My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/5/1987 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
2/5/1987 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/16/2018 5:08:58 PM
Creation date
2/16/2018 2:53:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/05/1987
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Conservation Commission <br /> Meeting of February 5, 1387 <br /> Page 9. <br /> i <br /> Mary Marsters asked that the record shove she is an abutter and took no part <br /> in the hearing . <br /> CONTINUED To MARCH 5, 1987 -- 7:30 p.m. <br /> Edward L. Shore and Peter Vanderbc i l t , construction manager for the project <br /> t Mau hop, asked to be heard. <br /> John stated he has advised the board of the problems and his letter rete i ve'd <br /> requesting to amend his Notice of I n ten t . The Board has accepted the letter <br /> and an amended order of Conditions will be issued. <br /> Ms. Beh rm n stated they rust get this letter to DEOE also. <br /> Mr . Vanderbuilt stated he went to the Building Department and after ten days <br /> he received a demolition permit and a building permit. H stated there is a <br /> breakdown between the Conservation and Bu i ld i ng' Inspector. <br /> Ms Behrman stated there was a breakdo:•jn bet-.-jeen the appl i a t i re rade to this <br /> 8 a rd and the project as you proceeded . It is on record as just building <br /> second Floor. it is the applicant 's respons i bi i i t ' , if the project changes , <br /> to no t i •'y this board and request a moi}i f i ca t i on . It is not an internal town <br /> responsk bi kt . <br /> Mr . Shore s to ted this was not done intentionally , they had a l�.+}ays planned <br /> do t7 ; s . <br /> � s Ja '=�r)n stated x ou 4.-fere here that - k _ tand you nearer indicated this to <br /> t�e ?ca rd . .'Ir . Share stated ne .manu a to r as lighting fk tores and had not <br /> ru-.in ,,era t to do. <br /> Ms Behrman stated a legal document ;pias signed stating that -this was just a ren- <br /> ovation, not a new structure and that the procedure involved was just uttinputting <br /> on a second story. The Commission only dea15 with the legal document submitted <br /> In his name. <br /> Mr . Shore stated the prob i em is that they nave a construction crew with familie - <br /> that are not going to be paid for ten days . <br /> Mr . Rosenberg advised Cher is no ,�iay under the State law that anything can be <br /> done about i t. <br /> Ms Behr-man stated DEQE has to receive the revised Order of Conditions , after <br /> which there is a ten day appeal period (working days) for abutters- or anyone <br /> concerned. If no appeals and D E B oas5es on the revised order , s they also <br /> have input , they may Droceed . <br /> r r <br /> "' ■ C iy+ <br /> asked k k t "{ r ��i rem ~t abutters . Vi <br /> ���- * e?,r;:�n stated I t <br /> Mrs- Mar tens s to tea the notice on the original order of conditions vidu1 d suffice <br /> s Notice of ',rjhat they are doing . <br /> ■ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.