3/4/2020 PLANNING BOARD Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 41, Section 81T and the Mashpee Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land,Bayswater Development,LLC has filed an application for an 81 lot Definitive Subdivision Plan of Land consisting of 16.29 acres located on Rock Landing Road and Red Brook Road at New Seabury "Section 5" and identified on the Mashpee Assessors Maps as Map 116,Parcel 74 for a "Cottage Development" under the terms of the New Seabury Special Permit. The Chair read for the record the Public Hearing notice and stated the order of presenters regarding the matter. John Falacci represented Bayswater's Definitive Plan to develop a site at the corner of Red Brick Road. Engineer David Crispin was also present to discuss the plans, as well as former Town Planner Tom Fudala, to provide a summary of New Seabury's unique Special Permit. Mr. Fudala provided a history of the New Seabury permit, established 60 years ago as a cluster subdivision, but before the existence of cluster zoning state statutes. Mr. Fudala indicated that the land was originally Chace family owned, and New Seabury was developed following the building of Popponesset during the 1940s and 1950s. The New Seabury project required different zoning because of the inclusion of golf courses and open space, and due to the donation of land to the Town(South Cape Beach), the deed restriction would specify the allowable amount of development. The bylaw was adopted in 1963, at a time when the development was greatly desired, offering a potential tax base. The deed restriction, with a life expectancy of 30 years and renewals of 20 years, divided the 1,240 acres into 29 sections. Each section would feature a certain number of dwelling units. As a result, the deed, rather than the Special Permit, served as the controlling document. The most recent renewal was valid until 2026. Section F-5 stated that the property was not subject to lot size requirements, setbacks, frontage or height restrictions. In addition, the State purchased South Cape Beach, and a modification was made in 1971 creating one combined section for sections 23-29, proportionally dividing the units and the square footage based on the acreage taken by the State. In 1971,the Building Inspector challenged the Special Permit, denying building permits because the units did not conform with current zoning. However,the Court determined that it was a preexisting non-conforming use. In 1982 it was determined that lots sold continued to be protected by the terms of the Special Permit. In 2002 Mashpee's ConsCom referred a project to the Cape Cod Commission, but an Agreement for Judgement determined that of the 8 areas to be developed,New Seabury was allowed to further develop 250 units, a reduction of approximately half of the units originally permitted. Mr. Falacci emphasized New Seabury's loss of density with the Agreement for Judgement and Eminent Domain, recognizing the need for Mashpee to maintain a public beach. Mr. Falacci confirmed that tonight they were discussing cottage style homes to be built in Section 5, ranging from 1,400 to 2,300 square feet. Typical of New Seabury homes,residents would be seasonal for the most part. As such,Mr. Falacci noted that the residents would be low impact to Mashpee, and Mr. Fudala added that approximately 10% of the residents in New Seabury were year round residents. Mr. Crispin identified the various phases on the plans,.emphasizing that Section 5, Phase IV, would include 49%protected space and permanent conservation restrictions, with openings to allow access. Mr. Crispin confirmed that they had met with the Fire and Water Departments and received approvals. As with prior phases, Mr. Crispin noted that they would develop an extensive stormwater drainage design and recharge the full 100 year storm, meaning there would be no change to runoff. Comments provided by Mr. Rowley had been incorporated. There had been discussion about grading and potential runoff toward abutters,which would be mitigated with an earthen berm and draining the road in to the middle. Mr. Crispin asked for a decision with a condition to address the matter further during 3