Town of Wellesley, Massachusetts

WELLESLEY PLANNING BOARD

REGULAR MEETING AND PUBLIC HEARINGS

MONDAY, JANUARY 28, 2008, 7:15 p.m.

GREAT HALL - TOWN HALL

Present: Mr. Frisardi, Ms. Donahue Mr. Chan, Mr. McCauley, Ms. Lehmann . Mrs. Jop. Mr. Brown.

Marc Stanton, Linda Sanderson, Maura Shoulkin, Mary Bowers, Steve Sykes, Ken Baer, John Buckley, Donna Buckley, Lance Tucker, Joachim Seemann, Sheila Tucker, William Noonan, Raymond J. Capobianco, Andrew Wrobel, Marian Wrobe, Harriet Warshaw, Jack O'Neil, Frank Holmes, Scott Engstrom, Bob Davis, Mary Ann Hill, Robert Corning, Peter Tamm, Holly Grace, Mark Paris, Denny Nackoney, Peggy Griffin, George LaRochelle, James Campbell, Michael Connolly, Christine Bellon, Julianne Ivey, Claire O'Shea, Megan Carroll, Julius Levin, Dan F. Gordon, Janie Batista, Chris Anne Banks, Mary K. Sullivan, Robert Sechrest, George Saraceno, Jim Gordon, Marlene O'Brien, Martin Kane.

1. Public Hearing - 576 Washington Street and 53 Grove Street - Wellesley Inn Project

Request for an amendment to Inclusionary Zoning Special Permit (request to extend Special Permit)

Chairman Frisardi opened the hearing and called upon Mr. Brown to summarize the notice given, which was done. Chairman Frisardi called upon the applicant for an explanation of the request.

Mr. Tamm of Goulston and Storrs, representing the owner WB Wellesley Inn, LLC, introduced project manager, Holly Grace, of Jones, Lang, LaSalle. Mr. Tamm indicated that the request is for an amendment of the previously amended special permit which currently expires in mid February 2008. He indicated that if the Board wished to have an update on the status of the project that could be given by Ms. Grace. The Board indicated that it wished to have an update.

Ms. Grace indicated that there were meetings with the Design Review Board (DRB) in November and December 2007. The project has not changed. DRB has suggested some minor design modifications that are being made. She said that an application will be made for site plan approval within approximately two weeks and with ground breaking this spring.

Chairman Frisardi asked for questions from the Board. There were none. He asked for questions from those in attendance.

Mr. Stanton asked if restaurants were included in this project. Mr. Tamm in consultation with Ms. Grace indicated that the approved PSI limits the size of any restaurant to approximately 1,500 square feet (size of a small coffee shop). Mr. Stanton asked about any changes to the infrastructure. The response was that this has not changed. Ms. Grace said water and sewer service are from Grove Street.

Ms. Donahue noted that those elements are part of the PSI permit not part of this discussion.

There being no further comment the Board moved, seconded and voted unanimously to close the public hearing and subsequently moved, seconded and voted unanimously to approve the Inclusionary Zoning Special Permit amendment so that the Special Permit will remain effective until February 23, 2009.

The Board moved, seconded and voted unanimously to approve the minutes of January 7, 2008.

3. Public Hearing - 27 Washington Street- Residential Incentive Overlay (RIO) and Lower Falls Village Commercial Districts - Special Permit Request

Chairman Frisardi opened the hearing and noted that the proposal involves a project at 27 Washington Street that includes construction of 150 apartment units at a residential density which takes advantage of the RIO Overlay District provisions. He explained the relationship between this hearing and the hearing to follow which concerns the Project of Significant Impact (PSI) application for the same land. He said that he would like to spend one hour on this hearing and then open the PSI hearing at 8:30 p.m. He said neither hearing would be concluded this evening.

Mr. O'Neil representing National Development and NDNE Lower Falls LLC (the applicant) introduced the members of the development team present. Using slides he presented the background of his company, projects completed, photographs and plans of the 27 Washington Street site showing the existing conditions and drawings in plan and perspective view of the proposed development, including the Town-owned right-of-way to the east of the site. He gave some of the history of this development mentioning two Town Development Review Team (TDRT) meetings, DRB meetings, consultations with the Wetlands Protection officials and the ad-hoc Town right-of-way committee. He mentioned that a favorable recommendation has been received from the DRB. He mentioned the status of the Stop and Shop interest in the site. Regarding the outstanding litigation he stated that the Land Court has established a timetable and that his company is required to report to the Court on progress toward project approval. He mentioned the Lower Falls Guidelines and the prerequisite criteria for a permit. These criteria are 1) a favorable DRB report; 2) contribution toward pedestrian and bicycle amenities and safety in accordance with Lower Falls Guidelines; 3) improvement of pedestrian access to the river; and 4) contribution to creation of a village center, town green or mini-park. He mentioned discussions which have been held with the residential neighborhood to the west of the site and the decision to increase the buffer on that side from five feet in width to 13 feet and the effort to maintain more existing vegetation along that area. He mentioned that site lighting will follow town standard lighting except that it will be "full cut off" meaning that light is directed down and will not spill onto adjacent areas.

Chairman Frisardi asked for questions from the Board.

Mr. McCauley asked about allowed density without RIO. The response was that RIO requires 1800 square feet of lot area per unit and the underlying Industrial District A requires 2500 square feet of lot area per unit (equaling approximately 120 dwelling units). The side is approximately 5.4 acres.

Chairman Frisardi entertained questions from the floor.

Mrs. Wrobel said that she favors the overall project but is concerned about neighborhood quality. She referred to a letter signed by 17 abutters. She asked for a show of hands to indicate the signers in attendance (about 14). She said although the signers favored the overall aims of the project they feel it fails to meet the goals of the Lower Falls zoning. She said the project is not in keeping with the neighborhood because of the scale of the westerly residential building. She said that the Town has adopted Mansionization controls to keep buildings in scale with their neighborhoods and this project is not consistent with that intent. She said there should be better year-round screening with 2 or 3 rows of trees at least 18 feet high. She stated concern with the impact on Columbia and Ledyard Streets.

Ms. Donahue noted that the DRB report made similar recommendations concerning screening.

Mrs. Wrobel said the project does not protect the riverfront because proposed buildings will be closer to the river than the existing buildings. She said there should be no building within 100 feet of the river. She felt there should be no asphalt within 200 feet of the river. She mentioned the potential for noise and dust and express concern about safety. She asked that the neighborhood be represented on the TDRT's.

Mr. Nackoney introduced himself as a member of the Wellesley Trails Committee. He said the westerly apartment building will be 45 feet high 77 feet from the river. He said the building will dominate the riverfront. He favored moving the buildings back from the river and graduating the building height - stepping back the upper floors.

Mr. Wrobel said that he is concerned with the quality of life in the neighborhood. He said that his house is dated 1740 or perhaps 1710. He found out that he has less rear yard than he thought. He said Mr. Grossman, who owned the land for many years, placed his fence inside his property line to allow the abutters on this side wider yards. He mentioned the screening that was done for the residential abutters at the Harvard Pilgrim project. He presented display boards showing the relative height of his house against the proposed building and a tree screen against the proposed building as it might appear at night to the residential abutters to the west. He said the neighborhood needs protection and asked the Planning Board for that.

Mr. Frisardi suggested that perhaps the westerly apartment building could be shifted by about 20 feet to the east.

Ms. Donahue asked about the grade differential across the property line (rear line of Columbia Street properties) on this side of the site. Mr. Paris said that it is approximately 6 - 7 feet.

Chairman Frisardi commented that the matter before the Board concerns the Residential Overlay District which allows a greater residential density than the underlying zoning (Industrial District A).

Mr. O'Neil said that he wishes to be a good neighbor and committed to work with the neighbors. He said they cannot remove a floor from the building. They don't want or need any variances.

Mr. J. Gordon asked where the application and plans can be seen. The response was at the Planning Board Office. He asked if the old railroad bridge can be used for vehicular access. The response was that it would not be.

Ms. Donahue suggested that plans be made available at the Library so that they could be seen more hours. Mr. Paris said that he would see to it.

Ms. Griffin said that there has not been enough dialog with the neighbors. She said that there has not been a perspective drawing done with a view from the neighborhood or the river side. She said that this site provides an opportunity for a good project. She feels this one is not.

Mr. Kane said that he trusts the Planning Board to look out for the neighborhood. He said the side streets are not wide enough to withstand the extra traffic. He suggested a lower building on the west side and a higher one on the east.

Ms. O'Brien asked about the process. She suggested that a shadow study be done. She favored removal of a story and questioned whether the design guidelines are being met.

There being no further comments Chairman Frisardi asked for Board discussion.

Mr. Chan suggested a site visit by the Board. Ms. Donahue agreed and mentioned the possibility of a balloon demonstration. (raising a lighter-than-air balloon to show the building height).

Mr. McCauley expressed concerns about the proximity of the buildings to the river. He wondered whether there might be flexibility in the setback requirement.

Ms. Lehmann agreed with the need for a site visit and that flexibility in the height limits should be explored.

There was some discussion with the applicant and his attorney, Mr. Davis, concerning the logistics and timing of the site visit. Subsequently, with the consent of the applicant, it was moved, seconded and voted to continue the hearing until 7:45 p.m. on Monday, February 4th in the Great Hall to discuss a site visit, to continue the hearing for the purpose of receipt of testimony on Monday, February 25th at 7:30 p.m. in the Great Hall of Town Hall, and that no votes would be taken on the 4th. This was announced to those in attendance.

4. Public Hearing - 27 Washington Street - Project of Significant Impact (PSI)

Chairman Frisardi opened the hearing and indicated that the purpose of the PSI review is to assess the impact of a project on seven town services water, sewer, storm drain, electric, refuse disposal and recycling, fire protection and public safety, traffic and pedestrian safety.

Mr. O'Neil indicated that he would make the PSI presentation but there would be no presentation of traffic and pedestrian safety since they are still working on that element of the process with BETA, the Town's traffic engineering consultant. He introduced Frank Holmes to make the presentation on the remaining elements.

Mr. Holmes summarized the considerations for water, and sewer. He mentioned the existing 24" gravity sewer line and a 20" force main sewer currently crossing the property which need to be relocated to a different route through the property. An easement will be provided for the new sewer alignment. He said that sewer generation will be less than 2 % of the pumping capacity of the Boulevard Road pumping station which serves this section of Town. He said there would be a new 6" fire service from Washington Street and a new 4" domestic water service. He said fire flow tests have been done at three hydrants in proximity to the site on Washington Street. All adequate with no need for supplemental pumps on the site. He said there will be three new hydrants on the site at locations specified by the Fire Department. He said there is no existing or proposed connection of storm drainage to the Town's system. All storm drainage will discharge to the river as it does now but there will be infiltration basins meeting current NPDESII (water quality) requirements. Currently there is no treatment.

Mr. Chan asked if the system is designed for the 100 year storm. The response was in the affirmative.

Ms. Donahue asked about irrigation. Mr. Paris said no landscaping is to be irrigated except the planter boxes along the street frontage.

Mr. McCauley asked about the capacity of the Boulevard Road pumping station. Mr. Saraceno from the Town of Wellesley Engineering Division briefly explained the system and the discharge point to Newton noting that there is plenty of capacity at that station.

Ms. Donahue noted that there was discussion with the City of Newton concerning sewer flows at the time of the discharge contract renewal. Mr. Saraceno said that if the Town exceeds 4 million gallons for 7 days the agreement could be changed but noted that the summer pumping is 5-600,000 gallons per day in the summer and 1.0 - 1.1 million gallons per day in the spring (ground water infiltrates the sewer lines during spring high water). Mr. Saraceno stated that Mr. Duggan, the Wellesley Water and Sewer Superintendent, has no capacity concerns with the Boulevard Station.

In discussion of the refuse and recycling element Mr. Saraceno clarified that the Town has no objection to refuse being brought to the RDF. He noted there are tipping fees (fees based on tonnage).

Mr. McCauley asked about water usage particularly summer peaks. The response from the applicant was that it has not been noted as a concern by Wellesley Public Works and since there are no lawn irrigation proposed the year-round usage should not vary markedly.

Chairman Frisardi asked about outfall monitoring and what happens if the on-site systems were to fail. The response was that they will monitor as required but this monitoring is strictly for pollutants. In a failure situation the runoff would be towards the river as it is today.

Ms. Donahue suggested that the applicant make written responses to the DPW report. The applicant agreed to this.

Mr. McCauley suggested that the applicant examine power saving equipment and fixtures.

Mr. Chan asked about the applicant's wetlands permitting for the proposed storm water outfall improvements. The response was that it has begun and a hearing with the Wetlands Committee is scheduled for Thursday evening.

A question was asked about the sequencing of the RIO and PSI hearings. The Board indicated they would be combined to facilitate the public discussion.

Subsequently, with the consent of the applicant, it was moved, seconded and voted to continue the hearing until 7:45 p.m. on Monday, February 25th in the Great Hall. This was announced to those in attendance.

5. PSI - 07-01 #978 Worcester Street Continuation of Public Hearing

The Board opened this hearing and continued it until February 25th with no testimony being taken. It was felt that the applicant should be notified that the petition should be withdrawn and resubmitted when it is ready.

6. Warrant Articles and Reports

The Board briefly discussed the articles with Mr. Sykes and Mr. Baer of the Advisory Committee. There was some interest expressed by Planning Board members that zoning be considered in the fall and not at the spring meeting which is principally for budget discussions and approval. It is felt that there is a more favorable consideration in the fall.

Mr. McCauley said that this is an appropriate matter to be considered by the By Law Study Committee.

Mrs. Batista said that if zoning is to be considered on a regular basis in the fall the time of Town Meeting is important. She felt that an early or mid November Town Meeting allows sufficient time for discussion and analysis a late September or October Town Meeting would not.

There was a brief discussion of the Zoning Bylaw Recodification project. Mr. Brown had prepared a memo on the topic which was discussed. The consensus was that it is an important project that should be brought forward soon. It was suggested that a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) be drafted.

Inclusionary Zoning Unit Density Waiver

There was a brief discussion of this article as it has been submitted for the warrant. The Board was not convinced it should be brought forward for the Annual Town Meeting.

Mr. McCauley said there needs to be an analysis of the impact of the density change. Mrs. Jop felt she could pull numbers together fairly quickly.

Wellesley West Gateway

Mr. Brown presented some options for closing out this project. A meeting will be scheduled with Donna Jacobs of Metro West. Mr. Chan will take the lead on this.

Ms. Donahue updated the Board on CPC projects. She said there are six applications one of which is the relocation of the Country Club building. A second important project is the Sprague Fields rehabilitation.

Next Meeting: Monday, February 4, 2008

Meeting Adjourned: 10:40 p.m.