Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning 05/10/2023Town of Mansfield 0 0 . Planning Boded sA 'RECE1VED T0p4 CLERKS OFFICE Meeting eti gO mutes 2023 AN 15 A cool 2023 r% ,IJ MEETING HELD IN PERSON IN MEETINUR. ,_ ITTS AND VIRTUALLY USING GOTOWEBINAR PLATFO Present: Joseph Cerretani, Chair; Michael McClanahan; Ralph Penney; Adrian LeCesne; Michael Feck and Mark Corsillo, Associate Sarah Raposa, Director of Planning & Development Priscilla McGill, Administrative Secretary Absent: Sharon Friedman, Clerk Motion to appoint Mr. Corsillo as Clerk for the meeting. (McClanahan-Feck) Four (4) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Mr. Cerretani announced that Brendan Roche resigned from the Board as he was elected to the Select Board. He said that there are two Board vacancies, one member and one associate, and explained the application process for anyone that may be interested in applying. 7: 08 pm Mr. LeCesne arrived at the meeting. Motion to dispense with the reading of the Public Hearing Bylaw Amendment Article 13 full legal advertisement which was advertised in the Sun Chronical on April 26'h and May Yd. (McClanahan -Penney) Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Mr. Cerretani started with the introduction of the 2016 TOD background process noting that the project was tabled in order to work on completion of the 2020 Master Plan, which included plans to increase density in the TOD area. At that time, the Board expressed to the community that density would not be increased without fixing the roadways and fixing the outlets out of the train station, which led to the current project coming together with roadway improvement plans. Mr. Cerretani said that there is also underutilized land which would be addressed with the new TOD overlay. Arek Galle of BETA Inc., Laura Smead of JM Goldson and Sarah Raposa, Planner were presenters for the public hearing zoning bylaw. Mr. Galle began the presentation with the project team introduction who have been working on the project for many years and are working on re -envisioning the area as a gateway to the conununity. Planning Board Meeting Minutes 5/10/23 Page 1 of 6 Mr. Galle highlighted the Mansfield Station Revitalization Overlay District (TOD) as it began in 2014 with goals to re -envision the area around the Conmmter Rail Station, including quality of life, traffic congestion, disconnected walkability, and inaccessible conservation land plus create a neighborhood gateway and revitalization opportunities. Mr. Galle continued with the 2018-2019 Planning Board work to assess goals of the TOD district and how to better achieve them. The Strategic Development Committed was then established to better understand what the shortcomings were and to simplify the ordinance, create more by right opportunities and simplify the permitting. The Committee developed a Vision Statement in 2019 to promote mixed - use, connectivity, and balance for the needs of the community and businesses. In 2018 — 2019 both the Committee and the Planning Board were working to assess the goals of the TOD and how to better achieve them. Work then paused due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Mr. Galle spoke of the 2022-2023 Route 106 corridor improvements and how the TOD project is occurring concurrent with the improvements. Approximately $18 million in grant funds have been directed to the Route 106/Chauncy Street improvements between Route 140 and North Main Street, with proposed intersection routing commuter vehicle traffic away from the Highland Avenue neighborhood. He noted the importance of the TOD project acceptance to work in conjunction with the MassDOT Route 106 project. Overall funding approaches $28M with both State and Grant money for transportation improvements in the corridor area. The Proposed new intersection would allow for access to the western side but also requires collaboration with other stakeholders and the MBTA for the development of the parkway. There is also $10.3M in grant funding from GATRA to support design and construction of the Parkway. In 2022-2023 the cormnunity outreach began with public workshops. Ms. Raposa spoke of Mansfield Access outreach with recorded videos which are posted on the Cable Access website. The Planning Board continued, where previous work left off, with the Master Plan and the work that Mr. Galle spoke of. The new road will provide a buffer and help to eliminate the commuter congestion. The new road will open up publicly acceptable open space to the North of the commuter rail station that can be used by residents for passive recreation. A new parking garage will serve conunuters and residents. She also referenced the importance of the MBTA Communities legislation which requires by right multi -family housing zoning in proximity to commuter rail station mandating the rezoning of areas to accommodate about 1,400 housing units. The proposed zoning Bylaw could achieve about half of the mandated housing units in the overlay area. She said that there will be additional zoning amendments over the next 18 months as the Town strives to come into compliance with the MBTA legislation by December 2024. Ms. Raposa said there were 2014 Zoning Bylaw challenges to be addressed relating to Special Permit requirements, density, what is considered desirable for areas in a walkable down area, and building height restrictions. Ms. Smead referenced that the 2023 Zoning Bylaw updates will address the current lack of clarity by reorganizing the Bylaw and adding structure and clarity in alignment with the state housing requirements; making change to the current special permit requirement by adding more as of right uses and reducing special use permits. Residential housing density is lower than what is considered desirable to a walkable downtown area. The revisions create increased residential housing density aligned with state and local revitalization goals and reorganized the housing density with added incentive structure. Planning Board Meeting Minutes 5/10/23 Page 2 of 6 New areas within the district were created to allow for greater building height up to 60 feet while maintaining a height of 45 feet closer to residential areas. There are added requirements and details regarding desirable first floor uses, building size, form, articulation, detailing and overall character within any given site as well as with the Overlay District. Ms. Raposa concluded that the purpose of the Zoning Bylaw Amendment is to update language, help the Town realize long-standing revitalization goals, incentivize economic investment within broader downtown, keep pace with on -going transportation projects within and adjacent to the Mansfield Station Overlay District, promote concurrent investments in the public realm, open space, safety, walkability and activate under-utilized Town -owned lands. Ms. Raposa reviewed the draft Bylaw language stating that the base level allows for density of 30 units per acre, a building height of up to 45 feet or 60 feet with step backs. This would be by right or as of right as defined in the definition section of the Bylaw, which means that it is allowed but still requires Site Plan review with the Planning Board. The proposed amendment also incorporates a series of tiered incentives which a developer would be eligible for upon demonstrating compliance with the prequalifieation criteria. Ms. Raposa reviewed the incentives as written in the draft Bylaw amendment. She noted the importance of the tiered incentives being predicated on a 25% of the square footage of the ground floor area mixed use requirement to publicly accessible non-residential uses. All development in the overlay district will have to comply with the special permit requirement from the Planning Board to ensure that the requirements are met, complying with the revised general development standards. She also referenced the design guidelines for sidewalks, vehicular access, landscaping and screening, parking materials, plantings, pedestrian amenities, lighting, service entrances, rash, utilities, and stormwater management. Board Comments Mr. Cerretani said that the process for the Bylaw amendment was in keeping with the knowledge that there would be compliance with the MBTA guidelines for 30 units per acre with developer incentives to provide coimnercial space, open space, and better design elements to create a more vibrant area. Mr. Penney referenced the plan depicting proposed building heights. He noted that the new roadway is not shown but will run from Draper Avenue and Chauncy Street to County Street and North Main Street. The new roadway design will provide more neighborhood traffic buffering. Mi. Galle noted that the intent is to have the space west of the new parkway remain green space. Mr. Penney spoke of the higher density closer to the tracks with stepping down the building height closer to the neighborhoods. Mr. Feck asked about the "green" stormwater infrastructure and that if it is a part of a developer's best management practice, how would "substantially exceed" be measured. Mr. Cerretani said that it is less expensive for a developer to utilize "green" infrastructure. Mr. Galle will review and follow-up for the May 24'h session. Mi. Feck clairified that if the structure has cantilevered parking it would not reduce the 25% requirement and that the 25% should be calculated by the footprint of the building not a reduced first floor under cantilevered second floor. Discussion ensued with conclusion that the language would be revised with supporting diagrams. Mr. Cerretani recommended further discussion of option for 5% reduction for the developer if an additional incentive is chosen from Incentive 1. The Board discussed and concluded that it could be part Planning Board Meeting Minutes 5/10/23 Page 3 of 6 of the waivers at the special permit application review process. Ms. Raposa said clarification would be included for the next draft of the amendment. Mr. Cerretani referenced Incentive 3 relating to the fee -in -lieu funding of $50,000 indexed to inflation and expressed that the incentives are broad and not well defined. Discussion ensued for monetary finding and where it should be allocated. Mr. Galle said that the intent of applying a monetary value was to establish a known value for applicants that may be interested in Tier 3 incentives. Ms. Smead suggested a possible revolving fiord be established for this finding to be invested in the TOD area for specific purposes. Mr. Galle said there will also be future overlay districts to be identified to meet the MBTA goals. Mr. LeCesne suggested that the monetary contribution be a percentage of the overall cost of the project versus a set value. Public Comments Jill Keyes of 11 North White Pine Lane referenced a previous public session in which the residents spoke of affordability, open space, and traffic. She asked how the incentives would be known to be the best uses for the developers. Mr. Cerretani noted that typically a developer would attempt to gain the highest best use of the property and it would be their prerogative to choose incentives. Mr. Feck said that the incentives align with the MBTA communities requirements, which will require the by right use and a certain amount of units within the train station area. This is designed to incentivize the developers toward special permit where the Planning Board can work with the developer to achieve what is best for the Town and MBTA community requirements. Ms. Keyes asked if the units per acre could be less dense. Mr. Feck explained that density is required to meet the MBTA unit requirements. Ms. Keyes asked if existing areas, such as the Chocolate Factory, could be included. Mr. Cerretani replied that other areas will be considered for the next phase overlay areas. Wetlands are also excluded from the land calculations. Mr. Cerretani noted that some of the incentives are intended to activate uses to create accessibility to the open space land. Ms. Keyes asked if there are incentives for building condominiums. Mr. Cerretani clarified that the Board cannot mandate what a landowner does with their property as zoning cannot regulate ownership. Ms. Raposa said that there is the affordability component and noted the META requirements. Ms. Keyes noted that there are no setbacks in the dimensional requirements for abutting residential property. Ms. Raposa clarified that no property in the overlay district is abutting residential property. Mr. Cerretani said that the overlay area is underutilized and that the Town is not currently getting revenue from it, so if it is developed will would be a revenue boost to the Town. Paul Sullivan of 26 Hemlock Lane commented about the Town owned portions of land and asked if the Town intends to sell some of the land. Ms. Raposa said that there is a land swap being contemplated in order to create the developable space closer to the train station and for the creation of the new parkway road. The Board clarified the incentives to create pathways and water area bridges to access the public open area land, which is landlocked. The Board also explained that other overreaching areas will be taken into consideration for the fatrre additional overlay areas. Mr. Cerretani noted that if they do not move forward with this district the Town could lose grant finding in the future. Ms. Smead noted, in the Dimensional Standards, that there is a footnote relating to the residential setbacks. Planning Board Meeting Minutes 5/10/23 Page 4 of 6 Susan Berthelette of 49 North Main Street expressed her opinion that the proposed round -about would not resolve traffic and speed issues. Mr. Feck clarified that the new roadway is in the design phases through MassDOT and the Town Engineering department. Stan Poon of 125 Central Street, referenced page 12 section G parking table for multi family, apartments, townhouses, 1 space per unit and noted to clarify that it is one space per building unit. He referenced page 13 G.6 2023 Massachusetts Stretch Building Code, with suggestion to eliminate the year reference. He also asked for additional clarification for the definition reference EV wiring. After discussion it was decided to change the language to only reference the Massachusetts code so that the Bylaw will allow for any future changes to the code. Tom Winrow, attending virtually, asked about the unused commercial space in existing nmlti-space building and if the proposed incentives are reasonable and ensure that it does not result in unutilized commercial space in mixed use plans. Mr. Cerretani said that there were a few years of vacancy due to COVID and that the spaces should begin to be utilized. Also, the requirements have been reduced to a 25% requirement with incentives to lessen the percentage. Mr. Feck said that the incentives allow for design flexibility and for the Board to work with developers to better design usage within the spaces. Mr. Galle said that live -work space is also included for more flexibility and activate usage. Mike Robinson, attending virtually, asked what consideration has been given to improvements within the immediate walkable area between this development, schools, library, and the downtown area where people can walk and shop. Mr. Galle referenced the Chauncy Street corridor improvements and how it would improve traffic, walkability, biking and crossing opportunities where it currently does not exist. There will also be improvements to the North Main Street intersection. Mr. Robinson asked what percentage of the investment is being made in the quarter mile radius of the train station. The Board clarified that they work on revising the zoning and does not participate in how money is allocated. Ms. Raposa said that the draft Bylaw has been reviewed by Town Counsel and that there were a few non - substantive recommendations, that will be included in the draft for the May 24'h meeting. She further noted that because of the multi -family zoning as part of the legislative changes in 2020 associated with the Housing Choice legislation that the quantum of vote for Annual Town Meeting is a simple majority to pass this Zoning Bylaw. Should this Bylaw pass, the quantum of vote for a Special Permit will also be a simple majority. In the past it was a 2/3 majority vote. Ms. Raposa also discussed the proposed language for Incentive 1 that was submitted by Attorney Bobrowski. The Board was generally amenable to the proposal to add more public realm amenities for a reduction in publicly accessible mixed -use space. Ms. Raposa will include it in the next draft as well as a couple of changes to Incentive 1 (land donation) and Incentive 2 (conservation restriction). Planning Board Meeting Minutes 5/10/23 Page 5 of 6 Mr. Cerretani asked if Mr. Horowitz could provide updates. Ms. Raposa said she will schedule a meeting to meet Mr. Horowitz and discuss. None Mr. LeCesne suggested consideration to the Main Street ADA parking spaces and asked if the spots are grandfathered. He referenced resident complaints that local business employees are using some of the spaces. The Board noted that the parking would fall under the Select Board purview. Ms. Raposa suggested a lighter summer schedule, meeting once per month, June 14, July 12, and August 9'h. If something arises, the dates could be reconsidered. She referenced some potential upcoming projects, but they have not been submitted yet. The Board agreed to the lighter summer schedule. Motion to adjourn at 8:58 p.m. (McClanahan-Feck) Six (6) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Date of Next Planning Board Meeting May 24, 2023 at 7: 00 p. m. MpA Corsillo, Actrp", 6/x/23 Date of Approval Planning Board Meeting Minutes 5/10/23 Page 6 of 6