Laserfiche WebLink
variance to Lot 1 as it does not conform to zoning (lot size), or a notation is placed on the <br />plan indicating that it is not to be considered a separate building lot until such time as the <br />Zoning Bylaw has been satisfied. <br />It is Mr. l owley's opinion that this is the only way the plan could be signed a <br />Approval Not Required, as this plan would be creating a lot that is substandard in terms <br />of the present zoning. <br />The Town Planner cautioned against mal ing reference to a Zoning Board of <br />Appeals variance as they expire after one-year and this would he a permanently recorded <br />plan. He also reminded the Board that as an ANR plan the only Board consideration is <br />frontage. <br />Mr. Rowley made reference to the Subdivision Regulations definition of a lot, <br />being "an area of land in one ownership with definite boundaries used or available for use <br />as the site of one or more buildings complying with area, frontage, and other <br />requirements of the Zoning Bylaw of the Town of ashpee." <br />The Town Planner argued that if the plan shows frontage that meets the minimum <br />zoning requirement on a Town road or previously approved subdivision street or on <br />road that the Board decides is good enough to serge as access to the house, the Board is <br />rewired to sign the plan as Approval Not Required. Signing the plan does not create a <br />buildable lot, which is a zoning issue. This is a matter of subdivision control and the <br />statute says that if it is not a subdivision plan (under that definition) you have to sign it. <br />Mr. Rowley agreed to the extent of zoning. with respect to Planning Board <br />definition and subdivision rules that define a Lot as one that has definite area and <br />frontage suitable as the site of one or more buildings under the Zoning Bylaws of the <br />Town. The regulation could be waived under subdivision control la. <br />Mr. Rowley also made reference to the statement within the signature block, <br />"Signature does not assure compliance with the Zoning Bylaw'', suggesting if the Board <br />is comfortable with this wording they could take a vote. <br />The Ton Planner reminded the Board that they are required to take some action <br />on this matter this evening in order to comply with the 2 1-day t*umefrarne. He suggested <br />the Board ask the Applicant to withdraw their application to be resubmitted at the next <br />meeting, at which time the Board would be prepared with the proper language for <br />signing. <br />At this point the Chairman recognized Bob Melvin who discussed possible <br />reconfiguration of the lot in order to meet the requirements. He provided a sketch of the <br />original proposal with a 1 o-ft. strip in an attempt to meet the 1 o-ft. of required frontage. <br />Sketch 2 shows a o-ft. width in order to meet the setback, the lot size has also been <br />increased everything over the 40,000 ft. rewired for Mr. west's property). Sketch 3 is <br />l 1 o- t. by 1 oo- t. provides a few more options for the home and is more visually <br />