0:15The meeting’s focal point was a detailed examination of Bert Street’s acceptance request, which was referred to the Planning Board by the city council. Bert Street, a narrow private way 210 feet long, has been a topic of concern due to its substandard width, lack of sidewalks, and inadequate drainage systems. The estimated cost to restore the pavement is approximately $100,000, and the street serves limited residential and commercial access without a proper turnaround. The board acknowledged the street’s poor condition, particularly its lack of utilities and maintenance, with further complications arising from inadequate drainage infrastructure. A resident underscored the situation, stating, “Everything that sits there sits in front of my house,” as they described water accumulation in their yard due to insufficient drainage.

Board members debated the implications of accepting such a street, weighing the potential liabilities against the need for improved infrastructure. One member expressed skepticism about the city’s ability to manage future repairs, questioning whether taking on a deteriorating street would exacerbate existing problems. The discussion also touched on the possibility of enacting an ordinance to allow the Department of Community Maintenance (DCM) to perform repairs on private streets, although state funds cannot be allocated for such projects. The conversation concluded with concerns about funding, with one member suggesting that without increased budgetary provisions, recommending acceptance to the city council would be challenging.

17:20Parallel to the Bert Street discussion, May Street’s status as a private way drew attention due to its parking and road conditions. May Street’s narrow width of 20 feet poses parking challenges that impede emergency vehicle access, a concern amplified by nearby multifamily dwellings. Residents reported that improper zoning approvals might have increased the number of apartments, further complicating the parking situation. A representative from the First Baptist Church confirmed that parking was a persistent issue, with vehicles regularly obstructing access to the church’s dumpster.

35:36The board acknowledged that, as a private way, May Street’s parking issues fell outside the city’s jurisdiction. The idea was proposed to send a letter to property owners, urging them to address the parking concerns possibly through legal means. Despite these suggestions, the complexities of land ownership and rights highlighted the challenges of transitioning May Street to a public road. Concerns were raised that such a move might exacerbate the parking situation rather than resolve it.

The meeting also addressed proposed amendments to the A2 apartment zoning district. The proposed changes included reducing the minimum lot area to 5,000 square feet for the first dwelling unit and 1,500 square feet for each additional unit. The board also discussed reducing the maximum building height from 70 feet to 45 feet, reflecting concerns about the proximity to neighboring properties. These revisions were intended to align the A2 zoning with similar districts and address historical compliance issues faced by property owners.

53:03The proposed zoning amendments prompted concerns about the potential impact on emergency response capabilities and educational resources. Questions were raised regarding the fire department’s ability to manage increased density, particularly with reduced spacing between buildings. The board noted the absence of feedback from the fire department, raising further concerns about the adequacy of current emergency response plans. Additionally, the potential strain on educational services due to increased housing density was discussed, with the city experiencing growth in its school population.