My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/09/2014 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
TownOfMashpee
>
Town Clerk
>
Minutes
>
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
>
2010-2019
>
2014
>
04/09/2014 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/19/2022 3:53:44 PM
Creation date
1/19/2022 3:53:11 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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).
View images
View plain text
MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br />APRIL 9, 2014 <br />MINUTES <br />• <br />Mr. Kirrane stated Dave MacLean, Architect was present if the Board had any questions, <br />and Mr. and Mrs. Chafetz were also present. Mr. Kirrane mentioned there was some <br />concern that the proposed building is much larger than the Board had previously approved. <br />He asked Dave MacLean to provide a schedule of square footages and particular lot <br />coverage which was attached to the rear of the written presentation. The previously <br />approved square footage of the proposed structure was 2,932 square feet, which is 18% lot <br />coverage. The proposed square footage is 2,975 which is a 42 square foot difference and <br />still represents 18% lot coverage. He also pointed out in his written remarks, the lot is part <br />of the Little Neck Bay cluster sub -division, and technically under the bylaw cluster <br />subdivision rules, 30% lot coverage is allowed. This would comply in the applicable R-3 <br />Zoning District. He stated other than the two variance requests the Board granted the owner <br />of the property, which is under agreement with the Chafetz', the lot is not considered <br />buildable unless relief was granted because of the 40 foot setback requirement. The <br />hardship relates to the site conditions of this lot. The relief can be granted without detriment <br />to the public good or the neighborhood. <br />Mr. Furbush read the comments from Conservation Commission: "Most recent plan <br />changes (smaller house/cantilevered deck) administratively approved at the March. 27`h <br />Concom hearing." <br />• Mr. Furbush read a letter sent from Frankie Drew, Manager of the (ARC) Architectural <br />Review Committee; `The ARC reviewed the design of the new home to be built at the <br />above referenced address. We have no issue with the design of the home and approved it <br />on a preliminary basis. We have a few issues to work out i.e. roof color, use of window <br />materials to be discussed, and a certified Site Plan for the Committee to review for setbacks. <br />We feel that none of these issues will be a problem to work out with the Chafetz's and final <br />approval will be given. We understand that the ZBA hearing is scheduled for April 9, 2014 <br />and their attorney will be issuing a packet of information, including this email, in that <br />packet on March 14, 2014." <br />Mr. Furbush read a comment from Catherine Laurent dated Wednesday, April 9, 2014; <br />"Please advise the Board that the above applicant, if the requested variances are approved, <br />shall require a Curb Cut Permit from the DPW prior to any work being performed on the <br />property and/or issuance of a building permit." <br />David McLean, Architect stated the research he did on the lot was originally developed in <br />1974 with the Tide Run cluster subdivision. There were four lots along Great Oak Road at <br />the time. According to the President of New Seabury, who owned the water district in that <br />area had a water main installed, and it short cut across the marsh to reach Little Neck Bay. <br />The two lots to the West are now unbuildable because the water main curves down the <br />center. He stated the foundations for the deck are now 5.5 feet further back from the <br />resource area that was previously approved. The big difference is the scale of the house <br />relative to the neighbor's house which is quite larger; 2.5 stories with a walk -out. The <br />proposed house is one story with a walk -out similar to the New Seabury homes. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.