The proposal of a marijuana and Hot Yoga Studio, along with the regulation of hemp and cannabis by the state, was among the most items on the agenda. The discussion centered on the legality of serving low-percentage hemp-derived THC products in restaurants, a subject that brought up various legal and regulatory concerns. The board considered the impact of such establishments on local zoning laws and the broader community, as well as the state’s role in regulating these emerging businesses.

The board then delved into the complexities surrounding the Wakefield plan, particularly the issue of split lots within the proposed marijuana overlay district. Members discussed the need to clarify zoning boundaries and the potential effects on property owners. The conversation extended to the broader zoning map and the necessity of legal compliance, as evidenced by references to legal cases and court rulings throughout the meeting.

The granting of special permits also garnered considerable attention, especially concerning the authority of the Planning Board versus the Zoning Board of Appeals. Furthermore, the process of granting waivers within special permits was a topic of debate, with questions raised about whether to require separate special permits for specific waiver requests or to incorporate the waivers directly into the original special permit.

Accessory structures and buildings were another key subject of discussion. The board considered imposing a numerical percentage limit on the size of accessory structures in relation to the principal use and debated the appropriate regulations for shed sizes, placement, and the need for a building permit. The members also discussed setbacks for accessory structures, lot shape factor calculation, and the allowance of multiple buildings on a single property for various uses.

In the residential context, the board grappled with non-conforming uses and the limitations on business sizes in certain districts. The goal was to achieve a balance between maintaining the character of neighborhoods and the success of local businesses. The board discussed the potential for flexibility within neighborhood business districts to cater to different neighborhood needs, as well as specific size limits for neighborhood stores.

The topic of townhouse regulations was met with confusion among members, who emphasized the need for clearer guidelines. This led to a broader conversation about the placement of clauses within the zoning regulations, including those related to cluster developments and townhouse or row house structures. Members debated various aspects of non-conforming structures, parking and loading regulations, and the logic behind restrictions like the 25% cap on expansion for non-conforming structures.

The Planning Board also touched upon the regulation of adult uses, including adult businesses and tattoo parlors, discussing the need to incorporate performance standards into the bylaw. Additionally, they brought up the legality of regulating political signs, referring to a US Supreme Court case, and the need to update regulations on wireless facilities.

In discussions about affordable housing, the board expressed concerns over the threshold for inclusionary housing and the necessity for state intervention following a recent court ruling. Senior housing facilities and the reevaluation of wetlands districts were also topics of interest, alongside site plan regulations and the requirement for a public hearing.