Pickleball zoning article tabled; board will publish staff comment after more study
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
After extensive public comment focused on noise and neighborhood impacts, the Planning Board voted to take no action on the pickleball prohibition article and asked staff to draft a brief explanation of the board’s work and next steps for the warrant.
Following extended public comment, including multiple neighbors and residents who described noise and use‑pattern concerns, the Planning Board decided to take no action on a citizen article that would have prohibited pickleball courts in most zoning districts.
Staff presented two options: a narrow prohibition (the article as written) or a more tailored special‑permit approach that would allow courts in larger and commercial zones subject to conditions such as setbacks, screening and noise mitigation. Public speakers said the repetitive paddle‑strike noise is the primary nuisance; others urged caution about regulating sport courts generally.
Board members debated between (1) immediate prohibition, (2) a special‑permit regime, or (3) continuing the discussion to craft objective setback and siting rules. Several board members and public commenters urged more time to develop site‑specific standards, quantitative setback metrics, and a clean explanation for the public. The board voted to take no action on the article, and staff will prepare a short comment summarizing the board’s analysis and next steps for the March 6 meeting. The comment will be included with materials the board forwards ahead of town meeting to explain why the board did not support the prohibition as written.
The board emphasized it may revisit sport courts in a broader, more detailed regulation for game courts or in a special permit framework rather than by an across‑the‑board ban.