These minutes are not verbatim – they are the secretary’s interpretation of what took place at the meeting. – Open Meeting Law – Section III.
Board Members: Marc Garrett, Malcolm MacGregor, Paul McAlduff, Larry Rosenblum, and Bill Wennerberg
Planning Board Alternate: Timothy Grandy
Staff Members: Lee Hartmann and Howard Coppari
Recording Secretary: Eileen Hawthorne
Administrative Notes:
A Form Plans:
4314 – Alison Shanahan, Bartlett Road, Map 45, Lots 51 (.84A) – Divide into lots 51-1 (12,768 sf) and 51-2 (25,041 sf)
The Board took no action.
B437 – Great Kame Modification – Endorsement
Paul McAlduff moved for the Board to endorse B437 – Great Kame Modification; the vote was (4-0-1) with Bill Wennerberg in abstention.
Minutes:
September 8, 2008
Paul McAlduff moved to approve the minutes of September 8, 2008 as presented; the vote was (4-0-1) with Larry Rosenblum in abstention.
Paul McAlduff moved to take “Other Business” out of order; the vote was unanimous (5-0).
Other Business:
B543 – River Run – MEPA Comment letter on FEIR to State
The Board reviewed the draft letter to MEPA regarding the Final Environmental Impact Report for B543 – River Run.
Paul McAlduff moved for the Chair to sign the letter; the vote was (4-0-1) with Larry Rosenblum in abstention.
MEPOD Workshop
Design Standards
Steve Newbold, Gensler Architects, addressed the Board stating that he would like to discuss their comments on proposed changes to the draft Design Standards.
Marc Garrett suggested reviewing the document page by page and making additions and corrections as necessary.
Malcolm MacGregor suggested discussing the series of elements of the design standards that they have concerns with such as water supply, wastewater, access, architecture, site plan, excavation, buffering, landscaping controls and performance standards. There are three documents that need to work together, the MEPOD bylaw, the MOU and the design standards. The Planning Board’s authority needs to be defined as well as what will happen if there is a disagreement.
Mr. Garrett suggested taking the design standards document and firming it up while insuring that it is tied to the MOU.
Lee Hartmann stated that Town Counsel is still reviewing the draft MOU language and once we receive their comments, the Board will review it.
Mr. MacGregor suggested starting with the language about buffers.
Mr. Rosenblum stated that there are references to buffers in the Design Standards, but not details. They don’t speak to the earthen berm to buffer noise. There are two classes of information: guiding principles and standards for compliance.
Mr. Newbold explained that the definition of the buffers is in the MEPOD Bylaw and the Design Standards define how the buffers are executed. The whole complex will be buffered from all adjacent uses in one form or another. They can put more detail in the design standards if the Board desires.
Mr. MacGregor suggested that the details would be part of the site plan review.
Mr. Hartmann stated that the Design Standards should include a description about the ways of buffering. The main goal is retaining existing mature vegetation and installing earthen berms with mature landscaping. The next steps include dialogue about ways to enhance buffers, language about using the building design and how you place the building within the topography to compliment the buffers, and employing non-vegetative measures within the buffers such as fencing to further compliment the buffering.
Mr. Newbold stated that there is a diagram of the proposed berm along Long Pond Road in the Design Guidelines. The intent is that the sound stages will not be visible from Long Pond Road.
Mr. Wennerberg suggested defining the Long Pond Road buffer as Buffer A.
Mr. Hartmann stated that the 10 detached single family homes should be included as part of the buffer to Long Pond Road.
Mr. Garrett stated that on Page 21 of Version 4 of the Design Standards the discussion on site plan begins and has subcategories: buildings, proximity to Long Pond Road, privacy, screening, landscaping, Underground utilities, pedestrian network, surface water and wastewater disposal, retaining walls, wayfinding and signage, and urban furniture. Mr. Garrett again suggested going through each section of the Design Standards for a thorough review.
Mr. Hartmann stated that the goal is to vote approval of the Design Standards prior to Town Meeting.
The following changes were suggested by the Planning Board to the Design Guidelines, Version 4:
Page 3, Applicability, include language about the Special Permit for access as defined in the MEPOD bylaw;
Page 3, 1, b, remove “If a pre-application review is requested by the Applicant”;
Page 4, 3, e, add “considering best engineering practices” after “portions of the site”;
Page 7, as “Boulevard” is shown on the legend, it should be added to the definitions;
Page 9, 1, a, use “limited” rather than “minimized” in regards to cut and fill where possible;
Page 10, h, add berms to “Buffers or Screening” of adjoining rural residential properties and change “or” to “and”;
Page 10, i, remove “Buildings adjacent to Route 3 will be screened from view where possible.”
Page 11, k, change “should” to “will” in regards to landscaped screens, setbacks and buffer spaces;
Page 14, c, iii, define light fixtures; and prohibit a large number of 150 watt lamps and limit the concentration of the lamps;
Page 15, 2, a, change “four” campuses to “three” campuses;
Page 15, 2, a, i, add a general description of the size and specifications of plantings;
Page 15, 2, a, iii, add separate headings for formal and natural landscaping areas, and add the requirement for an irrigation system for the formal landscaping areas; and add language requiring erosion control for natural landscaping;
Page 15, 2, a, v, add language to encourage lower heights for light fixtures;
Page 15, 2, a, vi, add “bicycle racks” to urban furniture;
Page 17, 3, add a new section before (v.) language regarding the encouragement of shared of parking and overflow parking for businesses with different hours of operation;
Page 17, b, i, capitalize “concept” and “road”; and remove “coming from the Route #3 off ramp”; and add language from the bylaw regarding the access off Long Pond Road that includes local employees and the single family homes;
Page 18, 3, b,, ii, 3, add “where possible” to the minimum lighting elements;
Page 18, 3, b, iv, and v, revise language regarding pedestrian crossings to “preferred crossing distances of less than 175 feet”
Page 19, 3, b, vi, add reference to driveways for the “Educational/Research campus”;
Page 20, viii, add the language from the bylaw referencing local employee and single family home access off Long Pond Road and add language to minimize the visibility of that access;
Page 21, 4, a, add language that refers to the illustrative, referenceable plan for the site;
The Board took a five-minute break.
Paul McAlduff left the meeting.
Design Standards Continued:
Pages 22, 4, a, viii, remove “infiltration-based systems” and add language to refer to systems defined in the Town’s Stormwater Guidelines;
Page 22, 4, a, iv, add a section regarding a contingency that requires replacement of a percentage of the mature trees that have been relocated (the language for this change will be deferred to the project landscape architect);
Page 23, ix, add “or other materials” to language regarding the retaining walls;
Page 25, add language regarding the difference in the appearance of the sound stages from the rest of the buildings on the site;
Page 29, e, remove the reference to “three buildings” on the Educational/Research campus and correct a typographical error: “Un articulated”;
Page 31, correct the spelling of “attetion” to “attention”;
The Board suggested reducing the number of pictures. They encouraged the Studio to work with the school department regarding the proposed access road and to be consistent with the references to the access road.
Atty Edward Angley stated that there were three technical points in the proposed bylaw that the Plymouth Rock Studio’s has agreed to change: the 100,000 sq. ft. of office space in the amenity campus should read 10,000 sq. ft.; access onto Long Pond Road will be limited to 500 local employee vehicle trips; and language that all intersections will be brought to a level of service “D” or better.
Malcolm MacGregor moved for the Board to accept the above-mentioned amendments to the MEPOD bylaw; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Mr. Hartmann recommended that the discussion on the Design Standards be continued to October 6, 2008.
Malcolm MacGregor moved to adjourn at 10:00 p.m.; the vote was unanimous (4-0).
Respectfully Submitted,
Eileen M. Hawthorne Approved: October 6, 2008
Administrative Assistant
| 
