Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Maritime Zoning Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board approves variance allowing Hinckley/BPT Holdings to add 30-foot boat-storage building

Oxford Board of Appeals · May 28, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Oxford Board of Appeals granted a variance allowing BPT Holdings LLC (Hinckley Bachelor's Point Marina) to construct a 30-foot accessory building on a parcel constrained by wetlands and existing structures, finding site-specific hardships and incorporating the applicant's narrative into the written decision.

The Oxford Board of Appeals voted to grant a variance that allows BPT Holdings LLC (owner of the Hinckley Bachelor's Point Marina site) to build a 30-foot accessory structure on a 17.75-acre parcel where the code otherwise limits accessory heights to 18 feet. Applicant counsel Brendan Mulaney argued the parcel is long and narrow and roughly half of it is wetlands, restricting buildable area and creating unique, property-specific hardships that justify the variance.

"This 30 foot building is required, by this applicant in order to adequately serve the customer base that the applicant has and ensure that it has a fully functional operation on the site," Brendan Mulaney said. Engineer Danny Hussain testified he prepared the site plans and that the proposed building footprint is 4,992 square feet; he also said existing on-site buildings are already about 30 feet tall. Nearby homeowners and local operators spoke in favor of the application: John Sutton, representing an adjacent homeowners association, said the HOA had been briefed and did not object, and another speaker who identified himself as Campbell told the board the operation employs "28 to 35 people for the last 28 years."

Board members questioned whether the hardship was self-created by the applicant's desire to expand capacity, whether the wetlands triggered critical-area variance criteria and whether an expanded footprint or other design changes could avoid the need for added height. After discussion the board approved a motion to grant the variance and to adopt and incorporate the findings set out in the applicant's exhibit 2 as the board's written decision. The board attorney said the final decision form would be completed and signed so that the 30-day appeal period begins to run from the date of that written decision.