Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-12-08-SPRD-min RECEIVED 022 20Jain, 320 piiri TOWN CLERK Special Permit Residential Development (SPRD) LEXINGTON MA Meeting Minutes of December 8, 2021 Special Permit Residential Development(SPRD)Ad-hoc Committee Members present for the Public Meeting: Wendy Manz, Chair; Scott Cooper,Joyce Murphy, Charles Hornig, Richard Perry, Heather Hartshorn. Lexington Staff present for the Public Meeting: Carol Kowalski,Assistant Town Manager for Development; Lorraine Welch, Office Manager; Kiruthika Ramakrishnan, Administrative Assistant. Other Attendees: David Trietsch. Wendy Manz, chaired the meeting and called the meeting to order at 8:08 am. The meeting was broadcast live on LexMedia and recorded for future on-demand viewing. 1. Residential Development proposal A draft dated 11.09.2021 of the Residential Development Bylaw was displayed by Carol. Salient points were discussed with the purpose of determining if the committee would like any modifications of certain areas for a better understanding. Carol is planning to use the expertise of an attorney, who is well versed with the zoning regulations,to review the draft. She is waiting for a quote regarding his fees. Charles explained the different rules for SSDs and ARDS. Scott wanted to know what changes were made to SSD and was wondering if the focus should be on ARD instead. Charles answered that the substantial differences between the one in the draft and the current bylaw is that under this new provision, SSDs would be required to provide inclusionary housing and in exchange would be permitted to have multiple dwelling units within a dwelling, and this was included due to the support received within the committee. Scott asked if there were any standard/threshold requirements to qualify for SSD. Charles answered saying that the only threshold requirement is that, it has to support a two lot conventional sub division. Scott was wondering if there is too much tinkering with SSD to make it less appealing to developers. Richard responded saying that he believes SSDs are builders friends. Scott asked if the tinkering with the SSDs is moving in the right direction. Richard was not sure and said it might be moving in the wrong direction. David brought about the confusion in the language and wanted to check with others their opinion to redraft to make it easy for people to understand. Wendy felt that it was important to come up with the contents and then focus on the language. 2. Report to Select Board Heather wanted to make a cover letter/summary of the recommendation to make the proposal clear and understandable. Wendy said that we can do a summary of what we are trying to achieve in each of the proposal aiming for Jan first. Carol agreed to what Heather said and was wondering if a site plan review should be made optional to make it simple. Scott wanted to know the difference between site plan review and special permit process and also the process for conventional sub division Charles explained that the conventional sub division goes through a sub division approval process, which is similar to a site plan review process only for the street.The layout and the drainage and such are only taken into consideration. And in explaining what site plan review and special permit process is, Charles said that both involves engineering,filing with the planning board, and going through the public hearing.The major difference is that in site plan review, if the rules are followed, it would definitely be approved, within the 60 days. Special permit, on the other hand, might take longer, possibility of not getting approved and needs two-third votes. Carol clarified saying that as per law, there is a presumption of approval with a special permit, if the given standards in the town's by laws are met. David said that everything that goes to planning board and town meeting needs to be an English translation so that everyone can understand the depth of the zoning codes. Heather said that now is the time to act on bringing about the change, using simple compliant language which would facilitate easy understanding. Richard had a few questions for Carol as to when the zoning attorney will be appointed to simplify the language of the bylaw. Carol said that she is waiting for the estimate from him and would give him a time frame to respond. Wendy suggested circulating portions of the draft of the bylaw along with questions, prior to future meetings,just so that everyone will have some clarity when attending the meeting. David agreed saying that other material information can also be added to get a better understanding and to arrive at a conclusion. Richard felt it was important to expedite the process of sending the draft to the attorney. Wendy asked the committee if they think that should be the next step before the committee starts addressing the individual decision points. Charles felt it was really important that the committee make a statement about the two types of development with the kind of permitting and the kind of developments the committee wanted to propose, so that would help the zoning attorney to work on the wordings of the bylaw. 3. Joint meeting with planning board Charles said it would be good for the SPRD committee to have a clear idea of what it wants to present to the planning board and the direction it wants to go and their expectations from the planning board. Joyce commented on the dimensional aspects like the 50 feet boundary, and the 500 square feet exclusive use could be very restrictive.Joyce also wanted to comment on how 12 Summit road would look using ARD and wanted to hear inputs on all the above. Scott commented saying that the size of 650 square feet minimum seemed very small, and should have something closer to 1000 Square feet. He had a question regarding special permit versus site plan review as to why SSDs require special permit and the distinction should be eliminated between them and should be going towards site plan reviews for both SSDs and ARDS. Richard said that SPRD committee is not ready to meet with the Planning board and the bylaw has to be redrafted to get a better response. Richard responded to Scott's comment on the 650 square feet minimum, saying that the new Bedford street construction had all 650 square feet units to cater to a segment of the population. Based on the discussion so far,Wendy wanted to take a vote to defer the meeting with the planning board to a later date.Joyce, Scott, Heather and Richard wanted to defer the meeting with the planning board. Charles abstained from the vote. 4. Miscellaneous Wendy then said that the committee agrees that Carol should reach out to the zoning attorney to help review the draft of the bylaw. Also she wanted to check with the committee to see if they were interested in coming up with clear specifications regarding special permit and site plan review process, since Wendy also felt that the special permit process has not worked well in the past. Wendy also wanted to send to the committee members, prior to the next meeting, some decision points to help the committee resolve some preferences. Richard,Joyce and Scott agreed with Wendy. A member of the public,Tom Shiple, wanted to know when the proposal would be brought to the Town Meeting? Wendy said it would possibly be in Fall of 2022. Carol said she would reach out to the town counsel to see the need of special permit versus site plan review and would also redraft the bylaw in a simple language and has already reached out to the zoning attorney, Mark Bobrowski regarding reviewing the bylaw. Wendy offered to review the first part of the bylaw and come up with questions to share to the committee. Scott felt that if there is no reason for special permit, his recommendation would be to use the site plan review instead. Wendy suggested to schedule the next meeting in January using a doodle poll. 5. Approval of minutes No meeting minutes were approved. The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 am.