2007-06-11-PB-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JUNE 11, 2007 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board was held in the Planning Office in the Town Office Building, and called to order at 4:00 p.m. by Chairman Manz with members Hornig and Canale and planning staff McCall-Taylor and Henry present. *******************************CLUSTER BYLAW************************************ Ms. McCall-Taylor said that while Mr. Galaitsis was not present he had expressed concerned about the equivalent impacts. He felt the mission of the cluster bylaw was to have comparable impacts and that Town Meeting would have to approve any changes. Ms. Manz suggested that developments have been required to be below the maximums to allow changes with time. Mr. Hornig asked if any of the members present disagree with the staff suggestions about what to keep and drop in impact figures. All indicated that they agreed with the suggestions. He then asked about the ISR. He felt that if they went to a proof-plan-based multiplier they should subtract the right of way from the tract area, apply the ISR percent to the remaining area to get a square footage of impervious surface, and then add to that the impervious surface of roadway to establish a cluster maximum. He proposed allowing waivers for proof plans if the conventional plan were one where the Board would have approved waivers. Mr. Canale said that if they were to allow waivers, there would have to be two plans on the table. Ms. McCall-Taylor said under current regulations they could get the subdivision with waivers. There would need to be a decision framework for waivers. If applicants have to get a conventional plan approved to get the waivers, why would they then go to the cluster? Mr. Henry said the might have to go through the process to get the waivers. Mr. Canale said the proof plan can be whatever the Board chooses, including allowing waivers, since it can be written into the bylaw changes. Ms. McCall-Taylor asked if open space should be just a percent of developable area rather than a percent of the entire site. This might address concerns about open space being more than just land that could not be built on because of wetland and slope constraints. Mr. Hornig suggested that the developments at Cary Avenue and Grove Street could be treated in the same vein as reduced frontage subdivisions. He suggested extending §135-38E to allow waiving the