HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-05-30-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF MAY 30, 2001
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Room Town Office Building, was
called to order at 7: 35 p.m. by Chairman Galaitsis with members Bridge - Denzak, Chase, Davies, Harden,
and staff Garber and McCall - Taylor present.
**** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MINUTES ******* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the meeting of May 9, 2001. On
the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Ms. Chase, it was voted unanimously, 5 -0, to approve the
minutes, as amended.
* * * * * * * * * * ** ADMINISTRATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS * * * * * * * * * * * **
SUBDIVISION OF LAND
Lexington Park Cluster Subdivision Release of Lots Mr. Moloney of Halyard Builders, Inc, requested the
release of thirteen lots from the restrictions upon sale and construction contained in the covenant. These
lots are located on Boxwood Lane and the extension of Sullivan Street. As all lots have rights in the
common open space so it was necessary to release this area as well. On the motion of Ms. Bridge - Denzak,
seconded by Ms. Chase, the Board voted unanimously to release lots 6 through 18 and the common open
space of the Lexington Park Subdivision.
121 Concord Avenue, Reduced fronta Subdivision Attorney Frederick Conroy had submitted a letter
on behalf of Mr. George Kazazian requesting that the Planning Board allow the public benefit of $27,500
to be split into two payments. He suggested that the Certificate of Occupancy be issued for 121 Concord
Avenue after a payment of $14,000, and the Certificate of Occupancy for 119 Concord Avenue after the
payment of the balance. Mr. and Mrs. Havan, the current owners of 121, were present and explained that
there was a lack of capital until the second house was sold as the first house was sold within the family_
The Planning Board discussed the proposal, expressing concern about the diminution of the buying power
of the amount specified in the SPS overtime.
The motion by Mr. Galaitsis, as amended with his consent by Mr. Davies and Mr. Harden, and seconded
by Ms. Bridge - Denzak, was to 1.) grant the request to allow the public benefit of $27,500, as required in
the SPS, to be made in two payments, the first of $14,000 and the second of $13,500; 2) authorize the
issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for 121 Concord Avenue upon the towri's receipt of $14,000; 3)
require that as of September 1, 2001, interest will be accrued on the outstanding balance at the prime rate,
and such interest will be included in the second payment; 4) require that the balance of $13,500 and any
accrued interest will be paid when 119 Concord Avenue is sold or, at the latest, by September 1, 2002.
The Board voted 5 -0 in favor of the motion.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** REGIONAL, INTERTOWN ISSUES * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Development of Regional Impact (DRI) Mr_ Richard Canale had asked to speak with the board on this
matter but was not present.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNING STAFF REPORT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Mr_ Garber continued the discussion from a previous meeting on current and future projects in the
planning department_ His overview included the following: 1) The Comprehensive Plan - The five
elements of the comprehensive plan are underway. Toward the end of the calendar year work will begin
on transportation and public facilities. These are very different elements and will require a different
approach and a different RTP. 2) Metropolitan State hospital Reuse - This is moving toward a definitive
Minutes for the Meeting of May 3 0, 2001 2
plan, to go to the three towns simultaneously. Judith Nitsch has been the engineer for DCAM. 3)
Middlesex Hospital -- A concept plan will soon be coming forth for Middlesex Hospital. Neither this
parcel or the whole campus has had the benefit of an inter -town planning process. Any private developer
will need rezoning as it is currently zoned for single family residential. 4) Zoning amendments — These
may be drafted by staff and board members. Perhaps it is time to break mansionization off from the
comprehensive plan and being drafting possible by -laws. There will also be definitions and technical
changes_ 5) If undergrounding of wires and cables continues to be an issue, Chapter 166 clearly puts the
Planning Board in the forefront. In looking at what is ahead, the Board should think of prioritizing these
items. It is hoped that an intern, with skills in GIS and statistics as well as an ability to conceptualize, will
be added to the staff for the coming year_
Mr. Davies said they should look at the definitions of areas. He gave as an example that, although it is
used in other by- laws, there is no definition of footprint in the Zoning By -lava. Mr. Galaitsis felt the
board members should take initiative on the mansionization issue, going off on their own and bringing
back ideas of what they want to see_ Mr. Davies thought the Board should benefit from Maryann and
Glenn's research and from the consultant's work_ Mr. Garber said it could be a combination of board and
staff research_ The expertise of the Board is welcome and they can draft by -laws. Ms. Bridge - Denzak
said she would like to add to the list of potential projects a revision of subdivision control. She finds
herself frustrated that the Board has control over site issues only when there are three or more lots in a
subdivision. Mr. Garber responded that subdivision law is limited to the right of way and that the special
permit power is from zoning and is a separate matter. Mr. Bridge - Denzak said that then they should be
looking at reducing the number of lots that trigger a site plan review. Ms_ McCall- Taylor said that there
is no site plan review in the state enabling legislation and it might be difficult to impose special permit
site plan review on fewer than three lots. Ms. Chase said it was important to clarify what regulatory
concepts they are aiming for. Ms. Bridge - Denzak said her goal was controlling mansionization and it
might be possible to use something other the special permit with site plan review to control it_ Ms. Chase
said she thought it was important to think of the highest and best use and wondered if developers did not
get the highest and best use, was the town in jeopardy? Ms. McCall - Taylor said that highest and best use
was not a eoncem of zoning, and, in fact, case law simply requires that a landowner retain soiree economic
use for a property.
Mr. Garber and Ms_ McCall - Taylor reported on the photographic project that is being done as part of the
comprehensive plan. It's purpose is to explore the visual impact of infill housing on the neighborhood
and on the lot_ The quantification of the design parameters could lead to a design manual- Mr. Galaitsis
said new houses are being built to the setback and that will change the look of the town. Mr. Garber said
he is encouraged by what some other towns are doing, and that dealing with the bulk and massing of a
house might avoid the prohibited regulation of interior space. Mr. Galaitsis said that with the noise by--
law they thought Lexington would be an innovator and they found it was not so. It may be the same for
mansionization once they begin to look at it. Mr. Harden wondered how, in terms of process, does the
Board get a by -law for next year?
Mr. Harden said that the development plan for Met State would set the context for the whole
development. Mr. Garber said that the plan being discussed is only a subdivision plan, dealing with
lotting and roadways. Once it is in place, an RFP will go out to the development committee, then a
feasibility analysis and finally, a rezoning proposal.
RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPLICATIONS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Applications To Be Heard on June 21, 2001: Mr. Davies had just received the applications so he will
review them before the next meeting.
Minutes for the Meeting of May 30, 2001. 3
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE
The Board agreed to cancel the meeting scheduled for June 13 and to hold a public hearing on 32
Roosevelt Road on June 27. Future meeting dates will be July 11 and August 8.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** REPORTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Mr. Davies reported that he had been told the board proceedings were hard to hear and he urged the Board
to speak up and use the microphone system so that the public could bear.
Mr. Galaitsis reported that the Conservation Commission, the Recreation Department and the Bicycle
Committee had met on the footpath behind Coppersmyth Way to investigate placing a more permanent
bridge there_
The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 p_m. ^�
Sara B. Chase, Clerk