1990-03-BOS-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

The proposed reuse of the property, with an aim of revenue to L. ,e County had been exp lored by the Comm ittee which was charged with obtaining z consultant 1'or preparation of a study. Nei 'hborhood input, as well as comments and suoaestions from Town Boards had been sought throughout the process by the consultants chosen: McGinl Mart ; Associates, Architects and Planners, and Brat ley Associates, Inc Real Estate Consultants. Further input on concerns was requested from Waltham and Lexington, before the Land Use Committee's recommendations are given to the `onntz� Commissioners. L Mr. Bonomo ortt 1 fined the statutory requirements under which County land ma.%7 be d isposed of. An appraisal of the property- must be made. officials of 1 affected communities must be included in procedures, and a Public Hearinc must be held. :after 90 days, the Commissioners can decide, Dv. majority vote .)n the disposition of the land. Mr. Murray listed the three options presented by the consultants as: -option A, market rate residential use; option B, affordable housing•, option C. no development at this time but possible future elder care or other hospital developments. Mr. Murray stressed that the Land Use Committee had taken no position on any of the options. Mr. McSweeney noted that at meetings held in Lexington to date, the -- affordable housing option had appeared to be somewhat favored. The Affordab Housing options Committee had not included the site in its considerations mold because of lack of definite information. ,Joyce Miller, Chairman of the Conservation Commission, reported that the Commission had had problems with the use of part of the land by Waltham, which had been filled, as play fields. This play area is adjacent to wetlands and the Commission is concerned with the future use of the site. Their preference Is to maintain the land as open space. Robert Bowyer, Pl anning Director, said that the Planning Board after review of the study, had not expressed its opinion on the three options. He rioted that the two residential alternatives would be located mainly- on Walnut Street, which is narrow and not adequate for current or increased traffic. He asked for assurance that other access to the site will be explored. A Concord avenue resident pointed out existing and potential growth in South Lexington, such as Brookhaven and Lexington Ridge, and was in favor of leav ing the land as it is. Louise Cava also supported the option of no development. Angela Frick, Conservation Commissioner, felt that considerable time should be allowed, with the land left open, for decision on a use. Marian Reilly, 2 5 Walnut Street, said she was aware of traffic problems on leer street and felt that most of the land should be in conservation, with a parcel along Walnut Street for af fordable housing. Mr. McSweeney said lie saw reflected in comments made, that tlpt ion C. was favored keeping the sand open with attention paid to potential future de %relopment. He noted that Federal, State and local financial constraints - wou seem to preclude deve lopment of affordable hous at this time. Ntr. Dai said lie would like to see the land transferred to the .jurisdiction of the Town regarding decisions on its use. Mr. Marshall said he was not moved by the County wish for revenue from disposition of the land and gave his priority- as conservation, with some recreational use. lie also favored using the existing buildings on the site for conversion to affordable housing or other public use.