Foxborough Planning Board keeps current officers, names design‑review liaison and outlines upcoming regulatory work

At its May 28 meeting, the Foxborough Planning Board voted to keep its existing officers in place, appointed a liaison to the design‑review committee and heard staff briefings on a small‑business sign and facade program and draft Town Meeting articles on solar and battery energy storage.

During the board-reorganization portion of the meeting, a member proposed leaving current officer positions unchanged; speaker 4 read the current slate as Kevin Weinfeld (chair), Ron Gressi (vice chair) and Tom Murphy (clerk). The board voted to retain the officers.

Members discussed the need for a design‑review liaison (a role previously held by Gary) and, after a motion and second, voted to appoint Tom as the town liaison to design review so the board has an architect/designer voice available for façade and streetscape recommendations. A board member also recommended Gary Whitehouse as an alternate/associate member; members agreed to take that recommendation to a joint meeting with the Select Board for formal appointment.

Staff reported that a small‑business sign and façade program had cleared procurement and finance and that guidelines would be released within days or early next week for small‑dollar, nonstructural façade and sign funding aimed at local businesses. The planning office also previewed draft zoning/regulatory work for an upcoming special town meeting: updates to solar and battery storage regulations (some changes are state‑mandated and some update outdated technical language), relaunch of public engagement for the Neponset planning effort with three community sessions in late July, and preliminary consideration of data‑center language to protect town water and electrical resources.

Board members asked staff to review approaches other towns used for data‑center zoning and to coordinate with town engineering and the Fire Department on site‑specific access and utility requirements when projects are proposed. No formal votes were taken on regulatory language at this meeting; staff said draft language would be returned for future review and a Town Meeting warrant.