The meeting opened with a discussion on tiny homes, driven by the new affordable homes act. This act allows communities to adopt zoning bylaws for tiny homes, defined as structures 400 square feet or less, to be designated as seasonal communities. Falmouth, although a seasonal tourist destination, had not automatically qualified for this designation but could apply for it. The economic feasibility was debated, with concerns about high land prices making single tiny home developments impractical. The potential for clustering tiny homes was discussed as a more viable economic model, reminiscent of old-style fish camps with shared spaces.

Key considerations included distinguishing tiny homes from trailers, with the state law’s classification posing potential zoning and land use challenges. Emphasis was placed on the necessity for permanent structures with utilities to ensure stability. Members expressed interest in developing a unique definition of tiny homes for Falmouth, diverging from state minimums that were seen as too restrictive for comfortable living.

The Board also explored the potential for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) as an affordable housing solution. The idea of a tiny home overlay district was floated. Concerns about community character and policy implications arose, with members highlighting the need for careful planning to differentiate tiny homes from mobile or transient housing.

Transitioning from tiny homes, the Board addressed the starter home bylaw, proposing a new zoning district for smaller, affordable homes. This district would permit up to four units per acre, with structures capped at 1,800 square feet. The initiative aims to echo 1970s practices of smaller, ranch-style homes. While the bylaw aligns with Massachusetts General Law chapter 40Y, members debated the practicality of state-mandated requirements, including three-bedroom homes, given cost and septic constraints. Some advocated for a maximum size of 900 square feet, citing personal experiences of living comfortably in smaller spaces.

Concerns emerged about the need for more flexible zoning to integrate diverse housing options, including tiny homes, without imposing rigid limitations. The notion of a starter home district was critiqued as “social engineering,” with fears of stigmatization and property value impacts. The Board acknowledged the complexities of balancing state requirements with market realities and community preferences.

The conversation then shifted to municipal services, focusing on trash pickup and snow removal for new developments and private roads. The fairness of service provision was questioned, with confusion over the authority of the Department of Public Works (DPW) versus the select board and planning board. Some residents on private roads faced service gaps, prompting debates about road standards and the implications of private versus public roads. Safety concerns were raised regarding service vehicles on poorly maintained roads, emphasizing the need for adherence to town standards.

The Board was urged to ensure new roads meet necessary standards to guarantee service provision. Discussions highlighted the role of developers in constructing roads to town standards, with a suggestion to inform potential buyers about service implications. Concerns about reducing services across town departments were voiced, with calls for better funding and staffing for the DPW to provide equitable services.

Further discussions touched on the acceptance of new roads as town roads, revealing a backlog of roads awaiting acceptance due to unmet standards. This backlog presents challenges for residents needing engineering studies for road acceptance. The meeting explored the possibility of expediting new roads built to standards through the acceptance process.

Lighting regulations were also a topic of interest, with concerns about increased lighting and its impact on the community. Participants suggested compiling existing bylaws to develop regulations that minimize light pollution while ensuring safety. The meeting concluded with procedural discussions, including upcoming elections and meeting schedules.