Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-11-19PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF NOVEMBER 19, 1984 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Offices, was called to order at 7:43 p.m., by the Chairman Mrs. Smith with members Sorensen and Flemings and Planning Director Bowyer present. Mr. Cripps and Mrs. Uhrig were absent. 223. INTERPRETATION OF ZONING Attorney Stephen Anderson was present for an explanation of the educational use exemption contained in Section 2 of Chapter 40A. The interpretation is important for the facility to house mentally retarded adults on the lot on Hill Street (Articles 4-5) and the hotel -conference center proposed for the Minuteman School (Article 7) of the Special Town Meeting. Mr. Anderson said that the educational use of property is exempt; the facility must still conform with dimensional requirements, off-street parking requirements and the like provided those requirements are not so restrictive as to affect the location of the use. The test which the courts have used is whether the dominant activity is educational. In a case involving the city of Fitchburg Housing Authority, which has striking similarities to the proposed facility on Hill Street, the court determined that the education of mentally retarded adults was the dominant activity and the fact that it was a residential accommodation was incidental. The definition of education in Massachusetts statute and case law is very broad. In a case in the Town of Lenox, the court struck down a very well - drafted special permit provision, because it affected the ability of the educa- tional use to be located in a particular zoning district, although the court did recognize that traditional dimensional and physical requirements would be valid. Mr. Anderson was not aware of any case in which a profit-making commercial use existed as a lessee of a public agency but he will look further. DETERMINATION OF GRADE AND CONSTRUCTION OF UNACCEPTED STREET 224. Hazel Road: CUS 84/2, Map 88, Lot 35: Mr. Bowyer reported that he had discussed the Hazel Road situation with Town Engineer Francis Fields, whose opinion is that the proposed construction will improve a substandard situation. He recognizes that the grade is steep and would not be permitted in new construc- tion. It is not likely that the grade will be changed because the Town has recently installed a sewer at the minimal acceptable depth in order to avoid extensive blasting. Lowering the grade would require reconstruction of the sewer which would be prohibitively expensive. He thought that site lines and other traffic considerations were adequate. Mr. Sorensen moved and Mrs. Flemings seconded, that the grade and construction of Hazel Road would be acceptable if the improvements were made. Mrs. Flemings and Mrs. Smith voted in favor of the motion; Mr. Sorensen against it. It was not clear whether a 2-1 vote was sufficient to constitute a favorable action by the Board. Mr. Bowyer will check with the Town Clerk on that point. At 8:35 p.m., the Board recessed to attend a meeting of the Board of Selectmen at which a presentation on the status of North Lexington traffic improvements was to be made. At 10:20 p.m., the Board reconvened. Planning Board Minutes: November 19, 1984 2 SUBDIVISION OF LAND 225. Maple Tree Village, Acceptance of Surety, Release of Lots: On- the motion of Mrs. Flemings, seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was voted unanimously to accept Lexington Savings Bank passbook #01074466, in the amount of $13,000 as surety for the completion of the subdivision, and to release Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4. 226. Applications to the Board of Appeals Mr. Sorensen reported on the cases to be heard on December 13, 1984. It was agreed to make no recommendation on the following case: 225 Waltham Street, Moore Homes: SP, convert single-family house to two- family. 12 Freemont Street, Steven Trippi: Variance, front yard: An addition to the front of the building is proposed but there is no drawing indicating its loca- tion. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Flemings, it was voted unanimously to recommend against granting a variance because it cannot be deter- mined what is being requested or the reasons for the request (it was subse- quently learned that this petition had been withdrawn). 80 Westview Street, John Rizzo, Photomarketing Service Inc.: SP, Temporary Use of a Trailer: The Planning Board has a policy of not favoring annual, or recur- rent, grants of special permits for the use of mobile homes as office or other support space. That use of a mobile home is appropriate during construction leading to the provision of permanent space. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Flemings, it was voted unanimously to recommend in favor of granting this application with the condition that it is the last time it would be granted for a full twelve-month period. The applicant should promptly initiate construction on permanent space or be prepared to remove the mobile home at the end of the one-year period. 9 Locust Avenue, Fred Rothbaum: Variance, side yard: On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Flemings, it was voted unanimously that, consistent with the position on variances for yard setbacks taken by the Planning Board in August, 1984, the Board would recommend against granting the variance requested because a yard setback of only five feet is insufficient and there is not evi- dence of a hardship or that other alternatives are not available. 153 North Street, Amalia Samoylenko: SP, five congregate housing facilities: Mr. Bowyer reported that he had discussed this application with Building Commissioner Peter DiMatteo and Stephen Anderson of Palmer & Dodge. All agree that Section 9.2 of the Zoning By -Law is not clear, particularly with respect to the meaning of "facility." The Building Commissioner has made an interpretation based on the state building code that a facility may be either a free-standing structure or a part of a structure contained within fire rated walls. That was the interpreta- tion that was used when the By -Law was drafted in 1979 because it permits congre- gate living facilities to be a different class of construction than a hotel, for instance. More than one facility may be constructed on a lot. Mr. Bowyer reported that he discussed the intent of this section with former Planning Board member Iris Wheaton, who presented the article to the Town Meeting in 1979. Her interpretation is that more than one facility may be built on a lot and the language was designed to cover both the conversion of existing houses and newly Planning Board Minutes: November 19, 1984 3 built congregate living accommodations. Mrs. Flemings and Mrs. Smith accepted that interpretation; Mr. Sorensen did not agree with it. Mrs. Smith said it was difficult to visualize what facilities housing 60 people would look like. She thought there should be elevations and plans to review. The relationship of the development to the single-family neighborhood is important. Board members noted that Section 9.2 refers to a special permit with site plan review, which requires a traffic study. It was agreed to contact the Board of Appeals to defer the scheduling of the hearing until the traffic study, required for an SPS, was submitted. ARTICLES FOR NOVEMBER 26 SPECIAL TOWN MEETING 227. Article 7, Minuteman Conference Center: Drawing on the discussion earlier with Stephen Anderson, it was agreed that the Board should not take a position before the Town Meeting on whether the current zoning by-law applies to this proposal because the determination of "educational" use is too complex an issue. It should be deferred until more information is available. The Planning Board does support Article 7 to require a two-thirds vote because changes of this magnitude should not be made except by a two-thirds vote. That is the standard that applies to land use changes with substantial impact requir- ing a change in the zoning map. 228. Article 2, Pine Meadows Golf Course Acquisition: Mrs. Smith reported that the negotiations with the property owner are still proceeding and it is not clear what motion will be offered on the floor of the Town Meeting. The Board agreed that the property should be acquired. Mr. Sorensen expressed concern about the proposed two-step procedure, in which the Town would be committed to a large expenditure but would be uncertain as to when or how much money would be received to defray the large expenditure. 229. Articles 4-5, "Poor Farm Lot": Mr. Bowyer reported that Conservation Administrator Charles Wyman said the edge of the vegetated wetlands was about 125 feet from the front lot line and the Conservation Commission would not allow any building within 25 feet of that. That means an area about 100 feet back from the front lot line was buildable. Applying the front and side setback requirements means there is a building envelope about 70' x 70' in which to locate a struc- ture. The Planning Board's Housing Needs Advisory Committee is in favor of this type of housing. The Planning Board had some concern about the density, i.e., having a large number of people on a lot which has a substandard frontage. Other potential locations in the Town for this type of housing should be examined. REPORTS 230. Planning Board Members, Subcommittees a. Franklin School Conversion: Mrs. Smith reported that the conversion committee has finished the presentations or proposals and will rank the five proposals still under consideration at its next meeting. 1 1 Planning Board Minutes: November 19, 1984 4 231. Planning Director a. Planning Board Budget: Mr. Bowyer reported that he had prepared an estimate of the cost of completing the various elements and work items in the comprehensive plan. Mrs. Smith thought it would take too many years to complete the comprehensive plan with the funding the town now makes available. It was agreed to submit a budget request that would permit the comprehensive plan to be accelerated. This is consistent with the Board of Selectmen's interest in updating the master plan or the "Lexington 2000" program proposed by the Board of Selectmen. It was agreed that the Planning Board should meet with the Board of Selectmen to discuss compre- hensive planning and "Lexington 2000." The meeting was adjourned at 11:12 p.m. Ci Judith J. rig, Clerk