SOME TRUE WEASELLYNESS: THE STERLING PLANNING BOARD, CHAIRED BY SELF-DEALING DEVELOPER WEASEL CARL CORRINNE, PROPOSES TO GUT AND ALTER KEY ZONING BY-LAW “DEFINITIONS.” SOME PROPOSED CHANGES ARE JUST IDIOTIC

SO the Sterling Planning Board, Chaired by self-dealing developer weasel Carl Corrinne, together with its make-work talking sock puppet Town Planner, propose to alter and gut some key Sterling Zoning By-Law “Definitions”—

SEE the proposed changes here– https://www.sterling-ma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif1266/f/uploads/zoning_proposal_5_-_new_revised_definitions_3.pdf

Let us take a look at some of the proposed changes.

Here is the current Sterling Zoning By-Laws definition of “BUILDING CODE or STATE BUILDING CODE”—

BUILDING CODE or STATE BUILDING CODE

The Building Code of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, as the same may be amended from time to time. Terms used in this bylaw shall have the same meaning as ascribed to them in the Building Code unless the context of usage in this bylaw clearly indicates another meaning.

As you can see, the meaning is perfectly clear and EVERYONE knows what is the Massachusetts State Building Code. IT’S THIS AS FOUND ON THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSTTS WEBSITE—

https://www.mass.gov/handbook/tenth-edition-of-the-ma-state-building-code-780

Here is the PROPOSED new “definition” of same—

BUILDING CODE or STATE BUILDING CODE  Massachusetts State Building Code – 780 CMR consists of a series of international model codes and any state-specific amendments adopted by the Board of Building Regulations and Standards (BBRS). The BBRS regularly updates the state building codes as new information and technology becomes available and change is warranted. These updates are listed here, as well as links to the model codes. Terms used in this bylaw shall have the same meaning as ascribed to them in the Building Code unless the context of usage in this bylaw clearly indicates another meaning.

Do we really need that verbose, idiotic BULLSHIT??? Obviously NOT.

Now let’s look at the proposed new definition of “FAMILY”—

FAMILY A number of individuals living and cooking together on the premises as a single unit., but not more than five unrelated individuals.

The ‘strikethrough’ change ELIMINATES ANY CAP ON THE NUMBER OF UNRELATED PEOPLE WHO CAN LIVE TOGETHER IN A DWELLING UNIT.

THAT’S TOTAL HORSESHIT.

AND IT’S a TOTAL PANDER to the so-called ‘MBTA MULTI-FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT COMPLIANCE GUIDELINES” THAT PUT NO LIMIT WHATSOEVER ON THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO CAN OCCUPY A ‘DWELLING UNIT.’

As we know, the Planning Board and Town Planner have shown over the past 2-3 years that they are F#cking Morons by taking those so-called ‘Compliance Guidelines’ seriously, notwithstanding the clear language of Mass.Gen.Laws Ch. 40A, Sec. 3A and the fact that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled on 8 January 2025, in accordance with that statutory language, that so-called ‘MBTA Multi-Family Zoning Districts’ MUST BE LOCATED WITHIN ½ MILE OF AN MBTA TRAIN/TRANSIT STATION. STERLING HAS NO LAND CLOSER THAN 5-6 MILES TO THE MBTA TRAIN STATION ON NASHUA STREET, LEOMINSTER.

SEE the SJC decision here–

Click to access SJC_AG_Milton_1.8.25.pdf

NOW LET’S LOOK AT THE PROPOSED, OUTRAGEOUS, PRO-DEVELOPER DEFINITION OF “FRONTAGE”—

FRONTAGE That portion of a lot fronting upon a street or way, said frontage to be measured along street lines between its side lot lines and their intersection with the streets.

The boundary of a lot coinciding with the street line, being an unbroken distance along a way currently maintained by the Town, county, or state, or along ways shown of the Definitive Plans of approved subdivisions, through which actual access to the potential building site shall be required unless otherwise exempted herein. A street may provide frontage only upon a determination by the Planning Board that it provides adequate access for fire, police, and emergency vehicles. Lot frontage shall be measured continuously along street lines between side lot lines. Lots with interrupted or discontinuous frontage must demonstrate that the required length along the street may be obtained from one continuous frontage section, without any totaling of discontinuous frontage sections.

The ‘strikethrough’ language is the CURRENT definition. The proposed change provides that contiguous/continuous frontage on a street or way IS NO LONGER REQUIRED TO MEET ‘BUILDABLE LOT’ FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS. THAT MEANS THAT A DEVELOPER CAN BUY A PARCEL WHOSE FRONTAGE ON A STREET OR WAY IS INTERRUPTED/SEPARATED BY AN INTERVENING PARCEL OR INTERVENING PARCELS, ADD THE SEPARATE FRONTAGE SEGMENTS TOGETHER,  AND THEN CLAIM TOTAL FRONTAGE REQUIRED FOR A BUILDABLE LOT.

NICE TRY CORRINNE, YOU FRIGGIN’ LITTLE WEASEL.

Here’s the proposed new definition of “HOTEL or MOTEL”—

HOTEL or MOTEL

A structure used or designed for overnight lodging, and which may also provide a restaurant and hotel/motel related retail and consumer services to lodgers and the public.

A building or group of buildings providing accommodations on a transient basis for compensation.

The ‘strikethrough’ language is the CURRENT definition and is perfectly adequate. The proposed NEW DEFINITION DOES NOT COVER WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER TO BE ‘MOTEL CABINS.’ WHAT ABOUT THEM, HUH GENIUSES???

Lastly, we move on to the proposed new definition of “STRUCTURE”—

STRUCTURE A combination of materials assembled to give support or shelter such as buildings, towers, masts, sheds, roofed storage areas, mechanical equipment, swimming pools; but not including signs, fences, septic tanks, and septic systems and accessory facilities associated with the provision of utilities such as drains, wells, transformers, and utility poles.

A combination of materials to form a construction, including among others, buildings, stadiums, tents, reviewing stands, platforms, stagings, observation towers, water tanks, play towers, swimming pools, trestles, sheds, shelters, fences over six feet high, display signs, flagpoles, masts for radio antennas, courts for tennis or similar games, backstops, backboards; the term “structure” shall be construed as if followed by the words “or portion thereof.” A vessel shall not be considered to be a structure.

The ’strikethrough’ language is the CURRENT definition. It is more comprehensive, provides examples, and is THEREFORE PREFERABLE. NOTE that under the proposed NEW definition “accessory facilities associated with the provision of utilities,” including “utility poles,” don’t count as “structures.”

NOW WHY MIGHT THAT BE??? WELL, IT’S BECAUSE CORRINNE WAS CAUGHT WITH HIS PANTS DOWN WHEN HE CLAIMED THAT HIS LAND UNDER THE THREE (3) PARALLEL SETS OF HIGH VOLTAGE LINES AND TOWERS ON THE NATIONAL GRID RIGHT-OF-WAY OFF 100 CLINTON ROAD COUNTED TOWARD THE 60% “OPEN SPACE” HE NEEDED TO CLAIM AS PART OF HIS MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT THERE. UNDER OUR MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT BY-LAWS ‘ABOVE-GROUND’ UTILITIES ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ON LAND CLAIMED AS REQUIRED “OPEN SPACE.”

SO AGAIN, NICE TRY CORRINNE, YOU FRIGGIN’ LITTLE WEASEL.

CONCLUSION: As a group these proposed Zoning By-Laws “Definition’ changes are objectionable. Shoot them down at the May 2025 Sterling Annual Town Meeting.

J.G.