Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-11-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF FEBRUARY 11, 2004 The 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 Harden with members Chase, Davies, Galaitsis, Kastorf and planning staff Garber, McCall - Taylor, and Tap present. ARTICLES FOR 2004 TOWN MEETING Article 8, Zoning Bylaw, Home Occupations, Public Hearing Mr. Harden opened the public hearing for the Planning Board's proposed amendment to the Home Occupations Bylaw. He explained that the Board seeks to refine the definitions of "home occupations ", to adjust the use table relating to home occupations and to establish specific performance standards for such uses and defining three tiers— instruction, minor and major. The home occupations bylaw has not been updated since millinery and taking in washing were listed as permitted occupations. Ms. McCall- Taylor gave a brief overview of the article, explaining that it was a change from a list of allowed uses to an impact -based regulation. Audience Comments and Suggestions: Ms. Judith Uhrig and Mr. Nyles Barnert of the Zoning Board of Appeals expressed some concerns over aspects of the amendment that would restrict certain uses that are now allowed. They suggested changes that would allow the Zoning Board of Appeals to regulate the number of clients that could visit the home at one time, thus allowing psychotherapists to hold group or family counseling sessions. They also thought that the hours of operation being proposed were too restrictive. Regarding permitted hours of operation, Mr. Michael Martignetti, resident and local realtor, noted that psychologists and psychiatrists often see patients in early morning hours before the workday begins. This was also thought to be something a special permit under the "major" category might address. Special permits must be renewed periodically. Ms. Dawn McKenna asked if there had been any attempt to ascertain what types of home occupations are currently being conducted in town. Ms. Uhrig said that the Board of Appeals mostly sees requests for professional home offices. Mr. Galaitsis asked if the proposed changes would affect the Zoning Board of Appeals' caseload. Mr. Barnert said it probably would not, as only major home occupations would come before the Appeals Board and the minor occupations would be allowed as of right. Those present seemed to agree that this amendment would make it more likely that people with home occupations would seek a permit, as it takes into account technology related occupations. The hearing was closed at 8:05 p.m. Artic _ 7, Zoning Bylaw, Impervious Surface in Residential Developments, Public Hearing: Mr. Harden opened the hearing on the Planning Board's proposed amendment to the way impervious surface is calculated in residential developments at 8:05 p.m. He explained that the amendment is meant to codify current practice and equalize the treatment of cluster and conventional developments and has raised the question of whether or not the cluster regulations are doing what they were designed to do. Mr. Galaitsis expressed his belief that the amendment would remove an important control on cluster developments, which already get a density bonus. A number of the members of the development community were in the audience. Mr. Gerry Moloney, Halyard Builders, observed that the amendment seems like a big change, but Ms. McCall- Taylor responded that in looking back through completed cluster developments, she found that impervious surface was calculated in the same way in all of them; the amendment would simply put it in writing. So- called pervious paving materials were discussed. Staff indicated that they all become impervious by compaction in a rather short period of time. Anything less than 100 percent pervious would not be counted as pervious in plan calculations. Mr. Austin commented that mitigating structures in the drainage Minutes for the Meeting of February 11, 2004 2 system handles runoff from impervious surface and suggested they should be factored in to the calculation. Mr. Rick Waitt, Meridian Engineering, agreed that drywells and other drainage structures could be designed to take care of any runoff from impervious surfaces in a subdivision. Mr. Galaitsis disagreed with this, saying that if mitigation were the only answer, then Iots should be developed with 100 percent impervious surface to catch all runoff. Mr. Harden felt that the idea of relying on dry wells and other drainage structure oversimplifies the situation. Mr. Todd Cataldo indicated that there might be a potential conflict with the Conservation Commission's definition of impervious surface. He also indicated that one might begin to see smaller houses and dirt driveways as a result of the bylaw amendment. He also asked how sidewalks would be figured in. Mr. Barnert, Board of Appeals, asked about the terms "interior drive" and "secondary drive ". Mr. Garber responded that a hierarchy of drives has been defined to a degree, but that the Board has some flexibility in evaluating individual development plans in this regard. Using the Lexington Hills subdivision as an example of the re- development of a site where pre - existing impervious surface would be removed, the staff explained the proposed calculation for impervious surface ratio in such circumstances. Any increase in impervious surface ratio by a special permit, above what is allowed in the Zoning Bylaw, shall result in a net reduction of impervious coverage from the existing site. Such permitted increase shall not exceed one -half of the difference between the existing ratio and the ratio specified in the "Schedule of Permitted Buildings, Density and Dimensional Standards." Mr. Moloney commented that the change seems to be in the spirit of the 1996 cluster bylaw revision The hearing was closed at 8:55 p.m. Article 6 Zoning B law. Qpen Space in Residential Developments, Public Hearin : Mr. Harden opened the public hearing on the Board's proposed amendment to the way open space is defined in residential developments. He explained that developers have found it difficult to meet the "usable open space ", as currently defined, and "common open space" requirements without over - excavating a site. Staff found that open space in Lexington's completed cluster developments is lower than that in other municipalities' clusters. Combining the two "types" of open space, as is proposed, would be slightly less restrictive, but a majority of the Board believes that better site design would result if the amendment were adopted. Mr. Galaitsis indicated that he has concerns and cannot support it. Mr. Todd Cataldo, Sheldon Corporation, commented that he thought it might discourage developers from doing cluster subdivisions. Mr. Moloney asked to be updated on any revisions the Board makes to the proposal. The hearing was closed at 9:15 p.m. * * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * ** Discussion_ on Engineering Review of Plans and Inspection Fees Mr. Garber reported that as the Engineering Division has lost so much personnel, it will no longer be able to review subdivision plans or inspect work at development sites, effective immediately. A letter over the signatures of Mr. Harden and Mr. David Carbonneau, Assistant Town Engineer was sent to people active in Lexington development. Mr. Carbonneau was present to answer how a pass - through system would work. Mr. John Austin and Mr. Todd Cataldo, both developers, and Mr. Rick Waitt, engineer, were in the Minutes for the Meeting of February 11, 2004 audience. Their questions had to do with whether or not permit fees would be reduced, the protocol for deciding level of detail of review relative to the Town's review standards, how the reviews would be priced and what the process for communicating with the reviewing engineer would be. Mr. Carbonneau indicated that he would issue a Request for )Proposal for the work and endeavor to provide the best value and fairest process possible. He indicated that the arrangement might end up being better all around. MINUTES Review of Minutes The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meetings of November 5, 2003, January 7 and 21, 2004. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the minutes as amended. COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING Executive Order 418, Additional Work Mr. Garber reported that consultant Rick Taintor, Taintor and Associates, who is doing work for the Board with a grant authorized by Executive Order 418, has finished his first assignment, an analysis of the impervious surface and open space requirement the Development Regulations. There is still enough money left in the grant for him to continue working on issues related to implementing the Comprehensive Plan, as required by grant conditions. His contract ends on June 30, 2004. A number of potential subjects were brought up — "tweak" the cluster bylaw; center business district issues, e.g., parking, store vacancies, potential new uses in the Battle Green Inn property; examine DB zoning as a whole. Mr. Kastorf commented that the center parking issue has been studied a number of times. The issue is so complex and involves so many "players ". Mr. Garber suggested doing a zoning analysis and a history of center initiatives and successes. Mr. Kastorf urged that the results be a public document. Mr. Garber indicated that he would speak with Mr. Taintor about an estimated cost of such a study. ARTICLES FOR 2004 TOWN MEETING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Rezone Met State _Hospital Site, AvalonBay The Board reviewed the various issues that need to be worked out with AvalonBay Communities, Inc. relative to its redevelopment proposal for the former Met State Hospital site before the public hearing on March 10. The number of units planned is 430 and that is seen as too many by nearly everyone. The memo from the Transportation Advisory Committee received by staff this week asks the Board for guidance before TAC meets with AvalonBay. On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously 6/ dj �1 ourn a0: 0 p.m. Davies, Clerk