Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA05051992ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES 92 HAY 20 Ph r1,: 49 ut MAY S, 1992 HASSACHUSEl 1 S The Board of Appeals held its regular meeting in the Town Hall, Mansfield, MA, at 8:00 P.M. Present at the hearing were the following members; Mary-Lou Cotton, Clerk; Leonard Flynn; Eric Butler; Peter DeTrolio, Associate Member and Richard Lewis, Zoning Board of Appeals Advisor. Mary -Lou Cotton was appointed Acting Chairman, Peter DeTrolio was appointed as a full time member in place of Karl Clemmey and Leonard Flynn was appointed Acting Clerk. The hearing on the application of Edward and Geraldine Curtin for a variance from Section 4, Schedule 4.2.1 of the Zoning By -Law, for an existing non - conforming structure at 29 Elyse Road with less than the required minimum side yard setback in the R -1 Zone began at 8:10 P.M. The application was labeled Exhibit "A "; newspaper advertisement as Exhibit "B "; a Plan of Land dated December 28, 1991 prepared by Nicholas Beinars of Foxborough, MA, as Exhibit "C "; another Plan of Land dated July 5, 1988 prepared by Rim Engineering as Exhibit "D "; and a Form A from the Mansfield Planning Board dated July 8, 1988 as Exhibit "E ". Mr. Flynn read a letter from the Planning Board dated May 5, 1991 into the record. It stated that if the Form A has been filed with the Registry of Deeds, the Planning Board is of the opinion that a variance is not required. Mr. Flynn also read a letter from Wynn & Wynn dated March 5, 1992 stating that there is insufficient sideyard setback from the edge of the building to the side line. As a result, it would not be possible for First Federal Savings Bank of America to refinance the mortgage without a variance. The applicant, Geraldine Curtin, presented her case to the Board. Mrs. Curtin explained that three years ago she built her house in Massapoag Estates. An original Plan was done by the developer and the engineer. When they did an as built plan, they discovered there was a problem and the house had 21 feet instead of 25 feet sideyard setback. Mr. and Mrs. Curtin and their neighbor switched pieces of land to correct the problem and had a new Plan and new Deed drawn up. In the beginning of 1992 they decided to refinance their mortgage and found out through the bank's attorneys that they had insufficient sideyard setback. The new Plan and new Deed were never filed with the Registry of Deeds. A discussion ensued regarding the advisability of granting a variance or making a determination of findings or whether a new Form A should be filed. There was some confusion as to just which plan was on file at the Registry of Deeds and whether or not 1 Minutes of May 5, 1992 Page 2 of 2 the Deed accurately described the plan. It was finally determined that since Wynn & Wynn had recommended that the applicant obtain a variance, this would be the best course of action. It was further recommended that the Curtins get together with their neighbors and forget about the previous land swap if that was agreeable to them since the plan had never been recorded and that the variance, if granted, would eliminate the sideyard problem. A motion was made by Mr. Butler, seconded by Mr. Flynn, to grant a variance for a 21 foot sideyard to Edward and Geraldine Curtin. Unanimously granted. The hearing closed at 8:40 P.M. Approval of the minutes of April 21, 1992 was tabled until the next meeting due to the absence of several members. The meeting adjourned at 9 :10 P.M.