The most development was the approval of application number 24-11 Z for a property located on Valley Road. The applicant, Charles Mahia, presented his proposal to construct a small addition to the rear of his existing single-family dwelling. Mahia explained the need for a kitchen extension, describing the current space as insufficient for his family, which includes two teenagers. “We’d like a little room for them for ourselves and improve the value of the home as well,” he stated.

The proposed addition involves extending the kitchen over an existing patio area, which would slightly reduce the deck’s width but not eliminate it. The board’s legal representative confirmed that the meeting notice was timely and sufficient, allowing the board to hear the case. The board engineer noted that the project was exempt from stormwater management requirements since it involved work over an existing non-conforming area. However, Mr. Mahia agreed to install a roof leader to ensure proper drainage, as stipulated by the engineer’s memo.

The board raised concerns about the reduction of outdoor space and the impact on the neighborhood. Mahia reassured the board that the deck would still provide ample space post-construction and that neighbors had no objections. Additionally, the board emphasized the need for exterior lighting to comply with regulations to prevent light pollution, with Mahia agreeing to ensure that any new fixtures would shine downward.

Following a review, the board unanimously approved the application, recognizing that the project would correct existing non-conformities while enhancing the property’s overall value.

The meeting also addressed another application concerning the construction of an inground pool at a different property. The applicant discussed plans to replace an existing above-ground pool with a new inground version. The conversation covered technical aspects related to impervious coverage and proper neighbor notifications. The board advised that if the applicant wanted approvals for additional structures like an outdoor kitchen, these should be included in the current application to avoid future resubmissions.

Stormwater management was a topic, with discussions about the proposed drainage system. Concerns were raised about the system becoming clogged with debris, and the necessity of implementing gutter guards was emphasized. The design included plastic arches for water retention and a stone backfill area for drainage. The board deliberated on making inspection ports mandatory to ensure regular maintenance and system effectiveness.

Moreover, the applicant sought a variance for lot coverage, as the proposed coverage of 28.8% exceeded the permitted 20% in the R3 residential zone. The board members expressed support for the application, noting that the proposed improvements would enhance the property value and benefit the neighborhood, especially given the lack of objections from neighbors.

In addition to application reviews, the board discussed updates to their bylaws. A new section concerning site visits was introduced, requiring board members to disclose any personal knowledge or observations to ensure transparency and fairness. The bylaws were also updated to include guidelines on professional attire, based on the University of Michigan’s dress code, and to address the implications of social media participation on board members’ responsibilities.

A notable point of discussion was the need for board members to document property visits and disclose any information gathered through personal research or online tools like Google Earth or Zillow. The board emphasized that this information must be brought to light to ensure a fair decision-making process.

The meeting concluded with an acknowledgment of upcoming applications involving additions that exceed impervious coverage limits and a reminder that there would be no meeting on Election Day due to members’ commitments as poll workers. The possibility of a Zoom meeting was briefly considered but ultimately dismissed.