Laserfiche WebLink
MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> MEETING MINUTES <br /> MAY 12, 2021 <br /> Chairman Furbush said he met with Evan Lehrer together with Dave Morris and Mary Ann <br /> to discuss the best way to solve this problem. <br /> Evan said that the Planning Department and Charlie Rowley had noted some time ago that <br /> when the Board should desire a peer review of any site plans for a Special Permit, or a 40B <br /> application, this should occur while the permit is still open. If the Board votes to approve <br /> a Special Permit or another petition that is reliant on some type of engineering, conditioned <br /> upon the engineer's review of a specific set of plans without the benefit of the peer review. <br /> Should the engineer request certain revisions or notes on the plan,the Board has no ability <br /> to capture those comments or technical review once the Board approves the project. It <br /> would require the applicant to the petitioner to return to the Board seeking a modification <br /> and the fee would require to be paid by the applicant. Once a project is approved there is <br /> no urgency for the applicant to accept the Board's approval. If the Board wants to go <br /> through the process of a peer review, and the Zoning Act allows the Board to do so, it is <br /> strongly recommended that the Board ensure to not vote to approve the condition of a peer <br /> review. The Board can vote to authorize the review, to wait and continue the hearing until <br /> the peer review report has been submitted to the Board of Appeals. <br /> One of the issues that the Chairman mentioned is the delay in the process. The process is <br /> designed to enable the Board as the discretionary granting authority to continue the <br /> hearings as much as required to obtain all the information to make decisions to protect the <br /> health, safety and welfare of the residents of the Town as noted in the Zoning Act Bylaw. <br /> The Board should continue the hearings and not vote on petitions without the consulting <br /> engineer delivering the report, but there is also a level of oversite of the project that occurs <br /> after approval that doesn't require the involvement of a Town Board of Appeals authorized <br /> consulting engineer, would be to include a condition in all decisions that would require the <br /> designing engineer whose stamp appears on the petition plans to condition an approval and <br /> require that engineer to conduct his own site inspection for design, and submit a letter to <br /> the Building Commissioner certifying with his stamp that all the construction has been <br /> done in accordance with the approved plan. This would solve the circular issue of requiring <br /> an extra month and a half review. <br /> Additionally, if the Board wants to engage in their own consultant, and the Board did not <br /> want to wait for a public hearing to be continued and wait for a written report, the Board <br /> could simply require the consulting engineer agree to site inspections that is paid for by the <br /> applicant, but is hired by the Town. There are ways to manage the peer review and site <br /> inspections, but to not approve a project without receiving the report from the peer <br /> reviewer. <br /> Chairman Furbush asked if peer reviews are only authorized by either the Planning Board <br /> or the Board of Appeals to hire a consulting engineer for the Town. <br /> 2 <br />