HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board minutes 12-16-1996 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
( MEETING OF DECEMBER 16, 1996
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Office Building, was called to order
at 7 40 p.m. by Chairman Canale with members Colman, Davies, Davison, Planning Director Bowyer, and
Assistant Planner Marino present. Mr Merrill was absent.
****************** PLANNING BOARD PROJECTS, POLICY MAKING ********************
244 Policy Issues - South Lexington Commercial Area. Using an outline/questionnaire prepared by the
staff, entitled South Lexington Commercial Area and dated December 16, 1996, the Board discussed its thoughts
and potential positions on future commercial development in South Lexington. For the purposes of this
discussion, Mr Bowyer defined the South Lexington Commercial Area as the existing CRO districts.
The Board discussed at length the impacts of increased development in the South Lexington CRO commercial
districts. While approving of efforts to increase tax revenue from commercial properties, it agreed that traffic
impact is a primary issue and that the Board must be proactive in ensuring that additional development doesn't
add to local traffic congestion or decrease the quality of life in adjacent residential areas. The Board ought to
reassure those who live near commercial development that it will be ambitious in requiring mitigating
requirements and benefits to the town. The Board agreed that reducing the number of vehicle trips is more
important than upgrading the infrastructure to accommodate more traffic.
Mr Davies observed that Hayden Avenue is located near two interchanges on Route Two and much of the
traffic may go directly to Route Two Mr Canale added that some come from other directions and use streets
in the residential areas.
Recalling the similar discussion of Hartwell Avenue, the Board thought it should develop a vision for what
Hayden Avenue might look like. That could then be carried out on a CD basis,
On the subject of the intensity of commercial development FAR, Mr Canale, Mr. Davies and Mrs. Davison
agreed that the Board should not sponsor an amendment to restore the district-wide FAR to the 1984-5 level
(0.25) but should indicate its willingness to support a higher than present FAR (0.15) for developments it
believes are worthwhile on a case-by-case basis through individual CD Planned Commercial Development
districts.
On the relationship between development potential and infrastructure capacity, Mr Canale and Mrs. Davison
agreed that the Planning Board should maintain its policy of seeking a balance between the development
potential the Zoning By-Law allows and the capacity of the infrastructure. Mr. Davies believes that the Planning
Board should propose a zoning amendment that either repeals Section 12 or modifies it to permit development.
Mr Canale disagreed with this.
On the subject of the South Lexington Transportation Fund, Mr Bowyer reviewed the list of allowable items
for expenditures from the Fund. That includes traffic signals, intersection channelization and traffic engineering
improvements, street reconstruction, sidewalks, bicycle paths, capital expenses for bus services. The Board
agreed the money in the Fund, which has accumulated since the mid-eighties, should be spent. It should not be
returned to those who contributed.
The Board thought the money in the Fund should be used for more than improving the capacity of intersections
but should be devoted to programs that reduce traffic levels that affect nearby neighborhoods. There needs to
be greater emphasis on transportation demand management and reducing the number of single occupant
vehicles. The Board did not want to see all the available money used up for intersection improvements. The
Board asked the staff to prepare a record of what money was contributed for which developments and what
2 Minutes for the Meeting of December 16, 1996
restrictions or specifications were included in the contributions.
The Board discussed whether a Planned Commercial district should mirror the zoning requirements of an
existing commercial district. Mrs. Davison argued for that position but Mr Davies and Mr Canale believe that
the flexibility allowed by the CD process produces better results. Mr. Bowyer said that tracking the dimensional
requirements of an existing district does seem necessary because the operative guideline in Lexington is
"generally consistent with the character of the development in Lexington." He said developers seem to know
what the range of acceptability is.
Mr Canale pointed out that if a proposed CD district simply tracked an existing district, there might not need
to be a rezoning. However the standards for normal business districts, in terms of height and floor area, might
provide a useful context. Then the Board could talk about why in the particular case the CD proposal would
make sense. In any case the Board must consider what fits on a particular site and what are the impacts. Those
will vary from site to site.
245 Report on South Lexington Transportation Management Association meeting• Mr Bowyer reported
on a recent meeting of the South Lexington Transportation Management Association and the report filed
annually by Boston Properties. The Association is the traffic management association(TMA) formed by Boston
Properties as a condition of their special permit to build 191 Spring Street. Ridership on the Association's shuttle
to the Alewife MBTA station is now over 100,000 rides per year The employees of participating businesses
want the service to continue. Mr Bowyer said that the transportation literature shows that without the
government requiring these traffic mitigation measures as a condition of approval they would not exist. Mr
Bowyer cautioned that many employees come from other suburbs and can not be served by the shuttle service
to the MBTA Alewife terminal. The difficult part of alternative transportation services is to reach those suburbs.
************************ ARTICLES FOR 1996 TOWN MEETING ************************
246. Proposed CD Rezoning. 55 Hayden Avenue: Board Response: The Board reviewed a draft letter,
dated December 13, 1996, prepared by the staff. The letter, which is a response to the presentation, on
December 9, of a proposal to rezone land at 55 Hayden Avenue, by representatives of the W R. Grace Inc.,
recommends that the applicants continue with the proposal with some ideas about how it can be improved. After
a brief discussion, on the motion of Mrs. Davison, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted unanimously to
approve the letter as amended.
247 Proposed CD Rezoning 16 Hayden Avenue: Board Response: The Board reviewed a draft letter,
dated December 13, 1996, prepared by the staff. The letter, which is a response to the presentation, on
December 9, by Michael Martignetti et al, for a proposed rezoning of land at 16 Hayden Avenue, recommends
that the applicants continue with the proposal with some ideas about how it can be improved. The Board
suggests a different, less intensive use, that will not require as much parking and can result in a smaller
building. After a brief discussion, on the motion of Mr Davies, seconded by Mrs. Davison, the Board voted
unanimously to approve the letter as amended.
************* ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS **************
PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL LAW
248. Form A/96-17 915/917 Massachusetts Avenue. Town of Lexington: The Board reviewed an
Approval Not Required Plan for land at 915/917 Massachusetts Avenue. On the motion of Mr Davies,
seconded by Mrs. Davison, the Board voted unanimously to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land in
Minutes for the Meeting of December 16, 1996 3
Lexington, MA (Middlesex County)", dated December 4, 1996, prepared by Noonan & McDowell, Inc,
Billerica, MA, certified by John L. Noonan, Registered Land Surveyor, with Form A/96-17, submitted by the
Town of Lexington, applicant, as it does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law
SUBDIVISION OF LAND
249 627 Massachusetts Avenue. Carter Scott. Accent Covenant. Endorse Definitive P1an: Mr Marino
reported that in accordance with Section 3 7.2 of the Development Regulations, the developer has satisfied the
conditions that were to be met prior to the endorsement of the plans. He suggested that the Board should now
accept the covenant and endorse the subdivision plans for the 627 Massachusetts Avenue, 7 4.5 subdivision.
On the motion of Mr Davies, seconded by Mrs. Davison, the Board voted unanimously to:
1 accept the covenant executed by Robert Carter Scott, dated December 16, 1996, and
2. endorse the defmitive subdivision plan entitled "627 Massachusetts Avenue, Definitive Subdivision"
dated July 6, 1996.
*************************** PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT **************************
250. Recent Activity
a. 94 Adams Street/Brent Road. Woodhaven Realty Sketch Preliminary Subdivision Plan. Rollout: Mr
Marino rolled out a sketch preliminary plan for the development, off Adams Street, that was submitted by
Woodhaven Realty on December 12, 1996. The staff has not reviewed the plan in detail yet. The time for
action on this plan expires on January 11, 1997
b Middlesex County Hospital. Mr Bowyer reported that according to Ronald Vokey, Waltham's Planning
Director, Middlesex County Hospital and the City of Waltham are now in court over the issue of zoning
compliance in connection with the sale of the Middlesex Hospital property to Olympus Health Care, a for profit
company He also said that the State Emergency Finance Board turned down the County's request for an
extension of time on a large loan that was due.
251 Reports. Liaison
Mrs. Davison reported that a recent article in the Lexington Minuteman newspaper article says a report of the
Selectmen's Business Committee states that the Zoning By-Law needs to be updated so that the businesses on
Hartwell Avenue can thrive. She felt that a report referencing zoning, without input from the Planning Board,
should not have been made public. After a brief discussion about the Selectmen's Business Committee, on the
motion of Mrs. Davison, seconded by Mr Davies, the Board voted unanimously to send a letter to the chairman
of the Business Committee requesting participation before the final report is given to the Selectmen.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:39 p.m.
John L. Davies, Clerk