View Other Items in this Archive | View All Archives | Printable Version

Board of Appeals



Owner/Applicant:           8 Park Circle LLC                                Agent:                  Vcevy Strekalovsky
                                  73 Burditt Avenue                                                          42 North Street
                                  Hingham, MA 02043                                                        Hingham, MA 02043
Premises:                     8 Park Circle
                                 Hingham, MA 02043

Deed Reference:           Plymouth County Registry of Deeds Book 44591, Page 325

Plan Reference:             Floor plans entitled, "Proposed Addition and Alterations to: Johanne Brown                                                    

Residence, 8 Park Circle, Hingham, MA" prepared by Strekalovsky Architecture                                                
Inc., 42 North Street, Hingham, dated October 24, 2014, drawings A.1-A.2 and                                  
elevation plans entitled, "Renovations for Johanne Brown," prepared by                                                               
Vcevold Otis Strekalovsky, R.A., and dated October 23, 2014.                                                                                            


This matter came before the Board of Appeals (the “Board”) on the application from Vcevy Strekalovsky on       behalf of Park Circle LLC, 73 Burditt Ave, for a Variance from § IV-A of the Zoning By-Law and such other         relief as necessary to construct a front porch within the front yard setback at 8 Park Circle in Residence            District A.

A public hearing was duly noticed and held on December 17, 2014, at the Town Hall, 210 Central Street. The Board panel consisted of its regular members W. Tod McGrath, Chairman, Joseph M. Fisher, and Joseph W. Freeman.  The Applicant and its Agent appeared to present the application. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Board voted unanimously to grant a Variance from the front yard setback requirement under § IV-A of the By-Law.

Throughout its deliberations, the Board has been mindful of the statements of the Applicant and the comments of the general public, all as made or received at the public hearing.

The subject property is located the end of Park Circle. The lot is approximately 13,465 SF in size and includes a single-family dwelling with nonconforming front and side yard setbacks. The proposed plan would add a covered porch to the front elevation, which would intensify the existing nonconformity and result in a front yard setback of 17' where 25' is required in Residence District A.

During the hearing, the Applicant described the property shape as uncommon. The arc of the Park Circle cul-de-sac affects the property indicates that the existing grading makes the entryway difficult to access without a wider landing. Finally, Vcevy argues that the incursion is de minimis as it is only 30.31 SF beyond the existing steps, which currently extend 29.69 SF into the setback. It is unclear to me whether either of these measurements include the area under the structures overhang. You might ask the project architect to confirm since it is difficult to understand how the site plan dimensions relate to the elevation and floor plans.

A member indicated that the design is an improvement. The Board calculated the incremental incursion as 60 SF beyond the existing front steps. The Board agreed that the lot is unusually shaped, particularly in the front . There appears to be no alternatives to improve the front entryway. The Board considers this to be a de minimus incursion. Further, there would be no incursion were it not for the arc of the cul-de-sac.

Based upon the information submitted and received at the hearing, and other information available to the Board, the Board has determined that:

  1. There are circumstances relating to soil conditions, shape or topography especially affecting the land but not affecting generally the zoning district. The Property is triangular in shape. The pre-existing nonconforming dwelling was sited parallel to Kimball Beach Road, but at an angle to the Planter's Lane frontage and rear property line. In addition, the Applicant represented that the property has a distinct 20' grade. Surrounding properties do not generally share these circumstances.
  2. The literal enforcement of the Bylaws would involve substantial hardship financial or otherwise.  The requested relief will allow the Applicant to remodel and expand the existing dwelling instead of demolishing and repositioning the structure.  A grant of a Variance in this instance will allow for a reasonable use that is entirely consistent with a single family use in the Residence A Zoning District;
  3. A variance may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good.  The proposed project will not create any noise, traffic or result in other similar negative impacts.  In fact, the proposed project will improve the existing dwelling in a manner consistent with many single family residences in the surrounding neighborhood.  There will be no adverse effects or harm to the public good; and
  4. A variance may be granted without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purposes of the Bylaw. The design of the proposed porch and two-story addition (as modified to eliminate the side yard setback nonconformance) is consistent with the character of the neighborhood.  The requested front yard setback relief is modest, ranging from approximately 5' to 3' from one side of the addition to the other. The granting of a dimensional variance in this instance is consistent with the purposes of the By-Law.

Upon a motion made by Joseph M. Fisher and seconded by Joseph W. Freeman, the Board voted unanimously to 1) accept the Applicant's request to withdraw without prejudice the side yard setback Variance and 2) grant the front yard setback Variance from § IV-A of the By-Law approving construction of an addition at 18 Kimball Beach Road, subject to the following condition:

  1. The plans submitted in support of a building permit application shall be consistent with the front yard setback shown on the approved plans referenced in this Decision and demonstrate compliance with the 15' side yard set from the east property line as required in § IV-A of the Zoning By-Law.

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 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 W. Freeman