Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-06-11-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JUNE 11, 2008 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Town Office Building was called to order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairman Hornig with members Manz, Galaitsis and Canale and planning staff McCall-Taylor and Kaufman present. Mr. Zurlo joined the meeting in progress. ***************************SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATION ************************** Rangeway Appeal: Ms. McCall-Taylor said Town Counsel advised her that the Rangeway appeal is once again active. ******************************** BOARD MEMBER REPORTS*************************** Mr. Canale reported the Boston MPO drafted a Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) for 2009-2012 and the Waltham Street and Marrett Road intersection did not make the list. The Boston MPO also does a Unified Planning Work Plan that consists of small studies. The intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and Maple Street is to be studied this year. They are considering a study of the one of the state’s most congested corridors, three of which are in Lexington - Route 2A Wood Street to Boston, 4-225 from Route 2 to Billerica, and Route 128. The Planning Board should let the Board of Selectmen know if they to want them to advocate on behalf of the corridor study. A study of HOV lanes on Route 128 maybe funded for $75,000.00. Looking at inner suburban transit mobility (bus services) is also a possibility. Ms. McCall-Taylor questioned if the MORE funding is obtained for Waltham Street and Marrett Road, would it need to be on the TIP? Mr. Canale said probably not, if it is fully funded. ***************************SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATION*************************** 341 Marrett Road, Preliminary Balanced Housing Development (BHD): In attendance were Rick Waitt, Brian Timm and John Gwozdz of Meridian Associates, Ron Lopez, applicant, and Dan Harrington, attorney. Mr. Waitt said this preliminary plan was a balanced housing development under the new bylaws. It proposes ten units on 2.4 acre, with frontage on Wachusett Drive and Marrett Road. The plan presented tonight was modified based on comments from the Planning Board at the sketch plan meeting and the Fire Department. The access driveway would come off Marrett Road. The tree inventory was done in the winter and some trees were mislabeled and that would be corrected at the definitive stage. The proof plan would allow four lots with units at 7,200 square feet each. The total GFA would be 28,800 square feet. Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of June 11, 2008 Mr. Zurlo joined the meeting at 7:55 p.m. The proposal keeps the main house and carriage house, removes the existing garage and adds a new two- car garage and eight additional units The average natural grade at Units 1-3 would be 257.4’, the cellars at 252’, ridgeline at 296.2’ with the height being 35.7’. Seven units, representing 70% of the units, would be less than 2,700 square feet each. These would be units 1-3, 6-8 and the carriage house. The ridgeline was incorrectly stated on the plan for units 6-8 and will be corrected. The common open space is just over the 33% requirement at 33.2%, and including the piece off Marrett Road it would come in at 35%. Mr. Waitt said he spoke with the Assistant Fire Chief Delaney regarding the layout of the roadway and reported that Mr. Delaney wanted a 24-foot width in front of the units but did not mind a reduction to 18 feet for the driveway, and there was no expressed interest in access to Wachusett Drive. The drainage would have no net increase from the site. The area with units 1-5 would be on a fairly flat surface with previous disturbance. Mr. Waitt indicated that they would be willing to take a second look at moving the units further from the perimeter and tightening the buffers. Board Comments: Ms. Manz said she was pleased to see the cluster moved down from Wachusett Drive, creating more open space, but she would like to see units 1-3 moved over to widen the buffer. She asked if the patios were within the 25-foot buffer, and how far from the property line. Brian Timm said they are 10-15 feet from the property line. Ms. Manz said to move them east and south. Did the Assistant Fire Chief say he wanted 24 feet all the way up? Mr. Timm said yes. Ms. Manz asked if units 6-8 were stepped down. Mr. Waitt said the units would be stepped down the slope 2-3 feet each, with the roofline stepped down and retaining walls along the driveways. Ms. Manz said she would like a walking path and more buffering on the eastern side. Mr. Galaitsis said he liked the BHD with the attached units and a majority of them under the 50% threshold size footprint of 2,604 square feet. He said that since the numbers are so specific, there must be a specific design in mind so he would like more information about the height and cellars and he expressed concern about visually appearing as three-plus stories. Minutes for the Meeting of June 11, 2008 Page 3 Mr. Waitt said the buildings were still in the design phase. Mr. Lopez said the attics all have pull down ladders and he was still working on the design of the roofs of the stepped units. Mr. Galaitsis said visually the units appeared to be 3½ stories, which he considered undesirable, but was pleased that the conventional plan was not being pursued. He stated that a good design should also benefit the abutters. He indicated that in a conventional subdivision (based on the proof plan) there would be one unit near the east border, which would account for 25% of the structural square footage. However, the proposed BHD has five units, which is about 45% versus 25%, and, in totality, much bigger than the biggest conventional house. He suggested moving the group of units to the end of the drive next to the big house and getting rid of the carriage house. Ms. McCall-Taylor said the Historical Commission does not want the carriage house razed. Mr. Galaitsis said he was not aware of that, but they may need to do something else to relieve the pressure on the eastern border. Mr. Waitt said the reason the units were moved was because the Board wanted the units moved off the slopes and it would save trees. Mr. Canale said the sketches were helpful, but on the locus plans the structures were not identified and need to be on the next submission. What is adjacent to the parcel with units 4 & 5? At 367 Waltham Street are a single-family residence, a garage, and two residential condo units above commercial office space. Ms. McCall-Taylor said the zone line runs through the middle of the lot. Mr. Canale said in terms of the path, it would be required for his approval. If a bicycle path is not feasible, they should justify why not. Would all the tall evergreens in front be removed? Mr. Gwozdz said they are removing them all due to the width requirement for the pavement. Mr. Canale said that it appeared to be an overly aggressive stormwater management system; what was being proposed for lawn area as opposed to natural landscape and roof runoff? Mr. Waitt said the roof runoff would go into its own infiltration systems, and overland drainage would go down the drive into a catch basin. At this point steepness made it difficult to do much else and the lots are too small for bio-swales. This would be discussed this more at the definitive stage. Mr. Canale said he did not see any plantings on Marrett Road. It is a matter of health since the trees could capture particulates from the traffic. He also wanted to minimize lawn areas. Regarding the roadway access and width, direction should come from the Board of Selectmen regarding sustainability and encouraging the Town to have the right sized emergency vehicles so not to require excessive pavement. Mr. Canale asked what units 4-6 looked like from Marrett Road and what was the nature of the neighborhood discussion? Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of June 11, 2008 Mr. Waitt agreed that he would love to reduce the pavement, but the policy would need to come from within, not from the applicant. He said they met with approximately a dozen abutters and have been communicating via e-mail with the neighborhood representative. Mr. Zurlo wanted to know what the neighbors asked and what was addressed? Mr. Waitt said density was the biggest concern along with views of the backyard, the path and emergency access. The neighbors felt they did not need a path since they could use the historic path at the end of Wachusett. Some abutters felt like part of the property and were not advocating for screening, but rather an attempt to scale back the mass since screening would only add more stuff. Mr. Zurlo said a three dimensional Styrofoam model with the proposed homes and abutters on the topography would show the massing was inappropriate for the area. He felt there was some progress in the stepped units, but that they should seriously think about reducing the number of units. More three-dimensional models should be used early on. What was the proposed height of the porches on units 4 & 5? Mr. Lopez said they would be at grade. Mr. Timm said there would be steps down to the patio or a deck. Mr. Zurlo asked how the calculation of the average natural grade was done, and what would it be if it were one structure? Mr. Waitt said he wasn’t sure he wanted to go there; he said Town Meeting allowed the height to be calculated for each individual unit of an attached structure on a downhill slope. Mr. Zurlo asked about the treatment of the carriage house. Mr. Lopez said he was still working on it with the Historical Commission. Mr. Zurlo asked if the goal was to fully replace the cumulative caliper of the trees being removed, and Mr. Waitt said he believed in adding more than taken down. Mr. Hornig asked if they were bringing in gas service. Mr. Waitt said it would be on the definitive plan. Mr. Hornig said he wanted all electric utilities to be underground, including removing all existing above ground utilities from Wachusett Drive to existing homes. How much disturbance would there be for the extension of the water service? Mr. Waitt said approximately 10 feet for the water main and the sewer would be down the middle of the roadway. Mr. Hornig said to explore an historic preservation restriction on the exterior of the two historic houses. He commented that if the parking spaces were for the units they should not be in the common open space. Mr. Waitt said it was for the units and should not be in open space. Mr. Hornig also asked about bicycle access. He suggested that moving units 1-3 and 4-5 closer together and to the west might address issues. He liked the small units, but wanted to do something about the massing and preserve larger trees by making adjustments in units 1-5. Mr. Waitt said he now has a good tree survey; there were many trees leaning and some were dead. Minutes for the Meeting of June 11, 2008 Page 5 Audience Comments: Parvaneh Barakhshan of 355 Waltham Street said the area was just like a wetland three to four months in the winter. The Todd’s house has a spring under it. No one talked to the Waltham abutters regarding this project. Margaret Heitz of 335 Marrett Road said to notice the size of her house, which is considered large, compared to the units they were proposing to build. She was concerned about the number of cars, number of trips, limiting the number of parking spaces, fire access if cars were not properly parked and drainage in the spring where there is heavy water from the Todd residence spring above them. Dave Langseth of 29 Wachusett Drive gave out a handout. He said the number one issue was density. They were squeezing the maximum density allowed, four units on this site, which would be too many for the neighborhood as it doubles the 2.2 units per acre to four units per acre. Neighborhood abutters suggested a maximum of eight units. Other issues raised were: ?? Common open space; ?? A condition that if main house and carriage house were demolished they should be replaced with a forested area; ?? Sustainable practices for green buildings and landscaping; ?? Impervious surface ratio calculation seemed off; ?? Support pedestrian access from Wachusett Drive, did not see the need for a bike path; ?? Common open space conveyed to the Town or by deed restriction in perpetuity; and ?? Reducing density to an appropriate number. Mr. Hornig said the basic density was the Gross Floor Area (GFA) or the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) rather then the number of units. Mr. Langseth said he had the numbers and would submit them. Eugene Foley of 365 Waltham Street said the runoff was of great concern. There is surface water 35 to 79 inches below the surface; there was standing water on the eastern edge in late winter; why not connect to the town sewer system. Mr. Waitt said they were not allowed to tie into the town’s drainage system. Tests were done by certified people and based on soil mottling. Mr. Zurlo asked if they planned on doing additional testing before the definitive plan. Mr. Canale said the Planning Board should have a peer review from an outside firm at the definitive plan stage. Ms. Manz said the Engineering report was not in yet and she would have to take that Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of June 11, 2008 into consideration. Mr. Galaitsis questioned how with the water level so high these units have cellars rather than basements. Peter Shapiro of 11 Wachusett Drive said if the plan was approved with the existing main house and carriage house and if Mr. Lopez demolished the houses that would be a material change and they should not be allowed to replace them with new units, but rather more trees should be put in as a condition. Steve Stanford had a concern about the ledge that juts out in the eastern portion; water was a problem and that would increase the water level. There would be an aesthetic impingement of a large structure there. He said they had been excluded from the neighborhood meeting. Doug Rae said that the neighbors, not Mr. Lopez, put together the list of neighbors to invite to the meeting. Oliver Morgan of 24 Wachusett Drive said there were a lot of hypothetical changes to hypothetical plans of the hillside and hillside area. This is a fundamental change in the neighborhood and the roadway plan prepares for higher density and construction in the future. Mr. Hornig said there was no report from Engineering and the Board would not want to act without that input. The applicant requested a 45-day extension of the deadline for action to allow the Board to receive input from Engineering. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to extend the action deadline 45 days. This development would be taken up again on June 25, 2008. ****************************ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT****************************** Update from the Economic Development Officer: Susan Yanofsky, EDO, said she would be available to assist the Planning Board with Hartwell Avenue and answer any questions. The EDTF will be closing out within a month. Ms. Yanofsky said Mr. Hornig requested her help with the meeting in the morning on June 24 for the landowners. She said there was a lot of interest. Ms. Manz asked who was invited and was it a public, open meeting? Ms. Yanofsky said it was geographically based on the Planning Board’s designation of a study area. Mr. Galaitsis apologized in th advance for not being able to attend the June 24 meeting. Mr. Canale asked if the invitation went to the property owners and their representatives, and how about tenant managers? Ms. McCall-Taylor said that there should probably be another session for tenants and employees. Minutes for the Meeting of June 11, 2008 Page 7 Ms. Yanofsky said there was a meeting at the end of May to discuss transportation issues on Hartwell Avenue such as a possible shuttle, lack of sidewalks and participating in a survey. Hanscom Base and Lincoln Labs were there. Transaction Associates attended and would be conducting a survey. They will share the results with the town and the 128 Business Council. Mr. Zurlo said the 2020 Executive Committee was interested in having the EDTF and Cecil Group present their findings. He felt that in the fall the EDTF could make a presentation on their report and the Planning Board could roll out their specific goals. ***************************SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATION*************************** 63 Paul Revere Road, Preliminary Reduced Frontage Subdivision: This was a continued public information meeting. Mr. Fred Russell, Engineer, and Steve Genova, the applicant, were present at the meeting. The Board looked at the site construction plan and the change in grading. The changes shown were as follows: ?? Height for the new building would be 31.5 feet on lot 1; ?? Addition to the limit of work line; ?? Shows the various easements across lot 1 for lot 2; ?? Relocate propane tanks; and ?? Existing lines underground. Mr. Genova brought in photographs showing views from the existing neighbors and said he would be the one to see the most. Mr. Canale asked as you walk up the driveway, what presently exists, and why were you cutting down trees? Mr. Russell said there are no trees coming down. Mr. Canale asked what grade changes were being made to the drive? Mr. Russell said there were none. The width was going from 12-14 feet to 18 feet. Mr. Galaitsis asked about the test pits. Mr. Russell said there was no ledge down to 84”. Mr. Canale asked in terms of the grading, did they anticipate more cut than fill, and how many truckloads? Mr. Russell said there would be more removed than filled by approximately one truckload. Mr. Galaitsis asked for a plan with more clearly delineated driveway and plants. Ms. McCall-Taylor suggested the plan show the existing drive as dotted and the proposed be shaded. Mr. Zurlo had questions about the views. He asked about the stone walls and perspectives. Mr. Genova Page 8 Minutes for the Meeting of June 11, 2008 said they were not exact. Mr. Zurlo said the terracing of the stone walls was a better way to integrate the proposed house into the site. He felt if the wall followed the natural contours, a plateau would be created and result in a more useful backyard. Mr. Hornig said the property plans did not show easements. These would be required at the definitive stage as well as the draft of the text of the covenants. The retaining wall appeared eight feet tall. Mr. Russell said they were approximately six feet and when extending it they would try to match up with the existing stonewall. Mr. Hornig asked about the history of the house, as the assessors said it was built in the 1700’s. Mr. Genova said it was built in the 1880’s. Mr. Hornig was concerned about the large oak tree between the houses because the utilities go through the drip line. He told them to adjust the utility layout and put a limit of work construction fence around the tree to protect it from damage during construction. More native plantings would be desirable. Mr. Hornig asked about the GFA of the new dwelling. Mr. Russell said they would use the neighborhood profile to establish a size. Mr. Hornig said that policy was under the old bylaw. Under the new site sensitive development, they want to know the size of the house and massing to see if it is appropriate for the development. Mr. Galaitsis said until the Board adopts the new guidelines, the Board should keep the old one in mind. Mr. Hornig said one condition will probably be a GFA limit for both homes combined; any changes to the existing home would have to be included in that figure. Mr. Galaitsis said all the trees look the same size on the plan; the larger trees shown should be represented by larger circles than the smaller trees to differentiate them from one another. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to approve the preliminary plan subject to the comments of the Planning Board. ***********************PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE***************** Associate Planning Board Member: The Planning Board received six letters of interest for the Associate Planning Board Member position and appreciated these individuals who put themselves forward. After careful review and consideration it was decided that the two candidates that the Board would interview on June 25 would be Chris Kluchman and Ginna Johnson. All the applicants who submitted letters of interest and resumes would be sent letters, and the two applicants selected will be contacted to arrange the interviews. Community Forum: Mr. Hornig reviewed the outline he would be presenting on June 18 at the public forum. Mr. Hornig’s presentation will include the following: ?? Introductions; Minutes for the Meeting of June 11, 2008 Page 9 ?? Mission from Town Meeting to increase commercial development; ?? What has been done – study area, topic list, Cecil Group, EDTF; ?? Statistical facts about Hartwell Avenue (1 page fact sheet); ?? Walk through the process through to 2009 Town Meeting: September public forum, draft, public information session in January, and public hearing in February; ?? How they could be involved, e-mail list, attend public meetings; and ?? Public comments, three minutes per person, ending at 9:00 p.m. sharp. Mr. Canale said you don’t want to inflame the residents by discounting what was currently going on there. Mr. Hornig said we want to hear about traffic mitigation strategies. Mr. Canale said to expect questions like why was Wood Street being paved now with only one sidewalk. Mr. Galaitsis said that unless the Board offers some specific suggestions, residents may have little to comment on at this point; therefore, he suggested providing a list of generic or envisioned traffic mitigations. ******************************* BOARD MEMBER REPORTS*************************** Mr. Canale said Jim Gallagher from MAPC was coming on July 9 to speak with the Planning Board. Mr. Canale spoke with the Burlington Planning Board and found that their base FAR is .15, but can increase to .4 with certain conditions. They are currently trying to write a TDM policy. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 11:05 p.m. Wendy Manz, Clerk