Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board continues contentious Toombs Court apartment proposal after neighbors press density and parking concerns
Summary
The board continued review of an 11‑unit apartment building proposal at the Toombs Court/Old South Road site after extensive public comment raising density, parking and notice concerns; the board asked the applicant to consider reducing unit count and to provide a conventional (non‑stacked) parking plan.
The Planning Board continued a special‑permit application May 15 for an apartment‑building project proposed for three contiguous lots with access from Toombs Court, after neighbors and several board members expressed concerns about density, parking and neighborhood impacts.
Attorney Arthur Reed presented the proposal for a condominium project that would total 11 units across three lots under the town's CN zoning rules and said the applicant would prohibit short‑term rentals and is willing to designate two units for year‑round occupancy. Reed described shared parking and an intent to create condominium ownership with a homeowners association and management contract.
Public commenters objected strongly to the project’s scale. Neighbor Timothy McClure said the parcel’s proposed number of units would create heavy parking demand on Toombs Court and cause traffic conflicts; another resident, Jean McGore, said notices had not reached many neighbors and expressed concern about changes to neighborhood character. Multiple board members said the project as proposed “felt too dense” for the site and recommended several changes before the board could move forward.
Board discussion recorded the following recurring requests for the next submission: reduce overall unit count (several board members suggested eliminating three to four units), remove or reduce stacked/stack‑parker parking and replace it with more conventional parking layout, increase the number or percentage of units designated for year‑round occupancy, and provide clearer parking and traffic analysis and a proposed management plan that describes on‑site management and enforcement mechanisms. Planning staff advised paving and sidewalk improvements on Toombs Court to the development entrance, and noted the applicant would likely be expected to contribute to pedestrian connections consistent with prior road and sidewalk plans.
After more than two hours of public comment and board discussion, the board voted to continue the hearing to May 29 (motion by Joe Topham; second by John Kitchener). The continuation is intended to give the applicant time to prepare revised materials that respond to board and neighbor concerns.
No formal approvals were granted; the board and several participants described the discussion as weighing the public benefit of additional housing against neighborhood impacts. The applicant indicated willingness to discuss revisions and said earlier that condominium documents would require a property‑management contract and unit‑owner association to address long‑term oversight.
