2008-10-22-PB-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of October 22, 2008 resulting in $609,000 revenue per year, with an average annual net of $472,000. The transportation mitigation plan consists of a fixed amount of money, including an annual allocation for Lexpress, along with a performance-based component. Mr. Grant, responding to Mr. Sandy’s TMMA letter, said if the FAR were calculated using the total gross floor area and the entire area of the site, it would be 0.6428. He said that the answers to Mr. Mehr’s questions on fiscal analysis and abatements were confidential information as per State law and would have no relevance to the assessed value on a yearly basis. Regarding trees, there was no meeting with the tree committee because they do not have jurisdiction. Those with jurisdiction are the Planning Board because of the PSDUP, the Zoning Board of Appeals due to the special permit and Conservation Commission because of wetlands. Mr. Mehr wanted to know the number of trees removed. Mr. Larson explained that because the building would be built over the existing road, which is on 14-15 feet of fill, there would only be secondary growth removed, no major trees. The total count of trees 12-inches or larger is 235-240, and 35 of these would be removed. The building is set 200 feet from the nearest home, which is on Spring Street. Audience comments/questions/concerns: Audience comments, questions, and concerns are summarized below. Italicized text at the end of sentences shows responses by petitioner or Planning Board. ?? The balloons that were supposed be to mark the high corners of the proposed Three Ledgemont building were not there as of today. Mr. Nichols said there were now stakes in the ground and the balloons would be there this weekend for the site walk. ?? Did the calculated FAR of 0.64 exclude the wetlands area from the denominator. Mr. Gloski said it was the gross floor area over site area. ?? Someone observed that the site has many unused parking spaces and wondered why more are needed. Mr. Nichols said they were still in the lease-up period for Ledgemont One and offices were only now starting to be occupied. ?? Would construction affect moisture in the lower areas? Mr. Nichols said a thorough storm water analysis was done and there would be no water runoff onto Munroe Road. It would flow toward the wetlands below the Ledgemont Two building area. ?? Someone suggested to turn the building 90 degrees to lessen the impact. Mr. Nichols said that in 2003 that concept was presented and they had been told that it was not desirable. ?? An increase in commercial development would lower the quality of life with impacts such as increased traffic; other hidden costs would reduce the revenues from the development; the