Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-06-27-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF TUNE 27, 2001 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Guard Room, Police Station, was called to order at 7:37 p-m. by Chairman Galaitsis with members, Chase, Davies, Harden, PIanning Director Garber, and Assistant Planner McCall- Taylor present. Ms_ Bridge - Denzak was absent_ MINUTES ***** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meetings of May 2 and May 30, 2001. On the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Mr. Harden, it was voted unanimously, 4 -0, to approve the minutes, as amended, * * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUBDIVISION OF LAND Old Smith Farm Cluster Subdivision, 160 -170 Wood Street, Stabile Cos., Naming of Streets: Ms. McCall - Taylor informed the Board that the developer has proposed the names Smith Garden Lane and Chestnut Lane for the two cul de sacs 1D the Old Smith Farm subdivision. Both names reference features of the site. After a brief discussion, on the motion of Mr. Harden, seconded by Ms. Chase, the Board voted unanimously, 4 -0, to accept the following names for the streets in the Old Smith Farm Cluster Subdivision: Road "A ": Smith Garden Lane; Road "B ": Chestnut Dane. DETERMINATION OF GRADE AND CONSTRUCTION OF UNACCEPTED STREETS I I Haskell Street, Request for Determination of Adequacy of Grade and Construction: Ms. McCall - Taylor informed the Board that Haskell Street, from Lowell Street to Crescent Hill Avenue, was constructed to Town standards in 1999 as part of the Winship Common cluster subdivision work. Mark Moore Homes' is now requesting a determination of adequacy of grade and construction for Haskell Street as it provides frontage for I 1 Haskell Street. The Town Engineer bas no problem with the condition of the street_ After a brief discussion, on the motion of Mr_ Davies, seconded by Ms. Chase, the Board voted unanimously, 4 -0, to determine that Haskell Street, as it provides frontage for number. 11, is of adequate grade and construction. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** REGIONAL, INTER TOWN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *x Met ro2ol i tan State Hospital Reuse Mr. Garber reported that the State Department of Capital Asset Management wants to convene the Tri -Town Met State Task Force but, so far, a date convenient for all parties has not been found. The purpose of the meeting would be to familiarize everyone with the current plan and develop a timeline of events: zoning action, transfer of land, utilities, and issuance of an RIP. M. Garber characterized this activity as "getting to the outer sphere of implementation." * * * * * * ** ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUBDIVISION OF LAND 32 Roosevelt Ro ad Special Residential Devel opment Definitive Plan, North Shore Con and Developm PUBLIC H Present for this item were Mr. Ronald Lopez, North Shore Construction and Development, applicant; Mr_ Daniel Harrington, attorney: Mr..Edmund Grant: Attorney, M . Dylan James, of Meridian Engineering engineer: Mr. Richard Lakutis, LandTech, landscape architect, and Mr. Michael Abend, Abend Associates, traffic engineer_ There were a dozen people in the audience_ Mr. Harrington described his Mr. Lopez's efforts to respond to the wishes of the Board at earlier stages in Minutes for the Meeting of .Tune 27, 2001 Z the permitting process, and to the abutters to the proposed special residential development at 32 Roosevelt Road. Mr. Grant added that Mr_ Lopez is proposing smaller dwelling units, in contrast to the large houses being built now elsewhere in Lexington, in response to the Planning Board's goal of providing alternative dwelling types. Mr. Grant went on to say that the impact measures are lower than those permitted and only six units are proposed, down one frown the earlier proposal. He characterized Mr. Lopez's plan as a win -win proposal. It is compatible with the existing neighborhood and is designed for as low a visual impact as possible. The buildings are as low as possible relative to the ground water level_ All the requests of the Engineering Division have been met. The developer feels be has done all he can to meet everyone's objectives_ Mr. James presented an overview of the drainage plan, saying that it actually results in a decrease in the amount of runoff from the site. Mr. Lakutis described the landscape plan, saying that all the trees within the setback will be retained and protected throughout the construction process. Mr. James said that they cannot guarantee trees will not be disturbed when the drainage system is installed. In answer to Mr. Galaitsis' question, Mr. Lopez said that upkeep of the drainage system will be responsibility of the homeowners association, which will own the system. Mr. Harden asked about the size of the homes and possible future additions to the homes_ Mr. Lopez said they would have three bedrooms and two baths. Mr. Harden noted that there is a staircase leading to the attic. That could mean the houses would have 4 bedrooms and this would likely change the impact measures. Mr_ Lopez responded that his intended market is two- person households. Mr. Garber suggested using a pull -down stairway to the attic. As there were no questions from other boards and committees, Mr. Galaitsis invited the audience to ask questions. Tim Wheaton, 20 Wilson Road, asked if the interior driveway was included in the impervious surface calculation. The answer was no. He also asked what the setbacks were in this subdivision and in a conventional subdivision. The answer was there is no set requirement; they are at the Board's discretion . in a cluster development. A conventional subdivision would have a 25 foot setback for a dwelling with a gross floor area of 2,500 square feet or more. John Wilson, Wilson Road, commented that six dwelling units is too much for the size of the lot, and he wanted a sewer problem addressed. (Later in the ineeting, Mr. James informed the Board that the Engineering Division had reviewed a video of the sewer in question, provided by Mr_ Lopez, and saw that the problem no longer exists.) Douglas Davis, 31 Roosevelt Road, said there is a serious traffic problem there when there is a snowstorm or a function at Hastings School. Mr. Abend noted that these are existing problems that are not connected with Mr. Lopez' development. Carolyn Johnston, 8 Wilson Road, asked if her big maple tree will survive the construction_ Mr. Lakutis pointed out that trees will be protected to their drip line and there is a limit of work line. He assured her that an arborist would be brought in if it looked like her tree would be affected. He urged her to make the developer aware the tree when work begins_ Mr. Davies emphasized the significance of the limit of work. fine. In response to a question, Mr. Lopez said that the asking price for the new houses is not yet determined. Mr_ Galaitsis commented that he is disappointed that Mr. Lopez is proposing six dwelling units. With the interior drive not included in the calculations Mr. Lopez' impact figures work, but lie is not observing the spirit of the cluster by -law. Mr. Galaitsis provided his own set of calculations in the form of a handout_ Mr_ Harrington argued that if five dwelliugs were proposed, they would have to be bigger to make the economics work_ Mr. Lopez wants to.provide the desired smaller units. Mr. Grant added that Mr. Lopez also honored the Board's request that he not ask for waivers of site coverage or impervious surface snaxirnum. Mr. Galaitsis responded that Section 9.3.3 provides that a developer is not entitled to the Minutes for the Meeting of June 27, 2001 maximum development impacts. He also pointed out that a strict interpretation of the Zoning By -Law would include the interior drive-in the calculation for impervious surface. Mr. Davies' asked why the open space is all cut up into small pieces. Mr. James said that the development team spent a great deal of time figuring out the layout ---- dwelling units, driveways, turnarounds — observing the cluster requirement as well as giving the owners of the homes enough space, Mr. Grant summarized Mr. Lopez' efforts to please the Board and still have a viable project_ He noted that there is give -and -take on both sides in the regulatory process. Mr_ Galaitsis thanked the development team. At 9:48 p.m. Mr. Galaitsis stated that the hearing would be continued at a meeting in the near future and asked if the neighbors present would designate a contact person who would be informed when the date is determined_ 336.342 Bedford Street, Johnson Farm ,Sketch Cluster Subdivision Plan, 3MG Development, LLC. Presentation by the Applicant Present for this item were Mr_ Joseph Gelonnini, JMG, Inc. applicant, Mr. Michael Weinnmayr, Weinmayr Associates, landscape architect, and Mr. Malcolm McDowell, Noonan and McDowell, engineer. Mr. Weinmayr presented a sketch cluster subdivision plan for a six -acre site off Bedford Street, near Route 128195. He also showed a "proof' conventional subdivision plan. Three alternate studies, each with 17 dwelling units in eight buildings, with minimal attachment, .illustrated various configurations for the open space. Mr. McDowell said there are no hard drainage calculations at this early stage, but that there would likely be a filtration system, a detention pond, and sewers would be both gravity and pump_ Mr. Harden asked about the emergency access path. He was ioformed that the fire department would like to see another solution as the proposed path would not support fire equipment. Mr. Harden also asked what is the anticipated market and had Mr. Gelormini considered including some affordable units? Mr. Gelormini said he plans to build three or four bedroom homes of about 3,200 square feet. He had not thought of providing affordable units. A new house will replace Mrs_ Johnson's house at 342 Bedford Street and she will continue to live there. Ms. Chase suggested that the applicant check the Historical Commission's inventory of cultural resources as the Johnson farmhouse might be listed, in which case lie would have to apply to the commission for permission to demolish it. Relative to the open space proposed to be deeded to the Conservation Commission, Mr. Galaitsis noted that the Commission prefers that the open space be larger, connected parcels. The Board agreed that they would like to see another sketch plan before the applicant moves to the next stage in the permitting process- The meeting was adjourned at 10:36 p -m- Sara B. Chase, Clerk