Laserfiche WebLink
Mashpee Zoning Minutes <br />Board of Appeals May 26, 2010 <br />1) A municipal or government entity; 2) a non-profit organization; or 3) a limited dividend <br />• corporation. Attorney Ford said that the issue is not whether the permit is in the name of <br />Giatrellis or Cape Cod Cooperative Bank, but in the fact that the Petitioner is a limited <br />dividend corporation. He said that the permit dictates that the developer must provide <br />evidence of that status to the Board. <br />Mr. Furbush asked how the fact that Mr. Giatrellis never created the limited dividend <br />corporation affects the proposal. Attorney Ford said that it does not affect it at all, because <br />there are multiple conditions that have to be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit; <br />none of which have been satisfied yet. <br />Mr. Bonvie asked if there was anything worded in the permit that states that the owner in <br />the chain of title has the right to the permit. Attorney Ford said "No. There is a provision <br />in the permit that, if the permit changes hands, the Board has to be notified." He said that <br />the Petitioner's request for an Extension is notification to the Board of a change in <br />ownership of the subject property. The Petitioner is seeking an Extension of the approved <br />permit in its name as the new owner of record. Mr. Bonvie reiterated that the Petitioner is <br />seeking a two-year extension, as well as the right to change the name under which the <br />permit will be issued. Attorney Ford said that whoever has title to the property cannot <br />exercise rights to the permit until the limited dividend corporation has been established. <br />Attorney Michael Ford said that the Petitioner is seeking other development possibilities. <br />He said that he recently represented the Petitioner at the Planning Board on an industrial <br />• subdivision proposal. Attorney Ford said that the Cape Cod Commission, Town Planner <br />and other departments appealed to the Petitioner to look at other alternatives to the Chapter <br />40B development on the subject property. <br />Attorney Ford said that the Petitioner would be agreeable to a one-year extension. Mr. <br />Furbush said that the Board normally grants six-month extensions on Variances and asked <br />how the rules change and the length of time such an extension could be granted. Mr. <br />Nelson said that a maximum of a three-year extension can be granted to a Chapter 40B <br />permit. He assured the Board that Jason Talerman would continue in his role as Counsel <br />for the Board in this Chapter 40B permit process. Attorney Ford said that Chapter 40B is <br />governed by rules and regulations that protect a Comprehensive Permit for up to three <br />years and extensions can be granted for an equal period of time. Mr. Furbush asked Mr. <br />Bonvie what he felt would be the disadvantage of granting a two-year extension. Mr. <br />Bonvie replied that he was concerned about going over the 10% affordable housing goal. <br />Mr. Nelson said that the Town is not anywhere near that percentage. Mr. Bonvie said that <br />if another proposal for a Chapter 40B comes before the Board and it puts the Town over <br />10%, the Board's granting of that proposal could be appealed at the State level. He <br />repeated that the Board could consider granting an extension for one year rather than two <br />years. Mr. Nelson said, with only one other proposal, that the Town would not exceed the <br />10%. Mr. Bonvie said that the economy will continue to improve and he doesn't want the <br />Town to limit its options. <br />Mr. Reiffarth said that he personally wanted to hear from Town counsel regarding the <br />• legality of granting an extension to this Petitioner. He said that the Petitioner is not the <br />original owner of record and that the permit is in default. Attorney Michael Ford said that <br />2 <br />