Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board Minutes, 1993-06-14 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JUNE 14, 1993 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7 40 p.m. by Chairman Williams, with members Canale, Davison, Domnitz, Grant, Planning Director Bowyer, and Secretary Tap present. 90. Review of Minutes The Board reviewed and approved as written the minutes for the meetings of March 31; April 7, 26; May 3, 5; and June 7, 1993, including Executive Sessions. The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meetings of March 17 and 22; April 28; and May 10 and 24. On the motion of Mr. Canale, seconded by Mrs. Davison, it was voted unanimously to all approve the minutes, with those cited, as amended, and the others cited as written. ************************ PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT *********************** 91. Staff Reports a. 224 Woburn Street Mr. Bowyer showed a sketch plan for land on Woburn and Webb Streets. He has advised this applicant and all others who inquired that access to the property from Woburn street is not desirable as the terrain is steep, sight lines are not good and more intersections with Woburn Street should be avoided. Access from Webb Street by a paper right of way is more desirable even though the right of way is only 40 feet wide and waivers would be required. Mr Bowyer also pointed out that the plan submitted was computer generated, presents no context map, and shows no sensitivity or creativity in its approach to the site Site planning by a landscape architect will remedy some of the problems with the plan submitted The applicant has withdrawn the plan after explanation from staff of the type of exhibits needed and the design approach that is desirable There was a general discussion of the Board's policy to not grant waivers from a full compliance plan unless there are identifiable public benefits. In this case, a full compliance plan and an alternative should be submitted even though the benefit of access from Webb Street is identifiable early on as a benefit Mr. Williams inquired whether the old house on the 10,000 sq. foot lot might not be given to the Town for affordable housing Mr. Williams reminded the Board of discussions on the proposed Munroe Village development, near this site, and the proposal from Bob Cataldo to donate one house lot out of the six proposed. ***************** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************ SUBDIVISION OF LAND f 92. 110 Grove Street John and Debra Cary, the owners, were present. Gary Larson, a landscape architect of Larson and Associates, presented two sketch plans for the Carys' property on Grove Street. It is a parcel of 117,000 square feet, with 136 feet of frontage in the RO district. He briefly Minutes for the Meeting of June 14, 1993 2 described the soils and vegetation. There are some wetlands The owners would like as little pavement as possible and so would like to avoid building a cul de sac. One plan showed a cul de sac with two driveways leading onto it. The other showed the original house with its driveway onto Grove Street, and a common driveway shared by two new proposed house lots. The second plan is less disruptive to the site, with little or no fill required. Mr Bowyer observed that the two plans are extremes - nearly polar opposites. There are other designs that do not require a full circular turnaround and potentially other places for the location of the new houses. Mr Domnitz and Mr. Canale indicated they would be unlikely to approve a plan with what is essentially a driveway serving two house lots. They want to see alternative forms of turnaround consistent with what the Planning Board has previously approved for one and two lot subdivisions Mr. Williams said that a wetland determination is needed before much more can be decided. The amount of wetland on this site is critical in applying the mathematical formula in section 9 2.9 of the Zoning By-Law to determine the number of dwelling units permitted That affects whether the property can be treated as a cluster subdivision or a two-lot conventional subdivision. Mr. Williams also suggested moving the existing driveway to the new subdivision street to reduce the number of access points to busy Grove Street. It was agreed that the applicants need first to obtain an approval of the wetland boundaries from the Conservation Commission and a computation of the area in wetlands which is a prerequisite for determining the density and whether the property can be treated as a cluster subdivision. The Board will be willing to consider alternative forms of turnaround for the subdivision street, consistent with what the Planning Board has previously approved for one and two lot subdivisions, but not a driveway The applicant may want to offer land to the Town adjoining the existing conservation land and/or provide a walking path to it if it is dry land. The applicant is encourage to consider connecting all driveways, including the present driveway to the existing house, to the subdivision street to reduce the number of curb cuts on Grove Street. If the property qualifies for treatment as a cluster subdivi- sion, the applicant may want to consider one additional building to include two dwelling units in a "single family house" one being an accessory apart- ment The Board would like to walk the site when the flags delineating the wetland are in place. 93. 915-917 Massachusetts Avenue Mr. Bowyer reported that the staff had researched, at the Board's request, a potential zoning violation due to the existence of two dwellings on one lot. The two family house was built @1850 The single family house was moved to the site in 1965 with a building permit issued. The statute of limitations has run and the Town is not in a position to take enforcement action now The Building Commissioner, the Town Counsel and the two members of the planning staff all agree those zoning violations do not affect the Board's ability to approve a subdivision plan The applicant wants to build a two-family house on the new second lot. That is permitted because the land is in the RT, Two-Family, district Mr Bowyer said that the property is too small for a cluster subdivision For a two-lot subdivision in an RT district, a road has to be built. 3 Minutes for the meeting of June 14, 1993 The Board agreed that the rehabilitation of the existing 1850s house will be a very important issue They might be willing to reconsider the requirements of the street construction standards if the house is rehabilitated and preserved. 94 Tracer Lane Mr. Bowyer showed the Board a letter from Acheson (Mike) Callaghan of Palmer and Dodge to Mr Nahigian's counsel It asked why the Board has not heard from Mr. Nahigian in response to their letter asking him if he would adjust some of his waiver requests. It also questioned why the turnaraound was located in wetlands In a recent letter, Mr Nahigian's counsel had implied that the Planning Board was remiss in not having approved the plan. 95 Pheasant Brook II Mr. Marino reported that the developer of the Pheasant Brook II subdivision, Robert Cataldo/Sheldon Corporation wishes to renew the level of surety in order to have additional lots released. The "Cost to Construct" for the remaining work at this subdivision, as estimated by the Engineering Department, on June 8, 1993 is $45,000. With the required contingencies and fees added, the total amount of surety to be held is $61,250. On the motion of Mr Grant, seconded by Mr. Canale, the Board voted unan- imously 1) To set the amount of surety for the Pheasant Brook II subdivision at $62,000, which is the total remaining "Cost to Construct," plus three additional items noted in the Town Engineer's memo dated June 8, 1993, plus contingency/engineering, escalation deposit, and administrative costs, as the amount necessary to hold until the completion of the community facilities and the subdivision. 2) That this level of surety is determined to be sufficient through June 14, 1994 only. If the subdivision is not completed by that time, the amount of surety needed may be re-evaluated to determine its relationship between the then applicable construction costs and the work remaining to be completed. If little or none of the work that remained, at the time this surety was posted, is completed by June 14, 1994, and the current costs, of the amount of work to be completed, have in- creased, the amount of surety will be increased to reflect the costs of completing the work and the developer will be required to furnish additional surety to the Planning Board. RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS 96. Anulications To Be Heard on June 24 1993 Mr. Canale gave an oral review of the following applications 20 Chase Avenue, Carol and Ronald Monzillo, variance to replace a nonconforming front porch. The Planning Board notes that the applicant did not adequately address hardship in the submission they reviewed. 482 Bedford Street, Beth Israel and Children's Hospitals, special permits to install two signs. The Planning Board agreed reluctantly to make no comment to the Board of Appeals about the freestanding sign but is very much opposed to the wall sign. 1 Minutes for the Meeting of June 14, 1993 4 The Planning Board thought the overall signage plan misdirected and out of character with Lexington tradition and policies for commercial signage They recalled that the Planning Board, the Board of Appeals and the Town generally discourage signs for advertising but permit signs that are directional. The face which Lexington seeks to present to the world is not one of businesses competing for attention from motorists on expressways. They believe there is virtually no justification for a sign visible from Route 128 for a non-profit organization whose clien- tele largely arrive for prescheduled appointments. The Planning Board agreed to recommend the applicant reevaluate its signage plan and submit a plan more in keeping with Lexington's tradi- tion and policies for commercial signage and the needs of its opera- tions The Board agreed to make no comment on the following application 33 Taft Avenue, Shawn and Rosalind Seitz, special permit to add a second level and sun deck to a nonconforming dwelling ******************* PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE ******************* 97. Election of Officers Mr. Domnitz moved, and Mr Canale seconded, the nomination of Mr Williams for Chairman, Mr. Domnitz for Vice Chairman, and Mr Grant for Clerk. Mr Williams urged the Board to reconsider nominating him as he will not run for re-election to the Planning Board in March, 1994 He stressed that if he is to continue as chairman there should be another election in December or January so that the new chairman is in place before Town Meeting. The rest of the Board agreed this should be done. The nominat- ed slate was elected unanimously The Board went on to discuss their committee assignments. Mr Domnitz said he would resign from all committees having to do with MassPort because of his new job with the State Mr Domnitz thought that a change should be made in the Planning Board's liaison to the Hansom Area Traffic Study Committee because of philosophical differences within the Board and the need for the Planning Board to exert its influence to get HATS to act to oppose Hanscom expansion. Mr Grant, the current liaison, said he wanted to continue to serve because he did not believe he had differences with other members of the Board on Hanscom issues and that he did not favor Hanscom expansion because he lived in a neighborhood that was affected by Hanscom activity After a poll of the Board, with Messrs Domnitz and Canale and Mrs. Davison in favor, it was decided that Mr. Canale would be the Planning Board's liaison. Mrs Davison will be liaison to the Design Advisory Committee That is a new committee assignment for the Board Mr Grant resigned as Clerk. Mrs. Davison was elected by a unanimous vote to fill the post The meeting was adjourned at 10 45 p.m Jacqueline B. Davison, Clerk ` i r / �'