The Lakeville Planning Board reviewed a package of suggested edits to the town's site-plan review bylaw and began discussing a formal permit and construction oversight process intended to reduce missed review items and improve transparency.

Discussion points included closing a procedural loophole whereby site-plan review can be avoided if a project disturbs more than 1,500 square feet of ground cover but does not require a building permit; board members asked the town planner to propose language so the bylaw expressly triggers site-plan review for nonbuilding disturbances that meet the applicable thresholds. Members also asked for clearer, enforceable architectural standards rather than advisory language that "strongly discourages" certain appearances.

Staff proposed adding the Open Space Committee to the list of reviewers for landscape and native-species comments; board members supported returning landscape review requests to that volunteer resource. The board asked Nancy Darphy, the town planner, to draft suggested language and pass it to Amy (town counsel) for legal review.

Separately the planner proposed a permanent construction process that would create: (1) a technical review committee to give staff and department heads an opportunity to review plans before formal submission; (2) an optional—but publicly noticed—pre-submission conference allowing applicants to present early concepts to staff and the board; (3) a checklist-style application and waiver request form so applicants provide required items up front; and (4) periodic post-permit inspections or engineering oversight during critical construction milestones (drainage installation, curb cuts, planting) to ensure approved plans are built as permitted. Board members asked staff to draft the checklist and suggested application edits and to seek a proposal from the town's peer-review engineer (Apex/Environmental Partners) for construction oversight fees.

The board voted to continue work on the bylaw edits and the permit/construction process and to take a detailed draft up at a subsequent meeting (target Feb. 13 for bylaw edits, and Feb. 27 for the permit/construction process oversight proposal). Members emphasized transparency for any pre-submission reviews, suggesting public notice or an open meeting format to avoid the perception of closed-door decision-making.

Why it matters: Clarifying when site-plan review applies and creating a clear pre-submission and post-permit oversight workflow would reduce later-stage surprises, improve interdepartmental coordination, and give applicants clearer expectations. Adding Open Space Committee review would use local volunteer expertise on landscape/native-species choices.

What happens next: Town planner will draft specific bylaw language, an application checklist, and public-notice procedures and then circulate drafts to town counsel and the board ahead of the next meetings.