Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-01-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF NOVEMBER 1, 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 Galaitsis, Hornig, Canale and Zurlo and planning staff McCall-Taylor and Schilt present. ************************************* MINUTES ************************************** Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of October 18, 2006. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the minutes as amended. The Board reviewed the minutes for the executive session on October 18, 2006. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the minutes as submitted. The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of October 25, 2006. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the minutes as amended. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************* SUBDIVISION OF LAND Wisteria Lane Conventional Subdivision, Request to Set Surety: Mr. Schilt informed the Board that Mr. Joseph Marino of Homes Development Corporation has submitted a request to set surety for the remaining improvements to construct the road and install municipal services for the Wisteria Lane Subdivision located off of Colony Road. At a later date, Mr. Marino will submit a request to release the lots in the subdivision. The current request is to set surety for no less than 15 percent of the original estimated cost to construct the improvements, which in this case would be $27,000.00. The Engineering Division has reviewed and approved the estimated cost to construct the remaining improvements. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted 5 to 0 to set the amount of surety as $27,000.00 for completion of the street and municipal facilities for the Wisteria Lane subdivision. *************************** ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS **************************** The Commons at Lexington: Mr. Zurlo stated that he has a business relationship with one of the members of the applicant team so he recused himself and left the room. Ms. McCall-Taylor presented plans that have been submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for the Definitive Site Development and Use Plan (DSDUP) for the redevelopment of the Battle Green Inn property as a mixed- use development. She explained that most of the changes from what was shown on the preliminary plan approved by Town Meeting were building design issues. The most significant change is that the Minutes for the Meeting of November 1, 2006 2 applicants are proposing that construction workers would park off-site, most likely in the long-term unmetered municipal lot behind the CVS Pharmacy. During the preliminary plan review, it had been stated that during construction parking would be on-site in the existing garage, which will be reconfigured in the new building. Ms. McCall-Taylor suggested, and the Board concurred, that construction worker parking should be provided outside of the Center, with shuttles to bring workers to the site, rather having workers park on side streets or take up spaces at public parking meters. She provided a draft of a letter she will submit to the ZBA and asked the Board for input. It was noted by the Board that the Design Advisory Committee should review the building design changes. Ms. McCall-Taylor indicated that neighbors have submitted a petition to the Planning Board and the Board of Selectmen requesting that the ZBA ensure that the Town retains the right to regulate the proposed loading zone and parking spaces on Waltham Street, and to regulate turning movements into and out of the parking garage. The matters they raise are under the jurisdiction of the Board of Selectmen regardless of what is shown on the plans, as they are elements that impact the public right-of-way, and the Board felt that it was unnecessary to restate this in the special permit. Mr. Hornig noted that there had been a reconfiguration to the parking program in the garage. Ms. McCall- Taylor stated that the parking ratio was still within the limits approved in the preliminary plan. Mr. Canale noted that there were materials missing from the submission, and that the lack of text describing the DSDUP should be provided in order for the Board to make recommendations to the ZBA. Ms. Manz asked if the Board had any other comments to include in Ms. McCall-Taylor’s letter to the ZBA. Mr. Galaitsis asked Ms. McCall-Taylor whether all concerns expressed in the neighbors’ letter to the Board were explicitly or implicitly addressed by the zoning by-law. Ms. McCall-Taylor noted that they were. Mr. Hornig stated that the construction worker parking should be provided elsewhere, or the applicants should get the appropriate approvals and permits from the Town to park in the municipal lots. Mr. Zurlo rejoined the meeting at 8:20 p.m. ******************************** ZONING INITIATIVES ******************************* Article XII Traffic By-Law: Ms. Manz suggested that in discussing revisions to the Traffic By-Law, the Board should follow Mr. Canale’s suggestion and try to envision what the whole transportation network in the town should entail. She stated that it might be difficult to quantify demands for alternative modes of transportation, such as transit or bike routes, where those modes currently exist to only a limited degree. Minutes for the Meeting of November 1, 2006 3 She noted that the Comprehensive Plan does not include recommendations that additional roads be built, or for expansion of existing roads, but the Plan does detail strategies to improve deficiencies in other transportation modes. She also noted that both the Sidewalk Committee and the Bicycle Advisory Committee have initiatives underway to prepare master plans for facility improvements in town. Mr. Zurlo provided a handout detailing LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) rating systems that promote sustainable site design and planning elements. He described how developers could earn points for LEED accreditation for projects that incorporate a wide variety of environmentally friendly design and construction practices, four of which are devoted to alternative transportation strategies. He described how the provisions could be applied to the Town’s by-laws, including provisions for access to public transportation, promoting commuting by bicycle, use of alternative fueled vehicles, and reductions in the capacity of the parking supply. Mr. Hornig asked if the Board had ideas on ways to improve the current transportation infrastructure. He stated that his vision for the town would be for more bicycle facilities along arterial roadways, both on- and off-road, provisions of sidewalks on all arterial roadways, more LEXPRESS coverage, and, ideally, extension of the Red Line subway system from Cambridge to Hartwell Avenue. Ms. McCall-Taylor added that the Board should consider requirements that sites be designed to accommodate bus access. Mr. Zurlo added his vision for rail stations and bus drop-off areas near commercial developments. Mr. Canale stated that the Bicycle Advisory Committee has identified three types of bicycle facility users: commuting to work or school; point to point trips, such as from home to a store; and, recreation. He noted that most bicycle trips are non-commuting. Mr. Hornig stated that arterial roads are intended to be used for point-to-point trips and not necessarily for recreation. Mr. Canale stated that the Bicycle Committee does not feel that commuting by bicycle on arterials is generally safe, and they would prefer seeing alternative routes for bicycle commuters as well. Mr. Hornig suggested that arterial roads should be considered as arterial corridors, with multi-modal provisions to ensure safety for all users. Mr. Canale stated that a mature roadway system should have a rating system. Ms. Manz asked whether the Board should consider safety measures for arterial roads first. Mr. Hornig stated that arterials have been established to accommodate large demand, and they are unsafe for bicyclists. Mr. Galaitsis noted that recreational bicyclists crossing arterials is also a safety issue. He added that increasing the FAR for properties on Hartwell Avenue will not accomplish much in terms of new development potential if access issues are not addressed first. Mr. Canale noted that the MBTA has a 25-year plan that includes two Minutes for the Meeting of November 1, 2006 4 options for extending the Red Line, one along the Minuteman Bikeway out to Hartwell and the other along Route 2. Both projects are ranked in the 170’s out of approximately 180 projects, and in 25 years the MBTA expects to implement only a small number of the higher-ranking projects. Mr. Galaitsis stated that a bypass road around the Center would alleviate congestion and make the Center more pedestrian friendly. He described communities in Europe where cars were not so prevalent in the town centers, and that the compact development patterns of the communities encourage a pedestrian orientation. He wondered whether the options to have a Lexington center by-pass have been irreversibly eliminated. Mr. Hornig indicated that completing Worthen Road would require a legislative act. Mr. Hornig stated that he felt that problematic intersections should have a higher priority for improvements. Mr. Canale noted that constructing roundabouts might be a good solution, referencing a list of recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Manz inquired whether the Board might favor giving equal attention to different modes of transportation when requesting exactions from developers. Mr. Hornig noted that a program for infrastructure improvements is needed, but questioned how zoning could be used to acquire funding to fix the backlog. Ms. Manz described research she has conducted on case law pertaining to exactions from rezonings, and her findings have been that the Supreme Judicial Court has supported exactions beyond those which mitigate direct impacts of development, when they are approved by local legislative bodies. She added that subdivision approvals, which do not require Town Meeting approval for rezoning, are not treated in the recent cases, and in those decisions, the Planning Board appears to be limited to requesting mitigation measures. She added, however, that impacts for which mitigations may be requested could be broadly defined. She described rulings from the Land Court and the Supreme Judicial Court, which have upheld mitigations and exactions that had a rational nexus with the development project, and a “rough proportionality” to the impacts being mitigated, especially if they were provided voluntarily. Mr. Hornig noted that exactions should be negotiated and not spelled out in the by-law. If there are specific requirements in the by-law he felt it could be considered a taking. He added that the Town can suggest a wide variety of mitigations, but in the end, the commitments have to be voluntary in order to hold up in court if challenged. Ms. Manz added that the Board could ask for mitigations in subdivisions, but Town Meeting rezoning approvals give the Town much more power to expect a broader range of exactions. She suggested that the by-law be written to require contributions to mitigate generalized impacts in the Town. Minutes for the Meeting of November 1, 2006 5 Mr. Hornig noted that he saw no problem with a broad definition of addressing impacts and expected mitigations, but he suggested that a policy should be established to address the backlog of needed improvements and ensure that exactions are proportional. Mr. Galaitsis asked the staff whether the town counsel has been consulted about this issue, as requested during the October 25, 2006 discussion of compensatory benefits. The town counsel has not been consulted yet. Mr. Hornig stated that while the current traffic by-law is a barrier to resolving problems with impacts, he does not foresee major problems if the by-law is not updated in the coming year due to the need to thoroughly work through the issues. Mr. Zurlo suggested that while he feels it is reasonable to broadly define mitigation improvements, he thinks it is important that baselines and prerequisites are established for improvements, and that any exactions should be specifically tied to particular developments. Inclusionary Housing: Mr. Zurlo stated that he has not benefited from the in-depth discussion of the Board on the by-law that took place prior to his service and has requested an opportunity for further discussion of by by-law at a subsequent Planning Board meeting. He is currently discussing the by-law with the Housing Partnership and other community groups. Changes he would like the Board to discuss at a later date include modifying the cost factors to bring existing housing units up to current building codes, addressing how the affordable housing units would re-enter the housing market, and including incentives beyond increased densities, such as reduced project review fees, less stringent requirements to provide infrastructure, and if possible to make the by-law more applicable to more entities. Ms. Manz stated that members of Temple Isaiah have been meeting with members of the Planning Board and the Housing Partnership Board to help generate support for the Inclusionary By-Law zoning amendment before Town Meeting. The group has volunteered to make phone calls to Town Meeting members and the Board of Selectmen to discuss the by-law and solicit support for approval. ************************************* REPORTS ************************************* Staff Ms. McCall-Taylor stated that a warrant article has been submitted by the Selectmen for the Special Town Meeting to adopt the Mullin Rule, which permits board members to vote on an issue, even if they have missed a meeting at which it was considered, as long as they have reviewed a tape or transcript of the meeting. She recommended conducting outreach to members of other town boards and commissions Minutes for the Meeting of November 1, 2006 6 to garner support for Town Meeting approval. Mr. Hornig inquired whether the Board meetings would be audiotaped for absent members to listen to. Ms. McCall-Taylor stated that arrangements would be made to record the meetings where absences were known in advance. Ms. McCall-Taylor stated that the second round of interviews for the Senior Planner position are scheduled for November 6, 2006. Ms. Manz and Mr. Canale will represent the Board at the interviews. Ms. McCall-Taylor stated that staff has been notified by the Office of Commonwealth Development that our proposal for a Smart Growth Technical Assistance Grant was approved. $25,000 had been requested to use for consultant services to revise the Cluster Subdivision by-law. The approved grant is only for $15,000, so a revised scope of work will be submitted to the state for approval. Planning Board Mr. Canale stated that the next MAGIC meeting is scheduled for Thursday, November 9, 2006. The topic will focus on transportation. The Metropolitan Area Planning Council is developing a toolkit for communities to use to consider parking requirements, and will give a presentation about the toolkit. Mr. Canale stated that the Smart Growth Conference is scheduled for December 1, 2006 in Worcester. Mr. Canale distributed copies and provided an overview of the recently completed Heritage Landscape Inventory. He described a map that had been prepared outlining the eight sites in Lexington that have been surveyed by the consultants who prepared the inventory and made recommendations for preservation initiatives. Mr. Canale distributed copies of a draft proposal from the Bicycle Advisory Committee to the Community Preservation Committee for a West Lexington Greenway Corridor. The project proposed is for a series of off-road trails and paths on conservation land west of Route 128. The Committee has asked for support from the Planning Board for the Corridor initiative. The Board agreed to review the proposal and consider a recommendation to the Community Preservation Committee. Mr. Zurlo stated that the Economic Development Task Force will hold their first meeting on November 2, 2006. Ms. Manz stated that the first meeting of the Sustainable Lexington Task Force is scheduled for November 13, 2006. Minutes for the Meeting of November 1, 2006 7 ******************************* EXECUTIVE SESSION ******************************** At 10:00 p.m., by individual poll of the Board – Mr. Canale, Mr. Hornig, Ms. Manz, Mr. Galaitsis, and Mr. Zurlo – it was voted 5-0 to go into Executive Session to discuss the status of litigation regarding the denial of the cluster subdivision for 177 Grove Street. The Board agreed not to return to open session. Gregory Zurlo, Clerk