1986-12-BOS-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

, 4 The owner can rebuild with the same floor area and for similar types of uses with no penalty for insufficient parking. The concept of building a two - story building, allowed under the Zoning By -Taw, was discussed. In that case, the building wound be treated as a new building and off- street parking must be provided for the whole building. He had talked briefly with the owners and they had mentioned a two -story building with underground parking, permitted by the Zoning By --Taw. He pointed out the problem of a ramp needed for such parking, the space it would take from the public parking lot and the interference with loading and service whiah could be caused. He thought it likely that some off -lot parking spaces would have to be provided, which the Zoning By --Taw allows anywhere in the CB District. Since there is not much privately owned space for parking elsewhere in the Center, he felt the most logical approach would be to work out an _ arrangement .with the l'cwn relative to the adjacent public parking lot. Because existing Town - owned spaces cannot be used to meet zoning requirements for new construction he felt it would mean a multi -level parking structure on the adjoining Town lot, a joint venture between property owners and the Town. He noted his experience with similar projects some of which 1 been successful, and described several types of structures which might be considered. Tisting the benefits of a parking structure, he pointed out the need to increase parking spaces in the Center: removal _ of curb --side spaces to reduce traffic %now problems; and its prime location near the stores. He was confident that the problem of aesthetics could be solved and outlined possible means of financing the pro -ject,under a Town/owner arrangement. He spoke briefly about the architectural scale of development, noting that a parking garage would tend to encourage even more development in the Center. He saw the construction over time of two -story buildings from Edison Way to the Harvard Trust driveway as a possibility; Mr. Bowyer noted two major hurdles in addition to financing: timing/staging and feasibility studies. He felt that any construction dealing with the whole lot would best be broken into 2 or 3 stages. He suggested the best short term route would be to design a two - -story building with underground parking and building one story, adaptable later for expansion. Regarding feasibility studies, he estimated at least $50,404 for engineering, legal work, architectural and financial analysis. He concluded by saying there were several choices and policy decisions to be made: i} si.mp?y rebuild the existing building, 2) a' cooperative joint venture between the- Town and the owners, which would require decision on what type of parking structure; building in stages or a? 1 at once;. h.ow to finance; the extent of design review of the new building and the role of other private sector interests in the Center. He saw all of these options permitted within the general parameters of the Zoning By -Taw. Mr. Bowyer stressed that his presentation had been an outline of alternative and choices and that he was not necessarily recommending pro or con on construction of a parking garage, adding that that w i l-2. be a decision of elected officials and the Town Meeting. Mr. Marshall asked if there would be any procedure whereby the owners could seek rezoning to CD uistri^t, which does not have pre - determined standards for development.