The most discussion of the meeting revolved around a proposed single-family home that required several variances, including those related to setbacks and landscape area ratios. The project, poised to increase the footprint while reducing impervious coverage, was seen as an important step towards bringing the new construction in line with zoning requirements. The board engaged in a thorough dialogue with the engineer, who presented the proposed changes and addressed questions about the variances and their potential impact on the surrounding area.

Members of the board showed particular interest in the variances related to the principal and accessory side setbacks as well as the landscape area ratio. The engineer’s detailed explanations aimed to clarify these changes and underscore the efforts to comply with zoning regulations.

In support of the application, a planner testified that the proposed dwelling was appropriately sized and situated for the lot in question. It was noted that without approval, the lot would remain undeveloped, effectively rendering it useless. The application received unanimous approval from the board.

Another topic was the case of Marina Pelino, who sought variances for a jacuzzi, bar, and shed on her property. Pelino conveyed to the board her intention to improve her property for her family, while also addressing practical issues like improper grading and water damage. A professional present highlighted the soggy conditions of the property and the necessity for the variances concerning the structures in question. The board’s discussion focused on setback requirements and the impact of Pelino’s improvements on her property.

The board also considered an application from a property owner who had built several structures without obtaining the proper permits from the zoning and construction offices. The structures in question included a shed, jacuzzi, and driveway, all of which did not meet the required setback requirements. During the meeting, the importance of ensuring that the shed did not become an unauthorized living space was emphasized. The applicant assured the board that they would adhere to any conditions set forth and expressed a willingness to comply with all requirements. The board voted in favor of the requested variances and design waiver after hearing no public objections.

In a related case, a resident sought variances for a gazebo and a shed with an attached bar that had already been constructed. The resident, a construction worker, explained that the structures were built during the COVID-19 pandemic under the assumption that permits could be obtained subsequently. The board discussed the implications of legalizing the structures and the hardships the resident might face if required to alter them to comply with the regulations. After deliberation, the board approved the variances with the understanding that the resident would ensure the deck was also compliant and secure the necessary permits.

The board’s actions underscored the challenges that property owners often face when navigating the complexities of local zoning ordinances.