Today is January 7th, 2026. As a preliminary matter, this is Woody Knight, chair of the Newbury planning board. Uh, permit me to confirm that all members persons anticipated on the agenda are present and can hear me. Planning board members, when I call your name, please uh respond on the affirmative. Peter Pos, >> yes, sir.
>> Larry Murphy, >> present. >> Scott Ker, >> yes. Steve Manian. >> I I uh town staff Kristen Grubs, planning director. >> Yes. >> And
um special projects planner. Martha Taylor. >> Yes. >> And Sadie Woodward, assistant planner. >> Yep. Very good. Um good evening. January 7th, 2026 open meeting of the new planning
board is being conducted remotely consistent with the chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 which extends the governor's march well 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law GLC 30A
20 until June 30th 2027. For this meeting, the new planning board is convening by video conference via Zoom as posted on the planning board's agenda, which can be found at the town's
website. You may join us by going to http semicolon/zoom. us and entering meeting ID number 8327141 3056 and the passcode is 108790.
or by calling in 1 1929 2056099 US and entering the meeting ID number and passcode when prompted. Please note that this meeting is being recorded and that attendees are participating by video and or telephone
conference. The meeting is also being broadcast live through local access cable channel 9 and on Zoom and at https semicolon newberryvixsite.comtnctv
and the recording will be available on the new access YouTube channel. Um, it's meeting uh meeting business ground rules. Before we turn to the first item on the agenda, we're meeting to cover some ground rules for effective
and clear conduct of our business and to ensure accurate meeting minutes. As chair, I'll introduce each speaker on the agenda. After speakers conclude their remarks, I'll go down the list of board members. Inviting each by name to provide any comment, questions, or
motions. For all attendees except board members and staff, please remember to mute your audio when you're not speaking. On Zoom, use the mute button. On your telephone, uh please use star six to toggle and
that will mute and unmute. I will then allow questions or comments from members of the public who have have raised their hands in in the order in which they have raised their hands. Each participant will be called on to
provide his or her name and address and then may ask questions or make comments. Finally, each vote taken in this meeting will be conducted by roll call vote. that includes open statements.
Now, the first item on the agenda this evening is uh liaison reports. So, um we'll start with the ZBA. That would be Larry. >> Thanks, Woody. Um the ZBA uh did not
meet in December. Um they're meeting this month on the 15th and um I expect that they will continue the discussion on the uh pavilion at the Sunset Club. Uh I don't know what else might be uh
upcoming on that agenda. That's really all I have to report this this evening. >> Okay. Thank you, Larry. Um next is Conservation Commission. >> That' be myself. Um we met last night.
Uh there were two items on the agenda um that kind of pertain to us. Uh there was it was a lengthy meeting. It was three hours long. We had a lot to go through. Um the first being uh the Barago solar
project. We uh they they wanted a certificate of compliance. um we advise them to as a board to um close out with planning as well. So they'll be um in touch with Kristen and
going through the process to close out with us. So that'll be on the radar. So that'll be coming up soon sometime this year this year. Um the second and I'm drawing a blank right now.
The second thing. >> Yeah. 34 Central. >> Yeah. Yes. 34 Central Street. Excuse me. I'm sorry. And >> it's been a long day for me. I'm sorry. Um 34 Central Street. Um the layout last night for that was um basically to
establish whether or not they needed to um submit a new and notice of intent. Um, we determined that they could amend the original notice of intent to include um the results of
uh decision with 34 central for the u one way in one way out road and rec it's going to go into the reconfigured um central street and that meeting is also going to be coming up before the select board later on this month. Uh I don't
recall the date at this moment, but we determined that they could amend and they uh notify the aboters again as well. So that was good and um we'll meet with
them at our next meeting in two weeks. So that's what I have for conservation. Um next is MVPC and that would be Kristen. Um, let's see. So, the December MVPC
regional planners meeting um was a holiday openhouse um as well as the commissioners meeting which happened right before the lunch. And so they open up their offices and invite um all the folks who volunteer in
the planning community in the region to come by, see the spaces, talk to all the different um community planners in all their different offices. And um so Satie and I attended that. Um it's very um upbeat
and inspiring. There's a lot of really good people. I think I mentioned they're expanding the space they have a little bit. If you've ever been to the MVPC office building in Haveril, it's a really lovely, very old building. Um
they're um they've grown and they have a lot of people in really awkward, weird, old building spaces. So, it's exciting for them. Um I would say one of the highlights was talking with um the
transportation team. They I've never met um one of their staff, Danny, who's the one who does all the traffic counting when you have seen from time to time around Newberry equipment up on a pole
taking um you know counts of traffic and traffic patterns um particularly along Route One and Plum Island Turnpike. They're regular you know tracking metrics for the amount of traffic. Anyway, he sort of talked us through all the up the technology and um likewise, I
think the GIS team is like pretty excited about a lot of their new um they've uh one of the things they've done is implement the um the trail counters that you might see if you have walked along the um Clipper City Rail
Trail and the Parker Street section of the trail in Newbury. there's some counters keeping track of who uses it, when they use it, um how you know and then that data is used for um management and stewardship of the properties. So
anyway, that was the meeting. Um the commissioner's meeting is coming up next week and the agenda on that is not quite as fun. and they're actually reviewing all the bylaws of uh the way the commissioners um operate relative to the
organization as a planning commission. So, um so that's coming up next week. >> Okay. Thank you, Kristen. >> Kristen, can I ask a quick question, please? the um on the trail counters, I imagine that they're counting both
pedestrians and bicyclists. And I'm wondering whether on the uh like the Plum Island Boulevard, Plum Island Turnpike, whether they differentiate cars from bicyclists. >> Um I don't think there's one of their trail
counters, um you know, permanently established out there. So, I don't um the data I've seen for Plum Island Turnpike is solely car traffic. >> Um
>> but it's a good question. I think the question >> maybe I would ask is do they have a way to, you know, a mobile unit that could be brought out to that site? Um, which if that's sort of where your thinking's
going, Steve, which is a good one, is you know, what is the multimodal use that's currently happening out to the island? Cuz I do think the trail counter data distinguishes between um like strollers, bikers,
you know, different, you know, whether it's motorized or not, that kind of thing. >> Right. even well even a summation on the plum island turnpike would be useful even if they couldn't differentiate cars from bicyclists so that's all
>> yeah I can share that um you know they they have really expanded their use of GIS to represent data in different portals that's um you know available to the public so I can um share that and we
can check out what they do have Right. And of course there could be u the technology could be limited. If you've got uh cars or bicyclists bunched in a group, can you really count 1 2 3 4 5 or has it become one
as people go by? But forgive me for taking up so much time. >> No, that Yeah. No, I that's that's great to talk about a few things. I think the um the most one of the one of the things I've seen recently that they collected
data they collected was at actually something I was going to mention in my planners report but here's a preview. Um there's some work moving forward on the Boston Road Route 1 intersection and there was um they had video um footage
data collection in September on at that location and it really remarkable. It it's um it doesn't capture any human beings by the way, but it shows the pathway that cars take at
all the turns as well as speed and it just collects a lot of really interesting um information. >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Steve. Thank you, Kristen. Um,
>> next item on the agenda is meeting minutes. We have meeting minutes for um I'm trying to find the date. I apologize. The meeting minutes that we had before
us, everyone got in the packet were uh planning board meeting minutes for December 3rd, 2025 all the way back in last year. Um do we have any um comments or corrections on the meeting minutes? And if everyone had a
chance to review them? >> Um uh I've read them, Woody. They look fine to me. >> Okay. So hearing no uh comments or corrections, I would entertain a vote to
approve the meeting minutes for December 3rd, uh 2025. >> Motion. >> Thank you, Pete. Uh do I have a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Scott. Um roll call vote.
Uh Peter Bos. >> Yes, sir. Larry Murphy, >> yes. >> Scott Kinta, >> yes. >> Steve Manian, >> I >> and I vote yes as well. So, thank you and thank you for doing the meeting,
man. The uh important that we keep keep up with those. And I'm I've uh 7:16. So, we'll get into our first public hearing.
A rolling public hearing I believe um public hearing continuence 2-8 Oldpoint Road level two site plan review application is Asbelt construction constructor changes to approved site plan
of record in a proposed new 40x40 pavilion structure at the Sunset Club at 2-8 Bullpoint Road assesses map Q 02- 0-153A owner of the Cottages Commercial LLC
Vincent Coden Manager applicant representative uh manager excuse me applicant representative Steven Sawya P Millennium Engineering Inc. The applicant has submitted a request in
writing for a continuence with a public hearing until January 21st, 2026. So, um, that being said, I would entertain a motion to continue the public hearing for 2-8 Old Point Road
site plan review to January 21st, 2026 at 7:15 via Zoom. I'll move. >> Thank you, Larry. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Scott.
>> Quick question uh before we move to vote. I think I mentioned at the last one that uh the status of the commercial shed was also needed to be considered by
us. Wasn't just the pavilion. >> Okay. Yep. Um, >> note that. So, the merch shack, I think it's called. >> Yep. >> And I apologize for not checking carefully in the meeting minutes to see
if that was worthwhile raising, but I think we can move on. >> Okay. Uh, roll call vote. Pete, >> yes, sir. >> Larry, >> yes. >> Scott, >> yes. >> Steve, >> yes.
and Ibo as well. So, we'll see them on the uh 21st and they will have their um they'll have gone through the ZBA meeting at that point as well. So, hopefully we can move along with them. Um next item on the agenda, old
business. We have uh potential zoning amendments for the annual town meeting 2026. Um, we have Martha Taylor, special projects planner with us. And welcome, Ma.
>> Thank you. Hi. It's that time of year again. Um, so I have an outline um that I thought I would go with you all go through with all of you rather than trying to go
through the entire 186 pages um to kind of summarize where where we are and what the proposed changes are. But Kristen, I don't know if you want to go do you want to go through the um schedule first? >> Um, sure. Yeah, let's do that.
Got to find it. Sorry. >> Yeah, sorry. I don't have it handy. >> I have it right here, but that doesn't do us any good. >> Um, can you all see that yet? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Um, I'll Should I walk through this, Martha, or did you want to? >> Um, no. If you can, that would be great because I know you've talked with Tracy about it. >> So, the annual town meeting has been set
by the select board for May 5th. Um, so this is a uh slightly modified version of this schedule leading up to town meeting that you've seen before. We've talked about a
little bit, but um essentially we look at all the regular meeting dates. We look at Mass General law to um make sure that some of the timing uh outlined by the regulations is
followed. And then there's this sort of fun little dance of the planning board referring zoning amendments to the select board who then review them and refer them back to the planning board for the planning board to be the host of
public hearings related to the amendments. So this is what is kind of laid out here. some of this is more relevant to staff and in terms of dates we need to make sure we get the legal notices out to the newspaper and that
kind of thing. Um but it does it does take us really get going with all this in January. So essentially, we have tonight and one more meeting to get proposed zoning amendments in pretty
good shape for what the planning board is comfortable with. Um sending them referring them to the select board. Um so we it would be good to do that on the 21st.
I'm over the next week going to really finalize some of these dates with Tracy. So right now we have this number one is probably the 21st at the next meeting but possibly the first meeting in February. Um
then uh the planning board with staff's assistance submits that language up to the select board. the select board reviews them at their public meeting um which the date for that would be the
10th. Um they meet on Tuesdays. Then they refer the amendments back to the planning board for the board to host the public hearing. Um and then four, five, six, seven, eight relate to the
legal notices about um the public hearings. Um and then we anticipate the public hearing opening in early March, uh March 4th, which would be the first
Wednesday in March. Um we could have you know more than one night if the public hearing were to be continued. It could be continued to the second meeting in March. Um then things
are sent back to the select board. So, planning board voting to recommend the final version of the zoning amendments for inclusion on the warrant and then the fincom and the select board review the articles as a part of um the
select and then the select board is the body that signs the town meeting warrant. um that is set for uh again this has some flexibility that the select board I think if things are
ready likes to get the warrant signed um you know as soon as they're ready uh which could potentially be the end of March could also be their meeting their first meeting in April and then the warrant gets posted and
town meeting is Tuesday March May 5th. So that's where we are. Um happy to answer any questions or just move forward into talking about what the proposals are. There are no questions. I would move
right along to proposals. I don't know who wants to go first, Martha or Kristen. >> Um, yeah, I guess I'll get into it. So, um,
as you all recall, last year, well, a few years ago, we started the recottification of the zoning with with town council. We incorporated some of that into the um bylaw amendments that we proposed last year and everything was
approved. Um we're continuing on phase two of that. Now we've had meetings, you know, Kristen and and Sadi and I have been meeting pretty regularly with town council going over certain things. Excuse me. And we've also had um a
couple of zoning workshop meetings with um Larry and Woody to kind of get into more detail on some of this stuff. So tonight, what I'd like to do is just provide kind of an overview in outline form of where we are and then a little
bit more detail for each of the um the zoning articles and and what's being changed in that. So I will see if I can share my screen here. So, are you all able to see that? >> Yep. >> Yep. >> Yep. Okay. Is it big enough or should I
make it a little bigger? >> If you could make it a little bit bigger, Martha, that would be wonderful. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> How's that look? Is that better or a little bit more? I can't see what you're seeing. So,
>> a little more would be great. >> Okay. >> Just the caps. Yeah. Thank you. >> Okay. You're welcome. All right. Um, so this is kind of a two-part document. The first is an overview and I've grouped it
um in a way that we're thinking about presenting for town meetings. So, I'll come back to that um after I've gone through all of this and I'll try not to make it too tedious. Um but the first um you know the first proposal really will be to finish up the the recottification
and as you recall that really has to do with resolving internal inconsist inconsistencies and getting rid of redundancies, making sure that the bylaw is consistent with local and state regulations and recent case law, updating references. um
reorganizing somewhat so that it's a little easier to navigate. Um adding some language that reflect current practices of some of the boards. Um we'll get into that in particular with the Plum Island Overlay District and some of the interpretations of the
bylaw. Um and that goes into how um our building commissioner is interpreting the bylaw as well as the ZBA in particular. and then updating clarifying some of the definitions, relocating them and adding some new definitions for clarity.
So that's you know that that's kind of pretty much not substantive. It's more technical. Um the second bucket is what we're calling substantive changes and new bylaws and some related reorganization.
Um the first one is a revision of certain district boundaries, three of them which I'll get into in a minute. Then the creation of a new clean energy facilities article and this is really in response to um clean energy regulations that the state has developed for kind of
a comprehensive permitting process as well as model bylaws that they've developed both for um solar and for battery energy storage. So, what we're proposing to do is to create a new clean energy facilities article that would
include our our existing large wind energy facilities, our small wind energy systems. Those are bu being pulled out of their current locations. um a revised ground mounted solar um bylaw which is being worked on
largely by town council to make sure that it's consistent with the state requirements and recent case law. And then a new battery energy storage systems bylaw also to be consistent with the state regulations and recent case law.
And finally the addition of a new inclusionary zoning bylaw. And then the last bucket is revisions to the table of use regulations including some changes to who the special permit granting authority is for certain uses.
Some revisions to the level of permitting required. So some going from special permit to permitted and vice versa. Um a few revisions to be consistent with bylaw amendments adopted in previous years that we didn't address last year. And then we need to add some
some lines in there for the um solar solar facilities and the battery energy storage facilities to um identify where they have to be where they are allowed by right because we have to have some area in town where they're allowed by
right and where they're allowed by special permit. So that's kind of the the overall picture of what we're looking at. Um, so to get into a little bit more detail, um, article one from the bylaw, general
provisions, there are no changes there. We updated that last year. Nothing else needs to be changed. Um, article two, the use districts. Um, as I mentioned, we're looking at changing the boundaries of three districts, and I can pull those up on
the screen if you'd like. Um, one is the is a portion of the commercial highway. So that's that's actually the parcel that's across from 12 Kentway um where the AL Prime um
uh gas station is right now. The front of that parcel is commercial highway. The back of it is residential agricultural. In general, best practice is to try to have district boundaries cterminous with parcel boundaries. So it would be to
clean clean that up and have it all be in the commercial highway district. The second one is the commercial highway A which is where Kent K 12 Kentway is located the town offices and that
description currently is a 500 foot wide strip going from Central Street down to the Parker River. The way it's drawn on the map doesn't actually reflect that. Um and it crosses parcel boundaries. So, um, we've chosen boundaries that we
think are appropriate to include in that. Uh, the third is the Parker River Marine District, um, which is on the south bank of the Parker River and straddles Route 1A. Um, currently it includes a number of parcels that were,
um, that no longer have any sort of marine related industrial uses. They're purely residential. and some parcels that because they're riverfront and marsh really could not realistically be
be used. So the suggestion is to to reduce that down to the b to the parcels that are specifically um marine related uses. And I don't know I could pull that up now or we can come back to it afterwards. Whatever you'd prefer,
whatever you think would be most useful. >> Um, the the visuals of the Parker River or the visuals of the all three might be helpful for the board. >> Okay. So, I'm going to stop sharing this
and I'll pull those up. see if I can do this. So, currently um I'll start with the commercial highway first. So, this is the current current configuration. This is the ale prime gas station right here. The commercial
highway line goes across it right there and then the back of it. So this front portion in pink is commercial highway and this back portion is residential. So the thought would be to
clean that up and to um to make the entire ale prime gas station parcel commercial highway and get rid of the portions that overlap into the adjacent parcels. So that's the first one.
Do you want to talk about that or should I go on? >> Just a quick question, Martha, and I didn't think about this when we talked last. Um, has town council seen this and and would this be considered spot zoning? >> Um,
we're going to be reviewing all of this with her tomorrow. Um, she's seen the proposal, you know, as it's written in the bylaw. I would say it's not spot zoning only because it's part of the larger commercial highway district. You know, it's no more spot zoning really
than it is right now. You know, it's not a not a standalone commercial highway with nothing else anywhere near it. >> Okay, fine. >> That Yeah, that's my opinion anyway. >> Is it
like what's the likelihood of You know, another I mean that what how much land is you 11054? >> Well, I don't remember offh hand, I'm afraid. How many acres it is?
>> Maybe two acres, two and a half. >> Um, do you guys know how many acres this is? Because I know there's been a a development proposal for that. >> Um, I'll I'll check. I think it's like
three maybe. >> So it looks like this would be slightly less like maybe two and a half. >> Yeah, I'm just >> 2.4. Yeah, I was so I was just thinking um the likelihood of
you know the existing um commercial building there, the gas station um you know from a tax um you know receipt perspective um you know what could the town count on
or what are the opportunities you know on the commercial side uh for the town to um you know collect more taxes on that parcel. me looking at it just this map I would
say the likelihood or the opportunity I mean it's not nil but it's probably unlikely but if you did make it um you know residential
then I'm not sure if you can even do that but >> then there'd be opportunity to um you know for U153 or U147. I think there we have something uh
before the board for U153 already, right? >> So I'm just looking at uh potential tax dollars of the future. I don't see much opportunity on the commercial side there, but just a thought,
just a um maybe a question to provoke some conversation. >> Yeah. No, that's a good question. I think we were thinking of expanding the commercial use because that, you know, that that currently takes up the majority of the parcel and is the whole
front of the parcel. So, it seemed to and it's unlikely that the the gas station's going to be going away anytime soon. >> So, you know, it seemed to make the most sense to just expand the commercial use to be, you know, the
entire parcel and to get rid of the little bits that are over here and over here. Just kind of clean that whole thing up. You know, if there were expanded commercial use on there, that would certainly be of, you know, benefit tax-wise. the tax rate is the same for
commercial and residential. So there's no difference there. Um we don't have a split tax rate, but you know, additional commercial usage on that that site could generate taxes as you know.
>> Yeah. And I guess that's my point. I ju I just I just can't see it's been like that for a very very long time, you know, but never say never. um you know, if it if it did lean
towards a residential, you know, if you kind of squared that um you know, piece off and you took the whatever shape you want to call it uh in the back and you combined it uh or just you had you would have to call it, you
know, its own. Then that would give somebody um whether it's the the one pursuing U 11053 an opportunity to um possibly you know purchase
um that piece from you know the u the energy company and maybe get um another two family back there which would um again um in my opinion just bring in some some more
revenue to the town just but I'm just thinking out loud. >> Right. Let me I'm going to take this back down and pull up the other one. Um so is is your thought that it might be better just to leave it as it is for right now?
>> I think so. >> Yeah. because you you've you've got um right now at least a buffer between the uh lots uh what is it of 48 and 49 and
Johnson Road. They don't show up on the screen, >> right? Yeah, it cuts off. >> I mean, you you you could square off um uh the uh westerly boundary. I think it's westerly >> over here.
>> Yeah. And what it looks like um what's in on lot 47 >> 047 >> I believe that it is a single family house and it's access there's a a driveway that comes in from up here
that's not showing >> because you you're by extending the commercial district down you're potentially removing a buffer from um from those residential uses. Right. And we have talked about that. I
mean, I can see that that that might be of concern to, you know, to those res residential um uh the residents in that in that area. So, it's, you know, it's kind of a tossup. I think you've got it it it helps clarify interpretation if the
entire parcel is one zoning district. But, you know, I can certainly see that with this one in particular, there's some some potential pros and cons. So, and and nobody needs to make a decision right now. Um, or if the
feeling, you know, if there's a consensus, then we can just not move forward with this at this time. or we can, you know, come back to it because there will be at least one more meeting to talk about all of this stuff before it needs to be referred to the
select board. >> Yeah, I think this one we might want to come back to. >> Okay. I I'm just unless you know I'm open to hear what anybody else might really have to say.
>> It It's something >> Oh, go ahead, Claire. >> I was going to say I'm inclined to agree with Scott. >> That makes one one person today, Larry, that would agree with me. >> All right. And I agree with you too. >> So is the agreement to come? I I kind of
heard two things. One is to come back to it and the other is just to kind of table this one for right now. >> I guess we could table it for right now with the potential of coming back to it um you know with a different um I guess
solution or different cleansing. I do think um you know I don't see why you couldn't clean up um
U 11053 that lot line right I mean that makes sense to me right >> yeah this one here and probably this one here as well >> yeah I mean that's that's kind of that's that's just no-brainer
Um but the you know the area in the back again for me um you know revenue was good for the town. Um,
and you know, we did I and I we did we did a sitewalk back there, Martha. So, we we're we're familiar with what's back there >> and um you know, I think we did um mention or I
may have mentioned to the applicant, you know, have you spoken to um what was the who owns the gas station again? Is it Prime? They don't own it. They're renting it. Um I don't remember who the owner is.
>> Yeah. Uh so I just mentioned and and the applicant said, "Have you ever dealt with like gas stations before?" Like uh a few. But um it is it is an uphill uh climb. But again, um, you know, there
could be an opportunity for the town, could be some more housing. Um, anyway, a table and some cleanup. Um, I think would be would be good.
>> Okay. No, I think those are all good observations. So, um, yeah, I think everybody sleep on this one and we'll come back to it. If we do, if we do clean it up, it'll be a little unusual in the sense that most of the changes that we've made have been to to be
complete parcels, but, you know, I think there's there there's certainly a reasonable argument to keep that residential. And I haven't been back there, so I actually don't know what the development part potential is of this back. I know it kind of goes uphill. I don't know if there's any ledge in there
or anything like that. >> It's it's it's um it's really it's a cleared area. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> It may have been um you know hay uh in the past what he might know. >> Well, I recall and I don't know how many
years ago it was, but I do recall they scrubbed that out pretty good and opened it up maybe 10 years ago. I don't know. Yeah, I think that might have been with the intent of doing some development that back there that never went forward.
>> Yeah, maybe a rumor of a McDonald's or something, but that's that was a while ago, >> right? So, okay. Well, we'll come we'll come back to this one. Um, >> y
>> let's see if I can get the other um so this is uh Oops. So this if you can see it is a current the current boundaries of commercial highway A. So it doesn't um
Oh, actually I'm sorry. It's I'm I'm wrong. That's the proposal. I seem to have >> Martha. I have my map up. Do you want me to just share it? >> Yeah, if you could do that. I thought I had the other ones. Oh, here it is. Never mind. I've got it.
>> Okay. I think. Hold on a sec. Sorry. Yeah, maybe if you can do it. I've sort of gotten myself messed up here a little bit. >> All right. See it? >> Yep.
>> Here I am sitting right here. Let me take that off. So, commercial highway A is this darker red.
Um, and I think you know Martha, you can describe it, but there's the blue lines are the parcel boundaries and the red line is the district. It's just there's like a
weird thing going on right here. Um, and then up here there's a weird thing and then it cuts across this parcel 19A and it cuts across this lot here
at the corner of Kent Way and Central Street. So that's what we currently have for commercial highway A. Right. So the thought is um if you can take that down then I'll put up the
proposal. So, here's the proposed um reconfiguration. So, it would be basically to include all of this uh U1406 up here because right now it cuts through this way. These parcels are already in it. This is in it. This is
all of Kent Way, 12 Kent Way. It would clean up that funny little bit down there. It would include all of this parcel, but take out the portion of the commercial highway A that's in the town-owned parcel right here.
So again, trying to to follow the parcel boundaries. So any any thoughts on that one? I have none. >> No, it's good to me, Martha. >> Okay. >> Easy to understand. Martha.
>> Yeah. I mean, it it seems seems to to make sense. And this one, even though it's residential right now, you know, could have some good potential for for comm commercial use at some point. This is the dentist's office. This used to be her house. Um, but it is still
residential use. Um, so anyway, this seems to be a kind of sensible way to clean that one up. And then the final one is um, >> you want me to go over on my map and you
do the other one? >> Yes. If you can do that, that would be helpful. Thank you. Yeah, >> but have I had everything all lined up just right, but clearly not. >> We've got a lot of lot of stuff.
>> At this point, you might be seeing some of this in your sleep little bit sometimes. >> All right. Now we're across town by the Parker River and Route 1A. Um,
and I'll let you take it away, Martha. >> Okay. Yeah, actually, yeah, if you can zoom in like that, that would be good. So, um, so right now, as you can see, the district straddles Route 1A. Um, on the east side, you have what used to be
Fernald's, which then was Newberry Kayak and Canoe, and I'm not sure what it's called right now. And then you've got per l's um and then the red that comes down I can't I guess I can't point to it with my my
pointer but the the blue portion that comes down into um 82 and 82A that all of that used to be Arthur Blood's property and was also zoned for marine related industrial use at some point.
But if you guys remember a few years ago um those um a series of ANR lots were created there. So those two are purely residential now and unlikely that any um
marine related use would happen there commercially. And then on the other side on the west side of 1A you've got uh riverfront marine. You can see all the boats there in the aerial view
and then it goes into um really mostly marsh area which you can see very clearly on the aerial view. Um so the potential for any any any development back there is is very limited. So the thought again would be to clean
this up to follow property boundaries. And I can pull that one up if you want me to. So it would be these three. So per lols, what used to be Fernalts and Riverfront Marine and taking out all the portion that goes over here and the portion that
comes down into into this lot. >> Do you have a um do you have a satellite shot of that? >> I think Kristen had the aerial, so we could pull that back up if that's helpful. >> Is that what you think, Scott?
>> Yes, that's fine. Okay, I'll I'll take this down. >> You see that? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. You can see these, >> you know, these are the part >> the parcel boundaries here. >> That's parcel.
>> Yeah. But so my I guess my question would be like on RO5047 does riverfront have um you know does it marine or extend like
docks? It does. It looks like >> it does. Yeah. >> So how does that um I mean that's an Army Corps of Engineer thing, right? with the with the docks in the river um
along the like the frontage of whomever does riverfront own that frontage. >> I don't believe they do. >> No, they but they access it from their own lot. And actually last night we just
had on the other side of the bridge we had a presentation for Bernolds or Kayak, whatever you want to call it. I think it's called real something now. We're resurfacing the lot and docks on that side of the bridge and it'll have
to go through the permanent process of uh a couple entities. But >> so if you if you do this change, does that now restrict riverfront from
um from their use as it exists today? I don't I well someone speak up if I'm wrong but I don't believe so because they are in the waterway you know they don't own you don't own land underwater I mean in some cases you do I guess on
island from erosion but um in this particular case I don't believe so >> okay >> and it's interesting >> yeah I'm not I'm Can you ask your question again, Scott? Are you talking about whether this
parcel could have docks coming off of it? >> Not whether they have docks like how it exists today. So they have um you know they have um I would say moing foundations that are in the water that
are holding those docks in place. those docks um you know go down um you know west um you know um alongside of the riverbank.
So I guess my question would be if I owned RO547 and if it wasn't marsh if it was developable developable um would the marina
um you know would they be allowed to you know run docks in front of um you know my land if I had a home there like I don't think so. Not that I'm saying
I'm only saying that whatever we do, we don't want to restrict an existing condition. Um, so I think it would be a town council just question. >> Yeah, that's actually what I was going to say. It's one that we could run by
her tomorrow. Um, you know, I could take a guess and say that, you know, worst case it would be a grandfathered condition because it's the use that they've been allowed to do. Um, >> yeah. And that would that would provote that would be my next question. If it
was grandfathered and if we did this, then there would be um it would uh restrict any opportunity to expand right in the future. So, say if Riverfront Marine wanted to
expand. >> Yeah. And I only know this because like there's like a 50-year waiting list for a slip in, >> you know. So, um, you know, if, uh, if they wanted to expand, um, you know, to
service the community, um, not me, um, but, uh, the community, they they they wouldn't be able to do any more expansion if there was a grandfather situation. Um, if we cleaned this up and, um, just created a property line,
um, you know, commercial zone. Right. >> Right. So, are you thinking um expansion of their dock usage or expansion of their land usage? >> It would be dock usage. Um you know, they certainly would wouldn't have any
really opportunity to expand beyond where they're at now. They they may even be encroaching um you know, a little bit, but whatever. Um I mean, that is Marsh, but you know, what happens on the river, it's um it's different than what happens really on
the land. And I'm just saying, you know, if the frontage if we eliminate um you know, that zone of um you know, frontage opportunity for a uh for a business um you know, it more than
likely would be grandfathered in, but it would restrict expansion in the future. And just a question for town council. >> Yeah, we'll put that on the I mean, it's a very interesting question. We'll put that on the list. Um, >> and I'm sorry with all these questions.
I had like three cup three cups of coffee this afternoon, so I'm a little wound up. >> I promise I won't No more coffee. >> No, it's good. Good. You know, and I I think it's good to get any questions out on the table now, too, because we need
to anticipate questions that might be coming up from the public when we have the public hearing or a town meeting. So, I think it's I think it's great. Martha, I get that the um docks are there right now, but is it should we also ask town council if they've been
properly permitted to begin with? And you know, just just because it's there doesn't mean it's proper, shall we say. >> Um yeah, I'm not sure that town council would be able to answer that question. Um our conservation agent might be able
to. >> Right. Well, seems like it's worthwhile checking. U otherwise uh if that situation is okay and let's say they wanted to expand
further up river, how would that occur? But that would also tell us how the present situation was permitted to begin with. I'm not I'm not saying that's a a bad situation, but rather, you know,
>> do they already have the proper permits to do it? >> Right. Right. I mean, I would think it would be, you know, chapter 91 and all kinds of stuff potentially, but I'm not sure. Um, so if
um if we get input from town council that indicates that there's no there's no issue with potential further expansion or continued use of those docks, does this seem like a reasonable
change to make to clean this up? >> For me, it does. >> Yeah. >> Okay. But again, I'm just thinking about I keep referring to, you know, revenue for the town. So, more more more docks, more
excise tax. Um, you know, there could be other taxes that the riverfront pays, you know, for their um, you know, dock space. So, that's that's that's just really where I'm going. But if you can
if you can keep that opportunity alive um you know for future tax revenue um and still do um what you think is is the right uh uh you know proposed uh
cleaning um of course why not. >> Okay. Well, we will run that by town council tomorrow and report back on that one. Okay. Well, thank you. That was great great input. >> Yep. And those are the three those we did all three.
>> Yep. Those were the three proposed changes there. Now there are some other ones um some descriptions that we are changing um uh because they need to be updated or there are some mistakes um things like
that but they don't involve any actual changes to the boundaries. Um we also need to update some map names and references. Um, in article 2, use districts, we need to add some references to the multif family overlay districts
and there's some language regarding interpretation of district boundaries that town council has recommended. And we're still we're actually going to be meeting with um, uh, our building commissioner, Peter Bernett, tomorrow regarding that to try to get a final
final version. Um there's some language that's been suggested which is you know consistent with some other towns but not necessarily consistent with current interpretation. So we're going to get that sorted out. Um any any questions about all of that?
And if you want to if we want me to pull up the the current draft I'm happy to do that as well. Otherwise I will keep going. I'm good. >> Okay. Um the next article is regulations of use districts and most of these are
relatively minor changes or clarifications um of some of the language regarding restrictions and table of use regulations. Um that section was kind of a holdover from our previous zoning. We updated the
whole thing in 20 2010 2011. Um, and there had been language in there. We didn't really have any good special permit provisions. So, there was language in there regarding the select board being the special permit granting authority for specifically recreational
facilities in certain certain districts. And that's really covered now in the article 5 special permits language that we adopted last year and in the table of use regulations. So the proposal is just to strike all of that because it just
it's it doesn't make sense and it's redundant at this point and could be in conflict. Uh in article four um water supply protection uh we need to um add some language regarding the multif family overlay
district in that um the the MICMOD language itself kind of excludes projects that are in the water supply protection overlay district but this is kind of the the flip side of that to make sure that it comes up there as well. Um, we need to update some section
references and also um, CMR and Mass General Law references and there's some outdated language regarding special permit procedures in in that which we need to make consistent with our updated special permit
language. Um, I'll bring up there is a question um here. The select board currently is the special permit granting authority for projects in the water supply protection district um for projects that require a special
permit and the criteria for that are laid out in the bylaw. Um and we've had some discussions on that. But I think we've come down to feeling that because it concerns water supply for the town, it makes sense for this
select board to remain the special permit granting authority. For that, we're suggesting that that they not be for some other uses. But I don't know if anybody has any thoughts about that right now or we can get into that when we
um get into the table of use regulations. But I think at this point the re the recommendation would be to keep them as the special permit granting authority for those projects. >> That makes sense to me.
>> Okay. Um wireless communications that was updated a few years ago. No changes to that. uh the Plum Island Overlay District. Um we need to add some language regarding accessory dwelling units in that section.
And then the next two points really are there there's sort of a a discrepancy between the way the ZBA has been handling um applications for non-conforming uses and structures and the language in the bylaw
is they're making findings but in fact they're issuing special permits. Um and that's that's been their process for quite a long time. Um, so we've gone through and changed finding to special permit um in in both of these two
sections. Um, and I'm happy to review that with you guys. Um, or you could take a look at it um on your own, whichever you'd prefer. >> I mean, that to me it seems appropriate.
>> Okay. Okay. and it's it's consistent with the language um in Newbury Port's POD as well. So I think it just it it it essentially just reflects what the current process is.
>> Martha, could you um refresh me on the difference between a finding versus a um special permit? I seem to recall there's some um land that they're not the same thing and one
is more difficult than the other, >> right? The special permit is more is um stringent may not be quite the right word, but you know there's a clear process for the special permit including public hearing and all of that stuff,
>> which is is the way that they've been doing that. And for any, you know, any special permit that they grant, they have to find that the proposed project is not going to be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood or to the PIOD. You know, that's kind of the
the language. So, does that answer your question? >> Well, I I I think on a special permit, there's clear process, >> right? >> Um and a clear path. Um and finding is a bit loose.
So, um, that's how I've always looked at it, Steve. >> So, the town would have more protection, um, you know, to stand behind the process, um, than it would with the finding.
>> Okay. So, I'm just trying to refresh my memory. Uh, I've seen a lot of special permits going through where um no more detrimental to the island or the neighborhood than what's already there.
And that gets to be somewhat contentious. Whereas I thought that something about findings involved saying well and in fact it didn't matter if you had bedrock you know coming up 15 ft all around the property. That's sort of like it was
like tough luck that you you got to live with what the land is or something like that. In that sense I thought a finding was more difficult than a special permit but I'm getting way out of my uh knowledge base. Yeah, you may actually been think be thinking
about a variance >> could be, >> you know, which is definitely, you know, making making a case for variance is much more difficult. >> Okay. You know, I think that's what I was thinking of, Martha. So, I withdraw my previous comments.
>> Okay. No, it's good to ask the question. Thank you. >> Um, uh, there's a provision in there regarding grandfathering. I've just changed that heading to preserved lots. Um, and then there's some language in there regarding use variances, which we
don't actually allow use variances, so that language has been struck out. Um, flood hazards, um, no changes. That was updated last year. uh adult entertainment. We've just we've pulled the definitions from
article 11 uh administration and place them in in this section which is consistent with what we've done with others. Um this is another one wanted to get some input from you um in the multif family overlay district.
I think there were some questions that came up during 34 central regarding location of the septic system. There's some language in in there about certain things that are allowed within the open space. The septic systems were not one of them. So,
this would be to clarify that that they are allowed in the open space. And there is a provision in there about open space that's intended for public use. Um, and this would just be to clarify that that if to encourage
applicants to provide publicly accessible open space if it's appropriate. So I highlighted that as something that might be for discussion. Well, I I think in in the OSRDS we've we've allowed the septic systems from
the open space in the past, haven't we? >> We have. Yeah. The the OS OSRD specifically allows spec um septic systems and underground storm water management systems, not detention basins
and retention basins in the open space. The um MCMOD actually allows low impact development storm water management systems in the open space which to me would be storm water um retention basins
and detention basins. So it's not exactly one one but but we do allow septic systems in the open space in the OSRD. >> And the proposal here is to allow them in in the open space within the MCM mod. Correct.
>> Right. Right. Right. >> So Martha, I understand. >> I'm sorry. Sorry. >> No, go ahead, Pete. >> No, no, I'll let you finish. No, I was I was just going to say the point being just to clarify.
>> Right. Right. >> Because I think didn't didn't the septic system in um 34 central isn't that in the open space >> portion of it? Yes. >> Yeah. There's also the question or
a question just that came up today was whether um open space versus the buffer zones that are required in the MCMOD. Um just clarifying
for the buffer areas as well what can be included. Actually, that's a that's a great point, Kristen, because you know, I think when we did this originally, we were thinking buffer that nothing would happen in the buffer. At least that was, you know, my
perception when we talked about a buffer. And of course, we found that that wasn't the case. The buffer was utilized as part of the infrastructure development. So, I don't know if we want to have that conversation now, if that's if that's appropriate, Martha. I don't know.
>> Yeah. Yeah, I mean I think it's sort of putting it out on the table to see basically if you all want to have a conversation about that and try to resolve that at this point, make some modifications or table that for another time.
That's not what I was going to bring up on on point two. I I understand what we're trying to achieve here. Um we can encourage an an you know the applicant to provide uh open space but you know there's no teeth to that. Right. >> Right. It's certainly not a not a
requirement. >> Right. Right. So if we get push back from an applicant we can't be offended because we haven't given anything more than recommendations. >> Right. And and that's the way a lot of
the the the guidelines um are set up really that they're they're recommendations. They're not hard and fast requirements, >> right? >> Um because it was felt at the time that we couldn't, you know, we couldn't really make hard and fast requirements.
>> Appreciate that. So, back to the the the item that I really didn't come into mind until we had our conversation. Do we want to do we want to do anything about buffers in saying that buffers should in fact be a buffer and not part of the infrastructure so we don't get stumbled into what we fell into this last this
last go around >> or is the buffer not part of the open space >> right that's um I think on 34 central there's a lot of buffer there >> yeah you know I think at least my my
interpretation when we were talk we're talking about buffers and we were talking about we wanted to have a buffer on this side and on this side you know from the butters on this side and from the from the roadway. It was to actually create something that would be um
undisturbed or that would not be developed or you know would would actually be you know something that would be a cushion between what was to be developed and what was uh adjacent or contiguous. Um and you know in this in 34 that you
know that wasn't the case. I mean infrastructure was brought up through the buffer uh right to the property line. Um and then we're left with you know having you know having the applicant put trees to create a buffer. So
my interpretation way back when we were putting this thing together was buffer and maybe it was just my my invite that it would be a buffer buffer. >> I agree with you there Pete. I that's how I felt back then too. >> Yeah, I think that's kind of what we
were all thinking. Um I think the you know the issue may be if you've got a site that has limited perks or perks in only one location then how do you deal with that? So I guess then is there a way to create
some modification to the language so that we indicate that the intention is that a buffer should be maintained unless uh it is not uh possible to do the
project without that and then it's at the discretion of the board to say yes go forward with that because because if we if it's granted by right and we don't have some sort of way to enforce that then we're just going to
what's what has happened in the past will happen again. >> Yeah. So what if it were some language that basically says you know the buffer should should remain undisturbed um but the planning board can grant a waiver if you know whatever the circumstances are
something along those lines. I think that's a that's a great thing. That's a great needle to thread there, Martha. >> Okay. >> I think what the bylaw actually says is that it's a setback. Our our what we're calling buffer is in
the dimensional standards table. It's the setbacks are 60 ft in the you know the the project we just permitted. There was a 60ft setback. So I do think um we
just need to take a look at that and you know Martha and I can dive into this and you know come back at the next meeting to make sure this is part of I think what needs to just be looked at very clearly and that we have a good you know
having just gone through that permitting we know where the slight lack of clarity you know has been. So I I think a setback is not a don't do anything.
I guess the way I thought of a setback was no buildings. There's not going to be a home any closer than 60 ft to the abuing property line. And that that is true with the project that was permitted. but allowing other things in
that 60 ft buffer or setback zone like septic like a road like you know a trail you know allowing anything needs to be clarified what can and can't be
>> so the language doesn't say buffer it says setback it doesn't mention buffer at all >> um I don't see the word buffer but I'm Okay. >> Well, if you know if if you were, you know, buying a lot, building a house, um
you know, and you were looking at at the zoning, you'd be looking at, you know, front, rear, side setbacks, right? >> So, um you know, what can you put? You certainly can't put your structure within the setback. Uh but you can put a
well right within the setback. you can which is you know I guess you could um you know call that infrastructure. Um so I think at the end of the day we want to protect um the town and the
abutters. Um but we want housing. Um, so I think Kristen, um, well, just one last note, you know, if I was a little restricted, you know,
with the house that I wanted to build uh on the lot that I was buying and instead of 20 foot, I could do 18. >> What would be my >> It was supposed to It was supposed to be >> my opportunity to remedy that. That
would be to go before zoning for a variance, right? In that case, >> right? So, you would have to prove hardship in order to get the variance, >> right? And that's very very difficult to do. So, we don't want to
um you know, we I think we do want to encourage housing. um and they're you know it's it's what's available out there in land. It's um
difficult parcels. So I think again again Kristen, I think you're on to something with respect to um you know the planning board's um um ability to grant a waiver um you know within um you know what the
applicant um is considering um doing in the setback. town council would have to um you know write that out. But I think that that would be the concept.
>> Yeah. So why don't we take a look at that and come back with some proposed language to sort of help clarify what the expectation is and when what you know what the waiver criteria would be if
you know if if the site requires it. >> Sounds good math. >> Okay. >> Awesome. >> All right. Um moving on. Next one is article five special permits um bed and
breakfast. Um suggestion would be to change the special permit granting authority from the select board to the ZBA. Um and then there are some minor revisions to um to update references to other
departments sort of out of out of date and things that it's referring to. So any any discussion on that one? >> Makes sense. >> Okay. >> Um
OSRD I think the only change is updating department of housing community development to housing and livable communities to make it consistent with their current name. Um there was some discussion of um regarding um the allowed length of the
common driveway. Um there was a suggestion to say that it the house would need to be sprinklered, houses would need to be sprinklered if it's if it's beyond a certain length. Um I don't know if we've gotten any feedback from the fire department on that yet.
So that one is still kind of pending. Um, we're proposing to add some language referring to the general uh special permit criteria above because we don't really have anything related to that right now. There's specific findings for the common
driveway and then consistent with that revising the language regarding the permitting process. uh large wind energy that's going to get pulled out and moved to the new clean energy article and we'd add the definitions that are currently in
article 11 administration similar to what we've done to other um you know some of the other bylaws uh ground mounted solar PV similar uh delete it here and move it to the new article clean 11 clean energy
um and that's being revised um by town council to be consistent with case law and state law and regulations. Marijuana establishments and medical marijuana, no changes. Uh dimensional regulations, there are few clarifications and minor revisions,
nothing substantive. Parking, similar, minor revisions, some addition regarding language. Um we had hoped originally to do a deep dive into parking and review it against current best practices. And um I think that the
feeling has been that we should wait for another time for that one. There's enough here to deal with. Um same with signage. There's some minor revisions and clarifications and some language, added language regarding lighting of signs.
Um but no major changes to any of the sign regulations in any of the districts. in article nine which is our site plan review we need to add some language um to be consistent with final ver revision of the solar bylaw
um and similarly to be consistent with the revised marijuana bylaw and we have to add the multif family overlay district uh there are provisions in there regarding enforcement and penalty um they're covered elsewhere now so those can be taken out
uh town council has provided some suggested language regarding non-conforming uses and structures. Um there's a section on small wind energy in article 10 which would be moved to the new clean energy article. rest gets renumbered
and then clean energy has as I just said the large wind small wind solar and the new battery energy storage systems and then the subsequent articles get get renumbered.
Um there are some proposed t changes to the table of use regulations. Um, I've already mentioned a couple of the ones regarding special permit granting authority. Um, a few changes to what's permitted,
special permit not permitted. Um, some of which to are made to coordinate with things that were passed last year. Um, we need to make sure that we coordinate the use designations and definitions and we have to add some lines for the
solar and battery energy storage. Marthur, a quick question. Uh, when I was looking at the table of use regulations, I noticed how there were certain geographic areas broken out like in Bfield. That's the one that comes to mind. Um,
and I was wondering whether Plum Island needs a separate breakout to clarify what can and cannot pass muster as a table of use regulation. I know that at least I think that Plum Island is all residential agricultural, which means you can have chicken coops out here,
which which I find to be charming when the sun comes up. But is it worthwhile considering whether Plum Island should be broken out as a geographic area in terms of table of use regulations? >> Um, that's a good question. I think
there is a um, and that kind of applies to some of the other overlay districts. There's a note, a footnote, um, which specifically references the overlay district regulations for the allowed uses. So that would
apply to Plum Island as well as a multif family overlay and and some of the other ones. >> So I'm not >> Yeah, I agree that it sounds like it's in there. Um I guess I'm thinking
would uh something written in large friendly letters be useful for others to be aware of? >> Right. No, I know. And I I had originally thought that perhaps we could add add columns for each of the overlay districts, but I looked at some zoning
tables in other communities that had done that and they were very confusing and cumbersome. Um, so I don't think that's a good way to go, but maybe there is some way to really call out in a better way. Um, you know, make sure that people really are
paying attention to those overlay districts, including Plum Island. Yeah, I think that might be useful down the road uh for our heirs and successors.
I think that's um uh maybe you mentioned by field being in a column, Steve, and I I think everything that's listed in those columns are actual zoning districts, but as Martha's
saying, like then they're the overlay districts. So, they're it's kind of like a separate kind of zoning. Um I I I take I think your point is a good one about there being um and as
Martha just said, like we can think about a way to clarify, but we also need to keep like with like, you know, keep the zoning districts that are technical zoning districts in one sort of place and then the overlay districts kind of in another place. But
>> yeah, that that makes some sense. And u again there could be an asterk in there somewhere or scroll down and see an boldface i.e. the large and friendly letters. >> Yeah. >> Something to alert the public and us. Thank you.
>> Right. Right. No, I think it's a good point because we don't want these things to get lost. >> Yes. Well, um the last piece is is um the draft inclusionary zoning bylaw. So, I don't know if Kristen, you want to
get into that or >> Well, I just Yeah, I mean, I I wanted to talk about it a little bit and I I just I'm also cognizant of the time and we how we have um some other folks waiting
on the agenda. Um, I don't know. Woody, how do you feel? Do you want me to dive into inclusionary or I could just hold it a little bit and then include it as part of my planners report at the end? >> Um, with that being the last thing that
we have to do, we should uh probably move along to the new business, which would be the uh little green local historic district committee. and um we can get back to the
inclusion area at the end. >> Okay. >> All right. That would be great cuz I know that those folks are we and Martha. Thank you. >> Oh, you're welcome. >> Martha, do you can you hang on to join
that inclusionary? Does that work? I don't want to. >> Yes. No, I can't. and I was planning on staying so I'd like to hear about the local, you know, the lower green. >> Great. >> Okay, great. So, um >> we we have um and under new business we
I want to welcome Robin Ethridge um chair of the local green uh lower green local historic district study committee. Are you with us Robin? >> Go ahead, Robin. >> Hello. Can you hear me? All right.
>> Yes, we can. >> Okay. Right. Thank you very much. I'm here Robin Ethridge, chairman of the uh local historic district project and I'm here with Vice Chair Joy um >> Joy Misho and uh we just wanted to give
you an update of where we are um and how the project's going. Uh there's um uh and hopefully uh members of the committee have had the report um uh of uh what we've submitted to the
Massachusetts Historic Commission and we have had back from them a very encouraging letter uh um giving us the green light to go ahead with it. So, what I wanted to do just
this evening is to uh give you the timeline of where we are and um so you're uh put into position and also to solicit any comments you have on the report. I mean, you're not required to
sort of vote on it or accept it. that's that goes towards the town. But if I can just run through the timeline of where we are and um we'll come on to um where your values going to be. Okay. So, and I
did send in earlier on a timeline of um um where we are in the project. So, I don't know whether you got that. >> Go. That would be great. And go right ahead. The flow's >> okay. Right. So what you're seeing here
uh is the flowchart that the Massachusetts Historic Commission set to anyone involved in this project. Um we are currently on the lowest box uh the blue one SP
SHPO which is a state historic preservation uh officer who has provided endorsement. I have sent that through to you. You can see that in due course. So all the processes before have been done and they
form the report now uh which is the submit study to SHPO and planning board. Uh well just in the for the sake of good um keeping everyone informed we've also submitted it to the select board their
their involvements um so that they're appraised of it. So um and we we will you know as you've uh can read through it in your own time uh come up with any questions. There is a
sort of um timeline on this because we then have to go to a public hearing which is um to put towards the um uh good folk of uh um Newbury. After the public hearing, we then uh
issue a warrant that goes to the town meeting town meeting vote on it. And for this um to be approved, the uh rules say it has to have a 2/3 majority from the town to approve uh this area
being granted historic district status. And then you can see the rest of it. um it goes towards the attorney general to sign off and then uh when it's created and this is the important thing is after
assuming and we all hope it goes through after it's created there then has to be set up a historic um I think it's called the historic commission uh historic district commission
um uh which the select board approves. Now the um historic district commission has to have this is the uh the important thing it has to have um between five and seven members.
One member has to be a resident of the lower green and the remaining members have to have uh generally an interest in historic preservation or architectural history or
urban planning or architectural history or and it lists in the report that you have American studies and cultural anthropology. And my guess is that when you get to
that stage, the select board who are charged with appointing this committee will probably approach or discuss with your committee um to see that there if there's anyone who
wants to be represented on this committee because uh you guys have clearly the um professionals in the whole planning process should it be required. So that's where I think your
interests lie. Meanwhile, so this gives you the timeline. So we're aiming for the town vote which is in the first week in May I think. I mean I may be wrong but >> May 5th >> May 5th I think. Yeah. So uh so there are in order to get warrants through and
all the rest of it um uh time frames which we're adhering to. So the the point of this is to bring you up to date with this timeline uh see that you got the report and um if you've got any questions or any feedback
or anything um is gratefully received. >> May I break in just a moment? >> Sure. Yeah. >> Um hi, I'm I'm Joy Misho, vice chair. Um up until this point where we are at the bottom in the blue box, this has taken us three years. um three years to get to
this point. And not only was Mass Historic uh encouraging, they um they loved our report and accepted it in the first draft. So, we didn't have to change anything for them. So, we're very
much encouraged. We also have um trustees of reservations, green belt, sons and daughters of the first settlers. we have um a lot of people on our side. So, we're very very encouraged and would love your feedback. Also, this
project um the turning the lower green into um a local historic district will cost the town nothing. It will cost nothing to the town. And um we we just want to make that clear because always,
you know, there there's a price tag to everything. So, we appreciate your time. Thank you. >> Thank you, Joy. Yep. So, uh that's really the the report sort of details um uh what we've been doing. It discusses
the area and the map uh which you have of the proposed um district. Um the fact that we've uh um solicited responses from all the residents there and gone through it in quite a lot of detail. So,
um it's I think pretty comprehensive. Um this all the and in the back it goes through uh Massachusetts rule 40C I think which is which is the governing uh
general laws on establishing it and uh what what the people need to know who will be sitting on the committee. So really it was just an update and seeing whether uh you have any comments. Um I'm not expecting any today but over the
course of the next couple of weeks or so if there's any feedback would be gratefully received >> and we would need this um fairly soon. Yeah, we are under a timeline to get a public hearing 60 days before the town
meeting which is the 5th of May. So, you know, we we would we would ask perhaps within the next month or, you know, the next meeting time perhaps if you have any questions or comments or um praise.
We always love that, of course. So, we thank you very much. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you for your for that. And if there's any questions or comments, please any anyone speak up. >> Woody, I would love to. Guys, I got to
tell you, I read this entire thing and I was really, really impressed. I was impressed by the detail. I was impressed by by the digging down and really bringing the importance of what this district means to our community. And and I never knew that George Washington crossed that bridge.
>> No, I did not. >> Well, can I have crossed that one, but >> well, a modified bridge. But but but but the the the point that I want to make is this is very important. I mean, you know, uh for everyone in this community
re to realize the significance of what our town represents and I want to thank you for that. Uh uh and I and I think this is very noteworthy. I'm very glad that the community is going in this direction. So those are my comments. Thanks, Woody. >> Thank you so much. >> Uh thank you very much. and uh and
indeed um exactly as you said we learned an awful lot uh as we went along as well in a similar vein. So it was a >> it's a lot of work. It's a labor of love for the town >> and also the importance of which came
out with a letter very nice letter sent which I'm happy to circle around by the trustees who were very endorsed it but also um added that the fact is we're not creating a bubble which freezes in time.
It's it's an area which is is is still going to evolve. I mean it's still a a public piece of land which is used by people. We see people on it practicing um soccer, football, whatever it is, lacrosse all the time. It is a common
land and uh the idea that it could be developed over time or in the next hundred years maybe is um quite frightening. So it it sort of preserves as an active place and protects as an active place to continue whatever sports
are played in a 100 years time or whatever it is that people can still um congregate together on a public land as they did way back in the day. So uh and they they actually were fairly um
complimentary that we' we'd done it in a way that allows evolvement as well. And that's again throws it over to a um a proper planning committee that allow this to happen within in the rules as
well whatever that's set out. So yeah, thank you very much. >> Yes. And thank you. It's uh I think it's a great thing and you guys have put a lot of hard work into this as you said. >> It's been three years to get to where we are today. So,
>> okay. Well, as I said, you know, we're uh welcome any any feedback. >> Yep. Anyone else have any comments or questions? I'd just like to say we're the historical commission is 100% behind
them and um we agree with the severe importance it is to keep the lower green in the areas around it the way it is um instead of having things get destroyed like they have in the past.
>> So we're there. We're right behind you and we appreciate how much work it was too. >> Thank you, Jan. Yeah. >> Yes. Thank you, Jasmine. >> Um, Robin, is the is your study report
>> on the town website yet? Is this is this like open for public review or can I help with that if if it's not yet? >> If it isn't, um, I will let you know tomorrow. I >> I thought it was
>> I thought it was, but uh we'll do um it is because we had to do a a slight update. We we um got a a couple of lines wrong. No, it doesn't really affect the whole district. It just a correction needed to be made and I think that was
updated yes a couple of days ago. So yeah, I'll I'll check and get back to you. >> May I may I also add a point? Um we are not anti-development. We are not anti- people living in homes, building new homes. We're not anti- this, but this
area is so special to the town and it's so right now it's unprotected. We would just like to, you know, protect it for future generations. We are not anti- anti-development at all. And I I really
want to make that clear. >> That was the the gist. And indeed that's what the residents effectively all agreed anyway. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Very good. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you and have a great
night and good luck with everything. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I hope you get some positive very positive things back. So, >> thank you. >> Yep. All right. >> Okay. to >> now back to do we go back to
inclusionary zoning. >> Would that be >> Scott? You got coffee for us all? >> Scott does. Yeah. >> Yeah. Um okay. So, the last um bit of
Martha's uh outline, which was very helpful and thorough, and I truly truly appreciate all the work Martha's done on all of this. Um couldn't do it without her work on this. Um
the as you recall the town passed our housing production plan uh year and a half ago and one of the first strategies in that plan for year 1 was to develop and adopt an inclusionary zoning bylaw.
Um I know this has been discussed by the planning board for a long time. Um some specific work on drafting the bylaw has been done by um some of you and certainly Martha over the years. Um and
now we're really trying to dive into this and move this forward. Um so I just wanted to acknowledge this is sort of the next step in the housing work that the board has done to um you know set forth a five-year plan. We uh two years
ago passed the multif family zoning overlay district. Um last year we updated the accessory dwelling unit bylaw. Um those were both passed with a lot of support by the community at town meeting. Um, and now our hope is to have
this inclusionary bylaw, which we've talked about at previous meetings, but essentially trying to encourage more affordable housing to be built um when there are multi-unit projects going forward. So,
um I do if well I guess question to Woody. Would you like me to put the draft bylaw up on the screen and kind of go through it a little bit? Um or
do you all want to dive into it a little more and we do that at the next meeting? Um where are we with the agenda for that? >> Well, um Go ahead, Larry. >> I I just had a couple of questions,
Kristen, because th this is and Martha. Um, I mean, this version of the inclusionary zoning bylaw is very different from ones we've looked at in the past, and I understand that's at the advice of town council that it it can't
be cannot be made mandatory because that would be a a form of taking. My understanding from our conversations was that this d was drafted by MVPC. Is is that correct?
>> Yes. So we um uh MVPC has a technical support grant through the state to assist communities with housing work and assisting Newbury with the inclusionary zoning um development is was part of
that grant. So, this draft has um started with the planning commission um and had input in conversations to get to the draft and then there I think the version you all have has some comments and edits and a lot of questions still.
>> Has town council reviewed it? >> Um she has it. I don't believe we've had a detailed conversation about this draft that you have. Um, but Martha and I are sitting with her tomorrow. >> Yeah. Um, because I I find it the the
process somewhat confusing or at least not as clearly set out as it might be. And and frankly, it it looks to me like uh I don't know what's the right term for it. Almost a generic bylaw. I'm not
sure it you know that that it's tailored to Newberry's needs necessarily. like there's not a lot um you know I mean we don't we don't well we we don't have a sewer you know public sewer for example
um and um uh I'm sorry I'm not making myself very clear um I I I think it I yeah I I think you do need to have a good discussion with town council about it you know in in particular I mean we I
know that the planning board has a lot of authority But um I I guess that authority is going to come through what? Either subdivision control, special permit, site plan review. What if you got an ANR? um you
know on a um on a large parcel um I don't know if we have you know any properties in town that that would be um um that that would uh be an alternative.
But um in the monitoring of of of the um monitoring, the applicant and subsequently the property owner shall be responsible for all monitoring and administrative costs associated with
ensuring ongoing compliance with the rent limit and income eligibility requirements, etc. I don't know how that's going to work as a practical matter. So, I guess that, you know, I I don't don't want to keep going around in
circles, but I I think you need to have a good conversation with town council about this. >> Um, yeah. No, I appreciate all of that, Larry. I know you um have a good perspective on this, having dived into
some other town bylaws. I I think one comment is um town council's position on not being able to require or mandate
um that a certain number of units are affordable in a in a proposal is very different than what 99% of the inclusionary bylaws that currently exist in the state of
Massachusetts are. It is not something MVPC or pretty much anyone I've spoken with, including some of the state um housing affordability, you know, NOS's and advocacy groups,
most people's inclusionary zoning bylaws that are currently in existence say if you're going to if you're going to build four or if you're going to build seven units, one of them has to be affordable. They're requirements. their mandates.
>> This um position that town council has that you can't do that legally is very new, frankly. And you know, again, it it's not necessarily something there. There is clear case law
yet. There are some pending lawsuits, but um there have been some articles recently in the Boston Globe and um a lot of other magazines about a court case that's going forward in Cambridge. Um, but again,
uh, I do believe this is part of why this bylaw is a little bit, um, not fully shaped yet because it's a new approach for a town to say we're not going to require the inclusionary
component. We would like to incentivize it. We would like to say how can we encourage and create conditions that um a developer would find um appealing enough to pursue. So if you're going to
build, you know, five units, you can um get one more market rate unit if you have another affordable unit. So it's it again the structure the approach is incentivizing that rather than mandating
it and that's part of why this is a little bit still needing to be shaped. >> Do you think that's practical within the time constraints of town meeting?
Um, I think it's something that we can get something in shape in time to at least move it forward and see if the community um is interested in this. I
think it's not, you know, the clean energy sections have a lot of edit editing to do in the next couple weeks as well. Um, so there's a lot of sort of pulling things together. I I certainly welcome this conversation tonight to
hear from you all about, you know, how you're feeling about moving it forward. >> I mean, I I don't have I don't have any issues with the intent, you know, it's just the devil's in the details, I think. I mean just one example for
example under item article section 7 conversion of existing structures uh a an existing single family dwelling may be converted to a structure containing more than one dwelling unit in any zoning district provided that and
then there are some conditions you know for appearance of the exterior structure etc. To me that looks like it's as of right call on the on the part of the building commissioner. Um but yet there's no
you know no reference to u u uh title five. There's no reference to to the availability of water you know I mean those are the kind of details I think that that
may be lacking you know. Uh >> anyway um that's all. Yeah, I mean I think it's it's kind of it's it's I would say almost at an outline state. There's, you know, the ideas are there, but as you said,
there's, you know, there's nothing in there that really specifies the process. Like similar to the OSRD, you would have to present a yield plan that shows what you can build by, right? And that sets your number of units and then, you know, that helps determine then you get your bonus and your additional market rate.
But there's nothing in there right now that leads, you know, >> well, you summarized very well in 20 seconds what I took five minutes to say. now that you touched on a lot more. >> I agree.
>> I like that summary, too, because I think what's what's important is can we can we build out the details of how this would actually function. I think that's that's the easier bit. I mean, we have
to do it. We have to do it and we have to have town council review it. But I think the the outline points are sort of what I think, you know, I'm looking for input on. And I Larry, you you highlighted one
component of it, which is something very specific to Newberry. um that came into this draft through conversations that um you know Martha and Satie and I have had with Ian Burns and Kayla and you know
Lisa that a lot of the opportunity in Newbury is um conversion you know we don't have a ton of land area yet we worked really hard to get the multif family overlay district properties
um uh you know identified and some of those were vacant land but many of those were opportunities for conversion. So again thinking about the kinds of subdivisions that Newberry's seen in recent years they've been small they've
been you know two lots, three lots, five or seven lots. So, um, having inclusionary that incentivizes, um, you know, those new developments, but then looking at the housing stock we currently have and thinking about our
limitations due to septic, but a big house, a big fourbedroom house right now could potentially be converted to four studio apartments and would require the same, you know, title five uh,
you know, review for for their septic um wouldn't be a big change on the neighborhood. So, trying to work in a way that conversion of housing stock can result in affordable units. Like that's
sort of the goal is looking at all the ways to do that. Um, and trying to take a stab at this. I mean, I I know I've heard Martha say and I know it's happened before where a bylaw has been passed at town meeting and the next year
we've had to go back and sort of tweak it and fix things. Um, you know, we were just doing that with the discussion of the MCMOD bylaw. So, I still feel hopeful we could get this in a shape in time for the public hearings and we can
flesh it out some more. Um, >> but I think, you know, ultimately that's going to be a decision not only on on this one, but some of the others as well, is you know, does the board when it's all put together, is the board going to feel comfortable moving forward with all of it and recommending that it
it be placed on on the warrant. So that will be probably a subsequent conversation. >> I agree with everyone that just spoke. So >> it's a work in progress. So >> all right. So just one one more note if
I may. So we've been talking. Oh, Steve, you were trying to say something. I think you were muted. Do you want to go? >> Thank you. I will. Uh, when I skimmed through the document, I was left with the impression that it didn't have a distinctly newery flavor to it. It really did seem generic, as I think
Larry pointed out. And like, you know, converting a single family residence with six to six units to me seemed u very unlikely given our soil conditions out here. And again, that's why I was thinking that this became a very generic kind of document
rather than one that reflected the realities of Nubbery. Um, and at some point I'll find that unless things are clear to me, I might end up in a position where saying, well, gee, I don't understand
this. And you can always bring it back, which is why I would be viewing the proposal with a dim eye. That's not meant to be a threat, but it's just meant to be some of the reality that there's a lot of details in here. And I think we darn well better
understand them very clearly before we vote yay or nay versus tableabling the document when the time comes. Sorry, I'm being long-winded and perhaps Martha might end up summarizing very
succinctly in 20 seconds again. >> No, probably not. I do want to say one thing on the conversions though. I think I mean one of the reasons that this has come up is that I've you know several years ago there was a developer who was very interested in converting a fairly large house on Orchard Street into a
multif family. We had nothing in our zoning that would allow that. Um, but you know, assuming that it was a four-bedroom house, it could easily have been converted into four, you know, one-bedroom units and, you
know, still be compliant with Title 5 and all of that. It actually had a massive subject system upgrade done when it was when it was sold. Um, so I think, you know, I I think there could be demand for it. There are certainly
certainly houses that that could could be good candidates for this and it's something actually some of the other like um Evelyn Noise who's been advocating for more housing and affordable housing for quite some time has been interested in seeing as well
you know is there potential for conversion of single family homes into multi multi-unit. So, I think it's it's worth pursuing, but I agree there's still a lot of details that need to be worked out on on this. And in the end, everybody's going to have to feel
comfortable either moving it forward or say, let's let's hold off and make sure it's right. >> Very good. But just one thing um in terms of of kind of bundling all of this for town
meeting um you know I think the the hope is that it can be done as succinctly as possible without having like 10 or 15 different warrant articles. Um one model that Lisa has suggested is one that
Marble had used a few years ago. So their recottification was in one warrant article and the entire bylaw was actually printed as a separate booklet that was handed out at at town meeting, you know, similar to the finance committee
meeting. And then things that are substantive changes would be in separate articles. Um so for example, the boundary changes, the clean energy inclusionary if we move forward with that and that kind of thing. So, that's kind of the model we're working with
right now. We'll be discussing that with with town council more and come back with a a more fleshed out proposal, but that's kind of the direction. So, we'd have maybe five articles >> instead of 10 or 11.
>> That makes sense, >> right? Nonetheless, an underlying concern I would have using that scenario is that uh I really don't imagine that people who have read the separate booklet which may be provided which gets to what is in the article and uh like if this is the US
Senate, you could stand up and say accept the bill as read. No, you've got to read the bill out loud at town meeting to see exactly what's in it and discuss it point by point. I think um there's a risk in trying to put too much
using a fast ball as opposed to a slow pitch to try and entertain what's in a significant document like this. So I think that's something just to consider in terms of how we present at town meeting.
We we were talking >> we were talking about that a little bit today Steve present so that it's understandable for the public and also last year too did we post post everything on the websites to try and
advertise it make it easy for people to find it as the weeks were coming up to town meetings. So, so the people who did get the chance to read it probably at a town meeting, but >> well, you know, you can lead a horse to
water, but you can't make it drink. >> Yep. Great. Um, any anyone have anything else? No. Hearing nothing, we can roll right into the plans report. I just want to say thank thank you all for your
patience in uh going through all of this. It's a lot. >> Yes. I'm sorry Martha. Thank you. And thank you for >> Thank you. >> Thanks Martha. >> Thank you. >> We'll see you again future. >> Um I think the only thing I uh
you know we've been busy we've been really focused on this. That's the primarily primary um task we've been focused on lately in the planning office. But there's a lot of other things going on. But one thing in
particular I just I do think um Woody we wanted to check in with the board on is the um mention earlier of 34 central is uh submitting their materials to the
select board to get the select board's approval on behalf of the town for the offsite improvements for the 34 central multif family development. So, as you recall, it's uh the biggest thing that's
a condition in that permit is um realigning Central Court where it intersects with Central Street. Um that's obviously town-owned right of way. So, the town needs to um review and approve that. Um,
and then the other off-site improvements include um upgraded sidewalks and um speed signage and crosswalks um along Central Street. All all of it is really
focused on public safety related to that development. So anyway, that's coming to the select board later this month. And I think the question I have for the board is um you know of course it's a public meeting you'll be welcome to attend the
select board but if you wanted to sort of draft a memo that describes you know why these requests are coming from the applicant that they are um conditions of the project that the planning board supports and feels are important to the
you know public safety of this project being successful. um just a short memo that is what um I was advised would probably be helpful for the select board. Um so those meeting materials
would be due before our next meeting. Um the select board meeting is January 27th, but the meeting packet materials are due on the 20th, which is a Tuesday. So I guess two-part question. Is the
board interested in submitting a written letter to the select board? And um possibly you could uh sort of authorize either the chair or someone else to you know work with the support of staff to submit that on behalf of the board.
>> So just a question. So this is a suggestion from town council. Um, >> no, it came up from one of you saying, you know, how can we support the process and be available to the select board to,
you know, answer questions related to the project. Um, and when I brought that up with the town administrator, her suggestion was something in writing is always helpful and then the select board receives it ahead of time. So
regardless from really from where it came from um and it coming from the the administrator again regardless I I think it's a good idea um and I also think that um you know the chair with the help uh and
the assistance of um um uh you all um you know could probably drop something that um would be very very helpful. I think >> to to the to the flag board. >> We just lost her. >> I I think it's a great idea, Scott, that
we direct Woody uh and the head staff to do it. Is uh Do we need that in the form of motion from >> Where did Woody go? >> All right. So, before Woody comes back, is uh anybody want to make a motion? >> No, no. I I think it's I think it's a great idea and we've kind of talked
about that. So, uh, I think staff is is willing to do. Hopefully, uh, Sadie and, uh, Kristen could help put things together and Woody or I can help, uh, um, with that. I know that I I'll be planning to go to that meeting just in case there are questions. Um, and I think Woody said that he's going to be
going to that meeting in case there are questions because I think it's really really important because we're the we're the folks that really pushed this in the direction that it's going. And for both conservation and the select board to understand our reasoning and how we got to the point we're at is really very
very beneficial to the community. >> Love to see Pat uh Pete taking ownership. >> That was we're gonna play back the script of this Zoom meeting and just put it into a memo.
>> Go AI. >> Where the heck did Woody go? But okay. Uh, are we good with the planners report then? >> Yes. Thank you. >> All right. So, I don't think there's anything else on the agenda. So, at this point in time, in the absence of our
chair, I'd be happy to entertain a motion to adjourn for this evening. >> Uh, so moved. >> Thank you. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Wonderful. Roll call vote. Larry, >> yes. >> Scott, >> yes.
>> Steve, >> I. chairs in favor as well. Everyone, thank you very much. It was a very good meeting. Long meeting, but productive. Uh, good to see everyone. Everybody have a meeting. >> Thanks. Thanks again. >> Thank you. Good night, everyone. >> Thank you. Good night. Thank