My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/22/2006 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
>
02/22/2006 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2022 5:02:55 PM
Creation date
2/4/2022 2:44:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/22/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mashpee Zoning Douglas Lambert <br /> Board of Appeals V-06-14 <br /> 2 <br /> discusses the history of the zoning changes and the fact that this purchase was made in <br /> good faith by Mr. Lambert. The Board reviews the letters and paperwork and finds that <br /> this is a reasonable variance request. Abutters Tom Fudala offers support on this <br /> variance request. However,Neil Dupont of 32 Christopher Lane feels that the variance <br /> restrictions are in place to reduce the density of houses being built on small lots. The <br /> Board takes into consideration his comments however, where so many lots in the area <br /> have similar residences on them. They feel the variance is reasonable. Frederick <br /> Borgeson makes a motion to grant a 27,500 square foot landspace variance and a 50 foot <br /> frontage variance. Robert Nelson seconds the motion. All agree. So moved. <br /> GENERAL FINDINGS <br /> 1. that the subject lot is located at 68 Brewster Road and contains 12,500 square <br /> feet. <br /> VARIANCE CRITERIA <br /> Section 10 of Chapter 40A requires that the permit granting authority determine <br /> that there are circumstances relating to the shape and topography which affect this lot and <br /> not the district in which it is located and that a literal enforcement of the By-laws would <br /> involve hardship to the petitioner. <br /> SPECIFIC FINDINGS <br /> The Board determined that: <br /> 1. that there are circumstances relating to the shape and topography that affect <br /> the subject lot and not the district in which it is located. <br /> 2. that a literal enforcement of the By-laws would involve hardship to the <br /> Petitioner. <br /> 3. that relief may be granted without detriment to the public good. <br /> 4. that relief may be granted without derogating from the intent or purpose of the <br /> By-laws. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.