Owner seeks rear‑setback and coverage variances to move carriage house at 169 Union Avenue

Representatives for the owner of 169 Union Avenue asked the Zoning Board of Appeals Sept. 15 for modifications to variances the board previously granted for a detached carriage house. The applicant seeks a five‑foot rear‑setback (to the alley) where 25 feet is required, among other relief tied to lot width, principal coverage, and driveway percentage.

Tonia Yesenczyk of Y Engineering, speaking for owner Eric Grossman (appearing by representation), told the board the site sits within a historic review district and that the Design Review Board had recommended placing the carriage house closer to the alley to match historic context. The applicant originally planned to sit the structure 10 feet from the alley; subsequent surveying and code interpretation identified that the measurement is a rear setback, not a front setback, so the required relief is larger than originally thought. The applicant said similar 5‑foot setbacks were approved on nearby properties in 2019 and argued that the proposed location would be consistent with neighboring carriage houses.

Board members asked about prior approvals and whether previously granted variances would be reissued or combined with the new request; staff noted any new resolution would need to include both the prior variances and the additional rear setback because the earlier decision is set to expire. The board discussed parking and permeability: members asked whether the project provides the required parking spaces (UR‑1 / UR‑2 parking standard discussion noted that 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit may apply) and whether adding a third space or permeable strips would change driveway coverage calculations. The applicant said they can revise plans to show permeable strip parking and update impermeability calculations.

The carriage house proposal also referenced the footprint and said the new structure would be smaller than an earlier design; the applicant noted the previous garage was closer to the property line than the new proposal, so the new plan moves structure further from the neighbor than the original barn/garage had been. Board members asked that the applicant provide updated drawings showing proposed parking configuration and permeability calculations for the record. The public hearing was opened; the applicant will return with revisions and additional documentation.