Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Pool topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA grants rare front‑yard pool variance at 3 Division Street with screening condition
Summary
The ZBA approved a variance allowing an in‑ground pool forward of the house at 3 Division Street, citing topography and conservation constraints; the board required additional screening between the pool and the street as a condition.
The Dennis Zoning Board of Appeals voted April 27 to grant a dimensional variance for an in‑ground pool at 3 Division Street after an extended discussion of topography, wetlands and coastal‑bank restrictions.
Attorney Paul Tardiff, representing petitioners David and Carrie Capucci, told the board the lot slopes steeply toward wetlands and that Conservation Commission conditions constrained where the pool could be located. He said the requested encroachment equates to roughly 224 square feet and argued the hardship flows from the site’s shape and soil conditions rather than from an attempt to obtain a special benefit.
Conservation‑commissioner or project engineer Kieran Healy explained the regulation that limits structures within the coastal bank and said the pool patio elevation was designed to sit below street level. “You cannot build any structure within a coastal bank because it’s considered armoring a coastal bank, so that’s not allowed, period,” he told the board, explaining why moving the pool farther back would either violate conservation rules or require more intrusive retaining work.
Board members pressed for additional technical detail — sections and elevations showing pool grade relative to the street — and discussed whether the pool could be moved back and lowered. Mr. Foley, the town reviewer, asked for site sections to better understand how the pool would sit in the slope and whether alternative locations or grades might remove the need for a variance.
After hearing neighbors’ letters of support and the homeowner’s testimony about family use, the board approved the variance and attached standard conditions plus a new explicit requirement that additional screening be provided between the pool and the street to reduce visual impact. Chamberlain (board member) moved the motion adding the screening language; the motion carried on the board’s vote.
The board’s approval is conditioned on the listed staff and conservation requirements; the decision notes that Conservation Commission conditions remain applicable and that any erosion control or mitigation required by Natural Resources must be implemented before final permits are issued.
