Laserfiche WebLink
items of concern for the Beard of Appeals, <br /> s <br /> PP <br /> 6-10, paragraph 4-Mr. Nelson stated the Board of Appeals <br /> feel the char ; <br /> e s made could cause >> ' <br /> g se more problems than. would be <br /> Solved and recommended leaving it alone, (This paragraph refers <br /> to rules a <br /> licable to all cluster P <br /> PP uster subdivisions. ) <br /> } . �* <br /> 6-15 New Scab r -u y Mr. Nelson stated the points made by the { <br /> Planning Board have been well taken, that the Board, of Appeals <br /> � <br /> agree (more or less but take ' xi <br /> 9' � less) , e the position t 1 on that there exists <br /> more pressing problems within the Town and that this matter . <br /> should be examined at a later date, especially in view of the ;; <br /> fact the Special Permit will not expire any time soon. � <br /> Mr. Nelson reported that most of New Seabu matters <br /> appearing before the B � � �pp g Board of Appeals deals with docks and piers. <br /> 9-9, Mr. Nelson referred back to item 6-9 . The chairman +; <br /> clarified, for purposes of consistency, the boldface and minimum <br /> lot frontage of fifty (5o) feet are to be deleted. <br /> 9-13, Mr. Nelson referred back to item 5-19, which has been <br /> addressed. <br /> Appendix-cam rounds Mr. Nelsons , <br /> Appendix-Campgrounds, stated there remains <br /> disagreement between Planning Board/Board of Appeals. He stated , <br /> the Board of Appeals "De not want campgrounds in Mashpee" . � <br /> Adult Use Bylaw-Mr. Nelson reported the Board of Appeals ` <br /> concurs with the Planning Board regarding the necessity for this <br /> �.� <br /> Bylaw. Mr. Nelson made a recommendation for a joint venture <br /> between the Planning Board./Board of Appeals in this regard. He <br /> suggested h ' � <br /> gg the Planning Board would require a Public Hearing in <br /> these matters, which recommendations could then be forwarded to <br /> r <br /> the Board. of Appeals who would in return also conduct a Public <br /> Hearing, which process would prove to make a stronger Bylaw for y <br /> g y , 1 <br /> the Town of Mashpee. (Mr. Nelson made reference to the Town of ; <br /> Hingham proposal as outlined in the <br /> proposal. ) <br /> Mr. Nelson clarified. the Board of Appeals position is that <br /> they don' t necessarily want this responsibility, but that they , <br /> are willing to take it on as it is their feeling it would prove <br /> to be advantageous to the Town of Mashpee. , <br /> 4� <br /> The chairman determined it is not possible to alter the <br /> Article at this point in time, as it has alreadybeen published ` <br /> i <br /> n the warrant. <br /> It was the position of the Planning Board Members to allow ' <br /> the Artic1e to go forward for approval at the May Town Meeting as ' <br /> submitted, with the possibility of amending it in October. <br /> MOTION: John Kuchinski made a Motion to amend page 9-9 asE ;� <br /> -2 5- <br /> r <br /> y <br />