ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
DOCKET NUMBER 3205
IN THE MATTER OF
67 MOTT STREET
ARLINGTON, MASSACHUSETTS
APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL PERMIT
Hearing: Tuesday, March 11, 2003
Decision: April 15, 2003
Members present:
Joseph F. Tulimieri
Susan M. McShane, Esquire
Patrick Dignan
OPINION OF THE BOARD
The Applicants, Shawna Rau Johnson and Andrew Sherwood Johnson filed an Application for Special Permit requesting that they be allowed to construct an enclosed entranceway leading to the front door of their home at 67 Mott Street, Arlington, Massachusetts, with the floor area of the entranceway comprising approximately 54 square feet.
The property is located in an R1 zone and the Applicants' construction plans require a Special Permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 6.19 of the Zoning Bylaw for the Town of Arlington.
Statutory notice was given and a hearing was held at Arlington Town Hall on Tuesday, March 11, 2003.
Appearing along with the Applicants at the time of the hearing was their attorney, Robert J. Annese.
Mrs. Jennifer Watson, who owns a home at 66 Mott Street, i.e., across the street from the Applicants' home, appeared in opposition to the Applicants' requested zoning relief.
A Memorandum of Law and Fact was submitted to the Board by Attorney Annese and the Board was also in receipt of a Memorandum from the Arlington Redevelopment Board, Alan McClennen, Jr., Ex Officio, dated March 7 of 2003. The Memorandum addressed the application of the Applicants with respect to their request for Special Permit.
The Applicants also submitted a plot plan depicting the proposed construction of the front entranceway to their home, said plot plan identified as "Plot Plan, Arlington, Mass., dated October 1948, W. H. Roby, C.E."
The Applicants, Shawna Rau Johnson and Andrew Sherwood Johnson are husband and wife and own a single family house located at 67 Mott Street, Arlington, Massachusetts.
The subject lot contains 6,000 square feet and has 66.67 feet of frontage on Mott Street.
The left side yard is 12 feet and the right side yard is 11.16 feet.
The rear yard set back is 34.8 feet.
The present front yard set back conforms to zoning, however, the Applicants' plans to construct an enclosed entranceway in the front door area of their home would result in the front yard set back being 23.2 feet with the result that the front yard set back would not comply with the 25 foot front yard set back required by the terms of the Zoning Bylaw.
The Applicants propose to construct an enclosed entranceway leading to the front door of their home with the floor area of the entranceway comprising approximately 54 square feet.
The entranceway would be constructed of wood with vinyl siding and the stairs would be wood construction.
The depth of the front entranceway would be 6 feet and the length would 9 feet.
Section 6.19 of the Zoning Bylaw, i.e., "Projections Into Minimum Yards," provides that a projected enclosed entrance not more than 25 square feet in floor area or more than one story high which does not project more than 3.5 feet beyond the line of the foundation wall may extend beyond the minimum yard regulation of 25 feet and if the dimensions of the proposed entranceway do not satisfy this provision of the Zoning Bylaw, the Zoning Board may nevertheless grant relief by way of issuance of a Special Permit.
In light of the fact that the floor area at the Applicants' proposed entranceway will be greater than 25 square feet, i.e., 54 square feet, the Applicants have applied for a Special Permit in accordance with the provisions of Section 6. 19.
The Applicants recently added a second story to their one and a half story single-family house in accordance with a Building Permit issued in November of 2001.
The resultant two and a half story colonial style house, built in accordance with the terms of the Building Permit, was built without a covered entry porch for economic reasons because the Applicants could not afford to construct the entranceway at the time they constructed the addition to their home.
The Applicants indicated to the Board at the time of the hearing that prior to the construction addition to their home, they removed a previously existing front entranceway which extended 4 feet into their front yard.
The relief requested by the Applicants will result in an additional 2 foot extension into their front yard.
The distance from the front wall of the Applicants' home to the front yard line of their property is 29.2 feet and if relief is given to the Applicants with respect to the front entranceway construction they have requested, there will be a 23.2 foot front yard set back, rather, than, a 25 foot front yard set back as required by the terms of the Zoning Bylaw.
The Applicants have requested a 6-foot deep entranceway because an entranceway with less depth would result in their having difficulty opening and closing the front door to their home as well as the interior door at the front wall of their house.
The neighborhood in which the Applicants' home is located contains some non-conforming structures and lots with some porches and entranceways within the neighborhood extending into front yards resulting in there being less than a 25 foot front yard set back for some of those houses.
Mrs. Watson stated to the Board that she was concerned about the proposed entranceway extending into the 25 foot front yard dimension and that the granting of a Special Permit to the Applicants could lead to other Special Permits being granted in the neighborhood in which her home is located.
Section 6.19 provides that an enclosed entranceway larger than that allowed by the terms of the Zoning Bylaw may extend into the minimum yard regulations otherwise provided for the district by Special Permit and Section 10.11 of the Zoning Bylaw authorizes the Zoning Board to grant a Special Permit if the following conditions are fulfilled:
1. The use requested is listed in the Table of Use Regulations as a special permit in the district for which applications is made or is so designated elsewhere in this Bylaw.
2. The requested use is essential or desirable to the public convenience or welfare.
3. The requested use will not create undue traffic congestion, or unduly impair pedestrian safety.
4. The requested use will not overload any public water, drainage or sewer system or other municipal system to such an extent that the requested use or any developed use in the immediate area or in any other area of the Town will be unduly subjected to hazards affecting, health, safety or the general welfare.
5. Any special regulations for the use, set forth in Article 11, are fulfilled.
6. The requested use will not impair the integrity or character of the district or adjoining districts, nor be detrimental to the health, morals, or welfare.
7. The requested use will not, by its addition to a neighborhood, cause an excess of that particular use that could be detrimental to the character of said neighborhood.
The Applicants' construction plans are consistent with the physical characteristics of other single family houses located within the area and neighborhood of their home and, in addition, their construction plans will not be detrimental to the neighborhood in which their home is located in light of the fact that other homes in their zoning district and neighborhood also have front entranceways which intrude into front yards.
Following the Hearing, the Board voted unanimously to grant the Applicant's Application for Special Permit.
The Board hereby makes a detailed record of all of its proceedings relative to this Application; sets forth the reasons for its decision and findings; directs that this record be filed in the office of the Town Clerk and shall be a public record; and that notice of this Decision be made forthwith to each party in interest.
Appeals from this Decision, if any, shall be made pursuant to Section 17 of the Zoning Act (Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A), and shall be filed within twenty days after the date of filing of such Decision in the Office of the Town Clerk.
By the Board:
Joseph F. Tulimieri
Susan M. McShane, Esquire
Patrick D. Dignan
| 
