Arlington Redevelopment Board - Nov 10th, 2025

Meeting held at 27 Maple St. Materials were available from arlington.novusagenda.com/agendapublic/MeetingView.aspx?MeetingID=2368&MinutesMeetingID=-1&doctype=Agenda.

Approval of Minutes

The board approved minutes from their Oct 20, 2025 meeting, 5--0.

Docket 3867 - 9--11 Robbins Road

This docket involves a new apartment building in one of the MBTA Communities multifamily districts.

(Claire Ricker, Planning Director) Ms. Ricker says the applicant has asked to have their hearing continued.

(Kin Lau, ARB) Mr. Lau asks if there are have been changes to the proposal.

(Claire Ricker) Ms. Ricker says they're reducing the number of units from nine to four, and still have details to work out.

The board votes to continue the hearing to Dec 1, 2025, 5--0.

Docket 3866 - 18 Grafton St

This docket is a site plan review application to construct a six-plex in the Neighborhood Multifamily District.

(Rachel Zsembery, ARB Chair) Ms. Zsembery explains how the hearing will be conducted. Staff will introduce the project, the applicant will make a presentation to the board, and the board will ask questions of the applicant. Afterwards, the board will take comments from members of the public and then discuss the application.

(Claire Ricker, Planning Director) Ms. Ricker says the parcel is in the R2 and Neighborhood Multifamily District, and the applicants have chosen to develop according to the multifamily district rules. They intend to demolish the existing one-family house and construct a building with six two-bedroom apartments. They're proposing three parking spaces and a bike shed with room for ten bikes. One of the six units will be an affordable unit.

(Trevor O'Leary, Architect) Mr. O'Leary says that 18 Grafton St is between Mass Ave and Broadway, but closer to the Mass Ave side. There's an existing two-story one-family home. The height of the proposed building is similar to existing two-family homes on the street. They'd like to preserve the existing setbacks, which include a large enclosed front porch at the front of the home. There is no straight line at the front of the lot, and they plan to re-use the existing garage for bike storage.

The proposed building will have six two-bedroom dwellings and is intended to be transit-oriented. It's 0.1 miles from several bus routes and one mile from the Alewife T station. There will be two dwellings on each floor, and a crawl space rather than a full basement. They're proposing three parking spaces, and leaving the driveway in the same location. One of the parking spaces will be sixteen feet wide, in order to accommodate an accessible van. The existing garage will be converted to a bike shed.

Tree protection will be a priority. There's a mature tree in the rear corner of the property and two street trees in front.

The applicants are looking for relief from the front and rear setback requirements.

The dwellings are 650--790 square feet, which is less than the 850 square feet in the Chapter 40B guidelines. Mr. O'Leary says they're trying to make the units affordable by virtue of their size. He believes the Executive Office of Housing and Liveable Communities will accept the affordable unit because it's comparable in size to other units in the building.

The building will have 4,900 square feet and both units on the bottom floor will be Group 1 accessible. They're trying to maintain the look and feel of a single-family home. There will be open space in the rear and a lawn in front, and there will be ADA access from Grafton St to the front door. Utilities will be underground.

They're proposing a 6' privacy fence for the property, ten long-term bicycle parking spaces, and two short-term ones. The building will be sprinklered.

Mr. O'Leary says they're planning to use a light-colored walkway and roof to reflect heat. There will be red siding, with a darker color for the mansard roof on the third floor. They'll use native plantings for landscaping. They've designed the floor plan to minimize circulation space, in order to maximize living space in the apartments.

(Kin Lau, ARB) Mr. Lau likes the design and he thinks it will fit in well. He doesn't believe the board will be able to give relief for the 15' rear setback the applicants are requesting. He thinks the applicants will be able to have a setback that's 80% of the average lot depth, and asks the applicants to verify this with staff. In front of the building, it's possible to take advantage of the average setback on the street.

(Trevor O'Leary) Mr. O'Leary says they've measured the setbacks of other buildings on the block, and the average is around 15'. He's not sure they can make a 15' front setback work with the smaller units.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau thinks a smaller affordable unit will be allowed, if other units in the building have a similar size. He'd like to see the next submission include details the placement of trash and mechanical systems.

(Shaina Korman-Houston, ARB) Ms. Korman-Houston suggests the applicants consider showers rather than bathtubs for the accessible units. She didn't see space for mail on the plans. She notes that the applicants will need to submit a transportation demand management plan.

(Eugene Benson, ARB) Mr. Benson doesn't think the board can grant the setback relief that the applicant is looking for. Mr. Benson says that 5.3.13.B.1 exempts minor accessory structures from side-yard setbacks, but the bike shed is too large for that exemption. He doesn't think the board can approve the shed in its current location.

Mr. Benson asks the applicants to consider whether 6.1.10.A requires them to provide a vegetated buffer along the driveway. He says the applicant's main problem is that the road curves. He suggests that the applicants ask if the town would be willing to sell them a portion of Grafton St.

(Steve Revilak, ARB) Mr. Revilak reads a section of the bylaw which says that the requirement for a solar energy system applies to the Mass Ave/Broadway multi-family district. He think solar-ready is acceptable, because this property is part of the Neighborhood Multifamily district.

Mr. Revilak doesn't believe the board can grant relief on the rear yard setback. The front setback could be set according to Section 5.3.10, but it sounds like the applicants have already considered that.

Mr. Revilak asks if the applicants will re-use at least two walls of the garage when building the bike shed.

(?, Applicant) The applicant says they plan to keep three of the garage walls.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak is okay with the proposal to convert the garage into a bike shed. He sees it as a pre-existing, non-conforming accessory structure.

Mr. Revilak notes that the bylaw provides a 10% parking reduction for projects that provide affordable units, so their parking requirement is five spaces instead of six.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery asks how access to the bike shed will work if there are cars in the driveway.

(Trevor O'Leary) Mr. O'Leary thinks there will be enough room to maneuver between the cars.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak asks if these will be rental units or condominiums.

(Trevor O'Leary) Mr. O'Leary says they're leaning towards rental units, but haven't made a final decision.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson agrees with Mr. Revilak's statement about solar energy systems -- the applicants will not be required to provide one.

There's discussion about setback relief, and whether the applicants might consider applying for a variance, given the shape of the lot.

The chair opens the hearing to public comment.

(Andrew Waite, 15 Everett St) Mr. Waite asks how the tree at the rear of the property will be protected during construction. If the tree is pruned, he's like to make sure the pruning is balanced. He asks if the applicants have tested for hazardous materials. He loves the idea of a bike shed but is concerned about the structural integrity of the garage. He hopes that removal of the rear fence can be coordinated with the garage removal. Otherwise, it's a nice plan.

(Adam Storeygard, 15 Everett St) Mr. Storeygard is also happy to see multi-family. He's mostly concerned about the process. He's like to know when demolition will happen, and if there can be coordination around the fence replacement.

(Jen Thompson, 22 Grafton) Ms. Thompson says there's a chain link fence between her property and 18 Grafton. She's not opposed to a new fence, but would like to coordinate on the changeover. The existing fence is attached to her shed, which isn't in the best shape. She's concerned about how the demolition will take place.

(Chelsea Waite, 15 Everett St) Ms. Waite asks who's property the tree is on.

(Susan Stamps, 39 Grafton) Ms. Stamps also has questions about the tree. She says it's very large and right on the property line. The roots probably go well into the subject property. She'd like the board to consider root protection.

There are no more comments from the public.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery would like to address the questions she heard during public comment. She asks if there are hazardous materials on the site.

(Trevor O'Leary) Mr. O'Leary says there are state laws and regulations that cover demolition. The demolition will be supervised by the Inspectional Services department and handled in a proper way.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery asks about tree protection and coordination.

(Trevor O'Leary) Mr. O'Leary says the tree is in the rear corner of the lot, and far enough away that it won't be harmed by the construction. He says the plan to work with a landscape architect to maintain the site.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery asks about coordination.

(Trevor O'Leary) Mr. O'Leary says they'll coordinate with everyone.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery asks if pursuing a variance for the setbacks is an option. This could be done as the next step in the process, or the board could approve with conditions.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak thinks it would make sense to have the applicants pursue the variance first.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson asks the applicants whether they'd be willing to pursue a variance.

(?, Applicant) One of the applicant's says they'll need time to talk it through.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson thinks the board's options are to continue the hearing, or deny the application.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston agrees with Mr. Benson.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau would support a continuance. He thinks the applicant's have a slim chance of obtaining a variance.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery says this is a great project overall. She summarizes the list of things the board would like to see from the applicant during the next hearing. These include:

• a transportation demand management plan
• locations of HVAC wells and trash containers
• a central mail site
• a vegetated buffer for the parking area
• taking a look at the patio setbacks
• detail on how they'll preserve the non-conforming garage

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson adds snow removal to the list.

Hearing continued to December 15, 5--0.

Docket 3869 - 1513--1519 Mass Ave

This is a special permit hearing for a mixed-use building in a B2A business district.

(Claire Ricker, Planning Director) Ms. Ricker says the board approved docket 3821 in January 2025, which was for five residential units and one commercial space. At the time, these parcels were zoned B1. Since then, Town Meeting approved the rezoning to B2A and the change was approved by the Attorney General's Office. The applicants are here to present a new proposal for the site, with 15 residential units and one commercial space. All of the apartments have two or three bedrooms, and they'll be required to provide two affordable units.

(Matt Eckel, Attorney) Mr. Eckel says the first proposal was scaled back to comply with the way these parcels were zoned at the time. The site is technically two lots with just under 9000 square feet of space and approximately 98 feet of frontage. The area consists of a number of uses, and he thinks their plan will help activate the streetscape.

Mr. Eckel says there's a prominent focus on the commercial space, which is right in front of the building. The units will have recessed decks, and there's a 7.5' step back on the fourth floor. They'll provide four public shade trees, 15 parking spaces, and 26 long-term bicycle parking spaces inside the building. The trash area will be located in the garage, and there will be separate entrances for residents and the business space. They plan to plant arborvitaes along the side of the building.

The building will have two means of egress. Thirteen of the units are two-bedroom and two are three-bedroom. The fourth-floor units are a little smaller, because of the upper-story step-back. Mr. Eckel says these will be owned units, rather than rentals.

(Rachel Zsembery, ARB Chair) Ms. Zsembery asks if the utilities will be above ground.

(Illya ?, Applicant) I'll says they'll have to check with the electric company.

(Steve Revilak, ARB) Mr. Revilak asks if the applicants still plan to use the commercial space as their office.

(Applicant) One of the applicants answers in the affirmative.

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak understands the lot is 8975 square feet, so 1346 square feet of landscaped open space would be required. The rear yard is 10' by 94.5', which provides 945 square feet of landscaped space. Mr. Revilak asks where the rest is.

(Matt Eckel) Mr. Eckel says there's a landscaped strip along the side of the building.

(Eugene Benson, ARB) Mr. Benson tells the applicants that they'll need to provide a solar energy system on 50% of the roof.

(Illya) Illya says they'll provide that.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson asks if there will be a garage door.

(Applicant) One of the applicants says they're planning to leave the garage entrance open.

(Matt Eckel) Mr. Eckel asks Ms. Ricker to show the slide of the rear elevation. He says the garage will be open air.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson says he wants the applicants to think about how the building will look from the Minuteman Bikeway. He'd like to see a rendering of the rear elevation.

(Gene Bernshtein, Applicant) Mr. Bernshtein says there's a big elevation change between their property and the minuteman bikeway. People on the bikeway would be looking up at the building.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson would like the applicant to provide their calculations for open space and GFA, as these are part of the submittal requirements.

(Shaina Korman-Houston, ARB) Ms. Korman-Houston asks if the 4.5' side yard setback goes all the way up the building.

(Matt Eckel) Mr. Eckel answers in the affirmative.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston thinks that underground utility service makes sense for a large building.

(Illya) Illya says this would be beneficial, if it's possible to do. It's really up to Eversource.

(Kin Lau, ARB) Mr. Lau asks to see the material samples the applicants brought with them.

There's discussion about the samples, and the rendering that was provided to the board this evening.

(Shaina Korman-Houston) Ms. Korman-Houston says she'd like to have more time with the rendering.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau thinks the applicants haven't given enough consideration to the commercial space. It's 10' 10" high, and Mr. Lau doesn't think that's enough height. He'd like to see a greater ceiling height on the ground floor, and a slight reduction to ceiling heights on the upper floors. He believes that the business signage needs to be associated with an entryway. He's advocating for a nice commercial space. He'd like to applicants to look into making it bigger and more inviting.

He suggests a band to terminate the wall on the rear of the building, right above the openings for the garage. He'd like the applicants to do something to break up the depth of the building. He'd like to see a rendering that shows the mixed-use building in context with the surroundings. He thinks the building scale is a bit massive.

(Gene Bernshtein) Mr. Bernshtein says that each entrance will have signage on the door. He agrees that a band on the rear is a good idea. The siding will meet with an ending board, and there are different materials on the balconies.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery appreciates the roof articulation. She's like to see additional windows on the sides, or something to break up the side facades. She'd like to see a lighting plan to understand how light spill will affect the bikeway. She's having a hard time considering this as a mixed-use building, with only a 575 square foot commercial space. She thinks the commercial space is shallow and difficult, and doesn't feel like a balance of space. She asks how bike access will work.

(Gene Bernshtein) Mr. Bernshtein says the ground floor was driven by parking. These units will be for sale, and it's hard to see units without parking. He says they can consider a parking reduction, and will provide precise measurements for the parking spaces.

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau suggests using 8' 6" wide space instead of 9', and considering compact spaces. Mr. Lau would like to understand where the support columns in the garage will be.

There are additional discussions about the placement of the transformer and trash areas.

The chair opens the hearing to public comment. There is none.

(Rachel Zsembery) Ms. Zsembery summaries the list of items the board would like the applicant to provide. These include:

• calculations for gross floor area and open space
• dimensions for the upper-story step-back
• a lighting plan and description of light controls
• adding articulation to the side of the building, in order to reduce flatness
• a rendering of the rear of the building
• coordinating the elevations with the rendering
• increasing the ceiling height on the first floor
• adding a band on the rear to terminate materials
• including the dimension of parking spaces, and incorporating compact spaces
• having all vents placed on the roof of the building
• more detail on the transformer location
• details of where mechanical systems will be located.
• details for screening the rear of the parking area, such as a knee wall

(Kin Lau) Mr. Lau suggests a trim change for the top floor.

The board discusses the procedural aspects of revoking the applicant's existing special permit, should the new permit be approved.

The board votes to continue the hearing to December 15, 5--0.

Discussion of 455 Mass Ave

(Claire Ricker) Ms. Ricker informs the board that 455 Mass Ave is currently under a stop-work order. They removed one of the storefront facades in order to square it off, but that wasn't a modification the board approved. They've also started to install signage on the corner space. Ms. Ricker would like some guidance from the board on how to proceed.

(Eugene Benson) Mr. Benson says what the owners have built isn't what the board approved; it's not close at all.

The board would like to bring the owners back in, in order to discuss the deviations.

2026 Meeting Schedule

The board discusses their meeting schedule for January 2026. They changed the March 2nd date to March 9th, and approved the schedule.

Open Forum

There are no speakers for tonight's open forum.

New Business

(Steve Revilak) Mr. Revilak says that one of the Select Board's topics for tonight includes a discussion about setting the tax rate. The Assessor's FY2026 tax booklet was posted with the board's meeting materials, and he'd like to highlight a few things from that document.

Last year's tax levy was $151,944,248, and we are claiming $1,238,000 in new growth. That's 0.8% new growth, which has been typical for Arlington during the last few years.

Mr. Revilak provides a breakdown of where the new growth came from. 83% was residential -- mostly single-, two-, and three-family homes and condos. 7% came from commercial growth, 11% came from personal property, and there was no new growth from industrial uses.

He notes that nearly 21% of Arlington's commercial taxes comes from MassDOR code 504, which is personal property taxes that the town collects on gas utility infrastructure. In years past, the payees have been Boston Gas and Eversource.

Meeting adjourned.