Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Interpretation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Uxbridge ZBA finds no dimensional relief needed for garage at 406 Douglas Street; solar permit question routed to planning
Summary
The board found that a detached garage at 406 Douglas Street meets setbacks when the corner-lot front is properly identified and made a formal finding that dimensional relief is unnecessary; the ground-mounted solar array may still require Planning Board review depending on recent bylaw amendments.
The Uxbridge Zoning Board of Appeals on Aug. 13 issued a finding that the dimensional relief requested for a proposed detached garage at 406 Douglas Street is not necessary because, under the town's lot-definition rules, the proposed garage meets applicable setbacks.
Applicants Gina and George Pedranti sought a variance to build a garage and a special permit for ground-mounted solar in a Residential C district. The application prompted detailed review of the zoning table and footnotes governing corner lots: whether the front setback must be measured from both streets or from the narrowest boundary that the owner may designate as the front. Using the town clerk's codified bylaws and definitions, board members concluded that Douglas Street is the front lot line (the narrower frontage) and that the proposed garage sits beyond the 75-foot front-setback from that street, which means the garage complies with the dimensional requirements.
Board members also discussed whether the ground-mounted solar installation requires a Planning Board special permit. The panel noted the town recently amended solar/energy-storage provisions at spring town meeting and that the Attorney General review window had run (the town clerk's records indicate the AG review period was near completion); depending on final AG action, small residential ground-mounted arrays could be exempted from Planning Board special-permit requirements. At the hearing the board said it lacked authority to issue the Planning Board's special permit even if the ZBA finds no dimensional relief is necessary.
A neighbor spoke in support of the applicants' landscaping and visual mitigation. Rob moved that the ZBA make a finding that dimensional relief is not necessary; Richard seconded and the motion passed unanimously. The board asked staff to prepare a formal finding for the record and noted applicants may still need to seek planning-board review for the solar array if the recent bylaw changes do not apply to their installation.
The ZBA recommended the applicants consult with the zoning enforcement officer and the town planner to confirm whether the updated bylaw language exempts the proposed residential array from planning-board review.
