Danvers planning board debates two paths to update master plan; members favor funded consultant or hybrid approach

Town of Danvers planning staff briefed the Planning Board on two approaches to preparing a municipal master plan and the pros and cons of each.

Staff outlined Option 1: assemble an in‑house master plan by combining recent and in‑progress topical plans (housing production plan, transportation needs assessment, open space/recreation updates, and the town strategic plan) into the state‑recognized master plan chapters. Staff said the state indicated this approach would be allowable. Planning staff cautioned that compiling the documents in‑house would be a substantial internal workload.

Option 2 would fund a consultant to produce a comprehensive master plan through a grant or a Town Meeting warrant article; staff estimated a consultant‑led process typically costs in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars (staff cited a rough range of $150,000 to $175,000) and provides a more exhaustive, facilitated public process. Board members discussed a hybrid approach that would combine recent staff work with consultant support for community engagement and writing.

Member Tim Spittle said he favored hiring a consultant or at least securing grant funding so staff are not overburdened, calling the master plan essential to set shared goals and objectives. Member Jean Hartnett and others supported a hybrid approach that leverages recent studies to reduce consultant costs while ensuring a full public process. Several board members asked staff to research examples from other communities and to prepare cost estimates and potential funding strategies so the board could decide whether to request funds at Town Meeting.

Members of the public asked for clarification about what a master plan includes and whether the planning board’s prior work and the town strategic plan would be incorporated. Resident Karen Nastick urged the board to include visual renderings and clear design guidance so residents can better visualize proposed changes. Staff said the master plan would be a high‑level guide for development and could incorporate zoning maps, goals, and implementation steps, and that recent topical plans could supply several chapters.

No final decision was made. Board members asked staff to compile examples, cost estimates and a proposed scope (including a potential hybrid model) to present at future meetings, and suggested pursuing grants or a Town Meeting appropriation if a consultant is needed.