3/2/1994 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

•,J � � Y BOARD of APPEALS Minutes March 2. 1994 The Hashpee Board of Appeals held a meeting on Wednesday, March r 1994 at 7230 PO4% at thO XaGhpee Tawe Rall. Board Members present and acting throughout were: Michael A. Makunas, Jamie Regan and Cheryl A. Hawver . d tard 'M. Govonip Clerk, stepped down from the Board for the first two hearings and returned for the discussion. Building Inspector William F. Hauck was in attendance . Mr. Makunas opened the meeting at 7 : 40 P ,M, He said the Board had eight hearings which had been postponed from January 26, 1994 due to lack of quorums . He said the Board was using the Rule of Necessity in -hearing the Petitions and read the Rule allowing a Hoard to acct even if one of the sitting members has n interest . Mr. Regan said he had done some read estate business with the principals and Mr., Makunas said he was an abutter on some of the properties. Robert Mills, Attorney for Donald H. Priestley and Kevin iirrane, Attorney for Dream Developers, stated that they had no objections to using the Rule of Necessity, Mr . Makunas said the Board would act first on the appeals . Dream Developers - has Appeased the Decision of - the Building Inspector in the issuance of a Stop Work order for a xoing violation in the construction of a single-family dwelling in an R-5 zoning distract on property loctd at 211 Names Circle (Map 71 , Bloc 169 ) Mashpee, MA. (Owner of record: Richard M. Scudder TRS. ) Members sitting: M. Makunas, J, Regan, C, Hawver Attorney Devin Kirrane started that he believed the Stop Work* order was in error. He said a foundation existed on the lot . He said the Board had issued a single decision on Variances on 16 lots in November, 1991 . He said that amendments to the Decision were filed on July and December, 1992 and the Board voted to extend on July 1993 , He said the Stop Work order was incorrect since the July, 1992 amendment extended the Variance and the Building Permit was issued prior to the expiration, He said the tens of the Decision contemplated certain "down initiated improvements be completed. He explained that construction of a dwelling had commenced within aw year of 1991 and that would satisfy "substantial construction" under Chapter 4A. Mr . a1 una stated that he belieVed the Variance c was used and had not expired .