The board began by addressing updated stormwater regulations issued by the state, which are important for preparing municipalities for future precipitation levels. These new standards will primarily apply to major development projects disturbing over an acre or increasing impervious surfaces by a quarter acre. The regulations require engineering designs to account for both current and future precipitation, extending projections to the year 2100. The board emphasized that while these requirements are not expected to affect many residential applications, commercial projects might see significant impacts. The adoption of these standards by the end of July 2024 is mandatory. This change is expected to demand more comprehensive planning from engineers.

Following the stormwater regulation discussion, the board turned its focus to a detailed review of the Doyle application, which sought variances for constructing an addition to a single-family home on Harrison Avenue. The applicants, who acquired the property in June 2021, faced challenges due to the lot’s narrow and skewed shape. They requested variances for exceeding the maximum floor area ratio and combined side setbacks, although the proposed addition would not exacerbate existing non-conformities. The board scrutinized the architect’s testimony, which detailed the existing layout and proposed changes, emphasizing the unique difficulties posed by the lot’s shape. The board’s role was to ensure the requested variances met the necessary legal standards, balancing the need for modernization with compliance to local zoning laws.

Another discussion involved a proposed addition to a century-old house on Harrison Avenue. The applicant needed variances for habitable floor area and existing non-conformities in setbacks. A crucial point was the inclusion of the basement in the habitable floor area calculation, which brought the total to 3,720 square feet. The board deliberated on how the proposed addition would impact light and air space for surrounding properties. The applicant argued that the addition, located at the rear of the house, would preserve the historic character of the bungalow-style home and would not be visible from the street. Public comments included support from a neighbor, Nicholas Hall, who emphasized that the addition would not overshadow or obstruct views from his property. Another commenter, Stephen Nolton, raised concerns about affordability and suggested vertical expansion over horizontal to maintain property dimensions.

The meeting also covered a proposed development for a property on Cloney Terrace. The proposal involved demolishing the existing home and constructing a new structure with modern amenities. The lot, undersized for its R30 zoning classification, required multiple variances. The board acknowledged a preference for renovation over new construction but recognized that renovations would still leave nonconformities unaddressed. The applicants aimed to improve the situation while minimizing street view impact. The board discussed the engineering challenges posed by the lot’s significant slope and the need for compliance with county and health department regulations.

A proposal for a property on Cy Terrace sought variances for demolishing an existing dwelling and hardscape to build a new two-story home with a garage. The design aimed to replace impermissible hardscaping with a vegetated slope, aligning with Department of Environmental Protection directives. The board discussed the importance of maintaining a natural coastal bluff and the implications of the project on drainage and flood elevation standards. The plan included significant removal of hardscape and the introduction of vegetation to manage stormwater runoff effectively.

The meeting also included a debate on the definitions of “seller” and “basement,” which have implications for zoning applications. The board noted the need for clarity in these definitions, particularly regarding finished floor elevation and the inclusion of average existing grade surveys in applications. The conversation highlighted potential penalties for existing homes close to the 30-inch threshold distinguishing a basement from a seller, emphasizing the need for clear guidelines to prevent last-minute complications for applicants.

Lastly, the board discussed the conversion of attic spaces into livable areas, with concerns about maintaining the appearance of an attic and not resembling a third floor. The need for strict guidelines on roof pitch and interior height was emphasized to prevent misuse of attic spaces for living quarters. Public input and board member experiences from other towns underscored the importance of clear zoning definitions and regulations to maintain the town’s aesthetic character and prevent unintended consequences.