The primary focus of the meeting was the proposal for a new home on a non-conforming lot at the intersection of Kemp and Laurel. The applicant, represented by Mark Aikens, sought to replace an existing single-family ranch with a new two-and-a-half-story home. The lot measures approximately 9,865 square feet, falling short of the required 11,500 square feet for corner lots in the R10B zone. The proposed design included reusing the existing foundation, which was emphasized as crucial for project feasibility. The design also called for a covered porch with a setback of 17.5 feet from Kemp and a single-bay garage set back at 25.5 feet, both of which required variances.

Elizabeth Waterberry, the project’s engineer, presented details on the existing conditions and proposed changes, using aerial exhibits to illustrate the site and neighborhood. She explained the complexities of the lot’s zoning classifications and the need for variances due to non-conformance in size and frontage. The board discussed the proposed foundation changes, noting that most of the new dwelling would be built atop the existing foundation, with additional foundations for the garage and rear.

The discussion also highlighted the need for variances related to the parking setup, as the proposed garage did not meet the prevailing setback standards. The applicant argued that the existing parking configuration was consistent with neighborhood practices, despite the need for ordinance relief. Concerns were raised about the placement of air conditioning units and a generator, which would encroach on the side yard setback. The applicant’s representative suggested potential solutions, such as relocating utilities or adjusting the porch design, to address these issues.

Water management was another topic, with proposals to redirect runoff into dry wells to improve drainage. The applicant’s plan aimed to manage water flow effectively, balancing the need to minimize impact on neighboring properties, with an acknowledgment that impervious coverage would increase with the new construction.

Architect John Brower provided testimony on the home’s proposed design, detailing the layout and aesthetic choices aimed at blending with the neighborhood. The design included a wraparound porch and a coastal aesthetic, featuring cedar shake siding. Brower emphasized the good condition of the existing foundation, despite lacking some standard features, and expressed plans to rectify these during construction.

A point of contention arose over the visual impact of the proposed front porch, which some board members felt would disrupt the neighborhood’s aesthetic harmony. Suggestions were made to align the porch with the prevailing front yard setback, which could alleviate concerns about its prominence relative to adjacent houses.

The meeting concluded with a decision to carry the application forward to a future meeting, allowing the applicant to revise plans and address the board’s concerns. The board underscored the importance of a full quorum for subsequent discussions and decisions on the matter.

In addition to the primary application, the board discussed other projects, including a small addition on Harvard Road. This addition had initially been approved with the understanding of no net increase in impervious coverage. However, the discovery of an existing dry well, thought to enhance stormwater management, led to considerations about whether additional conditions were necessary. The board leaned towards accepting the existing dry well’s adequacy, planning to formalize this in a resolution for clarity.