2008-06-25-PB-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of June 25, 2008 Mr. Hornig said this was a preliminary plan and the Board does not ask for renderings at this point. Mr. Canale said there were flags up at this point, the developer could go forward but we should give as much information as possible. Mr. Hornig asked do the Board should move forward with the preliminary, definitive or informal? Mr. Zurlo suggested using the Design Advisory Committee and then step into the definitive. Mr. Harrington said the applicant would not do that. Ms. Manz said they just revised the zoning bylaws and standards and the applicant met the standards. She said the Board needed to be more transparent and be reasonably clear as to what they want, and asking for a visual model earlier than the definitive stage may help the Board do better in giving guidance as to what they are asking for. Mr. Zurlo said he was not asking them to come in several more times and is interested in helping the applicants move forward but this site has a great deal of complexity including underground water, dramatic elevation changes, and the layout of the property lines. Mr. Galaitsis said there were three difficulties - slopes, the shape of the lot and the two existing structures, which was why they could not be at the maximum. Mr. Hornig said at this point he was at a loss as to what the Board wanted. Mr. Galaitsis said to deny the preliminary plan as it was now due to the deficiencies of the site, which included the shape, slopes and constraints of the two existing buildings. Ms. McCall-Taylor said that denial of the preliminary plan would not prevent the applicant from coming back with a definitive plan. Mr. Canale said the Board had flags regarding this project and he would vote with Mr. Galaitsis. Mr. Zurlo said the denial would result in an interim review so they could work something out and assure better success at the definitive stage. Ms. Manz said that since the Board at this stage was not prepared to be united and approve with conditions she would go with the denial. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-1, (Mr. Hornig opposed) to deny the preliminary plan for 341 Marrett Road. Mr. Harrington said the Board had been forthright and they got the messageThey met with neighbors in the past but would do so no more and would pursue the definitive plan or other options. The development regulations are being revised. There would need to be discussion about what was required at each stage. Ms. McCall-Taylor asked the Board to read section 175, especially section 11, so they could discuss how they would like the development regulations to be modified.