Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-04-15-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF APRIL 15, 2020 Minutes of the Lexington Planning Board Held on April 15, 2020, Virtual Meeting per Governor Baker’s Order at 7:00pm Present: Robert Creech, Chair; Charles Hornig, Vice-Chair; Robert Peters, Clerk; Ginna Johnson; Richard Canale; and Michael Leon, Associate Member. 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, April 15, 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 take care not to “screen share” your computer. Anything that you broadcast may be captured by the recording. Development Administration 1. 147 Shade Street, Definitive Site Sensitive Special Permit Residential Development Present for the Public Hearing: Frederick Russell, P.E Robert Creech, Chair opened the public hearing and then requested a presentation from the Applicant. Mr. Russell provided a brief update regarding recent amendments made to the project relative to comments received from the Fire Department. Mr. Creech requested comments from members of the Planning Board. The following comments were provided. Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of April 15, 2020  Richard Canale, Charles Hornig, Robert Peters, and Mr. Creech did not have any comments at this time.  Ginna Johnson requested clarification relative to the removal of six (6) shade trees. Ms. Johnson further stated concerns relative to the damage of the tree’s root system and the loss of such trees would change the character of the neighborhood. The Planning Board reviewed the draft decision. Ms. Johnson requested a condition be included in the decision relative to tree protection and replacement of any trees that die. Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board voted to approve the Definitive Site Sensitive Special Permit for Residential Development application, with conditions. Richard Canale seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Ginna Johnson – yes; Robert Creech – yes; Richard Canale – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Robert Peters – yes). MOTION PASSED 2. 15-17 Fairland Street & 185 Lincoln Street, Minor Modification to Balanced Housing Special Permit Residential Development Present for the Public Meeting: Attorney John Farrington Ginna Johnson recused herself from the review of the modification for the property at 15-17 Fairland Street and 185 Lincoln Street. Michael Leon, Associated Planning Board participated in the review of the request for modification. Attorney Farrington provided a brief review of the request for modification of the July 10, 2019 Decision. Such modification would include an addition of a twenty-five (25) foot reservation of easement from the property to a land locked abutting property. Attorney Farrington provided insight relative to the appeal of the decision granted for this project.  Michael Leon stated that there does not appear to be any objections to the reservation of easement. Mr. Leon stated that logistical details will need to be worked out, such as the cost for improvement or modification would be on the granter of the easement. Mr. Leon requested clarification regarding the need for amendments to the stormwater calculation.  Richard Canale stated that he did not have any comments at this time.  Charles Hornig requested a review of the site plans, which included a review of a retaining wall within close proximity of the proposed easement. Mr. Hornig questioned if the Applicant would mind adjusting the easement to avoid the retaining wall that appears to be located in the proposed easement. Mr. Hornig stated that the Planning Board’s decision should reflect everything that the Planning Board is and is not determining or deciding with the request for modification. Mr. Hornig provided a detailed list of items that the Planning Board would not be deciding with this request for modification. This request for modification does not include: o Compliance with the applicable sections of the Subdivision Regulations; o Provide legal access to the abutting property; or o Determine whether the abutting property is buildable. Minutes for the Meeting of April 15, 2020 Page 3 Mr. Hornig concluded that this was just the granting of an easement, and should anyone want to do any improvements to the easement they would have to come back to the Planning Board.  Mr. Creech questioned if the Applicant would consider making the easement narrower.  Robert Peters stated that he did not have any questions at this time. Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board vote to modify the July 10, 2019, Decision by adding an access easement, subject to the Applicant modifying the easement to preserve the existing retaining wall. Richard Canale seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Richard Canale – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Michael Leon – yes; Robert Creech – yes). MOTION PASSED The Planning Board took a brief recess at 7:39pm The Planning Board returned at 7:53pm 3. 53 Hancock Street, Definitive Site Sensitive Special Permit Residential Development Present for the Public Hearing: Jason Brickman, Applicant; Attorney Ranen Schechner; Fred Russell, P.E. Robert Creech, Chair opened the public hearing and then requested a presentation from the Applicant. Attorney Schechner provided a brief update to the Planning Board relative to the application currently under review and the potential for the Applicant to redevelop the property as a Public Benefit Development. Attorney Schechner noted that formal plans have not been prepared nor has a new application, but rather the project team is looking for feedback from the Planning Board. Mr. Creech requested comments from members of the Planning Board. The following comments were provided.  Mr. Creech let the Applicant know that a new application for a Public Benefit Development project can always be submitted.  Charles Hornig stated that he feels the site is better suited for a Public Benefit Development, rather than a Site Sensitive Development project.  Richard Canale stated that the Applicant needs to preserve the mansion. Mr. Canale provided input relative to the potential of a Public Benefit Development project. Attorney Schechner let the Applicant speak relative to the conceptual design for the Public Benefit Development. In addition to introducing the 9 unit Public Benefit Housing concept, Mr. Brickman said that the housing situation had changed recently and that he was looking for an approach other that the Site Sensitive Development (SSD) proposal. Nevertheless, he did not want to withdraw the SSD plan at this time and requested that it be continued to June 10. Mr. Russell provided a brief review of a Public Benefit Development site layout. Members of the Planning Board continued to provide input.  Ms. Johnson requested clarification as to whether the review of a Public Benefit Development conceptual plan was a violation of open meeting law. Ms. Johnson provided insight relative to the proposed conceptual plans, the concerns of over at least Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of April 15, 2020 eighteen (18) vehicles on the property, which far exceeds what was proposed for developing the parcel, the need for the project to fit in with the character of the neighborhood, and an in-depth review of the proposed landscaping. Ms. Johnson provided a review of two (2) sketches attached in the Planning Board Meeting Agenda Packet for this meeting that she had prepared as to potential site layout options. Attorney Schechner requested that the Planning Board provide the Applicant one last continuance for the Site Sensitive Development application. Attorney Schechner stated th that if the Applicant was not going to be ready for the June 10 Planning Board meeting, then notification would be sent well in advance. Ms. Johnson requested that a covenant be placed on the existing structure to ensure that it would be preserved. Mr. Canale provided input relative to the Site Sensitive Development application, which requires no affordable units, while the Public Benefit Development would require one (1) affordable unit. Mr. Canale noted that a balanced housing project with five (5) or six (6) units would seem to be the maximum without the benefit. Mr. Creech opened the floor for public comment. The following comments were provided.  A statement that the project has gone from bad to worse. A development with nine (9) units would be more than the property could hold. Such development would be a parking lot, followed that such pavement would not be in the character of Hancock Street.  A statement of concern regarding the direction of all the small units being converted into larger units. Such project is not consistent with the neighborhood, neither is the Site Sensitive Development nor the Balanced Housing Development.  A statement of support for Ms. Johnson’s proposed sketches.  A statement that affordable housing would be welcomed on this site. However, the number of units exceeds what the property can handle.  A statement that the developer has put a for sale sign on the property and that the MLS listing has potentially misleading information. Mr. Creech stated that the Board was looking for a way to preserve the historic home and an acceptable compromise was being sought. He also pointed out that Board members had said that the Balanced Housing concept shown tonight was probably too dense for this site. Mr. Creech requested closing remarks from members of the Planning Board.  Mr. Canale requested clarification regarding the proposed three (3) units in the existing mansion. Mr. Canale stated that the project would need to meet the standards of the Bylaw but would like to see the mansion saved. Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board continue the public hearing for the project at 53 Hancock Street to June 10, 2020 at 7:00pm. Richard Canale seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Charles Hornig – yes; Richard Canale – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Robert Creech – yes). MOTION PASSED 4. 840 Emerson Gardens Road, Balanced Housing Special Permit Residential Development Minutes for the Meeting of April 15, 2020 Page 5 Present for the Public Hearing: Attorney John Farrington; Scott Seaver, Seaver Construction; Fred Russell, P.E; Laurie Tarr Ellsworth, LTE Land Architecture Robert Creech, Chair opened the public hearing and then requested a presentation from the Applicant. Attorney Farrington provided a brief review of the project, which included highlights of all amendments made to the project based on comments received from staff. Mr. Russell reviewed amendments to the revised site plans dated February 6, 2020, revised through April 5, 2020. Mr. Russell highlighted amendments made to the plans relative to comments made by the Department of Public Works, in addition to comments received from the Planning Board. It was noted that the project requires review by the Conservation Commission, which will be undertaken shortly. Attorney Farrington provided a review of the proposed moderate housing unit, in addition to the land being registered land. Mr. Creech requested comments from members of the Planning Board. The following comments were provided.  Charles Hornig stated that he did not have any comments at this time.  Richard Canale provided a review of the request for an additional moderate housing unit. Mr. Canale concluded that he would go along with the majority of the Planning Board as to whether they would like one (1) or (2) units provided, but would prefer two (2) moderate units.  Ginna Johnson stated that she would request that the project landscape architect be provided an opportunity to speak about proposed revisions that Ms. Johnson had submitted to the plant schedule.  Robert Peters requested clarification regarding the cost associated with the construction of a moderate unit, in addition to the costs required to raze the existing structure, construct of the trail associated with the easement, in addition to other public benefits associated with the project.  Mr. Creech stated that he did not have any questions at this time. Mr. Creech requested a presentation from the Applicant’s landscape architect. Ms. Tarr Ellsworth provided a review relative to the landscape site plans which included all native plantings. Ms. Tarr Ellsworth stated that recently amendments were made to include additional plantings. Ms. Johnson stated that it would be a condition of approval of the special permit that a sustainable method of construction and landscaping be utilized. Ms. Johnson stated that the Town spends a lot of money annually to remove invasive species. Ms. Johnson and Ms. Tarr Ellsworth discussed landscaping. Ms. Johnson requested that Ms. Tarr Ellsworth utilize The Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist, latest edition, to specify plant species native to Middlesex County. Attorney Farrington requested that the Vascular Plants of Massachusetts: A County Checklist be provided on the Planning Board’s website to be utilized for future projects. Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of April 15, 2020 Mr. Creech requested clarification regarding an increase in the number of public off- street parking spaces. Mr. Russell stated that he had reached out to Conservation to see if spaces could be added in the 100’ river front, but did not received a response. Mr. Creech said that the additional Great Meadow visitor parking spaces should continue to be pursued by Mr. Russell at the upcoming meeting with the Conservation Commission. Mr. Creech questioned if members of the Planning Board had any additional comments. The following comments were provided.  Ms. Johnson provided a statement of input relative to the moderate affordable housing issue and agreed that the Applicant was providing many benefits through the project. Ms. Johnson questioned if the Applicant would consider providing mitigation to offset the costs of the additional housing units that would be required at a later date. Mr. Creech opened the floor for public comment. The following comments were provided.  A request that the Planning Board take a step back and consider approving this project as presented. Comments from members of the public during the last meeting were greatly appreciated but some comments provided are not matters of the Planning Board. For example, comments relative to traffic on Bryant Road, drinking by minors on conservation land, etc. It was further stated that the Applicant has provided a lot to the Town, for example removal of an old building, moderate housing unit, trail access, etc. Mr. Creech questioned if members of the Planning Board had any additional questions.  Mr. Hornig stated that there is nothing in the balanced housing bylaw that requires an affordable or moderate housing unit. Mr. Hornig stated that there have been reviews to add such requirement but has not been amended. The project as proposed is preferable to a conventional subdivision  Mr. Peters stated that he understands the economics of this project and greatly appreciates what the Applicant proposes. Mr. Peter further stated that he would like to see more affordability.  Mr. Creech stated that he recently visited another project by Seaver Construction. It was noted the discussions previously that vinyl siding will not be used. Mr. Creech opened the floor for final public comments.  A request for clarification as to whether these units, which are intended to be for sale can be rented or used for short term rental properties. There was a discussion between Mr. Creech and the Applicant regarding Short term rentals and the possibility of Investors buying units for this sole purpose. Mr. Seaver said that the Association documents would preclude Short Term Rentals. He pointed out that the Association could change that in the future with two-thirds support of the Association members. Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board vote to close the public hearing for the project at 840 Emerson Gardens Road. Richard Canale seconded the motion. The Minutes for the Meeting of April 15, 2020 Page 7 Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Robert Creech – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Richard Canale – yes). MOTION PASSED Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board vote to approve the Balanced Housing Special Permit Residential Development Application for the property at 840 Emerson Gardens Road, with conditions. Ginna Johnson seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Robert Creech – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Richard Canale – yes). MOTION PASSED Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board vote to allow the Chair of the Planning Board to sign the decision for 840 Emerson Gardens Road. Robert Peters seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (a roll call was taken: Robert Peters – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Richard Canale – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; and Robert Creech – yes). MOTION PASSED Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board vote to allow the Chair of the Planning Board to sign the decision for 147 Shade Street. Richard Canale seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (roll call: Richard Canale – yes; Richard Canale – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Robert Peters – yes; Robert Creech – yes). MOTION PASSED Board Administration 1. Board Member and Staff Updates Robert Creech provided a brief update regarding a recent training by the Town Manager and the Chair of the Select Board on utilizing Zoom for public meetings. 2. Minutes of April 7, 2020 The Planning Board reviewed the draft minutes of April 7, 2020. Members of the Planning Board discussed two suggested amendments to sections of the April 7, 2020 meeting minutes relative to the term amendment vs. edit. The Planning Board agreed to use edit rather than amendment. Ginna Johnson moved that the Planning Board vote to approve the minutes of April 7, 2020, as amended. Richard Canale seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 4-0-1 (Roll Call: Richard Canale – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Robert Creech – yes; Robert Peters – abstain). MOTION PASSED Adjournment Charles Hornig moved that the Planning Board vote to adjourn. Robert Peters seconded the motion. The Planning Board voted in favor of the motion 5-0-0 (Roll Call: Robert Peters – yes; Charles Hornig – yes; Richard Canale – yes; Ginna Johnson – yes; Robert Creech - yes). MOTION PASSED The meeting was recorded by LexMedia. Page 8 Minutes for the Meeting of April 15, 2020 The following documents used at the meeting can be found on the Planning Board website in Planning Board packets. 147 Shade Street:  Revised Plan Set dated 4.1.20 (7 Pages).  Revised Cover Letter dated 4.7.20 (5 Pages). 15-17 Fairland Street:  Revised Plan Set dated 3.5.20 (19 Pages).  Cover Letter dated 3.12.20 (1 Page).  Application dated March 6, 2020 (5 Pages). 53 Hancock Street:  Concept Plan dated 4.12.20 (1 Page).  Concept Plan shown at the 3.5.20 Meeting (1 Page).  Ginna Johnson driveway design sketch (2 Pages). 840 Emerson Gardens:  Revised Plan dated 4.5.20 (10 Pages).  Project Cover Letter dated 4.8.20 (12 Pages). Robert Peters, Clerk of the Planning Board