Owner seeks to demolish and rebuild 260 Bellevue Road; board continues after neighbors raise height, privacy concerns

Attorney John Lyons and architect Matt Mueller presented a proposal to the Zoning Board of Appeals on Dec. 10 to demolish the existing residence at 260 Bellevue Road and rebuild a larger single-family home on the same foundation. The owner is 260 Bellevue LLC.

Lyons told the board the property sits on a steeply sloping lot in a Residence A single-family zoning district and that most of the existing dimensional nonconformities predate the current owner. He said the proposal maintains the existing foundation footprint but adds a dormer in the rear to provide headroom for an upper-level primary suite, which creates a new story-count and a technical height violation.

"We do have a technical violation of the code with which we do not disagree," Lyons said, adding the height overage is about 14 inches and stems from the lot’s slope and the decision to reuse the existing foundation. Architect Matt Mueller described floor-to-floor heights of roughly 9 feet on the first floor and 10 feet on the second; he said the third-floor spaces include sloped ceilings and dormers for the master suite and office.

Why it matters: The lot’s steep grade concentrates the appearance of height toward the rear of the house; neighbors said a taller structure and the proposed rear decks and exterior stair could intrude on privacy and views and lead to a loss of light for nearby properties.

Public comment and concerns: Several abutters and neighbors spoke in opposition or with reservations. Joseph and Joyce Skowronski, who live behind the property, said they feared the new house and proposed rear retaining wall would reduce privacy and sunlight and asked whether an existing buried septic tank on the site had been addressed. Neighbor Joy Atwood raised concerns about hazardous material removal because the existing structure had been condemned for drug activity and said she wanted confirmation that needles and biohazardous waste would be handled by ISD during demolition. A number of neighbors said they welcomed removal of the blighted structure but urged the applicant to reduce height and not add a full third story with decks and an exterior stair.

Board response and direction: Several board members said they would not be comfortable granting a three-story approval in a Residence A district and emphasized the board’s practice of generally limiting new construction to two-and-a-half stories in that zoning category. Members suggested the applicant revise elevation and plan details: reduce or eliminate third-floor decks/stairs, explore lowering floor-to-floor heights, and consider alternative designs to meet headroom needs without increasing measurable story count. The applicant agreed to return with revised drawings and to work with abutters on retaining wall and drainage details.

DPW comments and inspections: The DPW submitted standard comments requesting details on increased impervious area, trench repairs, proposed fill or grading, and on the location of driveway placement. The building department had previously boarded the property and flagged code violations; the applicant said demolition would proceed under ISD oversight and that hazardous materials and site cleanup would be handled as part of the demolition permit process.

Board action: The zoning board continued the hearing to the January 28, 2025 session and requested revised plans showing changes to height, decks or exterior stairs, and detailed retaining-wall design and drainage mitigation. The board said it expected the applicant to coordinate with abutters and DPW before returning.