At the July 15 Planning Commission briefing, planning staff reviewed a series of waiver requests tied to new and previously approved single‑family developments. The items covered included front and rear setback reductions, conversion of accessory structures, increases in retaining‑wall heights, and requests to raise screen or privacy walls.

Staff said it could not support several setback reductions because the houses or additions could be redesigned to meet existing setbacks, because properties lie in MPO/RMP areas where primary structure setbacks apply, or because proposed changes would increase nonconformity. For example, staff opposed a waiver to reduce a front setback from 40 to 35 feet on a new house, noting the house could be redesigned. Staff also opposed a request to reduce a rear setback from 30 to 10 feet in one case because attaching an accessory dwelling to a primary structure triggered primary‑structure setbacks and because the property is in an MPO/RMP area with applicable regulations.

Staff supported some wall‑height increases where site topography and previous approvals justified taller walls. In one previously approved 113‑lot subdivision, staff supported a 9‑foot screen wall at locations that effectively combine a 3‑foot retaining wall plus a 6‑foot screen wall, which staff said would not increase impacts to neighbors. In another subdivision, staff supported increases along a west property line where the site sits lower than the adjacent planned commercial property and the walls provide buffer.

Why it matters: these waiver requests affect neighborhood character, privacy, drainage and compatibility with adjacent land uses. Staff repeatedly cited the availability of alternative design solutions and existing regulatory constraints (for example, MPO/RMP requirements) as reasons to deny some requests.

Public comment and recommendations: town boards and citizens advisory councils varied in their recommendations; several items drew small numbers of support and opposition cards. Where staff could not support a waiver, the item was either recommended for denial or held for further review; several items were moved to nonroutine agenda items for public hearing and formal action.

Next steps: items the staff could not support will return for hearings where commissioners can take formal action.