My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/24/2008 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
TownOfMashpee
>
Town Clerk
>
Minutes
>
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
09/24/2008 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/1/2022 3:13:50 PM
Creation date
2/1/2022 3:06:35 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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 <br />Board of Appeals Minutes <br />• 3 September 24, 2008 <br />Daniel Aver: Requests a Variance from Section 174-31 of the <br />Zoning By-laws to seek relief from the setback requirements in order <br />to build a three -season room and a deck on property located in an R- <br />3 zoning district at 11 Oneida Avenue (Map 65 Parcel 44) Mashpee, <br />MA. <br />Attorney John Kenney and Steve Cook, Architect from Cotuit Bay Design <br />represents the applicant at this hearing. They are seeking a variance for <br />setback relief in order to add additional living space to the first floor. The <br />tot is burdened with all frontages which require 40 foot setbacks. The <br />existing dwelling is non -conforming and in order to have any additions <br />constructed the applicant will need a variance. Steve Cook presents his <br />plans to the Board and shows where the relief will be needed. Attorney <br />Kenney explains to the Board that there would be no building envelope left <br />if all the zoning were conformed to. The Board reviews the plans and try to <br />suggest some alternatives to reduce the variance request. Jonathan Furbush <br />• suggests moving the deck around — Mr. Cook says that they would lose the <br />use of the deck should these suggested changes be made. There is limited <br />movement for any acceptable changes. Mr. Cook says that the bulkhead is in <br />the way and there is only one window for an egress. They discuss the one <br />foot offset and the Board is reluctant to give a variance of 39 feet — it would <br />send a message that they are not comfortable with. Attorney Kenney says <br />that the lot line abuts a road that will never be developed and there are no <br />abutters that are concerned. They all discuss various suggestions to reduce <br />the variance request. Jonathan Furbush also suggest making the room round <br />and changing the pitch of the roof. Mr. Cook says that he can make soiree <br />compromises after he speaks with his client. The Board discusses the shed <br />and how far off the lot line it needs to be — they ask Mr. Stevens if it needs <br />to conform to frontyard setbacks or can it just sit 5 feet off the lot line. It is <br />determined that the applicant will need a variance for the shed if it stays in <br />that area. The Board would like to see revised plans before they grant <br />anything. The matter will be continued until October 8, 2008 at which time <br />the new plans will be submitted and the Board is in agreement to grant the <br />variances with the compromises they have come up with. All agree. So <br />moved. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.