The Northborough Planning Board continued a public hearing on proposed amendments to the town zoning bylaw at its March 4, 2025 meeting after extended discussion of accessory dwelling unit rules, inclusionary‑housing provisions and other technical edits.

Planning staff presented a revised draft that aligns the town’s ADU language with the state definition, adds a “where feasible” placement standard and inserts a 10‑foot minimum setback from other buildings for detached accessory dwellings. Staff said language from the Department of Public Works director, Scott Charpentier, was added to clarify water‑meter, water‑service and sewer‑service responsibilities in the ADU permit language. The board discussed whether converting space above an existing garage or barn into an ADU should trigger minor site‑plan review and generally agreed that conversions that do not change a building’s exterior should not require new site‑plan review, while newly constructed detached accessory dwellings would require additional oversight.

Board members and staff also debated the draft’s language about lot merger protections that were added to reflect recent state changes. Planning counsel recommended removing the local merger provisions and delaying local action until state guidance and case law clarify how the statute will be interpreted; the board agreed to delete the proposed local merger language for this year and rely on state requirements until further guidance is available.

The draft also contains edits to the town’s land‑clearing and grading provisions to align local language with the state stormwater management and land disturbance rules and the conservation commission’s regulations; staff said the goal is to avoid duplicative permitting and to rely on the more detailed conservation standards where appropriate.

Sign rules were revised to permit signs on glazing (glass or other transparent surfaces) and to clarify projecting‑sign standards downtown. The draft establishes a 10‑foot minimum clearance from grade to the bottom of projecting blade signs and limits horizontal projection so a sign does not extend over a walkway by more than two‑thirds of the walkway width, the board was told.

Inclusionary‑housing provisions drew prolonged debate. Staff reorganized the section to define a “development” (previously capitalized as “Project”) and to specify which board acts as the permit‑granting authority by district (planning board in most residential districts, board of appeals in business districts). The board discussed a density bonus incentive that would allow dimensional flexibility in exchange for affordable units; members considered whether such bonuses should require a special permit and whether the town should waive special‑permit fees for density bonuses to create an effective incentive. Following discussion, staff removed the phrase “by special permit” from the density‑bonus clause so the permit‑granting authority retains discretion to approve dimensional relief without creating an additional special‑permit path. The board did not adopt a final position on fee waivers and left that procedural detail for later action.

Why it matters: the amendments would implement recent state ADU requirements, add local detail on utilities and permitting, change how the town approaches inclusionary housing incentives and resolve inconsistencies across sign and grading rules. Several changes could affect homeowners, developers and the town’s review workload if adopted at town meeting.

The board voted to continue the public hearing to 6:00 p.m. on March 18, 2025. No final zoning changes were adopted at the March 4 meeting; staff will circulate updated draft language and attorney comments for review before the continued hearing.

Speakers who spoke to these topics during the hearing included: Laurie Connors (Planning Department staff), Amy (first name only; planning board member or staff), Bill Pierce (Planning Board member), Millie Milton (Planning Board member), Brad (Bridal/Blanchette) Blanchette (Planning Board member), Anthony Zieten (Planning Board member), and Bob Frederica (planning/consulting participant). Several outside officials and advisers were referenced in the discussion: attorney John Aikman (cited for legal drafting), DPW Director Scott Charpentier (water/sewer language), Rick Leaf (master‑plan implementation committee; noted later in the meeting), and Margaret Hurley at the Attorney General’s office (review request).