Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-05-21PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF MAY 21, 1984 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Offices, was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by the Chairman, Mrs. Smith, with members Cripps, Flemings, Uhrig and Planning Director Bowyer present. Mr. Sorensen was absent for the first part of the meeting. PLANS NOT REQUIRING SUBDIVISION APPROVAL 124. 124-128 Spring Street, Beal Company, Form A-84/11: The Board reviewed a plan dated May 15, 1984 of the Ledgemont property at 124-128 Spring Street which showed a Parcel A with 11.252 acres and containing the existing Ledgemont Research build- ings and a Parcel B with 24.97 acres. In response to the Board's question why the plan was revised again, land surveyor Donald Forand said the change resulted from a discussion among the partners, Beal Company and Bank of Boston. He understood that the addition of about 53,000 square feet to Lot A was intended to permit compliance with the new floor area ratio requirement for the CR district for Lot A. On the motion of Mrs. Uhrig, seconded by Mrs. Flemings, it was voted 4-0: The plan entitled "Subdivision Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass." dated May 15, 1984, by Miller and Nylander Company, certified by Donald J. Forand, Registered Land Surveyor, with application Form A-84/11, by Irwin Barkan for Beal and Company Inc., does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law. The Board agreed that the Board of Appeals should be notified that this plan changes the lot area and lot lines for Parcel B which was the subject of a special ' permit with site plan review approved in June, 1983. There is some question as to whether a building could be constructed in accordance with that SPS as the adoption of the CR floor area ratio amendment may require a new application for an SPS. 125. 209-215 Grove Street, Raymond Carchia, Form A-84/12: The Board reviewed a plan showing separation of land at Grove Street into two parcels: A, with 30,159 feet on which is located the dwelling at 209 Grove Street, and B, with 13.50 acres. On the motion of Mrs. Flemings, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted 4-0: That the plan entitled "Compiled Plan, Land in Lexington, Mass." dated May 7, 1984, certified by Richard L. McGlinchey, Registered Land Surveyor, with application Form A-84/12, by A. Raymond Carchia, does not require approval under the Subdivision Control Law. 126. EXECUTIVE SESSION On a motion by Mrs. Smith, seconded by Mrs. Flemings, it was voted 4-0, by poll of the Board, to go into Executive Session to discuss strategy with respect to liti- gation which, if discussed in an open session, may have a detrimental effect on the litigating position of the Town. At 7:18 p.m., the Board went into Executive Session. Following the Executive Session, the Board returned to Open Session at 7:57 p.m. 1 Planning Board Minutes: May 21, 1984 2 SUBDIVISION OF LAND 127. Xerox -Ginn Property, 191 Spring Street, Preliminary Subdivision Plan: The Board reviewed a draft of a decision disapproving the preliminary subdivision plan. Changes in the draft were made. On the motion of Mrs. Uhrig, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted 4-0 to disapprove the preliminary subdivision plan, dated March 21, 1984, submitted by the Xerox Corp/Ginn and Company and to approve a letter, as amended, stating the reasons for the disapproval. The meeting was recessed at 8:03 p.m. so that the members could attend the Town Meeting. It was agreed the Board would reconvene, if the Town Meeting did not run too long, to act on the Board of Appeals cases. The meeting was reconvened at 11:12 p.m. in Cary Memorial Hall. Mr. Sorensen was present. 128. APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS The Board reviewed cases to be heard by the Board of Appeals on May 24, 1984. It was agreed to make no recommendation on the following cases: 537 Lowell Street, Hugh Leichtman: Temporary SP, Use of accessory structure as a dwelling 307 Wood Street, James Cosgrove: SP, roadside stand 33 Center Street, Kenneth Mills: SP, swimming pool 195 Woburn Street, Elaine Paul: SP, non -complying shed 12 Glen Road, Fleming Fox: Variance, side yard 34 Cary Avenue, Thomas Bartee: Variance, rear yard setback 53 Simonds Road, Malcolm Blier: Variance, side yard setback 65 Cliffe Avenue, Mary Brennan: Variance, side yard setbacks: It was agreed to recommend against the granting of a variance for the construction of a new dwelling on this small lot which has only 2,950 square feet of land. The meeting was adjourned at 11:16 p.m. Judith J. Uhi-i , Clerk / 1 EXECUTIVE SESSION PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF MAY 21, 1984 After a unanimous vote of the four members present, by poll of the Board, the Lexington Planning Board met in Executive Session in Room G-15, Town Offices, at 7:19 p.m., to discuss strategy with respect to potential litigation which, if dis- cussed in open session, may have a detrimental effect on the litigating position of the Town. Present were Chairman Smith and members Cripps, Flemings, and Uhrig, Planning Director Bowyer and special counsel Martin Healy of Rackeman, Sawyer and Brewster. Mr. Healy reported that his review shows the preliminary subdivision plan submitted by Xerox Corp/Ginn and Company appears to have been prepared carefully to qualify for an eight year freeze of the Zoning By -Law and to postpone the effect of the newly -adopted floor area limitation in the CR district. Healy indicated there might be one or two procedural errors which he is still investigating. He said that due to the shape of the land, the narrow frontage and the continuation of the land into the City of Waltham, there are inherent problems in developing a defini- tive site plan which the Planning Board would have to approve and, hence, exempt the property from the new zoning regulations. Healy explained that a preliminary subdivision plan is an opportunity for the exchange of information and for the Planning Board to comment on a proposed sub- division plan. It is not controlling and is not subject to judicial review because ' it is not a required part of the subdivision process. Action on the definitive subdivision plan determines whether there is a subdivision and whether the eight year freeze from zoning changes will be in effect. The Board's action on the def- initive plan is subject to judicial review and it can be assumed the applicant will appeal to the courts if the Planning Board disapproves the definitive plan. At this stage, the Planning Board should make a good faith review of the definitive plan and point out areas of potential problems with the definitive plan. A judge reviewing the Board's action on the definitive plan may consider what type of guidance the Board provided on the preliminary plan. The Board reviewed a draft of a decision on the preliminary subdivision plan. Several changes should be made and it was agreed to request that the applicant submit a detailed traffic report based on the maximum development potential anticipated for the property. The Executive Session was adjourned at 7:57 p.m. and the Board reconvened in Open Session. Judith J. Uhrf, Clerk �`