GCC MEETING MINUTES
May 18, 2006
Attending: Carl Shreder, Paul Nelson, Tom Howland, John Bell, Mark Gauthier, Charles Waters, Steve Przyjemski, Laura Repplier
HEARINGS
20 MEADOWVIEW ROAD (GCC-2006-12; DEP 161-0641)
Reps: Bob Grasso, Professional Land Services
MOTION to accept the septic system repair as drawn on plan dated 3/15/05 – Paul /
AMENDED MOTION to accept the septic system repair as drawn on plan dated 3/15/05 without accepting the wetland line – Paul / John / 3 Aye, 3 Nay
MOTION to continue to June 1 at 7:30 – Mark / Tom / 4 Aye, 1 Nay
94 ELM STREET (GCC-2005-15; DEP 161-0623)
Reps: Steve Eriksen, Norse Environmental; James Mangano, Developer
GCC – We are concerned about the loss of the two very large trees. How can you save them?
Steve Eriksen, Norse Environmental – I could only save them by moving the building back about 35’ towards the wetland.
Paul N, GCC – If you only built one of these buildings it would fit the lot outside the buffer zone and without destroying those trees.
James Mangano, Developer – That is economically unattractive.
Ed DesJardins, Georgetown Historical Commission – Now that the town has passed the Demolition Delay Bylaw you will need to come to the Historial Commission for a review of the property before you can get a building permit to demolish it.
MOTION to accept the plan dated 5/18/06 with additional 50’ bounds and 4 stormwater infiltrators – Mark / John / Unam
MOTION to close the hearing – Tom / Paul / Unam
8-10 PINE PLAIN ROAD (GCC-2003-19; DEP 161-0532)
Reps: Nelson Tidd, Owner
MOTION to continue to Sept 7 at 8:00 – John / Paul / Unam
4 ROSEMARIE LANE (GCC-2005-34)
Reps: George Zamboras, Atlantic Engineering; Greg Dolan, Atlantic Engineering; Joseph Cifuni, Applicant
George Zamboras, Atlantic Engineering – We had the site walk with the GCC 3 weeks ago. Additionally, in the latest flood event we received 15” of rain – over the 100-yr flood level – and the water did not come up to the floodplain levels. (Shows photos of floodplain area to the rear of the property)
Mark G, GCC – So photos of that rain event are acceptable to us as proof? I agree that there was no water there, I visited the site during the floods myself. The wetlands were still wet but the floodplain wasn’t flooded on this site.
GCC - Yes, photographs of flood levels in the May 2006 flooding are acceptable as evidence of flooding or not flooding.
Carl S, GCC – The issue with this project is still the distances from the project to the resources.
George Zamboras, Atlantic Engineering – This is a developed lot, already disturbed land.
Steve P, GCC Agent – Yes but you are proposing to cut trees so there will be further disturbance.
Paul N, GCC – We are only negating the floodplain, not the wetland issues.
George Zamboras, Atlantic Engineering – We’re not asking for an official stand on the floodplain elevation. We have shown the flood storage extras shown in the original plan are not required.
Paul N, GCC – You are adding additional impervious surface & fill within a No-Disturb area. All your proposals require variances and there isn’t great rationale for granting them.
Steve P, GCC Agent – I want to see this stay out of the 50’ towards the ledge side. This project should be moved towards the 75’ rather than the 50’
MOTION to continue to June 29 at 7:30 – Tom / John / Unam
66 THURLOW STREET (GCC-2006-04; DEP 161-0638)
No Reps.
MOTION to continue to June 29 at 8:15 – Tom / John / Unam
| 
