1988-1990-ZBA APPEALS (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• • -� Mashpee Board of Appeals April 11, 1990 Lindsley (cont.) Mr. Lindsley presented plans of the Merry Meadow shopping area and explained that he proposed to use one office in Building 1 for a sales office and have four parking spaces.for used cars adjacent to Falmouth Road. He explained that no repair or maintenance work would be done at this site. He stated that the majority of his business was dealer -to -dealer and he had recently worked from the Cataumet Garage in Cataumet. There were no comments from abutters. Robert McNutt, owner of the property, spoke in favor of the application. Mr. Makunas stated that he would want to know the opinion of the Building Inspector on the application. Mr. Halpern asked if banners or signs would be used and Mr. Lindsley said this was not planned. Mr. Lindsley said he had discussed his plans with the Building Inspector and learned he was limited to a C-2 zoning district which limited him in finding a location in Mashpee. 'Mr. Makunas moved to take the application under advisement. Mr. Govoni seconded. All agreed. James L. Galvin TR - Requests a Variance under Section 174-31 for permission to vary the setback requirements in an R-3 zoning district on property located at 12 Compass Circle (Map 105, Block 263) Mashpee, MA. Members present: C. Hawver, M. Makunas, E. Govoni, R. Halpern Attorney Richard Dubin represented the Applicant. He presented plans for a proposed garage and explained that the lot is located on the corner of two roads and its unusual shape prevents building without a variance. He stated that he had seen cases where hardship was determined when an owner cannot use his land in the same manner as others in the neighborhood and said other homes in the area had garages. Board members discussed the set -backs in the area and were of the opinion that the front setbacks were 25'. Ms. Hawver read a letter from an abutter, Lorraine Viglione, objecting to the location of the garage and stating that it would cause traffic hazzards. 2. Mr. Makunas asked why the garage was placed so far from the house and Mr. Dubin replied that the architect had done the siting to preserve views from the house. Mr. Dubin said he would be willing to discuss the location of the garage with his client and if moving it closer to the house would lessen the impact on traffic he thought they would do so. Mr. Makunas moved to take the application under advisement. He suggested the applicant discuss the location of the garage with the abutter who objected. Ms. Hawver seconded. All agreed.