HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-03-17-PB-min
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF MARCH 17, 2005
A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Office
Building, was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by acting Chairman Harden with members Canale, Hornig,
Manz and planning staff McCall-Taylor present. Mr. Galaitsis was absent.
************************* ARTICLES FOR 2005 TOWN MEETING ************************
Article 9 – Waltham Street Rezoning – The Board discussed the issue of traffic mitigations for this
development proposal, and in general. While the Traffic Advisory Committee had taken a lead role in the
longer process the previous year Board members felt that the Planning Board should be the body to
determine an appropriate level of mitigations. Mr. Hornig said there was a need for a mitigation policy
but that was for a future discussion. The question of whether a separate Development Agreement was
needed, or if the Preliminary Site Development and Use Plan (PSDUP) could contain a commitment to
funds was considered. The members felt it was a question for legal counsel.
On the motion of Ms. Manz, seconded by Mr. Hornig, the Board voted 3 to 0 to accept the report on
Article 9 with the changes discussed. Mr. Canale abstained from the vote.
Article 5 – Center Parking – Copies of a draft report were distributed. Ms. McCall-Taylor commented that
the amendment would not put restaurants on a par with retail uses in the center as retail was one space per
325 square feet while the amendment would put restaurants at one space per 250 square feet. Ms. Manz
expressed her displeasure that this issue was just coming up now, after she had worked with the Center
Committee since the last Town Meeting. Mr. Canale said that he would have preferred to look at the
whole parking situation in the center rather than dealing with just one aspect but as a new member had
been willing to support this article. Mr. Hornig said it was nice to have some parking requirement for new
construction and he would like to attempt to resolve the underlying problem. He wondered if there was a
reason to go forward with the article at this time. Mr. Harden said that he did not know the intricacies of
the zoning board of appeals process and whether the changes still might offer some advantage to
restaurants seeking permitting, but had to conclude also that the parking amendment would not go far
enough to accomplish the board's intent of leveling the playing field. Mr. Canale thought going forward
with this article might have a negative effect on Article 4, as there would be uncertainty about impacts
during the construction period.
On the motion of Mr. Hornig, seconded by Mr. Canale, the Board voted 4 to 0 to move for indefinite
postponement of the article. Ms. Manz said she would go back to the Center Committee and let them
know that a good faith effort had been made. All agreed that as worded the amendment did not achieve
the stated goal of putting restaurants on a par with retail uses. Mr. Harden said that although it had not
been a perfect article it had been a step in the right direction and he wanted to continue to work on the
issue. Mr. Canale made a motion to bring an article to the 2006 Town Meeting as a Board priority. Mr.
Hornig seconded the motion saying that it would be a comprehensive approach to the center parking. It
passed 4 to 0.
Article 4 – Battle Green Inn – Mr. Shapiro had offered to review the financials of his development
proposal with a small group of people skilled in the review of pro formas. This was in response to Mr.
Patrick Mehr’s assertion that the developer stood to make a huge profit on this development. Mr. Harden
said that he was annoyed that this was coming up now given his prior request for financial information.
Ms. Manz said she had a problem with the philosophy: the goal is not to soak every developer to the
maximum but to mitigate the impacts. She does not see the need to come before Town Meeting and prove
that a project will not make a profit. Mr. Canale said that having units to be sold is okay and justifiable,
but when the developer says he is adding units for financial reasons that is different. Mr. Hornig
commented that the developer can approach others if he wants to have someone speak to this issue at
Town Meeting. Board members agreed that they did not need to see a pro forma to decide on the project.
Minutes for the Meeting of March 17, 2005 2
Mr. Canale suggested that one way to think about the density of this project was to consider it as two
units per acre in the CB district as a whole. Ms. Manz said that it could be viewed as a pilot to bring
residential into the center but that that might not be an argument to use. Mr. Harden said that a response to
the 60 units per acre was needed but he was not sure that considering the CB as a whole would not be
seen as disingenuous. Ms. Manz suggested keeping the argument in the Board’s “back pocket”.
The Board returned to a discussion of the pro forma. Mr. Harden said he was not sure he wanted to
cultivate an indifference to this and if a group were pulled together to look at the pro forma he would go
to the meeting but would not promise to represent anything to anyone. Ms. Manz said that the information
on a pro forma is outside of the Planning Board’s expertise. Mr. Canale said that if there is a meeting to
present the figures other boards should be present. Ms. Manz said that fair mitigation for impact is what
the Planning Board looks at. Any share in an increase in value is matched by an increase in tax revenue.
Mr. Canale suggested the Board say that the mitigation offered was fair value, the use fits with the
comprehensive plan, and the board wants to see that there is some incentive to move forward.
The Board approved the edits to the report on Article 4. Mr. Hornig left the meeting as he had to chair the
TMMA meeting that evening.
Report to Town Meeting Under Article 2 - Board members agreed that though the Board can make a
report to Town Meeting under Article 2, they would rather not do it on the first night. Ms. McCall-Taylor
will speak to the moderator about scheduling the report during the second week. Mr. Harden will present
the report. He said he would talk about inclusionary housing and center parking and welcomed any drafts
the other members might send him.
On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 p.m.
Wendy Manz, Clerk