2009-03-26-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Mr. Bartenstein, a member of the Appropriations Committee and TMMA member, (not speaking on behalf of the Committee), voiced his concern about rehabilitation of the Leary house, and the access issue. He suggested that there might be other conservation land that could be used for housing purposes, which might be better suited than the Leary land. He suggested identifying an existing parcel of conservation land that might be a better site for housing, and “swapping” it for the housing proposed for Leary parcel. He said he did not like the idea of restoring a historic farmhouse, and then putting an adjacent house in its front yard. Mr. Wolk explained that taking land out of conservation for such purposes would in all likelihood not be possible, since it involved a vote of the State legislature. The correct time, he noted, was before the land was voted for conservation purposes. Ms. Miller, Chairwoman of the Conservation Commission, informed the hearing that the Conservation Commission had never done such a swap, and that in this case, had approached LexHAB to see if the lot could satisfy any housing needs. She said it was better to have a legal sized lot, hence the 30,000 sq. ft. but that any decisions on housing wouldn’t be determined for quite some time. She added that the Commission would not plan any parking without public input, but noted that the access off Brookwood was surrounded by wetlands. (Ms. Fenollosa left the hearing at this point.) Upon further inquiry from Mr. Keane about the finality of the 30,000 sq. ft. lot, Mr. Cohen stressed that the Town had the unique opportunity to acquire the land, and that the acquisition should be the priority. Mr. Cohen said he was concerned that the land would go to a developer if the Town did not act in a timely manner. He said there was a greater risk in not voting the project, than aspects of the proposal that might seem “predetermined”. Mr. Adler added that it was far easier to have options for affordable housing up front, and that any unused land could always be returned to conservation. Ms. Dianne Carlson, an abutter to the Leary property also asked about parking, specifically for possible housing. Mr. Wolk addressed this point stating that there would be parking for the affordable housing, and that any parking for conservation could be incorporated or could be separate. Ms. Carlson noted that the access off Brookwood Drive appeared to be primarily upland, and perhaps would be better suited for the conservation parking. Mr. Michael Eppling of 15 Manley Court, stated that he was a conservation supporter, but felt a bit “held hostage”. He said the only way he could vote for the conservation acquisition was to also vote for housing. He said he generally supports housing, but not in this location. He said he had concerns about traffic issues and aesthetic considerations, but supported the rehab of the house. Mr. Harry West of 56 Vine Street spoke in support of the acquisition of the land, stating that it was a remarkable place to observe birds. He added that he is not in favor of parking on Vine Street, and supported preserving Mr. Leary’s house in its present location. He also said he did 4