3/11/2020 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES MARCH 11, 2020 Mr. Furbush said in his opinion he would not be able to issue a variance. The Chairman polled the members asking their opinion. Mr. Bonvie was not in favor, Mr. Goldstein was not in favor because of the size of the shed, and cannot see a hardship. Sharon believes there is plenty of room to move it. Jim questioned the lot coverage. The Board could not determine a hardship under the statute, and do not have the rights to amend the bylaw unless there is proof of a hardship. Mr. Furbush said made a suggestion that a shed could be built smaller and moved 5 ft. away from the property line, or increase the size of the smaller existing shed. There's a list of options. The bylaw states that a shed 120 sq. ft. or smaller can be 5 ft. from the property line, and a larger shed will require to be 15 ft. from the property line. Mr. Furbush told the applicant he would require a new site plan depicting the relocation and dimensions of the shed because the current plan cannot be approved. Mr. Bonvie made a motion to accept the applicant's request for a continuance until March 25, 2020. Mr. Goldstein seconded. All were in favor to allow for the applicant's extension. 78 Popponesset Island Road: Owners, Daniel R. Marie and Karen S. Joyce request a Written Finding under §174-17 of the Zoning Bylaws to replace a pre-existing pergola structure with a roofed pavilion on property located in an R-3 Zoning District, Map 106 Parcel 30, Mashpee, MA. Attorney Andrew Singer represented the applicant. Also present was Coastal Engineering. The request is to replace an existing pergola that is on the right side of the house between the fenced area and the attached garage to replace the existing pergola with a roofed pavilion and outdoor living space. The house and the existing pergola are pre-existing non- conforming are too close to the front setback. The Written Finding is a determination that the request is not substantially more detrimental than what exists today, and that there is adequate land area as set forth in the zoning bylaw. The site plan depicted the proposed pavilion outdoor kitchen area located next to the driveway. Mr. Singer said that the roofed pavilion is going to be within the front setback. It will be situated further back than the existing pergola and the house. The pavilion is open on all four sides and will be secured with footings. The setback of the existing pergola is 18.5 ft., the pavilion will be setback 19.7 ft. The current lot coverage is 33.5%, and the request is to increase the lot coverage to 33.9%. The top of the pavilion is the only portion visible from the street and is located within the fenced area. There will be no impact to the house or driveway. The existing deck will be removed and replaced with pavers. The project will be in front of the Conservation Commission on Thursday because it involves a mitigation of the coastal bank. There is no impact on the house,parking, or use. 2