The proposed mixed-use development by Kamal Levy LLC stood at the forefront of the meeting. The site plan engineer provided a detailed presentation of the building, which includes retail space, two apartments, and the materials intended for exterior construction. Architect Sarah Jennings elaborated on the design, responding to concerns regarding the commercial space area and flood-proofing measures, among other issues. Discussions unfolded over the choice of railing materials, with the architectural advisory committee advocating for Intex composite materials, while the architect conveyed the need to discuss this with the building’s owner. The elevation of the building, designed to mitigate flood risks, was accepted based on the owner’s knowledge of local flood conditions.

The board examined the practical details of the building’s operations, such as the allocation of parking spaces, with the applicant proposing to designate three spaces specifically for residential use. Lighting for the parking area was also discussed, with the applicant opting for building-mounted incandescent lights. Further scrutiny was directed toward the color of the building materials, with the applicant seeking the flexibility to potentially choose a light blue hue, diverging from traditional natural color schemes. A commitment was made to consult with the architectural advisory committee regarding color choices.

The board and applicants engaged in discussions regarding the installation of the railing system throughout the building. The applicant agreed to the potential condition of installing Intex railings, emphasizing a willingness to collaborate. Concerns about the transition between the south side of the proposed building and the adjacent property led to requests for additional visual representations to better understand the proposed design. Safety considerations, particularly relating to a nearby battery substation, were addressed with the applicant assuring the board of measures taken to accommodate for fire suppression and loading zone accessibility.

Public safety related to the new development was also a point of public interest, especially concerning the proximity of the proposed residences to the battery substation. The public voiced their concerns, prompting reassurances from the board and applicant about the safety considerations and mitigative design elements incorporated into the plans.

The board’s attention was also captured by a variance application concerning the alignment of driveways with garage doors. The applicant advocated for the variance. While the board did approve the application, the decision was not unanimous, and some members expressed hesitations about deviating from the town’s ordinances.

Another noteworthy topic was a request for a change in the distance between curb cuts on a property on Second Street. The applicant argued that reducing the distance from 22 feet to 18 feet would allow for the creation of additional parking spaces and would enhance the area’s aesthetic. Skepticism arose from some board members regarding the necessity and impact of this change, which they viewed as a self-created hardship. Despite reservations, the board approved the application.

The meeting also touched on a settlement agreement with MIH Holdings, which the board voted to adopt. The resolution included specific individuals eligible to vote on the matter. This action resolved previous discussions and set the conditions for the site plan approval.

During the meeting, a property owner expressed concerns about not receiving proper notice. The board acknowledged the oversight and recommended that the property owner confer with the tax department to prevent future issues.

In routine business, the board approved meeting minutes and bills. It also clarified the role of the three-person committee in reviewing applications for exemptions from formal site plan approval, noting that five applications had already been given the green light by the subcommittee.