The meeting’s foremost discussion centered on Delton Black’s application to modify his garage plans. Mr. Black sought to alter the dimensions and placement of his garage, originally approved in 2018, due to safety concerns. He proposed moving the garage closer to the driveway, which he believed would improve the safety of vehicle ingress and egress. However, the revised design was larger than the already oversized structure initially approved. Despite Mr. Black’s argument that shifting the garage four feet closer would not pose issues, staff recommended adherence to the original approval terms, emphasizing that additional variances for reduced distances from the road were not advisable.

During the discussion, it was noted that Mr. Black had previously engaged in conversations with a staff member named Jonathan to explore possible adjustments within the zoning parameters. The board maintained that the original plan’s specifications should be followed, primarily to ensure compliance with zoning regulations concerning setbacks from the street and sideyard property lines. Ultimately, the board voted unanimously to deny Mr. Black’s request for the revised garage plans. He was advised to proceed with the construction according to the 2018 approval, which he agreed to.

Following the deliberation on Mr. Black’s application, the board turned its attention to Ronic Patel’s request for a variance to install a six-foot vinyl privacy fence with a 20-foot setback along North Randolph Road, instead of the required 40 feet. Patel’s application was notable for its similarity to another recent case and was distinguished by existing landscape screening at the proposed location. A staff member, also named Jonathan, highlighted the necessity of marking the area to prevent encroachment into easement areas, which Patel acknowledged.

The board, having no further questions or concerns, moved to approve Patel’s application conditionally, emphasizing the need for a pre-installation review to ensure compliance with zoning requirements. The public portion was opened, yielding no comments, and the application was approved unanimously, with the decision set to be memorialized at the next meeting.

In another matter, the board reviewed an application from Faridin Say, who sought a variance for a shed exceeding the maximum height restriction. Say’s shed, pre-fabricated and situated out of street view, stood at 12 feet, surpassing the nine-foot limit. Say explained his unawareness of the height restriction when obtaining the zoning permit. The board, influenced by the shed’s location and lack of safety concerns, approved the application after Jonathan noted that any future repairs or replacements would need to adhere to the height limits. The unanimous approval was followed by a directive for the resolution to be documented in the next meeting.

The board also considered David Losi’s application for a patio cover. Staff memoranda had highlighted possible issues with front porch encroachments, contingent on future development along Elizabeth Avenue. Losi was willing to dismantle temporary canopies to facilitate the new construction. The proposed patio cover’s height was confirmed to be within allowed limits, leading to a unanimous approval of the application, with no public objections.

Lastly, the board discussed and approved Keith Sha’s request to install a six-foot privacy vinyl fence, contingent on conducting an underground markout due to nearby drainage structures. The board’s decision was made without public comment, and the application was approved.