Laserfiche WebLink
of TMs s,s <br /> z. <br /> Aannin Board <br /> 16 Great Neck Road NOYth <br /> Mashpee, Massachusetts 02649 <br /> standards. Those are more in line with approval language than what he sees in the findings <br /> today. <br /> Ms. Waygan struggled with that herself, usually it is written in the form of an approval, and if it <br /> doesn't get approved the reasons for rejection are stated. <br /> Mr. Tobin commented this situation is unique, and the draft decision was drafted for the Boards <br /> consideration, to be able to add and subtract as the Board sees fit, based on discussion this <br /> evening. If the Board ends up with a denial and grounds aren't expressed in findings, then there <br /> is a problem. <br /> Ms. Waygan noted if that vote happens the decision is tweaked. <br /> Mr. Milbury pointed out Section 28, where it boldly says `is or is not', and that is where the <br /> Board will fill in the blanks on how we vote. <br /> Mr. Tobin explained based on the outcome of the vote, it could be changed. This decision has <br /> bold and underlined provisions clearly subject to adjustment. The first sentence says this <br /> decision "approves /denies" in bold underline, and the final draft will have the result, <br /> everywhere there is bold/underline, is subject to change from tonight's meeting, and will be <br /> adjusted accordingly. Regarding specific findings, if the Board wants to make edits, <br /> adjustments, or intentions, they are welcome to do so during the deliberation process. <br /> Additionally, we have not closed the public hearing. <br /> Mr. Kirrane inquired about moving the findings in groups 1-10 or 21-28, something like that. <br /> Ms. Waygan stated they typically go through individual findings. <br /> Mr. Tobin stated that can be effective but is only necessary if there was a clear dissension <br /> amongst the Board for a particular finding. If they unequivocally want something added or <br /> pulled, and there is consensus. He will say, it was pointed out by the applicant, Number 19-26 <br /> the applicant finds challenging. That is 7 out of 29 findings. He crafted this decision with <br /> balance to account for all Board members perspectives throughout the entire process. <br /> Ms. Waygan commented they must agree on every finding with a simple majority. <br /> In closing, Mr. Kirrane stated this is a good project, they listened to the Board, Town Planner, <br /> and neighbors to make it a great project. He wants to stress that a decrease in LOS does not <br /> make for a significant adverse impact. One thing about traffic findings, LOS C, D or F, they are <br /> not taking an LOS A and turning it into an F. An LOS grade C and LOS grade D are acceptable, <br /> and the state approves these conditions, and even worse conditions. We are making a great <br /> 3 <br />