Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-10-25-PB-minPLANNING BOARD - MINUTES MEETING OF OCTOBER 25, 2000 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room of the Town Office building, was called to order at 7:3 5 p.m. by Chairman Colman, with members Davies, Galaitsis, Chase, Planning Director Garber, Assistant Planner McCall- Taylor and Secretary Snell present. Ms. Bridge - Denzak was absent. MINUTES * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Review of Minutes The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes of the meetings of September 20 and October 3, 2000. On the motion of Mr_ Davies, seconded by Mr_ Galaitsis, the Board voted 4 -0 to approve the minutes as amended. Minutes of the October 3, 2000 executive session were deferred. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** CONSENT AGENDA Approval Not Required Plan, 32 Burlington Street, Form AI00 -6 The Board reviewed an Approval Not Required Plan for land at 32 Burlington Street. On the motion of Ms.Chase, seconded by Mr-Galaitsis, the Board voted unanimously: to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, MA (Middlesex County)," dated September 28, 2000, prepared by Meridian Engineering Inc,, Danvers, MA., certified by Michael J. Juliano, Registered Laud Surveyor, with Form A106 -00, submitted by Todd Cataldo, Sheldon Corporation, as it does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law_ * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** COMPREHENSIVE PLAN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory Committee, Appointments The Board reviewed the letter of invitation that had been sent to those appointed to the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee at the last meeting. The Committee will serve as a representative form of public participation in the comprehensive plan process. On the motion of Mr_ Davies, seconded by Ms. Chase, the Board voted 4 -0 to appoint Jeanne Krieger from the Board of Selectmen and Elaine Dratch and Wendy Manz from the Town Meeting Members Association to the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PUBLIC DARING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Davis Road Definitive Conventional Subdivision Plan, Ronald Lopez, PUBLIC HEARING Mr. Colman called the public hearing on the definitive subdivision plan for Davis Road to order at 7:44 p.m. Present for the hearing were Attorney Edmund Grant Ronald Lopez, President of North Shore Construction and Developme�at, Dylan :Tames and Richard Waitt, Jr., of Meridian Engineering, Inc., Richard Lakutis of Landtech Associates, Inc_ and Attorney_ Daniel Harrington_ The applicant proposes to construct the currently unaccepted and paper street portions of Davis Road between Rockville Avenue and Moreland Avenue to town standards with waivers for grade (from 8% to 10 %), sight - distance, and width of right- (from 50' to 40') and pavement (from. 24' to20'). The intent is to construct one house on the lot. The lot in question is a 25,702 square foot lot with 155 feet of frontage in an RS district. Mr_ Grant said that the planning staff and the Town's consulting engineer agree that this is a significant improvement on the existing conditions and recommend approval. Mr. Grant stated that the proposal comes under the Planning Board's jurisdiction, as it is an orphan lot. He explained that the lot has frontage on the paper street portions of Davis Road and Moreland Avenue. No zoning determination was submitted as the lot conforms to dimensional requirements, it only lacks frontage on a street as defined by the Zoning By -law. It falls under subdivision control as it is a product of a subdivision and the developer willing to construct the road. The land was on a plan duly recorded in the registry in 1913_ Ilse land has been in the ownership of Mr_ Edwards since 1955_ A previous building inspector had told Mr. Edwards that I e would have to improve the road in order to obtain a building ;permit_ Minutes for the Meeting of October 25, 2000 2 Planning Board Comments: Ms. Chase asked if the combination of three lots into one, an inverse of the usual subdivision concerns, was unusual. Ms. McCall - Taylor responded that combination of lots was not unusual. In this case the lots in question were deeded as one since 1917, and, therefore, are now considered one lot. In response to Mr. Colman's question regarding a wheel chair ramp and the raising of the utility wires, Mr. Jaynes responded the wires will be raised to a safe level and a wheelchair ramp will be installed. Audience Participation: Ms. Bonnie Newman asked for clarification of street status and whether the lot on Davis Road could be built upon under the current road condition? Is it possible to improve the road enough to build or is paving required? Mr. Grant responded that there was an improved section of Davis Road when the other house was built. W. Garber noted the Planning Board, in theory, could waive anything if they feel it is in the public's best interest, but they do not grant waivers lightly. Mr. Colman said the Board goes for the minimum amount of paving possible. Ms. McCall- Taylor explained that a street as defined by the Zoning By -law needs to be provided and that this portion of Davis Road included paper, unaccepted and public street portions. A street improvement plan can not be used on a paper street. Margaret Harrington informed the board that even though Davis Road is unpaved cars speed on it now and if it is paved it is going to be worse. She felt this was a major concern due to the number of children living in the area. Ronald Goldner pointed out that other houses had been 'built without paving the street and asked if the road is to be paved, can speed bumps be installed. Ms. McCall- Taylor responded that the laws have changed, and those houses would probably not receive the building permits today. Mr_ Goldner also had questions concerning the sidewalk and whether the abutters would lose land to accommodate the sidewalk. Mr_ Dylan James pointed out the current traveled portion of Davis Road is about 15 -20 feet of the right of way_ The paved road will be 20 feet with a five -foot sidewalk on one side of the road. Ms_ Susan Wilson wanted to know if the sidewalks are a requirement. Mr. Lakutis noted it was the town's reviewing engineers who recommended the installation of the sidewalks. Mr_ Juan Carlos Londono stated the .Planning Board must take into account the children when considering the granting of this petition. There was considerable discussion about the amount of traffic that would be attracted to a paved road and ways to minimize travel speeds, including the use of speed bumps and signage. Statements Pro/Con regarding proposal: A petition signed by the neighbors was presented to the Board outlining their concerns with the safety of their children if the Davis road is improved upon.. The petition was duly entered into record_ The hearing was closed at 8:55 p_m_ * * * * * * * * * * * * ** UNACCEPTED STREETS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Prelim Morris Street Construction Plan: Steve Hamilton, Cornerstone Concepts, Inc: Mr. Hamilton presented a street improvement plan for the end of Morris Street that would provide frontage for a substandard lot_ He wishes to preserve the country look of the area and therefore proposes with the use of gravel for three playground parking spaces. To match the existmi g guardrail any new guardrail would be wood_ Roger King, of S Morris Street, was concerned with the preservation of the large trees on either side of the gate and would like to have only one handicapped space, to reduce the potential of "kids" parking their cars and "hanging out_" Mr. Hamilton said he will consider removing the spaces. Abutter Scott Lundahl said he would like to maintain the country feet but that he had two concerns_ Since the abutters will be responsible for future maintenance be wants to make sure the road is constructed well to begin with_ He was also concerned that the run off from the road will end up in his yard. Mr. Hamilton responded that the water would flow on to Winter Street and into the field_ There will be an apron at the driveways to deflect runoff. TMr. Hamilton said that the road would be graded, properly pitched and paved to Iowa standards_ Neighbors were concerned about the effects on the abutting field, which already has « rainage p r oblems, * * ** KEGIONAL ISSUES INTER TOWN ISSUES * * * * ** * Dev of R,e Tonal Impact f DRI), Richa C Canale updated the Board on the status of the 'F our `1 own Planning Group and asked the Board to sign on -to the DRf A dvisofy Review Process proposed by the Four To Planning Group_ He said that the process would provide an important communication link with the Minutes for the Meeting of October 25, 2000 Hanscom Area Towns (HATS) and would have an informal influence on their proposed developments. Mr. Galaitsis and Ms. Chase expressed their concern about the additional workload the proposal places on the planning board and staff. Ms. Chase was also concerned about the vagueness of the current proposal. Mr. Canale responded "the plan was intentionally made vague because they did not want to make more work for the board." Mr. Canale also said legal counsel has reviewed the proposal and was told the Board could sign it, as it is solely advisory, not regulatory_ In response to Mr. Davies' question about how many times a year will the board have a project, Mr. Canale said maybe one or two. There was discussion about the amount of work required for what in the end will be an advisory. Could the work be done in at timely manner without additional staff support? Mr. Canale stated he believes that there will be some way of providing secretarial service. Mr. Garber would like to see central coordination since actions must be timely to be effective. Projects will need to be tracked. Mr. Canale said a successor group to the four -town group is now needed_ Mr. Galaitsis suggested keeping four members from the Four Town Planning Group. Mr. Canale said the successor committee would consist of two members from each of the four towns; however, each town would only have one vote. On the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Mr. Galaitsis, the board voted 3 -1 to approve the memorandum of agreement that established a DRI review committee. Ms. Chase voted in the negative stating that she was leery of the vagueness of the document and did no want to add to the Planning Board's duties_ _M State Hospital Reuse Committee: Mr_ Garber reported that the Met State Hospital Reuse Task Force is meeting weekly; the access sub - committee is reviewing the second amendment to the approved Re -Use Plan. He said that Waltham is pushing to get the second amendment finalized, as it wants to develop its golf course_ The piece in Lexington has never gotten much attention. At issue are the 3 0 plus acres of land that are part of the old main campus where the buildings are. Demolition of the existing buildings and the potential removal of possible hazardous waste may require large sums of money_ Lexington's position is that, at a minimum, some resources are needed for a minimal feasibility analysis and testing. While the state is pushing to sign now and worry about the details later, Mr. Garber feels that there is insufficient information to sign off on the reuse plan. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** COMPREHENSIVE PLAN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Comprehensive Plan, Request for Proposals Mr. Garber reported that the RFP was sent out today (October 25). He asked board members to read the scope of services section of the RF'P before the November 15 meeting_ The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. 4 A J