Text · page 4 of 54
OLD BUSINESS Application 2025-047 — 137 Fernald Avenue — Front Yard Fence • Applicant request: Extend front yard fencing along a shared driveway; presented four alternatives: 1. Gas service line constraints near proposed posts 2. Preferred plan: extend fence 25 feet forward to match east-side fence; close across the front with a gate near porch stairs 3. Compromise: raised garden bed across the front for child boundary 4. Minimum: approve a 25-foot extension along driveway side for safety • Code Enforcement (Busse): Raised beds/landscape acceptable if not impacting drainage/ROW; backyard fencing 4'–6' permitted up to property lines; 3' separation applies to detached structures, not fences; gas line clearance is utility-company matter. • Board discussion: Backyard fence is a feasible, code-compliant alternative; applicant acknowledged after clarification. • Public comments: o Neighbor Angel Castor (135 Fernald Ave): snow management, driveway access, dog behavior concerns, aesthetics. o Neighbor Kimberly Wilkowski (135 Fernald): measurement disputes; dog safety concerns; submitted photos. • ZBA Counsel (Joseph Trapp): Recommended board discussion first; advised that if approval tied to ADA needs, consider a removal condition when the child no longer resides there; child’s ADA needs were not part of original application; brief executive session held for legal advice. AREA Variance Balancing Test 1. Undesirable change/detriment: Yes. Front-yard fence impacts neighborhood character, shared driveway operations, winter snow storage; aesthetic concerns. 2. Feasible alternatives: Yes. Backyard fence fully permitted and feasible; cost concerns do not negate availability. 3. Substantiality: Yes. Front-yard fencing is prohibited; extending a 25-foot segment and potentially closing the front is substantial relative to the ordinance. 4. Adverse physical/environmental impacts: Possible impacts to driveway maneuverability and snow management; utility separations are outside town regulation. 5. Self-created hardship: Yes. Preference for front-yard containment; rear-yard fencing exists as a compliant option. Motioned by Stachowski, seconded by Lang to deny front yard fence. Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Result: Area variance denied. Page 4 of 54