TRURO — Since 2017, Truro’s zoning bylaw has included a limit on the size of large houses. But a provision in the bylaw allows homes to exceed the limit with permission from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The ZBA has been asked for extra square footage eight times, and each time the request has been granted.
This track record does not sit well with some ZBA members — in particular, Darrell Shedd, who brought a citizen petition to town meeting in April that would have eliminated the option of requesting a special permit to exceed the bylaw’s limits by 1,000 square feet.
The select board supported Shedd’s bylaw amendment in the spring, but the planning board did not, and Shedd ultimately withdrew the article from consideration.
There will not be another version of that article at the upcoming special town meeting.
At the end of its statement rejecting Shedd’s proposal in the spring, the planning board said it would work on a new version of the change for the fall. But the board decided last month not to move forward with any changes to the house-size bylaw. The ZBA, however, will consider special permit criteria again at its Sept. 25 meeting, looking at examples of bylaws from other towns.
The house-size bylaw that passed in 2017 imposes a 3,600-square-foot maximum gross floor area for a house on a 0.775-acre lot. The limit rises to 3,668 square feet for houses on one-acre lots. An additional 300 square feet are permitted for each additional contiguous acre of land in the house lot.
The special permit provision allows houses to exceed that limit by up to 1,000 square feet.
According to Shedd, that amounts to a loophole that had slipped past many of the voters who enthusiastically approved the house-size limit at town meeting in 2017.
“The whole purpose of my submitting an article was that I was not aware until I became a member of the ZBA that there was this language in the bylaw,” he told the Independent.
When Shedd presented his article to the select board in the spring, he said that “we did not want to see mansionization in this town.” The select board supported the article with four votes in favor and one abstention.
Although the planning board agreed that the special permit loophole had eluded voters’ attention, it voted against the amendment before the April town meeting. In its comments, the board wrote: “Many of us did not realize that the article actually allowed owners to apply for a Special Permit for more space, up to 1,000 square feet. Since the passage of the article many homeowners have come to the ZBA for this space and been granted it. This article removes that option.”
The planning board worried about possible amendments to Shedd’s measure on the town meeting floor, however. “While the Board supports the intent of this article it may have the opposite effect if passed. Therefore, we do not support it,” the board wrote.
The planning board concluded its comments with a plan to collaborate with Shedd in revising the petition for the next town meeting. Shedd withdraw his article.
But in July, when the planning board was gearing up to submit zoning articles for the special town meeting this fall, it again decided not to proceed with Shedd’s proposal.
Chair Anne Greenbaum referred to the additional 1,000 square feet as a “safety valve” for the house-size limit.
Chuck Steinman, who worked with the planning board to draft the bylaw, was also vocally opposed to Shedd’s amendment.
“The language was carefully crafted to allow some flexibility but limit what the ZBA could give,” Steinman told the Independent this week.
He echoed Greenbaum’s concerns about bringing the matter to town meeting floor, which he said could backfire if town meeting voters expanded the 1,000-square-foot provision in the bylaw. “Obviously, if people are coming to town meeting to get additional square footage, there’s a demand for it,” he said.
At the ZBA meeting on Aug. 21, Shedd argued that the special permits are still a problem.
“It seems that the board is being asked more and more to skirt the limits of the zoning bylaws,” Shedd said. “If the ZBA strictly enforces the bylaws as they are written and to their intent, not all projects are going to be approved.”
“When do you stop, and where do you draw the line?” asked ZBA member Nancy Medoff.
“That’s why people are here before us: they’re asking us to kind of bend the law,” said ZBA chair Chris Lucy. “People hate it when they hear that, but they’re asking to bend the laws because not all the laws fit on every project,” he added.
Lucy said the central question is “essentially, are we comfortable on any of these projects, allowing people to do what they’re asking to do? That’s all it comes down to.”
Per the town’s zoning bylaw 30.8.C, in order for a special permit to be issued, it must be clear “that the proposed use is in the opinion of the Board in harmony with the general public good and intent of this bylaw.”
“By continuing to let people run roughshod,” Medoff said, “we make this board untenable.”
Shedd said that he still wants to eliminate the special permits. “I just don’t think it should exist,” he said. But he elected not to bring the proposal as a petitioned article on his own, citing the planning board’s lack of support.
Town Planner Barbara Carboni said she will bring examples of house-size bylaws from other towns to the ZBA’s next meeting on Sept. 25 to help the board consider alternative approaches.
Editor’s note: An earlier version of this article, published in print on Aug. 24, incorrectly referred to Chuck Steinman as a member of the Truro Planning Board. He worked with subcommittees of the board to draft the house-size limit but was not a member.
