The most notable issue involved a variance request for a property that had been the subject of extensive legal scrutiny and community opposition. Representing the abutters, Matthew A. presented a petition signed by over 50 residents opposing the variance, citing historical zoning decisions and potential negative impacts on the neighborhood. The property in question had previously been subject to specific conditions, including height restrictions and boundary limitations, which the new proposal sought to alter significantly. Matthew A. argued that the proposed changes would adversely affect adjacent properties, stating that “the family came in and they divided this lot and created this undersized lot,” and there was no substantial hardship justifying the variance. Other community members, like Lisa Q. and Mary H., echoed these concerns, highlighting issues with emergency access and potential disruptions to newly paved streets. Despite a suggestion to allow a withdrawal of the petition, the board ultimately decided to deny the request after deliberating on the lack of substantiated hardship.

In a separate matter, the board evaluated a variance request to convert a large single-family Victorian home into a two-family dwelling. The property, located in a predominantly multifamily neighborhood despite its single-family zoning, faced challenges due to its size and shape, which made it difficult to maintain as a single-family residence. The request included plans to add parking spaces, necessitating a variance for lot coverage. A board member noted that recent state regulations might allow for the addition of an accessory dwelling unit, potentially reducing the need for the variance. After considering the implications of increased density, the board approved the variance with the condition that no more than two units be created, aligning the property with the surrounding neighborhood’s character.

Additionally, the board approved a variance request for the estate of Ronald Shard, which sought to divide an existing lot into two parcels. The proposal aimed to maintain the existing single-family dwelling on one parcel while constructing a new home on the second. Attorney Mark Levan, representing the Shard estate, explained the historical context of the property and emphasized that the division would not negatively impact the neighborhood. Concerns regarding stormwater runoff and lot coverage were addressed, with recommendations for site plan review and drainage considerations incorporated into the approval.

The meeting also included a petition from T Real Estate LLC to divide a parcel into three lots, retaining an existing two-family dwelling on one lot and constructing single-family homes on the other two. The board approved the request, emphasizing the need for off-street parking and ensuring the new driveways would not connect to Mison Street, thus preserving on-street parking.

Concluding the meeting, the board granted a six-month extension to a landscape company that had previously been granted a variance. The extension was necessary due to delays in finalizing plans and obtaining permits, compounded by indecision regarding building design and the landscaping season. The meeting adjourned shortly before 7:00 PM, following procedural motions concerning the election of officers and approval of prior minutes.