Photo caption: The former Cahill Farm farmstand, above, is not part of the land purchase.
By Sharron Luttrell
The Zoning Board of Appeals approved a hardship variance at its Jan. 15 hearing, clearing the way for a four-home development that will share one driveway off Hartford Avenue East.
Mendon residents, brothers Damon and Lawney Tinio, doing business as MJT RE LLC, requested the variance for approximately 13 acres of the 26-acre property at 35 Hartford Avenue East behind the former Cahill farmstand. Lawney Tinio, an alternate member of the ZBA, recused himself from the vote and sat across from the other members to speak on behalf of the petition.
In addition to the shared driveway, the variance allows the developers to reduce both the 200-foot frontage and 125-foot lot width requirements down to 50 feet. The Mendon zoning bylaws allow for one driveway per house lot. They cited the property’s topography, ledge, high groundwater and environmental concerns in the variance request. Muddy Brook runs through the property.
The former farmland was designated 61A, giving the town the right of first refusal to purchase it. Since only half of the 26 acres were offered to the town and the 400 feet of the road frontage with the farmstand was not included, the Select Board passed over the right of first refusal.
The plan to develop the parcel was the second one the Tinios brought to the town. In November the Planning Board reviewed their preliminary plan to build a cul-de-sac and seven houses on the land. Damon Tinio is vice chair of the Planning Board and recused himself to speak on behalf of the proposal.
Lawney Tinio said he and his brother prefer the smaller development.
ZBA Chair Matthew Clark noted that four houses would have a lower impact on the town than the larger development.
“It’s four houses on 16 (developable) acres that could be developed for eight houses and if someone wanted to do affordable housing, it could be 12 houses,” Clark said. “It could get much more impactful to the town and create a bigger traffic issue so it’s kind of the best of both worlds for that property.
The eighth house wasn’t included on the preliminary plan because it would have been built outside the neighborhood, on Hartford Avenue East, Lawney Tinio said.
While several neighbors who attended the ZBA hearing seemed more supportive of the smaller development, they voiced concern about increased traffic from the four new homes. They pointed out that the driveway would be located on a sharp corner of Hartford Avenue East with limited visibility.
The ZBA included in its approval the requirement that the developers explore ways to address the traffic impact of the development.
