Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMaster Plan Council 11/13/1986Date of meeting: Members Present: TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING November 13, 1986 Kelli Spedden Steven Chapman Robert Whitney Larry Harrington Ed Broderick William Madan Leigh Ann Foster The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. Richard Callinan Stuart Sweet Stephen Calvin Allen Willis Carl Nelson George Wojtkiewicz The minutes of the September 25th meeting (as revised per discussion during the October 16 meeting) and the October 16th meeting, having been mailed to all members for their review prior to this meeting, were not read. A motion was made, seconded and passed by unanimous vote to accept them. Correspondence A note was received from Paul Folkman to advise the Council that he would be unable to attend this meeting but would like to be informed of its content. Old Business The Council was advised that the regional meeting on affordable housing (presented by Connery Associates and the EOCD), previously scheduled for Thursday, November 20th, had been changed to Wednesday, November 19th, at 7:30 p.m., at Watson Lecture Hall, Wheaton College, Norton, Massachusetts. Members of the Council were advised that Ms. Hillman, Council Secretary, had copies of documents previously distributed to the Council available for those members who had not been present when they were distributed, and that they could obtain them @ following this meeting. Mr. Harrington informed the Council that the possibility of mailing the public opinion surveys to residents of Mansfield in envelopes with their electric bills had been favorably discussed by the Board of Selectmen; that should the Council decide on this type of distribution, the Board of Selectmen as Electric Light Commissioners would likely approve the plan. He added that if this is the manner of distribution the Council selects for the surveys, the request should be made in writing to the Board of Selectmen.. - 1 - TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING (cont) Presentations by Consultants Mr. John Witten, Senior Planner, and Mr. Brian Dolan, Planner, of IEP, Inc., presented Council members with draft copies of the Master Plan Update, Phases I and II, which they in conjunction with Henderson Planning Group had developed. There were not enough copies available for all Council members, but members who did not receive a copy were asked to list their names on a sign up sheet and assured that IEP would have one sent to them Federal Express the next morning. Mr. John Witten, in introduction of this report, emphasized that it was a draft report for the Council's review. He added that IEP had received the Council's letter requesting the inclusion of population "trigger points" in the master plan update, and that these would be included in the final copy of this report. Mr. Brian Dolan began the presentation of this report by outlining its contents, which are: Phase I; Task A - Demographics Phase I; Task B - Developable Lot Study Phase I; Task C - Town Government Phase I; Task D - Land Use Trends Phase I; Task E - Open Space Inventory Phase II; Task A - Market Analysis, Service Demands Phase II; Task B - Options Phase I, Presented by IEP, Inc. Mr. Dolan, in presenting the first section, Demographics, stated that Mansfield has seen very rapid growth over the last few years, and that IEP expects this growth to continue for another year or possibly two, followed by steady, but slower growth. By their estimate, the population will reach 20,000 between 1990 and 1995. The theoretical population limit of the town is 37,625 (based on maximum construction of housing units). Mansfield must consider the spin off effects of this growth. In considering town schools he emphasized that the condition of existing facilities must be considered along with their capacity. IEP estimates the maximum population that the current water supply can serve to be 21,000, which would be reached within the next ten years. Protecting water quality will also have to be addressed; that though the town has constructed a new sewer facillity, it does not'solve all water quality problems. - 2 - TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING (cont) Presentations by Consultants (cont) Phase I, Presented by IEP, Inc. (cont The Developable Lot Study is divided into three sections: Residential, Industrial, and Commercial. "Commercially" zoned land is defined as land falling within the General Business, Downtown Business, and Special Business zones. Statistics for all sections were determined by analyzing the town's current zoning map and zoning by-laws to predict the potential for land division and for developable lots, also taking into account land unsuitable for building and land necessary for roads into developable areas. Mr. Dolan noted that there is a discrepancy of approximately 500 acres in industrial zoned land and industrial classified land; that this may be due to mistakes on assessor's sheets or large amounts of use outside of normal zoning. Mr. Dolan introduced the town government section of the report by distributing a chart which illustrates the organization of Mansfield's town government and by explaining that IEP had interviewed several town officials and employees to determine how the organization of town government relates to its effectiveness and the current levels of service provided by town boards and departments. He noted that one problem in this structure is a lack of accountability and communication between boards and departments. The town charter requires the Board of Selectmen to "coordinate long range objectives of the town" and to "formulate policy for the implementation of programs necessary to fulfull these objectives." Despite provisions in the Charter, the authority of many boards and committees is mandated by the Massachusetts General Laws, which can conceivably conflict with the Selectmen's objectives. In order to deal with issues of town wide concern in a comprehensive and unified manner IEP is making three recommendations: 1. All boards and departments establish a project and program referral process. 2. A bimonthly inter -board memo be distributed throughout town hall to keep board members and department employees informed. 3. Amend the Charter to require monthly (instead of bimonthly) meetings between the Chairmen of all boards. Mr. Dolan briefly reviewed the levels of service currently provided by various boards and town employees. Mr. Dolan explained that because of the long period of time since Mansfield's last Master Plan the town lacks a relevant land -use policy. He outlined five specific problem areas: 1. The Planning Board has jurisdiction over special use permits. IEP does not disagree with this, but questions workload. - 3 - TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING (cont) Presentations bV Consultants (cont Phase I, Presented by IEP, Inc. (cont) 2. The Town Engineer, because of workload, is currently unable to review subdivision plans. IEP feels it is essential that this review take place before construction begins, and that if this cannot be provided by town staff the Planning Board needs consultations from private civil engineers. 3. The site plan review process contains a problem of methodology and the appropriateness of the reviewing body, which IEP believes can be remedied by a zoning by-law amendment and will address this in Phase IV. 4. Since the Conservation Commission currently has to rely on the Building Inspector or the applicant to identify to the Conservation Commission or Agent projects which are in its jurisdiction, it is possible for projects to be completed without proper review. IEP recommends that the Conservation Agent "sign off" on all building permits before they are issued. 5. A problem exists in overall planning coordination due to the number of development applications, which overwhelm the board members and professionals involved. IEP concludes that an additional staff member, a Zoning Administrator, responsible to the Planning Director and the Town Manager, is needed. There was some discussion among Council members about when this position should be recommended due to the budget process. Some members questioned the need for more staff if the building rate was predicted to decline eventually, and whether increased efficiency rather than additional staff was the solution. Mr. Dolan replied that Mansfield is experiencing a peak period now, that proper reviews of plans are essential, and that to accomplish this additional staffing would be required. Mr. Dolan used maps to aid the Council in visualizing the land use trends that have developed, and also to show the open space inventory. He states that of approximately 1300 acres of natural resource inventory the town currently owns about 10%. Ms. Spedden asked if it would be possible in the future for IEP to distribute documents to Council members for their review a few days before their formal presentation. Phase II, Presented by Henderson Planning Group Mr. Jim Sempere, a Senior Associate of the Henderson Planning Group, introduced the market analysis of Mansfield's growth, which is divided into three categories: residential, commercial, and industrial. In presenting his first map to the Council he remarked on the fact that the shape of the town is basically rectangular, and shows about 63% zoned residential, 14-15% zoned industrial, and about 2% zoned commercial. TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING (cont) Presentations by Consultants (cont) Phase II, Presented by Henderson Planning Group(cont) Growth trends in residential development show an increase in multi -family units from about 28% in 1970 to about 35% in 1985, with the majority of these being constructed in the Downtown area. Trends indicate that single family construction is taking place mostly in East and West Mansfield. Current building trends show approximately 200 units being constructed per year. Under current zoning regulations the maximum number of new residential units that can be contructed is a little under 7,000, which would be a 120% build out, and if building trends continued, would take about 33 years to be constructed. If the relative proportion of housing types remains constant, this would result in a population limit of 37,625. Mr. Sempere complimented the members of the Council on the excellent job they had done completing the commercial survey cards, and displayed the maps the Henderson Planning Group had developed from the information. He noted the presence of many residences in commercial zones, which often leads to conflicts. He also pointed out that the length of the Downtown area discourages pedestrian shopping, and the trend towards service related businesses in the Downtown where once the emphasis was on retail space. Mansfield will probably see applications for major commercial development in the 495/140 area soon, due to its proximity to major regional and local highways. The type of development which is constructed there will have an impact of the Downtown area. The Henderson Group feels that a major mall would not directly compete with the Downtown area, but that small plaza type development would. The Great Woods area, according to Mr. Sempere, will see development of first-class office and supportive buildings, again due to its location near major highway corridors. He added that this type of construction has slowed, but will continue at a steady pace. The Council then discussed many aspects of commercial development, such as the length versus the width of the Downtown area and possible parking requirements for future businesses. Members of the Council also discussed discrepancies on the maps presented by Henderson, and how best to correct them. It was decided that the Council member who had surveyed an area would be responsible for checking the corresponding map, and listing the discrepancies found. This information would be conveyed to the Henderson Planning Group, who would then revise the maps. - 5 - TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING (cont) Presentations by Consultants (cont) Phase II, Presented by Henderson Planning Group(cont) In presenting Industrial Growth information, Mr. Sempere advised the Council that the Cabot, Cabot, and Forbes Industrial Park, if it continues at its present growth, will be full in 8 to 10 years. The Mansfield Industrial Park has experienced slower growth, but should also be full within the next 10 years, having only two parcels left to develop. The development of office space seems the most likely use of remaining land in the Great Woods area; Mr. Sempere added that development of a new interchange allowing southbound access to Rt. I-495 would provide better access here. All three of these areas have good access and will most likely be developed before other areas. The majority of other vacant property in industrial zoned areas have problems relating to poor access or proximity to residential areas. In discussing residential growth trends the Council questioned the effects of the new tax laws on development, and the value and costs of industrial development as opposed to residential development in town. In introducing the Future Options portion of this report, IEP and the Henderson Planning Group are not making firm recommendations at this time, but presenting to the Council information and options to which the Council's and town's (through open meetings and surveys) input must be added. Traffic and circulation systems are sufficient from a residential perspective, although some are poorly maintained. However, some industrial areas are not well accessed, and the town must decide on improving and maintaining present road service or taking steps to improve access routes to these industrial areas. The town must also decide whether traffic generated through town by the Great Woods is tolerable, and if not, take steps to modify its access system. As part of the Master Plan Update the town must also decide whether it wants growth to occur as the market dictates or whether it wants to pursue growth management policies to limit growth and preserve existing town character. Open Space Preservation must also be considered. The town currently owns about 10% of the total land area in town. By National Park standards this is sufficient land area per resident for its maximum population, but not enough is currently "developed" open space to meet these standards at present. The town needs to decide policy on developing recreation areas, or setting its own agenda for desired amounts of open space and identifying and preserving conservation land, or allowing the remaining open land to develop as the market dictates. TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING (cont) Presentations by Consultants (cont) Phase II, Presented by Henderson Planning Group (cont) In the Downtown area the town will have to decide whether to let existing trends continue and promote development of other areas or take steps to correct problems in the Downtown area, such as its length, traffic, and parking problems. Water Supply Protection must be addressed also. The new sewer facility, while alleviating pollution to town rivers, is not the answer to all water supply problems. Sewer lines have been planned with regard to particular areas of density, pipe required and functional consideration of system design, not necessarily to coordinate with water needs. Also, the removal of wastewater from an area eliminates the recycling of the water and eventually depletes the water supply. Since the town will reach the "trigger point" regarding water supply fairly soon, IEP suggests only one option: identification of, and specific technical planning to protect, current and future water supplies. Economic Development is possible due to the amount of available industrial and commercial zoned land. Commercially the town must decide whether to improve the downtown area, concentrate on districts such as Copeland Drive and Chauncey Street for strip development, or encourage development of a regional shopping mall. Industrially the town must decide whether it wishes to develop industrial use outside of the CC&F Park. If so, it must provide for better access to other industrial zones, or attract "specialty" industrial uses not requiring high traffic volume. If not, vacant land in these areas should be rezoned. Mr. Dolan advised the Council that the next phase of the Master Plan Update process would be the survey of town and public hearings. Copies of the proposed survey were distributed to Council members. The Council members discussed various means of distributing the survey to the public, including having them inserted with electric bills. Since the bills are mailed on a rotating schedule determined by geographical areas, the Council decided against this, as one or two weeks mailings would not provide a random sample and the Council does not wish distribution of the surveys to require a full month. The Council also discussed at length the questions included on the survey. The following changes were decided on: 1. A question regarding the future of the Downtown should be added. 2. Questions regarding the airport should be reworded. 3. A question asking whether the respondent owns or rents his home should be added. - 7 - TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING (cont) 4. A question asking whether the respondent is living on a fixed income should be added. 5. Section B of Question 2 should be deleted (where respondent works, if outside Mansfield) 6. A question asking the number of children a respondent has should be added. Mr. Chapman made a motion that the survey be accepted with these changes. Mr. Harrington seconded the motion, and it passed by unanimous vote. The Council then discussed the means of distributing the survey, and the inclusion of a cover letter explaining the survey and outlining how and when it should be returned. A number of locations in town where residents could return their completed surveys were discussed and the Council agreed on the following locations: 1. Town Hall 2. The Senior Center 3. Stearns 4. Central Post Office 5. East Mansfield Post Office 6. Cook's Market 7. The Old Country Store Mr. Nelson, with the assistance of another Council member, volunteered to be responsible for contacting these locations to obtain permission for the Council to place a drop-off box at each location. The Council also decided that, in addition to the Mansfield News, copies of the survey would be available at these locations. It was felt that the surveys should be returned within two weeks of their receipt, and that distributing them in electric bills would not provide a random sample in this time period. The Council discussed the possibility of having them included in an edition of the Mansfield News, which has a circulation estimated at approximately 3500. Mr. Harrington made a motion to authorize Ms. Spedden and Mr. Callinan to spend up to $500 to have the survey sent out in the Mansfield News. The motion was seconded by Mr. Madan and passed by unanimous vote. IEP requested that after reviewing the draft of Phases I and II Council members contact them in writing with their comments. The Council discussed the possibility of having the survey distributed by the week of December 4. Ms. Spedden questioned whether the update process is on schedule. IEP feels they are about 1 1/2 weeks off. Phase III of the update process will address where Mansfield.wants to go by means of the survey results and public workshops. Goals f and objectives need to be developed with public input. Phase IV will include the actual regulations and recommendations in regard to town government, zoning, water quality, and growth bylaws. - 8 - TOWN OF MANSFIELD MASTER PLAN ADVISORY COUNCIL MINUTES OF MEETING (cont) New Business Members were reminded that the next meeting of the Council would be the regional meeting with representatives of Norton, Taunton and Mansfield, on Wednesday, November 19, 1986, at 7:30 p.m., at Watson Lecture Hall, Wheaton College, Norton, Massachusetts. Members were also advised that the next regular meeting of the Council is scheduled for Thursday, December 4, 1986, at 7:30 p.m., at the Town Hall. The Council discussed the date of the regular January meeting of the Council, which, if held on the first Thursday of the month, would be January 1, 1987. A motion was made by Mr. Chapman to reschedule the meeting to the second Thursday, January 8, 1987. The motion was seconded by Mr. Madan and passed by unanimous vote. The Council discussed the importance of having the input of a Housing Authority representative at as many Council meetings as possible because housing is such a crucial aspect in developing a new Master Plan for the town. Since the current representative of the Housing Authority has been unable to attend meetings, the Council discussed asking the Authority to designate an alternate member to attend. It was noted that the Board of Selectmen's position on such matters notes that a member of a town committee can be asked to resign if four consecutive meetings are not attended. Mr. Harrington made a motion that Ms. Spedden write a letter to the Authority regarding this matter. The motion was seconded by Mr. Madan and passed by unanimous vote. At 10:45 p.m. a motion was made, seconded, and passed by unanimous vote to adjourn the meeting. Respectfully submitted, Deborah Hillman Secretary (4 -k dcAe ,