The first item for detailed examination involved Rodman Enterprises LLC’s proposal to demolish an existing garage and erect four townhouse-style apartment buildings on Rodman Street. The petitioner presented revised plans which included adjustments to the buildings and parking layout to mitigate concerns regarding Salem Street’s traffic and access. The board engaged in a discussion about setbacks and right-of-way issues. The local engineering department acknowledged the efforts made to address these concerns. A neighbor raised issues about the potential loss of parking spaces, but was assured that the revised plan would not affect their parking. Following the board’s debate, the floor was opened to public commentary, with individuals expressing both support and opposition to the petition.

A particularly contested item was the variance request for subdividing a property on Mount Hope Avenue and The Plain Street. The attorney for the applicant explained that a previous 2019 variance for the property was inadvertently overlooked during a subsequent property sale. The attorney’s argument for reinstatement of the variance hinged on the claim that the subdivision would create lots consistent with the existing neighborhood pattern. After a discussion, the board approved the variance, allowing the 7500 square foot parcel to be split into two lots, one retaining the current single-family dwelling on a 5000 square foot lot, and the other conveying 2500 square feet to the adjacent property.

Another variance approved during the meeting was for the subdivision of the property on Anderson Street. The applicant’s representative outlined a revised plan that introduced a ‘jog’ in the lot line, permitting the retention of an existing shed and facilitating the construction of a new single-family dwelling. The board reviewed these changes and, after discussing the implications of waiving frontage and lot area requirements, granted the variance.

Aside from these major variance requests, the meeting included discussions on private ways and potential neighborhood improvements. Public comments were heard, with voices both in favor of and against the proposed petitions. The board took the time to address the public’s concerns and clarify the intentions behind the various petitions.

As the meeting progressed, the board also attended to other petitions slated for future consideration, noting specific dates for each.