HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-04-07PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF APRIL 7, 1984
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board, held in Room G-15, Town Offices, was
called to order at 10:12 a.m. by the Chairman, Mrs. Smith, with members Cripps,
Sorensen, Uhrig, and Planning Director Bowyer present. Mrs. Flemings was absent.
ARTICLES FOR 1984 TOWN MEETING
86. Article 18, CR District, Floor Area Ratio: Attorney Norman Richards delivered
a letter from Daniel Gotthelf, director of the real estate division of the Xerox
Corporation, dated April 6, 1984, which expressed opposition to the proposed
article because of the economic effects on the Xerox property. Xerox considers an
FAR of 0.35 as acceptable. The letter also asked for greater dialogue and coopera-
tion with property owners.
The Board reviewed a revised motion excluding steep slopes in the calculation of
developable site area. Some editing changes in the report were made. It was
agreed to recommend that the Town Meeting adopt the proposed amendment, as set
forth in the revised motion, and to approve the report as amended.
87. Article 21, Technical Corrections: It was agreed to revise the motion by
dropping part "e" which deals with the width of a sign. It was agreed to recommend
that the Town Meeting approve the proposed amendment, containing parts a through d,
and to approve the report to Town Meeting, as amended.
88. Article 22, Setback for Swimming Pools: The Board reviewed a draft of the
report which says this amendment is a judgemental matter that is best decided by
the Town Meeting. It was agreed to recommend against this citizen's article and to
approve the report to Town Meeting as written.
89. Article 23, Wellington Lane Avenue: It was agreed to recommend to Dennis
Lowe, attorney for the petitioner, that the change in the district boundary line be
modified to exclude the Town -owned conservation land, which will remain in the RO
district. If the petitioner agrees with that recommendation, the Planning Board
will recommend in favor of the proposed change in district line.
90. Article 24, 16 Hayden Avenue: (Mrs. Uhrig disqualified herself from discussion
on this rezoning.) Mr. Sorensen questioned how the Board could support the Temple
Barker Sloane proposal in view of the traffic projections that have been developed
and included in the Article 18 report. Several Board members thought that the
actual traffic impacts aren't that great and the development complies with the 0.25
FAR standard for the CR district. The property is in an isolated location between
the highway and an access road and is not appropriate for single family develop-
ment. Temple Barker and Sloane would resolve one of the traffic problems in the
area by eliminating the sight line problem at the exit ramp off Route 2 at Hayden
Avenue.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:27 p.m.
Judith J. Uhrig, Clerk