Neighbors are still unhappy, and the Zoning Board of Appeals has still not come to a decision on whether to grant a special permit for the development of condos on Front Street.

The project, located at 324 Front St., has received backlash from abutters who think the project is too large for the area. The footprint for the current building is 2,382 square feet, while the proposed project’s footprint is 3,972 square feet. The overall square footage would also increase from 5,297 to 8,803, and the height would increase slightly from 31.5 feet to 34.5 feet.

The plan is to completely raze the current four-unit building and rebuild the bigger five-unit building.

Developer Christian Loranger is seeking a special permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow the substantial extension of a pre-existing non-conforming building, as it is a single-family residential zone. His attorney John Mathieu said the building has always been non-conforming, as all three previous owners used it as a multi-family home since at least the late ’50s. Thus, it precludes the structure from any new bylaws.

Ultimately, the board had a few main decisions to make: if the use would be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current use, if the structure itself would be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current structure and if there is substantial proof that the building has always been nonconforming.

The board was able to agree that sufficient proof had been given that the building is lawfully nonconforming and had been nonconforming at the time the bylaw changed to make the area a single-family district.

“I think they’ve proved that it should be grandfathered in,” board member Michelle Smith said.

There was some discussion whether or not the new structure would be more detrimental to the area. Smith and Chair Marc Leblanc thought there were comparable size structures already in the area.

“The Knowlton house down the street is very comparable in size, floors and height,” Leblanc said.

Smith added, “I don’t see it as detrimental.”

However, board member Kate Mahoney pointed how the significant change in size from the current building.

“The footprint increase is substantially bigger,” she said.

Before the closure of the public hearing, abutters had reiterated their objections to the project.

“This project is hard for us to grasp because it’s just so large,” abutter Julia Kalkanis said. “I don’t want to raise my family next door to an apartment building. This is a neighborhood. It’s residential.”

Ultimately, the board wanted more time to look over the project individually before coming back in two weeks to discuss again and hopefully make a decision.