The short reason for the citizens’ petition to amend bylaw section 125-3A is that pretty much every existing municipal and school building is nonconforming in some way. We are looking at the uncertainty of a variance every time we modify a building. The proposed bylaw amendment would apply only to buildings that pre-date the bylaw change that made them non-conforming.
Did you know that the library addition also required two variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals and that both were acquired without fanfare? Since the Town Hall project continues to be politicized by those who never supported it, the public, who do support the renovation—and have voted several times in its favor—needs greater certainty that their wishes will be met.
The longer reason is that we have a number of buildings in the town center that will eventually need renovation: the Fire Station, the Old Library, Hildreth House, and the Bromfield House. Although their “use” is allowed, all will need some kind of zoning relief—when or if they are renovated or enlarged—for the kinds of modifications they’ll require.
Not knowing the future of these buildings and knowing the reluctance of the ZBA to grant variances, shouldn’t we fix the bylaw?
Many towns have a bylaw that exempts every municipally owned building. That’s a very broad solution, so the signers of our citizens’ petition have limited the scope of this exemption to the town center and to institutional uses within 2500 feet of the flashing light at the intersection of Route 110/111, where the greatest constraints exist.
If the ZBA doesn’t grant the variance, do we want the town suing the town on appeal? Do we want the town to be unable to renovate its buildings in the least expensive way?
Stu Sklar
Scott Road
