Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Zoning board approves setback variance for Bickford property at 725 River Road

New Boston Zoning Board · June 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

The New Boston Zoning Board approved a variance to allow a two-car garage closer to the road than the 50-foot front setback requires for property owned by Terry and Alan Bickford, citing lot constraints, a steep rear embankment and on-site utilities.

The New Boston Zoning Board approved a variance May 28 allowing Terry and Alan Bickford to construct a two-car garage at 725 River Road inside the 50-foot front setback.

Chair (speaker 2) read the application under Article 2, section 204.4 of the New Boston zoning ordinance and noted the applicants own the property in the residential-agricultural (RA) district. An applicant representative described the proposal as placement of a 30-by-25-foot garage on an existing 31-by-26-foot concrete slab and said the lot is under half an acre, the rear of the property slopes steeply, and the existing well and utility line limit alternative locations.

Board members questioned sight lines and driveway access and discussed drainage. One member summarized the practical constraints: "You really have basically nowhere else to put that," and the applicant confirmed the proposed garage would use the existing curb cut and would not add parking or a new access point.

After member discussion, a motion to approve the variance was made and seconded; the board voted in favor and the motion carried. The board placed no additional conditions in the motion as recorded in the meeting transcript.

The board cited the lot'specific hardships and found the requested relief to be the minimum necessary to allow reasonable use of the property. The applicant was advised that, because the board sometimes sits with three members, appeal rights are limited to grounds other than the size of the quorum.

The board proceeded to the next agenda item following the vote.