Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-07-23-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JULY 23, 2003 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Room, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Harden with members Chase, Davies, Galaitsis, Kastorf and planning staff Garber, McCall - Taylor, and Tap present. ****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MINUTES Review of Minutes The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of July 9, 2003. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the minutes as amended. * * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUBDIVISION OF LAND Olde Smith Farm Cluster Subdivision Amended Plan, Stabile Companies Having approved the minor amendment to the Olde Smith Farm Cluster Subdivision at the conclusion of the public hearing on May 14, 2003, and having received the Town Cleric's certification that no appeals were filed within the 20 -day appeal period, the Board endorsed the amended subdivision plans. Rangeway Road Extension Definitive Subdivision Plan, Mr. James Public Hearing Mr. Harden opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m. Present for this item were Mr. James Raymond, applicant; Mr. Fred Russell, designing engineer; and Mrs. Doris Duff, owner of the property. There were 10 people in the audience. Mr. Russell presented a definitive plan showing an extension of Rangeway Road to provide frontage for a 20,483 square foot lot and the construction of one single - family house with a two -car garage and an 18- foot pavement width with a turnaround that extends outside of the existing right -of -way. The garage did not appear on the preliminary plan. Waivers of the development regulations are sought. Conditions of the preliminary plan approval were: applicant would offer a deed restriction limiting the gross floor area and footprint of the dwelling to the approximate area shown on the preliminary site construction plan; a turnaround sufficient for a fire truck; and, a commitment to implement improvements to the existing Rangeway Road from the applicant's lot to Skyview Road. Board Questions and Comments: Ms. McCall - Taylor, responding to Mr. Harden's question about a letter from town counsel, said that the Board has three choices in this case and cases like this: 1) do not approve any waivers; 2) approve the road without a turnaround; 3) approve the road with a turnaround on the applicant's property, which would then require a variance of lot size from the Zoning Board. of Appeals. This latter approach would also raises the question of the grandfathering of the lot as it could be argued that a new lot had been created. Mr. Russell commented that a road extension like the one he proposes on Rangeway was approved for James Street. Mr. Harden pointed out that no two cases are identical and that the Board has the authority to judge each on its merits and individual conditions. The mechanics of a deed restriction on the size of the house were discussed. Mr. Raymond said he was willing to do without the garage and to offer a deed restriction on the size of the house. Mr. Kastorf said that the addition of a 24' by 24' garage, which resulted in a substantial widening of the building, was moving in the opposite direction from what the Board had wanted. Mr. Davies recalled that on the site walk saving trees on the site seemed paramount to the participants, but the garage and a larger storm water management system shown on the definitive plan would require much tree cutting. He also questioned the steepness of a "rip- rapped" slope. Mr. Harden commented that the driveway was being raised approximately six feet. Minutes for the Meeting of July 23, 2003 2 Audience Questions and Comments: Abutters to this development were concerned about the loss of trees but safety concerns were paramount. The difficulty of maneuvering fire apparatus on Rangeway, especially if visitors to the abutting conservation land were to park on the pavement in front of the new house, was cited. Currently people do park at the end of Rangeway to access the conservation land and neighbors were concerned that the turnaround would be an invitation to park there and it would take a major enforcement effort to keep cars out of the turnaround. These conditions would be worse in the winter when it snows. One neighbor said that he has had fire trucks use his driveway to turn around. Another neighbor reported that a fire truck had gotten stuck at the end of Rangeway and it had taken several days to get it out. They also regret the loss of open space. Though the residents on Rangeway Road would like their street repaired, they believe the improvements done in connection with this development would not be lasting. Mr. Raymond had offered to fill potholes and the like. A street construction plan with which the neighbors could obtain estimates of the cost to improve their road was to have been provided with the definitive plan submission but was not. Someone asked if LexHAB would pave the road in front of its lot. Ms. McCall - Taylor said if this plan were approved LexHAB would not have to pave in front of its lot, but might be asked to do further improvements to the upper portion of Rangeway. Other abutters said that at the sketch and preliminary stages of this development the neighbors felt a lot of good will based on the promise of a modest house, little tree removal and some street improvements. But now, the house is bigger and the infiltration field is bigger. The fire and engineering departments have misgivings about the proposed roadway, Conservation Commission input is not in yet, and a turnaround on the house lot would increases its non - conformity. They asked: How far should the regulations be bent? Mr. Raymond responded that he would work with the neighbors to build a satisfactory development. Mr. Russell listed the benefits of the definitive plan, Board Deliberations: Mr. Harden said that if the owner has a right to build on his land, the neighbors' loss of "open space" does not prevent him from building. But he also noted that the safety issues here are real and he sees no lasting public benefit in this plan. Mr. Kastorf also noted the serious public safety issues. He saw them as neighborhood issues that could have been worked out by now, including benefits to balance the negatives, but were not. He expressed concern about likely parking on an easement where it cannot be regulated. Mr. Davies asked if the town could offer Mr. Raymond an easement for a turnaround. Or could he get a variance for lot size? He believes the town needs the kind of a smaller housing that the preliminary plan showed. He dill express concern about the configuration of the end of Rangeway Road. Mr. Galaitsis said that the Board likes to help people with these little lots, but with the waivers needed, this one would set some bad precedents if approved. He, too, did not sympathize with the neighbors' loss of "open space" Ms. Chase said she shares Mr. Davies' view that modest housing is needed, though the safety issues concern her too. There was further discussion of possible scenarios for approval and perhaps continuing the hearing. Mr. Russell said he would like to meet with the abutters and get their input. The Board agreed it was too late for that now. Upon individual poll of the board, it was voted to close the public hearing at 9:20 p.m. Minutes for the Meeting of July 23, 2003 3 Mr. Davies moved to approve the plan subject to conditions, including that the applicant go to the Board of Appeals for a variance. Mrs. Chase seconded his motion. On a vote of 2 -3, Mr. Harden, Mr. Galaitsis and Mr. Kastorf opposed, the motion was defeated. On the motion of Mr. Galaitsis, seconded by Mr. Kastorf, the Board voted 3 -2, Mr. Davies and Mrs. Chase opposed, to disapprove the definitive plan for Rangeway Road, dated June 1, 2003, and to not the granted the requested waivers of the Design Standards for Streets and Rights -of -Ways, § 175 -45E of the Subdivision Regulations in the Planning Board Development Regulations. The waivers that would have been necessary to construct the plan as submitted include the following: • Provision of landscape plan • Minimum pavement width.: reduction from 20' to 18' (§ 175- 45E(1)) • Side slopes (§ 175- 45E(10)) • Turnaround of 120' diameter (§ 175- 45E(4)) • Dead -end water main to be extended, rather than a looped water system • Elimination of landscape strips ( §175- 45E(1)) • Elimination of roadway shoulders ( §175- 45E(1)) • Minimum travel lane reduction from 2 x 10' to 2 x 9' ( §175- 45E(1)) • Centerline of street to be offset (§ 175 -45E(5)) • Use of Cape Cod berm throughout rather than vertical granite curbing at the back of catch basins (§175-45E(8)) Clelland Road Preliminary Subdivision Plan Mr. Rasko Ojdrovic Public Informational Meetin : The informational meeting began at 9:30 p.m. Present for this item was Mr. Rasko Ojdrovic, applicant and engineer for a proposed three -lot subdivision on Clelland Road. Mr. Ojdrovic told the board that he discussed his preliminary plan with Assistant Fire Chief Middlemiss, Senior Engineer Derek Fullerton and with the neighborhood. He believes the plan improves public safety in that it widens Clelland Road, provides a turnaround and a new fire hydrant. New retaining walls will define the roadway as well. He requests the following waivers of the Development Regulations: condition of the intervening street; the centerline of the street; the construction of a full circle turnaround; and the provision of shoulders. The plan shows a 200 -foot extension of Clelland Road and a hammerhead turnaround. He said that the drainage system will improve things for the neighbors, including those on Lisbeth Street, and the retaining walls will be more attractive than the current stone walls. Board Questions and Comments: The road improvement was the primary concern, as the site is steep and difficult. Mrs. Chase asked if the town engineering division approved of the proposed connection to town sewer. The answer was affirmative. Mr. Davies said that while he favored stone wherever possible for retaining walls, he understood the problem with the lower wall. The height of the walls was of concern to the Board and Mr. Kastorf asked if there should be a safety structure on top of the wall. Mr. Ojdrovic responded that he did not think it was needed. Mr. Harden asked Mr. Ojdrovic to provide the Board with a written agreement signed by the uphill abutters about the work to be done that affects them. Mr. Galaitsis asked about the road, concerned that there is not room for a "shoulder ". Mr. Ojdrovic said there is very little traffic on Clelland Road and his plan would actually improve the parking situation. Mr. Davies thanked Mr. Ojdrovic for his "very cogent presentation." Minutes for the Meeting of July 23, 2003 4 Audience Questions and Comments: Mr. Peter Galeno, I1 Lisbeth Street, thanked the Board for the work they do, recognizing the difficult decisions they have to wrestle with. (He and other abutters to Clelland Road sat through a good bit of the Rangeway hearing as they waited for Clelland Road to be taken up.) Mr. Galeno and Mr. Brus, who live on Lisbeth Street, described winter conditions on their street as icy and snowbound. Only a payloader can make it up to clear those streets and sand trucks cannot make the corner. They asked where the snow could be plowed to if there are higher retaining walls. Mr. Ojdrovic described the construction details of the retaining walls. It was noted that there would be a great deal of new infrastructure. Mr. Galeno asked about liability regarding the retaining walls; Mr. Harden answered that each direct abutter on the private way on which a retaining wall is located would be responsible. Preserving the woodland character of the area was another concern of the abutters. Mr. Ojdrovic assured them that some trees they thought endangered were actually going to be unaffected by the construction. The Board noted that a detailed landscape plan is a required element of the definitive plans. Board Deliberations: Mr. Davies said he thought that Mr. Ojdrovic could proceed to the definitive stage if he field- checked the large trees and reduced the slope of the road at the corner of Clelland and Lisbeth. Mr. Garber said he should define the transition at the corner. Mr. Kastorf concurred. He added that he hopes that the proposed houses would be of modest size. He noted that a more detailed landscape plan would be submitted at the definitive stage. Ms. Chase agreed that the plan could move to the definitive stage if Mr. Ojdrovic fixes the design of the road's corner and addresses snow removal. She urged him to consider styles of homes that are more horizontal than vertical. Mr. Galaitsis commended Mr. Oj drovic's presentation but observed that the turn from Lisbeth onto Clelland Road is "impossible" and that something must be done to remedy this. He reiterated the need to address snow removal. Mr. Harden commended Mr. Ojdrovic on his presentation but said he is not yet convinced that this project is viable. He told him to go forward, but to work with the neighbors and come back with a better understanding with them, as they seem quite worried about the effects of this development. On the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted unanimously to approve the preliminary plan for Clelland Road and allow Mr. Ojdrovic to come back with a definitive plan with the following conditions: that the grade of the road at the turn from Lisbeth Street onto Clelland Road be improved; that a detailed landscape plan be provided; that more frequent cross - section drawings be provided, as well as a true scale drawing showing the slope of the road; that the proposed houses be of modest size; that a field -check of the trees is done and their locations shown on the plan; that there be further conversations with the abutters regarding the retaining walls: and, that it is determined that DPW trucks could negotiate the turn at the intersection of the two streets. Minutes for the Meeting of July 23, 2003 APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PLAN 5 ANR 2003 -4 537 Lowell Street: After a brief discussion, on a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land located in Lexington, MA," dated June 24, 2003, prepared and certified by Kevin E. Danahy, Professional Land Surveyor, Meridian Associates, Inc., Danvers, MA, with Norm A/2003 -4, as it does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law. On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn at 11:35 p.m. John L' Davies, Cl_er-k �r