HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecision 1282T011711 OF YMPI-It'iUT11
E021RD OF APPnTLLS
Filed frith T;.•xn Clerk: He Dater 10/1Q/7�4
'OCT 2 1 '1974
Petitioner: Petition No.: 1202
8 111tcIZ-I .Z Roa_ d
South Yarmouth, Massachusetts
DECISION
Tho petitioner recruects a varicinco and/or approval of the Board of
Appeals to allots a garage to be 229 6" from side of the road, due
to the Load being moved. ry The prop�c�»►nisi a o7ycfa: ed oon W� itch"wood �Road.
in South Yar�ouLY:, Mass Cd3L'��$4y c'is d x 9 Ji�Q:Y w�*;i tiQ. iJiSvsVOiv J'iG�i�}
No. 59 Ll. 4
Ple be s of Board cf Arpyals pros ent:
MROL-D L. ITIKYE , M. ROBVIRT t•". SHEEEMMN
WILLTAm F. BI1zLER, ni - DAVID OHM
DONALD F. IMINDERSON
It appearing that noti.eo of said hebxrs.ng has been given by sending
notice thereof to the petitioner and all fiho.e o►rners of property
deemed by the Board to be affected thereby, and that public notice
of ouch hearing having boon given. by publication in the Caps Cod
Standard Tones on Scptcnbex 23, 1974 and SepLe<rtbor 30, 1974, the
hearing was opened and held on the date first above written.
The following appeared in favor of the petition:
Pctitioner
The following app^sred in oppos-Ilion:
None
REASON FOR DECISION:
r
Petition No. 1282
It appeared at the hearing that had received a notice.
from the assistant building inspector indicating that•a recent sur-
vey had indicated that the garage in question was 22' 6" from the
lot lino. It further appeared that the zoning by-law requires a
30 foot notback.
The Board notes that it did appear that the garage had
been erected in 1972 and that there had been no notice to the pe-
titioncr of any violation of the setback requirements until a not-
ification dated Septwn-bar 6 from the office of the building inspector.
It also appsared at the herring that the building was erected in good
faith and it is noted by the Bcard that there was no opposition to the
granting of the rc?uosted variance. Tno.petitioner also indicated
that there eras a road taking covering Mulford -Streit and that 3,250
square foot would be taken in order to establish this road as a town
Way.
The Board considered this as.a request for a variance.
The Board considered all of the statutory requirements and finds
In this case each of the statutory requirements have been met.
The Board specifically finds that the public good'wiil not be
advorooly affected and notes th^t there cyan no opposition to the
granting of this request. The Board also finds that the garages
and the.deviaticn represents a relatively slight portion of the
duelling and that the larger. portion of the -duelling does conform
with the sideline requirements. The Board finds that there would
u
be a hardship were the petitioner required to move or relocate the
building some two years aft ar it was erected ir. good faith.
Members of
Eoard voting:
HA.ROLD L.
R& ES, JR. -
Voted
in
Favor
ROBERT W,
SHEF..'y -7 -
Voted
in
Favor
J-7ILL1,101 F.
BUTLER, ITT_ -
Voted
in
Favor
DAVM OMIM -
voted
in
Favor
DONIALD F.
AETMERSON -
Voted
in
Favor
Therefore,
%.,a authorize a variance
to allow an
existing garage to
.be 22' S"
from side of road in accord-ance erith
the petitioner's
requost•
110 permit isstcd until 22 days from date of filing decision %Iiih
th, Tore Clark.
per nOBERT 61. SHEM-mw
CL' RK PRO `r
u