Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-03-16-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF March 16, 2022 Minutes of the Lexington Planning Board Held on March 16, 2022, Virtual Meeting at 6:00 pm Present: Charles Hornig, Chair; Robert Peters, Vice-Chair; Michael Schanbacher, Clerk; Robert Creech, Melanie Thompson, and Michael Leon, Associate Member. Also present was Eve Tapper, interim administrative planner. Charles Hornig, Chair, called to order the meeting of the Lexington Planning Board on Wednesday, March 16, 2022, at 6:00 pm. For this meeting, the Planning Board is convening by video conference via Zoom. LexMedia may broadcast this meeting live and will record it for future viewing. Detailed information for remote participation by the public may be found on the Planning Office web page. Mr. Hornig conducted a roll call to ensure all members of the Planning Board and members of staff present could hear and be heard. Mr. Hornig provided a summary of instructions for members of the public in attendance. It was further noted that written materials for this meeting are available on the Town's NovusAGENDA dashboard. *****************DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION********************** Continued Public Hearing: Special Permit – Site Sensitive Development (SSD) – 75 Outlook Drive: Mr. Hornig opened the continued public hearing. Present were Mr. Michael Novak, engineer from Patriot Engineering who introduced project team member Mr. Jeff Thoma, landscape architect and Eduardo Alvarez, applicant and owner. Mr. Novak presented the revised plans, updated information from the Historic Commission Meeting, and the neighborhood outreach that they were tasked with. Mr. Thoma presented the revised landscape plan and explained that all residents will be able to access the landscape features. He showed where the tree protecting fencing will go which will protect the drip line and the roots of the existing trees. Mr. Alvarez presented the new house design features and a reduction of 24% in the footprint and will use the basement as living space. He said the Historical Commission visited the site and then the applicant went to the hearing where the commission approved the plan. Mr. Alvarez described the neighborhood outreach they had done for the past 11 months of engagement and provided the five points of feedback from the neighbors regarding their concerns. Board Comments and Questions:  Mr. Peters asked if the applicant will put a historic preservation restriction on the house. He hoped there will be discussion about slowing down the traffic and safety for pedestrians walking on Outlook Drive since it is a narrow road and there are no sidewalks. Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of March 16, 2022  Mr. Schanbacher said he liked the reduction on the impervious pavement and asked for clarification on how the hammerhead would work since it is part of a driveway. Will the deed reflect that it must be maintained and there cannot be any parking there to block it?  Ms. Thompson thanked them for the detailed plan.  Mr. Creech asked for clarification on the DBH for the large shade trees they will be planting. He asked for clarification on how the new owners will know where the undisturbed area is for the future. He asked for clarification on the amount of living area in the basement and the proposed heights of the houses.  Mr. Leon said that the undisturbed area may be better for enforcement to be a local conservation restriction. He suggested the hammerhead should be put in a reciprocal easement agreement for the homeowners. He asked for clarification if the stormwater system will cover all the houses or only three houses.  Mr. Hornig asked if all the road improvements requested by Engineering can be made and put in as a condition of the special permit. Do you already have a permit for the accessory apartment in the garage for the existing house or will you be seeking a special permit under our SSD for that apartment? If you do not want to come back to modify the special permit you should request that now. Since Outlook Drive is a private road you will need permission to reduce the speed from all the residents on the street. If you want Outlook Drive to be a public way you need to petition for that. Public Comments and Questions:  A resident asked for clarification if you would consider all-electric buildings, solar ready systems, and EV stations. Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board close the public hearing for 75 Outlook Drive. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Bob Creech – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig - yes) MOTION PASSED Board deliberations: Mr. Hornig asked the board if there are any extra or unusual conditions they would like to place in the decision.  Mr. Peters would be in favor of approval with a condition to allow for building height flexibility if they go above the requested 37 feet and also asks that the applicant request the Town accept the street as a public road.  Mr. Schanbacher and Ms. Thompson would be inclined to support this and had no additional conditions to add.  Mr. Creech would be inclined to approve the special permit and would like to see land adjacent to lots a and b protected. He also requested that they add Effie’s last name “Briggs” to be on the street name.  Mr. Leon would like legal protection for the no-build area and hammerhead drive so the easement agreements carry onto the lots.  Mr. Peters would like proper vetting of Effie Briggs before deciding on a street name. Minutes for the Meeting of March 16, 2022 Page 3 ***************************TOWN MEETING***************************** Continued Public Hearing: Article 40: Amend Zoning Bylaw – Sustainable Residential Incentives (citizen’s petition): Mr. Hornig opened the continued public hearing. The applicant has chosen to ask that this Article be referred to the Planning Board rather then going forward to Town Meeting due to potential changes in the legal landscape. Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board close the public hearing for Article 40: Amend Zoning Bylaw - Sustainable Residential Incentives. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Bob Creech – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig - yes) MOTION PASSED Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board recommend Article 40: Amend Zoning Bylaw - Sustainable Residential Incentives be referred to the Planning Board at the proponent’s request. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Bob Creech – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig - yes) MOTION PASSED Report: Article 36: Amend Zoning Bylaw and Zoning Map – Mixed-Use Developments and Multi-Family Housing: Mr. Hornig said the Planning Board should revote the recommendation to be consistent with Article 40 on referring this back to the Planning Board instead of an indefinite postponement. Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board change their recommendation to Town meeting from indefinite postponement to refer back to the Planning Board for Article 36:, Amend Zoning Bylaw and Zoning Map - Mixed-Use Developments and Multi- Family Housing. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Bob Creech – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig - yes) MOTION PASSED Article 8: Comprehensive Plan Implementation: Mr. Hornig explained the changes and issues with this Article. This Article will be indefinitely postponed on the consent agenda, but there will be an article on the warrant for the Special Town Meeting 2 for the same amount to complete the Comprehensive Plan. *****************DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION********************** Public Meeting: Sketch Plan Special Permit – Site Sensitive Development (SSD)– 35 Hayes Lane: Mr. Hornig opened the public meeting. Present were Mr. Michael Novak, engineer from Patriot Engineering who introduced Mr. Jeff Thoma, landscape architect and Peter Johnson, applicant. Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of March 16, 2022 Mr. Novak presented the sketch plan with the existing conditions, site analysis plan, proof plan for three lots, the grading of the proof plan, and the motivation is to make this a family compound for their two daughters to move back here. Mr. Thoma presented the landscape plan which was to keep as much of the landscape as possible with additional buffer plantings. The only addition to the existing home is an additional garage. He showed where the two new homes will be located. Board Comments and Questions:  Mr. Peters asked for clarification on why house #3 is directly accessed off Hayes Lane instead of the existing driveway. Would this be three separate lots or a homeowner’s association? He asked for clarification on easements for use of the driveway.  Mr. Schanbacher had no additional questions.  Ms. Thompson asked for clarification about the walkout basements for houses 2 and 3 and if it is included as part of the total square footage.  Mr. Creech said this is a perfect plan from his point of view. He asked the property owners to consider how much of their land they would be comfortable placing in a conservation easement.  if there will be a conservation easement for part of the land.  Mr. Leon asked for clarification on what is the maximum GFA that would be allowed based on the size of the lots.  Mr. Hornig said this is exactly what SSDs were designed for. He had no problem with a third curb cut since it would reduce the length of the driveway significantly. Audience Comments and Questions:  A resident on Hayes Lane was pleased with this plan and was glad to have families moving in.  A resident on Hayes Lane and believed this plan is reasonable. Mr. Novak had no further questions for the Board and said they were good. ***************************TOWN MEETING***************************** Report: Article 39: Amend Zoning Bylaw and Zoning Map– 475 Bedford Street: Mr. Peters recused himself. Mr. Hornig said they rushed the meeting last time and realized the Board needs to have a vote. Michael Schanbacher moved that the Planning Board recommend approval of Article 39: Amend Zoning Bylaw - 475 Bedford Street to Town Meeting. Charles Hornig seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted against the motion 2-1-1 (roll call: Bob Creech – abstained; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – no; Charles Hornig - yes) MOTION FAILED for lack of a third affirmative vote. Mr. Peters rejoined the meeting. Deliberations: Article 35: Amend Zoning Bylaw – Open Space Residential Developments (OSRD): Minutes for the Meeting of March 16, 2022 Page 5 Mr. Hornig said they were continuing the discussion on the inclusionary portion of this proposed article and Mr. Daggett’s recommendations. Mr. Hornig continued the presentation on the inclusionary section he proposed. The Board Member Comments and Questions:  Mr. Peters was in favor of the concept and language as it improves the bylaw.  Mr. Schanbacher was in favor.  Ms. Thompson was in favor but asked for clarification on 3.2 for substantially being similar does this include interior and exterior.  Mr. Creech asked for clarification on the 20% of the GFA in 3.1.  Mr. Leon said this maybe hard to make applicable universally in Town. Maybe this section should be restricted to OSRDs. He asked for clarification the inclusionary section on the two different references for percentage of GFA in section 5.6.3.1 and percentage based on number of units in section 5.6.4.  Mr. Creech said he did not want to do a separation of the inclusionary section in Article 35 at this Town Meeting.  Mr. Peters agreed to put it back into the OSRD section.  Mr. Schanbacher said to keep it in the OSRD section.  Ms. Thompson said keep the wording but in the OSRD section.  Mr. Hornig said they will put it back in 6.12.6 inclusionary housing piece back in the OSRD with the new wording discussed tonight. Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board renumber the section on inclusionary housing as presented and updated currently section 5.6 to be included in the OSRD as section 6.12.6. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Bob Creech – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig - yes) MOTION PASSED The Board discussed Mr. Daggett’s following recommendations to Article 35. 1. Update Bylaw Purposes – The Board accepted changes to 6.12.1.7 but end the sentence with “techniques”; and accepted changes to 6.12.1.8, and did not accept 6.12.1.9 since it is duplicative elsewhere in the language. 2. Regulate the Number of Units- The Board decided to allow 5 times the number of units as allowed on the proof plan plus inclusionary units. 3. Set a Minimum OSRD Development Site- The Board decided to allow the proof plan must show a two-lot conventional subdivision on a tract of land of at least 70.000 square feet. 4. Modify the Maximum Building Size- The Board agreed to use the actual number as Gross Floor Area (GFA)for the minimum lot size in the zone and not base it on the lot size in the proof plan. 5. Exclude Protected Resource Areas from the Allowable GFA and Open Space Calculations- The Board decided to not accept this recommendation. Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of March 16, 2022 6. Define the OSRD Approach as a Form of Natural Resource Protection Zoning- The Board decided to not accept this recommendation. 7. Make OSRD Locations Consistent with the State’s Smart Growth Objectives- The Board decided to not accept this recommendation. 8. Increase Inclusionary requirements with Development Scale- The Board decided that 20% inclusionary is required unless the GFA is greater than 60.000 square feet. 9. Develop Inclusionary Housing AMI Levels Collaboratively- The Board decided to change collaboratively to consultation. 10. Historic Incentives Need to be Modified- The Board consensus was to not accept this since this item was already addressed by the study group. 11. Inclusionary requirements are Incompatible with Historic Preservation Requirements- The Board decided to not accept this recommendation. 12. Require Parity in Inclusionary Unit Construction- The Board said this was already addressed in the inclusionary language. 13. Require Accessible Unit Construction Standards and Practices- The Board said this will be done per the AAB. 14. Develop Design Standards- The Board agreed that design guidelines are needed. 15. Ensure Sustainable Development- The Board all agreed that this is not necessary. The Board recessed at 8:47 to 8:50 p.m. Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board recommend approval of Article 35: Amend Zoning Bylaw – Open Space Residential Developments to Town Meeting as amended over the past several meetings. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 4-0-1 (roll call: Bob Creech – abstained; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig - yes) MOTION PASSED Board Position on Articles 12b and 12c: Appropriate for Municipal Capital Projects and Equipment-12b Town-wide Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan-12c South Lexington and Forbes-Marrett Traffic Mitigation Plans: Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board recommend approval of Articles 12b and 12c to Town Meeting. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Bob Creech – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig - yes) MOTION PASSED **********************BOARD ADMINISTRATION************************ Board Member Updates: Mr. Creech attended only half of the webinar on the Route 128/95 since it did not include the section of Route 95/Route 128 near Exits 31a and 31b, i.e., Bedford St in Lexington. LexHab withdrew their request for CPA monies. Minutes for the Meeting of March 16, 2022 Page 7 Upcoming Meetings: Reports will be discussed next week and we will complete as many as we can on March 23, 2022. The zoning articles will be done at the end of Town Meeting starting April 11 &13. There will be pre-town meetings on those dates. Review Meeting Minutes for February 23, 2022: Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board approve the minutes of the February 23, 2022 as amended by Mr. Creech. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Bob Creech – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig – yes). MOTION PASSED. Adjourn Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board adjourn the meeting of March 16, 2022. Michael Schanbacher seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Bob Creech – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Schanbacher – yes; Melanie Thompson – yes; Charles Hornig – yes). MOTION PASSED Meeting adjourned at 10:10 p.m. Lex Media recorded the meeting. The following documents used at the meeting can be found on the Planning Board website in Planning Board packets. Article 35: Open Space Residential Development:  Matt Daggett revisions to Article 35 dated March 16, 2022 (25 pages).  Inclusionary Provision dated February 4, 2022 (1 page). 75 Outlook Drive:  Plan set dated February 25, 2022 (12 pages).  Historical Commission decision dated February 17, 2022 (1 page).  Stormwater report dated February 25, 2022 (160 pages).  Declaration of Covenant and homeowner’s restrictions (4 pages).  Staff memo dated March 14, 2022 (9 pages). 35 Hayes Lane:  Staff memo dated March 14, 2022 (2 pages).  Sketch Plan set dated January 10, 2022 (5 pages).  Project Narrative dated January 13, 2022 (1 page). Michael Schanbacher, Clerk of the Planning Board