2000-05-05-MGWG-min.pdf - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

OUTREACH QUESTIONNAIRE Larry Belvin distributed the updated version of the outreach questionnaire. Larry plans to distribute the questionnaire door-to-door in his neighborhood. It was also suggested that an electronic version be distributed to the town meeting members email list. Several suggestions were made for achieving further distribution. Deadline for return of questionnaries will be Sunday, May 14. Mike Hanauer volunteered to reformat the questionnaire so that it could be more easily sent via email. It was moved (Lee Sinai) and seconded (Mike Hanauer) that the questionnaire be approved for distribution. The motion was approved by a vote of 12-0. FURTHER DISCUSSION OF GOALS A discussion of goal 2.5 resulted in several suggestions for revisions to that goal. It was pointed out that the most appropriate goal was not "increased evaluation" of commercial property, but rather reduction of transportation impacts from commercial use. Karl Kastorf noted that the intersection of Hartwell Avenue and Bedford Street was "failing" and would limit any commercial expansion that depended upon more traffic. Glen Garber pointed out that Hartwell Avenue was not densely developed compared to Hayden Avenue. It is traffic-limited and not space-limited. Garber noted that there has been success with formal, funded regional transportation programs supported by businesses to provide transportation to commercial areas. Marianne Lazaraus suggested that Goal 3 include as an action the establishment of a pay-as-you-throw trash pricing program in order to reduce waste and increase recycling. John Andrews said that based on information compiled by the Solid Waste Action Team, this was a very effective and attractive step to take. Some concern was expressed over whether such programs would lead to illegal dumping. John stated that when done right, illegal dumping does not increase under pay-as-you-throw systems. Mike Hanauer stated that the goals were too heavily focused on mitigating impacts, and that more should be added about the underlying processes that produced pollution, congestion, etc. John Andrews commented that local and global objectives needed different approaches since things done locally might be ineffectual or inappropriate in response to a global problem. Jerry Moloney requested that the phrase "protect individuals from unwanted changes " be deleted from objective 4.2 saying that 'unwanted changes" and "inappropriate development" (under Measure) are too broad and vague. Discussion followed regarding the rights of neighborhoods to control development versus control through town-wide regulation. Concern was raised that establishing neighborhood councils as an added regulatory layer would discourage good developers from undertaking potentially desirable projects. The example of Moon Hill Neighborhood Association was raised as an example of neighborhood control, but it was pointed out that this control was set up when that neighborhood was developed and therefore neighborhood residents are subject to it voluntarily. The imposition of such a control (not voluntary) would be fundamentally different.