Create an Account - Increase your productivity, customize your experience, and engage in information you care about.
View Other Items in this Archive |
View All Archives | Printable Version
TOWN OF HINGHAMBoard of AppealsNOTICE OF DECISIONVARIANCEIN THE MATTER OF:Owner: Keith Way Condominium Trust David J. Chase and Thomas F. O’Brien, Trustees 188 Whiting Street Hingham, MA 02043Applicant: Independence Realty Trust David J. Chase, Trustee 188 Whiting Street Hingham, MA 02043 Premise/Property: 4 Keith Way (Building #3), Hingham, MA 02043 Title Reference: Plymouth County Registry of Deeds, Book 5812, Page 1Plan Reference: Plan entitled, "As Built Plan of Land, 2 & 4 Keith Way, Hingham, Mass,” prepared by Keefe Associates, 5 Carmela Lane, Buzzards Bay, MA, dated November 7, 2018 (1 Sheets)SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGSThis matter came before the Board of Appeals (the "Board") on the application of Independence Realty Trust, David J. Chase, Trustee (the "Applicant"), for a Variance from § IV-A of the Zoning By-Law (the “By-Law”) and such other relief as necessary to maintain a portion of the newly constructed office/storage building with a 34’ side yard setback where 35’ is required at 4 Keith Way in the Industrial Park District. On December 18, 2018, the Board opened a duly advertised and noticed public hearing on the application together with a concurrent hearing on a related application to modify a Special Permit A1, issued on April 17, 2018, under § III-C, 8. of the By-Law in order to amend the approved plans for the office/storage building to be developed at 4 Keith Way in the Floodplain Protection Overlay District. The Board panel consisted of its regular members Joseph M. Fisher, Chair, and Robyn S. Maguire, and associate member Mario Romania, Jr. The Applicant appeared before the Board to represent the application. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Board voted unanimously to grant the requested relief with conditions as set forth below.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.BACKGROUND The subject property consists of approximately 4 acres of land (176,331 SF) located at the corner of Keith Way and the Derby Street Shoppes Service Road. The lot is improved by multiple industrial condominium buildings. The Applicant previously sought and attained permits to construct a new 1,200 SF office/warehouse building adjacent to the easterly façade of Unit 4. Since the property is located partially within a mapped floodplain (FEMA Flood Zone A) as depicted on Part B of the Zoning Map, one such permit consisted of an exemption, issued by the Board through a Special Permit A1 under Section III-C of the By-Law, from the general prohibition on building within a mapped floodplain zoning district. The exemption was granted based in part on a Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (LOMR-F) included with the application that removed Unit 4 from the Special Flood Hazard Area. The Applicant represented during the hearing that construction of the approved building was largely completed. The foundation as-built plan revealed an unpermitted plan change, consisting of a 2.8’ x 8.2’ front entryway, that requires additional relief in the form of both a variance from the required side yard setback and a modification of the original Special Permit A1, dated April 17, 2018. The Applicant indicated that the entryway was added to the building design in an effort to improve handicapped accessibility to the interior units. He then described his attempts to eliminate the need for relief by modifying the lot line through the filing of an Approval Not Required plan with the Planning Board; however, full compliance with the applicable setback requirements was not possible without triggering the need for a variance on the adjoining property at 2 Keith Way. As a result, the Applicant seeks relief from the Board for the relatively small (1.93 SF), remaining portion of the front entrance of the building that extends into the side setback. FINDINGSBased on the information submitted and presented during the hearing, and the deliberations and discussions of the Board during the hearing, the Board made the following findings:1. Circumstances related to soil, shape, or topography especially affect the land or structures in question: The subject property has an unusual shape. This condition, in combination with the location of the existing improvements on the lot, especially affect the subject property and not generally the zoning district. 2. The literal enforcement of the By-Laws would involve substantial hardship financial or otherwise. The lot shape in relation to the location of the existing buildings presents physical and practical difficulties to by-right construction elsewhere on the lot. A grant of a variance in this instance will allow for the reasonable improvement of the property in a manner consistent with other commercial and industrial development in the area. 3. A Variance may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. The improvements will not create any noise, traffic, or result in other similar negative impacts. There will be no adverse effects on the neighborhood and there will be no harm to the public good resulting from the front entryway addition. 4. A Variance may be granted without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purposes of the By-Law. The incursion is relatively modest in nature, resulting in a 1’ linear intrusion and a 1.93 SF overall incursion into the side yard setback. The granting of a dimensional variance in this instance is consistent with the purposes of the By-Law.RULINGS AND DECISIONUpon a motion made by Robyn S. Maguire and seconded by Mario Romania, Jr., the Board voted unanimously to GRANT the requested Variance from § IV-A of the By-Law to maintain a portion of the newly constructed office/storage building at 4 Keith Way with a 34’ side yard setback where 35’ is required in the Industrial Park District, subject to the condition that the Applicant’s representations to the Board are accurate.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, ChairFebruary 25, 2019