The conversation during the Marion Planning Board meeting on March 20 centered on two elements of the draft Master Plan, facilitated by Ken Buckland, the former town planner and consultant for the town.
Whether the board was discussing climate resiliency or open space – the two Master Plan elements under review that evening – the central theme was the same: Marion is a low-lying coastal community and would be well served to keep in mind extreme weather events when contemplating future infrastructure modifications and open space planning.
Planning Board member Stephen Kokkins underscored the need within the plan to consider the time horizon when discussing sea level change. Kokkins questioned the emphasis placed on sea level changes and the ranking system outlined by the plan.
Board member Jennifer Francis said, “[The plan] is underwhelming about coastal resiliency and severe storms. The threat is going to be here in the same timeframe that we are going to be able to do something about it.”
The Master Plan considers a ten-year time horizon, and the board acknowledged a disagreement among its members as to the rate of climate change and its affect on Marion and the coastal communities in that time, but agreed that climate change is contributing to severe weather and increased sea level.
Board member Michael Popitz remarked that the town, in its planning for infrastructure, should “keep in mind the ideas discussed in this and other sections, ideas such as flooding in the Gateway area of Marion – investments in areas of sea level rise should keep that in mind as part of the planning. Be forward thinking, have a vision of the future.”
Popitz suggested that the town should consider future sea level rise so that adjustments are made now to prevent the need for revising the projects in the future. Francis agreed and felt this idea should be added as its own paragraph to emphasize its importance.
“Whenever we spend money in town on infrastructure,” Francis said, “we should remember that it should be designed with extreme storms in mind, maybe even more than sea level rise, right now.”
Kokkins added, “We should make sure Marion is working in concert with other towns in the region, including on large infrastructure projects.”
Francis highlighted the Town Resilience Committee contemplated by the Master Plan and suggested that its main focus be on town infrastructure and town properties. She suggested it could also be a resource for private property owners and for other towns.
Board member Will Saltonstall asked if the town had a Hazard Mitigation Plan, to which Francis replied that there was an application in for it, under the purview of the town administrator and Board of Selectmen.
The town is not eligible for FEMA disaster relief funds until the plan is completed.
The discussion moved to Open Space and Recreation, the second element of the Master Plan to be reviewed that evening.
Efforts are underway to set up an advisory group to include the Community Preservation Committee, the Sippican Lands Trust, Marion Open Space Acquisition Commission, Marion Tree and Parks Committee, the Marion Marine Resources Commission, Marion Recreation Department, Planning Board, and the Washburn Trust to coordinate efforts to protect and manage open space in town.
The group, called Stewards of Community Open Space (SOCOS), still in the beginning stages of formation and waiting for selectmen review, believes it has an important function in town and can effectively influence policy changes.
The group would like formal recognition by the town before the Master Plan is completed. In response to whether the individual land protection organizations within the group could all be under one umbrella, Buckland replied that this should be taken one step at a time, but, he added, “If the iron is hot, it’s time to brand the cattle!”
The board acknowledged that the protection of open space within the town has broad implications with regard to other elements in the Master Plan. Board member Eileen Marum suggested that open space be considered during the planning of housing developments.
“Open space can help with temperature control, reduce impervious surface percentages, provides more value versus man-made structures for water treatment facilities,” said Marum.
Chairman Robert Lane noted that cluster housing developments, which would have the same housing density as allowed under current zoning but would allow houses to be clustered to maximize contiguous open space, would require a zoning bylaw change.
Francis suggested that people in Marion feel that there is enough protected open space in town. “A lot of people may feel we have enough open space – forty-nine percent of the town – and maybe we should consider changing the wording from expanding open space to maintaining open space.”
Saltonstall noted in the discussion of harbor resources that the plan should “emphasize public access to the waterfront and preserving or enhancing that use.” Francis added that the plan should “explicitly remind people we are also talking about the harbor environment.”
In closing the discussion, Buckland reminded the board of the last two elements of the plan to be reviewed: Natural and Cultural Resources and Implementation.
In other business, the board voted unanimously to approve an ANR plan presented by Rich Charon on behalf of Nadler and Malone located at 81 and 91 Allens Point Road. The plan described a legal non-conforming lot, which the board approved with the note that the parcel was approved only for conveyance purposes and was not a buildable lot.
The board also briefly touched on the creation of the Transportation and Circulation Task Force. Francis will be contacting potential Task Force members and will report back to the board.
The next meeting of the Marion Planning Board is scheduled for April 3 at 7:00 pm at the Marion Town House.
By Sarah French Storer