TOWN OF HINGHAM
BOARD OF APPEALS
IN THE MATTER OF:
Applicant and Karl R. Willner
Property Owner:
Premises:
Title Reference:
SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS:
This matter came before the Board of Appeals on the application of Karl R. Willner (the “Applicant”) for a side yard setback Variance from §IV-A of the Zoning By-Law and such other relief as necessary to construct a 10' x 20' deck to the rear of the existing dwelling at 3 Summit Drive, in Residence District A.
A public hearing was duly held on
BACKGROUND:
The premises consist of a single family, single story dwelling with an attached garage originally built in the 1950’s. The dwelling is considered pre-existing non-conforming as it relates to the side yard setback. The Applicant proposes to construct a deck to the rear of the existing dwelling and garage. The deck would be approximately 10’ wide and 20’ long and would be built off the rear of the existing attached garage and dwelling approximately 9’ 3” from the side yard property line at its closest point. The garage setback is 10’ 2” at its closest point.
The Applicant explained that the proposed deck area once had a covered porch that has since been removed. There is a 6’ change in elevation on the northeastern portion of the property along with a bulkhead for access to the basement, thereby preventing the deck from being built off that portion of the dwelling.
The Applicant presented a sketch plan for the deck showing the location and size of the proposed deck along with a copy of a plot plan dated
The Applicant and the Board discussed the possibility of redesigning a portion of the deck to keep the setback at the 10’ 2’ mark; the closest distance the existing garage is to the lot line. The Applicant agreed that this could be done with minimal changes to the plans.
No abutters appeared, nor did the Board receive any correspondence, for or against the granting of the Variance.
FINDINGS AND DECISION:
The Board voted unanimously to GRANT the VARIANCE. In granting the requested relief, the Board found that owing to circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape or topography which especially affect the premises, but do not affect generally the zoning district in which the premises are located, a literal enforcement of the Zoning By-Law would create a hardship to the Applicant.
The Board determined the configuration of the existing dwelling and garage relative to the side yard setback along with the existing slope and basement access issues limited the practical options for the Applicant to construct a useable deck. The Board also determined that although the proposed deck will intrude into the side yard setback, such deck (i) may enhance the property’s appearance and the value of the dwelling, (ii) will not detract from the neighborhood, and (iii) will not intrude into the side yard beyond the existing garage and thus will not impose on abutting properties.
The Board further determined that the requested Variance might be granted without detriment to the public good and without substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the Zoning By-Law. The proposed deck is consistent with the existing residential use of the premises and the zoning district.
The Variance is granted subject the following condition:
1. That the proposed deck be constructed in substantial accordance with the plans presented in the application and the representations made at the public hearing, particularly that the proposed deck be built off the rear of the existing garage approximately 10’ 2’ from the side yard property line.
This decision shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing the certification of the
For the Board of Appeals,
_____________________
Joseph W. Freeman