The board addressed the application of Diane Fox, granting a use variance for an addition to a main home on a lot that currently contains two dwelling units, exceeding the standard one unit allowed. The conditions set by the board for this resolution included plan revisions, landscape maintenance, and the confirmation of air conditioning condenser locations.

A focal point of the meeting was the proposed addition of a covered porch to a residence by applicants Thomas and Ly 415. The board evaluated the notice’s sufficiency and reviewed exhibits such as the land use zoning permit denial form and the plot plan. Tom Peterson, the architect, presented the porch addition, explaining the challenges of the undersized lot and the need for relief due to excessive allowable coverage. The board members expressed their views, with some supporting the expansion and others concerned about the potential impact on neighboring properties and zoning adherence.

Another central discussion involved the project presented by Mary Hearn, a licensed architect, representing the applicant William Shyer. Hearn described the challenges of the lot size and shape, with plans to add a garage and pool while creating an enclosed yard with landscaping for privacy. The applicant, Peter Ville Andor, expressed his intent to use the property as his principal residence, highlighting the need for additional storage space. The board established conditions for approval, including compliance with affordable housing rules and maintaining landscaping.

The meeting also delved into the application by Christopher and Jennifer Parmer, represented by architect Brian Vinski, to build a new three-bedroom, three-bath home. Vinski detailed how the proposed design would reduce the existing seven non-conformity conditions to three variances. The board scrutinized the lot area, frontage, and front yard setback, with Vinski providing insights into zoning regulations.

Furthermore, the board discussed a proposed project involving a new shed and the addition of a garage, focusing on aesthetics, safety, and the potential effect on the community. Concerns from neighbors and community members were heard, ranging from construction noise to parking and landscaping impact. The board set forth conditions for approval, including landscaping maintenance and the non-use of the garage as living space.

The board tackled a shed addition for exterior storage on a property, discussing the incorporation of the shed into the building coverage calculations. The proposed home design included a variety of materials typical of the neighborhood. The board and applicant agreed to make a good faith effort to put utilities underground if feasible. Public comments were largely supportive, with minor preferences expressed for additional features like a full front porch.

To conclude the meeting, the board required an amended calculation for the building coverage percentage after noting the potential for a lower figure than the initially stated 32.25%. The motion to approve the application was passed with standard conditions, including detailed grading and drainage plans and adherence to affordable housing contributions.