During the meeting, Liz Sheridan, the owner of Fair Haven Yoga, explained the demand for early classes, highlighting the convenience they offer to clients with tight schedules. The board discussed whether to grant a variance based on community benefits versus adhering to zoning rules. O’Harn argued that the early classes had not been the source of noise complaints. Measures such as soundproofing and keeping windows closed were reportedly being implemented to address these concerns. Despite efforts to mitigate noise, some nearby residents expressed continued disturbance, leading to a discussion on finding a balance between the studio’s operations and community peace.

A significant portion of the meeting addressed the broader implications of granting the variance. Board members debated the potential precedent set by allowing one business to operate outside established hours, which could lead to similar requests from other businesses. The studio’s supporters, including some residents, emphasized the positive social and health impacts the classes have on the community, arguing that they provide a valuable service beyond mere fitness.

Noise complaints, primarily between 6:00 and 7:00 a.m., were a focal point, with a Fair Haven Police Department officer noting that while complaints were frequent, they were not consistently substantiated upon investigation. The studio had received five citations for noise violations, which became a point of contention, as some community members felt these disturbances were detrimental to their residential quality of life.

In light of ongoing noise and zoning concerns, the Planning Board ultimately decided to allow Fair Haven Yoga to withdraw its application without prejudice. This decision allows the business to address noise issues and potentially reapply with a stronger case in the future.

Following the resolution of the yoga studio’s application, the Planning Board shifted its focus to the upcoming master plan re-examination, due in August of the following year. The board discussed forming committees to handle various elements of the master plan, such as housing, land use, and recreation. They emphasized the importance of public engagement and the need for a concise and clear master plan document to guide future zoning and development decisions.

The board outlined a timeline for updating the master plan, including a public survey planned for early fall to gather community input. This survey aims to capture residents’ sentiments on various planning elements. Emphasizing transparency, the board proposed a dedicated webpage and potential open houses to keep the public informed and involved in the planning process.