Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-09-10-PB-min.pdfMinutes of the Lexington Planning Board Held on Wednesday, September 10, 2025, Virtual Meeting at 6:00 pm Planning Board members present: Michael Schanbacher, Chair; Melanie Thompson, Vice -Chair; Tina McBride, Clerk; Charles Hornig; Robert Creech; and Michael Leon, associate board member. Also present were: Abby McCabe, Planning Director, and Carolyn Morrison, Planning Coordinator. Michael Schanbacher, Chair of the Planning Board, called to order the meeting of the Lexington Planning Board on Wednesday, September 10 at 6:00 p.m. For this meeting, the Planning Board is convening by video conference via Zoom. LexMedia is filming this meeting and is recording it for future viewing here. The Chair explained the process and the procedure of the meeting. Mr. Schanbacher conducted a roll call to ensure all members of the Planning Board and members of staff present could hear and be heard. Mr. Schanbacher 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. The Board will go through the agenda in order. Development Administration Linc Cole Lane — Special Permit Residential Development — Modification to Plans Mr. Schanbacher called the applicant of 69 Pleasant Street Nominee Trust to present the modification of an approved special permit residential development. The applicant's team included: Todd Cataldo of Sheldon Corp. and Michael Novak of Patriot Engineering. Mr. Novak reviewed the Special Permit Residential Development approved' for Linc Cole Lane and explained the proposed modification to remove the 3 -foot strip of grass between the sidewalk and the common driveway. He stated that the grass strip would be difficult to maintain and that moving the trees would give them additional space to flourish. Mr. Cataldo added that a previous modification for the sidewalk from Pleasant Street to the first shared driveway was approved administratively by Ms. McCabe. That stretch of sidewalk required modification due to a retaining wall needed for an infiltration system. Board Questions and Comments Mr. Schanbacher asked about the site layout from the entrance of the development off Pleasant Street. Mr. Cataldo explained that the sidewalk is against the road's berm in that segment. Mr. Hornig noted that typically the sidewalk is set back from a street for snow storage purposes. Mr. Novak highlighted designated snow storage areas on the plan throughout the site. Mr. Hornig emphasized the need to keep sidewalks clear of snow. Ms. McBride asked if the intent is to make the yards larger. Mr. Cataldo clarified that the intent is to provide continuity of the sidewalk from Pleasant Street and to allow more space for the trees. Ms. McBride noted that the 3 -foot grass strip also provides a safety buffer from the roadway and moving vehicles. She expressed a preference to retain the grass strip originally approved. ' Approved September 7, 2022 Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 10, 2025 Page 1 of 5 Mr. Leon asked Mr. Cataldo and Mr. Cataldo confirmed that the trees are on the individual lots and are the homeowner's responsibility to maintain. He confirmed with Mr. Novak that the boundaries of the lots are the back of the curb along the common driveway. Mr. Schanbacher stated that he takes no issue with the change. He acknowledged Ms. McBride's concerns, but appreciated the continuity of the sidewalk and the benefit to the trees. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Thompson moved to find the request to modify the sidewalk location along the development's drive is not a substantial change to the 2022 special permit and subdivision approval. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 4-0-1 (Roll call: Creech — yes; Hornig — yes; Thompson — yes; McBride — abstain; Schanbacher — yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the Applicant's request to modify the sidewalk location as outlined in the Applicant's request dated August 29, 2025 and as shown on the landscape plan sheet revised on August 14, 2025. Mr. Creech seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 4- 0-1 (Roll call: Hornig — yes; Thompson — yes; McBride — abstain; Creech — yes; Schanbacher — yes). MOTION PASSED. 125 Hartwell Avenue — Definitive Subdivision Ms. McCabe informed the Board that the Definitive Subdivision for 125 Hartwell Avenue was approved August 13, 2025 and the appeal period has concluded. She presented the request to accept the submitted standard covenant as a performance guarantee and to vote to endorse the approved plans. Staff recommends approval. Ms. McCabe advised that the Board members would need to come to the office to sign the documents. Board Comments Mr. Leon questioned a sentence in paragraph 4 in the draft covenant. He stated that typically a lot cannot be sold until the subdivision infrastructure is complete, however paragraph 4 included language that would permit the sale of a lot if services were independently supplied to the lot. Mr. Leon suggested this might be appropriate in a phased or large subdivision, but that it is unusual for a 3 -lot subdivision. He asked if the Planning Board would make the determination for release and recommended an addition of clarifying language. Ms. McCabe was unsure if that language has been in other covenants and was in support of Mr. Leon's proposed additional language in paragraph 4 "unless explicitly permitted by the Planning Board in writing". Mr. Hornig recommended echoing the language in the Board's Subdivision Regulations Ch. 175.6.5(D) for the standard statutory covenant language. Mr. Schanbacher expressed concern with revising the covenant where the applicant had already signed this draft. Ms. McCabe recommended making the revision and voting. She noted that the applicant could return to the Board if they disagreed with the revision. Mr. Schanbacher also noted that this application was intended as a zoning freeze, so it is unlikely the lots will ever be built as approved. The Board agreed to proceed with the revised wording on this application with the understanding that the overall language would be reviewed and refined when the Board discussed amendments to their Subdivision Regulations. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Thompson moved to accept and sign the covenant with edits made to paragraph 4 during the Planning Board meeting prepared by Eliot Community Human Services, Inc. for the definitive subdivision of 125 Hartwell Avenue approved on August 13, 2025. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 10, 2025 Page 2 of 5 The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig —yes; Thompson —yes; McBride — yes; Creech — yes; Schanbacher — yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to endorse the definitive subdivision plans for 125 Hartwell Avenue as shown on the plans revised through August 7, 2025. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech — yes; McBride — yes; Thompson — yes; Hornig — yes; Schanbacher —yes). MOTION PASSED. Board Administration Planning Board Subdivision Regulations Ms. McCabe stated the public hearing is scheduled for September 25, 2025 and the intent of this session was to present the changes proposed by staff and incorporate initial Board feedback prior to the public hearing. She reminded the Board of their revisions to the Board's Zoning Regulations (Ch. 176) at an earlier meeting and clarified the scope of the discussion would be on the Subdivision Regulations (Ch. 175). Ms. McCabe defined a subdivision and provided an overview of state and town requirements. She advised that any subdivision applications with a preliminary subdivision filed prior to these revisions would be able to submit their definitive subdivision application within 7 months under the existing bylaws; they would not be held to the revised regulations that may be adopted in the upcoming weeks. Ms. McCabe suggested modifying §175.7.2.E(7) to include a minimum road length of 150' for dead-end roads. She explained that there is a maximum length of 650' and that 150' seems to be the smallest length necessary for a full turnaround based on other small subdivisions in Lexington. She noted that this change stemmed from a preliminary subdivision with a half of a cul-de-sac that the Board disapproved in the spring. Ms. McBride expressed support of this revision; the rest of the Board had no further comments. Ms. McCabe proposed the addition of a 10 -foot minimum distance between a new right-of-way and the boundaries of the subdivisionz. She cited 131 Hartwell Avenue subdivision as an example, where the proposed right-of-way directly abuts the lot line for the neighboring property. Ms. McCabe explained her intention is to create a larger buffer and minimize any negative impact on potential residential neighbors. The Board engaged in a discussion over this proposal. Mr. Hornig raised several points opposing the requirement. He stated that there is an existing provision encouraging access from adjoining properties and shared multiple examples of existing subdivisions3 that would not have been possible if they were required to have a 10 -foot buffer. He noted that at least one of these examples resulted in litigation. He requested further review and revisions on this recommendation. Ms. McBride supported the general idea, but agreed that the language might need further revision. Mr. Creech asked about Ms. McCabe's intent and agreed that the idea has merit. He noted that Lexington bylaws require driveways to be set 5 -feet back from property lines. He supported further revisions to the proposed language and suggested considering how close a residence is to the lot line in question. Mr. Leon stated that this topic has been litigated in other places and raised a concern with the proximity of a subdivision's roadway entrance to nearby driveways citing safety concerns. He wondered if there was an existing provision prohibiting a subdivision entrance within 5 -feet of a driveway. Mr. Hornig advised that he would not take exception to a 10 -foot setback of the road from the lot lines rather than from the right-of-way. Ms. Thompson wondered how a sidewalk would factor into the setback. Ms. McCabe and Mr. Hornig agreed that a z Add to the table in §175-7.2.E(1)(b) 3 On Grandview Avenue, Rangeway, and Rowland Avenue Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 10, 2025 Page 3 of 5 sidewalk is included in the right-of-way. They noted that this could increase subdivision frontage requirements by as much as 20 -feet compared to current standards. Mr. Hornig additionally raised concerns about lots that have reserved access to the rear of their lots on paper streets who may not be able to take advantage of the connection if a subdivision were to be built. Mr. Schanbacher expressed general support for the revision, but recognized Mr. Hornig's concerns. Some of the Board members agreed to meet with Ms. McCabe individually to consider this further and revise this proposal for the public hearing. Ms. McCabe next suggested adding a requirement to §7.1.B to include proof circles on buildable lots in subdivision plans. She noted that the proof circles represent guidelines referenced in §4.2.2 and §4.2.3 of Lexington's Zoning Bylaws (Ch. 135) and explained that staff often asks applicants to add the proof circles to submitted plans. Mr. Leon noted that lots are not always buildable for various reasons. He questioned the language in 7.1 stating that "all lots shown on the plan [must comply] with the Zoning Bylaw" in the first sentence and "buildable lots" in the new sentence. Mr. Leon suggested that 7.1 should reference "buildable lots" only. Mr. Hornig stated that a buildable lot is a "lot" and an unbuildable lot is a "parcel". Mr. Leon and Mr. Hornig discussed the definitions of lots versus parcels, the requirements of a buildable or unbuildable and conforming or non -conforming lot. They agreed that that use of "lots" in the regulations would be more accurate. Ms. McCabe summarized the remaining proposed changes, including updated fees (§3.4), the removal of hard copy requirements unless necessary for filing purposes (§3.3, 4.2, 5.3, and 6.1), consideration of future street improvements and sidewalks (§7.2), aligning the language about tree management to reference the Planning Board's preferred planting list only (§7.6) with site plan review regulations and based on Tree Committee member feedback on soil rebuilding a couple months ago, and other minor clarifications. Mr. Leon stated he would bring a markup to staff for further discussion. He raised concerns about numbering and formatting issues and confirmed that hard copies would not be prohibited in the submission process. Mr. Leon also recommended clarity defining and distinguishing the application fees from the peer review fees. He further highlighted a potential conflict with Ms. McCabe's suggestion to not include topographic data on areas that will not be developed. He suggested that the viewscapes requested would necessitate a certain amount of topographical data. Mr. Leon requested clarification on the perpetual landscape maintenance, stating that he felt it was unclear if the regulation would apply to plantings within the public way or on individual lots within the subdivision. Ms. McCabe advised that her intent is for the homeowners to maintain trees planted on their lots, as discussed earlier in the evening regarding Linc Cole Lane. Mr. Leon recommended review of this alongside the tree bylaws. Mr. Leon also requesting further clarification of Ms. McCabe's recommendation in §7.2 to consider future sidewalks. Ms. McCabe explained that her intent was to provide guidance on landscaping and site layout at the entrance to a subdivision. She stated that if there is an existing sidewalk, the subdivision should align with that, but if there is not, she would like applicants to consider the possible installation of a sidewalk in the future when choosing landscaping and layout. Mr. Hornig noted that landscaping is typically only discussed in subdivisions when there is an easement of some sort. It is unusual to see landscaping on the lots within a subdivision plan. He further noted that there are instances where the Board would not want a tree or planting replaced in-kind, even if it is native. He recommended using the preferred planting list created with the Tree Committee and including Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 10, 2025 Page 4 of 5 language stating that "proposed street tree species must be found in the Planning Board Preferred Planting List." Public Comments Tom Shiple, 18 Phinney Road, Precinct 9 Town Meeting member, Bicycle Advisory Committee, opposed the removal of §7.3.C.2 regarding path easements and recommended changing "footpaths or trails" to "bicycle and recreational paths" to keep language consistent. Nancy Sofen, 3 Abernathy Road, Tree Committee, agreed that it would be clearest for the Planning Board to have a single preferred planting list. She further agreed with Mr. Hornig that there are trees that should not be replaced in-kind. Board Member & Staff Updates Ms. McCabe informed the Board that the lottery for the inclusionary unit at The Edgewood at Meriam Hill is open until September 19. She shared that the RHSO has received 15 applications thus far, which indicates high interest in this family -sized unit. She anticipates more applicants to apply closer to the deadline. Review of Draft Meeting Minutes: August 13, 2025 Ms. Thompson moved that the Planning Board approve the draft August 13, 2025 meeting minutes as presented. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig — yes; Thompson — yes; McBride — yes; Creech — yes; Schanbacher — yes). MOTION PASSED Upcoming Meetings: Thursday 9/25; Wednesdays 10/8, 10/22, 11/19, 12/10. Mr. Schanbacher confirmed that the Board is keeping 11/5 available for a meeting if necessary. He highlighted that definitive subdivisions are being submitted, which may increase meeting times. Adjournment Ms. Thompson moved that the Planning Board adjourn the meeting of September 10, 2025 at 7:29 p.m. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig — yes; Creech — yes; Thompson — yes; McBride — yes; Schanbacher — yes). MOTION PASSED Meeting adjourned at 7:30 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. Linc Cole Lane Cover Letter Narrative, dated 9/2/25; Proposed Plan Modification, dated 8/14/25; 2022 Planning Board SPRD Approval Decision; 2022 Approved Landscape Sheet, dated 8/24/22; Proposed Modification — Color, dated 8/14/25; Visuals 2. 125 Hartwell Avenue DRAFT Covenant 125 Hartwell Ave, revised through 8/21/25 3. Planning Board Subdivision Regulations DRAFT Amendments Subdivision Regulations 9.4.25; DRAFT Amendments in Full Sub Regulations 9.4.25; Visuals of Proposed Changes Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes September 10, 2025 Page 5 of 5