Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES <br />MEETING OF APRIL 28, 2004 <br />The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Room 227 of the Clarice Middle School, was called <br />to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Harden with members Davies, Galaitsis, Kastorf, Manz and planning <br />staff Garber and McCall - Taylor present. <br />* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** ARTICLES FOR 2004 TOWN MEETING * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** <br />Article 13 — Metropolitan. Hospital RD Rezoning — The Board members voted to accept the report and put <br />it out for distribution to Town Meeting members. <br />Article 8 — Home Occupations — Mr. John Bartenstein was present to explain his proposed amendment to <br />Article 8, should Town Meeting vote to reconsider the article passed April 12, 2004. He has two changes, <br />one substituting the term "business - related visitors" for "customer or client ", and the second allowing two <br />visitors at a time with no more than six visitors through out a day for a minor home occupation. <br />Mr. Harden said that home occupations are self-policing to some extent. If something becomes a <br />nuisance the bylaw gives some basis to ask for enforcement. He felt the changes made sense as it fits <br />reality a bit better. Mr. Galaitsis wondered what happens now if someone wants to see two clients at <br />once. Mr. Bartenstein said that it was allowed under a special permit for a professional occupation but he <br />thought his version would bring the regulations in line with reality. Ms. Manz said she felt it fit the more <br />common situations. <br />Mr. Galaitsis said he would prefer that any multiple clients arrive in a single car, and arrivals of multiple <br />cars be subject to a special permit. Mr. Davies said that he liked the language "business- related" better <br />and that two people at a time reflect reality. He felt it would be rare that it would create a problem. Mr. <br />Garber expressed concern about future conflicts with the performance standards, as it was not clear if <br />deliveries would be included in the number of "visits ". Mr. Harden thought it might be good to define <br />"business- related visitor ", but in the end that seemed to be too complicated. <br />On the motion of Mr. Kastorf, seconded by Mr. Galaitsis, the Board voted 5 to 0 to recommend favorable <br />action on the amendment of Article 8. <br />Article 12 Revision of RD Standards — The Board discussed the draft report and made some changes. Mr. <br />Kastorf said to include wording that the developer was not seeking to go beyond the Lexington standard <br />but to live with a pre - existing situation that was not of its own making. There should also be mention of <br />the fact that there are no neighbors, as the site is surrounded by the open space reservation and golf <br />course. Mr. Harden wanted the impervious surface and useable open space to be mentioned more <br />specifically and that it followed from reserving existing building and the campus layout. <br />On the motion of Mr. Davies, seconded by Ms. Manz, the Board voted 5 to 0 to accept the report as <br />amended. It will be made available to Town Meeting members on line as soon as possible. <br />* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** <br />The Board agreed to meet before the next week's two sessions of Town Meeting. <br />On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously to bourn :55 m. <br />L. Davies Clerk <br />