HomeMy WebLinkAbout018-78
C)./~-I.g
\J '-J \\ ,,~~" "------"
t
~. OX.lB~
In the matter of the petition of Sherburne Associates (018-78),
Mr. Renny Stackpole appeared and stated he was the contract pur-
chaser of Lot 6, L. C. Plan No. 10752-E being a small parcel of
vacant land located at the end of Swain's Wharf (Commercial Wharf)
The tract is approximately laoe> sq. ft. in size and is one of two
vacant areas on the Wharf.
Other parcels on the Wharf are improved with single family
dwelling units occupying 90% of the ground cover or more. The
houses are closely spaced with some sharing common walls. There
are now approximately 15 dwelling units on the Wharf.
The petitioner desires to construct a dwelling unit and work
area combined. The proposed structure is 24' x 32' nd is a two-
-1-
--r .-
"--------- .,~--------_._-~---
y
.,
It _,_. "'. ......
..
.........-_~__~cl
~
~ .J< -;~ I.,,,
.. ,.~. '~"" I
~.
J
../
/'"
story wood frame building. The second floor is 16' x 32'. The
owner proposes to use the first floor as a work area for ~ook bi~j
ing and related uses and to occupy the second floor as living quari
ters.
The parcel is served by a private way. Some of-the parce15
-
have parking areas, but generally only pedestrian travel is encour-
aged.
The applicable ground cover allowed under the code is 50%
(Residential-Commercial). The land area under consideration is a
portion of Lot 6 being 30' x 40'more or less. Lot 6.by itself now
has ten structures most being residential units.
,
The land area is suitable for no purpose other than residen-
tial use in keeping with similiar contiguous uses.
There was no opposition and no other speakers.
There was no correspondence.
After due deliberation the Board found:
1. Lot 6 is a non-conforming lot and use, and the expansior.
of the use by adding an additional structure is allowed ur.der the
by-law.
2. The proposed
properties and can be
the area.
structure is compatible with the neighbOring!
allowed without any deleterious effect on I
I
the
and
I
3. The petitioner has demonstrated a hardship in that unless,
vacant area is used for this purpose no other use is reasonabl ,
it will be denied the effective use of the property.
On motion made by Mrs. Bartsch, seconded by Mr. Hyde, it was
unanimously voted to grant the petition and relief, and, therefore
the variance is granted.
I
~ 6K.<i3~