Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-03-08-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF MARCH 8, 2006 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 Manz with members Galaitsis, Hornig, Canale, Zurlo and planning staff McCall-Taylor, Schilt and Tap present. The Board welcomed new member Gregory Zurlo, elected on March 6, 2006. ************************************* MINUTES ************************************** Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of January 11, 2006. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted 4-0 (Mr. Zurlo abstaining) to approve the minutes as amended. The Board reviewed the minutes for the meetings of February 10, 21, and 24, 2006. On a motions duly made and seconded, 3-0 (Mr. Galaitsis and Mr. Zurlo abstaining) it was voted to approve the minutes as written. ************************************* REPORTS ************************************* Staff Jefferson Union Conversion, 31 Fletcher Avenue, Stop Work Order: Ms. McCall-Taylor informed the Board that Building Commissioner Steve Frederickson issued a stop work order at 31 Fletcher Avenue. An abutter had notified the Planning Director that demolition on the site seemed to far exceed the amount approved by the Special Permit and Ms. McCall-Taylor reviewed the plans and inspected the site prior to informing Mr. Frederickson of the extensive demolition. Ms. McCall-Taylor consulted Town Counsel, whose opinion on the matter is expected soon. His preliminary comments indicated that rescinding the Special Permit approval would not be justified. Ms. McCall-Taylor said that the Historical Commission plans to discuss the matter at its next meeting. The Commission could call for a two-year delay in work at the site. Planning Board Ms. Manz reported that she has received feedback on the Board's proposed inclusionary housing amendment expressing concern that the current version did not appear to permit developers to provide affordable units on multiple sites by right. The Board agreed that its intention is to permit developers to provide affordable units on multiple sites and that the language in the motion will be clarified to reflect this. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************* SUBDIVISION OF LAND Public Information Meeting, 177 Grove Street, Rayvon Realty Trust, Preliminary Cluster Subdivision Plan: Representing the development team were Mr. Arthur McCabe, attorney, and Mr. Doug Lees, engineer. There were 25 people in the audience. Mr. McCabe provided a brief history of the project, noting that the Board had reviewed several different sketch plan concepts for cluster subdivisions on the site in 2005. A definitive plan for a three lot conventional subdivision for the site was filed and is also before the Board. He stated that this current plan for a four-lot cluster subdivision is the product of several months of work with neighbors in order to prepare a plan that balances the various interests. Mr. Lees provided an overview of the subdivision plan, pointing out the differences (from the conventional subdivision plan) that reflect input from the neighbors, including open space buffers, preserving mature trees, and using shared driveways in lieu of a subdivision roadway in order to minimize Minutes for the Meeting of March 8, 2006 2 drainage impacts. He noted that the proposed cluster subdivision is below the maximum impact measures of a conventional subdivision. Mr. Lees provided photographs to the Board showing areas where wooded open space would minimize views into the site, and examples of existing homes in the area that are similar to those being proposed. Questions and comments from the Planning Board concerned how the colonial design of the proposed houses would fit with the overall contemporary character of existing homes in the neighborhood; why the common open space was segregated into smaller areas rather than a contiguous area that could be shared by the neighborhood; and how the proposed driveway off of Dewey Street would work with the steep slopes. Board members indicated that they had hoped to see more creative site design. The Board requested that if the driveways could not be wider to accommodate larger vehicles, that at least a four-foot traversable shoulder on each side be provided. The Board noted that drainage is a significant issue in the area, and had questions about the stormwater management system's ability to prevent off-site impacts. While the Board favored the cluster plan over the conventional subdivision proposal, the general consensus was that three units are much preferred. Comments from the audience commenced with a presentation by Markus Pinney, a consultant hired by fourteen neighborhood property owners to help negotiate a plan that addressed their concerns. Mr. Pinney presented a plan that was a modification of the cluster subdivision proposed by the applicants, and stated that the applicants had met with the neighborhood three times in order to come up with a compromise. He noted that not all residents in the neighborhood support the proposals that are being put forward. Mr. Pinney's plan showed the common open space looped around the perimeter of the site to minimize views in and out and which could be used for passive recreation. It also proposed low impact development techniques that utilize natural features to channel stormwater and allow for better recharge. He noted that there is a perched water table, which greatly impacts drainage in the area and requires enhanced mitigation. One of the requests from the neighborhood was for more testing of the soils on the site, and for the Board to require an independent review of the soils and drainage plans. One abutter said that the slope adjacent to Dewey Road seems to be incorrectly shown on the plans, that it is not as steep as one might think and it could easily be accessed by someone “wearing a comfortable pair of sneakers.” The neighbors not represented by Mr. Pinney, who were in the audience, indicated that they also want to see an independent review of the soils tests and drainage plan, as well as deed restrictions on the open space to prevent removal of mature trees. A neighbor asked for confirmation from the Conservation Commission that there is, or there had been a wetland resource area on the site. Some abutters expressed the suspicion that the culvert the Goodmans installed under their driveway out to Grove Street has channeled water onto adjacent properties and may have drained a wetland area. Other neighbors requested that more retention basins be provided on the site, and that catch basins be installed at the driveway on Dewey Street to accommodate runoff. Traffic safety on Grove Street was noted as a concern, and one neighbor suggested that the site should be accessed only from Dewey Road. Another neighbor, who said she has seen deer in the area, asked the Board to ensure that enough vegetation remains on the site to provide sustenance for wildlife. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted unanimously to approve the preliminary cluster plan and to permit the applicant to proceed to the definitive stage, with the conditions discussed this evening, most notably that there be three dwelling units. The Board also asked the applicant to have a midterm review of the definitive plan by the Board before submitting the final plan. Public Information Meeting 16 Shade Street, Seaver Construction, Preliminary Reduced-Frontage Subdivision Plan: Members of the applicant team were Frederick Russell, engineer, and Scott Seaver, developer. There were seven people in the audience. Minutes for the Meeting of March 8, 2006 3 Mr. Russell provided a brief overview of the history of the project, stating that the Board had reviewed a sketch plan in August of 2005 for a three lot conventional subdivision on the site. In response to the sketch plan, the Board felt that the amount of grading and resulting retaining walls required to accommodate the proposed roadway was excessive and suggested that the applicants consider a two-lot reduced frontage subdivision. Mr. Russell described the proposed plan, noting that the two-lot subdivision with a shared driveway calls for less grading than did the conventional plan roadway. The driveways meet the required grade, with slopes of eight to nine percent. He detailed how the sight distances from the driveway at Shade are adequate and noted that there is a clearing easement in the right-of-way along Shade Street where vegetation could be trimmed to improve sight distances if needed. The driveway curb cut would be reduced from the existing 80 feet to 30 feet wide. The estimated cost to construct the road for the conventional subdivision would have been approximately $120,000, which indicates that a public benefit worth about $60,000 would be expected, according to the reduced-frontage provisions. The applicants have no preferences in terms of a public benefit and look to the Planning Board for suggestions. The Board said that people in the neighborhood have suggested planting street trees on Shade Street or providing traffic calming on Shade Street. The Development Review Team suggested constructing a parking lot or other amenities related to the trails in the Lexington Technology Park at the other end of Shade Street. The Planning Board indicated that this proposal is much better in general than the three-lot conventional subdivision shown in the sketch plan. Questions and comments from the Board mostly concerned how the proposed houses would be sited to comply with the guidelines for reduced frontage subdivisions, and how existing trees could be retained to provide more screening of the house on Lot 2. The Board made suggestions on how grading for the driveways could be minimized to preserve more of the existing hemlock trees in the center of the site. Other suggestions included shifting the lot line between the two lots to separate the houses more, moving the house on Lot 1 closer to the street, and providing more of a shared driveway in order to minimize site disturbance. The Board asked the applicant to provide with the next submission cross section drawings showing how the proposed houses would relate to the site contours and to each other. Comments from people in the audience had to do with their desire to preserve the wooded character of the neighborhood by retaining as many trees as possible and for selective trimming of vegetation along the Shade Street right-of-way to improve vehicular and pedestrian safety. Some testified as to existing drainage problems along Shade Street. They asked that the runoff from the proposed driveways be managed in such a way as to minimize impacts to neighboring properties. The Board indicated that the proposed houses are quite a bit larger (4,500 to 5,000 square feet of living area) than nearby dwellings and not consistent with the reduced frontage subdivision guideline that they not be more than one and one-half times the neighborhood median house size, though they would be consistent with the town wide median, which is permitted in certain circumstances. Mr. Seaver asked the Board to consider allowing larger houses given that the proposed lots are quite a bit larger than current zoning requires. A resident of Shade Street said that while the houses in the immediate vicinity are small, further down Shade Street there are many larger houses on small lots and that the new houses would not seem incompatible with the overall neighborhood. The Board indicated that it would consider houses of a size comparable to the town wide median in the next submission, but noted that the massing of space in the houses could be better arranged in relation to the site. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted unanimously to approve the preliminary plan, with the conditions summarized this evening, and to permit Mr. Seaver to proceed to the definitive stage. Minutes for the Meeting of March 8, 2006 4 ****************** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE ******************* With the change in membership of the Board, committee assignments will need to be reviewed. It was agreed to put this on the next meeting’s agenda. Mr. Canale reminded the Board of the Historic Landscapes Inventory meeting on Tuesday, April 11 from 7 to 9 p.m. Gloria Bloom, chair of the Town Meeting Members Association (TMMA) has asked that a Planning Board member be available at the TMMA meeting on March 15 to do a ten minute presentation on inclusionary zoning followed by 15 to 20 minutes of questions, and, if possible, be available at the end of the meeting for further questions. Ms. Manz indicated that she would attend the TMMA session. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 11:20 p.m. Anthony G. Galaitsis, Clerk