1967-05-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

PLANNING BOARD HEARINGS IMay 24, 1967 The Lexington Planning Board held four hearings on Wednesday, May 24, 1967 in Science Hall, Lexington High School. Present were Chairman Greeley, members Fowle, Riffin and Worrell, and the secretary, Mrs. Macomber. The Chairman opened the hearings at 7:30 p.m. by reading the notice as it had appeared in the Lexington Minute -man. He explained that in effect this first proposal provides for parking in C 2 districts, and that para- graph 2 and 4 mentioned are districts in the center. The 50/50 means there must be as much land for parking as there is for building. Slides were shown of the map with C 2 districts, of First National Store and Lexington Lumber Co. showing the buildings and how much could be used for building under the proposed amendment, and of the Wallis Court area showing the lack of sufficient parking areas, with cars projecting into the street. There is at present no parking required for C 2 districts. That comes about primarily because until recently the only C 2 district was in the Center and the buildings there have been long existing. The Town has provided parking areas to serve most of the Center. It is hoped to get this amendment on the books before someone comes in and develops more land with inadequate parking, such as that at Wallis Court. This amendment is too late for that, but the thinking is, it is better than not to take any action at all. A question was asked as to why the center of town was excepted, and Mr. Greeley said because it is built up and the policy has been for the town to provide the off-street parking there. Someone said it seems unreasonable to cut down any parking that might still be there. A remark was made that with regard to the adequacy of this as a means of providing enough parking space now, if they were to build to the limit of this revised zoning later there would not be adequate parking. Mr. Greeley said the Board was hoping that with the type of use that required a large parking area, such as a super -market, the builder would be enlightened enough to put it in. The Board thinks any type of use would re- quire at least this much, and it is hoped the types that depend on more park- ing will take care of it. Someone asked if you demolish and replace by a new building, will it continue on the old or come under the new regulation. Mr. Greeley said there is a specific date, namely tonight, and in the future if there is a change in the building structure the percentage that was in tonight applies - the new would be effective from now on. If they tore down the building they could rebuild on the same percentage they have as of tonight. Someone asked how you interpret "available" - if there is a driveway at the present time where four cars park but upon a grass plot, is all of this "available" for parking? If a new building is put up, is the parking space for four cars considered necessary? Mr. Greeley said he hoped that the Building Inspector could interpret as to what had reasonably been available for parking space. If there is a little yard 10 ft. wide, don't think that could be considered as available.