Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board declares lead agency and Type 1 action for Eddy—s Lane development; public hearing scheduled
Summary
The board declared itself lead agency for the nearly 11-acre Eddy—s Lane residential proposal, found it to be a Type 1/unlisted action under the board—s "Seeker" process, and scheduled a public hearing for December after discussing parking, trails, and potential variances.
The Planning Board on Oct. 21 declared intent to act as lead agency for the Eddy—s Lane residential development and determined the project is an unlisted/Type 1 action under the board—s environmental-review process referred to in the transcript as "Seeker."
Vic Costa of Advanced Engineering & Surveying described the proposal by BF Acquisitions 2 for an approximately 11-acre site off Oakwood Avenue: construction of a private roadway, nine residential buildings comprising about 72 units under the latest plan, municipal water and sanitary sewer connections, and a passive trail system. Costa said the developer would retain an auxiliary parcel for future parking rather than dedicating it to the city.
Board members and staff questioned parking counts and setbacks. Costa said the plans show roughly 76 parking stalls and that the project's Transportation Demand Management plan provides for one parking stall per unit, with an auxiliary lot held in reserve should more spaces be needed. Staff noted possible variances for proximity of parking to Eddie—s Lane and said the project may have to go to the zoning board for those variances.
The board voted to declare itself lead agency, to treat the project as an unlisted/Type I action under "Seeker" because it is substantially contiguous to a historic structure and exceeds relevant thresholds in the EAF, and to accept the application as complete for scheduling. Members discussed hearing scheduling; the public hearing was tentatively set for December 16, with staff noting that if variances were required the hearing might need to move to a later meeting.
Staff instructed the applicant to respond to an outstanding item in the EAF (question 20) and to provide any deed references or survey materials staff requested. The board recorded the vote and the application will return for public hearing as scheduled or as otherwise required once variances and remaining materials are addressed.
No budget, funding, or affordable-housing commitments were stated on the record; the applicant described the units as market-rate.
