Laserfiche WebLink
r <br /> Town of Nashpee <br /> 16 great J�eck load Arth <br /> RLE�°" Mashpee,Massachusetts 02649 <br /> MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> Decision for a Special Permit <br /> RE: Town of Mashpee Harbormaster SP-02-44 664 Great Neck Road South <br /> Map 104 Parcel 79 <br /> I <br /> A Petition was filed on February 25, 2002 by the Town of Mashpee Harbormaster <br /> for a Special Permit under Section 174-25.I.9 of the Zoning By-laws to allow for ! <br /> construction of a pier, ramp and float on Ockway Bay on property located in an R-3 <br /> zoning district at 664 Great Neck Road South(Map 104 Parcel 79) Mashpee, MA. <br /> Owner of record: Town of Mashpee. <br /> � I <br /> Notice was duly given to abutters in accordance with Massachusetts General IIS <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 March 8 and March 15, <br /> 2002, 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, March 27, 2002, at which time the following members of the Zoning Board <br /> of Appeals were present and acting throughout: Frederick R. Borgeson, Richard T. <br /> Guerrera and Marshall A. Brem. I'll III <br /> The Mashpee Zoning Board of Appeals issues this Decision pursuant to the i! <br /> provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A Section 9 and the Town of <br /> Mashpee Zoning By-laws. <br /> II I� <br /> Mr. David Sanicki of Cape & Islands Engineering represented the Petition and <br /> stated that plans call for installation of floats onto the existing ramp for ease of loading <br /> l <br /> and unloading for boaters. The proposal would also allow for dinghies to be tied to one <br /> side of the ramp. Mr. Sanicki said that the area is shallow and Variance relief is needed <br /> in order to reach depth to prevent boats from bottoming out. The Conservation <br /> Commission and Shellfish Constable have approved the proposal. I it <br /> Mr. Brem questioned who would be responsible for policing the situation. The <br /> Board went into a lengthy discussion on the possible problems regarding abuse of the �! <br /> dock and how rules would be enforced. Mr. Borgeson concluded the discussion by saying i!! <br /> that problems with parking and docking may arise; however,those issues do not come <br /> under the scope and authority of the Board. Mr. Borgeson said that the Board has <br /> jurisdiction to grant or deny a request for a Special Permit or a Variance but does not <br /> have the authority to guarantee or enforce use of a particular structure. III <br /> Mr. James J. Priestly of 73 Neshobe Road said that he was in favor of the j <br /> proposal. 1 <br /> Ilj i <br /> I ; <br /> i <br />