A primary focus of the meeting was the proposed development by Pine Ridge Estates LLC, which planned to construct 38 single-family homes, ten of which would be designated as affordable housing. The board’s chairperson expressed reservations about the adequacy of the environmental reports submitted, particularly concerning the aquifer protection district. The removal of a drainage pond from the plan was scrutinized, as board members sought assurances that this modification would not negatively impact the aquifer. Despite assurances from the applicant’s attorney that the changes were minor, the board remained unconvinced, emphasizing the need for formal verification from engineers.

Public concerns were also highlighted, with residents voicing skepticism about the project’s potential impact on local traffic and infrastructure. A resident, Joseph Monis, emphasized the historical context of the property and criticized the developer’s failure to maintain existing infrastructure, such as roadways and stormwater management systems. He argued that the current proposal mirrored previous plans that had not been adequately scrutinized for compliance with environmental regulations. Residents insisted that the board ensure all past agreements and requirements had been met before approving any new development.

The board discussed the responsibility of the current developer, Coastal Harvest, to maintain Westport Lakes Drive and its associated utilities. Concerns were raised about the potential increase in traffic and the strain on existing infrastructure if the development proceeded without adequate oversight. The condition of the roadway was described as inadequate, prompting discussions about the necessity of significant repairs to accommodate construction traffic.

Further deliberations centered on the involvement of MBL Land Development and Permit Incorporation, a consultant hired to review the project’s engineering aspects. The board questioned the comprehensiveness of MBL’s scope of work, particularly concerning stormwater management and traffic analysis. Members stressed the importance of a thorough and up-to-date review process to prevent future complications and ensure regulatory compliance.

The meeting also addressed the procedural aspects of extending public hearing deadlines and the necessity for updated reports, including stormwater and traffic studies. Board members expressed frustration with the applicant’s lack of preparedness, emphasizing the importance of having all necessary documentation ready for review to maintain the efficiency of the hearing process.

In addition to the Pine Ridge Estates debate, the board briefly discussed the regulatory framework for short-term rentals, following a recent Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling classifying these as businesses. The board considered the implications for zoning processes and the need for a new bylaw to manage these rentals effectively.