Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-06-28-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JUNE 28, 2006 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Manz with members Hornig, Canale, Zurlo and planning staff McCall-Taylor present. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************* SUBDIVISION OF LAND 31, 33 & 35 Cary Avenue - Mr. Cataldo of Sheldon Corporation, the developer of the subdivision at 31, 33 and 35 Cary Avenue, asked the Board to allow the addition of two patios to the plans. The changes proposed are within the previously approved maximums for site coverage and impervious surfaces. On a motion duly made and seconded, the Planning Board voted to allow a minor revision to the special permit issued as part of the definitive approval of the cluster subdivision entitled 31, 33 & 35 Cary Avenue. The original special permit was issued May 11, 2005 and filed with the Town Clerk on May 19, 2005. The minor revisions permitted are: ?? Addition of a 196 square foot patio to Lot 1, 33 Cary Avenue, to be made of pavers installed on a sand base ?? Addition of a 300 square foot patio to Lot 2, 31 Cary Avenue, to be made of pavers installed on a sand base ****************** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE ******************* Goal Setting: Ms. Manz said that the purpose of the rest of the meeting was to see if the Board could develop a work program and goals for the next year. A list of possibilities and been circulated and members had indicated their priorities. Looking quickly over the lists, she stated that there seemed to be four consensus priorities - inclusionary housing, cluster revisions, center parking and FAR (floor area ratio)/ commercial values. Inclusionary Housing: Ms. Manz said that the Board was already committed to working towards the passage of the inclusionary housing by-law but that it was no longer as certain that there would be a fall town meeting. If there were a fall Town Meeting there would need to be a push at the end of summer. Two “Housing 101” sessions have been proposed to explain the inclusionary by-law, July 22 and August 5. There was already interest expressed in the session on August 5. Mr. Canale said that they needed to know the purpose of the meeting and what would be presented. He felt that Board needed to get its framing of the issues out and have responses to anticipated questions. Mr. Hornig said it was later than one might think as if there were a fall town meeting, as the public hearing would be in September. Floor Area Ratio (FAR): The Board had met with the Board of Selectmen on Monday to discuss this issue. It had been agreed that a working group of members from the two boards and staff would continue the discussion. They would rough out the data needs and how to proceed. Ms. Manz felt they would not expect a warrant article for the ’07 Town meeting. Mr. Hornig commented that if they were going to make something happen, it would take a lot of staff time. Mr. Canale felt that the issue should not be taken up until the economic development officer was on board. Mr. Zurlo said that he was going to suggest that the 2020 scoping group revisit the economic development portion of the Comprehensive Plan. It could step back from the FAR part but still address economic development. Mr. Hornig said that during the coming year the Planning Board members would probably touch on everything on the list of possible work items but should select a few items to focus on. Ms. Manz said rather than Far they could take a broader look at how to encourage economic development and give it a medium level of effort. Mr. Hornig said the only significant thing for spring is the inclusionary housing and that’s written. Ms. Manz said that revising the cluster by-law is a priority but the work might not start until the fall. Mr. Hornig said the inclusionary housing will take a big push but is a short term project. As to the economic development items he is willing to work with the Board of Selectmen but not Minutes for the Meeting of June 28, 2006 2 to push it. Mr. Canale suggested pushing the Board of Selectmen and see where they wanted to take it. He felt the Planning Board could be pro-active by cooperating but not taking the lead. Mr. Zurlo said that he originally thought the 2020 scoping group was to develop a job description for the economic development officer but that seemed to be already done, so he had suggested that they try to identify issues and strategies. He had agreed to co-ordinate this first effort. He asked the members for guidance on how he should represent the Board’s interests and views. Mr. Canale said that he should get a sense of the Board but that they were delegating him to represent them. Mr. Hornig said there might be some formal Board positions. The rest would be an informal guess as to where the Planning Board stands. Mr. Zurlo said he would analyze the individual issues raised in the Economic Development element of the Comprehensive Plan and try to link related topics. This effort may benefit the Group during its work as well as provide an opportunity to evaluate the appropriateness of the major issues cited in today's climate. Parking: Mr. Hornig suggested the Board treat center parking in the same manner as FAR and walk along with the Board of Selectmen but not get ahead of them. Mr. Zurlo wondered if the Planning Board had exhausted what they could put on the table. Ms. Manz said the Planning Board had batted around the parking issue to some degree for several years. The VHB recommendations were still out there waiting to be implemented. The addition of spaces at the N-star lot and increased police enforcement represented some progress. Mr. Zurlo then asked each member to say what he or she thought was the parking problem and what change could solve it. Ms. Manz said new restaurants had trouble locating due to the higher than retail parking requirements. Mr. Hornig said Mr. Michelson’s version is that there is insufficient parking, but people in the community are unhappy about various aspects. Mr. Canale said people are unhappy with the market realities of what is happening; banks outbid shops and they should zone to alleviate this. It is a center and a small space and people want to park near where they are going. They look to Planning Board for a simple repertoire of tools. He said the Board is probably not articulate enough in saying “we are not solving these issues”. He suggested putting forward eliminating parking requirements, which would put pressure on others to deal with the situation. Mr. Zurlo asked if the Board in fact felt there was no problem. Mr. Hornig said there is nothing the Planning Board can do to make it better; some problems cannot be solved with zoning. Mr. Canale said the most they could do is look at allowed floor uses. He said that the Center Charrette was going to have a second session and they should wait for them to solve the issues. Ms. Manz said there is the issue of a center parking structure - who would build it and how to fund it. Mr. Pagett of the Board of Selectmen is looking for funds for a feasibility study to put the issue to bed. Members agreed to offer advice and a willingness to serve on committees but again the Planning Board would rather be right behind the Selectmen, not leading them. Traffic: Mr. Hornig felt that they should not take on any more as even without taking on a rewrite of Article 12 of the Zoning By-Law the Board will be doing other things. Ms. Manz commented that if FAR is studied, traffic will come up. Mr. Canale said that Article 12 was written and developed in another time when the solution was to increase capacity. Mr. Hornig said that Article 12 was seen by Town Mewing as a limit on development and if they proposed changes it would have to be something with controls. Ms. Manz suggested giving input to TMG but Mr. Hornig said the rewrite would be the responsibility of the Planning Board and they would want input from TMG, rather than the reverse. He thought it would compete with the cluster revision for resources. Mr. Canale said he was volunteering to work on Article 12. He did not feel the need for a consultant as he felt there was more expertise in the building than consultants would have. Mr. Hornig said if they did this, it is how they will spend their fall meeting time. Ms. Manz said she was not averse to giving priority to the Article 12 rewrite. Special Zoning Districts: Mr. Canale said he was not sure if this needed change, or if the Board simply need to follow its own regulations more closely and that would resolve the problems. Ms. McCall-Taylor said it is difficult for the Board to stand on its rules and to tell Town Meeting to defeat a proposal because the petitioner had not followed the Board’s rules. Minutes for the Meeting of June 28, 2006 3 Other goals/work items: Mr. Hornig said there may be other small items that the Board will want to come forward with such as the definition of subdivision found in 135-47. Wireless Communications By-Law - Mr. Canale said these changes are most likely to be technical corrections as most of the changes being considered are actually in the Zoning Board of Appeals regulations, not in the zoning. Heritage Landscapes Draft Inventory - To be reviewed and comments returned by next week Scenic Byway - Not a workload for the Planning Board but Mr. Canale hoped there would be continued staff support. There will be an application for a federal highway grant in February. Scenic Roadway - Tree Committee has some interest in having this adopted. If so the Planning Board will have to weigh in as they would be the body to approve tree removal in public ways. Mr. Canale was concerned that some board members might not be able to support this. Mr. Hornig said that if he was the party in question, he didn’t think he would have a problem with it but would have to see it first. In the particular case of Walnut Street, he had safety concerns about walkers and bikers being able to use it. Open Space and Recreation Plan - According to Ms. Manz the Community Preservation Committee is required to develop an open space and recreation plan and this will create demands on the staff. Mr. Canale suggested standing firmly behind the Conservation Commission on this one and suggested inviting the Commission to a Planning Board meeting. ************************************* REPORTS ************************************* Planning Board - Mr. Hornig reported on the TMMA wrap-up for Town Meeting. It was suggested that the Planning Board communicate more prior to public hearings and that Lex Media film the public hearings. Board members felt they had held numerous public information sessions that were attended by only a few. Mr. Canale said he had been to the Metro Future meeting last night where there were approximately 150 attendees and that 200 were expect at tonight’s meeting. He urged member to attend the additional session that will be held in September. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 10:05 p.m. Gregory Zurlo, Clerk