Laserfiche WebLink
This transcript was exported on Aug 21,2023 -view latest version <br /> So it wouldn't even need subdivision. <br /> Speaker 9 L I <br /> Uh,you know,it maybe,you know,maybe it'd be nine,four <br /> Speakers()..i.;; ,i.-, <br /> Or 10.So it'd be nine or 10 formula laws.Yes.Pretty,prettysimple <br /> Speaker 9(r; a'"r <br /> Path.Non-resistance.And that's stu by,right?It can go,you know,be the planning board.That that'd <br /> only hurdle.But,um,it would,I couldn't,I could not issue a permit.I would not send it to the board. <br /> They conform.They have every right to do that. <br /> Speaker 1 <br /> Anybody else on the board like to,uh,add any input in this?What I'd like to do is go to the audience and <br /> have some input.Let's not take all night,but,uh,anybody have in the,uh,anybody on the board have <br /> any Input?Any more questions?Oh,no.Okay.Why don't we go to the board.One second.Uh,Chris,I'd <br /> just like, <br /> Speaker 4(j%w r 4): <br /> Thank you Mr.Chair,members of the board,again,attorney Christopher Kare representing the <br /> applicant.Also with me tonight is attorney Kate Carter.Uh,she is the lead attorney on the litigation.So <br /> certainly if there's any,uh,questions regarding the litigation portion,uh,she's certainly capable of <br /> answering and,and probably jumping on some of the zoning questions that are before this board.Urn,1, <br /> I'd just like to focus this board on what we're here for.And that Is simply,has the permit lapsed or has it <br /> not lapsed whether or not they can get 29 lots?10 lots,95 lots is not what we're asking for.We are not <br /> asking you to approve any lots tonight.Okay.So It's irrelevant.I just want to note that they would need <br /> approval from the planning board.It's,it would be a cluster subdivision.It'd have to get approval.So it's <br /> not relevant,but I just wanna make sure its,there's no as of right building because of the size of the lot, <br /> It would have to get,uh,go through the planning board as a duster. <br /> So I don't look at that aspect.Yeah,as I said,It's not relevant'cause as I said,we're just simply asking <br /> this board to determine whether or not the,the special permit is lapsed or it has not lapsed.We're not <br /> looking for any other approvals from this board.And I just want to note what the remand order states a <br /> portion of the reader.It says,as for the trustees,count one brought under chapter 48,section 17,it <br /> appears the trustee is entitled to some of the relief he seeks.Namely,that the board's decision <br /> upholding the building commissioner's determination that the special permit has lapsed is untenable, <br /> unreasonable,whimsical and capricious and arbitrary for failing to take into account the board's 1992 <br /> Interpretation of the special permit,which states there Is no completion deadline for developing and or <br /> constructing signal family lots and homes on the development site. <br /> Speakers <br /> But we just dealt with that.I'm saying to you,that should have been a mon,that's a very integral part of <br /> that special permit.Those dates are integral.And the only way you can change those dates,in my <br /> opinion,would be a modification. <br /> Mashpee Zoning Board of Appeals-8092023(Completed 08/21123) Page 61 of 73 <br /> Transcript by <br />