Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance Pool topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Uxbridge ZBA grants variance for pool at 780 West Street
Summary
The Expert Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance allowing a property owner to install a pool closer to the road than the bylaw normally permits after finding topography creates a hardship; the board advised the owner to confirm the street line with a survey.
The Expert Zoning Board of Appeals on May 7 voted to grant a variance allowing a pool at 780 West Street to be set closer to the road than the zoning bylaw normally allows.
The board granted the variance for FY25-18 after hearing from owner George Chapman and his son, who told the board the pool location responds to the grade and the planned house addition. The board found the property’s topography and lot configuration created a practical difficulty that justified the relief and voted in favor of the variance by a unanimous roll call of the five voting members.
The pool application requested relief from the frontage setback for an accessory structure. Town staff described the lot as in the agricultural zoning district, shown on the Town of Uxbridge assessor’s map as map 43, parcel 5219, and referenced a deed recorded at the Worcester Registry of Deeds (book 40988, page 20). The applicant said the principal dwelling sits roughly 45 feet from the road and that the pool area will be farther back, likely about 50–55 feet from the road. Under the board’s reading of the regulations, an accessory structure such as a detached pool apron requires a 75-foot frontage setback.
Board members pressed the applicant to be conservative in final placement. As one member cautioned, if the street line differs from where the applicant expects, constructing the pool closer than the approved distance could expose the owner to enforcement or require the owner to return to the board. The board discussed common conditions — screening or as-built surveys — but did not impose additional conditions beyond the variance.
Owner George Chapman described the project to the board: “I just wanna be able to come off the addition and go to the pool.” Board members noted a historic stone wall and the site’s steep drop-off as factors that limit placement options and make the requested relief reasonable. The board recorded that the variance may be granted without detriment to the public good and without derogating from the intent of the zoning bylaws.
The board directed staff to draft the written decision within the board’s normal timeframe; the board discussed the decision/posting schedule on the record, noting the drafted decision must be filed and posted with the town clerk and is subject to the statutory appeal period before work proceeds.
The board’s action was procedural: it closed the public hearing, deliberated, and approved the variance. The vote was recorded as a unanimous approval by the five voting members present.
