The meeting delved deeply into the balcony modifications, which had been altered from the approved plans. The original dimensions stipulated a 4×4 foot balcony, but practical issues with storm door operation led to a redesign, resulting in smaller balconies with dimensions of approximately 2 feet 10 inches deep and varying widths. One board member expressed concerns about the usability of these revised balconies, noting that they were too narrow to accommodate furniture, thus limiting their functionality.

A participant emphasized that the changes were necessary to address the practicalities of the storm door operation, which conflicted with the original balcony dimensions. This led to a redesign to ensure the door could open properly without compromising the structural integrity of the balcony. The board debated whether the storm doors were essential or merely decorative, with a consensus that their impact on the balcony dimensions was beyond the scope of initial approvals.

Complicating the matter further, the board discussed the potential compliance issues arising from these modifications. There was a suggestion to implement a “dummy wall” to prevent excessive use of the balcony space, although practical concerns about such a solution were raised. The architect, Michael Saar from MSA Architects, defended the aesthetic and functional aspects of the current balcony design, asserting that it adhered to the original intent of limited occupancy. He admitted that further approval should have been sought for these changes.

Public comments highlighted support for the Dunns, the property owners, with residents like Ben Hall and Gloria Paretti lauding the improvements made to the previously overgrown and unsightly lot. They argued that the deviations from approved plans were minor and did not negatively impact the neighborhood. However, board members maintained that the deviations required scrutiny to ensure compliance with zoning regulations and community standards.

The debate also covered the rooftop screening modifications, focusing on the change from a lattice design to fixed louvers. The original lattice was intended to allow light and air while preventing climbing, but practical concerns about safety, particularly for children around a hot tub, led to the adoption of louvered screening. The board raised issues about the solid wall-like appearance of the louvers, which contradicted the approved, less intrusive lattice design. One participant noted that despite the two-inch spacing, the louvers effectively created a solid barrier, raising aesthetic and safety concerns.

Further complicating the approval process, the board discussed the lack of written communication from the building department regarding compliance with the louver system. This lack of documentation made it challenging to verify whether the modifications met building code regulations. The necessity for non-scalable structures on certain sides of the building was debated, with calls for consistency in the approach to compliance across the project.

The meeting also touched on the installation of synthetic turf, with discussions about maintenance, aesthetics, and impervious surface calculations. The board was concerned about the percentage of impervious coverage resulting from the proposed materials. An applicant confirmed that synthetic turf would be installed only up to the fence line, with a small strip of grass separating it from the regular lawn. Concerns were raised about compliance with local zoning regulations, particularly regarding setbacks and the management of impervious surfaces.

In addition to these primary topics, the board addressed other compliance issues, including the placement of street trees and lighting design. A representative explained that the placement of trees on Sixth Avenue and Web Street had been coordinated with the shade tree commission and the Department of Public Works, although utility lines complicated their placement. The board also discussed concerns about non-compliance with lighting ordinances, specifically regarding spotlights that could potentially spill over onto neighboring properties. An updated lighting plan was promised to ensure compliance with dark sky regulations.