The primary focus of the meeting was a debate over the interpretation of existing setback requirements for solar panel installations. The current bylaw stipulates that large-scale installations must be at least 300 feet from any way and no less than 150 feet from side or rear property lines. However, confusion arose over whether these distances should be measured from the panels themselves or from any surrounding fences. One participant argued, “the panels are the structure,” indicating that the setbacks should be measured from the panels rather than the fences.

Further complicating matters, the bylaw’s language left room for interpretation on whether the requirements for side and rear setbacks were independent of the 300-foot stipulation from the road. A participant highlighted this issue, stating, “if they have to adhere to the rear wouldn’t they have to be at least 150 ft if that’s their side or rear setback.” This led to discussions about hypothetical scenarios where property dimensions might not allow for such setbacks.

Several board members expressed the necessity for rephrasing the bylaw to ensure it was understandable to the general public. The consensus was that the setbacks must apply uniformly, regardless of a property’s proximity to roads, and that the bylaw should clearly state that all sides of a property must adhere to the same standards. The board agreed to consider proposing an amendment to the bylaw at the next public meeting to address these ambiguities.

In addition to the solar panel setback discussions, the meeting also touched upon Beacon Street’s discontinuance. The applicant, Robert Baptist, sought to merge a paper street with his properties for privacy and potential development. The board deliberated on the zoning implications, given that one lot did not meet the buildable standards of a minimum 100-foot frontage and 10,000 square feet area. Despite concerns, it was noted that the matter primarily involved private ownership, and the town’s attorney confirmed that this was a private road issue. The board agreed to seek further legal guidance to ensure all necessary steps were taken correctly.

The meeting further addressed the need for a Planning Board representative on the Community Preservation Committee (CPC). The board unanimously supported appointing a member to this role, recognizing the benefits of enhanced communication regarding CPA funds for historical preservation and open space initiatives.

Updates on the Master Plan were also presented, with plans for additional community outreach events and the implementation of an interactive map for residents to provide input on local concerns. The board discussed potential articles for the upcoming town meeting, including updating the town’s zoning map and removing outdated references to accessory apartments in light of new state regulations.

The meeting concluded with discussions on grant opportunities through the “community on stop for growth” platform, with members eager to apply for funding to address infrastructure improvements and conduct feasibility studies for local projects.