1984-03-BOS-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Selectmen -'s Meeting 0� March 19, 1984 Among remarks from the audience, Mr. D omni tz said he believed im- plementation of the new parking proposal attract new development, thus leading to an even greater shortage of parking. He advocated passage of Planning Board Articles 16 and 17 to limit expansion and suggested approval of the parking plan conditional on passage of Articles 16 and 176 In response to Mr. Cavatorta , Mrs. Battin assured him that abuttors to the lot will be notified of procedures, if voted. Upon motion duly made and seconded'. it was voted to authorize the Town Manager to proceed with invitations for proposals for the attendant parking operation at the Meriam Street lot. Mrs. Battin reported on the position of the Center Revitalization Committee on Planning Board Article 16, provision of parking for new construction in the Central Business District, and Article 17, Height Restriction in the Central Business District. The majority of the Committee had voted to oppose Article 16 by a vote of 5 to 3. Mrs. Battin noted the Committee's concerns with addressing problems of parking, traffic, business mix in the Center, obligation to retailers and businesses presently in the Center a's 'well as residents of the Town who have indicated they like the Center as a retail convenience Center to which they can drive and park. She added that the integrity of abutting residential neighborhoods also has to be preserved and protected from increased traffic and overflow parking. She noted that the first concern of Town residents who shop in the Center was lack of parking, and that the adverse effect of that lack was to drive retailers out. She expressed the view . of the minority of the Committee in support of the by --law amendment, which she said is intended to maintain and encourage retail activity by making new office space development more difficult. Mr. Sacco spoke on behalf of the majority; opposed to the amendment, and stated their concerns that passage would cap growth in the Center, cause increase in rents and drive out smaller retailers. Mr. Wells agreed that a cap on development would cause a decline in the Center because of need for replacement with new construction with required parking as buildings deteriorate. The majority of the C.R.C. had voted in favor of Article 17, Height Restriction, by a vote of 4 to 30 Mrs. Battin outlined reasons of the majority for support of the Article who felt that although it could be considered an integral part of the Chamber of Commerce and Planning 'Board proposals in terms of parking ratio and density of development, it should stand alone because it speaks to the issue of the appearance of the Center with respect to its size, scale, historic ambience and suburban character which the Lexington Center' Market Survey showed were valued above all else by residents and which those who voted in favor, felt. the Article would pre- serve. Mr. Sacco said he could support the 30' maximum height proposed, but was in favor of 2 1/2 stories, rather than the 2 story maximum proposed. The Board's position on the two Planning Board articles was con- sidered' later in the meeting. Articles 16 & 17, C.R.C.