Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 06/22/2022Board Meeting Minutes,ECEIVED June 22,2022 RKS OFFICE MEETING HELD IN PERSON IN MEETIT4k01Iik1 A/B 9* 35 AND VIRTUALLY USING GOTOWEBINAR PI�1TQID Present: Joseph Cerretani, Clerk; Sharon Friedman; Michael McClanahan; Adrian LeCesne; Brendan Roche, Alternate and Mark Corsillo, Alternate Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development Priscilla McGill, Administrative Secretary Motion to appointed Michael McClanahan as acting Chair for the meeting. (Cerretani-Friedman) Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES 7: 02 p.m. Mr. LeCesne arrived at the meeting. Mr. McClanahan requested a moment of silence for the passing of Mary D. Flynn who had been a member of the Planning Board for many years. There were no Form A plans submitted. Arek Galle of BETA Group noted the previous April meeting with discussion of the MBTA zoning overlay. The Town moved forward with the preliminary stages of the program for the initiative to provide multi -family housing by right in an area around commuter rail stations and MBTA facilities. Mr. Galle stated that this meeting will be to discuss what has been accomplished and moving forward with MBTA multifamily zoning initiative overlay considerations. He spoke of developing a map of the overlay district with limits of where density is best located and fits the community. The MBTA initially depicted a half mile radius. After discussions and consideration, it was determined that a better location would be closest to the train tracks and into downtown areas and a hybrid concept map was then created. The hybrid map meets and exceeds size requirements and walkability requirements. The map will be refined as discussions continue. Mr. Galle noted that a radius map does not work due to the roadway/train right of way under and over passes. He spoke of future development building size and scale and a potential all-weather connection pedestrian overpass. Planning Board Meeting Minutes 6/22/22 Page 1 of 4 Mr. LeCesne noted that an all-weather overpass was mentioned and that although it may not meet all bicycle and ADA requirements, it should not be overlooked if a separate bicycle and ADA access is also created elsewhere. Mr. Galle suggested a combination of solutions for connectivity. Mr. Galle noted that in consideration to the density requirements, his team reviewed the existing 20`h century buildings in Town for a better understanding of their features and characteristics relating to what works well and what does not. He displayed and discussed pictures of Town buildings for a comparison and contrast relating to scale, different types of materials, roofline, windows, doorways, first floor activation, and street level engagement. He also displayed pictures of sidewalks and spoke challenges with narrow widths, landscape treatments, doorways and facades. He recommended adding three feet of sidewalk width and relaxing the foundation plantings and perhaps require street trees and rain gardens in lieu of foundation plantings to get extra sidewalk width. Mr. Galle spoke about existing building heights with different techniques to adjust scale and height to appear less imposing. Mr. Galle further shared other town TOD case study buildings (Beverly, Newburyport, Newton) in comparison to similar buildings in Mansfield and units per acre at each town building shown. Mr. Galle expressed his observations and takeaways that larger buildings in regard to height and building footprints are closest to the rail lines and waterways. Brick, stone, and concrete are common building materials as well as large window and door openings. Often structures have been added onto, or expanded, or modified over the years, creating "organic" variation in building scale, roof lines, articulation and appearance. Urbanized public realm with wide, connected and walkable sidewalks with investment in pocket parks/common areas is a pattern from the past that still resonates in the design of downtown areas. Additional observations and takeaways from the study were that older existing buildings generally have smaller footprints in regard to fagade, proportions, windows, entrances and doorways. The smaller building footprints often created vertical articulation. Building materials are diverse, ranging from red brick, to tan stone, to blue shingles. Some of the Town's 18`h, 191h and 20" century building features are reflected and interpreted in modern TOD building design. Mr. Galle then noted that next steps and objectives for advancing the Master Plan concept and how to apply the observations to the TOD district. Objectives would be related to connectivity internal and external, alternate modes walk/bike, addressing parking and circulation, building position, size, height, scale and design, streetscape treatments and greenspace/open space. He also suggested to plan to talk about what kind of buildout could be accommodated at the train station undeveloped areas as that would have implications to the remaining areas. Mr. Galle then suggested future discussion topics and schedules for July, August, and September leading into a more in-depth review of the current Bylaw to establish areas for review, clarification and improvement to be compliant with MBTA zoning. Mr. Burke spoke of conversations with land owners regarding what densities they need to make their business plan function. He noted that parcel density and breakdowns have not been done yet. Mansfield presents a unique situation where for the past number of years development has been encouraged in train station area while some land areas are underutilized. Mr. Burke said that the focus has been on transit -oriented development since about 2014-2015 and if it has not been taken advantage of, then it is because the business plans do not work in the current allowed densities. There is opportunity with the underutilized properties including 44 acres of Town owned land, open space, and Planning Board Meeting Minutes 6/22/22 Page 2 of 4 the Rumford River areas. Mr. LeCesne noted that much of those areas are currently inaccessible. Mr. Burke said that there is TOD opportunity with the MBTA mandate and the question becomes does the Town merge some of the MBTA density with TOD and thereby reduce the radius and potential additional density on the North Main Street corridor. He further discussed undeveloped land and the conceptual roadway that would go from Route 106 up to County and North Main Streets that would provide additional vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle access. He spoke of access up and over the tracks, which MBTA requirements would typically have two elevators for handicap accessibility and a flight of stairs and referenced different configuration options with shared point access and expense. He also referenced a recent student Capstone project where it was recommended single lane pedestrian traffic in each direction and separate bicycle lane access to navigate under the existing train tracks. Ms. Friedman asked for calculations of current units within the half mile radius and how many units are required to meet requirements. She also agreed with Mr. Galle's recommendations for wider sidewalks and street landscaping and moving forward there should be consideration for real trees, open spaces and walkability. Mr. Burke mentioned consideration to public realm and public access as Ms. Ashman -Collins had mentioned at a previous meeting. He also noted that he would like to see wider sidewalks and street trees, not foundation plantings. Mr. Corsillo mentioned providing ways to capture people coming off the trains with food options to bring them into the downtown areas. Ms. Friedman noted that it is complex to balance density with all the dynamics. Mr. Burke spoke of the opportunity to add character to the undeveloped areas. Mr. Roche recommended two case studies for review in Washington DC, one at the Rhode Island Avenue station and the other at Brookland-Catholic University station which would be a similar match to Mansfield's design. Mr. Cerretani inquired if the recent developments could be included in the calculations or does it have to be all new units. Mr. Burke answered that that goal is to create new units, but recently created may be able to be included if the Town petitions to have them included. It does not need to be contiguous, but cannot be a series of islands. The visual impact of density can be lessened through architectural features, varying roof lines, and wider sidewalks. Mr. LeCesne noted that the density and space should reflect the needs of the people in the space. Mr. Galle referenced projects that incorporate water quality infiltration systems, rain gardens, within the street corridor storm water management with tree plantings and a more integrated approach. Further discussion ensued for creating density and access to foster development. Mr. Burke said that the Town has to satisfy the Department of Transportation, MBTA, CSX, Amtrack and private landowners so it will not be an easy or quick process. Mr. Galle suggested that the next step should entail TOD Bylaw review for use components and language. Map development would come after that. Ms. Friedman mentioned previously approved projects that have not been built out that could potentially be included in the calculations. Mr. Burke noted the next meeting with Mr. Galle could be mid to end July or early August. Mr. Burke also suggested that the Board review the Bylaw for next meeting discussion. Ms. Friedman asked about Chris McDermott, Economic Development Manager's roll with the TOD and inquired if the Board could meet him at a future meeting. Mr. McDermott, who was attending remotely from his office, then came into the meeting to introduce himself. Planning Board Meeting Minutes 6/22/22 Page 3 of 4 Minutes — June 8, 2022 Motion to approve minutes as presented and amended. (Friedman-Cerretani) Four (4) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Two (2) abstained PASSES Mr. Burke confirmed that the balloon simulation test is scheduled for Saturday, June 25, 2022. The applicant's attorney submitted a request to continue the public hearing to July 27, 2022. Motion to open the public hearing (Cerretani-Roche) Six (6) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Motion to continue the public hearing to July 27, 2022 at 7:15 p.m. (Cerretani-Roche) Six (6) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Mr. Roche said that recently on various days the signal lights at Mansfield Crossing intersection have been blinking and asked if that could be looked into. Mr Burke said he would check with the DPW. Ms. Friedman, as representative for the Planning Board participating in an advisory capacity for the Open Space and Recreation Committee, apprised the Board that the committee is working on the 5- year open space and recreation plan. Mr. LeCesne asked about the status for the Howe Street speed bump. Mr. Burke said he will check with Josh Reinke. Motion: To adjourn at 9:37 p.m. (Friedman-Cerretani) Six (6) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Date of Next Planning Board Meeting: July 13, 2022 at 7:00 p.m. Signature of Clerk Date of Approval � / 3 1W Z, Planning Board Meeting Minutes 6/22/22 Page 4 of 4