Laserfiche WebLink
a <br /> Town of*Nashpee <br /> N <br /> j MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 16 Greal.Neal Pond+.ldonh <br /> ���- l�'IasFtpee, IJ'1a,�sachusE?tts 0.3649 <br /> PETITION FOR A VARIANCE <br /> Under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 10 <br /> and Mashpee Zoning By-laws <br /> To: Mashpee Zoning Board of Appeals Date: November 2006 <br /> The undersigned Petitions the Mashpee Zoning Board of Appeals to vary, in the manner <br /> and for the reasons hereinafter set forth, the application of the provisions of the Zoning By-laws <br /> to the following described premises: <br /> Applicant: Robert L. Bateman, III 14 Jessica Way, E. Falmouth, MA 02536 <br /> (Full name) (Address) (Telephone #) <br /> Property Owner: Robert L. Bateman, III 14 Jessica Way, E. Falmouth, MA 02536 <br /> (Full name) (Address) (Telephone ht) <br /> Location of Property: 3 Mohegan Avenue <br /> (House Number and Name of Street) (Subdivision Name) <br /> Assessor's Map/Block Number: Map #: T72 Block#: , 72 <br /> Dimensions of Lot: 100, 125 Area <br /> (Frontage) (Depth) (Squar; Feet) n <br /> Zoning District in which premises are located: R-3 <br /> CD <br /> 2 1 CD <br /> What is current use of the property? _vacant land o _ � <br /> How long have you owned premises'? 5 & 1 2 years_ <br /> How many buildings are now on the lot? n/a " <br /> Give size of existing buildings: Proposed buildings <br /> State proposed use of premises: single family residence <br /> What section(s) of the Zoning By-laws do you ask to be varied? Section 174-31 <br /> State reasons for Variance: Applicant acquired several non-conforming lots which have <br /> been combined to create a large non-conforming lot which happened to be separately <br /> Have you submitted plans for above to the Building Department? <br /> Has permit been refused? <br /> Hearing Date set for: --- <br /> (Applicant's Signature) Kevin M. Kirrane, Esq. <br /> Dunning & Kirrane, LLP <br /> *owned until he acquired it. He assumed that because it was buildable when he <br /> acquired it, that it would continue to be buildable. However, due to the fact <br /> t that he had previously acquired another adjacent non-conforming lot, the Building <br /> Inspector has informed him that he has lost the protected status. In March 2004 <br /> the Board granted Variance Relief to allow a single family residence to be built <br /> on the combined parcels. The Applicant was unable to commence substantial <br /> construction and that Variance has expired. <br />