The application in question involved a property seeking bulk and use variances to construct an addition to an existing non-conforming single-family dwelling in an industrial zone. The applicant proposed a 10-foot bump out on the left side of the building and required variances for building coverage and rear yard setback. The planner utilized drone photos to illustrate the relation of the proposed single-family dwelling to the neighborhood, arguing that the addition would not impair the character and integrity of the area. The board members unanimously approved the application.

During the discussions, a neighbor, Barbara Balley, voiced concerns about the impact of a proposed property development on her kitchen’s natural light. The board sought clarification from their engineer and planner, who acknowledged some blockage of light but assured that it would not completely obstruct sunlight. Subsequently, the board voted in favor of the relief request.

The board also oversaw a case involving PKG Builders LLC, seeking variances for a two-story mixed-use building. The attorney for the case noted that the dwelling units ancillary to a commercial use might not require a use variance as it is a conditional permitted use in the zone. There was a discussion about the buffer requirement for abutting residential properties, with the attorney pointing out their lot was not adjacent to residential properties due to the lot’s shape. The board took a recess to review and discuss further between the attorney and the board members.

Another topic addressed was the application for variances by an applicant on Skyler Drive, who proposed constructing a garage where the driveway currently lies. The architect emphasized that the project would not impact light, air, or open space, and would integrate well into the neighborhood. A supportive neighbor recommended approval of the application. Furthermore, a second case involving bulk and use variances for a second-story addition on West Street was presented to provide additional bedrooms for family members, including an elderly mother. The board engaged in a discussion with the representatives to clarify the proposed construction’s impact and unanimously approved the application.

In a separate case, an application on Skyler Drive for variances to construct a second-story addition and a garage was discussed. The applicant’s representative outlined the necessity due to the growing family, and the board questioned the impact on the surrounding area, with several neighbors expressing support. However, the transcript did not conclude the case, and the outcome remained uncertain.