My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/24/2024 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
>
01/24/2024 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/16/2024 5:00:20 PM
Creation date
2/16/2024 8:53:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/24/2024
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> MEETING MINUTES <br /> JANUARY 24,2024 <br /> Mr. Steve Cook, with the Conservation Commission wanted to know if the Board was aware that <br /> the Section 174-33 was not written in the hearing notice, and he wanted more clarification from <br /> the Board regarding the 50 ft. setback. The Board stated that the proposed structure is not any <br /> closer to the wetlands than the pre-existing structure. The entire property is in the wetlands, and <br /> the Board and the Zoning Enforcement Officer does not consider land subject to coastal storm <br /> flowage with lot coverage. <br /> Attorney Kirrane agreed to move forward with the application knowing that the advertisement did <br /> not include §174-33. <br /> Mark Dibb commented on the remarks from the Commission Chair, and Mr. McManus. The <br /> number of hearings and the reason for their denials. He discussed the Commission's meeting <br /> minutes dated April 10,2023 that listed a timeline of the several meeting dates of the Conservation <br /> Commission and their final deliberations dated April 6, 2023 of the motion to deny the project <br /> without prejudice under their Regulation 25 Section 7 (Setbacks). Mr. Dibb stated that the current <br /> Commission has approved and denied similar projects with same setbacks, and expansions in the <br /> velocity zone.He believes there's has been an interpretation change with the Commission over the <br /> last year and a half. There buffer zone bylaws have changed,but the regulations have not changed. <br /> He stated for the record that at the March 23, 2023 meeting,Mr. McManus recommended closing, <br /> and approving the project. <br /> Mr. Bonvie believes that this Board should concentrate on the Special Permit bylaws and not be <br /> concerned with decisions of the Conservation Commission. <br /> Mr.Furbush asked Mr.Dibb to provide other applications that are similar to this project. Mr. Dibb <br /> mentioned 81 Bluff Avenue was an expansion in a flood plain, and did not require a waiver. Mr. <br /> Furbush wanted to know if there's consistency with what Conservation approves or does not <br /> approve. <br /> Mr.Dibb stated that his firm is asked to provide a waiver to the Conservation Department for every <br /> project that has an expansion of structure within 50 ft.within land subject to coastal storm flowage. <br /> The regulations have not changed.He said that there were eight projects in 2023 that did not require <br /> a waiver. <br /> Attorney Kirrane stated that Chairman Bonvie wants the Board to refer to the Special Permit bylaw <br /> description Section 174-24 C (2). <br /> Mr. Paul Colombo, Chair of the Conservation Commission spoke and told the Board that the <br /> Conservation Commission will be asking for waivers on every project, and will adhere to their <br /> bylaw standards as discussed with Town Counsel. <br /> 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.