The most notable topic of the meeting revolved around the discussion of the parking plan related to properties at 163, 165, and Pine Street. The primary issue was the non-conforming nature of the existing structures and the need for special permits to address the parking situation. A representative for MHG3 Fund LLC presented a proposal aimed at resolving issues with a retaining wall and parking lot that had led to non-compliance with a previous special permit. The proposal included relocating parking spaces to accommodate the limited lot depth, with additional spaces added at an offsite location. This plan was presented with a new parking layout and an easement deed to ensure compliance with zoning regulations.

The discussion revealed concerns about the practicality of the proposed compact parking spaces, particularly regarding the maneuverability of vehicles in the constrained space. A member of the public raised concerns about the feasibility of using the compact space, sparking a debate about the need for potential dimensional relief. The legal representative addressed these concerns by providing measurements to support the proposal’s viability, although questions about compliance with parking ordinances persisted.

Further complicating the matter was the proposal for a separate parking plan for a two-family structure on Pine Street. This plan included an aerial view of the property and proposed additional parking spaces behind an existing garage. The proposal aimed to alleviate on-street parking congestion, particularly during snow removal, but raised questions about whether the new spaces would serve adjacent properties, creating potential conflicts over parking allocations. The discussion included concerns about the intensification of a pre-existing non-conforming driveway, with suggestions that a special permit might be necessary to proceed legally.

The council also debated the implications of maintenance and cost-sharing agreements between the property owners at 163, 165, and Pine Street. A draft easement was introduced to outline responsibilities for parking lot maintenance, including snow removal and repairs. Although there was a consensus on the maintenance obligations, concerns were raised about how costs would be shared and the potential impact on tenant rents. The council stressed the importance of transparency and clarity in the agreements to prevent disputes.

In addition to the Pine Street properties, the meeting addressed other special permit cases. A request for a continuance was granted for BCF Investment LLC’s application to convert a two-family dwelling on Oak Street into a three-family residence. The continuance was necessary to allow for the completion of engineering plans, focusing primarily on parking due to elevation differences. Similarly, a continuance was granted for a special permit request for a two-family dwelling on Emerald Street, where an error in the advertisement prompted the need for further clarification.

They emphasized the importance of conducting site visits to better understand the practical implications of the proposed changes, particularly concerning parking layouts and tenant accessibility.