HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecision 570TGJU Or, MtD=
t BUM OF APPI!,.LS
i'' =isd with .Cold Clerk a ..O �W�JG�p06` fK7Garizig Date o:i,Atlo�'�3 pf �piC��Of*lOa��7��00004 UU60i.
Petitioner 4T'4.Oi.•'4 :I��O�b6 �J1?�04'037 G�0'G... Petition Number 04"i7VGA-fIO�UQ44'1G.-�C�G 3L10007000
I?Bi%.+ J.. s„�: on
Thia is an appeal from the decision of
` Seloetmn refining permit to
or
pe-tv.ition for approval of
'"he petitioner requested Pm=kxWxx approval of the Board of Appeals to allow
a baseball batting range adjacent to the
present golf driving range known as Bass
River Sports World on Route 28, Bass River,
Assessors' map 36-Al.
,4mbe s of 308rd of Appealq Hembers absent-.
2,'P
L11
It appeal.dng that notice of said h-oaring her been give.i by sending notice t11e2beo to tie
Petitioner and al.Z those ovmers of property deemed by the Board to be affected thereby,
and that public notice of such hearing hav Lng been given by publication in Tta Cape Cod
Standard Times on ..Marc IL.9 „ST,,,1�L��� tl,„as thh hearing was opened and hold on the
date first above written,
The fol3t; •yin; appeased in favour of the petition:
appsal
�'LL•1r N
CQ0^e�S,
1140 k ffi 1-1
.The following .appeared in opposition:
I 1-7 4,, 6,0 C
Reason for Decision: It appeared at the hearing the proposed baseball batting
range has already been existing upon the petitionerst property. It further
appeared there were two prior hearings concerning the land in question. The
first being the petition of Anthony Nickinello entitled, "Petition 512" befor(
this Board of Appeals, in which he requested this Board to approve a golf
driving range and miniature golf course on Route 283, Bass River.
The Board examined the records of that hearing and considered the decision
in that case in which it was set forth that the proposed use of land was a
limited type of amusement and the Board approves the project as proposed by
the petitioner. The Board was also of the opinion that it as a Board of
Appeals does not want to grant unlimited amusements in this area. It con-
sidered the fact that the original request was a limited one calling for the
miniature golf course and driving range and that only was approved by this
Board.
The Board considered that at a later date in petition 539 there was a
petition from Cape Cod Trampoline Inc.,,requesting the use of trampolines on
part of the premises involved. The Board acting upon this petition denied the
request. The Board stated in that opinion there have been very few petitions
for approval of amusements in Yarmouth which have been granted by the Board.
The Board in that decision among other reasons stated they felt trampolines
' would attract other amusements of similar nature which this Board did not wish
to encourage along Route 28. The Board in acting upon the decision before f
It considered the public good as being the beacon light that should guide J
the Board in arriving at its decision in this case.
The Board was of the unanimous opinion that had this request for a base-
ball driving range been included in the original request that it would not
have granted this particular type of amusement. The Board feels the golf
driving range and miniature golf are a limited type of amusement and felt
that at the time this petition was granted that the use would be restricted
to what was then requested by the petitioner.
The Board specifically finds the request before it, to wit the use of
the baseball range, would not promote the public good. The Board also finds
that this use is much broader than the use that had previously been granted.
It appeared at the hearing that the baseball range was close to neighbors,
Mr. and Mrs. Colley, who are the present owners of the Corral Motel. It
appeared the noise from this baseball range disturbed guests of the Colleys.
The Board does not rest its decision based upon this evidence. The Board is
aware thela nd in question is a business area and that other businesses could
have located in this zone that would undoubtedly have caused as much if not
more noise.
The Board in denying this request of the petitioner did not consider this
evidence as a reason to support its opinion in denying the request.
Therefore, petition for approval is denied.
VUL