Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-06-14-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JUNE 14, 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 Vice Chair Hornig with members Galaitsis, Canale, Zurlo and planning staff McCall-Taylor, Schilt and Tap present. Ms. Manz was absent ************************************* MINUTES ************************************** Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of May 17, 2006. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the minutes as amended. ***************** FORMER METROPOLITAN STATE HOSPITAL LAND ****************** Name of New Interior Drive at Met State Campus, AvalonBay Development: Ms. McCall-Taylor reported that the three potential names for the new interior drive at AvalonBay Communities, Inc.'s, development of the Met State Hospital Campus are: Lexington Hills Drive, South Lexington Drive, and Main Campus Drive. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to name the interior drive Main Campus Drive. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************* SUBDIVISION OF LAND PUBLIC HEARING: 177 Grove Street Definitive Cluster Subdivision Plan, 'Goodman Estates": At 7:45 p.m., Mr. Hornig opened the continued public hearing on the definitive cluster subdivision plan for land at 177 Grove Street, called "Goodman Estates". Representing the applicant, Rayvon Realty Trust, were Mr. Douglas Lees, civil engineer, of Land Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC, and Attorney Donald Borenstein, of Johnson & Borenstein, LLC. There were 25 people in the audience. Mr. Lees submitted a landscape plan sheet to the Board and explained that it highlighted features of the previously submitted landscape plan showing the difference between the limit of clearing area and a 30- foot buffer, and indicated trees to be retained. He pointed out changes to the subdivision plan in response to requests from Town staff and to the Board's comments at the public hearing on May 17. The changes related to the increased width of the proposed interior drives, layout of the common open space, placement of elements of the stormwater management system, and to the size and appearance of the four proposed dwellings. Mr. Lees indicated that the water line could be connected through the site to loop the system according to the Town Engineer’s request, but he would need to establish an easement for maintenance purposes. Mr. Lees reported that the proposed dwellings are within 75 to 80 percent of the town-wide median house size, but are still larger than the neighborhood median; the developer will not go for smaller house sizes given what he sees as the diseconomies of constructing a cluster subdivision. He reported that the Conservation Commission continued its June 13 hearing on the plan in order to ascertain if there are no wetland areas on the site. The Commission wants to hire a wetlands hydrologist to evaluate the site, and to witness test pits conducted in areas of the proposed houses, impervious surfaces and drainage facilities. Board Questions and Comments : Mr. Zurlo asked if the developer had considered other areas on the site for the house locations based on their knowledge of soil conditions, Mr. Lees indicated that the proposed houses are not more clustered toward the center of the property because the soil type there is best suited for the drainage structures. In order to determine the perceived visual scale of the homes, Mr. Zurlo asked Mr. Lees if the houses presented are those that would actually be built. Mr. Lees confirmed that these three houses would be built as shown and a fourth would be as presented in the first portion of the Public Hearing on May 17. Minutes for the Meeting of June 14, 2006 2 In response to Mr. Galaitsis' query as to how many bedrooms the proposed dwellings would have, Mr. Lees answered five. Mr. Galaitsis then observed that the developer had failed to adequately address any of the comments or concerns he had voiced over the past year at the various presentations of the 177 Grove Street cluster subdivision proposal. Mr. Canale noted that the Board asked for three smaller dwelling units at the last meeting but the applicant has instead presented four larger dwellings; he wondered where the disconnect had occurred. Mr. Lees said his client would only propose three units in a conventional development scheme and they would be large. Mr. Hornig asked if updated easements and draft deeds have been provided for review by staff and Town Counsel. Mr. Borenstein stated that they had not been revised yet, and it was premature to do so given that the plans may continue to change with further input. Mr. Hornig listed his concerns about the stormwater management system, especially the potential for water to pond near the proposed swale and depression adjacent to the proposed driveway access to Grove Street. He questioned the location of the sewer connections for lots one and two. Mr. Lees was unable to see them clearly on the plans he had with him so could not respond. Mr. Hornig pointed out that four-bedroom units, not five-bedroom units, were used in the impact calculations submitted with the subdivision application and that portions of the proposed common open space are under the driveways so the open space does not meet the requirements of the bylaw. (Later in the meeting, Mr. Canale asked if the applicant's intention here was to provide public access to the open space via the driveways. Mr. Lees said that the driveways are meant to provide access only for Goodman Estates residents.) Mr. Hornig noted that covenants will need to be placed along with the deeds for each of the lots that will restrict future clearing of land outside of the limit of work area. He noted that the common open space should be land left in its natural condition, and given the driveways are located in the common open space, more land would need to be designated in order to meet the 25 percent requirement. Mr. Hornig concurred with the rest of the Board that the proposed housing units were too large for the site. Audience Comments and Questions : Attorney Thomas Harrington asked the Board to close the public hearing that evening. He asserted that the applicant has again presented an incomplete plan and he did not perform the additional test pits as agreed. He also argued that this proposal does not represent an amenity to the neighborhood, and the open space does not comply with the Town’s requirements. He described the prolonged process as unfair to those who wish to participate and asked the Board not to give the applicant more chances, as it would only be a waste of further time and money. Mr. Fred Martin, 29 Dewey Road, speaking for the neighborhood Minimum Impacts Group (MIG), stated that it is their belief that the plan has no merit and they are frustrated with the lack of productive dialogue with the applicant's representatives. The MIG stated their preference for a three-lot cluster subdivision, even if the houses were large and out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. A number of residents reiterated their concerns about stormwater runoff, as there are currently problems in that area. Mr. Al Salvato, a MIG signee, asked the Board to give this cluster plan one more chance, as the proposed conventional plan would have more negative effects. Attorney Borenstein stated that the required soil testing was done according to normal practices. He contended that the applicant is bound to satisfy the Planning Board but is not required to satisfy a quasi- board of residents with its own hired consultants. He noted that the landscape plan was filed with the rest of the submittal; the sheet provided tonight just had additional information on it. An O & M plan was Minutes for the Meeting of June 14, 2006 3 submitted which stipulates the maintenance requirements for the homeowners association for the drainage system. He explained that the applicant has tried to satisfy the Board's requests for the open space to be contiguous. Mr. Borenstein stated that the applicant did not want to place a deed restriction on land outside of the limit of work area as it would be too restrictive for future home owners who may want to change the landscape in their yards. He stated that the applicant would not provide fewer than four units in a cluster subdivision, but there may be willingness to develop smaller units. He stated that progress had been made since the last submission, and asked the Board for a brief recess so he and Mr. Lees could consider asking for an extension of time in which the Board must act on the proposal. This request for a brief recess was granted. Mr. Hornig called the meeting back to order. Attorney Borenstein indicated that the applicant would like to request an extension of time so they could change the plan and a continued public hearing within 60 days. Acknowledging the substantial aspects of the subdivision proposal still unresolved, the Board discussed whether or not to grant an extension. Mr. Zurlo moved that the Board grant an extension of 60 days. There was no second. Mr. Hornig ruled that the motion was denied, and closed the public hearing at 9:20 p.m. The Board made summary statements to the effect that the Goodman Estates definitive cluster subdivision plan did not fundamentally meet the spirit or the requirements of the Zoning By-Law's cluster subdivision provisions. Mr. Canale stated that the plan, and the several sketch plans and the preliminary plan that preceded it, ultimately demonstrated a lack of respect for the site and the neighborhood and failed to provide satisfactory common open space and the diverse types of dwelling units which are among the chief goals of the cluster by-law. Mr. Galaitsis noted that he would consider a different type of cluster subdivision on the site if the unit sizes were smaller, or there were fewer of them. Mr. Zurlo remarked that there seemed to be a shift in the applicant's strategy tonight and expressed regret that the cluster plan would have no further chances, as there is opportunity for a cluster development on the site. Given that no motion had been made to approve the proposed cluster subdivision and a special permit with site plan review, on a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted 4 to 0 to deny the application for approval of the 177 Grove Street definitive cluster subdivision plan dated April 18, 2006 and to deny the applications for special permits, as presented. It was noted that the public hearing for Rayvon Realty Trust's definitive conventional subdivision plan for 177 Grove Street, filed in October, 2005, with an initial public hearing conducted on November 16, 2006, would now be held on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 at 7:45 p.m. Mr. Hornig declared a brief recess at 9:25 p.m. Mr. Hornig reconvened the meeting at 9:30 p.m. Mr. Canale recused himself and left the room, as the 16 Shade Street subdivision was the next agenda item. Mr. Canale is a resident of Shade Street. Postpone Public Hearing, 16 Shade Street Definitive Reduced-Frontage Subdivision Plan, Seaver Construction: Mr. Schilt said that staff received a request from Mr. Scott Seaver, the developer of the property at 16 Shade Street, asking the Planning Board to postpone the continued public hearing on his definitive reduced frontage plan to a later date. Mr. Seaver wants to submit revised plans for the hearing. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to postpone the continued public hearing on the 16 Shade Street definitive subdivision plan to July 12, 2006, at 9:00 p.m. Mr. Canale rejoined the meeting. Minutes for the Meeting of June 14, 2006 4 UNACCEPTED STREETS Accept Updated Lists of Unaccepted and Non-Streets: Ms. McCall-Taylor reported that Mr. Peter Karalexis, of the Town's Engineering Division, developed a list of subdivision streets and interior drives which did not appear on the zoning map. Staff have gone through Mr. Karalexis’ list and classified the ways as unaccepted streets or non-streets, and recommend that the Board adopt the classifications and incorporate them as revisions to the existing Planning Board lists of “Unaccepted Streets That Appear on Zoning Map”, adopted in November 1998, and “Non-Streets That Do Not Appear on the Zoning Map” adopted in November 1985 and revised in October 1998. It was noted by the Board that streets that appear on the unaccepted street list should only be those that have an approved right-of-way and are part of a subdivision. Interior drives that provide buildings with a property address would be non-streets. Mr. Canale noted that the new Main Campus Drive should be added to the list of non-streets. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to 1) adopt the classifications as presented and incorporate them as revisions to the existing lists “Unaccepted Streets that Appear on the Zoning Map” and “Non-streets That Do Not Appear on the Zoning Map”; and 2) to add “Main Campus Drive” to the list “Non-streets That Do Not Appear on the Zoning Map”. ************************************* REPORTS ************************************* Staff Former Met State Hospital/AvalonBay Communities, Inc. Ms. McCall-Taylor reported that AvalonBay Communities, Inc., closed on the former Metropolitan State Hospital Campus property on May 31, 2006 and has applied for and received building permits to begin construction on some of its 387 rental units. The issuance of a building permit for the property triggers payments to the Town of monies agreed to by AvalonBay as conditions of Town Meeting's approval of the rezoning of the property in 2004. They are: $200,000 for school transportation costs; $250,000 for transportation demand management; and the first annual payment to Lexpress that will be pro-rated from the $35,000 per annum figure. Planning Board Noise Advisory Committee: Mr. Galaitsis reported that the Noise Advisory Committee (NAC) has developed a set of forms that will become a part of the commercial special permit application process, The draft forms will be reviewed and finalized during the next meeting of the NAC. Future applications for a Special Permit related to the noise by-law must be submitted to Board of Selectmen for approval. Engine Run-Up (Article 40, 2005 Town Meeting): Mr. Galaitsis reported that the Article 40 group has been working on designing and scheduling the placement of signs reminding drivers not to let their vehicle engines idle while parked. The public schools may be among the first locations of the signs. Regional Issues: Mr. Canale reported the following: HATS has a meeting scheduled for the end of this month to set its goals and priorities for the ?? coming year. Representative Jay Kaufman plans to file a bill to designate the Battle Road a Scenic Byway. The ?? bill is expected to pass by the end of the legislative year (end of July). On June 13, 2006, MassHighway held the required "25 percent complete" public hearing on its ?? proposal for improving the intersection of Waltham Street and Marrett Road. It is hoped that the project will be a candidate for TIP funds in fiscal year 2008. There was a good turnout of citizens. th The Board of Selectmen will discuss the intersection improvements at their meeting on June 26. At that meeting consultants from Howard/Stein-Hudson Associates (HSH) will attend to present the recommendations for the Marrett Road/Spring Street intersection. Efforts are underway to put forward a request to the Metro Planning Organization (MPO) to ?? consider Route 2A's intersections with Massachusetts Avenue, Maple Street and Pleasant Street, Minutes for the Meeting of June 14, 2006 5 as a corridor, instead of just three separate intersections, in terms of mounting approaches to traffic improvements. 2020 Vision's Economic Development Scoping Group: Mr. Zurlo reported that he is taking part in a subgroup of 2020 Vision's newly formed Economic Development Subcommittee whose task is to help define the job description of the Economic Development Officer. He suggested that they start with the Economic Development Element of the Planning Board's Comprehensive Plan. Lexington Center Committee: Mr. Zurlo had attended a brainstorming session held by the Lexington Center Committee on ways to develop a viable vision for the center business district and perhaps other commercial districts in town. Using zoning to promote the public welfare, e.g., changing the allowed uses in the center, and defining public and private responsibilities were suggested as useful directions to take. Mr. Canale noted that a better vision about the types of uses desired in the Center is needed before more discussion about center parking occurs. ****************** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE ******************* Meeting Schedule: The Planning Board set meetings for July 26, August 2, August 16, and August 23. Mr. Canale said he would try to attend the Conservation Commission's hearing on the 177 Grove Street conventional subdivision plan on Tuesday, July 11. Potential Medium to Better Communicate/Evaluate Development Proposals: Mr. Zurlo, an architect, demonstrated a computer software program that can extrapolate from and display in three dimensions what a two-dimensional plan drawing describes. It was agreed that having these additional views would make it much easier to understand and evaluate development proposals. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 10:20 p.m. Anthony G. Galaitsis, Clerk