HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-05-12-PB-min
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF MAY 12, 2010
A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Town Office
Building was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Greg Zurlo with members Anthony Galaitsis,
Charles Hornig, Richard Canale, Wendy Manz and planning staff Maryann McCall-Taylor, Aaron Henry,
and Lori Kaufman present.
**************************SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATION****************************
177 Grove Street, acceptance of lenders agreement and release of covenant - In accordance with the
special permit granted for the development of 177 Grove Street, the developer requested that they be
allowed to start on the foundation, work on the common drive and installation of municipal services,
which would be secured by a Tri-Partite Agreement. The amount covered by the agreement was
reviewed, revised and approved by the Engineering Department as detailed on the Estimated Cost to
Construct Form.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to accept surety in the amount of $83,000 in the
form of a Tri-Partite Agreement.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to release the covenant since there would be
surety to secure the subdivision.
PUBLIC HEARING
Stedman Road, Definitive Road Way Improvement Plan:
Mr. Zurlo called the public hearing to order at 7:40 p.m. In attendance were the applicant Mr. Al Cassella,
Attorney Frederick Paulsen, and David Romero and Eric Nitche of Commonwealth Engineering, with
approximately 17 people in the audience. Mr. Romero presented the following information included in
the definitive plan:
It was a single family lot approximately 1.5 acres;
The cart path would be paved to 18 feet wide;
There was a sidewalk shown on the plan, but they are asking to waive it;
It shows a full drainage package;
Surface improvements are proposed at the end of Farmcrest Road; and
Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of May 12, 2010
An easement for the turnaround is provided.
There was a list of waivers requested to minimize the impact of the alterations since it would only serve
one house and the Board had expressed a desire to save the historic look and significant trees. A request
for a waiver to allow a street longer then 650 feet was included in that waiver list.
Board Comments:
The drainage study should address the runoff of the entire watershed draining into the street.
Who would be responsible for the operation and maintenance of the drainage system? Mr.
Romero said the owner of the new house.
There were no street trees shown on the non-sidewalk side; how would the slopes be stabilized?
Mr. Romero said with hay bales, seeding and vegetation and they were going before the
Conservation Commission.
The easement line should follow the pavement and allow anyone with rights to Stedman Road the
rights to use it.
Show where the snow would be stored and how the path and slopes would be stabilized.
Would not approve the current plan as submitted.
There were two letters, from the Stones at 30 Brookside Ave. and Mr. Sklar at 19 Hilltop Avenue
regarding safety and blasting. There were no comments from the audience.
Board Comments continued:
Comments from the sidewalk committee were reiterated regarding the use of the street and the
primary users, which would be pedestrians and bicyclists. There were concerns about parents
using the street as a pick up area and preventive mechanisms such as no stopping signs to prevent
that. At this site it makes sense to not have a sidewalk.
An appropriate street number should be used to avoid confusion (greater than 17).
There was a question on the position of the Board for a waiver regarding the length of the street,
was there any advice from legal counsel? Subdivision regulations would apply, not zoning bylaws
and therefore, the maximum length could be waived by the Board. Stedman Road could become a
through road by the removal of the gate at the school and then this would not be considered in
excess of 650 feet. Requested an explicit statement from legal counsel that the 650 feet would not
apply here.
Minutes for the Meeting of May 12, 2010 Page 3
Would the turnaround easement make the lot less compliant by reducing the size of the lot?
All the waivers seem fine, but would not approve with a sidewalk or without a prohibition on
snow storage on the cart path.
There was an issue with the 1:1 slope on the back of the street, it might be better with a retaining
wall.
There was concern that the walking path be adequately constructed to avoid erosion.
There was discomfort with two unrequested waivers: 175-45F(3) and drainage. Mr. Henry said he
would raise the issue with engineering and make sure it would be fine.
At 8:50 p.m., on a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to continue the public hearing to
June 9, 2010 at 7:30 p.m. in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room.
Morris Street, determination of adequacy of road:
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, that the grade and construction of Morris Street,
an unaccepted road, was adequate for the purposes of providing frontage for the construction of a single
new house on the property at 6 Morris Road and to grant a waiver from the requirements of §175-68.
Bacon Street, 142 Marrett Road, pre-application roll out:
Mr. Hornig recused himself from the discussion. Mr. Moriarty, the applicant, requested guidance from the
Board on how to proceed regarding the adequacy of Bacon Street. The narrow road provides access to and
from his property. The house needs to be torn down and replaced with another single family dwelling so
the use would be kept the same. He currently maintains the existing road and would like to not change it
since it was an old way and would lose its charm. The Board acknowledged this was a unique situation
and their preference was to keep things as natural as possible. Use of self compacting gravel was a
recommendation. The applicant should submit a plan for the road as well as a maintenance plan and
schedule. New Hampshire may provide examples of standards for the proper care of a gravel road.
91-93 Hancock Street, definitive subdivision plan and special permit deliberations:
The Board discussed structures along Hancock Street. The Board reversed the order of the sentences in
special condition number six in the draft decision. The Board discussed the street name and agreed on
Victory Garden Way.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-0-1, (Mr. Galaitsis abstained; ineligible to vote on
Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of May 12, 2010
this project) to approve the Special Permit with Site Plan Review for a subdivision and the site sensitive
development (SSD) located at 91-93 Hancock Street with the conditions set forth in the draft with the
change made to special condition number six.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-0-1, (Mr. Galaitsis abstained; ineligible to vote on
this project) to approve the Certificate of Action for the subdivision and site sensitive development
located at 91-93 Hancock Street with the conditions set forth in the draft including the change made to
special condition number six and naming the street Victory Garden Way.
*****************************ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS****************************
Cubist Pharmaceuticals, DSDUP and special permit with Site Plan Review:
The Board discussed the concerns they had regarding the DSDUP before the Zoning Board of Appeals
(ZBA) on this matter. The Board members asked if there was a copy of the DSDUP and the approved
PSDUP available for review and was advised that the submitted DSDUP was on line. The Board will take
up this discussion at the next meeting and if not able to provide a written report, will give a verbal report
with its recommendations at the ZBA public hearing
***********************PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION SCHEDULE*****************
Traffic Mitigation Group (TMG):
TMG has requested that the sidewalk requirements in the current regulations be changed to require that all
new streets have a sidewalk on at least one side of the street. Ms. McCall-Taylor said that would be part
of the development regulations discussion.
137-139 Shade Street site visit recap:
The Board discussed the number of trees to be to be removed based on a SSD or subdivision. The Board
refrained from deliberation and so no guidance was given.
ZBA, Cart Path Lane:
The applicant is requesting a variance to allow a dormer greater then 50% of the roof. The Building
Commissioner has denied the application since it would be greater then a half story. Would such a
determination be based on internal or external measurements? The Board agreed that a variance would be
inappropriate if it did not address the legal definitions for a variance request and further determined this
Minutes for the Meeting of May 12, 2010 Page 5
was a matter that would need further discussion of the present zoning bylaw since it is becoming
increasingly difficult to determine a half story based on the current trends in housing styles with multiple
roofs and angles.
TMOD schedule:
The Planning Board will meet with the Board of Selectmen on June 7, a community meeting would be
held on Saturday June 12 at 9:30 a.m., and a public hearing held on June 23 for the TMOD.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 10:10 p.m.
Anthony Galaitsis, Clerk