The primary focus of the meeting was the application for variances related to these two non-conforming lots. The proposed changes sought to adjust the lot lines to create one larger and one smaller lot. Lot 15, currently landlocked, would gain necessary frontage to become buildable under the new configuration. Despite these intentions, the proposal faced scrutiny for potentially resetting existing non-conformities, which would necessitate additional variances. Concerns were also raised about whether these adjustments would harmonize with the established characteristics of the neighborhood.

Local resident Margaret Thomas voiced her opposition to the plans, emphasizing the environmental and aesthetic impact on the area. She expressed concerns about the proposed 3,500-square-foot structure, which she argued would disrupt local wildlife and her marsh view. Thomas highlighted the importance of maintaining the environmental integrity of Plum Island. She urged the board to consider alternatives, such as variances regarding lot frontage, that would align with the neighborhood’s character.

They emphasized the need to balance property rights with preserving the neighborhood’s character and environmental integrity. Discussions touched on the potential for the proposed changes to set a precedent for future developments.

They agreed on the importance of ensuring that new developments do not disproportionately impact existing residents or the environment. A board member remarked on the need to provide equitable treatment to all property owners, emphasizing, “We want to provide you all the rights that everybody else has.”

In addition to the zoning discussions, the meeting addressed several other topics. An update on the progress of Cricket Lane’s construction was provided, highlighting successful collaboration between the town and contractors. This included the completion of connections to town water and the installation of drainage systems. A proposal was introduced to construct a small shed to house controls for a backup generator and irrigation system, which could also serve as a storage space.

The meeting also touched on the denied request for an easement that would extend a non-conforming use onto conforming property. The board noted the legal concerns raised by this request and acknowledged the diligence of staff in reviewing the plans to prevent potential zoning violations.