Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-02-10 PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF FEBRUARY 10, 2016 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room was called to order 7:06 p.m. by Chair Nancy Corcoran-Ronchetti. Present were board members Charles Hornig, Tim Dunn, Richard Canale, and Ginna Johnson, with planning staff Aaron Henry and Lori Kaufman present. ********************** STAFF REPORTS ********************** G: ENERAL UPDATES Written comments regarding the fiscal impacts of the Gross Floor Area (GFA) proposal have been submitted by the Residential Policy Committee (RPC) for the Board’s review. ***** UPCOMING MEETINGS & ANTICIPATED SCHEDULE ***** The February 24 meeting will start at 6:00 p.m. in the Parker Room with a public hearing at 7:00 p.m. If there are any continuations tonight, they will be added to either the March 2 or the March 16 meeting. The Board needs to be prepared to go early at Town Meeting, and will need to start at nd 6:00 p.m. on the 2to keep up with the schedule. **** 2016 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING – ARTICLE HEARINGS **** LSUCBD,A43: ARGE ERVICE SES IN THE ISTRICT RTICLE Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti called the public hearing to order at 7:14 p.m. There were 35 people in the audience. Mr. Canale explained the goal is to make the Center more vibrant by creating a supportive environment for a variety of uses. The concept was to limit the concentration of banks and real estate offices in the Center by only allowing them by special permit with specific criteria in the CB District. Parking requirements were also added. Public Comment:  The Center Committee has noticed that the diversity of spaces is changing and there appear to be more office in storefront spaces. It was determined that this could be limited by special permit with high criteria which would protect the retail climate of the Center.  Why do Concord and Winchester not have 12 banks and 8 real estate offices in their main center? The Lexington Town Center has now been now been overrun by office spaces and there should be more stringent enforcement of the rules to limit office space. The understanding is that Concord made it an unfriendly environment so banks looked at other locations. The special permit process hopefully will get existing banks to incorporate other uses like a café. That is not a solution it takes business away from existing businesses like the Ride Studio. Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of February 10, 2016  Want to make sure the special permit criteria are strong enough to create a pedestrian center that has a friendly environment.  The language of the special permit should be a “No” unless the conditions are met.  The special permit process includes public hearing notices that must be published and posted and with the additional criteria, this will require the applicant to do a lot of work to show that they meet the requirements.  Would potential legal challenges for a special permit be more than for a ban? A ban would always allow existing banks stay there. The criteria have to be consistent with State Law. An outright “No” would be safer. Board Comments:  The parking standard was far lower for these institutions then the national standard. This was just bringing them up to current standards and was adding two new lines for parking.  Was there any consideration for a hard limit of square footage? Everything was considered and this was the proposal that all stakeholders were willing to accept. Audience comments:  The Town Center was one of the draws to buy here 10 years ago and now the running joke is Lexington is the Town of Banks. The sense of Town that used to be is now starting to dissipate.  Remove the words “substantially increase” and not allow any increase. This comment will be taken into consideration Board Comments:  How is storage space defined? This would be on the building plans.  Going into an open space, where does the office start and stop? On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to close the public hearing at 8:12 p.m. ************ DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION ************ 48SR,SS,CPH: UMMIT OAD ITE ENSITIVE DEVELOPMENT ONTINUED UBLIC EARING Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti called the continued public hearing to order at 8:15 p.m. There were 30 people in the audience. The applicant requested to withdraw the application. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to accept the request from the applicant to withdraw the application without prejudice. **** 2016 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING – ARTICLE HEARINGS **** ARD-6,B: MEND ROOKHAVEN Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti called the public hearing to order at 8:16 p.m. There were 20 people in the audience. Mr. Bill Dailey, attorney, was present and explained that this is a residence. Brookhaven has been open 26 years and average age is 86 years for its residents. These people are very active and Minutes for the Meeting of February 10, 2016 Page 3 invested in their lives there and in the community. The applicant was looking to build 49 additional independent units, with underground parking and 30 additional assisted units. A traffic study was done and doubted any traffic mitigations would need to be made. Residents do have cars but many do not use them. Funds will be given to local transit services, which reduces the need for a car. The number of commercial vehicles would not be increased only the delivery sizes would increase. The trail system would be extended and parking would increase. Ms. Diane Duley, architect showed some of the revisions to the plans, presented views from neighborhood properties, and explained the elevations were still being modified. Mr. James Borrebach, civil engineer, said the fire lane and turnaround were approved by Chief Fleck of the Fire Department. Trip generations would add 125 weekday trips and 88 weekend trips. There will be a minimal traffic increase. The two existing loading docks will be used. The storm water analysis showed no increase in runoff. A looped water main will be created and tied into the Waltham Street main and a booster for the Fire Department maybe added. Dave Fisher, landscape architect, said additional plantings were added to create more of a buffer. There are shelters for the residents use to hike and sit down. The removal of existing landscape, which is mostly invasive, will be replaced with native materials. Audience comments:  If adding 40 units will the existing kitchen and dining area be able to handle that load? Yes, the dining area and kitchen will be expanding.  Is there room for 49 additional cars?  The immediate abutter would like a lower density.  Would the RD zone be for the entire site or just the new area? This would be to amend the entire RD-6 area.  What happens with the sewage flow, there are existing problems? That needs to be in the plans. Engineering said the capacity was sufficient.  There was concern about runoff onto the abutter’s property. There is no runoff from that location of the site.  The angle of the building cannot be changed so the access cannot be moved.  There has been flooding over the last three years.  The abutter will be seeing two and a half stories and the trees will not be full during the winter.  There was concern about sound from the condensers where would they be located and would they be insulated? They will be on the roof. They will be right at the abutter’s house height and going full blast during the summer when windows would be open. The Planning Board can discuss this issue in the deliberations and mitigations can be required. There needs to be a noise study to make sure the noise bylaw requirements are being met before Town Meeting.  There is a lot of wild life in that area. Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of February 10, 2016 Board Comments:  When will the revised plans with all these changes be completed? Mr. Grant said this has be in by March 14 seven days before Town Meeting begins. If the Board wants to continue public hearing, it could be done for March 2.  The north access road will only be for the Fire Department. Yes, but the Police Department asked to gate the hammerhead.  There will be no way to prevent other vehicles from entering? That is correct. Staff will get details on that.  The pathway does not show public access from Waltham Street to the public property and want to make sure the public sticks to the pathway. There will need to be some signs for access to the public to the Western Greenway.  Check the wall structure on Concord Avenue.  Are there affordable units? No, from the beginning we have made contributions of $400,000 for affordable housing given to LexHAB and will make another contribution based on the preference of the Town Manager. This is a non-profit organization and has tried to keep the units affordable.  A huge amount of site is parking; have you considered an agreement with Zip Car? Zip Car did not like the age group. We do try to use LexConnect. Try to eliminate some of the parking spaces.  This expansion has made a major impact on the view to the north. What material is being used? That is under review. That material must be provided before Town Meeting.  Is there going to be fencing around the detention basin? The applicant will provide information for all these details.  Will there be automatic irrigation?  The winter view shows a need for evergreen screening, which would also help with light spill and recommend white pine.  The historic, old town road should get some treatment. The applicant will work with Conservation to address the treatment of that path. The plans need to show the treatment of the path.  Any 3-D views should have winter and summer view.  The Board wants to see the draft MOU before the next meeting. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 3-2, (Mr. Canale and Mr. Dunn opposed), to close the public hearing at 10:10 p.m. PDD: LANNED ISTRICT EVELOPMENTS Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti called the public hearing to order at 10:13 p.m. There was one person in the audience. Mr. Hornig explained these changes would replace RD and CD districts with a single type of district and the 24 existing districts would not be changed unless they come in for an amendment. The districts can be residential, commercial or mixed uses and this would simplify the planned district process. This would also change the process to use site plan review instead of the special permit process. Minutes for the Meeting of February 10, 2016 Page 5 Board Comments:  Presently the way that most CDs have worked they are looking for exemptions from the Zoning Bylaw and are looking for relief. A written statement will be provided by Board Member regarding how to change the wording.  Where is staff with the regulations? Staff will have the cleaned and adopted regulations ready by the end of summer.  Any districts requesting an amendment would go through the new process. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to close the public hearing at 10:51 p.m. ************************* MINUTES ************************* On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to approve the minutes of January 6, 2016 as amended. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to approve the minutes of January 20, 2016. ********************** ADJOURNMENT ********************** On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to adjourn at 10:52 p.m. The meeting was recorded by LexMedia. The following documents used at the meeting can be found on file with the Planning Department:  Proposed schedule for Town meeting Preparation (1 page).  Letter from John Farrington, Esq. to withdraw the application for 48 Summit Road, Definitive Site Sensitive development without prejudice.  Comments from Malcolm Kasperian regarding Brookhaven RD-6 dated February 10, 2016. (1 page).  Article to Amend Planned Development District (4 pages).  Article to Amend Zoning Bylaw from Aaron Henry for Banking and Real Estate Uses in the CB District (2 pages).  Article to Amend Zoning Bylaw from Howard Levin for Banking and Real Estate Uses in the CB District (2 pages).  Fiscal and Financial impacts from the RPC working group for the Residential Gross Floor Area (4 pages). Ginna Johnson, Clerk