pages: PlanningBoard/2006-09-25.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2006-09-25 | 8 | business. In response to an inquiry by President Lynch whether he had come to an agreement with his neighbors regarding the easements, Mr. Reed replied that there was 18 feet between the properties, and that 8'6" was a legal driveway; they were trying to split the difference at this time. He estimated that he was giving them 12 inches of free land, and that he did not envision ever getting a semi truck into the back. He tried to curtail the liabilities of the business by keeping his operations fenced within his property. The public hearing was closed for Board discussion. In response to an inquiry by President Lynch regarding the City's historical perspective on easements, Ms. Mooney replied that in a potential dispute over a right of access, the City sees fencing disputes as private matters to be resolved among the parties. If they reach an agreement regarding an easement that would typically be recorded. President Lynch cautioned the Board not to condition an easement, which was a private matter between two parties. Member McNamara noted that the front part of the building would be reserved for office use, and expressed concern about the hydraulic lift parking as an alternative to fulfilling the parking requirements. She inquired whether the administrative office could be incorporated into the new building to create more room for parking. Mr. Garrison noted that one of the factors when looking at demolition was the potential historic value and concerns that the building would be too tall for the neighborhood if the office was added to the new building. Mr. Smith noted that the original design had half of a floor that was dedicated to the office space, as well as other administration functions; they had to remove that part to make the building shorter. He noted that the building was in bad shape, and that the HAB had given permission to tear the building down. He noted that the hydraulic lifts were not his first choice, but they were concerned about parking capacity. He noted that they would be open to suggestions regarding parking. Member Ezzy Ashcraft noted that since HAB approved demolition, she was concerned with the lack of off street parking spaces. She inquired whether the old building could be demolished, the new building moved closer to the front of the property, with parking in the back. Mr. Smith noted that they wanted to have enough maneuvering room for vehicles, which would be difficult under those circumstances. Vice President Cook shared the concerns about hydraulic parking, and was concerned about having heavy vehicles above people's heads. Planning Board Minutes Page 8 September 25, 2006 | PlanningBoard/2006-09-25.pdf |