Loading...
Boches - Variance Decision on Petition for a Variance Requested by Brian Boches A public meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeal (“Board”) was held on Tuesday, March 26, 2002 at 7:00 p.m. at 191 Cabot Street, Beverly City Hall, Beverly, Massachusetts. The agenda included a petition by Brian Boches that was first heard at its February 26, 2002 meeting and continued to the March meeting. The petition asked for a Variance to encroach 11 feet plus or minus upon the required side yard setback of 20 feet with a two-story addition (24 feet by 28 feet) that will contain an attached one-car garage and mud room with a family room above, regarding property located at 19 Rezza Road (the “Parcel”). The property is located in an R-45 Zoning District. The March 26, 2002 public meeting of the Board was called to order by the Chairman Scott D. Houseman. The following members of the Board were present: full members Scott D. Houseman, Margaret O’Brien, Scott Ferguson, Mark Schmidt and alternate member John Colucci. Member Andrea Fish was absent. The public hearing on this application started with the Zoning Clerk, Diane Rogers reading the application request to the public and the Board members reviewing the application materials. Mr. Boches spoke on his own behalf. He stated that this item was continued from the last meeting. He added that a previous petition, filed with the Board was denied in April 2001. He stated that he had been before the Planning Board on March 19, 2002 and it found a specific and material change had been made to the petition and its plan and granted permission for Mr. Boches to be back before the Board with a repetitive petition. A letter from the Planning Board confirming this was given to the Board. Mr. Boches added that at the February 26, 2002 meeting, he was before the Board and it was uncertain as to whether the Planning Board had seen the revised plan ultimately denied by the Board in April 2001. A motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to allow Mr. Boches to proceed with existing petition and plan noting that the Planning Board on March 19, 2002 voted 8-0 that there was a material and substantial change. The motion was seconded by Mr. Colucci. All members in favor. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Houseman then asked the Board for their questions or comments on the merits of this petition. The Board members questioned the petitioner. They made observations and obtained answers regarding the criteria upon which findings must be made in order for the Board to grant a variance. Mr. Ferguson commented that the hardship is the narrowness of the Parcel and the existing position of the building. Mr. Colucci stated that this would be encroaching less than the previous plan. Mr. Houseman commented that he made a site inspection and noted a steep slope with ledge which creates a hardship. Mr. Houseman asked to clarify the dimensions of the addition for the record. Mr. Boches responded that the addition would be 20 feet by 28 feet. Mr. Houseman commented that the dimensions on the application state a 24 feet by 28 feet addition. Mr. Boches responded that he revised the plans showing the addition to be 20 feet wide by 28 feet deep. When asked, no member of the public present at the hearing wished to comment on the petition. The Board incorporated its observations as its general findings and also made the following specific findings: (1) that the request is a minimal one that could be granted and still allow the petitioner reasonable use of the Parcel; (2) that the shape of the Parcel is narrow with a steep slope and ledge to the rear of the Parcel creating a hardship that would result in a loss of the reasonable use of the Parcel if the zoning ordinance were strictly enforced; (3) that there are no objections from abutters and in fact several neighbors were in attendance at the February meeting in support of the petition; (4) that the granting of this variance would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning bylaw; (5) that this proposal is not injurious to the neighborhood; (6) that no factual evidence was presented indicating that property values in the neighborhood would be adversely affected; and (7) that based upon the above mentioned factors, allowing the application would not result in a material detrimental impact on the neighborhood or be inconsistent with the zoning bylaw. Following the questioning and discussion, the Board voted, on a motion made by Mr. Ferguson and seconded by Mr. Colucci, to GRANT the variance as presented (with revised plans showing the addition to be 20 feet wide by 28 feet deep). The motion carries 5-0. The Board finds that the applicant carried the burden of showing, (1) that owing to conditions especially affecting the locus, but not affecting generally the Zoning District which it is located, a literal enforcement to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance would involve a substantial hardship to the applicant, and (2) that relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. Appeals from the Board’s decision on this petition may be filed in accordance with the provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 17, within twenty (20) days in filing of this decision with the City Clerk. This decision shall not be valid unless recorded in the Essex County Registry of Deeds in Salem, Massachusetts after the twenty-day appeal period has passed without an appeal being filed. Respectfully, Scott D. Houseman Zoning Board Chairman