HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-04-12 Planning Board MinutesM;,nutes of ,the Meetina'of April 12 1~~2.
Chairman B. Mitchel called the meeting to order at 7:10 P.M, in Room
131, Reading Memorial High School, 62 Oakland Road with Board members
K. Messina, M. Rich, J. Shaw and A. Burne present. There were approxi-
mately 50 people also present at this meeting. At the request of the
Planning Board Town Counsel, H. Theodore Cohen was also present,
Chairman Mitchel stated that the Planning Board had formally closed
the public hearing and that this meeting was for additional informa-
tion requested from the petitioners regarding the restrictions to be
placed on the back land as well as additional traffic study data.
'own Counsel was asked to give a brief summary to the Board on the
possibility of placing restrictions on the back parcel of land which
is on the Town Meeting Warrant for rezoning.
Town Counsel stated that he has had several conversations with the
petitioners attorney and the Board's secretary in this matter. As he
saw it, there were 2 possibilities for placing such restrictions:
1 - "conditional zoning - this is a situation where Town
Meeting could adopt an amendment to the Zoning By-laws
subject to certain conditions and once these conditions
were fulfilled, the zoning would go into effect.
2 e "contract zoning" w- no specific conditions are attached to
the actual zoning amendment but a separate contract with
restrictions, which state that in turn for rezoning there
would be a contract to adhere to certain restrictions.
Until very recently this has not been allowed. But the
landmark decision with Town of Newton vs. Sylvania, Electric
Company, this is now possible. This case should be closely
followed if this is the route the. Town chooses.
Another possibility is a "conservation restriction". Although. tyhe
Town does not own the land, a conservation restriction could run
directly to the Town, providing such-restrictions This can be done
2 ways. The conservation restriction could run directly to the Town
which would require acceptance by Town Meeting with a proper article
on the Warrant. The, other way is it could run to the Town but be
acquired by the Conservation Commission with approval by the Board
of Selectmen, which would not require acceptance by Town Meeting.
Attorney Latham requested that the conservation restriction acquired
by the Conservation Commission with Board of Selectmen approval would-
be the way he would proceed. The 'petitioners want the zoning in effect
before restrictions are in place.
Town Counsel stated that a conservation restriction could entitle the
landowner to a tax break because the property is not allowed to be
used to its highest and best use. Tn response to questions"about the
permanence of such a restriction, Town Counsel stated that such a
restriction must go through Town Meeting approval and then thro=ugh
2/3 approval of the General Court, both House and Senate..
Page 2
4%12%82
Attorney Latham then requested that the Board defer any action on this
matter until input from the Conservation Commission and the Board of
Selectmen can be obtained. The traffic studies could then be com-
pleted, as bad weather the previous week prohibited further investi-
gation. The Board would then have an opportunity to review the
matter sufficiently, in Attorney Latham's opinion.
After questions from concerned citizens, the Board agreed to take a
vote on this article.
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted 3;2;0 not to
recommend Article 27 as proposed.
After the vote, the Board discussed their reasons for their positions.
_Mr. Burne stated that there could be no ironclad guarantee that the
restrictions could be lifted and therefore felt that at some future
time such uses could be allowed and he felt that this was not in the
best interest of the abutting residents.
Ms. Rich stated that she was of an open mind until Town Counsel said
that this guarantee could not be ironclad. She stated that she also
had reservations with such a project because it did not adequately
"answer the needs of the Town as she saw them.
Mr. Shaw asked that the Board reconsider their vote as he felt that
there should be more time to allow Conservation Commission and the
Board of Selectmen to consider the conservation restriction as well
as obtain the additional traffic data, that was requested,
The Board's options were
seconded reconsideration
of the Board, it was dec
27 and obtain additional
Board of Selectmen, Town
traffic study.,
stated and Mr. Shaw moved, Mr. Messina
of the Board's vote. On, a unanimous vote.
.ded to reconsider their position on Article
information from Conservation Commission,
Counsel and the petitioners regarding the
Ms. Rich voiced her objection that after the majority of the interested
citizens had left the room, the Board reconsidered their vote, Mr,.
Messina stated that the Board had not adjourned and that any citizen
interested in the further business of the. Board had the opportunity
to stay at the meeting. Chairman Mitchel then moved that the Board
adjourn until Thursday, April 15, 1982 at 7 P.M. in Room 131, at the
High School. It was unanimously voted to adjourn.
Respectfully submitted,
Kenneth G. Messina, Clerk