7/18/2018 PLANNING BOARD Minutes

Home Browse Search

in areas such as applications, whereby projects less than 10,000 square feet(small scale)would not require notice or public hearing and large scale projects over 10,000 square feet required notice, but not a public hearing. Mr. Rowley encouraged taking a closer look at the content, with consideration of its overall impact, suggesting that they were a long way from a final document, Mr. Rowley agreed that the master plan was unnecessary at this time because the application and methodology needed to first be determined. The Chair agreed that she did not wish to reinvent the wheel of the approval process, which is why she supported maintaining a Special Permit process. Mr. Rowley and the Chain'agreed that Form Based Code could work, but there was hesitation about how it would fit with Chapter 40A and Chapter 41, The Chair stated that there were set approval processes that had survived Court challenges. The Chair stated that she would need to again review Mashpee Commons' Article 7 because it was so different from their existing process. Ms. Wilbur stated that they would be happy to take comments regarding Article 7. Mr. Rowley suggested legal Counsel with Bylaw familiarity would be best suited to address the issues of impacts to procedural and statutory requirements that would need to be upheld. Mr. Balzarini stated his preference that a consultant be hired to assist with the review of this process and Mr. Weeden agreed. Chairman Waygan stated that, when Mashpee Commons initially reached out to the Board of Selectmen many years ago, Mashpee Commons was required to pay for a consultant to work with the Planning Board. The Chair indicated that the Planning Board had no budget to hire a consultant. Mr. Rowley stated that there was legal counsel during the 40B process, though the Chair indicated that the ZBA could request funding or the project proponent could pay to hire a reviewing consultant. The Chair added that it was not typical for a developer to draft a bylaw. Mr. Lehrer agreed with Mr. Rowley to address questions coming out of the proposed draft. Mr. Rowley suggested that review was more than just tweaking Article 3 and moving on to Article 4. Mr. Balzarini inquired whether they could ask the Selectmen to hire a consultant for the Planning Board, The Chair expressed concern about serious legal questions with the document. Mr. Preston stated that he had done this for other cities and towns and municipalities in Massachusetts. Mr. Preston stated that the methodology was referred to as place code. Mr. Preston stated that Article 7 was drafted and intended to be added as a new chapter in the Town's Bylaw, Mr. Preston added that Vanessa Farr, author of Article 7, had prior experience as a Town Planner and should be involved with further conversation and comments. Mr. Rowley responded that he would not recommend any portion of Article 7, the way it was written. Mr. Balzarini stated that he did not like Article 7 and the fact that the Building Inspector served as the regulating authority rather than the Planning Board. Town Manager,Rodney Collins, stated that, if the Planning Board wished to have legal counsel, he would make arrangements with Town Counsel, with expertise in zoning issues, to have him available at a regularly scheduled meeting. Otherwise, Mr. Collins recommended developing a scope of work, specific to the Planning Board's thoughts and possibly beyond consultation.with Town Counsel, which he would bring to the Board of Selectmen to add an Article for the October Town Meeting. However,the current plan could not then come to a practical vote in October. Mr. Collins did not wish to rush anything and felt that constructive dialogue was in the best interest of all parties. The Chair thanked Mr. Collins. 13