04/12/2005 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mashpee Zoning John Reardon 2 Board of Appeals SP-05-50 narrow lot which currently has upon it a small residential structure that has failed a septic inspection. Currently, the town zoning requires the lot to have 40,000 square feet and maintain 150 feet of frontage. The lot does not meet those requirements and therefore it is deemed a non-conforming lot. The structure is non-conforming in that it sits on and over the southerly boundary line and within 50 feet of the adjacent wetland resource area. There is a 15 foot sideyard setback requirement as well as a 50 foot setback requirement from the wetlands resource area. Mr. Kirrane feels the language in Section 174-17 and 174-20 applies to the current situation for altering a pre-existing non-conforming structure and the Board finding the new dwelling not more detrimental to the area. They are also 39 feet from the ACEC which is more than the required 25 feet. In opposition to this matter is Attorney Howard Smith of 60 Amy Brown Road. He states that the lot is substandard and that by the addition of a larger house it is exacerbating the non-conformity of the lot. Current zoning requires 150 feet of frontage and this only has 50 feet. There are two dwellings on what should be considered one lot, not two. By razing this structure, one is setting a precedent that having two dwellings on one lot is acceptable. He feels this is being done in defiance of the law. Mr. Smith feels this structure should not be built. Mr. Smith feels this dwelling would substantially change the look of the neighborhood. Mr. Nelson confers with the board and they feel they can make a motion in favor of the requested relief. Frederick Borgeson makes a motion to grant the Special Permit. This matter is conditioned on the driveway easement being defined. Mr. Reardon states that he will build a new driveway for the neighbor. SPECIAL PERMIT CRITERIA Section 174-17 and 174-20 of the Mashpee Zoning By-laws and Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Chapter 6, require a finding that the extension, alteration or change shall not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming use.