The most contentious item of the meeting involved a discussion about a homeowner’s request to convert their existing residence into a two-family dwelling to include an in-law suite. The petitioners, who had been living in the home for approximately 15 years, proposed to add an approximate 900 square feet of living space for the mother’s residence. The board pointed out that the construction of a two-family dwelling as presented did not comply with the town’s zoning bylaws. These bylaws allow the conversion of a one-family house to a two-family by special permit, but strictly for the addition of an in-law apartment, not an entirely separate dwelling unit.

Members of the board explained that the town’s bylaws are designed to permit in-law apartments but within specific constraints. The size of the proposed addition, in this case, was a point of contention as the bylaw limits the size of an in-law addition to 25% of the existing dwelling’s size. Furthermore, the board clarified that the petitioners could not apply for a waiver regarding this stipulation.

During the discussion, the board differentiated between an in-law setup and a two-family dwelling, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the town’s regulations. The conversation also touched upon a previous case where an in-law addition was approved, but the board expressed uncertainty about the details of that precedent.

Seeking to address the board’s concerns, the applicant inquired about the possibility of adding a hallway to help meet the square footage requirements. The board deliberated on various options the homeowner might consider, including submitting revised plans that align with the guidelines for an in-law apartment setup. As a result, the board made a motion for a continuation.

In addition to the conversion request, the board entered executive session to deliberate on a pending case. They voted unanimously to endorse the Town Council in representing them in the ongoing legal matter. The details of the case were not disclosed during the open session of the meeting.

Another administrative matter discussed was a discrepancy in the payment of a town employee, Clerk K Costa. The issue at hand was the clerk’s pay, which required a correction. The board voted to accept this correction and signed off on the necessary paperwork to amend the payroll records accordingly.

As the meeting progressed towards its conclusion, the board set the date for the next meeting.