The Scituate Planning Board’s year-end workshop sparked intense debate over a proposed expansion of the Water Resource Protection District (WRPD) buffer, which critics warn could render nearly 10 acres of prime development land useless. The proposal, intended for the 2026 Annual Town Meeting, seeks to increase the non-disturbance buffer from 150 feet to 400 feet from surface water sources and 200 feet from tributaries. Local residents and developers argued the change directly contradicts the town’s recent MBTA Communities zoning efforts.

“This is specifically about a non-disturbance zone; you’re not allowed to do anything, not even cut your grass,” warned resident Gregory Morris. He noted that the shift would encompass approximately 10 acres near the Greenbush rotary, including the yoga studio and general store. “Per your new MBTA zoning, it’s 15 units an acre. This now prohibits the construction of approximately 150 units. I think the board needs to take that into consideration.” John Barry, a developer with a purchase agreement for 7 Driftway, echoed these concerns, calling the proposal “kind of a land taking” that would kill the viability of redevelopment projects incentivized by the town.

Chair Patricia Lambert acknowledged the friction, stating the board would consult town counsel and the Water Resources Commission to determine if state regulations require a total non-disturbance zone or merely a regulated one. “Most of the changes that are occurring in the bylaw are a result of housekeeping,” Lambert noted. “We’re finding things that were incorrect from the MBTA bylaw that we’re trying to correct all at once.” Stephen Pritchard suggested a middle ground might be necessary. “The primary objective of this thing is to protect our water resources,” Pritchard said. “But maybe there is a way to address the middle piece of 150 to 400 feet that has some other consistent standard.”

The board also tackled updates to the stormwater bylaw to comply with federal MS4 requirements. Consultant Nick Cohen explained that while regulations were updated in October, the bylaw must now "catch up" to provide the necessary legal framework. A new "80% threshold" was introduced to prevent developers from skirting the rules. “We have a lot of projects that come in at 23.9% impervious and 14,990 square feet of disturbance,” Lambert said, referring to projects that stop just short of triggering a full permit. “All this is saying is if you’re at 80% of the threshold, give us a staking plan. We’re going to hold you to that in the end.”

During a discussion on accessory building setbacks and decks, the board reached a consensus to ease restrictions on low-profile structures. Member Maura Burke participated in the decision to adjust the height threshold for decks that can extend into setbacks from 12 inches to 30 inches. “That might be a good cut-off point that makes sense,” Pritchard noted, citing building codes that require railings above 30 inches. Member Rebecca Lewis also pushed for clarity on lot area requirements, supporting a change to ensure all required lot areas are continuous. “We did that circle thing... except we’re changing ‘buildable’ to ‘required’ to avoid confusion,” Lewis explained.

Beyond zoning, Lambert informed the board that the 2026 budget would be "tight," noting that the position of Assistant Town Administrator Director of Planning and Development was currently defunded. Motion made by Ann Burbine to reappoint John Buckley to a three-year term on the Design Review Committee for a term running from January 2026 to January 2029. Seconded by Stephen Pritchard. Motion Passed (5-0).

The board also processed several financial items to close out the year. Motion made by Ann Burbine to approve purchase orders including $1,467.12 for a traffic study related to the 21 Central Avenue project and $875 for the printing of revised zoning bylaws. Seconded by Stephen Pritchard. Motion Passed (5-0).

As the meeting concluded, Lambert updated the board on a new proposal for 7 Driftway, where a developer intends to build an 18-unit multi-family project by-right under the new density rules. “He’s going to try to reuse the existing building because he says it’s structurally very sound,” Lambert said. Ann Burbine observed that the sensitive location has always been a challenge. “It sits right on the... yeah, this is what predicated—I mean, this has always been the issue on that site,” Burbine said. Motion made by Ann Burbine to adjourn. Seconded by Rebecca Lewis. Motion Passed (5-0). The meeting was adjourned.