HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-09-21-PB-min
Minutes of the Lexington Planning Board
Held on Wednesday, September 21, 2022
Virtual Meeting at 6:00 pm
Present: Robert Peters, Chair; Michael Schanbacher, Vice-Chair; Melanie Thompson,
Clerk, Robert Creech, and Charles Hornig. Also present were Abby McCabe, Planning
Director, and Sheila Page, Assistant Planning Director. Ms. Belanger joined the meeting
for the 9 Bruce Road and 6 Park Street matters.
Mr. Peters, Chair, called to order the meeting of the Lexington Planning Board on Tuesday,
September 21, 2022, at 6:00 pm. For this meeting, all members are participating remotely
via Zoom. LexMedia is filming this meeting 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. Peters conducted a roll call to ensure all members of the Planning Board and members
of staff present could hear and be heard.
Mr. Peters provided a summary of instructions for members of the public in attendance. It
was further noted that materials for this meeting are available on the Town's Novus
AGENDA dashboard.
95 Hayden Avenue & 128 Spring Street (99 Hayden Avenue) – Continued Public
Hearing for Major Site Plan Review
Peter Tamm, Goulston and Storrs, attorney for the project, provided an update on the
work done and plan changes since the August 17th meeting.
Scott Turner, Environmental Partners, civil engineer for the project, provided an
overview of the plan changes: added bore hole locations; revised the entrance to provide
better sight lines and accessibility; highlighted accessible ramps; added bicycle racks to
the entrances of buildings 1 and 3; provided silt sack and accessible ramp details;
provided enough room between bicycle racks; located car share, EV parking spaces, and
shade locations; added bicycle racks and bollards in the parking garage; reduced light
levels on the roof of the garage; and reduced light pole height.
Board Discussion
• A board member said they appreciate the Applicant’s explanation of the parking
demand and the appropriate level of parking so that parking issues do not
spillover into the neighborhood.
• Several board members wanted to make sure that the historic building on site that
is proposed to be demolished will be commemorated. Mr. Tamm explained the
MOU requirement to provide funding for archiving materials and providing
exhibit materials.
• Mr. Tamm pointed out that, for the record, the “Historic Building” is not officially
Historic but that it will be researched and commemorated to include photographs
of the building
Mr. Peters asked for public comments. There were no public comments.
Ms. McCabe said that staff has reviewed the submitted material and believes all
outstanding items have been addressed. A draft decision of approval with conditions was
reviewed by the Board.
On a motion made by Mr. Schanbacher, seconded by Ms. Thompson, the Planning Board
voted 5-0 on a roll call vote to approve the request to waive the strict requirement of the
Board's zoning regulations to allow finished grades greater than 3:1 because of the existing
ledge and to waive the tree bylaw because the tree removal and replacement has been
incorporated into this site plan review. (Board vote: Schanbacher – yes, Thompson – yes,
Creech – yes, Hornig – yes, Peters – yes).
On a motion made by Mr. Schanbacher, seconded by Ms. Thompson, the Planning Board
voted 5-0 to approve the major site plan review application submitted by Hobbs Brook
Real Estate for 95 Hayden Ave. and 128 Spring Street with the conditions outlined in the
draft decision prepared by staff and discussed tonight (Board vote: Schanbacher – yes,
Thompson – yes, Creech – yes, Hornig – yes, Peters – yes).
On a motion made by Mr. Schanbacher, seconded by Ms. Thompson, the Planning Board
voted 5-0 to close the public hearing on 95 Hayden Ave. and 128 Spring Street Major Site
Plan Review. (Board vote: Schanbacher – yes, Thompson – yes, Creech – yes, Hornig –
yes, Peters – yes).
Exhibits can be found: https://lexingtonma.viewpointcloud.com/records/64765
9 Bruce Road - Street Adequacy Determination
Mr. Peters opened the matter of a Street Adequacy Determination for 9 Bruce Road. Ms.
Belanger described the condition of the road with a few places of failure and widths that
were too narrow. Planning, Engineering, and Fire report that the road width and
conditions are inadequate for the proposed use. This is explained further in the memo to
the Planning Board dated September 15, 2022.
Fred Russell, the civil engineer for the project, explained that although this property has a
Bruce Road address, access to the property is from Hillside Avenue. Mr. Russell
explained that test pits were dug to determine where full depth construction is needed.
The Applicant agreed with the Town’s assessment and has prepared a plan that provides
cape cod berms, two drywell catch basins to improve drainage, and provides for
reclamation and, in certain places, full-depth construction of the pavement.
The Applicant is asking for a waiver to widen the roadway to 16 feet rather than the
required 20 feet. Staff supports this waiver due to the steep slopes adjacent to the road.
Mr. Peters asked for public comments. There were no public comments.
On a motion made by Mr. Schanbacher, seconded by Ms. Thompson, the Board voted 5-0
on a roll call vote to waive the regulations to allow the pavement to be widened to 16 feet
rather than 20 feet and to determine that Hillside Avenue in the vicinity of 9 Bruce Road
is not presently of adequate grade and construction to provide for the needs of vehicular
traffic, but will be adequate with the improvements outlined in the staff memo presented
this evening. (Board vote: Schanbacher – yes, Thompson – yes, Creech – yes, Hornig –
yes, Peters – yes).
Exhibits can be found: https://lexingtonma.viewpointcloud.com/records/64283
6 Park Street - Street Adequacy Determination (Continued from September 7, 2022)
Mr. Peters reopened the matter of a Street Adequacy Determination for 6 Park Street,
continued from the September 7, 2022 meeting.
Fred Russell, the civil engineer for the project, said since the last meeting they have
revised the plans to widen the road to the required 20 feet. The road in front of the
property will be reclaimed and, in the areas of widening, the road will be constructed to
the full depth on each side of the existing pavement.
Ms. Belanger said that Engineering reviewed the plans and agree to what is proposed.
Board Discussion
• A board member asked who was responsible for moving the mailboxes should
they need to be moved. It will be the Applicant’s responsibility.
• A board member wanted to understand the impact of widening the road. Mr.
Russell explained that the road widening will be on both sides so the center of the
road remains the same.
• Board members appreciated the Applicant’s flexibility.
Mr. Peters asked for public comments.
John Mazerall asked if the section from Reed Street to number four would be overlaid. An
abutter asked if the Applicant was willing to petition the town to accept the street. A board
member noted that the residents abutting the unaccepted street would need to petition the
town to have the street accepted.
On a motion made by Mr. Schanbacher, seconded by Ms. Thompson, the Board voted 5-0
on a roll call vote to determine that Park Street in the vicinity of 1-6 Park Street is not
presently of adequate grade and construction to provide for the needs of vehicular traffic,
but will be adequate with the improvements outlined in the staff memo and discussed today.
(Board vote: Schanbacher – yes, Thompson – yes, Creech – yes, Hornig – yes, Peters –
yes).
Exhibits can be found: https://lexingtonma.viewpointcloud.com/records/65095
35 Hayes Lane – Public Hearing for a Site Sensitive Development, Definitive
Residential Subdivision, and Street Adequacy Determination
Mr. Peters opened the public hearing for the 35 Hayes Lane Site Sensitive Development,
Definitive Subdivision, and Street Adequacy Determination at 6:42 pm.
Michael Novak, Patriot Engineering, Fred Gilgun, Nicholson, Sreter and Gilgun, and Jeff
Thoma, Land Design Studios, represented the Applicants Peter and Valerie Johnson.
Mr. Gilgun introduced the Johnsons and explained the proposed project. They are
applying for a site sensitive development to allow a subdivision and a street adequacy
determination, including requesting a waiver from the 20-foot width requirement, to
create two additional lots at 35 Hayes for modestly sized houses. This portion of Hayes
Lane is in good condition and the waiver is justified to protect the trees and wetlands.
The land is big enough to support a 3-lot subdivision. The property is encumbered by a
conservation restriction and sewer easement. The project is designed to minimize the
impacts to the environment, will not detract from the neighborhood, and the beneficial
impacts outweigh the adverse impacts.
Mr. Novak further explained the details of the project. The approximately 3-acre parcel
abuts the Vine Brook riverfront area. The wetland line and top-of-bank line have been
approved by the Conservation Commission. The proposed subdivision, with three lots at
the front of the property, stop the limit of grading from encroaching on sensitive areas,
leaving much of the lot undeveloped. Each lot has its own access and utilities making a
homeowner’s association agreement unnecessary.
Mr. Thoma said that he and the Johnsons worked very hard to save the trees and the
meadow. Seven trees are proposed to be removed. He also said that the Johnsons have
been maintaining and caring for the meadow. The site plan shows two distinct limit lines.
One is the limit of grading within which all the construction will take place. The second
is a limit of work line. Mr. Thoma explained that because maintaining the meadow will
require invasive species removal there will be work done outside the limit of grading line.
Board Discussion
• A board member said this is a good site sensitive project. Why did the Applicant
choose this kind of development? Mr. Novak said that they are building these
houses for their families and wanted the flexibility to have houses large enough
for their families.
• A board member asked the Applicant with which stormwater requirements the
Applicant will seek to comply. Lot 3 is really the only lot that would be subject to
wetland jurisdiction. Staff recommends that the entire property be subject to the
wetland requirements. This can be a condition of the decision.
Ms. McCabe asked if the applicant would be willing to provide a second conservation
restriction. Mr. Gilgun explained that the Johnsons would like to continue to use the
meadow area, maintain it, and keep it free of invasive species. The Johnsons may
consider conveying parcel 2 to the Town. The Johnsons may be amenable to a
conservation restriction depending on the conditions. Ms. McCabe said that the
impervious surface, site coverage, and gross floor area limits should be provided for each
lot.
The Board added more comments
• A board member supports the idea of a conservation restriction or conveying the
parcel as long as it does not compromise the Applicant’s privacy.
• A board member said that although he had asked for only one curb cut during the
sketch plan review, he does understand the reasoning for three curb cuts.
Ms. McCabe said that the Applicant is requesting a waiver from the Street Adequacy
Determination because of concern for the trees. However, the Fire Department would like
the road widened as much as possible. A member of the board asked that we get
clarification from the Fire Department so that the Planning Board and Fire Department
agree.
Mr. Peters asked for public comments.
Dan Koretz, 10 Hayes Lane, said that Hayes Lane varies in width and is as narrow as 11
feet 3 inches. He said that the roadway by 16 Hayes Lane had to be widened to 16 feet.
The need for public safety should be consistent.
Chuck Alexander, 26 Hayes Lane, said he supports the project and thinks the trees and
wooded roadway should be left as is.
Brienne Leary, 50 Fletcher Avenue, said she supports that project and the waiver .
Rick Resetich, 29 Hayes Lane, says he supports saving the trees
Michael McCormack, 21 Hamblen Street, said that he was there representing George and
Loretta of 30 Hayes Lane who support the project and appreciate the effort to minimize the
impacts.
James Skecher, 48 Fletcher Avenue, said he would like to see the hayfield restored.
Marianne Lazarus, 22 Hayes Lane, recalled that during the development of the property
next door the Planning Board did not require widening because it was a country lane. She
supports a narrow street as it keeps the traffic away. She asked that construction vehicles
be parked off the road.
Mary Ellen Maloney, 44 Fletcher Avenue, said that she did not want to lose the trees.
Jean Acker, 27 Hayes Lane, said that she supports the plans and does not want the road
widened.
Mr. Peters asked that Planning staff look more carefully at the road width and to work with
the Fire Department so that we are being consistent with our requirements as to what is
adequate.
On a motion made by Mr. Schanbacher, seconded by Ms. Thompson, the Board voted 5-0
on a roll call vote to continue the hearing until October 19 at 6 pm over Zoom. (Board vote:
Schanbacher – yes, Thompson – yes, Creech – yes, Hornig – yes, Peters – yes).
Exhibits can be found: https://lexingtonma.viewpointcloud.com/records/66154
7 Bird Hill Road – Request to release surety from the required
improvements of the March 3, 2020 Street Adequacy Determination
The Street Adequacy Determination from March 3. 2020 required road improvements
associated with the reconstruction of the house. Work has now been completed.
Engineering and Planning staff confirm that the required improvements have been
completed and recommends the release of funds back to the Applicant.
Mr. Peters asked the Board for comments. The board had none.
On a motion made by Mr. Schanbacher, seconded by Ms. Thompson, the Planning Board
voted 5-0 to release the surety in the amount of $4,730.00 to the Applicant (Vahan
Zhamkochian and Narine Sharkhatunyan) after confirmation of completion of the road
improvements required as part of the March 3, 2020 Street Adequacy Determination.
(Board vote: Schanbacher – yes, Thompson – yes, Creech – yes, Hornig – yes, Peters –
yes).
The Planning Board recessed at 7:35 PM. The Meeting resumed at 7:40. Mr. Peters
conducted a roll call to ensure all members of the Planning Board and members of staff
present could hear and be heard.
Update on the Bedford/Hartwell Complete Streets 25% Design Project and
Transportation Demand Overlay District Plans
Ms. Page provided an overview of the both the Bedford/Hartwell Complete Streets 25%
Design Project and TMO-1 Hartwell Area District Plan. She explained that the 25% Design
consultants created a build-out scenario to determine the expected number of vehicles.
Traffic analysis with the design alternatives showed that there would be a backup onto I-
95/Route 128. Possible solutions included allowing multi-family housing in the corridor,
implementing strong transportation Demand Management techniques such as unbundled
parking, and creating a collector road that connects I-95 directly to Hartwell Avenue.
Board Discussion
• A board member said he would like to examine further with staff the build-out,
how it relates to the avigation easement, and why these build-out numbers are
different than those presented two years ago.
• A board member said that they were glad the additional ramp was on the list for
consideration.
• The ramp is a high impact solution but we may be able to solve the issue without
building an additional ramp.
• Several board members agreed with the concept of housing on the corridor but
thought that 40% was too much. Do we know the number of housing units 40%
translates to?
• Several board members expressed skepticism that paying for parking would work
in the suburbs as medical building are the only examples.
• A board member asked if adding housing on Hartwell could be part of the MBTA
Community Housing effort.
Ms. Page provided an update on how the Transportation Management Overlay District
works and the progress being made on the TMO-1 Hartwell Area Plan Update. Nelson
Nygaard will be presenting their initial findings at the October 12, 2022 meeting.
Staff Updates
Hemali Shah, the current Senior Service Director, has been appointed as Lexington’s Chief
Equity Officer.
The Open space and Recreation Plan survey is open to the public and is posted on the
website.
The Board discussed upcoming meetings and the schedule.
Board Updates.
Mr. Creech reported that MAGIC has scheduled their meetings through May. They are
looking for a town to consider featuringa project at an upcoming meeting.
Mr. Hornig said the SPRD committee is planning to bring zoning to the Annual Town
Meeting, which is the same timeline as the Planning Board’s MBTA Communitiy Housing
zoning. The Board and the committee will need to coordinate outreach so people are not
confused as there will be two different articles.
Mr. Peters said that Vision 2020 will be presenting their survey findings at an October 17
joint Select Board/Planning Board/School Committee meeting.
Meeting Minutes
On a motion made by Mr. Schanbacher, seconded by Ms. Thompson, the board voted 5-0
on a roll call vote to approve the meeting minutes for September 7 and 13, 2022 as written.
(Board vote: Hornig – yes, Peters – yes, Schanbacher – yes, Thompson – yes, Creech -
yes).
Lex Media recorded the meeting.
Materials from the meeting can be found in Planning Board’s Novus Agenda Packet and
the project applications submitted online to Viewpoint Cloud.
List of Documents:
1. 95 Hayden Ave & 128 Spring Street Site Plan Review Power Point presentation
titled “ 95 Hayden Ave & 128 Spring Street (Proposed 97,99,101 and 103 Hayden
Ave)”, dated September 21, 2022, for continued public hearing
2. Memo from Scott Turner, Environmental Partners regarding “95 Hayden Avenue
and 128 Spring Street (Proposed 97, 99, 101, and 103 Hayden Avenue) Plan
Revisions (Major Site Plan Review)” dated September 14, 2022
3. Draft 95 Hayden Decision with revisions after September 16
4. Street Adequacy Determination Road Construction Plans – 9 Bruce Street
prepared for Seaver Construction, signed and stamped by Frederick W. Russell,
Registered Professional Engineer no. 30751 and James R. Keenan Registered
Land Surveyor no. 36713, dated August 8, 2022
5. Memo to the Planning Board regarding 9 Bruce Street Adequacy Determination
dated September 16, 2022; revised to September 19, 2022.
6. Street Adequacy Determination Road Construction Plans – 6 Park Street
prepared for Deepak Amenani, signed and stamped by Frederick W. Russell,
Registered Professional Engineer no. 30751 and James R. Keenan Registered
Land Surveyor no. 36713, dated July 20, 2022 – no revision date.
7. Memo to the Planning Board regarding 6 Park Street Adequacy Determination
dated September 30, 2022.
8. 35 Hayes Lanes Definitive Planset prepared for Peter and Valerie Johnson, signed
and stamped by Michael J. Novak, registered PE no. 50696, dated August 15,
2022
9. Memo to the Planning Board regarding 35 Hayes Lane Adequacy Determination
dated September 16, 2022; revised to September 19, 2022.