Laserfiche WebLink
JC <br /> UJ 9_IOI�,i Town of Aash pee AanninA Board <br /> 16 Great Neck Road Worth <br /> 'vlashpee, Aassachusetts 02649 <br /> the Development Agreement and it will trigger a number of externalities as we navigate through the <br /> process. For the next couple meetings, if the Board could work through details of the bylaw like <br /> dimensionality, parking ratio, and administration and work through this process. By the end of the <br /> month we have a technically functional bylaw and have time to tweak and work on nuanced <br /> refinements of that language without the deadline. Are high dense uses such as residential and office <br /> generally consistent? America historically over provides for parking and has for a very long time, like to <br /> see a walkable pedestrian friendly neighborhood. <br /> Chairman Fulone had a question on the OSID reference. He is not familiar with OSID. He could use an <br /> explanation. <br /> Mr. Lehrer shed light on the OSID bylaw that was voted on and approved at the 1986 Town Meeting. It <br /> replaced the Open Spaced Multifamily Development bylaw. It was the regulatory tool used to build the <br /> higher density condos in Town like Sea Oaks, Deer Crossing, and parts of Willowbend etc. It allowed 4 <br /> units per acre. In 1986 the OSMD was replaced by OSID, which operates under the principle premise <br /> of transferring of development rights. Any units above the basic number allowed on the property by the <br /> underlying zoning, must be transferred from other land, which may be located elsewhere in Town, and <br /> must be set aside as open space. A certain number of units from that now protected land could be <br /> transferred into a project of at least 20 acres and that would allow for mixed use development. One <br /> thing he will note about OSID, it is mechanically complicated. In the 1998 Comprehensive Plan, it <br /> discussed the OSID needs amendments to function well. Another critical piece, it is not naive to think <br /> that zoning needs to be responsive to market conditions. There are two potential development <br /> pathways under the current zoning, OSID and conventional commercial subdivisions. The private <br /> sector is going to invest in projects that the market responds to. If in the 1986 OSID, the market was <br /> allowing for development under that bylaw, he thinks it would have been developed by now. Now in <br /> 2021 it hasn't occurred, there is a new option on the table. Two options here: one is mechanically <br /> complicated and expensive and the other is mechanically simple and cheaper. As we consider how to <br /> analyze zoning we need to make an honest assessment that OSID isn't responsive to current market <br /> conditions. The other option is very feasible financially and thus why we are going through this route <br /> now. Conventional commercial subdivision option has zero benefits from built, environment, public <br /> realm, traffic or a natural resources standpoint. <br /> Chairman Fulone asked if the OSID had been amended since 1986. To which Mr. Lehrer mentioned <br /> there had been some, but he would need to look into what specifically they were. <br /> Mr. Balzarini asked if there would be parking for visitors. A dwelling with 1 or 2 bedrooms and only one <br /> parking space, it is difficult to have a two bedroom dwelling with one parking spot. Noted garages with <br /> stories. <br /> Mr. Lehrer reiterated we should go through the nuances of dimensional criteria with why it's proposed <br /> and what it achieves by way of urban design principle and urban form and a presentation will be given <br /> by a traffic professional in regards to parking at a future meeting. <br /> 7 <br />