Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Setback Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dagustinino front‑yard variance at 425 Fifth St. carried to Oct. 6 for CAFRA, survey and plan clarifications
Summary
The board carried the Dagustinino application for variances at 425 Fifth St. to Oct. 6 after architects and planners presented a constrained building envelope, wetland/deed‑restriction issues and a front‑stairs design that may be revised to reduce encroachment; the board requested CAFRA documentation, revised impervious calculations (excluding mapped wetlands), monument verification and additional elevations.
The Land Use Board continued the application from Mark and Allison Dagustinino for multiple variances at 425 Fifth Street, carrying the hearing to the board's Oct. 6 meeting so the applicants can supply additional documentation and consider design changes to reduce a front‑yard encroachment.
Attorney James Raven introduced the application: variances were requested to permit a front‑porch/deck and stairs that encroach into the 15‑foot front yard setback (the applicants described a proposed 12 1/2‑foot setback to the new deck and roughly 8.4 feet to the proposed front stairs) and to leave existing zero legal off‑street parking because the lot and a deed restriction constrain where development may occur.
Architect Jay Madden and planner/surveyor Joseph Barbar described the lot as unusual: the three‑lot subdivision created a limited building envelope constrained by mapped wetlands and a transition line, leaving a 61‑by‑47‑foot envelope and a shallow buildable depth in which the owners seek modest additions and a relocated front entrance. Barbar explained that he had surveyed the block and would provide additional spot elevations along the crown of the street and would re‑compute impervious coverage to exclude mapped wetlands areas; the applicants also agreed to provide CAFRA (Coastal Area Facility Review Act) and related documentation showing the environmental approvals that permit the proposed overhangs or cantilevering.
Board members asked for clarifications about deed restrictions, the locations of monuments that define the wetland transition line, compliance with flood‑zone mechanical elevation requirements, and whether certain elements (for example, the flanking wing of the proposed front stair/deck) could be reduced or shifted so the structure would intrude less into the front setback. The board placed three conditions on the record as items to be resolved before construction: (1) proof of the CAFRA/permitting position allowing the proposed canal‑levered decks/overhangs; (2) revised impervious coverage numbers recalculated to the wetlands line; and (3) additional survey shots and monument location verification to demonstrate the limit of disturbance.
The applicants requested a continuance; the board voted to carry the application to the Oct. 6 meeting and instructed the applicants to submit revised plans and the outstanding documents at least 10 days before that session.
What happens next: the application will return Oct. 6 with revised coverage calculations, any CAFRA documentation, monument verification and -- if applicants choose -- architectural revisions aimed at reducing the front‑yard encroachment.
