Board approves second‑floor addition variance at Lagores Drive; architect says design respects neighborhood
Loading...
Summary
The Zoning Board of Adjustment unanimously approved variances allowing a partial second floor and a small infill that raises the property’s lot‑coverage over the two‑story limit, with board and neighbors saying the design will fit the street and staff finding practical difficulties for a different configuration.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment on Sept. 8 approved a pair of variances allowing a partial second‑floor addition and a small infill at a single‑story home on Lagores Drive, concluding that the house’s existing configuration creates practical difficulties for complying with normal setback and lot‑coverage requirements.
The board voted 6‑0 to permit a second‑floor addition that would follow the first‑floor setback (existing street‑side setback ranges from about 5.7 to 6.8 feet where 15 feet is required) and to allow a modest increase in lot coverage. The property is a pre‑1965 single‑story house; staff noted the maximum lot coverage for a two‑story building is 30% but the existing pre‑1965 single‑story baseline carries a 50% allowance. The project would raise lot coverage from 40.8% to about 41.9% once the second floor and a previously exempt covered breezeway infill are counted.
Owner and architect Nick Gelpi, who described himself as both the property owner and project architect, told the board the house is an unusual, deep U‑shaped plan with a recessed courtyard. He said shifting the proposed second floor northward to meet the street‑side setback would cover a deeply recessed courtyard and materially increase lot coverage, and could present structural difficulties for aligning a new second floor with existing walls. Gelpi presented elevations and renderings and told the board the addition was pushed back from the street and sited to reduce visibility from the public right‑of‑way. "We're hoping that the upstairs bathroom now ... it's really the idea was that it's a home office," Gelpi said, explaining program changes and showing how family use would shift within the house.
No members of the public were present on Zoom to oppose the application; board members said they visited the block and found surrounding houses already included two‑story buildings and large trees that would reduce visual impact. Staff recommended approval, citing practical difficulties tied to the lot and the house configuration. Conditions discussed included submitting a full landscape plan to address frontage and privacy impacts; Gelpi said he plans to work with a landscape architect on the design.
The motion to approve the variances was made by Board Member Jeffrey Aronson and seconded by Board Member Andres Assayant; the board approved the variances 6‑0. The applicant and his architect were told to coordinate final site, elevation and landscape details with staff as part of the building‑permit review before construction proceeds.
The decision allows the property owner to proceed with schematic design and to pursue building permits; any changes required by building‑department review or the landscape plan must be incorporated before a certificate of occupancy is issued.
