The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-06-20-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF R NTE 20, 2001 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Room, Town Office Building, began at 7:35 p-m. with Chairman Galaitsis, members, Chase, Davies, Harden, Planning Director Garber, and Assistant Planner McCall - Taylor present. Ms. Bridge- Denzak was absent. Philip Herr and Sarah Jaynes, of Herr and James and Associates, planning consultants, were also present and co-led the evening's discussions. Members of the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee -- Tom DeNoto, Karl Kastorf, Joyce Miller, Wendy Manz, Larry Belvin, Lee Sinai, and Susan Solomon were present as well as Elaine Dratch, Marilyn Fenellosa, Iris Wheaton, Ada Wong, Fred Johnson and Eileen Entin. COMPREIIENSIFVE PLANNING ** * * * * * ** ** * * * * * * * ** * ** Infill Housing Pho Project Members of the Planning Board and the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee had been divided into five groups and assigned a section of Lexington — north, south, east, west and central_ Given panoramic one -use cameras, their assignment was to document infill housing in Lexington, taking pictures of infill houses that they felt "worked" in their neighborhood and others that did not "work_" Mr. Galaitsis introduced the team leaders, each of whom presented their group's photographs, which had been mounted on a presentation board, and explained why their examples were chosen, why certain houses blended in or enhanced the neighborhood while other did not. The asseinbled participants discussed their reactions and thoughts and began to list common themes and elements that came out of the exercise, including criticism, concerns about and approval of some of the infill houses_ Comments were as follows: Themes East Lexington: Torn Harden Is the house in scale with its neighbors? Were trees preserved? Trees mitigate a lot. Is the house sited well in relation to the topography? Architectural critique avoided. Why do Moon Hill, Five Fields, Turning Mill, and other areas, avoid teardowns? Joyce Miller Topography Mature trees Improved streets Covenants limiting additions Houses interspersed with open space. North Lexington: Iris Wheaton Some are in poor taste due to style incompatibility Some good examples are rustic, wooded, and don't overwhelm the site. Some big houses meld nl; most don't_ Mansions change the scale of a neighborhood. Some big new houses turn their backs on the neighborhood. Neighborliness is no longer an asset. Even the smallest lots are being built on. Whole neighborhoods are being nearly destroyed. Change character of neighborhood Change sense of community- camaraderie Trees, scale, character, lot coverage, pavement Minutes for the Meeting of June 20, 2001 South Lexington: Wendy Manz Woodhaven area is being hard hit by infill housing. It had a "coherence" to it that is being undermined. Taste cannot be regulated, but Tree loss is a huge negative. Scale is a big issue in this neighborhood_ Architectural incompatibility is also an issue. Vernacular neighborhood preservation -- Zoning? Historic Districts Lite? Careful siting also helps mitigate impact of infill Dousing. Scale on lot, tree removal Neighborhood compatibility. General: Marilyn Fenollosa Bad design cannot be ignored_ Details are important. Architectural compatibility is a bib problem Mismatched additions Garage or back of house to street Central Lexington: Tony Galaitsis Clearing excessively. Building too close to the setbacks. Pushing height limits. 2 Sustain ability_ Sarah James, of Herr and James, consultant to the comprehensive plan process, spoke about the place of sustainability in the comprehensive planning process_ Ms. James wrote the Arnerican Planning Association's position on sustainability principles and led the effort to get it adopted by the national organization. She gave a synopsis of the sustainability workshop, held in May for the Planning Board and CPAC_ .After an overview, she described creative ways that are being used to save energy, such as solar panels that light a Cambridge shopping center's parking lot lights, and a dry cleaner that uses non- polluting methods. She said that the comprehensive plan offers away to encourage people to Use sustainable technologies. Producing affordable bousing also encourages a sustainable lifestyle. A number of people stated that they believe the Town should be an exemplar_ lvlr. Garber said that proposing actions to Town Meeting will be an outgrowth of this grotip's discussions. It will be important to focus on action items. Sustainability principles are a context for that. Mr. Galaitsis urged those present to offer ideas to help the Planning Board break new ground in this area. Mr_ Carlson commented that new technologies are difficult to create, implement and measure. How do we know they are better? sensitiv for Key Private P arc els in Lexingt Mr_ Garber explained that the Planning Department has a database containing over 300 undeveloped and underdeveloped parcels. Approximately 40 of these were identified for analysis that would provide a planning context for review of larger, privately owned under- or undeveloped parcels in the town. The sites were categorized by the importance of acquiring there for open space and the desired future use if they are to be developed. These lands can be generally characterized as the properties most vulnerable to development. hour categories have been created as possible future use scenarios: 1) Critical Preservation, 2) Highly Sensitive Open Space Residentia 3) Cluster Usually preferred, and 4) Innovation Sites. The categories provide differing modes of preservation based on a number of factors, including but not limited to ease of development, site Minutes for the Meeting of June 20, 2001 characteristics, and environmental concerns. Each category attempts to balance environmental concerns against increasing development pressure, attempting to strike a balance between open space preservation and limited development In lieu of acquisition, the Town is proposing a hierarchy of two cluster categories that will allow preservation of the important features of the site_ Ms. McCall Taylor made a visual presentation showing how these parcels of land have been classified. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** The Planning Board's July 11, 2001, meeting date was affirmed pending confirmation that there was no conflict with another meeting the Planning Director is committed to. ****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** REPORTS ****** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNING BOARD, SUBCOMMITTEES Historical Commission Mr. Davies reported that the developer's request to demolish two old buildings on the site of the Old Smith Farm cluster subdivision on Wood Street will be heard by the Historical Commission at its meeting on June 21, 2001. The buildings appear in the Commission's Survey of Lexington's Cultural Resources, 201201 Implementation Co mmittee : Mr. Harden reported that the Comprehensive Plan was reported on at a meeting of the 20120 Vision Implementation Committee. They were receptive to it, although the members have not been attuned to what the Planning Board is doing. The committee is still trying to determine its role in the implementation process relative to other Town boards and committees. Mr_ Harden also reported on the meeting preceding the Planning Board meeting where a small group met to discuss the concept of sustainability as a theme in the Comprehensive Plan. The meeting was adjourned at 10:13 p.m. Sara B. Chase, Clerk � , ✓.� � �� ,:� -ter