by Frank Schroth

At Thursday’s meeting of the Planning Board, zoning to allow Bed & Breakfast establishments and medical marijuana facilities as well as the status of the housing production plan were discussed. In addition, they signed site plan approval for renovations to be made at 480 Adams Street by East MIlton Realty Trust and deferred any decision regarding the removal of the blue spruce in from to the Henry House on Eliot Street.

The board has been discussing the possibility of allowing bed & breakfast establishments to operate in Milton on and off for two years. Member Innes has been an advocate for zoning that will permit them. The response of the other members is tepid at best. Innes said that there is a market for them with Curry College and Milton Academy parents visiting as well as people who want to take advantage of the hiking available in the Blue Hills and the proximity to Boston. There is tax revenue to be realized and there are likely already B&Bs operating in town under the radar.

Concerns with B&Bs include the number allowed, whether they are owner-occupied, parking, length of stay, number of rooms/guests, and signage. Member Kelly was concerned that it would open the door for boarding houses, and that any enforcement would be difficult. Member Duffy was blunt, “We do not want them now.” The board was reminded that a survey done some years ago indicated that 53% of respondents were interested in them. Kelly asked if there was an understanding of the need, and Whiteside suggested consulting with local realtors on the possible impact to home values. Kelly seemed amenable to the idea of capping the number of B&Bs to, say, five and then incrementally increasing the number over time. Mr. Whiteside offered to assist member Innes, but he wasn’t completely sold on the idea. He said the primary issue is the siting of such establishments.

Ms. Innes also led the discussion of medical marijuana dispensaries and production facilities. They cannot be prohibited: there will be 35 dispensaries with at least one in each county of the Commonwealth and no county will have more than 5. The key issue here is the same as the previous issue – where to put these things. There was brief discussion over Chapter 61, which deals with forestry as it relates to production. Most communities are looking to marijuana production facilities (which need to be indoors and secured) in industrial zones. Milton does not have an industrial zone. Ms. Innes explained that due to federal narcotics laws, existing pharmacies cannot dispense medical marijuana because they accept federal Medicare payments. However, people in the Commonwealth and in Milton voted in support of the medical use of marijuana. There is a hardship provision which would allow an individual to grow their own if obtaining it from a licensed facility were not feasible. It is unclear how that is determined. Member Kelly asked rhetorically if he could grow and sell watermelons. He can.  Whiteside saw no issues with putting a dispensary in one of Milton’s existing commercial zones. However, marijuana sites need to be “bifurcated,” that is, production and selling need to be located substantially separate from each other.

The Housing Production Plan continues to be the discussion that no one wants to have. Town Planner Bill Clark has been working on a map of the town that identifies town-owned parcels. He had a preliminary version last night. When Chair Whiteside asked Town Planner Clark for sites he felt would be appropriate for affordable housing developments, Mr. Clark parried the question back to the chair. “I thought you were the town planner,” Whiteside said. “We’ve had this conversation before,” Mr. Clark replied. Member Kelly said the map was not really useful for the purpose as it did not yet exclude town parcels that have restrictions on them (e.g. conservation). He did suggest that 131 Eliot (Hendries) would be a suitable location that met the criteria as indicated in the draft of the Housing Production Plan. The criteria include characteristics such as the location being on a public transportation line. Chair Whiteside did not entirely agree. While it did satisfy the criteria, an affordable development in that location would be especially dense and would not be as beneficial to the area as a mixed use development. The property is complicated in that the town owns a portion of the parcel and Carrick Realty owns a portion. Whiteside maintains that any development would need to make use of both parcels. A recent negotiation to sell the town owned parcel to Carrick fell through. While no other specific sites were identified, a next step was agreed to. Mr. Clark will modify the map to exclude town owned parcels with restrictions, and the remaining parcels will be filtered against the criteria identified in the draft plan to come up with an inventory of possible sites. In the meantime, Mr. Whiteside said any residents who care to make a suggestion would be welcome to do so.

All three of these discussions, which orbited around siting as the primary concern, would seem to speak to the value of a Master Plan. Regarding the Master Plan, Ms. Innes said that the prize-winning logo for the plan which would come from Milton High School will be featured on the cover of the town’s annual report.

At a previous meeting of the Planning Board Ned Corcoran said that the developers of the Hill House want to remove the blue spruce in front of the Henry House as it is distressed and the need to run utility lines etc had put it at risk. The developers are proposing replacing it with three sugar maples. At that session Chair Whiteside asked that he consult and get the opinion of the neighborhood association. Last night it was reported that the Revitalization Committee is okay with that. However, the wishes of the neighborhood association are still unknown. Mr. Corcoran was not available last night. The matter will be taken up at a future time.