Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board offers preliminary support for Habitat concept, stresses conservation and legal review
Summary
The Plymouth Planning Board told the Select Board it is preliminarily supportive of a Habitat for Humanity concept that would require changing a conservation easement to allow an access road and additional housing, but members emphasized that any swap or road would require detailed conservation, legal and state-agency review.
The Plymouth Planning Board on a preliminary, nonbinding vote told the Select Board it is supportive "in principle" of a Habitat for Humanity concept that would add road connectivity and housing capacity by pursuing a swap or modification of an existing conservation easement, provided the change survives rigorous review by the conservation commission, town counsel and state agencies.
Why it matters: The proposal links a possible extension of an access road to increased housing yield and long-term connectivity, and it would require altering a 2001 conservation easement whose terms currently prohibit roads or excavation in the protected area. Any easement modification would be subject to legal, conservation and state-level approvals—actions board members repeatedly said would be necessary before work could proceed.
What the board did: After a presentation from a Habitat for Humanity representative (Frank) and a technical review of conceptual site maps (minimum, medium and maximum yields prepared with Horizons), a motion was made and seconded "to respond to the Select Board that we are in favor of this project as preliminarily presented to us and that we are supportive of the effort regarding the length of the conservation easement swap moving forward with the necessary review." The motion passed with a majority and one abstention.
Board concerns and caveats: Members pressed Habitat and staff on several points: whether the new road would be a full-time collector or an emergency-only access; traffic impacts on Tenny Mountain and Boulder Point roads; wetlands and buffer requirements; and how to ensure any land swap offers "equal or greater conservation value." Phil Lamaro said he "would support including the concept in our master plan when we talk about land use and natural features" but stressed enforcement and voter approval would be needed for any zoning changes. Several board members said the conservation commission should be closely involved in defining what counts as an equitable land swap.
Public response and legal questions: Public commenter and abutter Colin Delari told the board he opposed any modification to the easement and urged the board to read the deeded language carefully; he also raised a procedural concern that a Conservation Commission discussion had not been properly noticed. The board acknowledged those concerns and said any future formal proposal would include public hearings and require approvals from the Select Board and relevant state agencies. The planner (Joseph Perez) confirmed that state wetlands and conservation rules would constrain any access-road alignment.
Next steps: The board's statement is advisory and conditional: it signaled conceptual support only and did not authorize construction or easement changes. Any concrete application would require (at minimum) conservation-commission input, town-legal review, state-agency approvals and formal public hearings before the planning board and select board.
Ending: The board closed the discussion by asking Habitat and staff to continue consulting with the conservation commission and town departments; members reiterated that the proposal remains conceptual until legal and conservation questions are resolved.
