HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-06-25-PB-minPLANNING BOARD MINUTES
MEETING OF NNE 25, 2003
The meeting of the Lexington Planning Board held in the Selectmen's Room, Town Office Building, was
called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Chairman Harden with members Chase, Davies, Galaitsis and planning
staff Garber, McCall- Taylor and Machek present.
Also present: Mimi Aarens, Kellie Barnett, Florence Baturin, Bob Bicknell, Bill Carlson, Barbara
Ciampi, Jacqueline Davison, Kenn Elmore, Phil Herr, Deb Jackson, Pauline Jennett, Ken Kreutziger,
Winifred McGowan, Tom Montanari, Michael Schroeder, Dan Smith, Graydon Wheaton, and Iris
Wheaton.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Mr. Harden opened the meeting with a brief statement and then asked all present to introduce themselves.
Town of Bedford Activities - Ms. McCall - Taylor reported to the group that she was unable to get Gene
Clerkin from Bedford to come and speak with the group. He had spoken recently to the Fair Housing and
Human Relations Committee and said there was little to add over what members could report. He feels
that without a dedicated funding source such as the Community Preservation Act (CPA) little could be
done. Mr. Elmore added that Bedford has a centralized approach with three organizations working
together. He said that it is different than Lexington as it is a small town with an open town meeting,
which allows them to politic for attendance as needed when housing issues are presented. Ms. Ciampi
cautioned against comparing apples and oranges, as the situation in Bedford is very different from
Lexington. Mr. Herr said that the relevance of Bedford is that it is a town that has made some progress.
He said that what towns are trying to do is difficult but there are some towns that are making progress,
each in its own way. The discussion continued with some speculation on various things Lexington might
do to increase housing opportunities including an inclusionary bylaw, linkage payments and joining a
HOME consortium.
What do we hope to gain? Mr. Elmore said that this will take an extraordinary effort on the part of many
people and it needs the force of will. He said that he knows some people who feel that they will lose
something if affordable housing is produced and wondered what those present would answer about the
importance of affordable housing.
Ms. Aarens said that it is the right thing to do. She feels that people do not understand what affordable
housing is, what it looks like and whom it is for. Teachers and civil service workers are among those who
need moderately priced housing. Such housing would allow people to change homes as they age but still
stay in town. She feels it is important to create a platform to educate the community. Ms. Davison
suggested a community dialogue as part of the program, and that might include a presentation at the
Council on Aging. Mr. Smith suggested that it be a topic of discussion at a high school debate. He
wondered what sort of model of community we were teaching our children. He feels that socio - economic
diversity of the community is a core value of the town. Ms. Chase echoed his comments and said she
wants to see the children of plumbers sitting next to the children of academics in the schools.
Mr. Smith said there is a widening income gap and asked if one could say it is a good thing? If it is not
good on the national level, we need to look at how it is playing out in our own town. Mr. Elmore said he
feels people think residence in Lexington carries a cachet and that people see their investment as
threatened. People who have bought in don't want to see the things that come with more people. He
hears the argument that some towns are doing nothing, so why not Lexington? Ms. Baturin said the
values of houses near LexHAB units have not gone down. Ms. Jennett said that the town is becoming
less diverse demographically with younger adult age groups missing from town. Mr. Smith said that "l, 1,
Minutes for the Meeting of June 25, 2003 2
I..." seems to be peoples' focus; the primary language should be that of community rather than individual
values.
Mr. Carlson said that people react to specific projects and proposals and that is the real test to receptivity
from the community. Mr. Galaitsis said that the "how" is very important and cited the example of ten
units being put on a lot that formerly had only one unit of that size. He feels it is not an issue of high cost
vs. low cost, but of density.
Mr. Carlson said that putting a second story of residential downtown over commercial uses was a good
idea. There is added value in being able to build residential units. Ms. Jennett agreed, saying that she had
seen it work in many places. Ms. Davison said that inclusionary units should be law, not a result of
negotiating by the Planning Board. Mr. Smith wondered if it had not been happening because there is
not a housing partnership to put pressure on and suggested it might be better to have a group that is
outside of town committees.
Mr. Herr said that the Planning Board is not a housing advocate, but rather working for the town good
while balancing various interests. A partnership would be a single -issue advocacy group. He gave an
example of his experience in Newton where a non - government advocacy group put out a report card on
the aldermen and housing. That could not have been done if they were appointees of the aldermen. He
added that Lexington already has two policy - making groups— Vision 2020 and the Planning Board —that
have urged exploring residences in the downtown.
Mr. Harden raised the question "why now ", and cited the alanning demographic trends. Ms. Wheaton
said that the same alarms were sounded in the 1970s. The issue is an ongoing one and if anything is to
happen, there will have to be truly broad -based advocacy, with a group willing to work. The focus will
remain on the PIanning Board until another group is formed.
Advocacy Programs Phil Herr spoke about various housing programs in places across the state.
Regional Consortium He said that Lincoln became exempt from 40B on the basis of its housing plan, a
consolidated plan. Lincoln and Needham both pursued a HOME consortium as a means of gaining at least
limited resources. Lexington could join the consortium and then do a local, one - community plan.
Community Preservation Plan (CPS Mr. Herr feels that Lexington should reconsider the CPA, as it is a
steady and valuable resource for housing. He gave the example of Newton's using its next five years of
CPA funds to put in a bid on the only tract of undeveloped land over ten acres in size in Newton.
Housing Partnerships. – This was originally a Dukakis concept of a partnership between the state,
developers and local communities. Many have now gone away. A Housing Partnership Fund was
created, but now has limited resources. Municipal housing partnerships have no statutory role, although
they still sign off on LIP applications.
ECHO Program – Mr. Herr described a concept of Professor Stone, who thinks communities should seek
out those living in big houses, who are having trouble keeping up with costs, and who are eligible for
affordable housing. There would be resale restrictions in perpetuity while fiends would go toward a lump
sum for renovations and an annuity to help the homeowner stay in place. It doesn't attempt to address the
root problem of producing new units.
Mr. Garber asked if a housing partnership were the way to begin. Is it initially public education, or do we
pursue regulatory or other initiatives for the next town meeting, or both? Mr. Smith said that Hancock
Church and the Lexington Interfaith Organization strongly support the idea of a housing partnership. He
also said that the Hancock Church group was getting ready a poster campaign, similar to the one on the
Minutes for the Meeting of June 25, 2003
3
Fort Collins web site. Mr. Montanari said you need to build a real community base of knowledge and
support before you plunge in too far. Mr. Garber said he felt that the consensus was to pursue a housing
partnership. Mr. Carlson said that the people in the room need to carry the ball. Those present agreed to
have the Planning Board call the next meeting but that a subgroup should come with a plan.
On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted unanimously to adjourn at 9:15 p.m.
�j
Sara B. Chase, Acting Clerk