ZBA denies variance to keep 192‑square‑foot shed that sits on Target buffer at 14 Midway Park

The Zoning Board of Adjustment denied a variance request Tuesday from a Summersworth homeowner seeking to keep a 12-by-16-foot (192 square feet) shed placed at the rear property line of 14 Midway Park. The board voted 4-1 to deny the request after deliberation on the ordinance criteria.

The shed is located at or beyond the rear lot line of 14 Midway Park and, by city zoning, is subject to a 30-foot rear setback in the R-1 (residential, single-family) district; sheds 120 square feet or smaller are allowed by right without a variance. Applicant Dale Spainhour said the structure has been in place for more than eight years, was maintained by him and taxed by the city for the last four years, and sits immediately adjacent to a 20-foot buffer area maintained by Target Corporation.

Board members said the central question was whether the owner’s property has a special condition that creates an unnecessary hardship under the five-criteria test the board applies to variance requests. Several members said the shed had been built without a permit and partly on another party’s land, and that those facts weighed against finding a qualifying hardship.

“I don’t find anything that causes an unnecessary hardship,” said a board member during discussion, noting that many nearby lots are similar in size and configuration. Another member added that, if the applicant were starting from scratch and sought to build a 192-square-foot shed, the board would likely tell the applicant to build a 120-square-foot structure instead.

Spainhour told the board the shed is used to store pool and yard equipment and that moving it would be difficult due to a leach field and an in-ground pool on the lot. He said Target had previously allowed neighbors to use the buffer but recently told him to remove the shed.

Neighbor Clyde Hawes of 16 Midway Park spoke in support, saying, “He maintains his property in a very spectacular way.” Spainhour also told the board he is a retired assistant fire chief and expressed concern about site safety if the shed were relocated too close to the house.

After public comment and board discussion, Ms. Brooks moved to deny the variance; the motion, amended to include the reasons discussed, was seconded by Mr. Ferdette and passed 4 to 1. The variance request was denied and no permit was issued.

The board recorded that the application did not present regional impacts and closed the public hearing. No further direction to staff or follow-up tasks were recorded at the hearing.

Background context: The applicant told the board the lot is a nonconforming lot of about 15,000 square feet in an R-1 district, and that R-1 in this jurisdiction generally requires larger minimum lot size and a 30-foot rear setback; an R-1A district allows different minimums in older, denser sections of the city. The shed was described as constructed on what the applicant believed to be Target’s maintained buffer; Target has since asserted ownership of the 20-foot strip and asked for removal of the structure.