1988-1990-ZBA APPEALS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BOARD OF APPEALS • MINUTES April 12, 1989 The Mashpee Board of Appeals held a meeting at 7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, April 12, 1989 at the Mashpee Town Hall. Members present and acting throughout were Cheryl Hawver..-Acting Chairman, Michael Makunas, Edward Govoni and Richard Halpern. Douglas Boyd, Building Inspector, was in attendance. Lloyd Gainsboro - Requests a Special Permit under Section 6.3.I.9 of the Zoning By-laws for permission to construct a stairway, pier, gangway and float in an R-3 zoning district on property located at 59 Keel Way (Map 120, Block 139) Mashpee, MA. Members sitting: Cheryl Hawver, Michael Makunas and Edward Govoni Douglas Cameron of Braman Engineering represented the petition. He reviewed plans for a 6' x 24' float to replace a 6' x 6' float. The proposed pier would be elevated and extend 52' into Great River. Paul Somerville, Mashpee Shellfish Constable, read comments from the Shellfish Commission which recommended that the applicant consider a reduction in the size of the float to minimize the shading effects on • the submerged aquatic vegetation in the area. The Commission also suggested that the structure be designed in a standard T formation. Ms. Hawver read comments from the Conservation Commission which stated that they considered the 24' float size excessive and that it would have a negative impact on the eelgrass beds. The Conservation Commission also reported that the area is an A.C.E.C. zone and that the start of the dock should be at the 11 foot contour. Gertrude Simmons of the Conservation Commission said she agreed with the comments of the Shellfish Constable and stated that the size of the float indicated it would be used by a number of boats. Mr. Halpern questioned the request to follow the 11' contour. Ms. Simmons responded that it would provide more protection of the bank. Mr. Cameron. said the project is not within the A.C.E.C. zone and he would provide the Board with documentation. He said he would consider a change in the size of the float but considered that the proposed shape is better for the environment than a T shape. The T shape prevents the use of a larger vessel on the inside of the float. He asked what size float would be considered acceptable. Ms. Simmons said she could not comment with the opinions of other members of the Conservation Commission. L]