10/10/2012 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Jennifer J. and Robert R. Blackburn, Jr. 46 Meadow Haven Drive Mashpee, MA 02649 Finding-2012-47 No comments were received from abutters. General Findings: The subject property is located at 46 Meadow Haven Drive and consists of approximately 18,035 square feet of land. Written Finding Criteria: M.G.L. c. 40A §6. Pre-existing non-conforming structures or uses may be extended or altered, provided, that no such extension or alteration shall be permitted unless there is a Finding by the permit granting authority or that such change, extension or alteration shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming use to the neighborhood. §174-17. Continuance; Extensions; Alterations - Lawfully created structures or uses may be continued, although not confonning with the provisions of this chapter. Non- conforming single- or two-family dwelling structures may be changed, extended or altered if such change, extension or alteration complies with the dimensional requirements applicable to the lot under current provisions of§174-31 or, for lots which have been developed pursuant to §174-21, complies with such requirements as were applicable to initial construction of the dwelling under provisions of§174-21. Changes, extensions or alterations of non-conforming single- or two-family dwelling structures which do not meet the applicable dimensional requirements as set forth above, and changes, extensions or alterations of all other non-conforming structures, or non- conforming uses, may not be made unless there is a Written Finding by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Although said Finding shall not constitute a Special Permit as defined by the General laws and this By-law, the Zoning Board of Appeals shall follow the procedures specified in the General Laws for Special Permits in processing requests for such Findings. Specific Written Findings: The Board determined that: 1. The proposal shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing non- conforming structure or use to the neighborhood due to the following: • The proposal will be an improvement to the home. • The proposal is compatible in size and character with other homes in the neighborhood. • The proposal is well below the maximum 20% lot coverage allowed in the By-law. 2. There is adequate land area to provide sufficient parking. 3. There is adequate land area to provide sufficient setbacks as may be required by the Board. 2