3/28/2018 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES MARCH 28, 2018 Attorney Kevin Kirrane represented Mr. Coffee who was also present,and is a prospective buyer seeking to build a new home on the lot in question. Mr. Kirrane provided a written narrative that explains the zoning history of the lot, and if in fact the lot was held in common ownership between 1971 and 1981. Mr. Kirrane told the Board that he wanted to address the Building Commissioner's decision letter dated January 17, 2018, and the Variance request at the same time because of the unique history of the lot. Mr. Kirrane mentioned that the lot in question on Amy Brown Road, and the building portion of the lot on Amy Brown Road was shown on a plan dated back in September 1959, when the Town had no zoning,and no Planning Board. Amy Brown Road is an old ancient way, which the Town never paved, and has been a dirt road for a long time. He said ten years later, after the 1971 plan was presented to the Planning Board, another plan dated 1981 was presented to the Planning Board and shows three landlocked parcels that were in marshland that the Planning Board approved as an Approval Not Required (ANR). The Planning Board proposed a condition on that plan that those landlocked marshland parcels had to be appended to the building lots on Amy Brown Road. Mr. Kirrane said the lot was purchased in 1981, and the Town of Mashpee said if a lot was shown on a plan dating back prior to 1977, and conformed with the requirements of Chapter 21' sub-division, than it could be built upon and was considered a protected lot. That zoning bylaw changed in 1985, and the grandfather clause also protected this lot because in 1985 it was separately owned. In 1990, the grandfather clause changed again, and rather than letting the Town decide was a fair grandfather provision, that the grandfather provision would have to comply with Chapter 40 Section 6. Mr. Kirrane believes that lot was held in separate ownership back in 1981, would keep it protected under the particular section and was separately owned based upon the record prior to the 1990 zoning change. Mr. Kirrane continued to explain the Variance request. The Planning Board approved the plan in 1981, the zoning had changed in 1979 when this particular parcel was placed in an R-2 zoning district as opposed to an R-1 zoning district. In 1979,the map changed and the frontage requirement was 125 ft., not the 100 ft. that the lot had. At the time,the Planning Board executed an Approval Not Required,(ANR)which suggests that the lot had adequate frontage on the road, and sufficient acreage to qualify for building purposes. The Building Commissioner's interpretation that the plan should have never been approved because the fact the lot did not have 125 ft. of frontage. Mr. Kirrane pointed out the Conservation Commission on two different occasions granted Orders of Conditions to develop single-family residences on this lot, and the previous Zoning Board approved Variance relief back in 1999,relative to the fire protection bylaw, to be within 100 ft. of an approved surface, relative to the setbacks from the front lot line and setbacks from the wetlands. There was no discussion relative to the need for Variance relief from the frontage requirements. 6