Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-02-09-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF FEBRUARY 9, 2011 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Town Office Building was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Greg Zurlo with members Richard Canale, Charles Hornig, Anthony Galaitsis, Wendy Manz and planning staff Maryann McCall-Taylor, Aaron Henry, and Lori Kaufman present. MINUTES *************************************************************************** On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to accept the minutes for January 20, 2011. DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION ************************* ************************* SUBDIVISION PLANS PUBLIC HEARING 12 -18 Hartwell Avenue, site plan review and special permit: Mr. Zurlo called the continued public hearing to order at 7:40 p.m. Mr. John Farrington, attorney, Mr. Adam Colangelo, applicant and Mr. Colin Smith were present. There were approximately five people in the audience. Mr. Farrington discussed the following updates since the last hearing:  The 128 Business Council was very interested in a Hartwell Avenue shuttle;  Formal membership to the 128 Business Council would be a condition to get a Certificate of Occupancy;  The sidewalk around the corner to Bedford Street will require undergrounding of three poles, which are in the Town’s right of way (ROW). The applicant is meeting with the Board of Selectmen tomorrow to discuss further. They met with the Town Engineer earlier today;  Plan B shows 27,000 square feet for the main building and 7,000 square feet for the out building, there will be 230 parking spaces and no office space is shown in the plan; and  There will not be a parking easement with 24 Hartwell Avenue since it is fully occupied. Board Comments:  Which plan do you want approval for A or B? Mr. Smith said both.  Plan B does not need a special permit for parking. Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of February 9, 2011  Is the landscape plan a planting plan? Mr. Smith said yes.  Will the invasive species be removed from the site in back by the retention basin? Mr. Colangelo said he was not sure of the resolution with Conservation Commission, but they may make it a condition. If not required to remove the plants, a waiver must be requested. Mr. Farrington said they would request the waiver.  The regulations strongly discourage irrigation with off site water. Mr. Smith said there would a small amount of irrigation in a few areas using a drip line and using native species would reduce the need for heavy irrigation.  Does the new parking transportation and demand management plan (PTDM) show the information regarding the 128 Business Council? No.  Will there be a lawn area and how much? What are you doing to reduce lawn area and use natural features? Mr. Smith said most of the lawn area is in the ROW.  Are there any green energy savings measures being used? There will be hybrid parking areas with electric chargers, infiltrators for storm water, pavers to reduce the impervious surface, and roof runoff may be used for irrigation.  At what level of membership will you join the 128 Business Council? There is only one level based on size of the building and number of employees.  Is there anything in the PTDM plan showing how you will reduce the number of automobile trips and get to the required target? When do you plan on joining? Mr. Farrington said no and membership would be a condition for getting a Certificate of Occupancy.  How much invasive species are there? They should be replaced with native species. Mr. Farrington said there are three other properties that drain into that area so if removal of invasive species is required, the expense should be shared.  Will snow storage be along the wetlands side? How will you handle it in severe storms? Mr. Smith said it would be carted off site.  What is the intent for access with Plan B and how will the building be used? There need to be design guidelines provided to assure the quality of the design.  There is less enthusiasm for plan B since there was a preference for activity all around the buildings as shown in Plan A.  In Plan B, sacrifice some parking spaces and move the out building away from the lot line so you will not need that waiver. The parking spaces would be needed for restaurant staff. Minutes for the Meeting of February 9, 2011 Page 3  In Plan A there is a parking waiver for 35 spaces -- if you do not get that waiver how will you handle parking on site? This is not just about access to parking, but also a change to the Hartwell Avenue and to move forward to a long range plan. The issues with permitting both plans would be lack of clarity regarding what goes with what. There would also be issues with different peaks for parking demands, perhaps valet parking could be used.  Restroom would be in the restaurants -- how would the retail shops access bathrooms and employees showers? There are restrooms in each retail shop and common access to employee showers.  What is the commitment to the sidewalk? Mr. Farrington said they would share the cost with the Town, but was not sure of costs for all that would be involved. What would be the dollar value of commitment? Mr. Farrington said approximately $200,000.  Get full cost of construction for sidewalk along their properties frontage; join the 128 Business Council when applying for the building permits and get a target figure for reducing automobile trips.  If Plan A is amended with valet parking that would be a more attractive and innovative project. Plan B could also be acceptable, but will require more information and commitments in black and white. The Board could not approve two plans. Mr. Farrington said the applicant preferred Plan B. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to continue the public hearing to February 23, 2011, at 7:30 p.m., in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room. 171-183 Woburn Street, sketch plan: Mr. Fred Russell, engineer and Mr. Gerald Cupp, applicant, were present. Mr. Russell said the site consists of six green houses and two homes. The proof plan allows for seven lots with five houses on the cul-de-sac and two more with frontage on Woburn Street. The submission shows a sketch plan for a Balanced Housing Development (BHD) with two cul-de-sacs, preserving four greenhouses and the two existing houses, 12 units in 10 dwellings, and trying to minimize the impact on the woods. Board Comments:  Saving the green houses and keeping the existing two houses on the site is good, but with the additional units it would be too heavily built out for this site. There should be a reduction in the number of proposed units to be built. The overall density looks too high. Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of February 9, 2011  How will the green houses fit into the plan? What would be the point of keeping them?  Come up with a plan that addresses the issues of the site.  Keeping the green houses productive and useful would make the buildout acceptable and makes the plan attractive.  A teardrop turnaround would be preferred over a circle turnaround.  There needs to be a landscape architect brought in,  Would this be a closed community?  This plan has smaller units, provides an opportunity to preserve the back land and provide great connectivity to conservation land. It has the same density as 341 Marrett Road.  This is one of the best proposals of holding onto the character of Lexington. Audience Comments:  How do the two elements mesh. The greenhouses are more industrial in nature and now adding more residential homes does not seem to be a good fit.  Why are the plans so far along without the residents being notified? New Englandscape operates out of this site with oil trucks in and out for the greenhouses and adding 28 more cars would make it more difficult for existing residents to get out of their driveways. This amount of density is hard to stomach and it would be silly to expect the new residents to use the greenhouses.  This is a lot of density in our yard. What is the purpose of the neighbors being here tonight? This is a sketch plan and the first time the Planning Board is seeing this project. The applicant and the Board are listening to your concerns.  How will this mixed use development work? Will they continue the business and sell off the land? That does not seem fair it is too much density for one site. Board Comments:  There needs to be some available open space other then wetlands. What would happen if the greenhouses closed, there needs to be an exit strategy.  The greenhouses seem to create some complications. There needs to be a plan in place explaining what the applicant has in mind for this site. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to close the sketch plan and have the applicant return with another sketch plan, which would address comments and provide development data not given tonight. Minutes for the Meeting of February 9, 2011 Page 5 TOWN MEETING ******************************************************************** Warrant Article Run Through: Board members expressed interest in the following Articles: Article 8 - CPA articles; Article 10 - Appropriate monies for capital projects; Article 14 - Street Acceptance; Article 17 - CPA surcharge; Article 20 - Establish and appropriate sums of monies to specific stabilization funds; Article 27 -Allow the Board of Selectmen to authorize the temporary repairs to private ways; Article 31 - Amend the tree bylaw; Article 33 - Accept state Land grant for Cotton Fund; Article 34 - Approve the Battle Green Master Plan; Articles 37 & 38 - Change the way the commercial properties and residential properties are assessed and increase assessment value when the property is rezoned. The Board decided that they would discuss the articles after the new Board has been elected into office. PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE ******************* ****************** February 23 is the continued public hearing on Hartwell Avenue, March 9, public hearings on the zoning articles and March 16 sketch plan for 71-79 East Street and finalizing the Board Reports for Town Meeting. BOARD REPORTS ******************************************************************* Mr. Hornig said that at the Conservation Commission meeting there were concerns expressed regarding the failure of the storm water system at Lexington Hills. Mr. Canale reported that the Board of Selectmen did approve the Greenways Committee, but was not sure if the Planning Board member would be a liaison or a member. The Board will need to appoint a liaison once notice is received. Everyone should have gotten an email on the final meeting of the Battle Road Scenic Byway Committee. There are a couple of transportation meetings coming up regarding the TIP and transportation needs in the Greater Boston area. There is a draft report on the MPO website. Lexington is in the northwest section and the area between Route 128 between Route 2 & 3, Route 4 and Route 225 through Carlisle is mentioned as heavily congested in the report. Page 6 Minutes for the Meeting of February 9, 2011 Mr. Zurlo said he and Ms. McCall-Taylor will schedule a meeting with a member of the Board of Selectman and Engineering regarding South Lexington. It will be an informational meeting for what is going on and he will report back to the Board for feedback since the Board feels a responsibility to participate. The meeting was recorded by Lexmedia. The following documents used at the meeting can be found on file with the Planning Department: 1. Memo from Colin Smith regarding Hartwell Square, dated February 2, 2011 (2 pages). 2. Hartwell Square, Planting Plan B, dated February 4, 2011 (1 page). 3. Hartwell Square, Architectural Site Plan-A & B, dated January 4, 2011(3 pages). 4. Sketch Subdivision Plan for 171-183 Woburn Street, Lexington, MA, dated December 3, 3010, application (12 pages). 5. Sketch Subdivision Plan for 171-183 Woburn Street locus context map, dated December 3, 2010 (5 pages). On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 p.m. Anthony Galaitsis, Clerk