Zoning board denies variance to move shed closer to the road at 22 Cherbuk Lane

The Wareham Zoning Board of Appeals voted June 24 not to grant a variance sought by Paul Jackman to relocate a shed closer to Cherbuk Lane. The motion to grant the requested relief failed on a roll‑call vote.

Paul Jackman told the board the lot’s irregular shape and an existing garage left no practical place to site the shed except in the area that zoning defines as the front yard. Jackman said the shed was 192 square feet and had been placed on skids during winter storage; he asked the board to allow it to remain or to be moved closer to the road for privacy and to create garden space.

Neighbors and a representative raised objections. Robert Dphano, representing other homeowners, told the board the structure sits in a flood zone and lacks a reinforced slab required for flood‑prone locations and that moving it closer to the road could block an ocean view; he asked the board to require the applicant to keep the shed where it currently sits. Chelsea, who identified herself as a neighborhood resident, spoke in favor of allowing relocation, citing the applicant’s full‑time residency and gardening activities.

Josh Fary, Wareham’s director of planning, clarified how frontage is measured under the zoning bylaw: frontage is the face of the building toward the road, not the water, so the zoning map and lot frontage determine whether the shed is considered in the front yard.

Board members debated the statutory variance standard, noting that a hardship must be grounded in the location of the existing house and not solely the shape of an otherwise undeveloped lot. Members suggested compromises (pushing the shed to the 10‑ft setback near the parking area and adding screening) and discussed the consequences of denial; one member noted that denial would bar an identical reapplication on the same issue for two years if the applicant pursued a decision rather than withdrawing.

When the board took the roll‑call vote on a motion to grant the variance, the recorded votes were: Connor Alden — Nay; Troy Larson — Nay; Jim Makabachi — Nay; Chris Conte — Nay; Richard Sample — Abstain; Chair Nazi Akalasi — Nay. The motion failed.

Next steps: the applicant may either keep the shed in its current permitted location (side yard) or withdraw the application and return later with modifications; if denied, the board noted a two‑year bar on reapplying for the same relief without prejudice if the applicant withdraws prior to a vote.