The most pressing topic was the proposed construction of the two-family dwelling on Carnegie Place, presented by Natasha Montalava on behalf of Carnegie Place JL LLC. Initially, the application faced scrutiny over its request for a D6 height variance alongside several bulk variances. However, feedback from the town prompted a modification, and the height was adjusted to 27 feet and 11 inches, eliminating the need for the height variance. The project’s engineer, Giovanni Mleio, provided an overview of the site’s existing conditions and the proposed development, specifying that the property is located within an RB zone designated for two-family residential use. The lot, measuring 56 feet by 70 feet with a total area of 3,931 square feet, falls short of the RB zone’s required 5,000 square feet and 100 feet depth, presenting pre-existing non-conformities that remain unaltered by the new proposal.

Mleio elaborated on the details of the two-family dwelling, intended as a permitted use in the RB zone. The design technically classifies as three stories per building code, with a garage on the first level, two bedrooms on the top floor, and a living area on the middle level. The parking plan exceeds requirements, offering one garage space per unit plus an additional driveway spot per unit, totaling four spaces. Site improvements include replacing the curb and sidewalk along the frontage and installing air conditioning pads in the rear. Mleio addressed engineering concerns, confirming compliance with requests for separate dry wells for stormwater management and separate utilities.

The proposed building height was further scrutinized, with an architect noting a minor height increase to approximately 29 feet due to a parapet designed for aesthetic and weatherproofing purposes. A board member raised a concern about the driveway length not meeting the required 22 feet, which could require a variance or design waiver. Paulo Dantis of Dantis K Architecture presented the proposed floor plan, which features a mechanical room, garage, and access stairs on the ground floor; an open concept second floor with living, dining, and kitchen areas; and a third floor with two bedrooms and bathrooms.

Questions from board members included height compliance, given the maximum allowed height is 27 feet. Dantis acknowledged the slight exceedance and explained that design allowances were made for potential site constraints. Another inquiry concerned the classification of the building as three stories, which raised compliance concerns. Dantis assured the board that the design meets type 5A construction requirements with appropriate fire ratings and safety measures, including egress points and a potential sprinkler system.

The board concluded that the application required further review, particularly regarding the revised design and height compliance, and agreed to an adjournment to the December 10 meeting. The applicant’s attorney requested this continuation, and the board unanimously approved the motion, noting the applicant’s consent to waive time constraints.

The meeting also addressed calendar number 3462, related to an accessory structure on Meister Avenue. The applicant, David Pereira, through his representative, Natasha Montalava, sought an adjournment to the December meeting, citing the need for additional time to adjust the property based on board feedback. The board’s attorney found the request reasonable, and the motion to carry the case to December 10 without further notice was unanimously approved.