Laserfiche WebLink
TOWN OF MASHPEE <br /> Board of Appeals <br /> Minutes <br /> Wednesday, May 8, 1996 - 7:30 P.M. <br /> The Mashpee Board of Appeals held a meeting at the Mashpee Middle School on <br /> Wednesday, May 8, 1996 at 7:30 P.M. Board members present and acting throughout <br /> were Edward M. Govoni, Chairman; James E. Regan III, Clerk and Associate Members <br /> Kenneth E. Marsters and Robert G. Nelson. Board members absent were Cheryl A. <br /> Hawver and John J. Friel. <br /> Kostas and Ina K. Nenortas -Request a Variance from Section 174-31 of the Zoning By- <br /> laws for permission to vary the minimum lot size requirements to allow the construction of <br /> a single family house on property located in an R-5 zoning district at 134 Pimlico Pond <br /> Road (Map 2, Block 138) Mashpee. M.A. (This hearing is being reopened from March 13, <br /> 1996). <br /> Members sitting: E. Govoni, K. Marsters, R. Nelson <br /> Attorney John Alger represented the applicant and stated that the hearing had been <br /> reopened because of a question on lack of notice. He reviewed plans of the adjoining lots <br /> and stated that each had homes on them and it would not be reasonable to combine this <br /> lot. He explained that the property drops 30 to 35 feet from Pimlico Pond Road down to <br /> Wakeby Pond and drops from 10 feet to the adjoining lot. He said the lot is not usable <br /> without a variance and this would result in financial hardship to the owners. He said the <br /> lot is similar in size to other lots in the area and that using it for a single family residence <br /> would not be a detriment to the neighborhood. <br /> Mr. Govoni moved to grant the Variance based on the following: the lot was created in <br /> 1986 and was in an R-3 zoning district with a 40,000 square foot requirement, was part of <br /> a subdivision plan and clearly intended to stand on its own and not as part of adjoining <br /> land, lot has been assessed as a separate buildable lot, is larger than many lots in the <br /> immediate area and without relief, could not be used for a residence. The hardship is the <br /> topography of the land and the amount of wetlands and the stringent new wetlands <br /> requirement. Mr. Nelson seconded. All agreed. <br />