HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-04-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 4, 2004
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Room, Town Office Building, was
called to order at 7:30 pm by Chairman Harden with members Chase, Davies, Kastorf and planning staff
Garber, McCall - Taylor, and Tap present. Mr. Galaitsis arrived at 7:50 p.m
* * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL LAW
ANR 2004 -2 Woburn Street Lexin on 300 Lexington Street Woburn Map 53 lot 1: The Board
reviewed an Approval Not Required Plan for land at Woburn Street, Lexington (300 Lexington Street,
Woburn), Map 53, lot 1, submitted with Forth. A/2004 -2 by Phyllis Etsell, and voted to endorse the plan
entitled "Approval Not Required Plan of Land in Woburn and Lexington ", dated December 16, 2003,
prepared and certified by Daniel D. O'Neill, Professional Land Surveyor, Burlington, MA, as it does not
require approval under the Subdivision Control Law.
SUBDIVISION OF LAND
Lexington Hills Definitive Cluster Subdivision Plan, Walnut Roseland LLC Withdraw Plan: Ms. McCall-
Taylor informed the Board that staff received a request from Mr. Charles Forman asking to withdraw
Walnut Roseland LLC's Lexington Hills Definitive Cluster Subdivision plan without prejudice. On the
motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Davies, it was voted to allow Walnut Roseland LLC to withdraw
the Lexington Hill Subdivision without prejudice.
Aaron Road Subdivision — Release of Covenant and Release of Lot: Since the Board issued its special
decision December 17, 2003 with regard to the lot release request for the Aaron Road Subdivision the
following actions have occurred to address the deficiencies:
• Both lot owners now share responsibility for the maintenance for the drainage system and the road
improvement as outlined in the January 23, 2004 agreement between Margaret Barons, Trustee of Aaron
Road Realty Trust and John Connors.
• Trustee's Certificate recorded for Aaron Road Realty Trust.
• As -built plan, dated 12/4/03 and revised 1120104, submitted that shows the transformers moved out
of the easements.
As a result of these actions, there appears to be no reason to retain the covenant over Lot 1 and the lot can
be released for sale as requested. On the motion of Ms. Chase, seconded by Mr. Kastorf, the Board voted
unanimously to release lot I of the Subdivision.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Applications To Be Heard on 12, 2004 Ms. McCall - Taylor indicated that her review of the
following petitions revealed no significant planning issues.
• 359 North Emerson Road - Variance to construct an attached garage
• 1377 Massachusetts Avenue — Variance and special permit to construct apartment
• 22 Oxbow Road — Variance to construct a wheelchair ramp entry
• 436 Marrett Road — Special permit to operate an automobile sales & service business in CS District
• 4 Jackson Court — Variance to construct an addition rear of property and install 8' fence and trellis
area
• 65 Taft Avenue — Variance to construct additions w /in front and side setback and allow shed w /in
required rear yard
• 23 Ledgelawn Avenue — Variance to construct an addition within req. front yard
• 3 Constitution Road — Variance to construct addition Win front and side setback
• 8 Ledgelawn Avenue — Variance from either front or side yard setback to construct house
Minutes for the Meeting of February 4, 2004
64 Grant Street — Variance from front yard setback to construct addition
22 Barberry Road — Variance to construct addition Win front and side setback
The Board agreed to make no recommendations on the petitions.
ARTICLES FOR 2004 TOWN MEETING
Metropolitan State Hospital : There was a brief update on the public forum held January 28. Board
members agreed that it would be important to work with the Transportation Advisory Committee and to
include them in future meetings with the developer, AvalonBay Communities, Inc. Members asked when
the peer review of the fiscal analysis would be available and were told that the original report had been
changed to utilize figures from Lexington so the peer review was delayed.
* * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * **
SUBDIVISION OF LAND
47 & 53 Pleasant Street Definitive Conventional Subdivision Plan Continuation of Public Hearin : Mr.
Harden opened the continued hearing for the 47 and 53 Pleasant Street Subdivision at 7:50 p.m. He
reported that the hearing had been continued from January 7 to allow 1) additional site design work,
including lowering the first floor elevations (FFE) of the houses; 2) drafting of a homeowner's covenant
that would limit the design and size of the dwellings; 3) a peer review of the sight distance. He reported
that the peer review had upheld Meridian's figures and methodology. The sight lines met the Town's
standard but not the AASHTO recommended distance. Mr. Harden said a fourth issue raised in January
was the status of the tenant on the site. He would allow a brief report on attempts to address this situation
but that it was not an issue within the Planning Board's powers.
Gary Larson, Rick Waitt, Dylan James and Chris Bailey and attorney Lawrence Kenny were present for
the development team, along with Mr. and Mrs. Luongo and their son. The response to the outstanding
issues was as follows:
1) The FFE of the house on Lot 7 was lowered 3'10 ". By using gravity flow perimeter drains the
proposed front retaining wall could be eliminated. On Lot 1 the main house had been lowered
11" and the garage lowered 2'4 ", allowing for less slope of the driveway and retention of more
vegetation.
2) The covenant places some control over the architectural style, scale and general character and
litr its the height to 32 feet above FFE.
3) Mr. Rick Waitt reported that the sight distances were over the minimum Town standards for both
arterial and collector streets. The peer review confirmed this.
4) The current tenant had been offered a rental through LeXHAB but had not found it acceptable.
He is working on his own with a real estate agent and will have at least six months to make other
arrangements.
The Board discussed the sight distances and the difference between stopping sight distance, which is an
AASHTO standard, and intersection sight distance, which is a Town regulation. Mr. Galaitsis said that
slope causes a need for longer stopping distances and that is not reflected in the Town regulations and
added that the Board might want to address that in the future.
The covenant had a clause that terminated certain requirements upon transfer of the title. Mr. Larson said
the intent was to retain quality control and they would be willing to delete that clause. Mr. Kenny said it
was not the intent to terminate the obligations and that the obligations rest with the successor owner, not
Minutes for the Meeting of February 4, 2004
the original owner. He said the clause was meant to only limit who is required to fulfill the obligations,
not what is limited. Mr. Galaitsis said he wanted bullet -proof language so there would no be any
confusion in the future. Mr. Kenny said he would work to clarify the language, not the concept. Mr.
Garber said legal counsel had felt that the second phase was unnecessary and confusing. The Town needs
standing to enforce the covenant with language such as "Town of Lexington has the right to enforce ".
Mr. Kenny said that was not a problem. Mr. Galaitsis wanted to set the maximum square footage allowed
and for there be no provision to exceed it without coming back to the Planning Board.
Audience Questions and Comments: The neighbors were concerned about the effects of this development
on the heavily traveled Pleasant Street. They argued that any decision made here would be a precedent
that could change the entire community. They urged the Board to use the ASHTO standards and require
longer sight distances than the current Town regulations. They also wanted the Board to turn down the
proposal as they felt the development would change their neighborhood and put too much traffic on
Pleasant Street. One neighbor requested that the construction site be surrounded by an 8' high fence. The
Board expressed their desire to see a cluster on this site but recognized the right of the developer to do it
as a conventional subdivision. They said that they were forced to work with what had been proposed and
felt that they had negotiated a number of mitigations. They reminded those in the audience that they were
working within the bylaws that had been adopted by the community, and if the residents were unhappy
with these regulations they should work to have them changed, however, in the meantime those were the
regulations in effect.
On the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted 5 to 0 to approve the
subdivision. On the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Ms. Chase, the Board voted to continue the
hearing on the special permit to a date certain, that date being February 26 at 6:30 p.m.
Hazel Road Special Residential Development, Preliminary Plan Public Information Session --
Planning Board member Karl Kastorf recused himself due to his standing as an abutter and left the room
when this item came up. Ron Lopez, Dan Harrington, Dylan James and Michael Dryden were present as
the development team Area residents, who had been informally notified of the agenda item by mail,
were in attendance. Concerns were expressed about blasting, storm water runoff and traffic. The Planning
Board members raised questions about the size and location of the dwellings on a topographically
challenging site. There was considerable discussion about the provision of affordable housing.
• On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to disapprove the preliminary plan due to the
following issues:
• The right of the applicant to incorporate the right of way of a portion of the unaccepted street into
development tract needs to be established.
• There are too many units for a difficult site. (The proof plan shows four units.)
• Location of dwelling units and storm water infiltration units to the southwest of the interior drive
on a steep area of the site requires excessive grading and fill.
• Dwellings are too massive, and loom over downhill houses. The prominently peaked roof design
exacerbates the problem.
• Retaining walls located too close to existing trees will compromise the trees' chances for survival.
• The steep grade on existing Hazel as it ascends from Winter Street could increase risk with more
units added to the way.
The Planning Board suggested that the development plans be modified to reduce the scale of the project
in both the number and size of units, and that the applicant continue to explore whether one or more
affordable housing units can be incorporated, the mode and details of which shall be determined in
Minutes for the Meeting of February 4, 2004
discussions between the applicant and the Board.
4
EXECUTIVE SESSION
Mr. Kastorf rejoined the meeting. Mr. Harden polled the members at 11:30 pan and the Board voted
unanimously to go into Executive Session to discuss litigation. The Board agreed to reconvene in open
session only for the purpose of adjourning.
Upon reconvening in open session and on a motion duly made second e Board voted
unanimously to adjourn at 11:40 p,m.
P
/John L. Davies, Clerk