The primary focus of the meeting was the proposal by ala Asset Management LLC to divide the existing trapezoidal-shaped lot into two parcels. The property currently houses a 1947-built structure, which the applicant plans to demolish. The proposed subdivision would result in one lot measuring approximately 12,680 square feet and the other about 12,667 square feet, both with frontages of roughly 81 feet. These dimensions fall short of the 15,000 square feet area and 150 feet frontage mandated by local zoning laws, prompting the need for variances.

Witnesses testified to support the application, starting with Camille Wiskowski, managing member of the applicant company. Wiskowski described the current home as outdated, with structural deficiencies, stressing that the new homes would comply with all setback requirements and maintain a habitable floor area ratio below 21%. Despite the variances requested, Wiskowski assured the board that the proposal would adhere to other zoning standards, including side yard, backyard, and front yard setbacks.

The board engaged in discussions about the character of the neighborhood, particularly concerning lot sizes and dimensions. The applicant’s representatives highlighted that many nearby properties also failed to meet the 15,000 square feet standard, with at least seven lots within a 500-foot radius exhibiting similar non-conforming characteristics. This context was used to argue that the proposed subdivision would not alter the neighborhood’s established aesthetic.

Concerns from residents were voiced during the meeting. Alisa Chang, a neighbor, expressed worries that the new homes would be too close to the street, potentially obstructing her view.

The board’s deliberations included discussion of the C2 variance analysis, which evaluates deviations from zoning regulations. The applicant argued that the proposed subdivision aligned with the master plan’s objectives, such as promoting population density and preserving the environment, and would result in homes more consistent with the neighborhood’s character than the existing oversized lot. They reassured the board that the development would not involve removing mature trees and would conform to modern building codes and energy efficiency standards.

Members of the board weighed the benefits of the new development against potential detriments. Some members noted the aging nature of existing homes on Hillside Avenue, emphasizing the need for new construction that would integrate well with the existing community. The applicant was commended for their flexibility in addressing neighbor concerns and their commitment to maintaining the neighborhood’s rhythm of lot sizes.

Ultimately, the board moved to approve the application, subject to conditions including compliance with an engineering memo and a proposed 60-foot setback. The motion passed unanimously.

Towards the end of the meeting, a resident raised concerns about local wildlife, specifically mentioning sightings of coyotes and foxes in the area. While these concerns were acknowledged, the board maintained focus on the subdivision proposal.