Laserfiche WebLink
value was in the land and the home was $200,000 allowing for only a $100,000 renovation. Scott <br /> Goldstein, member of the ZBA, confirmed that 50%was a FEMA requirement for homes located in a <br /> flood zone, adding that Mr. Caparella would also not be able to Raze and Replace under the proposed <br /> Bylaw. Mr. Rowley stated that a homeowner could go beyond the 50%value, provided he comply <br /> with FEMA regulations, and Mr. Mendoza agreed, but the house may need to be rebuilt to comply with <br /> FEMA. The Chair referenced what was originally presented to the Planning Board, which allowed for <br /> a wall to remain, and Mr. Bonvie responded that there was no legal status to allowing a wall. Mr. <br /> Caparella agreed that he was in support of the proposed Article. <br /> Mr. Goldstein referenced Mr. Lynch's comment regarding the allowance of McMansions and stated <br /> that it was not the intent of the ZBA to allow oversized structures and were strict about lot coverage. <br /> The Chair referenced Planning Board minutes from May 2 that inquired of the ZBA whether they <br /> would accept a limit on the increase of the footprint of a house to 25%. Mr. Goldstein responded that <br /> he would not. The Chair read the minutes and discussion, as presented by ZBA members, a dialogue <br /> that no footprint would be increased, but in fact then corrected that the footprint would be increased. <br /> Mr, Goldstein responded that the ZBA was meeting lot coverage and setbacks. Mr. Bonvie stated that <br /> in the last several years,they did not support any variances related to lot coverage, which was 20% in <br /> most parts of Town. Requests were now often received with 19.8%lot coverage, in order to provide <br /> McMansion protection. The Chair asked if the ZBA would codify that. Mr. Bonvie provided an <br /> example whereby an expansion could not exceed 50%. The Chair asked if the ZBA would codify that <br /> they would not provide any relief for lot coverage and Mr. Bonvie responded that he could not agree <br /> on behalf of the Board, but did not believe that he voted in the past on any lot coverage variance. The <br /> Chair stated that she requested on August 14 examples for consideration at the Public Hearing and Mr. <br /> Bonvie confirmed that they would be providing the information. Mr. Bonvie stated that the Article <br /> would not allow any alterations, other than existing pre-existing non-conformities. <br /> Fred Naddaff, 29 Overlook Knoll, stated his belief that the proposed Article was intended to clarify the <br /> Raze and Replace rule, which seemed more difficult to acquire since it went from a written finding to a <br /> Special Permit. Mr. Naddaff felt that there was no need for additional restrictions since non <br /> conformities could not be increased, it was limited to 20% lot coverage and there were height <br /> restrictions. Mr.Naddaff referenced the May 2 meeting and neighbors expressing concerns. Mr. <br /> Naddaff expressed his support for this proposed Article, noting that his project was stalled despite <br /> having met with various Town parties who indicated he would have no trouble with his project and <br /> expressing his frustration that he submitted plans that had been approved and was now carrying the <br /> costs of two households. Mr. Naddaff emphasized that property improvements and increased taxes <br /> would benefit the Town. <br /> Christina Thomas, 123 Short Drive, stated that she lived in a 900 square foot house which she would <br /> love to rebuild, stating that it was unfair that she could not rebuild and adding that she would leave <br /> Mashpee if she could not rebuild. <br /> Tom O'Neil stated that he had spent 26 years in the community and felt that this was his first crisis he <br /> had encountered with customers in his business of reconstructing homes. Mr. O'Neil stated that other <br /> communities allowed homeowners to tear down and rebuild their homes. Mr. O'Neil further stated <br /> that the homes did not meet energy or building codes, some of which were built before building codes <br /> existed. Mr. O'Neil noted that Mashpee was an energy community requiring 2x6 construction with <br /> proper insulation and proper wind requirements within one mile of the coast. It was Mr. O'Neil's <br /> opinion that there were already so many restrictions in Mashpee, with safeguards already in place and <br /> being stalled since December, it created a real danger to the community to not provide new housing <br /> 9 <br />