HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-12-19PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF DECEMBER 19, 1983
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Offices, was
called to order at 7:36 p.m., by the Chairman Mrs. Smith, with members Flemings,
Nichols, Sorensen and Planning Director Bowyer present.
PLANS NOT REQUIRING SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
251. Piper Road at Waltham Street, Herman Erikson: Form A-83/18: Mr. Bowyer
explained that this parcel of 21,370 square feet resulted from a land -taking by the
State DPW when Route 2 was widened in 1964. It would not be possible to determine
whether this is a building lot for zoning purposes because it would have to be
determined how the owner was compensated in the eminent domain taking. The plan
contains a notation that the Planning Board makes no determination of the status of
Lot A as a building lot for zoning purposes. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen,
seconded by Mrs. Nichols, it was voted 4-0 that:
The plan entitled "Compiled Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass." dated December
8, 1983, by Miller & Nylander Company, Lexington, Mass., certified by Donald
J. Forand, Registered Land Surveyor, with application Form A-83/18, by Herman
H. Erikson, does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law.
APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS
252. 92-100 Hayden Avenue, Boston Properties: SPS: The Board reviewed a prelimi-
nary draft of a report on the SPS dated December 19, 1983. There was some uncer-
tainty as to the amount of floor area in the building; the staff will determine
that. In reviewing the difference of about 60 parking spaces between what would be
' required if the proposed zoning amendments are adopted and the amount of floor
space on the site, it was agreed to recommend that the amount of floor space be
reduced to match the 271 parking spaces. It was also agreed that the developer
should participate in curing the projected decline in level of service from "C" to
"D" at the Spring Street -Concord Avenue intersection. A final draft will be pre-
pared for the next meeting.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
On the motion by Mrs. Nichols, seconded by Mrs. Flemings, it was voted 4-0, by poll
of the Board, to go into Executive Session with representatives of the Conservation
Commission to consider the purchase or exchange of real property because such con-
siderations, if held in Open Session, may have a detrimental effect on the nego-
tiating position of the Town. At 8:06 p.m. the Board went into Executive Session.
Following the Executive Session, the Board returned to Open Session at 8:39 p.m.
Seven representatives of the South Lexington Civic Association were present for the
discussion of items 253 through 256.
253. 191 Spring Street, Xerox Site: Ronald Kulpinski, Manager of the real estate
division of the Xerox Corporation, and Mark Kisiel, Leggatt, McCall and Werner,
were present to inquire about the Board's receptivity to an industrial subdivision
that would require a waiver of the maximum length of a dead end street from 650
feet to 1100 feet. Mr. Kisiel explained their conceptual development plan, pre-
pared by Sasaki Associates, called for dividing the 33 acre parcel into three lots
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF DECEMBER 19, 1983
2
with the existing Ginn -Xerox building occupying one of the lots. Mr. Kulpinski
explained additional development of up to 150,000 square feet of floor area on each
of the other two lots was anticipated.
Mrs. Nichols noted that proposed parcel II was a "pork chop" lot which does not
appear to have direct access to a street. Mr. Kulpinski explained that access to
the building site would be by a roadway through parcel I.
Much of the discussion centered on the traffic impact from the development of an
additional 300,000 square feet of floor space, making a total of more than half a
million square feet of floor space on the site. There was discussion as to whether
a single roadway could adequately service that many vehicles. Mrs. Smith commented
that their approach appeared to be an attempt to put the maximum amount of develop-
ment on the property. The Planning Board would not look favorably on intensive
development because of the traffic impact on local streets which are already exper-
iencing growing traffic congestion.
ARTICLES FOR 1984 TOWN MEETING
254. CR District, Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The Board reviewed a draft of a pro-
posed zoning amendment dated December 8, 1983 which would introduce the floor area
ratio technique as a method of limiting the intensity of development in the CR dis-
trict. Mr. Bowyer explained a statistical analysis of properties in the existing
CR district that showed where the floor area ratio was more than 0.25, the site
appeared crowded. The Board thought that the floor area ratio technique was useful
but had reservations about requiring an absolute maximum on the floor area on a lot
' because it might result in more commercial subdivision. It was agreed that the
Board should submit an article for the warrant but the particulars of this amend-
ment need more work.
Mrs. Uhrig joined the meeting at this point.
255. Special Permit, Traffic Considerations: The Board reviewed a draft of an
article dated December 9, 1983 which clarifies the intent of the amendment adopted
in 1982 requiring that the Special Permit Granting Authority make a finding that
there is sufficient traffic carrying capacity in intersections to accommodate addi-
tional traffic from a development. Mr. Sorensen was not in favor of submitting the
article because he thought the existing language of the By -Law was clear enough;
the Board of Appeals chooses to ignore it. Mrs. Flemings thought it would be help-
ful to make it more explicit. On the motion of Mrs. Nichols, seconded by Mrs.
Flemings, it was voted 4-1, with Mr. Sorensen opposed, to submit the article for
inclusion in the warrant.
256. 16 Hayden Avenue, CD: The Board reviewed the draft of a letter to Gregory
Muzzy of Temple, Barker and Sloane, representing the Board's response to the con-
cept plan presented at the October 24 meeting. Mr. Muzzy and Roger Altreuter of
Spaulding and Slye were present for the discussion. Mr. Bowyer reported that
Assistant Planner Arslan and Mrs. Nichols had reviewed the site plan carefully and
found several objectionable features, such as a long stretch of stone rip -rap
facing Route 2. Mr. Altreuter reported that the State Department of Public Works
preferred to respond to a formal application for the development of a sight line
adjacent to the Route 2 off -ramp, but the staff of the District 4 office generally
agrees on the desirability of that improvement.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF DECEMBER 19, 1983 3
Mrs. Smith commented that the intensity of the proposed use was an important issue.
While residential use may not be appropriate, that does not meet intensively devel-
oped office space is appropriate. She informed Mr. Muzzy that the Board's willing-
ness to support their articles was dependent on the success of the Planning Board's
two proposed amendments affecting the CR district. If those are not adopted, the
Planning Board will not support the rezoning for 16 Hayden Avenue.
After deciding on several changes, it was agreed the Planning Board would transmit
the letter, as amended, to Mr. Muzzy.
257. Parking Articles: Mr. Sorensen advocated, and the Board agreed, that in
addition to the public hearing sessions, meetings should be set up with groups or
individuals to discuss the proposed parking articles. The Board discussed the
articles briefly with Mr. Sorensen pointing to several sections that needed addi-
tional work.
258. SOUTH LEXINGTON CIVIC ASSOCIATION
Jacquelyn Davison and members of the Steering Committee of the South Lexington
Civic Association invited the Planning Board to a meeting to be held on January 12,
1984 at Clarke Junior High School. The purpose is to update residents of the area
on a variety of development proposals. The SLCA requested that the Planning Board
report on the status of its study and its proposals for Town Meeting.
REPORTS
259. Planning Board Members, Subcommittees
a. Streets for Acceptance: Mrs. Nichols reported on her inspection of the
streets which the Board of Selectmen propose to construct. She noted that
Ellis Street may have some merit because it would connect two public streets,
Taft Avenue and Oak Street, in a densely developed neighborhood. Norton Road
is a dead end street off Brandon Street and could provide improved access to
the Great Meadows for fire equipment. She questioned whether there was room
for a turnaround. She did not look at Tower Road. The Board agreed to
support the construction of Sunnyknoll Avenue, which meets a number of cri-
teria and has been advocated by the Board for several years. The Board will
not support the construction of Emerald Street.
Mr. Bowyer reported that the Selectmen have not adopted criteria for propos-
ing unaccepted streets for construction. Mrs. Smith will contact Chairman
Politi to determine what criteria the Selectmen used.
b. Subcommittee on Approval Not Required Plans: Mr. Sorensen, acting as a
subcommittee of one person, reported on a meeting with Norman Cohen and
Stephen Anderson of Palmer and Dodge. The situation on Approval Not Required
Plans is not clear because of several strange cases that produce a radically
different result than a reasonable interpretation of the definitions in the
Subdivision Control Law would suggest. The "Smalley" case appears to say
that a "lot" under the Subdivision Control Law does not mean the same as a
"lot" meeting the zoning requirements and the more a lot is non -conforming
with respect to zoning, the greater the Planning Board's obligation to en-
dorse a plan under the Subdivision Control Law. He said that case after case
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF DECEMBER 19, 1983
4
shows that an approval not required plan is a means of making a reference for
recording purposes; it is not a zoning test for the use of a lot for building
purposes.
It is also not clear what effect notations placed on the plan may have. They
are probably not enforcable and merely show the Planning Board's intent at
the time the plan was endorsed. If a plan has sufficient frontage, the Plan-
ning Board must endorse it.
One of the larger problems for the Planning Board is that many people misin-
terpret the endorsement. It is not an "approval" and does not confer any
zoning status.
c. Center Revitalization Committee: Mr. Sorensen reported that the CRC re-
viewed proposals for articles for the 1984 Town Meeting. There were a number
of problems with developing a large parking lot off Park Drive. Objections
were raised by the School Department, the Recreation Commission, Conservation
Commission and residents of the Forest Street area. Further investigation
will be made of a more limited parking lot in that area. Mr. Sacco's move to
revive the School Administration parking lot proposal was defeated by a 3-4-1
vote. Mrs. Nichols reported that the CRC's Land Use Subcommittee, which she
chairs and of which Mr. Sorensen is a member, had taken a position opposing
additional business district parking on recreation land and in residential
areas adjacent to the center.
d. Minuteman School Hotel -Conference: Mrs. Smith distributed a summary of
' the hotel proposals submitted to the Minuteman School district. Mr. Bowyer
reported a meeting had been tentatively arranged for January 9. Mrs. Smith
suggested the meeting be coordinated with the Board of Selectmen who also
wanted to meet with the school district.
e. Maple Tree Village Subdivision: It was agreed to schedule the public
hearing on the subdivision on January 16, 1984.
260. Planning Director
a. Hanscom Field Restaurant -Access Road: Mr. Bowyer reported that he had
received several telephone calls from a representative of MassPort about the
development of a new restaurant on Hanscom Field land in Bedford. One pro-
posal to provide access is to construct a road that would connect with the
Kiln Brook V development and, thence, out to Maguire Road. While he has had
several telephone calls, he has not seen a plan showing an alignment. Such a
proposal would pose a number of questions about desirability of the road, its
traffic impact on Maguire Road and Hartwell Avenue, whether it should be a
public street and presented to the Town Meeting for acceptance, and the con-
struction standards it should meet. Those questions may now be moot because
the proposal received an inhospitable response in Bedford and may never be
presented to Lexington as proposed.
b. Retirement Village, East Village Nursing Home: Mr. Bowyer reported that
James Gapstur had approached him several times with a proposal to construct a
retirement village -congregate living center on land adjacent to the East Vil-
lage Nursing Home off Emerson Gardens Road. Mr. Gapstur was in the process
of acquiring an option for land. He approached officials in the Town of
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF DECEMBER 19, 1983
5
Arlington about acquiring development rights for a section of the Great
Meadows. Mr. Bowyer reported that he discouraged Mr. Gapstur from making any
representation that Lexington officials favored or required any such arrange-
ment. After discussion with the Planning Director in Arlington, Mr. Bowyer
found that Mr. Gapstur had not received a favorable reception there either.
C. Housing Needs Advisory Committee: Mr. Bowyer reported that he had
attended a meeting of the Housing Needs Advisory Committee which was also
attended by several new people interested in becoming members. Acting Chair-
man Eleanor Klauminzer will recommend that several new persons be appointed
to the Committee.
d. Planning Grant: Mr. Bowyer reported that the Executive Office of Commu-
nities and Development'is entertaining applications for financial grants to
assist towns in updating comprehensive community plans. The deadline for
submitting a grant application is January 6, 1984. As Lexington could only
hope to receive between $15,000 and $30,000, the work would have to be
limited to one component of a master plan. f
The meeting was adjourned at 11:40 p.m. �i J
;d;i:th J. Uh Clerk
1
1
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
EXECUTIVE SESSION OF DECEMBER 19, 1983
After a unanimous vote by poll of the Board, the Lexington Planning Board met in
Executive Session in Room G-15, Town Offices at 8:07 p.m. to consider the purchase,
or exchange of real property, discussion of which in open session may have a -detri-
mental effect on the Town's negotiating position. Present were Chairman Smith and
members Flemings, Nicho]G-, Sorensen, Planning Director Bowyer and Chairman David
Williams and member John Oberteuffer of the Conservation Commission.
Mr. Williams explained that the Conservation Commission had just begun to negotiate
seriously with the owners of the Pine Meadows Golf Course on a four-part deal
1. Acquisition of a nine -acre, triangular parcel near Bates Road, across
Route 128;
2. Acquisition by the Town of the development rights of the Pine Meadows
Golf Course, which has about 90 acres of which about 40 acres are wet;
the golf course would remain;
3. The Town would grant the right to Pine Meadows Golf Course to lay out
nine more holes on the Town -owned school site in the Meagherville area
adjacent to the golf course; the golf course has no immediate plans to
construct more holes but would have an option to do so;
4. The Town would swap the school site, retaining a conservation easement,
for the triangular parcel adjacent to Bates Road.
The Conservation Commission is obtaining an appraisal of this deal. It appears
that -,the package would be in -excess of $1,000,000. It is estimated that the devel-+-
opMent r ghts represent about 70% of the full market value.
In discussion of the proposal, the following points were made by members of the
Planning Board, Conservation Commission or the Planning Director:
1. The "super block already has a considerable amount of Town -owned land
and does not lack for open space.
2. This is a very large parcel with a significant amount of fragile land.
3. A public (available to the public)golf course is rare inside Route 128.
This type of golf course is a recreational asset.
4. The Town should obtain legal rights to use the property in the winter for .
sledding, skiing, and other recreational activities.
5. Development of the land for housing would place a heavier traffic burden
on Cedar Street, an old, narrow Town street. If the area were developed
for housing, the Town could incur significant costs to reconstruct Cedar
Street. An analysis of the costs and benefits might show that the net
costs might look more favorable than the apparent initial acquisition
cost.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 2
EXECUTIVE SESSION OF 12/19/83
6. Some towns, e.g., Brookline and Cambridge, own golf courses which are
recreational assets. Operation of a course could be leased to private
parties. The Town should think about acquiring the golf course if it is
not able to be operated under private auspices.
Mr. Sorensen questioned spending the estimated 70% of value without ,acquiring
ownership. He suggested investigating complete acquisition of the property and
then leasing it back for golf course operations.
The Planning Board agreed the Conservation Commission should pursue the matter
further and investigate several alternatives ranging from acquisition of develop-
ment rights to outright purchase. The Board generally favored retention of the
property as a community recreational asset, subject to further details on negotia-
tions.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:38 p.m. and the Board reconven innJ open session.
dith J. Uhr' Clerk
mss.