04/02/1980 PLANNING BOARD Minutes

Home Browse Search

PLANNING BOARD Town of Mashpee PLANNING B.oARD MINUTES': 4/.2'f S'0 'C on t" ,--d Mrs . DeLory asked why the by.-law- was only asking for, l oo '', whereas the Mashpee River Corridor was asking , for 100 yds . Mr Terry. replied it was a compromise; it was thought that l00 feet was s-omething. people could Live with and that the 'Planning Board did not want to impose Anything too burdensome on any in.d-iv-dual. Mr. Magi's ter.s stated that a setback of 300'�. would eliminate .s-ome -Parcels comp.leteiy thereby definitely crea.t ng hardships . MT. Mars ters further stated that during other hearings, there was much opposition.. . ..therefore our compromise.- Mr. Tavares of Conservation Committee asked the Planning Board if this was not an accommodation for New- Seabury�, as the 'larges-t land owners- along the. Mashpee River, so that -any of their lots would not come within this loo feet. Mr, Terry replied that any lot would be subject unless there was- a building permit in effect prior to this by-law- going into effect within the area contained in this by-law. 11r, ' Mars ters stated that ownership can be right ht down to the river ,and no one 'ass property would -he � taken. away. In effect it would create something similar to an easement Mrs . DeLory asked if taxes would have - to be paid to which Mr. Mars ters replied yes , but hopefully the assessors will consider this and it would have some value definitely, but the .property. owner sh,oul-d bring it to the asses-sors attention and then normally- they do look at each zoning area and assess it at a different rate , Mr Ken Pecci of Conservation Committee ques ti-oned re ownership of dockage to which Mr. Terry replied nothing was in mind as to joint ownership of docks,. Mr, Mars tern further stated that people would still have -to go about' that in the same manner; i e. through Corps of Engineers , etc . There will just be a small area subject to docks- whereas, that is a salt water river.. Mr* ears ters- stated he believed Conservation Committee would have Icontrol to which Mrs . DeLory- agreed that their Committee would indeed have control .' Mr. McKay, property owner explained that, he thought there was about 30 acmes of land on the opposite side of Pirate's Cove that was not included in this proposal He asked if the Planning Board would consider including it as he personally would, like to s-ee it done .. Mr. Terry explained that there has to be some point at which this wo-ald stop ; he can'-t really say whether 'or not Stenburgs land (,30+-A) would be included or could be included l Mr.. Terry stated "'we must walk before we run with this proposal" and it seems that it has been advertised and it is what people know about and what the Board feels comfortable With. Mr. Mars tens asked where exactly the property was to which Mr.- McKay replied location is from David Niven'-s property up wards . Mr. McKay then asked if this was the sole purpose of the meeting to which Mr. Mars t e rs replied yes Mr. Mars ters further stated that the only reason -it was not included is that the line was drawn . straight across stopping at Pirate ' s -Cove . - Mr . Marst_ers then asked for any further questions and thoughts . Attorney Dubin.s tated the line is not quite where the land is . . it is on the west side of Riverview Subdivision. Mr. Mars tern stated that was correct just a little bit north of the Riverview Subdivision Mr . McKay stated that he would start building' a house in another couple of weeks and would like to have River Bend included. Mr. Mars ters asked the depths of lots in area to which Mr. McKay replied 300 ' . Mr. Marsters told Mr. McKay the Planning Board would Zook into that .