Laserfiche WebLink
ap <br /> gUAr <br /> own oJ*Mashpee <br /> N ' <br /> MASHPEE ZONNG BOARD OF APPEALS 16 Gt-eat Neck q rpad,North <br /> AL a.slipee, Wassach«setts 0,2649 <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 2o06 <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 R) <br /> Property Owner: Robert L. Bateman, III 14 Jessica Way, E. Falmouth. MA 02536 <br /> (Full name) (Address) (Telephone 0) <br /> Location of Property: 55 Pequot Avenue <br /> (House Number and Name of Street) (Subdivision Name) <br /> Assessor's Map/Block Number: Map #: _ 72 Block#: _ 68B <br /> Dimensions of Lot: 150' 110 Area --4 <br /> (Frontage) (Depth) (Squ• Feet)* <br /> co <br /> Zoning District in which premises are located: R-3 p - <br /> What is current use of the property? __ Vacant Land N <br /> How long have you owned premises'? 5 & 1/2 years_ <br /> lko <br /> How many buildings are now on the lot? n/a <br /> A rr; <br /> Give sire of existing buildings: n a 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 <br /> have been combined to create a large non-conforming lot which happened to bP* <br /> Have you submitted plans for above to the Building Department? <br /> Has permit been refused? <br /> Hearing Date set for: <br /> ( pplicant's Signature) Kevin M. Kirrane, Esq. <br /> Dunning & Kirrane, LLP <br /> *separately owned until he acquired it. He assumed that because it was buildable <br /> when he acquired it, that it would continue to be buildable. However, due to the <br /> fact that he had previously acquired another adjacent non-conforming lot, the <br /> Building Inspector has informed him that he has lost the protected status. In <br /> March, 2004 the Board granted Variance Relief to allow a single family residence <br /> to be build on the combined parcels. The Applicant was unable to commence <br /> substantial construction and that Variance has expired. <br />