|
|
View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
TOWN OF HINGHAM
BOARD OF APPEALS
IN THE MATTER OF:
Applicant and Kevin D. Perruzzi
Property Owner: 57 Aster Circle
Weymouth, MA 02188
Premises: 312 High Street
Hingham MA 02043
Title Reference: Plymouth County Registry of Deeds Book 5143, Page 182
SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS:
This
matter came before the Zoning Board of Appeals on the application of
Kevin D. Perruzzi, 57 Aster Circle, Weymouth, MA (the “Applicant) for a
front yard setback Variance from §IV-A of the Zoning By-Law and such
other relief as necessary to place a 10' x 10' x 10' shed on the
southern portion of the property at 312 High Street (the “Property”), in
Residence District B.
A public hearing was duly noticed and held
on December 19, 2012 at the Town Hall before a panel consisting of
regular members Joseph M. Fisher, Chairman, Joseph W. Freeman, and W.
Tod McGrath.
BACKGROUND:
In 1982 the Board of Appeals denied
a use Variance to the previous owner to use the property as a dental
office for a non-resident dentist. That denial was appealed to land
court and the court subsequently nullified the Board’s decision finding
that the “application should be deemed constructively granted…due to the
strictures of G.L. C. 40A, Section 15, finding that the application was
filed with the Town Clerk on April 23, 1982, even though not
transmitted to the Board of Appeals until September 13, 1982.” Due to
the constructive grant of the Variance the property has been used as a
non-resident dentist office for decades.
The Applicant is a
dentist who recently purchased the Property which consists of
approximately ±26,100sq.ft. of land that is surrounded by three public
streets. After purchasing the property the Applicant inquired of the
Building Commissioner about the possibility of installing a shed on the
property for storage purposes only. The Building Commissioner and
Zoning Administrator discussed the installation of a shed on the
Property and whether or not it could be considered an expansion of a
non-conforming use. Because a shed is an allowed use in a residential
zone and the Property is located in Residence District B both Town
Officials determined it would not be considered an expansion of a
non-conforming use and could be placed on the property.
DISCUSSION:
Under
the Hingham Zoning By-Law a corner lot, and a lot surrounded by streets
on all sides, shall maintain front yard setback requirements from each
and every street; the required front yard setback in Residence District B
is thirty-five feet (35'). During the course of the hearing the
Applicant explained that his Property is surrounded by streets on all
sides, has topography issues on almost all of the Property as well as a
septic system that precludes placing a shed on any portion of the
Property that would not encroach into the front yard setback. The
Applicant will be clearing and leveling a small area and placing the
shed on cinder blocks.
With the application the Applicant
submitted a stamped Mortgage Inspection Plot Plan (1 page) dated March
21, 2012 prepared by DeCelle Burke & Associates, Inc., 149
Independence Avenue, Quincy MA. At the hearing the Applicant presented
seven (7) photographs of the property as well as literature (2 pages)
representing what the proposed shed would look like. The photographs
showed the placement of the cinder blocks on the southern portion of the
property.
No abutters appeared at the public hearing nor did the Board receive correspondence regarding the Applicants proposal.
FINDINGS AND DECISION:
The
Board voted unanimously to GRANT a front yard setback Variance to place
a 10' x 10' x 10' shed on the southern portion of the property. 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 Applicants.
The
Board concurred with the determination made by the Building Commissioner
and Zoning Administrator that the construction of a shed on the
Property would not be considered an expansion of a non-conforming use.
The Board also determined that the Property is unusually shaped and is
surrounded by streets on all sides. Existing conditions on the
Property, specifically the location of the existing septic system as
well as the sloping topography, create a hardship in that there is no
reasonable alternate placement for the proposed shed.
The Board
determined that although the new shed will be built within the front
setback, it will not detract from the neighborhood nor will it impose on
the abutting properties. The Board further determined that the
requested Variances might be granted without detriment to the public
good and without substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of
the Zoning By-Law.
The Variance is granted subject the following conditions:
1.
The shed shall be constructed and placed in accordance with the plans
submitted with the application and the photographs and representations
made at the public hearing.
The zoning relief granted herein
shall not become effective until (i) the Town Clerk has certified on a
copy of this Decision that twenty (20) days have elapsed after the
decision has been filed in the office of the Town Clerk and no appeal
has been filed or that if such an appeal has been filed, that it has
been dismissed or denied, and that (ii) a copy thereof has been duly
recorded in the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds and indexed in the
grantor index under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and
noted on the owner’s certificate of title.
For the Zoning Board of Appeals,
___________________________
Joseph W. Freeman
February 8, 2013
|
|