HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board minutes 07-19-1995 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF JULY 19, 1995
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room 105, Town Office Building, was called to
order at 7:54 p.m. by Chairman Davison, with members Canale, Davies, Grant, Planning Director Bowyer,
and Assistant Planner Marino present. Mr. Merrill arrived during Item 116.
************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS *************
RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS
116. Applications To Be Heard on Auuust 10. 1995
Vacant Land on Grandview Avenue, LEXHAB, comprehensive permit to construct one dwelling unit.
Marshall Derby, Lexington Housing Assistance Board Chairman, was present to describe LEXHAB's
application for a comprehensive permit to build a single-family dwelling on vacant land between 11 and 19
Grandview Avenue as part of the Town's scattered site housing program. He gave a brief history of the
project and explained why relief is needed from the Zoning By-Law's lot area and frontage requirements.
He said that the house would be sited to fit in with the existing houses and described a number of other
features of the proposal that LEXHAB believes will enhance the neighborhood.
The Local Initiative Petition application was approved by the Selectmen on February 13 and by the
Executive Office of Communities and Development on June 5, 1995 Mr. Derby said the reaction of the
people he talked to at EOCD confirms to him that Lexington is unique in the State in having a Town
program to produce affordable housing.
The Planning Board expressed its support of LEXHAB's goals and agreed to recommend approval of the
Grandview Avenue proposal, believing there are technical reasons why the Board of Appeals should grant a
comprehensive permit.
Mr. Davies gave an oral review of the following applications: I
2 Oakmount Circle. Donald Sundue, variance to expand a one-car garage into a two-car garage.
The Board agreed to recommend not granting the variance because the planned garage would be a
visual intrusion into the narrow street. It believes that additional parking could be provided on the lot
without adding to the garage and that a landscaped solution is preferable.
26 Brandon Street, Charles Yang, special permit for second story addition to dwelling
The Board believes that the drawings included in the application are not to scale with respect to
vertical dimensions.
286 Lincoln Street. Shell Oil Co., special permit for signs, and a variance to install a canopy
Recognizing that the Design Advisory Committee thoroughly reviewed these applications, the
Board agreed to defer to its judgement.
The Board agreed to make no comment on the application below, also scheduled to be heard by the Board
of Appeals on August 10, 1995.
16 Barberry Road. Nancy Blackmun, special permit to use portion of residence as an office
Minutes for the Meeting of July 19, 1995 2
SUBDIVISION OF LAND x-
117 Garfield Street Extension. Definitive Subdivision Plan. Decision: Ronald and Nancy Gold, the
applicants, Jonathan-Gold, their attorney and Rick Waitt, engineer, of Meridian Engineering Collaborative,
Inc. were present.
Mr. Bowyer reported on his discussions with the Town Engineer qbout die Planning Board's questions
about the drainage and street specifications in the Garfield Street Extension plans. Mr. Fields has responded
that the Town's street standards are minimum standards. They are appropriate for public streets and are
based on dimensions and physical engineering criteria. His many years of experience are in public roadway
engineering, and he is in constant communication with the operating division of the public works depart-
ment which has the responsibility for maintaining the roads. Large vehicles, such as snow plows and
garbage trucks have difficulty operating on substandard streets. He does not want to be involved in
analyzing die relative merits of systems that are poor and unworkable. In his mind there are not relative
degrees of substandardness.
Relative to the drainage system proposed, Mr. Fields said it is substandard and he believes will not work. It
may fall within the mathematical ranges in the accepted methodology While it may appear adequate in
theory, Mr. Fields believes it will not work in practice based on his years of experience.
Engineering is particularly concerned that subsequent buyers of the property may have a view different from
the Golds about the status of the street and may demand later that the Town maintian the street and provide
services. Engineering is willing to accept the Planning Board exercising its responsibility and granting
waivers provided the Town is not subsequently responsible for what it knows now is a substandard street.
Mr. Bowyer said that conditions should be included in the Planning Board's decision as has been done in
the past. Those conditiions will provide notice to prospective buyers that the Town's position is that it will
not provide the full range of services to newly constructed substandard streets.
Several members of the Board expressed the view that the Board's discretionary powers allow it to evaluate
the merits of individual plans and to arrive at the best solutions in each case. Mr. Grant compared the
Planning Board's authority to grant waivers to the Board of Appeals' authority to grant variances and
special permits. Mr. Bowyer said he believes the Board's role, as elected policy makers, is to set standards
that will apply in almost every case, not to negotiate each subdivision with developers.
Mr. Merrill asked about the June 16 memo posing an approach that would consciously have two standards:
1) for public streets that are built to Town standards, and, 2) for small streets that are going to be private, in
exchange for waiving the Regulations. What is the Board's position on this approach? Should we talk about
it? Mrs. Davison argued against denying services to the applicants. Mr. Davies thought it was beyond the
Planning Board's authority to include a reference to DPW's maintenance responsibilities as part of its
decision. Mrs. Davison thought current practice should prevail and it is not fair to make the Golds be the
first ones subject to a new formalized policy The Board agreed to schedule a time to discuss a formal
policy on "double standards" i.e., separate street construction standards for private and public ways, in
conjunction with other Town departments.
Mr. Bowyer warned the Board about setting a precedent, saying there are many landowners who would like
to develop their property using only a driveway for access. Allowing a subdivision on what is essentially a
driveway would result in much more development of vacant land. The practical effect may be to encourage
more development. If the Board does not follow a consistent practice, the staff will not be able to advise
applicants what the Board will require on subdivision plans.
3 Minutes for the meeting of July 19, 1995
Mr. Waitt said he understands why the Town Engineer takes the position he does but believes that the road
and drainage designs are appropriate for this development. Both the applicants and the neighbors approve of
the designs.
After further discussion, on the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Mr. Grant, the Board voted 3-2, with
Mr. Canale and Mr. Merrill opposed, to approve a waiver of Section 3.6.2.5 1, Minimum Pavement Width,
to allow a 16 foot pavement width instead of the required 20 feet for a residential minor street.
On the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Mr. Grant, the Board voted 3-1-1, with Mr. Merrill opposed and
Mr. Canale abstaining, to approve a waiver of Section 3.6.2.5 1, Travel Lanes, to allow two 8 foot travel
lanes instead of the required two 10 foot travel lanes for a residential minor street.
On the motion of Mr. Grant, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted unanimously, 5-0, to approve a
waiver of Section 3.6.2.5 1, Sidewalk, to allow the street to be constructed without a sidewalk instead of the
required 5 foot sidewalk on one side.
On the motion of Mr. Canale, seconded by Mr. Merrill, the Board voted unanimously 5-0, to approve a
waiver of Section 3.6.2.5.4, Turnaround for dead end street, to allow an alternate layout at the end of the
dead end street instead of the required 120 foot diameter circular turnaround.
On the motion of Mr. Merrill, seconded by Mr. Canale, the Board voted unanimously, 5-0, to approve a
waiver of Section 3.6.2.5.5, Street Pavement, to allow the centerline of the paved section of the street to be
offset from the centerline of the right-of-way instead of centered in the right-of-way
On the motion of Mr. Grant, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted 3-2, with Mr. Merrill and Mr.
Canale opposed, to approve a waiver of Section 3.6.2.5 7, Street Pavement, to allow the pavement to pitch
across the street toward one side instead of the required pavement pitching down from the centerline toward
both sides.
On the motion of Mr. Grant, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted 3-2, with Mr. Merrill and Mr.
Canale opposed, to grant a waiver from Section 3.6.2.5.8, Curbs and Gutters, to allow the installation of
berms along a portion of the street on only one side instead of the required continuous "cape cod" style
berm curb.
On the motion of Mr. Grant, seconded by Mr. Davies, die Board voted 3-2, with Mr. Merrill and Mr.
Canale opposed to grant a waiver of Town of Lexington Engineering Department Standards for Street
Construction, to allow alternative slopes within the right-of-way as described in the waiver explanation and
shown on the plan instead of sloping the required 3/8" per foot.
On the motion of Mr. Canale, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted 4-1, with Mrs. Davison opposed, to
not grant a waiver of Section 3.6.4 4 1, Installation (Electric, Power and Communication), to permit the
existing aboveground utility wires and poles to remain in place and require that only the connection to the
proposed dwelling be in underground conduits.
The staff was asked to prepare a draft certificate of action for the Board to review at its next meeting.
*************************** REGIONAL, INTERTOWN ISSUES **************************
118. Comment on Business Air. Inc. ENF for Commuter Service from Hanscom Field: The Board
reviewed a draft letter stating its concerns about the Environmental Notification Form filed by Business Air,
Inc. to operate a commuter air service out of Hanscom Field. After a brief discussion, on the motion of Mr.
{
Minutes for the Meeting of July 19, 1995 4
Canale, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted unanimously, 5-0, to approve in principle the content of I
the draft letter prepared by the Town Manager, subject to minor editorial revisions to be made by Mr.
Canale and Mrs. Davison. Mrs. Davison observed that an increase in surface truck traffic, if a parcel service
is also initiated, was not addressed in the letter
The meeting was adjourned at 11 12 p.m.
621k--1/
Frederick L. Merrill, Jr., Clerk
I