02/12/2025 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes

Home Browse Search

MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING MINUTES FEBRUARY 12, 2025 CONTINUED HEARINGS 24 Seconsett Point Road: Owners, Joshua and Nicole Delman request a Variance under §174-31 (Land Space Requirements), and §174-33 (Setback to wetlands) of the Zoning Bylaws to vary the lot coverage and setback to wetlands to allow for construction of a single-family residence on property located in an R-3 Zoning District, Map 124, Parcel 35, Mashpee, MA. (Continued from 11113124, 12/11/24, 1/8/25 at the request of the Attorney). Attorney Kirrane represented the homeowners for their Variance request. The property is a vacant lot that is almost entirely within the flood zone. The Attorney is seeking a variance from lot coverage, and setback to wetlands. His client bought this property back in 2020, and at that time the Town was reviewing the requirements under the old method of determining flood area that would not affect the lot area, or lot coverage, and would be considered a buildable lot. But since the Wading Place Road court case, a Variance is required for lot coverage and setback to wetlands. The lot is on Seconsett Island and located in the R-3 Zoning District which requires 40,000 sq. ft. of lot area, 150 ft. of frontage, 40 ft. from the front yard setback, and 15 ft. on the side and rear setback, 20% lot coverage, and 35 ft. building height, and a 50 ft. setback from wetlands. In this particular case there are three nonconformities. The lot is obviously on the water, and there is only 470 sq. ft. of upland because the lot is almost entirely in the flood zone. The setback to wetlands is zero; the frontage is also nonconforming at 94.46%. At the last meeting, there were four items the Board had to find that qualify for the variance request. The first is the unique features that justify the request. Attorney Kirrane stated that because the lot is within a flood zone, and there is an elevation issue, and is a hardship. Each abutting lot has been developed with single family residences which are also in a flood zone. There is also a substantial financial hardship when he purchased the property in 2020, and is paying taxes. The next item; does a variance cause a substantial detriment to the public good. This lot is located within a residential zone with existing residential structures on both sides of the street. The home will be building code compliant, flood zone compliant, and the project was approved by the Conservation Commission. An IA septic system is proposed and is consistent with the development in the neighborhood. The final criteria; it will not derogate from the intent of the bylaw. The proposal calls for a single family residence, as of right, and is located in a single family developed neighborhood. The total lot area is 20,721 sq. ft. If this lot was not within the flood zone criteria, there would be 19.8% of lot area and would meet the 20% requirement. There are no other variance requests other than lot coverage and setback to wetlands. 2