1988-1990-ZBA APPEALS (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• MINUTES September 14, 1988 -3- BOARD OF APPEALS Chester Koblinsky, Harbor Master, stated that he could not comment on the By-law because the blueprint does not show the distance to the dock on the concrete wall side. It does not show the dimensions to the poles and to the other man's dock. - Mr. Toomey stated that the DEQE determination was that shallfish were not threatened by the construction of the dock. Mr. Halpern stated that the Board is required to study impact on shellfish under the present By-law. Paul Somervell asked for more information on construction. Attorney Henchy discussed the DEQE shellfish requirements. In order for the DEQE or a local Conservation Commission to act under the DEQE rules, the land containing shellfish has to be mapped and identified. It is entirely possible that between the time the first order was issued and the second order, DEM identified this area as a shellfish area and mapped it. He reviewed the fact that local Conservation Commissions in Massachusetts are free to adopt, and often do adopt, a by-law or a set of rules and regulations which are more stringent than the DEQE standards. Ms. Hawver said that one reason the dock was previously turned down was the opposition of the Conservation Commission, Shellfish Constable and the • abutters. She explained that it is important to now have as much information as possible. Mr. Toomey asked for specifics on information required. Abutters Ken Konikowski and James Garabigian asked for information on distances between the docks. Richard Kauffman, the abutter on the south side, stated he was against the dock. Mr. Toomey agreed to meet with the Conservation Commission and the Shellfish Constable as well as the Harbormaster to determine what additional information they require. He agreed to send letter waiving hearing time constraints. Richard Halpern moved to continue the hearing to October 26, 1988. Mr. Makunas seconded. All agreed. Edward and Aline Amesbury - Request a Variance under Section 7.4 of the Land Space Requirements for permission to vary the sideline setback in an R-3 zoning district on property located at 58 Running Light Way (Map 111, Lot 66) Mashpee, MA. Members sitting: W. Hanrahan, M. Makunas and R. Halpern Attorney Kevin Kirraine represented the petitioners. He presented plans showing proposed new construction on an addition on the house with a sideline setback of 51. The building permit had been issued, the foundation poured when it was discovered that the lot was not included in the New Seabury Special • Permit. Mr. Kirraine stated that the street has 21 lots and 16 of them are in the Special Permit. The Amesbury lot is two lots removed from that zoning. He explained that there would be significant financial hardship if foundation had to be removed. He also stated that there was reliance upon the Town in having sought the advice of the Building Department and having obtained a valid building permit.