The variance application from Wall Street Development Corp., represented by Lou Petrosi, dominated the meeting. The company sought relief from zoning bylaws to construct a home 30 feet from the road, instead of the required 60 feet, citing environmental considerations. The 1.8-acre property is challenged by an intermittent stream and vegetated wetlands, complicating construction efforts. Petrosi emphasized that building at the rear was feasible but would negatively impact the environment, and the Conservation Commission’s strict regulations left the variance as a viable path to minimize environmental disruption.

Residents voiced strong opposition to the variance. Bruce Hungren, an abutter, read a letter opposing the variance, signed by several neighborhood families. He argued that half the site comprises wetlands and that the neighborhood’s 60-foot setback rule should be maintained to preserve property values and scenic character. Ellen Deutsch echoed these concerns, highlighting safety issues on the narrow scenic route. Historical denials from the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Conservation Commission were also referenced.

The board weighed these concerns against zoning requirements. One board member noted the economic hardship of constructing a bridge or driveway over the stream, estimated at an additional $120,000. The conversation highlighted a trade-off between zoning compliance and environmental impact. While residents emphasized preserving the neighborhood’s character, the board focused on procedural aspects and potential benefits, such as housing and tax revenue.

The board deliberated on whether the variance would harm public good or contradict zoning ordinances. The motion to grant the variance passed with a four-to-one vote, acknowledging unique lot conditions like intermittent streams and soil challenges. Opponents of the decision feared it would disrupt the consistency of the neighborhood. However, supporters believed that environmental concerns would be managed by the Conservation Commission.

Besides the variance for North Mill Street, the board also addressed a special permit request for a garage addition on Ash Street. The existing structure is non-conforming with zoning regulations, prompting the need for a special permit rather than a variance. Discussions revolved around the garage’s placement and its integration with the existing dwelling. The board approved the special permit, acknowledging that the proposed construction would not exacerbate existing non-conformities.