The meeting’s primary highlight was the discussion surrounding the rezoning of 5559 Middlesex Street, a property owned by Joe Freeman. Freeman, alongside property manager Pedro Kamara, advocated for changing the zoning from IIA to CBLT to better accommodate existing and potential tenants, specifically those with retail-oriented businesses. The current zoning, which prohibits retail uses, was described as outdated and misaligned with the evolving market. Freeman underscored the property’s role as a hub for small local businesses, including a 250-square-foot incubator space, and emphasized a commitment to long-term tenants.

Evan, a board member or town planner, provided context on the property, noting its historical significance as part of a mill district and the lack of interest from property owners in pursuing residential development through mill overlay zoning districts. Freeman assured the board that the proposed zoning change would not create inconsistencies with surrounding properties, which included a mix of residential neighborhoods north and south of the mill.

Parking and tenant retention were also discussed, with Freeman highlighting ample parking facilities and the importance of maintaining existing tenants, which included plumbing supplies and a CPA firm. He stressed the value of stable, long-term tenancies over short-term leases.

The board inquired about the implications of switching to CBLT zoning, particularly for existing light manufacturing businesses. Freeman clarified that the focus was on enhancing the utility of the current mill structure without demolition or new construction. The discussion revealed a consensus on the desirability of the zoning change, with a pressing interest in moving the request forward promptly.

Another subject was the potential repurposing of local mills into spaces akin to successful models in other towns, featuring a variety of local crafts and food production businesses. The idea was to foster built communities that support small-scale enterprises instead of converting mills into residential properties. This vision was compared to a vibrant community model seen in Hudson.

The board also grappled with the complexities of defining “ultralight manufacturing” and its implications for zoning. There was a debate on the current definition of light manufacturing, with concerns about the compatibility of certain industries like wood and paper manufacturing with residential areas. The need for clear, unambiguous language in zoning definitions was emphasized, with suggestions to include specific examples of allowable activities.

Further discussions centered on side and rear setbacks between residential and commercial zones, proposing an increase to 100 feet when abutting residential properties. The conversation underscored the importance of maintaining reasonable distances to mitigate visual and noise disturbances.

A debate emerged over including residential uses in mixed-use developments, particularly in zones intended as buffers between residential and industrial areas. Opinions diverged on whether residential units should coexist with commercial spaces or be restricted to overlay districts, with members weighing the benefits of innovative designs against potential zoning conflicts.

The meeting also touched on a proposal to exclude nursing rehabilitation homes from current zoning, with discussions highlighting the distinct nature of institutional residential uses compared to traditional residential developments. Concerns were raised about placing such facilities near industrial zones, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of residential zoning categories.

Parking regulations, particularly for accessory parking lots, were another point of focus, with a proposal to define their proximity to principal uses. The board acknowledged the need for clarity in zoning regulations to encourage development while protecting existing property owners’ rights.