A central topic of discussion was an application for a height variance on Wyoming Avenue, submitted by Patricia and John Mueller. The proposal involved a D6 height variance necessitated by a 10-foot deviation from the maximum permitted height due to a change in the average grade calculation around the existing 1902-built structure. The board required five affirmative votes to approve the variance, with the applicants given the option to defer the decision until a full board was present. The architect, Timothy Quest, explained that the height variance arose because the proposed addition, which conformed to height requirements when accounting for the new average grade, increased the building’s height from 40 feet to 42 feet 9 inches. Despite the technical complexity, the board members engaged in a thorough discussion to understand the implications of the existing and proposed heights.

The existing building’s height was non-conforming due to the new average grade established by the addition. Quest provided a detailed breakdown of the calculations, highlighting that the variance was necessary due to the shift in measurement, not because of physical alterations to the existing structure. The board members debated whether the variance was justified, given that if the existing building were to be removed, the new construction would meet all height requirements. Ultimately, the board sought clarity to ensure compliance with zoning regulations before making a decision.

Following the height variance discussion, attention shifted to a proposed deck extension at another property. The deck development plan included improvements to an existing porch. The board was informed of “good dense screening” that would obscure the deck from adjacent properties, maintaining privacy and aesthetics. The proposed deck was positioned over 100 feet from the nearest house, and the applicant highlighted that it would replace an unsightly gravel area, thus enhancing the backyard’s utility.

The deck application involved both C1 and C2 variances, justified by the unique shape and configuration of the lot, which included a rear-facing garage. The design aimed to provide a functional solution for safety, especially for children playing. During the public comment session, neighbors expressed support for the application, noting that the current deck was too small for practical use. The board members agreed that the proposed changes would be beneficial, emphasizing compliance with zoning regulations. The motion for approval was unanimously supported.

Additionally, the meeting addressed another application involving Edward Maguire and Doug Miller on Sagamore Road. The applicants sought a variance for updates to the front yard and the addition of a covered porch, constrained by the steep sloping lot. The board was informed that the proposed modifications aimed to improve curb appeal and functionality while ensuring no negative impact on neighboring properties. Despite initial reservations, board members supported the application, recognizing the design’s potential to improve the neighborhood’s aesthetic without detracting from light or open space.