The meeting also featured a detailed examination of multiple variance applications, including a property development on Bailey Road. The applicant, represented by an engineer, sought variances for accessory lot coverage, fence and wall height, and disturbance of steep slopes. The case was a continuation from a prior meeting, focusing on regrading the side yard, constructing a patio, and installing a fence. The engineer presented solutions to the topographic challenges and proposed landscaping enhancements. Board discussions revolved around the proposed design’s specifics, including the structural integrity of retaining walls and the placement of fencing in relation to the walls.

Another property owner’s application for a home renovation variance also garnered attention. The owner sought to retain their home’s design while expanding the garage. Board members debated the renovation’s scale, its fit within the area, and the potential impact of the garage addition.

A separate application involved a residential addition requiring a floor area ratio variance. The resident stressed the addition’s necessity for improving the kitchen and bedrooms and took measures to maintain privacy for themselves and their neighbors. Despite neighbor concerns regarding privacy and the scale of the proposed addition, the board focused on the variance specifics, such as floor area ratio and setbacks. The resident’s detailed presentation highlighted the efforts made to address any potential adverse neighborhood effects.

Further discussions included a proposed home construction project with an F variance, where board members largely supported the application after considering the addition’s conformity with the zoning plan and its limited visibility from the street. Concerns about a deck’s height and proximity to property lines were raised, but after reviewing modifications to the plans, the board voted in favor of the project.

Public comments brought to light another concern regarding a resident who had removed their garage after a neighbor’s complaint, only to face potential break-ins due to cars being left in the driveway.

Lastly, a resident’s report of not receiving a proper notice for a previous hearing sparked a debate on the notice’s validity and due process implications. The resident described the late delivery and its impact on their ability to contest the variance, raising questions about the notice process’s legality.