2006-DESIGN REVIEW - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Basically they are proposing: • To bring elevation down. • Slope to be less severe and landscape both sides of the slope. • Landscape plan for KenMark side was presented and reviewed, but landscape for 40B side was not presented. • Basically looking at fully landscaped slope,rather than high wall. Issues raised by Design Review: • Grading Plan doesn't show reduction in grade. • Proposal is a big transition in this regrading. Steven Hayes responded: `yes, about 6 feet". • On proposed plan the 10 foot buffer zone has 8 feet of grading within the buffer zone. On previous plan all grading appears on other side of buffer. Steven said because they can work on both sides of the buffer that is to their advantage. • Tom stated there is a substantial drop and maybe it will require some type of boulders, etc. to hold it. • Tom pointed out that it was important to hold the front and the back and maybe work with the area in the middle. • Design Review needs more information on the landscaping to see what it looks like on 40B side. • Tom repeated that it is important to leave screening and asked how they are going to hold the bank at the comer. Since applicant is to appear before ZBA 2 weeks from yesterday, they will get the landscape plans to Building Department in next day or so for Tom to review with Mary LeBlanc and Walter Yarosh and schedule Design Review meeting thereafter. Conclusion: Not approved. Applicant to provide Landscape Plan being proposed for 40B side of the project so that Tom O'Hara can review with Mary LeBlanc and Walter Yarosh and then schedule Design Review Meeting. Approval of Minutes Minutes of September 14, 2006 were approved. Adjournment...Meeting was adjourned at 9:30 a.m. Respectfully submitted, J Fdin erti Secretary