Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adu Withdrawal topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors oppose ADU at 75 Washington Street; applicant withdraws application
Summary
An application to build a 900-square-foot accessory dwelling unit at 75 Washington Street was withdrawn after multiple neighbors raised privacy, safety and parking concerns; the applicant indicated willingness to redraw plans and refile.
An application to construct a detached, 900-square-foot accessory dwelling unit (ADU) at 75 Washington Street was withdrawn after substantial neighborhood opposition and board questions about setbacks, parking and emergency access.
Attorney John Kelty presented the application on behalf of the Jacoosh family, seeking side-yard variances for a 45-by-20-foot ADU in the rear yard that would require a 6-foot left side setback where 15 feet is normally required. Kelty said the lot is narrow (about 43.5 feet wide) and that the proposed location responds to an existing right-of-way that provides rear access. He said the ADU was intended for the family's daughter and described the primary house as an older structure that predates zoning. Kelty told the board he could move the building to the other side and re-advertise if necessary.
Board members and several residents raised concerns. Board members asked about parking counts, emergency vehicle access and whether the main building is a two- or three-family. The applicant said the on-site plan showed eight spaces; the board noted ADU rules require one space and individual apartments generally require two. One board member said he would ask the fire department to review access before the next meeting.
Several neighbors spoke in opposition, citing privacy, safety and overcrowding: Sharon Kelly of 1 Washington Place; Jake Mackey and Jennifer Mackey of 3 Washington Place; Nancy Davis of 79 Washington Street; and Elsa Vieira of 7 Washington Place. Comments included that the ADU would be “too close for comfort,” that the rear yard is already crowded with boats and sheds, and that adding the ADU could effectively convert the property to a higher-occupancy use.
After hearing opposition and board questions, counsel asked to withdraw the application, and the board voted to allow the withdrawal. The attorney said he intends to redraw plans and may return; the board said the applicant will be notified if the matter is refiled.
