Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-01-23-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 2013 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Town Office Building was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Richard Canale with members Charles Hornig, Michelle Ciccolo, and Wendy Manz and planning staff Maryann McCall-Taylor, Aaron Henry, and Lori Kaufman present. Greg Zurlo joined the meeting in progress. ************************DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION********************* PUBLIC HEARING Rangeway, continued public hearing: Mr. Canale called the continued public hearing to order at 7:35 p.m. Present were Ed Grant, Attorney, Fred Russell, Engineer, Doris and Ginnie Duff, property owners, James and Suzanne Raymond, applicants, and Fred Gilgun, Attorney. There were 13 people in the audience. Mr. Zurlo was not in attendance but could use the Mullins Rule to be allowed to vote on the project. Mr. Grant presented a comprehensive list of responses regarding the application ranging from technical details on road construction to storm water. Mr. Henry responded to Mr. Grant’s responses with additional comments. Mr. Zurlo joined the meeting in progress. Mr. Russell addressed the following updates:  Infiltration area two was moved 11 feet off the existing sewer;  Access to the sewer line beyond the stonewall was improved;  The proposed snow storage area was fine with the Town Engineer;  The retaining wall would be moved one foot off the property and four to five feet off the right of way and would have no impact on abutting properties;  The pavement was centered and would be symmetric with the center line and would allow the retention of a 30 inch diameter tree;  Granite curbing would be added; Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of January 23, 2013  Drainage would flow into a catch basin instead of onto the road;  The relocation of the pedestrian access;  The wall would be on five feet high; and  The wall thickness would be 26 inches across. Mr. Henry addressed the following concerns to the Board on the application before it:  The applicant should look to the merits of the plan to justify the frontage waiver, not the 2002 zoning determination letter;  The length of the dead end street would not be subject to the 650 foot requirement;  The turnaround was not adequate for the fire truck to execute a turnaround without extending out of the right of way and extend onto an abutters property; and  The list of waivers would continue to be modified as the plan evolved. Board Comments and Questions:  The road grade between stations 100 and 300 was not shown on the plan;  The shoulder grade was not shown on the plan;  The road profile plan showed the existing center line, but not the sidelines;  The hydraulic calculations do not cover all the improved areas;  There were technical issues regarding drainage;  The path would cross Town property on the way to the condo property and would require permission from the Conservation Commission for a license;  Was there a statement from Engineering regarding the wall and drainage? Mr. Henry responded no;  The utility pole was on Town property and would require permission to use;  The 15% maximum grade of the road along with the vertical curve created safety issues; in the past an 8% grade was proposed and should be required. Mr. Russell responded it would impact abutters existing driveways;  Without seeing the shoulders on the plan it would be hard to comment on waivers for slopes, shoulders and landscaping, etc.  Snow removal in the turn around would be the owners responsibility and should be in the covenant;  The covenant for drainage and snow removal require enforcement provisions; Minutes for the Meeting of January 23, 2013 Page 3  Was there a statement from the Fire Department that this would be an acceptable turnaround? No.  Was there any information on the path regarding grade and construction materials? Mr. Russell responded the proposed grade would be the same as what exists today 10% and bonded materials would be used in construction to withstand erosion.  Put street trees on the shoulders that have none.  It was hard to read the plan; and  Was the proposed foot path intended to access Conservation Land? Yes. Audience Comments and Questions:  There are lots of new issues that need to be seen regarding snow storage and the path;  Anytime the applicant came back and agreed to all the Board recommendations, it would always require relief or a waiver from somewhere.  It was stated that the road improvement would be in the public interest, but not everyone would agree with that;  How would the new turnaround affect my property? There would be bumper overhang on the property and require an easement. Mr. Russell responded the design would be revisited to prevent the bumper overhang on the abutter’s property.  An abutter never received any letter from the applicant to try and reach out on this project;  If the drain got clogged during the 100 year flood the water could pond on the side of the wall and freeze, which would be a huge safety issue for vehicles and pedestrians;  There was a concern regarding future owners required maintenance of this property;  No one contacted the Condo Association Board; this would require a lot of effort by others for one house;  The owner of the property has owned it for 80 years, paid taxes and it was a matter of fairness that the owner deserved the right to use her land; and  The owner deserved to use her land, but this was not the right project for this property. Board Comments: The Board asked the applicant whether the preference was to provide more information on this project or get a decision on the plan currently before the Board. Mr. Grant responded the applicant would like to have a decision before Ms. Manz' term ends on March 4, 2013. The Board Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of January 23, 2013 could close the public hearing and make recommendations and changes that would be required to approve the current plan. The Board considered the request and felt there were fundamental issues for which it was unclear if resolution was possible and decided to keep the public hearing open. Mr. Henry said the deadline for an updated plan submission to planning staff including electronic submission is February 13, 2013. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-1, (Mr. Hornig opposed) to continue the Rangeway public hearing to February 27, 2013, at 7:30 p.m. in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room. 114 East Street, Sketch Plan Site Sensitive Development: The applicant wanted to postpone the application again. The Board recommended that the applicant withdraw the application and come back when ready. Mr. Fred Russell said whatever the Board wanted would be fine and asked that future fees be waived. Ms. McCall-Taylor said that the fees were not able to be waived. The plan was considered withdrawn and the applicant will come back when ready. **********************ZONING BYLAWS (ZBL) REWRITE ************************ Ms. McCall-Taylor said that planning staff met with David George, Gary Rhodes and Mark Bobrowski and discussed the Zoning Bylaw rewrite. The Zoning Bylaw base document of December 19, 2012, along with an errata sheet of the changes would be used for the public hearing. After the public hearing was finished a redline version for the changes would be produced and then a clean copy for the warrant article to keep confusion at a minimum. Any changes that needed to be moved were put in the Development Regulations, which would only require a public information meeting. The Development Regulations changes will be ready for Town Meeting and the Zoning Board of Appeals also received the same changes for review. *******************************TOWN MEETING******************************** Tracer Lane Rezoning: Ms. McCall-Taylor spoke with Town Counsel and the recommendation was to leave this parcel as is for now and this matter could be taken on at a later time. Minutes for the Meeting of January 23, 2013 Page 5 On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-1, (Mr. Hornig opposed) to withdraw the warrant article for Tracer Lane for the upcoming Town Meeting. ***********************************MINUTES********************************* On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to accept the minutes of December 19, 2012, as submitted. *************************PLANNING BOARD SCHEDULE************************ The Planning Board will meet on February 13 for the public hearing on the Zoning Bylaws at 7:30 p.m. in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room and February 27 for the continued public hearing for Rangeway at 7:30 p.m. in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room. *******************************STAFF REPORTS******************************* There will be a 25% design public hearing held by MassDOT to discuss the proposed Route 2 over I-95 bridge replacement project in Lexington on Tuesday, February 12, 2013, at 7:00 p.m. in Cary Hall. This is a state project. *******************************BOARD REPORTS******************************* Mr. Canale said there were three projects that would be occurring in the area; the Route 2 bridge replacement, the Route 2A bridge to be replaced in three years, and the on going work at Crosby Corner. There will be a complete street workshop on Thursday, February 7, 2013. Next Wednesday, February 6 in Cary Hall there will be a public meeting on the 3 intersections on Massachusetts Avenue on Maple Street, Marrett Road, and Pleasant Street Mr. Zurlo said Jeanne Kreiger sent out an announcement that on February 26 there would be a conversation on climate change. The Board might want to chime in on that matter. Ms. Manz encouraged the Board to attend this “Community Conversation” sponsored by the Lexington League of Women Voters and following up a successful townwide conversation on Town goals last year. Mr. Zurlo said the 20/20 Visions survey was on the web and it was a comprehensive survey, which touches all aspects of Lexington. Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of January 23, 2013 Mr. Canale said the Massachusetts Legislature has started and the deadline for filing bills was last Friday. Notable items were that land use reform is back. The LUPA bill has been re-filed because of a college project that some students were working on. Ms. Ciccolo said that MAPC has developed a complete street certification program Active Streets and Healthy Living. This program is still in early stages and unsure it will go through. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 10:11 p.m. The meeting was recorded by Lexmedia. The following documents used at the meeting can be found on file with the Planning Department:  Agenda item Summary & Staff recommendation regarding Rangeway, dated January 16, 2013 (6 pages).  Letter from Ed Grant regarding Rangeway, dated January 18, 2103 (17 pages).  E-mail from Ed Grant regarding Rangeway, dated January 22, 2013 (2 pages).  Definitive subdivision plan set regarding Rangeway, dated January 17, 2013 (4 pages). Michelle Ciccolo, Clerk