Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-08-30-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF AUGUST 30, 2000 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room of the Town Office building, was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Colman, with members Davies, Bridge - Denzak, Galaitsis, Chase, Planning Director Garber, Assistant Planner McCall- Taylor and Secretary Snell present. ******** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** MINUTES ******* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed the minutes for the meetings of April 12, May 10 and May 17, 2000. Corrections were made to the meeting minutes of April 12 and May 10, 2000. On the motion of Mr. Galaitsis, seconded by Mr. Davies, the Board voted 5 -0 to approve the minutes of May 17, 2000 and the revised minutes of April 12 and May 10, 2000. ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** SUBDIVISION OF LAND * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Old Smith Farm, 160 -170 Wood Street, Stop Work Order: Mr. Garber presented the Board with a letter from James Gaklis requesting a postponement of tonight's scheduled review of the subdivision at 160 -170 Wood Street. Mr. Colman read the letter to the Board. Mr. Garber briefly updated the Board as to the status of the 160- 170 Wood Street project. Work was started at the site although proper subdivision endorsements had not yet been obtained and it was discovered that there is a conflict with a Hanscom Air Force Base water line easement running through the property. The Air Force has concerns with the burial depth and access to the water main if future repairs are needed. In Iight of these issues Mr. Garber issued a stop work order. It is Mr. Davies' opinion that in keeping with the applicant's cooperative spirit the Board should hear him as soon as possible. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNINGDIRECTOR'S REPORT * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Met State /Middlesex Hospitals Reuse Mr. Garber reported that questions have arisen due to the upcoming auction of the Olympus Healthcare parcel of land that is part of the Middlesex Hospital property. Waltham and Lexington are both talking about buying land at these sites, but there has been no public planning process for the Middlesex site. He noted that an intertown planning project is typically initiated by special legislation. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Signature sheets for Registry of Deeds and Land Court As required by State statute, the Board endorsed signature sheets, to be filed with the Registry of Deeds and the Land Court, reflecting the current membership of the Board and staff members authorized to sign for the Board. ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** COMPREHENSIVE PLAN * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Comprehensive Plan, Next Steps Mr. Garber stated that tonight's meeting was a crucial meeting for the planning and development of Lexington's Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Garber made two presentations, one outlining the elements that should be included in the Comprehensive Plan and the second pertaining to the proposed advisory committee. Presentation 1- Recommended Elements FY2001 Comprehensive Plan: There are six substantive topical planning elements in the statute. At this time, Mr. Garber recommends the inclusion of land use, housing, natural and cultural resources, and economic development, with services and facilities and circulation (transportation) to be added at a future date. Mr. Garber supported his recommendation with the following reasons: Minutes for the Meeting of August 30, 2000 2 I . Land Use: From 1998, when the Board started talking about the Comprehensive Plan, this element has had the board's initial and overriding commitment. Land use is the glue that ties all the elements together. 2. Housing: Most of the board's permitting is for residential uses. Housing has links to the zoning by -law and inclusionary housing policies, as well as to the issue of mansionization. 3. Natural and Cultural Resources element: This element will allow the Board to take another look at innovative techniques for open space and historic preservation. 4. Economic Development: This element would allow the Board to look at Hartwell Avenue and the possibility of allowing more intense use. It could also include a review of the neighborhood commercial districts and update the allowed uses. With the CPAC service of Joseph Marino, Economic Development Officer, this should be a relatively easy element to undertake. 5. Services and Facilities: Issues that fall under this element, such as the reuse of school buildings and the relocation of the DPW facility from 201 Bedford, tend to be emotional, and their resolution labor intensive. Mr. Garber recommended adding this element at a future date. 6. Circulation (transportation): Mr. Garber feels that to do this element takes major consulting resources and data collection. Origin and destination studies, regional perspective, traffic counts, and transit studies will be needed. It is recommended for future inclusion, when resources are available. Presentation 2 — A Proposed Advisory Committee for the Comprehensive Plan: At the July 24, 2000 Planning Board meeting, the Board agreed to the representation model for public participation. Mr. Garber reported that the Planning staff surveyed all of the town's ad hoe groups, civic associations, commercial groups, and standing decision- making bodies and boards. It took considerable effort to narrow down the list to a manageable group. In developing recommendations for the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee (CPAC), groups were chosen that are highly relevant to planning in Lexington, yet represent a whole spectrum of opinion. Mr. Garber stressed that the CPAC must be an adjunct to the Planning Board and will need to be managed by the Planning Board. Mr. Garber has seen other representation models flounder and fail because the group was too large. Mr. Garber's recommendation was to have representation from the Board of Selectmen, Historic Districts Commission, Historical Commission, Conservation Commission, Department of Public Works, Economic Development Officer, Vision 20120 Growth Management Working Group, Lexington Center Committee, Design Advisory Committee, LexHAB, the neighborhood associations, and the development community. Representatives from the School Department, Traffic Safety Advisory Committee, and the Permanent Building Committee would be added at a later date. With these groups represented Mr. Garber believes that the advisory committee would be streamlined and. more likely to be workable. The Board offered their feedback on the presentation. Mr. Colman felt that the circulation /transportation element was so important that he wanted to discuss the effect of putting it off. He had recently spoken with Barbara Lucas, who is a transportation planner for the Metropolitan Area Planning Council. MAPC has much information that could be used in the transportation element, probably more than we realize. Mr. Garber said that the goals developed by the Vision 20/20 could be used in developing the comprehensive plan. Ms. Chase requested clarification on who the Economic Development Officer is. Specifically how is he /she appointed? Do they develop any annual reports? Ms. Chase asked when the town would have the current census figures. Mr. Garber responded that some information is available now, but it will be several years before all the information will be available. Mr. Galaitsis said he will be glad to see the occupancy figures updated. Ms. Bridge - Denzak's questions had to do with the exclusion of the open space and recreation element. She commented that open space is more than the preservation of space and natural resources. It covers areas outside the Conservation Commission's interest/jurisdiction. Mr. Garber responded that he hopes the Conservation Commission chair will consent to be on the CPAC. He said that in 1995 the Conservation Commission prepared an open space plan that designated various properties for protection. Conservation commissions in Minutes for the Meeting of August 30, 2000 Massachusetts usually prepare open space plans, in part to make the town eligible for matching state acquisition funds. Ms. Bridge - Denzak recommends that the Board review the plan. Ms. Bridge- Denzak said that she was interested and excited to be looking at the small commercial nodes. Mr. Garber commented that the small nodes are suffering and this might provide an opportunity to pump some life into them. Mr. Davies commented that if the Board were starting from scratch he would put the public service element ahead of commercial development. It is a politically active issue and there is the danger that uncoordinated decisions will be made. Mr. Garber stated that it would take at least $200,000 to do a proper public facilities element. Discussion ensued over which town committees /groups should be invited to participate in the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee. The Board agreed that CPAC should be a sounding board for the Planning Board, on everything from policy proposals and milestone points to developing a conclusion from the Board's data analysis. The advisory board can give instant feedback and it is Mr. Garber's desire to gain a broad spectrum of opinions from business community to environmental groups to citizen groups at large. Mr. Galaitsis stated his preference for having a town meeting member representative from each precinct as opposed to representatives from the civic association. His concern is that the number of citizens the civic groups represent is less than the number of citizens represented by a town meeting member. Ms. Bridge - Denzak expressed some support for having representation from each precinct. However, she understands the staff's concerns regarding the advisory committee becoming too large or unwieldy. Mr. Colman wants to do outreach to the Town Meeting Member Association, have one or two people from TMMA and key civic groups, and stressed that the Board must carefully manage the advisory committee as well as make it clear to the participants what their role is. Mr. Garber concurred with Mr. Colman stating, "we need to tend structure to the meetings; there have to be rules and an agenda." Ms. Bridge - Denzak suggested talking to the Town Meeting Member Association (TMMA) requesting advice on a way to achieve global representation. Mr. Davies pointed out that the purpose of the TMMA is to represent Town Meeting during the off - season. He felt the Board should invite one or two representatives from TMMA who in turn would represent all of Town Meeting. Mr. Galaitsis continued to address the issue of representatives from each precinct. Mr. Colman said he liked the idea of TMMA representation in the form of one or two members. It was the sense of the board that with a little tweaking they had a committee. A theme through out the discussion was to be cautious not to let the advisory committee get too large and overwhelm the five- member Planning Board, as well as the importance of including the Board of Selectmen and Town Meeting in the process. Mr. Garber requested suggestions as to the best way to streamline the process of getting the advisory committee formed. Should the Planning Board make preliminary calls or follow -up? Mr. Colman asked that a letter notifying the Selectmen of what the Planning Board is doing and an invitation letter to potential advisory committee candidates be drafted. The Selectmen should be briefed on the process before any invitation letters go out. Mr. Davies felt that the contact should be made through the chair or president of each group. Mr. Colman said he wants the master plan to make a difference, to be different and to have an effect on the future of the Town. Following the (Steven) Covey concept, it should have an end in mind that the Board can get behind. Mr. Colman thinks the plan is going in the right direction and thanked the staff for their good work. Minutes for the Meeting of August 30, 2000 4 BOARD MEMBERREPORTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** Mr. Davies reported that he has been receiving a lot of questions as to why the town doesn't have any "mansionization" controls since Lincoln and Weston do. Mr. Davies volunteered to do research in other towns regarding their mansionization by -laws. Mr. Colman and Mr. Galaitsis also volunteered to assist with the research. Mr. Garber cautioned the board about trying to rush something to Town Meeting. It will be important to make sure that what is drafted is legally defensible and done right. The Board would like to come up with recommendations for a by -law for presentation to Town Meeting. Mr. Colman stated that the work had to be started now in order to have something to put on the warrant in December. Mr. Colman, recognizing the limited staff availability, suggested forming a sub - committee of the Board to work on this issue. Mr. Garber is willing to have the staff gather by -laws from other towns to assist the Board with their research. Ms. Bridge - Denzak expressed concerns about starting work on a mansionization by -law because she is currently working to produce a tree by -law. She was concerned that if the board works on a mansionization by -law there will there be a lack the energy to work on the tree by -law. Mr. Galaitsis responded that the Board would agree that work on the mansionization by -law would not interfere with the tree by -iaw. Mr. Davies reported on a discussion he had with David Kelland of the Historical Commission concerning teardowns and what constitutes a teardown. There is not a good definition of demolition and what a demolition permit allows. This is an issue in the Zoning By -law, the State Building Code and the General By -Laws. Mr. Galaitsis reported that he received a call from Jerrold Van Hook, chairman of the Bikeway Advisory Committee. Mr. Van Hook would like to have a member of planning board as liaison to the bikeway committee. As no members volunteered, this matter will be discussed again at the next meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m.