03/28/2012 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MARCH 28, 2012 MINUTES Attorney Kevin M. Kirrane represented the Petitions and stated that plans call for demolition of the existing, non -conforming, four-bedroom, two-story home on the non- conforming lot. Attorney Kirrane submitted photos of the property and dwelling. The property slopes significantly from front to rear and is impacted by wetlands. The property is an oddly -shaped pork chop and is very narrow near the street. Construction of a new four-bedroom dwelling will be placed largely within the foot print of the existing home. Proposed lot coverage will remain below the 20% maximum allowed. The new structure will meet the applicable front, side and rear setback requirements. The new deck will extend beyond the existing footprint but will not be any closer to the wetland resource area than what currently exists. The re -development will be a substantial improvement because the setback to water and wetlands will be reduced by two feet. Another improvement will be replacement of the lawn area with indigenous plantings which will reduce impact on the adjacent wetlands. This proposal is scheduled for the April 12, 2012 Conservation Commission public hearings. The Board of Health has restricted the proposed dwelling to four bedrooms. Comments from abutters include an email from Paul and Mary Lou Bast at 61 Spoondrift • Way expressing concern about the proposal disrupting their existing view. They are also concerned about the potential adverse impact on the ecosystem. Amy Coughlin of 56 Spoondrift Way sent an email to the ZBA office expressing concern about the proposal affecting her view. She said that the proposed driveway will be closer to her property and raised concerns about privacy and noise. The ZBA office mailed copies of the proposal to Ms. Coughlin and told her that the entire Petition was available for review in the ZBA office and the Town Clerk's office. Although the ZBA office told her that she could attend the public hearings to express her concerns, Ms. Coughlin kept repeating that she wasn't aware that this would be her "only opportunity to speak and be heard." She said that she was not prepared. Mr. Nelson told her that she would have another opportunity to attend the Conservation Commission hearings. While she said that she is not opposed, she stated that she would like to consult an attorney and evaluate the proposal. Ms. Coughlin. said that she bought her home a year ago for the view and its waterfront community. She stated that "this is unfair", " it feels wrong" and she feels that the house could have been "designed differently". She asked the Board to take into consideration that she is the one "most affected by the proposal". Karen Twohy spoke on behalf of Eileen Tye of 52 Spoondrift Way, whose primary concern is the proposal's impact on her view. Mr. Nelson commented that the ZBA does not have jurisdiction over views. • Mr. Blaisdell made a motion to grant the Written Finding. Findings: not substantially more detrimental than what currently exist; there is sufficient land to provide adequate parking and setbacks. This Decision is conditioned upon: 8