The town council at its April monthly meeting referred to the planning board a request from the current owners of 51 Cole St., petitioning for a change in the status of the structure.
Michael …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
Please log in to continue |
Register to post eventsIf you'd like to post an event to our calendar, you can create a free account by clicking here. Note that free accounts do not have access to our subscriber-only content. |
Are you a day pass subscriber who needs to log in? Click here to continue.
The town council at its April monthly meeting referred to the planning board a request from the current owners of 51 Cole St., petitioning for a change in the status of the structure.
Michael Monti of the law firm Sayer Regan & Thayer, LLP, representing the proprietors, WIP LLC, spoke to the council about his client's application, which would permit the structure to be changed to allow for mixed use.
Monti noted the 51 Cole is likely less than a tenth of a mile west from town hall, located in the manufacturing district.
In its written petition, the applicant described the cumbersome nature of being included in the district, where "all residential uses are prohibited."
However, it was also claimed in the document upon the town's adoption of an updated Comprehensive Plan late last calendar year, the premises should now be deemed "appropriate for mixed use and identifies the Premises as Mixed Use on its Future Land Use Map (FLUM)."
The petition read in part, "This property abuts land zoned Village Business and is found to be more suitable for mixed use due to existing and abutting land uses, locating in close vicinity to Historic Downtown, and the potential creation of needed housing units and small local business that would result from rezoning."
Said Monti at the council meeting, "So the time is now ripe to formalize this so that residents can move into the residential component of the property and also a small businesses. The manufacturing district is very restrictive zoning in the town. So we request that the matter be referred to the planning board so that they can make a determination as to whether it is in fact consistent with the comprehensive land use plan."
Councilor John Hanley made the initial motion for referral. Before the vote was taken, Town Solicitor Anthony DeSisto advised the council to revisit the matter at its June meeting so as to allow for proper the notice and advertising. The solicitor also noted the motion should include any costs associated be paid for by the applicant.
The revised motion passed unanimously.