2008-06-24-PB-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Minutes for the Meeting of June 24, 2008 Page 3 Redevelopment requires taking a property out of the income stream, so is not attractive for recent purchases. It is not attractive to redevelop unless it can be dense. A mixed use is a new concept for the northeast. Ancillary retail uses won’t be successful without significant third party customers to make a go of it and generate revenue from the space. He thought allowing 20 to 25 percent other uses would be attractive. He said that Lexington is a ‘tweener market and will remain such without significant change. He could see Hartwell with 6-story office buildings; it has the potential of being a very walkable street with the addition of sidewalks. Mr. Andrews said Alexandria has four properties, relatively recent purchases. Numbers 29 and 35 are at .32 and .35 FAR, while 44 is mostly wetlands and has a low FAR. 60 Westview is about .25 FAR and is converting from office manufacturing to lab. He could see three to four story lab/office buildings on the one side of Hartwell but the other side has wetland constraints. He doesn’t see a lot of redevelopment, as it would require taking properties out of the income stream. There is a challenge in fitting surface parking. Mr. Cantalupa said you need to see what site will take you to what density. Mr. Henry asked if there was a particular floor template, a square footage per employee, or a desired parking ratio that they would like to see. He told the developers they had information the Board needs to make decisions. Mr. Canale asked what density would justify structured parking. Mr. O’Gorman said structured parking is just overhead as they can’t charge for it in the suburbs. Mr. Horning asked what would they build if there were no FAR, setbacks, etc? Mr. O’Gorman said it was subject to the market. If they are looking for wholesale reinvestment they need to look at density. Mr. Duffy said that .4 FAR by right is very attractive and there is limited opportunity in Waltham for such. He said in Burlington the ZBA can increase the FAR from .15 to .56 and that is with surface parking. Ms. Manz asked how they found the existing process with the Town for planned commercial developments. Mr. Duffy said that at 25 Hartwell Avenue when they added 8,000 square feet a few years ago, they had to go through the ZBA and Conservation Commission and they found it worthwhile. He noted that Lexington was alone in its definition of developable area that excludes wetlands. Mr. Cantalupa said when you look at lots, it’s an order of magnitude. In Waltham the largest you see is 350,000 square feet and six stories and he doesn’t see any bigger than that happening in Lexington. Four spaces per 1,000 square feet seems to be the magic number for parking, although some tenants want 6 per 1,000 sq. ft. He thought 3.5-4/1,000 was workable, using the rentable area. Mr. Andrews said 3/1,000