Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-10-22-PB-min.pdf Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 1 of 13 Minutes of the Lexington Planning Board Held on Wednesday, October 22, 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; Aaron Koepper, Planner; and Carolyn Morrison, Planning Coordinator. Michael Schanbacher, Chair of the Planning Board, called to order the meeting of the Lexington Planning Board on Wednesday, October 22, 2025 at 6:00 PM. 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 287 & 295 Waltham Street – Special Residential Development Mr. Schanbacher re-opened the public hearing for a special residential development (SRD) at 287 and 295 Waltham Street. The applicant’s team included: Iqbal Quadir, property owner and applicant; Frederick Gilgun, attorney with Nicholson, Sreter, and Gilgun; Javed Sultan, architect with EcoHabitat, Inc; and Daniel Coughlin, civil engineer with Coughlin Environmental Services. Also present was the Board’s peer review consultant, William Maher of Nitsch Engineering, Inc. Mr. Gilgun introduced the applicant’s team, including its newest member, Dan Coughlin, and shared an overview of changes since their August 13th presentation. He highlighted the redesign and added details of the retaining wall system and materials. Mr. Gilgun asserted that the proposal complies with SRD and Zoning Bylaws and Site Plan Review regulations. He further stated that it meets SRD goals by adding two inclusionary units, modeling green building practices, and diversifying the housing inventory in Lexington. Mr. Gilgun advised that civil and architectural plans had been aligned and Mr. Coughlin performed additional soil testing and updated the stormwater management report. He noted that there are a few issues which remain outstanding from the peer review but stated that he felt that they could be addressed through conditions of approval in the decision. Mr. Gilgun informed the Board that the applicant is seeking one waiver at Planning staff’s request regarding the tree bylaw. Mr. Coughlin presented updated civil plans and highlighted revisions made in response to prior comments. The construction management plan now includes a larger tracking pad and strengthened erosion controls. Additional soil testing was completed across the site, confirming suitable soils. Plans were updated to verify required open space, add snow storage areas, adjust building alignment, and reduce retaining wall heights. Utility and drainage improvements include added inspection ports, infiltration features, sump pump and perimeter drain connections, updated utility runs, and new roadway and sewer profiles. Construction details were added, including ledge excavation, roadway, crosswalk, bollard, and bike rack details. Landscaping updates reflect full tree replacement quantities and the proposed woodland path. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 2 of 13 Retaining wall design details were expanded, including materials, railing options, and planned vegetation. Building and parking areas will incorporate permeable pavers for heat reduction and infiltration. Mr. Coughlin advised that there will be a public access easement for the bus stop located at the entrance of the development. He presented two photometric plans, one of which met Lexington Bylaws and showed zero light spillage over property lines. The other plan showed minimal light spillage at the driveway entrance for safety. He requested Board and Staff feedback on their preference. He added that the fire truck turning plan was corrected to keep all wheel paths within the roadway. Staff Comments Ms. McCabe summarized the staff memo from Mr. Koepper dated 10/17/25. She advised that this is the second SRD application received under the zoning voted in at Annual Town Meeting 2023. Ms. McCabe confirmed that the applicant has responded to all previous requests and that the plans comply with the Zoning Bylaw and the Board’s Regulations. She stated that the applicant hasn’t requested any waivers other than to waive jurisdiction of the tree bylaw, as the submitted landscape plan meets the required caliper inches for replacement and contains recommended species on the tree planting list. Ms. McCabe further confirmed that the inclusionary units, Unit 1 in both Buildings A and B, meet the 17.6% required GFA per the bylaws updated at Annual Town Meeting 2025. She agreed with Mr. Gilgun that any final comments can be addressed with conditions and in a final plan set. Ms. McCabe recommended using the conforming photometric plan, showing no light spillage. She advised that any spillage would require a special permit, which was not included in the legal advertisement and would require an additional hearing with proper public notification. She stated that the applicant could proceed with the conforming plan and submit a request for a special permit at a later date. Ms. McCabe questioned the plan for trash storage and removal. She recommended private removal and advised that the applicant would need to coordinate with Public Works if they wanted to pursue Town removal. Mr. Coughlin advised that they are exploring options and would likely use a property maintenance firm, with individual barrels for the townhouse-style buildings and a common trash room for the garden-style buildings. They confirmed there is not a proposal for an exterior dumpster. Ms. McCabe stated that staff recommended approval with conditions, including a revised plan set and minor updates. She acknowledged public comments that were received and shared with the Board and introduced Mr. Maher to present his findings. Peer Reviewer’s Comments Mr. Maher agreed that the recent submission addressed almost all concerns. He recommended Mr. Coughlin review the location of the proposed transformer. Mr. Maher advised that a new comment was added regarding a concern with stormwater management in a 100-year storm event. He further recommended Mr. Coughlin include details in the plans on the proposed use of existing stones in the retaining walls. Mr. Coughlin agreed to include these details and advised that existing stones will be used to fill gaps in the walls, particularly along Waltham Street. Board Questions Mr. Schanbacher provided an overview of the meeting process, noting the order of the discussion and that he would take public comment on this application after Board questions. Mr. Creech complimented the project’s progress and level of detail. He encouraged the team to return with any further improvements if identified. He asked about the purpose and connectivity of the four stairways, including whether the stair near Waltham Street might be used by the public and raised Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 3 of 13 concerns about potential litter. He also asked whether rear areas behind Building A are intended for resident use, inquired about the proposed building color palette, and confirmed whether rooftop solar panels remain on Buildings D and E. Mr. Coughlin explained that the stairways provide resident, recreation, and fire access, and that rear areas are primarily for unit owners; the Waltham Street stair is intended mainly for residents. Mr. Sultan noted that exterior colors are still under review and confirmed that solar panels will remain on all buildings. Ms. McBride asked about the species and mature height of the five proposed front trees, expressing a preference for taller trees to provide greater screening and privacy along Waltham Street. Mr. Coughlin explained that the front trees were changed to dogwoods due to space and root constraints but could be further refined. She requested that any ivy used on the retaining walls be noninvasive. Ms. McBride confirmed that stairways would include railings, that detailed stair plans would be provided, and that permeable pavers are proposed for all driveways and parking areas. Ms. McBride asked about the placement and intensity of the proposed lighting and whether composting would be accommodated on site in addition to trash and recycling, citing the Town’s sustainability goals. Mr. Coughlin advised that the lighting would be low-intensity and not obstruct vehicle visibility. He further noted that composting is not currently proposed but may be discussed with the owner as part of future operations planning. Mr. Leon supported allowing limited light spillage at the driveway intersection to improve safety, noting the area is not particularly light-sensitive and that pursuing a special permit for this purpose would be worthwhile. He asked clarifying questions about the location of the proposed bus shelter, confirming it would be placed on private property adjacent to the public sidewalk within the right-of-way and subject to a Town easement. Mr. Leon endorsed the use of permeable pavers, while emphasizing that their higher maintenance requirements should be clearly assigned as an ongoing responsibility of the owner. He noted appreciation for the design revisions made in response to prior Board concerns and supported the proposed upper-level pathway improvements. Ms. Thompson expressed appreciation for the project revisions and asked for clarification on whether an additional inclusionary unit had been added. She advised that the inclusionary units must be substantially similar to the market-rate units. She also asked about indoor and outdoor amenity spaces for residents, including whether there would be shared outdoor green space for sitting or walking. Mr. Sultan confirmed that the project includes two inclusionary units, meeting the required square footage requirements, and that these units will be equivalent to the others. He outlined unit amenities including in-unit laundry, storage, and private bathrooms, and described a rooftop garden located on the third-floor roof of the townhouse-style units. He stated that outdoor green space is planned at the rear of the site, but the design is still being refined to improve usability while preserving trees. Public Comments Carol Sacerdote, 15 Loring Road, Precinct 4 Town Meeting member, appreciated the revisions. She questioned if the landscaping would impede the view for vehicles existing the site, noting that one proposed tree could pose a safety issue. She also asked about procedures for blasting and notifying abutters. Siqi Lin, 5 Bushnell Drive, asked about the project timing, noting concerns with noise from construction on this project at the same time as the Lexington High School development. Jay Luker, 26 Rindge Avenue, Precinct 1 Town Meeting member, wondered if there was a way to ensure the accessible 3-bedroom units were occupied by those in most need. He noted that in response to some Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 4 of 13 earlier comments Lexington is not a city and that the type of government is what creates a city designation and not the housing typologies. Jacky Chen, 5 Bushnell Drive, requested information about a safety plan during construction and after occupation. He noted that children walk and bike along that stretch of Waltham Street frequently. Mr. Chen further wondered about solar generation given the large number of trees covering the lot. Applicant’s Response Mr. Gilgun addressed the project timing and advised that the applicant is eager to begin construction. It is his belief that the owner is looking to begin construction in the spring/summer 2026 season. He further advised that they would follow all bylaw requirements for any blasting needed, including notice to abutters and evaluations. Mr. Coughlin confirmed he would review the plans to ensure full visibility at the site entrance and protective measures during construction. He advised that they are finalizing the solar calculations. Staff Response Ms. McCabe reported that she prepared and distributed a draft approval decision containing 58 conditions. Key conditions include requiring a geotechnical analysis prior to any site work to assess potential ledge removal. She noted a preference for blasting rather than hammering for extended rock removal and explained the condition requiring blasting if rock removal exceeds seven days. Additional conditions include pre-construction inspection surveys of all properties within 300’, construction notifications, and a request that revised plans recheck tree placement and sight lines at the entrance. Board Comments Mr. Schanbacher confirmed with Mr. Gilgun that the applicant team was comfortable with the draft decision distributed by Ms. McCabe. Mr. Creech stated his opinion that a small amount of light spillage is advisable in this area. Mr. Schanbacher stated that he remains disappointed with the overall result of the project, noting that the site’s prominent location near the future high school warranted a more site-sensitive design. He emphasized that current zoning, parking requirements, and fire access standards heavily influenced the extent of paving and layout, particularly given the site’s direct access to bus service. He expressed concern that parking is being treated similarly to single-family homes and suggested that alternative, more consolidated parking approaches could have produced a different outcome. He acknowledged the limitations of zoning and site constraints and encouraged applicants to consider site design. He concluded that, despite his concerns, the project will add needed housing types to the town. Ms. Thompson moved to close the public hearing for the site plan review and stormwater permit application for 287 and 295 Waltham Street. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Hornig – yes; Creech – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to waive the Tree Bylaw in full because the project's tree removal on the property is best mitigated with the proposed landscape planting plan revised through October 3, 2025 showing tree replacement which exceeds the caliper inches required by the bylaw. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Hornig – yes; Creech – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 5 of 13 Ms. Thompson moved to approve the proposal submitted by Iqbal Quadir at 287 and 295 Waltham Street with the findings and conditions included in the draft approval decision prepared by staff and the 58 conditions of approval as may be modified this evening. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Hornig- yes; Creech -yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to have the Chair sign the decision and correct any non-substantive changes such as grammar, typos, and for consistency. 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. 242 Bedford Street – Definitive Subdivision Mr. Schanbacher opened the public hearing on the application of 240 Bedford LLC for a definitive subdivision at 242 Bedford Street. The applicant’s team included: Frederick Gilgun, attorney with Nicholson, Sreter, and Gilgun; and Michael Novak, engineer with Patriot Engineering. Mr. Gilgun presented the proposal for a 3-lot subdivision at 238-244 Bedford Street, which had a preliminary subdivision approved March 27, 2025. He stated that the applicant does not intend to construct the subdivision as presented and is seeking to preserve the Village Overlay (VO) zoning as it existed prior to Annual Town Meeting (ATM) 2025. Mr. Gilgun advised that they are seeking waivers for the submission of certain materials and is agreeable to including the submission of these documents prior to construction as a condition of approval. Mr. Novak shared the existing site conditions, including multiple buildings, bus parking area, and a brook which has been surveyed and the buffers defined. He explained that the definitive plan now proposes three fully complying lots, revised from the approved preliminary subdivision layout with three conforming lots and one non-conforming parcel. The design minimizes site disturbance, with limited work areas and roadway grading that directs runoff to new catch basins and a subsurface infiltration system which was sized based on rear-lot soil testing. He noted that the request for a waiver on additional testing was due to the extent of pavement on the lot and the intent to limit disruption to current occupants. Utility plans include new water and sewer extensions from Bedford Street, individual service connections, a hydrant, and driveway aprons for all lots. The plan also includes required street trees, a sidewalk connecting to Bedford Street, and roadway and utility profiles showing minimal slopes. Staff Comments Ms. McCabe confirmed that the subdivision is not proposed to be constructed and explained the 8-year zoning freeze. She stated that staff has no concerns with the requested waivers given that the subdivision is not going to be constructed. She noted that the submission of the waived documents was included as a condition of approval should the subdivision ever be built. Staff recommends approval and prepared a draft decision. Public Comments Lin Jensen, 133 Reed Street, Precinct 8 Town Meeting member, wondered if waivers should be granted on zoning freezes and if a zoning freeze would apply to unbuildable parcels in the subdivision. Ms. McCabe advised that the applicant could develop the subdivision as proposed because it meets Zoning Bylaws and Board’s Subdivision Regulations. She further clarified that the waivers pertain to certain construction and maintenance documents, which would not impact approval of the subdivision plan. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 6 of 13 Board Comments Ms. McBride strongly encouraged the inclusion of a woodland setting and promotion of the natural features of the brook if a residential development plan is brought forward. Mr. Schanbacher echoed Ms. McBride with a request for a site-sensitive proposal that embraces the abutting Minuteman Bikeway and the brook should the applicant move forward with a development on the property. Ms. Thompson moved to close the public hearing for the Definitive Subdivision for 242 Bedford Street. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Hornig – yes; McBride – yes; Thompson – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the request for the waiver to allow the sight lines for the driveway intersections to be provided prior to any building permits and to allow submission of documents providing for the operation and maintenance of landscaping, streets, and utilities prior to construction. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Hornig – yes; Creech – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the request for a partial waiver to allow the submission of soil surveys, test pits, and test borings in the vicinity of the proposed infiltration system prior to construction. 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. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the Definitive Subdivision for 242 Bedford Street with the 27 conditions of approval in the draft decision. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig – yes; Creech – yes; McBride – yes; Thompson – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to have the Chair sign the decision and correct for any non-substantive changes such as grammar, typos, and consistency. 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. 251, 267, 275, 301 Massachusetts Avenue and Fottler Avenue – Definitive Subdivision Mr. Schanbacher opened the public hearing on the application of Sean Maloney for a definitive subdivision at 251-253, 267, 275, and 301 Massachusetts Avenue and Fottler Avenue. The applicant’s team included: Frederick Gilgun, attorney with Nicholson, Sreter, and Gilgun; and Michael Novak, engineer with Patriot Engineering. Mr. Gilgun explained that this application is intended as a zoning freeze following a preliminary plan approved on March 27, 2025. He noted that they are requesting two waivers related to construction and maintenance documents and stated that the applicant is agreeable to including the submission of these documents prior to any construction as conditions of approval. Mr. Novak shared plans of the current site layout and conditions, and the proposed 4-lot subdivision plan. He highlighted the Minuteman Bikeway and a sewer easement to the rear of the site. The subdivision proposes 4 lots conforming with the underlying CRS (Retail Shopping) zoning, with two lots showing frontage on a new right-of-way, one on Massachusetts Avenue, and one on Fottler Avenue. Mr. Novak Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 7 of 13 presented proposed utility and stormwater plans. He advised that the site is within the 200’ riverfront buffer of Mill Brook, and if construction ever proceeded, they would have the boundary defined and would work with Conservation as needed. He stated that the new cul-de-sac was located directly across the street to align with the roadway1 across Massachusetts Avenue, and Fottler Avenue per Ch. 175- 7.2.B(3). Staff Comments Ms. McCabe confirmed that the preliminary subdivision was submitted prior to the Special Town Meeting 2025-1 vote, and that this definitive subdivision would provide an 8-year zoning freeze under the 2024 Village and Multi-Family Overlay bylaws. She recommended approval of the waivers and noted that the submission of waived documents and connection with Conservation were included as conditions of approval if the plans were to be constructed. Staff distributed a draft decision. Board Questions Ms. Thompson wondered if the applicant could share any further development plans and encouraged a mixed-use development when those plans are ready to come forward. Mr. Gilgun advised that there are currently no further plans but indicated it would be a multi-family development. Public Comments Carol Sacerdote, 15 Loring Road, Precinct 4 Town Meeting member, wondered what could be developed on the site, noting that there is commercial and residential zoning around the site. Staff Response Ms. McCabe advised Ms. Sacerdote that the applicant could pursue development under the underlying CRS zoning, the old Village Overlay (VO) zoning, or the new 2025 VO zoning. She encouraged the applicant to work with the staff and public to incorporate elements of the 2025 VO zoning as appropriate, specifically referencing dimensional requirements like height, density limit, and setbacks. Ms. Thompson moved to close the public hearing for the Definitive Subdivision for 251 -253, 267, 275, and 301 Massachusetts Avenue and Fottler Avenue. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Hornig – yes; McBride – yes; Thompson – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the request for the waiver to allow submission of documents providing for the operation and maintenance of landscaping, streets, and utilities and construction phasing to be submitted prior to construction. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig – yes; McBride – yes; Thompson – yes; Creech – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the Definitive Subdivision for 251-253, 267, 275, and 301 Massachusetts Avenue and Fottler Avenue with the 22 conditions of approval in the draft decision. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Hornig – yes; McBride – yes; Thompson – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. 1 Lisbeth Street Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 8 of 13 Ms. Thompson moved to have the Chair sign the decision and correct for any non-substantive changes such as grammar, typos, and consistency. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Thompson – yes; Creech – yes; Hornig – yes; McBride – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. 419 Marrett Road – Definitive Subdivision Mr. Schanbacher opened the public hearing on the application of Curtin Realty Trust for a definitive subdivision at 419 Marrett Road. The applicants’ team included: Jonathan Silverstein of Blatman, Bobrowski, Haverty & Silverstein, LLC; and Michael Novak of Patriot Engineering. Mr. Silverstein shared an overview of the 2-lot subdivision which proposes no new roadway or drainage infrastructure. He advised that the applicant has requested waivers similar to previous zoning freeze subdivisions. Mr. Silverstein noted that the preliminary subdivision differed from the definitive plans2. Mr. Novak presented current site conditions and the proposed subdivision. The site is currently improved by a historic house and detached garage, a retaining wall and landscape cover. The subdivision proposes splitting the lot with Lot A retaining the house and existing utilities, and Lot B with the garage and accessed via a utilities easement. Board Comments Ms. McBride expressed support for protecting the historic house currently on the property. Mr. Silverstein advised that there is no intent to build the subdivision as presented; it is to freeze the zoning. He further advised that while there are no plans in existence yet, the applicant is exploring options to preserve the house and has received a demolition delay from the Historical Commission. There were no public comments on this item. Ms. Thompson moved to close the public hearing for the Definitive Subdivision for 419 Marrett Road. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig – yes; Creech – yes; McBride – yes; Thompson – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Mr. Creech moved to approve the requested waivers to submit final landscape and planting plans, earth movement calculations, maintenance documents, and phasing plans prior to any construction. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Thompson – yes; Hornig – yes; Creech – yes; McBride – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the Definitive Subdivision for 419 Marrett Road with the 25 conditions of approval in the draft decision. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig – yes; Creech – yes; McBride – yes; Thompson – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to have the Chair sign the decision and correct for any non-substantive changes such as grammar, typos, and consistency. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Hornig – yes; Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. 2 Preliminary Subdivision was submitted February 28, 2025 under 439 Marrett Road and encompassed 419, 429, 433, and 439 Marrett Road (PLAN-25-15) Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 9 of 13 439 Marrett Road – Definitive Subdivision Mr. Schanbacher opened the public hearing on the application of Curtin Realty Trust for a definitive subdivision at 439 Marrett Road. The applicants’ team included: Jonathan Silverstein of Blatman, Bobrowski, Haverty & Silverstein, LLC; and Michael Novak of Patriot Engineering. Mr. Silverstein explained that this application is substantially similar to the previous agenda item – the 419 Marrett Road definitive subdivision, with two lots, no new road or infrastructure, and waivers for construction and maintenance documents. Mr. Novak shared the existing site conditions, which include a single-family residence and a parking area accessed via a driveway easement. The proposed subdivision creates two conforming lots, with Lot A having frontage on Marrett Road and maintaining existing utility connections, and Lot B being accessed via utility and driveway easement. Mr. Novak noted that some trees might require removal depending on the utilities’ access. Board Questions Mr. Leon asked for the rationale behind giving Lot B frontage on Marrett Road, rather than an easement like Lot B at 419 Marrett Road. Mr. Silverstein advised that the frontage was kept below 20’ in order to avoid qualifying as an Approval Not Required (ANR) plan while Mr. Novak stated the subdivision design was chosen for practicality. Mr. Leon wondered if the lots between the properties3 were under common ownership. Mr. Silverstein and Mr. Novak advised that they are not. Public Comments Renee Briggs, 445 Marrett Road, asked for details on the “porkchop” handle and wondered if it would encroach on her property or driveway. Mr. Silverstein responded that there is no intent to build the subdivision as presented. If any development is pursued, it would require a separate application and more detailed plans. He concluded by noting the existing driveway on the eastern side of the lot and suggested that if the subdivision were to be constructed, there would be no need to create a new driveway on the western side. Ms. Thompson moved to close the public hearing for the Definitive Subdivision for 439 Marrett Road. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig – yes; Creech – yes; McBride – yes; Thompson – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the requested waivers for a note indicating the amounts of earth material being removed, added, or reused on site; for a plan and plant schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs, and ground covers; for draft documents providing for the operation and maintenance of landscaping, streets, and utilities by the property owners; and for phasing. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Hornig – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the Definitive Subdivision for 439 Marrett Road with the 24 conditions of approval in the draft decision. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Hornig – yes; Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. 3 429 Marrett Road and 433 Marrett Road, also known as Map 33, Lots 104A and 104B Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 10 of 13 Ms. Thompson moved to have the Chair sign the decision and correct for any non-substantive changes such as grammar, typos, and consistency. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Hornig – yes; McBride – yes; Creech – yes; Thompson – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. The Board recessed at 8:02 PM and reconvened at 8:07 PM. Board Administration Amendments to Planning Board Subdivision Regulations (Ch. 175) Mr. Schanbacher continued the public hearing for proposed revisions to the Planning Board’s Subdivision Regulations (Ch. 175). The hearing is continued from September 25 and October 8, 2025. Ms. McCabe shared revisions since the October 8 meeting. She stated that she met with two Board members to continue to review the language for the proposed 10’ right of way (ROW) buffer in §7.2. She explained the circumstances in which an exception could be granted and shared examples of existing subdivisions and streets. Ms. McCabe advised the Board that there was an additional request from a resident to include earth material calculations in plans. She suggested language requiring that any relocation of earth material over 300 cubic yards (CY) be shown on the site construction plan. Board Discussion Mr. Leon stated that the revised language for 7.2B addressed his previous concerns by ensuring that the paved roadway surface would be set back from the edge of the ROW. He noted a remaining concern with 7.2C as it is an unusual provision that he felt warranted more discussion at a later date. Mr. Leon expressed support for the new proposal regarding cut and fill, stating that regulating the amount of earth moved would exceed the Board’s authority, but that the suggested language only requires more visual representation of grade changes. Mr. Creech expressed concern about potential unintended impacts on residents from the proposed exceptions to the 10-foot separation requirement and presented hypothetical and real-world examples to test how the regulation would apply. He emphasized a preference for erring on the side of protecting existing residents’ privacy and separation, while still supporting a vote on the regulations that evening. Mr. Hornig responded that the 10-foot rule remains the standard, with limited exceptions necessary to allow road extensions or required easements and explained why many of Mr. Creech’s examples would not trigger exceptions. Ms. McBride asked clarifying questions about the necessity of 7.2B(4)d, and Mr. Hornig and Mr. Leon explained that it is required to address proof plans, which cannot receive waivers. The discussion concluded with general agreement that broader concerns about driveway placement and privacy in SRDs should be addressed through zoning or site plan review in the future, rather than through the subdivision regulations under consideration. Public Comments Lin Jensen, 133 Reed Street, Precinct 8 Town Meeting member, questioned if the exceptions to 7.2 would increase or facilitate future zoning freezes and expressed concern about widening the “loophole” of zoning freezes. Ms. McCabe explained that once the updated regulations are approved, any new zoning freeze plans submitted would be required to follow the new regulations. She further clarified that proof plans are different from subdivision plans but would also be held to the updated regulations. Mr. Hornig further clarified that 7.2B(4)d would not apply to subdivisions, whether it was for a zoning freeze or not. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 11 of 13 Final Board Comments The Board engaged in a discussion of the additional request regarding earthwork. They were largely supportive of the proposal although they will continue to monitor the impact on projects. Mr. Hornig and Ms. Thompson expressed some concerns with the last-minute addition, however noted that it is reasonable and something the Board has requested on many applications. Ms. McBride stated that the Board can do better with more information and informative visuals. Mr. Leon wondered if 300 CY was the correct threshold, noting that he has seen other towns require a special permit to move more than 20 CY of earth. Mr. Schanbacher advised that 20 CY is approximately one standard dump truck. Mr. Hornig reminded the Board that this would only apply to subdivisions, which are rare in Lexington at this time. He suggested reviewing the Board’s Zoning Regulations to better manage this request across developments. Ms. Thompson moved to close the public hearing on the amendments to the Board's Subdivision Regulations Chapter 175. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Hornig – yes; Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Ms. Thompson moved to approve the amendments to the Board's Subdivision Regulations Chapter 175 of the Code of Lexington as outlined in the draft changes revised through October 14, 2025 and as may be modified through this evening's meeting. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Thompson – yes; Creech – yes; McBride – yes; Hornig – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Comments for the ZBA regarding 591 Lowell Street Affordable Housing project (Map 68 -44) Ms. McCabe informed the Board that the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) received the comprehensive permit application from Causeway Development for the project on Lowell Street. As the Planning Board’s next meeting is after the first ZBA meeting, she suggested the Board provide general comments at this time, although she expects there will be additional opportunities to provide feedback. She summarized the 40-unit, income-restricted development and asked the Board for their initial comments which she would compile into a letter. Board members expressed strong support for the project and emphasized its importance in meeting the Town’s affordable housing goals. Mr. Schanbacher praised the project’s overall design, scale, and comprehensive affordability. Ms. McBride discussed transportation and access, suggesting that improved or expanded Lexpress service, particularly on weekends, would further support future residents and reduce dependency on vehicles. Mr. Hornig raised preliminary questions about zoning waivers requested under the comprehensive permit, particularly related to parking dimensions, parking layout, and whether reduced parking standards were appropriate given the site context. He noted that these issues are typically addressed during site plan review and would benefit from more detailed staff analysis. The Board reached consensus to submit a letter to the ZBA expressing support for the project, while noting that the Planning Board and staff will conduct further review and provide additional, more detailed comments at a later ZBA hearing, likely in December. Ms. Thompson moved to send a letter to the ZBA in support of the Lexington Woods affordable housing Comprehensive Permit at 591 Lowell Street as discussed this evening. 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. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 12 of 13 Ms. Thompson moved to have the Chair sign and finalize the letter. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Thompson – yes; Creech – yes; McBride – yes; Hornig – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED. Board Member & Staff Updates Mr. Creech attended Minuteman Advisory Group on Interlocal Coordination (MAGIC) meeting which focused on a Climate Resilience Playbook, an online tool which allows municipalities to share and review climate resiliency ideas across many areas including stormwater, housing, and infrastructure. He stated they also discussed equalizing Chapter 30B to streamline procurements of services and supplies, and options to secure the permanent ability to meet remotely. Mr. Hornig shared that the Housing Partnership Board (HPB) presented housing strategies to the Select Board. Mr. Schanbacher stated that he attended the meeting and spoke for himself but also advised the HPB that they could coordinate with Ms. McCabe if they would like to have a discussion at an upcoming Planning Board meeting. Ms. McCabe shared that the applicant for 16 Clarke Street recently had a hearing with the Historic Districts Commission (HDC) and the hearing was continued to the next meeting on November 6, 2025. She reminded the Board that the zoning freeze plan for 16 Clarke Street will be on their November 19 th meeting agenda. The applicant has not filed a site plan review with the Planning Board yet and Ms. McCabe suggested they may intend to make further progress with the HDC prior to coming to the Planning Board. Ms. McCabe also shared that the Board was invited to attend a Housing Roundtable on October 30th at the Lex Arts Center. Review of Draft Meeting Minutes: 9/25 Ms. Thompson moved to approve the draft September 25, 2025 meeting minutes as presented. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Hornig – yes; Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED Upcoming Meetings: Wednesdays November 19 and December 10. Mr. Schanbacher confirmed that November 5 is a tentative meeting date if needed. Ms. McCabe advised that the meeting would likely be canceled as there are no public hearings scheduled. Review January-February Meeting Dates Proposed dates include Wednesday 1/7, 1/21, 2/4, and 2/25. Ms. McCabe asked the Board to confirm they have no conflicts with those dates. Mr. Hornig wondered if Ms. McCabe had heard of any anticipated citizen-driven Zoning Articles for Annual Town Meeting 2026. Ms. McCabe confirmed she had not been made aware of anything yet. Adjournment Ms. Thompson moved that the Planning Board adjourn the meeting of October 22, 2025 at 9:29 PM. Ms. McBride seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll call: Creech – yes; Thompson – yes; McBride – yes; Hornig – yes; Schanbacher – yes). MOTION PASSED Meeting adjourned at 9:29 PM. Lex Media recorded the meeting. Material from the meeting can be found in the Planning Board’s Novus Packet. Lexington Planning Board Meeting Minutes October 22, 2025 Page 13 of 13 List of Documents 1. 287 & 295 Waltham Street Staff Memo from A. Koepper dated 10/17/25; Peer Review Nitsch Memo dated 10/17/25; Plan set titled “REV-Lex_Terrace-Civil-Arch-Combined_CD_Phase_10-07-25.pdf” dated 10/7/25; Public Comments: 1. Electronic mail from James Carrico to Planning Board and Staff; Subject: 287 Waltham Street comments; dated 10/16/25 and 10/19/25 a. PDF attachment labeled “Exhibit 1” b. PDF attachment labeled “Exhibit 2” 2. Electronic mail from Ravneet Grewal to Planning Board and Staff; Subject: Research in support of 287 Waltham St. proposed SRD; dated 10/22/25 a. PNG attachment labeled “Exhibit1_287Waltham_Topography” b. PNG attachment labeled “Exhibit2_MillRun_Topography” 2. 242 Bedford Street Plan Set titled “238-244 BEDFORD ST_DEF SUB_REV-1.pdf” dated 9/11/25; Staff Memo dated 10/16/25 3. 251-301 Massachusetts Avenue Plan set titled “251-301 MASS_DEF SUB_REV-1.pdf” dated 9/11/25; Staff Memo dated 10/16/25 4. 419 Marrett Road Plan set titled “419 MARRETT_DEF SUB_REV-1.pdf” dated 9/16/25; Staff Memo dated 10/15/25 5. 439 Marrett Road Plan set titled “439 MARRETT_DEF SUB_REV-1.pdf” dated 9/16/25; Staff Memo dated 10/15/25 6. Amendments to Planning Board Subdivision Regulations Proposed Amendments titled “DRAFT_Subdivision_Amendments_10-14-2025.pdf” dated 10/14/25; Draft Subdivision Regulations titled “DRAFT_2025_Amends- PB_Subdivision_Regulations_10.14.25-FULL.pdf” dated 10/14/25; Visual Slide Deck titled “Sub_Regs_Amenments_Visuals_10.22.25.pdf” dated 10/22/25 7. Draft Meeting Minutes for September 25, 2025 meeting 2025-09-25 PB Minutes REV DRAFT.docx