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:Applicant: Patrick Brady 71 North Street Hingham, MA 02043 Property: 67-71 North Street, Hingham, MA 02043 Deed Reference: Plymouth County Registry of Deeds, Book 48748, Page 127Plan Reference: “Mortgage Inspection Plan,” prepared by Farland Corp., 401 County Street, New Bedford, MA, dated July 26, 2017 and an architectural plans set entitled, “67-71 North Street, Hingham, MA,” prepared by Lortie and Sons Construction, dated September 19, 2017 (4 Sheets) SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGSThis matter came before the Board of Appeals (the “Board”) on the application of Patrick Brady (the “Applicant”) for a Variance from § IV-A of the Hingham Zoning By-Law (the “By-Law”) and such other relief as necessary to alter and extend a portion of a nonconforming three-family dwelling located within the required 10’ front yard setback from Ship Street at 67-71 North Street in Business District A.A public hearing was duly noticed and held on November 14, 2017, at Hingham Town Hall, 210 Central Street. The Board of Appeals panel consisted of its regular members Robyn S. Maguire, Chair, and Joseph M. Fisher, and associate member Mario Romania, Jr. The project architect, Gabriel Lorte, appeared to present the application during the hearing. At the conclusion of the proceedings, the Board voted unanimously to grant the requested relief, subject to conditions 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 is located downtown, at the corner of Ship and North Streets, and improved by a nonconforming 3-family dwelling (ca. 1840). The lot itself has an irregular shape, similar to a trapezoid, where rear property lines do not join the front at a right angle. The proposed plan calls for a modest upward extension of a portion of one unit that happens to be located partially within the front yard setback from Ship Street with the intent to make the unit ceiling height code compliant. The rear section of the second floor roof will be removed and the pitch altered. No change to the existing footprint is proposed and the work will not increase the useable floor area, bedrooms, or other dimensions of the nonconforming use except for the ceiling height. The Historic Districts Commission reviewed and approved the proposed project on October 19, 2017.FINDINGSBased upon the information submitted and received, and the deliberations and discussions of Board members during the hearing, the Board has determined that:1. Circumstances related to soil, shape, or topography especially affect the land or structures in question: The property has an atypical shape, similar to a trapezoid. This circumstance, in combination with the position of the nonconforming, three-family dwelling upon the corner lot, does not generally affect the neighborhood. 2. The literal enforcement of the By-Laws would involve substantial hardship financial or otherwise. Literal enforcement of the By-Law would prevent the Applicant from bringing a unit into compliance with ceiling height requirements under building code. A grant of a Variance in this instance will allow an existing use to be maintained in a safe manner. 3. A Variance may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. The proposed extension was designed to complement the existing historic structure and surrounding area, as evidenced by the Historic Districts Commission’s approval, dated October 19, 2017. Since the nonconforming use will be maintained, as opposed to expanded, there will be no adverse effects on the neighborhood and there will be no harm to the public good resulting from the structure. 4. A Variance may be granted without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent or purposes of the By-Law. The requested relief is de minimis in nature and will bring the structure into greater compliance with building code. The granting of a dimensional variance in this instance is consistent with the purposes of the By-Law. DECISION Upon a motion made by Joseph M. Fisher and seconded by Mario Romania, Jr., the Board voted unanimously to grant the requested Variance from § IV-A of the By-Law and such other relief as necessary to alter and extend a portion of a nonconforming three-family dwelling located within the required 10’ front yard setback from Ship Street at 67-71 North Street in Business DistrictA, subject to the following condition:1. The Applicant shall construct the addition a manner consistent with the approved plans and the representations made during the hearing before the Board.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, _______________________________ Robyn S. Maguire January 9, 2018