HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-03-26-PB-min
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF MARCH 26, 2008
A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board was held in Estabrook Hall, in Cary Memorial Hall
and called to order at 5:20 p.m. by Chairman Hornig with members Canale and Manz and planning staff
McCall-Taylor, and Henry present. Mr. Zurlo and Mr. Galaitsis joined the meeting in progress.
************************ ARTICLES FOR 2008 TOWN MEETING**************************
Article 52, Countryside Plaza Rezoning: Ms. Manz will make the presentation to the Board of Selectmen
and at Town Meeting.
Articles 53-60 The Board supports the indefinite postponement of Articles 57 & 60. Mr. Canale said the
Traffic Mitigation Group (TMG) took no position, but will have a statement that any bylaw changes
should be consistent with minimizing single occupancy vehicles.
In the report under Article 2, the Board has been asked to be more specific on the work plan for the year
ahead.
Mr. Canale will present Articles 54, 56 and 58. Mr. Hornig will present the rest.
Mr. Zurlo joined the meeting.
Mr. Zurlo questioned the statement in the Articles 53-60 Report that increasing the commercial
development was for revenue purposes. Is the goal better zoning or an increase in revenue?
Mr. Canale said at TMG they discussed what they might do with the studies for Hartwell Avenue. Within
DPW there were sufficient funds to prepare a project need form for Hartwell sidewalks and intersection.
The Town will need to resubmit the forms.
************************SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATION******************************
63 Paul Revere Road, Reduced Frontage Subdivision Preliminary Plan: In attendance to present the
Page 2
Minutes for the Meeting of March 26, 2008
preliminary plans were Mr. Fred Russell, civil engineer, and Mr. Steve Genova, property owner. In May
2007 the sketch plan showed approximately 1.5 acres in the RS Zone with the restored house and barn,
and the carport that has since been removed. The proof plan, as per regulation, showed an approximately
200-foot road that would require demolition of the house and barn to actually construct. The proposed
plan shows the drive to remain where it is, but widened to 18 feet and branching into two drives towards
the rear. Approximately 2/3 of driveway stormwater flow would be collected and infiltrated. Mr. Russell
said he didn’t believe he was asking for any waivers. Plans showed removed trees.
Mr. Zurlo asked about the dimensional standards. Mr. Russell said engineering found it acceptable. Ms.
McCall-Taylor said it may be acceptable, but is it complying? Mr. Hornig said with the curvature and
tangent lengths, the centerline is not in the center. Mr. Henry gave an explanation of questions that went
to Engineering. He described the differences from what is required as very small discrepancies and
wondered how far should one push the proof plan. Mr. Zurlo asked about the melding of radius into
property line. Mr. Russell said the center of the cul-de-sac is not on the centerline. He felt these questions,
if there were issues, should have come up at the sketch plan. Mr. Zurlo said that the Board had asked at
the sketch plan stage for confirmation of the proof planand it is important to confirm that the proof plan
works.
Mr. Galaitsis joined the meeting.
Mr. Zurlo asked about the swales at the top of the back lot. Mr. Russell said they were to direct drainage
away from the house.
The Board discussed the size of the house. It appeared that it would be approximately 5,000 square feet.
Mr. Zurlo said the neighborhood sample should be larger.
Mr. Canale asked if the first floor elevation on lot one is approximately 316 feet, the other houses on
Massachusetts Avenue are 310 to 314 feet, on Columbus Street 322 and 320 feet. Mr. Canale asked about
the height. The existing height is less than 30 feet. He asked the applicant to present what he wanted next
time, and it should be less than 35 feet. In reduced frontage subdivisions the Board usually wants the
height to be less than 40 feet.
Minutes for the Meeting of March 26, 2008 Page 3
Mr. Galaitsis wanted to know the relationship to nearby structures. He asked that they supply the sizes of
the houses in order to better understand the 5,000 square foot gross floor area (GFA) and 3,000 square
foot living area. He noted that the neighbors are 2,000 square feet. Mr. Galaitsis said it would be nice to
have a cross section through the house as well as the style of the proposed house.
Mr. Hornig asked about the GFA of the house on lot 2. He noted that the easements are missing for the
common drive and he wanted to get a sense of its length, width and location. He thinks there may be
height issues if there is a 2,500 footprint with a garage underneath. He asked if there would be gas
service and Mr. Russell said no, the existing house had propane tanks. Mr. Hornig asked that the existing
utilities be shown on the plan, including the location of the propane tank. Since the utilities are required
to be underground, why not keep them under the drive? Mr. Russell said he was trying to reduce the
number of bends.
Mr. Canale asked if the grading would be higher or lower when complete. Mr. Russell said they will
probably bring some fill onto the site and he will have the numbers at the next session.
Ms. Manz asked had he considered waiting until the Town Meeting vote on the Special Permit
Residential Development? She then asked what was being proposed as the public benefit. Mr. Russell
said he felt it would be approximately $64,000.
Audience Comments and Questions:
Ms. Janet Dephoure, 31 Columbus Street, asked how many new houses would be built. While not a
direct abutter she felt it would affects her view and was interested in landscaping and the trees.
Ms. Joanne Fray, 2361A Massachusetts Avenue wanted to know the rationale for a subdivision. Mr.
Hornig responded there is either a conventional subdivision or this alternative.
Myrna Morgan, 24 Wachusetts Drive asked if there were a required public benefit. Mr. Hornig said it was
in minimizing the site disruption. A public benefit can benefit the neighborhood or town. The Board has
a policy on public benefits and the size of the house. Ms. Fray said she moved there for open space. Mr.
Hornig said the rules would change if the Special Permit Residential Development passes. This is being
presented under the old rules. Mr. Galaitsis said people have the right to build a second house and no one
Page 4
Minutes for the Meeting of March 26, 2008
can arbitrarily require the owner of a buildable lot to reserve it for open space. The advantage to Town
and abutters is a smaller house, kept away from the property line.
The houses on Columbus Street were evidently built by variance and are a source of disgruntlement. Mr.
Hornig said that the Planning Board does not do variances, so cannot comment on what happened there.
Mr. David Horton sent a letter of support.
Mr. Zurlo questioned the ambiguity of elevations relative to grades at the rear and front of the house and
requested three dimensional perspectives to clarify the intent and the visual impact on abutters.
Mr. Russell asked what he should have for the next meeting. Mr. Hornig said the size of house in feet and
stories, as well as the GFA. Mr. Galaitsis reiterated that he would like to see cross sections and that he
wouldn’t support a building with an appearance of three stories on any side. Mr. Hornig wants members
to give guidance as to what is acceptable at the definitive stage. Ms. Manz said the GFA is at 150%
median; it would be helpful if they stayed within those limits. Mr. Canale said a 10,000 square foot total it
is fine - 5,000 square feet per unit per lot. If it is over, he wants to see a rationale. Mr. Zurlo said it is
important to have three perspectives from various angles, which he will convey to planning staff, in order
to understand the strategy and move forward to the next stage. Mr. Russell they would not exceed the
5,000 GFA size on new site, but in his memory a maximum GFA had never been applied to an existing
house. Mr. Russell said it is in everyone favor to grant an extension of time, and based on his ability to
have the additional material ready in three weeks for the meeting on April 23, 2008, he requested an
extension. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0 to grant an extension of time to May 1,
2008. Materials are to be in to the Planning Office by April 16, 2008 for consideration on April 23, 2008.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 7:30 p.m.
Wendy Manz, Clerk