The board’s main topic of discussion was the draft of the new ADU bylaw. The board members reviewed revised plans, which included changes to align with state law. One major revision was the limitation of special permits for additional units to one per property. This limitation aimed to prevent issues similar to those encountered in other towns, as emphasized by comments from the fire chief. The fire chief raised concerns about safety and fire department approval, leading to the inclusion of specific language in the draft to address these issues.

The conversation around the ADU bylaw also delved into the financial aspects of constructing and maintaining these units. One board member suggested limiting ADUs to one-bedroom configurations to minimize the impact on the community. They discussed the high costs associated with building additions or standalone units, emphasizing the financial burden on property owners. Concerns were raised about the betterment fees for connecting new units to the sewer system. It was noted that the privilege fee for adding another unit to an existing sewer-connected property could be around $122,000, while a separate fee of approximately $6,000 would apply for properties not subject to betterment charges.

The board also explored the historical context of these fees, pointing out that previous assessments were based on unit counts rather than property frontage, which led to disparities in fee obligations. One member recalled past discussions on the Board of Public Works, where the fee structure was a contentious issue. The board agreed that adding units would increase the burden on the sewer system, necessitating a fair assessment of fees to maintain system integrity.

Further, the discussion emphasized the need to incorporate clear language in the bylaw regarding potential sewer fees or assessments. There was a consensus that property owners should be adequately informed about these costs when seeking permits. The board agreed to forward the finalized draft to the Town Council for review, ensuring all relevant considerations, including potential fees, were addressed.

In addition to the ADU bylaw, the board discussed considerations regarding water and sewer billing for properties adding new units. There was an agreement that new units should incur the same sewer and water charges as existing ones. The board members debated the distinction between accessory apartments and two-family dwellings, noting that the term “in-law apartment” had been replaced by “accessory unit.” One participant highlighted the necessity of a fee for at least a one-bedroom unit, leading to the decision that the town planner, Victoria, would incorporate these comments into the next draft of the regulations. The board emphasized the importance of consulting the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for their input before finalizing the regulations, particularly regarding the special permit for auxiliary apartments.

Victoria also provided an update on potential grant applications, revealing that she had met with Jamie regarding a memo about projects the town is interested in pursuing. The board is exploring online permitting options, although concerns were raised about the town’s capacity to handle the maintenance costs of such a system. Victoria confirmed she was gathering quotes for an IT grant, and all relevant permitting departments supported the idea of online permitting. However, they needed to assess the town’s ability to sustain the system. The board expressed a desire to keep the Board of Selectmen informed about the grant applications and related projects. Victoria was tasked with preparing a memo to ensure the Board of Selectmen remained aware of the planning board’s activities.

The meeting also touched on the master plan committee, with members inquiring about further developments since the last meeting. They planned to meet early next week to define the scope of work, which could include additional projects beyond just the master plan. The committee’s structure was discussed, with members considering whether the planning board should appoint representatives or if it should function as an independent committee. Public involvement was deemed critical, and it was suggested that discussing the master plan at every meeting could keep the community informed. The board contemplated the size of the committee, typically suggested to be seven members, to ensure adequate representation while maintaining a manageable quorum. Discussion included potential representatives from the planning board, Board of Selectmen, conservation, public safety, and citizen representatives.

Interest in committee participation was expressed, with one member stating, “that was my original hope when I came on the board.” Another member acknowledged their willingness to step back if someone else wanted to take the second position on the committee. The planning board members deliberated on the necessity of having two representatives from their group to ensure their perspective is included in the master plan development process. Victoria confirmed she would manage the project without being a committee member, providing guidance throughout.