HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-03-23C
1
L
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 23, 1987
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Cary Hall, Cary Memorial Hall,
was called to order at 7:47 p.m, by the Chairman, Mrs. Uhrig, with members Cripps,
Klauminaer, Sorensen, Wood, Planning Director Bowyer, Assistant Planner Rawski and
Secretary Peters present.
********************** ARTICLES FOR 1987 TOWN MEETING ***************************
54. PUBLIC HEARING - ARTICLE 43 - COMPREHENSIVE REVISIONS COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS
PERMITTED USES: (continued from January 15, 1987).
The Planning Board conducted a public hearing as required by Chapter 40A, on the
following proposed amendment to the Zoning By -Law:
Article
43
- Comprehensive Revisions Commercial Districts Permitted Uses
Part
A
- Section
1, Creation of Districts, Purpose of Districts
Part
B
- Section
4, Permitted Uses and Development Standards
Part
C
- Table 1,
Permitted Uses and Development Standards,
Part A, Residential, Institutional, Agricultural Uses
Part B, Commercial Uses
Part
D
- Section
10, Landscaping, Transition and Screening
Part
E
- Section
12, Traffic
Part
F
- Table 2,
Schedule of Dimensional Controls
Part
G
- Section
3, Special Permits and Special Permits with Site Plan
Review
Part
H
- Redesignation
of Commercial Districts
Mrs. Uhrig declared the hearing closed at 10:55 p.m.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:56 p.m.
Martha Wood, Clerk
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF MARCH 23, 1987
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room G-15, Town Office Build-
ing was called to order at 7:37 p.m. by the Chairman, Mrs. Uhrig, with members
Cripps, Klauminzer, Sorensen, Wood, and Planning Director Bowyer present.
*********** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS *********************
PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL LAW
89. Form A/87-6, Oakmount Circle, Oakmount Realty Trust: The Board reviewed a
plan showing a confirmation of existing lot lines, the lot having the same bound-
aries since 1906. On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was
voted unanimously:
to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington, Mass. (Middlesex
County) Being Lot 127", dated March 13, 19870 by Noonan 6 McDowell, Inc.,
certified by Malcolm Parker McDowell, Professional Land Surveyor, with
application form A/87-6 by Oakmount Realty Trust, as it does not require
approval under the Subdivision Control Law.
The Board voted unanimously to authorize the Planning Director to endorse the
plan in behalf of the Board.
SUBDIVISION OF LAND
' 90. Highland Farms, Dunham Street, action on preliminary plan: The Board re-
viewed a draft decision, dated March 18, 1987, approving the preliminary plan
submitted by J. G. Enterprises and Trinda Realty Trust. On the motion of Mr.
Sorensen, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer, it was voted 4-0-1, (Mrs. Wood abstained
because she had not attended the hearing) to approve the preliminary plan and the
report, as presented.
The Board voted unanimously to authorize the Planning Director to sign the deci-
sion on behalf of the Board.
91. Grove Street/Volunteer Way, action on preliminary plan: The Board reviewed
a draft decision, dated March 23, 1987, approving the preliminary plan submitted
by the Grove Street Nominee Trust. They agreed to drop the phrase "the Planning
Board is disappointed with the proposal which shows a lack of sensitivity to the
natural features of the site and the absence of creative design" in the second
paragraph of the decision section of the draft, so that the second paragraph will
begin: "While the proposal essentially complies with the Zoning By -Law and the
Development Regulations, the Planning Board urges that ... "' with the remaining
portion of the paragraph unchanged.
On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted 3-1-1, with
Mrs. Uhrig voting against and Mrs. Wood abstaining since she did not attend the
hearing, to approve the preliminary plan and the decision as amended.
The Board voted unanimously to authorize the Planning Director to sign the deci-
sion on behalf of the Board.
Minutes for March 23, 1987 Page 2
APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS
92. Hearings for April 9, 1987: Mr. Sorensen gave an oral review of the follow-
ing applications scheduled to be heard by the Board of Appeals:
31 Independence Avenue, Frank & Beverly Colby, Variance, to allow an addi-
tion on the second floor: Mr. Sorensen reported the nonconforming structure
is within five feet of the lot line, and no change is proposed in the foot-
print of the building. The Board voted 4-0-1 (with Mrs. Uhrig abstaining)
to make no recommendation in this case, since they did not know how close
structures on abutting lots were to the proposed addition.
31 Hayes Avenue, John C. Kent, Variance, side yard setback to reconstruct a
replacement to the existing unattached garage and shed: Mr. Sorensen re-
ported they wish to replace a single "falling apart" garage with a 2 -car
garage that is four feet from the lot line. On the motion of Mrs. Wood,
seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted unanimously to recommend against grant-
ing the variance since the Board felt there were other locations on the
paved driveway where the proposed garage could be placed that would not
intrude into the setback.
511 Marrett Road, Martyn Roetter, SP, inground swimming pool: Mr. Sorensen
reported the proposed pool complies with all zoning requirements including
the provisions recommended in Article 44. On the motion of Mrs. Wood,
' seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted unanimously to recommend the special
permit be granted.
The Board also agreed to make no comment on the following:
93 Gleason Road, Terrell D. Cambria, SP, continued use of a deck.
755 Massachusetts Avenue, Follen Community Church, Variance, side and rear
yard setbacks for addition of a second story.
******************** ARTICLES FOR 1987 TOWN MEETING ***************************
93. Article 42, Technical Corrections: On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded
by Mrs. Wood, it was voted unanimously that in Part A7 to change the word second
to first where it refers to paragraph in the motion and in the "PB" explanation
to change the word first to second where it refers to the motion. The effect of
this change in the section of the By -Law that deals with average height of build-
ings is to delete the first paragraph which could be interpreted as allowing some
elements of a building to exceed the permitted maximum height. Another effect is
to retain the second paragraph which refers to buildings on a sloping site.
On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted unanimously
to recommend that the Town Meeting adopt the proposed amendment as contained in
the motion, as amended, attached to the report, and to approve the report on the
article, as amended.
94. Article 44, Swimming Pools: on the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mrs.
Klauminzer, it was voted unanimously to recommend that the Town Meeting adopt the
proposed amendment as contained in the motion attached to the report, and to
approve the report on the article, as written.
Minutes for March 23, 1987 Page 3
95. Article 46, Jumbo Houses: On the motion of Mrs. Klauminzer, seconded by Mr.
Cripps, it was voted unanimously to recommend that the Town Meeting adopt the
proposed amendment as contained in the motion attached to the report, and to
approve the report on the article, as written.
96. Article 47, Traffic Study: Mr. Sorensen said he was not as negative about
the article as the draft report indicated. Mrs. Klauminzer suggested and it was
agreed to eliminate paragraph one. She suggested that words such as "unnecessary
and unworkable" be substituted for "extreme and undesirable" in referring to some
of the data requirements and procedures contained in the citizen's article.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Cripps, it was voted 4-0-1, with Mr.
Sorensen abstaining, to recommend to the Town Meeting that the proposed amend-
ments not be approved. On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer,
it was voted 4-0-1, with Mr. Sorensen abstaining, to approve the report, as
corrected.
97. Article 48, Floor Area Ratio (FAR): Mrs. Klauminzer suggested that the
wording in the draft report that said the proposed amendment was aimed at perma-
nent freeze on development be changed to read "would have the practical effect of
a freeze". On the motion of Mr. Sorensen, seconded by Mr. Cripps it was voted
unanimously to approve the report as amended. (See item 72, Minutes, March 9,
1987, for vote on recommendation to Town Meeting.)
' 98. Article 49, Building Height: On the motion of Mrs. Klauminzer, seconded by
Mr. Cripps, it was voted unanimously to approve the report, as written. Ephraim
Weiss, the sponsor of the citizen's article, said that he had drafted a new mo-
tion. Mrs. Uhrig said that the Planning Board had held a public hearing on the
amendment as filed and printed in the warrant and had voted to make a recommenda-
tion, at its March 9, 1987 meeting, based on that proposed amendment. The action
this evening was just to approve the wording of the report. The Board could not
reopen the matter because that would require holding another public hearing.
99. Article 43, Comprehensive Commercial Revision: The following members of the
TMMA Special Zoning Committee were present: Jacquelyn Davison, Robert Domnitz,
Kate Fricker, Paul Hamburger, Margaret Rawls and Ephraim Weiss.
PART C. PERMITTED USES: Mrs. Rawls urged that there be more consistency and
clarification about what uses are permitted in the RD district. In addition to
the new language in Section 4.1.1, it was agreed that there would be a note and
additional asterisks in the table to show the only uses permitted are those
specified in the preliminary site development and use plan for that particular RD
district.
Mrs. Rawls recommended that accessory apartments appear in the section under
accessory uses and not as a principal use. Sub -paragraph 4.1.7 needs to have
wording to allow an accessory apartment, which may have 30% of the floor area in
a dwelling, to exceed the 25% of the gross floor area permitted for all accessory
uses.
It was agreed that all uses in Section 11, Motor Vehicle Related Sales and Ser-
vice Uses, would require a special permit.
Minutes for March 23, 1987
Page 4
Mr. Cripps suggested, and it was agreed, to eliminate the restriction on the
number of unregistered vehicles that may be garaged in a building, and to only
limit the number which may be parked outdoors.
Mr. Domnitz raised questions about the treatment of home occupations and offices
in the home for a physician or professional person. Mrs. Uhrig explained the
subject had been thoroughly reviewed and the Board had responded to requests made
by the Board of Appeals. She said home occupations was a complicated issue that
the Board will tackle for the 1988 Town Meeting, and what appears in the proposed
amendment was a holding action until the subject could be handled in depth. Mr.
Sorensen objected to the wording of the new definition of "home occupation" which
it was agreed at the last meeting would be prepared. Without substantive stand-
ards, the definition appears to be too permissive. It was agreed that the exist-
ing definition would be retained for one more year.
Mrs. Davison expressed concern about the Service Business, CS district, and that
the services permitted in that district would be too close to one -family homes,
particularly on Marrett Road. Mr. Bowyer observed there were two separate is-
sues: 1) what uses should be permitted in the CS district so that certain types
of uses are permitted somewhere in town, and 2) where the CS district should be
designated on the Zoning Map in relation to adjacent land uses. Mrs. Uhrig said
one of the stated objectives of the revision was to permit a variety of services
for residents somewhere in the town. After a discussion of particular types of
services, Mr. Cripps said he did not believe in zoning numerous services out of
town.
Mrs. Rawls said she had reviewed the proposed Table 1, line for line, with the
existing Table 1, and that even after allowing for changes in terminology, it
appeared that some uses are proposed to be permitted which are not currently
allowed. She also had compared the industrial or services uses permitted.
Mr. Hamburger asked that there be a listing prepared showing which uses are added
or subtracted from the existing Table 1.
The Board reviewed again Section 12 on construction, storage, distribution and
industrial services. They agreed to require a special permit for several of the
uses, and to modify the language in several other uses to make it more
restrictive.
PART D. LANDSCAPING: Mrs. Rawls and Mr. Hamburger both commented on apparent
inconsistencies in this section such as the specified height of plant materials
at initial planting and at maturity, and how one determines whether screening is
75% or more opaque. Mr. Bowyer commented Part D still needs work on the admini-
strative section and procedures to make them consistent with other parts of the
By -Law. It needs improved draftsmanship in those sections without changing the
substantive standards proposed or the basic content of the proposed landscaping
and screening provisions.
PART E. TRAFFIC: Mrs. Davison wanted more consideration of the traffic impacts
from developments in adjacent communities. Mr. Bowyer commented that most every-
one would agree, in concept, with consideration of the traffic impact from ad-
joining communities, but the problem arose in drafting specific language on:
which development should be considered, how far away, and the type of data
available.
Minutes for March 23, 1987 Page 5
Mrs. Uhrig commented that broad brush terms could not be used. Mrs. Klauminzer
observed that if traffic from the adjacent community became critical in the
determination of level of service and whether or not a special permit would be
granted, the same type of data applied to the proposed development and other
developments in Lexington would have to be made available about the development
in the adjacent community.
The Board agreed that the same criteria used within Lexington should apply to
traffic from development across the town line. The Board then discussed whether
the applicant should be required to do a traffic study of developments in adja-
cent communities. The applicant is not required to do a traffic study of other
developments in Lexington because a traffic study was prepared for those other
developments as part of the SPS process approving it. In a poll of the Board,
four members, with Mr. Sorensen opposed, agreed that an applicant should not be
required to do a traffic study of a development in another community, where such
traffic study does not exist, but should analyze the data from a traffic study
about the development in the adjacent community if that traffic is comparable to
that required in Lexington.
Mrs. Davison urged that the Board set traffic level of service "C" as the lowest
acceptable level. On a poll of the Board, it was agreed unanimously to retain
the Board's recommendation that the lowest acceptable traffic level of service
would be "D".
' PART F DIMENSIONAL CONTROLS: The Board reviewed data prepared by Assistant
Planner Rawski showing the existing floor area ratio, site coverage and the like
which showed the number of buildings that would be made non -conforming at differ-
ent floor area ratio levels. Mr. Weiss said that it would be difficult to sell a
floor area ratio of 0.25 in the CRS district as it would apply to the Countryside
area. Mrs. Uhrig commented that five of the seven buildings in that area could
expand at that level. Mrs. Davison commented about the development potential of
the Stop and Shop property on Bedford Street.
Mrs. Uhrig observed that it was not an assumption or a premise of the proposed
amendments that all further development in town should be stopped. She said the
Board's recommendations were on that fine line between allowing "too much" expan-
sion and avoiding making numerous buildings non -conforming. The Board sought to
pursue the objectives stated at the beginning of the report which was to allow a
variety of business services in town while discouraging new office space in the
older districts.
On a proposal to reduce the permitted floor area ratio in the CRS district from
0.25 to 0.20, Mrs. Klauminzer, Mrs. Uhrig and Mrs. Wood were in favor and Mr.
Cripps and Mr. Sorensen were opposed. In a poll of the Board to reduce the
permitted floor area ratio in the Local Office, CLO, district, from 0.30, as
recommended by Ms. Rawski, to 0.25, it was agreed to do so unanimously.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mrs. Klauminzer it was voted 4-1, with
Mr. Sorensen opposed, to recommend that the Town Meeting approve the amendments
contained in the motion in Article 43, as amended. Mr. Sorensen proposed that
the Board go forward only with changes in the Table of Dimensional Controls.
Minutes for March 23, 1987
Page 6
*******************t REPORTS *********************************************
100. Planning Board Subcommittees
a. Board of Appeals Action: Mrs. Klauminzer reported that at the meeting
on March 19, 1987, the Board of Appeals had, in effect, disapproved the
proposed two story office building at 12-18 Hartwell Avenue. Three
members of the Board of Appeals voted in favor of postponing the hear-
ing so that Mr. Colangelo could present a more specific proposal for
traffic mitigating measures. Two members of the Board of Appeals voted
against postponing. As four votes were necessary for any affirmative
action on a special permit, the application would be disapproved.
Mrs. Klauminzer reported that BIDC had submitted a revised set of plans
for the comprehensive permit application for the Katandin Development
at Hartwell Avenue and Wood Street. She said they had dropped the
Teller Program and had a new financing program. She said that, while
the new financing scheme may offer features comparable to the Teller
Program, it was important to have those financial limitations spelled
out in the new comprehensive permit to replace those in the old compre-
hensive permit decision that referred to the Teller program.
Mr. Sorensen said the Town should not have to approve what could he a
significant redesign of a project on such short notice and the revision
to the comprehensive plan should be denied until the plans are
thoroughly reviewed.
On the motion of Mrs. Wood, seconded by Mr. Sorensen, it was agreed to
send a letter to the Board of Appeals expressing the Board's strong
objection to an approval of what could become a new project without a
thorough review of the plans. The Planning Board is not attempting to
scuttle the multi -family development, particularly when additional
rental housing is needed, but the Town does need to know what is pro-
posed in the revised plans.
101. Planning Director
a. 1709-1727 Massachusetts Avenue: Mr. Bowyer reported that Town Counsel
had reviewed the position advocated by Mr. Sorensen and Mr. Domnitz
that a special permit was required before the burned -out building at
1709-1727 Massachusetts Ave. could be reconstructed because it was a
non -conforming use because of insufficient parking. As reported by Mr.
Bowyer, Town Counsel's determination is that the question of non-
conforming parking is dealt with specifically in Sections 11.1.3 and
11.1.4 of the Zoning By -Law and the question of reconstruction of a
building, which is non -conforming with respect to parking and is
destroyed or demolished, is also dealt with in that section. As the
sections of the Zoning By -Law which deal most specifically with non-
conforming parking do not require a special permit, the owners of the
1709-1727 Mass. Ave. development would not be required to apply for a
special permit.
J
1
Minutes for March 23, 1987
Page 7
Town Counsel also said to Mr. Bowyer, that in the absence of Sections
11.1.3 and 11.1.4, Mssrs. Domnitz and Sorensen might possibly have an
arguable point about the need for a special permit because of their
interpretation of several other sections of the Zoning By -Law.
However, Mr. Bowyer reported that Town Counsel does not agree with that
point either, but since the issue is specifically covered by Sections
11.1.3 and 11.1.4, there is no case for requiring a special permit.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:27 p.m.
C. z,(-)
Martha Wood, Clerk