Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />sought by defendants Anthony Shuman and DorothylKagan. <br />9. The May 28, 2003 memorandum from Deputy Hamblin of the <br />Mashpee Fire Department noting that the Propety is lacking the <br />paved access road required by the Zoning By-laj was entered into <br />the record at the public hearing. (Exhibit A). <br />10. The plaintiff, as the owner of the abutting property, has <br />legitimate concerns about whether the zoning relief granted by way <br />of the variances will unduly affect and harm his, abutting property <br />as well as the interest of the neighborhood. Additional use of the <br />Property for multiple residences will have an �ffect on traffic, <br />esthetics and (as indicated in the Fire Department Memorandum - <br />Exhibit A) the potential need for and the access for fire and other <br />safety vehicles. The value of the plaintiff's property and his <br />ability to utilize it himself is directly affected by the increased <br />use of the Property as would be permitted by th,e variances. <br />11. The Board of Appeals granted the requested zoning relief <br />on June 11, 2003. The Board of Appeal's decisions which were duly <br />filed and recorded on June 18, 2003 are attachedlas Exhibits B & C. <br />12. The decisions of the Board of Appeals granting the <br />requested zoning relief exceeds the Board's authority in that the <br />decision was rendered without the basis for the required finding <br />for a variance under c.40A X10 and the Mashpee iZoning Bylaw. <br />13. The decision of the Board of Appeals granting the <br />requested zoning relief exceeds the Board's authority in that it <br />was arbitrary and capricious and based on the <br />ground that defendant's two non -conforming lots <br />9 -4- <br />legally untenable <br />did not have to be <br />