08/12/1998 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Decisions

Home Browse Search

Board of Appeals William McElroy V-98-105 2 Mr. Nelson moved to continue the request for a Variance in order to obtain further input from the Conservation Commission to resolve the issues in question. On September 23, 1998, Attorney Fain Gildea requested that Mr. McElroy's application be continued until October 14, 1998. At the continued hearing on October 14, 1998, MT. Regan stated that he met with Conservation Agent Robert Sherman in September. MT. Regan read a letter submitted by MT. Sherman that confirmed significant adverse effect would occur to wildlife, shellfish, fisheries and storm damage if the lots were to be developed. FINDINGS General Finding 1. the subject property is located at 403 Great Oak Road and consists of 19,177 square feet. Variance Criteria Section 10 of Chapter 40A requires that the permit granting authority determine that there are circumstances relating to the shape and topography which affect this lot and not the district in which it is located and that a literal enforcement of the By-laws would involve hardship to the petitioner. Specific Findings I. extremely dangerous curves along Great Oak Road will jeopardize public safety with construction of three driveways entering onto this road. 2. the subject lot abuts a large area of saltmarsh, freshwater wetlands, ACEC line and lies within the Mashpee National Wildlife Refuge. 3. construction and removal of vegetation on the lot will have significant and adverse effects upon wildlife habitat, shellfish, fisheries and prevention of storm damage, 4. the Board cannot grant relief given the extreme opposition ftom the Conservation Commission and in compliance with § 174.86.F of the Zoning By-laws, "The Board of Appeals, in considering applications hereunder, shall give primary importance to the protection of the environment," In view of the foregoing, the Mashpee Board of Appeals found that the applicant failed to meet the criteria necessary for the granting of a Variance. Upon motion duty made and seconded, the Board of Appeals voted unanimously on October 14, 1998 to deny, without prejudice, Mr. McElroy's request for a Variance.