7/18/2018 PLANNING BOARD Minutes

Home Browse Search

information, particularly considering the costs to the Town such as traffic issues and the need for increased emergency responder services. The Chair requested the full report from 2005 and Mr. Lehrer confirmed that he could provide it. Mr. Lehrer inquired about the density differences between the proposals and. Chairman Waygan responded that previously it consisted of 382 housing units, on 60 acres, with 17 acres of open space. Mr. Lehrer inquired about potential revenue streams outside of property tax. There was consensus to assess the best uses to ensure increased revenue streams, such as the possibility of a hotel. The Chair recommended working with the FDIC. Mr. Weeden inquired about the ability to conduct a study without a master plan to accurately assess the impacts. Mr. Lehrer pointed out that master plan development was part of the process for either the MPD or Mashpee Commons' Form-Based Code and suggested that the Board consider the bylaw, whether it was MPD or FBC, which would create the clearest path forward for the developer, so that there would be no question regarding the final outlay. The Chair stated that the MPD would include the master plan requirement as part of the Special Permit application. Mr. Balzarini inquired whether Mashpee Commons could work collaboratively with the Board to develop.something, The Chair stated that, without a master plan identifying the number of units being requested, it was difficult to determine whether or not the open space requirement was reasonable. Russell Preston, representing Mashpee Commons, stated that the fiscal impact study would be a costly endeavor and would require a master plan, but that there was currently no clear path for entitlement for development. Mr. Balzarini responded by inquiring how the development would be benefitting the Town. Mr. Preston responded that the current study was part of the 40B process, which they had since abandoned, adding that the proposed MPD would not work due to the additional costs and unclear path forward for their development. Mr. Balzarini emphasized . the necessity for the Town to have a better idea whether to anticipate the need for additional teachers if there would be an increase in family homes, or emergency responder services for an increase in an older population. Mr. Preston responded that, for them to conduct such studies, they would need to know from the Town current information, such as, the cost to educate a child, per school, stating that it was an in depth analysis. Mr. Preston suggested that Mashpee Commons was seeking a density of 44-66 units per acre in order to pay for the necessary infrastructure and develop a high quality public space, which, under.MPD, would require them to provide more than one acre of open space, creating an additional burden for development. Mr. Preston stated that the current 40B permit had no external open space requirement, with a higher affordability requirement, but was not feasible. The Chair responded that the Planning Board needed a master plan to determine whether the open space requirement was unreasonable. Mr. Balzarini responded that Mashpee Commons depicted different neighborhoods with different styles of buildings and inquired about them providing the cost and tax potential with.the information. Mr. Preston responded that they had a 5-10 year plan, as well as the long term master plan that would include plans for the rotary. The Chair responded that the rotary was too far out as it would be dictated by the State and the Town. Mr. Preston inquired about what it was the Board was seeking, The Chair responded that they were seeking a draft master plan with blocks coded to Mashpee Commons' form-based code. The Chair suggested that Mashpee Commons would likely have trouble at October Town 7