HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-03-25-PB-min
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF MARCH 25, 2020
Held on March 25, 2020, Virtual Meeting per Governor Baker’s Order at 7:00pm
Present: Robert Creech, Chair; Charles Hornig, Vice-Chair; Robert Peters, Clerk; Ginna Johnson; and Richard
Canale. Also, present was Amanda Loomis, Planning Director
Robert Creech, Chair, read the agenda into the record, introduced members of the Planning Board and Planning
Department Staff, and called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 25, 2020.
Mr. Creech read the following statement relative to the recent outbreak of COVID-19.
Good evening. This meeting of the Lexington Planning Board is being conducted remotely consistent
with Governor Baker’s Executive Order of March 12, 2020, due to the current State of Emergency in the
Commonwealth due to the outbreak of COVID-19.
In order to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19, we have been advised and directed by the
Commonwealth to suspend public gatherings, and as such, the Governor’s Order suspends the
requirement of the Open Meeting Law to have all meetings in a publicly accessible physical location.
Further, all members of public bodies are allowed and encouraged to participate remotely.
The Order, which you can find posted with agenda materials for this meeting allows public bodies to
meet entirely remotely so long as reasonable public access is afforded so that the public can follow
along with the deliberations of the meeting.
Ensuring public access does not ensure public participation unless such participation is required by law.
This meeting will feature public comment. For this meeting, the Lexington Planning Board is convening
by video conference via Zoom as posted on the Town’s Website identifying how the public may join.
Please note that this meeting is being recorded, and that some attendees are participating by video
conference.
Accordingly, please be aware that other folks may be able to see you, and that take care not to “screen
share” your computer. Anything that you broadcast may be captured by the recording.
Development Administration
1. 53 Hancock Street, Definitive Site Sensitive Special Permit Residential Development
Robert Creech, Chair opened the public hearing for the Definitive Site Sensitive Special Permit
Residential Development for the property at 53 Hancock Street and then requested a
presentation from the Applicant.
Present for the Public Hearing: Attorney Ranen Schechner; Fred Russell, P.E.; Erik Bednarek;
Jason Brickman, Applicant.
Attorney Schechner provided a review of the background as to why a site sensitive project
application was submitted.
Mr. Russell provided a review of the project, which included a review of existing conditions, a
review of the Approval Not Required (ANR) plan, layout of the proposed lots, lot coverage and
Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of March 25, 2020
gross floor area allowed, creation of a driveways or roadway dependent upon which option is
chooses, stormwater mitigation and collection of roof runoff, reduction of impervious lot
coverage, in addition to a list of all relief or waivers requested.
Mr. Bednarek provided a review of the project landscape plan.
Mr. Russell provided a review of the project’s utility plan, noting that all utilities will be brought
to Hancock Street. The project team has been and will remain in contact with the Department
of Public Works (DPW) as the project progresses. It was noted that the property does share a
common sewer connection with the abutting lot, on which they are conducting research.
Mr. Creech requested clarification relative to the alternative site plan that was provided
to the Planning Department. Mr. Brickman provided clarification regarding the
alternative site plan, in addition to what would need to occur for such plan to be
utilized.
Mr. Brickman provided a review of the alternative site plan that would allow for the
preservation of the existing historical structure.
Mr. Creech requested comments from members of the Planning Board. The Planning
Board provided the following comments.
Charles Hornig stated that the intent of the project should be to preserve the existing
house. Mr. Hornig recommended that the Applicant consider modelling the project after
110 Shade Street. Mr. Hornig requested clarification that preservation was still an
option on the table for consideration. Mr. Brickman provided clarification as to what
would need to happen for the house to the preserved. Such action would require the
Planning Board granting the requested relief.
Mr. Hornig requested clarification as to whether it would be acceptable for the Planning
Board to require in their decision a preservation restriction on the existing historic
structure. Mr. Brickman stated that a preservation restriction would most likely not
happen.
Mr. Hornig stated that the plan appears to remove the existing structure and replace it
with new smaller houses. Mr. Hornig referenced the easement and whether there had
been any discussion with the neighbor.
Ginna Johnson referenced Section 6.9.1 of the Lexington Zoning Bylaw, relative to the
purpose of providing a detailed review of the intention, which is site plan review. Ms.
Johnson stated that the plans as presented would not receive her vote. Ms. Johnson
strongly encouraged the developer to advance the alternative site plans which were
recently submitted. Ms. Johnson noted that the plan does not reflect the historical
nature of the area or Lexington. It was recommended that the landscape plan be revised
to reflect the history of the neighborhood and the area. Ms. Johnson stated that
landscaping needs to be revised to include only native plantings and also be consistent
with the neighborhood.
Richard Canale stated that he concurred with the comments made by both Mr. Hornig
and Ms. Johnson. Mr. Canale referenced a previously approved Approval Not Required
(ANR) Plan of Land, and whether the lots were indeed buildable.
Minutes for the Meeting of March 25, 2020 Page 3
Robert Peters understood that the project meets the Town’s standards, but also
concurred with the comments made by Mr. Hornig and Ms. Johnson.
Mr. Creech stated that he could not get beyond razing the historic house, noting that
the alternative site plan is much more attractive and appealing.
Mr. Creech opened the floor for public comment. The following comments were
provided.
A request for clarification regarding the differences between Section 6.2 vs. 6.9 of the
Lexington Zoning Bylaw, relative to the historic preservation for the house. In addition
to a request for clarification relative to the requested easements.
A statement of concern relative to the sewer easement, and that the developer has not
attempted to contact the owner of the easement.
A question as to whether the proof circles are actually drawn accurately.
A statement that the driveway for the alternative site plan provides opportunity for the
developer to make money, while preserving the existing historical structure. It was
noted that the Town should not give up variances if the developer does not want to
preserve the house.
A statement of appreciation for the opportunity to participate in the meeting, and a
statement of support for the preservation of the historic house.
A statement of appreciation to the Planning Board for taking this project so seriously,
which includes the preservation of the existing historic house.
Mr. Canale referenced the ability to save a historic structure in the Lexington Zoning
Bylaw. It was encouraged for the Planning Board to continue this meeting since there
appears to be a lot of merit to salvage the historic structure, through an alternative
plan. Mr. Canale stated that it is up to the Applicant to come back with a plan that the
Planning Board can take seriously.
Mr. Hornig questioned if there was a way to move this project forward or not with the
alternative design and preserve the existing structure. Mr. Brickman provided a brief
review of what needed to be done.
Members of the Planning Board and the Applicant’s project team discussed potential
future public hearing dates.
Prior to the continuance of the public hearing, Mr. Brickman requested that the
Planning Board provide clarification relative to retaining walls. Ms. Johnson provided a
reasoning for the maintenance of the existing retaining wall. Ms. Johnson further stated
that her recommendations can actually save the developer money, and contribute to
the project.
Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board continue the public hearing for the
th
project at 53 Hancock Street to Wednesday, April 15 at 7:00pm. Richard Canale
seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call:
Robert Peters – yes; Richard Canale – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Charles Hornig – yes;
Robert Creech – yes) MOTION PASSED
2. 147 Shade Street, Definitive Site Sensitive Special Permit Residential Development
Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of March 25, 2020
Robert Creech, Chair opened the public hearing for the Definitive Site Sensitive Special Permit
Residential Development for the property at 147 Shade Street and then requested a
presentation from the Applicant.
Present for the Public Hearing: Fred Russell, P.E.
Mr. Russell stated that the project was a resubmittal of an application submitted to the
Planning Board on June 30, 2010, with some revisions. Mr. Russell reviewed the Definitive Site
Sensitive Plan for 147 Shade Street, dated December 27, 2019.
Mr. Creech requested comments from members of the Planning Board. The Planning Board
provided the following comments.
Charles Hornig state that he supported the project in 2010, but would like to review and
compare the 2010 plans to the new plans.
Richard Canale requested clarification regarding the differences between the new application
and the 2010 plan, which are similar to Mr. Hornig’s statements. Mr. Canale stated that he too
voted to approve the project in 2010.
Ginna Johnson requested clarification as to why a large tree was being removed that appears to
be outside the scope of work. Ms. Johnson further requested clarification as to why the project
would cut down Lexington trees. Ms. Johnson provided a review of the stormwater
management system. Ms. Johnson and Mr. Russell discussed the removal of the tree, in addition
to the need for the width of the driveway which was designed based on Fire Department
comments. Mr. Russell stated that he would discuss with the Fire Department as to whether the
width of the driveway could be decreased. Ms. Johnson stated that to get her support for the
project the plantings need to be native.
Robert Peters requested clarification as to the type of application this project was in 2010 and
how the 2020 project meets the criteria for a site sensitive application.
Mr. Creech stated that he had similar questions, relative to the 2010 and the 2020 application.
Mr. Creech opened the floor for public comment. No public comments were made.
Mr. Hornig questioned when the Applicant would be ready to come back to the Planning Board
for their next public hearing.
Mr. Canale requested clarification as to whether the new plan has been updated to reflect new
ownership and if all abutters are shown on the plan. Mr. Russell stated that he would check
with the surveyor.
Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board continue the public hearing for the project at
147 Shade Street to Wednesday, April 15, 2020 at 7:00pm. Richard Canale seconded the
motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Ginna Johnson – yes;
Robert Peters – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Richard Canale – yes; Robert Creech – yes). MOTION
PASSED
3. 840 Emerson Gardens Road, Definitive Balanced Housing Special Permit Residential Development
Robert Creech, Chair opened the public hearing for the Definitive Balanced Housing Special
Permit Residential Development for the property at 840 Emerson Gardens Road and then
requested a presentation from the Applicant.
Minutes for the Meeting of March 25, 2020 Page 5
Present for the Public Hearing: Fred Russell, P.E.; Scott Seaver, Seaver Construction; Laurie Tarr
Ellsworth, LTE Landscape Architecture; and Attorney John Farrington.
Attorney Farrington provided a review of the project, noting that a sketch plan had been
previously filed with the Planning Board. The application before the Planning Board is a
Balanced Housing Development. Attorney Farrington further reviewed the legal rights
relative to the trail which will include access for fire safety purposes.
Mr. Russell provided a review of the site plans entitled Site Analysis Plan, Lexington
Meadows, dated February 6 or 8, 2020. The review of the site plans included a review of
the conventional subdivision plan along with associated soil test pits; amendments to
the plans since the sketch plan previously reviewed by the Planning Board; and
circulation and fire access. It was noted that the project is also under review by the
Conservation Commission.
Mr. Seaver provided a review of the Moderate Housing Unit, at 150 percent AMI, which
will sell for about $500,000.
Ms. Ellsworth reviewed the landscaping plan, which included a review of the nature
trial, screening for the residents, street trees. It was noted that the plants selected are
predominately native to allow them to grow best.
Mr. Russell reviewed the utility plan, which included both sewer and water being
connected from Emerson Gardens Road. It was noted that the project includes one fire
hydrant. Mr. Russell stated that they had received a comment letter from Department
of Public Works (DPW), which included a request to loop the water line, which is difficult
to do due to the property being surrounded by open space parcels of land.
Mr. Creech request comments from members of the Planning Board. The Planning
Board made the following comments.
Charles Hornig stated that he did not have any questions at this time.
Richard Canale requested clarification regarding the proposed architecture and whether
the architecture previously shown during the sketch plan phase of the project had
changed.
Ginna Johnson requested clarification regarding the location of the conservation
easement, in addition to ensuring that the number of conventional subdivision unit
number was correct.
Ms. Johnson lost connection at 9:17pm
Robert Peters requested clarification regarding the number of off-street parking spaces
on the north side of the roadway, and whether such location would preclude future
carports from being installed. Mr. Russell stated that the siting of a solar carport would
not be conducive in that location due to solar exposure. Mr. Peters thanked the
Applicant for the moderate unit. Mr. Peters stressed the importance of providing a
variety of housing options.
Mr. Creech stated that he would like to see additional off-street parking spaces for
public trail parking. Mr. Russell stated that they stopped adding additional off-street
public spaces before they encroached into the river front area.
Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of March 25, 2020
Ms. Johnson regained connection at 9:24pm
Mr. Creech referenced a document that he had prepared for the meeting but that Mr.
Seaver had not yet seen. Mr. Creech requested clarification as to the heat source that
the project would be utilizing. Mr. Seaver stated that neither oil nor natural gas would
be used and that it appeared that the only option was propane. Mr. Creech asked that
energy efficiency be maximized and suggested better quality insulation. He reiterated
his opposition to vinyl siding unless the Board felt differently. Mr. Seaver said that he
usually uses foam insulation and that he never uses vinyl siding in Lexington.
Ms. Johnson stated her appreciation for the moderate housing unit, but requested that
the Applicant provide an additional moderate housing unit. Ms. Johnson stated a
concern relative to Unit 1, which was still in the river front. Ms. Johnson noted that the
size of the units are concerning, still being extremely large. Mr. Seaver provided
clarification for the sizes of the houses. Ms. Johnson noted that she would like to see a
reduction in the number of units by eliminating Unit 1 or rather relocate Unit 1 outside
the riverfront area.
Mr. Creech opened the floor for public comment. The following comments were made.
A statement of concern regarding the potential increased traffic on Bryant Road that
would be associated with the project.
A question as to whether a traffic study had been conducted.
A request for clarification regarding the number of affordable housing units.
Members of the Planning Board discussed the number and location of the public off-
street parking spaces.
Mr. Creech allowed for additional public comment.
A statement that the only reason to allow for additional density would be for the
additional moderate or affordable housing units.
A statement that the one moderate unit is a token. It is a problem regarding off-street
parking and concerns with conflicts between vehicles and children.
A statement regarding the width of the road, lighting, a real need for affordability in
Lexington.
A request for clarification relative to the razing of the existing structure as to what type
of infestation can the neighbors expect, what types of toxic poisons will be used to
exterminate, and what needs to be done to talk to Lexington and Arlington to get rid of
these animals.
Mr. Peters highlighted the number of proposed public off-street parking spaces. Mr.
Peters stated that he would not support a reduction in off-street parking spaces. Mr.
Peters further stated that he absolutely supported an additional moderate housing unit.
Mr. Peters requested that the Applicant look at the total footprint and consider adding
an additional moderate housing unit. It was noted that these are not affordable units
and will not be listed on the SHI.
Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board continue the public hearing to
Wednesday, April 15, 2020 at 7:00pm. Richard Canale seconded the motion. The
Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Robert Peters – yes; Ginna
Minutes for the Meeting of March 25, 2020 Page 7
Johnson – yes; Richard Canale – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Robert Creech – yes)
MOTION PASSES.
Town Meeting
1. Review and approval of Town Meeting Reports
The Planning Board reviewed the draft reports for Article 42, in addition to Articles 35-41 and 43-46 for
the 2020 Annual Town Meeting.
Richard Canale requested additional time to review Article 42, but was ready to vote on the other
articles.
Richard Canale moved that the Planning Board vote to approve the Annual Town Meeting Article
Reports for Articles 35 through 41 and 43 through 46, as presented. Charles Hornig seconded the
motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Richard Canale – yes; Ginna
Johnson – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Robert Creech – yes). MOTION PASSED.
The Planning Board agreed to review Article 42, Annual Town meeting Report on April 7, 2020.
Board Administration
1. Review Minutes of March 4, 2020 and March 5, 2020
The Planning Board reviewed the meeting minutes from the March 4, 2020 Planning Board meeting.
Charles Hornig requested that a statement be reinserted on page 8.
The Planning Board reviewed the meeting minutes from the March 5, 2020 Planning Board meeting.
Members of the Planning Board made edits to page 5, further noting a spelling issue, a grammatical
issue, and formatting issue.
Robert Peters moved that the Planning Board approve the meeting minutes of March 4, 2020 and
March 5, 2020, as amended. Charles Hornig seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor
of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Richard Canale – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Robert
Creech – yes; Charles Hornig – yes). MOTION PASSED
2. Board Member and Staff Updates
The Planning Board had a brief discussion regarding other boards and committees which are meeting
virtually.
Adjournment
Robert Creech moved that the Planning Board vote to adjourn. Charles Hornig seconded the
motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 via roll call (Robert Peters –
yes; Robert Creech – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; and Richard Canale - yes)
MOTION PASSED
Meeting adjourned at 10:28pm
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.
Page 8 Minutes for the Meeting of March 25, 2020
Annual Town Meeting Articles:
Draft language- Article 36 Short Term Rentals Amendment (3 Pages).
Draft language- Article 39 Solar Energy Systems Amendment 2.17.20 (3 Pages).
Draft language- Article 43 Hartwell Avenue 2.14.20 (3 Pages).
Draft language- Article 45 Streetscape, Screening Amendment 12.4.19 (1 Page).
Revised Draft Language-Article 45 Streetscape, Screening Amendment 3.5.20 (1 Page).
Draft language- Article 37 Site Plan Review Amendment 2.11.20 (1 Page).
Draft language- Article 38 Financial Services Amendment 11.19.19 (2 Pages).
Draft language Planning Board Recommendation - Article 38 Financial Services
Amendment (3 Pages).
Draft language Planning Board Recommendation - Article 41 Technical Corrections
Amendment (1 page).
53 Hancock Street
Application packet Site Sensitive Development dated 1.31.20 (68 Pages).
Plan Set dated 1.31.20 (8 Pages).
Elevation Plans dated 2.4.20 (5 Pages).
147 Shade Street
Application packet Site Sensitive Development dated 1.7.20 (62 Pages).
Plan Set dated 12.27.19 (7 Pages).
Revised Plan set 2.7.20 (7 Pages).
Waiver Request Form (1 Page).
840 Emerson Gardens
Application packet dated 2.14.20 (100 Pages).
Project Summary dated 2.18.20 (2 Pages).
Master Deed (26 Pages).
Property Trust (3 Pages).
Plan Set dated 2.6.20 (10 Pages).
Robert Peters, Clerk of the Planning Board