Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PLANNING BOARD MINUTES <br />MEETING OF APRIL 27, 2011 <br /> <br />A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Town Office <br />Building was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Greg Zurlo with members Richard Canale, Charles <br />Hornig, Michelle Ciccolo, and Wendy Manz and planning staff Maryann McCall-Taylor and Lori <br />Kaufman present. <br /> <br />DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION <br />************************************************** <br />341 Marrett Road, change in surety: <br /> <br />The applicant has requested a release from the tri-partite agreement in lieu of a cash deposit in the same <br />amount for $30,600. <br /> <br />On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to accept financial surety of $30,600 cash in lieu <br />of the release from the tri-partite agreement. <br /> <br />On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to release the Town’s interest in the tri-partite <br />agreement. <br /> <br />ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br />******************************************************** <br />15 & 18 Rockville Avenue, variances: <br /> <br />The Planning Board discussed the variances being sought for 15 & 18 Rockville Avenue and is concerned <br />about allowing the re-division of a lot made up of old lots that are no longer grandfathered as this is not a <br />unique or uncommon situation in Lexington. The Planning Board is asking the Zoning Board of Appeals <br />to be mindful of these concerns when considering the variances to allow the re-division of lots no longer <br />grandfathered. The concerns will enter into the Planning Board’s decision-making process if the project <br />comes before it. The Board also feels that citing their Stedman Road decision should not serve as a <br />justification for allowing the waiving of the length of this dead-end street. The Board explicitly states in <br />its deliberation that each situation is unique and is not to be used as a precedent for another situation. <br /> <br />On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 5-0, to convey the Planning Board’s concerns <br />discussed on this matter to the Zoning Board of Appeals. <br /> <br /> <br />