11/12/2025 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes (2)

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 12, 2025 Sitting on this hearing are Chairman Bonvie, Board Members, Mr. Blaisdell, Mr. Ganzenmuller, Mr. Reidy, and Mr. Morizio. Attorney Christopher Kirrane represented the Owners, Julie Silva and Martin J. Reilly. At the last hearing, there was brief discussion regarding an email that was submitted by Mr. Morris, Building Commissioner dated July 18, 2025 regarding a vinyl fence that was constructed and is obstructing the view to the street and should be lowered to 2.5 ft. The applicants chose to appeal Mr. Morris' decision to the Zoning Board. Attorney Kirrane filed the appeal for the applicant referencing§174-31.1 Sight obstruction because this is the only reference regarding site obstructions involving fencing. The Attorney stated that this lot is located in the middle of the street, and the fence should not be considered a sight obstruction issue. He believe this is a civil matter. Mr. Morris agreed that the issue is considered a civil matter. He had a discussion with other Town Officials and agreed that it should be discussed between the two neighbors. He did not cite the bylaw,but there is a State regulation that solid fencing higher than 3 ft. are not allowed within 30 ft. of a curb or sidewalk to not obstruct visibility of drivers. He wrote a letter to the homeowners, and they did not respond. Consequently, it was then brought to the Board. Mr. Morris wrote a letter dated September 4, 2025 to the Board and included photos of the entire fencing around the lot, and in his opinion the fencing at the driveway on Childs Road is not consistent with the opposite side of the lot and was not constructed professionally. He considers this a civil matter and wanted to reserve his right to withdraw his letter. He asked for the Board's opinion. Mr. Reidy read a letter dated October 7, 2025 from the abutters that own 41 Monomoscoy Road with their concerns regarding the fencing. Chairman Bonvie asked Mr. Reilly, the Owner of 15 Childs Road if he can describe the situation and can resolve this issue. Mr. Reilly stated that the fence around the property has been existing for three years. He said that he constructed the extension of the fence to provide privacy to 17 Childs Road that is a short-term rental. Mr. Morris said he did some research through the State, and most definitions listed were rather vague,but he found a definition stating a"spite fence". He believe this issue was done out of spite, and told the Board he is withdrawing his decision and should be discussed in court as a civil matter. Attorney Kirrane agreed to accept the withdrawal of the appeal. Mr. Bonvie asked for further comments from the audience. There were none. 2