The discussion about the shed’s placement on the property with two street frontages was the focal point of the meeting. Given the property’s frontage on both Perry and Chestnut streets, the zoning officer had required a 20-foot setback, treating the lot as having dual frontages. The applicant’s attorney argued that Perry Street should be considered the front based on the major entrance to the property, thus challenging the zoning officer’s determination. After a examination, including the applicant’s planner presenting exhibits to support their argument, the board ultimately voted to affirm the zoning officer’s position, maintaining the 20-foot setback requirement.

The permit application for the shed was thoroughly scrutinized, with discussions around the definitions of alleys, streets, and the height of the proposed structure. The zoning officer had initially recommended denial of the application based on the old zoning standards, which allowed for a maximum height of 10 feet for an accessory structure. However, the new ordinance had changed the allowable height, which the applicant’s representative argued should be applied to their case. The board debated whether a cupola on the shed should count towards the overall height and examined the distinctions between different types of outbuildings and their regulations.

Another topic at the meeting was the decision regarding a second-floor addition on a property represented by attorney Ray Went. The applicant sought a variance for the roof pitch of the addition, which had not been addressed in the previous application. After clarifying the definition of what constitutes a roof and its coverage, the board approved the variance. Subsequently, the board granted a two-year extension for the project’s completion, which was requested due to contractor supply issues and timing. The board confirmed that this extension was properly communicated to neighboring residents and debated the implications of similar future cases.

A detailed review of a new development application by Cape Home Investment LLC on Pittsburgh Avenue also took place. The proposed development required a variance for the front yard building setback along Idaho Avenue. The applicant’s professional engineer, Brian Murphy, and the board’s engineer, Mr. Hur, provided extensive testimony and addressed concerns about parking, stormwater mitigation, and compliance with standard conditions of approval. The board eventually voted to grant the application, stipulating conditions related to the site triangle, shade tree commission, sidewalk deed notice, and revision of plans.

During the meeting, the board also took care of administrative matters, including the swearing-in of new board members, the election of the chairperson and vice chair, and the designation of the official newspaper for public notices. The board attorney, board engineer, and meeting dates and times were appointed and adopted, respectively.

Finally, the meeting concluded with the board addressing a public member’s structural concern about a second-floor deck’s support. The board emphasized the importance of clarifying the plan and ensuring safety.