The Planning Board on Monday voted to continue a hearing on work proposed for 75 South Street until April 27 so that it could receive the Department of Public Works director’s opinion on a potential sidewalk in front of the property.

The applicant, Lance LaFave, intends to repurpose 75 South Street from a commercial/industrial building to an office building/warehouse, moving away from manufacturing.

Currently, it is used for offices and manufacturing. The property was purchased in September 2024 by Magunco Realty LLC. The 32,000-square-foot building was constructed in 1973 and houses multiple tenants, including RSC Industries and CTS Valpey Corporation.

During the major site plan review hearing, principal planner Aneri Patel said she received a revised plan the previous week. She noted that the applicant is seeking a waiver for sidewalks along the full frontage of the building. Due to the slope of the street, the proximity of the wetlands border and the need for a retaining wall, the applicant purported that a sidewalk would not be feasible.

Patel added that she is waiting for DPW director Kerry Reed’s comments on this plan. The previous plan was modified after receiving feedback from Reed and the town’s peer review consultant.

This proposed project is slated to be reviewed by the Conservation Commission on Tuesday. During previous meetings, the applicant’s representative stressed that he would like to receive the commission’s feedback before the Planning Board makes its decision.

“The only change to the plans was the introduction of the sewer manhole at [Reed’s] request,” said consultant Joe Marquedant on the applicant’s behalf.

Sidewalk remains issue

The introduction of a sidewalk in front of the property was the main issue discussed. At the last meeting, vice chair Matthew Wronka noted the lack of sidewalks on most of that side of South Street, as well as the board’s goal of increasing pedestrian connectivity.

Parker Happ, on the other hand, said at this meeting that he felt that there is “sufficient space today for pedestrian access.”

He added that in the future, the town may want to take “more collective action” regarding adding sidewalks. In this instance, Happ said it might make sense to have a traffic study.

“One of the things we noticed on the site walk is there aren’t a lot of good crossing points,” said Wronka in response. “Which does mean that if you are on one side of the street, it’s very inconvenient to get to the other side where there’s a safe pedestrian area.”

Added Wronka: “It would seem like a reasonable place to start kicking off sidewalks on that side of the street.”

Marquedant countered that there would be a gap between 75 South Street and the sidewalk going toward Project Just Because at 77 South Street. He noted that when Project Just Because received its approval, “there was a recognition that there wasn’t a tremendous need there [for a sidewalk].” He pointed out that several other proposals he reviewed had been granted relief from the sidewalk requirement since 2019.

Member Vikasith Pratty, who had recused himself from voting, spoke as a citizen. He noted that there is no crosswalk near there.

“It’s always a pain for us to cross there,” he stressed.

He said he has to drive his daughter, who volunteers at Project Just Because, the short distance from their home to ensure her safety.

Chair Rob Benson called for a straw poll on granting the waiver. Everyone agreed on granting it except for Wronka, who wanted to get the DPW’s response. Benson said he was curious about Reed’s thoughts on the matter.

After the straw poll, the hearing was continued in a 6-0 vote.

Clinton Street hearings continued

The board also voted 7-0 to continue two hearings related to the development of a second home at the rear of a historic house at 86 Clinton Street. The property is 2.61 acres.

Patel said the applicant submitted two requests. One was for two special permits. The first was for a proposed common driveway that would link the two dwelling units. The second special permit would be required under the “lots with historic structures” bylaw to allow the lot to be subdivided for the new home.

The second request was for a frontage waiver for the existing historical home, a farmhouse built in 1790 and subsequently altered in 1819. Residents Roger and Merylyn Mezitt previously renovated the home, removing later additions to restore its historic integrity, according to a 2013 news article.

This home does not conform to current zoning standards, as it is on the land as a preexisting nonconforming use.

Applicant Aaron Stone told the board he was unaware that the home was historic when he purchased it.  He learned that different regulations apply to historic lots when he sought to build an addition onto the historic structure.

He added that he has worked to abide by those regulations as closely as possible while still fitting the second house onto the lot.

Patel noted that she received a revised scope of work earlier in the day. The Conservation Commission and Health Department had expressed concerns on the previous plan, she said.

Resident Ken Parker appeared before the board with his wife, Zoe. They live directly across from the property.

“My concern primarily is that it seems like the historical aspect of the house is being used in order to build two houses in place of just one,” he said. “From looking at the pictures shown in the supplements, they’re not preserving very much of the old house.”

Stone countered that proposed renovation “actually keeps all of the structure in play.”

Engineer Jay Thrasher described how the lot is flanked on two sides by wetlands. There also is a potential vernal pool on the site.

“We were able to successfully protect these resource areas by keeping all work outside of the jurisdictional areas that are these buffer zones,” he stressed.

Benson scheduled a site walk for April 11. He noted that this is the first time he has encountered this type of situation during his tenure on the board.

“It doesn’t give me a warm, fuzzy feeling right off the bat,” he said.

Bond releases approved

In other news, the board approved bond releases for Whisper Way and the Chester Street extension. A peer review noted that all work had been completed on these two projects.