A major focus of the meeting was the proposal for a marina and boatyard on Main Street. The applicant’s representative, attorney William F. Riley, argued for the necessity of additional storage space to support the Oyster River Boatyard’s operations, which handle over 250 boats each season. However, the application met with resistance from both board members and public commentators who questioned the proposal’s compatibility with Chatham’s zoning regulations and its impact on the area’s character. Concerns were raised regarding traffic congestion, environmental risks, and the proposal’s alignment with the town’s long-term planning vision for West Chatham Center.

Ted and Pat Burke, residents opposing the project, expressed worries about the boatyard’s potential to disrupt the aesthetic and functional character of the business district. Warren Chain, a member of the town planning board, echoed these concerns, stating that the proposal did not align with the comprehensive plan adopted in 2003, which emphasizes high-density mixed-use developments. He urged the board to reject the application, arguing it would be detrimental to the neighborhood’s future character.

Board members deliberated on whether the proposal truly met the definition of a boatyard under existing zoning bylaws, with discussions focusing on whether the primary function was storage rather than maintenance. The need for a more plans and input from the Planning Board was emphasized, as members expressed reluctance to approve the special permit without further clarification. The board ultimately decided to allow the applicant to withdraw the proposal, enabling them to revise and potentially resubmit a more comprehensive plan.

In addition to the boatyard discussion, the board reviewed several residential applications. One notable case involved Daniel and Suzanne Linahan’s proposal to expand their non-conforming dwelling on Stage Harbor Road. Represented by Paul Malun, the application sought to add a pergola and reconstruct a deck within the existing setbacks. The board received no opposition from the public or correspondence expressing concerns, and after deliberation, members unanimously approved the application, noting its consistency with the neighborhood’s character and zoning criteria.

Another residential case concerned modifications to a property on Sur Lane, where the owners sought to replace a deteriorating garage foundation. The board’s discussion highlighted the proposal’s alignment with neighborhood aesthetics and its minimal impact on the surrounding area. Support from neighbors and the health agent further bolstered the application, leading to its unanimous approval.

The meeting also addressed an application from the Fitz Family Trust to modify an existing special permit on Cedar Street. The proposal aimed to expand a deck and stairway, maintaining the non-conforming dwelling’s footprint. With no objections from relevant commissions or the public, the board expressed support for the project, emphasizing its adherence to neighborhood aesthetics and safety standards. The application was approved unanimously.