The applicants, Tim and Mary Hauser, have submitted a proposal for the construction of a two-story addition to the rear of their residence located at 67 Wisteria Drive. This property falls within the R5 zoning district, which typically mandates a 35-foot rear yard setback. However, the existing structure is nonconforming with a current setback of 31 feet. The proposed addition would further decrease this setback to 26 feet, representing a reduction of 5 feet from the existing grandfathered condition.

Mr. Jacques presented aerial views of 67 Wisteria Drive along with detailed site plans. He outlined that the project entails the removal of the existing garage, thus negating the need for any additional variances related to green space and side yard setbacks, while also increasing the amount of green space in the rear yard. The current driveway will be preserved from the street up to the rear building line, ensuring two off-street parking spaces in compliance with the Zoning Code; however, it will be eliminated beyond the rear building line to accommodate the new addition. Notably, several homes in the vicinity, including the neighboring property at 69 Wisteria Drive, do not feature garages.

Ms. Yankel inquired whether the setback regulations apply equally to structures and uncovered pergolas.

Mr. Jacques stated that attached structures like the Applicants’ pergola are treated the same as the principal structure. However, if the pergola were to be detached, different setbacks would apply because there are different rules for detached accessory structures.

Mr. O’Connor inquired whether the City had previously granted a variance for the pergola.

Mr. Jacques explained that the pergola did not require a variance because it was built before the Zoning Code was in effect.

Mr. O’Connor asked what the side yard setback on the west side of the property would be upon completion of the project.

Mr. Jacques said that the site plan does not specify that measurement. However, it is a scale drawing and the west side yard setback appears to be roughly equal to the east side yard setback.

Mr. O’Connor asked if there would be a change in use if the addition is used as a school classroom, which is noted on the plans.

Mr. Jacques said no and explained that although the Applicants are including a classroom area for home-schooling their children, it is an accessory use. The principal permitted use remains single family residential.

Mr. Jacques noted that with only three members in attendance, a unanimous vote from all three would be required to approve the application. Consistent with the board’s usual practice, the Applicant was informed of the right to table the application for consideration by the full board and elected to proceed with just three members.

Mr. Endsley opened the public hearing.

Tim Hauser, Applicant, was sworn in. He shared that his family moved to 67 Wisteria Drive in 2018. They intend to raise their family in this residence, but they require additional living space.

Mr. O’Connor inquired about the proposed placement of the trash cans.