The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1985-01-28PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JANUARY 28, 1985 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 Cripps, Flemings, Sorensen, Uhrig and Planning Director Bowyer present. ARTICLES FOR 1985 TOWN MEETING 23. Article B, Planned Residential Development: The Board reviewed a draft of "Major Elements of Comprehensive Zoning Revision, Planned Residential Development." A number of editing changes were proposed and it was agreed the staff should redraft the document. Sections receiving particular attention included: relaxation of dimensional standards, flexibility in siting individual buildings, discussion of plan -based review, housing for smaller households, discontinuance of the RH-Subsidized Housing District, and the role of the Board of Appeals as the SPGA. It was agreed the staff would have a revised draft prepared by Wednesday after- noon. Members will review the revision and phone in comments to the Department office. If necessary, a meeting will be held Saturday morning, February 2, to make other changes as needed. 24. Article C, Specialized Amendments to Planned Residential Development: The Board reviewed a draft dated 1123185 of three policy -laden amendments to Article B. One would reduce the base density in the RO and RS district by about one- third, a second would permit a density bonus above the base -density for quality design and a third would permit a density bonus above the base density for providing "affordable" housing. It was agreed the Board would not present those amendments to the 1985 Town Meeting because: 1) they might adversely affect the prospects for passage of the main planned residential development amendment and 2) the proposals need to be worked out and presented in the context of the housing element of the comprehensive plan. 25. Fees for Public Hearings: Mr. Bowyer asked that the Board state a policy for fees for citizen petitions to amend the text of the Zoning By -Law. The three citizen petitions to amend the text will probably cost a total of more than $100.00 in legal notice fees. For citizen petitions to amend the Zoning Map, the Board now charges a fee of $750.00 for review of the proposal, and the developer must pay for printing the legal notice in the newspaper and for use of an audi- torium. Fees are considered appropriate because rezoning is part of the real estate development process and the developer stands to increase the value of land if successful. The Board thought that citizens should not be charged fees because they are usually motivated by interest in an issue rather than economic gain to be real- ized from a development. The Board thought that these expenses should be paid from an account other than a Planning Board account because the Board has no control over the cost. The Planning Director was asked to confer with the Town Manager on this matter. Planning Board Minutes: January 28, 1985 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, POLICIES 26. South Lexington Planning Program, Technical Memoranda 1-4, 6: The Board reviewed five of the technical memoranda prepared by the staff. In Memo #1, Existing land Use Characteristics, it was agreed to change the wording on the first page relative to the series of technical reports. That change should appear in other technical memoranda as well. In Memo #2, Parcels Susceptible to Development, it was agreed to delete the lists of lots in the RO and RS districts and use an aggregate total instead. The commercial properties will continue to be listed separately. At the end of the memo, Section 5 "Policies Raised by this Memo," will be deleted as the questions are out of context for this memo. For Memo #3, Natural Systems, it was agreed to ask the Conservation Commission to review the draft report. As in the other memos, the section on policies raised by this memo at the end will be deleted. In Memo A, Commercial Development, several editorial changes were made. In Memo $6, the format of the tables needs to be made consistent. SUBDIVISION OF LAND 27. Simonds Estates, Acceptance of Surety, Release of Lots, Tidd Circle Section: The Board was in receipt of a memorandum from Francis Fields, Town Engineer, ' estimating that the amount of money necessary to complete work in the Tidd Circle section of the subdivision and in the adjoining conservation area was $31,000 and recommending that the surety for that section be reduced to that amount. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Flemings, it was voted unanimously to: 1) reduce the amount of surety needed for the Tidd Circle section of the subdivi- sion from $143,000 to $31,000, 2) to accept the assignment of Everett Cooperative Bank passbook #22858, balance $31,000 as surety for construction of the public improvements in the Tidd Circle section of the subdivision and 3) to release Lots 2 through 12 in the Tidd Circle section. There are three parts to this subdivi- sion and the Board has now accepted surety and released the lots on the Tidd Circle and North Emerson Road section but has taken no action on the Mead Circle section of the subdivision. 28. APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS Mr. Cripps presented an oral review of the cases to be heard by the Board of Appeals on February 14. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted unanimously to make no recommendation on the following two applica- tions: 62 Harding Road, James Moore: SP, continue use 93 Outlook Drive, Swapan Roy: SP, use of home as office 1 Planning Board Minutes: January 28, 1985 3 and to recommend against favorable action on the following cases: 18 Boulder Road, Richard Marzilli: Variance, yard setback 39 Lincoln Street, Donald Crocker: Variance, yard setback 23 Pearl Street, Stephen Puleo: Variance, side yard setback COMMUNICATIONS 29. Inter -Town Environmental Review The Board was in receipt of a request from Chairman Margery Battin of the Board of Selectmen to comment on legislation advocated by the Town of Lincoln and filed by Senator Carol Amick that would set up a procedure through the Metropolitan Area Planning Council for a detailed environmental review. A town could request a detailed review of a major development in an adjoining city or town. Mrs. Smith stated that the Town should not relinquish control over development to a regional commission. Mrs. Flemings commented that the Metropolitan Area Planning Council did not have the authority to enforce such a review and she was not satisfied with the mechanics of the proposed review procedure. Mrs. Smith noted that the state already administers an environmental notification procedure and thought that could be utilized or expanded rather than creating another agency. ' The majority of the Board thought the spirit of the environmental review proce- dure proposal should be supported but the mechanics and responsibilities for making determinations needed more work. The review procedure should focus pri- marily on traffic. Perhaps the determination should be limited to communities within a certain radius of the proposed development rather than including commun- ities way on the other side of the metropolitan area. 30. Board of Selectmen's Policy on Unaccepted Streets The Board reviewed a preliminary draft of criteria and a schedule of capital expenditures for upgrading presently unaccepted streets. The Board was pleased that the Board of Selectmen are working on written criteria for these expendi- tures. There are some potential differences between the standards in the Subdiv- ision Rules and Regulations and the Planning Board's policy on the grade and construction of unaccepted streets to qualify for a building permit. The Select- men would approve an 18 -foot wide street in certain cases whereas the minimum standard in the Subdivision Rules is 24 feet and in the Planning Board's unac- cepted streets policy, 20 feet. Members inquired whether the Board of Selectmen had taken the Planning Board's policy on unaccepted streets into account. Mem- bers inquired whether the Selectmen's policy said anything about the existence of internal drives serving condominium or industrial park developments. 31. REPORTS Planning Board Members, Subcommittees a. HNAC: Sherry Edmonds: The Board noted with regret the resignation of Sherry Edmonds from the Housing Needs Advisory Committee as she has recently been appointed to the Housing Assistance Board (LEXHAB). Her contributions will be missed. Planning Board Minutes: January 28, 1985 4 b. Board of Appeals Hearings: Mr. Sorensen reported on the hearings held on January 24, 1985. The Board of Appeals did not follow the Planning Board's recommendation on Kiln Brook IV. Mr. Dupree will write up a plan on how they intend to comply with the conditions of the special permit. The meeting was adjourned at 11:08 p.m. ,` udith J. Uhri Clerk 1 1