Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-02-16-PB-min PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF FEBRUARY 16, 2005 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Estabrook Hall, Cary Memorial Building, was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Kastorf with members Davies, Galaitsis, Harden, Manz and planning staff McCall-Taylor and Tap present. ************ ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS ************* SUBDIVISION OF LAND Glen Road South Cluster Subdivision, Oberteuffer/Mockett, Endorse Approved Plans: Ms. McCall- Taylor informed the Board that the applicants, Mr. Oberteuffer and Ms. Mockett, have decided not to ask for a revision of the special permit for the Grant Street at Glen Road South Cluster Subdivision, approved by the Board on December 1, 2004. The Board voted to endorse the definitive plans. ************************ ARTICLES FOR 2005 TOWN MEETING ************************ Non-Zoning Articles: Mr. Harden suggested several articles which the Board may wish to comment on at Town Meeting: Article 6, Restrict Parking on Residential Streets; Articles 7and 8, Community Preservation Act; Article 19, Transfer North Street Land to Conservation; Article 20, Acquisition of Middlesex County Hospital Land; and Article 23, Acquisition of Franklin School Apartments. Article 5, Zoning Bylaw, Center Parking, Public Hearing: Mr. Kastorf opened the public hearing on the Board's proposed amendment to the CB, Center Business district parking regulations at 7:50. There were 20 people in the audience. Mrs. Manz explained that the amendment would relax somewhat the parking spaces requirement for restaurants in the center business district. The number of spaces a restaurant must provide in order to get a special permit has long been considered problematic—to the point of being referred to as a "virtual scheme"—and a barrier to new restaurants. Last year, the Center Committee tried to address this but their proposal was not approved by the Town Meeting. In support of the Center Committee's concerns and its proposed strategies to re-vitalize the center, the Planning Board has crafted an amendment that would not dramatically change the bylaw, but that would "level the playing field" by making the restaurant parking requirement the same as that of other businesses. The issues around this include: the need for parking enforcement; a parking study, which indicated there is ample parking but it is not used well and its locations not well identified; employees of businesses "feeding the meters"; lunch hour difficulties; and, overflow parking into residential neighborhoods. Mr. Julian Bussgang, 2 Forest Street, presented his objections to the proposed amendment, saying that the center does not need more restaurants; Lexington's parking requirements are more lax than those of other towns, and overflow parking in adjacent residential neighborhoods is a problem. In response to a question from Mrs. Judith Uhrig, chair of the Board of Appeals, Mrs. Manz said that the bylaw would not apply to other commercial districts, as no similar concerns have been identified there. Mr. Jerry Michelson agreed with Mr. Bussgang, noting that the number of cars in the state has increased 11 percent in the past decade so lessening parking requirements would be a bad move. He provided a number of other information points. Mr. Richard Michelson indicated that though there are fewer empty retail spaces than there were three years ago, economic conditions are still challenging for small businesses. He believes the proposed amendment would have a negative impact, as restaurants can outbid the useful specialty shops the center needs to improve the mix of stores. Minutes for the Meeting of February 16, 2005 2 Mr. Don Rosenberg, owner of the Lexx restaurant, endorsed the proposal, indicating that it is banks and real estate offices that have the deep pockets relative to competing for renting commercial space. He indicated that he makes it clear to his employees that they must not park in areas that are the most convenient for Lexx's customers. Mr. Jerome Smith, Lexington Center Committee, commented that the amendment is not meant to solve all of the center's problems. The Center Committee believes it would be a positive step toward improving the economic wellbeing of the center. Mr. Howard Levine said that the current parking regulations create obstacles to businesses trying to locate in the center and that the bylaw discriminates in favor of uses that aren’t desirable, such as banks. Ms. Mary Jo Bohart, executive director of the Chamber of Commerce, indicated that the measure would complement a recent economic development initiative that made liquor licenses available to smaller restaurants. She felt restaurants were used as a scapegoat for the perceived parking problem. Mr. Nyles Barnart asked if existing restaurants would be "grandfathered" in relation to parking if the amendment were approved. Mr. Frank Sandy said that many employees think parking tickets are an acceptable cost. He thought that fines should increase with repeat offenses. Mr. Galaitsis said the town should consider "booting" repeat offenders. Ms. Manz commented that the new parking enforcement officer is quite diligent. The hearing was closed at 9:05 p.m. Article 4, Rezone Battle Green Inn Property, Traffic Impacts, Revised Plans: The Battle Green Inn development team, Mr. Eric Shapiro, Mr. Arthur Klipfel, Ms. Gwen Noyes, Oaktree BGI, LLC; traffic consultant William Carlson, of Design Consultants, and Erik Rhodin, architect, of Line Company Architects, were present. Mr. Shapiro outlined the changes to the project that were made responding to comments from town officials, boards and committees: ?? The name was changed to The Commons in Lexington Center ?? They will offer four affordable units ?? They will offer free three-month Lexpress passes to new unit owners ?? They have projected the number of school-age children likely to live in the units and the financial and traffic impacts ?? There will be incentives for unit owners to have fewer cars Changes to the building design: ?? Gross floor area is reduced by nine percent. ?? Retail space reduced to 4,700 square feet ?? The bulk of the east elevation has been pulled back 12’ ?? The corner nearest Vine Brook Road abutters is set back seven feet ?? Underground garage provides 80 parking spaces ?? The fourth floor has been pulled back from Massachusetts Avenue Mr. Shapiro noted that he is scheduled to meet with the Selectmen to discuss public benefits on February 28. Mr. Rhodin explained the revised plans. The three penthouses have been moved away from Massachusetts Avenue; the third floor has smaller—and an additional two—units. The Board's comments related guaranteeing the viability of the existing trees on the south side towards Minutes for the Meeting of February 16, 2005 3 Vine Brook Road, the positive change to the east façade, and placement of the storm water detention structure. Mr. Galaitsis reiterated his concerns about the high density of the project and about the impact of future development on adjacent properties. Public benefit priorities: The Board indicated that donations to center "connectivity" projects are regarded as very relevant and the project has potential for providing impetus to form a center Business Improvement District. How the mechanics of the four affordable units would be worked out was touched upon. Mr. Carlson presented the results of his traffic impact study and briefly explained his methodology, which he characterized as conservative. He concluded that the project would have minimal impact on traffic on Waltham Street and Massachusetts Avenue. The level of service (LOS) at the intersection of Waltham Street and Vine Brook Road is currently Level C and would not change if the Commons project is built. Board members and people in the audience raised concern about left turns into and out of the Commons on Waltham Street and where moving vans and delivery trucks would park. Dawn McKenna requested a study taking into account traffic from the high school. Traffic counts at lunch hours in the center were also requested. Mrs. McKenna indicated that a donation to Lexpress, in perpetuity and with an escalator factor, should be considered. Mr. Kastorf said he felt that appropriate mitigations would be tightly tied to the center, e.g., contributions toward establishing a business improvement district, with any cash going toward connectivity projects. ************************************* REPORTS ************************************* Ms. McCall-Taylor reported the following: Lexington Square (Met State): Regarding Lexington's affordable housing, DHCD agreed to redraft its recent letter that laid out required actions Lexington must take before the Lexington Square affordable units are added to the DHCD inventory. The actions laid out in the recent letter belied earlier commitments. Lexington Square (Met State Campus): DCAM has backed away from on its agreement to provide for the school-aged children fund for ten years beginning at 75% occupancy and were saying that the funds would only be available to be drawn on for 10 years from the start of the project. King Street Development, Dan Taylor: The Housing Appeals Board ruled in the Town's favor on Mr. Taylor's appeal of the Planning Board's disapproval of his subdivision plan for land off King Street. Senior Planner Search: The advertisement for a senior planner will run in the Boston Globe Sunday paper on February 27. Interviews are tentatively set for April 11. She asked if any Board members are available to take part in the interviews that day. Marrett/Spring/Bridge Street Intersection: Chief Procurement Officer James McLaughlin has suggested doing a phased RFP process so that it will be easier to move forward with the second phase. This will also allow a qualifications based selection of a consultant, rather than a straight low bid situation. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 11:15 p.m. Wendy Manz, Clerk