My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/16/2009 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
>
12/16/2009 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2025 3:59:07 PM
Creation date
1/19/2022 3:51:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
PLANNING BOARD
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/16/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Jobs Whitings. The three remaining areas are North Market Street Phase 11, East Steeple <br /> Street, and Trout Pond. There is a statutory inability to extend the I RI any further, <br /> which currently expires on February 1, 2010. There VIitl be a subcommittee meeting on <br /> December 1 , 2009 in order to review the procedural denial decision made on December <br /> , 2009 with regard to the three remaining neighborhoods. This does not preclude future <br /> application of any of the areas. <br /> The regulations currently allow an extension of the IRI permit; a -year DRI may <br /> be extended 5-years. The Act als allows an extension of the 0-day decision period. <br /> Neither extension process applies to the Mashpee Commons situation. <br /> Ibis. Senator* suggested the procedural denial regulations make more sense in this <br /> regard which.allows.for a procedural denial when the project fails to continue <br /> expeditiously through the I RI process. The Mashpee Commons f RC appl icationIMEPA <br /> filing was originally submitted in 1989. There is no statutory ability for any further <br /> extensions. The Trout Pond portion ofthe project remains sub e t t the rig �l 1 I. <br /> She could not speak to IiEPA requirements for re-filing; however any future <br /> proposed development at Trout Pond would likely be subject to a lRI. At this point <br /> there has been no formal confirmation that Trout Pond is not part of the Development <br /> Agreement. <br /> t this point the Chairman recognized Mr. Storrs who stated that both the Cape <br /> Cod Commission and the Mashpee Planning Board have been notified verbally that Trout <br /> Pond is not to be included in the proposed Development Agreement. <br /> Ibis. Senator' then informed the Board that the Commission is required to act on <br /> the remaining neighborhoods under iI prior to February 1, 201 . <br /> Parties to a Development Agreement could be any qualified Applicant, Cape Cod <br /> Commission, Municipalities. A Commission certified Local Comprehensive Plan must <br /> have been adopted, and a Commission approved Development Agreement bylaw. State <br /> agencies could also be qualified parties. <br /> Applicant is required to file a Notice of Intent in order to file a Development <br /> Agreement application, which Mashpee Commons has done through the Regulatory <br /> Committee as well as the full Commission. <br /> At this point the'Cha.innan asked whether or not Mashpee tepee Commons would be <br /> required to re-submit due to the withdrawal of the Trout Pond parcel, as it was included <br /> in the initial filing. <br /> Ms. Senators stated that she would investigate the requirement in order to <br /> determine if Mashpee Commons needs to re-file the Notice of Intent. They currently have <br /> authority to proceed with the Development Agreement for three neighborhoods. <br /> 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.