The proposed development, aimed at providing affordable housing by designating 25% of the units for low and moderate-income households, has undergone multiple revisions. Initially conceived as a mixed-use project with commercial elements, community feedback prompted a shift towards an entirely residential focus. This change necessitated discussions around new project eligibility under Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B. The board emphasized the importance of securing a revised eligibility letter from Mass Housing due to the project’s transition from a mixed-use to a fully residential development. The existing letter, set to expire shortly, only accounted for 23 units, necessitating an update to reflect the current proposal of 27 units.

Board members expressed various concerns, notably the density of the project, which would result in 24.8 units per acre on a 1.0-acre site. This density was deemed excessive, with board members highlighting the potential for congestion and insufficient open space, particularly for residents with children. Additionally, the proposed parking ratio of 1.1 spaces per unit was criticized as inadequate, considering the community’s norm of multiple cars per household. This led to suggestions for a comprehensive parking plan to avoid parking overflow on adjacent streets.

Architectural design and aesthetic compatibility with the local Cape Cod style were also points of contention. The board critiqued the current flat-roof design, advocating for more traditional elements like gabled roofs and cedar shingles to align with community preferences. The applicant argued that the design aimed to incorporate solar panels for energy efficiency, yet acknowledged the need for potential design adjustments to meet aesthetic expectations.

The board also addressed the implications of the project’s proximity to Pine Grove Road and Route 28, with traffic concerns necessitating a peer review of the traffic report. The timing of the traffic study, conducted in July, was questioned due to seasonal variations in traffic patterns. Board members stressed the importance of maintaining buffer zones and mature trees along the southern property line to protect the residential neighborhood from the impacts of the development.

In response to these concerns, the board suggested reducing the number of buildings from three to two to facilitate better design and adhere to zoning requirements, particularly regarding setbacks and buffer zones. This reduction could potentially improve the site’s layout while maintaining the desired number of units, though financial viability remained a consideration.

As the meeting continued, the board expressed the need for a more detailed and revised plan from the applicant. This plan should include updated architectural designs, a comprehensive traffic and parking strategy, and documentation from Mass Housing confirming the project’s eligibility under the revised scope. The meeting concluded with a unanimous decision to continue the matter to a future date, allowing the applicant time to address the board’s feedback and refine the proposal.