My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08/09/2023 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes (2)
>
08/09/2023 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2024 5:12:42 PM
Creation date
4/12/2024 4:25:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/09/2023
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
196
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
The 1992 Determination <br /> 25. Beginning in 1992,through a series of deeds,the Trust conveyed several parcels <br /> of the Property(the"Marsters„Parcels")to Prime Properties, Inc.,a corporation managed by <br /> members of the Marsters Family. <br /> 26. After acquiring the Marsters Parcels, Prime Properties applied for building <br /> permits to build three single-family homes under the Special Permit. <br /> 27. However,by letter dated September 22, 1992,the Building Inspector denied the <br /> three building permit applications. A true and correct copy of the September 22, 1992 letter is <br /> attached as Exhibit F. <br /> 28. Specifically,the Building Inspector noted that there was an ambiguity between <br /> the language of the Special Permit and the 1980 Modification. As he explained,"the 1973 permit <br /> limits the multi-family units to 143 units per year for five years and the single-family home was <br /> an `optional.' The `optional' indicates to me an open time frame with no conditions or time <br /> limits." <br /> 29. In contrast, Condition No. 3 of the 1980 Modification phased"the project over <br /> five years,but not to exceed more than ten years...[and] limit[ed]the number of houses per <br /> year."As the Building Inspector noted,"the petition intent may have been just for the <br /> condominiums but Condition#3 includes single family." <br /> 30. Accordingly,because Condition No. 3 appeared to have not been met,the <br /> Building Inspector declared the Special Permit in default but did not consider it void: "the Board <br /> of Appeals permit is still in effect but subject to a determination set b,. the,Board of&ILeals," <br /> (emphasis added). The Building Inspector suggested that Prime Properties apply to the Board as <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.