Laserfiche WebLink
Mashpee Zoning <br /> Board of Appeals Matthew Mase <br /> 2 V-05-69 <br /> has started to build. The foundation is already in and the building inspector has had a <br /> change of opinion that he could move forward without a variance. Mr. Mills says that his <br /> client thought that the previous variance was all that he needed to obtain. At the time the <br /> lot was granted to be buildable there was no house enveloped on the lot. Mr. Nelson asks <br /> for comments from the audience. Mr. John Dewey of 76 James Circle, direct abutter has <br /> some concerns. Mr. Mills states that his client has conferred with him and has agreed to <br /> compromise on some things. Mr. Dewey addresses the Board with his concerns that now <br /> his privacy has been taken away due to all of the trees that were removed. He does not <br /> have a problem with the house, however, since he cannot meet the 25 foot setbacks he <br /> would like the applicant to put up a fence to keep everything private for both parties. He <br /> would like the fence to match the one on the other side and it should be 8 feet in height. <br /> They have mutually agreed that the fence will start in the rear of the house and continue <br /> to the front line of the dwelling and be about one foot or so off the lot line and maintained <br /> by the applicant since it will be on his property. They have agreed to do this. The Board <br /> feels this is a good compromise and move to grant a 7.9 foot southerly sideyard variance <br /> and an 8- foot frontyard setback variance. <br /> VARIANCE CRITERIA <br /> Section 10 of Chapter 40A requires that the permit granting authority determine <br /> that there are circumstances relating to the shape and topography which affect this lot and <br /> not the district in which it is located and that a literal enforcement of the By-laws would <br /> involve hardship to the petitioner. <br /> GENERAL FINDINGS <br /> 1. that the subject property is located at 84 James Circle and contains 14,123 <br /> square feet. <br /> SPECIFIC FINDINGS <br /> The Board determined that: <br /> 1. a literal enforcement of the By-laws would involve substantial hardship to <br /> the petitioner. <br />