Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-11-15-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF NOVEMBER 15, 2017 A meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chair, Richard Canale with members Charles Hornig, Ginna Johnson, Nancy Corcoran-Ronchetti, and Bob Creech, and planning staff Aaron Henry, David Fields, and Lori Kaufman present. A meeting of the Historical Commission held in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Chair, David Kelland, with members Diane Pursley, Wendall Kalsow, Marilyn Fenollosa present. Samuel Levi Doran was absent. ***************NEIGHBORHOOD CONSERVATION DISTRICTS (NCD)************** PUBLIC HEARING (joint with Historical Commission) Turning Mill Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD): Chair Richard Canale opened the continued public hearing at 7:02 p.m. with approximately 2 people in the audience. Diane Pursley recused herself from the Turning Mill Lane NCD. Mr. Bob Creech recused himself from the Turning Mill NCD. The submission deadline dates for opt-outs and written comments will be discussed after the public hearing by the Boards. Ms. Pursley presented an executive summary of the report from the study group for the Turning Mill Lane NCD. Individual Board Member Comments:  Concern section 78-4 and what it is trying to do? This section was requested at the neighborhood meeting for further clarification on how the process would work. How does the process get going for selecting the pool of candidates and how does the vote work?  When the joint body meets they can discuss any modifications they want and gives the Town Manager guidance. Town Counsel has reviewed the Bylaw.  Sections 78-5A, 5C needs to be clarified as to what it is referencing.  Section 78-5D variances should be a separate section.  A beautiful and professional effort was done. Public Comments:  Liked the presentation. Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of November 15, 2017  What is the timeline for this process? The joint boards will discuss a deadline date on comments and opt-outs and if anyone finds a flaw send the written comments to planning staff.  Why do the Town Meeting Members (TMM) get to make this decision even though they do not live in the NCD area? TMM are the legislative body for the Town.  Against the NCD, this community is not only about the buildings but should be about the people and a small committee should not be deciding what an entire neighborhood can and cannot do which could devalue the properties. Individual Board Member Comments:  How can we change the opt-out date without sending another letter? Town Counsel said it could be appealed. Believe that the deadline could be changed and notice is being given at this public hearing. The two boards will be meeting on November 29 to discuss the NCDs. On a motion of Ms. Fenollosa, seconded by Mr. Hornig, it was voted, 7-0, to keep November 22, as the opt-out date On a motion of Mr. Hornig, seconded by Ms. Johnson, it was voted, 7-0, to keep November 22, as the deadline to receive comments. On a motion of Mr. Hornig, seconded by Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti, it was voted 7-0, to close the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. On a motion, duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the Historical Commission meeting at 7:58 p.m. Planning board recessed and returned to open session at 8:03 p.m. *********************DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION************************ 6 Eliot Street, Sketch Balanced Housing Development (BHD): John Farrington, attorney, Michael Novak and Rick Waitt from Meridian, Gary Larson, landscape architect, and Richard Perry, applicant were present. Mr. Farrington said 6 Eliot Road is just under three acres in RS zone and was the Armenian Sisters Convent. This can be done as a seven unit waiver-less conventional plan as shown on the proof plan, but are looking to do a BHD for 14 units, in 12 buildings, two and a half stories, two common driveways, one which will remain open to emergency vehicles as a throughway. Mr. Novak presented the seven lot conventional plan which was registered and certified in land court. Mr. Larson presented the BHD and the existing conditions that lead to this proposed BHD. The current structure is in total disrepair and would cost a fortune to repair. Minutes for the Meeting of November 15, 2017 Page 3 Individual Board Member Comments:  Why not include this building and provide documentation why not keep the building.  Use north up on the plans and add context to the plans.  This site is flat, but on the east side where is it in context into the nearest abutters.  These buildings seem quite large so provide scale.  This is at the top of the watershed will you be blasting in this location? What is depth to bedrock? Did not do testing yet.  Will the building be buried? No hauled away.  Don’t like plans the units are shoehorned into the site.  The beech tree should not be disturb using the drip line under the canopy.  The other areas are too close to the property line.  The feel of the estate is lost and the site plan should keep the feel of the estate with open space.  14 units is too many units want only 1.5 per lot and the size and number of units is a privilege not a right and the site should be less dense.  More could be included for possible approval if an affordable unit was included.  Have more of the contiguous open space cluster units closer.  See no benefits to the Town with this plan. Why not use a site sensitive development (SDD)? Could do a conventional without having to get a special permit. This is an expensive site.  None of these houses will be affordable and will have an impact on town services. Do not like this, but prefer over a conventional plan.  Lot 7 could be used for open space. Would consider eight house units or nine units for an affordable unit.  This is not in character with the neighborhood, want more open space and prefer conventional.  SSD would be preferred, for a BHD would consider 1.7 could go up to 2 if more innovative, more open space and or an affordable unit was included. Were you envisioning public access through this site? Have not gotten that far yet.  If there is no benefit for the Town why should you get more than a 1.6 ratio, what would the Town get as a benefit? Come up with a design that respects the current site and consider the neighborhood and units should be small. Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of November 15, 2017  Reduce the size of the units and provide a benefit since the Town would need to come up with 1.5 affordable units. Audience Comments:  What would be the time table for this? This will be at least one year process.  There is a lot of concern amongst the neighbors with the density proposed and is not a good fit for the neighborhood.  Dr. Mann’s homes and these condos are stacked up against my property line.  Think about density and benefits to the town with the school being at capacity what would it cost the Town to accommodate those additional students.  A neighbor’s beech tree drip line crosses over some units.  Would like to see a design to save the building along with other older buildings throughout the Town. Individual Board Comments:  Take a look to see if the old building could be saved? Mr. Farrington said would let the engineer give feedback on what it would take to save the building. 443 Lincoln Street, Sketch Balanced Housing Development: Ms. Johnson recused herself from the project. Present was Jeff Router, Symes Development, applicant, Rich Harrington, Project Manager, James Emmanuel, landscape architect, Brad Latham, attorney. Mr. Latham said the Eversource letter said to come to them before you build but believe they can build. Mr. Harrington presented the plans. Individual Board Comments:  Do not want a conventional plan here and prefer a public benefit proposal.  It was surprising they got a letter from Eversource.  Who would the open space be available to?  There will be no economic diversity provided in the proposed project no matter how small you make the units and see nothing to benefit the Town and suggest SSD or five- unit PBD.  Don’t want to see two individual subdivisions make it look like a neighborhood.  Think about how you relate to Lincoln Street and how you articulate the houses and need to make Lincoln Street as safe as it could get. Minutes for the Meeting of November 15, 2017 Page 5  You have a circle rather than a tear drop why since you want to minimize the pavement consider that.  BHD units are too large and prices too high bring down the size to 2100 square feet instead of 2700. Audience comments:  Concerned about the lots on the proof plan and question if they are compliant.  Have Town Counsel review the Eversource letter.  There is not a lot of room to the property line.  The duplexes are very large and could be reduced considerably.  Have you been to Conservation for Hobbs Brook riverfront buffer zone?  Do not see any benefit to the BHD being proposed here unless there was an affordable unit. The houses are big and very expensive and the Board should not vote in favor of this. Individual Board Member Comments:  Consider whatever you do propose what are the benefits to the Town the next time.  If there is high remediation costs may reconsider the BHD. The applicant said this site is an eyesore and will become a deficit and be rented and the Board should walk the property with us. 331 Concord Avenue, Proposed PDD: Present were Robert Buckley, attorney, Ted Doyle, Vice President for LCB Senior Living, Bob Schiller marketing research, Lee Bloom director of development, Erin Fredette, McMahon Associates project manager for traffic impacts, Brian Jones, Allen & Majors Associates, project manager and project architect. Mr. Doyle said LCB has been in business for 20 years for independent living, assisted living, and memory care and build in high end towns like Lexington. Mr. Bloom said this project would have a low impact on municipal services and pay high taxes and would be a quiet neighbor, Rob Schilling compared LCB to the other senior living developments in Lexington. Mr. Jones reviewed the conceptual plans. The project architect presented the different elements of the building to break down the massing and give interesting texture. Ms. Fredette discussed the preliminary traffic impact study. th Mr. Buckley said he would have the PSDUP ready by 12/30. Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of November 15, 2017 Individual Board Member Comments:  Didn’t see number of units or residents how many? Mr. Doyle said there would be 180 individuals and 160 units.  How you will fit that many units on that site?  How many garage spaces? There will be about 160 and 170.  Seven acres with a 60 foot grade change makes this very dense and shoe horning reduce the size of the footprint.  Are there any retaining walls? Yes. What are abutters looking at? Very early in process will be meeting with abutters how tall? 4 to 5 feet.  How tall is four stories? 40-45 feet.  What is the staff numbers? There will be 90 full time 50 will be during the day.  Have you considered noise control regarding generators and ambulances?  Give us three sites you have for others to look at in the local area and get ambulance rates.  Does the 160 units count towards the housing inventory? Only independent units will count.  Concerned with blasting.  You are two months behind to make it for Annual Town Meeting. Mr. Buckley said he was aware that this will be difficult, but it is on the applicant.  There was some outreach to residents; what was the response? Mr. Doyle reached out to abutters and sent mailings that if anyone wanted to talk with them before the meeting who to contact. Public Comments:  This is an incredibly ambitious plan and it just is not going to happen especially with Brookhaven only needing 49 units, but this is 160 units on the same size site.  Concerned with traffic in the area.  Appreciate the outreach.  There is issue that this dense plan is not really residential and will create more traffic, lights 24 hours a day, with delivery trucks for food, packages, staff and visitors. Concerned with safety with all the children, school buses, walkers, and cyclists impacts in this residential area.  The synagogue the number vehicles in the area is a major problem, view will be impacted, there is tons of kids with no place to play. Minutes for the Meeting of November 15, 2017 Page 7 Individual Board Member Comments:  Consider not scheduling this for Annual Town Meeting especially with all the concern being shared tonight. On a motion, duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 p.m. The meeting was recorded by LexMedia. The following documents used at the meeting can be found on the Planning Board website in Planning Board packets.  Comprehensive Plan draft schedule.  Comprehensive Plan draft mission.  Turning Mill presentation.  6 Eliot Street sketch Plan set (4 pages).  6 Eliot Street staff recommendations.  443 Lincoln Street sketch Plan set (4 pages).  443 Lincoln Street staff recommendations.  443 Lincoln Street Eversource Letter (2 pages).  443 Lincoln Street project narrative (2 pages).  331 Concord Avenue Proposed Planned development District (13 pages).  LCB presentation 331 Concord Avenue (22 pages). Bob Creech, Clerk