My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03/12/2014 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Decision
>
03/12/2014 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Decision
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2023 4:15:57 PM
Creation date
1/19/2022 3:22:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Document Type
Decision
Meeting Date
03/12/2014
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
74
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
8. Defendant, Domingo K. DeBarros, is a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the <br /> Town of Mashpee, and is a resident of Mashpee, MA. DeBarros is being sued in his capacity as a <br /> member of the Zoning Board of Appeals. <br /> Facts <br /> 9. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-8 as if expressly <br /> rewritten and set forth herein. <br /> 10. A public hearing, duly noticed, was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals on March 12, <br /> 2014 on Defendant Derenzo's Petition for Written Findings under Article V Section 174-17 of <br /> the Mashpee Zoning By-laws and M. G. L. c. 40A Section 6. Defendant Derenzo appeared <br /> through counsel and presented their request. <br /> 11. Defendant members of the Zoning Board of Appeals conducted and participated in said <br /> hearing and voted to approve the Plaintiffs Request and made findings to allow the project. A <br /> copy of the Decision is marked Exhibit A, is attached hereto and by reference is incorporated <br /> herein. <br /> 12. The evidence presented and/or made available to the Board and existing at the time of the <br /> hearing did not support the Board's finding that the proposed reconstructed dwelling will not be <br /> substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming structure or use to the <br /> neighborhood. <br /> 13. The evidence presented and/or made available to the Board and existing at the time of the <br /> hearing did not support the Board's finding that the proposed additions will be an improvement to <br /> the lot and similar in size and character to other existing structures in the neighborhood. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.