An applicant representing the owner of 169 Union Avenue requested additional area-variance relief on Sept. 15 so that a previously approved detached carriage house can be placed 5 feet from the alley property line rather than the 25-foot rear-yard requirement in the UR4 district.

What was proposed: Tonia Yesenczyk of Y Engineering said the project received prior variances and design-review approval but that the design-review board recommended the carriage house sit closer to the alley to match historical context. Staff advised the team the feature in question is a rear setback—not a front setback as previously believed—so the requested relief is a reduction of the 25-foot rear setback to five feet (an 80% variance). The applicant noted nearby properties granted similar 5-foot carriage-house setbacks in 2019 and argued the proposed placement is consistent with the alley’s existing pattern.

Other variances and site constraints: The applicant confirmed the previous approvals (from 2024) included relief for principal-coverage (40% to 46.5%), driveway percentage (25% to 40%), and minimum average lot width (80 feet required, existing 50 feet). At the Sept. 15 hearing the applicant said the current request should be added to the previously approved set and that the project footprint had been reduced from original larger proposals. Board members discussed parking, permeability and whether the applicant can achieve a required third parking space via permeable strips; the team said they could revise the driveway/parking design and submit calculations showing permeability compliance.

Board response and next steps: Board members generally expressed support for the consistency argument and noted the carriage house would sit farther from the property line than an earlier preexisting garage (1.7–2 feet). Board members also asked staff and applicant to confirm the cumulative impact on driveway/impermeable percentages and to provide parking/driveway strip calculations to show compliance. The public hearing was opened and left active; the board and applicants agreed the item will return after the planning details are updated and staff confirms whether the expanded driveway percentage needs separate relief.

Why it matters: The change would alter the carriage house placement along a residential alley in a historic district; the applicant framed the request as correcting a previously misunderstood setback boundary and matching the historic alignment of neighboring carriage houses.