meeting of the bylaw review committee meeting to order at six o'clock. Uh if there's anyone recording other than LCAT, say your name. Hearing none, we'll go ahead and
get started. With us is our planning zoning conservation director Rob and our consultants from Barrett and they will be giving us a presentation on the zoning diagnostic report where we will
have the ability to ask questions and and get go ahead and get started. So you guys want me to introduce the consultant first so I show some background. Okay. So you joined >> Oh sorry you can go a hole first. So, um, thank you for the invite today. Uh, Rob Woodshell, director of planning. Um,
so I have with us, um, Judy Barrett of Barrett Planning Group LLC, a firm that's based in Hingham, Mass. She's been doing this kind of work for a long, long time. Um, so basically what you have before you, what was sent to you before this meeting is a zoning diagnostic report. And basically what
this document achieved was to look at our zoning text in its entirety and just look for everything that potentially is wrong with it, things that are looking good with it. Kind of like a comprehensive and honest uh analysis and
feedback of the zoning bylaw. There's going to be another document that follows this one later on in the process. So we are contracted with Judy and her team to have them provide recommendations after this discussion. So, the whole point of this meeting today was to
introduce this report to the committee. Uh, to have them feel any questions or concerns you might have after your review of this report, uh, and then potentially discuss anything else that they think is helpful on their end for next steps after the fact. So, Judy and
Bob, uh, you guys can take it away. >> Yeah, she's >> Thank you. I just want to make sure we also introduce my colleague Bob Mitchell um with whom I frequently have the pleasure of working on zoning projects and um you'll probably hear from both of us kind of throughout this uh this
meeting. Um so consultants can't go to a meeting without slides. So I uh I just kind of put together a few slides to kind of walk through the report. I'm sure you've all seen the report, but nonetheless, for the sake of those who perhaps haven't had much chance to think about it, um I would like to uh to
present those slides. And I think I probably have I have screen share permission. This is excellent. So, hold on. >> Thanks, J. See that? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Super.
So, Bob and I have worked on several of these. uh they're always enjoyable uh and they're always a little bit different. There are some things I think we find um in zoning bylaws we're asked to review that are fairly typical or common and other things that jump off
the page and you say, "Boy, I've never seen that before." Um and I can't say there's too much here that made me feel like I hadn't seen it before. But so I just want to tell you a lot of the things that we noticed we have seen in other zoning reviews as well. Um, and I want to just kind of go over the overall
structure of the audit, kind of the key issues that we found, um, and how they sort of divide between technical and policy considerations, and then we can just open it up for, uh, for discussion. So, bear in mind, I can't see you guys now. So, um, if you are dying to
interrupt in the middle of this because you don't want to wait till the end, that's fine, but you may have to holler at me because I I can't see you. So, it's a comprehensive review of the zoning bylaw. And by that, I often mean um what's a comprehensive review? You're
literally doing a a close reading of a very dense document. Um and and also trying to consult with other people who are users of it to see to do a reality check on whether the things that you're seeing are commonly experienced or
understood at the local level by a variety of users whether it's members of town boards or uh local developers or business people or whomever um who may have come into contact with with the zoning bylaw. Um it is mainly a
technical analysis. So when we look at technical considerations, we look at the structure or organization of a bylaw. How user friendly is it? In other words, how easily can people find information in the zoning bylaw? Um are there
internal inconsistencies uh both at sort of the text level but also between sections? Um are there places where there's redundancy or near redundancy? And sometimes near redundancy is even more disconcerting because you might find two paragraphs
that are awfully similar, but there's just a few words that are different and you don't really know what the town is trying to do. Um conflicts with state or federal laws and judicial decisions as well. Um we tried to focus on kind of key key points um rather than doing a
line by line review of the bylaw. And then also I just want to say although this was mainly a deep dive um close reading on our part, we did talk to a few people, Rob gave us contact information for a few few folks in the community for us to talk to just to do a
reality check and get their perspective on on both the bylaw and how permitting is working and what the development review process is like and so forth. So, it was very helpful to get a chance to talk with people in East Long Meadow in addition to um to doing the as I said
the sort of technical or close reading review. I think you're going to find that there are sort of two the the report sort of divides issues into two buckets. Uh one is kind of strictly the technical review, the things that make the bylaw hard to use or you know those
legal conflicts as I mentioned earlier, things that just aren't clear. So technical things that you could fix without disturbing or hopefully not disturbing any sort of larger policy considerations. But then there's also policy considerations. We were asked to kind of comment on that as well. And
those are things where at best what we can do is sort of point out where you know this is maybe out of sync with uh contemporary practice or out of sync with things we heard from the community. Um, but those are things that you really need to discuss locally and give us
direction on. Whereas often the technical review fixes are are somewhat easier to do that you either fix it or you don't. Um, and ultimately I think we're going to need some direction from the town whether it's you folks or or others on what you want us to focus on.
Um, so we can make lots of recommendations and we have clearly made a lot of findings, but we need to know what the what you guys think uh is the most important uh content or especially things that you think maybe we missed or didn't elaborate on enough.
So, we'll look at the technical points first and Bob, I'm just going to say generally as we've done before, just jump in if there's something you want to mention to elaborate on. Um, >> I will. >> I bet you will. So, structure and formatting.
Um, I think you probably all know the bylaw doesn't really have uh a a consistent structure organization. Um, the internal organization varies a lot from section to section. And I I think I kind of know why that is the case. Uh, it's not an
uncommon problem in in town cities and towns. There are sections that overlap uh kind of within and across articles, you know. So, you've got articles, you got sections, you have subsections. Um, but sometimes it's just not clear why something is where it is placed. Um,
it's it's sometimes a little bit difficult to understand why a section is in a particular article or or or why perhaps it's not somewhere else. And and I would just say generally when a zoning bylaw is is inconsistent in its structure, um it's easy for people to
miss key provisions. um it can you know cause some delays in the permitting process. It can certainly make town boards sometimes appear to be inconsistent even when that is certainly is not their intent. So just the structure itself um really could use
some cleanup and would probably make the bylaw much easier for people to use uh even if you didn't touch any policy issues. Bob, did you want to comment at all on this slide or or should I just move on? No, I I think um just as a com somewhat
of a general comment, one of the things we find when we work with towns and we talk to people in the town um that is a key reason why things get missed or people get confused is the fact that in
many bylaws the same topic is spread either all over the bylaw >> or is spread in multiple sections of the bylaw unexpectedly. Yeah. >> So, if somebody I'll just give this an example. It's not related specifically to the east long mail, but but if
somebody's looking for a parking requirement and they see in the table of contents parking section, you know, 6.2 parking and they go to 6.2 and they find they think they find what they're looking for, but it turns out that there's more parking requirements
in 8.4 and more parking requirements in 10.6. And sometimes the same use for example has got a pocket requirement in the first section and in the 10th section and they don't agree with each other. >> Right?
>> Um so it's that surprise of not finding the topic you think you're looking for when the table of contents says it's in this section and there's nothing that informs you it's in three other sections. looking at how to organize topics. Not
always possible to do it every topic only in one place, but better organization of where topics are is goes a long way to making the bylaw easier to navigate and find things. >> Yeah. And and I would just say it's not only easier on applicants, it's easier
on the town boards. um it just reduces the likelihood of error if you actually know where where everything is that someone needs to account for in a particular application. Um the district regulations um they're
broken up across different sections. Um there doesn't seem to be any internal logic to how they're grouped. Um people have to kind of cross reference several different tables or articles to meet the requirements of of just a particular use in in one district.
um without clear structure for the rules, I think people can struggle to identify like all the requirements they have to meet for a particular project and scattering related regulations across several sections can affect the long-term maintenance of the zoning
bylaw because sections are likely to be missed during updates and amendments leading to contradictions um you know increasing over time. And I this is just a really common problem as bylaws are amended over time. If they're if the structure that someone is supposed to be working within is not
clear, it's really easy for things to fall apart and all of a sudden regulations get get scattered and it wasn't ever anybody's intent, but that's what happens. Um so just the way useth regulations are organized in the bylaw really could be I think clearer and more
more intuitive. Do you want to add anything, Bob? >> No, I'm good. >> Okay. So standards and regulations section introduces or amends regulations for uses that are not included elsewhere in the bylaw and in several places the
regulations in the table contradict other sections and we talk about this a little bit more in the report. There are also administrative mistakes like a pagemarked amendment and with incorrect um you know cross references or incorrect sections me mentioned regulations only listed in the table of
uses can easily be overlooked um leading to confusion for for users. So uh there's just I think some real cleanup that needs to happen with the table of uses. So, it's just more intuitive for people to use and understand um perhaps you know where where else in the bylaw
they need to be looking such as just simple cross references would be uh would be very helpful on readability. There are some sections that just need reorganization so they read better or they're easier to understand. You have you have sections
in your bylaw with like large sections of unbroken text. I I sometimes call these Jamesian paragraphs because that's how Henry James used to write was just these long paragraphs that just sort of went on u sometimes an entire sentence, you know, a one paragraph is an entire
sentence. And and there are times too when there's just excessive what I would call sort of legal ease um or wording that just weights down the sentences and makes them harder to read and understand. Um there's really no reason for that. the clearer and simpler the
language is, the more likely it is that people are going to understand what's being asked or what's being said. Um, again, with text that's dense and difficult to understand, it just increases the likelihood of mistakes being made in in interpretation or
enforcement. Um, and applicants will struggle to identify what they're supposed to be doing. And um, and as I said earlier, oversight boards can miss relevant regulations they should be enforcing. Um, and I I this is especially important to me because I happen to sit on a ZBA in my own town
and I know what that frustration is like when you just find realize that this simple project that's in front of you actually requires you to master several sections of the zoning bylaw. Bob, were you trying to add something in there? >> Well, just one specific example. We found one of the sentences in the bylaw.
There might be more, but we did find one that was 166 words long. Just just as a future reference, don't put sentences in your bylaw that are 166 words long. Pretty hard to understand
what you're trying to say. >> It is. And those are relatively easy things to fix, too, which is the good news is those are not hard to fix. I mean, just breaking things down into lists. When you have sentences that are that complex and long, I can just readily take something and make it much
easier to understand with relatively little effort. Can I jump in real quick, Ralph Paige? Um, I know that I know the paragraph you're talking about. It's 450 section 3.4. Um, that is verbatim for state law.
>> Oh, yeah. >> We actually took it out of the state law and that's why it's 166 characters. Yes. >> Um I I would think in a situation like that there's no um if you start changing it,
shortening it or whatever, you may miss some of the the meaning within the state law. Um I mean, would I be incorrect in saying that that you're better off using the exact language under the law if that's what you're trying to get across?
Well, you can use the LA exact language often without replicating putting it all into one sentence, >> right? >> You can break it down into either sometimes you can break it down into list >> uh or sometimes you can break it down
into multiple sentences. Um, so as long as you have that information, it's not necessary to have everything that's written in a state statute, which if you've used the state statute 4A much or
practically any state statute, you know how poorly worded they are, uh, drives the court drives the judges nuts. Um, so just taking the state statute format and language and putting it in bylaws is
often not helpful. So you look for a way can this be broken down with the same words or almost the same words into a list or just separate sentences to have the same meaning and not uh not unduly
uh ruin the intent of the state statute. Um, and we have we have we run into this all the time. So, we've done this many times and uh uh usually there's a way to make it easier to read and understand without following the format of it. I
mean, if it's any consolation, just spend a nice Sunday afternoon reading some of the case law under section six of chapter 48, which is the non-conforming uses and structure section, because some of the decisions are delightful in terms of their
recognition of how badly written that section is. And I think that's my main point is if you have, you know, 30, 40, 50 court cases that can't figure this out, I think if we try and simplify it and
break it into sentences, um, our meaning and our interpretation probably won't meet the state law. Um and again this came uh through e-code actually when we were doing it and um
that was the determination is that heck if they can't understand it how are we going to try and simplify it for the residents when the state can't even do that? Well, the answer to that is yes, the courts say they can't really understand
that, but nevertheless, the court make decisions, >> right, >> and say this is what we're basing our decision on what what we believe, what we interpret this to mean. And from this point for, especially appeals court, supreme judicial court, >> right?
>> Each point forward, this applies across the state, >> right? >> How we have interpreted this paragraph or this sentence or whatever. So there are answers in the court decisions as to what that means. >> Yep. >> From the court's perspective and from
the court's perspective, that's what it means for all the towns and cities. So sometimes you just can, you know, you can just take what the court said and turn it into what you say in your bylaw. We tried that with our solar bylaw and
the Supreme Judicial Court again ruled against us even though we followed the previous. So, and I do understand what you're saying and it's very difficult when you read this to even interpret it even when you know the bylaws um and you know chapter
48. Um, some things I just think are maybe too complicated to try and change. Um, and I think the the couple of examples were the reason we used the whole thing. >> Understood. And I think we're saying
>> I'm sorry about that. >> No, it's okay. I mean, >> no, no, >> it's it's your decision. I just think, you know, we've had experience with this and it's something we can point out. Um, I don't think cities and towns should be enslaved to badly written legislation.
>> Yeah, I'm going to agree with you there. >> Yeah, I I think we can, you know, as I said, we've dealt with this in other towns and we draft up something that we take a long paragraph and say, here's how it could read or how it could be listed and we give that to you and you
can tell us, >> uh, yeah, that looks good or no, we think we're losing something here. So, but at least show you an option. >> Right. >> Thank you. >> And that brings us to non-conforming uses, structures, and lots of my
favorite topics. Um, >> love this topic. So Bob, I'm I'm actually going to bump you in a little bit on this because I know you were the one who sort of picked this section apart, but the bylaw is not really clear about the special permit granting process for non-conforming uses and
structures, and it's missing information that's kind of commonly found in some other communities. It doesn't address at all kind of how findings work related to non-conforming uses and structures. Um it's a little unclear when does a change or an alteration actually require a
special permit. um the provisions that typically pertain to single family and two family lots uh are are not there. A little bit of uns lack of clarity around the difference between a variance versus how a lawfully
pre-existing nonconformity uh is addressed. That section really would benefit from I think some significant revision. Do you want to add anything Bob or not? Well, I think um uh much of the section
is just kind of bringing it up to date with >> Yeah. >> putting it into conformance with state statute and some of the more recent court decisions. Um some important information that Judy's pointed out, you know, the the exemptions for single
family and two family lots really should be in there. that difference as to when you need a variance and when you need a find a non-confirming um uh finding under you know a finding under the non-conforming. I spent an
hour today on the phone with a zoning board chair of another town who >> didn't know there was a distinction between when you need a variance and when you need a non-conforming finding and it had created a huge mess in the
town. Um and they didn't have any language in their bylaw that defined that so everybody reading the bylaw could understand that distinction. Um, so I I think this is one of those sections we always run into that's kind of
partly poorly written because this is section six, as some of you probably know, is the number one section of 48 that the judges hate. Uh so we try to try to narrow it down to the where we can not narrow it down but to try to clean it up, try to change
some of the vague language, try to add language that is specific and should be there because it is one it addresses a lot of issues. Single and two family lots obviously that exemption is an important thing for everybody to know.
But then so again we'll we will work on some drafts to show you you know more specifically what we're suggesting and then we can have a discussion about um you know what you think and in you know
what you think of the drafts. But in the meantime, if you if the town could tell us they think something's missing or some section of your non-conforming section is incomprehensible even to the board's members and the staff members,
that would help us uh as well. Um, so yeah, this is usually one of the bigger sections we spend more time on with with the committees. Um, because towns are all over the place with their bylaw provisions for non-conforming because
section six is so vague in so much of the language of section uh 66. So, we'll take a take a shot at yours and um, you know, take a look at it and give you some ideas. Yep. definitions. Um there's several issues I
think we we're concerned about with the definitions. Some of them are really quite vague. There are some contradictory language. Um sometimes the definitions just don't align with sort of common definitions used for terms. Um, for residential uses in particular,
one of the things we noticed was that in some ways the bylaw is attempting to kind of regulate use through definition. Um, like how many units can be connected or the minimum size of units that really doesn't belong in the definition section. It's it really is a regulation
and it's better to have the use regulations with the use regulations and let the definition stand on its own. So, I think some cleanup would be would be helpful to you uh in the definition section of your uh zoning bylaw. And that um we just we see this a lot as
well. And some of this happens because definitions over time get put in different parts of the bylaw. There's a definition section, but then a town is trying to adopt a model bylaw that came from somewhere and definitions associated with that bylaw are part of the model. So, it ends up being put in
your zoning bylaw with the definitions, not in the definition section, but in the section relating to this new provision that's being added. And it just over time really crumbles the structure um of of the of how people find out what things mean uh in the
zoning bylaw. And and even more so, I would say as definitions get fractured across the bylaw, you increase the possibility of inconsistencies between like a term being defined twice in a bylaw, but not necessarily the same way. So, I think some of the
definitions really could be cleaned up. Um, your bylaw doesn't have purpose statements for your districts. They can really be helpful to uh a special permit granting authority when you're trying to review a project and and um think about
whether the applicant has met uh the requirements of the district or at least the you know the what what the town is trying to accomplish within a particular district. Uh I think it can be especially helpful when boards are stuck with this difficult job of trying to understand what things like character
mean. um because it's just people don't agree on what it is and it ends up um becoming a a source of frustration for lots of folks in a permitting process. So having purpose statements for the districts we think would be very helpful to you. Um the mixeduse village district
is is a paper zone. Um it's not defined anywhere. It's not on the map. So you would have trouble enforcing it. Um just to be clear, the zoning act requires all districts to be shown on a map. So when it's not on the map, um you have a you have a conflict with state law. Um and
it seemed that there were some other districts that weren't on the map as well. And those things happen sometimes. Districts are new districts are created and they're created based on a map that's shown the town meeting, but that map doesn't get inter integrated with the zoning map. Those kinds of corrections kind of need
to be made. So just Bob, did you have anything else you wanted to add on? >> Yeah. Well, just back into the purpose statements. One other >> Yeah. >> um reason to have purpose statements is if you end up in court,
>> Yeah. >> on a case that some kind of an appeal related to a district, one of the things that judges will often look for and sometimes include in their decision is what is the purpose of this district? You know, there's this
argument about is the district doing supposed to do this? Is the intented district of that? We don't know because there's no purpose section or we know here's the purpose section of this district that you know well explains why this district was created and that often
will help the judge rule in favor of the town, >> right? >> Because you have a clean purpose section and then everybody should know what that means and should be followed. And if everybody if the town did then the you know appellent loses. Um uh so sometimes
the the judges pay a lot of attention to the purpose districts in the right set of circumstances. >> Right. Right. >> Um use regulations. Um there's contradictory language in the bylaw. Um,
some of the requirements are hard to quantify. Like again, this community character thing just shows up multiple times and it's not clear what that means to you folks. Um, there's some inconsistencies with state law which you probably are already aware of on ADUs,
accessory dwelling units, um, and other do amendment uses. there are some vague or contradictory requirements that are hard to administer and leave applicants unsure of what's required of them and most certainly would probably leave boards questioning what's required as
well. So, um I think just cleaning up a lot of this is cleanup. It's cleaning up language. Um it's reducing inconsistencies and um contradictions so that the document is easier for everybody to use. Also
want to say that the um so we didn't adopt our ADU bylaw until before those regulations from the state came out for the ADU. So that's why those inconsistencies exist. >> Yeah, understood. I understood. We're just documenting what we saw. But I do >> No worries. Yeah.
>> And you're not the only town that was in that boat. I mean, we have some other clients who were trying to be on top of this >> and went to town meeting and adopted something that then turned out to not be consistent with ADU regulations. So, I sympathize. >> That's what we get for being ahead of the deadline for one.
>> You're not alone. You're not alone. A couple of the towns on the vineyard were in the same boat. Um, >> so there's some inconsistent language in the bylaw about how certain boards or bodies are referred to. Um, and it's sometimes just hard to know like, well,
who is actually the permitting authority for this or some other use. um doesn't provide an outline of the roles and responsibilities and duties of the planning board as it does the zoning board. This is not an uncommon thing in zoning bylaws, but if you're going to have a planning board that has a lot of
special permit granting authority, it's a really good idea to make sure that the planning board also kind of has a section on the zoning bylaw that says what it is, what its authority is, and so forth. Um there are subjective kind of criteria. I think you probably all know this. Um, especially for special
permits, the rules aren't clear uh for use, which certainly can lead to inconsistencies in how a board makes a decision and and can be, you know, discouraging or frustrating for applicants. So, um, just when things are clear, everybody understands, the board
understands, the applicant understands, the town staff understand. um when the requirements are not clear, when the language is muddy, when or sometimes even worse when it's inconsistent, um it becomes very difficult for people to work with the code in a sort of
commonly understood way. Um there are a lot of other little things that we talked about. Um you know, again, how it refers to various boards and commissions. There are a lot of cross reference mistakes in the bylaw. um or and sometimes the there's not enough information for someone to
even figure out, oh well, I went to this section that obviously isn't what it is. Where should I be? But it's not you just can't tease it out of the language that is available. Um there's some words that are just used almost interchangeably in a way that perhaps they should not be. Things like setbacks and yards. Um it
just can be very confusing to interpret because the language isn't consistent. So now I'm just on some policy topics. Um, you know, these are these are totally policy issues for the town, but the way multif family uh and
manufactured housing is treated in the zoning bylaw makes them both kind of difficult to do. Um, if you have if you're concerned about affordable housing and you're trying to provide more of it, you probably want to clean that up. Um the bulk regulations make
your buildout built out areas uh non-conforming creates a lot of non-conformity in town, prevents infield development and hinders special provisions for certain kinds of uses. So there just seems to be a lot in the regulations that actually make it hard to do something and we're not sure if
that's intentional on the town's part. Um but it would sure help to know uh what it is that you're actually trying to accomplish. Uh there are restrictions uh in the bylaw that kind of make it a little difficult to do some commercial uses or limit what business owners can
do such as banning outdoor seating. Um and those are those are things that typically communities are cleaning up today. >> Hey Judy, uh just go back to that uh last slide real quick. Could you just um briefly explain uh sorry I guess the connection to um in
terms of the bulk requirements making those lots not conforming and how it relates to infill development. I guess also give some background what infill development is just for some of the people here don't know. >> Sure. I mean, infill development is is I actually call it incremental
development, but it's it's you have spaces in your a downtown district's an easy one to talk about. You have spaces in the district where you have a break in the form and infill would help to kind of close that gap and create a
sense of continuity at the street edge and public realm. Um so infill development is an important tool. Um, sometimes a lot is underutilized and being able to to maximize its utility um
improves the sense of the of the pedestrian the the person's relationship to the the street relationship to build to businesses and just builds a nice kind of town center or downtown or business district form.
Um, so that's kind of what infill is. It's it's incrementally filling in spaces. It's the easiest way to explain this. >> When you have lot regulations that require uh more land for a use than the land
that would be available for infill, you essentially make that infill impossible. when you have setback requirements that would break the continuity of perhaps an existing sort of organic development pattern, but now the new setbacks would
create a very odd uh sense of the space at the street. Um you you you defeat the ability to do that kind of infill or incremental development that is so essential for growing uh a business district that people want to be in. So
that's kind of the way I think about it. But believe me, um, height regulations, lot regulations, and setbacks can render areas non-conforming, and people don't even realize that that's what's happening, but it is. And all of a sudden, it becomes difficult to use land
in a more efficient way. So, it's a policy issue, but it's something I think we felt like we needed to point out. One one of the things one aspect of this is uh you know we've deal with a lot of towns and town center revitalization and whatnot and they're trying to bring in
more business opportunities more opportunities for businesses. You know, a lot of that revolves around, you know, local mom and pop businesses, smaller spaces and whatnot, but those those are often the spaces that cannot be built because of >> right,
>> you know, and so you're losing the opportunity not only to have more business in your downtown, more jobs, more tax dollars, but maybe depending on circumstances, uh, you know, being able to have more local people
create businesses to locate when town center. Um so there's a ripple effect from in the economy and in the employment uh beyond just um you know creating a more attractive town center where you can fill in these empty
spaces, >> right? >> You know, just just a thought. >> Um roles and responsibilities. Um, in some ways the zoning bylaw is stricter than state law for permit approvals or voting rules. Um, 4A allows
an applicant three years to exercise a permit, but the zoning bylaw currently says one. Uh, Mullen rule, it was not clear to us whether the town has actually adopted the Mullen rule, but the Mullen rule allows board members who miss a meeting to participate and vote if they've reviewed like the tape of the
hearing and read the minutes and so forth. But it appears that that is not possible in East Long Meadow. Um, >> um, just to interrupt, Judy, so we did, um, adopt it in town meeting, I think like in 2012 or something like that. The town clerk sent me a ruling for it. It
just wasn't ever put into the zoning bylaw itself. >> So, that's something we can fix easily. >> Yeah, >> we can fix that. >> Um, >> and the town clerk, the town clerk would know which meeting that was voted upon as well. She was able to pretty easily for me.
>> That's fine. So, we can we can check that out. Um, that's that's helpful to know. I mean, it was a little surprising to me, frankly, because so many towns have adopted the Mullen rule, but we're responding to the text as we received it. So, >> thank you for that information. Um, >> of course.
>> And then the site plan review guidelines um, you know, could be streamlined without necessarily compromising quality. Some some of this these documents are just very wordy and excessive and and they're and then not clear. So just the roles and responsibilities, who does what? Um what
are the various time frames within which boards and commissions and applicants have to to work? Um it just these there are the areas like this that could be cleaned up uh in the bylaw. And that's I mean that's really high level, but I think you guys have seen
the report. So we're sort of happy to answer any questions that you may have, but that's high level what we what we talked about today. Oh yeah. Yeah. She stopped sharing. It should come back. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Awesome.
>> Is it's not the worst bylaw I've ever read. If that is any consolation to you. Um Bob and I have worked on a couple that were much worse. >> I'm sure. >> Yeah. These, you know, your bylaw has good sections, some, you know, some
well-written sections to easy to understand sections. So it's not it's not the whole bylaw is the problem. It's just uh much of it's organization and if you clean up the organization it all makes sense without changing a lot of the
language. Um so u you know you're not in like Judy just said you're not anywhere near the worst bylaws we've did. >> Yeah. I mean which in some ways is sort of advantageous for you folks because there's probably more we can do for you in the recommendations.
It's not like this wholesale cleanup, which Bob and I have just gone through in a couple of towns. That was painful, but we got through it. So, do you find in towns um with town meetings that the bylaws tend to be a
little bit more scattered because the residents are actually writing um the changes and then they're being adopted at town meeting where now with a city form of government, it's the council that gets to approve everything.
Well, I mean, citizens can still petition for zoning changes even if it's a council form of government. Yes. >> So, if citizens are going to be writing stuff, then they're going to be writing it whether it's town meeting or the council. Are you talking about the citizen petition process or just town meeting perhaps not necessarily having staff?
>> So, in the past at the town meeting, a citizen would write the bylaw, bring it to the town and say, "I want you to adopt this." they would bring a hundred of their closest friends and no matter how bad the bylaw was written, it was adopted. Um, where at least now we have
a process to go through, try and fix it, try and straighten it out, try and make it more readable, >> uh, find a place for it before it gets adopted. >> Right. One one of the things we always talk to towns about was exactly on this
topic because if if you know they've hired us to fix the bylaw so to speak. We fix it, they like it and they take it to town meeting and town meeting adopts it and we say okay now you have to make sure you don't screw it all up again in
five years. And and they hadn't thought, you know, they haven't thought about that. And we say you have to have a process, you know, where somebody is paying attention to the grammar, the punctuation, the syntax, where the where the amendment is
being proposed to be put into. And some towns have developed, you know, sort of a internal process to do that. And then when the planning board goes to town meeting, it'll say, "Look, the substantive issue, the substantive
issue, maybe fine, we we were in support of that, but if the bylaw is written as a mess, it's all screwed up. It's in the wrong place. It contradicts, you know, these other two sections, we we need time to work with the
petitioner to fix those problems." Now, sometimes town meeting might say, "Well, we don't care about those problems. and vote to approve it. But sometimes town meeting gets sick of hearing out how bad the bylaw is becoming all over again. We're going to have to hire consultants again in another 10 years and say,
"Okay, send it back, fix that, and then come back to us with a clean by order." So, you kind of have to develop a messaging with the planning board and the staff, town attorney, even town meeting. Well, you don't have time to walk, but town council, you know, as
things come in, if it's written by the planning board or the staff or the citizen, okay, who's reviewing it? Who's looking at the editorial aspect of it? >> Yeah. >> Before it gets to the public hearing or before it gets to a vote by town council
to approve. So, that's something to keep in mind going forward. How are you going to keep it in good shape? What is uh what's our next set of deliverables deliverables going to look like and when should we expect those?
>> So I think we are going to need some direction from the town about like what you want us to focus on. >> Okay. Yeah. >> We can start writing. >> I guess I guess this might be more for the group like how does that work for stuff like what if anything are we
changing for outdoor seating? Are we adding purpose statements to each bylaw? Is that something we create? Are they writing? If they're writing it, do we review it before it goes town council for a vote? Like, >> so I guess >> what's the order of operations? >> The the goal
>> was to kind of give them direction for the policy stuff. I think it's pretty self-explanatory that we definitely want them to fix a lot of the technical stuff. Yep. >> Or at least give us suggestions on how they can rewrite some of those paragraphs that they brought up. That's that's a given. I guess the policy considerations is where they want
guidance from us. So what do we see currently? I know it's only 10 of us in here um making these decisions, but like what do we see as direction that we want in the next 5 to 10 years or even beyond that for this bylaw? They brought up a lot of policy considerations for us to
kind of think about and examine. Uh and I think it's up to us to decide, you know, what's important, maybe what's not as important that can be focused on at a later time. Uh and then whatever deliverables they create is going to be those recommendations that we'd ask them
to provide to us just from those policy discussions that we're supposed to be having. Uh and then the the technical changes that they're going to do anyways. So that's kind of the gist of of what you're you're bringing up, Judy. Is that correct?
One aspect of the policy decisions I'll just throw out there. Um we do this with every town and every town does it with us. Um some policy decisions are fairly minor if you will and there's quick
consensus about how to fix it or you know the direction for the policy decision. And at the other end of the spectrum, there's big policy issues that are controversial, may have been talked about in the town in the past and never got anywhere because it was too
controversial. It's going to lead a lot of discussion from the town. That means a lot of time and probably not enough money to pay us to do that. So we usually end up with sort of a phase one and a phase two. Phase one is part of
the partly the technical and what other things of substantive can be done with our contract and with the town. And phase two are bigger issues that the town's going to have to tackle down the road, you know, next year or two years
down to, you know, resolve pol bigger policy issues with the town council and the planning board and citizens and all of that. So you'll end up with kind of that list from us and that helps sort things out somewhat.
So I guess um sorry Connor you can >> I was just going to say um for the policy consideration aspect are there things that you and your experience have seen in like other cities and towns that are similar to to
us in our size that you think were missing that just aren't currently part of our zoning bylaw that we should give some thought to because I know you had some things that like you know you saw that were in ours that you thought could use some change or you at least flagged
as policy considerations, but are there things that were just totally missing that we aren't even aware of? >> Off the top of my head, I'm not thinking of anything that that's that's an unfair answer to you, but that's my answer right now. I I can't think of I mean
nothing jumped off the page for me as oh my god why don't they have this >> given the size and scale of the town I I think >> you know I mean there are things that I was a little surprised by um
>> well the difficulty of trying to just do multif family housing I think is really striking um I mean this is this is 2025 and so I I was a little surprised Um, I think you have really sort of an
archaic type of um, senior housing bylaw that I think probably needs to wholesale revision. >> Nobody writes senior housing for 62 and over and everybody has to be 62 or over. I mean, that just nobody does that. So,
those kinds of things I think really do 55 and older. Well, it's, you know, the fair housing law is 80% or more of the units in a development would need to be restricted um for occupancy of by households where at least one person is
55 or over, but not everybody has to be 55 or over. That's that's just that's excessive. That's that is not anchored in the fair housing law. Mhm. >> Then you mentioned something else too that's a FHA violation about the um I
think you had mentioned this somewhere in in the general laws 48. It's the uh uniformity of certain use categories applied across the district >> as 48. Yep. >> You mentioned that there was one category I think it was multif family
>> multif family manufactured homes >> but not not just that I think it was just multif family or multiple buildings on the same property multiple residences same property I think is what the category is called. Yeah. >> And it only applied to town owned properties. >> Oh yeah, that's an issue. And that we should have brought that up tonight.
>> And you mentioned that like because that that violates Does that violate fair housing act or is that something different? >> It's a uniformity issue. It's like there so that this is only allowed within the district if the property is town owned. >> Yeah. >> And you know
that's that's a problem. You're not treating the the use is multif family or the use is senior housing or the use is whatever independent of who owns the land. >> Yeah. And that would be included in your technical review, right? To to look for
those and >> Yeah. Yeah. If it's not there, it should be. Sorry. >> No worries. >> But we talked about it. >> So I guess what would be the most useful next steps from our end or from the committee's end to provide to you moving forward?
because they're only contracted to be at this meeting and then the next meeting when they present the results to us. So, I guess there's got to be some way that we can I guess this committee could potentially meet again or discuss these things and then bring suggestions in a different format that you could use in
your recommendations phase. I don't know how the bout committee wants to tackle that. >> That would be helpful. I think the techn technical cleanup uh maybe something like a tech uh template and bylaw for future revisions and then >> I don't want to call it a menu but a
menu of policy considerations. >> Yeah. >> And like I don't know if this committee is the right committee for >> the policy stuff. >> So for policy stuff >> probably not. >> Yeah. I feel like that would be a council level thing. >> So how do we do that with the timeline we have?
>> Yep. >> We extend our timeline. What's the what's the timeline for when you have to have the um second meeting with this additional report? >> So, we had told them >> we originally gave him a deadline of
January, but I think Judy, we had discussed potentially pushing out to March for flexibility reasons. >> Yeah, I remember. >> So, we have a little bit of time. >> We do, but I think town manager wanted to be March at the absolute latest to get that recommendations back. >> Oh, yeah. I don't want to make it too long, but I'm just >> Yeah,
>> I think based off of that, my suggestion would be if they could go forward with the technical cleanup aspects and their recommendations for that >> and then if they could give us like a like Ryan was saying, a template and
structure for like here's how to fill in the blanks for future bylaws that we might consider. >> Yeah. But then also like here's a a menu for how to organize them going forward because I'm sure as part of the
technical here's how to organize the stuff we have. But if we're trying to figure out where do we insert stuff in the future, are there like steps that we should follow to figure out where it might belong >> would be useful. >> Okay. And then perhaps in the interim while you guys are working on that, we
could have a meeting with the council and the planning board, maybe even jointly to discuss what we think some policy considerations could be. But if you provided us what >> the list of things we should even think about would be helpful. Yeah, we know you included
we know it's in this document already, but I guess it'd be helpful for this committee and for town council if you guys created um a condensed version that's like a like a list of policy considerations to look at. >> Questions could be discussed at these meetings.
>> Y >> um but yeah, it seems like you're emphasizing or prioritizing the technical review pieces that have to be changed >> and then you suggested like a menu of what could be applied, >> right? Yeah, >> later on >> we have to clean up what we have now. It's >> Yeah, >> obviously it's not the worst, but it's
probably uh closer to the worst than the best that they've seen. I would [Laughter] >> I mean, I think depending on what some of those policy considerations are, it would be nice to have some of those written and included by you as recommendations, but at least while
you'll have something to work on while we hash out some of those discussions for you. So >> part of my concern going forwards is adopting stuff like this. Obviously the charter um to adopt multiple changes at
once was voted down. We have to try and bring that back. >> Y >> but I think if we put too many purpose things in it, it may become too controversial and then you lose the whole thing. Um I just think we we need
to be careful as far as um how we adopt stuff going forwards. Obviously council should be talking about all of that. Um >> Oh, I agree. When it comes to like the actual adoption into law, but I would at least like to see some of the more of it than not in the recommendation and even if it
takes us a couple years to implement it peacemail, that's okay. >> I would agree with that. So, do you have like clear direction from us, Judy and Bob? Is there anything you think >> I just would like to throw one thing out
related to policy issues? Um, >> the town knows what policy issues might be a problem or an issue or has been discussed already. Town council, planning board, you staff. Um, so some
of the information that comes back to us would be helpful if you told us >> what are some of the policy issues you've been discussing or got discussed three years ago and got dropped and you know uh every town talks about policy
issues. So what have y'all been talking about in East Long Meadow, right? >> Um and then we can you know incorporate it into our our draft and our thinking. we can look at it and you know give give you some feedback and then you can run it back up the chain to the town council
but it would be helpful to get some you know town perspective on policy issues for the town. >> Yeah. >> And they don't have to go to they don't have to be part of the full >> bylaw that goes to town council. Like I
said, some of them you could say this needs more discussion for, you know, a future time and we not we won't include it in this draft that goes ultimately to town council. >> How much of that is the purview of this committee or were we just like Bremer
police? >> No, no, we're not. So, it's a comprehensive review of all bylaws with recommendations for changes. >> Okay. because we we definitely have >> that gives us pretty wide broad >> scope of I agree. I agree.
>> But it seems like, you know, from what you guys discussed, like you definitely want the technical changes to be taken care of right away. That that's a 100% >> definitely something they want to see or we want to see. >> Um but I guess the policy stuff that's kind of that seems like Connor, you know, town council president, you want
that to happen at the town council meetings with the plan board. >> I think that would be helpful. Well, I mean, we certainly can discuss it as a committee here, too, but I think there's probably a larger audience to try to figure out some of >> that like a high priority policy change
>> and they get a voice on the back end because they can reject what we suggest and keep the wallet text if they choose to do so or some of those things and such. >> Y >> we should probably just take another look at the master plan
>> and see what's in the master plan that's not in the zoning bylaw. We can do that. We should probably add that to our final report. >> Okay. >> Because that might policy issues. >> Absolutely. Yeah. >> Hi Judy. I'm Marilyn Richards. I'm over here in the corner.
>> Hi. How are you? >> I'm hiding. I am a counselor, former planning board member and just, you know, enjoying this discussion. Great. >> Um, I have a question, please, about what you stated about the mixeduse village district being a paper zone. I
realize we don't have any district right now that addresses that because it's a new district. We we created it just before CO. There was a developer that was interested. We would have reszoned the property and then their project fell
through. So what is it okay to leave it in the bylaw the way it is until such time as someone else may take advantage of that opportunity? went into that. >> It's not mapped. It's not on the map. So, >> it really shouldn't be in the bylaw at
all. Now, if somebody comes forward and wants to do something like that in the future, you can always bring it back to town meeting along with a map amendment. >> On the map, it's not map. The map has been updated. >> Was designed, but then CO hit and then the developer didn't actually move
forward with it. >> So, where is it? >> Oh, hold on. So, I I believe there's two separate things that you have here. One is a bylaw, which basically outlines what you could do in this district if someone so chose to change their
property, come in for a zone change. >> Yeah. >> And adopt basically say, "Hey, I no longer want to be in the industrial garden park. I'd like a zone change to the mixeduse village district." If you don't have a bylaw for that outlining what you can do, then you can't
>> Sorry, chapter 48 is very clear in section five, all districts shall be shown on the map. >> It's true. And if it's not on the maped, >> if it's not on the map, then you can't really enforce it. You have to create boundaries for it. >> Even if it's an overlay district, too.
Like usually in that situation if you made like a you could do a townwide overlay district if you wanted to but if you were to do something like that you'd have to show it on the map in some way shape or form. >> So that that bylaw shouldn't have been
adopted until such point in time that a change of zone was going to be requested to change the map >> or you could have done >> and adopt them both at the same time. >> Right. Right. When you create a district, you create the text of the district and you show it on the map.
>> You might want to go back. >> That's what I thought I signed up for. >> You might want to go back to when this was adopted by Tommy, the viral fun >> and look at the letter you got from the attorney general's office reviewing
that. Because normally when a town does this, adopts the bylaw, but doesn't put the district on the map, the attorney general will say to you, "Hey, >> you have to have both the bylaw, the the district in the bylaw and on the map. You didn't do the map. Put an amendment
together and go back to town meeting and get it on the map." >> So, we do that letter. See if she says that. >> We didn't do this at town meeting. We're a city form of government. We adopted this under the city form of government.
>> Okay. Well, same. Okay. Well, that explains it because you don't send the bylaws to the attorney general. >> Exactly. >> So, they don't get reviewed, but but >> doesn't make it legal. >> 4A applies to cities as it does town.
So, you're still in out of conformance with chapter 48. >> Right. So what you're telling us is when we went to our attorney, the attorney should have advised us not to do that. >> I'm not commenting on anything council. I'm simply telling you that
chapter 48 is very clear. All districts shall be shown on the map. >> And if it's not, that would just mean that the provisions of that zone aren't enforceable anywhere, which would be fine because we don't have anything under that zone anyway. >> Anyway, >> right. >> Yeah.
Chapter 48 is very clear shall be shown on the map. So the technical recommendation is remove it from the bylaw. If someone wants to come forth with something like that in the future, they can you can always go back to the council >> and say we want to propose this
district. Here it is on the map. Here are the rules and regulations. >> We got a deal for you. And they pass it. >> Repeat needs to be struck. >> Well, actually Judy, I just thought of something else. um just now thinking about our contract and stuff. Um I do remember we actually put in there a
public outreach component um on your behalf and I guess working with the town. So maybe could we potentially use that as an avenue to get those policy um I guess discussions going on with town
residents in any way, shape or form. Um, and I think the way the contract is that the public engagement piece could be up to you guys to figure out how you want to do it. Um, and this is like moving more into the recommendations part of
the of the whole ordeal. Um, you know, because obviously the the audit report was just the technical analysis, the whole bylaw, right? And then you raise these questions that we discussed here today. But then afterwards, you know, we have that next piece where, you know, we have the recommendations that you you'll
provide, but also, you know, reaching out and I guess coordinate a way to get opinion from the public as well. And I think, you know, we kind of left it up to you to decide like what method you you see as best. So whether it's like a survey, whether it's like a in-person meeting that we invite folks to come to.
Um, and I think, you know, that could be definitely a good place to bring up those types of discussions in addition to doing it in front of the plane board and the the town council as well because that could invite residents to to weigh in on these things. Um, so could potentially be a good idea?
>> Yeah, we we can certainly do something. I mean, my understanding, and you know, correct me if I'm wrong, Rob, but I thought >> because you had the town center district going on and housing plan that we were we weren't going to be doing a lot of direct engagement with the community because it was just too much going on.
But we certainly more than happy to do, you know, we could certainly I I sometimes I think a meeting is more helpful because you ask people, you ask anybody like, >> do you think that a salon me should have more multif family housing? what do you think the answer is going to be? Um,
it's better to have a conversation with people and to be able to explain why a question is important >> than simply throw a question at them. So that I I think some kind of meeting would be a better option. Yeah, we can discuss that too. Uh when we have our
next team meeting about this uh and then just find that time maybe I would say in maybe early next year or something like that whenever you know some of this other stuff's kind of blown over a little bit so we have space to just do this. >> Sure. um in addition to this process
obviously but you know I think you know those policy questions are pretty important because we can't just >> I guess that within this room or within the town council and the plane I think that has to go above and beyond >> and just invite we've had good participation recently amongst folks in town >> you know for the Jeff Spec event that we
did last month like we had at least like 60 people here we had 80 people for the center town district so we we've been getting good numbers and I think we could definitely attract residents who want to weigh in on this stuff. >> Yeah. I mean, I'm just thinking again back to you've got a master plan. We
should probably try to like say, look, you know, your master plan is is has these recommendations in it. What do you think? It's really remarkable to me when you go work on a zoning bylaw in a community. Um, and people kind of forget what their own planning documents say or things have
changed, you know, and so it's helpful to kind of calibrate. >> Um, it would be great. It'd be wonderful if we could do it on a Saturday morning instead of in the evening, but I'm just putting in a plug for >> I would agree >> how >> much I really have come to hate night meetings, but that's just me. Just me,
you know. >> Um, but we certainly could. We owe you that. I I just I was trying to take my cues from you. >> Sure. >> That you guys didn't want us to try to do a whole lot of public outreach right now, but you are correct. It's in the contract and I'm more than happy to do it. I I kind of want to go back to the
bylaw anyway and in response to this question of what do we do are we missing anything because I think I I was just speaking for myself. I was so focused on the the technical nitty-gritty stuff that frankly is just a lot of fun to pick up >> um that I'm not sure I gave it that
lens. So I want to do that too before we call this report final. >> Sure. Yeah. And uh you know that's why we're flexible with the deadline uh being what it is so we can iron out these sort of things when they come up. >> Absolutely. Um but yeah, no obviously it's something we could consider and um
I guess you know Connor and council we also take direction for you guys as well in terms of like what would be a better process. Um I guess it seems like you know at least having one meeting with members of the community would be helpful. >> Yeah, I think that's a good idea. >> You want people to know what's going on.
I mean >> those could also be very educational, too. I mean, part of it is just the making sure people don't feel like something's going on that they don't know about, but it's also educational. People sometimes have ideas about land uses or the impact of development that
actually it turns out are not necessarily accurate. Like, so, and we learn a lot. You know, there are things you hear from residents in a community that ordinary like residents who aren't serving on town boards, they just have
concerns and interests or things that they're worried about that it's helpful to us to know. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Everyone at the center town district meeting had the same opportunity I did to sign up for this fund. >> So,
may I um you had listed uh uh redundancy Um, I know in the past, uh, a lot of the thought was to list certain things multiple times within the zoning bylaws because you may miss it here and you'll see it here.
>> Um, it sounds to me like what you're saying is put it in once in a specific area and that's the area. That's it. Don't don't do referrals. Just list it where it's supposed to be. Did I Did I
pick up on that correctly? >> Yes, you did. So, >> one of my greatest frustrations is finding something in multiple places in a bylaw and it's not written exactly the same way.
>> Okay. this way one year and then a few words changed here the next year and a few years later it was like it morphed again >> and all of a sudden you have this inconsistency threaded through the bylaw in the way something is treated just because somebody liked commas and
somebody else did not. >> So I think it's best to get it clear once. >> Did I just insult an attorney? I didn't mean to. Um, but you know, it's just like really you got to you you run the risk of creating inconsistency and lack
of clarity when you try to repeat things when really the best thing is say it once and cross reference it. >> I remember me and the um the previous building commissioner Dave Gardner were we would debate about several things in the bylaw all the time because it wasn't
clear to either one of us how certain things were applied. Like we'd go back and forth. It'd say one thing here and the other thing. It' be different, but then you look at the text very closely >> and it's like and it's like >> told you what we meant. >> Yeah. Or like if you look at the text itself like that can mean that can mean
three other things within the text. It's like >> I don't think staff should be having those types of back and forths, you know? It should just be you look at it and it makes sense to everybody and you're like, "Wow, we can apply it this way when doing this development review for this person or applicant." so we can
give them a clear answer and a clear path. >> I think that's kind of like the biggest I guess the biggest frustration from staff is that the bylaw is unclear in certain areas and like we have trouble figuring out the best way to do it and oftent times the building commissioner is the person that makes that call. Um
which you know broad powers they already have under the zoning act. I mean the building commissioner zoning enforcement officer which our building commissioner is in this town like you know he often has to he often confuses himself because he he he might second guess something. He's like, "Oh, actually, you know what? You know, the definition of farm is
actually more like this." And I just think that's that creates a lot of um roadblocks and confusion for for staff. >> Yeah. I mean, it's it is a common problem and I understand how it happens and it's the sort of
thing that every once in a while you just have to step back from your zoning bylaw or ordinance and just do a cleanup. These things happen. You just fix them when you find them. >> Yeah. Things change. So your building comm somebody's going to walk in and
even after you get this done, somebody's going to walk into your building commissioner's office and say, "I want to do this." And he's going to say, "I never heard of that before. >> There's nothing in the bylaw about that because, you know, new uses come down the pipe and nobody, you know,
>> Barry Storage was the the first big one for me." >> Yeah. But battery storage, like people were using solar bylaws to regulate battery storage for the longest time. Like cuz nobody had battery storage. Like how do you fit that into your bylaw? Like it happens all the time. Like I get it.
>> Definition process. Zoning bylaw is always kind of catching up with problems or new things. >> It's never never ending process. That's zoning for you. >> Is it your thought definitions should only go in definition?
>> Yes. >> Okay. So, so again, there were certain landlords um solar that had a set of definitions that were only really um >> solar related. >> Perfect. Solar related. So, a lot of
times we kept them in the bylaw, but your thought process is just put definitions under definitions and that's it. >> Yeah. And we've dealt with this before. You know, solar signs is another one. this like a god-awful long list of, you know, definitions associated with. And
there are ways in the definition section that you can like color code or put a border around to kind of make it clear that, >> you know, these are these are definitions that relate to solar or these are definitions that relate to signs. We've just been able to do it
just by the the design of the page. So, um it is just much better to have definitions go with definitions. People are going to look at the table of contents and say, "Oh, there's a definition section." >> Yeah, >> I guess all the definitions are there. But they're not. >> Holy moly. >> I think I'm guilty of doing that for at
least one of the bylaw revisions we've had recently. Solar. >> Yeah, that's >> right. You're forgiven. >> Yeah. Uh, any further questions for them? >> Um, >> how many do you want?
I thought of two more when folks were just talking. Um, you also had mentioned like the purpose statements for the zones themselves, but are there other parts of the zoning bylaw, even if it's not related specifically to the zones themselves, that you were unclear what
the objective of that regulation was for and we should therefore think about what the purpose of that might be kind of to go hand inhand with the policy consideration. Well, that's a good question and I I'm going to give you a very generic answer because I don't have the bylaw open in
front of me, but sometimes I find that particular provisions have a clear purpose statement and it's and some of it is just because there was a model bylaw out there for solar for telecommunications or whatever that there were purpose statements laid for and communities simply grab them. But at
the district level, it's remarkable to find an absence of uh of of a sense of what is this district supposed to be? >> And I think it would be helpful to your boards and commissions and applicants, but certainly to the boards and commissions to know
>> this is kind of what we're trying to do in this residential district versus this one. Um >> yeah that I to answer your question my from my perspective that we noted there's some sections subsections that
are incredibly vague and we're saying well what was the intent here? What was the town trying to accomplish when this language is so very vague? >> Yeah. >> Um so there are sections like that. So we and you know I think I think Judy had
one bullet point on vagueness maybe more than one on vagueness and so we will have specific examples to ask you what was the town thinking and often we get an answer is nobody knows >> that's for us
>> that often happens but if you know you've got some people that have been around for a while hopefully they remember when it was adopted and and uh you know you can get some history and sometimes that history is pretty funny >> and you know the reason why it was
adopted hasn't been a reason to keep it in a bylaw for 25 years but there it lies. So those kinds of things I think relate to somewhat to your question. >> All right. Any additional questions? Thought you had two.
Oh yeah, the second one. Um, welcome. >> I don't think we touched on it tonight, but I think it was at least somewhat part of the report, but like the districts themselves and, you know, like commercial versus business and >> Yeah. >> Are there other things you should be
thinking about just even in terms of like the naming of those kinds of districts? Like is that similar or very dissimilar to like how other people are doing it? Well, I don't think I've ever seen
Industrial Garden District anywhere in my 36 years in this business. >> That was an interesting name. Um, it left us scratching our heads. You might want to think about what what the name of this district.
>> Yeah, there's no gardens. >> So, it really kind of made me wonder. >> Actually, there was wives. Wives. Yeah. When when >> what is the purpose of was created. It was all >> Farmfield. >> Farmfield. >> Gardens. >> I mean, that's just like what do you
want this district to be? You could probably name it something that's a little more like what you think of it as. Um, >> warehouse space. Sorry. >> An industrial district. I mean, >> well, the the industrial was a lot more
uh lenient than what we wanted the industrial garden park. the industrial garden park. We wanted more manufacturing uh facilities. Industrial opened it up to a lot more and was along the railroad. This was
separate on the south end of town. >> We we've seen that before. It's just that that's not typically the name you would find. >> So, it's just the name, >> you know. >> I mean, not not to be cute, but sometimes you just find it as industrial A industrial B. And industrial A is where you want the higher end uses and
industrial B is where the, you know, the landscaping contractor's yards can go. I mean, >> yeah, that makes sense. >> That's all. >> Okay. >> So, what about like commercial and business? I've seen other cities
business one, business two, and it's divided by what's allowed within those zones. Does that make sense? or >> there's a lot of communities that have multiple commercial districts or business districts. And >> so you have a central business district that might be your town center area or a
town center district, whatever you're going to call it. >> Um you might have a highway business or a general business that might be the outlying areas where the business districts are. You could have a neighborhood business district. Um, depending upon the form of development
in your town, you might have, you know, sort of crossroad areas where you might have an opportunity for a small neighborhood zone and then people aren't having to drive multiple miles to get a gallon of milk. So, um, those are the types of business districts you typically find.
>> Yeah. >> And they might allow office or retail or whatever, but the sort of division of commercial and business is a little bit weird. >> I know um, other communities. So I used to work for Ammeris a couple years ago and uh they did it like on a numbering scale. So like residence 1 2 3 and then
it did same thing for business and industrial but the numbers represented like a certain density. So if it was like one that' be like your lower density. I I also could have that flip-flop. One was like lower and then four was like your high density. So like your downtown versus like what you see
in the outskirts. And if you looked at their zoning map, everything on the outskirts of downtown is like that lower number for low density and you get closer to the center and then UMass and other places it gets more intense. >> Yeah. So I think it's just it kind of
it's like a metric when you think about it if it's applied that way. Um but yeah, I mean that's a lot of stuff to consider too and a lot of work that would be involved in something like that. Um, and >> there's a lot of ways to name districts, as you all have seen, and we've seen a
thousand different ways, but >> the ones that do it best, however they name it, are districts that actually reflect what the town wants in certain locations, >> what is already in those locations, where your town center is, where, you
know, do you have any village centers? Do you have a strip commercial? Do you have uh you know uh do you already have heavy industrial or do you have just light industrial uses? Um so you know looking at what what's what you already
have and what you want to have then that can help shape the lanes of the district and the locations of the district. That was the last thing I thought of. >> I'm sure there's footes everywhere, but I was gonna say, >> "Oh, I'm sure we'll have more once we
digest it all." And >> the first you come up with more questions, you know, like on your drive home tonight or or over the next month or so, feed them to Rob. Feed things to Rob so he can get them to us. Would be very helpful.
or thought or ideas, not just questions. >> Did those guys know where I am? >> Appreciate it. >> I'll give you appreciate your time and joining us >> and for the this report.
>> Yes, thank you. It was definitely very helpful to think about all of that and have it presented. >> Yeah. And Judy, we can um talk about this further when we have our next meeting, too, and just kind of start talking about next steps and stuff. >> That's fine. No problem. >> Great.
>> Well, thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you very much. >> Very interesting. >> Bye, folks. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Uh any new business for the bylaw review committee? >> I will entertain a motion to adjourn.
>> So move. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. Any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Any opposed? Any abstensions? We are journed at 7:20. It's