Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Site Plan Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arlington board continues review of proposed 26 Dudley Street redevelopment, asks for solar, parking and lighting studies
Summary
The board continued site‑plan review for a proposed roughly 12,000‑square‑foot mixed‑use redevelopment at 26 Dudley Street by Santini Realty Trust, asking the applicant for a solar/shading study, parking and circulation revisions or TDM/offsite parking plan, site lighting photometrics, and a viewshed study before the July 20 continued hearing.
The Town of Arlington Development Board on June 1 continued review of a proposed redevelopment at 26 Dudley Street after the applicant agreed to provide additional studies and plans requested by the board.
Attorney Frederick Gilgun, representing Santini Realty Trust, said the project would replace a dilapidated rear storage garage and add an addition to create roughly 12,000 square feet of mixed‑use space for offices, light industrial and storage uses. Gilgun said the proposal includes safety and accessibility upgrades such as new egress, an elevator and fire‑safety improvements and noted the project has received variances from the zoning board of appeals.
Board members raised technical questions and concerns during a lengthy review. Requests and concerns included: a clear solar/shading study identifying which bylaw exemption the applicant seeks; site‑lighting photometrics showing light spill at adjacent residences and the apartment building; clarification of parking requirements and whether the mixed‑use parking exemption applies (applicant proposed 13 on‑site spaces, said they would add three street spaces and noted 10 currently exist); a Transportation Demand Management plan or a designated off‑site parking arrangement; rework of tight drive aisles and a terminal parking bay; snow‑storage dimensions; and a viewshed/photo study showing how the larger rear addition would appear from the nearby park and conservation land.
Board members also asked staff to coordinate with the conservation commission (ConCom), which is still reviewing the project’s wetlands/stormwater matters, and said any material changes resulting from ConCom should come back for administrative review. The board set a continuation date of July 20 to allow the applicant to supply the requested materials and studies.
Next steps: the applicant will prepare and submit the solar/shading study, detailed site lighting photometrics, parking reconfiguration options or an off‑site parking/TDM plan, a snow‑storage dimension plan and a park viewshed study; staff will compile and send a consolidated list of requested deliverables.
