Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-08-06-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OFAUGUST 6, 2008 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, Town Office Building was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Hornig with members Manz, Galaitsis and Canale and planning staff Henry, Kaufman and McCall-Taylor present. Mr. Zurlo was absent. *************************HARTWELL AVENUE AREA STUDY************************** Mr. Buzz Constable from the Massachusetts Association of Regional Planning Agencies (MARPA) gave a presentation on the best practices for local streamlined expedited permitting. He stated that funding of technical support grants to communities adopting 43D was currently at $100,000 a community. Electronic permit tracking software was available but not great and expensive. Some of the best practices mentioned were to improve communication with applicants; standardize the process; figure out what local governments need to do to make the process better; link plans to the regulations; and develop flow charts and checklists for developers. The Town needs to address streamlined permitting in order to be considered for certain grants and funding. Mr. Hornig said the Board is working on plans to rejuvenate Hartwell Avenue, a major commercial area, and increase tax revenue and economic development. The current process is decidedly not streamlined. Mr. Canale said the challenge is the perception that Lexington is not development friendly. Mr. Constable said in order to be successful with the expedited permitting of 180 days there must be clear guidance as to what would be expected from the applicants and what the Town would be looking for. The Town should be able to recoup some of the increased value accruing from an increase in allowed intensity of use to pay for infrastructure improvements. Developers don’t mind impact fees as long as their financial commitment is known and determined before hand. The Town needs to be very clear as to what it required; give and take makes it less workable. Mr. Hornig said the Board has fallen into the habit of saying give us a plan and we’ll tell you what we like and dislike about the plan. How do you get to guidelines that are complete enough? Mr. Constable said to have staff discuss the plans with the applicant and then come to the Board with the issues. Mr. Galaitsis said he felt the Board gave the applicants a good list of comments/instructions regarding the plans presented. The zoning bylaws are clear and he was frequently amazed by the developers’ liberal Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of August 6, 2008 interpretations of the by-law. Mr. Constable said it may be good for towns to have quid pro quos in place. Allowing an increase such as from .15 FAR to .35 FAR could double land values. He said the Board needs to look at the whole regulatory gamut and examine what the developer’s objectives are versus what the town wants. In the case of commercial development, allowing 250,000 square feet where before only 100,000 square feet were allowed should be contingent on the developer agreeing to do certain things, or a set amount of money per square foot that could go into an infrastructure fund. Mr. Galaitsis asked Mr. Constable’s opinion on what percentage of increased value the Town could receive. Mr. Constable said 20, 30 or 40 percent of the increased value. Mr. Henry felt that once the Board begins to ask for pro formas, the discussion might change to one of monetary values, rather then looking at the quality of the development itself; that could be a slippery slope. Ms. Manz said this seemed to be an abandonment of the idea of mitigation, and instead the Town simply tries to get a piece of the profit in return for the rezoning. If the Town says it would take 40% of the increased value created, isn’t this selling zoning? Mr. Constable said this “value capture” would be a source for mitigation funds. As Hartwell Avenue develops there would be a certain amount of impact on the Town; decide on a generic amount instead of doing one developer at a time to get the maximum value capture. This would best be done collectively and not incrementally to avoid potential legal complications. Development agreements rather then impact fees should be used since impact fees might have difficulties at the federal level. Development agreements could to be entered into with the Board of Selectmen for quid pro quo, which would be good for developers - giving predictability, extending grandfathering and other possible benefits. Mr. Henry asked about development agreements with the special permit process. Mr. Constable said the state law was not perfectly clear. If the Town was giving back something it could work as an agreement through the Board of Selectmen where the developer does something the Town requests and in return the developer receives something back. The most defensible agreement would be to offer an interest in real estate, for instance give town land in return for getting something from the developer. Mr. Canale said Lexington should keep the base FAR at .15 and allow higher density with impact fees Minutes for the Meeting of August 6, 2008 Page 3 and mitigation funding. Mr. Constable said the criteria would need to be very clear with the expedited permitting. Ms. McCall-Taylor asked if there would be any interest by Board members in having some by-right development. Mr. Hornig said the Town was so steeped in special permits for everything that while the concept seems appropriate he was not sure that Town Meeting would endorse this leap of faith. Mr. Galaitsis said the Board could not write rules that would address every contingency. Mr. Canale supported keeping .15 FAR as of right and go up from there by special permit or site plan review depending on the amount of density bonus. Let’s see what can be recaptured and what the funding would do, but do not give up site plan review. Ms. McCall-Taylor said that site plan review is tied to the building permit and therefore could be appealed to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). Mr. Hornig asked the Board if it would be willing to accept pure by-right for small developments, site plan review for a set of things, and beyond that would require a special permit. Mr. Galaitsis said smaller developments by-right should be possible, but defining “small” would be the issue. He also supported the retention of the special permit with site plan review for larger sites. Mr. Canale said Lexington does so many unique things and perhaps the Town should try to be more like other communities and make the Planning Board the special permit granting authority (SPGA). Mr. Hornig said the Planning Board should be the SPGA for large projects like commercial development as a policy making board is needed. Ms. McCall-Taylor said this is a political hot potato in Lexington and the Board should be flexible on this matter. Mr. Canale said the Economic Development Task Force (EDTF) wants the Town to be more like other towns; some feel the ZBA is more developer-friendly. He suggested surveying other comparable communities and count the FAR (gross floor area vs. net floor area) as do others, gather information to bolster the position of the Planning Board being the SPGA, and be more objective. Mr. Henry said the Planning Board members should speak with the ZBA. Mr. Hornig said that 43D would not fit into the policy here and that rezoning of Hartwell Avenue to a 43D district was not necessary. Ms. McCall-Taylor said that 43D should be considered for use in the Beal project. **********************************MINUTES****************************************** The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the July 23, 2008 meeting. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 4-0, to approve the minutes as amended. Page 4 Minutes for the Meeting of August 6, 2008 The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the July 30, 2008 meeting. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted, 3-0-1 (Mr. Galaitsis abstained), to approve the minutes as amended. ******************* PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE******************* The members agreed to make another site visit to Hartwell Avenue at 7:00 am on Monday, August 11. On August 13 there is a public hearing on 63 Paul Revere Road and a mid-term review of 48 Summit Avenue. There is no meeting on August 20. August 27 is the public hearing for 341 Marrett Road. ***********************************STAFF REPORTS********************************** Ms. McCall-Taylor reported that once the minutes for the meeting at which Ginna Johnson was selected as the Associate Planning Board member are signed, and a copy given to the Town Clerk, Ms. Johnson can be sworn in as the associate member. ******************************* BOARD MEMBER REPORTS**************************** Mr. Canale said the Lexington Sidewalk Committee met and wants a public pedestrian way between Marrett Road and Wachusett Drive. Mr. Galaitsis said the Noise Advisory Committee would be reviewing the Town’s bylaws vis a vis the new Massachusetts General Law to see if any changes would need to be brought before Town Meeting. Mr. Hornig said the Court upheld the Brookline residential FAR. He would send the decision to the Board. Mr. Canale said that a recent 40B decision went for towns, saying they could regulate 40B developments. It is no longer assumed that conditions make a project uneconomic but the town would have to bear the burden of proof. Mr. Canale would forward the email to the Board. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Wendy Manz, Clerk