03/28/2001 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Decisions

Home Browse Search

Mashpee Zoning Gary Tavares SP-01-31 3 Board of Appeals will not cause excessive erosion or cause increased runoff onto neighboring properties or into any natural river, stream, pond or water body and will not �! otherwise be detrimental to the town or the area". j Section 174-25.G.4, Section 174-25.G.7 and Section 174-25.G.9 of the ZoningII' By-laws state that the following uses are allowed in an I-1 zoning district by grant of Special Permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals: "Principle industrial, wholesale and transportation uses. (4) Plumbing, electrical or carpentry shop or other similar service or repair ! I. establishment. (7) Trucking terminals. (9) Wholesale business and storage. I Section 174-25.H.6 of the Zoning By-laws states: !' "Any other uses determined by the Zoning Board of Appeals to be substantially similar in their construction, operation, traffic and environmental impact to other uses allowed as of right or by special permit in a district and which are substantially dissimilar in those respects from uses prohibited in a district. Where the Zoning I' Board of Appeals cannot make a clear determination, such uses shall be considered prohibited. No use specifically listed in the Table of Use Regulations shall be allowed by the Zoning Board of Appeals in any district where it is prohibited. In ! reviewing an application for determination under this subsection,the procedure applicable for a special permit shall be followed by the applicant and the Zoning Board of Appeals". !' SPECIFIC FINDINGS The Board determined that: 1. although the proposed use is not specifically enumerated in the By-laws,the proposed use is similar in impact to other uses allowed by the Zoning By-laws such as plumbing, electrical, or carpentry,trucking terminals, wholesale business and storage. 2. the proposed use is consistent with applicable law, rules and regulations. 3. the proposed use would not be detrimental to the town or the area. 4. the proposed use would not have an adverse effect on public health or safety. 5. that there will not be an excessive demand upon community facilities as a result of the proposed use. 6. the subject property is exempt from the Cape Cod Commission Development !' Agreement. 7. the proposal conforms to the setback requirements. 8. there is adequate land area to provide sufficient parking. j 9. the Design Review Committee and Technical Review Team have approved the project. 10. storm drainage plans submitted by J. E. Landers-Cauley Engineering were designed using the guidelines adopted by the Wetlands Protection j Act-Stormwater Management. i I