Planning staff outlines major projects and warns of state housing law changes that will alter local zoning

Planning and economic development staff gave the South Berwick Town Council a multi-part update Tuesday evening on major local projects and a set of new state laws that the presenter said will require ordinance changes and careful local planning.

The presentation listed project costs, grant timelines and next steps for a Brownfields study of the Railroad Avenue parcel, a parking-digitization project, a wayfinding and bike-pedestrian planning effort, an impact-fee study and an MDOT intersection project that carries a multi-million-dollar federal grant application. Staff also outlined the immediate and longer-term impacts of LD 1829 and related legislative changes on housing density, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and parking requirements.

The update matters because the state changes — which DiCarlo, the planning presenter, said take effect at different dates, including some immediate changes and some effective July 1, 2026 — will change what South Berwick can require by local ordinance and will require amendments to the town’s zoning code and comp plan processes. That could affect the town’s downtown revitalization work, tax increment financing (TIF) planning and infrastructure budgeting.

DiCarlo told the council the Railroad Avenue (Brownfield) property work is funded by a $22,000 grant and that consultants have completed a site visit and are drafting land‑use options for a July 31 staff review and a final wrap-up expected in September 2025. A parking GIS digitization contract with SMPDC was described as a $2,500 expense that will feed a $25,800 wayfinding study (kickoff late July/early August) and a $63,000 bike‑pedestrian plan that carries a $7,000 local match and is slated to begin in August with a 10‑month schedule. DiCarlo said the town’s impact‑fee study, budgeted at $45,650 from TIF funds, is on task 3 of 8 and expected to wrap in September so the town can legally begin collecting impact fees.

On the intersection project, DiCarlo said the town is an anticipated recipient of a $3,000,600 federal grant for two intersections and that the town’s local share could be roughly 10 percent — about $400,000 — though that amount depends on whether federal funds and related requirements are included. DiCarlo said MDOT changed public‑meeting timing: an internal meeting is planned for Aug. 18, the first digital public meeting is expected this fall and an in‑person public meeting is likely in early 2026.

DiCarlo summarized costs and estimates: a preliminary water‑study bid for the area the presentation called “Pumpkin Town” was one estimate received and additional quotes were pending; a draft water‑study cost DiCarlo said would be about $20,500 and take roughly two months to complete. An open‑space map required by a recent $25,000 open‑space grant has a single contractor quote of about $48,000; staff said they are seeking more estimates and were not asking the council to approve that amount at the meeting.

The presentation spent substantial time on LD 1829, which DiCarlo said becomes effective July 1, 2026. DiCarlo summarized changes the town should expect: fire suppression will no longer be required in standalone ADUs; local rate‑of‑growth ordinances are no longer allowed in growth areas (though moratoriums remain possible for limited durations); an affordable housing incentive can allow an additional 14 feet of height above local limits for qualifying projects; state language now explicitly allows up to three dwelling units per lot (and up to four in designated growth areas with water/sewer), and it resets subdivision calculations in ways staff said could allow higher density than current local rules. DiCarlo also flagged that a separate law, LD 14427, will limit a municipality’s ability to require more than one parking space per dwelling unit inside growth areas (effective Sept. 23, 2025), which staff said will reallocate development incentives toward residential uses unless the town acts on its zoning.

Council members pressed staff for clarifications about when rules apply, the definition of “affordable housing” (DiCarlo said the state currently treats projects with more than 50% affordable units differently but the language is changing), and the mechanics of how water‑service extensions outside the growth area might increase local density by triggering state protections. Councilor John James voiced frustration with the state changes during the discussion, saying he could not find positive aspects in the legislation as written.

DiCarlo also reviewed the downtown revitalization committee’s progress: a committee has been formed; staff leadership was identified; wayfinding and parking digitization work will feed downtown design; a downtown business owners meeting is planned for Aug. 21 with a SCORE (nonprofit small‑business mentoring) presentation sponsored by M&T Bank; and committee work includes evaluating modified TIF boundaries, design standards, pedestrian and parking studies, and targeted grant applications for Lower Main Street. DiCarlo said some studies will be internal or staff‑only initially but that public meetings are planned as deliverables near completion.

Council members asked staff to return with ordinance language and timelines so the council can consider where to adapt local standards, particularly where objective design standards might preserve a “small‑town” form while allowing modest density increases. DiCarlo said staff will meet with leadership to prepare a “plan of attack” on how to implement or respond to state law changes and to present draft ordinance updates to the council.

The presentation closed with a staff timeline of near‑term dates (Brownfield meeting July 31, wayfinding kickoff late July/early Aug., bike‑ped kickoff Aug. 12, MDOT meeting Aug. 18, impact‑fee presentation in September) and a pledge that staff would return with recommended ordinance language and implementation steps.

DiCarlo said: "LD 1829 is a new law…fire suppression is no longer required in standalone ADUs," and warned the council that multiple immediate and complex code changes will likely arrive in the coming months.

Ending: Councilors did not vote on any zoning change at Tuesday’s meeting; staff said formal ordinance revisions and public hearings will follow as the planning office assembles draft language and a schedule. The council asked staff to return with recommended changes and cost estimates before implementing code amendments.