My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/06/1990 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
>
06/06/1990 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/31/2025 3:00:15 PM
Creation date
6/23/2022 10:17:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
PLANNING BOARD
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/06/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
SPECIAL PERMIT <br /> Applicant: Dr. Malcolm MacDonald <br /> Location: Back Road <br /> Request: Discussion of Back Read improvement in <br /> connection with the Special Permit. Reschedule <br /> to this date at applicant ' s written request <br /> through attorney on April 12 , 1990 . <br /> Attorney John Connely was present representing the <br /> applicant. <br /> Mr. Connely stated that he believes the water quality is-sues <br /> has been resolved. He has not yet read the revised program <br /> but assumes it accurately reflects what -has been agreed upon. <br /> Torn had the completed water quality monitoring program which <br /> he distributed to the Board. <br /> Mr. Connely stated that the issue of the road is remaining. <br /> He had a meeting with representatives of the Planning Board, <br /> Mr. McGrath and Mr. virgillio to deal with how to refurbish <br /> the road in an equitable fashion. It was decided at the <br /> meeting to do the work and pro rate the cost as a betterment <br /> over 20 gears . <br /> Mr. McGrath has suggested that Ernie should knew the numbers <br /> and will have to come up the the dollars per foot based on <br /> submitted plans . <br /> Mr. Connely stated that there still remains the legality of <br /> compelling Dr. MacDonald to do it and the equity of that. <br /> He sent Mr. Reardon a letter asking his opinion on the <br /> legality based on the land 'court phraseology -- does he agree <br /> that it becomes a town responsibility as opposed to land <br /> owner responsibility because it is labeled a public way. He <br /> has never heard back from him on that on that issue. <br /> He would like to have a response from Mr. Reardon. <br /> Mr . Connely explained that Dr. MacDonald is concerned that <br /> they cannot pass on cost to the 2 ANR lots to the south of <br /> the road. <br /> He also has a problem with the difference of opinions <br /> regarding land court opinion of public responsibility. <br /> Mr . Connely will continue to work on getting the cost of <br /> refurbishing the road and also would like a response from <br /> Mr. Reardon regarding ownership and control of Back, ro c-iid and <br /> who ought to bear the cast of its improvement . <br /> Pat stated that they have discussed waiving some standards . <br /> Louise stated that the question is whether this is adequate <br /> access for the subdivision. She would want justifications <br /> for waivers of the standards . <br /> Tam stated that to conclude the special permit process tl-:e <br /> condition does not have to specify who will pay, it can just <br /> say it must be brought up to safe and adequate access for <br /> the subdivision. <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.