Arlington Redevelopment Board - Nov 17th, 2025

Meeting held at 27 Maple Street. Materials were available from https://arlington.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/MeetingView.aspx?MeetingID=2372&MinutesMeetingID=-1&doctype=Agenda.

Review Meeting Minutes

The board approved minutes from their Oct 19, 2025 meeting, 5--0.

Docket 3862 - 126 Broadway

This docket involves a site plan review hearing for a mixed-use building in the Mass Ave/Broadway Multifamily District.

(Rachel Zsembery, ARB Chair) Ms. Zsembery describes how the hearing will be run. Staff will give an introduction, the applicants will give a presentation, and then the board will ask questions of the applicant. Members of the public will be given an opportunity for comment, and the discussion will come back to the board.

(Claire Ricker, Planning Director) Ms. Ricker says the applicant plans to demolish a two-family home and construct a five-story mixed-use building with 14 residential units. The property is located in the Mass Ave/Broadway Multifamily District. The applicant is proposing three inclusionary units, 5 parking spaces (one of which is ADA compliant), and 22 long-term bike parking spaces.

(Tim Johnson, Architect) Mr. Johnson says their landscape architect has confirmed the species of the new tree on Broadway. The tree will not exceed 30' in height to avoid conflicts with power lines. They'll do landscaping around the transformer rather than fencing. They've changed the aesthetics of the building to better reflect the neighborhood by adding a water table and using historical colors. They've added glass sidelights around the front door of the commercial space. They've submitted a solar assessment that includes 37 panels and increased the amount of glazing on the ground floor. They've also replaced the glass block windows in the garage with metal louvers.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery notes that the marketing plan mentions retail and restaurants as possible commercial uses. She'd like to talk about ducting, if there a possibility a restaurant might use this space.

(Michael Cabral, Attorney) Mr. Cabral says they haven't decided on a specific use for the commercial space. He says they're working with the Town's Economic Development Coordinator.

(Tim Johnson) Mr. Johnson says they will provide a shaft to the roof for ducting.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery asks about the materials for the head-house.

(Tim Johnson) Mr. Johnson says they plan to use fiber panels, and black screening around the compressors.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery would prefer a lighter screening. She'd like the garage windows to have some sort of screening, rather than aluminum louvers. Ms. Zsembery says she didn't weigh in on the affordable unit discussion that we had last meeting. She reviewed the bylaw again, and feels that the applicants need to provide four affordable units to get the bonus floor, and that three units doesn't exceed 22.5%. She'd also like the applicant to return the cornices into the recessed areas.

(Kin Lau, ARB) Mr. Lau notes that the patios are recessed. He asks if there will be fenestration on the back walls.

(Tim Johnson) Mr. Johnson says they can use a pattern on the backs of the patios.

There's back and forth about joints and edging.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau says he'd like to see more detail on the back walls. He's concerned about the cornice. He asks about removing the parapet and reducing the size of the cornice.

(Tim Johnson) Mr. Johnson says they've increased the height of the ground floor by two feet, and reduced the height of each upper floor by 1', for an overall height reduction of 2'.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau thinks the transition from the corner to the front patio doesn't look right.

(Tim Johnson) Mr. Johnson asks about dropping the cornice to the roof line.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau suggests dropping the cornice, but leaving 4--6" above the roof line.

(Tim Johnson) Mr. Johnson says he can do that.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau asks how strongly the applicants need walk-up stair access to the roof. He suggests using a bulkhead.

(Tim Johnson) Mr. Johnson says he can look at a bulkhead, but he'll need to see what the building code says about that.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau suggests replacing the louvers on the garage with faux windows.

(Shaina Korman-Houston, ARB) Ms. Korman-Houston is concerned about the commercial space. She appreciates the changes to the door, but thinks the windows look residential. She'd like to see plate glass windows, or to have the mullions removed. She'd also like to see details of the transformer screening.

(Eugene Benson, ARB) Mr. Benson has questions about the solar assessment. It looks like the solar energy system will cover less than 50% of the roof.

(Michael Cabral) Mr. Cabral says that fire safety regulations require 3' between the solar panels and the edge of the roof, and that building mechanicals are taking up some space.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson thinks the applicants need to request a reduction. He appreciates the applicant's intention to charge $175/month for off-street parking, but isn't sure whether they'll be able to charge that to tenants of the affordable units.

(Tim Johnson) Mr. Johnson says that affordable unit tenants would be entitled to rent them. He'd consider the cost of the parking space to be an add-on amenity.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson suggests getting an opinion from the state. The 2 bedroom affordable unit needs to be 900 square feet, per state regulations. He says the applicants will need to talk with EOHLC, or change the location of one of the walls. He's okay with the height of the cornice.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak says he's happy to see the applicants working with the town's Economic Development Coordinator, and that some businesses have expressed interest in the space. He asks what kinds of businesses have shown interest.

(Applicant) One of the applicants says they've had interest from retail establishments, and a cafe.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak also appreciates the color changes.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston says that regulations around parking for affordable units are probably vague. Some types of projects can charge for parking and some cannot. She's not aware of any regulations that apply to inclusionary units.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery opens the hearing to public comment. Give the board's schedule for this evening, she'll take comments until 8:10 pm.

(Adam Lane, 77 Grafton) Mr. Lane thanks the applicants for implementing changes the board has suggested. He thinks the colors on the ground floor might contrast too much with the rest of the building. He thinks the recessed areas might be too contemporary. He thinks there's too much building for the site, and comments the board for holding the applicant to a requirement for four affordable units.

(Joanne Cullinane, Newland Rd) Ms. Cullinane says she sent the board a letter with 141 signatures. She thinks the rules around bonus floors are clear, and the requirements aren't being met. Three units out of fourteen is 21.4%, not 22.5%. The original goal of MBTA Communities was 10%, but we petitioned for 15%. She thinks that bonuses are different and something extra.

(Susan Stamps, Grafton St) Ms. Stamps is generally in favor of the proposal. She doesn't think that three affordable units meets the requirement of "at least 22.5%", and that the formula a Section 8.2 doesn't apply. She says the MBTA communities bonus provision doesn't have a formula. She thinks that space for ground floor parking should be considered in the requirements for ground floor commercial space.

(Marina Popova, Ridge St) Ms. Popova says her biggest concern is the zero setback. Everything is part of the ground floor. The ground floor could be 100% parking and 0% commercial space. She asks the board to please reconsider the bonuses.

(Joe Pinchero) Mr. Pinchero says he noticed something in the minutes about looking for funding to reduce the amount of complexity in the bylaw. He says we don't need funding, and that 3/14's is less than 22.5%. Three members of the board worked on the MBTA Communities proposal, and this is the first time the bonus provisions have come up. This is an important precedent. He says our failure is not to do simple math. It's hard to understand how 3/14 can be more than 22.5%.

(Gary Goldsmith) Mr. Goldsmith says that Arlington desperately needs more commercial space. Mixed use has gotten a bad reputation because the commercial spaces are smaller, and smaller spaces would carry that forward. He thinks that interior space is a bad path to go down.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery closes the public comment period. She'd like to discuss the bonus provision for providing 60% commercial space on the ground floor.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson thinks it's important to realize that zoning drives architecture, and he wants to avoid this. He says that the state building code considers the garage to be part of the ground floor, and not interpreting it that way would be inconsistent with the 60% requirement. He notes that if the board determines that 60% of the ground floor is commercial, the applicants can get a bonus story irrespective of the affordable housing bonus.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak thinks the applicants have met the 60% requirement. Arlington's zoning bylaw explicitly excludes accessory parking from gross floor area calculations, and he doesn't think it should be treated as gross area in this case. If the bylaw included parking in gross floor area, he'd agree with Mr. Benson, but that's not what the bylaw does.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston says that Mr. Revilak articulated her position well. Her position is unchanged since the last meeting.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau concurs. Parking is not counted in GFA and the definition of building says "enclosed", which the open garage is not.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery agrees with Mr. Benson. Three members of the board agree that the applicant has met the bonus requirement for providing 60% commercial space on the ground floor.

Ms. Zsembery would like to talk about the affordable housing bonus, although it's now a moot point. She believes there should be a high threshold for getting the bonus.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau still believes that Section 8 says to round. 22.5% of 14 is 3.15, so three units are required. He says the overlay overlaps the zoning, but the base zoning still stands.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston says she's gone back and fourth but has come around to Ms. Zsembery's view.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson says that a story may be added if the applicants exceed the requirements of 8.2.3 by providing at least 22.5% affordable units. He says you can't focus on the words "at least" by themselves -- you have to read the whole bylaw. The very next section says that 8.2 applies in the multifamily districts, and he believes the board is required to follow Section 8.2.3. If Section 5.8.4.G didn't exist, he might feel differently.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak agrees with Mr. Benson's interpretation. He says that the affordability bonus requires 22.5% of the units to be affordable, which is 50% more than the usual 15%. In other words, an applicant can get a bonus floor by providing 50% more affordable units than they'd otherwise need to provide. In the 15% scenario, they'd need to provide two and they are proposing three for the bonus provision. Three is 50% more than two, so Mr. Revilak thinks this adds up.

Mr. Revilak reads the phrase "exceeds the requirements of 8.2.3" to mean that 8.2.3 applies, and the words "by providing at least 22.5%" as how those requirements are to be exceeded. The bonus comes from taking the requirements in 8.2.3.A and replacing 15% with 22.5%.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson would like to hear more from Mr. Lau, regarding his suggestion for the cornice.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau says he was trying to make the cornice less heavy and reduce its scale.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery doesn't have concerns with heaviness of the cornice. She is concerned about the modern treatment of the recesses and the heavy dark brick.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak suggests using cement fiber clapboard for the recessed areas; the same material that's being used on the rest of the exterior. He agrees that the brick seems dark in relation to the other colors. He also agrees with Ms. Korman-Houston's comment about the muntons in the commercial windows.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery would like to see a sample board at the next hearing. She summarizes what the board would like to see at the next hearing, including:

• A statement requesting a reduction from the 50% solar requirement
• Confirmation of whether the affordable 2 bedroom unit needs to be at least 900 square feet
• A change to the brick coloration
• Turning the cornice into the recesses
• Examining the option of having a bulkhead on the roof, rather than full-height door
• Details for the transformer screening
• Reviewing the size of the parapet
• New treatment for the openings to the parking garage
• Changes to the commercial windows
• Replacing the fiber panel finish in the recessed areas.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson asks if the board will discuss the parking reduction at the next hearing.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery thinks the board should discuss the parking reduction now.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak says the applicant's memo claims four TDM measures. He doesn't think the board can count "additional bicycle parking" as a TDM measure because the bylaw required 21 bike spaces and they're only providing 22. He thinks the other three TDM measures are fine, and would agree to a parking reduction.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson is concerned that the two-bedroom units might need more parking. He's not sure whether five is the right number.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston says the applicants are asking for an aggressive reduction, but she's okay with the reduction.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau is okay with five spaces. He says the board approved a project on Park Ave, where people raised concerns that there wasn't enough parking and that tenants would park on the street. That issue never materialized and that property often has vacant parking spaces. He thinks the reduction is appropriate, as we transition to using cars less.

(Michael Cabral) Mr. Cabral asks what the board would like to see for the garage openings.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery would like to see some form of screening, with some degree of openness.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak suggests some sort of wrought iron for the openings.

The board votes to continue the hearing to Jan 12, 2026, 5--0.

Docket 3857 - 225 Broadway

This docket involves a site plan application for a four-family dwelling in the Mass Ave Broadway Multifamily district.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery introduces the docket and outlines the process for the site plan review hearing.

(Claire Ricker) Mr. Ricker says the applicant is planning to demolish a two-family home and build a four-family home in its place. The property is in the Mass Ave Broadway Multifamily district, and the applicant has provided a solar assessment for this hearing.

(Ronald, Architect) Ronald says the project architect had a medical emergency this evening, so he will be pinch-hitting in their place. This is a project to add new housing, and Ronald is asking the board for a vote of approval. Homes in the area are predominantly 2.5 or 3 stories tall; they're using a mansard roof so it feels like a 3.5 story building.

The front porch extends 22 square feet into the front setback, and zoning allows 25 square feet. This is detailed on Sheet A-20.

Long term bike parking has been moved to the rear of the building, where there will be a bike enclosure at grade. The enclosure will have a roll-up door, similar to a garage door. They're providing a 2x6' area for each bike.

The driveway is the only area of the site that's open to the elements, and the new plans indicate snow storage spaces. There is 220 square feet allocated for snow storage, and they plan to use landscaping that's hardy enough to withstand it.

The first floor is an accessible unit where the basement can be accessed via a lift.

There is a five-foot wide strip alongside one of the parking spaces, which will allow it to be converted to an ADA space if needed.

They've changed the fourth floor to a mansard roof design. Ronald thinks that better defines the fourth floor.

The applicants used Revision Energy to provide a solar assessment. They're proposing a system with 33 panels that will generate 16,992 kW/h annually. It uses all of the roof space that's not allocated to condensers.

Trash barrels will be stored behind the building. The existing two-family home would have four barrels and Ronald believes there's room for four more.

Ronald says that a 24' drive isle would create a sea of asphalt; he feels that 20' should be acceptable. Overall, the building will add curb appeal and new housing.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery is in favor of the architectural changes. She thinks it's an appropriate scale and design.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau thinks the back side of the mansard roof doesn't look like a mansard. He'd like to try maintain that style around the balcony.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston thinks the side facades are a little flat, and that anything to draw out the depth would be much appreciated. She believes the applicants will need a Massachusetts Architectural Access Board (MAAB) waiver for the lift. That could be a condition of the permit. Or, the applicants could look at providing a ramp to the basement, if the variance is an issue.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery notes that the applicants will need to receive a variance before they can get a building permit.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston thinks the trash area is very condensed. She's not sure that all barrels will be accessible.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson asks how the bike storage area will be accessed.

(Applicant) One of the applicants says it will have a roll-down door.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson says there are two constraints on the front porch. The first is that it can't extend into the front setback more than 25 square feet, or to a depth of more than 3.5 feet. This comes from Section 5.3.9.A. He's like to see the depth marked on the plans, or to have the porch moved back to meet the requirement.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak says the requirement for a 24' drive isle only applies to parking areas with five or more spaces. This parking area only has four spaces, so that requirement doesn't apply.

The chair opens the hearing to public comment.

(Catherine McFarland, Broadway) Ms. McFarland doesn't think there's enough space in front of the property for trash pickup. She notes that the area for a future accessible parking spaces is also designated as snow storage, and doesn't understand how that could work.

(Claudia Hews, Webster St) Ms. Hews says her uncle is 104 years old and lives next door to this property. He'll see a big wall outside his window. She's worried about parking and thinks the top floor looks very dark. She says the neighborhood is full of two-family homes, and a four-family doesn't fit in.

(Susan Stamps, Grafton St) Ms. Stamps wants to make sure a sufficient number of street trees are planted.

There are no more comments from the public.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery asks how trees will be protected during construction.

(Applicant) The applicants say they'll use fencing and wrap the trees with boards to prevent damage.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery summarizes issues that the board has mentioned, including:

• Changes to the rear of the building where the mansard roof is truncated.
• Addressing flatness on the sides of the building
• Looking at alternative locations for the trash cans, although this is not a blocker.
• Confirming that the front porch doesn't extend more than 3.5 feet from the foundation wall.
• A lighter color for the mansard roof, and providing a materials board.
• Obtaining a variance from the MAAB for the lift
• Increasing the horizontal band between the first and second floors.

The board agrees that these items can be subject to administrative approval.

The board votes to approve the application, 5--0.

Affordable Housing Overlay Presentation

(Claire Ricker) Ms. Ricker introduces members of the Affordable Housing Overlay (AHO) committee, who are here tonight to give a presentation.

(Carol Kowalski, AHO Committee) Ms. Kowalski introduces the members of the committee that are here tonight, and acknowledges work that an earlier citizens group had done.

Ms. Kowalski shows the 2025 town meeting article that created the AHO committee, and provides a timeline of relevant milestones:

• 2020. Arlington created the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF)
• 2022. The AHTF committee adopted a five-year action plan
• 2023. Town meeting adopted a resolution supporting an affordable housing overlay
• 2025. Town meeting voted to create the affordable housing overlay committee.

(Beth Elliott, AHO Committee) In her day job, Ms. Elliott works as an affordable housing finance attorney. Funding affordable housing projects is a challenge because very few affordable rents can actually cover the costs of building and maintaining the building. This problem is exacerbated in smaller buildings with fewer units.

These funding gaps can be filled through a number of federal, state, and local programs. There are capital subsidies and operating subsidies. Operating subsidies are hard to get, because we got out of the business of building and subsidizing affordable housing in the 1980s. Those subsides were replaced with Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC). Approximately $10.5 billion dollars of these tax credits are awarded each year, and they've funded 3000 affordable units in Massachusetts.

LIHTC requires units to be legally income restricted, and at least 20% of them have to be affordable. Massachusetts requires an additional 10% on top of that. Many LIHTC projects are 100% affordable, but they can be mixed-income.

Investors invest capital for these projects and they're given tax credits over a period of ten years, based on how expensive it is to build in the area. Builders can only take credits on income-restricted units; they can't be used to fund commercial space or market-rate units. Affordable housing transactions are complicated, which makes the projects more expensive. You generally need at least 30 units to be viable. It's very difficult to include commercial spaces, because most agencies won't provide loans for it.

40B and inclusionary zoning can produce some affordable units, but they can't produce affordable projects.

New one-bedroom apartments typically rent for $3,298/month, and a tenant would need a $120,000/year income to afford that. At 60% of the area median income, income levels of $69,481 to $79,440 are eligible for affordable units. This is in the range of what teachers and staff earn at Arlington's public schools.

(Carol Kowalski) Ms. Kowalski says the committee is leaning towards a district that is 100% affordable and 100% residential, using sites that are suitable for developing at LIHTC scale. They'd prefer sites that are near transit, schools, stores, and services. They think of the overlay as an alternative to 40B.

The group divided into teams to scout for sites in different parts of Arlington. Sites they've considered include:

• 307 Washington St
• Winchester Savings Bank
• all properties owned by the Arlington Housing Authority
• St. Paul's Lutheran Church
• the Belmont Country Club
• St. Camillus
• Arlington Automatic Transmission
• the rear of 33 Broadway
• the Order of St. Anne
• Park Ave Congregational Church
• 366 Mass Ave
• VFW Post 39
• the Russell Common Lot
• Greater Boston Motor Sports
• Mirak Chevrolet
• Astound/RCN

Ms. Kowalski says that none of these sites are in the B3 or B5 districts. There are large also sites in the R0 and R1 districts, which would otherwise be redeveloped as large homes. Ms. Kowalski notes that commercial and residential properties are taxed at the same rate in Arlington, so there's not a disadvantage from a tax perspective. New construction is assessed at higher values and contributes to new growth.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery says this is a creative way at looking at the issue.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau asks what's wrong with the inclusionary zoning we currently have.

(Beth Elliott) Ms. Elliott says that inclusionary only produces a few affordable units each year.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau asks if the housing would be town-owned under this proposal.

(Carol Kowalski) Ms. Kowalski says there's no criteria for town ownership. She notes that even the Housing Corporation doesn't have a by-right path for affordable housing development.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston asks what "by-right development" would mean in this context.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson says he likes the first three criteria, but the fourth doesn't make sense. He thinks locations shouldn't isolate people. He's also concerned about bad designs.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak would like to respond to Mr. Lau's earlier question about inclusionary zoning. Here, the difference is who pays for the subsidies. Under Arlington's inclusionary zoning, a 2BR apartment would have to rent for around $2000/month, while market rate for the same unit would be around $3500/month. Inclusionary zoning means that the market rate tenants subsidize the affordable units, so they're getting whacked to the tune of $300/month.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson says that the zoning will also be important. He'd like to understand what the buildings could look like, what choices were involved, and why.

(Carol Kowalski) Ms. Kowalski says they don't have specific zoning language yet, but they're working on that.

(Claire Ricker) Ms. Ricker says the AHO group will hold an affordable housing forum on October 19th, at 6:30pm on Zoom.

(Laura Wiener, AHO Committee) Ms. Wiener says the group hopes to come back in December to talk more.

Discussion of 455 Mass Ave

In this agenda item, the board will discuss non-conformities at 455 Mass Ave with the project manager and attorney.

(Claire Ricker) Ms. Ricker says this agenda item is for the board to discuss the facade of 455 Mass Ave. She says the site is currently under a stop-work order. Ms. Ricker says staff researched the history of this project, and she shows the rendering that the ARB approved. The applicants subsequently went before the Historical Commission, who approved something different, which was administratively approved by the Department of Planning and Community Development.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery says those changes should have come back to the board, and that the Historical Commission shouldn't have approved changes to the size and scale of the building. However, what's currently on the site doesn't reflect either set of renderings.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson agrees that the changes should have come back to the board, and what's built is nothing like the board approved.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau would like to hear from the developers.

(Corinne Doherty, Attorney) Ms. Doherty says the work isn't finished, and design elements will be added to the building, but that construction hasn't happened yet. She thinks the building was done according to plan, and the facade looks different because Leader Bank left and their sign was taken down. They removed Leader Bank's ATM because the space is no longer a bank.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau points out several places where the building differs from the renderings.

(John Murphy, Project Manager) Mr. Murphy says that some of the tile was removed after Leader Bank left. He thought they had received administrative approval for the changes.

(Claire Ricker) Ms. Ricker says that staff's position was that these changes had to come back to the board.

(Corinne Doherty) Ms. Doherty understands that the changes should have come back to the board, but she thought they were following the proper process. She assumed that the facade and materials changes that were sent to staff were also shared with the board.

There's back and forth about the miscommunication that took place.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston is troubled by the discrepancies what was approved by the Historical Commission and what's on the site now.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak points out a number of difference between the building and the rendering that the Historical Commission approved.

(John Murphy) Mr. Murphy acknowledge that there was miscommunication. The tile around the Leader Bank space was problematic. They talked to Historical, and they approved a change to brick panels.

(Corinne Doherty) Ms. Doherty says that some of the design elements approved by Historical have yet to be added.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau asks what we are going to do about the major facade changes.

There's more back and forth.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery asks how we could get closer to what was approved than we are today. She suggests a few specific ideas, and says the board would be willing to consider something different.

(Corinne Doherty) Ms. Doherty would like to propose that the board approve the changes to Verizon's facade. They wanted to make the facade flush with the rest of the building.

This will come back to the board at a later time.

2026 Meeting Schedule

(Claire Ricker) Ms. Ricker says that staff suggests adding a hearing date on March 23, to ensure we can meeting the statutory timeline for warrant article hearings.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery suggests adding a date in April as well, for approval of the draft report to town meeting.

The board adds March 23 to their calendar. They'll discuss an April date at their next meeting.

Open Forum

(Barry Jaspin) Mr. Jaspin says he'd like to propose a zoning amendment for the next town meeting, and asks about the process for doing so.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery says she'd like to have Mr. Jaspin come to one of the board's December meetings to discuss his proposal. She advises him to talk with Director Ricker for scheduling.

(Carl Wagner, 30 Edgehill Road) Mr. Wagner says he wasn't able to speak during the hearing for 12 Broadway. He says the board has gotten ten correspondences about that project and he hopes people will press for a better precedent. He says that 455 Mass Ave is very important. He's concerned about the Affordable Housing Overlay committee. He thinks the committee is creating a non-public process. He says there are housing advocates on the committee, and it doesn't represent stakeholders.

(Adam Lane, 77 Grafton St) Mr. Lane asks if the developer for 455 Mass Ave is the same one for the property at the corner of Mass Ave and Lake Street.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery answers in the affirmative.

(Adam Lane) Mr. Lane says he's terrified by that prospect. He says they need to fix the damage they've done to the center of town.

New Business

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak tells the board that 10 Sunnyside Ave has broken down. They've demolished the old garage, and it's one big open site.

Meeting adjourned.