Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Setback And Structural Repair topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicants propose enclosing second‑floor porch and extending front porch at 14 Orchard Terrace; ZBA to decide July 14
Summary
Applicants asked the Arlington Zoning Board of Appeals to enclose a second‑floor porch and extend the front porch 18 inches at 14 Orchard Terrace to address structural and code issues. The board closed the public hearing and directed staff to draft a decision for a July 14 final vote.
Vice Chair Patrick Hanland opened the public hearing on the Crane family’s application to remove a structurally deficient second‑floor deck and replace it with an enclosed upper porch that would project 18 inches closer to the street.
The applicants, Joseph and Patricia Crane, and their representative Stephen Stack said the existing deck is undersized and that modern framing and insulation reduce usable width. "If you put a couch there, it's kind of...one long room that you have to walk around," Stack said, describing the extra 1.5 feet as necessary to make the space functional.
Town staff summarized the zoning analysis, noting the property is a two‑family house in the R2 district and is already nonconforming with the front yard setback. Staff said the proposed change would reduce the setback from roughly 12.5 feet to about 11 feet and slightly increase gross floor area and the nonconforming deficiency in usable open space. Staff reviewed applicable standards cited in the hearing record — including section 539D (porches, decks, steps and landings), section 3.3.3 and section 8.1.3 of the zoning bylaw — and concluded the adverse effects appear minor relative to benefits such as correcting structural deficiencies and improving safety.
A neighbor, Steve Moore of Pedmont Street, asked whether the enclosed upper porch would effectively become interior living space; the applicants replied it would be enclosed and heated but remain visually a porch intended for views and not a bedroom.
After discussing standard conditions and possible additional requirements (staff suggested consulting the town’s tree warden where applicable), the board indicated an inclination to grant the relief but did not take a final decision. The board voted to close the public hearing and directed staff to draft a written decision for consideration at the July 14 meeting.
The board recorded the hearing closure by roll call; Chair Christian Klein had recused himself from this docket and the vice chair presided. A final vote on the permit will occur after the board reviews the drafted written decision at the next meeting.
