Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board minutes 1989-06-26 - - PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JUNE 26, 1989 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7: 33 p.m. by the Chairman Mrs. Uhrig, with members Klauminzer, Sorensen, Williams, Wood, Planning Director Bowyer, Assistant Planner Nordby and Secretary Peters present. ********************** REPORTS ******************************************* 171. Planning Director a. Royal Circle: Mr. Bowyer announced that a definitive plan for Royal Circle was been filed late this afternoon and that there will be a rollout for the Board at the next meeting. b. Chapter 774, Second Working Group: Mr. Bowyer met with the second of the EOCD groups working on the revisions to the administrative rules of Chapter 774; this group is working on recognizing local initiatives in the construction of affordable housing. In response to Mr. Sorensen's question as to how local initiatives could be authorized under the statute, he reported that EOCD proposes to revise the administrative rules so that, for the purposes of this program, any local initiative that meets with their approval will be considered a State subsidized program. 1 The group also discussed a draft report prepared by EOCD, which those of the Committee who represented cities and towns, considered punitive rather than permissive. The attitude contained in the report seemed to be that the suburbs are shirking their responsibilities to provide family type housing, and will find a way out of it by just doing elderly housing. Mr. Bowyer also reported it appeared that not all that Lexington has done previously, as affordable housing, will qualify. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ***************** SUBDIVISION OF LAND 172. Pheasant Brook II, Robert Cataldo: The Board reviewed revised drafts of a Certificate of Action, one approving and one disapproving the definitive plan, and a draft Special Permit disapproving the plan, that were prepared as the Board directed the previous week. They began by discussing the draft Certificate of Action, approving with conditions, which had received a 3-2 favorable straw vote last week. The Board agreed they had no difficulty with the layout of the subdivision street as filed, showing a conventional sub- division with a cul-de-sac off the main road. Mrs. Klauminzer stated she has had second thoughts about her straw vote in favor of the definitive subdivision plan. She said she was satisfied with the street layout, but believed there would be a problem since eventually the Board must certify that the road was constructed to the specifications con- tained in the definitive plan. She felt the Board can not do this since there is no information as to what the existing condition of the road right-of-way is today, and she did not think this information could be added as conditions to the Certificate of Action, before them, but should have been contained in Minutes for the Meeting of June 26, 1989 2 the plan as submitted. Mr. Sorensen noted that if this plan is denied, it is possible the next proposal could be a plan with no waivers; with a 30 foot roadway, a sidewalk on both sides, with development close to the wetlands and no access to the back lands. He added that the Board should be trying to get the best possible subdivision plan. Mr. Williams proposed that the Board require a 10 foot walking easement along the existing Town of Lexington sewer line where it crosses Lot 6. The other Board members declined to support the addition of that condition. In response to questions from Mr. Williams and Mr. Sorensen as to why the plan had been accepted in the first place, Mrs. Klauminzer noted that according to the Development Regulations, the 14 day review period is used to determine whether the submission is complete, not whether what has been filed is accurate. She added that the remainder of the review period is used, not only by the Planning Board but by other Town departments that regulate the con- struction of subdivisions, to determine whether the plans submitted are accurate and reflect existing conditions in the field. She thought the subdivision should be disapproved, as submitted, because the plans are not accurate. Applicant Robert Cataldo was granted permission to ask a procedural question, as to whether he could request an extension of time to submit whatever they require as corrected documents , or whether he should withdraw and file a new application for subdivision approval, with corrected plans that show existing field conditions. Mrs. Uhrig noted that the public hearing had been held on the definitive plan previously filed, and she did not see how the decision could be based on new information received after the hearings have been held. She also believed that the proper way to proceed at this time would be for the applicant to withdraw and resubmit the application with the correct information. On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer, it was voted 3-2 (with Mr. Sorensen and Mr. Williams voting in negative) to disapprove the- definitive plan, for the reasons stated in the draft Certificate of Action, (disapproving the plan) dated June 29, 1989. Mrs. Wood, noted and it was generally agreed, that the review of the resubmitted definitive plan probably would not require the full 90 days review. Mr. Cataldo presented, and the Board accepted, a written request asking that he be permitted to withdraw the definitive plan and application for approval of the Special Permit with Site Plan Review for a conventional subdivision entitled "Pheasant Brook II", without prejudice. He stated the new submission will be the same subdivision plan now before the Board, with corrected drawings, showing existing field conditions . In response to the request from Mr. Cataldo, on the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer, it was voted 3-0-2 (Mr. Sorensen and Mr. Williams abstained) that in light of the applicant's offer to withdraw his definitive subdivision plan entitled Pheasant Brook II, filed April 3, 1989, the Planning Board rescinds its vote, just taken, disapproving the definitive plan. Minutes for the Meeting of June 26, 1989 3 On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Wood, it was voted unanimously to release to the applicant the following three documents, as unapproved draft reports, discussed by the Board this evening, for his use as guidance, by the in the preparation of a new application: 1) the preliminary draft of a Certificate of Action, Definitive Plan Approved; 2) the preliminary draft of a Certificate of Action, Defini- tive Plan Disapproved; and 3) the preliminary draft of a Special Permit with Site Plan Review, Special Residential Development, Special Permit with Site Plan Review - Disapproved; and that following this guidance is not to be considered as a prior commit- ment, by the Board, to approve a resubmitted definitive plan. 173. Holderness Court, Robert E. Phelan, Decision on Definitive Plan: The Board reviewed and corrected a draft Certificate of Action, dated June 28, 1989, approving the definitive plan. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Wood, it was voted unanimously to approve the definitive plan, and the Certificate of Action, as amended. The Board will act on the Special Permit with Site Plan Review for the subdivision at its July 10, 1989 meeting. RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS 174. Hearings Scheduled for July 6 and July 13, 1989: Mr. Williams gave an oral review of the following hearings scheduled to be heard by the Board of Appeals on July 6, 1989: 153 North Street , Appeal of Patric P. Barbieri, of a decision of the Zoning Officer allow the installation of a propane tank for the resale of fuel at Dan McCabe's Creative Carpentry, Inc. The Board expressed concern as to whether the resale of propane constituted an accessory use as defined by the provisions of the Zoning By-Law. Mr. Williams moved that the Board make no comment on the application. There was no second. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Wood, it was voted 3-2-0 (Mrs. Uhrig and Mr. Williams voted in the negative) to recommend the decision of the Zoning Officer be overruled because the sale of propane gas did not constitute an accessory use, and the appeal of Mr. Barbieri be upheld. The Board agreed to make no recommendation on the following applications : 31 Maple Street, Marvin Antonoff, variance, to provide a bulkhead entryway into the basement of a nonconforming house with a side yard setback of 5.4 ft. instead of the required 12 ft. 185 Bedford Street, Craig A. Foster, determination that the proposed revision to the existing free-standing sign is a minor revision, and a public hearing will not be required. Mr. Williams gave an oral review on the application below, scheduled to be heard by the Board of Appeals on July 13, 1989, and the Board agreed to make no comment on: 478 Marrett Road, Wayne and Susan Woods, variance, to add a one car garage with family room above at the rear of a non-conforming single- ! Minutes for the Meeting of June 26, 1989 4 i family dwelling with a side yard setback of 8.6 ft. The Board also discussed a letter dated June 15, 1989 from Peter Kelley, in which Mr. Kelley asked the Board of Appeals to reconsider its decision, made on February 9, 1989, that the addition of a greenhouse over a deck at #46 Countryside Manor was not a minor revision, and a public hearing is required. On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was voted 4-1-0 (Mr. Williams voted in the negative) to reaffirm the Planning Board's recommenda- tion, contained in a letter to the Board of Appeals dated January 31, 1989, that a public hearing should be required because the addition of a greenhouse over a deck at #46 Countryside Manor is not a minor revision. **************************** REPORTS **************************************** 175. Planning Board, Subcommittees a. Pine Meadow - Meagherville Site Dev. Committee: Mrs. Wood reported the committee met last Tuesday evening to hear a report from Landscape Architect Gary Larson; they walked the site last Saturday morning and will meet this coming Tuesday at 7:30 a.m. to hear a report from the Town Treasurer on financial options that may be available to the Town. b. Affordable Options Housing Committee: Mrs. Klauminzer reported the committee met last Wednesday, and will meet again this Wednesday evening. The committee has divided into two task forces, one to review objectives and the other to look at techniques available. The goal is to have a report ready for the special Town Meeting in the fall. a. HATS: Mrs. Uhrig reported the committee met last Thursday and heard a presentation by Peter Phillips, Director of Planning and Community Development, Gloucester, about traffic mitigating measures which have been implemented on the North Shore. ********************* PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION *************************** 176. Election of Officers: Mrs. Uhrig asked for nominations for officers of the Planning Board to serve until the Board's next scheduled election. Mrs. Klauminzer nominated Mrs. Wood for chairman. There were no other nominations , and the Board voted unanimously to elect Mrs. Wood chairman. Mr. Williams nominated Mrs. Klauminzer for vice-chairman. There were no other nominations , and the Board voted unanimously to elect Mrs. Klauminzer vice- chairman. Mr. Sorensen nominated David Williams for clerk. There were no other nomina- tions, and the Board voted unanimously to elect Mr. Williams clerk. Mr. Williams expressed the appreciation of the Board to Mrs. Uhrig for her years of service as Chairman. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. 1 ) David G. Williams, Clerk