The most debated issue was the proposal for a mixed-use building on zero Scully Road, which includes a caretaker’s unit attached to a warehouse. The applicant’s request for four waivers from site plan regulations sparked discussions. These waivers entailed bypassing the need for a traffic impact statement, bicycle parking accommodations, a photometric plan for outdoor lighting, and stormwater management easements. The board scrutinized the justifications provided by the applicant, which argued that the project would generate minimal traffic and pedestrian activity, and that the site would retain private ownership, rendering town easements unnecessary.

The proposal’s residential component led to a debate, especially regarding its classification as a caretaker’s unit. Board members questioned the appropriateness of the residential unit in an industrial zone, citing features such as a hot tub, guest room, and fire pole, which suggested full-time, year-round living rather than a simple caretaker arrangement. There was a call for clarity from the Building Commissioner on the legal rationale for categorizing the unit as a caretaker’s quarters, as the current proposal appeared to blur the boundaries of existing zoning regulations.

Concerns were raised about the potential precedent this mixed-use proposal could set. If approved, it might open the door to similar requests in the future, creating challenges for maintaining clear zoning distinctions. The board emphasized the need for a formal letter from the Building Commissioner to ensure compliance with zoning laws and to address the ambiguities surrounding the definition and allowable size of a caretaker’s unit.

The board also discussed the implications of the proposed unit’s size and functionality, noting that it resembled a standard home more than a subordinate caretaker’s dwelling. Questions about the unit’s future use if the business ceased operations added another layer of complexity, with suggestions that conditions may be necessary to ensure the dwelling remains tied to the business’s operational status.

In addition to the mixed-use proposal, the board received an update on the Stratton Hill definitive subdivision. A letter from attorney Robert L. Collins requested a continuance to the September 10 meeting, allowing time for the applicant to address comments from the peer review and the Department of Public Works (DPW). An extension for the board to file a decision was also sought until September 30. The board unanimously agreed to continue the hearing, acknowledging the urgency of meeting the revised deadlines.

Further, the board delved into the intricacies of site plan elements, particularly regarding fire department requirements for truck accessibility at zero Scully Road. The design intentionally included space for a fire truck to maneuver, but modifications such as shrub and boulder removal might be necessary. The recent acquisition of a new ladder truck by the fire department prompted recommendations to incorporate its specifications into planning. Upgrading the fire service main from a 4-inch cast iron line to at least a 6-inch main was suggested to ensure adequate flow and safety.

Water management and drainage systems were other focal points, with discussions on roof drainage and its connection to the infiltration system. The proposed infiltration chambers met groundwater recharge requirements, but some members questioned the necessity of a roof drain system given the typically clean nature of roof water. The design constraints, such as wetland buffers and required freeboard, were emphasized as justifications for the current plan.

The board also addressed updates on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) following a recent webinar on the new ADU law, effective February 2025. ADUs will be allowed in any zone designated for single-family residences without a special permit, with specific parking regulations. The implications for local zoning and development patterns were discussed, particularly concerning parking requirements within a half-mile of an MBTA district.

In the latter part of the meeting, the board reviewed the Shaker Mill Pond subdivision, where a request for street acceptance was submitted to the select board. The Conservation Commission raised concerns about existing violations, including unauthorized structures encroaching on conservation land. The board recognized the need for clear communication and proposed a joint meeting with the conservation commission to address these issues and ensure a consistent approach to conservation restrictions in future projects.

Lastly, the board discussed the inclusionary housing bylaw and the new MBTA overlay district bylaw, emphasizing their compliance with state regulations and the impact on local development. The inclusionary housing bylaw stipulates that any residential or mixed-use development resulting in a net increase of five or more units must meet affordable housing requirements. The board acknowledged the significance of these bylaws in fostering affordable housing while maintaining compliance with state guidelines.