Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Process And Peer Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears peer-review critiques, sets schedule and accepts extension for Royal Residences review
Summary
Architectural and civil peer reviewers flagged concerns about parking dominance, playground siting, tree retention, drainage and testing logs; the applicant agreed to post written responses and provide a time extension to March 14, 2025. The board voted to accept the extension and continued the public hearing to Jan. 23, 2025.
Architectural and civil peer reviewers summarized findings and recommended revisions the planning board requested before a final decision. Cliff Bomer (Davis Square Architects) said the site plan is "dominated by parking" and urged exploring parking under buildings to reduce surface paving and improve amenity locations. David Jordan (Greenland Petersons/GPI) focused on grading, stormwater and septic: his office requested test-pit logs, clearer limits-of-work around the new entrance drive and more detail on wastewater handling in groundwater-conservancy areas.
On process and eligibility, counsel for the applicant (Jim Ward) and the board clarified that MassHousing’s Project Eligibility Letter (PEL) remains the governing document and that many modest project changes during design are typically handled without reissuing the PEL; they said MassHousing will review final changes during the project's final approval review.
Schedule and formal actions: The applicant agreed to provide a written time-extension; the board moved and adopted a motion to accept an extension to March 14, 2025 (roll call: Miss Fea — Aye; Miss Viola — Aye; Chair — Aye). The board then moved to continue the public hearing to Jan. 23, 2025, at 7 p.m. (hybrid). The applicant and peer reviewers will exchange written questions and responses and post them on the project webpage ahead of the next hearing.
