 right now welcome technical difficulties my own this evening welcome to the May 18th 2020 meeting of the Arlington Redevelopment Board being held remotely in accordance with Governor's March 12th 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law certain chapter 30a section 20 mass general law public comments will be accepted during public comment periods as designated in the agenda public can email or provide any other written comment at any time as we've done the last few weeks during public comment period I will unmute you and she and turn on your camera so that the spotlight will be on you find that this is a good way to ensure that your point is fully heard and appreciated by all the members of the audience and the board that will move through the public comment period and we have a difficult agenda or long agenda this evening although some things have changed in the last couple of hours so I'm going to take things out of order for now unless board members say otherwise back up for a second here just make sure we have all the members of the board here I see Gene Benson just go ahead and raise your hand when I call your name please Gene Benson David Watson Ken Lau Rachel Zimbari I see we have Jenny rate on Jenny other and Erin Zorko so good perfect excited happy to see all of you welcome back so we got a call earlier this evening late this afternoon from Bob and Essie who is the attorney on the Massachusetts Avenue project bear with me for a minute here to bring up the agenda the agenda should be on the screen right now that I'm sharing is it not there I can't scroll down to see the docket number and things just sorry I'm going to interrupt for a second if that's okay oh we need to schedule future meetings before we can do anything with any hearing so you need to talk about the schedule first all right so in that case we're gonna move to agenda item number two which is discussion and vote for meeting schedule for June July and August Jenny can you let us know what a meeting schedule looks like for those months and we can go ahead and vote on those things excuse me mr. Chairman yes Dawn I was wondering it could you enable my record button it says I have to ask the host I will have to have Jenny do that but that's fine thank you very much the meeting schedule June 1st June 15th July 6th July 20th August 3rd and August 17th just looking ahead at June June 15th is now the date for annual town meeting to start with a rain date of June 22nd or June 29th so we we we will meet and adjourn to town meeting on June June 15 but that's not a date that we can do more than that so so that's that's probably our biggest thing to talk about is just I would like to propose June 8th as potentially the either of the only or the second meeting date in June and then I'll let you talk about July and August I'm okay with June 8th as a meeting date any other board members will comment on that it's fine with me Rachel yeah I'm good all right so take a vote go ahead Andrew it looks I have on my calendar there's a public forum on sustainable transportation that night at 7 no Jenny is shaking her head yeah we won't be having a forum that evening we are planning virtual engagement events for the sustainable transportation plan but that evening is no longer that was when we thought we would be able to have a meeting in person we're not we're not but there will be we will make an announcement about when those engagements will occur but it won't be Junie okay I think it'd be fine with adding that meeting if somebody wants to make a motion so motion second all in favor of adding that meeting I'll just do about roll call Ken I gene yes David hi Rachel hi yes so there we go in June 8th is that gonna be at 7 p.m. that'll be at 7 p.m. yeah we'll continue meetings at 7 p.m. so long as we're gonna be doing them remotely if and when we return to in-person meetings we can revisit the time of those so the meeting that was set for June 1st and 15th is change of 8th right Jenny is June 1st still a meeting date I mean you didn't take it off so I think you're still meeting on June 1st and you've added June 8th and June 15th is annual 10th meeting all right part of the reason we're adding June 8th is expect to continue some hearings this evening that will need to be discussed shortly so now go ahead Jenny do you wish to keep the July and August meetings as they are right now that's headed next yes we can revisit taking those off the calendar at some future date we can do that administratively I'm okay with taking them off just not adding them without consent to the other board members what I wanted to mention is that in July at some point we will have a joint meeting with the select board again I don't yet have the date of that but as you recall from the conversation back in February we said that we would have some sort of joint planning meeting in July so when I have a better sense of that date I'll provide it to you great okay all right thank you so that that should take care of that agenda item Jenny unless there's anything else there that needs to be talked about recovered no thank you okay good good so moving on as I said I'm gonna be taking the public hearings a little bit out of order this evening the director can get into this a little bit she received a call from Bob Nessie who is the attorney for the applicant for 882 892 Mass Ave who apparently after hearing the outcry over the proposed plans to put it one way and taking these things into consideration has chosen to ask us for a continuance and both literally and figuratively go back to the drawing board I think that's wise I think both the board and the public probably would have had a lot to say about that potential design particularly the removal of local businesses which is a really unfortunate thing for the town and certainly not the way I want to see things redeveloped typically my mind things should be left better than they started and not take a step back even in the name of so-called progress I do like the idea of the housing that they were headed toward I think that one bedrooms and studio apartments are lacking in town they can contribute to the housing stock without contributing to a drain on services we've heard complaints about I'm happy that they were including affordable housing in those plans but again I'm not happy that there was a displacement of four local businesses several of which serve much more than just that adjacent neighborhood one of which particularly offers a lot to the town without naming names I think we can read between the lines so I will allow the other members of the board to chime in on this we'll go down the line but to the members of the public I will say that this is an occasion where I think we are all on the same page about where a project was headed and I'm hoping that the applicant can come back with something more appropriate for that location and communicated through Jenny that's some additional talks are needed as those plans come forth to meet those goals so what we'll be doing is voting on a continuance to a future date which maybe that June 8th date it may be a date in July we'll get back to Jenny on that excuse me but Ken I'll give you the first crack at that well I concur with you as far as postponing this hearing but since we already we I think I would speak like a street for all the board members but I spent quite a bit of time reviewing what's been submitted and I think I would like to share some of my thoughts on what's going on there so that they have an idea what we're looking at as they go back to the boards so they say so if you don't mind if you don't if you don't mind you spending a few minutes just talking about in a brief general way not I'm not gonna get specifics I think you touch base you already touched on yeah I'm just gonna interrupt you for one second just do need to formally open the public hearing which is talking number 3625 so that's open go ahead Ken all right I totally agree with you that the proportions of the commercial space and the housing is is not the right proportion they should be more commercial space on the ground floor I think I wouldn't mind talking to the other board members in the hearing saying like we I think I'm willing to look at maybe reducing some of the parking so that they could be more ground floor commercial space and eliminate also eliminating some of the ground for units which I don't think are that desirable facing the back of a parking lot those are some of the things that I was looking at also I want them the architect look at the way they view this building on the lot it's actually a corner lot and their side view the side elevation facing a lot of rockland have looks like a side view to like an alley or something it's not a front elevation I think they should look at that more closely since it's at a pre-predominant corner that you'll see go either way on mass F and I think the simple move that they just take those units that's there and flip it and have the kitchen and bathroom against the stairs and have the living room facing out to an exterior wall which they can allows them to put more windows in little things like that and also when it when they resubmit I strongly suggest that they should show show the site plan with the surrounding buildings it's kind of deceptive but there's a huge huge building right behind them off to the right if you look at it from mass staff and it's only like four or five feet from the property line I mean did they block windows or light or something we don't you know we don't really know how that works in conjunction and I think it'd be a better way of viewing the elevation with the other elevations of the street including the single family houses behind it so we know how it steps back and so forth it's just sticking in more context it would be better they should also show any mechanical equipment on the roof the elevator override they're not showing any trees out in the street I know there's trees out there maybe not as many as we want but you know we wouldn't mind talking about addings and trees they're putting in a a re-putting in some sidewalk and a curb cut I think we also should look into relocated a curb cut so it's safer the curb cut right now is so far back in that corner that as you're driving I guess inbound on Mass Ave and you and you had the curb cut any car that's parked on the street on Mass Ave blocks that view you don't see anything so I think we should take a little more time and look at how we place that curb cut there's all a little small stuff there but I think that was the major stuff I want to talk about to share with them so that at least when they go back to the drawing boards they can you know take some of this consideration if you want to thanks Ken appreciate that and Jenny if there's an opportunity for any of the members of the board to meet with the applicant appropriately as they work on these revisions I think that would probably be welcome and wise Jean did you have anything you wanted to share on this before we go to next step here I'll just be very brief I had many many concerns about the project also some of which both of you articulated I think and the only two big things that I'll add is I was unclear about whether they were going to end up narrowing the sidewalk or not and I would have concerns if they were going to narrow the sidewalk so that's one piece and the second is I think when they redo the project they should redo it so they have enough landscape then usable open space I agree I also just will add I agree that I didn't seem as if there was enough commercial space and I would like to see them get a parking reduction in exchange for additional affordable units which we have the authority to do under the zoning bylaw great I would like to tie those two together at least have them consider it I'd also like them to consider doing much better in the lead than they're proposing I'd also like them to consider a solar roof and I'd like them to consider at least one electric charging station in the parking lot David go ahead those are all great comments from Jean and I'll endorse them in addition I'll just echo what the others have said that the loss of commercial space particularly where they were businesses serving the surrounding neighborhood was unfortunate and I'd really like them to think hard about how to maintain if not increase the amount of commercial space available on that block in a form that meets modern needs since as currently configured it's it's a very it's a much older building with an older layout I'd also like them to be sure when they come back that they have paid closer attention to our zoning bylaw and I won't get into into specifics on that but I think there were a number of things that were not clearly in compliance with our bylaw and potentially things they were looking for relief on that we may not be able to grant them relief on as well they missed the mark with bicycle parking both as to the amount of bicycle parking and from what I could see the racks that they were proposing were also not in compliance with with our our zoning bylaw and and the bike parking guide I was also unclear to me what was going on with the sidewalk with and that that's a very important aspect so I will repeat that one as Jean covered and when they do think about about rebuilding or redesigning rather if there's any way to incorporate any aspects of that existing structure or or some of the look and feel on the ground level of that structure as it exists in the neighborhood now that that might be an interesting approach those those are my general comments thanks David Rachel go ahead I certainly won't believe or any of the comments that my colleagues have made I I agree that there are a lot of challenges with the project is proposed specifically the lack of real usable commercial space in a supposedly mixed use development I just also add to what what they've stated that I'd really like them to take a look at the materials proposed specifically including much more articulation than they had proposed in the form of the flat panels and very flat facade materials in their initial proposal thanks yeah I think I think these are all good points I should ask is the applicant on Bob are you here this evening I don't see your name in the list here I have to take that as a no any of these calling users etc yeah I don't see anyone I don't see anyone in the list but I would I would really like to see transcript of these comments however might be delivered to attorney in Essie so that he and his applicant can understand where the board is coming from you know I am still going to allow public comment this is a public hearing but you know I thought it was important that sort of these general comment without without knowing what the plans look like when they come back in whatever that may be we can at least give them some guidance from here as to what might be a more successful welcomed project and to me as I said before the idea of redevelopment is taking something that exists in improving it and just because it's new doesn't always mean it's an improvement and the same token just because told doesn't mean it needs to be kept but in a lot of ways this this seems like a step back for the neighborhood for that corner of Mass Ave and for the folks that live and work there and I would like to see something done about the commercial space that's being taken away and there's there's not much there's nothing the ARB can do as far as far as private contractual relationships between the landlord and the tenants that are there aside from voice our displeasure and make that known it's it's really disappointed to see things taken away you look at the mixed-use applications that have come before us over the last several years and the three that have ultimately come to fruition we've officially voted on four three have actually been developed there in various stages of construction and we could disagree on aesthetics but each of those is taken truly blighted property and markedly improved it whether adding commercial space or additional housing options or affordable housing and not taken anything away from what's already there and I think that's an important thing to keep in mind as we explore this option you know mixed use has been in place since 2016 but it's not something that's been used a whole lot in the last four years to really get anywhere and the intent when it was put in place was certainly not to take things away Bob I'm told that you're on I had trouble getting in I'm sorry okay but I am on yeah my position was going to be that I was going to be asking that the public hearing be continued we have a had a lot of comments come in over the weekend and we had comments from planning as well that was included in the planning department reports that we got on Friday we'd like to take a look at those issues see what we can do to address some of those issues so my intent at the outset was to request that the public hearing itself be continued okay it seems to me that there's been discussion while I couldn't get on that my my fault not yours okay already about the project so Andrew can you tell me where we are on that we talking about continuing the public hearing or just what are we doing at this point hearing I have opened the hearing I let it be no you requested a continue all right okay I think what would what would be wise is for you and your client to work with Jenny yep sitting down with Kim or Rachel yeah I'm having trouble hearing you Andy could you speak up yeah and I certainly am not adverse to that okay we you know can I make a few comments or should I not do that I'll leave it to your discretion say again at my discretion okay we are in a B2 zone for sure okay it is mixed use and I understand from comments coming in that they folks would like to see even planning would like to see more of a commercial component with respect to the to the building and we're certainly looking at that with respect to whether the building comes down or doesn't come down I think importantly we should know that we have a phase three contamination study and that phase three contamination study basically has told us where the contamination had emanated from it had emanated from the site and it crossed mass have now when we take the entire building down we're going to go to phase four now we can't go to phase four I don't believe until we take the entire building down so that we can take away any of the remnants of the contaminated soil that remain at the property from that chlorine contamination that's one of the reasons why we're proposing that the building come down the there was an EDR case back in 1988 that talked about building on top of the existing retail stores but at that point in time they're well there may not well have been a contaminated site as there is now the client has spent extensive monies with respect to dealing with the contamination issue and as I have indicated the only way that we effectively can do that in our opinion and I just want to make this clear is to take the building down in its entirety and put up a new building we we have comments from folks who are indicating that they want to see more of a commercial unit commercial component and we're certainly willing to consider that but we also would want the board to consider the fact that the B2 zone there is an orphan zone okay because where there's other zones around it right next door to the B2 zone is an our zone a high our zone with four floors I believe or perhaps even more of 33 residential units so one of the thoughts we had in terms of taking the building down and putting up residential units was that we would be consistent with the character of that building next door the I know there have been comments from tenants about the idea that they are being compelled to leave and and and the like the information I have from my client is to the contrary the information I have from my client is that that is not the case at all that all of the leases that exist at the property have expired and indeed she has taken no steps to evict anyone she couldn't do that anyone now would be corona crisis the emergency crisis but she's not even doing that and what she is doing is she's been dealing with tenants existing tenants for the purpose of talking with them about coming up with alternative space in other buildings that the pescudo family owns in allington so those those talks are ongoing I know that some of the issues that and they will continue to to be ongoing she will do the best she can to try to accommodate these folks but again for folks to say that she's evicting people or that they have a lease that goes on for the next 10 or 15 years that simply is not true she's given me information on all of the tenants and she's assured me that the leases on all the tenants are ended at this point we take cognizant of the of the comments made about buffering about the buffer between the property in the residential property to the rear we accept the comments on that we also accept the comments on the 20-foot side yard and we're looking at that as well that's something we're focusing on the reason we want the 22 units is because we feel that the 22 residential units are more marketable from the point of view of the owner but also the governor himself has indicated that we should have more residential units in the town the converting the property to residential units and some with some commercial component as well will be a furtherance of that objective on the part of the governor and I think also a furtherance of some objectives on the part of the town as well that's the reason we're coming in with the idea that we would like to have 22 units three of which would be smaller units okay studio type units the again we're going to go to school on the comments that have been made okay and come back at the next hearing date with changes with respect to our plans but we're hoping that the board is not going to be asking us to completely redraw our plans with respect to the concept that we're putting forth in terms of a residential component and as well as a commercial component understanding that there'll be some comments and some pushback with respect to more commercial components as far as the building is concerned but again I just want to leave with the board the idea that we would very much like to pursue the plan the the concept of the plans we have proposed I certainly would have no problem meeting with kin or Rachel Andrew whoever you suggest okay in that regard for the purpose of going over the plans getting feedback as I've done with the outward house okay and coming back with something that perhaps makes sense for the members of the board and makes sense for the members of the town as well that basically is where I'm coming from at this point but I just ask you all to keep an open mind with regard to what we're proposing I don't think we're proposing anything that is alien to the neighborhood okay I think that and again I'm going to suggest to you that the B2 zone is an anomaly the B2 zone is an orphan it shouldn't even be where it is okay and unfortunately what happened years ago is town meeting did what they did and they resumed that area and they left the B2 zone hanging out there by its fingertips okay so we're dealing with that at this point in terms of trying to trying to come up with a proposal that makes sense for the town and makes sense for the board that's pretty much what I wanted to say without getting into details as far as the plan our plans and the like okay thanks Bob and I look forward to uh working with you and having other members of the board and uh staff input yeah and you know me I want to work with the board okay I don't want to be uh you know uh antagonistic to the board in terms of what they're looking for as well okay so I'm looking for some guidance too at this point that's sort of looking for yeah and Bob I appreciate that thanks for calling it and thanks for the things that you had to say yeah yeah sure that you get some sort of idea where the board is coming from on this and that you can all right okay get access to this I see Jean's hand up and then just because this is a public hearing you know I think we will be we would have been continuing it any way based on what we saw earlier so I'm glad to have you come in and tell us that this is going to change drastically I hope yeah I see Jean's hand up I'm gonna let Jean speak I'll give the other members of the board one more opportunity to speak yes thank you I'll be briefed one of the things I didn't say before because I didn't know you were on Bob and I'm glad you mentioned the site remediation because I was looking for I've read a lot of the materials that have been submitted to DEP about the site and what what I'm hoping that you can provide next time is a proposed timeline to get through phase four and get a close out of that so we can see what that's going to be and how that will mesh with your proposed timeline for the I guess demolition and construction of a new building there that's it okay any other board members wish to speak unmuted Mr Chairman Chairman we haven't yeah we haven't opened it up to the public yet and if we do we need people to raise their hand to get called on I will let everyone speak I will turn your video on so you the spotlight will be on you but I just asked you to bear with us until the board has finished with its piece with Mr Nessie so if any other board members have something to say please go ahead and all right um Andrew I'd be I'd be willing to sit down with Bob and his client to review interim plans if he wishes good like that thank you yeah okay okay Rachel David Jean anything else all right so hopefully I know we have a lot of other people in the room this evening so there's a little bit of a learning curve as we move through this size there is an option on your screens if you're using a video option to raise your hand please do so we'll unmute you turn on your your camera and allow you to speak I'll go through as I see hands up if you're on the phone I'm not completely familiar with how that works but I know there's a way to go to raise your hand with a the keypad will allow you to speak I know there's a lot of controversy over this project I think you've heard that the board is unhappy with what's been put forth and that the applicant is going to change their plans so I'd ask that you not respond to what you've already seen necessarily and not to go down the rabbit hole of speculation this is that kind of meeting where that can run rampant but be respectful you know remember that we're still on video we're still in a public hearing you're still being recorded and I hope you'll behave yourselves that's the way you would in a public meeting so Steve Revolac I'm going to allow you to go first go ahead Steve hello Mr. Chair Steve Revolac 111 Sonnyside Avenue I'd like to concur with the number of the comments that you yourself made particularly I think it would be nice to retain you know a full first floor of commercial space I'm also heartened by you know something that Mr. Enise said earlier you know we're next door to this building is a five floor 33 unit apartment building and to be perfectly honest when I saw the when I first saw the proposal I thought cool this is something just like the something I wanted to see something like the apartment next to it and I'm really glad to hear that Mr. Enise is trying is his client is considering something along you know similar massing in that would complement it so overall I you know I am glad to see a proposal for more housing particularly single you know single bedroom and studios because we I mean we have a real need for housing in general and you know that type in particular is lacking in town thank you thank you Steve uh Carl Wagner is up next give me a second to unmute you Carl go ahead all right hi I'm Carl Wagner I live in Arlington I uh just wanted to hopefully you can hear me and see me getting a little alert yeah I know you said your name could you just and that you live in Arlington we just need your address for the record please sure I'm Carl Wagner I live 30 Edge Hill Road in Arlington I appreciate the words that the board members have made concerning the the proposed development and I just like to add that there are a lot of people here and they're here I think because the concern is looking at the building across the street from this proposed development people are concerned that they're going to get something like that and I know that this board feels rightly that they they did a lot to improve the building across the street the one next to AHS but people feel that that is not what we were hoping when 2016 town meeting approved the the the mixed-use law and and I really think people listening to this today should ask should the mixed-use law be changed if we're going to get units like this Arlington needs more support for our retail our existing businesses Arlington needs retail that people around those those businesses can go out and get food from or buy something like a hardware item Arlington doesn't need more luxury apartments and condominiums that raise the average rent for people and increase the property taxes for everybody I guess that's my comment thank you thank you all right Christian Klein hang on Christian go ahead Christian you should be thank you Christian Klein 54 Newport street I just want to confirm that written comments are going to be forwarded at this stage to the developer for inclusion they will be they've been made part of the record they're available on our website and we'll be sure to give them to turning uneasy perfect thank you very much thank you for those written comments as well Christian I thought those were well thought out thank you Jim Kempf go ahead Mr Kempf okay I'm unmuted there you're unmuted yes Jim Kempf at 900 mass abs so just a couple doors down from this proposed project I really like a lot of the comments from the board members and the last speaker last couple speakers but I'd also like to point out a couple of points that I haven't heard much about one 22 units single units we're talking 22 cars I see a plan with a big parking lot in there that's a lot of traffic we're adding at a corner where we have hundreds of high school kids every morning lining up to cross that street and go to school there oddly maybe it's somewhere in the plan it's 85 pages long I don't know but in the drawings of the building I don't even see the bus stop anymore that's a highly used bus stop by kids at the Gibbs kids at the middle school kids coming to the high school you know daily people going to the grocery store and that's I think an issue another key thing that really bothers me a bit is that we're building all the way to the sidewalk whenever these new buildings go up it's the same with the one across the street a little bit down the street on the other side of shop and stop and there's just you know there's an absence of green I applaud the board members for mentioning that but we give up quite a bit you know we're going to have this beautiful new high school where we've already agreed to sacrifice some of the green there and we can't have any you know along the way I think it's part of the town character that is a problem and it's something that we give up when we build to the edge when we build with materials which I again one of the board members mentioned this that just you know it looks like frankly you know I know we don't want to be too critical here but it's a bit of a piece of plastic and you know next door we have this beautiful brick building that will now be hidden from view and it matters for the long-term view of the town what we leave is the aesthetic and that's I think something that we have to consider you know this is a building that's going to be there for decades and we have to you know I don't know how much power the town has to influence but it's now or never and I really hope we take these things into consideration so thank you very much thanks for your comments Michael Ruderman go ahead Michael thank you mr chairman I have three brief comments I am heartened by the board's response to the initial plans in that there needs to be a lot of work done and I would underline the portion of the board's comments where it was asked that the next time this matter comes before the board we have accurate site plan and three-dimensional representations to show the surrounding buildings they are material the setbacks and the surrounding neighborhood have a great deal to do with how the public perceives the new design of whatever is to come second comment I heard it said tonight that all leases have expired within the building that is not true I hate I come to you tonight as the treasurer of Arlington community media ACMI we have a property there that we have leased since 2012 we call it our studio B it is where we have taught high school age students to produce you know television content and where it is broadcast from our lease has not expired we have a lease that runs through I believe August we have two more renewals on that lease for a period of three years each we could be there for another six years under the existing conditions of that lease like I said we've been there since 2012 with a lease that takes us through 2026 we thought we were justified in investing a large sum of money our executive director has estimated it to be $70,000 in buildout and technological additions to that property to turn it into a television studio which we thought was a prudent investment given the length of our lease which I will reiterate has not expired third point the contamination that was referred to previously we were not aware of any contamination on this site when we left the property in 2012 we were only informed of this to our knowledge for the first time a couple of months ago when we were told that the existing contamination would trigger the condemnation clause in our lease and cause us to have to leave the premises so I find three three things that are material to my contribution here tonight on the record as the treasure of ACMI one I echoed the board's dissatisfaction with the plans described so far to not all leases have have come to an end ACMI still has a lease three we have serious questions about the extent of the length of the duration the incidence of the contamination which we are now just finding out about that's all I have thank you michael appreciate those comments patrice smith go ahead hi my name is patrice smith I live at 10 Lachlan Avenue so I'm a I live across the street from the property that is being considered for redevelopment I've got a number of concerns and I will try to be brief what I will what I plan to do is send an email to this group and I will iterate all of them but in the interest of time the things that I would like to talk about are the height of the building and what kind of a shadow it will cost the cast I'm interested in groundwater studies I don't know if people are aware but the houses in this neighborhood are in a high watermark and our basements regularly take on water so I'm very interested in what what what the whether there will be an impact for that for the folks in the neighborhood I'm also interested in traffic impact studies if anybody's been on the street from 7 30 in the morning until eight o'clock in the morning during drop off for the high school people will realize that it's it's it's it's it's deadlock it's very difficult to get down the street so I want to make sure that we consider that as well and then finally the setback I couldn't see I couldn't I from what I looked at I did not understand what the setback proposed was going to be and as somebody else said I want to make sure that we've got enough setback from the street and not uh emulating what happened in the property across the street in the corner of what's basically between the high school next next in mystic wine you know which one I'm talking about because that that property does not have enough of a setback um so I've got a number of you know a few other concerns on the groundwater study is a big one for me if my basement is going to get wet more often we've got a big problem we've already done what we can to mitigate it we put in French strains we've got a sump pump going but you know it can only take on so much and during our heavy rainstorm our water will our basement will take on water thank you thank you thanks for your comments is there any other member the public would like to raise their hand and speak right now I think that everybody can unmute themselves so the people on the phone might not know how to raise their hand so just to reiterate that and then also to tell people to send comments directly to me and I will share them with the board and that also I have already shared with the applicant all of the comments that have been received both are except for anything that I received perhaps in the last two hours I know we've received a number of comments those up through late this afternoon have been made public they will continue to be made public and taken into consideration both by this board and I trust by the applicant so Jenny how do we go about letting people who've called in speak we haven't had to deal with this issue yet I think just if you've called in and you're just on the phone right now if you wish to speak you just need to unmute yourself you have the ability to do that on your own because you might not know how to raise your hand so I see a number in 303 that I think which is to speak please announce yourself and go ahead yes go ahead 303 you're on or you've you finally unmuted me hello your turn in the queue to speak mr warden please introduce yourself and thank you we've been trying to turn on the zoom thing for the past 50 minutes and we can't get it to come up it won't it won't ask for the the i the meeting id number and stuff and which I don't think it's really a fair public meeting if we're not allowed to to see it and hear it I mean we're being excluded because of your technology hello okay so we're we're discussing 882 892 mess out right now I know what you're discussing I've been listening on the phone to it and I'm glad to see that you you picked up on some of the comments that have come in that there's not enough commercial space and that the the fear that I enunciated at town meeting that they would build a high-rise building with a nice street wall and one little shop in the corner is is not to the liking of the board that that that that is relief to hear that and I hope you will continue in that vein and I mean mr nessie tried to sort of back and fill and say well don't don't make me change it too much and all this stuff minimum it seems to me that the ground the ground floor ought to be commercial and and and that seems to be something that the board members were working towards or some of them were anyway and I think that was that was what the way mixed use was sold to town meeting so I hope it continues in that in that vein thank you thank you mr order any other members who'd like to to join in via phone unmute yourself just announce yourself it'll do our best to give you the opportunity to speak and I understand that that's not the most ideal way to participate uh right now unfortunately with uh Andrew it seems to be someone uh michael alexander's waving their hands all right go ahead mr alexander well it's mrs alexander no i apologize also okay my name is judy alexander and i'm a sixth highland um i have a very basic question which is what is going to happen with traffic patterns when both the high school and this project come on at the same time and construction is just rampant I think that's a concern that we'll have to deal with with the applicant but I do appreciate that that idea it's definitely something that we're concerned about as these plans going into construction schedule is formulated thank you Bob do you have an answer to that do you want to respond they're going to look at that that is something we're certainly going to look at okay and I thank you for that for that comment uh we will address that when we come back for the next hearing for sure okay and the other thing I want to comment on if I could is that lease situation I will get a copy of that and take a look at that myself okay but the information I received was to the contrary I will read the lease and whatever the lease says that's what I'm going to believe and I just want I just want to say right now and for future hearings I am well aware that there is a dispute we'll call it over the terms of the lease in what each side that is not the purview of the ARB we have no control or say over contracts between private parties so if there is an issue there there are other much more appropriate ways to resolve that uh I want to have that get into a back and forth between you and members of the public I understand but I I simply want to know from my own information no no that's what I and that that comment is directed to to anyone who might want to speak yeah sure this is not an appropriate venue to to hash out a dispute yeah there is another individual with their hand raised yeah I see Norma McLeod so I will go ahead Mr. McLeod uh hi I'm Norma McLeod I'm an executive director on to community media my address is 77 Tanager Street in Arlington I just want to support uh the comments that Michael Ruderman had made before and no I will not get into the lease question uh I'm sure Mr. Andisi can follow through in that we can talk offline so to speak my um two comments here one is that in my world that lease was long enough to the point where we are looking for another place to go to we understood that the lease was going to be um was going to close um aside from that we have an issue where we have a $70,000 build out studio with current up to the day up to date equipment cutting edge as the phrase goes and we just can't go into our store front or wherever Mr uh where Frank or his daughter decided that they want to suggest for us so we have an issue along those lines we have a time there's a time factor involved here and that time factor really hopefully will go through August into September if we have to until we can find a place where we can go and we can transport all of our equipment and our and our ceiling and the walls and the and the doors even if we have to because they're all soundproof doors specialized equipment we have to find a place for all of that to go without spending about more $70,000 or more yeah I don't want to interrupt you I read a number of comments about the the use of that studio there and uh again you know we this board can't enforce anything but I would strongly uh do the neighbor the applicant some good if they could work something out with with you folks in the short term I'm more than willing to do that certain we haven't had no contact with them and that's part of my concern so we can move forward and have contact and negotiate I'm more than happy to do that just one last comment when the letter came to us concerning this this question of the building being raised there was nothing attached to it in terms of documentation to show that this building was supposed to be raised because of the EPA or environmental question I know that three years ago there was a test in the studio of air quality and it failed two years ago it was retested and it passed then we received the letter saying we have to leave because the building is going to be raised it's a curious situation I'd like to make that that one comment I'd like to see a documentation thank you I'd like to work that out with uh Mr. Nisey Alflane thank you I appreciate the comments all right is there anyone else before we turn this back to the board uh who wishes hi uh Marina Darler here uh hi I am from Six Clark so across the street from the potential hotel um I just want to echo the concerns that my neighbors raised um to ensure you know maybe if they're repeated by enough people they will carry more weight main concern is traffic water study and the fact that there's not enough offset from the street uh I personally I don't want to look into the hotel windows uh just to interrupt you we're not talking about the hotel right now oh apologies I joined late uh okay so that's it so my comments all pertain to the hotel on the corner of Mass Ave got it thank you all right anyone else all right so we'll continue to accept written comments as soon as we receive some updated plans those will go online for review by the board by the public I would encourage again I think there's a there's a willingness to work with the board on uh something that may be appropriate for this site um so we have a date for a continuance uh about to ask Mr. Nessie for one uh I was initially thinking June 8 okay but uh listening to all the comments and particularly I want to have that meeting with kin I think that's going to be pretty beneficial but I want kin uh to meet with my architect uh and my uh site guy as well I want a all of those people to participate in that meeting so I'm probably asking for I'm going to be asking for a longer time uh I would suggest if we could get June 29 rather than the date I was going to ask for June 8 that might be more relevant and more appropriate Kenny is that an appropriate date? June 29th yes yeah no mr. it was an earlier conversation just want to make sure that that's yeah it's basically a town meeting is June 15th with rain dates on the 22nd and I believe 29th so I I cannot say definitively that that will not end up being a date that ends up becoming town meeting um we might not we might need to change it again but um I didn't have us having a meeting on the 29th of June yeah I thought July 6th let's our next date after June 8th that's what I have July 6th yeah like we you'd be backtracking and adding another meeting so if you choose the 29th that would be that's a date that you would need to add as a meeting well how do you feel about July 6th yeah July 6th instead of June 29th hello yes uh jenny you're saying July 6th where I've been June 29th yes June 29th on the rain dates for town meeting yeah okay all right well if July 6th is the date that the board feels is most appropriate for them then I I think I have to defer to the board okay let's uh all right so I'll take a motion to continue public hearing special term of docket 36 25 to July 6th 2020 7 p.m so motion second all in favor kin hi david hi jean yes Rachel hi and I vote yes so Bob will see you on the 6th I look forward to what you have to give us okay thank you very much all yep and Jenny will be in touch about that offline meeting see where we can go yeah all right thank you thank you all right so that matters continue July 6th 7 p.m soon we'll still be on zoom at that point all right moving on thanks everyone for your patience we have a brief sign hearing docket 2818 for 880 math out this is a continued public hearing special permit docket 2818 by back-based signs I think we have those folks on so I think Jay Perillo is our guy can you tell us what you've come back with I think you've responded to our concerns from the last hearing yes good evening can you hear me yes okay yeah so we we changed the the directional sign which is sign e05 and the sign package to a size that conforms with the bylaw as requested by the board this is now a 1.99 square foot sign that is three feet off the ground I don't have any any questions or concerns about this I think it answers the questions we asked Mr Perillo to come back with after our last hearing I'll go down the line for members of the board Rachel I believe this is the one you had to recuse yourself from correct all right so Jean I have no concerns kin no I have no concerns David no further questions any anything to add before I see whether there's public comment all right any members of the public wish to speak to the TD bank sign going once all right all right so I would uh suggest we vote to approve this package as amended with the conditions in the directors report second all right go on voice vote here kin I gene yes David hi Rachel I've stayed thank you I vote yes so thank you Mr Perillo thanks for coming back and your patience through that first hearing thanks for your help good luck thank you very much have a good night you too all right good now we will move on to the hotel I know we have Mary O'Connor here I think Jim Doherty is on as well thank you folks for coming back I see that we don't have anything new from you and where this stands so Mary go ahead and let us know where things stand and what uh what Mr Doherty's intentions with the project is good evening to the members of the board Mr Chairman I represent 1211 Mass Availty Trust uh you do have my letter which this rate has put up with May 11th dealing with number of the zoning issues and if I can just address several of them because I think they are pertinent one of them is the use of the property this is a mixed use property there was some discussion that it was not a mixed use property because the hotel was a dwelling the definition of dwelling specifically excludes hotels and motels specifically says shall not include so this is not a dwelling it is lodging and comes within the mixed use definition with respect to the bonus FAR I had provided it on the calculations to you in January however Jenny mentioned to me that you don't have them on the plans we will get that to you with respect to the parking the it is the sum of the two uses as you know there's a 2,800 square foot restaurant proposed for the first floor but under article 6 6.110c I would suggest to you that the 2,800 square feet of restaurant space would not be included in the overall parking calculation it is the first 3,000 non-residential spaces exempt so what you're looking at is 50 parking spaces one for each hotel room and you have the ability to reduce the parking to 25% what the proponent is proposing is 28 spaces so we're looking for a reduction to 56% well within your authority but most importantly and this is something you have town council's memorandum to you dated May 13 concerning 5.3.17 as you know it was the wrong definition it was the wrong vote that was inserted in the bylaw that it is the step back is from the third floor it's it's a fourth floor step back it's not a third floor step back and I think that Attorney Hime has suggested that to you and you are bound by the vote of town meeting us to that issue that was raised Mr. Benson and Mr. Watson both expressed concern whether they had the authority to give that fourth floor step back I would say to you there is no dispute now as to that issue so that segues into the additional information when we left in January that issue as to the step back the fourth floor was up in the air it was of a concern to Mr. Darity the project would not likely be going forward if there was not that step back so he did not expend any additional funds to prepare the traffic study of the like until that issue was resolved I would suggest to you that issue was resolved and has been resolved by Attorney Hime and based on that and assuming that the board accepts the representation of town council Mr. Darity is prepared to complete what you what miss rate has pointed out in her memorandum of May 14 that is necessary for you to have a have all the information you need with respect to this project so that so if you have any questions but we don't have items one or two for you for tonight's hearing thank you Mary I appreciate that update and hope that we can move forward on a faster timeline at this point Andrew if I may point out one thing there is a concern we have called two traffic consultants you know with school out of session this presents a unique issue with respect to the traffic study there may be other ways to collect that data by getting numbers of students in school and extrapolating things we were not able to get an answer as to how quickly that could be done in light of the COVID situation okay so we have that to deal with but we you will have a complete traffic study that will also address pedestrian and bicycle safety good I think that's important David go ahead I'm sorry about that couldn't find the unmute a couple of things first I think there are two different issues related to the upper story setback the first is the one that attorney O'Connor referred to regarding regarding whether the stepback needs to start at the third or fourth floor and we do have town councils advice regarding that the other issue which is the one that I think Jean and I were both concerned about is whether the depth of the stepback can be altered from the seven and a half feet called for in in the zoning bylaw because the the applicant has proposed kind of splitting the setback into into multiple stepbacks on different floors in order to to meet the overall requirement and it wasn't cleared to us whether we we actually can allow that so that was the other question regarding the stepback I'm glad to hear that the applicant is prepared to move forward with a traffic study not just of the hotel but of the wider area that it is situated in particularly since there was just another bicyclist fatality at the Mass Ave Appleton intersection near this site that was all I had for the moment thanks David go ahead Jean thank you yeah I thank you for your letter attorney O'Connor I I just wanted to respond to a few things in your letter which I think might help inform what's going on first as far as the stepbacks on the fourth floor rather than the third floor yes we did receive the memo from town council and I believe that you know unbound by his legal opinion that even though the regular the current bylaw has published says third floor the correct way to look at it is town meeting voted fourth floor so I agree that is um um opinion to us resolve the issue of which of the two floors the stepbacks should be on I do have some other concerns about your letter and I'll just say them because for me at least I would like to see them responded to when you give us all the other materials that you haven't provided yet um the first one has to do with the um bonus far that um is being asked for in addition to asking for the actual calculations um I would like to know what the square footage of is proposed to be for the public access space because it wasn't clear whether that was part of what you were going to be giving us but I did want to see that's correct that that's see as part of it and if you could give us a draft of what the public easement would be I'd like to be able to take a look at that also um so that's one thing um second is on um the um setback not the stepbacks but the setbacks your memo or your letter says the bylaw does not require a front yard or a side yard setback yet as I read the bylaws because you're on a corner um with Clark you have to meet the requirements for what the front yard setback would be on Clark which is 20 feet and while we can waive that under our authority I would like to hear from you about why you think the hotel is not subject not now but in your letter back to us again why you think the hotel is not subject to the 20 feet setback because on Clark you have us that setback it's an R2 zone and secondly Andrew can I interrupt jean for one quick second on that one point there I did do some research on that is that okay jean can I finish and then interrupt sure and if if we do have that requirement and you want us to waive it tell us um why what this is is some condition that's unique uh not simply that this is a hotel but why it's unique enough that we should raise it so sorry can go right ahead that's all right um on clock street that's considered a front yard setback and in and the building behind it is also a corner lot there's also a front yard setback and according to zoning for front yard setbacks there's an exception in the in the zoning says that it could be an average of what existing set buildings are at so I actually went out and um estimated what the setback was for the building behind it was from the front front yard I'm saying it's probably six to seven feet so we're they're taking the average they taking that exception in the zoning so that they're meeting that requirements uh is that correct mary that's correct and there's actual a much more complicated legal argument that I can get into in the letter when I send it to you as to why I don't think it's frontage but I don't disagree necessarily yeah I don't think it's frontage either I don't think frontage makes the difference here but I'd like to see your explanation and then if we do need to provide an exemption from that why we should do it um the next question I had related to the the parking what what I believe was said the last time and I would like to see this in writing that the valet parking will only be for the people who will be staying overnight at the hotel and will not be for the restaurant guests so I would like to see that in writing and I would like to see it some way that that's going to be communicated to the restaurant guests and um don't yeah those are my um my comments on your letter and then with everyone else I would like to see all the materials that have not been provided so thank you thanks jean kin do you have anything else yeah mary can you uh quickly go over with me um but just bullet points what you're providing uh going forward uh now that you got this uh you know our review today sure I'm just concerned that a lot of things don't get slipped between the cracks I think kin they are all in jenny's memo dated may 14th okay things that um uh and she has it up on the screen plus whatever the board asks for tonight with the respect to different explanations so you have the traffic study a complete traffic study and then you have two a through h okay uh hold on a minute I have all the pictures blocking that okay uh and I will tell you I went and cross-referenced this with the january memorandum and jenny has picked everything up yeah I think thanks mary I think the big thing for me will be elevations yeah this yes any sorry yeah proper proper accurate elevations that will really give a good sense of what's out there uh I think there are some other illustrative photos that have been passed around and used as gospel which aren't necessarily the case obviously what we've looked for is is an elevation to judge how exactly the property sits on the site so that's that's a big thing that's that's really the main thing I'm looking for and the traffic study of course so turn it over to rachel for any comments sure I would actually ask that you go go back to again the january meeting notes there were actually quite a few additional comments that were made about the design of the building itself um irrespective of the of the setbacks um that don't appear on this list from from jenny um and I think that the the quality you know to andrew's point the quality of the of the drawings the elevations that we see being able to address um in much more realistic um depictions what it is we're going to see um much more I can quite frankly to some of the things that were in the package of the next use facility we didn't even get to tonight um you know I would just like to see the drawings to the next level of quality so that we can really review them in in much greater detail because there's there's a lot of nuance here and um I think that the quality of the of the of the drawings addressing all of the the the comments that were made at the last meeting need to be um really attended to okay thank you that was the plan thank you any other one more thing andrew yep go ahead in this in this sorry what do you say go ahead in this zoom meeting um it's all new to us how do we actually see materials before we used to ask to the opponent to actually bring in samples of the materials are we okay with just like um seeing photographs of of different materials so we have an understanding of yeah when they say stone what kind of stone what color is it the texture that kind of stuff it makes it very hard to um to understand that through the zoom meeting I think so Ken I know that we've had to present materials um and I'll just use my own experience here we've had to present materials you know as architects before in the past and I think Mary what you ask your architect to do is to do a flat lay of the materials and photograph them um along with providing detailed specifications that will that will describe you know to kin's point what is the what is the finish is it is it smooth is it glossy is it is it textured um you know together with with those photographs is going to be very important and not and again before it was this is the kind of material we're going to use we'd really like to see the specific color this is the finish this is this is what we're going to be proposing yeah Andrew I I had one other item I mentioned before the shadow studies I'm I'm not clear whether the new shadow studies took into account the change in elevation between the building the proposed building and the residences behind it and I'd like some clarification on that and also I was unclear whether the new shadow studies resulted in any shadows being cast on um that one of the two solar arrays so when you submit the materials can you just give us some clarifications yes on those and writing so I think that would be helpful good can I can actually pose a question to the other members of the of the board um given the the how important the traffic study is not only to to this board but also to the to the neighbors I'm wondering if we should ask for that to be also submitted to the um traffic advisory committee and have them weigh in on this as well given the the challenges of the many intersections surrounding this particular property yeah I Jenny can we arrange that do we have to do that formally or can that are they meeting can that be done so they're they're actually meeting tomorrow night to talk about that intersection as a result of revisiting a ctps report um that had been done in 2012 I think that this particular traffic study that you're talking about would be very useful for them to review and provide input on um I don't know their exact meeting schedule at this time but we can coordinate that you know online yeah I think I definitely want to see that happen I'd be interested in knowing how they're going to do this study without real traffic going on these days unless there was a traffic count done you know within the past year let's say in that area um that they can use for that I'm also a little concerned about their traffic study that the one they submitted so far from bc s group because it lists for example traffic going to and from the dav building which hasn't been occupied in years so when they compare you know what is it going to be now compared to before they're using compared before members that are completely wrong so I have some concerns about that and I also have some concerns about how they're going to give us a traffic study without traffic yeah I I definitely share that concern as well uh particularly uh because school is not in session and uh I've seen for myself in the past uh how many students are going back and forth uh through um through that area um I also while I I do think it would be very helpful for them to look at that 2012 ctps report um I would suspect that both motor vehicle volumes and bicycle volumes in particular have increased significantly since then um and uh and uh given the current situation it's it's just going to be very difficult to know where we're at right now with respect to volumes on any of the modes they may be able to extrapolate you know based on number of students you know if we get counts from the school department there may be other ways to do it so that's what we're trying to find out the only point I was making with that study is that TAC will be discussing that study and the accident that occurred um that that would be the only reference point in terms of how that relates to this project I think it's somewhat related but I think it's absolutely it needs to be updated and the directive that's been provided to this applicant has been pretty clear that it needs to be further studied it also needs to relate to the neighborhood impacts and we did a request back in essentially last July for this issue to be addressed when school started which was last September so at this point you know due to the current conditions they won't be able to study that and either the board you know will have to accept what they provide to us or we would need to further postpone that element of the traffic analysis but that was the only reason I referenced the study. Thanks Jenny. Any other comments from members of the board before I open this up to public comment? Mary do you have anything else that you want to share or does Jim want to speak before I open it up? Not at this point Jim. Jim did you want to share anything? No okay all right so I'll open it up to members of the public again state your name and address use the raise hand function will you work through that first then turn to the folks on the phone again I appreciate everyone's patience through this time challenging to conduct a meeting through our laptop camera so go ahead and raise your hands we'll open it up you know I think there's there's not much new to discuss here I think the chances that we bring this back next month or so are likely since we've asked the applicant for so much more but go ahead Don you're up Don Seltzer I unmuted you where'd you go okay how about my video thank you I'm not quite sure where to begin let's start with the claim that this is not a residential use I don't understand the logic that was given I have provided the board with the section of the bylaws that clearly laid this out it's 5.5.3 use regulations for business districts there are about 13 different residential uses listed there ranging from single family to family three family etc and number 10 on the list is hotel motel that's a residential use allowed in the before through special permits so it seems pretty clear this is a residential use and the and the impact of course is that the bonuses under the floor area ratio are not available for residential use under 20 000 square feet the next claim that was made is that there's no frontage along Clark Street you might notice I'm talking to you from Clark Street with the property 1211 in the background here it certainly looks like it's has frontage along Clark Street I don't understand the argument again that was given if you look in the definitions of the bylaw as two lot lines you'll find out that corner properties do indeed have two front lot lines one back lot line and one side lot line this is a corner property it has frontage on Clark Street and all the things that relate to yard setback and upper story step back apply to this building this is something that is of real interest to the people who live over on Clark Street on 26 28 and 30 Clark Street in terms of shadows eliminating this 20 foot setback that is required the impact on the people living in those and that address is that they're going to have their winter sunlight in the afternoon cut by 50% they would have 50% more afternoon sunlight if this setback was observed so it probably matters to them and it's not just a few weeks or so this is an effect that's going to last all winter for them from about late October to March 1st so I think it probably matters to them and the other aspect is that because it is on a corner it faces a street that the fourth floor has to be stepped back also not just the mass avenue side but the Clark Street side has to be stepped back and I'm really disappointed that that type the topographical survey hasn't come in yet because that's going to reveal all kinds of problems in terms of what the real height of the hotel is you're going to find out it's not 44 feet six inches or whatever it was given because that was measured simply at the highest corner of the land and it slopes off both down Mass Ave and it slopes off to the back of course and if you get the true elevations I think you're going to find that this hotel exceeds the 50 foot height limit that the zoning laws allow and you're also going to find out there are problems on the lower level where the parking is we have yet to find out exactly how high the garage openings are I think you're going to find that they're rather small they're only going to be eight or nine feet it's going to be a real problem for all those delivery trucks that are going to be coming down into there delivering their stuff and not going to be able to turn around because they're not going to be able to back out into the garage and there's not enough turning radius in the parking lot for them to operate uh I can go on with other issues but I think that's enough for now thank you thank you okay other public comment anyone on the phone wish to chime in go ahead Mr Wagner and Andrew and LaRoyer has her hand up too I see that now yep Carl Wagner go ahead thank you hi Carl Wagner 30 edge show oops let me start the video again Andrew can you start my video again uh yep sorry about that should be on you should be there you go weird process anyway no we can see me and hear me uh Carl Wagner I live at 30 Edge Hill Road in Arlington um I just wanted to add something for the benefit of people who are here as participants or are watching the recordings um although I don't mean to impugn the attorney for the developer at all I think it's strange that Arlington continues to allow people that have powerful positions in town government or related to town government to represent people in front of town boards like yours and I'm not saying that there's anything wrong in this specific circumstance but it really does bother me that we have somebody on the board of assessors who is petitioning you and potentially it could lean you in some other case one way or the other and so I would hope that people who are watching this will actively try and change Arlington's rules on how meetings can happen with town officials representing private parties in front of town boards thank you very much Andrew may I respond to that go ahead Mary I am a special town employee exempted and able to represent clients in front of other boards as a matter of Massachusetts law I see Lisa Heinz Lisa go ahead hi um I wanted to just speak in favor of the project I know there's more material required for the applicant to submit but um I'm sorry 14 Sunset Road so as a nearby property owner I appreciate the investment in the lot and I would love to see the the development occur so I know that I know that it comes with a mixed bag and some trade-offs associated and more needs to be understood about the traffic implications and I share the concern regarding the Appleton intersection but I I just wanted to voice support of investment in this property that's all thank you and I see you on here twice so if I've unmuted the wrong one you know what I'm gonna unmute both Ann LaRoyer go ahead she's still muted oh there she goes yeah there's two there's she's in twice so yeah I know my husband was on the other computer downstairs ah okay I guess they both came up as my name so um okay thank you thank you for um this whole hearing everything I I had some questions about um starting with Miss O'Connor's letter she talks about the bonus FAR she talks about a public access case for public art and presentation but um so my question I guess is is that that would only really be usable in good summer months and is that enough of a reason to ask for a 10 increased FAR bonus I don't quite know all the terminology but it just seems like that's a that's a limited advantage to the property and in fact many neighbors are not even in favor of that type of music or public activity that would be happening there and with also questions about the hours of the usage of that space so that that's one issue um about the upper story setback or step back um in her letter she says this project um contains a boutique hotel on substantially unimproved lots well in fact Mr. Doherty owns the b4 lot that is egregiously unimproved has full of abandoned vehicles it's really a junkyard he has not been a good steward of that space and um so there's a real question about how he would steward this property in the future um and there's an also an argument about that in order for this project to be successful there must be quote um adequate room revenue um and that has to do with the setbacks and the the FAR and so forth um but is it really the ARB's responsibility to worry about the financial success of of a project like this that's a question um and um let's see well another thing we've already talked about the traffic that's a major major concern for the neighborhood so I know that there'll be much more about that to come so I won't dwell on that too much but um it really has to be the full expanse of the Mass Ave from all the way from Forest Street all the way through Lowell Street I mean that whole area is just a mess and um you know the bike rider accident that happened recently is only one of a number of accidents that have happened in that area so I'm glad that that's going to be looked at more thoroughly um the former Nicola's pizza across the street on the corner of Mass Ave and Clark is currently being renovated I think it'll be interesting to see what once that's open and there's more traffic that's brought into the neighborhood from that business that will also impact how this whole area is going to be used um and and finally this is um for a future I suppose but the neighbors are just very concerned about what recourse we might have in the future if this project in some form goes forward and it's not successful or it becomes abandoned or it's not maintained properly what recourse to the neighbors going to have if this you know does not really work out the way you know it could and it should if it was a good project and not as large and overwhelming as it appears to be so those are some of the neighborhood concerns that I just wanted to share and we have a group of more than 30 immediate neighbors who are um on a local email list and that there are more that keep coming into the group and we're all very very concerned about how this is going to go forward so thank you for um looking into this further thanks in uh mr loretty go ahead you are unmuted hello mr go ahead chris thank you I'm speaking on a telephone so let me know if if um there's any problem with with the audio no you're not unclear thanks mr chairman I'd like to go through a few uh legal aspects that I think pertain to this case and in particular some of the requirements of the zoning bylaw that I believe the ARB needs to be cognizant of and the first one is I believe that the legal notice for this hearing was defective at the start and that's because section 11 of 48 of the state zoning act requires that the nature of the relief being sought be put into the legal notice for the special permit hearing and I don't see that there so I just mentioned that um you know so you're aware of it but I'd like to get into some of the requirements of the zoning bylaw that give you guidance on how to consider a project like this and under section 1.4 applicability um there's a couple sentences that I think are particularly relevant one that says no building structure or land shall be used for any purpose or in any manner other than as expressly permitted within the district in which it is located well clearly the bylaw does not permit a hotel in the B2 district so that criterion is not met and then that same section goes on to say whenever the regulations made under the authority hear of differ from those prescribed by any statute law or sex or I'm sorry other section of the zoning bylaw or other regulations that provision which imposes the greatest restriction with the highest standard shall govern so if there's a discrepancy or an inconsistency within the bylaw itself it's the obligation of your board to read the most restrictive or take the most restrictive reading of it the other thing I want to point out to you is decision criteria for all special permits and this is under section 3.3 a and what it says is one of the things that your board has to find uh it it says the determination shall include findings that all of the following criteria for granting a special permit are met and the very first one is that the use requested is listed as a special permit use in the use regulations for the applicable district or so designated elsewhere in the bylaw well again clearly a hotel does not fit that in the b2 zoning district now the applicant has talked about the exceptions to the maximum floor area ratio regulations under section 5.3.6 and as mr salser clearly pointed out the principal use here is residential it has nothing to do with whether they were dwelling units or not the applicable sentence in the in this section of the bylaw is um the lot or part of the lot is not less than 20,000 square feet when the principal use is residential it doesn't say anything about dwelling units uh and clearly um this isn't residential I mean the principal use is residential the lot is less than 20,000 square feet so this bonus provision doesn't apply but even if it did apply it doesn't apply to the b2 zoning district because if you look look under subsection c it lists the various districts where the where the bonus versions might apply and it's very selective b2 was not listed there at all and you can't simply consider a b2 zoning district to be a b4 zoning district it's not indeed if the applicant or the town wanted to do that they should have put in a warrant article to town meeting to change the zoning of the b2 lot to b4 the other thing I would point out and this becomes very clear when you look at what they're doing we're trying to do with this bonus provision is that this project not only does it not have any usable open space it completely fails to meet requirements for landscaped open space and this section of the bonus provisions that they're trying to take advantage of you know further state that the land that's going to be deeded doesn't can't count towards meeting the open space requirements and and also that the gross floor area calculation from the amount of from the amount of lot area is reduced so we haven't seen any of those calculations but that was something that that was clear from the outset and then under section five point three point five it it again indicates that you can't use the floor area floor area ratio regulations for one district and another you have when you have two different districts making up a lot you have to apply them separately you can't apply the more lenient floor area ratio requirements across the whole parcel and finally I'd like to talk about section five point three point sixteen this is the yards or setbacks for lots in the ARB's ability to adjust that one thing I would point out is not only was that relief not sought in the legal notice for this hearing it was not sought in the application either so I'm not really sure what business the board has even considering it when the applicant hasn't put it in the application and finally I'd like to make a comment about the public docket for this hearing because it seems to me the public comments and your board has received numerous ones in writing are not being made part of the docket when I go to the website for the ARB the public dockets listed it does not include any of the public comments they are a vital and necessary part of the docket of the docket and I'd suggest that it's actually a legal requirement that to be they put it be put into the docket because should this special permit be appealed they need to be part of that file and I notice even for this very the hearings for tonight's meeting they were materials submitted in time and they were listed under correspondence received those those materials should be part of the docket and so I would ask that the board one update the docket for this special permit procedure on its website and include everything not just submissions from the applicant or other people in the town they need to include or the docket needs to include the full listing of materials and submissions from the public as well finally just let me quickly address mr. Wagner's comment indeed the attorney for this proceeding understand is a special town employee and that's due to a decision made by the select board they are the ones that determine whether town employees can be deemed special mr. employees or not so if people have concerns about that they need to direct them to the select board thank you mr. chairman that's all I have right now thank you mr. Lurie michael sandler hi there go ahead you should be able to start your video yeah just clicked it thank you okay so i'm michael sandler i'm at 18 pier street and just a couple of comments um the uh with the high school rebuild the uh and the uh dpw um renovation um happening uh the formal alicata or at the soon to be formal alicata spot is going to be uh an undersized space for what the town needs uh which is right down the street um in addition there's a liquor store going into the former necola's pizza clearly we're a neighborhood that's um experiencing some transition um it's going to be vital that we have a real traffic study not a virtual one this uh this virtual meeting that we're having is not um it's not quite up to uh what we need as a town in terms of the public forum similarly uh to move forward without a real actual traffic study with school in progress uh without without traffic on the streets um i think is um that that's a that's a real warning um i'd like to thank mr. wagner for his uh for his comments um the the optics of this um have for the last year or so uh been bothersome to me um and that's uh that's all i have to say thank you thank you uh carol mcdonnell i know you've been waiting a while go ahead should be unmuted oh now i can hear you now and see okay uh i don't want to see me um i'm carol mcdonnell i live at 1192 math abs um unfortunately we were dealing that accident happened um last week that is only one of many i have seen in my lifetime living in this house um the traffic study i agree with the antler lawyer you have to do one you should even ask the patrol ladies that do that intersection when school is on they would tell you how bad the traffic is and the modern in the afternoon um i don't know if you have asked them about it have you as the committee approach them on it about their opinion we have not directly but i think that's one of the reasons why we um brought up the the option of speaking with the traffic advisory committee the patrol patrol ladies themselves you should be speaking to they've had close calls at that intersection that we have witnessed so i think that is major too when you do that um study and you gotta remember you just kind of do a student count you have the st james school that has a daycare up there you have the children's place that always has traffic and then you have to take in consideration what goes on at the church too funerals and whatever when they have possessions so the glia in the morning the accident that's here last week was basically due to glia and you need to do the study at that time of day to to understand how that glia affects matzap at that particular area where apples history and matzap so um i don't think anything can go forward without that traffic study before you make a decision or anything another question i have is i mean i i'm sure there's many people that have lived in this neighborhood as long as i have but i remember that gas station across the street and if the tanks were removed i'm talking about the contamination study wouldn't there have been a permit those tanks were removed because i don't know them ever being removed from that site so i don't rely on i don't know how comprehensive mr darvey's study was on the contamination but are we allowed to look at that study that he did it's it's part of the record if anything that's part of this docket is available on the website the town website all right then then i'm thinking about all these hotels that are being built and some of them in cambridge 160 rooms 200 rooms it's going to have an effect on this small hotel here i mean has he taken that into consideration what's going on closer to how the square versus a small hotel in allenten and what would happen if it's not filled is he going to rent it out as not a hotel as a room board i mean what happens when his vacancies there's too many vacancies for him to bring in income are you going to allow him to you know rent out the rooms section i'm not putting down six and eight i'm just saying is it going to be stipulations of how he can run that hotel that's another thing i would like to know if it goes through it'll be run as a hotel and if the use if it were to be approved if the use were to change it's a door to have to come back in front of us reopen the special permit and tell us why and how okay i'm just saying because what goes on in the hotels are being built down the street from us i see more people turn into one of the rent rooms there hotel rooms there and come into allenten i just don't feel it's a feasible it's practical to have a hotel in allenten it's not the right space i'm i've been in this neighborhood and i agree with and a lot of us oppose it and another question i have this is going to take a while to get resolved why can't why can't you rent out the vfw in the meantime to get some type of income coming in what what is preventing you from doing a short time lease so we get some type of income into this town maryl would you like to decide that building is owned by the town we don't have anything to do with releasing it out so it's just going to stay empty until you get the shoes off well that that's the town's choice i'm going to call the town manager and see what i can do it just seems it's just it's sitting there and you could at least get some type of income coming in on it that's all i have to say thank you for the comments uh andria dwyer go ahead andria my name is andria dwyer i am at 26 pier street which is the condominiums directly behind the property on the corner of clark and pure street and i am someone who is definitely eager in general to see the property cleaned up i think we've discussed at length the status of the property and what an eyesore it is you know and i have the the same concerns a lot of my neighbors have expressed around things like traffic and parking and you know potentially privacy of having this many visitors to the neighborhood um the one thing i want to um put some particular attention on in terms of my own concerns are the elevations that i know have been asked for and some perhaps for revised images and revised renderings what i'd like to request be be emphasized is being able to picture the property from from the back from you know standing on my property and and looking towards that property there is not a lot dividing our property there's you know visually there is one large tree um and a low fence and um as a few people have expressed there is a significantly different um elevation level between pier street and and mass out so the property that that exists there while um you know much lower than the property that is being discussed still is looks you know quite high up from standing from my property and so you know my major concern is the effect of having a building that is absolutely looming over you know my property and then the neighborhood in general um and i've you know i've seen the images that were originally created where you look you know say coming down mass out towards towards the center at what the property might look like i know there are some you know questions about that in general um you know but one aspect of it is that you're kind of looking downhill at it and i think it makes it look or even just level at it but it makes it look smaller than you know it would appear from from within the neighborhood itself and from within my property um you know my extension i know there's been the the sort of sunlight studies there's definitely a major concern i and my neighbors in the building have regarding um you know just just feeling like this this massive building really is is over our property and um taking away you know all of the light and and privacy that we have um yep so thank you for your attention and um i appreciate the the consideration thanks for your comments we appreciate it anyone else wish to speak about this matter anyone on the phone wish to come in mr. Wagner um i just uh this is carl wagner i just wanted to make a point of order of question wasn't there a woman in the first section who did want to speak i don't know if she had her comments yeah hi if you're probably me you're probably thinking about me marina darlow go ahead marina well i just uh want to reiterate the concerns of my neighbors i'm across the street from the the perspective hotel i'm at six clark um traffic may be a real issue we're right on the core north mass av very close by so i'm concerned about a ton of cars with a very limited visibility um spoke about it before so my main point in speaking up is just to i guess reiterate the number of people um in the neighborhood and you know maybe give us a little louder voice i don't know what will be the parking situation because right now uh clark is a private street um i would like to know what it would mean in terms of um the hotel parking and how tempted it would be to the restaurant guests to just park on our street because there are no visible limitations and frankly nobody would ever come and give them a ticket i don't think that ever happened to part of the people but right now it's you know it's manageable when we have 30 cars along the street it might be less manageable um and the last concern is just to build on what andrea said um the elevation and the setback of the third slash fourth floor um i would like to see a better quality um drawing um that would be more reflective of how the building would really look that's it thanks for your comments thanks for the reminder uh to bring you in is there anyone else who has not spoken would like to speak about the hotel issue all right so i i'm gonna bring it back to the board at this point then um no can somebody start my video someone turned it off hang on go ahead chris thank you mr chairman um mr i just have a question i forgot to ask you earlier can you confirm that you receive the copy of the transcript of the town meeting section or the excerpt of the trans the excerpt excerpt from town meeting at the time that the mixed-use zoning bylaw that um was passed that i sent you it pertain to the question of allowing prohibited uses as part of mixed-use and i had copied the relevant sections and sent to the board we've received with respect to this hearing you've had with the town council that i've included that so that we do have that you have and it is made part of the um of the docket i will defer to jenny as to whether that's part of the docket but it's been received and marked okay because i specifically requested that it be part of the docket so i expected to be made part of the docket thank you great thank you all right anyone else wish to speak about this matter all right now i'm going to bring it back to the board anyone else has comments about this they can submit them in writing um i think there's a lot of questions that still need to be answered a lot that's still unknown about this um and speaking as a member of the board uh i'm a little bit frustrated that it's gone on for this long and many of these questions are still unanswered i understand some of the challenges that are out there with a project of this size and with as many stakeholders as there are but i think right now we need to pick up the pace a little bit um there are a number of things that we've asked for a number of things that uh mayor you've agreed to provide attorney o'connor you've agreed to provide to us um i would like to see those and have this matter back on the docket back on the agenda um within 45 days and i would suggest that if mr dory is not prepared to do that to provide those things uh that he let us know so that we can make alternate arrangements and uh consider what other options might be out there i think clearly andrew with respect to two a through h that's achievable i cannot say for certainness to the traffic study until we talk to the traffic engineers to see what they're doing they they may have a system that they're using in these circumstances so you know i think that's achievable for two i think we have uh it's a little bit more than 45 days or maybe it's maybe it's not but i think what i'd like to see is uh this back on the the agenda for July 6th uh we'll just put these two projects together on the same meeting and uh power through it um yeah i think i think there's a lot of value to this project uh to the town and uh to the site in general but i think there are a lot of concerns that that need to be answered by the board needs to have answered that the neighbors need to have answered uh and we need to see some some action from from mr. dory uh so i think what i would do is ask for a motion that this be contentless the other members of the board have anything to say if you haven't heard what we've heard i think i take a motion to continue this hearing to July 6th at 7 p.m um can i just say something go ahead i think it's probably worth saying when a lot of people are still listening in that we've gotten two legal opinions from town council that relate to this one has to do with the step backs and says which basically says that the step backs should be on the fourth floor and that the wording on the bylaw third floor did not reflect the town meeting vote which was fourth law the other comment or opinion we've gotten from the town council and i i'd like the other board members to correct me if i've gotten this wrong is that um this this project even though it's in both b2 and b4 and part of it's a hotel and part of it's a restaurant meets the zoning requirements because it's mixed use and mixed use is allowed in both of those districts so i feel bound by the um legal opinion of town council on both those issues that's correct gene thank you andrew before you vote on the july 6th if i um if we find out in the next week that the traffic study is not achievable by july 6th how do you want me to handle that let jenny know and uh we'll discuss that we have some other meetings that come up before that july 6th hearing so if it needs to be continued or if we need to have you back in on uh to some degree we can do that okay andrew if i could just say one thing i i really don't want this to come back to us without the traffic study and without a traffic study that we can all feel confident um we can rely on and make some decisions based on so if if it is not achievable then i think we need to understand what a new timeline is and defer that until this time i i very much like to to continue this discussion and see this project um move forward in front of us for further deliberation but i from here in front of the neighbors and from what we have all said i think the most important thing is to have that traffic study the next time we we all meet together so july 6th is is probably a reasonable time um and we do need to continue this to a date certain we can't just continue it indefinitely uh so i would suggest that as soon as you have information on whether that will be ready mary please let us know and we can choose another date sir i will but i i i do agree with rachel for the sake of having these meetings be productive and uh being able to answer the questions of the neighbors that the traffic study question the traffic study needs to be part of of whatever our next conversation is and and quality elevations those those are the two things that i think are really going to uh move the needle one way or the other uh and a reputable shadow study as part of those elevations so i would move we continue this hearing till july 6 2020 i'll second that all right so just move down the line kin hi rachel hi gene yes david hi and i vote yes so this meeting hearing is continued to july 6 at 7 p.m thanks mary thanks jim see you then see you in time all right um very quickly jenny do you want to walk us through directors updates the next item when you join them very briefly very brief updates just to let you know that um if you if you hadn't already seen this um we are not back in the office uh none of the administrative offices are open yet we're still continuing to work remotely um we're likely to continue remote work for some time certainly up until june 1st but then likely thereafter um and uh we are not yet sure exactly when the public that will be the town hall will be open to the public um so i think that it's in all likelihood we can anticipate to continue remote meetings or through the summer until we have a good sense of um how many people can convene in a room what the room setup will be and a number of other matters that would need to be resolved for people to come back together um so that was the the primary thing that i wanted to mention and uh then second to that is just uh in terms of my staffing i am on a pretty reduced number of staff many of my team are helping with the recovery and response effort right now so um i'm working very long hours as part of that um and i am uh working as hard as i can in relationship to a number of different initiatives i think a lot of those things we talked about at my last update i don't have any specific virtual forums that are scheduled right now but i will be letting you know about upcoming opportunities um to participate in different online engagements at this point the only thing that we've been doing virtually are surveys um sharing information about projects but we have not yet scheduled any sort of formal engagement opportunity as in like a public forum virtually um we are exploring different ways to do that with different projects but um but have not come up with a date which is why you haven't received anything from me um but there are a number of surveys that are posted including uh david mentioned earlier the sustainable transportation plan that survey is active we are seeking lots of uh questions from anybody about their what they want to ask us about housing or economic development and have had a lot of questions come to us so far we also have a survey that's posted in relation to residential design guidelines and have had an enormous response to that like hundreds of respondents um and uh there's more to come so we will continue to engage people that way and i anticipate that there will be other updates in the future but wanted to just let you know about the office staff capacity and how we're engaging right now open to any questions yep thanks jenny you're welcome all right so move on to open forum uh anybody wishes to speak matters will not be acted on uh but raise your hand and i'll call on you and give you the floor and spotlight so to speak a few minutes for folks to take care of that and there's been a lot of discussion this evening thank everybody for being constructive and respectful and putting up with zoom actually i think it's pretty good all right um i do not see anyone raising their hand for open forum going once going twice i'm an auctioneer now all right uh i will take a motion to adjourn uh motion to adjourn motion to adjourn by kin second seconded by jean uh kin hi david hi rachel hi jean yes i vote yes thank you everyone uh i appreciate everybody's continuing to do this uh i actually think this is a pretty good way to go about it uh a lot of good input a lot of faces we don't normally see in person uh and i think uh that's a positive for getting people involved so appreciate that and uh we'll see you in a couple of weeks have a good memorial day weekend stay safe wear a mask and we'll talk to you soon thank you have a good night everybody thank you good night