HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-02-08PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 8, 1983
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Offices, was
called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Vice Chairman Mrs. Nichols, with members Sandy,
Sorensen, Uhrig and Planning Director Bowyer present. Chairman Smith joined the
meeting during discussion of item #20.
20. APPLICATIONS TO BOARD OF APPEALS
Mr. Bowyer read from the staff analysis prepared for cases to be heard by the Board
of Appeals on February 10, 1983. The staff analysis had not been typed or distrib-
uted to the members.
on the motion of Mr. Sandy, seconded by Mrs. Uhrig, it was voted 4-0 to make no
recommendation on the following application:
90 Hancock Street, Harold Millican: SP, operate private swimming instruction
On the motion of Mrs. Uhrig, seconded by Mr. Sandy, it was voted 4-0, with Mrs.
Smith abstaining, to make no recommendation on the following application:
739 Mass. Avenue, Waldorf School: SP, operate private school
443 Lincoln Street, Albert Piantedosi: Variance, use: Mr. Bowyer reported a
series of temporary use variances had been granted since the early 1970's and the
most recent use variance had expired. There are no special permits authorizing
vehicular parking or storage in an RO district. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen,
seconded by Mrs. Smith, it was voted unanimously to recommend against granting a
variance for the following reasons: 1) there is no procedural mechanism through
the Board of Appeals for permitting these uses to continue, 2) the petition does
not appear to meet the statutory requirements for a variance, even under the cri-
teria in effect before Chapter 808 was adopted, 3) the one remedy available is to
petition for an amendment to the Zoning Map, and 4) the use may present problems of
petrochemical seepage adjacent to the Cambridge water supply.
Mrs. Smith assumed chairing the meeting.
ARTICLES FOR SPECIAL TOWN MEETING
21. Article 2, Muzzey School Conversion: The Board reviewed a draft of a report
and recommendation to Town Meeting. A number of corrections and suggestions for
changes in the format of tables were agreed to. In a discussion of the maximum
annual income allowable, under the MHFA guidelines, it was agreed the proposal
should concentrate primarily on persons with annual incomes in the $20,000 range.
It was agreed to delete the section of the draft dealing with "LexHAB" because the
Board did not have specific information about the proposed housing assistance board
and because it was thought the discussion of this concept would confuse the issue.
It was agreed to delete from the draft the paragraph dealing with the financing and
priorities of the senior center and to limit comments on the senior center to its
land use implications. It was agreed to delete two suggestions for further nego-
tiations, i.e., the calculation of the resale price of units sold in the "pre -sold"
period and the inclusion of optional improvement packages. It was agreed to make a
suggestion that after 90 days after completion of construction and for a period of
180 days thereafter, the offering price shall be at least $10,000 more than for
M
Planning Board Meeting: 2/8/83 2
153
restricted units. After that period, there would
price of unrestricted units. It was also agreed to
the definition of "completion of construction."
be no limitation in the sales
include a suggested revision of
Mr. Sorensen suggested that the proposed 4% annual escalator in the resale price
for restricted units be changed to some index more consistent with housing prices.
In a poll of the Board, Mr. Sorensen and Mr. Sandy were in favor of a change and
Mrs. Nichols, Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Uhrig were not.
On a motion by Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Uhrig, it was voted 3-0, with Mrs.
Nichols and Mr. Sandy abstaining, to approve the report and recommendation as
amended. The revised final report will be distributed to the members during the
LO afternoon of February 9. If members have any comments or further revisions to
N suggest, they will be communicated to the staff by the morning of February 10. If
0 there are no further revisions, the report will be distributed, by mail, to Town
Q Meeting Members.
m Mr. Sandy indicated that if the proposal does not specify that all units will be
Q offered for sale at the "pre -sold" price in the pre -construction period, he will
oppose it. Mrs. Nichols said she favored the proposal but needed more time to
review the draft report and was not comfortable voting on it at this time.
22. Article 3, Acceptance of Meadow Brook Avenue, Wellington Lane Avenue: Mr.
Sandy noted that the Planning Board was required to file a report on streets pro-
posed for acceptance by Town Meeting. On the motion of Mr. Sandy, seconded by Mr.
Sorensen, it was voted unanimously that Meadow Brook Avenue and Wellington Lane
' Avenue are streets that should be accepted by Town Meeting; they are not the high-
est priority streets as viewed by the Planning Board; and expenditures for these
streets should be subject to the financial capacity of the Town.
ARTICLES FOR ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
23. Article 14, Accessory Apartments: It was agreed to hold the public hearing on
this article on March 10, 1983, at 7:30 p.m. preferably at Clarke Junior High.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING. POLICIES
24. Alternative Tax Revenues: John McLaughlin, Chairman of the Alternative Tax
Revenue Committee, was present to report on the work of the Committee and to en-
courage further discussion with the Planning Board. He suggested that in consider-
ing land use and zoning matters, the Planning Board give particular attention to
the tax revenue implications. The Board responded that those implications are
already one of the factors the Board considers. Mr. McLaughlin indicated the Com-
mittee had a target of submitting a report to the Board of Selectmen by March 1 and
would like to receive comments from the Planning Board on the report. It was
agreed that the Committee and the Board will work closely on this issue.
25. Procedural Rules, Notification of Hearings: Mr. Sorensen commented that
neighbors of the 87-89 Waltham Street rezoning proposal had received notifications
of the hearing in the mail quite late. Mr. Bowyer commented that under the statute,
the Planning Board is not required to notify neighbors of public hearings on zoning
amendments; the practice is to send a notification anyway. He said this can be a
workload problem and in this case the mailing of the notifications was delayed by
higher priority work, snow storms and illness.
1
LO
N
0
W
a
1
Planning Board Meeting: 2/8/83
3
155
Mr. Sorensen made a motion, seconded by Mr. Sandy, dealing with mail notification
to abutters. Mr. Sandy offered an amendment, seconded by Mrs. Nichols, which was
approved unanimously that the mailing would be done at least 14 days prior to the
date of the public hearing. The Board then voted unanimously to approve Mr.
Sorensen's motion as amended, as follows:
"It is the Planning Board's policy that all abutters and abutters of abutters
and all owners of land within 300 feet of a proposed zoning change be notified
by first class mail of the Planning Board's hearing for such a zoning proposal
with the notification mailed at least 14 days prior to the date of the hear-
ing. In the event of rescheduling of a hearing which requires a legal notice,
an additional notice will be sent in the same manner as the original to the
same individuals. The cost of this notification shall be considered part of
the cost of the hearing."
The meeting was adjourned at 12:07 a.m.
Judith J. U rig