Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-04-11-PB-min Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 1 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] Minutes of the Lexington Planning Board Held on Thursday April 11, 2024, Virtual Meeting at 6:00 pm Planning Board members present: Robert Peters, Chair; Michael Schanbacher, Vice-Chair; Melanie Thompson, Clerk; Robert Creech, Charles Hornig, and Michael Leon, associate member. Also present were: Abby McCabe, Planning Director; Meghan McNamara, Planner; Sheila Page, Assistant Planning Director; Carol Kowalski, Assistant Town Manager for Development; Susan Barrett, Transportation Manager; Kiruthika Ramakrishnan, Planning Coordinator. Robert Peters, Chair of the Planning Board, called to order the meeting of the Lexington Planning Board on Thursday, April 11, 2024, at 6:00 p.m. For this meeting, the Planning Board is convening by video conference via Zoom. Lex Media is filming this meeting and will record it for future viewing here. 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 Packet dashboard. Development Administration 28 Meriam St. & 32 Edgewood Rd., 28 Meriam Street Lexington, LLC – Site Plan Review Public Hearing for Special Residential Development (continued from March 13) Mr. Peters opened the continued Public Hearing on the application of 28 Meriam Street Lexington, LLC. for approval of a major site plan review under §135-6.9 of the Zoning Bylaw and Article VI of §181-71 Stormwater Management Regulations. The application is for a site sensitive Special Residential Development with 10 dwelling units in four buildings. The project proposes to preserve and renovate the house at 28 Meriam St. to create a two-family dwelling, raze the house at 32 Edgewood to construct three new buildings for 8 dwelling units, landscaping, parking, and stormwater improvements. The property is located at 28 Meriam Street and 32 Edgewood Road, Lexington, MA also known as Map 56, Lots 94A and 94B in the RS zoning district. The applicants Jason Brickman and Ben Finnegan were present. Also present were the Landscape Architect Gary Larson, attorney Fred Gilgun, and Project Engineers Michael Novak and Jamie Osborn. The Town’s peer reviewer for the project, Thomas Houston from Professional Services Corporation, PC, was also present. Mr. Gilgun shared his presentation and gave a brief overview of the project. Mr. Gilgun went over the architectural revisions that were done as per the suggestions of the Planning Board during the last meeting. Mr. Gilgun also informed the Board that modifications were made in order to meet bicycle storage requirements of the bylaw. Mr. Gilgun also shared the details of trash and recycling pickup and added that all trash removal for all dwelling units would be through private trash pickup through the condominium association. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 2 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] Mr. Novak shared the highlights of the revisions made to the engineering plans. Mr. Novak went over the revisions to the Construction Management Plan, Site Grading Plan and Stormwater Plan. Mr. Novak also shared the changes that were made to the Site Utility Plan and shared the Photometric Plan and explained it in detail. Mr. Larson shared the revisions made to the Landscape Plan to better fit the community and to relate better to the local tree bylaw. Mr. Houston, the peer reviewer, reviewed the revised plans and gave his opinion on the revisions. Mr. Houston gave a list of the significant issues that were addressed and resolved by the applicant. Mr. Houston said that the outlet for the large infiltration system in front of the site has been eliminated which would prevent overflow from the infiltration system contributing to the ponding in the intersection and also prevent the backflow from the ponded area that would compromise the capacity of the large infiltration system. Mr. Houston added that all the three onsite infiltration facilities, including the roof water facilities, are designed to accommodate the hundred year frequency storm event with no discharge, which would ensure that there was a substantial overall reduction in runoff from the site. Mr. Houston stated that the stormwater management system more than meets the standards in terms of water quality. Mr. Houston listed the outstanding comments from the previous meeting that were to be addressed which included the comments related to building height which was being evaluated by the building commissioner, and changes to the plan set and stormwater report. Mr. Houston added that all of the outstanding issues were capable of being resolved. Ms. McCabe confirmed that many of the staff comments were addressed by the applicant, informed the Board that staff had asked for the applicant to make sure the plans are consistent, and asked the applicant to make changes to the landscape plan to comply with the requirements of the tree bylaw. Ms. McCabe also informed the Board that the Building Commissioner had determined that the plans comply with the requirements of the Zoning Bylaw and detailed the calculations of the building height. Ms. McCabe explained the process of the demolition delay for the historical property and the Site Plan Review process in detail. Ms. Barrett stated that the parking for the development should be reduced to the minimum requirement of one per unit, since the development is located at a walkable distance to the center with easy access to transit. Reducing the parking will agree with the recently approved Comprehensive Plan and Climate Action and Resilience plan and would promote vibrant transit-oriented communities. Nancy Sofen, a member of the Tree Committee, shared the recommendations of the Tree Committee and the reasoning behind the recommendations. Ms. Sofen added that the Tree Committee requested the Planning Board and Staff to propose conditions to the applicant that will best preserve the health of retained trees and ensure the survival of new trees as well as honor the requirements of the Tree bylaw and provide public shade. Ms. Sofen said that the Tree Committee supported the suggestion of the Planning Staff that, contingent on acceptance of the conditions put forth by the Tree Committee, the Tree Bylaw be waived in order to provide administrative clarity in communication, documentation and oversight. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 3 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] Mr. Peters asked Mr. Houston, considering the level of parking and activity on the site, if he had any concerns with snow removal, snow storage, and stormwater runoff. Mr. Houston said that due to lack of space, during major snow events, snow would have to be removed from the site and recommended that it be an element for inclusion in the Homeowner’s Association documents. Mr. Peters also wanted to know if there would be sufficient space to mount the bicycles on the wall. Mr. Finnegan said he will check and give a definitive answer. Mr. Hornig asked the applicant if he felt all the requests from Staff and the reviewer were implementable and resolvable. Mr. Finnegan responded that all the comments were addressable. Mr. Hornig asked the applicants if they felt the need to modify the plans in order to address the changes requested by staff and the reviewer. Ms. McCabe recommended the applicant prepare a revised set of plans to address the changes requested by staff and peer reviewer. Mr. Hornig also asked the applicant if they had insights into what a compact neighborhood development would look like in response to the concerns raised by a few neighbors during the past meeting regarding the site being not suitable for a site sensitive development. Mr. Gilgun responded saying that the applicant has considered submitting an application for a compact neighborhood in the event the site sensitive development process did not get approved or was approved and appealed. The Applicant’s preference is the for the site sensitive development and the compact neighborhood path would not preserve the historic structures. Ms. Thompson wanted to know if the upgrades in the affordable housing unit will be equivalent in quality to the market rate units. Mr. Finnegan said that the upgrades to the affordable housing unit will be on par with the market rate units. Ms. Thompson also wanted to know if the space in the attic and basement be usable space. Mr. Finnegan gave details about the usability space in the attic and basement. Ms. Thompson wanted to know the details about the maintenance fees. Mr. Gilgun responded saying that the condo association would be responsible for the repairs of the exterior structure and the homeowner would be responsible for the maintenance of the interior. Mr. Schanbacher wanted to know if all the appliances in the development would be electric. Mr. Finnegan responded that it will be all electric with a possible gas fireplace and gas stove that would be offset by solar. Mr. Schanbacher also was curious to know the path the applicant was planning to take for passing the specialized stretch code. Mr. Osborn responded saying that the current plan is to use the performance pathway of the HERS system. Mr. Schanbacher also wanted to know the plan for the mailboxes in different buildings. Mr. Novak said that the proposal was to have a mailbox bank at the entrance from Edgewood Road. Mr. Leon wanted to know the percentage increase in impervious surfaces over the existing conditions and also wanted to know if the applicant planned on reducing the amount of paved parking and turning building B sideways or perpendicular to its current alignment to create more usable owner space. Mr. Novak responded that the impervious surface has increased by around 20 percent. Mr. Larson said that considering the substantial grade difference and making enough room for vehicle maneuvering, it was challenging to consider a different orientation of the buildings and the parking space. Mr. Leon also wanted to know how the allocation of condominium association percentages will be determined. Mr. Gilgun confirmed that the percentage will be based on the value of the property. Mr. Houston commented that the spacing of the building is tight and hence current parking configuration is required for vehicular maneuvering. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 4 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] Mr. Creech wanted details about the applicant’s plan to insulate the exterior walls of the existing building to make sure the property owners do not get huge electricity bills. Mr. Osborn stated that all the windows will be replaced to improve the thermal performance of the building. Mr. Creech also wanted the applicant to explain why the Carriage House could not be renovated. Mr. Gilgun explained that the present configuration of the Carriage House does not make it feasible to be divided into additional units without destroying its architectural significance. Mr. Gilgun added that preserving the Carriage House would require the elimination of one of the buildings, resulting in a reduction of around 8400 square feet of Gross Floor Area in the project. Since the preference was to preserve the main house and to preserve green space, it was decided to eliminate the Carriage House. Mr. Creech shared his presentation to show his suggestions of building configuration. Mr. Peters opened the hearing to public comments. Public Comments Steve White, 30 Edgewood Road, expressed his concerns regarding the ledge on the property and the impact on mature trees due to the development. Bridger McGaw, 89 Meriam Street, expressed his concern about too much parking on site and too many trees being cut down. Jay Luker, 26 Rindge Avenue, extended his support for the project and wanted to know if the applicant was able to take advantage of the exception in the bylaw for shortening the demolition delay due to the inclusion of affordable housing. Ms. McCabe said that the application was submitted prior to the bylaw coming into effect. Kenneth Virgile, 23 Edgewood Road, said he would appreciate a response from the Planning Board explaining how the project was not in violation of the bylaw. Jennifer Mckinley, 4 Upland Road, stated that the development does not preserve the historic buildings and asked if the Town was subjecting ‘shall’ in all its bylaws to interpretation and discretion. Russ Tanner, 35 Highland Avenue, supported the project but was concerned about the disadvantages of the high maintenance costs for the 3200 square feet affordable housing unit in the project to the potential buyer. Lauren Brodsky, 31 Meriam Street, expressed concern about the demolition of the historic building due to the project. Rebekah Swartz, 35 Meriam Street, expressed her concern about the lack of sufficient common open space. Christina Kinard, 24 Meriam Street, expressed her concern about the inclusionary unit having only one garage when other smaller units had two garages and shared her concern about the traffic and parking on Edgewood Road. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 5 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] Kana Norimoto, 20 Meriam Street, stated that preserving the Town’s history is important in preserving the value of the town and was opposed to the development. Alexandra Worden, 27 Meriam Street, agreed with the concerns raised by her many neighbors and stated that the project was not designed to meet the climate and sustainability goals of the Town. Anthony Weiss, 33 Adams Street, encouraged the Board to revisit the proposal and was concerned about the destruction of historic buildings. Scott Horsley, the Water Resources Consultant for the abutters, felt that the current analysis of the site test pits did not meet the requirements of the State. Mr. Horsley added that his clients were concerned about the increasing water table and flooding of basements. Mr. Horsley also added that a groundwater mounding analysis is required for this project. Randy Kinard, 24 Meriam Street, expressed his concern about the height of Building A. In response to a question about posting the public comments including the letter from the attorney of the neighbors, Ms. McCabe responded that the online application portal is where the Applicant’s application material is uploaded. The Applicant has been asked to provide comments and has responded with material in their online application. Public comments are not posted in the Applicant’s online portal. The Board recessed at 8:05 p.m. and reconvened at 8:12 p.m. Betsey Weiss, 8 Dover Lane, extended her support for the project as it would provide good options for downsizing seniors and first-time home buyers. Jeanne Desanto, 1 Upland Road, said that she wanted the Town Government to follow Town laws and wanted to see things done the right way. Mark Swartz, 35 Meriam Street, shared his presentation and went over the threshold requirements for Site Sensitive Development. Mr. Swartz shared the concerns of neighbors and shared pictures to show the flooding at the corner of Meriam Street and Edgewood Road. Mr. Swartz expressed his concerns about the effectiveness of the proposed stormwater mitigation plans. Mr. Houston responded to Mr. Horsley’s comment on mounding analysis and explained the requirements of the stormwater handbook and the details of the mounding analysis provided by the applicant. Mr. Houston added that there were a total of 20 parking spaces excluding the stacked spaces and that the spaces in front of the garage are required for maneuvering. Mr. Houston also addressed the questions raised on the height of the building relating to the number of building stories and said that based on a technical review session with the building commissioner, it was determined that the number of building stories met the zoning requirement. Ms. McCabe summarized the comments from the Director of Regional Housing Services, Ms. Liz Rust. Ms. McCabe explained that, based on Ms. Rust’s recommendation, it was determined to have one large inclusionary unit in the historic building instead of having two smaller inclusionary units in the new building as 4-bedroom inclusionary units are rare and high in demand. The 4-bedroom provides a home Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 6 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] ownership opportunity for a family where this doesn’t exist in Lexington or region today because most are rentals and not big enough for families with children. Mr. Finnegan also explained that, based on the discussions with Ms. Rust, a few different types of configurations were considered and they decided on this option as it was the best utilization of the required inclusionary gross floor area. Ms. Kowalski felt that the intention of the Special Residential Development was met with the current proposal. Ms. Kowalski added that the SRD bylaw should not be perceived as an all or nothing bylaw. Ms. Kowalski further said that the project will save some trees and historical buildings and the Town Meeting had understood that when it approved it. Mr. Gilgun reiterated that the proposal was designed to meet the provisions of Section 6.9.5 of the bylaw to preserve trees and historic buildings. Mr. Gilgun also reminded everyone that both the historic structures are subject to demolition in July 2024 and that if the Site Sensitive development (SSD) is not approved, the applicant will pursue a Compact Neighborhood Development (CND) that will result in the demolition of both the buildings as opposed to one building under the SSD process. Mr. Gilgun added that the preference of the applicant is to pursue the SSD and save trees and as much historic structure as possible. Mr. Gilgun shared a slide which showed the alternative sketch plan for a compact neighborhood development and went over the details. Gwen King, the attorney representing the abutters, asked that the legal letters of the abutters be published so that the public can understand both the attorney’s and the abutter’s position. Mr. Leon said that though the Board cannot deny the project, the Board has the opportunity to impose reasonable conditions to modify the project for greater compliance. Mr. Leon also felt that the project does not appear to have common open space or green space and asked the developer to create more usable green space. Mr. Leon agreed with Ms. Barrett that reducing the number of paved parking spaces should be considered. Mr. Hornig said that as long as the concerns from the staff and peer reviewer were addressed, the plans look good to him and updated plans will help understand better. Mr. Creech expressed his disappointment about the old house not being energy efficient and added that he preferred more affordable units in the project. Mr. Creech said he preferred that the house on Meriam Street to not go too far into the slope. Mr. Schanbacher said that the applicant has to make sure that all the condensing units and mechanical equipment are screened from the neighbors and also to make sure that there is no direct line of sight from any of the windows of the direct neighbors causing acoustic problems. Mr. Schanbacher also wanted the mechanical vents and laundry vents to be coordinated and not visible on the facades. Mr. Schanbacher felt that there was a lack of symmetry in the Buildings and also felt that it would be better to access the exterior decks from the living space rather than the bedrooms. Mr. Schanbacher added that the gambrel roofs create a very difficult geometry on the roof and asked that the exterior of Building C be changed to blend with the existing building. Mr. Schanbacher also favored a reduction in parking and paving on the site to encourage people to walk, bike, or use transit. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 7 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] Ms. Thompson urged the applicant to address more of the neighbor’s concerns, make the project all electric, and explore options to see if there could be two affordable units. Mr. Peters agreed with Mr. Leon’s comments about increasing the usable green space and reducing the parking and paved surface. Mr. Peters also felt that there could be two affordable units for the Gross Floor Area set aside for inclusionary housing. Mr. Peters added that ideally he would like to see both the historic structures preserved. Mr. Finnegan said that he and his team believed that the SSD was the most sensitive option for the site and said they will revise their plans to accommodate the suggestions provided by the Board. Mr. Schanbacher moved to continue the Public Hearing for 28 Meriam Street and 32 Edgewood Road to Wednesday May 8 at 6:00 p.m over Zoom. Ms. Thompson seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Peters – yes; Schanbacher – yes; Thompson – yes; Hornig – yes). MOTION PASSED Board Administration Board Member Updates There were no updates from the Board members. Staff Updates Ms. McCabe updated the Board about the Attorney General reviewing the Zoning Amendment which would give the Associate Member the ability to act on applications. Ms. McCabe also reminded the Board about the Search Committee for the new Town Manager and the request for a volunteer from the Planning Board to help with the search. Review of Draft Meeting Minutes: 3/13/24, 4/1/24 Mr. Schanbacher moved that the Planning Board approve the draft Minutes of the meetings held on 03.13.24 and 04.01.24 as presented. Ms. Thompson seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Peters – yes; Schanbacher – yes; Thompson – yes; Hornig – yes). MOTION PASSED Upcoming Meetings: May 8, May 22 Mr. Peters reminded the Board about the Planning Board Meetings scheduled for May 8 and May 22 and went over the proposed agenda items. Adjourn Mr. Schanbacher moved that the Planning Board adjourn the meeting of April 11, 2024. Ms. Thompson seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5 -0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Peters – yes; Schanbacher – yes; Thompson – yes; Hornig – yes). MOTION PASSED Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 8 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] Meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m. Lex Media recorded the meeting. Material from the meeting can be found in the Planning Board’s Novus Packet. List of Documents 1. 28 Meriam St. & 32 Edgewood Rd., 28 Meriam Street Lexington, LLC – Site Plan Review Public Hearing for special residential development: Staff memo dated 04.05.24, Peer review memo dated 04.05.24, photographs of balloon tests, tree setback removal analysis, height certification worksheets, average natural grade worksheets, applicant’s historic structure report response dated April 8, 2024, email from Regional Housing Services Director, Site Development Plan Set for 28 Meriam Street revised through March 22, 204, stormwater report revised through March 25, 2024. All material found here: https://lexingtonma.portal.opengov.com/records/86244 Public Comments: a. Electronic Mail from Ted Sidel to Andrea Jackson and forwarded to Abigail McCabe, Subject: 28 Meriam / 32 Edgewood, sent on March 13, 2024. b. Electronic Mail from Genevieve Wang to Abigail McCabe and Planning, Subject: Question on Article 22 from 2023, sent March 20, 2024. c. Electronic Mail from Lin Jensen to Planning Board Members, subject: Application for 28 Meriam St/ 32 Edgewood Rd needs improvements, sent March 27, 2024 d. Letter from Town of Lexington Historic Commission to Planning Board Members, dated March 27,2024, Subject: 28 Meriam Street/ 32 Edgewood Road Proposed Site Sensitive Development (SSD) Received on March 28, 2024. e. Electronic Mail from Steve Woit to Lexington Planning Board, Subject: Submission to Lexington Planning Board for 28 Meriam/32 Edgewood Development Proposal, sent April 1, 2024. f. Electronic Mail from Russell Tanner to Planning Board members and staff, Subject: 28 Meriam Street - Support and Comments dated 04.05.24 g. Electronic Mail from Bob Burbidge to Russell Tanner, Subject: Re: 28 Meriam Street-Support and Comments dated 04.05.24 h. Supplemental letter to the Planning Board re: Development at 28 Meriam St and 32 Edgewood Rd from Gwen King dated 04.05.24 i. Electronic Mail from Bridger McGaw as a Board member of the Merriam Hill Association, to the Planning Board and Staff, Subject: 28 Merriam Street Comment and Feedback, with a PowerPoint Slide titled: Meriam Hill Association Survey illustrates opposition to this development, dated 04.05.24 j. Electronic Mail from Russell Tanner to the Planning Board Members, Subject: 28 Meriam Street- Support and Concern dated 04.07.24 k. Electronic Mail from Mark Swartz to the Planning Team, Subject: Materials for Planning Board Public Hearing on April 11th, 2024 with a Power Point Presentation titled: Submission to Planning Board for Public Hearing on 11 April 2024, dated 04.07.24 l. Electronic Mail from Chuck Olson to the Planning Board Members, Subject: Historic building demolition – 28 Meriam Street, Lexington, LLC dated 04.08.24 m. Electronic Mail from Richard Hawkins to the Planning Board Members, Subject: Proposal for 28 Meriam St dated 04.08.24 Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes April 11, 2024 Page 9 of 9 [DOCUMENT TITLE] | [Document subtitle] n. Electronic Mail from Russell Tanner to the Planning Board members and staff, subject 28 Meriam Street, Additional Affordable Unit Concerns dated 04.10.24