HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-02-19-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF FEBRUARY 19, 2003
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 Galaitsis with members Chase, Davies, Harden,
Kastorf and planning staff Garber, McCall - Taylor, and Tap present.
MINUTES
Review of Minutes Mr, Galaitsis left the room before the minutes were considered. The Board reviewed
and corrected the minutes for the meeting of December 11, 2002. On the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded
by Mr. Davies, it was voted unanimously 4 -0 to approve the minutes, as amended. Mr. Galaitsis rejoined
the meeting.
* * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * **
PLANS NOT REQUIRING APPROVAL UNDER THE SUBDIVISION CONTROL LAW
AN 2003 -1 Grove Street/Royal Circle The Board reviewed an Approval Not Required plan for land off
Grove Street and Royal Circle. On the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Ms. Chase, the Board voted
unanimously to endorse the plan entitled "Plan of Land in Lexington in Mass. ", dated January 30, 2003,
prepared and certified by James R. Keenan, Professional Land Surveyor, Winchester, Mass., with Form
A/2003 -1, submitted by Gary Larson of Larson Associates, as it does not require approval under the
Subdivision Control Law.
ANR 2003 -2,_ Walnut Street (Former Middlesex County Hospital) Ms. McCall- Taylor informed the
Board that on October 9, 2002 it had endorsed a plan for land off Walnut Street that was formerly the site
of the Middlesex County Hospital. Part of the land is in Waltham. The applicant, John F. Farrington, for
HCRI Holdings, has requested that the Board rescind approval of that plan (ANR2002 -5), which was
never filed at the Registry of Deeds, a:nd to approve a new plan — AN 2003 -2. The recently revised plan .
will show the endorsement of both municipalities on a single plan.
After a brief discussion, on the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Planning Board voted
unanimously to rescind the endorsement of the plan dated February 18, 2002 and revised June 4, 2002
showing a subdivision of the land formerly the known as the Middlesex Hospital, and to endorse the plan
entitled "Plan of Land in WalthamlLexington, MA," dated February 18, 2002, revised June 4, 2002 and
February 7, 2003, prepared and certified by Kevin W. Hinds, Professional Land Surveyor, Southborough,
MA, with Form A/2003 -2, submitted by John M. Farrington for HCRI Holding's Trust, as it does not
require approval under the Subdivision Control Law.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ARTICLES FOR2003 TOWN MEETING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Led emont Rezoning CRO to CD Spring Street at Hayden Avenue. Recommendation to Town Meeting:
The Board discussed its thoughts on the public bearing for The Beal Companies' (Beal) petition to rezone
its property at Spring Street and Hayden Avenue from CRO to CD so a third building and an addition to
the parking structure could be added. Staff informed them of additional information they had received
from Beal. The Board agreed to recess for ten minutes so they could read the new material.
The meeting reconvened at 8:15 p.m.
Regarding the discovery that the building exceeds the height limit in the Zoning Bylaw, Mr. Gloski, the
architect, said that the roof could be redesigned. Possible traffic mitigations were again discussed as well.
Mr. Harden commented that Beal is asking Town Meeting to set aside the controls for balance between
residential and commercial uses without offering anything extraordinary in the way of traffic mitigation.
Minutes for the Meeting of February 19, 2003
2
He could support the right proposal, with broader benefits for the Town, but this proposal is not the one.
It does not offer enough incentives to make a TDM plan work. He suggested that no new parking spaces
be built, which would force the use of modes other than single- occupant- vehicle commuting.
Mr. Kastorf agreed, saying that Beal. knows the site is a very advantageous one, but that the bulk of the
advantages in this proposal go to the applicant, not to the town. The traffic mitigation program does not
go far enough.,
Mr. Davies asked what the rationale was for the proposed building's size, why a building half the size
would not work as well.
Ms. Chase concurred with what had been said, "saying that while the current two Ledgemont buildings
respect the site, the proposed building does not. It would be too dominating a presence. She added that a
conservation or hiking connection to Spring Street could have been offered but was not and that traffic
mitigations are not sufficient.
Mr. Galaitsis also concurred, saying that Lexington would give up a great deal while the proponent reaps
many benefits if this proposal is approved. He cited the .15 floor area ratio limit approved by Town
Meeting in 1987 as a clear indication of what the town wanted in its commercial zones. The proposed
0.32 FAR would be a substantial departure from that limit. Regarding traffic, he likened it to water or
electrical current: it has to flow somewhere and it will flow onto local roads if main. intersections are
clogged. If local intersections are improved, with no comparable changes to the main arteries and
intersections, they will attract even more traffic from the congested major arteries and intersections, In
sum, lie sees this project setting a bad precedent.
Mr. Kastorf added that the tax revenue, while it seems a benefit, could be eaten away by an increase in
police details needed to control peals traffic at troublesome intersections.
While recognizing that asking that no new parking spaces be added may be impractical, the Board agreed
that it could support a reasonable proposal that offers a rationale for its size and proves that traffic
conditions would be improved through its programs. It asked Beal, as a participant in the Lexington
community, to provide leadership for future development. The size of the proposed building, its visual
impact, increased floor area ratio and traffic remained the defining negative issues for Board members.
On the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted unanimously, 5 -0, to recommend
that the Town Meeting disapprove The Beal Companies' petition to rezone its property at Ledgemont due
to concerns about traffic and an increased floor- area - ratio.
SUBDIVISION OF LAND
Turnarounds: Discussion of Legal Issues The Board continued its discussion of the legal and practical.
issues of improvements to, and turnarounds on, unaccepted and paper streets. Mr. Kastorf said that his
review of a list of Board actions on proposals involving these issues, compiled by Ms. McCall - Taylor,
revealed that the Board consistently makes decisions that are based on individual site conditions. Mr.
Garber commented that addressing the special circumstances of each turnaround case is necessary when
trying to retrofit old subdivision provisions.
Mr. Kastorf said that the Conservation Commission would like to walk the Rangeway site with the
Planning Board.
Minutes for the Meeting; of February 19, 2003
STAFF REPORTS
Mr. Garber reported that the staff would be sending the Transportation Element Advisory Committee a
brief on the progress of the element since their last meeting. Getting a draft document to Town Meeting is
the current goal, but the consultants are lagging a bit behind schedule. He reported that Eli Machek would
be helping the students of planning professional Jean Van Orman on a project involving a Lexington
property. Ms. Van Orman is teaching a class at the Boston Architectural Center.
Ms. McCall - Taylor reported that Department of Capital Asset Management has invited three developers
to present their proposals for the developable portion of the Met State Hospital site in Lexington on
March 11, 2003. This meeting will be at the High School and open to the public.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn at 10:15 p.m.
arl P. Kastorf, Clerk