The Heritage Challenge Course in Sandwich was shut down by Superior Court as unlawful. But Heritage has submitted a new application. New by changing the zoning definition to Small-scale Community Recreation, in order to allow operation of its challenge course on a residential lot.

At the zoning board hearing the neighbors have been shut down when comparing the new application use to the previous use, which was deemed illegal in Superior Court. This is not a fair hearing. Heritage is allowed to quote court testimony. But the public is chastised when quoting court testimony with “this is a new application.” Yes, a new application, but the actual use remains the same and is unlawful. Changing the definition does not change the “unlawful use” adjudged by the court. It only changes the zoning definition. The bylaw violations remain. The ZBA knows this.

Heritage confirms no change in its R1 Lot use. The Superior Court declares this use will do substantial harm to the neighborhood. This argument was lost by Heritage in Superior Court. Heritage did not appeal. Will the ZBA allow new “manipulated” studies to overturn an unappealed Superior Court Judgement? Watch this space, Superior Court.

Carlo M. DiPersio

Morgan Trail


(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.