Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-07-11PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JULY 11, 1983 The meeting of the Lexington called to order at 7:33 p.m. Sorensen, Uhrig and Planning Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Offices, was by the Chairman, Mrs. Smith, with members Nichols, Director Bowyer present. Mrs. Flemings was absent. 129. MUZZEY SCHOOL CONVERSION The Board reviewed a letter from Kirk Noyes dated July 5, 1983 relative to the inclu- sion of additional three bedroom units and the pricing of units. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Uhrig, it was voted unanimously that the change pro- posed is acceptable and that alternative #1, which spreads the cost of the three bed- room units among all units, is preferred. Mrs. Smith commented that it is important to keep the units for families, i.e., the three bedroom units, affordable. 130. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of June 20, 1983 were corrected and on the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Uhrig,were approved, as corrected, by a vote of 3-0. Mrs. Nichols abstained because she was not present at that meeting. PLANS NOT REQUIRING SUBDIVISION APPROVAL 131. Pelham Road, Sister Mary Sears, SGM: Form A-83/3: Mr. Bowyer presented a new plan dated July 8, 1983 in which the line separating proposed lot 2 from lot 1 had been straightened leaving 39.13 feet of frontage on Pelham Road. Additional notes had been placed on the plan stating that lot 2 did not comply with the lot frontage requirement and that the land would be adjoined with other land of Gray Nuns Chari- ties Inc. Mr. Sorensen suggested that if the applicants wanted to show lot 2 as being joined to other land of the Gray Nuns, they should submit a plan showing all of the other land. After discussion, it was agreed to take no action on the revised plan and to seek the advice of Town Counsel. Roger Corbin, acting in behalf of the applicant, withdrew the plan from consideration so that the fourteen day statutory period would not be in effect. 132. 73 Grassland Street, Paul Valihura: Form A-83/4: On the motion of Mr. Soren- sen, seconded by Mrs. Uhrig, the Board voted 2-0, with Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Nichols abstaining, to affirm a vote taken by a telephone poll on June 23, 1983, that the plan of land at 73 Grassland Street does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law. In that poll, Mrs. Flemings, Mr. Sorensen and Mrs. Uhrig voted in favor; it was not possible to reach Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Nichols was out of the country. The motion to reaffirm the vote failed to obtain the three votes necessary. 133. 83 Pleasant Street, Gerald Mimno: Form A-83/5: The Board reviewed a plan of the Mimno estate at 73 Pleasant Street. Gerald Mimno explained that his intent was to maintain the estate appearance while subdividing eventually into three lots. He explained that a common driveway would be used to avoid breaking up an attractive stone wall into separate driveways. Mr. Sorensen expressed concern that the Board's approval may imply a driveway may be used for access to two lots. Such proposals have been presented to the Town often without the sufficient frontage this property has. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Nichols, it was voted 3-0, with Mrs. Uhrig not voting: 1) The plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass.," dated July 8, 1983, by Barnes Engineering Company Inc., of Auburndale, Mass., certified by John Planning Board Minutes: July 11, 1983 2 P. Hurney, Registered Land Surveyor, with application Form A-83/5, by Gerald Mimno, does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law; and 2) To place a notation on the plan "Planning Board approval is of lot lines only and not of the other information on this plan." OPINION ON CONSTRUCTION OF UNACCEPTED STREETS 134. Hayes Lane, Lot 48-211, CUS 1983/1: The Board reviewed a revised plan of pro- posed improvements to Hayes Lane, dated July 8, 1983. The Board was in receipt of a recommendation from the Town Engineer dated July 8, 1983 indicating the proposed improvements were acceptable. Mr. Sorensen commented that the worst part of Hayes Lane, with respect to alignment, condition and sight distance, was just beyond the lots under review. Mr. Sorensen expressed concern about the section of the road in which the grade was more than 10%. Mrs. Uhrig noted that the responsibility of the applicant was the frontage of the lots and the connection to the nearest public street. The Board agreed to make two waivers from the "Policy on Construction Standards for Unaccepted Streets, Relative to Building Lots," to wit: 1) the width of right-of-way may be 33 feet rather than 40 feet, and 2) the maximum grade may be 11.2%, for a dis- tance of about 35 feet, rather than 10%. On the motion of Mrs. Uhrig, seconded by Mrs. Nichols, it was voted 3-1, with Mr. Sorensen opposed, that: In the opinion of the Planning Board, Hayes Lane, insofar as it provides frontage for Lot 211, as shown on Map 48, is not now of adequate construc- tion. If the improvements identified on the "Plan and Profile Showing Improvements to Hayes Lane - Lexington, Mass.," dated July 8, 1983, pre- pared by Joseph W. Moore Company, Civil Engineers, Bedford, Mass., are made, and are considered adequate upon inspection by the Town Engineer, then Hayes Lane would be of adequate grade and construction. The section of Hayes Lane shown on the plan shall be considered to be of adequate grade and construction for a period of two years only from the time that the Town Engineer approves the improvements made. This opinion is limited to the construction of the street and should not be interpreted as implying that the lots under consideration meet other tests of the Zoning By -Law to qualify them as building lots. SUBDIVISION OF LAND 135. Willow Ridge, off Worthen Road East: Attorney Thomas Callahan was present to discuss development issues relative to the definitive subdivision plan submitted June 21, 1983. He identified three critical features of the plan. One was the request of the Conservation Commission to forego the use of two low, but buildable lots, and to deed that and other land to the Conservation Commission. A restrictive conservation easement would be placed on land within proposed building lots below elevation 203, which is the height of the flood plain in a storm of 100 year frequency. The second is the desire to obtain variances for two lots on the south side of proposed Barrett Road extension in consideration of the granting of title or easements to the Conser- vation Commission. The third issue is that constructing additional length of road to connect through to Wellington Lane Avenue adds to the cost of the development which would need to be offset by another building lot. Planning Board Minutes: July 11, 1983 3 Members discussed the connection of Barrett Road through to Wellington Lane Avenue. If that connection is not constructed, the Board would be required to grant a waiver from the length of dead end street provision of the Subdivision Rules and Regula- tions. The definitive subdivision plan dated June 21, 1983, shows a dead end street with a "hammerhead" ending. In a preliminary poll, Mrs. Smith, Mr. Sorensen and Mrs. Uhrig expressed interest in Barrett Road being connected to Wellington Lane Avenue. Mrs. Nichols thought the connection was a good idea but would support the hammerhead proposal because she had previously voted in favor of that proposal when an earlier Willow Ridge subdivision (since rescinded) was approved by the Planning Board. It was agreed that input from other Town departments and residents of the area should be received before the Board makes a final decision. It would be desirable to have the public hearing in Septem- ber when more residents are available. In the meantime, as Mr. Callahan had expressed concern about the expeditious review of the plan, Mrs. Smith advised him to submit a revised plan showing the street connected through to Wellington Lane Avenue. Mr. Callahan indicated he would do so and would revise the layout of the three lots on the south side of Barrett Road to show two lots, both in conformity with the Zoning By -Law. 136. APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS Mrs. Uhrig was absent for part of the discussion of this item as she was meeting with the Board of Selectmen to express the Planning Board's position on the Muzzey School conversion. 70 Westview Street, Kiln Brook IV: Dupree Associates, SPS: The Board reviewed and made amendments to a draft of a report dated July 11, 1983. The Board will oppose granting the SPS because of an adverse impact on the traffic carrying capacity of adjacent streets and the excessive utilization of the site. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Nichols, it was vote 3-0, with Mrs. Uhrig temporarily absent, to approve the report as amended. The Board agreed to make no recommendation on the following case: 23 Pearl Street, Steven Puleo: SP, maintain pool; Variance, side yard The Board agreed to make the same recommendation on the following cases: 31 Sherman Street, Brian MacIntosh: Variance, side yard 6 Vaille Avenue, Thomas O'Neil: Variance, side yard The Board will recommend that the petitions for variances be denied because it cannot be seen where there is a hardship. In both these cases and in similar petitions for variances from setback requirements, the Board believes it is essential that a certi- fied plot plan be submitted and will urge that the Board of Appeals not waive its requirements for a certified plot plan. 159 Reed Street, Joseph Rosetta: Variance, front yard: The Board agreed to recom- mend against a variance which would permit an addition to this structure because it has a minimal front yard setback at the moment. The Board will make no comment on the request to enclose the porch. Planning Board Minutes: July 11, 1983 4 1 Hearings Scheduled for July 28, 1983 73 Waltham Street, New England Telephone: SP, Variance, yard: On the motion of Mrs. Nichols, seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was voted 4-0 to approve a report dated July 11, 1983, which recommends in favor of granting the variance and the special permit and includes recommendations that the telephone company takes steps to soften the mass of the building and to cooperate with the Town in off-street parking. The Board agreed to make no recommendation on the following cases but to authorize the member attending the hearing to speak in behalf of the Board if additional infor- mation were forthcoming: 1644 Massachusetts Avenue, LaTienda: SP, sign 1666 Massachusetts Avenue, Lexington Square: Food Service 261 Marrett Road, David A. Souers: Variance, front yard 915 Waltham Street, Texaco, Inc.: SP, operate gas station; SP, standing sign 137. Traffic Capacity The Board reviewed a draft of a letter to the Board of Appeals, dated July 11, 1983, outlining the "legislative history" of the 1982 amendment requiring a finding that the traffic capacity of streets is adequate to handle additional traffic from a development. The letter stressed that traffic was an area impact and could not be limited to the segments of street abutting a development. Mrs. Uhrig suggested a number of changes in the draft, which were approved. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Nichols, it was voted unanimously to send the letter, as amended, to the Board of Appeals. PLANNING BOARD PROCEDURES 138. Amendments to Procedural Rules: On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Nichols, it was voted unanimously: "That the Procedural Rules of the Lexington Planning Board" be amended by: a. Redesignating Article 4, Enactment and Amendment, and Paragraph 4.1 as Article 5 and Paragraph 5.1 respectively. b. By inserting a new Article 4, as follows: ARTICLE 4. FEES FOR PLANNING BOARD SERVICES, PUBLICATIONS Applications for the following actions of the Planning Board shall be accompanied by payment of the fee indicated: 4.1 Approval Not Required Plan, Form A, under the subdivision "Rules and Regulations" Plan in which there is no change in lot line----------------- $ 25.00 Plan in which lot lines are changed-------------------------- 50.00 Planning Board Minutes: July 11, 1983 5 4.2 For Plans Submitted Under the Subdivision "Rules and Regulations" Preliminary plan--------------------------------------------- no fee Definitive Subdivision Plan---------------------------------- $500.00+ 50.00/lot 4.3 For the Special Permit for a Conventional Subdivision under Section 9.4 of the Zoning By -Law Special permit application----------------------------------- 500.00 + 25.00/lot* *The $500.00 fee will be waived if the application is accompanied by a definitive subdivision plan. The Planning Board may waive this filing fee if the applicant is a government agency. 4.4 Opinion on the Construction of an Unaccepted Street By direct application to the Board--------------------------- 100.00 By referral from the Building Commissioner after application for a building permit---------------------------- no fee 4.5 Review of a Petition for a Rezoning Petition by ten or more citizens----------------------------- 750.00 + Rental of public building in which the public hearing is held 35.00 Petition by a public agency---------------------------------- no fee * * * * * * * * * In all cases where the notice of a public hearing is required to be published in a newspaper in general circulation, the applicant shall pay the cost of printing the legal notice. * * * * * * * * * 4.6 Publications Zoning By -Law -----------------------------------------------$3.00 ZoningMap-------------------------------------------------- 2.00 Zoning District Maps---------------------------------------- 3.00 Subdivision "Rules and Regulations"------------------------- 3.00 Where publications are mailed, the cost of first class postage shall be added to the fee above. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS' DEVELOPMENT 139. Citizen's Guide to Zoning: The Board reviewed and discussed Chapter 1-3 of this book. REPORTS 140. Planning Board Members, Subcommittees a. Pearl Street Extension: There was discussion of a proposal by Robert Mabardy to construct a house on a lot which fronts on a section of the paper street extension of the Pearl Street right-of-way. Mabady proposes to build Planning Board Minutes: July 11, 1983 b. Criteria for Form A's: Mrs. Smith suggested that in view of the uncer- tainties surrounding several recent 'approval not required' plans, the Town Counsel be consulted about criteria for the approval of Form A's. c. Meeting Schedule: It was agreed the next Planning Board meeting would be August 1. The meeting was adjourned at 11:17 p.m ;dith J. Uig, Clerk 1 F i a street, which would extend to Bartlett Avenue, the Town Meeting for acceptance as a public way. and would be presented to As there is no change in lot lines, there is no subdivision. Mr. Sorensen suggested a one lot subdi- vision plan could be submitted. The question is what procedure the Town should follow in this case. The Board suggested that Town Counsel be consulted. b. Criteria for Form A's: Mrs. Smith suggested that in view of the uncer- tainties surrounding several recent 'approval not required' plans, the Town Counsel be consulted about criteria for the approval of Form A's. c. Meeting Schedule: It was agreed the next Planning Board meeting would be August 1. The meeting was adjourned at 11:17 p.m ;dith J. Uig, Clerk 1 F i