Lincoln zoning board hears motion to approve garage addition and ADU variance after neighbor support

The Lincoln Zoning Board of Review took up ZBR-25-12 on Nov. 4, considering an application by James DeGess for an 8-foot side-yard variance to add a third bay to an existing two-car garage and create an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) of roughly 900–1,000 square feet above it.

The chair read the board’s five variance standards into the record and asked DeGess to explain the proposal. DeGess said the property is a single-story ranch with an attached two-car garage; the project would add living space above a new third-bay garage so he and his spouse can age in place, while his son would occupy the primary dwelling in future years. ‘‘We really don’t want to live anywhere else but in Lincoln,’’ DeGess told the board.

Staff and board members reviewed site measurements and concluded the ordinance requires a 25-foot side setback. With the proposed addition, the structure would sit about 17 feet from the side property line, producing an 8-foot relief request. A board member noted lot coverage and other dimensional standards would otherwise conform.

The board questioned alternatives. DeGess said placing the ADU on the right side of the house or in the rear would not work because of interior layout, the pool and deck, and design constraints; he also said building the ADU as part of the existing dwelling would be much larger and visually awkward. The applicant said modest roof gables are planned so the addition ‘‘fits in with the character’’ of the street.

Neighbor James Arkand testified in support, saying he lives next door and that a similar apartment-above-garage exists elsewhere on the street. ‘‘I don’t see any potential for any problem as a result of this expansion,’’ Arkand said, adding he and the applicant have maintained a hedge row between properties for years.

The chair read a planning-board recommendation dated Oct. 22 noting aesthetic and planning concerns along the abutting property but reporting a 5–0 vote to forward a positive recommendation.

During discussion a board member raised an apparent open plumbing/boiler permit from 2018 shown in the portal; staff said record transfers and COVID-era remote inspections likely left some older permits marked open in the system and that incomplete closures can occur during electronic transitions.

A board member then made a motion to approve the variance, describing the hardship as arising from the property’s unique characteristics, the lack of viable alternatives on the lot, and the applicant’s long-term residency. The motion text in the record referenced the property as Musseybrook Road, Assessors Plot 34014, in the IRS 20 zone and cited the applicant’s 28 years in the house as relevant to the hardship argument. The transcript ends while the motion rationale continues and does not include a recorded second or the vote tally.

Next steps: the motion to approve was placed on the record; a final vote or any conditions tied to approval were not recorded in the provided transcript.