One of a notable topics was the proposed project on Westfield Road, where the applicant sought approval to construct two large homes on a lot that many residents argued was too small to accommodate such structures. Residents expressed strong opposition, citing concerns about the size and scale of the homes, which they described as “McMansions.” A resident’s letter emphasized that at 3,800 square feet each, these homes would dwarf existing residences, impacting privacy and light. The board acknowledged receiving consistent feedback from neighbors opposing the massing of the homes, indicating that despite efforts to reduce their size, the changes were insufficient to assuage community concerns. Ultimately, the board decided to continue the hearing to allow for further revisions and community dialogue.

In another significant matter, the board considered a proposal for a self-storage facility on Mill Street. The applicant aimed to modify an existing special permit to reconstruct three buildings without increasing the facility’s footprint. This proposal reignited concerns about compliance with prior zoning decisions, particularly regarding the prohibition of outside storage, and raised questions about the legality of ongoing practices at the site. The applicant addressed these issues by bringing the site into compliance with past decisions and confirming that outside storage would remain prohibited. However, residents voiced concerns about noise and traffic, particularly from vehicles accessing the site during early and late hours. The board discussed potential solutions, such as installing gates and limiting operational hours, to mitigate these impacts while ensuring the facility met zoning requirements.

The meeting also delved into a proposed single-family dwelling on Oxbow, where residents expressed apprehension about the scale and impact of the development. The applicant sought to demolish an existing structure and replace it with a new home larger than any other in the neighborhood. Residents, including Ruth Friedenberg, highlighted that the proposed home would occupy a disproportionate portion of the lot, fundamentally altering the community’s character and potentially setting a precedent for similar developments. Despite slight reductions in size, the board expressed skepticism over whether these changes would adequately address the neighbors’ concerns. The hearing was continued, with the board urging the applicant to present a design more in keeping with the neighborhood’s established character.

Further discussions focused on a project on Oak Street, where the applicant proposed to construct a large home that prompted objections from nearby residents and property owners. Concerns centered on the variance related to lot size, frontage, and building height, with neighboring residents arguing that the proposed structure would compromise privacy, light, and the area’s character. The board noted discrepancies in the applicant’s height calculations and questioned the appropriateness of the proposed size given the lot’s constraints. After deliberation, the board agreed to continue the discussion to allow for potential design adjustments.