Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> Mr. Dimakarakos proposed a 500 square foot addition 30 feet away from <br />the wetland within an area that was previously disturbed by a septic <br />system. No formal lawn is to be installed. <br /> <br /> Comments from the Commission as follows: <br /> Ms. Miller read the engineering report. Mr. Langseth commented that <br />there is room in the back of the house for the addition. <br /> <br /> Victor V. of 4 Turning Mill Road described an alternatives analysis for the <br />location of the proposed addition. He explained that the house on the <br />north, south, and east side are built into the landscape and it would require <br />significant excavation and disturbance. The proposed location would save <br />a lot of trees. <br /> <br /> Mr. Langseth commented that the stormwater standards are good, but <br />there could be additional mitigation. Mr. Hamilton stated that the 30 foot <br />setback is a concern and he read the setback regulation. Mr. Wolk asked if <br />an arborist was consulted regarding the property. Mr. Kennedy asked how <br />far behind the house the oak tree is located. Ms. Mullins suggested that an <br />alternatives analysis be done to give the Commission a better perspective <br />on the choice of location for the addition. Mr. Wolk suggested conducting <br />another site visit. <br /> <br /> Motion made and seconded to continue the hearing to November 13, 2012 <br />at 7:30 p.m. at the request of the applicant, 7-0 in favor. <br /> <br />8:50 pm Hearing - NOI, 39 Middleby Road <br /> DEP# 201-875, BL 833 <br /> Construction of a single-family home within the 100-foot Buffer Zone <br /> Documentation: NOI Application <br /> Present for the Applicant: Scott Goddard, Goddard Consulting LLC <br /> <br /> Mr. Goddard proposed the construction of a new single-family dwelling. <br /> <br /> Comments from the Commission as follows: <br /> Mr. Langseth commented that the drainage calculations fail to comply <br />with the bylaw regulations in which credit cannot be taken for existing <br />impervious surface. Mr. Langseth suggested that a careful analysis be <br />done on the stream. Mr. Bitsko asked about the soil testing that was done <br />and suggested that a restoration or planting plan be submitted for review. <br /> <br /> Motion made and seconded to continue the hearing to November 13, 2012 <br />at 7:30 p.m. at the request of the applicant, 7-0 in favor. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />