Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-08-08-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF AUGUST 8, 2001 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Room Town Office Building, was called to order at 7:34 p.m. by Chairman Galaitsis with members Bridge - Denzak, Chase, Davies, Harden, staff members Garber, McCall - Taylor and Tap and planning intern Deborah Tyson present. ******* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MINUTES ****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Review of Minutes The Board reviewed the minutes for the meetings of June 20 and 27, 2001. On the motion of Mr. Harden, seconded by Ms. Chase, it was voted unanimously 5 -0 to approve the minutes, as written. They postponed acting on the July I I and 18 minutes. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNINGBOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Meeting Schedule The Board agreed to cancel their meeting scheduled for August 22, as a quorum would not be present. They will meet instead on August 29, 2001. ****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** REPORTS ****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Board Member Concerns 17 Tower Road Mr. Davies reported that he has been receiving phone calls from residents about the blasting and tree clearing going on at 17 Tower Road. Ms. McCall - Taylor confirmed that no permits had yet been applied for from the Planning Board_ She said that the property owner can cut trees and do the blastmi .g without a building permit, but will eventually have to submit a street construction plan, per the Development Regulations, as that portion of Tower Road is unaccepted. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNING DIRECTOR`S REPORT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** _MAGIC Subregion al Area Study Mr. Garber explained that planning intern Ms. Deborah Tyson had produced a document entitled MAGIC Subregional Study Area completed by the Central Transportation Planning Staff. The Board agreed to discuss it sometime in the future. * * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUBDIVISION OF LAND B Hill Road Definitive Conventional Subdivision, Scott Seaver, Public Hearing Present for the hearing were the applicant Mr. Scott Seaver of Seaver Construction and Mr. Frederick Russell, P_E_, engineer_ There were 15 people in the audience. Mr. Russell presented a definitive plan for land on Bird Hill Road. It showed three new homes on three lots and improvement of Bird Dill Road to Swan Lane and 200 feet of Davis Road. Mr_ Russell explained that plan reflects changes that were suggested by the Board at the sketch and preliminary stages_ It is "Plan B ", the one the Board preferred from. the preliminary stage. He said that Mr. Seaver intends to augment the trees removed and protect all trees 10 inches in diameter and above. Any land below the 15- foot sewer easement will be left "natural ". The old stonewalls on the site will remain untouched_ Questions from the Planning Board Mr_ 'Barden asked what kind of surface preparation would be done prior to putting down the one -inch overlay of blacktop. Mr_ Russell answered that the potholes will be filled alter construction and before the pavement is laid. Mr. Galaitsis asked the staff if the Board has all it needs from the developer application. - wise. Ms. McCall- Taylor answered that missing are a landscape plan and a plan that details the no -build Minutes for the Meeting of August 8, 2001 zone on lot three. Mr. Galaitsis asked whether the developer would consider paving Davis Road instead of the rest of Bird Hill Road. Ms McCall- Taylor explained why Davis Road should be paved. Mr. Davies asked why a hammerhead turnaround is shown, when Bird Hill Road is not a dead -end street. The answer was that the fire department requested a turn- around. Ms. McCall - Taylor said she would speak to the Fire Chief about it, Mr. Seaver said he wants to do what he and planning staff already agreed to. Mr. Galaitsis questioned the square footage of the houses referred to in Mr. Seaver's letter. After some discussion, Mr. Seaver agreed that no dwelling would have more than 3,500 square feet of living area and the average square footage would not exceed 3,200 square feet. Mr. Galaitsis said that he wants to make sure that the house on new lot 3 will .not encroach into the setbacks of old lots three and four. The applicant agreed to this. Ms. Bridge-De nzak observed that there is not enough of a site plan even to review and a maximum building envelope needs to be determined. In answer to another question, Mr. Russell replied that all the existing buildings on the site have been or will be razed. Ms. Bridge - Denzak said she is not comfortable with the high finished floor elevation of the house on lot one. Mr. Russell explained that to lower it would involve more blasting into the ledge. Mr. Galaitsis pointed out that the.elevation drawings should show the grade of the site along with the dwellings. Questions and comments from the audience Jack and Nona Dreyer, 33 Moon Hill Road, representing some of their neighbors too, are concerned about three things: • the effects of blasting on their homes on Moon Hill Road. When the Moon Hill houses were built, they did not include basements so that blasting would not have to be done. They were built into the landscape. Nearby blasting now would undoubtedly disturb the radiant heating systems in their concrete floors as it had when other blasting was done in the area. i the height of the new houses that will have a basement and two stories above. They would like to see elevations drawings that include the grade of the land. the old stone walls in the woods. He thought they were his. Mr. Seaver said his company is insured. Mr. Russell added that there will be pre -blast surveys, seismographs will be installed at the perimeter of the blasting zone and he noted that blasting regulations have been made more stringent in recent years. The fire department will monitor the blasting as well. The applicant agreed to provide elevation drawings at the .next meeting. Mr. Russell said that the stonewalls are on the property line and so are in joint ownership. They will not be disturbed. A number of neighbors had questions about the treatment of the roads near the development. Some want Davis Road paved, others the remainder of Bird Hill Road, All agreed that the streets are in terrible condition. Some expressed belief that the area would be improved by the development_ Ms_ McCall - Taylor informed there that it was highly unlikely that the streets would be accepted by the Town upon being improved. Connie Heiti - nan, 12 Davis Road, said she has a basement that was built without blasting, so blasting is not inevitable_ She and her husband have been filling the potholes on Davis Road on a regular basis. She looks forward to the improvements Mx. Seaver's project will bring to the neighborhood - In response to comments from Nancy Trump, 7 Bird Hill Road, Mr_ Seaver agreed to save all trees over eight inches in diameter. Ms. Trump spoke in favor of upgrading Davis Road_ Minutes for the Meeting of August 8, 2001 Mr. Davies and Ms. Bridge- Denzak both faulted the developer for trying to ft a house designed for a level site onto a sloping site with ledge. The blasting would not be necessary if he were building a house designed to the site. Ms. Bridge- Denzak suggested turning the house 90 degrees so that it would fit better on the site without blasting. Caryl Dlugy, 16 Bird Hill Road, direct abutter to the site, commented that she welcomes this development. As it is now the site is ugly and she had hoped the Board would approve the plan tonight. Likewise, Philip Murphy, 25 Swan Lane, expressed his wish that the project would gain quick approval. But he asked if a one -inch overlay of blacktop would be sufficient to cover the very rough surface of the roads, potholes and all. Mr. Seaver entreated the Board to give him clear direction so that he can give them a plan they would approve at the next meeting. He would like to start the project this season. He said he cannot upgrade both Bird Hill and Davis Roads. They agreed that Mr. Seaver should improve Davis Road from. Bird Hill Road all the way to Rockville Avenue and Bird Hill to the match line as shown on the current plans. The Board said it would stipulate in the special permit that access to the site during construction would be only from Davis Road to-prevent damage to the portion of Bird Hill Road that was not being improved. Ms_ McCall - Taylor said that the Board could approve the subdivision before approving the special permit, . for which the Board's approval deadline is longer than for the subdivision. Mr_ William Trautman, 7 Bird Hill Road, said that since Mr. Seaver will be making quite a profit from the three houses he is building, why can't he improve all the streets? Why just one? Mr. Harden replied that that is not an appropriate quid pro quo. Mr. Garber said that the Development Regulations require that road improvements extend to the next intersection. Asking for improvements to two intersections is excessive. Ms. Bridge-Denzak pointed out that he had already been given direction by the staff to pave to Rockville Avenue and that should be honored. The Board gave the following direction to Mr. Seaver and Mr. Russell: 6 Better house siting; work with the site; lower the houses; consider putting the smaller house on Iot 1 and the larger house on lot 3 Y Move house to meet 25' setback and stay within setbacks of old lot three Bird Hill Road to be improved to the match line and Davis Road improved to Rockville Avenue 9 Trees over 8" in diameter to be retained and there be a mitigation plan for any removed Commit to an average of 3,200 square feet living space with no house to exceed 3,500 square feet show no -build easement on final plan provide Special Permit with Site Plan Review documents Philip Murphy, 25 Swan Lane, said that the corner of Davis and Bird Hill Road needs better sight distance_ Mr. Seaver said that be cannot widen the road due to private property issues. Mr, Garber returned to the issue of blasting and pointed out that the intensity of each blast can be lowered but the total length of time of blasting will go up_ At 9:20, the Board agreed to continue the hearing until August 29, the Planning Board's next meeting. 32 Roosevelt Road Definiti Reside Development Plan, Ronald L opez-, Contin Pu Hearing, Decision Mr. Galaitsis reconvened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m_ Present were Mr. Lopez, applicant, North Shore Construction and Development; Mr_ Edmund Grant, attorney; and Mr. Dylan Jaynes, engineer, Meridian Engineering, Inc_ There were five people in the audience. Mr. Grant said that Mr_ Lopez has responded to the concerns that the Board expressed at the previous public hearing sessions. He listed them, as follows:. Brick in sand construction for the walkways and visitor parking spaces Minutes for the Meeting of August 8, 2001 4 • The three dwellings have been slightly moved resulting in a shorter interior drive. • Building one is shown with a pull -down stairway to the attic and the skylights removed. • The front porch has been wrapped around and a window is added to the side of the dwelling facing Roosevelt Street, making its appearance more interesting from the street. Mr. Galaitsis asked for assurances that the pull -down stair to the attic is specified in the decision. Mr. Darden asked for more specifics to be listed in the decision regarding when an arborist will be called in to delineate the limit of work litre vis a vis the existing vegetation on the site_ Ms. Bridge- Denzak suggested a letter from the arborist and requiring the line to be staked out. The Board asked that the letter from an arborist and a plaza showing the limit -of -work line be made conditions of the special permit. Mr. Galaitsis closed the hearing at 9:55 p.m. The Board reviewed and revised a draft decision, slated August 8, 2001, prepared by the staff. Mr. Davies stated that Mr. Lopez has been responsive to the Board's wishes and he is happy with the final result. Subsequently, on the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Ms. Chase, the Board voted 4-0 to: 1) approve the definitive special residential development plan, entitled "32 Roosevelt Road ", dated May 1, 2001, as amended; and, 2) grant a special permit with site plan review (SPS) for a special residential development; and grant other special permits as cited in the decision. Ms_ Bridge- Denzak abstained, as she was not present for the public hearing on June 27. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ARTICLES FOR 2002 TOWN MEETING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Potential Zoning Amendments The Board went over a table, prepared. by Mr. Garber, which outlined potential zoning amendments to bring before the 2002 Annual Town Meeting. Residents have proposed a. number of therm_ Others, such as mansionization control, are high priority items that have grown out of the Vision 20/20 and comprehensive planning processes. As well, the re- codification of the Zoning By- Law and Development Regulations will likely engender word changes and technical corrections. Mr. Garber asked the Board to examine the table and prioritize the proposed amendments, including eliminating those deemed unnecessary. Mr_ Harden said that lie would like for the existing inclusionary housing policies to have more "teeth ". Mr. Davies volunteered to work on definitions_ All members want to block out time in September to spend. on a mansionization control by -law. ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * ** RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APDEAL.S _ App lications To Be Heard o n August 9, 200 1: ills. Bridge- Derrzak gave an oral review of the following applications: 4 • 80 HAYDEN AVENUE - The DeWolfe Company, Special Permit to place a sign above the first floor at the top of the rear side of the building, facing Route 2_ 35 WOODLAND ROAD - Sandra & Derek Gardiner, Special P ermit to construct an addition to a non- conforming single - family dwelling. • 141 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE - James Allen, Special Permit to operate a take -out and fast -food service in the CRS District as a Dunkin' Donuts franchise_ Minutes for the Meeting of August 8, 2001 • 1701 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE -James Allen, Special Permit to operate a take -out and fast -food service in the CB District as a Dunkin' Donuts franchise. 5 • 68 CLIFF'E AVENUE - Miriam Fein -Cole, Variance from required 15 -ft side yard setback to construct stairs to a rebuilt back deck on a nonconforming single - family dwelling. • 46 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE - Yoonsook Chung, Special Permit to operate a take -out food service, including sushi, and have seating for waiting take -out customers at an operating fish market_ • 51 YORK STREET — Ronald Koester, Variance from the 2.5 story residential height restriction to construct 3 -story addition • 15 FAIR OAKS TERRACE - Kevin and Laura Wilczewski, Variance from 15 -ft. side yard setback to expand garage and Special Permit to add to a nonconforming dwelling • 52 F'OTTLER AVENUE —James and Patricia Messenger— Variance to construct a 2 -story addition to a nonconforming single - family dwelling that would result in a 3-ft. side yard setback. The Board had no comment on the applications above. The Board agreed that it would defer to the Design Advisory Committee and the Historic Districts Commission on the applications below. • 330 WOBURN STREET - Bohler Engineering, Special Permit to install signage, including standing and illuminated signs at the Shell station. • 286 LINCOLN STREET - Bohler Engineering, Special Permit to install signage, including standing and illuminated signs at the Shell station. ■ 36 WALTHAM STREET Bonsoir, Inc., S pecial Permit to install a hanging sign • 153 NORTH STREET Belmont Savings Bank — Special Permit to replace 2 existing non - illuminated sings with 2 internally illuminated signs at ATM machine The Board wished to notify the Board of Appeals that the following application included construction of a paper street and would require an application to the Planning Board before a building permit could be issued_ They also felt that it was a stretch to call the proposal an addition, due to the size of the new construction. • 32 CLELLAND ROAD — Rasko Ojdrovic and Miljana Bovan, Variance from 30 -ft. yard setback to 6.6 --ft_ setback to construct a 2-'/2 story addition On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 10:34 pxii_ a B. Chase, Clerk f