The most significant approval was for the property on Shepard Avenue, which proposed adding a second floor to an existing two-bedroom, one-bathroom structure, expanding it to five bedrooms and three bathrooms. The property owner emphasized the necessity of additional space due to family growth and the importance of staying in Bridgewater for their children’s educational needs. He highlighted that his four children currently share bedrooms, a challenging situation that the expansion aims to alleviate.

Traffic safety was a concern discussed during the session, particularly regarding the property’s location on busy Shepard Avenue. The property owner described the traffic conditions as creating a “blind spot,” making it hazardous for his family to exit their driveway. To address this, the application included relocating the driveway from Shepard Avenue to the quieter Park Avenue. This change was seen as a significant safety improvement by the board members, with one member noting that the new driveway location would enhance neighborhood safety.

The proposed second-floor addition involved removing the existing roof and constructing a new second story with four bedrooms, including a master suite. The architect representing the property emphasized the safety benefits of accessing the garage from Park Avenue rather than Shepard Avenue. He assured the board that the addition would enhance the neighborhood’s aesthetic and comply with zoning requirements, despite the lot being substandard in size. The current lot size is 15,275 square feet, while the required size is 24,000 square feet.

During the discussion, concerns were raised about the required front yard setback, which is currently 50 feet but was proposed to be reduced to 20 feet. A zoning officer noted that no study of the surrounding areas had been conducted to compare setbacks. The board also discussed the necessity of accurate figures for impervious coverage, especially with the removal of the existing asphalt driveway and the installation of a new one using pervious pavers.

Public comments were invited, but no opposition was expressed, leading to the board’s unanimous approval of the application. Board members cited the hardship faced by the applicants living in an undersized lot and the need for additional space due to family size as key reasons for their support.

Another topic was the approval for a property on Minor Drive, which proposed removing an existing deck and above-ground pool to make way for a 372-square-foot addition and a new deck. The new family room would feature high ceilings, extending from 12 feet to a 16-foot ridge height. The existing unsafe stairs, described as steep with open risers, would be replaced with new stairs extending into the addition.

The architectural expert reassured the board that the new addition would not expand the footprint of the existing deck and would be built directly above the old deck’s location. The area beneath the addition would remain undisturbed. The planner noted that the property was undersized, with only 17,444 square feet available compared to the required 20,000 square feet in the R20 Zone. The addition sought a D4 variance, with the new square footage being approximately 2,982 square feet, requiring a variance of around 192 square feet.

Questions arose regarding the impact of the addition on drainage and the neighborhood streetscape. The planner argued that the project aligns with zoning law purposes, promoting general welfare and improving living conditions. The addition would not impact the streetscape as it is located at the rear of the dwelling and would not impede neighboring properties’ enjoyment. The proposed coverage would be 26.46%, slightly exceeding the permitted 25%.

Board members expressed support for the application, describing it as straightforward and modest. One member highlighted the safety improvements regarding the stair construction, while another remarked on the architectural appeal of the proposed addition. The application was approved unanimously, with stipulations including maintaining the area under the deck as pervious material and ensuring no new exterior lighting or tree removals.