1985-03-12 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Planning Board Minutes: March 12, 1984 2 It was agreed the Planning Board's report on Article 14 would be accompanied by the complete text of the motion with the changes highlighted. 49. Article 15, Rezone to CG, East Lexington, Worthen Road: It was agreed to present Article 15 as printed in the warrant. Mrs. Flemings will be responsible for this article. 50. Article 16, Center Parking: Jacquelyn Bateson, Peter Kelley, Richard Michelson and Richard Perry were present for the discussion of this article. It was agreed to change the parking factor for a medical use in the CB district to be 1 per 250 square feet, making it more consistent with the agreed change in Article 14 and the data developed in the land use study. Mrs. Smith recapitulated the arguments against a developer making a financial con- tribution to a parking escrow account rather than actually providing the parking spaces. (See Item 226, Minutes of November 14, 1983.) The Board discussed goals and policies for the Lexington center business district. It was agreed that retail uses should be encouraged rather than office uses and that other commercial districts are better locations for office space than Lexing- ton center. Several members spoke about the Town's responsibility for the parking deficit in Lexington center. One point was how a numerical determination of the deficit could be made because: 1) the "deficit" changes at different times of the day, 2) it may be different depending on the needs of employees or customers and 3) it may vary as to location, with the need for parking being greater south of Massa- chusetts Avenue than on the north side of the center. Mrs. Smith stressed that it is not the intent of the zoning proposal for the Town to sit back and do nothing. The Town should continue to do as much as is appropriate for it to deal with the parking problem. Mr. Sorensen thought the Town should continue to make a good faith effort and that a numerical target fixed to the needs of 1984 would not be appropriate. The Board agreed that the Town should not be tied to any one numeri- cal target for parking spaces. As for the Chamber of Commerce's proposal that the Town be responsible for about 65% of the parking spaces for new development, the Board disagreed vigorously. Mr. Sorensen commented the Town was having difficulty meeting the existing parking needs and would be in no position to take on the responsibility for new develop- ment. He pointed to the shortage of land within the CB district for additional on -grade parking. It was agreed that the Board would stress in its report that the Town should have no responsibility to provide parking for new development. That should be declared as a matter of policy whether Article 16 passes or not. 51. Article 17, Height Restriction, CB District: It was agreed that the Board would stay with its proposal of two stories in the height limit. The Board did not agree with the Chamber of Commerce proposal that 2� stories be the height limit because the additional half story inevitably means more office space which further aggravates the parking problem. Mrs. Uhrig will present this article. 52. Article 18, CR District, Floor Area Ratio: Attorney Norman Richards, repre- senting Xerox, and Lee Mapletoff of W. R. Grace, were present to discuss this article.Mrs. Smith reported that the Planning Board had received that evening a letter from Beal and Company, dated March 12, 1984, that raised a number of legal implications. Before the Board discussed the amendment further, it wished to