Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Quincy council upholds Zoning Board of Appeals denial for garage at 3800 Stone Drive; vote 13-1
Summary
The City Council followed the Zoning Board of Appeals recommendation and denied a variance request for a garage built at 3800 Stone Drive after an after-the-fact permit dispute; attorneys and staff described the technical basis and process implications.
The Quincy City Council voted to uphold the Zoning Board of Appeals’ recommendation and deny a variance for a garage constructed at 3800 Stone Drive, concluding a multi-month complaint-driven review and a ZBA hearing.
Why it matters: The vote clarifies the council’s approach to after-the-fact variances and highlights process questions about permit revisions and interdepartmental communication. Council members discussed whether the city’s complaint-driven enforcement leads to selective enforcement and whether permit amendment procedures were followed.
Background and the dispute: Property owners Forrest and Mrs. Ashby obtained a building permit to install a garage; after construction began in an altered location the city’s planning and inspection staff determined the leading edge of the garage was within the required 25-foot setback measured at the cul-de-sac arc. Attorney Chris Schultz, representing Forrest Ashby, told the council ‘‘this is not because mister Ashby thought that he was above the ordinance ... He simply made a mistake’’ and asked the council to overturn the ZBA denial and grant a variance.
City staff and testimony: Michael Seaver (inspection/permits) said applicants are informed of setback requirements when a site plan is submitted and that the permit process would have told the applicant the 25-foot setback. Jason Perry, planning director, described the process for documenting changes to site plans and said revised site plans should be submitted if the owner changes the layout after the permit is issued. Several council members and staff noted the case came to the council after a neighbor complaint and a ZBA review.
Vote and motion: A motion to reverse the ZBA decision was made but died for lack of a second. Later the council adopted a motion to follow the ZBA recommendation and deny the variance; the roll call returned 13 ayes and 1 nay and the motion carried. The council’s legal advisor noted that overturning a negative ZBA recommendation would require a two-thirds vote.
Consequences and clarifications: Staff indicated that if the council denies the variance the code requires removal of the structure (anything above grade) but not necessarily the underlying concrete slab. Council discussion included past variance precedents and the practical concern that allowing after-the-fact variances can encourage building without prior approval.
Looking ahead: The property owner may have to remove or relocate the above-grade structure or, if the owner chooses to challenge the decision, seek remedies available under the zoning code. The council did not direct staff to take additional enforcement actions beyond the code remedies discussed.
