HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-09-26 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 26, 1988
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Office
Building, was called to order at 7 35 p.m. by the Chairman, Mrs. Uhrig, with
members Klauminzer, Sorensen, Williams, Wood, Planning Director Bowyer and
Secretary Peters present.
246. Review of Minutes The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the
meeting of September 19, 1988. On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mrs.
Klauminzer, it was voted 4-0-1 (Mrs. Uhrig abstained as she had not attended the
meeting) to approve the minutes, as amended.
The Board reviewed the minutes for the executive session of September 19, 1988.
On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Wood, it was voted 4-0-1 (Mrs.
Uhrig abstained as she had not attended the meeting) to approve the minutes for
the executive session, as written.
************* ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ******************
PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL LAW
247. Form A/88-15, Marrett & Kendall Roads, William and Patricia DeBonte The
Board reviewed a plan showing the division of a lot 69 into two lots , lots 129A
and 129B, both of which conform to the frontage and lot area requirements of the
RS zoning district in which they are located. On the motion of Mrs. Wood,
seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was voted unanimously
to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass." dated July
19, revised September 7 and 20, 1988, by The Malcolm N. Johnston Co., Inc.,
certified by Malcolm N. Johnston, Professional Land Surveyor, by applicants
William and Patricia DeBonte, with Form A/88-15, as it does not require
approval under the Subdivision Control Law.
DETERMINATION OF GRADE AND CONSTRUCTION OF UNACCEPTED STREETS
248. CUS/88-3, Earl Street, William Herring Mrs Uhrig stated that it is
necessary for the Board to determine how much of the street must be improved.
She proposed that beginning at the intersection of Earl and Ash streets, the
applicant be required to construct 300 feet to Town standards.
Mr. Sorensen said that the Board's policy in the past was that the length of the
unaccepted street was considered to extend to at least the last house serviced
by the street. Using this as background, he felt the unaccepted portion of Earl
Street should go beyond the third house on the street, to the end of the third
lot. The second question he felt should be established was where the street
changes from the category of an unaccepted street to a non-street as defined in
the Board's "Policy on Construction Standards . ..".
Using the applicant's map of the area for reference, the Board agreed the street
changed from an unaccepted street to a non-street approximately where the first
I9 tree in the stand of birch trees was located in the roadway. They agreed that
the applicant should be required to bring the street up to adequate grade and
construction for approximately 374 feet, roughly from the far side of the inter-
Minutes for September 26, 1988
section of Ash and Earl Streets to the end of lot 28, where the property abuts
the right-of-way. I'
In response to a question from Attorney Patricia Hagedorn, representing Mr.
Herring, as to whether the construction standards would be the same as what Mr.
Herring had previously been required to do on Earl Street , Mr. Bowyer noted the
Policy has since been revised. It now calls for a paved street and drainage
facilities, if needed, and perhaps sewer and water service, but that all this
has to be determined when the detailed engineering plan is submitted.
Mr. Williams felt that if the street were brought up to Town standards, sewer
and water service should be installed as well as any required drainage. Mr.
Bowyer commented that the first thing to be determined is the length of street
that needs to be improved, and that at a subsequent stage when fully developed
street improvement plans are submitted , the other questions can be dealt with.
Mr. Williams wanted it made clear that the Town might in the future require the
installation of sewer and water lines as part of the construction of the street.
Mr. Sorensen stated, and the Board agreed, that he felt no land beyond the
birches can claim "grandfathered" status , since there is no street.
In response to a question from Gordon Osgood, 52 Ward Street, as to what effect
this determination would have on 49 Earl Street, Mr. Sorensen stated there would
be no effect. Mrs. Hagedorn asked if Mr. Osgood decided to complete the street
in front of his house , what would be the status of the lots across the street
from 49 Earl Street. Mrs. Wood replied they would have frontage, but would not
retain their "grandfathered" status. Mr. Bowyer noted this could create practi-
cal frontage but would not create legal frontage, and added that this only
relates to new construction, not existing homes.
Mr. Bowyer referred to a Lexington court case which held that if a lot does not
have frontage on a street, it can not retain any "grandfathered" status for
zoning purposes, if it is undersized. The determination of the length of the
unaccepted segment of the street was also important for the right of other
parcels to claim grandfather status. Attorney Harley Anderson, representing Mr.
and Mrs. Landrier, suggested the length be determined to be the furthest lot
line of lot 28.
In response to a question from Norma Small , 26 Earl Street, Mr. Bowyer noted
that the two lots at the corner of Ash and Earl Street are not affected by any I'
action in this determination, except the street may have to be brought up to
adequate grade and construction, but the "grandfathered" status of lots would
not be affected.
Thomas Small, 26 Earl Street, reported that there are real drainage problems in
front of his home, caused by the road previously constructed road by Mr. Her-
ring. Mr. Small asked that the Town do something about this. Mr. Bowyer noted
this was built under the previous policy; the standards in the current policy
call for attention to drainage. It was agreed Mr. Herring should look into
extending a drain pipe to correct that problem.
l
Minutes for September 26, 1988 -3-
On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Wood, it was voted 3-2 (with Mr.
Sorensen and Mr. Williams voting in the negative)
That the length of Earl Street as an "unaccepted" street extends to the
first of the clump of birch trees in the right-of-way and appears to be
approximately 274 feet from the northwesterly side line of the right-of-way
of Ash Street, with the exact location to be determined in the field by a
land surveyor and shown on a plan submitted to the Planning Board.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer, it was voted 5-0
That the improvements to be made to the unaccepted section of Earl Street
should extend from the Earl Street-Ash Street intersection (so that all of
the intersection is improved) to include all 75 feet of the proposed build-
ing lot (where the combination of lots 26, 27, and 28 abut the right-of-
way).
Mr. Williams wished the applicant to be made aware that there may be drainage
problems.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS
249. Hearings scheduled for October 13, 1988 Mr. Williams gave an oral review
of the following hearings scheduled to be heard by the Board of Appeals.
455 Lowell Street, St. Paul Evangelical Church, SPS, church and associated
buildings, parking Mr. Williams presented the material received from the
Board of Appeals and discussed a memo (attached) from the Building Commis-
sioner to the Board of Appeals, dated August 26, 1988, giving his comments
on the application. Among other things, the Board questioned 1) a
steeple that would be 81 feet higher above the building than allowed; 2)
whether the parking layout shown was adequate, (they agreed that Lowell
Street could not handle any on-street parking in that area); 3) an eight
foot perimeter buffer shown on the plan, rather than the 25 foot perimeter
buffer required by the Zoning By-Law; 4) the inadequate landscaping plan
and the lack of any lighting plan; and 5) where the trash dumpster and the
air conditioning unit are located.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Williams, it was voted unanimously
to recommend the application be denied, or the hearing postponed, since it is
incomplete and incorrect and, based on the information submitted, does not
comply with the requirements of the Zoning By-Law.
19 Forest Street, Grace Chapel, SPS, to construct a Christian Education
Building Mr. Williams reported on a joint meeting held by the Center
Advisory Committee and the Design Advisory Committee to discuss this appli-
cation, which he attended. He felt that the proposal was a good use in a
good location, but the building was too large. The consensus of that
meeting appeared to be that the applicant should try to work with the
neighbors to resolve their objections. The Board agreed the building was
too large and should be reduced; and that the required 25 foot buffer where
the property abuts residentially zoned land was not shown. They noted that
Minutes for September 26, 1988 -4-
the plan did not appear to show an adequate amount of parking area, loca-
tion of dumpsters, signage, air conditioning unit and lighting, all infor-
mation required by the Zoning By-Law.
Mr. Sorensen added there may be a problem in determining which street
should be designated the frontage street. The Board agreed to recommend
the 30 foot setback be required from both streets.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Williams, it was voted unani-
mously to recommend the application be denied, or the hearing postponed,
since it is incomplete and incorrect and, based on the information submit-
ted, does not comply with the requirements of the Zoning By-Law.
The Board also agreed to make no comment on the following applications
8 Manning Street, Richard Sullivan, Variance, side yard setback for a
second floor addition.
41 Clarke Street, Hershel & Kathleen Jick, Variance, side yard setback to
add a deck.
SUBDIVISION OF LAND
250. Ridge Estates II, East Emerson Road, procedures, next steps The Board
discussed a memo from the Planning Director to the Town Engineer dated September
28, 1988 which summarized the conclusions reached at an interdepartmental meet-
ing, held September 20, 1988, in the Town Manager's office to discuss what
corrective work was needed in order to complete the Ridge Estates II
subdivision.
The Engineering Department agreed to allow some deviation from Town standards
for construction of the sidewalk, in order to prevent destruction of substantial
existing landscaping and other improvements that have been installed by, or for,
homeowners within the right-of-way, and to permit the sidewalk to bypass the
location of installed telephone handholds, where necessary. They also agreed to
allow some deviation, where necessary, where the relative elevation of the
sidewalk and the adjacent lawn was substantially different and an adverse drain-
age condition would affect private property.
It was agreed the developer would do all the work required, and that in order
for the work to be completed before the end of the season, the finish layer on
the street may be installed prior to the completion of the sidewalk
construction.
Mr. Bowyer reported the next step will be to transmit the memo to the engineer-
ing department with a request for them to determine how many sidewalk problems
can be solved by allowing some flexibility in the Town standards.
The Board agreed to the outline of the step-by-step procedures that were recom-
mended to be followed to complete the work and resolve the neighborhood
concerns.
Minutes for September 26, 1988 -5-
251. Pheasant Brook II, Kahn/Quinn, procedures Mr. Bowyer reported that the
Town Manager's meeting also discussed how to resolve problems that have arisen
in processing this subdivision application. Taking part in the discussion were
Director of Public Works/Engineering Richard Spiers, Town Engineer Frank Fields,
Planning Director Robert Bowyer, Conservation Administrator Kevin Mendik and
Town Manager Richard White.
Mr. Spiers stated the the proposed pumping station and sewage disposal plan was
unacceptable to the DPW because the responsibility and cost of maintaining such
a system, would eventually fall to the Town, even though it would have no legal
responsibility for this maintenance, and it would be excessively costly to
operate and maintain. Mr. Mendik reported that the Conservation Commission ob-
jected to any plan that would connect the end of Butterfield Road to Maple Tree
Lane, since it would have a very detrimental effect on wetlands in the area.
Mr. Bowyer reported that the participants of the meeting had agreed that a
process should be established so that Town boards and commissions involved in
the review of various subdivisions can regularly consult with each other.
The Board agreed to invite the Conservation Commission and Conservation Adminis-
trator, the Director of Public Works/Engineering and the Town Engineer to meet
with the Board at their October 17 meeting, so that common concerns involving
the Pheasant Brook, Barrett Road and Philbrook Terrace subdivisions can be
discussed.
*************************** PLANNING BOARD PROCEDURES ************************
252. Planning Board Direction, Objectives Mrs. Uhrig summarized previous
discussions the Board had held on August 30 and September 8, 1988 about estab-
lishing priorities for work to be done. They should have a position prepared on
the Minute Man Park expansion by November 1, and need a position on the Air
Force expansion at Hanscom Field to be incorporated into a joint position for
HATS. She asked what else the Board felt they would like to accomplish in the
upcoming year.
The Board again agreed completion of the Development Regulations was their first
priority, particularly regulations governing one and two lot subdivisions and
commercial development. In response to a question from Mrs. Uhrig, Mr. Bowyer
estimated a draft could perhaps be ready for the Board's review sometime in
December.
Mrs. Uhrig expressed the hope that there could be progress toward the completion
of the South Lexington study. She thought the traffic study section was near
completion, and suggested work on the land use portion be started. In response
to a question from Mr. Sorensen, Mr. Bowyer defined the land use plan as what is
the Board's recommendation for use of large undeveloped parcels in South Lexing-
ton. Mr. Sorensen felt it was important to catalog what is contained in various
ares of South Lexington as a source of information for Town Meeting.
In response to a question from Mrs. Uhrig as to their recommendations on afford-
able housing development, the Board agreed this would not be a good year for
proposals to Town Meeting, but that there should be continuing work done. As
for a response to the information presented to the Town in the Engler Report,
Mr. Bowyer said direction from various Town boards and commissions is needed.
Minutes for September 26, 1988 -6-
Mrs. Wood suggested there should be a coordinated response from the Planning
Board and the Selectmen, perhaps prepared after their joint meeting. Mrs. Uhrig
asked members to review the Engler Report so the Board can discuss it at an
upcoming meeting, as soon as possible. Mr. Williams recommended, and the Board
agreed, it would be premature to bring anything to Town Meeting this year, but
work should continue, to establish a Board position on affordable housing.
Mr. Williams said he felt the Planning Board's obligation is to insure that
planning in Lexington is done to identify open parcels, suggest appropriate
densities and make this information available to Town Meeting for their decision f
when they must act on RD/CD rezonings. The Board noted they would like to look
at the proposed RD rezoning off Lowell Street , with or without staff analysis ,
as soon as it can be scheduled for a meeting.
************************************** REPORTS *******************************
253. Planning Board, Subcommittees
a. Metropolitan State Hospital Mrs. Uhrig announced there would be an
informational meeting on Tuesday, October 11 , 1988 at 4 30 p.m. at the
hospital to present recommendations for the Master Plan for the Metropoli-
tan State Hospital. Mrs. Klauminzer will try to attend.
The meeting was adjourned at 10: 39 p.m.
Latirtn-4a4+
Eleanor Klauminzer, Clerk
@Rrp
pi