Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-06-01-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JUNE 1, 2005 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 Harden with members Manz, Galaitsis, Hornig, Canale and planning staff McCall-Taylor, Schilt and Tap present. The Planning Board welcomed Mr. Scott Schilt, Senior Planner. ************************************* MINUTES ************************************** Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meetings of May 12 and 18, 2005. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the minutes as amended. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************* SUBDIVISION OF LAND PUBLIC HEARING: Rowland Avenue Extension Definitive Subdivision Plan, CRD Realty Holdings LLC: Mr. Harden opened the public hearing on the Rowland Avenue Extension Definitive Subdivision plan at 7:50 p.m. The development team—Mr. Richard Perry, applicant; Mr. Frederick DeAngelis, attorney; Mr. Richard Waitt, Jr., engineer; and Mr. Gary Larson, landscape architect—was present. There were 20 people in the audience. Mr. Harden explained that Barbara Palant, the owner of a parcel of land that is included in the subdivision plan before the Board tonight, had filed a conventional subdivision plan for the parcel in 1999. The plan was withdrawn after a court ruling, upon the appeal of abutters, that one lot does not constitute a subdivision. The current proposal includes two parcels of land. He added that because of the 1999 proposal, the applicant may submit a definitive plan to the Board, instead of beginning again with a sketch or preliminary plan, as is the usual sequence of submittals. Mr. Larson presented the 1999 site plan as background and then the new proposal, which includes the original lot and the lot adjacent to it. Test pits were dug to confirm the percolation rate of the soil. Town water and sewer pipes come close enough in Rowland Avenue that the proposed dwellings can be served by them. He pointed out that the house footprints shown on the plan were for the use of the engineer in his drainage calculations. They do not represent actual proposed dwellings. Two waivers would be requested if the Board consents: one relates to the roadway and the other to impervious surface. Board Questions and Comments : Board members expressed concern about the amount of impervious surface, the placement of the infiltration system near the right-of-way and the shape of the turnaround. The Board requested: assurance that the Town Public Works Department would approve the proposed connection to the – water/sewer service in the road adjustment to the limit of work line so that trees would be better protected during construction. – documentation of the homeowners' agreement to maintain the drainage facilities – Mr. DeAngelis stated that the impervious surface requirement does not apply as this is only a two-lot subdivision, not three. He cited Section 135-47 of the Zoning Bylaw. Mr. Galaitsis requested that Mr. DeAngelis’s assertion be confirmed for the board by Palmer and Dodge. The Board indicated that it would look favorably upon the waiver requests and asked Mr. Larson to provide the appropriate waiver language. Audience Questions and Comments : Abutters in the audience expressed reservations about the validity of the subdivision proposal, about negative impacts on the neighborhood during construction, asked why a definitive plan was submitted, and if there would be adequate protection of existing trees. Mr. Robert Katz, 6 Rowland Avenue, asked what the abutters' rights are relative to the new roadway and turnaround Minutes for the Meeting of June 1, 2005 2 and if the applicant would have to repair any damage done to the road. Mr. Michael Cassetari, 2 Rowland Avenue, counseled the Board to be very careful and to go slowly when considering the proposal, as it is not much different from the 1999 proposal, in his opinion. He warned of the cost to Lexington taxpayers of defending another appeal by abutters if the Board approves this subdivision. In response to a question about grading, Mr. Larson indicated that some grading would be necessary and that retaining walls would be built. Ms. McCall-Taylor, responding to Mr. Katz's query about public access to the staff reports, said that they are usually not available until the public hearing. Mr. Harden indicated the need to answer the questions raised tonight about setbacks and impervious surface. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to continue the public hearing to July 27, 2005 at approximately 7:45 p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room. Cedar Street Residences Sketch Subdivision Plan II, Joseph Gelormini, Presentation by the Applicant: Mr. Joseph Gelormini, JMG LLC, the developer, was present with his development team: Ms. Pamela Brown, attorney; Mr. David Jay, Jay and Weinmayr, landscape architect; and Mr. Ronald O'Brien, engineer. Mr. Jay presented two site layouts and explained how they respond to the Board's comments on the previous sketch plan at the April 11, 2005 meeting. One showed eighteen units arranged on a loop road, leaving more open land than previously shown. The second showed eighteen units arranged along one side of a loop road, saving more big trees and with 45% usable open space. Six units would be attached leaving twelve detached single-family dwellings, ranging in size from 1,600 to 3,400 square feet of living area. Two would be affordable, as at the Johnson Farm Subdivision off Bedford Street. The houses shown on the plan were templates for the Johnson Farm subdivision and are bigger than the homes would be at Cedar Street Residences. Board Questions and Comments : The Board generally agreed that the second scheme seemed the best layout so far. Most Board members would like to see two means of access to the larger open space behind the dwellings and a less "regular" loop road, with curves to promote traffic calming. More questions were asked about the width of Cedar Street, which is a dead-end road. Mr. Gelormini indicated that it averages just under 18 feet wide. He will be talking with the Town Engineer and with the fire department about that. The Board indicated that the affordable units are a plus, but that it would also like to see more duplexes and smaller units. Referring to the "scorched earth" appearance of the Johnson Farm development, like many other developments across the country, Mr. Harden urged more efforts to retain existing trees, pointing out that it can take nearly 30 years for trees to reach the appearance of those now on the land. Mr. Gelormini said he tries to save as many as possible if the cost is not too high, adding that the houses in the Cedar Street development would be 20 feet apart, not 15 as at the Johnson Farm cluster subdivision he built off Bedford Street. He indicated that the attached homes don't sell as quickly as the detached. The Board responded that with price tags close to a $1 million it is no wonder, and reiterated that the goal of encouraging attached dwellings is to generate smaller and more moderately priced dwellings in Lexington. It requested a size distribution list for Johnson Farm and for the proposed Cedar Street Residences. Minutes for the Meeting of June 1, 2005 3 A number of people in the audience expressed concern about the addition of traffic to Cedar Street, which is narrow and serves a densely populated neighborhood. They testified as to the number of fast-moving cars whose destination is the golf course at the end of the street and asked about sidewalks. The Board informed them that a traffic study would be part of a future submission and noted the dead-end street and access issues of this project. Noting also that the current cluster proposal is based on a 14-lot by-right subdivision, the Board indicated that a less dense development would lessen the impacts on the surrounding area. The Board said the developer could move to the preliminary stage, but stated that it would look much more favorably on a cluster scheme that uses the impacts of a nine-lot by-right subdivision in its calculations and with a wider range of dwelling sizes. 177 Grove Street Sketch Subdivision Plan III, Kenneth Goodman et al, Presentation by the Applicant: Present were the development team: Mr. Arthur McCabe, acting for the applicant; Mr. Mark Vaughan, attorney, and Mr. Doug Lees, engineer. Mr. McCabe informed the Board that Mr. Goodman recently passed away and that the goal of this subdivision submittal process is try to determine the value of the land and to position it for sale by being able to tell a buyer what the Town would like to see. He hopes that the current plan meets the Board expectations for an appropriate cluster development on the site. Mr. Lees identified the design changes made in response to the Board's comments on the previous two plans: Access would be from Grove Street, leaving undisturbed the land that fronts on Dewey Road – Dwelling units are smaller and clustered closer together – Sight distances for cars entering Grove Street from the cluster are adequate for safety – An affordable unit is offered; Mr. McCabe had some discussion with Mr. Derby of LexHAB – Test pits indicate good soil drainage – Proposed road pavement width is 20 feet – Questions from the Board had to do with drainage from the proposed roadway and the absence of landscaping along its length. Mr. Lees indicated that the right-of-way is too narrow for much planting. He explained how the run-off would be handled. The Board's major concern was the number of units, as the impact calculations were still near 90 percent those of a three-lot conventional development. At the previous meeting, it asked for impacts closer to 60 to 80 percent, but the proposal tonight—though the smaller units in a private setting may be an attractive design—does not represent a clearly worthwhile alternative to a by-right development. Mr. Vaughan questioned why, if a cluster proposal offers a mix of house sizes, includes an affordable component, and is within the impact measures, but has what the Board considers too many units, it is still not acceptable. Board members indicated their agreement that eight units on this site, in this neighborhood, is too intense a use, and that the public benefit of each cluster subdivision must be clear for its site and a decision made on its individual merits. The Board urged the applicant to come back with a site design showing six smaller units, along with an affordable unit. PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL LAW Form A/05-5,67 69 Woburn Street: The Board reviewed an Approval Not Required Plan for land at 67 and 69 Woburn Street. On a motion duly made and seconded it was voted to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, MA (Middlesex County) ", dated March 29, 2005 prepared by Noonan & McDowell, Inc., Billerica, MA, certified by John Noonan, Professional Land Surveyor, with Form A/05- Minutes for the Meeting of June 1, 2005 4 5, submitted by Paul and Patricia Hochman, applicants, as it does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law. ************************************* REPORTS ************************************* Staff : Ms. McCall-Taylor reported that the lots in the Glen Road South Subdivision are on the market. As to the house size limits in the Planning Board's special permit for the subdivision, she said that the proposed house plans will be reviewed by staff when they are circulated for the usual interdepartmental review. It was agreed that current cluster related development data needs to be collected and analyzed. Planning Board Ms. Manz asked if the Planning Board has any issues it would like raised at the Town Meeting Members Association (TMMA) wrap-up meeting on June 8. The Board agreed that it would like the TMMA to explore the relationship of TMM information meetings to the Board's public hearings on zoning articles. Most town meeting members do not attend Planning Board public hearings on zoning articles and then ask questions at Town Meeting that were answered at the public hearing. Ms. Manz offered a reminder about the Center Collaborative's up-coming Charrette on Saturday, June 11. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 11:05 p.m. Anthony G. Galaitsis, Clerk