The safety concerns arose from the horizontal balusters on the balcony railings, deemed a climbing risk for children. These railings failed to comply with a recent update in the Massachusetts State Sanitary Code, which conflicted with the existing state building code. The building inspector highlighted that previous tests on the balconies were inadequate, leading to the issuance of a notice of violation. Tim Alexander, representing Mil Creek Residential, did not appeal the ruling but proposed a solution involving the installation of perforated metal panels to mitigate the risk. He assured the board that fabrication of these solutions would commence shortly, with installation expected to continue through April and May.

Board members expressed reservations about granting occupancy before the safety measures were fully implemented. Concerns were raised about tenants potentially accessing the balconies despite restrictions. The proposed temporary solution involved securing balcony doors and removing handles to prevent access. Despite these efforts, the board was cautious, referencing past incidents of safety oversights. One member emphasized that the priority was ensuring safety above all.

The board’s deliberation on whether to grant temporary occupancy permits also touched on the broader implications of regulatory conflicts. The board ultimately leaned towards a solution that would permit temporary occupancy for units not affected by the balcony issue, provided that safety measures continued to progress without delays.

A secondary topic of discussion involved the vacant property registration and associated fees, with appeals from property owners highlighting the financial and regulatory challenges they faced. One property, 42 Bait Street, owned by William Baron, was under scrutiny for being classified as vacant due to low water usage and unregistered vehicles. Mr. Baron explained his health condition prevented him from residing there regularly, but he maintained the property for storage and checked on it frequently. The board considered his situation empathetically, proposing a potential waiver for the registration fees if improvements were made.

Similarly, discussions about a former commercial property on River Street, now repurposed for private use, revolved around its classification as vacant due to minimal water usage. The owner sought clarification on converting the property’s use and associated implications. The board reiterated the need for a site plan review to change the property’s classification, emphasizing that even residential properties could be deemed vacant without active occupancy.