My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/15/1998 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
>
04/15/1998 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2022 5:03:09 PM
Creation date
1/27/2022 1:44:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
PLANNING BOARD
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/15/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
rise ' <br /> The Chairman recognized. Mr. Fudala wh <br /> o noted that the Board •r i.- r <br /> had voted on numerous changes resulting from a meet in dis Y +� <br /> h the Bonin g1 cus s ion <br /> with e g Board oard of Appeals. He informed, the Board that at <br /> this point of Public Hearing, a formal vote would have to be ' <br /> taken. : I <br /> is <br /> The Chairman introduced Mr. Nelson <br /> Board of Appeals, and � <br /> explained that Mr.he and Chance Reichel had met with <br /> t . Nelson and � <br /> Mr. Govoni to discuss Board of Appeals concerns regarding the <br /> Plan. g g <br /> Mr. Nelson explained that Mr. Govoni is out of Town at the 4;;, ,, <br /> moment, but they have spoken on the telephone and that he wouldf f <br /> do his best to convey Mr. Govoni Is comments. <br /> Mr, Nelson made reference to Planning Board Memo dated Aril. <br /> S 1998, page _3-� , regarding Page 6-9 p 4 <br /> g . last paragraph. There <br /> appeared to be some confusion as to the meaning and intent of <br /> this reference. (The Board Secretary will review the tope/notes ,A <br /> of the April 1, 1998 Planning Board Meeting in order to provide rf. <br /> clarity in this matter. ) p <br /> Mr. Nelson made reference to a Memo from Mr. Fudala: 6-4 a :. <br /> Mr. Nelson stated the Board of Appeals concurs, there is no <br /> problem with "in general" . <br /> 6 5, Mr. Nelson again stated the Board of Appeals concurs t� <br /> regarding "a proper design screen" . <br /> 6-9. Mr. Nelson stated there are a number e o f things the <br /> Board of Appeals would like to know more about, such as the <br /> building envelopes being proposed. Mr. Fudala responded that i <br /> p t <br /> is a concept at the <br /> moment. Mr. Nelson made a general comment to <br /> the Board as a whole by stating that he feels envelopes are a <br /> tremendous asset f r p o the Planner. He stated. that he feels � <br /> envelopes on plans on small size lots are a "disgrace" . He <br /> stated his opinion that in order for envelopes to be effective ,1 <br /> 30, 000 - 40, 000 square feet is required. <br /> qu Mr. Fudala responded .:i �t <br /> the intent was speaking to envelopes as a separate issuel a list i <br /> Of issues to deal with on a layout of subdivisions, not <br /> specifically related to the 10, 000 square foot lots. '4 <br /> Selectman Caffyn requested the Chairman explain the <br /> definition ` <br /> p <br /> n of "enve 1 ope'r for the lay person who might not y.s <br /> understand, <br /> e Chairman explained an envelope would be some factor of <br /> Setbacks within which buildings could be laced., and at times <br /> could p . I <br /> also include rear septic, front well. i <br /> f � <br /> The Chairman asked Mr. Nelson if his concern was for said i <br /> envelopes being a detriment to small lots. <br /> -2 2- <br /> 4 j'7• <br /> " Ira <br /> V <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.