2009-03-19-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

There was a discussion of whether the 22,000 sq. ft. allowed enough flexibility for both the restoration of the Leary house and the addition of affordable housing units. Mr. McSweeney said he felt that the option for 4 units, as was shown on a previous plan reviewed by the Committee, was very important. Ms. McCall- Taylor added here that the 30,000 sq. ft. requirement was only important if the house were a standard conforming lot, and not an affordable lot. In this event, Ms. Krieger offered the thought, that perhaps the Committee was better off keeping the lot size low, so the house could not be sold as a standard home. Ms. Weiss said it was important to maintain as much flexibility as possible. Ms. Krieger stressed however, that the CPC was not creating a conforming lot with the intention that it would be used as a standard house lot. Mr. Wolk suggested that the Committee hold its public hearing, (scheduled for the following week) and assess the neighborhood’s reaction. Ms. Weiss felt this was off point, and expressed her frustration that the housing interests had not played a part in the planning process. Ms. Manz echoed this sentiment, stating that the definition of the housing lot seemed only to be presented as a fait accompli. Both Ms. Weiss and Ms. Manz argued for a more broad-based land acquisition committee which would include representatives of housing, recreation and other interests as well as those of conservation. There was a lengthy discussion of the planning process relative to the designation of the housing lot, during which Mr. Wolk left the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 5:35 pm. Respectfully submitted, Nathalie Rice Administrative Assistant Community Preservation Committee 3