The application concerning the Farington property on Pittsburgh Avenue was one of the meeting’s most debated topics. The property owners, Edward and Linda Farington, had previously received approval for a new entrance and covered porch, which included a front yard setback variance. However, they sought to make aesthetic changes to their home, specifically modifying the roofline from a flat design to a gable style and altering the porch’s screening to accommodate their large dogs. During the presentation, Linda Farington was sworn in and expressed her preference for the gable roof, stating it was more aesthetically pleasing and practical for their needs.

The board’s discussion centered around whether the proposed changes to the porch transformed it into a fully enclosed space, contrary to the original vision of an airy, screened-in porch. Board members raised concerns about the inclusion of columns and siding not present in the initial approval, with one member remarking that the design now appeared as “an extension of the house.” Questions were also posed about whether these alterations could potentially convert the area into habitable space, thus requiring additional variances due to the existing dwelling already exceeding the permissible floor area ratio.

Board members emphasized the need for clarity on whether the changes would create a habitable space and if there was any intention to increase the area beyond what was initially approved. The board deliberated whether to grant an adjournment to gather more details or proceed with a vote based on the current understanding of the application. Eventually, the board voted against approving the project in its entirety, citing concerns that the structure was evolving beyond a porch into a fully enclosed room.

The meeting also addressed the demolition and proposed reconstruction of a garage on Washington Street, a site with historical significance. The representative for the applicant explained the confusion surrounding the demolition, noting that the subcontractor had mistakenly demolished the structure, assuming oversight would be lax. The Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) had stipulated that the carriage house should be rebuilt in the same footprint and appearance as the original, emphasizing its importance to the neighborhood’s character.

The board reviewed the variances required for the reconstruction, including rear yard and side yard setbacks and the distance from the adjacent building. The HPC had denied the demolition but approved the reconstruction under strict conditions to maintain the historical aesthetic. The board expressed empathy for the situation and acknowledged the representative’s reputation as an architect involved in historic renovations. Ultimately, the board leaned toward granting the necessary variances, recognizing the application as justified and essential for preserving local history.

In another application, the board considered a variance request for a multifamily residential dwelling that had been converted from a bed and breakfast into a single-family residence. The project, located at the corner of Franklin and Columbia, required relief from several zoning requirements due to pre-existing non-conforming conditions. The architect, Brian Newswanger, testified that no changes were proposed to the property’s exterior and that the project would lead to a “downgrade in intensity of use,” maintaining the historic character of the area.

The board discussed the project’s requirements, including parking spaces and maximum lot coverage, which exceeded the allowed percentage for single-family homes. Despite concerns about the lot being heavily covered in concrete, the board recommended deeming the application complete and unanimously approved the variance requests, along with several waivers and conditions for approval.