Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board Minutes 1992-01-06 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JANUARY 6, 1992 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7 19 p.m. by the Chairman, Mr Williams, with members Davison, Domnitz, Grant, Wood, Planning Director Bowyer, Assistant Planner Marino and Secretary Peters present. 1. Review of Minutes The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of December 16, 1991. On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Grant, it was voted 5-0 to approve the minutes, as amended. ******************* PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT ************************* 2. Recent Activity a. Town Manager's Recommended Budget Mr. Bowyer reported that, although the Town Manager has proposed extensive cuts in numerous departments in this year's Town budget, no cuts will be made to the three current positions in the Planning Department. Mr. Bowyer was concerned that, in tight financial times, questions might be raised as to what the Planning Department produces and why they are spared from cuts. He added that Town Manager White has said that to justify continuing to maintain these three full-time positions, more planning, not zoning or subdivision, should be done. b. Sally Peters' Promotion/Departure Mr. Bowyer announced Mrs. Peters' promotion from Planning Department Clerk to Executive Clerk to the Board of Selectmen, replacing Marion Snow who is retiring. Mrs. Peters will start her new position on January 13, 1992. The position of department clerk for the Planning Department has been internally posted with the deadline for applications Wednesday, January 8, 1992. c. Planning Department Move to Room G-1 Mr. Bowyer reported the move should happen sometime after the middle of January. ************** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS *************** RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS 3. Hearings Scheduled for January 23 1992: Mr. Domnitz gave an oral review of the following applications scheduled to be heard by the Board of Appeals. 182 Bedford Street, L'Alouette, Inc. , renewal of a special permit to continue to operate a take-out food service in the CN district, serving enough food to comprise a meal. The Board made no recommendation, except to ask that the applicant seriously consider adding some sort of beautifi- cation, such as window boxes or barrels containing plants, in front of his store The Board also agreed to make no comment on the following applications Minutes for the Meeting of January 6, 1992 2 87 Kendall Road, Jean L. Parr, renewal of a special permit, to continue to use a portion of a residence for an office for the performance of elec- trolysis; April Lane, Minuteman Village Condominium Assoc. and Minuteman Associates, Variances, to divide the property at April Lane and allow the side yard setbacks of Unit 36 and Buildings 1,3,5 and 6 to be less than the required 40 feet to the new lot line. April Lane, Minuteman Village Condominium Assoc. and Minutemen Associates, SP, to allow the existing driveway on Lot b at April Lane to serve as a common driveway and provide a means of access to the buildings at Lot a. SUBDIVISION OF LAND 4. PUBLIC HEARING. Wright Street Extension. Definitive Subdivision Plan. Mr. Williams opened the hearing at 7 48 p.m. by reading the legal notice BSC engineer Fred Russell, representing applicant Kwi Yung Jung, presented the site plans for the two lot subdivision. Also present were Town Engineer Frank Fields, P.E. and Sam Sleiman, P.E, from the Town Engineering Department. Mr. Russell described how they propose to extend Wright Street to provide sufficient frontage for the two lots. He discussed the memorandum from the Engineering Department, dated October 21, 1991, which listed four problems it found with the plans, as follows 1 Mathematical ties and information should be shown on the plan to establish that the center line of the proposed road is continuous and in line with the existing street. 2. The intersection of James and Wright street has water ponding problems. Drainage catch basins need to be installed at this intersection and connected to the Town drainage system. This presently appears to be the only acceptable and feasible solution to the ponding problem. The paving of this intersection would worsen the ponding problem and create a hazardous situation with liability for the Town if and when it is accepted as a Town road. Furthermore, the applicant proposes to pitch part of the new road to this intersection which would exacerbate the water ponding problem. 3. An SCS soil map should be included with the drainage calculation. 4. A waiver from installing granite curbing at the street rounding has not been requested nor has the granite curbing been shown on the plan. Mr. Russell said concerns expressed in items 1, 3 and 4, could be dealt with, but they disagreed with the opinion that drainage catch basins were necessary to control drainage problems at the intersection of Wright and James Streets. Mr. Sleiman presented the reasons why the Engineering Department thought the catch basins were necessary. He indicated that, without connection to a Minutes for the Meeting of January 6, 1992 3 I drainage system, storm water might remain in the intersection and freeze, under certain circumstances, which would be a hazardous condition. Mr. Fields stated there is a problem at the intersection now and it will continue if catch basins are not installed. Mr. Sleiman also noted a potential problem with drainage run-off the rear of the property that has not been dealt with. He explained that drainage from a point source discharge changes from sheet flow into a channel or trough and can run off onto adjoining properties. Mr. Jung proposed that the road be constructed without the catch basins, and proposed a covenant, with specific language, that he would be responsible to build the catch basins to Town specifications if the problem persisted. Mr. Russell discussed the four waivers from the requirements of the Develop- ment Regulations they have requested. 1. Section 7.3.4, requiring pavement width to be 24 feet to 20 feet. 2. Section 7.3.5, requiring the construction of a sidewalk on one side of the roadway. 3. Section 7.9, requiring a fire alarm circuit. 4. Waiver from the Development Regulations that was not requested with the application, but requested at the Public Hearing; from Section 7.3.9, requiring granite curbing. Questions from Board members included. where the run-off not contained on the extension of Wright Street would go; what the plans were for the new lot (Mr. Jung said he planned to build a home for his family) ; would the work be up to Town standards if the recommendations of the Engineering Department were followed; what would be the cost to construct a connection to the Town drainage system (Mr. Sleiman estimated around $12,000 to $14,000) ; and why the applicant had not shown the granite curbing when it is required by the Development Regulations (the response was that the applicant did not think it was necessary) Abutter David Libman, 74 Fifer Lane, noted that recently he has seen more run- off on his land with the construction of the existing home, and expressed concerns that this would worsen with development of the second lot. Richard Sargent, 24 James Street, spoke in favor of the plans for the two lot subdivision believing it would improve existing conditions. Mr. Williams declared the hearing closed at 8 38 p.m. Later in the evening, following consideration of the recommendations of the Planning department staff and the Engineering department, the Board directed the staff to prepare a decision disapproving the Definitive Plan because the applicant had not presented an acceptable solution to the drainage problems at Minutes for the Meeting of January 6, 1992 4 the intersection and for noncompliance with other technical requirements of the Development Regulations. The Board will encourage the applicant to refile after he has met the objec- tions of the Engineering Department. It also agreed to indicate it is favorably disposed to grant the four waivers requested on a future submission. ***************** ARTICLES FOR THE 1992 TOWN MEETING *********************** 5. Joint Meeting with the Board of Anneals Board of Appeals Chairman, Ann Scigliano, with members Frank Smith, John McWeeney, Robert Whitman and Edwin Whittemore, and associate members Ryles Barnert, Eric Clarke, Robert Sacco, Arthur Smith and Judy Uhrig, joined the Board for a discussion of proposed zoning articles and other provisions of the Zoning By-Law. Also joining the discussion were Building Commissioner Stephen Frederickson; Design Advisory Committee Chairman, John Frey, with members Thomas Coffman, John Vinton and Betsy Whitman; and Thomas Barry, Jan Spealman and Jacqui Bateson from the Chamber of Commerce. Mrs. Uhrig represented the Lexington Center Committee as well. Mr. Williams welcomed all present, and turned the meeting over to Mrs. Davison for a discussion of draft Planning Board Article D, which proposes changes to the Zoning By-Law affecting window signs, projecting signs and free-standing signs. In response to a question from Mr. Williams about his feelings on the existing By-Law, Mr. Frederickson said he thought enforcement caused most of the problems. Mrs. Scigliano thought that abuse of the sign provisions has worsened and that there were too many signs, mostly unattractive. She noted that covering windows with signs was counterproductive, since it blocked the view to the inside of the store, and she did not think additional regulation would put stores out of business She also recommended that revisions deal with the length of wall signs which are not currently regulated. Mr. Barry said the Chamber of Commerce Board will be discussing the draft Article D when they meet next week. Jacqui Bateson, owner of Apple Scruffs, commented that considerable rent is paid for stores on Massachusetts Avenue, and that windows are to be used for advertising. She thought she used around 25% of the window signs at various times of the year, but did not think it was necessary to add the 25% limitation to the Zoning By-Law. Mrs. Davison was invited to attend the Chamber's meeting next Wednesday evening. Mr Clarke objected to the provision not allowing storage space in the windows, and said that the Town should not interfere with the merchant's use of space inside the store. Mr. Whitman noted that the Board of Appeals would probably welcome some framework to guide its deliberations, but that he did not believe in excessive regulation. Further discussion followed on ways to clarify the process for applicants, perhaps with a check-list of the steps to be taken to obtain a sign approval. Minutes for the Meeting of January 6, 1992 5 When the Design Advisory Committee should become involved in the process was also discussed. Mr. Bowyer agreed that a check list would be a help. He also suggested a pre-application conference so the applicant could learn what is allowed and appropriate. There was general agreement that anything that clarifies the process would be good for all Mrs. Wood also noted that there appeared to be general agreement on placing limitations to the length of a wall sign. Turning to the requirements in the Zoning By-Law covering landscaping, Mr. Williams said the Board would like to see further encouragement for the inclusion of planters, window boxes, barrels and the like for plantings, where there was not sufficient space to do screening and landscaping Mr. Coffman thought a group of retailers in a shopping area should be required to jointly undertake any beautification, rather than singling out one retailer in the area who happens to be coming before the Board of Appeals for a permit Mrs. Scigliano expressed her concerns about the need to tighten up what uses are allowed in a bed and breakfast, i.e. the renting of a parlor to persons not staying in the establishment. The Board agreed that the Zoning By-Law was specific on what was allowed, and that it was a matter of enforcement when uses not permitted in the By-Law were found to occur. Mr. Williams thanked everyone for sharing their thoughts with the Board. There was general agreement that it was a good exchange of ideas, and should happen more often. ************************ REPORTS ******************************************** 6. Planning Board Subcommittees a. Hearings for Zoning Articles Board members agreed to schedule the public hearings on all zoning amendments for February 24, 1992. They also agreed to hold Planning Board meetings on February 10 and 18, 1992. The meeting was adjourned at 10 59 p.m ISL-12C 4.--tr Edmund C. Grant, Clerk