7/25/2018 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES JULY 25, 2018 Mr. Wall's clients purchased a lot at 401 Monomoscoy Road last August located in an R- 3 Zoning District. After they purchased the property,they obtained a building permit from the Building Department which gave them permission to construct a four (4) bedroom dwelling with a two (2) car detached garage. Mr. Roche, the homeowner, intends to use the garage for purposes of a workshop, storing lawn and garden equipment, and also for storing some antique motor vehicles. He seeks to have a lavatory that is 3 ft. 10 inches, by 8 ft. bathroom. When the plans were submitted to the building department,the bathroom was shown in the detached garage,but the building department issued the permit with a condition that stated the plans are approved without a lavatory. Construction is underway, and to resolve the matter Mr. Wall met with Building Commissioner, Michael Mendoza. Mr. Mendoza respectfully said that because lavatories are not expressly set forth in the use table, it is his position that they are not allowed. Mr. Wall respectfully submitted a letter explaining the reasons stating that in a residential (R-3) district under Section 174-25 A.I in the use table, single-family dwellings are allowed as of right, and under Section 174-25 1 1, detached garages are allowed as an accessory use as of right. The garage is allowed under a building permit with no relief from zoning. He said that putting in a bathroom in the garage does not change the nature of the garage. He believes the Building Commissioner's decision can be overturned. In the alternative,the second argument is that under the zoning bylaws,if there is a use that is substantially similar to allowed uses, the Board can make a Finding to allow that use even though it is not expressly listed in the table of uses. Mr. Wall said the garage design on the plan has two open ends, and that there is a pull-down stairs to the second floor storage area. He respectfully asked the Board to make a decision on overturning and agree to a Finding. Mr. Mendoza, Building Commissioner addressed the Board and stated that he did meet with Mr. Wall and discussed the possibilities and options of this project. He felt the correct process was to meet the applicant's half-way by giving them the permit for the house, but addressing the issue with the bathroom in the garage. Mr. Mendoza said that he has addressed similar issues in the past, that under the current bylaws he does not have the authority to grant permission because there is nothing that states whether he can or cannot grant permission. He said he knows that sometimes these projects get built after the fact, so he is looking at this project as a two point issue. He said his position is that he is looking for the Board to uphold his reason for the denial on granting this permit for the bathroom, and that it makes more sense for the applicant to apply under section 174-25 K for "the matter that is not covered" which the Board can rule on is if it meets zoning or not. Mr. Goldstein said he agrees that Mike could not allow the bathroom because of the way the bylaw is written. He said there have been problems in the past, but he said he has no problem with the bathroom in the garage. His problem is a finished space becoming a guest house. He would like specific conditions applied to the decision. 2