6/6/2018 PLANNING BOARD Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

that the Board could determine if they needed to add a condition to the Special Permit Modification, The Chair added that they would need to meet again to sign the Modification, and following a review of the new information, if there is a recommendation to add a condition, it would be included in the draft Modification#2 for the next meeting, Mr. Lovely was unclear why an issue with the commercial building's parking lot would have anything to do with adding a use to the Special Permit. The Chair responded that a Special Permit Modification was their time to ensure compliance. The Chair stated that there was support for the Modification for the proposed use. Mr. Lovely expressed concern about the school's time constraints. Mr. Lehrer stated that the project proponents had worked very hard and had been great partners, bringing a complete application to the Board and had not consulted with Mr. Rowley and was unaware of the engineering issue. Mr, Lehrer stated that, had he known, he would have addressed the issue sooner and Mr. Lovely was in agreement. Ms. Starr inquired about the next meeting and was advised that it would be in two weeks, The Chair suggested that the use would likely be approved, but the vote would not be taken until the public hearing was closed, and more information needed to be forwarded to Mr. Rowley and Mr. Lehrer, allowing any necessary language to be added to Special Permit Modification#2. Mr, Balzarini inquired about ,State deadlines but it was noted that the State could not be contacted until everything was finalized in Mashpee. Mr. Lovely stated that he would collect the information tomorrow. MOTION: Mr. Balzarini made a motion to continue the Public Hearing until June 20 at 7:10 p.m. Mr. Kooharian seconded the motion. All voted unanimously. A five minutes recess was taken at 7:43 p.m. PRESENTATION Rui Almeida,Form Based Code Mr. Lehrer introduced his mentor, architect and Westerly, RI Town Planner with 30 years' experience, Rui Almeida, to discuss form based code with the Board. Mr. Almeida first inquired about the Board's knowledge about form based code then continued on to describe conventional zoning as land use based, which did not allow for the humanizing of space. Form based code allowed a focus on form, rather than land use or abstraction, as well as focus on desired outcomes, such as a proj ect's appearance. Mr. Almeida noted that form based code was flexible and could be used by site or general plan or rural area. Form based code allowed design for human usage, controlling the form at the outset. Form based code allowed for the creation of places, attracting people because it was beautiful, meaningful, functional and safe, through design, Form based code allowed design for people, rather than cars, as had been done historically in the U.S. Form based code allowed for a town to determine what their town would look like and how it would function, Mr. Almeida noted that sameness did not attract people. People were more attracted to uniqueness and character, which came from history, identity, memory and heritage. Form based code allowed for predictability that would allow the Town to determine their vision and improve quality of life. Mr. Almeida pointed out that conventional zoning allowed for the developer to present their plans to the Town, leaving the Planning Board to determine from the proposals what they wanted for the Town. Mr, Balzarini suggested a master plan provided clarity. The Chair noted that projects were better following Planning Board review. 4