The Cerebral Zoning Board of Adjustment on Aug. 27 approved an application to demolish an existing single-family home at 6 Marks Street, keep the existing basement and foundation, and rebuild a new three-bedroom, two-story house with front, side and rear yard setback variances and minor site-plan waivers. Michael Page, attorney for the applicant, presented the case on behalf of property owner Natalie Caporino and applicant Christopher Gonyea.
The board approved the application after testimony and planner comments that the requested variances are preexisting and minimal. "My intention is to sell it to my cousin, Christopher, to, rebuild," owner Natalie Caporino testified. Page told the board the project keeps the existing foundation and masonry garage and that the removal of a now-absent shed will reduce total lot coverage.
The board planner confirmed the existing and proposed setbacks against the ordinance: the required front-yard setback is 20 feet, the existing and proposed front setback is 19.12 feet, and the corner-lot geometry results in multiple apparent "fronts" that prompted the application for bulk variances. The planner also noted that the covered porch is already counted as building coverage and that the proposed change increases building coverage from about 23.32 percent to 25.12 percent and changes total lot coverage from 53.29 percent to 53.54 percent; removal of the shed (about 88.59 square feet) will reduce that coverage somewhat.
Board members had no public objections at the hearing. The board made a motion to approve and recorded a roll call vote in favor; the applicant was told the memorializing resolution will be prepared at the next meeting and that permits can be obtained afterward.
The board’s decision approved the plan as shown on the submitted drawings, including the one-step approach to a front entry that encroaches into the setback as drawn. No additional conditions beyond approval of the presented plans were recorded at the meeting.
The application reflects a reconstruction on an existing foundation rather than a net increase in nonconformity, the planner said, and the board concluded the proposal mostly formalizes preexisting conditions while replacing a house described in testimony as in poor condition.