HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-11-14PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 1983 Op n
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Offices, was 9
called to order at 7:37 p.m. by the Chairman, Mrs. Smith, with members Flemings,
Nichols, Uhrig and Planning Director Bowyer present. Mr. Sorensen was absent.
224. APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Mrs. Flemings presented an oral review of cases to be heard by the Board of Appeals
on December 8, 1983. It was agreed to make no recommendation on the following
cases:
3 Ledgelawn Avenue, Mary Gallagher: SP, maintain existing dwelling
31 Independence Avenue, George Harris: SP, maintain existing dwelling --
this case is believed to involve a violation of the side yard setback and
the Board will not comment on that. Mr. Bowyer will review the case and
if it is anything other than a yard setback, will bring it before the
(n Board.
N
® 7 Homestead Street, Robert Frank: Variance, side and rear yards: The applicant
Q seeks a variance to permit a side and rear yard of only two feet to construct a
garage. Board members questioned what hardship there could be. Mrs. Nichols will
m look at the site to see if there are any alternatives.
Q
19 Muzzey Street, Murray Awrach: SP, standing sign: This is a proposed sign for
the medical associates at 19 Muzzey Street. Mrs. Nichols noted there are other
companies at 19 Muzzey Street and approval of this sign may lead to a request for
another sign for them. The claim is that the doctors at 19 Muzzey Street need
better identification because of competition from the Liberties Medical Center on
Bedford Street. The Board agreed that competition in medical practice should not
be the basis for requesting additional standing signs. On the motion of Mrs. Uhrig,
seconded by Mrs. Nichols, it was voted unanimously to recommend against granting
the special permit.
39 Bedford Street, Liberties Gulf: SP, wall signs: On the motion of Mrs. Flemings,
seconded by Mrs. Uhrig, it was voted unanimously to recommend in favor of granting
a special permit for the wall signs if they are consistent with the guidelines for
service stations developed by Building Commissioner Peter DiMatteo.
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING. POLICIES
225. Open Space and Recreation Plan, 1983: The Board had a draft of the report as
prepared by the Conservation Commission. No one was present from the Conservation
Commission to discuss the report. Mrs. Uhrig reported that the Recreation Commis-
sion has not reviewed the document and will be acting on it this week.
Mrs. Smith thought that all five members of the Board should be present to act on
this planning document. She said that the Planning Board has to represent all the
needs of the Town and will have to consider other needs that may be in conflict, in
some cases, with open space or recreation objectives. She observed that the Con-
servation Commission had done a good job of identifying their program and had put
forward a responsible list. It should be recognized that the Commission is an ad-
vocate of a particular point of view and the Planning Board has to balance other
interests. The Planning Board should be prepared to comment on the merits of the
individual projects as they come before the Town Meeting.
Mrs. Uhrig inquired what the draft document represented. Mrs. Smith responded that
it was necessary to obtain state funding for open space programs. The Planning
Board is asked to review the plan, not necessarily to endorse it.
Panning Board Minutes of November 14, 1983 2
8'7
Mrs. Nichols questioned several of the proposed projects. She questioned whether
additional easements for the WCOP wetlands would further conservation objectives as
development is already restricted by a wetland protection zoning district. She
questioned whether the Concord Avenue green belt is still part of a regional open
space plan. She noted that times have changed since 1975, when the plan was first
prepared, and a number of the projects should be reevaluated.
It was agreed to ask the Conservation Commission and the Recreation Commission to
meet with the Planning Board, at a mutually convenient time, to discuss the report.
Mrs. Flemings asked that the Conservation Commission bring maps showing the parcels
that would be subject to conservation action. Mr. Bowyer should check with Cliff
Prentiss on the timetable for submitting the report to the State. If members have
comments on the draft report, they should give them to Mr. Bowyer.
ARTICLES for 1984 TOWN MEETING
226. Off -Street Parking and Loading; Center Business Articles: The Board reviewed
"Major Elements of Lexington Center Parking -Zoning Amendments" dated November 10,
1983, the text of four proposed articles amending the Zoning By -Law, and a letter
from the Planning Director to Norman Cohen, Town Counsel, dated November 9, 1983.
Mr. Bowyer reported that Mr. Sorensen had called with a number of comments on the
draft and asked that they be conveyed to the Board in his absence.
Mrs. Smith expressed pleasure that the draft prepared by the staff responded to
numerous concerns raised by the Board in the past. She suggested that such a
complex comprehensive package be reviewed in a public hearing held in several
stages. That would provide opportunity for revision between the sessions of the
public hearing. She recommended that the Board go forward with as many of the
ideas included in the draft as possible; the Board might not support all phases of
a proposal but they could be left in for now to obtain public comment and revised
later, as needed.
Mrs. Nichols inquired about a provision for dumpsters in the section on off-street
loading. They are not included at present but may be later.
In Item 4 of the "Major Elements," Mrs. Flemings inquired what the parking require-
ment would be if a change in use classification resulted in a less intensive use
with a lower parking factor. The Board's initial reaction was to not permit a
reduction in parking spaces already provided as the use may change again to a more
intensive type.
In Item 9, which deals with a financial contribution to the Town's parking fund in
lieu of private developers' responsibility for providing parking, the Board identi-
fied the following problems: 1) a great deal of development could occur before
sufficient money accrues to build parking spaces; that is counter to the principle
that parking spaces should be available to serve a development when it opens; 2)
pressure would build for the construction of a parking garage; that may force the
Town into construction of a garage without a good evaluation of the impacts of a
garage; 3) what happens to both the money and the parking situation if the escrow
fund is never used? 4) a financial contribution may be an easy way out for expen-
sive developments; 5) if a developer "buys" parking spaces, does he/she own them
and could the public use them? and 6) it tends to dictate one type of solution to
the Town before a comprehensive development plan has been prepared.
U
Planning Board Minutes of November 14, 1983
3
Mr. Bowyer observed that part of the problem may be this technique would be pro-
spective, with no guarantee the spaces would be provided and perhaps the technique
should be by reimbursement to the Town. In that way, at least the spaces would be
in existence.
Mrs. Smith thought the technique raised too many unanswered questions and should be
deferred to another year when more is known about the feasibility and desirability
of a parking garage. On a poll of the Board, it was agreed unanimously to delete
the financial contribution to the Town's parking fund from the proposed zoning
amendments. The Planning Board will not sponsor such a proposal; if the develop-
ment community wants to have it included, they can offer it as an amendment to the
Planning Board's article.
In Item 13, dealing with the maximum height of buildings, Mrs. Flemings thought
that 25 feet was too low because the result might be "boxy" buildings. The limit
should stay at two stories but different types of roof configurations should be
allowed. Mrs. Nichols thought the impact of 25 feet may be to permit only flat
roofed buildings. It was agreed to change the proposed permitted maximum height
from 25 feet to 30 feet.
On the motion of Mrs. Uhrig, seconded by Mrs. Nichols, it was voted unanimously to
submit the four proposed amendments, as amended, to the Board of Selectmen for
inclusion in the 1984 Town Meeting. It was agreed that the Board should start the
public hearing process soon to provide ample time for discussion and revision of
this complex package of articles. On the motion of Mrs. Nichols, seconded by Mrs.
Uhrig, it was voted unanimously to start the public hearing process on Monday, De-
cember 12 and to publish the notice of the public hearing as soon as possible.
The Board favored dividing the proposal into four separate articles but would
accept division into a lesser number if Town Counsel ruled that was essential.
REPORTS
227. Planning Board Members, Subcommittees
a. Muzzey School: Margaret Rawls of TMMA was present to say that the
Selectmen had held a meeting on Saturday, November 12, for which little
notification was made. It was understood that Kirk Noyes will make mortgages
available and not just make a best effort.
228. Planning Director
a. 92 Hayden Avenue: Mr. Bowyer reported an SPS application for the
Burroughs site had been received.
b. Subdivision off Maple Street: Mr. Bowyer reported a definitive subdivi-
sion plan submitted by William Hamilton for four lots, one of which contains
an existing house, had been received.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:27 p.m.
udith J. LHkYig, Clerk