One notable issue at the meeting revolved around the request for an extension of a special permit for a property that had been undergoing design changes due to health complications affecting the principal of the company. The project, which has been in the pipeline for three and a half years, sparked a debate among the board members about the necessity of the extension, given the significant alterations to the original plan.

Amid concerns about the property’s current state and its use as a dump site for materials such as asphalt, the board also considered the assurances from an engineer that the materials would be removed, and the land restored. The weight limit of a nearby bridge and the impact of heavy vehicles was another point of contention. Despite the back-and-forth over the length of the extension, which ranged from suggestions of six months to as little as five months, the board ultimately agreed to a five-month extension with specific conditions focusing on the construction activity and timelines for progress.

The debate was not without its complexities; board members were divided over the impact that the changes would have on the environment and the town. Ultimately, the vote to grant the extension was not unanimous.

Another application discussed was number 24-33, concerning the property on A Leonard Way. The applicant aimed to enlarge, extend, and change a non-conforming dwelling on a non-conforming lot. Despite the existing dwelling’s non-conformity with setback requirements and building coverage, the proposed addition was designed to comply with the setback requirements for abutters. With support from the health agent and several neighbors, the board members found common ground in approving the application unanimously, deeming it a modest proposal that would not substantially detract from the neighborhood.

In a similar vein, the board addressed application number 24-34 for the property on Menish Lane, where the applicant intended to convert an existing shed into a studio office and install an exterior mechanical system appliance. Despite the non-conformity issues regarding setback requirements and building coverage, the board approved the application. The conversion of the shed was deemed necessary for the applicant’s remote work needs and for hosting family and guests, and a deed restriction was recommended to prevent the converted shed from being used as a bedroom.

Additionally, the meeting included a discussion on the enlargement and extension of a non-conforming dwelling belonging to David and Sheila Hep. The application, which proposed additions, decks, and a garage with habitable space above, aimed to address and eliminate existing non-conformities. The applicants’ representative and architect presented the proposal, noting its compatibility with the R20 zoning district and the neighborhood, and its lack of environmental impact. The board sought clarification on the minor changes in the design plans and the proposed garage’s attachment to the main dwelling. The application was deliberated upon without any public objections or comments.

The meeting concluded with a unanimous vote to approve an application for constructing an elevated stairway and landings, subject to a condition that all construction activity and vehicles should be contained onsite or at a neighboring property with permission. Concerns about potential traffic and parking issues were raised, emphasizing the importance of not obstructing the shared driveway and considering the potential inconvenience to residents. The board then adjourned at 5:23 p.m.