01/23/2002 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Decisions

Home Browse Search

.... Town of Mash ee .•s Sry v h' 16 Great Xeck Pgad Jlrorth MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEAUF hpee, lWassachusetts 02649 Decision for a Variance RE: S.V. Raleigh Corporation V-02-17 486 &490 Main Street Map 27 Parcels 123 & 159 A Petition was filed on December 7, 2001 by S.V. Raleigh Corporation for a Variance from Section 174-43 of the Zoning By-laws for permission to reduce the required number of parking spaces in a commercial center on properties located in a C-2 zoning district at 486 and 490 Main Street (Map 27 Parcel 123 and Map 27 Parcel 159) Mashpee, MA. Owner of record of 486 Main Street: Lorraine M. Raleigh, Trustee. Owner of record of 490 Main Street: James Robert Vicino. Notice was duly given to abutters in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A. Notice was given by publication in The Cape Cod Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Mashpee, on January 7 and January 14, 2002, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof A Public Hearing was held on the Petition at the Mashpee Town Hall on Wednesday, January 23, 2002, at which time the following members of the Zoning Board of Appeals were present and acting throughout: Edward M. Govoni, James E. Regan III and Robert G. Nelson. The Mashpee Zoning Board of Appeals issues this Decision pursuant to the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A Section 10 and the Town of Mashpee Zoning By-laws. I Ii Ms. Eliza Cox and Messrs. Butler, Ojala and Raleigh represented the Petition. Attorney Patrick M. Butler of Nutter, McClennen& Fish stated that the Planning Board has given preliminary approval of the proposal and continued its hearing to allow the Petitioner an opportunity to receive grant of the Variance relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Design Review Committee and Technical Review Committee have approved the project. The Petitioner has received the Development of Regional Impact Decision from the Cape Cod Commission. Attorney Butler referred to several unique features of the subject property, which create hardship for the Petitioner. An indentation on the southeasterly border of the subject property dictates the location of the proposed building and parking area. The unusual shape of the property determines the location of drainage areas and places substantial limitations on the placement of the proposed building and parking spaces. The soil conditions restrict the placement of the septic system. A large sink hole drops significantly in elevation in a short distance on the property, thereby creating a large unbuildable area on the property.