The application for a cannabis dispensary on Monmouth Street sparked discussion, primarily due to concerns about the notification process for nearby residents. Residents expressed frustration over not being notified about the proposed cannabis dispensary, even though they lived in close proximity to the site. A resident and co-owner of the building on Monmouth Street voiced their discontent, stating they were not informed and only learned of the project through a neighbor. This issue was compounded by the fact that the resident was not given the chance to present their views during earlier meetings with the Cannabis Control Board.

The board’s reliance on the tax office’s certified list for notifications was highlighted as a key issue, with residents arguing that the list did not accurately reflect their association’s address. A discussion ensued regarding the responsibility of the condominium association to maintain accurate records and ensure proper notification. The board acknowledged the discrepancies in the notification process and suggested that the application be tabled to address these concerns. The board chair expressed unease about proceeding without resolving the notification issues, indicating that the project would be carried over to the December 10 meeting, requiring a new presentation and comprehensive review to rectify the situation.

In addition to the cannabis dispensary issue, the meeting addressed several other development projects. A notable project involved a preliminary and final major site plan for a property on MLK Drive, which was characterized as a mixed-use development incorporating commercial space and affordable housing. The project proposed a five-story building with 18 residential units, including studios, one-bedroom, and two-bedroom apartments. While the lack of parking spaces for tenants was noted as a concern, the project team emphasized the development’s alignment with the Redevelopment plan’s objectives, particularly in reducing automobile dependency. The board supported the project, recognizing its potential to enhance community relations and provide much-needed affordable housing.

Another discussion centered around a renovation project on Bright Street. The proposal involved transforming an existing three-story building into a four-story, four-unit dwelling, with C variances sought for the rear yard setback, building coverage, and height. William Wenman, the architect, detailed the renovation plans, emphasizing the preservation of the existing building’s facade and the addition of a rear yard and fourth-floor extension. The board recommended approval of the variances, contingent upon compliance with conditions set by the historic preservation commission.

The meeting also included a proposal for a 12-story building on Carbon Place, which required several variances, including those related to street tree spacing and loading zones. The project aimed to increase the total number of units to 547 and included enhancements to the public plaza area. The board was informed of community engagement during the planning process, and the project was ultimately approved with the requested deviations.