Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-04-12 Master Plan Implementation Committee Minutes Master Plan Implementation Committee, April 12, 2021 In Attendance (via Google Meet): Members Kelly Cormier(Chair), Chris Nobile, Meredith Barnes-Cook, Sean McDonough, Jon Strauss, Hollie Williams, Jay Dowd, and George Koehler Absent: Stan Limpert Staff. Andrew Shapiro (Director of Community and Economic Development) and Dan Beckley (Staff Planner) Immediately prior to calling the meeting to order at 5:OOpm, Kelly Cormier read aloud the following statement: Pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 Order Suspending Certain Provisions of the Open Meeting Law,G.L. c. 30A, §18, and the Governor's March 15, 2020 Order imposing strict limitations on the number of people that may gather in one place, this meeting of the Master Plan Implementation Committee will be conducted via remote participation to the greatest extent possible. Specific information and the general guidelines for remote participation by members of the public and/or parties with a right and/or requirement to attend this meeting can be found on the Town's website, at www.northandovenna.gov. For this meeting, members of the public who wish to watch the meeting may do so on their televisions by tuning to Comcast Channel 99 or Verizon Channel 28 or online at www.northandovercam.org. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted,but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time, via technological means. In the event that we are unable to do so, despite best efforts, we will post on the Town of North Andover website an audio or video recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting. If the public would like to participate in public hearings please email your question/comment prior to or during the meeting to ashapiro@northandoverma.gov. The question/comment will be read during the proceedings and responded to accordingly. Public Comment Ms. Cormier asked Andrew Shapiro if he had received any comments from the public. Mr. Shapiro said that no comments had been submitted as of the start of the meeting. Approval of minutes from the March 15, 2024 and February 2, 2021 meetings. Motion: George Koehler made a motion to accept both the March 15, 2021 and February 2, 2021 minutes as written; seconded by Jon Strauss. Motion passed 8-0. Discussion and vote on quarterly report Motion: Chris Nobile made a motion to approve the quarterly report as written; seconded by George Koehler. Motion passed 8-0. Discussion: Royal Crest presentation and Master Plan overlay Ms. Cormier asked the Committee's subcommittees to comment on what they thought about the Royal Crest presentation from the last meeting, and how the project may or may not align with the Town's Master Plan strategies. Mr. Strauss noted that from a transportation standpoint, there is a potential to tie in to many tenets of the Master Plan. In terms of improving MVRTA bus routes, the proposal currently calls for tying into the MVRTA and potentially also offering a commuter bus to Boston—it remains to be seen if these proposals will be implemented. Ms. Cormier noted that in terms of land use, she and her subcommittee feel that there are potentially three strategies that relate to the Royal Crest proposal. They see the developer's vision as consistent with the land use goal of focusing development and zoning changes along key commercial corridors. In terms of the Master Plan's goal of establishing area plans for key commercial corridors, the land use subcommittee again felt that the proposed project aligns with that strategy. In terms of"Review(ing) the existing planned residential development zoning for applicability on remaining undeveloped parcels of land in town, and ensure the existing zoning will aid in accomplishing the preservation of open space on those parcels, the land use subcommittee felt that this strategy was not applicable to the current Royal Crest proposal. Ms. Cormier then moved on to goals related to housing in the Master Plan, first referencing the goal of"Determin(ing) the supply and demand for senior market-rate and affordable housing and plan for housing to meet the need." She noted that the project currently proposes to provide affordable housing at a quantity that will enable the Town to exceed its 40B threshold, and that the project also contemplates age restricted housing for seniors. The second strategy, "Continue to review the impact of new housing development on the Town's public infrastructure and services,"was deemed by the subcommittee to not be applicable in that it is an action that needs to be taken by the Town and not the developer. In regards to examining the project's impact on public infrastructure, Mr. Strauss pointed out that the specific strategy citing this issue could be revisited once more was known about Royal Crest's project impacts. He continued to cover transportation related strategies from the Master Plan and their alignment(or lack of alignment) with the proposed Royal Crest Project. "Evaluate sidewalk gaps and prioritize new sidewalks based on their ability to connect residents to schools, activity centers, civic spaces, and recreation and open spaces in town." He noted that this strategy needs to be evaluated more through the lens of the forthcoming MassDOT project to improve Route 114—i.e. it's not directly applicable to the Royal Crest proposal. On"Evaluate the feasibility of increasing crosswalk frequency and visibility on major travel corridors such as Route 114, Mass Ave, Route 125, and Chickering Road" Strauss also referenced it as non- applicable and more related to MassDOT improvements. "Couple sidewalk and crosswalk improvements with pedestrian-scale lighting to increase visibility and safety." This also is seen as more in MassDOT's purview as to whether they incorporate these features along the 114 corridor. Ms. Cormier felt it was relevant to the Royal Crest project in that there is an expectation that pedestrian scale lighting be provided within the development. Mr. Strauss, Ms. Cormier, Mr. Dowd, Mr. Koehler, and Mr. Nobile all discussed how other strategies falling under the transportation section of the Master Plan also seem to tie into the MassDOT project and it remains to be seen if they positively benefit or link well with the proposed Royal Crest project. In terms of the strategy to "Improve MVRTA circulator routes and frequency of those routes as a way to increase ridership,"Mr. Strauss noted that the project proponent's willingness to engage with the MVRTA is positive and could lead to an alignment between the project and this strategy. Mr. Nobile discussed whether the proposed Royal Crest project is in congruence with Master Plan strategies related to economic development. He expressed that the project does seem to align positively with all of the following strategies, but that in the case of the first, it is still in progress: • Focus business attraction efforts on opportunities which are consistent with the character of the community and which can be reasonably supported in appropriate locations within the Town • Ensure existing commercial and industrial land is not converted to support only multi- family uses, but instead a mix of uses promoting vibrant commercial centers and corridors. • Encourage the development of mixed-use buildings which support both residential and commercial uses. • Work with large land owners of economically-important properties in town to identify and attract a mix of uses for the redevelopment of those properties. Mr. McDonough and Ms. Cormier expressed agreement with Mr. Nobile's observations about the project's positive contributions to economic development related strategies in the Master Plan. Mr. McDonough discussed the strategies related to open space: • Identify locations and create handicap accessible walking paths in natural areas and create management plans for each conservation area that address access for persons with disabilities. • Continue to consider the creation of more athletic fields to support youth sports including potential for use of private property. He noted that it's not clear that fields would be part of the Royal Crest,but he did reference the two acre "town square"that is proposed. Ms. Cormier said that it is her understanding that no athletic fields will be part of the project. In terms of handicap accessibility, Mr. Shapiro will follow-up with the developer to better understand accessibility of the walking trails, etc. Mr. Nobile commented on the strategy to "Provide appropriate facilities and services for an increasing aging population,"noting that the Royal Crest project does provide age restricted housing for older populations. Mr. Dowd commented that he is interested in hearing what comes out of the discussions with the Planning Board—how many cars or people can the property support; how much open space should there be? Ms. Cormier said that the Committee should wait to see what Ms. Barnes-Cook and Mr. Limpert have to say about how well the Royal Crest project responds to the strategies that they cover. After all information is compiled, the Committee can present these findings, in total, to the Select Board and Planning Board. New Business Ms. Cormier asked about other items the Committee might want to consider discussing at future meetings. The Committee debated whether or not to invite the proponent of the article proposing a housing moratorium, but ultimately decided to only discuss the topic among Committee Members, and not to invite the proponent to discuss the matter. Mr. Beckley noted that the Community Preservation Committee wants to, in the future,have a joint meeting to discuss funding Master Plan priorities. Ms. Cormier noted that she would seek to have a discussion item on a future agenda to clarify the issue around recusal by Committee Members on certain subject matters. Next MPIC meeting: Monday May 3rd. Adjournment Motion: Jon Strauss made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Chris Nobile. Motion approved by a vote of 8-0. Meeting adjourned at 6:35 PM.