2006-02-15-PB-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MEETING OF FEBRUARY 15, 2006 A regular meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in Cary Hall was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Manz with members Hornig, Canale, Harden and planning staff Schilt, Tapper and Tap present. Mr. Galaitsis was absent. ************************************* MINUTES ************************************** Review of Minutes: The Board reviewed and corrected the minutes for the executive session of November 16, 2005. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to approve the minutes as amended. ****************** PLANNING BOARD ORGANIZATION, SCHEDULE ******************* Change Date of Public Hearings on Impervious Surface and Center Parking Zoning Amendments: Because March 15 is the night of the Town Meeting members' information meeting on warrant articles, the Board agreed to reschedule the March 15 hearings on two of its own proposed amendments to the Zoning By-Law. to March 14, 2006. On a motion duly made and seconded, it was voted to hold the public hearings on impervious surface and center parking on Tuesday, March 14, 2006. ************************ ARTICLES FOR 2006 TOWN MEETING ************************ PUBLIC HEARING Article 4, Proposed Inclusionary Housing By-Law: Ms. Manz opened the public hearing on the Planning Board's proposed Inclusionary Housing bylaw at 7:45 p.m. There were 40 people in the audience. Mr. Harden made a PowerPoint presentation, about one-half hour in length, explaining the Planning Board's reasons for proposing an inclusionary housing zoning by-law and how it would work. Audience Comments and Questions Mr. Alan Wrigley, 205 Grove Street, first indicating that he owns three acres of land in Lexington, spoke against the measure, citing its complexity and its effect on a small subset of residents. He said that the whole town should have an opportunity to vote on it, as it will on the Community Preservation Act (CPA) in March. He suggested that CPA funds, if the act is adopted, could be used to provide affordable housing. He added that AMI, an acronym that appears many times in the proposed motion, should be defined early on in the document. Ms. Manz replied that it is not necessarily known who and how many property owners would be affected by the measure. Developers frequently buy and assemble smaller lots to create areas large enough to develop. The bylaw is not aimed at property owners. The Town has reached the ten percent of affordable housing prescribed by MGL Ch. 40B. But in order to stay at or above ten percent, the supply of affordable housing must keep pace with new market rate units. The bylaw creates a mechanism for developments of three units or more to provide affordable housing for a wide range of income levels, which is needed to maintain the diversity in the Town. She added that the Zoning Bylaw already has provisions that limit development options that reduce property values, such as requirements for maximum impervious surfaces or minimum lot sizes in new subdivisions. Profits from property ownership is not a given, and when a person purchases property there is no guarantee that it will increase in value. The proposed bylaw amendment is not a taking of profits from a developer or landowner any more than any of the existing regulations. Mr. Chris Spilios, 110 Shade Street, who owns seven acres in Lexington and has lived here for 50 years, said that he feels targeted, estimating that the measure could cost him $385,000 if the land is developed.