During the meeting, the board examined two cases involving the construction of new two-story single-family dwellings. In both instances, the applicants sought variances due to pre-existing non-conforming lot areas. The board reviewed the plans and addressed the concerns outlined by the zoning officer regarding the proximity of a proposed driveway to the corner of the parcel. After thorough discussion, the board determined that the variance for the driveway’s distance from the corner was not a concern and moved forward with approving the applications.

The construction projects included extensive details regarding the stormwater management plans. The engineer presented the potential impact of increased impervious surfaces and the plans to manage roof runoff and drainage issues. The board supported the engineer’s request for a waiver from the usual requirements, stipulating that any future drainage complications would be the responsibility of the applicants.

Another notable case involved a variance request for a property at a busy intersection where the distance between the driveway and the intersection was less than the required 50 feet. The applicant proposed moving the driveway to a less trafficked dead-end street, which would still necessitate a variance. After the architect confirmed compliance with other zoning parameters such as setbacks, height, and coverage limitations, the board approved the necessary variances.

Additionally, the board addressed a request to demolish an existing dwelling and construct a new two-and-a-half story single-family residence with various outdoor features. Variances were discussed concerning the front and side porch setbacks and building coverage. The applicant’s representative and architect presented revised plans to comply with the setback requirements, which included rotating the house and explaining a small bump-out feature. Despite a neighbor’s concerns about the frontage encroachment and building coverage, the board closed the public hearing and voted in favor of granting the variances.

The board’s deliberation included input from the board’s planner and experts, who provided technical feedback on the engineering and architectural aspects of the projects. The public had the opportunity to participate in the hearing, though no significant objections were recorded.