HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-10-06' PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 6, 1986
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Office
Building, was called to order at 7:37 p.m. by the Vice Chairman, Mr. Cripps,
with members Klauminzer, Sorensen, Wood, Planning Director Bowyer, Assistant
Planner Rawski and Secretary Peters present. Mrs. Uhrig arrived at 7:40
during Item 244.
244. Minutes for September 8 and 22, 1986: The Board reviewed the minutes
of September 8, 1986, and made corrections. The Board reviewed the minutes
of September 22, 1986, and made corrections.
On the motion Mr. Cripps, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer, it was voted unani-
mously to approve the minutes of September 8 and 22, as corrected. Mr.
Cripps abstained from the vote approving the September 22 minutes since he
did not attend the meeting.
***************** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS **********
225. APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS: Mr. Cripps gave an oral review
of the following cases to be heard on October 9, 1986.
14 Tower Road, Kenneth and Louise Kreutziger, variance, setback requirements
' to construct additions on the front and side of an existing dwelling: The
Board agreed they do not object to the proposed entry/steps which will
extend approximately two feet further into the front yard setback than the
existing stairs, since the topography of the lot makes access to the front
door difficult. They also agreed to not object to the two-story addition
since it will not encroach more into the front yard setback than the exist-
ing dwelling, and only a small corner will encroach into the side yard
setback.
The Board agreed to recommend the part of the variance permitting the addi-
tion of the deck and the greenhouse be denied because the additions would
encroach significantly into the side yard setback, and no hardship has been
demonstrated.
The Board agreed to make no comment on the following cases:
11 Pearl Street, Min -Chang Lee, SP, shed dormer
9 Kendall Road, Robert Munck, variance, garage
45 Solomon Pierce Road, Trudy Sack & Robert Bund, SP, inground swimming
pool
Mr. Cripps also gave an oral review of the following cases to be heard on
October 23, 1986:
90 Lowell Street, Melvin Savage, SP, for a dentist office in the basement of
his home: the Board believed this is not an appropriate use in a residential
' neighborhood because there is a potential for an increase in traffic and
employees if the practice grows. They agreed to recommend the application
for a special permit be denied.
IF
Minutes of October 6, 1986 Page 2
The Board agreed to make no comment on the following:
One Ames Avenue, variance, addition of enclosed porch
6 School Street, John Hubbard, variance, addition of dormer and deck
15 Westwood Road, Jonathan and Virginia Longley, variance, addition
26 Hathaway Road, Joseph Vaccaro SP, inground swimming pool
95 Hayden Avenue, Beal and Company, Inc., SP, sign
10 Maguire Road, Itek Corp., SP, to reserve an area for future parking
Wood Street & Hartwell Ave., Katandin Woods Ltd. Partnership, six month
extension of the comprehensive permit to construct and operate a
residential development.
245. Lowell Court subdivision, off Lowell Street, Robert E. Phelan: Mrs.
Uhrig opened the hearing at 8:03 p.m.
William Bergeron, from Hayes Engineering, reviewed the definitive plan. He
described the slopes, existing trees and the layout of the approximately 177
foot long road which ends in a standard cul-de-sac with a landscaped island.
They have discussed the drainage plan with the Engineering Department. They
propose to connect the street drainage system to an existing 12" drainage
pipe, which is part of the Town's drainage system. Both the Conservation
Commission and the Engineering Department recommend waiving the 24 foot
pavement width required by the Subdivision Rules and Regulations.
They requested the Board grant waivers for the following: 1) that the fire
alarm circuit not be constructed, 2) that granite curb inlets not be re-
quired at all catch basins, 3) that the pavement width be 22 feet, and 4)
that sidewalks not be required.
Mrs. Uhrig questioned the elaborate driveways, noting it was paving that was
not necessary. In answer to her question, Mr. Bergeron said the purchasers
of the houses requested turnarounds on their lots.
Mrs. Klauminzer asked if the slope draining towards the Miller property
would not cause problems for the Millers. Mr. Bergeron responded that the
cul-de-sac has been sloped in the opposite direction with a catchbasin
located at the low point, which should divert existing run-off into the
roadway drainage system, and from there into the existing Town drainage
system.
Ms. Rawski commented it is basically a straightforward two -lot subdivision,
complying with almost all regulations. She was concerned with the steep
slope which would occur if the sidewalk were required as shown on the plan.
Mrs. Wood suggested the sidewalk could meander rather than follow the road.
In response to questions from Mr. Sorensen, Mr. Bergeron said a ground
survey had been done. Mr. Phelan said the potential owners were agreeable
to the road being either public or private.
Mr. Bowyer asked if the developer would review the process that led to the
' final orientation of the homes. Mr. Bergeron said they tried to site the
homes so the narrow ends faced the closest lot lines.
Jeffrey Miller, 556 Lowell St., supported the developer's request for a
waiver for the construction of the sidewalk as shown on the definitive plan.
Minutes of October 6, 1986 Page 3
Louis Coppi, 11 Burroughs Road, stated he believed Lot B was unbuildable,
and felt there was "overkill" in the driveway and cul-de-sac system, given
it was only a two -lot subdivision. He added that the house on Lot B was
sited too close to the lot line between his property and the development.
Mr. Phelan disagreed, noting the location was within the zoning setback, but
offered to place more planting between the two properties.
Jacqueline Kates, 15 Burroughs Road, asked if the drainage was located on
her property and was told it was on the Coppi property.
In response to a question from Steven McCarthy, 564 Lowell Street, Mr.
Phelan said two trees had to be removed for the construction of the first
home.
Mrs. Uhrig declared the hearing closed at 9:10 p.m.
Later in the meeting the Board discussed the waivers requested by the devel-
oper, and reviewed the draft Certificate of Action.
Mr. Sorensen objected to the Board accepting frontage along a private road,
saying it created private enclaves throughout the Town. Mr. Bowyer noted
the Subdivision Control Law does not require frontage to be located on
public streets, and that there are many examples in Town where approved
subdivision roads have not been presented to the Town for acceptance. He
added the Board has the power within the right-of-way to waive construction -
standards.
The Board agreed to require buffer strips between the Coppi, Miller and
Kates properties and the development. They also agreed to grant waivers not
requiring installation of the fire alarm circuit, construction of the side-
walk and the granite curb inlets.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was voted 4-1-0,
(Mrs. Uhrig voted in the negative) unanimously to permit a 22 foot wide road
off Lowell Street narrowing to 20 feet, one-way, around the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Sorensen noted the house presently under construction cannot be released
for sale until the subdivision road is constructed since the lot receives
its frontage on the subdivision road.
The Board also agreed on the name "Courtney Terrace" for the subdivision
road.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was voted unani-
mously to approve the definitive subdivision plan entitled "Lowell Court",—
to approve the Certificate of Action, as amended, for the subdivision,and
to authorize the Planning Director to sign the Certificate of Action on
behalf of the Board.
He was concerned about potential
his property and the development,
damage to the 40 year
hemlock hedge between
and drainage problems
if the grading were
too steep in order to accomodate
the sidewalk. He supported
any move to
lessen the amount of paving shown
for the driveways and
the road.
Louis Coppi, 11 Burroughs Road, stated he believed Lot B was unbuildable,
and felt there was "overkill" in the driveway and cul-de-sac system, given
it was only a two -lot subdivision. He added that the house on Lot B was
sited too close to the lot line between his property and the development.
Mr. Phelan disagreed, noting the location was within the zoning setback, but
offered to place more planting between the two properties.
Jacqueline Kates, 15 Burroughs Road, asked if the drainage was located on
her property and was told it was on the Coppi property.
In response to a question from Steven McCarthy, 564 Lowell Street, Mr.
Phelan said two trees had to be removed for the construction of the first
home.
Mrs. Uhrig declared the hearing closed at 9:10 p.m.
Later in the meeting the Board discussed the waivers requested by the devel-
oper, and reviewed the draft Certificate of Action.
Mr. Sorensen objected to the Board accepting frontage along a private road,
saying it created private enclaves throughout the Town. Mr. Bowyer noted
the Subdivision Control Law does not require frontage to be located on
public streets, and that there are many examples in Town where approved
subdivision roads have not been presented to the Town for acceptance. He
added the Board has the power within the right-of-way to waive construction -
standards.
The Board agreed to require buffer strips between the Coppi, Miller and
Kates properties and the development. They also agreed to grant waivers not
requiring installation of the fire alarm circuit, construction of the side-
walk and the granite curb inlets.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was voted 4-1-0,
(Mrs. Uhrig voted in the negative) unanimously to permit a 22 foot wide road
off Lowell Street narrowing to 20 feet, one-way, around the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Sorensen noted the house presently under construction cannot be released
for sale until the subdivision road is constructed since the lot receives
its frontage on the subdivision road.
The Board also agreed on the name "Courtney Terrace" for the subdivision
road.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was voted unani-
mously to approve the definitive subdivision plan entitled "Lowell Court",—
to approve the Certificate of Action, as amended, for the subdivision,and
to authorize the Planning Director to sign the Certificate of Action on
behalf of the Board.
Minutes of October 6, 1986 Page 4
'
246. Sunset Ridge, off Buckman Drive: Ms. Rawski reviewed the revised
landscaping plans entitled
"Sunset
Ridge Lexington, Mass., Revision A and
Revision B," dated October
2, 1986.
She added she has not received a report
from the Engineering Dept.
on the revised plans. Andrew Goldstein, repre-
senting the developers, noted
they
hoped to get approval of the plans as
soon as possible in order
to begin
planting this fall.
Mr. Sorensen expressed concern over the significant surveying error, noting
the problems that now had to be corrected in the property of the abuttors,
as a result of this error. He also questioned the design of the tree wells
and asked if the slopes shown were within allowable standards.
Mrs. Uhrig spoke of the Planning Board's disappointment with the construc-
tion of the development in general, and referred to the Conservation Admin-
istrator's letter of September 29, 1986 which expressed "dismay" at finding
numerous violations of the Order of Conditions.
On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer, it was voted
unanimously to approve the revised plans entitled "Sunset Ridge Lexington,
Mass., Revision A and Revision B," dated October 2, 1986, provided the
Engineering Department also approves the plans.
247. Lincoln Park, off Lincoln Street: (Note: Mrs. Klauminzer did not take
part in discussion or action on this item, since she is an abuttor.)
Mr. Bowyer reported revised drainage plans have been submitted by the devel-
oper. The Engineering Department has determined that the differences be-
tween the revised plan and the original plan were neglible and the original
plan was somewhat better than the revised. Since it had been stated at the
time of adjournment of the hearing in May that the Board would be consider-
ing only drainage issues at the continued hearing, the original drainage is
what is now before the Board.
The Board agreed to hold the reconvened public hearing on November 3, 1986
for discussion of drainage issues only.
****************************** REPORTS ***********************************
248. Planning Board, Subcommittees
a. Housing Advisory Committee, revised charge:
The Board reviewed the draft "Housing Advisory Committee - Charge to
Committee" prepared by Elizabeth Flemings, of the Housing Advisory
Committee and Eleanor Klauminzer. Mrs. Klauminzer noted the changes:
1) name of committee, 2) purposes and 3) structure of committee (nine
members appointed by the Planning Board for a term of two years).
Mrs. Flemings felt it was important to get direction from the Board on
' what tasks might be undertaken by the Committee in the near future.
She added the Committee was thinking of putting a notice in the paper
inviting residents interested in housing matters to contact them, and
of asking the Selectmen for a list of residents who have expressed
interest in housing issues.
Minutes of October 6, 1986
Page 5
Mr. Bowyer discussed the Housing Grant and the work being done on it by
Roberta Leviton, the consultant hired by the Planning Board. He exp-
lained the two parts of the grant: 1) evaluation of completed afford-
able housing developments, with an outline of successes and failures
and 2) an examination of other ways of producing affordable housing.
In response to a request from Mrs. Flemings, Mr. Bowyer said he would
introduce Mrs. Leviton to the Committee for a discussion of her work on
the grant.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer, it was voted
unanimously to approve the Charge for the Housing Advisory Committee as
presented. Mrs. Uhrig thanked Mrs. Flemings for her work on the
Charge.
b. Revival of Design Advisory Committee; Selectman Eddison has sug-
gested the formation of a design review committee to oversee public
buildings and zoning proposals that are presented for approval at Town
Meeting. Mr. Sorensen commented that people's sense of esthetics vary
so broadly it would be difficult to form a committee to do this. Mr.
Bowyer observed that design review sounds like a good idea, but in
practice any design regulation of private construction is very
difficult to administer, even when the statutory authority for design
review exists. The Board agreed design review of proposals, such as
rezonings, before the Planning Board was not needed and that for review
of public projects, any such committee should be under the direction of
' the Board of Selectmen.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:43 p.m.
Martha Wood, Clerk