The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010-07-29-BLUPC-min MINUTES Busa Land Use Proposal Committee July 29, 2010 Meeting called to order at 7:02 PM. Missing: Ric Fulop Present: Ginna Johnson Pam Shadley David Horton Al Zabin Debbie Strod Bill Dailey Hank Manz Carl Valente Citizens Present: Kristen Reed, Igor Tsvetkova, Bella Tsvetkova, Justine Selsiny, Lisa Berland, John Bartenstein 1.Congratulations from all to Ric Fulop and his wife welcoming a new baby into their family. Debbie is in charge of finding an appropriate card and circulating it. 2.Minutes for the next meeting will be taken by Debbie Strod with all members taking their turn thereafter. 3.David laid out how public comment during regular committee meetings will work. There will be public comment at the start of the meeting. What is brought up during public comment will not necessarily be discussed during the course of that meeting. 4.Discussion over how to decide what to put on land. Ginna Johnson stressed how important a survey will be given the various land features such as the probable 200 foot buffer in the L-shaped parcel. Felt bid on the table a bit high given that there are, for instance, few significant trees on the parcel. She believes a competitive bid would result in a lower cost. Pam Shadley asked if the GIS maps are good enough for planning purposes given the land features such as the riverfront area. She felt we might want to field flag the area for accuracy. There is concern, however, that a detailed survey might well overwhelm the available budget. Al Zabin asked if the wetland overlay maps might not be good enough. General discussion of how specific a plan was desired from the committee merging with a discussion of why more specific information was needed. Bill Dailey’s feeling is that the proposals may well be sophisticated, but that we don’t yet have enough information about what will be proposed to be able to specify what we need from a detailed survey. He counseled that we listen first, then ask for the detailed survey. Wrapup of discussion: In favor of a detailed survey: 4 (Debbie, Ginna, Pam, David) Willing to go with a less detailed survey: 2 (Al, Bill) Decision was to ask Carl to solicit competitive bids in the hope of finding a much better price than is currently on the table. 5.Identification of things needed from the Town: Land use documents/Master Plans Hank will ask Planning, CPC, Recreation, Housing, Selectmen’s Office for possible documents Any past proposals Web Site planning Hank will talk to Dorinda Goodman for starters Debbie will find others to talk to about ways to effect and improve communication. Contact point Existing plan to use personal e-mails for contact information may be replaced with another plan. Hank will check on status of new plan. 6.How will the committee solicit proposals Al: Ask for concept proposals. Ginna Not only ask for “hopes and dreams” but also “fears” Pam Large public meeting (probably facilitated) to start the whole process—general agreement on this point. Bill Be sure to solicit major players such as Conservation, Recreation, Housing as well as other players Al Two sessions. #1: Open Forum. #2: Advocacy Groups. Out of this discussion came the following conclusions: Multiple public meetings will be needed  First Meeting: Open Session just to solicit general ideas from those who may not yet have a full proposal.  Second Meeting: Fully formed groups such as Recreation, Housing, etc. These groups should also attend the first meeting to get a flavor of what the wider community is thinking.  Third Meeting: Proposals outside the Fully Formed groups from Second Meeting.  Fourth Meeting: Possible overflow meeting if Third Meeting does not give groups enough time.  General Layout for the First Meeting Five minutes per presenter max—this may be too much o Is the e-gov list appropriate for notification? o Cary Hall is probably an appropriate venue give projected audience o size LexMedia should be invited to record the sessions o Include Arlington at least in Second Meeting o The term “Advocacy Group” was used during the meeting to mean established or fully- o formed groups, but a better term is needed. All groups who come forward with proposals will be advocates for their plan and at least some of the committee expect some very detailed proposals from groups which may not even have existed before the purchase of the Busa Farm property. For the purposes of these minutes, the phrase “Fully Formed Groups” has been used, with the understanding that there is a better term out there. 7.Projected Date for Recommendation: January 15, 2011 Some felt this date was aggressive and probably unattainable, but all felt that a sense of urgency should be maintained. 8.Future Meetings Next Meeting: August 26, 2010 Other Meetings: First Meeting: September 15, 2010 Committee Mtg: September 29, 2010 Second Meeting: October 7, 2010 Committee Meeting: October 21, 2010 Third Meeting: November 4, 2010 Committee Mtg: November 18, 2010 9.What is the cost of doing nothing?  Should we continue lease beyond growing season? Kick this one back to the town. But the general consensus is to allow an extended lease. 10.Agenda items for next meeting:  Develop design and program criteria Land use Implementation cost Site plan distribution Maintenance cost General impact on environment Financial gain  Develop general format for public meetings. Meeting adjourned at 8:40 PM.