Laserfiche WebLink
eo�Wry <br /> Ord a.✓s$ <br /> lown of Nashpcc <br /> 16 Great Veck I(o(id JNfi)i'th, <br /> MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL�jaslt.pee, A'lassachusetts 02649 <br /> Decision for a Variance <br /> RE: Pauline Hicks 10 Hicks Way <br /> Map 44 Parcel 47 <br /> V-05-116 <br /> A Petition was filed on September 6, 2005 for a Variance from Section 174-31 of <br /> the Zoning By-laws for permission to vary the landspace requirements under current <br /> zoning to deem this lot buildable. This property is located in an R-5 zoning district at 10 <br /> Hicks Way(Map 44 Parcel 47) Mashpee, MA. <br /> Notice was duly given to abutters in accordance with Massachusetts General <br /> Laws Chapter 40A. Notice was given by publication in The Mashpee Enterprise, a <br /> newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Mashpee, on September 9, 2005 and <br /> September 16, 2005 a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. <br /> A Public Hearing was held on the Petition at the Mashpee Town Hall on <br /> Wednesday, September 28, 2005 at which time the following members of the Zoning <br /> Board of Appeals were present and acting throughout: Robert Nelson, Zella Elizenberry, <br /> Frederick Borgeson, Jonathan Furbush and Evano Cunha. <br /> The Mashpee Zoning Board of Appeals issues this Decision pursuant to the <br /> provisions of Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 40A, Section 10 and the Town of <br /> Mashpee Zoning By-laws. <br /> Attorney Rob Mills represents the applicant Pauline Hicks at this hearing. She is <br /> requesting a variance for the above-referenced lot to deem it buildable so that she may <br /> pass them along to her children. There are four lots that all average about 20,000 to <br /> 30,000 square feet. There are sub-division plans from 1973 that the Board reviews. Half <br /> of the subdivision is constructed and Ms. Hicks family lives on Amanda Way that is <br /> adjacent to Hicks Way. Ms. Hicks understands that she needs to develop the road Hicks <br /> Way to the requirements of the planning board. Although there are no enveloped houses <br /> proposed for these lots, the applicant will adhere to the R-5 setback requirements and will <br /> not come back to the board for any further variances if this is granted. These lots have <br />