Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-01-23PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JANUARY 23, 1984 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Offices, was called to order at 7:42 p.m. by the Chairman, Mrs. Smith, with members Flemings, Nichols, Sorensen, Uhrig and Planning Director Bowyer present. SUBDIVISION OF LAND 7. Maple Tree Village, Public Hearing: Chairman Smith opened concurrent hearings on: 1) the application for approval of a definitive subdivision plan and 2) the application for a special permit for a conventional subdivision plan. William Hamilton and Roger Corbin, Land Surveyor, represented Anthony Gentile of Landmark Associates, the applicant. Mr. Corbin explained there were three new houses and one existing house in the four lot subdivision along with 320 feet of roadway. With the construction of a storm water retention area, there would be no increase in ground water runoff. Mrs. Nichols raised questions about the five points contained in a review by Town Engineer Francis Fields in a memo dated January 18, 1984. Mr. Corbin was not fam- iliar with all the questions but said he would respond to them point by point. Mrs. Smith read from the Order of Conditions adopted by the Conservation Commission January 11, 1984 which calls for the elimination of Lot 4 as a building lot. Mr. Corbin responded that the applicant intended to file an appeal from that order but hoped that a mutually satisfactory solution could be worked out. Mrs. Nichols reported on the review of the plan she had conducted with Assistant Planner Arslan. She recommended that the cul-de-sac not be extended subsequently into the adjoining Kahn -Quinn land and the Board should grant a waiver from the section of its Rules and Regulations which call for consideration of further exten- sion of the street and utilities. She commented the plan was not very sensitive because of the extensive grading, particularly on Lot 3. It appears that an exces- sive amount of material will be removed from Lots 2 and 3 to provide fill material for Lot 4. An unnecessarily steep banking would remain on Lot 3. Salvatore Spignese, 110 Maple Street, inquired about the removal of fill that had been illegally placed by the prior owner. Mr. Spignese stated he was not opposed to the development per se but was concerned about water runoff which in the past has flooded his garage and cellar. Norman LeFebvre, 109 Maple Street, expressed similar concerns about an increase in water runoff. Mr. Sorensen observed the plans should show a "limit of work" line. Mr. Corbin will meet with the staff and Mrs. Nichols to reconcile technical deficiencies in the plan. Mrs. Smith said the hearing would be continued until the situation with the appeal from the Conservation Commission's Order of Conditions is resolved. At 8:31 p.m. she declared the hearing recessed, subject to the call of the Chair. 8. Ingleside, Release of Surety: There was discussion of the request for the final release of surety by Emilio Spagnuolo. The Town Engineer, in a memo dated January 10, 1984, reported the final patch over the drain line on the east side of Ingleside Road does not meet with the Town's approval. The estimated cost to repair the trench is approximately $500. The Board agreed that it could not Planning Board Minutes of January 23, 1984 N release the surety. Mr. Sorensen suggested that, in view of the small amount of surety needed, a new letter should be submitted requesting a reduction of surety. It was agreed to defer the matter until next week's meeting. PLANS NOT REQUIRING SUBDIVISION APPROVAL 9. Land at 120 Laconia Street, Theodore Freeman, Form A-84/1: The Board reviewed a plan of land between Laconia Street and East Emerson Road, adjacent to the Ridge Estates II Subdivision. Mr. Bowyer said this was part of a land transfer prior to the filing of a new definitive subdivision plan involving Lot 37 of the Ridge Estates II Subdivision. Mr. Sorensen noted the plan did not show any indication of Parcel C being joined with Lot 37 or Parcel B being joined with any other land. Taking the plan at face value, it appears to be a subdivision in which two lots, with no frontage, would be created. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Uhrig, it was voted unanimously: To disapprove the plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass." dated January 5, 1984, by Hayes Engineering Inc., Melrose, Mass., certified by George E. Hayes, Registered Land Surveyor, with application Form A-84/1, by Theodore Freeman, because it is a subdivision within the meaning of the Subdivision Control Law and requires approval because neither proposed Parcel B or C has any frontage. 10. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meetings of November 21, December 19, the Executive Session of ' December 19, and December 27, 1983 were corrected and on separate motions by Mrs. Nichols, each seconded by Mrs. Flemings, were approved unanimously as cor- rected. Mrs. Uhrig abstained from the vote on the Executive Session of December 19 as she was absent and Mr. Sorensen abstained from the vote on the minutes of December 27 as he was absent. On the motion of Mrs. Nichols, seconded by Mr. Sorensen, the minutes of the meeting of November 28, 1983 were approved unanimously as written. On the motion of Mrs. Nichols, seconded by Mrs. Flemings, the minutes of the meeting of December 12, 1983, were approved unanimously as written. ARTICLES FOR 1984 TOWN MEETING 11. Planning Board Zoning Articles: The Board discussed changes in its proposed zoning amendments to be made for inclusion in the warrant and for the public hearing on January 30, 1984: a. Article A, Comprehensive Revision, Parking Requirements -- It was agreed to leave Section 11.1.3 on the substitution of uses as is because the number of use categories in 11.3 will be reduced. Section 11.1.4 will be changed to eliminate the 75% replacement provision, to not require additional parking where there is no change in use or increase in the floor area. The required parking for office uses will be reduced and the three categories of retail use merged into one. Other changes were made in the sections dealing with parking and loading factors, minimum yards for parking lots, transition and screening, design standards, landscaping, special permits and a new section of definitions will be included. b. Article B, Central Business District -- There was some discussion as to whether to reduce the permitted floor area ratio from 2.0 to 1.5. Mrs. Nichols Planning Board Minutes of January 23, 1984 3 reported on the FAR of several prominent buildings. Members thought that reducing the permitted FAR at this time might not be appropriate it had originally been advertised at 2.0. It was agreed that the parking factor in the CB district would be about 75% of that for the Town -wide requirement in most cases. The parking factor for office uses will be the same as it is not desirable to encourage additional office space in the center because of the parking problems it creates. c. Article C, Rezone CB to CG -- It was agreed to have retail liquor stores permitted by right, in part, because the Board of Selectmen has control over liquor stores through their licensing powers. d. Article E, CR District, FAR -- The Board approved a revised draft based on "developable site area" with a new definition of that term. The floor area ratio will remain at 0.25. e. Article G, Lot Frontage, Lot Width -- The Board reviewed and selected an alternate provision that will relate the lot width to a circle tangent to the lot frontage. It was agreed that graphics for this proposal are essential. REPORTS 12. Planning Board Members, Subcommittees a. Planning Board Budget: Mrs. Smith reported on a meeting with the Board of Selectmen on January 19 about the Planning Board budget. The Town Manager is ' reluctant to increase the Department budget with additional permanent staff because he fears that a person may have to be laid off in several years if the Town budget is further tightened. He would prefer contract services for addi- tional help. Selectmen McLaughlin raised a question of priorities among the Planning Board work projects. Others wanted to know what work items would be accomplished, by what time, if additional money were available. b. Unaccepted Streets: Mr. Sorensen commented on the Planning Director's memorandum to the Town Engineer, dated January 20, responding to inquiries about the number of lots that could be created on Emerald Street and Sunnyknoll Avenue. Mr. Sorensen was bothered by the apparent emphasis of the Board of Selectmen on the number of lots that can be created. That is only one criteria and a minor one at that. More attention should be given to the street network and the public investment benefiting the greatest number of people. The meeting was adjourned at 11:08 p.m. 1 Judith }T. Uhrig, Clerk