2023-06-22-SLC-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Sustainable Lexington Committee Minutes of June 22, 2023 o Cindy and Lin commented that in the future the policy should consider requiring net- positive developments. Celis added that the policy says “maximize onsite solar” but there are site-specific issues to consider. At Permanent Building Committee (PBC) meetings, he emphasizes getting the most that we can out of each site and that solar provides a financial benefit. o The was a general discussion about the policy and Net Zero and how things like the red list that had been a big challenge previously are now a best practice. •EV school buses. o Todd commented that Maggie’s and his current understanding is that the $350,000 for an EV school bus is still available, but that he has not received confirmation from LPS. •Brainstorming about solar o Cindy introduced the discussion by asking: What do we think we could do to encourage solar in new developments in town and adding solar to existing developments? o Rick commented that Melrose is a great example. At earlier SLC meetings, his students had presented the Melrose example of outreach to small businesses. Melrose helped the small- and medium-sized businesses acquire solar for their properties. Also, the students talked about partnering with large businesses to set up partnerships where the Town would support the funding for the solar project and use the Town’s portion to create community solar that is available to residents. o Andy asked whether we have relationships with the building owners, particularly those with a lot of property. Maggie said yes. There are a few larger companies like Boston Properties. o Rick added that in addition to the owners, it is good to get the tenants involved early in the process: “solar for all”. o Lin suggested that Town staff (Mike Cronin) could be a resource to smaller property owners interested in installing solar, adding that the process can be confusing to people. o Celis commented that installing solar is a risky decision for building owners because it’s a 25 year commitment. If the town could build it and just lease the site from the private company it might be a more favorable opportunity for the business. Sort of like the PACE program. o Mark added that PACE is set up to support solar. The value stays with the property, not on the building owner’s balance sheet. The downside for solar is that we’re encouraging heat pumps, so there’s not a lot of space for solar on the roofs for new developments. .5