Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-08-21-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF AUGUST 21, 2002 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 Galaitsis with members Chase, Davies, Kastorf and planning staff Garber, McCall - Taylor, and Machek present. Mr. Harden was out of town. * * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUBDIVISION OF LAND Scottish Glen Cluster Subdivision, 25 Summer Street, Second Interim Review Present for this item were Mr. Andrew Schwab of Curran Construction, the applicant, and Mr. Ronald Wood of Guidelines, Inc., the landscape architect. Mr. Curran stated that the plan the board will see tonight shows reduced density through the elimination of one dwelling unit, exceeds the open space and usable open space requirements, and meets all other criteria. Mr. Wood referred to the current plan as "Plan C ". It shows a total of four dwelling units with 13.3 percent site coverage and 19.5 percent impervious surface. The plan also shows no walkway surfaces. Mr. Curran added that the hammerhead turnaround was eliminated as a result of their meeting with Assistant Fire Chief William Middlemiss. Mr. Middlemiss said that that layout does not work for the fire department. He said that they would install a fire hydrant per Mr. Middlemiss's request. Mr. Wood stated that units 1 and 2 would be attached with a trellis over the courtyard that is an exclusive use area. The numbers on the size of the units were estimates as the final design is pending. Mr. Wood said if the direction they were moving were acceptable they would proceed with the architectural plans. Mr. Davies said the Board should realize that these are big units. He likes the project and the way the trellises differentiate between units 1- 2 and 3 -4. He said these are big, dense houses, but they fit together fairly well. Mr. Schwab said that the real living space is on the first and second floor so you could almost subtract the 450 square feet listed for the top floor. Mr. Galaitsis said that the three new houses on Summer Street are smaller and on bigger lots. He said the units on Litchfield average around 3,200 square feet. Mrs. Phyllis Aaronson commented from the audience that one unit on Litchfield is being advertised as having 5,000 square feet living area. Mr. Galaitsis said he had walked the site. He maintained that a conventional subdivision could not really be more than two units since there isn't "elbow room ". He felt that people who wanted mansions wouldn't choose this site. He said that this was really the equivalent of 3.6 units and that could be the reason that things are too big. Mr. Schwab responded that some incentive is needed to do a cluster. Mr. Davies reiterated that he liked the plan. Ms. McCall- Taylor expressed concern about the ability to back out of the driveways if there were two cars parked in front of all the garages. Mr. Galaitsis said he had a concem about putting four units on this site instead of two. He wondered if they were any more affordable than a conventional unit would be. He said this plan would double the number of units without providing any affordable units. Mr. Schwab said that the price of a comparable unit would be $300,000 more if it were on a single lot. Mr. Galaitsis repeated that he had walked the site and now feels that it is too enclosed. He felt the units were too big. Mr. Garber said that that was the cluster trade -off and that the units do not exceed the neighborhood standard. Mr. Galaitsis said that there is much more impact from the increased units on a smaller lot. Mr. Garber said that the staff had been discussing the problems with smaller lots and the impervious surface numbers. These are certainly issues for fixture consideration. Mr. Kastorf said the ~whole thing is problematic but he thinks the economy will solve the problem. If the Minutes for the Meeting of August 21, 2002 2 houses are too big for the lot, they will find out through the market. He appreciates the effort that has gone into the project. Mr. Schwab said that he already has a customer waiting and they want an even larger house. Mr. Kastorf said he was somewhat inclined to go forward with a preliminary plan although he felt it violated the spirit in that the houses are just too massive for the site they are on. Mr. Galaitsis asked if the applicant saw any way of resolving the issues. Mr. Schwab asked if it would help to take 450 square feet out of each unit. Ms. Chase asked if taking the livable space out of the flop floor would reduce the roofline? Mr. Schwab said the whole idea was to keep the units low. Mr. Galaitsis asked what was the size of the unit in the six -unit proposal. Mr. Wood said that the attached units were 2,200 square feet, and the one - family detached was under 3,000 square feet, but he was not sure if that included the 450 square feet on the top floor. Mr. Galaitsis said it was his belief that as the number of units decreased, the size increased. Mr. Schwab said that the site coverage had not really changed per unit from earlier plans. The Board members were asked to give the applicant guidance on how to proceed. Mr. Galaitsis said he could not support this number of units and this size of units. Mr. Davies said he would like to see the attics non - habitable and that that might lower the roofs. He would encourage the developer to continue. Mr. Kastorf said he wanted to see it go forward but was concerned with the size. He favored removing the attic space and using it to reduce the mass. Mr. Schwab said that in New England you need a steep roof but that he would put in pull -down stairs, which would preclude occupancy of the space. Ms. Chase asked for as much size reduction as could be effected. Mr. Schwab asked reduction to what? Mr. Galaitsis said that that was up to him and his view of the market. Members felt that at this point it would be helpful to have elevations and perspectives. Mr. Davies said he liked the courtyards, as they are a nice contrast to the common open space. Mr. Wood agreed, saying that people life small intimate spaces and cited Nantucket and Marblehead. Ms. Chase said that the finished first floor height would be a significant factor. Mr. Davies asked for illustrative sections and Mr. Kastorf agreed that a greater level of detail might allow the project to move forward. Pleasant Street, Continued Sketch Plan Present for this item were Mr. Richard Waitt of Meridian Engineering, Mr. Gary Larson and Mr. Chris Bailey of Larson Associates, and Mr. and Mrs. Luongo. Originally they had submitted a conventional subdivision with seven lots, ranging in size from 16,000 square feet to 32,000 square feet. Mr. Larson presented some cluster options for the 3.8 -acre site in the RS district. Cluster A has the same road configuration as the conventional, forming a "T ", witb nine single - family houses in groups of three. Cluster B has five dwellings with two twits each. The impervious surface for A is 21 -22 %, while for B it is 25 %. Neither had individual lots. The bigger issue for this site is the substantial change in grade. The site isn't big enough to meld the grade between the houses and the road. Mr. Larson closed his presentation by saying that the quality of life issue is much different for a cluster than a single- family house on its own land. The owners would prefer single - family houses on separate lots. Mr. Garber said that the 2% grade within 75' of an intersection could be waived within a cluster. He asked if any other location for the road /interior drive had been considered? Mr. Larson said the location. was pretty locked in due to the grades. In response to a question about floor area, he said that the floor area in A and B were roughly the same. He stated that the applicant was willing to substantially reduce the footprint of the houses in the conventional subdivision. Mr. Galaitsis asked if changing the orientation of some of the units could solve the grade change problems. Mr. Larson said he didn't know. Mr. Luongo said that they want to provide a certain life style where people could have their own piece of land. He wants to have a lot or two available for his children. He feels for this area a single- family conventional is the best approach and that it would enhance the neighborhood with less impact. Minutes for the Meeting of August 21, 2002 3 Mr. Garber asked if they had considered two clusters of 4 to limit alterations to the site. Mr. Waitt said that the controlling feature retrains the driveway and they can't cluster the units since they will be sited on severely sloping land. Mr. Garber said it might be better to work a conventional within a cluster, in other words, seven smaller units with less disturbance of the land on smaller lots. Mr. Davies agreed that maybe they wanted a cluster of smaller units. It was left that the design team would talk with the owners and see if they can come tip with another design. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNING STAFF REPORT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Lexington Hills Cluster Subdivision {Middlesex Hospital Site), Walnut Roseland, LLC — Rollout Of Prcliminary Plan. Ms. McCall- Taylor gave a brief overview. The proposal for the 11.75 -acre Lexington site is 26 units in 18 buildings with two affordable units. Planning board members felt there should be 3 affordable units. Ms. McCall - Taylor informed the Board that there is a rezoning proposal before the Waltham City Council for the Waltham piece. The proposal is for 246 apartments in seven buildings on 25+ acres and an undetermined number of townhouses for the elderly. 60 Bedford St., Walgreens. Drive - through Service - Board of Appeals Hearing. The hearing was never opened as the legal notice characterized it as a reconsideration of the decision. The Zoning Board will not be reconsidering its decision but might consider amending the decision. Any hearing must be re- advertised. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** REGIONAL, INTERTOWN ISSUES * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Metropolitan State Hospital Site Reuse— Lexington Task Force is scheduled to meet on August 22 to review the final draft of the RFP and the marketing plan. Amendments to Chapter 40B — The Duxbuty Planning Board is circulating a petition in support of certain amendments to 40B. After discussing the proposal, the Lexington Planning Board members felt they could not sign the petition, as it did not provide any alternative strategy for promoting affordable housing; it was purely a negative petition. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING Transportation Element The Board reviewed the agenda for the kickoff meeting with VHB and CPAC scheduled for Monday, September 9. AFFORDABLE HOUSING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Discussion of strategic affordable housing initiatives — Mr. Galaitsis began by saying his view of the 40B process is that it allows the impact of a project to affect a particular area rather than the town as a whole. He felt the town needs a credible plan to produce 10% affordable units and that such a plan would include the following: everyone shares the burden; the financial cost borne by all; guidelines so that all conventional projects would chip in; the percent of units in each development would be a bit higher than 10 %; if only one house, they would pay into a fund; the Community Preservation Act would be another source; contributions from commercial development might be sought; guidelines for inclusionary units; and, outreach to developers. Mr. Galaitsis said he felt there should be an article prepared for the next Town Meeting. Minutes for the Meeting of August 21, 2002 Ms. Chase said she was discouraged by the way the cluster provisions are working. She would like to mandate a financial fee to those not building affordable units. Mr. Kastorf said that the lesson he got out of tonight was that he was not sure with the cluster provision you can preserve open space and provide affordable housing on the same site. Mr. Garber said the Board might want to consider some housing initiatives for Town Meeting such as accessory apartments or some inclusionary provisions. Mr. Kastorf weighed in on the side of accessory apartments. REPORTS Planning Board, Subcommittees Mr. Galaitsis reported that he had spoken with developers regarding m.ansionization controls and found the discussion to be unproductive. He said that when the Planning Board had an article before Town Meeting the developers had said they wanted to work with the Board to produce a by -law, but now they have no interest in doing so. The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. /arl . Kastorf, Clerk