05/22/2024 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes (2)

Home Browse Search

37. At the conclusion of the public hearings, the Board voted to grant a Written Finding authorizing construction of two additions. 38. On July 16,2024, the Board filed a written decision with the Town Clerk setting forth the procedural history of the matter, several findings, and the decision(FINDING-2024-22) to grant the written finding.A copy of the decision is attached hereto as Exhibit A. 39. The Trustee is aggrieved, within the meaning of G.L. Chapter 40A, § 17, by the decision of the Board. 40. The decision of the Board is erroneous, in excess of the Board's authority, against the weight of the evidence, arbitrary, capricious and whimsical. 41. The errors made by the Board in rendering its decision include, but are not limited to,the following: a. The property's access roadway does not comply with the specifications in the zoning bylaw, which requires unobstructed,paved access for Fire Department apparatus as outlined in §174-32. The property's variance decision from §174-32 is conditioned upon compliance with the plan entitled "Proposed Site& Topographic Plan Located in Mashpee-Mass., Prepared for John C. & Sandra S. Hessler, Scale: 1" =20 FT., Plan No. 030399, Date: Mar. 3, 1999, Cape&Islands Engineering". Any expansion must adhere to zoning bylaw requirements. Legal precedent, such as Mendes v. Bd. of Appeals of Barnstable, 28 Mass. App. Ct. 527, 531 (1990) and Palitz v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Tisbury,26 N.E.3d 175, 177,470 Mass. 795, 796—97 (2015),dictates that a variance cannot serve as a basis for expanding zoning nonconformities. b. The existing house complies with the front yard setback. Any encroachment into the front yard setback requires a variance. According to Regulation §174-31 Land Space Requirement, Table Footnote 19, certain projections are exempt from setback requirements, provided they do not exceed specified dimensions from the foundation line along a line perpendicular to the nearest property line. This includes a house overhang projecting no more than two feet. The current proposal to add a first-floor mudroom under partly the existing second-floor overhang necessitates a 2- foot variance from the front yard setback. Thus,the front yard setback are incorrect, and the Board's findings and conclusions based upon the Petitioner's front yard setback measurements are also incorrect. 7