1987 JAN-JUN-ZBA APPEALS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 3 Evidence was received during the hearing which indicated that lot 14 has a house on it. It was further indicated that the Applicant Mr. Sullivan had gone before the Conservation Commission and received an order of Condition for the construction of a house on Lot 14. The evidence further indicated that a Building Permit had issued but that a Stop Work Order had issued by the Conservation Commission as the project did not conform to the plans approved by the Commission: It was noted that the Conservation Commission had been erroneously informed by Mr. Sullivan that a variance had been granted under Section 11A for location of the dwelling within 100 feet of the River. Evidence was further received that D.E.Q.E. had issued a Notice of Non-Compliance to the Applicant for permitting the discharge of drainage into the Mashpee River. Evidence was received that the Building Inspector had issued a Stop Work Order on the construction of the house as it did not comply with the original plans submitted and the septic system was not placed on the area shown on the plan. Evidence was received during the conduct of the hearings from the Mashpee Conservation Commission, the Herring Warden, D.E.Q.E. and from numerous other sources that substantial degrading of the Mashpee River was currently taking place at the site•of. Lots 14 & 15 and that ,the plan as presented by Mr. Sullivan would exacerbate this process of siltation of P the River which would have a serious impact on the continuing' life�of the . ' River as a fish run for alewives and brook trout. The evidence further indicated that the variance request in its present form 'could not be granted without constituting a detriment to the area and without substan- tial derogation from the intent and purpose of Section 11A of the Zoning by-Law. The evidence further indicated a lack of substantial hardship.