Laserfiche WebLink
F <br /> Mr. Donahue j But no vote was taken at the meeting? <br /> Pauline: The fact that we all agreed, 1 think, that's enough. It's a violation. <br /> Mr. Reardons can I interrupt one minute'? 1 got here a little bit late. As 1 <br /> understand it, I am under the impression that Mr. Ferguson has applied for an ex� <br /> tension of his present order of conditions and that has not yet been acted upon by <br /> the board, ars Iright? <br /> Pauline: N , we have not acted* <br /> It's before the board tonight. <br /> Mr. Reardon: Might that be a proper subject for the board to address itself to in- <br /> stead ofre-hashing what has been going on in the past. . <br /> Mr. Mur p : May I raise one point. Your comment has been well taken. We should get <br /> to the order of business. The condition that we are talking about (condition h4) sags <br /> that the work authorized hereunder shall be completed within one year from the date of <br /> this order. Now, the only work that id described in the order of conditions is that <br /> contained after condition #11 which is not a condition; It is a suggestion. It sags <br /> that the house be placed horizontally instead of vertically on the lot so than the set- <br /> back would be a greater amount of feet from the shone. Now, even if that Frere'. a condi# <br /> tion, that was complied with prior to the expiration of the- one-year period. That was <br /> complied with prior to Mr. Ferguson's ue ed ing a building permit which was in Sept. of <br /> 1978. The order of conditions was dated May of 1978, So within the orae-gear periodp <br /> all of the conditions contained in the order of conditions had been complied with. <br /> hereforet I see no necessity for even requesting anything. <br /> Charles t It says the work authorized shall be completed. No work was completed. The <br /> work is still ongoing. <br /> y <br /> Mr,,. Iht But the work authorized by the order of conditions as I react it is the <br /> work authorized hereunder. -Now the only work authorized hereunder is the order of <br /> { <br /> conditions itself <br /> har .e t I would .think that when it's mentioned this way it is- my indication that:: e <br /> are authorizing the building of a Dome, a hawse, a structure within a definite area. <br /> Is that not o i <br /> Mr. Murph l The actual building of the house comes under the building inspection de� <br /> partment. He issued the building permit and that covers the constructing and building <br /> of the buildingitself* You people have certain wetlands jurisdictions; but my paint <br /> s that your jurisdiction ended when the work authorized under the order of conditions <br /> had been complied with. <br /> Charles t All work doesn't end until we issue an order of compliance. <br /> Mr. Murphys I understand that. But in terms of the one-year period fr requesting an <br /> extension, the work authorized under the order appear to be limited to those conditions <br /> listed after condition Ai. That describes the work and the only condition set out there <br /> is* as I have indicated a non-condition t it is a suggestion and that was complied with <br /> within the one-year period. Therefore, there was no remaining work pursuant to the order <br /> that had to be complied with. And, therefore, no necessity to request an extension after <br /> the one-year period had expired. <br />