Town Meeting Says "No" to Muller Road PPD

Burlington's 2011 May Town Meeting concluded last night and a big item of contention on the warrant, the nearly the last issue taken up, was the . Town Meeting voted 61 to 23 to oppose allowing the zoning change.

That despite a strong push by landowner Symes Associates, which proposed the development project in question, some abutters in favor of the project and the fact Burlington's Planning Board voted 6-1 to approve the proposal during its May 5 meeting.

The plan in question was presented by Symes Associates which recently purchased the former Thorstenson property on . Symes intended to build 42 new homes on the site, which is currently zoned as industrial, and so needed to change the zoning. Symes tactic was to apply for a Planned Development District (PDD) rather than trying to get the zoning changed to residential to allow the project. The plan included 30 single family homes and 12 condominiums with ten percent of the homes set aside as affordable housing.

There was a bit of discussion on the pros and cons of the project before a vote was taken. Jeff Rhuda, Business Development Manager for Symes Associates, gave a short presentation on the project, highlighting how the size of the development plan had been reduced in response to concerns for abutters and how the proposal included setting aside green space to mitigate neighbor's fears that the project would have a great impact on the atmosphere of the neighborhood.

Rhuda said the maximum height of each home would be 35 feet and each home would have 20 feet of space between units. He also said 5.81 acres would be designated open space and much of the open space would be an area that formed a buffer between the new development and abutters on Eugene Road, who have also raised concerns about what the project would do to their properties.

There were also a couple of abutters in favor of the project. Steven Meyers, who lives on Muller Road and who described himself as the "closest neighbor" to the proposed project said he was in favor of the residential development. He said he'd rather have new homes in the area and was afraid that if the PPD failed Symes would sell the property, zoned for industry, to an industrial company that would be less appealing than a residential project.

"Right now the view from my bedroom is an industrial project," Meyers said. "I would prefer new neighbors with other kids for my children to play with. I would like this to stay open space, but that is not going to happen and I'm scared a huge industrial building will be built and traffic will be worse."

Town Meeting Member Sally Willard, who is also a member of the Land Use Committee, said she and her committee members also felt the residential development would be better than what might happen if Symes sold the property for industrial use.

"In general we felt this was a better use of the land than as an industrial site, as proponents have said," she said. "It is a down-zoning of site."

Other Town Meeting members rejected this line of thinking, stating they felt Symes was using the possibility of selling to an industrial company as a way to get a project many of them opposed pushed through.

Town Meeting member Mildred Nash was in this latter camp.

"I'm upset that the tone of those representing Symes was threatening," she said. "They're not willing to give up and say that if they lose they will sell to an industrial company. That scares people but being scared is not any way to make a decision."

In the end the decision against the PPD seemed to center around two issues, traffic and the density of the development. Traffic had been a big issue in Planning Board meetings leading up to Town Meeting.

During the May 5 meeting Eugene Road resident John Marquis expressed concerns about traffic.

“We can’t get out of our neighborhood. So adding more cars is a problem for us,” he said . “It’s a pretty brutal spot. People fly through there. Something needs to be done about it.”

Though traffic was brought up as a concern, there was little discussion on traffic studies or actual impact. Rhuda said residential development would mean less big truck traffic than an industrial zone and that Symes was prepared to set up radar-enhanced signs to combat speeding by motorists using Muller Road as a short-cut between different points in town.

The biggest issue, and the one that seemed to close debate, was on the density of the proposed project. Town Meeting member Frank Monaco said he felt 42 units was "too many" for the size of the project site and that he didn't think homes built so close together would retain value. 

"I cannot agree with the density," he said.

Paul Raymond, the one Planning Board member to vote against the proposal on May 5, agreed that density was a problem with the development plan. He said Symes could have tried to get the zoning changed in a traditional manner, which would have allowed 30 residential units, but it went with the PDD, which would have allowed 42 units. Raymond added that Burlington currently has 9,700 residential units, 6,700 of which are single family and nearly 3,000 of which are "other," including apartments, condominiums and assisted-living facilities. This point was apparently made to encourage members to consider what type of development would work best in Burlington.

"This Town Meeting has to make a decision on how much multiple family housing they want," he said. "This is not a case of 'not in my backyard,' but a decision on what type of development members want."

Discussion was cut short as the time went past 11 p.m. and the vote, which ultimately went against Symes' PDD, was taken, essentially ending Town Meeting.