Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Gateway Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developer presents revised Gateway Master Plan with smaller residential component and expanded 'flex space'
Summary
Karl Dubay of the Dubay Group presented a conceptual update to the Gateway Master Plan proposing roughly 200,000 sq ft of flex commercial space, a reduction from 31 townhouses to 16 detached units, doubled neighborhood buffers and questions about workforce-housing obligations and traffic flow.
Karl Dubay, principal of the Dubay Group, presented a conceptual update to the Gateway Master Plan for 2 Sharma Way, telling the Windham Planning Board the project now focuses on roughly 200,000 square feet of flexible commercial 'flex space' and far fewer residences than in earlier approvals.
The update would reduce the residential component from 31 townhouses to 16 detached units, double buffers to adjacent neighborhoods and replace the formerly proposed large Class A office buildings with mixed-use pads and interconnected sidewalks. Dubay said the site is now served by town water and that notes on snow-storage and curb cuts will be added to subsequent plans.
The board’s questions centered on open space and circulation, parking, stormwater recharge and workforce housing. Member Payal Ballaya said the layout appeared "overly condensed" and urged a plan that provides more open space; Mr. Greg Balestrieri agreed. Vice Chair Jack Gattinella recommended avoiding building rears facing the roadway and pressed on interconnectivity with neighboring parcels such as Beck’s and The Windham Restaurant. Chair Jacob Cross emphasized establishing pedestrian and vehicular connections to nearby properties.
Engineers and staff discussed impervious-surface and roof-recharge credits for compliance; Mr. Dubay noted state roof-recharge credit calculations differ from town-level crediting, and the board flagged that a variance may be required for roof-water recharge to meet impervious-surface rules. The discussion also touched on the applicability of HB 631 (noted by the applicant) regarding residential uses in commercial zones; the board acknowledged the statutory change may complicate project design and review.
A member of the public, Joe Byron of Lancaster Road, raised concerns about traffic and asked about a traffic signal for a specific part of the plan. Board members and the applicant agreed the team would return with a more detailed site plan showing curb cuts, hydrant availability, parking layout and snow-storage notes. The Planning Board closed the conceptual review on a 5-0 vote and will expect engineering details and revised plans at a future meeting for formal review.
The Planning Board did not take any regulatory votes on the project's merits at this meeting; the presentation was a conceptual review that will return for formal submissions and permitting.
