HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-05-30-MGWG-min.pdf Thursday,June 1,2000 Minutes:5/30 Meeting Page:1
Subject:Minutes: 5/30 Meeting
Date:Wed, 31 May 2000 22:17:50 EDT
Managing Growth Work Group Meeting Minutes
May 30, 7 - 9 p.m.
Room 111, Town Hall
Meeting convened at 7:14 PM
Attendees: Tom Harden, Gary Fallick, John Andrews, Karl Kastorf, Marianne
Lazarus, Mike Hanauer, John Frey, Donna Rossi, Suzanne Caton, Maryann
McCall-Taylor, Ed Vail
0.5 New Agenda Topic: Core Participants Group (CPG) Meeting Report
Approx. seven Managing Growth Work Group members attended last weeks CPG
meeting. The CPG had a strong senior citizen representation. Three Working
Groups, Education, Transportation and Managing Growth were asked to present
their results to date for review and comments. The overlap between
Transportation and Managing Growth Groups was considered helpful. The
Managing Growth Working Group's Goals Matrix received a very positive
response plus some requested areas to address like Hanscom, Commercial
Development. This last was discussed by the Group on 5/30 with respect to
its fit with other goals and alternatives like revitalization versus new
development.
1. Volunteer Scribe
Ed Vail
2. Agenda Review / Discussion groundrules
3. Approval of minutes for 5/16 meeting.
Approved with addition
4. Review of schedule and upcoming deadlines
6/6 Last Workgroup meeting
6/12 Final report due
6/22 Final event at Museum
5. Invitation to Present to Senior Center Siting Committee
(see my 5/27 e-mail)
Marianne gave a brief history of the Siting Committee. After discussion of
the best way to communicate the Group's work, Tom Harden volunteered to
present with the support of John Frey and Karl Kastorf.
6. Discussion of Prioritization and Cost Analysis of Goals
(see message below)
After reviewing several approaches, the Group reached consensus that the
Goals were now a consistent set and chose not to prioritize them given the 20
year horizon. With respect to costs, the new cost language in the Narrative
was reviewed by the group and felt to be appropriate. Tom Harden will
fine-tune the text based on the discussion (1% tax, other revenue sources,
gifts) .
mailbox:/Macintosh%2OHD/System%20Folder/Preferences/
Netscape%20Users/Alan%20Lazarus-3/Mail/Inbox?id=
Thursday,June 1,2000 Minutes: 5/30 Meeting Page:2
7. Review of to Draft 3 of the Narrative
Narrative changes noted:
Page 2, Para 3: strike "unknown"
Page 2, Para 4: insert "affordability" between . . .space, and . . .
Page 2, Para 5: after . . .limited. insert "without change to the character
of the town."
Page 2, Para 6: Marianne questioned the meaning of "Open space enhances a
sense of community". Also how the town would "protect as much as
possible of this remaining undeveloped land" .
Page 2, Para 7: First sentence. Marianne suggested changing tone by adding
the positive aspects of less congestion, beautification of streets, use
as play areas.
Page 3, Para 1: First sentence: "build" was questioned. Last sentence:
possibly revise sentence to clarify, reflect "historic nature"
Page 3, Para 2: Last sentence: revise to read "protect and maintain existing
levels of moderately". Also delete " from demolition where appropriate".
Page 3, Para 5: Find another term for "critique" in both locations used.
Suggestions: thesis, position, point-of-view, side. Delete "sufficiently".
Page 3, Para 6: Revisit "within the framework of individual property
rights" . Considerable discussion, no consensus.
Page 4, Para 2: Insert "of" between . . .amount new. . ." Marianne will send an
additional sentence on population.
Page 4, Para 6: Marianne will send additional/alternative text
Page 4, Para 7: Second half of the sentence: split into 2 concepts:
Group supports limited development, conditional
(consistent with respect to Goals)
Used for community needs
Page 4, Para 11: "and that new development. . . .outlined above" . Gary had
concerns about this language
Page 5 Para 2: Add F.A.R. (Floor Area Ratio) , Affordable Housing concepts.
Mike suggested that the 20/20 concept be extended to a regional
level. Marianne would like to add that Hanscom is not mentioned
elsewhere but that it would negatively impact . . . .
8. Comments on Vision Statement
Replace "needn't" with "need not"
9. Comments on Goals matrix
Goal 1.1, Action B. New item. Significant discussion, strong sentiment to
delete, will revisit next meeting.
Goal 1, Action C. Marianne to rewrite, add Community Preservation Act,
Transfer Tax. Also delete reference to 5.1.
Goal 2.6 & 2.7, Actions B & C. Delete "To". Revise language to better
capture commercial self-sufficiency means less traffic concept
Goal 4.9 , Action Significant discussion. Put to vote, will remain
10. Next steps
Next Meeting: 6/6
Respectfully submitted,
Ed Vail
mailbox:/Macintosh%20HD/System%20Folder/Preferences/
Netscape%20Users/Alan%20Lazarus-3/Mail/Inbox?id=
Monday,May 29,2000 Agenda for 5/30 Page:1
Subject: Agenda for 5/30
Date: Sun,28 May 2000 12:47:04 EDT
From:THarden 1 l9Ca@aol.com
To:drossi(a dre.coJil,l d.Vail@aol.com, fluterri.il@sasal i..com,pry fallick@waters.com,
arber@ci..lexinaton.nla.us, HAI.:YA.RDBl )@aol.corn, Heather Sweenev=@m.ma.org.,
jrttarino@ci.lexington.n.a.us,jwa@atum.mit.cdu,kastorf@shore.nct, KL..ougeteig@aol.com,
iarfy(i%cornicecom.com., Lsinai@worlctneLali.ne,t, ►.nalazarus@worldn.ei.att.net,ma.rni.ic@dellitet.cdm,
Mike.Hanauer@quintus.con., ►nrnecall@ei.1CxingtOn.rnaus,rnnordbv(ry ci.lexington.rna.us,
Murs 123@aoi.corn, Suzanne.Caton@ tcllabs.com, taffy123@hotmaiLcum
Please review and let me know if you have items to add or change.
Tom
Proposed Agenda for Managing Growth Work Group
May 30, 7 - 9 p.m.
Room 111, Town Hall
1. Volunteer Scribe
2. Agenda Review / Discussion groundrules
3. Approval of minutes for 5/16 meeting
ff
4. Review of schedule and upcoming deadlines 4,/( rD>'S1 k
u
6/6 Last Workgroup meeting
6/12 Final report due
6/22 Final event at Museum
5. Invitation to Present to Senior Center Siting Committee
(see my 5/27 e-mail)
6. Discussion of Prioritization and Cost Analysis of Goals
(see message below)
7. Review of to Draft 3 of the Narrative
8. Comments on Vision Statement
9. Comments on Goals matrix
10. Next steps
"Is there any way that your work group final report
(the one due in mid-June) could prioritze the action steps (in terms of high
priority, medium priority and low priority [no need to rank them
numerically] ) as well as resources needed (in terms of high level of
resources needed, medium level of resources needed, and low level of
resources needed)? The Operations Subcommittee is asking for this
information in order to get a firmer hold onwhat action items are most
important
to your Work Group so that when the implementation phase is moving forward,
individuals know what issues to focus on first. "
mailbox:/Macintosh%2OHD/System%20Folder/Preferences/
Netscape%20Users/Alan%20Lazarus-3/Mail/I nbox?id=