Received via email 11.13.23:
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
The above referenced application must be assessed with close attention to the Worth Avenue Guidelines, which are part of the town's zoning ordinances. Since I did not see any of the most relevant sections in the meeting back-up, I've attached them here. I am also adding Code Sec. 134-1165 below, since only the second part was referenced in the staff memo. (Highlighting mine.)
Sec. 134-1165. Special exception to height regulations; special exception structures.
(a) Criteria for granting. In order to encourage increased open space, landscaped open space, reduced density and lot coverage and architectural detail, the town council may at its discretion, upon review of an application and public hearing thereon, allow for the increase of the maximum building height in the C-WA Worth Avenue district, upon a finding being made by the town council that the proposed increase in height for a contemplated special exception structure is in the public interest, that careful attention is given to architectural detail, and that it meets the standards of sections 134-227 through 134-233 and the goals and guidelines in this section.
(b) Two-story and three-story construction. The following shall be applicable to two-story and three-story construction in the C-WA district:
(1) First story coverage not more than 35 percent and second story coverage not more than 35 percent. Additional coverage and other special allowances may be granted if the structure is built in accordance with the Worth Avenue Design Guidelines in conformance with section 134-233.
(2) A third story and other special allowances may be granted if the structure is built in accordance with the Worth Avenue Design Guidelines in conformance with section 134-233.
Please note that this particular section is part of the Code itself, not the Guidelines (which are also included in the Code by reference.) Given that this project increases density and reduces open space and landscaped open space, it does not meet the primary criteria sought in the conditional granting of special allowances for this district. James Murphy's memo describes well the more detailed elements of the Guidelines with respect to this application, but the reference to the Tiffany building 3rd story is misplaced. That structure failed on the primary requirement that the architecture be a restoration to a desired style (a full restoration had already been done fairly recently) or an enhancement of the existing style, and the modern style is specifically prohibited by the Guidelines. Unfortunately, the Council of the time appeared to be somewhat unfamiliar with the Guidelines, so this structure serves better as an example of what should not be done in the district.
It is critical that Sec. 134-1165 and the Guidelines be respected and adhered to. A simple change of architectural style is not enough to justify increased height, or there would be no need for the repeated and extensive references to open spaces, vias, the pedestrian experience, etc.
This application will be watched by other Worth Ave. property owners and Council needs to be mindful of not creating an invitation to development by loosening the standards of code enforcement.
Respectfully,
Carol LeCates
212 Seabreeze Ave.

The application for a variance enabling a large house to be built on this small lot oversteps. The plans for this large house indicate compressors and a generator too close to the Dunster House pool, adding unwanted noise.
Thank you for your consideration,
Kathryn Long, resident in Dunster House.