Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-07-02-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JULY 2, 2014 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Charles Hornig, with members Nancy Corcoran- Ronchetti, Richard Canale, Timothy Dunn, associate member Ginna Johnson, and planning staff Maryann McCall-Taylor and Lori Kaufman present. **********************DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION*********************** PUBLIC HEARINGS 48 Summit Road, Definitive Site Sensitive Development (SSD) Plan: Mr. Hornig called the continued public hearing to order at 7:00 p.m. There were approximately ten people in the audience. This was a joint hearing for a definitive subdivision plan and a special permit for a site sensitive development. Ms. Ginna Johnson was designated to act on the special permit piece of this project. Mr. Russell, project engineer was present. Mr. and Mrs. Tung, applicants joined the meeting in progress. Mr. Russell explained that this project came in 2006 for a definitive subdivision and again in 2008 and the Planning Board recommended a Site Sensitive Development (SSD) that was recently approved by Town Meeting. The owners were now moving forward with this plan. The site has approximately 1.4 acres of land mostly wooded and has moderate to steep slopes in the middle and less steep around the perimeter. The proposed development would have two lots and a new house was proposed to be built at the summit of the hill. The house footprint shown was not the final footprint and would be tied in prior to any approval. The end of Summit Road had an existing gravel path with extensive erosion, which would be repaired and rip rap would be added to prevent future erosion. The new impervious surfaces for roof cover and driveway runoff would be collected and piped into three infiltration systems and mitigated on site, which would maintain or reduce existing flows on site. The water main service was recently completed and looped and would be accessed for the new house. The rip rap would be across the entire width of the road. Board comments:  The decision deadline would be at the end of August. Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of July 2, 2014  In 2008 there was concern about the existing road that needed to be improved and would require a turnaround at the end. Mr. Russell said the proposed driveway would serve as a T turnaround. Show it as an easement and make sure it could handle the fire truck.  Confirm the length of the road.  Would the rip rap be sufficient to handle runoff from Summit Road and prevent water from flowing on to abutters properties? Mr. Russell said it conformed to town standards.  How would utility services get to the houses? That would be address in the new submission.  A utility pole was missing that was being held up by a 22 foot oak that was being removed be sure to resolve the utility problems.  Want to see more options shown for this configuration, show which drive goes to which house and provide more clarity.  No swales were shown and it looked like the runoff would go into the abutter’s swales and onto those properties. Mr. Russell said the water flow off site would be reduced with the infiltration structures.  Provide an operations and maintenance plan.  Reduce the amount of pavement and would pervious pavers be used. This proposed plan was designed for the for the maximum, but could be less with a two-car garage house instead of three, but could not agree to only a two-car garage house or using pervious pavers.  The grading very close to large trees and sacrificing their roots and stability. Would have a landscape architect look at that.  th Staff memo dated June 24 had some concerns. Mr. Russell addressed the concerns raised in the letter.  What would be the calculations for material brought in and out of the site? Those calculations would be provided next time.  Would the little wall in front of the existing house be relocated? The wall would be kept just pushed back.  What would be the approach for pedestrian path and bikeway?  Tie down the location of the house considering the existing natural features, soil conditions, vegetation and ledge and minimize the disturbance to the site. Would want to put the house as high as possible to minimize blasting of ledge.  Reclaim and replace pavement and show turning templates and easements. Minutes for the Meeting of July 2, 2014 Page 3  Show the footprint and height for where the new proposed house would be located.  The rear boundary would have quite a bit of fill and currently has a lot of dense shrubbery how would it be stabilized?  Show what the new view would be for the abutters living on King Street.  Confirm with the surveyor the lot’s rear property line.  Restore the path that eroded to nothing along Summit Road to Moreland Avenue and provide a way to prevent the water flow from being eroded again.  Show a utility plan for the new house.  Remove parking area within 5 feet of the property line.  Provide calculations for inches of trees removed.  The house should be located more south on the lot and reduce the width of the driveway. Audience Comments:  The entire site was granite ledge and water flows from Summit Road to Fern Street and was very concerned about drainage.  The plan was outdated and did not represent all properties that needed to be considered.  There was concern about the increase of water flow on King Street and into basements, driving was hazardous when icy, the proposed development would be primarily on ledge and there was strong opposition to the proposed development for those reasons.  The whole area was bedrock and with recent additions Fern Street has become a river or in winter a skating rink. Promises have been made in the past, but once this was done it would be too late to fix.  Putting a basement in that ledge would be creating a lot of water which now ran down to Bridal Path. There was concern about the future view that would replace the removed wooded area.  Removing all those trees that would be absorbing water would create more runoff, the fill that would replace them would not absorb the water as well as the removed trees even with the added water basins.  The Board was thanked for addressing the important issues. Board Comments:  What outreach was made to the abutters? Not sure if there was any outreach.  Want a commitment of trees that would not be cut no matter where the house would be located. Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of July 2, 2014  Want a caliper calculation for a better sense how much uptake would be lost and how it would be mitigated.  This was not a SSD proposal, by building on the high point of the site was not being sensitive to the site. The house location should lowered by 10-15 feet on the property. There would still be a view, but it would reduce the impacts to the site and abutters. Ms. Johnson would not be available 8/6/14, Mr. Canale would be out 8/13/14. The next full Board meeting would be August 20, 2014. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to continue the public hearing for 48 Summit Road to August 20, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room. 111 & 119 Laconia Street, Definitive Balanced Housing Plan: Mr. Hornig called the continued public hearing to order at 8:07 p.m. There were approximately 4 people in the audience. Ms. Ginna Johnson was designated to act on this special permit. Bill Eycleshymer and Michael Walsh, applicants, Mike Novak, project manager and Jeff Thoma, landscape architect, were present at the meeting. Mr. Novak explained the changes shown on the updated plans submitted based on comments from the Planning Board at the last meeting. The duplex was moved back eight feet, the utility pole was relocated, there would be one driveway with an 18 foot opening with a longer neck and shortened hammer head, which would reduce the impervious surface, every 50 feet along the 100 foot buffer area there would be markers to prevent encroachment on conservation land, the fieldstone would remain on site, and the utility easement was widened for the duplex. Mr. Thoma discussed the updated landscape plan. The main goal was to maintain the character of the neighborhood by preserving as many trees as possible along with the stone wall and reducing the number of curb cuts on the site. There was 45,000 square feet of open space created for recreational use, removal of invasive species, and screening provided on the sides of the proposed development. Board Comments:  Where were the legal documents? They were submitted with the packet.  There was an 18 foot wide drive proposed; it was too wide 12 feet would be enough. The 18 foot width was to accommodate two way traffic. A typical driveway would be 14 feet Minutes for the Meeting of July 2, 2014 Page 5 wide and smaller could be unsafe. 18 feet would be too much pavement for abutters to look at 12 feet would be sufficient.  Like the conservation markers, but move to the LOW or create an arc or something more reasonable. Place boulders along the LOW line and with one third of the rocks buried to look more natural.  Did the project kick in the tree bylaw? An analysis was done and the bylaw would apply and 75 inches total caliper would be removed in the buffer area, proposed 95 inches with a mature size at 25 years of 524 inches and total to be removed from the site would be 768 inches.  Part of the landscape plan should include removal all invasive species like poison ivy.  Would there be exclusive use of property for the duplex owners? There would be a lot line drawn down the middle for each owner’s use of the duplex. All the owners in the development own lot D as tenants in common. Incorporate that into the plan.  Give the Town a Conservation easement for lot D that was not included in the legal documents.  Would there be any foundation drains for these units? Drains and sump pump would be tied into infiltration units. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to close the public hearing at 8:29 p.m. The following conditions should be added to include the foundation drains, the Conservation easement for lot D, gross floor area to be on the plans for each units, field stones to remain on site, removal of invasive species outside the buffer area, boulders placed at the LOW with one third buried, a driveway 14 feet wide drive with an 18 foot wide opening, and all the usual conditions. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to approve the special permit for a Balanced Housing Development at 111 & 119 Laconia Street subject to the conditions discussed this evening. An ANR would be used to divide the lots. Oakmount Circle, Lot 186E, Street determination: The applicant requested a continuance to the next meeting on July 16, 2014 and extend the action deadline from July 3, 2014 to July 18, 2014. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-0, to extend the action deadline from July 3, 2014 to July 18, 2014. Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of July 2, 2014 137 &139 Shade Street, accept performance bond and endorse plans: On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-0, to endorse the plans for 137 & 139 Shade Street. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-0, to accept surety in the form of a cash deposit. *********************************ZONING************************************ Banks in the Center: Mr. Henry was working with the Center Committee on banks in the Center and suggested the committee step back and get more information before drafting bylaw changes. Staff was working on a survey on banks in the Center and the vision for what the TMMA would like to see in the Center and make sure the right path was being selected. A Massport intern would joining staff and help look at information that might be used to regulate banks. The problem needed to be defined first and consider the possibilities for unintended consequences. *********************************MINUTES************************************ On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-0, to approve the minutes of June 4, 11, and 16, 2014 as edited. *****************FY 2105 WORK PLAN AND SCHEDULE************************* Work Plan: Consider doing a three month chunk for priorities before September 21. The following items were on the current list: Center Banking Adjust district lines and eliminate un-zoned areas CRS/CS/CN Districts Was there anything that should be also be considered a priority? Complete Street policy should be the number one priority. That would have to be done in conjunction with other committees and consultation with the Board of Selectmen (BOS). To get this started the BOS would need to adopt a goal/policy statement and then figure out an implementation plan. For now the Planning Board could write a letter to encourage the BOS to adopt the policy. Minutes for the Meeting of July 2, 2014 Page 7 There should be a rewrite of the Comprehensive plan and determination of how should it be done. The Economic Development Officer was starting the rewrite and recreation addresses open space. If new zoning regulations were passed then a new Comprehensive plan would need to be totally done. The next meeting was scheduled for July 16 to interview candidates, Oakmount Circle would be addressed, on July 28 a joint meeting with the BOS to appoint a new Planning Board Member and have the regular meeting if there was anything else on the agenda. Lexington Hills would coming in for modification and would need to advertise. Mr. Dunn could only come in for a short meeting on July 28 for a quick vote. August 20 for 48 Summit Avenue would be the next meeting unless Lexington Hills applied in time for August 6. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-0, to adjourn at 9:20 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 and Staff recommendations, dated June 27, 2014 regarding 48 Summit Road (2 pages).  Definitive Site Sensitive Development application for 48 Summit Road, dated April 11, 2014 (11 pages).  Letter from Pamela Mann and David Baron regarding 48 Summit Road (1 page).  Definitive Subdivision Plan for 48 Summit Road pan set dated march 24, 2014 (8 pages).  Cover letter from Meridian Associates regarding 111 & 119 Laconia Street, dated June 25, 2014 (2 pages).  111 & 119 Laconia Street Balanced Housing Development Definitive Subdivision Plan Set, revised June 25, 2014 (10 pages).  Letter from Daniel Orwig regarding Oakmount Circle Lot 186E, dated June 27, 2014 requesting an extension of the action deadline (1 page).  Letter from Steve Berry regarding Oakmount Circle, dated June 24, 2014 (1 page).  Fiscal year 2015 Planning Board priorities list short term goals/work plan (1 page). Timothy Dunn, Clerk