Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-03-02-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF MARCH 2, 2005 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Cary Memorial Hal, was called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Chairman Kastorf with members Davies, Galaitsis, Harden, Manz and planning staff McCall-Taylor and Tap present. ************************ ARTICLES FOR 2005 TOWN MEETING ************************ Article 4, Rezoning of Battle Green Inn Property, CB to CD, Public Hearing: Mr. Kastorf opened the public hearing on the property owner's petition to rezone the Battle Green Inn site at 1720 Massachusetts Avenue. (Lot 36A on Assessors Map 48). There were 40 people in the audience. The development team included: Mr. Eric Shapiro, the applicant, Mr. Arthur Klipfel and Ms. Gwen Noyes, Oaktree BGI, LCC; Mr. John Farrington, attorney; Mr. Erik Rhodin, Architect, Line Company; Mr. Peter Gammie and Mr. William Carlson, engineers, Design Consultants. Mr. Farrington briefly described the process the Battle Green Inn rezoning proposal has been through thus far. The development team has met with and incorporated suggestions from the Planning Board, Historic Districts Commission, Design Advisory Committee, and other town bodies, public and private over the past several months. He indicated that Oaktree Development has much experience with this type of project. Mr. Shapiro indicated that the team now wishes to focus on the future of Lexington Center and the vitality that The Commons in Lexington would bring. He provided information about the history of previous residential use in Lexington Center and listed the positive aspects of the proposal relative to parking spaces provided, the potential number of school age children, projected revenue to the town, the "green" building materials and other environment-friendly aspects of the building. The team met with the Selectmen regarding mitigation of the impacts of the development. The Selectmen deferred to the Planning Board to negotiate them. The team offers $100,000 "seed money" for center improvements and four dwelling units to sell according to State affordability guidelines. Mr. Shapiro noted that the project couldn't support donating the units to the town. Mr. Peter Gammie, engineer of Design Consultants, gave a brief overview of the site utilities. He noted that the existing site has essentially 100 percent impervious while the proposed building offers ten percent pervious surfaces. In order not to endanger trees at the south lot line, they altered an aspect of the drainage system. The system as designed exceeds State Stormwater Management standards. Mr. Carlson presented the results of traffic studies, including an additional study requested by Selectman McKenna at the February 16 Planning Board meeting, regarding traffic from the high school at the end of the school day. That study showed 30 percent less traffic in the study area than at the a.m. and p.m. peak traffic hours. In sum, Mr. Carlson indicated that the project would have minimal impact on traffic at the intersection of Waltham Street with Massachusetts Avenue and with Vine Brook Road. Regarding moving entry/egress for the site to Waltham Street, Waltham Street carries only half the amount of traffic that Massachusetts Avenue does. During peak traffic hours, trips into or out of the site would be minimal. Fewer drivers would have to "go around the (Winthrop Road-Vine Brook Road) block" to get onto Waltham Street from The Commons. One (net) on-street parking space would be lost. Architect Erik Rhodin presented revised plans and compared them to earlier drawings. As Mr. Shapiro had said in his opening remarks, the building has been "shrunk" by nine percent. Existing site coverage is 98 percent, proposed is 79 percent. The partial fourth floor has been moved away from Massachusetts Avenue. The south building façade has been moved twelve feet back from adjacent Vine Brook Road lot lines. Mr. Rhodin stressed the high quality of the materials going into the building, indicating that it will be a structure that Lexington can be proud of. Minutes for the Meeting of March 2, 2005 2 Question and Comments Planning Board: Responding to Mrs. Manz question, Mr. Klipfel indicated that the configuration of the offer of four affordable units is yet to be defined. He suggested using the services of Mr. Peter Farrow, an expert in inclusionary affordable housing and offered to meet with Town officials in this regard. The Board agreed to proceed this way but Mr. Kastorf informed the development team that the Board is starting from the position that the units should be gifted to the town. Mr. Harden brought up the subject of what undoubtedly would be a very difficult demolition and construction period. Mr. Rhodin responded that they have contacted a "high-end" contractor experienced in staging construction for downtown sites. Building elements would be partially fabricated off-site to minimize the number of truck deliveries. Arrangements would be made to rent parking spaces and the alley beside Lemon Grass, and for police details when needed. It is an expensive operation, he noted. Mr. Kastorf commented that the resolution of the issue the Health Director brought up –the down gradient leaching of oil, possibly from a Battle Green Inn heating oil tank since removed – must be included in the final Preliminary Site Development and Use Plan submittal. Town Officials and other Committees: Mr. Eric Brown, Design Advisory Committee read a letter expressing the general support of his committee. Ms. Sara Arnold, Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC), expressed TAC's hope that the developer will make an annual contribution to Lexpress in perpetuity with an escalator factor. Mr. Kastorf commented that the nexus for requiring TDM mitigations of the Battle Green Inn developer is not as clear as it was for other developments such as AvalonBay's Lexington Square. Mr. Richard Canale, the Town's MAPC representative, indicated that the proposal embodies important "smart growth" principles, which favor redeveloping sites instead of using undeveloped land and are designed for sustainability. Bringing residential uses back could help revitalize the center and if the dialogue with the community continues, and the proposal meets specific local criteria. Economic diversity in housing will be enhanced. In response to Board of Appeals member Nyles Barnert's question about the types of businesses expected in the retail space, Mr. Shapiro said that any use allowed in the CB zone could lease space. Mr. Fred Johnson, Lexington Center Committee, indicated that the committee would not comment until after this public hearing. He voiced his personal support for the Article 4 as a resident of a center neighborhood. Speaking for Mr. David Williams, of the Trustees of the Public Trusts, and referring to the mechanism for using the potential donation of $100,000 for center improvements, he outlined the Trustees' offer to establish a "Lexington Center Fund" with an oversight committee composed of representatives of the Center Committee, Board of Selectmen, Design Advisory Committee, The Commons condominium association, and of the neighborhoods adjacent to the Center. Mr. Kastorf asked for copies of the draft proposal for the Planning Board and the development team and noted that should the oversight committee be established, it should include a representative of the Planning Board as well. Comments from the Audience: Mr. Richard Michelson, of Michelson's Shoes, spoke against the proposal, indicating the site should remain a motel to encourage tourism; the construction period with its disruption of traffic and parking will Minutes for the Meeting of March 2, 2005 3 be hard on existing businesses; future expansion by the Cohoe's property owner could be problematic. A Vine Brook Road resident asked why the penthouses were moved away from the Massachusetts Avenue side of the building and closer to vine Brook. Mr. Rhodin indicated that they had not been moved any closer to Vine Brook Road but were closer to Waltham Street and farther from Massachusetts Avenue. Mr. Eric Zahn asked when a 3-D model would be available. Mr. Rhodin indicated that once the plans are final, a model could be assembled, but it would not be possible to have it before Town Meeting. Responding to a question from Marilyn Alwan, 4 Raymond Street, Mr. Rhodin indicated that most of the mechanical apparatus for the building would be within the structure. None would be visible from the street. Other comments from the audience had to do with traffic, zero lot line setbacks, the size of the parking spaces under the building. Mr. Shapiro announced the schedule for, and invited everyone to, more informational meetings that the development team would host over the next couple of weeks. The hearing was closed at 10:35 p.m. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************* RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS Grandview Meadows Comprehensive Permit application, DEBCO Properties: The Board reviewed and approved a draft letter to the Board of Appeals, dated March 2, 2005, regarding DEBCO Properties' proposal to build ten to twelve rental dwelling units on Grandview Avenue under Chapter 40B. Board members agreed that the number of units proposed is excessive and that Mr. Burns's application does not contain enough information about impacts and their mitigation in the proposed project. The Board agreed to convey to the Board of Appeals that if Mr. Burns wishes to submit a different configuration, with perhaps six units, and with sufficient data and backup documentation that the impacts can be properly mitigated, the Planning Board would be happy to work with the Appeals Board in reviewing such an application. The Board noted that a preliminary subdivision plan must be submitted where a subdivision of land is involved and that Mr. Burns's previous subdivision plan for the lots on Grandview Avenue, which he is using to fulfill that requirement in this application, was for three single-family dwellings, and does not suffice for the current, much larger, proposal The letter also described a number of problematic issues – common open space, parking, roadway configuration, emergency vehicle access - which the Board of Appeals would need to rule on if it decides to grant a Comprehensive Permit. ****************** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE ******************* Non-Zoning Articles: The Board asked the staff to solicit from the proponents of a number of non-zoning articles, any material regarding their warrant articles that they want the Planning Board to review before it takes a position or issue an opinion. The Board indicated that it may wish to comment on Articles 6, 7, 8, 20, 21 and 22. The members agreed to discuss them at the March 23 meeting. Minutes for the Meeting of March 2, 2005 4 ************************************* REPORTS ************************************* Article 22, Fast Track Auction Resolution: Mr. Richard Canale, the Town's representative to the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, reported on what he understood to be the current situation regarding the Fast Track Auction bill. Ms. Jill Stein would like to come before the board again to discuss the issues, but the Board members indicated that due to time constraints that would not be possible. ******************************* EXECUTIVE SESSION ******************************** At 11:05 p.m., by individual poll of the Board – Mr. Galaitsis, Mr. Harden, Ms. Manz, Mr. Davies, Mr. Kastorf – it was voted to go into Executive Session to discuss litigation against the Town and not to return to open session. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 11:40 p.m. Wendy Manz, Clerk