The most notable topic of the meeting was the approval of variance application V246 for the property on Shore View Lane, owned by Lauren and Melinda Kerfield. The application requested a reduction from the required 30-foot road right-of-way setback to facilitate several additions to their non-conforming residence, which currently sits 8.8 feet from the road right-of-way. The proposed additions included extensions and a new parking area, which aimed to enhance the functionality of the property.

Lauren Kerfield presented additional details, emphasizing the need for more bedroom and garage space. She highlighted that 300 square feet of concrete would be replaced with grass, improving the property’s aesthetics and functionality for snow placement. Kerfield assured the commission that the project would not exceed the current impervious coverage, addressing stormwater drainage concerns raised in previous meetings. She also explained that the lower level of the front addition would be designated entirely for parking, with no living quarters planned in that space.

Several neighbors spoke in favor of the variance application during the public hearing. Wendy W., residing on Shore View Lane, expressed her support, stating, “I think anytime a neighbor can take an older property and bring it new life and add to the curb appeal… I think that adds to the value of your neighborhood.” Larry Martini, a property owner on Sand Beach Drive, also voiced his support, noting the project’s potential to reduce impervious coverage and eliminate outdoor parking, which he deemed a positive change for the community.

The commission unanimously approved the variance application V246, recognizing that strict adherence to the ordinance would be impractical due to the existing conditions created by a prior landowner. They concluded that the variance was not solely for economic reasons but was necessary for the reasonable use of the property.

Another discussion involved variance application V247, submitted by Michael and Fonda Schuts for their property on Shore View Lane. The request sought a road right-of-way setback variance for multiple additions to their duplex, which is currently 11 feet from the road right-of-way. The applicants had revised their plans after a previous denial due to inaccuracies. The revised proposal aimed to reduce the impervious surface coverage slightly and provide additional indoor parking.

Mike and Fonda Schuts presented their case, thanking the commission for the feedback from the previous denial, which led them to refine their plans. They emphasized their commitment to being good stewards of the land and their intent to alleviate parking congestion in the area. The commission raised questions about the impervious surface limits and the nature of pavers as either impervious or pervious surfaces, with clarifications provided that engineered permeable products could be permitted under current ordinances.

The commission unanimously approved the variance application V247, acknowledging that the applicants had addressed all concerns raised in the previous meeting and that the proposed changes were in line with community regulations.

The meeting also included the approval of variance application V248 for Robert and Linda Panner on South Bay Lane. The request involved reducing the required 30-foot setback from a wetland to 16 feet 8 inches for a new garage. Colin Jacobs of Mara Architecture presented the proposal, explaining the need for a new garage to replace an existing structure. He confirmed that the new garage would be situated similarly to the current one, taking into account the wetland and existing grading to minimize further impact. The commission approved the variance with a condition regarding stormwater management to prevent any unfiltered stormwater from entering the wetland.

Lastly, the commission approved variance application V24009 submitted by Bonnie and Joseph Stazinski for their property at 30982 Lane. The request sought to reduce the required road right-of-way setback to allow for the construction of an addition measuring 11.6 by 13.9 feet onto their existing non-conforming structure. The Stazinski couple presented their case, explaining their intention to enclose an existing cement patio to add a half bath to their home. The commission unanimously agreed that the variance was necessary for the reasonable use of the property.