Laserfiche WebLink
 The purpose is to clear a 30-foot section that inhibits safe passage and establish a <br />walkway. <br /> The aim is to improve safe accessibility and establish a consistent right-of-way for <br />neighborhood use. <br /> Large trees, particularly oak trees, will remain unaffected. Only the rhododendrons are to <br />be removed. <br />Property and Boundaries: <br /> A fence defining the boundary of Leach’s property with the neighboring lot was installed <br />due to previous encroachments by neighbors <br /> Leach’s intentions for removal pertain to ownership and rights to the half of the paper <br />road belonging to him. <br />Environmental Considerations: <br /> Leach was advised to consider planting new shrubs within his property line to mitigate <br />the environmental impact, especially given the proximity to water. <br /> Concerns were raised about ensuring the right of access for nearby residents and <br />maintaining the area’s ecological balance. <br />Related Permitting and Conservation Issues: <br /> Past permits involving septic installations and potential conservation requirements were <br />discussed, confirming that all previous compliance matters are closed. <br /> The neighboring property issues with revetment walls and compliance with certificates of <br />compliance are under review. <br />Additional Key Points: <br /> New septic was installed in November 2023. <br /> Commission staff: To monitor compliance with shrub replacement and assess impacts on <br />neighboring property boundaries and conservation needs. <br /> Mr. Leach to coordinate with staff regarding the replantation of shrubs and ensure <br />alignment with the project’s determination. <br />Agent Comment: <br /> Issued order of conditions and believed there was mitigation completed at that time <br />Public Comment <br /> None <br />Motion: <br /> Mr. Cook motioned for a negative determination with the condition that the removed <br />shrubs be replaced inside Leach’s fenced property and done in consultation with staff. <br />Ms. Zollo seconded the motion. <br />Commented \[AP5\]: Second was not stated <br /> No further discussion. <br />Roll Call: <br /> Ms. Zollo (Yes), Mr. Cook (Yes), Ms. Thornbrugh (Yes), Ms. Godfrey (Yes), and Mr. <br />Colombo (Yes). <br />7 <br /> <br /> <br />