2001-01-29-PB-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JANUARY 29, 2001 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G- I of the Town Office Building, was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Vice Chairman Galaitsis with members Bridge - Denzak, Chase, Davies, Planning Director Garber, and Assistant Planner McCall- Taylor present. Mr. Colman was absent. * * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * ** SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 32 Roosevelt Road, Ronald Lopez: Mr. Galaitsis began the meeting by explaining to the half dozen people in the audience that the purpose of the evening's meeting was to allow the Planning Board to discuss the proposed development at 32 Roosevelt Road, not to take public input. He noted that since the Iast meeting letters of concern had been received from neighbors Kelly, Wheaton and Jones. Ms. McCall- Taylor noted that a petition had been turned into the planning office that morning. It contained 80 to 100 signatures requesting a traffic study of the area. Mr. Davies raised the issue of sewage backups that had been referred to at the last meeting and wondered if they were sanitary or storm sewers. Ms. McCall - Taylor said that there had been four known sanitary sewer back -ups in the area in the last 15 years and that engineering was looking at the problem in more detail. At this time they believed the size of the sewer was adequate, but there might be issues of inflow and infiltration causing the problem. Mr. Galaitsis asked if there were setback requirements for an interior drive. He was told that this was something that could be determined by the special permit process. Mr. Davies stated that he felt the development should comply with site coverage and impervious surface ratios. This site is very tight and allows no slack. He acknowledged that in the past the interior drive might not have been included in these calculations and he didn't want to change the rules without notice but said that all future applicants have to include it in the calculations. He felt the Board should be rigorous about the rest of the coverage meeting the standards set forth in the Zoning By -Law. Ms. Chase agreed that the site was too tight to allow the seven units proposed. She wanted to see a traffic study performed. Mr. Garber explained the Board could not require a study of trip distribution throughout the area but that a trip generation study was within their scope. He wondered which the neighbors really wanted. Those in the audience said they were concerned about the traffic peaks at the intersection of Roosevelt and Wilson Roads during the four drop -off and pick -up periods at the Hastings School. Parking along Roosevelt Road is an issue as the parents park and go into the school to pick up children. Mr. Galaitsis said that the long, stretched -out parcel, reached only from one end, stretches the limits of what the By -Law allows. The long lot requires a long road to get to the back of the site, which results in a disproportionately high site coverage and impervious area. He felt the impact multiplier of 3.75 was very high given the constraints of the lot shape. He felt the number of units needed to be scaled down from the seven proposed. Mr. Harrington, attorney for the developer, said they had tried to take into account the guidelines for clusters. By keeping the units low, it causes the units to spread out. They had avoided the boxier townhouses that would have lowered the site coverage. Mr. Galaitsis said he was trying to find where the open space was. All he saw were left -over pieces. He wanted to see the proposal trimmed down. Mr. Harrington said that the Mazarells, current owners of the property, would lose value if the density were reduced.