by Frank Schroth

At last week’s meeting of the Planning Board members learned of a possible development on Blue Hill Avenue at corner of Vose Hill Road dubbed Hemenway Woods. There is an abandoned nursery on the site now. Paul Sullivan presented a plan that would put in a road and three houses. It was a plan he presented earlier the Zoning Board of Appeals. However, Planning Director Clark took issue with Mr Sullivan’s account of that session. According to Clark what the ZBA said and what Mr Sullivan was presenting were not exactly the same.

There was subsequent discussion of a PUD versus a subdivision and who had authority for what. One question that came up during course of discussion was: If a developer can build a subdivision that is not compliant with zoning (by receiving waivers from ZBA) then why do we have zoning?

Chair Whiteside untangled the knot of the discussion saying, “The deal is you are coming for approval of a street.” The street would give access to unbuildable lots. Sullivan then will go to ZBA for waivers to make the unbuildable lots buildable.

The board also discussed the plan for the women’s club with Mr Sullivan. The proposal for that parcel calls for constructing 4 houses though zoning only allows 3. In order to build 4 homes there needs to be a waiver and that it is in the public interest. Michael Balfe, an attorney on Lantern Lane, speaking as a resident and abutter said there were three options: to do nothing, to sell to an institution such as Temple Shalom, or to develop as residential. He said that the first was undesirable as building would simply continue to deteriorate. The second was not favored because an institution would bring parking issues, light pollution, possible noise, and exemption from zoning given nonprofit status. The third was preferred, While Mr. Balfe said he would prefer three to four, he would prefer residential to nothing. He said and believes most neighbors are “generally supportive” of the proposal. Whiteside encouraged Mr. Balfe and the neighbors to continue to air their concerns and identify what they wanted in terms of landscaping etc. Mr. Balfe, confessing to a slight libertarian streak, was not entirely comfortable dictating what other homeowners might need to adhere to and also questioned what enforcement there would be to such requirements. Mr Whiteside said the requirements would be in the permit, “there will be reasonable teeth.”

Other business included but was not limited to:

• Signing the site plan approval for Mr. Chan’s expansion
• A brief review of articles for fall town meeting. Mr. Whiteside was critical of an article that referred to “related production.” The article pertains to zoning permitting scientific research. The building inspector wants to retain the notion of “related production” which Whiteside characterized as “pure nonsense. . . straight out of Lewis Carroll. I think the whole thing should go.”
• The board will brining in all three respondents to the master plan phase 2 RFP for interviews during a session in September.