The public hearing for the site plan, submitted by to embo LLC and presented by Zenith Consulting Engineers, had previously been closed, leaving the board to make a determination based on advice from Town Council, represented by Amy Qule. Qule provided the board with options: deny the plan due to non-compliance with mandatory architectural standards or approve it with conditions that would ensure adherence. She emphasized the mandatory nature of these requirements, stating, “These are requirements you know they’re not guidelines… there is the word requirement.”

Board members expressed a strong inclination to deny the site plan review. One member articulated that exceptions should not be made to established rules and standards, saying, “I as a board member don’t feel that we should be making special exceptions to the rule from our current bylaws.” This sentiment was echoed by another member, who stressed that allowing exceptions could set a problematic precedent, saying, “It’s a disservice to us… to say okay we’re going to give someone a pass.”

The discussion also touched on the developers’ claim of financial inability to comply with the design standards, which was countered by pointing out their readiness to pursue legal action if the project was denied. This argument implied that funds were available for compliance if they could afford potential legal fees. The board weighed whether conditional approval would undermine their authority and design standards.

Ultimately, after extensive deliberation, the board decided to deny the project. The motion to deny was tabled and passed unanimously after addressing procedural aspects, including documenting the denial and filing it with the town clerk by December 5.

The board also discussed the implications of setting precedents with conditional approvals. A member raised concerns that imposing conditions could lead to complaints from other developers who had complied without similar conditions. This prompted a broader discussion about the need for consistency in adhering to regulations.

Moving on, the board’s agenda included a discussion of an Open Space Residential Development (OSRD) connected to Rocky Woods. Plans were made to hold a meeting on December 26 to evaluate a 300-acre parcel for potential preservation versus development. Members confirmed availability to ensure a quorum for this important evaluation.

In administrative updates, concerns were raised about a previous site plan review for a property on Main Street, where units were advertised for lease without compliance with the 55-plus component. The zoning enforcement officer noted that no occupancy permits had been issued, raising questions about the advertised availability. The planning board highlighted the need for review of lease agreements to ensure compliance with prior approval conditions.