Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Regulations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bolton PZC reviews multiple proposed edits to subdivision and zoning regulations
Summary
The Commission spent the meeting's substantive portion reviewing draft corrections to subdivision and zoning regulations, debating whether to raise the current 5% allowance for minor increases in building/parking areas, remove overlapping mixed-use items, clarify yard/setback diagrams, and simplify landscaping requirements.
The Bolton Planning & Zoning Commission devoted significant discussion on Oct. 9 to proposed revisions of the town's Subdivision and Zoning Regulations. Staff provided draft corrections and commissioners debated specific edits to minor modification thresholds, parking triggers, mixed-use listings, yard and setback definitions, and landscaping requirements.
Zoning Enforcement Officer Michael D'Amato argued that the existing 5% allowance for increases to principal building or parking area can disproportionately affect large properties, noting the town's largest building is about 44,000 square feet with several others between roughly 15,000 and 22,000 square feet. Commissioners proposed several alternatives: James Cropley suggested increasing the allowance, Tom Crockett proposed 10% with a 1,500-square-foot cap, and Cropley later proposed 15%. Manning recommended changing the regulatory text to read "15% or 1,500 sq. ft." but no formal vote was taken; staff were asked to draft clearer language for a future meeting.
On parking, the Commission discussed whether Item B(2)'s 5% allowance should be increased to 10% or left unchanged, and whether expansions should trigger a site plan or zoning permit. Commissioners and staff agreed that changes of use would require approval. Staff also proposed striking overlapping items in the RMUZ and GMUIZ sections that are covered under mixed-use allowances; the Commission agreed to remove those items.
Carson presented diagrams and new definitions for yards and corner lots; commissioners agreed to include diagrams illustrating regular, corner, pie-shaped, and irregular lots and to focus the section on required yards as setbacks. Manning asked whether "streets" covers both public and private roads; staff confirmed zoning requirements apply to either type and outlined frontage requirements.
In the Multiple Dwelling Complex section, Manning recommended removing outdated subsection references and adjusting dimensional and servicing requirements to align with lot size and public health standards; he also requested removal of a subsection noted by staff as removed from statute. On landscaping and buffering, Arlene Fiano urged replacing a prescriptive plant list with a requirement for "native plants and trees." Commissioners discussed removing the word "fully" from a phrase that could create an enforceable perfection standard and agreed the landscaping plan should indicate areas to be established with lawn or landscape.
Commissioners raised related issues including pavement and drainage provisions (with a suggestion to avoid redundancy with septic regulations) and how to handle replacement of large trees lost during construction. The Commission did not adopt final text changes at this meeting; staff were asked to prepare a simpler consolidated draft of Items B(1'5) and other revised sections for future review.
