Town of Duxbury Duxbury / Code

Town of Duxbury

Zoning audit

7 things worth a decision in the Zoning Bylaw: places where it does not agree with something else in it, with the contents, with the zoning map or with the Town's own record of what it has amended, and places where it would be easier to administer written another way. Each names the evidence, and says whose decision it is.

None of them are corrected in the published text. The bylaw on this site reads exactly as Duxbury prints it, and changing any of this is an amendment rather than a correction.

Against the text current through June 2025

Needs a drafting decision 1

The bylaw contradicts itself or is incomplete here. Only Duxbury can settle these, and only by amendment — correcting them here would state as law something Duxbury has never adopted.

19 cited section number(s) do not exist in the text (23 citations)

[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] The bylaw cites sections by number that the converted text does not contain. Some are references to other bylaws or to a superseded numbering; some will be sections the PDF reader failed to recognise. Either way a reader who follows the citation finds nothing.

  • § 424.2 cited 2 time(s); e.g. § 421-A: “…ficer may approve the following uses, provided that the provisions of Section 424.2 are complied with:”
  • § 440.2.5 cited 2 time(s); e.g. § 440 a.: “…shall be recorded as part of the restriction on the property noted in Section 440.2.5(i). For example, if a unit appraised for $300,000 is sold for $225,00…”
  • § 540.4.3 cited 2 time(s); e.g. § 540 2.: “…y recommended that a copy of the existing conditions plan required in Section 540.4.3 below be submitted at this stage. The Planning Board shall approve, a…”
  • § 560.5.1 cited 2 time(s); e.g. § 560: “…Planning Board or Board of Appeals may accept, any combination of the Section 560.5.1(a)-(d) requirements provided that in no event shall the total number…”

For each number, decide whether it is a stale citation to amend or a section the conversion missed to re-read.

read from the Town's materials

Between the bylaw and the map 2

The bylaw and the zoning map are one instrument, and these are the places where they do not agree.

2 map district code(s) never appear in the bylaw text

[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] The zoning map layer carries these district codes, and the converted bylaw text never writes them. Either the map uses abbreviations the bylaw does not (the bylaw may name the district in words), the layer is not the map of record, or the text is stale.

  • Map code PD-3: no match in text
  • Map code DP: no match in text

Match each code to the district the bylaw establishes by name, in districts.yaml, or replace the layer.

read from the Town's materials

3 district code(s) the text establishes are not on the map layer

[Automated statute and consistency scan, low confidence.] The bylaw names these districts with a code in parentheses and the map layer we hold has no polygon carrying that code. Overlay districts commonly sit on a separate layer; a base district missing from the map is a gap.

  • Text names (APOD); map has no APOD
  • Text names (POLOD); map has no POLOD
  • Text names (WSA); map has no WSA

Check whether each is an overlay on another layer or a base district the map should carry.

read from the Town's materials

Against the enabling statute 2

Where the ordinance appears to require, permit or prohibit something the state act it is adopted under does not allow it to. These are readings of two published texts side by side, not legal advice, and each names the provision on both sides so counsel can check it rather than take our word.

§ 410 9An accessory dwelling provision appears to require a special permit

[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] MGL c. 40A, § 3 forbids a bylaw to "require a special permit or other discretionary zoning approval for the use of land or structures for a single accessory dwelling unit" in a single-family residential district. This provision mentions a special permit in the same breath as the accessory dwelling.

  • § 410 9.: “…tion shall be subject to G.L. c. 40A, Section 6 and Section 401 of the Zoning Bylaw, provided however, that a special permit shall not be required but a majority of the Zoning Board of Appeals shall make a finding that the proposed al…”
  • MGL c. 40A, § 3: "shall not ... require a special permit or other discretionary zoning approval for the use of land or structures for a single accessory dwelling unit"

Read the provision: a special permit for a second ADU, or for an ADU larger than the statute protects, is allowed; one for the first protected ADU is not.

read from the Town's materials

§ 619A marijuana establishment prohibition without reference to the required ballot question

[Automated statute and consistency scan, low confidence.] MGL c. 94G, § 3(a)(2) allows a city or town to prohibit marijuana establishments only by a vote of the voters at a general or special election, unless the municipality voted no on Question 4 in 2016 (in which case a bylaw suffices until 31 December 2019).

  • § 619: “Marijuana Establishments are prohibited in all zoning districts in the Town in accordance with General Laws chapter 94G, section 3.”

Confirm the prohibition was adopted by ballot question, or the town's 2016 vote.

read from the Town's materials

Worth taking up at the next amendment 1

Nothing here contradicts anything, and nothing here exceeds the statute. These are places where what is written makes the bylaw harder to administer, to cite or to read than it needs to be. Each is still a change only Duxbury can make.

6 term(s) are defined more than once

[Automated statute and consistency scan, medium confidence.] A term with two definitions in one bylaw means one reading or the other, and the site resolves a use of the term to the nearest definition in scope. Where the two are the same words in two places that is only untidy; where they differ it is a drafting question.

  • “developer” defined in §§ 302, 725
  • “home owners’ or residents’ association” defined in §§ 302, 725
  • “impervious coverage” defined in §§ 302, 725
  • “town” defined in §§ 302, 725

Compare the definitions; if they differ, say which governs where.

read from the Town's materials

Not published here yet 1

Ours, not Duxbury's: things this site does not carry yet.

The zoning map is not published here yet

The district pages read from the code alone. Until the layers are built, a reader cannot go from a place to the rules that govern it, which is half of what this site is for.

Ours.

found by comparison

↑