Can anyone clarify?
Something that one of the candidates for Planning Board, Susan Koffman, said at the Candidates Night a couple of weeks ago has been bothering me since last weekend when we watched it on Waycam. I thought I'd ask this discussion board for opinions on her statements (we Tivo'd it and I just replayed it so that I could try to get the gist of her remarks right).

Ms. Koffman said that she is bothered by the current Zoning Change that we will be voting on this Wednesday at Special Town Meeting because it will require that 100 units of housing be built first before any commercial use of the Town Center project can take place. She said that the current developer is restricted by the deed which Raytheon granted to use the site for residential or recreation use. She said that commercial development there may be delayed for a very long time while "cleanup continues". She would have liked the situation better if there had been no housing involved at all.

So in other words what I think she said was:
1. The site is deed restricted to forbid residential and recreational use because of pollution.
2. Housing cannot be built there (or occupied?) until the site is cleaned up (including the alternative 40B?).
3. The new zoning change (Article 2 at Wed. meeting) will require that the housing be built first (or occupied?) before the commercial stores can open (or be built?).
4. The site may sit unoccupied for years due to the Raytheon pollution.

These statements were not disputed by the other two candidates, though there was very little time in which to do so in that forum that we saw anyway on the Waycam broadcast. So first of all is she right? If so basically, what are the details of this whole thing (in laymans terms please)? What can the developer really build there and occupy immediately? Could he really even build (occupy) the 40B project? I know they originally wanted to put that 40B housing over by the river side of the site because they said it would have the better views, etc., but were they really trying to avoid the part of the parcel that was restricted due to the pollution? Is the restriction just over part of the 50+ acres? Why does, if it really does, the zoning change include the requirement that the housing be built (and/or occupied?) first? Who's idea was that? How big is the risk that this whole site will sit empty? Is the risk the same for the proposed 40B option? Can anyone shine some light on this whole topic?

I really support the Town Center Project and maybe I missed some discussions on these matters that would clear this stuff up. I just thought it might be better to know about these details before the Special Town Meeting debate than for them all to surface at the meeting. I wish I'd gotten around to submitting this earlier in the week.
Thanks.

P.S. On a slightly different topic, traffic, I clearly heard the developer say at one of the Selectmen's meetings earlier this year that the 40B proposal they showed only developed part of the property with the housing, and that they would be deciding what could/would be done with the other part of the site (many acres remaining) at some time in the future. Did any of the traffic studies consider that the 40B proposal is not the whole and final use of the site and that the unknown future of the remainder of the site might add a lot more vehicles in and out of the site in the future? Seems like that never gets mentioned in comparing the two options.