The board’s extensive discourse on the ADU bylaw underscored the urgency of aligning local regulations with the impending state law. The newly enacted state regulations necessitate adjustments to the existing bylaw, which had already been updated during the town meeting in May. The board acknowledged the need for a public hearing to discuss these changes, with a consensus on holding it before the state law’s enforcement date. Members deliberated on whether to adopt the state language directly or to review and propose additional local allowances, such as increased setbacks for ADUs, during the next meeting. The board aimed to present a clear agenda item to attract public interest and feedback.

Another topic of discussion was the implications of updated floodplain maps, which now classify previously designated 500-year floodplain areas as 100-year floodplains. This change is expected to increase the number of residents requiring flood insurance, particularly along Main Street. The board recognized the need to review existing bylaws to ensure they adequately regulate land use in floodplain areas, considering specific FEMA regulations that prohibit the storage of chemicals in these zones. Concerns about agricultural uses in floodplains were raised, highlighting potential oversights in current allowances.

The meeting also touched on broader zoning issues, particularly the potential revision of the housing production plan. Concerns were voiced about the outdated nature of the 2015 plan, which relies on data from 2013 and earlier. The board discussed utilizing Community Preservation Act (CPA) funding to update the housing production plan, as a portion of this funding is earmarked for housing. The conversation emphasized the need to address zoning inconsistencies along the five and ten corridor, considering the impact of wetlands on development proposals and the potential for transitioning light industrial zones to 40R smart growth overlays. This overlay would facilitate mixed-use developments, encourage denser housing options, and require 20% of new units to be designated as affordable housing, offering financial incentives such as state funding for affordable housing development.

Further, discussions explored the complexities of implementing zoning changes, the logistical challenges of extending sewer lines to accommodate new developments, and the potential community opposition to increased construction and commercial activities. The board considered applying for planning assistance grants to streamline zoning processes and facilitate the development of the proposed overlay.

The need for an updated zoning map and bylaw revisions was another focal point, with the board considering how to best reflect the relationship between the zoning map and the language of the zoning bylaw. They proposed modifying how uses are described based on their impact to accommodate evolving business models, moving away from continuously adding new categories. The discussion included potential budget requests, such as increasing funds for legal notices and expanding the assistant town planner’s hours to manage the anticipated workload from updating plans and regulations.