|
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
<br />MEETING OF JANUARY 5, 2000
<br />The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in the Room G -1, Town Office Building, was called to
<br />order at 7:35 p.m. by Chairman Davies with members Bridge- Denzalc, Colman, Galaitsis, Director of
<br />Comprehensive Planning Bowyer, Planning Director Garber and Assistant Planner McCall - Taylor present.
<br />Mr. Merrill was absent.
<br />* * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * **
<br />PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL LAW
<br />1. Form A/00 -1, 7 and 9 Carmel Circle, Tien -Yu Tsui The Board reviewed an Approval Not Required
<br />Plan for land on Carmel Circle. On the motion of Mr. Colman, seconded by Mr. Galaitsis, the Board voted
<br />unanimously to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington in MA, dated September 24, 1999 and
<br />revised December 16, 1999, prepared and certified by Ernest H. Fagerstrom, Registered Land Surveyor,
<br />Norwell, MA, with Form A /2000 -1, submitted by Tien -Yu Tsui, applicant, as it does not require approval
<br />under the Subdivision Control Law. The possible non - compliance under the Zoning By -law was noted on
<br />the plan at staff insistence.
<br />SUBDIVISION OF LAND
<br />2. Rowland Avenue, Amendment to a Prior Definitive Subdivision Plan, Woodhaven Realty Trust,
<br />PUBLIC HEARING Present for this item were Gary Larson, landscape architect, Larson Associates, Inc.,
<br />and Frederick DeAngelis, attorney for the applicants. A number of Rowland Avenue residents were also
<br />present with their attorney, Emily Sample.
<br />Mr. Davies opened the hearing at approximately 8:05 p.m. He began by referring to a letter from the
<br />Rowland Avenue neighborhood. He refuted their claim that staff did not provide timely or sufficient notice
<br />of the hearing or were trying to hurry this project through. He cited key notice dates and actions.
<br />Mr. DeAngelis described the current plan as an amendment to a prior subdivision. He said that, physically,
<br />the plan has not changed. Mr. Larson summarized the physical layout plan. Mr. Galaitsis asked if the plan
<br />can accommodate a full 120 footdiameter right -of -way, and if any subdivisions have been approved without
<br />a full circle cul -de -sac being constructed. Mr. Bowyer responded that there have been perhaps six such plans
<br />in recent memory, citing the Taylor Lane and Garfield Street subdivisions. In response to Mr. Galaitsis
<br />question, "What are the "special circumstances cited in section 3.6.2.5.4 of the Development Regulations,"
<br />Mr. Larson and Mr. DeAngelis said that in meetings with Town Engineers, it was indicated that their
<br />turnaround dimensions were acceptable.
<br />Board members asked questions as to whether the Palant lot was part of an older subdivision, based upon
<br />evidence currently on the table.
<br />Robert Katz, 6 Rowland Avenue, asked the applicants why and how they decided to withdraw the earlier
<br />definitive plan. Mr. DeAngelis answered that it was done based on his own research. Michael Cassetari, 2
<br />Rowland Avenue, asked why Mr. Garber had not reviewed Palmer and Dodge's legal analysis as of
<br />December 28, the day it arrived from Palmer and Dodge. Mr. Garber responded that aside from the
<br />impossibility of reviewing a complex legal write up on the same day it arrives, 95% of the time, the staff
<br />analysis goes out to the Board on the Friday before their meeting the following Wednesday. Mr. Cassetari
<br />also requested a neighborhood meeting with the Planning Board. Chairman Davies responded that that
<br />would be a violation of the Open Meeting Law.
<br />Attorney Sample stated that she strongly disagrees that this plan is an amendment to an existing subdivision
<br />
|