The board considered an application for the construction of a 16 by 32-foot inground pool and a 1,250 square foot paver patio on Albany Avenue, a property that is partly within a designated flood hazard area. The applicants faced multiple zoning challenges, including a deficient lot area of 12,100 square feet where 15,000 is required, and a lot width and frontage of 50 feet, falling short of the 75 feet standard. Additionally, the proposed pool’s location infringed on the required setbacks, being only 5 feet from the right side yard and 9.1 feet from the detached garage, where 10 and 12 feet are mandated, respectively.

Concerns were raised about the pool exceeding the maximum allowable area for such structures, with the total pool and patio area reaching 1,717 square feet, surpassing the permissible 1,500 square feet. The board discussed the challenges of relocating the pool behind the garage, which would expose it to increased flooding risk and complicate access due to elevation changes. The applicants argued that placing the pool in the proposed location was optimal to minimize these issues.

The board reviewed a letter from Conor’s Engineering, which addressed concerns related to the flood hazard area. The applicants were required to comply with a permit by rule, which allows certain improvements in flood-prone areas without a full permit if specific conditions are met. The board confirmed that the applicants needed to provide testimony confirming adherence to these stipulations.

During the meeting, the board also addressed the applicant’s plans for driveway modifications and lighting for the pool area. It was confirmed that existing lighting on the detached garage would be adjusted to minimize impact on neighboring properties and that the pool area would include landscape lighting. Water drainage was another focal point, with assurances given that both municipal and state regulations would be followed, and excess water from the saltwater pool would be managed to prevent soil erosion.

A suggestion was made to include a stipulation preventing the use of the garage as an accessory dwelling or bedroom, to which the applicants agreed. The board expressed support for the project, noting that it seemed to address drainage issues better than other properties in the vicinity. With no public attendance to voice concerns, the board unanimously approved the application with the condition that specific stipulations regarding garage use and flood hazard compliance be met.

Beyond the pool project, the meeting also included discussions on broader zoning regulations. A significant conversation centered around the placement and growth of trees near sidewalks, with concerns about root systems damaging concrete and creating safety hazards. The board considered drafting a letter to the governing body to review and potentially revise planting regulations to mitigate these issues.

The topic of fence height regulations also surfaced, with a board member expressing frustration over inconsistent interpretations of existing ordinances.

In other matters, the board acknowledged the resignations of Mary Curran and Steve Beg, who both stepped down from their positions on the board due to personal commitments and other roles. Their contributions to the zoning board were recognized with gratitude.

The board also discussed ongoing open space projects, such as the development of a new field at the Little Leaf complex and the refinishing of tennis courts at Hersfield Park. The need to balance the demands of tennis and the growing popularity of pickleball was noted, with considerations for dual usage of courts being explored.