Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board recommends neutral stance to ZBA on two variances for Kindred Mason house project
Summary
Architect Emilio Escalados presented plans for a house at 1440 Sawmill River Road; the board voted to send a neutral recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on two variances (driveway width and pool location) and advised the applicant to pursue zoning relief at the ZBA before a public hearing can proceed.
At its July 15 meeting the Planning Board reviewed case PB2506 (Kindred Mason LLC), a proposed single‑house development at 1440 Sawmill River Road, and voted to recommend a neutral position to the Zoning Board of Appeals on two requested zoning variances.
Architect Emilio Escalados told the board the lot is large and steeply sloped; the design disturbs more than the code’s 500‑square‑foot disturbance threshold for steep‑slope rules and therefore requires a Planning Board steep‑slope permit, a wetland/watercourse permit and a pre‑livable permit. Escalados said the team had coordinated with engineering and other town departments and that one late memo from the building department identified two areas that need zoning relief: a maximum driveway width (the applicant proposes 40 feet versus the 30‑foot maximum) and a pool located in the side yard rather than strictly in the rear yard because of topography.
Escalados also presented a tree‑replacement plan and said roughly 49 trees were identified to be removed, with about a dozen already down from storm damage. He said the applicant proposes native plantings and additional arborvitae screening around the pool area.
Board members discussed precedent and visibility concerns. One commissioner argued the pool variance should be recommended neutrally rather than positively because a positive recommendation could set a precedent for side‑yard pools visible to neighbors or roadways. After discussion the board moved, seconded and approved a motion to forward a neutral recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals on the two variances and to allow the applicant to pursue variances at the ZBA prior to scheduling a Planning Board public hearing on the site plan.
The board recorded no changes to the design tonight and asked staff to confirm the applicant’s ZBA schedule; the Planning Board noted that if the applicant does not receive the necessary variances it may need to return with revised plans.
