HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-03-01-PB-min
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF MARCH 1, 2006
A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Office
Building, was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Manz with members Hornig, Canale, Harden and
planning staff McCall-Taylor, Schilt and Tap present. Mr. Galaitsis was absent.
Ms. McCall-Taylor observed that tonight was Mr. Harden's last meeting as a Planning Board member and
on behalf of the Town thanked him for his five years of service. Ms. McCall-Taylor presented him with a
proclamation from State Representative Jay Kaufman recognizing his years serving as a Planning Board
member and his involvement in Lexington's 2020 Vision process.
************************ ARTICLES FOR 2006 TOWN MEETING ************************
PUBLIC HEARING
Article 7, CD-7 to CD-13, 727 Marrett Road, Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide: At 7:45 p.m.,
Ms. Manz opened the public hearing on the petition of Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide to rezone
its property at 727 Marrett Road, the site of the Sheraton Lexington Hotel, from CD-7 to CD-13, Planned
Commercial Development. The development team was present, consisting of Mr. John Farrington,
attorney; Mr. Scott Thrun, Director of Real Estate Marketing, Starwood; Mr. John Fotiadis, architect,
Costas Kondylis and Partners Architects; Mr. Robert Weidknecht, landscape architect, Beals & Thomas,
Inc.; Mr. Alex Campbell, architect, Fruchtman Associates Architects.
Mr. Farrington briefly described the history of the hotel site. In 1989, the Sheraton made plans to renovate
and expand the hotel, but they were never implemented. Starwood purchased it from The Flatley
Company and now wants to demolish the old building and replace it with two smaller hotel buildings.
Starwood believes the new hotel complex would be an attractive community resource, which would
generate an estimated $1,000,000 in tax revenue beginning in 2008 with a yearly projected increase of
three percent. Building permit fees paid to the town would be about $200,000.
Mr. Thrun presented an overview of the service and lifestyle experience the two brand name hotels would
offer travelers. He said that: the buildings will be set lower into the ground and the interior height
reduced; the plans call for less disturbance to the knoll at the northwest end of the site than was called for
in the 1989 plans; a common green area between the hotels; "energized" interiors with links to the
outside; different exterior cladding materials; a connection (as yet undefined) to the Minuteman National
Historical Park; fewer parking spaces.
Mr. Weidknecht provided site overviews with an aerial photograph, cross-sections, and elevations as well
as renderings. He said that particular attention was paid to the view from historic Fiske Hill. The knoll
and a rock outcropping near the shared common area are treated as features. Mr. Fotiadis described how
the architecture and materials refer to the historical and cultural setting of the hotel: the "village green",
the stone and clapboard exterior of the Westin building, the quiet exterior lighting and views from the
open area into buildings with a restful aspect, and a water feature near each entry.
Planning Board Questions and Comments
The Planning Board observed that the plans responded in part to comments made in February but noted
that more blasting would be required as the buildings are set deeper into the site, so the cut and fill ratio
would change. They were assured that blasting would be minimized by "ripping" as much as possible.
Mr. Thrun outlined a conservative estimate of revenues the Town could expect from the project. The
Board urged the team to provide a detailed fiscal impact analysis.
Minutes for the Meeting of March 1, 2006 2
Mr. Hornig pointed out key figures in the application's narrative section that do not match those on the
plans. He was assured that would be rectified. Mr. Canale questioned the addition of some proposed non-
hotel uses. Mr. Farrington replied that they are for services that travelers are likely to want. Mr. Canale
said that these should be spelled out in the table of uses.
Visual Impacts: Asked where the building mechanicals would be, Mr. Weidknecht said that most would
be at grade and screened. As to the elevator shaft, there would be a five to six feet over-travel shaft.
Screening views of the hotel buildings from historical Fiske Hill and other points remained a concern of
the Board. Mr. Weidknecht noted that because of topography, the most effective screening would be to
plant trees within the Minuteman National Park property. Unfortunately this would invoke review of the
plans by multiple federal agencies within whose purview the activities involved in such planting would
fall. Even archaeologists could be called in. It was suggested that vegetation be planted within the Town
right of way bordering part of the site. The hotel windows will have non-reflective glass, another view
mitigation.
Traffic Impacts: Relative to traffic mitigation there were questions as to the status of mitigations that were
proposed as part of the 1987 CD-7 rezoning, such as. the payment to the town of $150,000 in
connection with intersection improvements at Marrett Road and Massachusetts Avenue and the yearly
reporting on the mitigation plan instituted at the hotel. The Flatley Company agreed that 34,000 square
feet of its land could be used for a drainage detention basin in connection with the intersection project.
Mr. Farrington reported that Starwood vans employees to and from Alewife station, has a car pool
program and encourages the use of bicycles. The Board asked for a mitigation plan. Mr. Farrington
replied that Starwood's transportation demand management (TDM) is ongoing in the form of transporting
its employees at its own expense and encouraging alternatives to single-occupant vehicles. Mr. Thrun said
it would like Lexpress to include the hotel on one of its routes. The Board urged them to begin talks with
Lexpress and reiterated its request for a TDM plan. Ms. McCall-Taylor noted that new Traffic Mitigation
Group should review the proposal.
Mr. Canale asked if the buildings would be energy efficient (green). The architects replied that they are
aware of green principles and use them as they deem appropriate.
Audience Questions and Comments
Mr. Nyles Barnert, Board of Appeals, asked if they had a traffic study done. The response was that the
study from 1989 pretty much covered conditions in the current proposal too. Mr. Weidknecht noted that
most of the cars using the driveway through the site constitute cut-through traffic. An emergency gate
system is proposed, which will stop this. Mr. Barnert also urged them to talk with the Minuteman
Vocational High School officials. Mr. Bunce replied that they work with the school. Students who are
interested in the hotel business work at the hotel as part of their program at Minuteman Tech.
Mr. John Frey, Tree Committee, asked for less cutting into the knoll to create the village green.
Ms. Sara Arnold, Transportation Advisory Committee, expressed the committee's desire to take part in
any TDM dialogue. She said that Liberty Ride goes to the hotel site using the main entrance. Working
the hotel into Lexpress's existing route structure is problematic because the bus is going in the "wrong"
direction as it goes by the hotel and making a turn to enter the site would be dangerous.
Ms. Dawn McKenna, Tourism Committee, said that the committee favors Starwood's proposal, but that
the two structures look like office buildings. The Tourism Committee is ready and willing to help the
architects design buildings better suited to a hotel. Speaking for herself, Ms. McKenna said that Starwood
Minutes for the Meeting of March 1, 2006 3
should agree to an annual payment to support Lexpress, in perpetuity and with an escalator clause.
Mr. John Rosenberg, 64 Bloomfield Street, spoke in favor of Starwood's proposal, saying that Lexington
needs this hotel space and has an opportunity here to get a brand-name facility, as well as substantial tax
revenue.
Ms. Manz closed the public hearing at 10:00 p.m.
************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS *************
SUBDIVISION OF LAND
PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING Murray Hills Preliminary Conventional Subdivision Plan, land off
Blueberry Lane, Winning Estates RT: Ms. Manz opened the public information meeting at 10:05 p.m.
Present were Ms. Phyllis Etsell, of Winning Estates LLC, applicant; Mr. Richard Lakutis, landscape
architect, Landtech Associates; Mr. H. Hamilton Hackney III, attorney; and Mr. David Romero, engineer,
Commonwealth Engineering. Two people signed the attendance list but a few more were in the audience.
Mr. Romero presented a four-lot conventional subdivision plan for land between 18 and 20 Blueberry
Lane, consisting of three new dwellings with access in the form of a dead-end road, with twenty-foot
wide pavement, in a 40-foot right of way off Blueberry Lane. One lot (Lot A) would remain vacant.
Utilities, which he described as 'typical systems', would be constructed in the right of way. Existing
structures and pavement would be removed and a restoration plan provided with the definitive plan.
Board Questions and Comments
Ms. Manz asked if the Lexington Conservation Commission had approved the road. Ms. Etsell replied
that the ANRAD process is currently underway. Mr. Canale asked why the applicant did not submit a
cluster plan. Ms. Etsell replied the applicant prefers a conventional development. Asked about intentions
for Lot A, Mr. Romero said that is open for discussion.
Other comments had to do with a narrow strip of land shown on the plan, which is forbidden by
Lexington's regulations; the lack of proof circles on the plan; drainage on and from the site. Staff
expressed concern about how drainage on the site, which is surrounded by wetlands, would be handled.
Mr. Hornig requested an easement for public access to the Winchester open space, but indicated that a
vehicle easement appeared impractical because of the terrain. The Board asked about provisions for snow
storage, tree retention and asked the development team to move the roadway to the edge of the property,
and to show the 200-foot resource area on the plan. It requested more information about the removal of
existing impervious surface.
Ms. McCall-Taylor reported that the Town Engineer finds the placement of pipe at depths over 17 feet
unacceptable. It is a safety hazard.
Board members agreed that with so many unanswered questions about the wetlands this subdivision plan
is difficult to evaluate.
Audience Questions and Comments
Mr. Justin Margolskee, 23 Peach Tree Road, testified that level of the groundwater in the neighborhood
is very high and stormwater does drain onto the site from Blueberry Lane. Mr. Stephan Voss, 20
Blueberry Lane, said that when he added onto his house, water was found within four inches of the
surface. He went on to describe the natural beauties of the land and said that, if preserved, it could be part
of an "emerald necklace" around the ponds and brooks in the area. He suggested that creating such an
amenity would be an excellent use of Community Preservation Act funds.
Minutes for the Meeting of March 1, 2006 4
The Board advised the applicant to withdraw the preliminary plan due to the lack of a wetlands
delineation and to conflicting reports about groundwater, then return with another that addresses the
concerns expressed by the Board, Town staff and the people present tonight. Mr. Hackney stated that the
applicant has responded to the points in the Planning Director's letter to Mr. Murray, dated January 27,
2006, about data missing from the preliminary submission. He indicated that he believes the Board has
enough information. Ms. Etsell said that the applicant prefers a vote of the Board.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted 3-1 (Mr. Hornig) to disapprove the Murray Estates
preliminary subdivision plan on the grounds that they had insufficient information of which to base a
decision.
Ms. Manz closed the information meeting at 11:00 p.m.
****************** SPECIAL PERMIT WITH SITE PLAN REVIEW *******************
Jefferson Union Conversion ,31 Fletcher Avenue, Stop Work Order Imposed: Ms. McCall-Taylor
reported that the Building Commissioner has issued a stop work order on the demolition of the Jefferson
Union Building on Fletcher Avenue, as the amount of demolition exceeded that permitted. The Historical
Commission is considering imposing a two-year moratorium on permits on the applicants.
Asked if the Board's Special Permit could be rescinded, as preserving the building was an important
factor in the Board's decision on the project, Ms. McCall-Taylor said she would ask Town Counsel.
************************ ARTICLES FOR 2006 TOWN MEETING ************************
Article 4, Inclusionary Housing: The Board reviewed a draft of the Inclusionary Housing amendment
motion, dated February 26, 2006. A definition of "unit" was added along with other changes. On a motion
duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve, pending staff's incorporation of the changes made
tonight, putting the document on the Town's web page.
Article 7, Rezone 727 Marrett Road, Starwood: The Board informally discussed their reactions to
Starwood Hotels and Resorts' most recent preliminary site development and use plan for the Sheraton
Hotel site. The size, especially the height of the two hotel buildings, was a concern for all, as was the
lackluster architecture and absence of a traffic mitigation package from the developer. But the need for a
good hotel in Lexington was acknowledged, and hope expressed that site design and architecture more
sensitive to the area, especially to the National Historical Park, would be forthcoming.
Ms McCall-Taylor remarked that the Planning Board's primary concern should be land use and zoning.
****************** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE *******************
The Board agreed to meet at 6:00 p.m. on Monday, March 27, in the Planning Department office, prior to
the first night of Town Meeting.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 12:00 a.m.
Richard Canale, Acting Clerk