Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Applicant seeks setback variance at 158 Old Westminster Road; board closes hearing and asks planner to draft decision

Town of Hubbardston Zoning Board of Appeals · January 17, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

An applicant asked the Hubbardston ZBA for a variance to build a garage with a 13.3‑foot setback where 30 feet is required at 158 Old Westminster Road. The board closed the hearing and asked town planner Alec to draft a decision for the board to vote on next week.

An applicant sought a zoning variance to allow a garage at 158 Old Westminster Road to sit 13.3 feet from the lot line where the zoning bylaw requires a 30‑foot setback. The applicant described switch to pellet heating and family caregiving responsibilities as the practical reason for the garage and said work was underway after a building permit was issued, but a subsequent inspection halted construction for being too close to the setback.

The board reviewed the procedural history: the agenda notice lists the petitioner and the relevant bylaw (Article 5, Section 5.1, Table of Dimensions), and town staff reminded members that a written decision must be issued within a statutory 100‑day window tied to the applicant’s filing. The applicant said the original permit was issued and that the foundation had been poured and materials staged before a later inspector found the structure did not meet the setback.

Contractor Chris Mercer told the board that foundation work and construction materials were on‑site and that delaying the project would cause hardship to his schedule and livelihood. Board members asked clarifying questions about which building inspector issued the permit, the timing of inspections, and whether the paperwork showed the nonconforming dimension.

Because precise legal language is required for a final variance determination (and because the board did not have a written decision in front of it), members voted to close the public hearing and asked town planner Alec to draft the written decision reflecting how members are leaning; the board will reconvene next week to review and adopt the formal document.

Representative quotes from the hearing include the applicant describing household circumstances and a contractor noting construction was underway.