My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/10/2021 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
>
11/10/2021 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/9/2021 5:00:21 PM
Creation date
12/9/2021 10:27:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/10/2021
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> MEETING MINUTES <br /> NOVEMBER 10, 2021 <br /> Attorney Kevin Kirrane represented the homeowners for the Special Permit and Variance <br /> request to construct a garage and second floor addition. Also present was Raul with Cape <br /> & Islands Engineering. Attorney Kirrane provided the Board with a site plan, house plans, <br /> and his written narrative of the project. A portion of the second floor addition will be built <br /> above the garage. The site is a 15,000+sq. ft. lot has 90 ft. of frontage along Sunset Circle, <br /> and 116 ft. of frontage along vegetated wetland. The shape of the lot is narrow in the front <br /> and wide in the rear along the wetlands. <br /> The property has been improved with a 3-bedroom ranch style single-family residential <br /> structure and fails to meet the 15 ft. side yard setback from its northerly property line where <br /> the deck is only 8.9 ft. and the dwelling is 11.1 ft. from the property line. The dwelling also <br /> does not conform to the 40 ft. front yard setback, but meets the average setbacks of the <br /> structures on either side and is considered to be conforming. The application is for Special <br /> Permit relief for an alteration or extension of a pre-existing non-conforming structure. <br /> The proposed Variance relief was applied for because of the 8.3 ft. from the southerly <br /> property line. Therefore the applicants are seeking a 6.7 ft. variance from that line. The <br /> Board has the discretion to grant variance relief if the applicant can demonstrate that a <br /> hardship exists due to the shape and topography, and other soil conditions on the lot, and <br /> will not nullify the intent of the bylaw. In this particular case the site plan demonstrates a <br /> significant change in the angle of the lot line to the South thereby rendering the front <br /> portion of the lot narrower than the rear portion of the lot near John's Pond. <br /> The project has not been in front of the Conservation Commission, but is scheduled for <br /> next week. The Board could certainly condition upon the Commission's approval, and any <br /> changes to the plan could reappear to the Zoning Board to seek a modification of the permit <br /> relief. <br /> Sharon read two letters submitted by the direct abutters who is in favor of the project, and <br /> believe that the project will not be a detriment to the neighborhood. <br /> Chairman Furbush asked what the additions include. Attorney Kirrane said that the <br /> additions include a second floor to the main dwelling and above the garage. The structure <br /> remains a 3-bedroom dwelling. Mr. Furbush agreed that the lot is odd in shape and has no <br /> issues. He polled the Board for comments. <br /> Mr. Goldstein questioned the variance request. Attorney Kirrane said that the application <br /> does not include the front yard setback because it meets the average setbacks on both sides. <br /> There is a slight bump-out in the front, however the question really becomes whether or <br /> not it is getting closer than the average setbacks, but the fact that it is an average setback <br /> and not meeting the 40 ft. setback makes it a non-conforming condition. The question is <br /> does this require a variance or is it a non-conforming condition even though it's an allowed <br /> condition because it meets the average setbacks. The Board can include this as part of the <br /> Special Permit for alteration or change. <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.