Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-11-18PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 18, 1985 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, was called to order at 7:36 by the Chairman, Mrs. Smith, with members Cripps, Sorensen, Plan- ning Director Bowyer and Secretary Peters present. Mrs. Uhrig was absent. Mrs. Flemings arrived during Item 256. 255. Approval of Minutes On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted unanimously to approve the minutes, as corrected, of November 4, 1985. PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL LAW 256. Route 2, Irving Hilsenroth, Form A/85-17: The Board reviewed a plan that is partly in Lincoln and partly in Lexington that has already been endorsed by the Lincoln Planning Board. Parcel A will be joined to land owned by James M. McLaughlin in Lexington which already has more than the minimum required frontage on an accepted street. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted unanimously: to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lincoln & Lexington, Mass.", dated October 30, 1985, by Bryant Associates Inc., Boston, Ma., certified by Mario D. Mandanici, Registered Land Surveyor, as it does not require ' approval under the Subdivision Control Law. SUBDIVISION OF LAND 257. Castelli property; extension of time for Planning Board action: On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Cripps it was voted unanimously to grant the request of Mr. Castelli to extend the time for Planning Board action on his application for Preliminary Plan approval for an additional 60 days. ARTICLES FOR THE 1986 TOWN MEETING 258. Choate-Symmes; presentation of the concept plan with building locations: Fred Bailey, for the Board of Trustees of Choate-Symmes, reviewed work to date, and reported they are working on the traffic report, utility analysis and are involved in discussions with the Town Manager to work out a plan for payments in lieu of taxes. Tom Huebner reported that they have negotiated an emergency access through the Haynes office building site for the project. They asked for guidance as to what category of parking use to follow. They have tentatively used the standards for elderly parking in the Zoning By -Law to figure their parking requirements. Mr. Bowyer commented that their project would not qualify under the public assistance parking provisions of .5 parking spaces per resident as permitted in the Zoning By -Laws. They might have a special clause in their application requesting this, however it would have to be well documented as to why they should be permitted to have fewer parking spaces than required for apartments. Architects Benjamin Bursdall and Biff Longfield presented the site plan. The plan will consist of three major building components: 1) a nursing home, 2) a community center and 3) two styles of residential unit types: a) apartments in a Minutes of November 18, 1985 Page 2 three story building, and b) one story townhouses. The path and road system will be around the perimeter of the property with the buildings grouped inside. There is one area of wetland they hope to get permission from the Conservation Commis- sion to fill. Mrs. Smith commented that it was imperative they meet with the Conservation Commission on that point before proceeding any further. The plan is within the 40% limit of impervious surface, and they have attempted to design around steep slopes and wetlands, except for the area mentioned above. They hope to buffer the development from the surrounding community. In response to questions from the Board, Mr. Longfield reported that the maximum building height was approximately 35 feet; the back parking lot was approximately 850 feet from the road; units were mainly 2 bedroom units, ranging in size be- tween 600-1200 sq. ft. Mr. Huebner added they hoped to keep the exit through the office development blocked off except for emergencies. Mrs. Smith commented that their attempt to work with the land is encouraging. Mr. Huebner responded they were trying to achieve the best balance possible between financial limits and physical characteristics. He added that for the first five years, approximately one-half of the beds in the nursing would be needed by the residents increasing to full use by the eighth or ninth year. Jacqueline Davison of the South Lexington Civic Association, asked about the distribution of apartments between the main building and the townhouses. Mr. ' Huebner answered there would be 30-50 townhouses and roughly 200 units in the main building. He added there would be van service for the use of the residents both for travel within the complex and for outside shopping trips, which is why they feel that .5 parking spaces per unit would satisfy the parking needs. Mrs. Smith asked how their proposed costs relate to the Lexington market. Mr. Huebner replied that the units would sell for approximately $97,000 for a studio apartment to $230,000 for a three bedroom unit, with monthly fees of $800 to $1700. He added they are doing a survey asking Lexington residents, among other things, what they felt they could afford, what kinds of physical amenities they wanted and what their needs were; the survey should be completed in about two more weeks. William Spencer said the Congregate Housing Committee would be very interested in the results. The Board felt the Fire Chief should be consulted as to how well he could service the development. Mrs. Smith requested elevations showing how the area would look from Waltham Street and what the residents would see when they looked toward Waltham Street. Mrs. Flemings asked if their were any wooded areas on the site, and the answer was not really, only along the back perimeter of the site. The construction would be occurring in the central open area that has already been disturbed. Mr. Bowyer asked that information be provided to the Board so it could keep pace with their progress in the design process, and, in particular, that they show how the site analysis data is reflected in the proposed design. Minutes of November 18, 1985 Page 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, POLICIES 259. Comprehensive Plan, Housing Element: meeting with the Housing Needs Advisory Committee: The Board resumed work on the draft of the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan, dated November 18, 1985, with Eleanor Klauminzer, Joel Adler, William Spencer, and William Hays of the Housing Needs Advisory Committee present. Mr. Sorensen did not agree with a statement on page 4 in the draft. He pointed out land is not a fixed cost; its value increases as the density increases. Mr. Spencer questioned the emphasis on encouraging more smaller -sized units as stated on page 5. Mrs. Smith felt that the "COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DEFINITION OF AFFORDABILITY" section on page 7, which incorporates 1985 income data, needs more detailed work; the results are rental levels that are too high. On page 8, the Board and the Committee agreed to drop the "FOR STUDY:" under POLICY 2.10 item which suggested using as a target the number and percentage of housing units in the town be affordable by households with varying incomes in relationship to the income distribution in the Boston metropolitan area. On page 10, Mrs. Flemings and Mrs. Smith both objected to POLICIES 4.4 and 4.5. which read as follows: Policy 4.4: Provide accelerated processing and reduced fees for ' developments consisting entirely or predominantly of affordable housing. Policy 4.5: Adjust the timing of previously scheduled public improvements, such as streets or utilities, to make potential sites available for use for affordabale housing, or to share development costs. Mrs. Smith felt there could be abuse and Mrs. Flemings felt they were not fair. The Board agreed there should be more work on the "Town Government; Development Regulations" section on page 11, which deals with providing incentives to produce more affordable housing and introduces disincentives to discourage the use of remaining sites suitable for development for other than affordable housing. Mr. Sorensen objected to the limit on appreciation of housing to 4 per cent on page 12; he felt it should be allowed to go up by index. Mr. Bowyer noted that this language came from the "Inclusionary Housing Policy" that was presented to Town Meeting, and used for Muzzey School. Mrs. Smith felt there should be more study first. On page 14, Mrs. Smith questioned whether the mixing of residential uses in commercial and industrial areas would only benefit people of moderate income and higher. The Board and the Committee agreed to continue the review of the Fusing Element of the Comprehensive Plan on December 9, 1985. The meeting adjourned at 10:43 p.m.