Laserfiche WebLink
Town of Mashpee <br /> ,111 rnn`aStit,J1 <br /> v i <br /> a MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> '• 16 great Neck load Xorth � <br /> Decision for a Variance Mashpee, Massachusetts 02649 <br /> 1 <br /> RE: Pauline A. Hicks V-00-40 22 Hicks Way <br /> Map 44 Block 48 <br /> A Petition was filed on January 10, 2000 by Pauline A. Hicks of Mashpee, (' <br /> Massachusetts for a Variance from Section 174-31 of the Zoning By-laws for I,I <br /> permission to vary the lot space requirements on property located in an R-3 zoning <br /> district at 22 Hicks Way(Map 44 Block 48) Mashpee, MA. <br /> Notice was duly given to abutters in accordance with Massachusetts General <br /> i <br /> Laws Chapter 40A. Notice was given by publication in The Mashpee Enterprise, ' <br /> a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Mashpee, on February 4 and <br /> i <br /> February11 2000 a co of which is attached hereto and <br /> copy made a part hereof. <br /> A Public Hearing was held on the Petition at the Mashpee Town Hall on <br /> Wednesday, February 23, 2000, at which time the following members of the Zoning <br /> Board of Appeals were present and acting throughout: Edward M. Govoni, Zella E. <br /> Elizenberry and Frederick R. Borgeson. til, <br /> � I <br /> The Mashpee Zoning Board of Appeals issues this Decision pursuant to the j! <br /> u. <br /> provisions of Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 40A, Section 10 and the Town of <br /> Mashpee Zoning By-laws. <br /> Mrs. Pauline A. Hicks represented her application and was accompanied by <br /> several family members. Mrs. Hicks said that she became owner of several lots on Hicks j II <br /> Way after her mother died. I� <br /> Mr. Govoni informed Mrs. Hicks that an applicant must develop a subdivision <br /> within 8 years of Planning Board's approval. He said that the Zoning Board of Appeals <br /> does not have the authority to act on the petitions until Mrs. Hicks goes back to the Ili <br /> Planning Board for subdivision approval and for approval to have the road paved. <br /> In view of the foregoing,the Mashpee Zoning Board of Appeals found that the II j jl� <br /> IIS, II <br /> applicant did not meet the criteria necessary for the granting of a Variance. Upon motion I' <br /> duly made and seconded the Zoning Board of Appeals voted unanimously on February I <br /> 23,2000 to deny without prejudice the petition for the above-referenced Variance. <br /> �n <br />