01/09/2002 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mashpee Zoning Minutes—January 9, 2002 g Board of Appeals Sitting: James E. Regan III, Richard T. Guerrera and Frederick R. Borgeson. Mr. Peter Sullivan of Sullivan Engineering represented the Petition and stated that plans call for construction of the pier, ramp and float on the subject property. The Conservation Commission has approved the proposal. No comments were received from abutters. Mr. Borgeson moved to grant the Special Permit, subject to findings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and Sullivan Engineering plan entitled `Site Plan, Proposed Boardwalk, Pier, Ramp & Float at 5 Mute Swan Circle, Mashpee, Mass., Date: September 5, 2001, Revision Date: 12/28/01'. Mr. Guerrera seconded. All agreed. Mr. Borgeson moved to grant a Variance of 22 feet, subject to same findings and plan as noted above. Mr. Guerrera seconded. All agreed. Eric & Ellen K. Dublirer—Request a Special Permit under Section 174-17 of the Zoning By-laws for permission to construct an addition to a pre-existing, non-conforming dwelling on property located in an R-3 zoning district at 8 Elizabeth Island Road (Map 123 Parcel 13 1) Mashpee, MA. Eric & Ellen K. Dublirer—Request a Variance from Section 174-31 of the Zoning By-laws to vary the front setback and lot coverage requirements to allow for construction of an addition to a pre-existing, non-conforming dwelling on property located in an R-3 zoning district at 8 Elizabeth Island Road (Map 123 Parcel 13 1) Mashpee, MA. Sitting: James E. Regan III, Robert G. Nelson and Zella E. Elizenberry. Mr. David Sanicki of Cape & Islands Engineering represented the Petition and submitted photos of the subject property. He said that the existing structure has a sizeable deck. The size of the proposed addition is 14 x 28 feet. Mr. Sanicki said that the Petitioner would be willing to reduce the size of the existing deck in order to reduce the lot coverage. Mr. Dublirer said that there are 5 sets of sliders accessing the deck. Ms. Elizenberry asked the nature of the hardship. Mr. Sanicki said that the hardship exists because the deck is an entrance and egress. Mr. Brem said that the deck is very large at 9% lot coverage of a small lot. Mr. Sanicki said that hardship exists because of the abutting streets. Mr. Dublirer said that he wants to maintain the home as a ranch-style home. He said that he is selling his home in Framingham and moving to Town full-time. Mr. Dublirer said that the deck is very pretty and that he does not want to remove it. Mr. Brem and Ms. Elizenberry repeated that a `pretty deck' does not qualify as a legitimate hardship to justify a large increase in lot coverage. Mr. Dublirer said that he understood. After some discussion, the Board and the Petitioner came to an agreement of reducing the lot coverage with removal of a portion of the existing deck.