Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board Minutes, 1994-02-28 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF FEBRUARY 28, 1994 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7 35 p in by Chairman Domnitz, with members Canale, Davison, Williams, Planning Director Bowyer, Assistant Planner Marino and Secretary Tap present Mr Grant arrived during Item 37. 37 Review of Minutes The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of February 7,1994 On the motion of Mrs Davison, seconded by Mr. Canale, it was voted unanimously 5-0 to approve the minutes, as amended. The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of February 14, 1994 On the motion of Mr Canale, seconded by Mrs. Davison, it was voted unanimously 5-0 to approve the minutes, as amended. *********************** ARTICLES FOR 1994 TOWN MEETING *********************** 38 PUBLIC HEARING Article 24. Jumbo House Setbacks Mr. Domnitz opened the hearing at 7 50 p m. by reading the Legal Notice Eight people were in the audience. Mrs Davison, the Vice Chairman, explained that this proposed amendment to the Zoning By-Law is an effort to control the mass of houses in relation to the lot size It will help protect neighborhoods from the construction of overscale houses (having over 2500 square feet of living space) that overshadow existing houses, and to help preserve diversity in Lexington's housing stock Houses in new subdivisions are currently controlled by the setbacks and the proposed amendment would extend the protection to demolition and redevelopment of existing houses Mr Domnitz then invited questions from the audience A number of residents expressed their belief that the amendment would restrict unfairly plans they had to expand their houses Robert Boyer, 104 Spring Street, said that an addition to his small Cape Cod-style house would be prohibited by the new setbacks Mr. Domnitz told him that the exemptions provided by Section 6.4. 1 would probably give him relief Paul Crowley, of 20 Dawes Road, said that his plans for an addition have already been drawn He needs more room for his family and does not want to buy a bigger house in a different neighborhood. The proposed setbacks would penalize him He feels that house additions have enhanced his area of town Ruven Liebhaber, of 87 Waltham Street, referring to Mr Domnitz' earlier reference to applying to the Board of Appeals for a variance, said that variances are hard to get and this would not be a viable avenue for the many people who want to add on to their homes Mr. Domnitz asked what he thought the threshold house size, to be affected by the setbacks, should be. Mr. Liebhaber suggested 3,000 square feet, not counting the basement. The current threshold penalizes owners of what are actually small to average size houses Judy Alexander, 66 Baskin Road, a resident and real estate broker, said that the reading she gets from neighbors of new houses in town is positive. People need and expect more in a house The houses being demolished and replaced are often neglected eyesores She questioned whether trying to preserve diversity in the housing stock is a valid reason for the proposed setbacks Minutes for the Meeting of February 28, 1994 2 Peter DeMatteo, 60 Ivan Street, told the Planning Board that the definition of habitable space is confusing since it includes the garage and basement. The hearing was closed at 8 48 p m ************************ PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT *********************** Recent Activity 39 Webb and Woburn Streets (Nishan's Way) , Rollout of Plans The Board briefly reviewed preliminary plans for a five-lot subdivision at Webb and Woburn Streets. They would like to know the Engineering Department's reaction to the drainage plan. 40. 395 Concord Avenue (Dias Drive) , Rollout of Plans The Board briefly reviewed preliminary plans for a three-lot subdivision off of Concord Avenue ***************** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************ RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS 41 Applications To Be Heard on March 10 1994 Mr Canale gave an oral review of the following applications 317 Woburn Street, Manny Moniz, special permit to operate a Dunkin' Donuts satellite franchise, and for an internally illuminated awning sign. The Board agreed that this site appears to have ample parking However they believe that the parking plan for this Dunkin' Donuts satellite should be revised to reflect both planned uses, take out and eat in, in accordance with Section 11 3 2 d of the Zoning By-Law — parking requirements shall be based on the cumulative requirement of all uses The Planning Board noted that the parking layout of the Countryside shopping area is amorphous and will recommend to the Board of Appeals that a condition of approval of the special permit should be that the parking lot comply with the design standards of Section 11 7 of the Zoning By-Law, particularly the lay out (11 7 2) , and striping (11 7.5) of the lot The Planning Board would like to see the addition of some containerized plantings to supplement the present landscaping, The Planning Board's initial reaction to the planned awning sign was unfavor- able They will strongly urge the Board of Appeals to be guided by the Design Advisory Committee's opinion. On the motion of Mr Domnitz, seconded by Mr Canale, the Board voted 4-1, Mr Grant opposed, to convey the above recommendations to the Board of Appeals Mr. Domnitz reviewed the following application 8 Carmel Circle, Francis Frankenburg and Mary Zanarini, an appeal of a decision of the Building Commissioner On the motion of Mr. Domnitz, seconded by Mr Canale, the Board voted 3-1-1, Mr Williams opposed, Mr Grant abstain- ing, to send the following comment to the Board of Appeals 3 Minutes for the meeting of February 28, 1994 The Planning Board agrees that the Building Commissioner's issuance of a permit for the five foot wall was proper The Board believes the original concrete retaining wall cannot be legalized by the construction of the second wall and the additional fill that raised the grade. The Board agreed to make no comment on the following application 2678 Massachusetts Avenue, Margo A Schmidt, special permit to use a portion of her residence as an office. *********************** ARTICLES FOR 1994 TOWN MEETING *********************** 42, Article, 24, Jumbo House Setbacks The Board discussed the feedback from the public hearing Mr Williams said that the 2,500 square foot threshold is clearly too low as it includes the basement and garage More research and groundwork must be done before this amendment is presented to Town Meeting Mr Grant pointed out that it will affect a great many people. No one spoke in favor and, in proposing this article, we don't seem to be representing any segment of Lexington's popula- tion On the motion of Mr. Domnitz, seconded by Mr. Williams, the Board voted 4-1, Mrs Davison opposed, to withdraw the article. ***************** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************ DETERMINATION OF GRADE AND CONSTRUCTION OF UNACCEPTED STREETS 43. Bennington Road Mr Marino, in answer to the Board's question at a previous meeting, reported that the Town Engineer recommended that the portion of Bennington Road in front of Mr. Mill's property not be accepted as a public street because it will not meet all the requirements for a public street The drainage is inadequate and a thorough review of the street's condition may reveal other deficiencies ************************ REGIONAL, INTERTOWN ISSUES ************************* 44. Met, State Hospital Land Reuse Mr Bowyer reported that the staff is re- drafting the housing portion of the reuse plan He distributed current copies to the Board ****************** COORDINATION AMONG BOARDS, DEPARTMENTS ******************* 45 Board of Anneals, Recommendations Mr Domnitz asked the staff to do a computer word search of the Zoning By-law on the words architectural and character. The Planning Board would like to recommend to the Board of Appeals, on applications before it, that they get the opinion of the Design Advisory Committee on matters of aesthetics and architectural character It would be helpful to cite specific sections of the Zoning By-Law where these attributes are mentioned. The meeting was adjourned at 70 32 p.m. atel tritailZLOA Richard L Canale, Clerk