2008-11-19-PB-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Page 2 Minutes for the Meeting of November 19, 2008 0.35 should be used rather than 0.30. In terms of the traffic mitigation issue, linkage payments or an advanced betterment fee should be used along with town contributions since the burden would be too large for developers and the neighborhood. Mr. Hornig said that dimensional controls as well as height were included in the warrant. The language in the warrant would put everyone on notice about the scope of the motion without the actual motion being included. Mr. McWeeney said do not stop development until there is a master plan in place, but for the future the Board of Selectmen needed to guarantee that the funds for mitigation would be there waiting for the work that would be needed. Mr. Hornig said minor changes could be done, but the goal was to have all properties have approved site plans and those could be modified as either major or minor changes. The Board would be discussing transitional plans and how to fund them. Mr. Galaitsis said smaller developments should not incur the same costs as larger developments. However, the idea of whether or not to let development roll forward without a plan in place was still an issue. Mr. McWeeney said that much of the impacts have to do with Waltham and Route 128 and were generated outside of Lexington. Development should not be stopped in order to accommodate Waltham traffic driving through Lexington. Ms. Manz said the Board was aware that not all traffic problems were generated locally and that solving the problems would cost money to improve the infrastructure. Development would be a way to increase revenue, but money may need to be spent to make money, keeping in mind how the infrastructures changes would be funded. Mr. Zurlo asked if the zoning articles to be proposed by the Chamber of Commerce were the same as last year? Mr. Smith said he was approached after the last vote, which was eight votes shy of passage, and asked to file for the 2009 Town Meeting in case the Planning Board’s articles were not palatable. Mr. Zurlo said it would be best to focus the time and energy on the combined efforts of the EDAC and Planning Board. Mr. Canale urged them to look at cut-through traffic. The Howard/Stein-Hudson report indicated that 75% of the traffic was locally generated or received and only 25% was cut-through. Level of Service for automobiles may decrease for a while, but access equity improvements for pedestrians and bikes should be considered. Ms. Manz said that the Board had not settled on making the height restriction more lenient, but what would be the breakpoint for height to impact the FAR? Mr. Zink said with the .35 FAR excluding the