1988-05-02 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF MAY 2, 1988 The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Office Building, was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by the Chairman, Mrs. Uhrig, with members Klauminzer, Sorensen, Williams, Planning Director Bowyer, Assistant Planner Nordby and Secretary Peters present. Mrs. Wood was absent. 128. Article 40, Part B, Nonconforming Situations: Mr. Sorensen did not participate in any discussion or action on this item. The Board discussed a draft amendment to Article 40, Part B, Section 6.5.3 that would reduce the minimum lot size required from 7500 sq. ft. to 5,000 sq. ft, and the minimum lot frontage from 75 ft. to 50 ft. Mrs. Urhig noted that the effect of this draft amendment would be that any grandfathered lot would be required to have a minimum of 5,000 sq. ft. and at least 50 ft. of frontage, would still have to front on an accepted or unaccepted street, as defined by zoning, and there would be no limit to the number of adjoining lots that can qualify as long as they meet these minimum standards. On the motion of Mrs. Klauminzer, seconded by Mr. Williams, it was voted 3- 0-1 (Mr. Sorensen abstaining) to present the amendment to Article 40, Part B discussed by the Board tonight. 129. Article 39, Technical Corrections: Mrs. Uhrig reported that reconsi- deration of Article 39 will not occur until after Article 36, Pine Meadows, ' is discussed. Mr. Bowyer reviewed the ramifications of the Ephraim Weiss amendment passed at the April 27 session of Town Meeting. He reported that the amendment affects at least 23 provisions of the By-law. One major effect is to delete the present exclusions in net floor area, such as areas devoted to heating and ventilating equipment, air conditioning and fuel storage, currently permitted in the Zoning By -Law. Developers would be prompted to put such facilities on the roof or on the grounds next to the building, making them more visible. It would also eliminate the exclusion for off-street parking. That would conflict with other sections where there is a 10,000 sq. ft. threshold, above which a special permit with site plan review and a traffic study is required. The 10,000 sq. ft. threshold in those provisions excludes area used for off-street parking and loading; the Weiss amendment means the definition conflicts with the text. Another result of the amendment would be that floor area devoted to parking spaces in a garage would itself gene- rate a requirement for additional parking spaces. Mr. Bowyer recommended and the Board agreed that it will move for reconsideration and indefinite postponement. Mrs. Klauminzer suggested and the Board agreed that Mr. Weiss be invited to discuss the effects of his amendment at the Wednesday May 4 meeting with the hope that he will agree that his amendment caused more confusion than he intended, and that he would support reconsideration and the indefinite postponement of the original motion.