07/08/2020 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION FOR A VARIANCE Cindy L. True and Michael Woodcock 53 James Circle (Map 71 Parcel 43) Mashpee, MA 02649 V-2020-17 Cindy gave a history of the property saying it was owned and built by her grandparents back in the 1970's. The original site plan contemplated a 15 ft. setback from the property line, but the house was set in the wrong location. The Association did a survey and it was shown that the deck was built over the property line. After purchasing the home from her family, she had to enter into an easement agreement with the Association to obtain title insurance. This agreement was included with her petition package. The Association was in agreement with her proposal as long as she eliminated the overhang of the deck from the property. The existing deck is not built to code and is not safe. In addition,there's a breeze way that has a 2 ft. drop off the back of the original staircase without a railing. She has secured a builder to reconstruct the deck to conform to current day building codes. All the setbacks on the other side of the property are being met,and the lot coverage will be moved from 18.6%to 19.3% and still is under the 20% requirement. Sharon Sangeleer read the Conservation comments into the record and was approved. The Board of Health had no comments. Scott Goldstein asked what the side setback was from the house itself. The house is 1.5 ft. from the side, and the applicant is seeking a 14 ft. variance. Scott mentioned to the contractor to be careful that the diamond pier legs don't go beyond the property line below grade. The contractor said he will be using 4 x 6 framing to hold the deck up, and using a 4 x 4 railing system. GENERAL CRITERIA: The subject property located at 53 James Circle is approximately 11,070 square feet. There were no abutter comments. VARIANCE CRITERIA: Chapter 40A: Section 10. Variances: The authority specifically finds that owing to circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape, or topography of such land or structures and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting generally the zoning district in which it is located, 1) a literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance or by-law would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner or appellant, and that 2) desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of such ordinance or by-law. 2