01/24/2024 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES JANUARY 24,2024 Mr. Furbush asked if the State approved this project because of the 21-day clock. Mr. McManus said he cannot say, but under the local bylaw standard order of conditions, notice of intent are stricter than the State. The DEP only considers their own regulations, not the Town bylaw regulations. The State typically does not consider the Town decision. There's a 10-day appeal process with the DEP, and there's a 60-day appeal the Town Bylaw decision. Mr. McManus offered to return on another day and discuss the Conservation Department's filing process. The Board had a conversation regarding the filing process of appeals. The Conservation Department has certain filing guidelines to follow and are not the same as the zoning filing process. Attorney Kirrane explained to the Board the term "Constructive Approval" and stated that this particular project was not a constructive approval. The DEP could have not given a superseding order of conditions. Mr. McManus stated that he has submitted questions for Town Counsel to consider such that the order of conditions submitted by the Conservation Department can make sure that the mitigation of this project is following the process as intended. The Conservation Department will still be overseeing the mitigation, and maintains jurisdiction of this project. Mr. Bonvie read the Zoning Bylaw §174-24 C (2) for the Board. Mr. Goldstein mentioned after reading the State's review, in his opinion agrees that this project is an improvement over what currently exists. Mr. McManus stated that the Town Bylaw in certain types of wetlands resource areas or coastal flow, the Town Bylaw has different standards than the State and in most cases is stricter. He also mentioned in his opinion,that he was not sure why an onsite was not performed for this project. Mr. Paul Colombo, Chair of the Conservation Commission asked the Board to review Section 11 of the Order of Conditions.He believes that the State wrote this condition into their form.He stated that the denial was dated April 10t', and had to be postmarked by April 13t'. He said that the Commission reviewed all the information that was submitted by the applicant during all the continued meetings, but it wasn't enough to approve the project. He stated that the Commission follows Regulation 25 of their bylaw, and the project did not meet their standards. This bylaw is an old bylaw dating back to 2005. He asked the Board how they justify the lot coverage with all the extra structures being added to the property especially with land within coastal storm flow. He also mentioned that he spoke to the Town Manager and Town Counsel regarding the Town Bylaw Chapter 172 Regulation 25, 7C, 1 and 2. He believes that a raze and replace of a home should not be allowed to expand, and should remain within the same footprint. Mr. Bonvie was aware of Town Counsel's decision on this regulation. s