Laserfiche WebLink
Board of Appeals Minutes lune 28, 1989 Page 2. <br />The Harris lot does not have sufficient frontage to subdivide under <br />the present R-3 requirements requiring 150 feet but the total land area <br />is 2.04 acres. His proposed subdivision of the lot would result in one <br />lot with 50' frontage and one with 110' frontage. He explained that <br />they had considered an alternate plan which would have divided the <br />frontage by one lot with 150' frontage and a private roadway to the <br />rear lot. The Town Planner had reviewed this plan and was not in favor <br />of it. <br />Mr. Hanrahan read a memo from the Town Planner in which he stated <br />that there is no way that this request should be properly considered <br />a Variance request since there is no hardship existing. <br />Mr. Saniki responded that he considered that there is a hardship <br />since the zoning regulations were adopted after the parcels were <br />created. <br />Ms. Hawver stated that the lot is now a buildable lot and to <br />subdivide it.would not be in the jurisdiction of the Board of Appeals. <br />Mr. Makunas said that the vote of Town Meeting would be required <br />to make the change in zoning. <br />Mr. Makunas moved to take the Petition under advisement. Mr. <br />Hanrahan seconded. All agreed. <br />Leonard Needleman - (Owners of record: Leonard and Deborah <br />• Needleman) Request a Special Permit under Section 5.1 of,the Zoning <br />By-laws for permission to change or extend a non -conforming structure <br />in an R-3 zoning district on property located at 14 Keel Way (Map 120, <br />Block 131) Mashpee, MA. <br />Members sitting: Cheryl Hawver, Michael Makunas, William Hanrahan <br />Attorney Frederick Grosser represented the Applicant. He reviewed <br />plans for the construction of a two car garage. Mr. Makunas asked why <br />garage had to be placed so close to the lot line. He replied that the <br />house has extensive glass walls. <br />The Board members reviewed the application and expressed the <br />opinion that this was a Variance request rather than a Special Permit. <br />Mr. Boyd stated that applications under 5.1 cannot be used to correct <br />all problems. Mr. Makunas suggested that the application be withdrawn <br />without prejudice and that the Applicant re -apply for a Variance. <br />Mr. Grosser presented a petition to withdraw without prejudice. <br />Mr. Hanrahan moved to accept the withdrawal without prejudice. <br />Mr. Makunas seconded. All agreed. <br />• <br />