Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-01-30-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF JANUARY 30, 2002 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's 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, Tap and Tyson present. Philip Herr, Marilyn Fenollosa, Wendy Manz, Susan Solomon, Elaine Dratch, Edmund Grant, Gary Larson, Gerry Paul, Michael Schroeder and Susan Fisher also attended. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** REPORTS Planning Board, Subcommittees Metropolitan State Hospital Site Reuse Mr. Kastorf reported on a Met. State Hospital reuse meeting of the tri -town task force on January 15, 2002, at which a representative of the State Department of Capital Asset Management (DCAM) announced that DCAM had been considering using the site of the Gaebler Building to construct a new juvenile and trial court building. However, a traffic study for that use indicated that it would generate a high amount of traffic so DCAM opted not to use it, looking instead at the Fernald School site. Mr. Kastorf said he was encouraged by DCAM's decision, as it seems to indicate that the State will live by its agreements with the Towns. Bikeway Advisory Committee Mr. Galaitsis reported that the Bikeway Committee is interested in the Cotton Farm development off Marrett Road and want to attend the next hearing on that project. The group is interested in a link to Highland Avenue through the conservation land adjacent to the proposed development. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Public Hearing, Draft Comprehensive_ Plan Overview by Staff: Mr. Garber made a brief introduction and then presented a PowerPoint show that detailed the planning process from its inception in the year 2000 to the four elements presented in draft form tonight: land use, natural and cultural resources, housing and economic development. The current effort had its wellsprings in the Selectmen's Long Range Planning Committee and subsequent 2020 Strategic Planning Initiatives. He described the lengthy and detailed public process which entailed more than 20 public meetings of the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee, a representative group of residents. The resulting plan provides clear impetus and direction for zoning amendments and a host of other implementing actions. Mr. Garber said that the draft document, on which this hearing is being held, was widely distributed and it addresses the concerns of everyone involved in the process, sometimes by softening the language, or changing its priority designation. Mr. Galaitsis expressed the Board's thanks for all the effort that the participants put into this plan and invited comments on the draft document. Comments by Planning Board and Public Mr. Gerry Paul, 43 Highland Avenue, asked if the plan showed a particular use for the Munroe Hill area, where he lives. The neighborhood would like to see it remain as open space. Mr. Garber responded that the plan is a general document. Ms. McCall- Taylor said that the area he is concerned with is covered by the Open Space and Recreation plan of 1997. Mr. Edmund Grant commended the Planning Board and everyone who took part in producing these four elements of the comprehensive plan. He said that the plan will add credibility to future Town actions within the town and from without. As a former Planning Board member, he knows how difficult it is to accomplish a plan. Minutes for the Meeting of January 30, 2002 2 Ms. Chase suggested that selected pieces of the data appear in the Lexington Minuteman, as it would help to support the Planning Board's positions at Town Meeting. She said the plan is rather too monumental as a whole. She also suggested a presentation to Town Meeting as a way to keep it before people. Ms. Manz suggested presenting it at the town meeting members' inforination meeting. Mr. Galaitsis suggested assembling a "mini" booth to be set up in the foyer at Town Meeting, showing strategically chosen data. Mr. Herr, planning consultant for this plan, stated that the implementation actions are the most interesting and challenging portion of the process. He said that what distinguishes a plan is the connection between the elements, the most difficult connection being that between circulation (transportation) and land use. However, to wait until the circulation and public facilities elements are done would only delay needed action in the elements already prepared and separating implementation from this important beginning would be unfortunate. This plan is about principles and values, the bedrock for future shaping of the town. It is most important to begin. Mr. Garber said that copies would be provided to the TMMA, and that it is important for them to read the elements before the implementing actions. Ms. Fenollosa suggested that an executive summary be written for town meeting members, who are overloaded with reading material during town meeting. Mr. Kastorf commented that at the beginning of the 2020 planning process, of which he was a part, the group needed data and it was difficult to acquire. This document pulls it together. lie believes its readership will increase and a well- printed copy should be available for people who will use it as a resource document. Perhaps it should be available after town meeting when there will be more time to absorb it. Mr. Grant agreed that an executive summary would be valuable. Ms. Dratch asked if a presentation about the plan, like that done by the staff last year, could be made under Article 4 at town meeting. Mr. Grant suggested a progress report on the comprehensive plan be made under article 4. Mr. Herr remarked that the executive summary and the presentation should be two separate items. Mr. Garber asked for guidance on the executive summary. Mr. Kastorf suggested that each Board member write a summary of one of the elements. Ms. Dratch questioned the wisdom of presenting the Board's proposed House Impact Review amendment to the Zoning By -Law before the comprehensive plan has been presented. Ms. Chase said that the housing element should accompany the house impact review amendment. Mr. Harden said that the comprehensive plan is already distilled and he believes that a summary would lose a lot. An executive summary would be a good thing only if it encourages people to read the entire plan. He believes it should not be a substitute. Ms. Manz asked how to get started on the implementation actions. Mr. Herr pointed out that the Iargest group of implementing actions is the Planning Board's responsibility. He suggested the Board organize its time so that it can act on them, and create groups to accomplish others. He noted the difficulty of getting an existing committee to act on the actions that are its responsibility. Mr. Kastorf said he believes that the momentum is there to accomplish much. It created this plan as well as the report of the 2020 Strategic Planning Committee. Mr. Garber commented that the staff will be making a presentation to the Business Roundtable as well as the 2020 Implementation group. The aim is to keep consciousness raised regarding the comprehensive plan. Minutes for the Meeting of January 30, 2002 After a brief discussion of whether or not to wait to accept the comprehensive plan in its entirety after completion of the other two elements, on the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Harden, the Board voted unanimously, 5 -0, to adopt the four elements of the comprehensive plan already completed, subject to technical editing. Mr. Garber thanked the members of the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee and all participants once again and invited them to take part as well in creating the circulation and public facilities elements next fiscal year. * * ** HOUSING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Update on 40B Review Committee Mr. Galaitsis left the room during this item, recusing himself from its deliberation. Ms. McCall - Taylor reported on the January 25, 2002 meeting of the 40B Review Committee. The number of units of housing acceptable to the town was the main topic of discussion. The developer wants to build 48 units. The developer filed his application with the Board of Appeals on January 23, 2002, but waived the 30 -day period within which the Appeals Board has to hold its first public hearing. Mr. Davies asked if there had been discussion of the price of the land as it seemed high. Mr. Harden agreed that the base price seemed high and that this had been discussed. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** .ARTICLES FOR 2002 TOWN MEETING Zoning Amendments The Board reviewed the latest drafts of articles 17, 18, 19 and 21. These versions will appear in the warrant. House Impact Provisions The staff reported on their meeting on January 24 with a number of developers relative to the proposed house impact review amendment. The developers aired their grievances on the amendment, mostly centering on a new, lower absolute height limit, carryover setbacks and counting the basement in the gross floor area. They also wanted an effective date that would not affect projects they have about to get underway. On the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted to include an effective date of June 1, 2002. After further discussion, on the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted 3-2, Ms. Chase and Mr. Harden opposed, to leave the height limit at 40' and not include a reduction in height as part of the proposed amendment. On the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Mr. Kastorf, the Board voted unanimously, 5 -0, to increase the allowed exemption for additions to 300 square feet. Mr. Harden commented that town meeting members will be applying these thresholds to their own houses and suggested that the Board members do the same. The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m. Sara B. Chase, Clerk