Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board Minutes, 1994-07-28 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JULY 28, 1994 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7:37 p.m. by Chairman Domnitz, with members Canale, Grant, Merrill, Planning Director Bowyer, and Assistant Planner Marino present. Mrs. Davison was absent. 153. Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of July 14, 1994. On the motion of Mr. Canale, seconded by Mr Merrill, it was voted unanimously 4-0 to approve the minutes, as amended. ************************* PLANNING DIRECTOR'S REPORT ************************ 154. Recent Activity a. Plans submitted to the Board since the last meeting: 11 Prescott Lane. off Lowell Street. Preliminary Subdivision Plan: Mr. Marino rolled out a preliminary plan for the Prescott Lane development, off Lowell Street, that was submitted by Pat Austin on July 15, 1994. The staff has not yet reviewed the plan in detail. The time for action on this plan expires on August 29, 1994. Mr. Domnitz asked if the wetland boundaries have been certified. The staff will provide the Board with copies of the decision on the sketch plan. 21 21 Haves Lane. Definitive Street Construction Plan: Mr. Marino rolled out a definitive street construction plan for 21 Hayes Lane that was submitted by Daniel Perry on July 18, 1994. The staff has not yet reviewed the plan in detail. The time for action on this plan expires on September 1, 1994. b. The Board congratulated Mr. Marino who was recently accepted as a member of the American Institute of Certified Planners. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************* RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS 155. Applications To Be Heard on Aueust 18. 1994 Mr. Canale gave an oral review of the following applications: 16 Dewey Road. Claire and Donald Smith, variance to add a garage. The Board agreed to recommend that the Board of Appeals deny the application for a variance. It believes the applicants have not demonstrated that they meet the statutory criteria for granting a variance, i.e., that they would suffer substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, owing to circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape or topography of the land if a variance from the provisions of the Zoning By-Law is not granted. The Board agreed to make no comment on the application below, also scheduled to be heard by the Board of Appeals on August 18, 1994. 10 Muzzev Street. Roka Restaurant, special permit to establish a restaurant, replacing Le Bellecour L, Minutes for the Meeting of July 28, 1994 2 DETERMINATION OF GRADE AND CONSTRUCTION OF UNACCEPTED STREETS 156. Bennin2ton Road. Kenneth Nill. CUS 94/2. Determination of Adeouacv of Grade and Construction: The Board reviewed a draft of a determination of grade and construction for Bennington Road. The staff reported that Mr. Ken Nill, in response to the Board's letter dated March 21, 1994, requested the Town Engineering Division to inspect the subsurface condition of Bennington Road. The Town Engineer, in his memo dated July 8, 1994 reported that the road currently meets the Town standards for a local street. In its previous review of this situation on January 24, February 28, and March 14, the Planning Board agreed the surface of Bennington Road is of adequate width, grade, etc. The only question was the subsurface. The Town Engineer's memo addresses the subsurface question. On the motion of Mr Grant, seconded by Mr. Merrill, the Board voted unanimously to: 1. waive the requirement for filing a Definitive Street Construction Plan; 2. determine that Bennington Road, as it provides frontage for lot #71D on Assessors Map #31, is of adequate grade and construction; and, 3. approve the wording of the draft decision dated July 25, 1994. SUBDIVISION OF LAND 157 Garfield Street Extension. Withdrawal of Annlication for Preliminary Plan: Mr. Marino informed the Board that the Planning Director found the application for approval of a preliminary plan incomplete and incorrect. The applicants were notified and they have requested to withdraw the application filed on July 11, 1994. On the motion of Mr. Grant, seconded by Mr Canale, the Board voted unanimously approve the request from Ronald and Nancy Gold, dated July 26, 1994, to withdraw the preliminary subdivision plan entitled Garfield Street Extension. 158. 10 Summer Street. Midterm Review of Definitive Plan: The Board held a mid-term review of the 10 Summer Street subdivision. Present were Sam Sleiman, of Sleiman Associates, and the applicant, Barbara T Zack. The Board discussed the applicant's proposal for complying with the 25 percent open space requirement for a cluster subdivision, the criteria for approval listed in section 9.3.5. of the Lexington Zoning By-Law, and the waivers and special permits requested by the applicant. The Planning Board agreed to walk the site on Monday, August 1, at 5:30 p.m. Later in the evening, the Board set the public hearing for September 8, 1994. Mr Grant left the meeting. ************************ ARTICJ.F.S FOR 1995 TOWN MEETING ************************* 159. Jumbo House Setbacks: Mr. Domnitz stated that the amendment should be formulated soon so that the Selectmen will understand early in the process the Planning Board's intent. He identified four issues that need to be dealt with: 1) to state the problem; 2) to assemble case studies, with plot plans and photographs of existing houses; 3) to define more clearly the composition of livable floor space and verify the threshold size of the houses to be affected and, 4) determine the number of houses that will be affected, i.e., made nonconforming. Mr Bowyer noted that the staff could provide information on the floor area from the Assessor's data base. Information on the key question on the minds of Town Meeting - the distance that houses are 3 Minutes for the meeting of July 28, 1994 set back from lot lines - will be difficult to produce. Reliable site plans are available in the Building Department only since 1960. Nearly all houses constructed since then comply with the 15 foot yard set back requirements. Reliable information on the approximately half the houses in town built before 1960 could only be obtained by a survey of individual properties. Given the problems of obtaining data on how many houses would be rendered nonconforming by the proposed amendment, he suggested an architectural approach to setback requirements. It would make the yard setback a function of the height of the building facing the lot line. He illustrated with some material he had prepared for Wellesley, Massachusetts while acting as a zoning consultant. The Board thought that approach was worth further discussion. Noting that only three members were present and all Board members should review the architecturally oriented approach, it was agreed to discuss it at its next meeting. Mr. Domnitz asked if Mr. Merrill supported this amendment because Mr. Domnitz thought at least four members of the Board should support an amendment if the Board is to present it to Town Meeting. Mr. Merrill asked for more time to think about the subject and the material presented this evening. 160. Special Permit to Waive Frontage: Mr. Domnitz suggested the Board propose an amendment that would reduce the number of dwelling units required in a cluster subdivision from three to two. That would allow the Board to waive the frontage on an existing street as in the 10 Summer Street subdivision. Mr Bowyer observed several shortcomings of that approach. First, a cluster subdivision requires land with at least 100,000 square feet. Many of the situations that the Board may want to waive the frontage requirement will occur in small two lot subdivisions that will not qualify for the 100,00 square foot minimum. Second, the requirement that 25 percent of the area be devoted to common open space can be difficult in some properties. It was relatively easy at 10 Summer Street which abuts Town owned Whipple Hill. Third, there could be a conflict with paragraph 9.3.5 of the Zoning By- Law that states it is not the intent of the cluster subdivision procedure to approve a subdivision that could not be built as a conventional subdivision. That is essentially what the proposed amendment would do. He distributed a draft of an amendment from a May 13 memo about Asparagus Lane that would allow a special permit for reduced frontage requirements in small cluster subdivisions after a fully complying preliminary plan was approved. It would create a special permit requirement, which is discretionary, to reduce the frontage requirement so that a second house could be built on an existing street without constructing a new subdivision street. Mr. Canale asked that criteria be added about the public interest so that the Board would have some discretion and not feel obligated to approve every application. The Board asked the staff to verify that such an amendment complies with the Development Regulations. ************** COORDINATION WITH OTHER BOARDS, COMMIT FEES **************** 161. Redesign of Route 2A. Mr. Canale reported that the Board of Selectmen approved the State Highway Department's plans for the redesigi3 of Route 2A at the Mass. Avenue and Forbes Road intersections. Minutes for the Meeting of July 28, 1994 4 ************************* REGIONAL, INTERTOWN ISSUES **************************** 162. Met State Hospital Reuse: Mr. Canale reported that the Board of Selectmen approved the reuse plan as presented by Met State Task Force Chairman Leo McSweeney. The meeting was adjourned at 10:18 p.m. LoAMLLiA, Richard L. Canale, Clerk H