My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/16/2009 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
>
12/16/2009 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2025 3:59:07 PM
Creation date
1/19/2022 3:51:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
PLANNING BOARD
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/16/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Compact Costs—Costs for infrastructure, severer transportation, and water in <br /> compact areas show significantly less demand for infrastructure in these areas. <br /> Illustrative Mitigation Picture, Incentives and Disincentives-—The mitigation <br /> picture compares three scenarios, development under the pi�or Regional Policy Plan, <br /> development under the current Regional Policy Plan outside of an Economic Center, and <br /> development under the current Regional Policy Plan inside an Economic Center. <br /> Comparisons have been made for total mitigation from three major sources, traffic, open <br /> space, and affordable housing. Disincentives are located within the resource protection <br /> areas (increased mitigation under the new RPP . Differentiation between the mitigation <br /> is the difference between traffic. An attempt is being made to direct growth into the <br /> denser areas that leave a lighter environmental footprint and will allow for an increase in <br /> the quality of economic development without the sprawl. <br /> Dennis Balzarini asked about wastewater provisions, to which Mr. Neidzvviecki <br /> responded there is no wastewater mitigation within the DRI. He stated that the <br /> Commission would require any development to mitigate wastewater impacts directly <br /> using T1iDL established under the Mass. Estuary Project as guidelines. <br /> Affordable Housing mitigation could be made in the form of cash which the. <br /> Town could apply wherever needed. <br /> The intent., Cape-wide, is for the Land Use Vision Maps to provides ways to use <br /> Chapter H to encourage economic development in industrial, service, and trade areas by <br /> raising thresholds and to direct development into the economic centers. <br /> Mary Waygan asked Mr. I eid wiecl i to review the benefits of using a <br /> Development Agreement. <br /> e introduced l rist r Senatori and Phil.Dascomb who are prepared to mare <br /> brief presentation explaining the differences between a IRI and a Development <br /> Agreement. <br /> Ms.:Senato explained that a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) decision is <br /> valid for seven years. It is usually a single development project likely to be <br /> constructed at one time. The Cape Cod Commission review is followed by local review. <br /> Development Agreement is-generally valid anywhere upwards of ten 10 gears <br /> (depending upon the parties involved)and can be extended for a longer period of time. <br /> This usually involves multiple buildings, large developments that are constructed over a <br /> longer period of time. This option provides a joint review between the Commission and <br /> possibly town-or state agencies involved. <br /> The Mashpee Connnmons luster Plan was subject to an environmental impact <br /> report from MEPA and became a Development of regional Impact. The Commission <br /> has rendered decisions on two of the neighborhoods,North Market Street Phase I and <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.