My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/5/1998 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
2/5/1998 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:15:36 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 2:19:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/05/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
i <br /> 5 February 1998 <br /> Wage 14. <br /> lir. Sherman stated to downsize the size of the house they would not need a <br /> variance. Also, he has not seen the citation that the Commission cannot ask <br /> therm to go for a variance. It may be in there, but he does not recall reading it. <br /> Mr. Rasked Mchael Grot ke who was present for another hearing what <br /> New Seabury or Little Neck has in their first floor requirements for a house? <br /> Mr. Sherman stated that has no bearing upon this discussion and they cannot <br /> teR anyone they have to have a larger house that supersedes the wetlands <br /> Protection Act. <br /> Mr. tarot ke stated the only thing he knows about Little Neck Fay Is that they <br /> will not approve a variance of less than 25 feet from the street. Tar. Sherman <br /> stated it is currently 30. It has not been established deely that by <br /> sitting down with the Health Agent that it's not possible to change the <br /> components of the leaching system so that they can line up the tank with the <br /> leach pits and thus gain 10 feet and puR it back. Nr. Doyle stated he can <br /> gain, but it would require a variance. Mr. Sherman stated there is nothing <br /> that he knows of that states the Commission cannot ask them to get a <br /> variance. Unless the law specifically prohibits them from going for a variance, <br /> which he is not aware of, he asked of it is then incumbent upon the <br /> Commission to not ash there to make ars attempt? Mr. Doyle stated they are <br /> not throwing haat out as an argument, what they are saying is that this will <br /> pull the house within 20 feet of the edge of the road., which is very close. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated if they got an additional 5 feet and maybe roved <br /> portions of the deck around to the side they might be able to achieve the <br /> average of loo which is what the Commission is trying to get. If they are not <br /> going to average 100, then they have to prove that they cant. This has not <br /> been proved yet. There are minor adjustments that can be made. The <br /> Commission is not supposed to go to Section 3 until the applicant has proved <br /> with a preponderance of credible evidence that it is not possible to do <br /> something else. <br /> llr. Power stated before he would want to do that, he would want to seek legal <br /> advice as to whether that is part of the Rivers Act. It is a salt water river and <br /> he would go to the effort of hiring ars attorney to check that out. <br /> The Chairman stated that would be prudent on his part. <br /> L <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.