Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Appeals Mashpee Commons Limited Partnership SP -99-49 <br />Mr. Renz indicated that parking demands and wastewater demands have been <br />met. He submitted a table documenting existing buildings' parking requirements per the <br />Mashpee Zoning Ordinance and existing parking spaces within Mashpee Commons. Mr. <br />Renz informed the Board that the estimates for wastewater are approximately 42,000 <br />gallons per day, and the plant has a Groundwater Discharge Permit issued by DEP <br />currently approved and built to handle 80,000 gallons of wastewater per day. <br />Mr. Renz stated that the applicant has submitted plans for Buildings 15 and 24 <br />with the specifics of each building to the Design Review Committee and has received <br />approval from such Committee. <br />No comments were received from abutters. <br />FINDINGS <br />General Findings <br />1. the subject property is located in a C-1 zoning district at 38 Nathan Ellis <br />Highway and consists of 40.3 acres. <br />Special Permit Criteria <br />Section 9 of Chapter 40A and Section 174-24C of the Mashpee Zoning <br />By-law require that the permit granting authority determine that the proposed use and <br />development are consistent with applicable law, rules and regulations; that there will be <br />no adverse effect on public health or safety; that there will not be an excessive demand <br />upon community facilities created as a result of the proposal; and that there will not be a <br />significant adverse impact on the environmental factors listed in Section 174-24.C.2. <br />Specific Findings <br />1. that the Board granted a Special Permit to the property in 1986 (SP -86-04- <br />024) as well as subsequent minor revisions, each of which has taken on the <br />form of a modification of the Special Permit, for permission to operate with <br />retail, office, restaurant and residential uses. <br />2. that the use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning <br />by-laws. <br />3. that there are circumstances relating to the shape and topography which affect <br />the subject lot and not the district in which it is located. <br />4. that a literal enforcement of the By-laws would involve hardship to the <br />petitioner. <br />5. that relief may be granted without detriment to the public good. <br />6. that there is adequate land area to provide sufficient parking. <br />