pages: PlanningBoard/2009-08-24.pdf, 7
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2009-08-24 | 7 | parking would exceed capacity on weekends. Vice-President Ezzy Ashcraft requested that Condition #8 be revised that the applicant "shall secure the shared parking agreement", instead of making a "good faith effort". Board member Cook noted that she did her own informal analysis of the site, and noted that a portion of the parking lot was not maintained or striped. She asked who was responsible for maintaining the parking lot. Mr. Khan stated that maintenance of the parking lot was up to the property owners that utilized the lot. Board member Cunningham asked how the Board would like to proceed and how to resolve the issues that are still pending. He supported the property owner's right to develop and utilize the site. President Kohlstrand asked the Board to come to agreement on how to proceed. Either deny the project, or continue the project to another meeting to give the applicant time to meet with the neighbors and develop a set of acceptable conditions. Board member Cook stated that there are too many unresolved issues, but that she would not be able to approve the project if there was a vote on the item this evening. Board member Cunningham stated that he felt that it was the board's responsibility to come to a decision instead of sending the project back to be revised yet again. Board member Autorino expressed that he supported the application and wanted to move forward with its consideration. Board member Zuppan favored a reuse of the site, but would not be able to approve it at this time, as she still had questions about the project. President Kohlstrand stated that she is not able to approve the project at this time, given the applicant's inability to achieve a resolution with concerned parties. Board member Zuppan asked whether there was air-conditioning on the site. The applicant affirmed this. She commented that while without air-conditioning, attendees would likely leave doors open once the facility became too hot, which would result in significant noise intrusion into the neighborhood. She asked how the applicant expects to address that issue. The applicant stated that there are automatic closers on doors. On-site staff would close the doors when amplified music is played. Board member Cunningham stated that a vestibule at the building may help mitigate noise intrusion into the neighborhood. Board member Zuppan asked the applicant to confirm the number of events that are planned per year. The applicant agreed to limit the number of events until the use permit is up for its first review, at which point the number may be increased to what was originally requested. Board member Zuppan asked if the applicant had secured an overflow parking agreement. Page 7 of 11 | PlanningBoard/2009-08-24.pdf |