Laserfiche WebLink
MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> MEETING MINUTES <br /> FEBRUARY 24,2021 <br /> Mr. Furbush wanted to confirm there are no variance requests, and that the setback will be <br /> approximately 3 ft. from the front yard setback making it better. The side yard will be <br /> improved by 6.9 ft., and the other side will remain the same at 8.5 ft. Mr. Furbush said his <br /> only concern was the two lots and if they are held in common ownership. <br /> Attorney Kirrane said because these lots are held in common ownership they are considered <br /> to be merged for zoning purposes. <br /> Mr. Furbush was concerned that the garage structure would become a separate dwelling. <br /> The Board had a brief discussion regarding the definition of an accessory apartment. The <br /> Board wanted to confirm the amount of bedrooms. <br /> Mr. Morris said that the garage is not considered a separate dwelling. <br /> Mr. Gould read the Board of Health comments into the record.The Board wants to confirm <br /> the bedroom count on the plans. <br /> Mr. Furbush read the Conservation Commission comment into the record. <br /> Sharon read Catherine Laurent, DPW Director's comments into the record. <br /> Mr. Furbush read the comments submitted by the Building Commissioner regarding the <br /> height of the structures. <br /> Mr. Furbush read an abutter letter from Marcia and George Boiros who opposed the <br /> project. A letter from Patricia and Robert Maciel opposed the project as well. <br /> Patricia Boiros called into the meeting and she does not believe these lots are merged. She <br /> said she spoke to the homeowner about the garage and size of the structures. She believes <br /> the water runoff will flow onto her property, and that the house is too large. <br /> Mr. Ed Gildea spoke representing the abutters that live at 372 Monomoscoy Road that are <br /> opposed to the project. The abutter called into the meeting and spoke as well. <br /> Attorney Kirrane commented that the two properties at 370 and 372 Monomoscoy Rd are <br /> much smaller lots than the lot in question. There are four residential structures on the <br /> combination of those two lots. Each has two residential structures. The proposed structure <br /> will only be one single family residence, and a garage with living space.The proposed will <br /> conform to the required lot coverage, and the required height restriction.The neighborhood <br /> has changed over the past few years, and that the proposed structures will not be more <br /> detrimental than what currently exists. <br /> There were no more comments by the Board or audience. <br /> 9 <br />