11/22/2000 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

Mashpee Zoning Minutes—November 22, 2000 10 Board of Appeals F Mr. Nelson attended the Design Review Committee meetings and stated that the landscaping shall be maintained as it is now. No landscape or performance security ' would be required. _. The Design Review Committee has approved the project. Mr. Nelson suggested that the request for a Special Permit under Section 174-5 LB of the Zoning By-laws should be removed from the Petition because the By-laws require approval from the Design Review Committee for the signage before the ZBA can approve it. Attorney Gildea agreed to Withdraw without Prejudice the portion of the Petition for a Special Permit under Section 174-51.B. of the Zoning By-laws. No comments were received from abutters. Ms. Elizenberry moved to grant a Variance of 10.6 feet to allow for construction of the ""IIC II addition and a Variance of 25.5 feet from the front setback requirements to the existing building, subject to criteria 1, 2, 3, 4 and findings 1, 3, 4 and plan dated 10/11/00. Mr. Nelson seconded. All agreed. �gglH+ L.. Ms. Elizenberry moved to grant a Special Permit, subject to findings 1, 3, 4, 5 and plan dated 10/11/00.. Mr. Nelson seconded. All agreed. Celine R. Ritzo—Requests a Variance from 174-31 of the Zoning By-laws to vary the front setback requirements to allow for construction of a greenhouse on property located in an R-5 zoning district at 16 Candlewood Lane (Map 21 Block 34) Mashpee, MA. Owner of record: Angela C. and Rose A. Castoria and Celine R. Ritzo. _ Sitting: James E. Regan III, Robert G. Nelson and Marshall A. Brem. II Ms. Maribeth Hersey represented the Petition and entered into a long dissertation of the history of the application. Ms. Ritzo also attended the meeting. Ms. Hersey stated that the request for a Variance is because the subject property fronts along two streets. She i said that none of the neighbors that were contacted have any objection to the proposal. oppp• The Petitioner drilled holes and framed everything on the ground. Then the outside shell was erected to protect the plants. The Petitioner took the risk and constructed the +I greenhouse because of the threat to the plants and trees from the cold weather. Ms. Ritzo I stated that some of the trees were many years old. The greenhouse is a 12x16-foot C structure with 2x4-foot framing. After reviewing the plans, the Board discovered that Ms. Hersey had drawn the proposed greenhouse on the plans herself. The Board said it had no problem with the project, but that the Petitioner must submit a certified, engineered plan with proper dimensions in order for the Board to grant a Variance. No comments were received from abutters. I