A key topic was the proposed expansion of a residential property located at lot 15, block 1904, 63 Avenue. This property, built in the late 1950s, occupies a 19,652 square foot lot in a zone mandating a minimum lot size of 26,000 square feet, making it non-conforming by current standards. The proposed plans included the installation of mechanical equipment like a gas generator and compressors, strategically placed at the rear to keep them discreet. A notable concern was the removal of two beach trees on the right side of the house to facilitate the project, which also raised questions about the impact on a municipal drainage easement.

The property’s existing structure has a setback of 18.4 feet from the property line, less than the required 20-foot minimum. The proposed addition would further decrease this distance to 15.6 feet, necessitating a variance. The applicant presented several exhibits, including architectural plans and photographs, to argue for the expansion. They noted that the home’s unique orientation either parallel to the property sidelines or radial to Crescent Bend created a hardship that justified the variance. The board engaged in a discussion about whether the proposed addition could be adjusted to reduce its encroachment on the setbacks, balancing the architectural design with regulatory requirements.

Another discussion point was the structural issue on East Allendale Avenue, where a wall on the right side had detached from the foundation during construction. This required a substantial demolition of 60 to 70 percent of the exterior walls, though the foundation and building footprint remained unchanged. The board approved an amendment to the prior application to address this structural challenge.

Following these concerns, the board turned its focus to the proposed expansion of another split-level home, which included plans for a new great room and a covered deck. The representatives highlighted the use of materials that would complement the existing structure, such as new vinyl siding alongside retained red brick facades. They emphasized improvements in exterior lighting for security, aligning with the house’s overall aesthetic. This proposal was also unanimously approved.

Additionally, the board addressed a proposed asphalt plan, emphasizing the importance of alignment with existing leases and setback requirements. An off-the-record discussion ensued to clarify the complex elements of the project, focusing on lighting arrangements and the positioning of utility connections to avoid disrupting existing systems. The board stressed the need for clear documentation on drainage and runoff management.

The removal of the beach trees emerged as a recurring topic, with concerns about their proximity to utility lines and potential impact on drainage easements. The board debated the legitimacy of the claimed “hardship” due to the home’s original construction, examining whether alternatives could mitigate the setback violations without compromising the project’s integrity.

The meeting concluded with the board addressing routine matters like scheduling future meetings and confirming dates that avoid conflicts with holidays and school events. They also briefly touched on ongoing negotiations related to fair share housing.