The Planning Board moved to tighten control over sand and gravel extraction across town on Monday, authorizing a search for a specialized consultant to overhaul Plymouth’s earth removal bylaws. The Earth Removal Bylaw Committee, formed after funding was approved at the Fall 2025 Town Meeting, is seeking an outside firm to help transition the town toward a more rigid, "binary" regulatory framework to reduce the subjectivity that has often plagued local enforcement.

Michelle Christensen, Chair of the Earth Removal Bylaw Committee, explained that the goal is to create a clear "yes/no" system for oversight. Our mandate is to develop what we consider a binary framework for regulatory oversight and enforcement, Christensen said. We want to make it clear with definitions and limits to limit subjectivity. The idea is to make it easier for people to do business with the town while ensuring the bylaw is enforced. Committee member Hampton Watkins added that the group is looking for a technical and legal audit of their work to date, emphasizing that the consultant will help develop language for site restoration standards and permitting fee structures.

While the board supported the move, several members expressed reservations about oversimplifying complex land-use decisions. Member Michael Leary cautioned against removing all board discretion, stating, I want to echo the concerns about the binary factor. Not all questions are black and white. There's a huge level of discretion we exercise on boards, and I worry about oversimplifying. Member Peter Conner suggested the committee use more flexible language, recommending the term clear and comprehensive instead of binary to describe the new standards. Motion Made by M. Leary that subject to the board's comments, the Planning Board is comfortable with the Earth Removal Bylaw Committee, in consultation with staff, finalizing and issuing the RFQ. Motion Passed (7-0-0).

Chair Michael Main suggested that while the town needs more predictable rules, some flexibility is vital to prevent projects that might meet every technical requirement but still harm the community. I suggested the change to 'limit subjectivity' rather than 'eliminate' it, because no two situations are identical, Main noted. We need some measure of discretion so we can stop projects that check all the boxes but are still horrible. Member Kevin O'Reilly, who volunteered to represent the Planning Board on the consultant interview committee, questioned the timeline for the project, asking, What's Plan B if you're not able to get to Town Meeting in the spring? Christensen replied that while the committee is maintaining a sense of urgency for the spring, a fall contingency remains an option.

In a separate effort to improve town efficiency, Assistant Town Planner Michael S- presented a new draft business permitting guide designed to help entrepreneurs navigate the often cumbersome path of opening a business in Plymouth. The guide features flowcharts and specific scenarios for restaurants, salons, and establishments requiring liquor licenses. Our goal was to provide a high-level, succinct, and clear pathway vision for business owners, he explained. Member Ed Conroy urged the department to seek direct feedback from those in the field, noting that face-to-face is always better when coordinating with consultants or developers. Member David Peck suggested the board revisit its previous priority list for zoning changes, noting, I'd be interested in revisiting that list to see what was completed before we jump into new things.

The board also held a wide-ranging discussion on upcoming zoning policy shifts, including "small footprint" housing and a potential overhaul of the senior housing bylaw. Town Planner Lauren Lind noted that the town is looking for more attainable and naturally occurring housing options, such as cottage developments. Chair Main specifically targeted the current senior housing regulations as an area in need of reform. Our senior housing bylaw is problematic; it uses illegal standards and doesn't contemplate the active 55-and-older communities that are common now, Main said. He also expressed interest in pursuing Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) to better protect open space, noting that for every 10 acres of development, TDRs could potentially unlock 20 acres of protected land. Lind emphasized the need for balance, stating that staff wants to ensure economic development potential is not overlooked while pursuing natural resource protection.