Laserfiche WebLink
2 <br /> MINUTES April 1, 1987 BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> Mr. Hanrahan commented that Mr. Malloy may require a Variance. Mr. <br /> Toomey responded that under Section 5.5 of the By-Laws, this lot is a <br /> non-conforming lot and if the subsequently enacted zoning ammendments <br /> applied to us this would be a totally unbuildable lot. <br /> Mr. Toomey stated the house would not be setback 50 feet from the <br /> wetlands, the closest distance would be 6 feet. <br /> Mr. Toomey stated they would not be able to comply with the current <br /> frontage requirements of 150 feet. He stated at the time of recording <br /> the plan with the registry of deeds the frontage requirement was 100 feet. <br /> Mr. Toomey stated the house would be setback 40 feet and the sidelines 15 <br /> feet, as currently required in the By-Laws. He stated at the time of re- <br /> cording the plans with the registry of deeds there were no rear setback <br /> requirements, however commented the setback in the rear will be well in <br /> excess of 15 feet, as currently required. Mr. Toomey stated they will be <br /> in compliance with the current maximum height requirements. He stated <br /> the current maximum lot coverage is 20% however there were no comparable <br /> provisions in 1970 and stated based on a square footage of 24,800 square <br /> feet, we would be well below the 20% maximum lot coverage. Mr. Toomey <br /> commented, in speaking with the Conservation Commission a question did <br /> arise as to the dwelling entering within the A.C.E.C. district. He stated <br /> he is requesting a determination by the Board on whether they are within <br /> the A.C.E.C. district. <br /> Mr. Varkonda, Mashpee Conservation Officer, presented himself before <br /> the Board and stated the dwelling is not within the A.C.E.C. district. <br /> Mr. Varkonda stated Mr. Toomey did comment that there were no objections <br /> from the Conservation Commission Officer but explained to the Board that <br /> this was in viewing the dock only, in an advisory sense. He stated there <br /> are grave concerns in regards to the house. Mr. Varkonda presented pic- <br /> tures to the Board and stated approximately half of this lot is flooded <br /> twice daily. He stated there are major concerns with the impact of the <br /> construction of this house, the septic system and its impact upon the bay. <br /> Mr. Varkonda stated this is free flowing water, therefore anything that <br /> comes in that could be pulled out by the capillary action of the tide is <br /> going to go right into the Bay, thereby doing more environmental damage <br /> to the bay then there is already at this point and stated the Bay is <br /> currently suffering from nutrient overloading. Mr. Varkonda stated if <br /> the Board were to determine a Variance was required they would be grant- <br /> ing a 40 foot Variance down to the edge of the salt marsh. He stated <br /> the Board of Health did deny a septic permit. <br /> Mr. Toomey stated they have received a superceeding "Order of Con- <br /> ditions" from the D.E.Q.E. for the dock and house and stated they do in- <br /> tend to comply with all of the conditions listed. He stated the septic <br /> system has been included as part of the superceeding "Order of Conditions" <br /> issued. He stated they do have a meeting with the Board of Health next <br /> week. <br /> Mr. Hanrahan questioned Mr. Boyd as to the necessity of a Variance. <br /> Mr. Boyd responded they would require a Variance for the walkway section <br /> of the dock as well as the wetland, however stated a opinion from Town <br /> Council should be ascertained. Mr. Hanrahan was in agreeance. <br />