The meeting’s most significant outcome was the approval of a use variance to convert a mixed-use residential and professional office on River Road into a two-family dwelling. This decision followed a discussion about the nuances between mother-daughter structures and two-family homes. The board stipulated conditions for approval, such as the abandonment of the professional office use and the maintenance of ten off-street parking spaces, tailored specifically for the second dwelling unit. This development highlights the board’s focus on adapting existing properties to meet evolving residential needs while ensuring compliance with zoning regulations.

Another focal point of the meeting was the application for a property on South Pearl Street, presented by property owner Jacob Morales. The application, which had been postponed previously, was revisited due to significant revisions. Morales faced challenges as the lot was undersized, measuring only 27 feet wide against the required 50 feet. Initial plans included front yard parking, which was later removed, leading to additional front yard setback variances. The board deliberated on whether the revised proposal aligned with neighborhood standards, with concerns about side yard setbacks and the overall size of the proposed home.

The debate was further complicated by the need to maintain the architectural harmony of the neighborhood. Morales had negotiated with a neighbor to shift the proposed building seven feet back to preserve the neighbor’s view, addressing one of the board’s concerns. The application also underwent a reduction in floor area by nearly 300 square feet to better fit the small lot. Despite these changes, the board discussed whether further evidence or testimony from the architect was necessary to clarify compliance with zoning ordinances.

The board’s examination of the South Pearl Street proposal also included a discussion on setbacks and their implications. The side setbacks were a point of contention, with some board members questioning whether the proposed 3.3 feet were typical for the area. It was noted that many properties in the vicinity had similar setbacks, usually around three to four feet. The architect explained that the design aimed to achieve a setback that allowed for window installations, balancing privacy and compliance with building codes. A proposed six-foot fence also sparked debate over potential access issues, although no objections were noted from neighboring properties.

Some members expressed concern that allowing oversized developments could set a precedent, impacting the town’s character. The ongoing trend of subdividing larger lots into smaller parcels was highlighted as a challenge, raising questions about the sustainability of current development practices.

In addition to the South Pearl Street application, the board approved a resolution for 50 Hilltop Terrace, which involved bulk variances for constructing a garage, an addition, and a second-story balcony. Conditions were set to ensure compliance with affordable housing regulations and to match the materials with the existing structure.

A proposed development on Berry Street also caught the board’s attention. Although the lot was wider, it was shallower, reducing concerns about side yard setbacks. The proposed structure was notably larger than existing homes in the area, sparking a debate on whether its scale was appropriate. Some board members emphasized the importance of developing long-vacant lots, viewing it as a positive step for the town, despite the size concerns.