Laserfiche WebLink
MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> MEETING MINUTES <br /> DECEMBER 12, 2018 <br /> The applicant claims ownership through a"release deed"for no consideration and for zero <br /> dollars. His final point is that the applicant's claim of financial hardship as current owner <br /> of an island with no money and with no proven way to access it, or any ownership on the <br /> part of Mashpee where he thinks he could put a bridge. <br /> Attorney Kate Connolly mentioned that Attorney Bowen was correct, it's simply a release <br /> deed that was taken for no payment, and also financial hardship is not one of the <br /> requirements to prove hardship under the bylaw, it has to be as Mr. Bowman said; owned <br /> to unusual circumstances of shape, soil conditions,or topography, and none of those apply. <br /> Ashley Fisher, Shellfish Constable for the Town of Mashpee approached the Board and <br /> quoted a couple of points from the bylaw in Chapter 130 Section 57 (Shellfish Aquaculture <br /> Licenses) for the record. She said that the area is under a grant and because of this, there <br /> cannot be any disturbance of the licensed shellfish grant area. <br /> Attorney Wall said that before the name of Punkhorn Point Road, it was called the way to <br /> Gooseberry Island. His client claims rights to that way. If there were no claim, the case <br /> would have been dismissed. The land court will decide the title issue, the Superior Court <br /> will decide the DEP issue, and the proposal before the Board is for the bridge to be there, <br /> and he thinks the Board can act on this. He believes it's completely different than the first <br /> submittal because now there is a bridge to access the island. <br /> Mr. Gould asked Attorney Wall if he and his client addressed the Tribe's claims, and how <br /> would you repair any damage if there's an issue with pollution regarding their shellfish <br /> grant. <br /> Attorney Wall said that the Tribe claims that their shellfish aquaculture grant prohibits the <br /> bridge from crossing the channel is not valid. He disagrees because the statute that the <br /> shellfish constable read says that the Tribe has exclusive rights to plant, grow and take <br /> shellfish but not exclusive rights to the area itself. The ideas is to put the house somewhere <br /> in the center of the island, and far away from shore. The septic system has not been <br /> proposed so those concerns are speculative and not before the Board. The bridge will be <br /> sufficiently high enough for boat traffic to pass. <br /> Mr. Furbush asked where the pilings of the bridge will be located. <br /> Mr. Haney, the Trustee, approached the Board and did not answer the question. He said <br /> that no one knows where the shellfish grant is located. He said he has a letter from the <br /> Town Manager that says it's sub-title below mean low water mark. He said he went to the <br /> DEP with the plan for the wooden bridge, and the Tribe said they did not want the piles in <br /> the shellfish grant area. He said the Town refuses to provide him with the legal <br /> requirements of the shellfish grant. He said his abutter's dock is in the shellfish area. He <br /> said that this is a"regulatory taking". <br /> Attorney Wall said that relief can be granted such that it doesn't derogate from the purpose <br /> of the zoning bylaw. He believes the bridge provides access. <br /> 6 <br />