2009-06-04-CPC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

4.Land Acquisition Policy - On the heels of this discussion, Ms. Weiss moved to the next agenda item, the discussion of a land acquisition policy for the CPC. Ms. Manz advocated for a “broad-based” approach to land acquisition, so that all possibilities for a parcel of land could be considered up front. She recounted that with the Leary acquisition, the Committee was initially presented with only a conservation purchase, but after CPC input, it included affordable housing and a possible historic preservation project. She noted that the Busa process was completely different, but stressed that the Committee needs a “more clear cut process”. Ms. Weiss stated that she felt that it was important to have various boards identify parcels of interest, and work cooperatively toward a final outcome instead of each interest soliciting property owners individually. She said the question is, “ whether the Town wants to speak as a unified voice or individual voices when approaching land owners”. She suggested that when a parcel of land is purchased (for municipal purposes), a land use committee be formed, and that the committee have a year to make recommendations for the use of the parcel. Ms. Weiss reported that Stuart Saginor of the Community Preservation Coalition said that other towns use this process, and she passed out handouts from the Coalition regarding land acquisitions committees. Mr. Cohen reminded the Committee that Busa had been on the Warrant for the past three years. Ms. Weiss reiterated Selectmen, Peter Kelly’s point at one of the CPC hearings - that land had been purchased in the past with Town funds, but now is funded from CPA funds. Such funding, Ms. Weiss felt, predisposes projects toward mixed use. Mr. Wolk said he would heartily oppose a Land Acquisition Committee, and felt that the Conservation Commission’s land acquisition subcommittee served adequately. He also said he disagreed that the Leary hearing process was too rapid and added that he felt the existing CPC process worked well. Ms. Manz responded to Mr. Wolk’s statement, noting that the endpoint was indeed good, but she felt the process needed to be clarified and improved. Ms. Weiss added that it was important to improve the process prior to another land acquisition submittal. Mr. Adler agreed with these sentiments, stating that it was due to the work and persistence of the CPC that housing was even considered for the Leary property. He stressed that a more balanced approach is needed, particularly since it is so difficult to adapt a parcel once it has been acquired for conservation. Mr. Kanter suggested a “collegial” approach, with a lead agency or board keeping the CPC and other committees informed. He applauded the Leary outcome, which he felt was in the best interest of the Town, and he suggested that the CPC not use an “all or nothing” approach to project approval. He felt strongly that the CPC has the authority to ask for modifications of projects if they can better meet the Town’s needs. There was a general discussion of modifying projects that are submitted to the CPC, and the appropriate time for such modifications. Ms. Krieger stated her opinion that requesting changes to a project is reasonable, 3