|
View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
Board of Appeals
NOTICE OF DECISION
SPECIAL PERMIT
IN THE MATTER OF:
Applicants: People's United Bank and Aquarion Water Company
850 Main Street 900 Main Street
Bridgeport, CT 06604 Hingham, MA 02043
Property Owner: People's United Bank
850 Main Street
Bridgeport, CT 06604
Applicant Joseph M. Antonellis
Representative: 288 Main Street
Milford, MA 01757
Premises: 29 Squirrel Hill Lane
aka Lot 45 Christine Hill Estates
Hingham, MA 02043
Deed Reference: Plymouth County Registry of Deeds, Book 42762, Page 156
Plan Reference: Plan entitled, "Plot Plan in Hingham ,
Mass.," prepared by P.N Associates, Inc., 310 Oak Street, Shrewsbury,
MA, dated October 14, 2014
SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS
This matter came before the Board of Appeals (the “Board”) on the
joint application from People's United Bank and Aquarion Water Company
(the "Applicant") for a Special Permit A1 under § III-A, 3.10 of the
Zoning By-Law and such other relief as necessary to maintain a Public
Utility Building consisting of a 20'x30' pump station at 29 Squirrel
Hill Lane, A/K/A Lot 45 Christina Hill Estates, in Residence District
A.
The Board of Appeals opened the hearing on the application at a duly
advertised and noticed public hearing on February 11, 2015, which was
continued without testimony to February 23, 2015. The hearing was held
concurrently with hearings on an Administrative Appeal of the Building
Commissioner’s determination, dated September 25, 2014, that the
principal use on the lot is a Public Utility Building/Pump Station and a
single-family dwelling cannot be an accessory use to the pump station
nor can the pump station be an accessory use to the single-family
dwelling at 13 Baker Hill Drive in Residence A and an alternately
requested Use Variance from the Hingham Zoning By-Law (the "By-Law") to
allow two principal uses on one lot. At the conclusion of the hearing,
the Board granted the requested Special Permit A1. The Board also
granted a request to withdraw the Variance application without
prejudice and granted the Administrative Appeal.
The Board of Appeals panel consisted of its regular members W. Tod
McGrath, Chairman, Joseph M. Fisher and Joseph W. Freeman. During the
hearing, the Applicant was represented by Joseph Antonellis, Esq.
Throughout the public hearing and its deliberations the Board has
been mindful of the statements of the Applicant, their representative,
and comments of the general public, all as made or received at the
public hearing.
BACKGROUND and DISCUSSION
Lot 45 in the Baker Hill Subdivision consists of approximately
116,510 SF. It is an irregularly shaped lot, as are many of the lots
within the subdivision. The property is improved by a pump station that
is 20' x 30' in size. The By-Law allows "public utility buildings" by
Special Permit A1. Though the structure received a building permit in
2005, there is no evidence in Town records that the water company, as
owner of the public utility building, ever applied for or received the
required Special Permit.
In September 2014, the Applicant made an inquiry to the Building
Commissioner seeking a determination as to whether Lot 45 could be used
for the purpose of a single-family dwelling. The Commissioner issued
his determination on September 25, 2014 that a variance would be
required to locate a single-family dwelling on the lot since there is
already a principal use on the property. The determination also
indicated that a single-family dwelling could not be accessory to a
public utility building. The Building Commissioner's letter of
September 25, 2014 is the basis of the appeal.
The Applicant argues that the By-Law does not prohibit multiple principal uses on a single lot.
The Applicant noted that there are many examples of industrial and
business-zoned properties with multiple uses on a property. Even within
residential districts, it is not clear that otherwise allowed uses such
as agriculture, commercial breeders, riding stables, daycares, would
be prohibited if a single family home already existed on lot. It is the
Petitioner's position that by requiring a special permit, the By-Law
anticipates that a public utility building or structure can be
established on the same parcel as a dwelling. If the By-Law is read
otherwise, then any telephone/cable distribution center or other
utility structure would require its own lot of 20,000 - 40,000 SF in
residential districts, and potentially more in other zones.
The Board reviewed the By-Law and determined that there was no
prohibition against two principal uses of the Applicant’s lot, provided
that both uses were otherwise permissible. The Board noted that the
By-Law prohibits more than one dwelling on a single lot (Section IV-C,
4.), but the Applicant was not proposing multiple dwellings. A member
referenced the decision in Hooper v. Goddard, 1 LCR 122 (Mass. Land
Ct. 1993), where the Court had conducted a similar analysis of the
Zoning Bylaw for the Town of Manchester by the Sea, concluding that
there was “no prohibition in the Bylaw against having two principal
structures on a lot” associated with two permissible, principal uses.
The Board observed that a Special Permit is required for "public
utility buildings and structures" under Section III-A, 3.10, and that
the conditions associated with the issuance of such a Special Permit
might, or might not, impose restrictions on allowing a utility building
and a single-family dwelling to coexist on the same lot. The Board
reviewed the Applicant’s proposal and determined that, as proposed at
the Premises, the pump house could coexist on the same lot as a
single-family dwelling subject to the terms of the Special Permit.
FINDINGS AND DECISION
Based on the information submitted and presented during the hearing, the Board made the following findings:
- The proposed use of the site is in harmony with the general
purpose and intent of this By-Law because construction of public
utility buildings is expressly allowed by Special Permit A1 under
Section III-A (3.10) of the By-Law in all residential zoning districts.
The use of the public utility building for the purpose of insuring
appropriate water pressure and volume as a public safety requirement is
in concert with the purposes of the By-Law.
- The proposed use complies with the purposes and standards of the
relevant specific sections of this By-Law. The proposed operations
center is a public utility building/structure and is a use allowed by a
Special Permit A1 under Section III-A (3.10) of the By-Law.
- The specific site is an appropriate location for such use,
structure, or condition, compatible with the characteristics of the
surrounding area. The Property provides the most appropriate place in
the Baker Hill Subdivision to locate a booster pump based on the
network of pipes and distribution of water. The specific site provides
easy access off of Squirrel Hill Lane for maintenance and repair of
equipment, while not limiting the building area available for
residential development.
- The use as developed and operated will create positive impacts or
potential adverse impacts will be mitigated. The existing use has a
positive impact on the neighborhood in that it insures proper flow and
pressure for domestic and public safety water supplies. The structure
was built in a manner that lessens noise and other environmental
impacts.
- There will be no nuisance or serious hazard to vehicles or
pedestrians. The structure is situated on the lot for ease of access
and except for occasional maintenance there is no traffic generated by
the use. Adequate and appropriate facilities exist or will be provided
for the proper operation of the proposed use. The site and the use
thereof help o insure the adequacy of the public utilities for the
subdivision and the surrounding area. Adequate and appropriate
facilities exist for the proper operation of the pump house itself. The
building is protected by fencing and is not accessible to the general
public.
- The proposal meets accepted design standards and criteria for the
functional design of facilities, structure, stormwater management, and
site construction. The construction meets accepted design standards.
The public utility building received a building permit and has
been operational since 2005.
The Board further found no reason to limit the Special Permit to
preclude the Applicant from locating a single-family dwelling on the
Premises.
Upon a motion made by Joseph Fisher and seconded by Joseph Freeman,
the Board of Appeals voted unanimously to GRANT the Special Permit A1
to maintain a Public Utility Building consisting of a 20'x30' pump
station at 29 Squirrel Hill Lane, A/K/A Lot 45 Christina Hill Estates,
in Residence District A.
This decision shall not take effect until a copy of the decision
bearing the certification of the Town Clerk, that twenty (20) days have
elapsed since the decision has been filed in the office of the Town
Clerk and no appeal has been filed, or that if such appeal has been
filed, that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded with the
Plymouth County Registry of Deeds and/or the Plymouth County Land Court
Registry, and indexed in the grantor index under the name of the
record owner or is recorded and noted on the owner’s certificate of
title.
For the Board of Appeals,
_________________________________
Joseph M. Fisher
March 16, 2015
|