2017-09-05-CONCOM-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The commission asked if they needed a new plan to define the area of the Restrictive Covenant. Ms. Mullins explained that they would just need to spell out the language of the Covenant in the order. Some commissioners expressed concern about this project because it is taking place in entirely undisturbed area. They were concerned about the loss of trees and the effect that tree loss would have on climate change, wildlife habitat, and increased downstream flooding. The commission stated that this project was not in the best interest of the wetlands. The commission added that the functions of a wetland are far reaching. Motion to close the hearing made by Mr. Langseth and seconded by Mr. Wolk. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 8:47pm DEP 201-1070, BL 1027 NOI, 167, 173, 177 Cedar Street Lot 10 Owner: Peter Staecker Applicant: 167, 173, 177 Cedar Street LLC Project: New single family home and associated site work Mike Novak- Meridian Associates, Ben Finnegan- Finnegan Development, John Farrington- Attorney, Fred Gilligan- attorney Mr. Novak stated that this project is a proposed single family home and infiltration system as part of a larger sub division. The patio on this plan has been relocated to be pulled away from the wetland. They are proposing FENO markers along the limit of work line which ties into the limit of work line for the entire project. The applicant is offering a restrictive covenant over a portion of the lot—all of the wetlands and the uplands from the 25' do not disturb line behind the house to the rear of the property except for a triangular area of upland at the far end of the property. Mr. Hamilton entered the engineering report into the record. Questions and comments from the commission: The commission asked if water would be running from the roadway into the driveway. Mr. Novak explained there is a high point at the front of the driveway. He added that they will adjust the plan to give the paving contractor a little wiggle room. The commission stated that they were concerned about the location of the wetlands and the pitch of the patio towards the wetlands in that area. Mr. Novak stated that they would reconsider the location. The commission stated that they have asked applicants to move patios outside of the 50 ft. buffer in the past because of the slope. Motion to continue the hearing to 9/18/2017 at the applicant's request made by Mr. Wolk and seconded by Mr. Langseth. Vote: 5-0 in favor. 9:04pm