HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-02-08-SPRD-min
Page 1 of 3
Special Permit Residential Development (SPRD) Ad-hoc committee
Meeting Minutes of February 8, 2023 6:00 pm
Special Permit Residential Development (SPRD) Committee members present: Jill Hai, Chair, Wendy Manz,
Joyce Murphy, Charles Hornig, Scott Cooper, Richard Perry, Heather Hartshorn, and Betsey Weiss.
Also present were Carol Kowalski, Assistant Town Manager for Development; Abby McCabe, Planning
Director; Molly Belanger, Planner and Kiruthika Ramakrishnan, Planning Coordinator.
This was a Planning Board meeting and the SPRD Ad Hoc committee participated in the Planning Board’s
public hearing for the zoning amendment for article 33. The Planning Board members were present at the
meeting.
Mr. Peters, the Planning Board Chair recognized Ms. Hai, the chair of the Special Permit Residential
Development (SPRD) Committee to call to order the SPRD Committee. Ms. Hai conducted a roll call to
ensure all members of the SPRD committee could hear and be heard.
Public Hearing: Article 33 Amend Zoning Bylaw Relative to Special Permit Residential
Development (SPRD)
Ms. Manz shared her presentation and gave a brief introduction on the formation of the SPRD
committee and the need to bring about change. Ms. Manz detailed the committee’s work which was
geared towards encouraging smaller, more varied and inclusive housing. Ms. Manz listed the statement
of values for the SPRD Committee, which was to seek greater diversity in housing to meet the needs of
families and individuals of different circumstances and that new homes should be built to sustainable
standards and explained the Goals of the committee in detail. Ms. Manz shared pictures of examples in
nearby communities of smaller, affordable and more sustainable homes. Ms. Manz explained in detail
about the work done by the committee to draft the bylaw, which included workshops, talking to various
members of the building community, town staff and housing advocates. Ms. Manz went over the
committee’s recommendations in detail and explained the project review process, which will be Site
Plan Review without a Special Permit. Ms. Manz felt that their proposal complements the MBTA Multi-
family zoning proposal and explained the need of both to address the housing crisis.
Mr. Schanbacher wanted clarification on how siting would impact a project and how the process would
work, in general and with respect to the Riverwalk project shared by the committee. Ms. Manz said the
SPRD committee can only make proposals but cannot control the requirements of any development. Ms.
Manz said that Riverwalk was built to create a pocket neighborhood. Mr. Hornig said that the plan
provides for the Planning Board to do Site Plan Review and to propose new regulations when they are
required.
Ms. Thompson wanted to know the market rates for the Riverwalk properties. Ms. Manz said that, the
last time she did some research, it was around $800,000, which was expensive and she hoped, with
SPRD, smaller and less expensive homes will be built.
Page 2 of 3
Mr. Creech wanted to know if covered porches can be excluded from GFA consideration since he felt
that pocket neighborhoods will look less attractive without covered porches. Mr. Creech agreed with the
goals of the SPRD committee and said he too was wondering about how the process would work. Mr.
Creech wanted to know the parking requirements under the proposed bylaw. Ms. Manz said that, in
Riverwalk, parking was on site and was not certain if it could be reproducible in other sites too. Mr.
Hornig added that Special Residential Developments will have the same parking requirements as any
other residential development in town. In response to Mr. Creech’s question on covered porches, Ms.
Hai responded saying that the SPRD committee was only charged with revising §6.9. and felt that it was
not within their purview to make other changes. Mr. Creech wanted to know how the committee
arrived at the number for the density bonus. Ms. Wendy said after much discussion, the committee
arrived at a number that would allow builders to have adequate profit with the inclusionary housing
considered.
Mr. Peters wanted to know the likelihood that it will be used by developers. Ms. Manz said that they
don’t have a specific estimate and that it will depend on the parcels, but in discussing with the
development community, they did sense some interest in trying it out. Ms. Kowalski said that she had
reached out to a number of builders with the basic parameters and most of the builders were interested
in trying it. Mr. Peters wanted to know how likely it will be used in comparison to OSRD. Mr. Hornig said
that SPRD and OSRD was intended to be complementary and will be attractive on different kinds of sites
and added that lessons from OSRD were taken into consideration in crafting the inclusionary
requirements in SPRD, to make it more attractive. Mr. Peters appreciated including the payment in lieu
for smaller developments.
Mr. Leon wanted to know if any analysis had been done on two small parcels being put together in order
to understand the results on what to expect. Mr. Leon also wanted to know the current estimated
payment in lieu. Mr. Hornig replied saying that based on the expected costs of the Vine Street
developments, he estimated it to be around $500-$600 a square foot. Mr. Leon wanted to know the
likely outcome in terms of the number of units in a parcel. Mr. Hornig said that few compact
neighborhood developments will have less than 6 units and that with two small parcels combined he
would expect 2 duplexes; less than 6 units, and the developer would choose to make the payment in lieu
instead of building the inclusionary unit. Mr. Leon also wondered whether it was really necessary to
eliminate special permits as opposed to site plan review. Ms. Manz said that after considerable
discussion, the committee felt that the provisions were very similar in both cases, but the uncertainty
associated with special permits made the committee lean towards site plan review to make the process
more attractive to developers. Mr. Perry reminded the Board of the hardships he had faced as a
developer in executing a project using a special permit and said that he firmly believed site plan review
is the way to go. Mr. Hornig reminded the Board that the recently adopted Comprehensive Plan
explicitly suggested that the SPRD Committee amend the Special Permit Residential Development
provisions to provide by right zoning.
Public Comments
Ms. McBride,45 Turning Mill Road, wanted to know details about the smallest and largest size unit at
Riverwalk. Ms. Manz said that the average size of units is 1760 square feet.
Mr. Tad Dickenson, 48 Hancock Street, wanted to know if razing of small house stock can be stopped
using the SPRD or any zoning regulations. Ms. Manz said that it is hard to try to regulate the property
Page 3 of 3
rights of owners. Mr. Hornig clarified that the scope of the SPRD committee was to regulate
developments on large tracts of land which could be subdivided into multiple building lots.
Ms. Shubra Chandra, 10 Childs Road, wanted to know if the capacity of the schools in Lexington was
being taken into consideration when the Town was proposing these zoning amendments. Ms. Manz said
that they have not had any discussions regarding families as the Town is not allowed to legislate against
having families with school children. Mr. Hornig added that it is not even allowed to discourage
development of housing for families with children, that Article 33 is addressing a small slice of the
housing market, and that the increase in school enrollment related to Article 34 has been taken into
consideration for the school planning.
Mr. Tom Shiple, 18 Phinney Road, shared his thoughts that when the zoning was not giving what is
desired, then it was time to update the zoning and extended his support for the proposal.
Ms. Robin Kutner, 70 Paul Revere Road, felt that Article 33 will not address the problem of razing of the
small houses leading to replacement of large houses and wanted to know what options she would have
if she were to sell her small house situated on a large property. Ms. Manz said the hope of the SPRD
committee was to provide other alternatives to developers.
Mr. Alvaro Amorrortu, 9 While Pine Lane, wanted to know how integrated the different committees of
the Town were, when making the zoning proposals, and wanted to know if environmental impact
analysis was done for 69 Pleasant Street. Ms. Manz said they have been working with different
committee members and Town staff in an integrated approach.
Mr. Gorka Brabo, 7 Moon Hill Road, felt that for large parcels the Town had to come up with a vision,
instead of giving by right options to them.
Adjourn
Ms. Hai moved that the SPRD Committee adjourn the meeting of February 8 th, 2023 at 7.52
p.m. Mr. Perry seconded the motion. The SPRD Committee voted in favor of the motion 8 -0-0
(Roll call: Weiss – yes; Cooper – yes; Perry – yes; Hartshorn– yes; Hornig – yes; Manz- yes,
Murphy- yes; Hai- yes). MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.