Town of Wellesley, Massachusetts

WELLESLEY PLANNING BOARD

MONDAY, JUNE 16, 2008, 7:00 p.m.

GREAT HALL - TOWN HALL

Present: Mr. Chan, Mr. McCauley, Ms. Lehmann, Ms. Donahue, Ms. Wasser, Mr. Frisardi..……Mrs. Jop

Steve Sykes, Tom Hunnewell, James Langan, Sheila Thoman, Alfred Thoman, Ralph West, Mary West, Kenneth Oye, Willa Michener, Deborah Hurley, Wendy Ross, Lee Nuwayser, Ruth Anne Nuwayser, Clark Brewer, Dean Behrend, Hillary Mankin-Kufe, John Marrs, Faith Rice, Janeen Smith Hansen, Steve Hansen, R.L. Ball, Fred Knier, Bernie Maurer

1. Plan Thought Not to Require Approval

PBC-08-02 #863 Washington Street

The Board met with Mr. (Tom) Hunnewell to discuss this resubmitted plan which now reflects a 1991 land division requested by the Board and would further divide the property into two lots to facilitate transfer of the house and lot to a family trust.

After a brief discussion the Board moved, seconded and voted unanimously to endorse the plan as not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law.

Mr. Frisardi was not present for consideration of this agenda item.

2. Plan Thought Not to Require Approval

PBC-08-03 #47 Amherst Road & #45 Wellesley Avenue

The Board met with Mr. (James) Langan to review this plan. After a brief discussion the Board moved, seconded and voted unanimously to endorse the plan as not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law.

Mr. Frisardi was not present for consideration of this agenda item.

3. LHR-08-3 #169 Grove Street

Ms. Lehmann recused herself from the review of 169 Grove Street and left the room. She is a direct abutter to 169 Grove Street. Chairman Chan opened the meeting and reviewed the role of the Planning Board in the matter of Large House Review. The areas of review are a) landscape preservation; b) drainage; c) building scale and shadow; d) lighting; e) open space; and f) circulation, driveways, parking areas and walks. He noted the application submittal date for the property is June 4, 2008. Mr. Chan noted in his packet the images of abutting properties were missing. Ms. Jop noted Mr. Behrend had submitted images. Mr. Chan noted the Board had received the Design Review Board recommendation tonight and was waiting for a letter from Engineering. Mr. Chan felt the project would most likely be continued due to outstanding documents and the number of abutters wishing to speak on the matter. Mr. Chan stated the Board would dedicate 20 minutes to the discussion, and would then continue the review to a later meeting date.

The project involves the construction of a new house which has a Total Living Area plus Garage (TLAG) of 5,918 square feet. The house exceeds the threshold of 3,600 square feet in the 10,000 square foot Area Regulation District.

The applicant, Mr. Dean Behrend, gave a brief presentation stating the lot was created through an ANR subdivision in 2006. The proposed house is a center entrance Colonial.

Mr. Chan noted one house exists at 173 Grove Street that was constructed prior to the Large House Review. He questioned the TLAG of the existing house. Mr. Behrend stated 173 Grove Street has a TLAG of approximately 5,800 square feet.

Mr. Chan questioned what was on the lot prior to the 2006 subdivision. Mr. Behrend stated a 10,000 square foot home that was approximately 40 feet in height.

Ms. Donahue asked Mr. Behrend to give a description of an existing agreement with the Wellesley Friends. Mr. Behrend stated the Friends have the right to travel over the driveway located on the 169 Grove Street lot. Ms. Donahue asked if there had been any changes to the agreement. Mr. Behrend stated at this time there have been no changes to the agreement

Mr. McCauley asked if the driveway is being relocated. Mr. Behrend stated the driveway would be relocated to the property line with the drainage pitching towards the 169 Grove Street lot. Mr. Behrend noted the driveway would be shifting between 2 feet to 6 feet from its current location. He stated the driveway would be regarded to drain away from the outer boundary line. The water would then travel overland from 169 Grove Street across 173 Grove Street.

Mr. Behrend stated he had approached the Friends with an alternative design that would relocate the driveway on to Ingraham Road, however the Friends did not accept the proposal.

Mr. Chan noted the Board would await the final Engineering correspondence, review the DRB findings, and hear the public comments prior to making any decision. Mr. Chan asked if the Board members wanted any additional information.

Ms. Donahue asked if Mr. Behrend could supply additional drainage information. Mr. Behrend stated the plan includes a design for underground drainage from runoff and roof top drainage. Mr. Behrend also noted a large amount of asphalt would be removed from the site.

Mr. Chan noted the Board received a letter from Alfred Thoman of 2 Ingraham Road. Mr. Thoman was present and asked to speak.

Mr. Thoman, 2 Ingraham Road, noted he was a direct abutter. He stated his house measures approximately 2,264 square feet of TLA in comparison to the 5,900 square feet proposed at 169 Grove Street. Mr. Thoman stated he would be looking at the side of the house, which to his calculations would be 100 feet long, visually uphill, and a fairly tall structure. He was concerned over the size, and concerned that in winter he would be unable to see the sun, due to the house at 169 Grove Street dominating his southern exposure. Mr. Thoman felt the existing 173 Grove Street has an appropriate distance from an abutter for its size. He was further concerned over a number of mature trees that would be removed to allow for the driveway to be relocated. Mr. Thoman believed one tree proposed for removal was on his property.

Ms. Deborah Hurley, Co-Chair of the House and Grounds Committee of the Friends, asked to speak. Ms. Hurley stated the Friends acquired the property in 1965. The deed refers to the driveway, she noted the Friends deed recorded a plot plan that shows the easement. Ms. Hurley stated she sent a letter in early March asking for the Planning Board to request the submitted plans show the current easement. Ms. Hurley stated she received a letter from Mr. Behred to install a driveway to Ingraham Road. She noted the Friends were concerned over elderly members and the travel over the Sudbury Aqueduct. Ms. Hurley stated the Friends have tried to protect the aqueduct and have agreements with the oil company to come up from Grove Street over the easement, as well as large memorial services. The Friends decided against the driveway to Ingraham because of the neighbors and angle of Ingraham Road. Ms. Hurley stated there has been no proposal to the Friends on the relocation of the easement. She noted the Town has informed her the easement is a private matter between parties.

Mr. Behrend stated an extensive STAT analysis, which took over 40 hours, has been made on the aqueduct. The findings indicated there doesn't need to be any restrictions. Of the three locations, Mr. Behrend analyzed, he noted they were found to be the best portion of the aqueduct.

Ms. Hurley stated she wrote a letter to MWRA in regards to the travel over the aqueduct, and stated MWRA was appreciative of the Friends limiting travel over the aqueduct.

Mr. Chan asked Mr. Behrend to submit documentation to substantiate the discussion on the aqueducts condition.

Mr. Lee Nuwayser, 25 Ingraham Road, stated he objected to any road going on to Ingraham. He noted there is a sharp curve on Ingraham, and he felt if an exit for churchgoers were created the safety of the road would be worse.

Mr. Chan asked if staff could provide an aerial image of the neighborhood for the next meeting.

Mr. Chan noted the proponent has taken the access to Ingraham Road off the table. He stated the Planning Board would not entertain the access to Ingraham, and would evaluate the shifting of the easement conditions at the next meeting.

Mr. McCauley suggested the Board take a site visit. Mr. Thoman stated the Board could access his property at 2 Ingraham Road.

Ms. Wasser suggested a comparison of total impervious on the existing and proposed plans be provided.

Mr. Behrend stated he was open to a site visit.

Mr. Chan encouraged the residents to assign a spokesperson for the site visit. He noted he was not precluding abutters comments, but in terms of a site visit if all the abutters were present it becomes difficult.

Mr. Chan asked Mrs. Jop to coordinate a site visit with the Board, a representative from the Friends and from the abutters.

The Board moved to continue the discussion of 169 Grove Street to July 14th at 8:00 pm.

4. LHR-08-10 #44 Whiting Road

Ms. Lehmann returned to the meeting. Chairman Chan opened the meeting and reviewed the role of the Planning Board in the matter of Large House Review. The areas of review are a) landscape preservation; b) drainage; c) building scale and shadow; d) lighting; e) open space; and f) circulation, driveways, parking areas and walks. He noted the application submittal date for the property is May 5, 2008. Mr. Chan noted the Board had received the Design Review Board recommendation and was waiting a letter from Engineering. Mr. Chan felt the project would need to be continued. Mr. Chan stated the Board would dedicate 15 minutes to the discussion, and would then continue the review to a later meeting date.

The project involves the construction of a new house which has a proposed Total Living Area plus Garage (TLAG) of 6,495 square feet. The house exceeds the threshold of 5,900 square feet in the 20,000 square foot Area Regulation District.

The applicant, Mr. Neil McLaughlin, spoke on behalf of the property owner John Marrs. Mr. McLaughlin stated the proposed house would be situated on a corner lot located at #44 Whiting Road. The house would front on Whiting Road and would have garage access on Sumner Road. Mr. McLaughlin noted the lot has 23,328 square feet, is well treed, flat, and has no easements, trails, significant natural features, or substantial grade changes. He stated the landscape plan would retain existing trees and would increase to 14.7% lot coverage from the current 10.5% lot coverage. He noted the lot coverage is under the 18% maximum allowed. Mr. McLaughlin pointed out that the TLAG for the house is 6,495, of which 692 square feet is finished attic. Without the attic calculations the property would be under the LHR threshold and the appearance of the house would not change. Mr. McLaughlin stated the Marr Family took time in designing the house to fit into the neighborhood and reduced the scale of the house from their original designs. The reduction in size included the removal of a 3 car garage for a 2 car garage and the removal of a screen porch in the rear.

Mr. McCauley questioned if Mr. McLaughlin knew the TLAG for the abutting homes shown in the images submitted to the Board.

Mr. McLaughlin stated 15 Sumner to the rear has 5,567 TLAG, 37 Whiting has 3,500 TLA exclusive of the garage, 57 Whiting has 7,800 TLAG, and 56 Whiting has 7,300 TLAG.

Mr. Chan reviewed the Design Review Board recommendation and noted the only outstanding issue was the cupola.

Mr. McLaughlin stated the plans showed the cupola at twice the size it should have been. Since the DRB meeting the cupola has been reduced in size by half.

Mr. Fred Nyer, 26, Whiting Road, questioned the height of the existing home and the proposed height of the new construction. Mr. McLaughlin stated the height of the proposed house is 34 feet and stated he was unsure of the existing homes height. Mr. Nyer stated the lot is the first visible house as you come up the road from Wellesley Avenue. He noted the far end of the street is much lower in height.

Ms. Wasser asked if there was any intent to change the grade for the proposed property. Mr. McLaughlin stated there is a small grade change of 1-3 feet. Mr. McLaughlin stated the design of the house has been set deep in the ground to reduce the scale of the building.

Mr. Chan stated the only outstanding issue with the site appears to be the Town Engineer's report. Mr. Chan moved to continue the meeting to July 14, 2008 at 7:30 pm.

Mr. John Marrs, homeowner, stated waiting until July for the next meeting is pushing back the project. Mr. Marrs stated he was trying to rent a house for his family and was now unsure as to when he should start his lease. Mr. Chan stated with the Engineering report hopefully the Board could vote at the July 14th meeting.

5. Continuation of PSI Public Hearing - 978 Worcester Street

Chairman Chan opened the continued public hearing. He summarized the additional material received from the applicant including a revised analysis from Vanasse Associates on traffic, modified site plans that have incorporated previous changes, and a document from Beals Associates dated June 13, 2008 with responses to questions raised by the Town Engineering department. Mr. Chan noted the Board of Selectmen voted favorably on the traffic recommendation at their June 9, 2008 meeting, however the Board had not received the recommendation from the Board of Selectmen. Mr. Chan noted the Engineering Department had not had time to review the latest responses to the documents submitted by Beals Associates.

Mr. Chan stated he would like a quick response from Beta to review the agreed upon traffic mitigation agreed to by Beals Associates and Vanasse Associates.

Ms. Donahue stated she would like a summary of the frontage road parking that would be removed, if a frontage road were to be installed. She also suggested an amount be established for the escrow fund agreed upon, for traffic monitoring, by the applicant in the memo dated May 15, 2008.

Mr. Behrend stated the proposed project at 978 Worcester Street includes the construction of a 24,000 square foot commercial building in the front of the lot, with a 54,000 square foot residential building in the rear. Mr. Behrend stated he has addressed the issues raised by Beta, and has spoken with abutters and shown the abutters the proposed plans.

Mr. McCauley stated he would like to see Beta's recommendations outlined. In a May 9, 2008 letter it discussed a future frontage road, and Mr. McCauley was curious of the proposed layout.

Mr. Behrend stated Mrs. Kehoe, the abutting property owner, was not interested in creating a frontage road. Mr. Behrend stated his understanding was that in order to add the frontage road, Mrs. Kehoe would need to alter the existing building footprint which lies within a floodplain and wetlands. Mr. Behrend stated the creation of a frontage road is impossible without her consent.

Mr. Behrend stated he met with Mass Highway, and stated Mass Highway stated the construction of a frontage road would be difficult. Mr. Behrend also stated Mass Highway would not entertain the frontage road without full plans.

Mr. McCauley questioned if the existing site had one or multiple curb cuts. Mr. Behrend sated there are three existing curb cuts on site. The current proposal is to close one, and leave two open. The curb cuts proposed would be one way in and out.

Mr. Chan stated the Board had received an analysis that found the traffic mitigation recommendation was to reprogram the lights at the Route 9/Overbrook intersection.

Mr. McCauley questioned if the existing rear structure would be used as part of the new construction. Mr. Behrend stated the rear building would also be demolished. He noted, however that the existing 13 foot setback from the side property line would be maintained.

The Board moved, seconded, and voted unanimously to continue the public hearing until 9:00pm on July 14, 2008 in the Great Hall.

6. Continuation of PSI Public Hearing - 10 Bethel Road, Temple Beth Elohim

Chairman Chan opened the continued public hearing. He summarized the additional material received since the last meeting on May 25, 2008 including the traffic recommendations from the Board of Selectmen dated May 19, 2008 and a letter from DPW dated June 6, 2008. Mr. Chan also noted the Board had received a copy of the Order of Conditions from the Wetlands Committee. The Board reviewed a draft PSI decision.

Mr. Steve Langer, attorney for the Temple, reminded the Board that all sidewalk paving has been included in agreements with the Schoefield School.

Ms. Donahue recommended referencing the sidewalk agreements in the negotiated improvements section of the PSI decision. The remainder of the Board and applicants agreed.

Mr. Chan questioned if there were any additional comments from the public or the Board.

Mr. Frisardi moved to close the public hearing of the Temple Beth Elohim PSI located at 10 Bethel Road. The motion was seconded, and voted unanimously.

The Board then moved, seconded, and voted unanimously to approve PSI 08-02 for Temple Beth Elohim as presented with additional comments in the Traffic and Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation Negotiated Improvements to read "The applicant shall also complete the improvements referred to in the April 15, 2008 Letter & Easement attachment (referred to above) from Al Robinson to DPW & Schools, re: final agreement (driveway & parking)."

7. 27 Washington Street - Recalculation of Affordable Unit Determination, PSI 07-02 and RIO Special Permit

Mr. McCauley noted Mr. Brown was unable to attend tonight's meeting due to a death in the family.

The Board received a letter dated June 9, 2008 from National Development requesting a new assisted unit determination based on the reduction of units on site from 150 to 141. Mr. Chan stated the recalculated number of affordable units would be 30 from the previous 31.

The Board moved, seconded, and voted unanimously reduce the affordable unit determination from 31 to 30 assisted units to be constructed on site for the revised National Development project.

Mr. Chan began the discussion by stated the Board had received a letter from Beta Engineering dated June 10, 2008 that added some additional recommendations to the traffic review. Ms. Jop noted the recommendations were received after the close of the PSI public hearing.

Mr. Chan stated he was concerned over the tapering of the sidewalk in front of the Kane Building and recommended the first on street parking space be removed. Mr. Davis stated the Selectmen were aware of the sidewalk issue and suggested the Planning Board write a letter to the Selectmen to delete a parking space as a condition of the sidewalk. Mr. Frisardi agreed that a side letter expressing concerns over the construction of the sidewalk and new Beta recommendations be sent to the Selectmen as a side letter.

The Board began the discussion on the draft RIO Special Permit Decision. Mr. Frisardi moved the Board approve the RIO Special Permit as presented with Ms. Donahue's recommended editorial comments. Ms. Donahue seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion Mr. McCauley questioned the buffer required by the RIO. Mr. Chan stated said side yard setback from residential zones is 60 feet. Mr. McCauley questioned if the buffer was of natural material and/or earthen berm. Mr. O'Neil stated the 60 foot buffer has been established and natural vegetation along property line has been preserved for 13 feet.

Mr. Chan stated he would be voting no on the RIO Special Permit. He felt it was debateable as to whether the proposed project would contribute to the village character of the area. He did not think the project was intended to be disproportionate to the neighborhood. Mr. Chan stated the Town's interpretation of the bylaw does not reflect the original Lower Falls Guidelines.

Mr. Frisardi noted the village character of Lower Falls is not quaint, and the area is near urban density. He felt the question of the RIO Special Permit was how the Planning Board would integrate high density. Mr. Frisardi stated residential high density can stabilize a neighborhood. He thought the proposal accomplished the Lower Falls goals or residential mixed use development.

Mr. McCauley concurred with Mr. Frisardi and stated he felt the development would reate a village where a village does not currently exist. He noted the proposed project would be an enhancement to the village character and the general character of the area with a residential anchor. Mr. McCauley also stated adequate efforts have been made to buffer the neighborhood. Further, he felt the opening of the bridge and pathways proposed would further enhance the site.

Ms. Lehmann commended National Development for its efforts to work with abutters. She felt the residential component would add to the attractiveness of the area. Ms. Lehmann stated the development would not be trading the village character, but would be building the village character.

Mr. Frisardi stated the site is a large tract of land, which must counteract office development to the east. He noted office development does not add anything to the life of the community, and that the new project would interact with the community.

Mr. McCauley noted the proposed streetscape improvements and felt the two story commercial building would provide screening and privacy for the residential, creating two subareas on one parcel.

The Board voted 4-1, with Mr. Chan objecting to the approval of the RIO Special Permit as presented with Ms. Donahue's recommended editorial comments.

The Board began the discussion on the draft PSI Special Permit decision. Ms. Donahue stated the Board had not received an updated evacuation plan for the revised west building, and recommended adding the evacuation plan requirement to the Fire Protection and Life Safety negotiated improvements.

Mr. Chan recommended adding a third paragraph C, to the Post Construction Monitoring Reports, that would require a future evaluation of intersections and driveways that were evaluated in the current traffic study.

Ms. Donahue recommended several editorial comments relating to punctuation.

Mr. Frisardi moved that the Board approve PSI 07-02 as presented, subject to Ms. Donahue's editorial comments, the addition of paragraph C. recommended by Mr. Chan, and the additional requirement of the updated evacuation plan for the west building. Ms. Lehmann seconded the motion.

Mr. Chan asked for any discussion. Mr. McCauley stated he was concerned over the traffic review process, although he is not inclined to vote against the project. Mr. McCauley stated he felt the site access could be handled better if on the eastern side of the property. He felt the western side had greater conflict issues. Mr. McCauley expressed concern over the reliance on left turn bays, and noted the turn bays are at the cost of some safety in front of the site considering the width of the right of way. He stated he thought more attention could be paid to traffic congestion, however he noted some key elements were picked up at the Glen Road and Concord Street intersections. Mr. McCauley stated he was still in favor of the project, but felt the 12-month scrutiny on traffic and safety would be significant. Mr. McCauley noted the bottle neck at the Concord Street intersection would be a good improvement.

Mr. Frisardi also added that a letter would be sent to the Board of Selectmen addressing issues raised by Beta Engineering in the June 10, 2008 letter.

Mr. Chan called for a vote on the motion on the floor, and the Board voted unanimously to approve PSI 07-02 as presented, subject to Ms. Donahue's editorial comments, the addition of paragraph C. recommended by Mr. Chan, and the additional requirement of the updated evacuation plan for the west building.

8. Release of Bond #22 Oakencroft Road

Mr. Chan recused himself from the discussion. The Board began a discussion on the release of a bond for 22 Oakencroft Road. The Board noted they had received a letter from Engineering dated June 5, 2008 stated the work required had been completed. The Board moved, seconded, and voted unanimously to approve the release of the bond for 22 Oakencroft Road.

Next Meeting: Monday, June 23, 2008

Meeting Adjourned: 10:25 p.m.