The board granted approval to applicant Milton Dart for a bulk variance request related to an expansion project on Elm Street. The variances, necessitated by the lot’s existing non-conformities in terms of size and width, will allow Dart to construct a second-story addition to accommodate his growing family. The board’s decision followed a examination of the proposed construction’s impact on drainage, the visual landscape, and the overall benefit to the community.

During the meeting, architect Tom Ellenberger provided visual aids and a comprehensive presentation of the project, addressing concerns over the lot’s dimensions and the planned modifications to the existing structure. The board discussed at length the potential impact on the property’s slope and drainage, with suggestions to mitigate water runoff to neighboring properties. A debate ensued over the benefits and detriments of the variances, with considerations given to impervious coverage calculations and additional landscaping to offset any negative effects.

One of the more contentious points of the project was the presence of an unpermitted swimming pool, prompting discussion on the need for a proper stormwater management plan. Furthermore, suggestions were made to relocate the air conditioning unit to a less conspicuous location and to provide adequate screening from the street. The applicant agreed to remove an existing oversized shed on the property, alleviating one of the non-conformity issues.

In other matters, the board commenced with the reorganization of its members. Jonathan Rosenberg, Tom Grosskopf, Randall Watts, and Meredith Crawford Collins were sworn in, with Edwin F. Gerecht, Jr. elected as chairman and Tom Grosskopf as vice chairman. Debra Coonce was appointed as the secretary of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, with her term extending until January 21, 2025.

The board’s administrative agenda also included the approval of resolutions for legal, engineering, and planning firms for the upcoming year. The 2024 meeting and hearing schedule underwent review, with a decision to omit a second meeting in November in anticipation of potential complications arising from the presidential election. Additionally, the minutes from the December 5 meeting were approved without dispute.

As the meeting progressed, a member announced their absence for an upcoming application, citing a busy schedule with five other applications. The board briefly touched upon an upcoming course on land use law and acknowledged a member’s departure from the meeting.

Towards the conclusion of the meeting, the board engaged in deliberation over the Elm Street variances. Members voiced their support for the project, highlighting the narrow lot as a unique circumstance and commending the applicant for his engagement with the board’s professionals and adherence to proper protocols. The proposal was seen as a positive enhancement to the property and the neighborhood, with the board ultimately granting unanimous approval, subject to stipulated conditions.