Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Zoning Appeals approves multiple setback variances for existing sheds and accessory structures
Summary
At its June 2 meeting the Plymouth Board of Zoning Appeals approved a string of variance requests allowing several existing sheds to remain at their current locations (setback reductions ranged from conditional relief to zero-foot approval), and approved one carport variance with conditions.
The Plymouth Board of Zoning Appeals on June 2 considered a series of variance requests from homeowners seeking to keep existing accessory structures in place despite current setback standards.
Staff presented each case in turn, noting a recurring pattern: many sheds had been constructed before current development standards, property lines and septic/sprinkler layouts limit relocation options, and Beacon mapping can be imprecise. Staff recommended approval in several cases and recommended denial in others where maintainability seemed impossible (staff said reductions under roughly 5 feet frequently pose maintenance and safety concerns).
In BCA 2026-07, staff recommended approval of reductions to 5 ft rear and 5 ft side setbacks to accommodate existing sheds; applicant Joshua Troyer thanked the board for considering keeping his structures. In BCA 2026-09 (Fiser), staff recommended denial of a 2-foot rear-yard request, but neighbors and the applicant described long-standing use and the board approved a time‑conditional allowance that permits the shed to remain unless removed or destroyed. Several other cases (including Richard, Greer and Hustle addresses) involved irregular lot shapes, septic and sprinkler constraints; the board granted most of those variances, often citing topography and maintenance as factors. One applicant (Zachary Dean, BCA 2026-25) requested a zero‑foot rear setback for a woodshed; staff recommended denial, but the board approved the variance after receiving a supporting letter from an adjacent large‑parcel neighbor.
The board also considered a carport setback request for 709 Pennsylvania Ave (BCA 226-26). Applicant John Hall proposed a 20x20 freestanding metal carport to be sited near an existing line of hedges. Board members and staff discussed clearance from utilities, the effect on the neighbor's hedges and the benefit of keeping the structure open for maintenance. The board approved the carport with a condition that it remain open on the sides for maintenance and safety.
Board votes were taken by roll call for each case; most variances were approved, some reluctantly or with conditions, and a few were approved despite initial staff recommendations of denial. Several residents spoke in support of the applicants during public hearings.
