My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/22/2004 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
>
1/22/2004 BOARD OF HEALTH Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2018 5:01:19 PM
Creation date
3/26/2018 2:07:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
BOARD OF HEALTH
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/22/2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
k <br /> 1 <br /> i <br /> Mr. Ball asked Mr. Weinstein when he purchased the property. <br /> Mr. Weinstein responded that he purchased it in 1999. <br /> Mr. McElhany offered a little more background for those who were not <br /> sure of the zoning by-law. Essentially these were all calculated as one- <br /> acre lots. Under the cluster concept basically you put the houses on half- <br /> acre lots and then the.other Dalt-acre that goes with each of the Iota <br /> essentially becomes one large clustered open space that was deeded to <br /> the torn. So that deed occurred under the terms of the special permit and <br /> was restricted as open space* Mr. Weinstein, although he was not on that <br /> deed, he was in essence the successor to the developer and essentially <br /> the developer has the right to build on the sub-standard lots for zoning <br /> purposes. Sub-standard in terms of acreage. They were also essentially <br /> requesting that they could use the open space as part of the nitrogen- <br /> loading plans <br /> Mr. Ball asked how many lots were being built on. <br /> Mr. McElhany stated that they were only thirty-five in total. They were <br /> only talking about the ten that were left, It was somewhat unfortunate <br /> that they were kind of rolling along and Mr. Weinstein got a little bit <br /> caught by surprise by the change in the interpretation on what he needed <br /> to do to look in his rights. They were talking about ten remaining lots. <br /> Before, when it was everyone's view that they should go to the town <br /> meeting and everything else. It really wasn't worth that much of a hassle <br /> when they could build out to three-bedrooms. However, they thought at <br /> this point it was worth looking at it. 'they've had the discussions with the <br /> DEP and they were not at this point requiring a town meeting vote in order <br /> to put a restriction on it. They were -going to set the restriction that was <br /> in the deed. <br /> Ms. Grady asked Mr. Harrington for his opinion. <br /> Mr. Harrington had three points that he would like to discuss. This would <br /> be the first time that he had every heard of using the special permit as the <br /> ownership attachments So, for the Mr. Weinstein to get the additional <br /> credit from the open space when he was not the true owner may be <br /> attached as the owner-to the developable portion by special permit, but <br /> ultimately not on the ownership of the open space. He was leery of setting <br /> a precedent set where other people may cone in from the outside and say <br /> that they were going to use that portion of town conservation apace as <br /> their credit. Not being owner of that property even though it was town <br /> land. He didn't know and he felt that there were more legalities beyond <br /> using the special permit as the attachment. He would prefer to go back to <br /> 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.