Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Request topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Demos family variance continued after design and wetland concerns; Nature Conservancy seeks driveway protections
Summary
The Zoning Board continued a variance request from Gregory and Desiree Demos to Jan. 28 after the applicant circulated redesigned plans and secured DEM wetlands approval; the Nature Conservancy and a neighbor asked the board to require delineated, permeable vehicle tracks and silt fencing to prevent work from spilling onto adjacent conserved land.
The Zoning Board of Review continued to a January 28 public hearing a variance request by Gregory and Desiree Demos concerning a remodel and limited footprint increase on a property where wetlands constraints and an existing foundation constrain design.
Applicant counsel Hamza Choudhry told the board the revised plan reduces visual massing issues raised at the July hearing, represents a net 244‑square‑foot increase (about 1.8%) to the building footprint, and preserves the existing foundation to avoid additional wetland impacts. Choudhry said DEM had granted freshwater wetlands approval and the applicant circulated an architect’s letter from Douglas Gilpin Jr. to address the board’s prior wall‑plane concerns.
A Nature Conservancy representative thanked the applicants for plan changes and asked that the board require a defined, permeable driveway marking (described as tire tracks or gravel) and installation and maintenance of silt fencing during construction so work does not spill onto Conservancy property. The Conservancy also urged that all work be confined to the applicant’s site.
Designer Mark Castellanos described plan changes that shift roof forms and reduce the wall‑plane measurement that was previously at issue. Board members pressed whether the revised design achieves the six‑foot recess or consistent roof profile used to measure wall plane, and discussed checking the foundation’s integrity before requiring demolition. The board also noted recurring quorum issues for January and that members would proceed with four members if needed.
After discussion, the board voted to continue the matter to January 28 to allow further review and possible amendment and re‑notice of the application.
