My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/09/1992 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Decision
>
09/09/1992 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Decision
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2023 2:27:20 PM
Creation date
3/15/2022 10:44:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Document Type
Decision
Meeting Date
09/09/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
II <br /> town of JIM1110pee <br /> 16 GREAT NECK ROAD NORTH <br /> MASHPEE. MA 02649 <br /> ABLE BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> DECISION <br /> FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT <br /> RE: James B. and Margaret Reiffarth - SP-92-60 <br /> A Petition was filed by James B. and Margaret Reiffarth of <br /> West Medway; Massachusetts for a Special Permit under Section <br /> 174-25.I.9 of the Zoning By-laws for permission to construct a <br /> wooden pier in an R-3 zoning district on property located at <br /> 422 Monomoscoy Road (Map 124, Block 48) Mashpee, MA. <br /> Notice was duly given to abutters in accordance with Massachusetts <br /> General Laws Chapter 40A. Notice was given by publication in The <br /> Enterprise, a newspaper of general circulation in the Town of Mashpee, <br /> on August 21 and August 28, 1992, a copy of which is attached hereto <br /> and made a part hereof. <br /> A Public Hearing was held on the Petition atrthe Mashpee Town <br /> Hall on Wednesday, September 9, 1992 at 7:30 P.M. at which time the <br /> following members of the Board of Appeals were present and acting <br /> throughout: John J. Friel, Michael A. Makunas and Edward M. Govoni. <br /> Engineer David Sanicki represented the applicant and presented <br /> plans for a fixed pier to replace a dock destroyed in the huddicane. <br /> He explained that the strong current in Great River prevented the use <br /> of floats. Letters were received from 'both abutters in favor of the <br /> project. <br /> The Board found that the use was in harmony with the purpose and <br /> intent of the by-laws and complied with the provisions therein. The <br /> Board determined that the structure would not interfere with free <br /> passage of travel by water or cause substantial degradation of the <br /> marine or coastal environment. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.