Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the OSRD topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Open Space Residential Design rewrite meets strong public pushback; board delays vote and asks sponsor to refine scope
Summary
A proposed expansion of Northborough’s Open Space Residential Design (OSRD) rules — including opening the option to a broader set of residential districts and allowing 1–4 units per structure — drew extensive debate from board members and residents over slopes, density, taxes and timing; the sponsor will revise the draft and bring it back for further review.
A substantial rewrite of the Town of Northborough’s Open Space Residential Design (OSRD) bylaw prompted extended debate Jan. 6 and ended with the Planning Board asking the sponsor to revise the proposal and gather additional feedback.
Board member Carter introduced amendments that would expand where OSRD can be used, replace the current mathematical yield analysis with a parcel‑specific "yield plan," and (in some drafts discussed) permit duplexes, triplexes and four‑unit structures as options to cluster development and permanently protect at least half of a parcel as open space.
Carter said the aim is to protect large, unprotected tracts — including some state‑owned parcels and farms — and to align the bylaw with master‑plan goals on natural resource protection, habitat connectivity and farmland preservation. "This bylaw is about protecting open space and maintaining community character," he told the board.
Residents and several board members raised concerns about the scope and timing, arguing the draft could be read as increasing developable units on parcels that are currently financially marginal because of steep slopes and ledge. One resident, Lisa Maselli, urged caution and said residents do not want the town to ‘‘open up everything’’ to development. "We don't need it," she said, expressing anxiety about taxes and town services if large projects moved forward.
Technical points in the debate included how to treat steep slopes in yield analyses (staff inserted language singling out slopes 15% or greater as conservation areas), whether removing density bonuses would change developer incentives, and whether the board should pilot OSRD on a small set of large parcels (for example, specific farms or the golf course) rather than making the option broadly available in Residential C. Several members suggested presenting detailed parcel‑level examples and soliciting the Open Space Committee’s view before presenting the item at town meeting.
After more than two hours of discussion and multiple public comments, the board agreed to give Carter time to adjust the draft, to consult additional stakeholders and to bring back a revised proposal; no vote was taken on the draft at the meeting.
The board also scheduled further meetings ahead of the Annual Town Meeting and signaled that other non‑controversial bylaw items (fences, donation bins) will follow the normal public‑hearing schedule.
