Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structure Height topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA approves larger, taller garage at 65 Arlington Street to replace dilapidated outbuilding
Summary
The board unanimously granted a variance to allow a 24-by-48 garage 16 feet 6 inches at midpoint where 12 feet is the limit within 10 feet of a property line; applicant cited need to house a tall vehicle and reduce theft risk.
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structure Height topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment granted a variance April 22 to allow the Lacasse family to replace an aging garage at 65–65½ Arlington Street with a larger detached structure.
The applicant requested relief from Land Use Code section 190‑31(a)(1) to exceed the maximum height for an accessory structure located within 10 feet of a property line. The proposed garage measures 24 by 48 feet with a midpoint height of 16 feet 6 inches; 12 feet is the permitted maximum where an accessory structure is within 10 feet of the property line. The property is in the RV zone, Ward 6.
Jeff Lacasse and contractor testimony described the existing garage as old and failing; Lacasse said he needs higher clearance to store a tall work vehicle and to reduce risk of theft. A nearby neighbor, Lou Juris, who lives on Haines Street, spoke in favor and said the work would likely proceed without significant disruption and that the proposed garage would be lower than many nearby residential roof lines.
Board members asked about measurement methods and were advised the city measures accessory-structure height at the midpoint between eave and ridge. Members said the applicant and contractor took steps to minimize roof pitch and keep the profile low. The board made findings that the requested height was consistent with neighborhood character, that denying relief would cause substantial injustice to the owner, and that an affected abutter had spoken in support. The motion to grant the variance passed unanimously.
As with other approvals, the chair reminded the applicant of the 30‑day appeal period.

