Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessory Structure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Zoning board allows preexisting slab to host shed at 10 Leonard Drive
Summary
The North Smithfield Zoning Board of Review granted a dimensional variance allowing a shed to be placed on a preexisting concrete slab at 10 Leonard Drive, finding the location—s existing pad and topography justify the limited relief.
The North Smithfield Zoning Board of Review on May 27 granted a dimensional variance allowing a shed to be built on an existing concrete slab in the front-yard area at 10 Leonard Drive.
Applicant Zachary LaDuke sought relief from the town—s accessory-structure siting rules after a concrete slab already existed on the property. He told the board the slab was poured in 2022 and he wants to place a storage shed on it to remove equipment from his garage and reduce safety risks for his children.
A neighbor, Kenneth Trudell of 9 Franconia Drive, testified in favor of the applicant and said he had recently surveyed his property and provided copies to nearby homeowners; Trudell told the board stakes from that survey remain on site and confirmed the slab—s placement relative to property lines.
Why it matters: The board found the pad—s existing location and the property—s topography would make relocating the storage building impractical and costly. Approval avoids requiring the owner to demolish the slab or perform substantial rework where buffering and plantings limit visibility.
Board findings and conditions: In written findings the board said it considered the variance standards (9.3.1) and concluded the hardship arises from the property—s unique features and not from the applicant—s actions. The board noted the slab appears to predate the current owner and that moving the proposed structure to another part of the lot would be difficult because of slope and grade differences.
The motion to approve included an amendment that the shed be placed on the preexisting concrete slab in the front yard. No additional buffering or documentation was imposed by the board; however the hearing record notes that the applicant must still demonstrate compliance with building-code requirements (frost protection, footings) to the building official before a permit can be issued.
Vote: The board approved ZBR 25-4 by roll call; the recorded votes were unanimous in favor among members present.
Ending: The applicant may proceed with building-permit paperwork to verify foundation details and other building-code compliance with the town—s building official. The board—s action grants a narrow dimensional variance limited to placement on the existing slab, not broader changes to accessory-structure standards.
