01/19/2000 PLANNING BOARD Minutes

Home Browse Search

Subsequent to some modifications being made without the Public Hearing, the issue of major or minor changes surfaced. Mr. Mc lhinney was offended by the comment that the language was deemed to be underhanded. Mr. Fudala indicated it was not meant to be underhanded, at which time fir. Dorgan requested the discussion be kept relevant. Mr. Dorgan specifically asked wi l lowbend"What do you want to do?" Mr. Healey responded Willowbend wants to eliminate 57 units adding open space a -1 holes of golf; Mr. Healey indicated the modification is contingent upon DRI approval of the area outside of the original special Permit. If the I RI before the Cape Cod Commission (CCC) is not approved,then the modification to the original Special Permit is"back to Square one". Tonight's question is "Does the Planning Board have jurisdiction"? Ms. liabth Lane(Kopelman and Paige,PC ,Mashpee Town Counsel, indicated she was curious about the area outside the Special Pe-rnit. what would be the applicable zoning that governs that area? Mr. Butler responded that the area outside the Special Permit has -been filed as a DRI application. Mr. Fudala responded that-the entire project has been referred to the CCC by the Planning Board after they made the decision it was. mandatory referral. Mr. Butler disagreed with that statement stating that the application that has been filed and scheduled for a I5 00 nearing is only that portion outside the original Special Permit which has been agreed to by the CCC staff. The IRI application before ore the CCC is the entire additional -hole golf course. her. Butler also pointed out that there is the possibility that prior to the vote of the CCC.as a I RI,that a Development Agreement may be reached which would result in this project going forward without the necessity of I RI permit. Mr. Butler stated, and indicated the CCC agreed, is the only matter that would have to meet regional policy plan conformance is the area of the 9-hole golf course expansion. Mr. Fudala indicated the Planning nning Board would have to get that from the CCC,because what the CCC accepted was the board's referral which was-all the part within the Special Permit. Responding to a question from.Ms. Lane,her. Fudala stated that all that was filed before the board was.specifically what was within the Special Permit area. Ir. Butler responded their meeting was with their(CCQ then counsel, Patty Daley and four or five members of the staff, including the Assistant Executive Director; he will provide a letter to the Planning Board clarifying what was filed before the CCC. Mr. Butler indicated, it was his opinion,that under the CCC Act, D I enabling regulations, and under the updated regional policy plan, the -hole expansion can be dealt with as a DRI project and does not necessarily bring the rest of the project into the purview of the DRI and on a local zoning basis, it could be treated in a bifurcated fashion as suggested by Mr. Healey. 1r. Bennis I (PIanning hoard members again asked "Does the Plarming Board have jurisdiction"? Mr. Fudala responded"Yes". Ms. Lane asked if it were a Master Plan originally, ghat is the reason that here were modifications of the Special Permit? Mr. Healey responded there was only one reason for that. There were a series of modifications, some sign cant, some not. GIs. Lane asked if 1987 zoning applies forever? Mr. Healey responded the Special Permit can lapse; if it hasn't lapsed, then the conditions of the Special Permit continues, as long as work begins within six months. Ms. Lane responded that where they differ, is ghat freezes? The concept of a special permit frm is a very different concept; that concept states that so long as the lapse is avoided, you can buildout according to the Special Permit. iris. Lane asked for Willow bends' concept of lapses. Mr. Fudala responded that no one has made the claim that there have been any lapses, only a dormant stage. Mr. Malone asked what is the