Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board Minutes, 1991-07-15 PLANNING BOARD MIINUTES MINUTES OF JULY 15, 1991 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7 34 p.m. by the Chairman, Mr. Williams, with members, Davison, Grant, Wood, Planning Director Bowyer and Assistant Planner Marino present. Mr. Domnitz was absent. ************************ PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT ************************* 147. Planning Director a. Town Manager's Observations on State/Town Fiscal Affairs Mr. Bowyer reported on the monthly meeting of the town manager with depart- ment heads, held last Thursday. Among the items discussed was the Town's fiscal situation. Town Manager White reported that Town's share of revenue from the State is approximately $900,000 less than what was expected to be received for the year The Town budget was reduced by $500,000 from last year's budget, leaving a deficit of approximately $438,000. Mr. White expressed concern as to how the Legislature will act on local aid next year. ******************** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ********** SUBDIVISION OF LAND 148. Taylor Lane. Decision on the Definitive Plan. The Board reviewed and corrected the draft Certificate of Action. Mr. Marino reported that there will be a memo from the Engineering Department, that was referenced to be attached to both decisions, stating they have no recommendations for changes to the plan. On the motion of Mrs. Davison, seconded by Mr. Grant, it was voted unanimously to approve the definitive subdivision plan and to approve the Certificate of Action, as amended. The Board reviewed a draft Special Permit with Site Plan Review approving the definitive plan for the subdivision. On the motion of Mrs Wood, seconded by Mr. Grant, it was voted unanimously to grant the Special Permit with Site Plan Review for Taylor Lane, and approve the decision, as written. 149. Turnburry Hill. Final Release of Surety• Mr. Marino reported that a request has been received from Otis Brown, developer of the Turnburry Hill development, requesting that the Planning Board release the covenant dated May 10, 1989. The Planning Board voted to release the full amount of the surety for the development on October 29, 1990, and voted that the covenant would remain in effect and would not be released sooner than July 1, 1991. On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Grant, it was voted unanimously that Whereas, the terms imposed in the Planning Board vote of October 29, 1990 have been met, and Francis X. Fields, Town Engineer, has indicated in a memorandum dated August 14, 1990, that the "as-built" plan of the Turnburry Hill Development has been approved, and that all required community facilities in the Turnburry Hill Development have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the Town's standards; Minutes for the Meeting of July 15, 1991 2 The Planning Board releases the covenant for the Turnburry Hill Develop- ment dated May 10, 1989. Mr. Williams asked that Mr. Marino check on why Mr. Brown, who also owns Lexington Toyota, has not begun implementing the landscaping plan for the planting required between the bicycle path and Lexington Toyota. RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS 150. Hearings Tentatively Scheduled for August 15. 1991 Mr. Marino gave an oral review of the following applications scheduled to be heard by the Board of Appeals. 22-24 Charles Street, Patricia Costa, Charles and Marjorie Guthrie; variances, to add a second floor bay addition over an existing porch on the front of a two-family house with a 4' front yard setback and a 7.7' side street setback; and to allow a 64 square foot increase in the net floor area of a non-conforming second dwelling. Mr. Marino noted that the proposal will increase the net floor area of a nonconforming dwelling, which is not allowed by the Zoning By-Law. Mrs. Davison noted the footprint is not any greater. The Board agreed that no hardship has been demonstrated with respect to criteria, such as soil, shape or topography of the land, established under state statute for the granting of a variance. On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Grant, it was voted 3-0-1 (Mrs. Davison abstained) to recommend the variances not be granted, since the statutory criteria for granting a variance have not been demonstrated. The Board also agreed to make no comment on the following applications 1088 Massachusetts Ave. , Wendy Tighe-Hendrickson; SP, continued use of a residence as an office for a licensed psychologist. 20 Waltham Street, Eddie's of Lexington, Inc , d/b/a Sweet Peppers; Renewal of a SP, to allow the temporary 5' diameter wall sign to be the permanent wall sign at the restaurant known as Sweet Peppers. ******************* REGIONAL, INTERTOWN ISSUES ****************************** 151. Sale Re-Use of Metropolitan State Hospital Mr. Williams reported that since the last Planning Board meeting, the Selectmen have voted to reactivate the Metropolitan State Hospital Land Task Force Committee. Mrs. Davison reported that a meeting had been scheduled for last Thursday in Waltham, convened by Representative David Gately of Waltham on this matter. She had hoped the Planning Board could attend, but no notice had been received. Mr. Bowyer reported that neither Lexington's Town Manager or Board of Selectmen had been notified or invited, and that it appeared to be a Waltham meeting. He added he discussed the disposition process with a friend who works at the state Division of Capital Planning and Operations (DCPO) , which is, in effect the state's property manager. The disposition process is spelled out in state statute (Chapter 7, Section 40F-I) and that there is a sequence to be fol- lowed, first offering the property to state agencies, and next to the sur- rounding municipalities, before offering it to private organizations, and that Minutes for the Meeting of July 15, 1991 3 C the whole disposition process is a lengthy one. He also noted that the property in Lexington is located in a one family residential zoning district; I any "higher economic" use, by a private investor, would require a rezoning, which would have to be approved by Town Meeting. The Board recommended that a joint meeting be scheduled with the Metropolitan State Hospital Land Task Force Committee and the Planning Board to discuss future uses for the site at a mutually convenient time. It asked that a letter be sent either to Natalie Riffin, if she is still the chairman, or to pp the Selectmen requesting a joint meeting, perhaps in mid-September. The Board also suggested that a very preliminary site analysis be done by the staff, and a walk of the site be scheduled. *************************** REPORTS ************************************* 152. Planning Board. Subcommittees a. Bicycle Committee: Mr. Wiliams noted that he had read in the paper that funds would soon be available for the construction of the bicycle path, and that the Committee would soon be reactivated. Mrs. Wood, a member of the Committee, added that she had not yet heard anything, but that, the last time the Committee met the plans for most of the pathway had been completed. ******************** PLANNING BOARD PROJECTS, POLICY MAKING ****************** 153. Revision of Development Regulations. Subdivision Regulations a. Statistical Evaluation of Subdivisions Built between 1980 and 1990 Mr. Bowyer ask that the Board critique these subdivisions, i. e. what is good and what is bad about the subdivisions constructed in the last decade in order to provide direction for the revisions of the Development Regulations and Subdivision Regulations. He suggested they fill out the questionnaire, previously distributed, to start the process. In response to a question from Mr. Williams as to what Mr. Bowyer hoped to learn from this process, Mr Bowyer said he hoped to identify some techniques for improving subdivisions. He thought if this is done, two questions may be posed. 1) is there enough land left in Lexington subject to development to justify a substantial effort involved in the revision of the cluster regula- tions, and if there is, where are the parcels and how big are they; and 2) how to identify and offer creative incentives to protect significant open space from the development process. These may involve some zoning changes and it will mean selling Town Meeting on innovative techniques, such as the transfer of development rights, which politically may be very difficult to do Another major technique would be using density bonuses. Mr. Bowyer noted it will take a substantial portion of the Board's time to sell new techniques and regulations to encourage development of remaining privately owned land in non-traditional ways. The Board also had questions about the mandate from the state for each municipality to produce a Comprehen- sive Plan. In response to a question from Mr. Williams, Mr. Bowyer noted that the Plan- ning Board has the sole authority to change the subdivision rules and regula- Minutes for the Meeting of July 15, 1991 4 tions and does not require Town Meeting approval. He added that in a proposed subdivision development, zoning which requires Town Meeting approval generally regulates anything on the privately owned land outside the street right-of- way, while the Subdivision Rules and Regulations which requires the approval only of the Planning Board regulates anything inside the right-of-way. Mrs. Davison hoped that the Board will develop more creative ways of dealing with the small plots of land that are proposed for three and four lot subdivisions Mr. Bowyer also commented that a set of regulations could be crafted that attempt to solve all the problems found in past subdivisions, but the Board still has to convince builders that a process that depends on discretion, is worth doing. He added that, often, all builders see happening are time delays, controversy and probably not a positive result in the end. The Board discussed whether they would like to invite several builders, cur- rently working in Lexington, to join the Board for a discussion of what changes they would like see in the Rules and Regulations. b. Outline of Revision of Develonment Regulations The Board reviewed a draft "OUTLINE 1991 EDITION OF DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, as of June 26, 1991. Mr. Bowyer reported that in 1986, the first of a two step process was complet- ed revising the procedural requirements for submitting a proposed subdivision plan for approval. It did not deal with the design standards, regulations governing commercial subdivisions or two-lot subdivisions, which were indicat- ed in the Regulations as "reserved", and must still be completed. Mr Bowyer noted that a recent court decision has been the impetus for completing this work, as soon as possible. The merging of zoning concepts and subdivision concepts into one document had been ruled by the judge as so confusing and intertwined that she was unable to find out what the subdivision requirements are. He thought that, in response to this decision, the Subdivi- sion Rules and Regulations should now be clearly identified and separated from the rest of the document. Mr. Bowyer suggested that Planning Board policies, adopted over the years, should also be incorporated into this development regulations document, as well. These include "Guidelines and Policies for RD and CD Rezoning Peti- tions" and "Standards for Grade and Construction of Unaccepted Streets". He also recommended that a process be developed that enables a developer to go through various tracks such as a subdivision track, a zoning track, a wetland protection acts track and a Board of Health track in a way that moves an applicant concurrently through tracks, rather than sequentially. The Board agreed it may wish to contact the Design Advisory Committee to ask about assigning a liaison from the Planning Board to monitor its meetings, and to invite the committee to meet with the Board to provide input in the preparation of revisions to the Development Regulations. The Board reviewed an "Outline of Subdivision Rules and Regulations, Chapter 5, Development Regulations" included with the general outline Mr. Bowyer said a chart will be prepared to show where the existing regulations would fit into the revised Development Regulations. Minutes for the Meeting of July 15, 1991 5 Mr Bowyer distributed a draft SECTION 5. (of Chapter Five) APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED PLAN -- as of July 15, 1991, for the Board's review. Mr. Williams asked that Board members be prepared to discuss the draft at its next meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 10 02 p.m. Edmund C. Grant, Clerk