Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the 65 Miramar Avenue topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors object to boulders on private road, question pool fencing and mitigation at Miramar Avenue project
Summary
During a June 4 hearing the commission reviewed a proposed addition and mitigation at 65 Miramar Avenue; neighbors raised safety concerns about large boulders placed on the private road, a missing four-foot pool fence or auto cover, and cleared vegetation within the buffer. Staff advised these are largely civil or building-permit issues but recommended private remediation; the commission continued the matter.
Dan Ojila of Down Cape Engineering presented a plan for an addition and mitigation plantings at 65 Miramar Avenue in Dennisport, and neighbors used the public hearing to press for corrections to site work they said was done without proper approvals.
Neighbor Mark Skim told the commission the project left large boulders along the road edge, fences on the traveled way and an open pool that lacked a four‑foot fence. He said the boulders are large enough to obstruct travel and asserted: "Those rocks, and they probably could be bold as they're 16 to 24 inches, were placed there by the lanes during this construction of the pool." Amy Scanning (online) urged relocating the rocks to the property line so the stones are not in the traveled way.
Ojila said he did not recall specifics of a fence-versus-auto-cover conversation recorded in an earlier meeting but noted modern code permits an auto cover in lieu of a four-foot fence. He recommended the building department enforce pool-safety requirements and suggested the road-edge rocks are largely a private civil matter on a private road. "If it's a life safety and something, then the rock should be moved," Ojila said, and he said planting and mitigation were proposed to restore stripped vegetation.
Commissioners emphasized limits of their jurisdiction: vegetation and buffer restoration within the commission’s area are appropriate for review, but private-road encroachments and building-code enforcement fall to other agencies or civil remedy. The commission recommended applicants move boulders off the traveled way or place them on private property and asked staff to confirm building-code compliance for pool safety. The commission continued the matter to June 25 to allow the applicant to update plans and address the road‑edge and mitigation matters.
No formal enforcement action was issued at the June 4 hearing; staff and commissioners encouraged the applicant to correct rocks on the road edge, confirm pool‑safety devices required by the building department are in place, and finalize mitigation plantings shown on updated plans.
