HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-03-17-BOS-packet-releasedHearing Assistance Devices Available on Request
All agenda times and the order of items are approximate and subject to change.
SELECTMEN’S MEETING
Monday, March 17, 2014
Selectmen Meeting Room
7:00 p.m.
AGENDA
7:00 p.m. PUBLIC COMMENTS (10 min.)
7:10 p.m. SELECTMEN CONCERNS AND LIAISON REPORTS (5 min.)
7:15 p.m. TOWN MANAGER REPORT (5 min.)
7:20 p.m. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION
1. Authorize Town Manager to Send RFP for Comcast Renewal Process (5 min.)
2. Planning Board Presentation on Zoning Articles for Annual Town Meeting (30
min.)
3. Update on Center Parking (15 min.)
4. Center Streetscape Presentation (1 hour)
5. Shade Street Traffic Calming/ 2014 Road Reconstruction Projects (15 min.)
6. Interim Report on School Enrollment Projections (15 min.)
7. Article Positions/Article Presenters (20 min.)
8. Revised Health Insurance Budget (10 min.)
9. Appointment/Resignation- Human Rights Committee/Arts Council (5 min.)
10. Approve and Sign Eagle Letters Congratulating Thomas Elliott, Ian Davis and
David Whitman-Kinghorn (5 min.)
10:20 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA (5 min.)
1. One Day Liquor License – BBQ
2. Sign Battle Green Flag Certificate for Retiring Army Service
3. Approve Tax Bill Insert – Solarize Lexington
4. Minutes
5. Executive Session Minutes
10:25 p.m. EXECUTIVE SESSION (15 min.)
1. Exemption 3 – Collective Bargaining Discussion – Lexington Municipal
Management Association
2. Exemption 2 – Preparation for Negotiations – Non Union Personnel
3. Exemption 3 – Pending Litigation Update: Sellars v Lexington et al
10:40 p.m. ADJOURN
The next meeting of the Board of Selectmen is scheduled for Monday, March 24, 2014 at 6:00
p.m. in the Selectmen’s Meeting Room, 1625 Massachusetts Avenue.
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
DATE: 3/17/14 STAFF: Lynne Pease ITEM NUMBER: I.1
SUBJECT:
Authorize Town Manager to Send RFP for Comcast Renewal Process
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Dave Becker, Dave Buczkowski and Nick Lauriet, members of the Communications Advisory
Committee and the Negotiating Subcommittee, will be at your meeting to request approval to
have the Town Manager send a letter to Comcast Cable Communications to begin the formal
renewal procedure. Attached is an email from Dave Becker explaining the process and the
proposed letter for the Town Manager to send to Comcast.
Because of its size, I have not included the proposed Comcast Renewal License, but I have it on
file if you wish to see it.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDATION / SUGGESTED MOTION:
Motion to authorize the Town Manager to sign and send a letter and the proposed Cable
Television Renewal License to Jane Lyman, Senior Manager of Government and Community
Relations.
STAFF FOLLOW-UP:
Selectmen’s Office
Town of Lexington Town of Lexington
Town Manager’s Office Town Manager’s Office
Carl F. Valente, Town Manager Tel: (781) 698-4540 Carl F. Valente, Town Manager Tel: (781) 698-4540
Linda Crew Vine, Deputy Town Manager Fax: (781-861-2921 Linda Crew Vine, Deputy Town Manager Fax: (781-861-2921
March 17, 2014 March 17, 2014
By E-Mail and U.S. Mail By E-Mail and U.S. Mail
Ms. Jane M. Lyman
Ms. Jane M. Lyman
Senior Manager of Government and Senior Manager of Government and
Community Relations Community Relations
Comcast Cable Communications, Inc. Comcast Cable Communications, Inc.
12 Tozer Road 12 Tozer Road
Beverly, MA 01915 Beverly, MA 01915
RE: Town of Lexington Renewal LicenseRE: Town of Lexington Renewal License
Dear Ms. Lyman:
On behalf of the Board of Selectmen, statutory Issuing Authority for the Town of Lexington,
MA (the “Town”), I have enclosed the Town of Lexington’s Cable Television Renewal License
for Comcast. The Issuing Authority is transmitting this Renewal License to Comcast for response
in accordance with the formal renewal procedures of the federal Cable Act, 47 U.S.C. Section
546(a)-(c). The Renewal License contains the material terms and conditions being proposed by
the Issuing Authority.
The Issuing Authority conducted a public ascertainment hearing in the Town on January 26,
2012. The purpose of the hearing was to provide members of the community the opportunity to
voice their concerns and identify issues in connection with the future cable-related needs and
interests of the Lexington community. Proper notice of the hearing was provided.
Comcast should submit its response to the Renewal License to the Town no later than Thursday,
May 1, 2014, by submitting one (1) original and five (5) copies, to the Selectmen's Office at the
Lexington Town Hall. Comcast should also send one (1) copy of its response directly to the
Town's outside Cable Counsel, Peter J. Epstein, 101 Arch Street, Suite 900, Boston, MA 02110-
1112 by the same date referenced herein.
Ms. Jane M. Lyman March 17, 2014
Page Two
The four-month period, mandated by Section 626(c)(1) of the Cable Act, shall commence on
May 1, 2014 and expire on August 31, 2014. The current Cable Television Renewal License
expires on August 31, 2014.
In the meantime, please let me know if you have any questions regarding the enclosed Renewal
License.
Very Truly Yours,
Carl F. Valente
Town Manager
CAC/CFV
cc: Board of Selectmen
Communications Advisory Committee
Peter J. Epstein, Esquire
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
DATE: 3/17/14 STAFF: Lynne Pease ITEM NUMBER: I.2
SUBJECT:
Planning Board Presentation on Zoning Articles for the Annual Town Meeting
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Charles Hornig will be at your meeting to present the zoning articles (Articles 27-32) for the
Annual Town Meeting.
See attached Planning Board Reports.
Tom Fenn will also be at the meeting to discuss a proposed amendment motion for Article 30 –
Amend Zoning Bylaw – Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers. His information is attached.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDATION / SUGGESTED MOTION:
STAFF FOLLOW-UP:
Selectmen’s Office
Town of Lexington
PLANNING BOARD
Charles Hornig, Chair 1625 Massachusetts Avenue
Nancy Corcoran-Ronchetti, Vice Chair Lexington, MA 02420
Timothy Dunn, Clerk Tel (781) 862-0500 Ext. 84560
Richard L. Canale Facsimile (781) 861-2748
Gregory Zurlo planning@lexingtonma.gov
REPORT TO THE 2014 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
ARTICLES 27-29
CITIZEN PETITIONS TO AMEND THE ZONING BYLAW
MARCH 2014
The Planning Board Report to Town Meeting conveys the Planning Board’s positions on the
articles. It contains details regarding the proposals that are intended to inform decision-
making and to provide helpful knowledge to the public and all interested parties.
Article Description Recommended
Action
27 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Allow for-profit educational uses
in the neighborhood business and residential districts
APPROVE as
modified
28 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Allow for-profit educational uses
in the neighborhood business district and remove size
limitation
APPROVE as
modified
29 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Allow for-profit educational uses
in the neighborhood business district
Indefinitely Postpone
THIS REPORT WAS ACCEPTED BY VOTE OF THE PLANNING BOARD ON
MARCH 12, 2014.
Planning Board Report on Articles 27-29
ARTICLE 27 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Allow for-profit educational uses in
the neighborhood business and residential districts
ARTICLE 28 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Allow for-profit educational uses in
the neighborhood business district and remove size limitation
ARTICLE 29 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Allow for-profit educational uses in
the neighborhood business district
BACKGROUND
These three articles are citizen’s petitions from a single petitioner. They evolved over time
with Article 29 being the first one submitted. When the petitioner realized the 1,500 square
foot limitation on establishments in the neighborhood business (CN) district could not be
amended within the scope of the original warrant article she submitted the two additional
articles to accomplish her goal of allowing for-profit educational uses in more areas of town.
The current bylaw limits them to commercial districts.
The warrant articles were written broadly to allow a range of options which were narrowed
down as the petitioner talked with residents. The original idea was to treat nonprofit and for-
profit educational uses the same. To address concerns about the expansion of this use into
residential districts, the petitioner is limiting her proposal to allow only for-profit educational
uses for instruction in music and the arts with a size not to exceed 3,500 square feet per
establishment by special permit in the RT District and the CN District. They would continue
to be allowed by right in other commercial districts. The 1,500 square foot maximum size of
service establishments in the CN District could be modified by a special permit.
To accomplish this there will be;
A motion under Article 27 to add “Instruction in Music or the Arts, not to exceed 3,500
square feet of floor space per establishment” to the Table of Uses and to allow such a use by
special permit in the RT and CN districts, by right in the rest of the commercial districts, but
not in the RO or RS districts.
A motion under Article 28 to allow the development standard of 1,500 square feet for
personal, business, or general service uses in the CN District to be modified by special
permit.
A motion to indefinitely postpone Article 29 as it was replaced by Article 27.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Board recommends that the motions under Articles 27, 28 and 29 be approved
if they are as represented above.
1
Planning Board Report on Articles 27-29
2
PUBLIC HEARING
A duly advertised public hearing was held on February 26, 2014 in the Selectmen’s Meeting
Room. Approximately 20 people were in attendance.
The petitioner presented her proposed articles which would allow “Instruction in Music or
the Arts, not to exceed 3,500 square feet of floor space per establishment” by special permit
in all residential districts. This generated considerable comment with residents suggesting
that such a use should not be allowed in the single-family residential zones. Some said they
could support the introduction of such a use in the RT two family district, which runs along
Massachusetts Avenue in East Lexington. It was felt that this was a busy street that could
support such an activity. In addition, the special permit requirement could address specific
concerns by imposing conditions to mitigate any impacts, or even deny the use based on the
particular circumstances. After the public hearing, the petitioner indicated that she would
limit her proposal to allow for-profit educational uses for instruction in music and the arts
only by special permit in the RT District and the CN District and with a size limitation of
3,500 square feet per establishment.
After deliberation, the Planning Board voted 4-0 to recommend favorable action on Article
27 and 28 as modified and the indefinite postponement of Article 29. Ms. Ciccolo abstained
from the vote.
The recommendation was reconsidered on March 12 to allow the new member of the
Planning Board to weigh in. After deliberation, the Planning Board voted 5-0 to recommend
favorable action on Articles 27 and 28 and to indefinitely postpone Article 29.
MOTIONS FOR ARTICLES 27-29
This is a citizen’s petition and the Planning Board is not responsible for the motion. The
final motions were not available at the public hearing as they were modified to respond to
concerns raised at the public hearing. The Planning Board supports the following proposed
bylaw:
RO RS RT CN CRS CS CB CLO CRO CM
H. PERSONAL, BUSINESS, OR GENERAL SERVICE USES
H.1.0 AS A PRINCIPAL USE
H.1.014 School not exempt by statute N N N N Y Y Y Y Y Y
H.1.014.1 Instruction in music or the arts, not
to exceed 3,500 square feet of floor space per
establishment
N N SP SP Y Y Y Y Y Y
…
H.2.0 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR
PERSONAL, BUSINESS, OR GENERAL
SERVICE USES
H.2.01 Services with more than 1,500 square
feet of floor space per establishment Y Y Y SP Y Y Y Y Y Y
Town of Lexington
PLANNING BOARD
Charles Hornig, Chair 1625 Massachusetts Avenue
Nancy Corcoran-Ronchetti,Vice Chair Lexington, MA 02420
Timothy Dunn, Clerk Tel (781) 862-0500 Ext. 84561
Richard L. Canale Facsimile (781) 861-2748
Gregory Zurlo planning@lexingtonma.gov
REPORT TO THE 2014 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING
ARTICLES 30-32
AMEND THE ZONING BYLAW
MARCH 2014
The Planning Board Report to Town Meeting conveys the Planning Board’s positions on the
articles. It contains details regarding the proposals that are intended to inform decision-making
and to provide helpful knowledge to the public and all interested parties.
Article Description Recommended
Action Report Motion
30 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Medical Marijuana
Treatment Centers APPROVE p. 1 p. 5
31 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Site Plan Review APPROVE p. 7 p. 8
32 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Technical
corrections APPROVE p. 9 p. 9
THIS REPORT WAS ACCEPTED BY VOTE OF THE PLANNING BOARD ON
MARCH 12, 2014.
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
ARTICLE 30 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Board recommends that the motion under Article 30 be approved.
BACKGROUND
At the November 6, 2012 State election, the voters of the Commonwealth approved a law
regulating the cultivation, distribution, possession and use of marijuana for medical purposes
by patients with debilitating medical conditions through Medical Marijuana Treatment
Centers (MMTCs), also known as Registered Marijuana Dispensaries (RMDs). Within the
Town of Lexington, 65% of the voters who cast ballots on this question supported the law.
The law, Chapter 369 of the Acts of 2012, became effective January 1, 2013, and required
the Department of Public Health (DPH) to issue regulations governing its implementation.
These regulations state that
“[t]he Department [of Public Health] does not mandate any involvement by
municipalities or local boards of health in the regulations of RMDs, qualifying
patients with hardship cultivation registrations, or any other aspects of marijuana
for medical use. However, nothing in 105 CMR 725.000 shall be construed so as
to prohibit lawful local oversight and regulation, including fee requirements, that
does not conflict or interfere with the operation of 105 CMR 725.000.”
and that nothing in the regulations
“[r]equires any accommodation of any on-site medical use of marijuana in any place
of employment, school bus or on school grounds, in any youth center, in any
correctional facility, or of smoking medical marijuana in any public place.”
In brief the Department of Public Health regulations cover the following:
There will be no more than 35 RMDs in the state and no more than 5 per county.
Physicians who wish to prescribe medical marijuana to their patients must
register with DPH. Physicians must have an established relationship with the
patient to prescribe marijuana.
Patients and personal caregivers must also register with DPH.
Organizations looking to run an RMD must be non-profit, have a minimum of
$500,000 under their control, and apply to run no more than three RMDs.
RMDs must cultivate their own product, although this can be done at an alternate site
under their control with all transportation to the actual dispensary handled by the
organization under strict transportation regulations.
Independent laboratory testing must be performed on the marijuana.
Security requirements including alarm systems, security cameras with retained
secured videos for a minimum of 25 hours, locked storage area, marked limited
access areas, no plantings outside the facility where someone could hide, outside
lighting, and written emergency procedures.
Waste disposal procedures.
1
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
Logos and signs cannot include any reference to medical marijuana or any images of
the product or symbols of associated paraphernalia and must conform to local sign
ordinances.
Siting of RMDs must conform to local requirements and cannot be within 500 feet of
a school, daycare center or facility where children usually congregate unless local
regulations establish a different standard.
DPH can conduct unannounced inspections of the RMDs and any transport
vehicles.
A license is issued for the period of one year.
DPH can grant permission for a patient with financial hardship or who does not
have adequate access to an RMD to cultivate marijuana for personal use. (This is
the only mechanism currently available to patients pending licensing and opening
of RMDs.)
The Attorney General has determined that municipalities may not enact a total ban on
MMTCs. However, cities and towns may adopt zoning by-laws to regulate such
dispensaries, so long as such by-laws do not conflict or interfere with the operation of
the DPH regulations.
At a special Town Meeting in June of 2013 the Town instituted a moratorium on the use of
land or structures for an MMTC until no later than July 31, 2014. The temporary moratorium
was intended to allow sufficient time for the Town to engage in a planning process and to
adopt any bylaws and regulations the Town deemed necessary. Having received public input,
the Planning Board is returning to Town Meeting to establish districts that will allow for
MMTCs as well as for free-standing distribution centers. The Board of Health is considering
local regulations which will further regulate these centers.
The law provides that in the first year up to 35 permits for MMTCs could be issued with at
least one center in each county and no more than five in any one county. Currently there are
four locations in Middlesex County provisionally approved, none of which are in Lexington.
There was an initial application for a Lexington site that did not progress to the second phase.
The bylaw amendment would allow MMTCs incorporating any combination of cultivation,
preparation and distribution in the CM District. This use fits with the production and
manufacturing already allowed in the CM District. The CM District, which runs along
Hartwell Avenue, is also near relatively few residential properties.
Distribution only of medical marijuana related products would also be allowed by special
permit in the CB and CRS Districts. This is motivated by the feeling that distribution fits
with the other retail uses allowed in those districts, such as pharmacies; safety is enhanced at
such facilities by providing “eyes on the street”; and it would allow access for patients who
use public transportation. The CB District covers Lexington Center. CRS districts are located
at Lowell Street and Woburn Street, along Massachusetts Avenue in East Lexington, at
Worthen Road and Bedford Street and on Waltham Street at the Waltham line.
2
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
The proposed amendment leaves local MMTCs subject to the DPH-defined 500’ buffer
around “facilities in which children commonly congregate”. The DPH interprets “facility in
which children commonly congregate” as follows:
Such a facility includes dance schools, gymnastic schools, etc. if children commonly
congregate there in a structured, scheduled manner. It includes facilities where
services or programs targeting children or youth take place. It includes a private
home housing a family day care center, but not a private home where children
happen to live. It includes a city or town park if the park includes play structures
intended for children to use. It does not include other facilities, such as ice cream
shops, where children may happen to congregate, but not in a structure, scheduled
manner.
(DPH’s “Guidance for Municipalities Regarding the Medical Use of Marijuana,” updated 12/13/13)
Should the Town wish to impose different buffers, this should be done through carefully
crafted Board of Health regulations, rather than through the zoning bylaw.
If the Town does nothing, the moratorium on the location of an MMTC will expire on
July 31, 2014 and the use will be governed by current zoning and the state regulations.
This would allow growing, production and processing in the CM District as a light
manufacturing use permitted under line N.1.01 of the Zoning Bylaw and allow
distribution as a medical clinic in the CRS, CB, CLO, CRO and CM Districts as
permitted under line H.1.13 of the Zoning Bylaw. The DPH-defined 500’ buffer would
apply unless modified by other local action.
PUBLIC INPUT
Public Information Meeting September 11, 2013: The Planning Board put forward a draft
proposal for discussion as follows:
Allow all three phases (cultivation, preparation and distribution) in the CM District
Allow distribution in the CB and CRS Districts
No additional buffer in zoning although one could be established by the Board of
Health or Board of Selectmen.
Audience Comments (responses in italics):
Could all three elements be split between Towns? Yes, but all three elements must be
permitted within each municipality.
This use should be allowed anywhere a pharmacy would be permitted; there were
more dangerous elements out there than this.
The CB district should be excluded, based on the State’s buffering regulations. Each
municipality could provide its own regulations or use the State’s.
The evolution of zoning and licensing for operational details should be kept as open
as practical and the Planning Board should recommend the location based on the
operational details.
The School Committee has not met regarding this proposal; what would be the
timeline? This would be going forward at the Spring Town Meeting.
3
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
Why couldn’t the Town ban this use? Other Towns have tried to ban the use, which
was vetoed by the Attorney General’s Office. The State would decide which
municipality would get the license and there would be no local opt out allowed.
Manny Ferro, Captain of Operations for the Lexington Police Department, reached
out to other police departments in the west and mid-west states that currently allowed
this use and said there were lots of issues with assaults, vandalism and rips offs.
Given that there have been rip offs locally for $20 with pizza delivery what would
happen with a $4,000 delivery of marijuana? The Police Department recommended
only allowing the use in the manufacturing zone (CM Zone), which would be better
equipped for security and monitoring as opposed to the busy Lexington Center.
Restricting the use to a CM Zone would not be good for distribution since
accessibility would be restrictive for those who might need to get to the dispensary
through public transportation.
How would eligibility to allow home grown product be determined? It would be
based on financial hardship and would be determined by the State whether or not to
allow product to be home grown.
Agreed with the Police Captain about restricting this use to the CM district at first to
see how it worked out. If an expansion to other locations was to be considered the
Town could revisit the matter at a later time.
The dispensary should be in a more accessible location like the CB District.
Board Comments:
Was there an unsafe condition presently with pharmacies and liquor stores that exist?
Captain Ferro said there was an existing problem now and the addition of this use
could increase the potential for more trouble and the Board should take a
conservative approach to start and expand down the road if need be.
This should be permitted in the CM District, but there were differences of opinion for
permitting this use to be allowed in the CRS or CB District.
This should be placed where liquor stores and pharmacies were permitted.
The heavily targeted audience would be people that have debilitating diseases and
disabilities and require accessibility by public transportation and there was no real
service on Hartwell Avenue for access to a dispensary.
What would happen with State buffers if the Town permitted the use in retail
locations? The Town would waive the State buffer regulations. Was there any
information about marijuana and alcohol use in the underage category? There was a
youth risk behavior survey that would be made available to the Board.
Public Hearing: A duly advertised public hearing was held on February 26, 2014 in the
Selectmen’s Meeting Room in the Town Office Building. There were twelve people in the
audience, four of whom spoke on the issue. Some advocated for making the possible
locations as accessible as possible while others had concerns about having a distribution
center in the CB and CRS Districts.
The Board members discussed the need to make an MMTC accessible to users while trying
to avoid any possible negative secondary effects. There was concern about the possibility
that allowing an MMTC in the Center would result in medical marijuana being smoked on
4
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
benches in the Center and whether or not this could be addressed by Board of Health
regulations.
After deliberation, the Planning Board voted 4-1 (Ms. Ciccolo in opposition) to recommend
favorable action on Article 30.
The recommendation was reconsidered on March 12 to allow the new member of the
Planning Board to weigh in. There was discussion of a proposed amendment by Mr. Fenn
and further comments by the Police Chief and members of the public. The recommended
motion, which was changed from the one previously voted on, would leave the DPH-defined
500’ buffer in effect unless and until further local action is taken and would require a special
permit for distribution centers in the CB and CRS districts. After deliberation, the Planning
Board voted 5-0 to recommend favorable action on Article 30.
MOTION FOR ARTICLE 30
That the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, be amended,
effective July 31, 2014, as follows:
1) Delete §135-6.10: “Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers" that imposed a moratorium
through July 31, 2014 on the use of land and structures for a Medical Marijuana
Treatment Center.
2) Insert in Definitions after “Medical, dental, or psychiatric offices” the following
definition:
Medical Marijuana Distribution Center: An establishment that has been
certified by the State Department of Public Health as part of a Medical
Marijuana Treatment Center that sells, distributes, dispenses, or administers
marijuana, products containing marijuana, related supplies, or educational
materials to registered qualifying patients or their personal caregivers but does
not cultivate or prepare the marijuana on site.
3) Replace the existing definition of a medical marijuana treatment center so that it
reads as follows:
Medical Marijuana Treatment Center (MMTC): A not-for-profit
establishment, registered as a Registered Marijuana Dispensary (RMD) in
accordance with Massachusetts law, that acquires, cultivates, possesses,
processes [including development of related products such as edible marijuana
infused products (MIPs), tinctures, aerosols, oils, or ointments], transfers,
transports, sells, distributes, dispenses, or administers marijuana products
containing marijuana, related supplies, or educational materials to registered
qualifying patients or their personal caregivers.
5
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
4) Insert in Part I of Table 1 “Permitted Uses and Development Standards,” after line I.1.012, a
new line I.1.013 so that the amended section of Table 1 will now appear as follows:
RO RS RT CN CRS CS CB CLO CRO CM
F. SALES OR RENTAL OF GOODS AND EQUIPMENT
I.1.0 AS PRINCIPAL USE
…
I.1.013 Medical Marijuana
Distribution Center N N N N SP N SP N N Y
5) Insert in Part N of Table 1 “Permitted Uses and Development Standards,” after line N.1.02, a
new line N.1.03 so that the amended section of Table 1 will now appear as follows:
RO RS RT CN CRS CS CB CLO CRO CM
F. MANUFACTURING USES
N.1.0 AS PRINCIPAL USE
…
N.1.03 Medical Marijuana
Treatment Center N N N N N N N N N Y
6
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
ARTICLE 31 Amend Zoning Bylaw – Site Plan Review
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Board recommends that the motion under Article 31 be approved.
BACKGROUND
These articles are part of a continuing effort to encourage economic development in the
Town and reverse the controls adopted by the Town in the 1980’s that had the practical effect
of freezing commercial development. The 2002 Comprehensive Plan pointed out that “the
real limitation [on business growth] results from rules that Town has chosen for controlling
such development, not from basic limitations inherent in location or the land…”1 At that time
the Plan expressed satisfaction with the status quo regarding commercial development, but
the changing share of the taxes borne by residents has led to a re-evaluation of that vision for
Lexington.
In 2006, the Vision 2020 Steering Committee and the Board of Selectmen established the
Economic Development Task Force (EDTF) and charged it with investigating and promoting
discussion of the issues surrounding economic development. The EDTF’s final report, issued
in August 2008, recommended zoning changes that would encourage higher value
developments, make commercial development approvals predictable and equitable, and
develop traffic management strategies encouraging alternative modes of transportation.2
In 2009 Town Meeting passed a series of zoning amendments focused on the Hartwell
Avenue commercial district, including the removal of the requirement for a special permit
with site plan review, replacing it with site plan review. Article 31 seeks to allow
development in the other commercial districts in Town to utilize site plan review without
having to obtain a special permit unless another special permit is triggered.
Site plan review differs from a special permit in several ways that encourage desirable
commercial development by providing more certainty and expediting review:
Site plan review Special permit
Granting
Authority
Major: Planning Board (majority)
Minor: Planning Director
Board of Appeals or Planning Board
(2/3 vote)
Criteria Specific criteria in Planning Board
regulations
General criteria in Zoning Bylaw
Time
Limit
60 days from application to final
decision
65 days from application to hearing
unlimited time for hearing
90 days from hearing to final decision
Denial Denial only in exceptional cases where
goal of bylaw cannot be met through
conditions or changes
Denial at reasonable discretion of
granting authority
1 The Lexington We Want, March 2002, p.65.
2 Lexington Vision 2020, Economic Development Task Force, Final Report, August 2008, p. 9
7
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
Should a development also require one or more special permits, the Planning Board would
become the special permit granting authority for them, as provided for in §135-9.4.1 of the
Zoning Bylaw.
The proposed change does not affect residential developments (no special permit
requirement), development in the CM District (already subject to site plan review),
development in RD and CD districts (subject to separate provisions of the Bylaw), or
developments which require review of traffic impacts under §135-5.5.
PUBLIC HEARING
A duly advertised public hearing was held on February 26, 2014 in the Selectmen’s Meeting
Room in the Town Office Building. There were eight people in the audience, two of whom
spoke on the issue. One wanted to know the trigger for a major or minor site plan review.
Another felt that site plan review did not provide adequate protection as it could only be
denied in the most extreme circumstances. Board members felt that the site plan review
process with it ability to impose conditions was adequate and it was an important tool in
increasing certainty in the development process.
After deliberation, the Board voted to recommend the adoption of Article 31 to Town
Meeting.
The recommendation was reconsidered on March 12 to allow the new member of the
Planning Board to weigh in. After deliberation, the Planning Board voted 5-0 to recommend
favorable action on Article 31.
MOTION FOR ARTICLE 31
That the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, be amended as
follows:
In Part F of Table 1 “Permitted Uses and Development Standards,”, Line F.1.02 delete “SP”
and replace with “R” under the columns for RO, RS, RT, CN, CRS, CS, CB,CLO and CRO
Districts, so that the amended section of Table 1 will now appear as follows:
RO RS RT CN CRS CS CB CLO CRO CM
F. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS – THE FOLLOWING DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS APPLY TO ALL USES IN SECTION G TO P, INCLUSIVE, OF THIS
TABLE IN ADDITION TO ANY STANDARDS SET FORTH THEREIN
…
F.1.02 Uses and structures
with 10,000 or more square
feet of gross floor area
including the area of any
existing structure, but not
including any floor area
devoted to off-street parking,
on a lot
R R R R R R R R R R
8
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32
9
Article 32 Amend Zoning Bylaw- Technical Corrections
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Board recommends that the motion under Article 32 be approved.
Background
This article makes corrections to the Zoning Bylaw that are not substantive. The changes are
proposed in hopes of making the bylaw clearer and more understandable. For instance the
current bylaw has a category of accessory apartment called “by-right accessory apartment”
yet in some instances it requires a special permit. By changing the name of the category to
“basic accessory apartment” it removes this seeming contradiction without changing any of
the rules about what and where such apartments are allowed.
Typos and mis-alphabetizations are also corrected. The table that follows shows the
proposed changes and gives a brief comment as to why the change is proposed.
PUBLIC HEARING
A duly advertised public hearing was held on February 26, 2014 in the Selectmen’s Meeting
Room in the Town Office Building. No members of the public spoke.
After deliberation, the Board voted to recommend the adoption of Article 32 to Town
Meeting.
The recommendation was reconsidered on March 12 to allow the new member of the
Planning Board to weigh in. After deliberation, the Planning Board voted 5-0 to recommend
favorable action on Article 32.
MOTION FOR ARTICLE 32
That the Zoning Bylaw, Chapter 135 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, be amended as
follows:
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32 Reference Existing RORSRT CN CRS CSCBCLOCROCMA.2.01 Not more than 3 rooming units Y Y Y N N N N N N N Proposed RORS RT CNCRSCS CB CLOCROCMA.2.01 Rooming units (not to exceed 3) Y Y Y N N N N N N N §135-3.4 Table 1 line A.2.01 (page 7) Comments Clarity Existing RORS RTCNCRSCSCBCLOCROCMA.2.02 Accessory apartment, by-right Y Y N N SP SP SP SP SP SP A.2.03 Accessory apartment, special permit SP SP N N SP SP SP SP SP SP A.2.04 Accessory apartment, accessory structure SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP Proposed RORS RTCNCRSCS CB CLO CRO CMA.2.02 Basic accessory apartment Y Y N N SP SP SP SP SP SP A.2.03 Expanded accessory apartment SP SP N N SP SP SP SP SP SP A.2.04 Accessory structure apartment SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP SP §135-3.4 Table 1 lines A.2.02 to A.2.04 (page 7) Comments It is confusing to require a special permit for what is called a by-right accessory apartment so the name is being changed to basic accessory apartment. It is also confusing to have a special permit for different categories of apartments, only one of which is called a special permit apartment. The text of the bylaw refers to 3 categories of accessory apartment – by-right accessory apartments, special permit accessory apartments and accessory structure apartments. The categories should be consistent between the text and the table so we are proposing to lead with the descriptive phrase, rather than putting it after a comma. 10
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32 Existing Public and institutional buildings, maximum height: Proposed Institutional buildings, maximum height: §135-4.4 Table 2 (page 23) Comments In Table 1 Permitted Uses and Development Standards under the heading “B. INSTITUTIONAL USES” “Municipal buildings or uses” is listed as a principal institutional use, however “the Commonwealth and the U.S. government” is not listed, probably because they are exempt from municipal regulation. Municipal is the Town of Lexington, Consistency. Existing 5.4.5 Lamps. Lamp types shall be selected for optimum color rendering as measured by their color-rendering index (CRI), as listed by manufacturer. Proposed 5.4.5 Lamps. Lamp types shall be selected for optimum color rendering as measured by their color rendering index (CRI), as listed by manufacturer. §135-5.4.5 (page 44) Comments Remove hyphen as in the industry it is without a hyphen. Consistency Existing 6.6.5.5 There shall be provided at least 150 square feet of usable open space for each resident. Proposed 6.6.5.5 There shall be provided at least 150 square feet of open space for each resident. §135-6.6.5.5 (page 61) Comments The “useable” was removed as a technical correction by Article 47 of the 2009 ATM because the requirement for usable open space was removed by Article 49 of the 2008 ATM; somehow it made it back into the document when reorganized and should be removed. Existing 6.7.2. General. An accessory apartment is a second dwelling unit subordinate in size to the principal dwelling unit on a lot, located in either the principal dwelling or an existing accessory structure. The apartment is constructed so as to maintain the appearance and essential character of a one-family dwelling and any existing accessory structures. Three categories of accessory apartments are permitted: by-right accessory apartments, which are permitted as of right, and special permit accessory apartments and accessory structure apartments, which may be allowed by a special permit. Proposed 6.7.2. General. An accessory apartment is a second dwelling unit subordinate in size to the principal dwelling unit on a lot, located in either the principal dwelling or an existing accessory structure. The apartment is constructed so as to maintain the appearance and essential character of a one-family dwelling and any existing accessory structures. Three categories of accessory apartments are permitted: basic accessory apartments, which are permitted as of right in certain residential districts and by special permit in other districts, and expanded accessory apartments and accessory structure apartments, which may be allowed by a special permit. §135-6.7.2 (page 62) Comments It is confusing to require a special permit for what is called a by-right accessory apartment so the name is being 11
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32 changed to basic accessory apartment. It is confusing to have a category called special permit accessory apartment that does not include all accessory apartments that require a special permit so the name is being changed to expanded accessory apartment. §135-6.7.6 (page 63) Existing 6.7.6 By-Right Accessory Apartment. A by-right accessory apartment shall be permitted if the requirements set forth in §6.7.3 is satisfied and the following criteria are met: … 5. The entire structure containing the by-right accessory apartment must have been in legal existence for a minimum of five years at the time of application for a by-right accessory apartment, except for minimal additions necessary to comply with building, safety or health codes, or for enclosure of an entryway, or for enclosure of a stairway to a second or third story. Proposed 6.7.6 Basic Accessory Apartment. A basic accessory apartment shall be permitted if the requirements set forth in §6.7.3 are satisfied and the following criteria are met: … 5. The entire structure containing the basic accessory apartment must have been in legal existence for a minimum of five years at the time of application for a basic accessory apartment, except for minimal additions necessary to comply with building, safety or health codes, or for enclosure of an entryway, or for enclosure of a stairway to a second or third story. Comments It is confusing to require a special permit for what is called a by-right accessory apartment so the name is being changed to basic accessory apartment., also correcting grammar. Existing 6.7.7 Special Permit Accessory Apartment. The SPGA may grant a special permit for a special permit accessory apartment, subject to the following: … 2. The gross floor area of the special permit accessory apartment shall not exceed 40% of the gross floor area of the swelling, excluding areas of structure used for parking. 3. The special permit accessory apartment shall be located in the principal structure. Proposed 6.7.7 Expanded Accessory Apartment. The SPGA may grant a special permit for an expanded accessory apartment, subject to the following: … 2. The gross floor area of the expanded accessory apartment shall not exceed 40% of the gross floor area of the swelling, excluding areas of structure used for parking. 3. The expanded accessory apartment shall be located in the principal structure. §135-6.7.7 (pages 63-64) Comments It is confusing to have a category called special permit accessory apartment that does not include all accessory apartment that require a special permit so the category is being renamed. 12
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32 Existing 6.9.3.1 A site sensitive development (SSD) is the development of a parcel with configurations of lots allowing flexibility and creativity in residential development through reduction in minimum lot size… 6.9.3.2 A balanced housing development (BHD)…Instead of determining density by minimum lot size… Proposed 6.9.3.1 A site sensitive development (SSD) is the development of a parcel with configurations of lots allowing flexibility and creativity in residential development through reduction in minimum lot area… 6.9.3.2 A balanced housing development (BHD)…Instead of determining density by minimum lot area… §135-6.9.3 (page 67) Comments The term lot area is used in Table 2. There is a definition of lot area but not lot size. Consistency Existing 6.9.16 Accessory Apartments. The SPGA may authorize Special Permit Accessory Apartments, as described in §6.7.7 of this Bylaw, to be created within a site sensitive development… Proposed 6.9.16 Accessory Apartments. The SPGA may authorize Expanded Accessory Apartments, as described in §6.7.7 of this Bylaw, to be created within a site sensitive development… §135-6.9.16 (page 71) Comments Changed to reflect the new term used in §6.7. Existing Revision of Special Permit and Changes of Use or Site Development Plans. After to the grant of a special permit… Proposed Revision of Special Permit and Changes of Use or Site Development Plans. After the grant of a special permit… §135-7.3.5.8 (page 80) Comments Correction of typo, remove “to” Existing 8.5.2 Public Acquisition. If a public acquisition of land causes a lot to be rendered nonconforming… Proposed 8.5.2 Government Acquisition. If government acquisition of land causes a lot to be rendered nonconforming… §135-8.5.2 (page 82) Comments clarity Existing Communications equipment Shelter: A structure designed principally to enclose equipment used in connection with wireless communication transmission and/or reception. Proposed Communication equipment shelter: A structure designed principally to enclose equipment used in connection with wireless communication transmission and/or reception. §135-10. Definitions (page 95) Comments Correct the capitalization and inconsistent spelling 13
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32 Existing Crawl space: … Color rendering index (CRS): … Cutoff angle: … Proposed Co-location: … Color rendering index (CRS): … Commercial district: … §135-10. Definitions (page 95) Comments “Color rendering index (CRI)” is out of order in the definitions. Existing Motel: … Motor vehicle body work: Repairs to motor vehicle bodies, including fenders, bumper and similar components of motor vehicle bodies, but not the storage of vehicle for the cannibalization of parts Proposed Billboard: … Body work, motor vehicle: Repairs to motor vehicle bodies, including fenders, bumper and similar components of motor vehicle bodies, but not the storage of vehicle for the cannibalization of parts §135-10. Definitions (page 101) Comments Should be listed as “Body work, motor vehicle” and re-alphabetized to follow “Billboard” (page 94); Table 1, L.1.04 and L.1.05 use “body work”, not motor vehicle body work Existing One-hundred-year flood: … Open space, common: … Proposed Commercial vehicle: … Common open space: … Communications equipment shelter: … §135-10. Definitions (page 101) Comments Common open space is listed under “open space, common”; should be under “common open space” and re-alphabetized in the definitions Existing One-hundred-year flood: See “base flood” Proposed Delete §135-10. Definitions (page 101) Comments Base flood is not used or defined in the Bylaw so the reference is useless. User should refer to section 7.1 and the FEMA maps 14
Planning Board Report on Articles 30-32 15 Existing (There is no definition of peak period, although used in Bylaw.) Proposed Peak period: The period in which the highest traffic counts occur, usually the two hours between 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. and between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. §135-10. Definitions (page 101) Comments Based on peak hour definition. Clarity Existing (There is no definition of peak traffic hours, although used in Bylaw) Proposed Inset after Peak period: Peak traffic hours: see “peak period” §135-10. Definitions (page 101) Comments Inserted for clarity Existing Public: The Town of Lexington, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, United States Government or an agency thereof. Proposed Delete §135-10. Definitions (page 102) Comments When used in the Bylaw “public” is used in this sense twice in the over 76 time “public” appears in the Bylaw, and those two instances can be clarified by other means
March 17, 2014
■ Lexington Center Parking Management Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Ongoing Effort
Parking in Lexington
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
■ Parking is closely linked to:
– Economic vitality
– Local business health
– Tourism
– Pedestrian environment
– Traffic patterns
– Development potential
– Bicycling accommodations
– Signage and wayfinding
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Lexington Parking
Goals and Expectations
■ Manage Parking More Effectively
■ Increase Parking Availability
■ Accommodate Short and Long Term Parking
■ Simplify Parking System
■ Support Economic Development Goals
■ Integrate Solutions with Town Center Environment
Study Process
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Parking User Profiles
Ø Online Survey (550+ respondents)
Ø Dozen+ stakeholder interviews
Ø Public Open House at Depot Square
Fall /Winter 2013
Parking Supply and Demand Analysis
Ø Identify Existing Conditions
Ø Parking Utilization Data Collection
Ø Utilization Database and Mapping
Winter/Spring 2014
Draft Parking Management/
Implementation Plan
Strategy Development, Policy
Analysis, Best Practices, and
Recommendations
Public Meeting (Initial Strategies)
Public Meeting (Revised/Refined Strategies)
Board of Selectman Meeting
Final Parking Management/
Implementation Plan
Analysis Public
Process
5
Parking Supply
On-Street 1,342
Off-Street 1,957
TOTAL 3,299
Lexington Center- Study Area Boundary
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
646
1400
1634
1660
1414
1160
986
457
2653
1899
1665
1639
1885
2139
2313
2842
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
7:30AM
9:30AM
11:30AM
1:30PM
3:30PM
5:30PM
7:30PM
9:30PM
Occupied
Vacant
Thursday
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Publicly Accessible: Open to All
Restricted Access: Limited to
particular users
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
74
174
221
263
167
248
154
37
207
107
60
18
114
33
127
244
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Occupied
Vacant
THURSDAY
Off-Street: Publicly Accessible vs. Restricted Access
Public Access Restricted Access
386
692
717
676
650
452
454
278
911
605
580
621
647
845
843
1019
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Occupied
Vacant
Survey: Why you do (or don’t) come to the Center
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Unique shopping
experience
Bump into neighbors
Unique dining experience
I feel safe and secure
Can find what I need
Able to walk to many
different services and
shops
Want to purchase items/
dine locally
Convenient to my home
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Not enough
stores
Parking is
inconvenient
Cannot find
what I need
Not enough
restaurants
Not
convenient
to walk
around
downtown
+-
Challenges
■ Difficulty finding parking in core area
■ Customer/visitor confusion and frustration
■ Lack of visible signage
■ Time limits impede customer activity
■ Employees compete with customers for parking
■ Payment technology is inconvenient
■ Pedestrian safety challenges on Mass Ave through some lots
■ Customers avoid the Center due to parking issues
11 Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Parking Management Approach
Create Available Parking
■ Demand-Based Pricing
■ Employee Permit Program
■ Technology
■ Enforcement
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Improve Administration
■ Information
■ Shared Parking Program
■ Zoning/Regulatory Updates
■ Ongoing Management
Invest in the Center
■ Parking District
■ Access Improvements
■ TDM
■ Other Center Improvements
Study Process
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc.
Parking User Profiles
Ø Online Survey (550+ respondents)
Ø Dozen+ stakeholder interviews
Ø Public Open House at Depot Square
Fall /Winter 2013
Parking Supply and Demand Analysis
Ø Identify Existing Conditions
Ø Parking Utilization Data Collection
Ø Utilization Database and Mapping
Winter/Spring 2014
Draft Parking Management/
Implementation Plan
Strategy Development, Policy
Analysis, Best Practices, and
Recommendations
Public Meeting (Initial Strategies)
Public Meeting (Revised/Refined Strategies)
Board of Selectman Meeting
Final Parking Management/
Implementation Plan
Analysis Public
Process
13
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectTown Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectLexington, MAProject UpdateBoard of Selectmen MeetingMarch 17, 2014
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectProject Coordination MeetingsDateCommittees6/24/2013Transportation Forum8/8/2013Center Committee 9/30/2013Streetscape Committee9/10/2013Streetscape Committee 11/25/2013Streetscape Committee 12/5/2013Public Meeting Workshop12/19/2013Streetscape Committee (debrief public workshop)1/9/2014Streetscape Committee (on Battlegreen)1/9/2014ADA Committee1/18/2014Battle Green Committee2/14/2014Coordination Meeting with Nelson Nygaard on Parking Study2/20/2014Battle Green Committee2/28/2014Tourism Committee3/12/2014Property Owners Meeting3/12/2014Streetscape Committee‐Lighting3/11/2014Pre‐BOS meeting with Town Manger
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectPresentation Outline•Town Center/Battle Green–Traffic Safety Improvements•Pedestrians, Bicycles & Vehicles–Streetscape Improvements•Overall Concept•Walkway Treatment•Amenities (seating, gathering areas, trees...etc)•Lighting
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectOverall PlanWaltham StEdison WayWoburn StCary Memorial LibraryTown Hall
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green Project
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green Project
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green Project
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectWaltham StEdison WayCary Memorial LibraryTown HallWoburn StOverall Plan•Gateways/Clear entry to town center•Encourage visitors to walk through town center•Extend Historic influence of Battle Green through town center•Unified streetscape treatments
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectTown HallCommercial Area/Waltham Street Gateway•Variety in seating •Special crosswalk treatment•Perspective views
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectCivic Area/Town Hall•Sidewalk uniformity •At grade granite paver median •Gathering areas at Town Hall and Wallis Court
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectSafety at crosswalks•Bump out configuration•Shorten crossing distance•Concrete pavement•Lighting•Detectable warning
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectCVS Pharmacy•Rain Garden•Stone Seat Wall
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectGrain Alley•Gathering Area/Historic Interpretation•Coordinate with Grain Alley
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectWaltham Street Gateway•Waltham Street Gateway wall and plant bed•Direct pedestrians to crosswalk •Outdoor tables
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectSalter Building•Bench grouping•Exposed aggregate/brick•Snow removal
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectWoburn Ave. •Special crosswalk treatment•Focal Point/Gathering Area•Granite bollards, stone wall•History•Bicycle Accommodations•Seating at Bus StopMass Ave.
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green Project
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green Project•Shorten crosswalk•Connect to Belfry and Visitor Center•Island refuge/ photo taking•At grade paver median
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green Project•Gateway•Driveway entrance relocated•Ye Olde Burying Ground entrance•Gathering/interpretive area•Bus drop off•Focal pointMassachusetts Ave. Harrington Rd
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green Project•Gateway•Special crosswalk treatment•Plant bed
Lexington Town Center Streetscape & Battle Green ProjectNext Steps•2ndPublic Meeting (March 18th)•Complete Preliminary Design
Street From To TREATMENT
Minute man Trail Fletcher Woburn Rebuild
Minute man Trail Arlington Town Line Fottler Mill and Overlay
Diamond Roundabout Radius 100'Rebuild
Bedford Worthen Minuteman Trail Mill and Overlay
Bertwell North Hancock Williams Mill and Overlay
Hamilton Ledgelawn North Hancock Mill and Overlay
Ledgelawn Bedford Revere Mill and Overlay
Liberty Ledgelawn Hamilton Mill and Overlay
Manning Bedford Milk Reclaim
Mass Ave Route 128 Hotel Drive Mill and Overlay
Preston Simonds Burlington Mill and Overlay
Shirley Bedford Greeley Village Reclaim
Simonds Bedford Burlington Mill and Overlay
Tewksbury Bedford Greeley Village Reclaim
Wyman Williams Williams Mill and Overlay
Harding Williams 200' past Simonds Mill and Overlay
Eaton Bertwell Blake Reclaim
Boulder Blake End Reclaim
Gleason Williams Siamonds Mill and Overlay
S U N N Y K N O L L A V E
SPRINGSTCONCORD HIGHWAYLISBETH STJOURNEY'S END LNMAPLE STWELCH RDHARDING RD
IVAN ST
HANCOCK S T
MORGANRDR IC H M O N D C IR STATION WAYBYRON AVE
KATAHDINDRSHEILARD
ELLIS STS
Y
L
V
I
A
S
TOXFORD STBROO K W O O D R D
DANIELS
ST
NELSON RD TURNBURRY HILL RDC
A
R
M
EL CIR
MA RR E T T R D BAKER AVEB
U
R
N
S
R
D GARDEN AVEWARREN
S
T
ANN STSHERBURNE
R
D
BEDFORD ST
MERIAM STTARBELL AVEHAYDENAVEWESTVI
EWCEMETERYAPPLETREE LNE S S E X S T
LOWELL ST
F O R E S T S T
W
A
LT
H
A
M
S
T RAW S O N A V E
PELHAM RDEATON RDNORTHHANCOCKSTGROV
E
S
T
SUTHERLAND RDWALTHAM
ST
CEDAR
ST
R O L L I N G L N
RIN
D
G
E A
V
E
AARON STA V O N S T
W IN S H IP R D
CAMELLIA PLHARRINGTON RDREVERE STBEDFORD ST
B R IDLEP ATHTHIRD ST
PLY
M
O
U
THP A T R I C I A T E R
FOTTLER AVEMOUNT TABOR RDLOCUST AVELOWELL ST
WORTHEN RD
F
ORBE
S
R
D
D
A
N
E R D
DEERING AVEROSSRD SOLLY'S WAYDO U G L A S R D
AUDUBON R D
MI L IT I A D R WINNAVEEMERALDSTP
A
T
RIO
T
S
DRLILLIANRDC
L
I
F
F
E
A
V
EWOBURNST
LEROYRDWILLOW STHARBELL ST GIBSONRDB
A
C
ON
S
T
M E L R O S E A V ERT 3EDNA ST
SUNSET RIDGE RDGRANGER
SC
HO
OL
ST
MOGNOLIA LN
NORTHGATE CIR
ALPINE STMUZZEY STDAWESRD
B E N N E T T A V E
AMHERST ST
B A N K S A V E
T U C K E R A V E
CHESTNUT LND E P O T P L
OAK ST
PLEASANTSTC H A D B O U R NERDHO
WARD MUNROE PL
BONAIR AVE ELIOTRDH U D S O N CARVI
LLE AVEJOHNSONFARM RDWORTHENRDCLEMATISR D
V A L L E Y RD
T
O
W
E
R
FOURTH ST
KENDALL RDOUTLOOKDRBENNI N G T ONRDS U M M E R S T
STEDMAN
RD
B R A N D O N S TWHIT
TIER RD
SCHOOLHOUSE LNLOTHROP CIRM I L LBROOK RD
EVERGREEN LNFORESTCTEASTE R N A V E
D O W N I N G R D WALLIS CTE M E R S O N RD
G A F F O R D A V E
JUSTIN ST
M IL L IK E N R D
BE L L F L O WE R ST
WESTONSTYOUNG STAS B URY
ME
A
D
O
WB
R
O
O
K
A
V
E
LAWN AV E
WOODLAND RD
ASH STWEBB
STMEAD CIRG L E N R D
MILK STGARFIELD
STMYRTLESTPHILIPRD
ROBBINS RD
LEXINGTON AVE
BATTLEVIEW
CIR
WINGATE RDBERT
W
E
L
L
R
D
ROUND HILLH
I
B
B
E
R
T
S
T
BEDFORDST HAMILTONRDCANDLEWICK CLPVTCEDARWOOD TERCOLUMBUSSTLOCKWOOD RDL E IG H T O N
A V E
POT T E RP O NDSPENCER ST
R I D G E RD
JACKSONCTREVOLUTIONARYRDRHODES STS H E R M A N S T
JOSEPHWILLIAMS RDB O W M A N S T
MUNROE RDW
O
O
D
ST GERARD TERBATESRDSH A W
PL
FAI
RVI
EWAVEHOLLAND STSWANLNJOHNPOULTERR
DTEWKSBURY STBELFRY TERSTEARNS RDBONDSTFRANKLINRDCARLRDJEANRD
PEARTREE
RD
ELDRED STHUTCHINSONRDWELLINGTON LN AVEVILESRDHAYESAVEC
L
YDEPLPEARL
M A R R E T T R D
HAZEL
BI
RCHHILLLN
D R E W
A V ECENTREST
PATTERSON
R
D
V IN EB R O O K VILE D IS O N
WAYGLEASONRD
NORTON RDS
H
E
R
I
D
A
N
S
T
C L E L L A N D R D
BRAEM
ORE
TER
SLOCUMRDR
Y
D
E
R
L
N
DAVIS
POWERS CT
H I L L S I D E A V E
D
R
U
MMERB
O
Y
WAYC A M D E N
A N T H O N Y
R D
B U R R O U G H S R D
C U M M IN G S A V E
G O L D E N A V E
WO RTH E N R D E A S TBALFOURST S T E V E N SSEDGERDSHIRLEYSTCHERRY STWHITMAN CIRL U O N G O F A R M L NJEFFREY TERJ O H N W I L S O NLN
GOFFE RDSMITHAV EUPLAND
COMPTON CIRWATSON
FAIROAKS
D
R
ROLFERD
BUCKMANDR
LEE L A ND TER
MAGUIRE RD
KI
N
G
STDIEHLRDSOMERS
ETR D RUSSEL
L
R
D
W
A
L
N
U
T
ST
DIANA LN
HIGHLAND AVE
DIA
M
ONDRDDENVERSTM U N R O ECEMETER Y
M A RSHALL RD
ROWLAND AVETAVER N L NBUR
N
H
A
M
R
D
S
U
MMI
TGRAH A MRDGR A N T
P L
ROGERS R D
WOODBERRY RD
V IN E B R O O K R DMOUNTAIN RDBOULDER RDMOHAWKDRBRIGGS RDFESSENOEN WAYGREENWOOD ST
I VY LN
FREEMAN CIRW A D M A N
AUGUSTUSRDLAURELSTCRA
WFORD
RD
OAK PARK CIR
HOL
L
OWL
N
TURNINGMILLRD
ARCOLAST
R A Y M O N D
S T
WHITETER
DEESTC O N C O R D H I G H W A Y
T O D D
EUSTISST
F A I R B A N K S R D
T
UFTSRDJUDG
ESRD
B
L
O
S
S
O
M
S
TBLINNRD BRUCERDF
L
E
T
C
H
E
R
A
V
E
MANLEYCT
PHI
LBROOK TERHOMESTEADA P O L L O
C I RCARLEYRD
OXBOW RD
BRENTRD
TAY L O R LN
LINCOLNTER
F A I R O A K S
T E R
CA
S
T
LERD
F OXRU NLN
CHURCHILL LN
BUSHNELL DRPINEWOOD ST
LEONARDRD
CARTPA T H LNMANNINGSTUTICASTJUNIPERPLM
A
U
R
EENR
D
HA
Y
E
S
LNPLAINFIELD STA E R IA L S T
EA R L S T
H A N C O C K
A V E
CARYAVEFROS
T
R
D
MASONSTLAKE
ST
M ASSACHUSE TTS A V E
NORMANDY RDW A RD ST
OLDS
H
A
D
E
S
TNOWERS WESTMINSTER AVE
CAROL LNDEXTER RD
K
I
T
SON
P
A
RKD
RFAIRLAND STB U T L E R A V E
A M E S A V EHUNTR
DBERWICKRD
BROOKSIDEAVEHAMBLENSTE D G EWO O D RD
WILDWOODRDBRIGHAM R D BROWNR D
KIMBALLRDSTE T S O N S T
FRANCIS RD
W
IL
S
O
N
RDM Y R N A R D
C
O
NESTOGARDLOCKE LN
HARTWELL PL
A I R P O R T R D
F A R M C R E S T A V E
H A W T HORNERD
FREEMONTB A R R ETTBARRYMEADE DR COURTYA RDPLH I L L T O P A V E
WI
NS
T
O
N
R
D
ELLISON
R
D MINOLARDALCO
TT R D
BOWKER STSTRATH A M R D
MINUTEMAN COMMUTE R B I K E W A Y
SCOT
T
R
D
HADLEY RD
CAR N E GIE P L
LORING RD
BLOSSOMCR ESTRDDONALD STCALVIN STBERNARD STCOOLIDG E A V E
HOLTONRDPROSPECT H IL L R D
L A NTERNLNANGIERRD
CU
TLERFARMRDB
A
L
L
A
R
D T
E
R
FISKE RD
STIMSON AVESCOT
L
ANDRDH
ASTIN G S R D
FOSTER RD
STAGE C O A C H R DFISKESC
HOOLYANKEE DIVISION HIGHWAYE
W
ELL AVE
PARKER ST
IDYLW ILDE
R
D
F
I
E
L
D
R
D
YANKEE
DIVISIONHIGHWAYPINEKNOLL RDLIN
M
O
O
R
T
E
R
M A R RE T T S T
RUMF O R D
R
D
GRENIER ST
M I D D L E B Y RD
ME
T
R
O
POLITANPAR
K
WAYNORTH
WHEELER RD
CONCORDH IG H W A Y
HATHAWAY RD
CO OK E R D
H O L M E S R D
S H A D E S T
SOLOMON PIERCE RDROYALCIR
HAMPTONRDV
A
L
L
E
Y
F
I
E
L
DSTFARMRDJOHN HOSMER LNSTONEWALL RDCURRIER CTO
RCHARDLNM
O
ONHI
LLRDD O VERLN
COUNTRYSIDE VILDORAN FARM LNOAK
MONTCIR
LONGFELLOW
R E E D S T
T A F T A V E
HAYDENAVEHAYWARDAVEC O N C O R D A V E
CONCORDAVEW A C HUSE T T D R
BURLINGTON
ST
B AT T L EGREENRDM ASSACHUSETTSAVEMASSACHUS
ETTS
AVEOAKLANDSTCOTTAGEST
SH I RE WAYYORK
L E X I NG T O NRIDGEDR
SANDERSONR
D
I N D E P E N D E N C E AVECIR
CLE R
D
VAILLEAVESIMONDSRDPARKWASHINGTONSTHILLSTRICHARDRDCHASE AVEBLOOMFIELD STWINCHESTER DRE A S T S T
ROBINSON
RD
WESTVIEWSTLEX ING TO NDPWHIC KO RY S T
LINCOLNSTLINCOLN STCR E S C E N TRDWOODCLIFFE RDLINCOLNSTVINESTTHOREAU RDNORTHE M E R S O N R D
PERCY RDNORTHSTNORTH ST
ROCKVILLEAVEGREATROCK RDPIPERRDB R ID G E S TPARKST
BIC E NTENNIAL DR FAIRLAWNLNBASKINRDJONAS STONE CIR
INGLESIDERD
MIDDLESTADAMS
SCHOOL
CONSTITUTIONRD DUNHAM STB
A
RBERRYRDGREENLNPHEASA
N
TL N
W E B S T E R R D
MARLBORORDELENARDTYLER RDHARTWELLAVENICKERS
ONRDFERNSTWHITEPINELNDUDLEY RD
E M E R S O N G A R D E NSRDWESTWOODRDC
R
O
S
BY
R
DLEDGELAWNAV E
B ATTLEG
R
EENAPTS
G R A P E V IN E A V ECAPTAINPARKERARMS
B ENJAM I N RDVICT
O
RYGARDENW
AYLAC ON IA S T
FLINTLO
C
K
RD
PHINNEY RDM IN U T E M A N V O C .T E C H .S C H O O LBL U E B E R R Y L N
LAWRENCE LN
PA R TR IDGE RD
WOODPARKCIRFIFERLN
A P RI
LLNTURNING MILL RDROBINSON RDDEMAR
RDTURNING M ILL RD
RD
WI
NTER STW
IN
T
E
R
S
T
STCI D E RMILLLNTIDDCIRW YMANRDFULLERRDNICHOLS RDPRESTONRDSIMONDSRD
HENDERSON RDBLAKE
RD
T
E
R
HIL
L
SID
E LIBERTYA V ESCHOOLDIAMONDMIDDLERDREDCOAT LNRDBURLINGTON STBURLINGTON STNO RT H ST
B R E N T R DSUZANNE RDADAMS STADAMS STADAMS STEAST STLOIS LNGOODWINDRCIRRDC H A N D L E R S T
G L E N
R
D
SOUTH
GRANT STGRANT STG
R
A
N
T
S
T
K
E
E
L
E
R
F
A
R
M
W
A
Y
S
E
A
B
O
R
N P
LMUSTER CTOPI CIRPOND WAYSUZANNE RDEAST STFULTONRDV I N E S TFAIRFIELD DRIVESADDLECLUB RDBOWSERRDR D
COLONYRDWISTERIA LN
STA B B O T T
R D RDEA S T EMERSON
EMERSONEASTRDRD
WOBURN STWOBURN STWOBURN STAPPLETREE LNBLODGETT RDPEACHTREE RD
W IN C H ES TER D R
TY L E R R D
TYLER RDMAPLETREELNBUTTERFIELDB U T T E R F I E L D RD
RDJOSE P T H C O M EERD
SOLOMONPIERCERDABERNATHYRDMAPLE STMAPLE STVILL A G E CI RRDBRYANTSANDERSON RDSANDERSON RDPAGERDST
BARTLETT AVEWHIPPLEW H I P P L E
RDR D
LOWELL ST
LO
WELL STHASKELLSTCRESCENTHILL AVE
LOCKE LN
RDCURVE ST
PLBARNESELLEN DANACTL E E A V E
T H E R E S A A V EFOTTLER
A V E BOW STHILLCRESTAVEA
L
B
E
R
M
A
R
L
E A
V
EALBERMARLE AVESOUTHRIDGEAVETAFT AVER D
S T
CHARLESSTO A K S T
TROTTING H O R S E D R
P
E
A
C
O
C
KFARMRDPEA C O CK FARM
RDPEACOC
K
FARMRDWATERTOWN ST
W
ATERTOWN S T
ROCKVILLE AVE EXT.RDMORELANDAVERD
FOL L E N R D
FOLLENRDFOL
L
ENR
D
BUCKMAN DR
R DPADDOCKLNRDRD
TRICO
R
NE R
D
MARRETT RDM
A
L
T
L
N
ALLEN STA L L E N S T ALLEN ST C
R
E
S
T CIRPITCAIRNPLW
A
L
T
H
A
M
S
T
R
E
E
TWALTHAM STREETPAYSON ST
G R A S S L A N D S T
G R A S S L A N D S T
R DSPRING STS H A D E S T
BROOKHAVENBROOKHAVENMWRA WATER TANKPOTT E R POND POTTERPONDMAINCAMPUS D R IV E
M A R R E T T R O A D
MARRETT ROADCOPPERSMYTH WAYBRIDGE SCHO O LW O R T H E N R DWALTHAM STW INTHROPRDSHERBUR
N
ER DWINTHROP
RD
BLOOMFIELD STPERCY RDELIOT RD
BIRDHILLRDMARRETTRDWALTHAM STDRCLARKESTF
OREST S T
LINCOLN STFAIRBANKS RDS
C
H
O
O
L
S
T
G R A N D V IE W A V E N U E
ESTA
B
R
O
O
K R
D MASSACHUSETTSAVEM A S S A C H U S E T T S
A V E
CHILDSRDHILL STHILL STGREELEY VILSA R G E N T S T
MINUTEMANLNPAULREVERERDSTSTSTMARTINGA
L
E
R
D
V A L L E Y R DHARTWELL AVEKATAHDINDR
S P R I
N
GD
A
L
E
R
D
SMITHFARMLANEOLD MASSACHUSETTSAV E
YANKEE DIVISION HIGH
W
AYYANKEE DIVISION HIGHWAYPORTER LNRTES 4/225
RTES 4/225
RTES 4/225 R T E S 4 /2 2 5
R
T
E
S
4
/
2
2
5
RTES 4/225
RTE 2ART E 2 A RTE 2ARTE 2ARTE 2ARTE 2ARTE 2A
R T E 2 A
MULBERRY LN
CORNERSTONE WAYLACONIA STRD63 Legend
Paving_Program
Mill and Overlay
Rebuild
Reclaim µTOWN OF LEXINGTON
MASSACHUSETTS
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
PAVING PROGRAM
PETER KARALEXIS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
JOHN R. LIVSEY, P.E.
TOWN ENGINEER
COMPILED BY:
2014
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
DATE: 3/17/14 STAFF: Lynne Pease ITEM NUMBER: I.6
SUBJECT:
Interim Report on School Enrollment Projections
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Joe will give a subset of the attached presentation on the Interim Report of the Ad Hoc
Enrollment Working Group.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDATION / SUGGESTED MOTION:
STAFF FOLLOW-UP:
Selectmen’s Office
1
Interim Report of the Ad Hoc
Enrollment Working Group
11 March 2014
Recordings of the Presentation to the School Committee:
http://joepato.com/video/20140311-lpsenrollment.wmv
http://joepato.com/video/20140311-lpsenrollment.mp4
2
• Enrollments are approaching capacity limits
for current LPS use patterns
• Recurrent enrollment forecast surprise
Need to gain confidence for educational and
resource planning
Challenges Facing Lexington
3
•Outline the enrollment working group’s (EWG) charter
• Provide overview of enrollments and current methods
• Share findings regarding enrollment increases
• Provide preliminary guidance on enrollment forecasting
Presentation Objectives
4
Enrollment Working Group (EWG) History
December 2013:
• Ad Hoc Enrollment Working Group is formed to
assist the school leadership in enrollment forecasting
• Membership:
Mark Andersen, Ruth Quinn-Berdell, Rod Cole,
Tim Dunn, Dan Krupka, Joe Pato
• Skills:
Business Forecasting, Data Privacy, Data Analysis,
Demographics, School Enrollment, Planning,
Municipal Governance
5
Enrollment Working Group (EWG) History
January 2014:
• The EWG reviews and recommends against
outside consultant proposals
• Group agrees to undertake its own study of
enrollment and forecasting
6
• Outline the enrollment working group’s (EWG) charter
•Provide overview of enrollments and current methods
• Share findings regarding enrollment increases
• Provide preliminary guidance on enrollment forecasting
Presentation Objectives
7
Enrollment and Population Trends
Lexington, 1950 – 2013
Enrollments have greater variation than population
0
8000
16000
24000
32000
40000
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
19501955196019651970197519801985199019952000200520102013LPS Enrollment Population
8
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
19501955196019651970197519801985199019952000200520102013LPS Enrollment
Enrollment Change Drives Resource Use
11 elementary
3 middle
1 high school
5 elementary
2 middle
1 high school
6 elementary
2 middle
1 high school
4 schools close in 4 years
Enrollment drops 410 in one year
6 elementary
2 middle
1 high school
9
21st Century Enrollment Is Climbing
Accelerating
Growth
Sharp and unexpected growth started in 2010
5600
5800
6000
6200
6400
6600
6800
20032004200520062007200820092010201120122013Total LPS Enrollment
10
Where Will Enrollment Be in 5 Years?
Enrollments are uncertain
•7300 ?
•6900 ?
•6500 ?
•6100 ?
5600
6000
6400
6800
7200
7600
200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132018
11
• Model used nationally for mature communities
• Babies are born and progress forward year by year
Cohort Survival Model
Lexington has used this “Cohort Survival Model”
Birth Age 1
• Students also arrive and leave
xP1 xP2 xP5
K G1……GRAD
• # of 2-year-olds next year = P2 x # 1-year-olds now
• P2 = 1.05 predicts a 5% increase in 2-year-olds by next year
Age2
12
Declining Birth Rate Suggests Fewer Students
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013Lexington Births
13
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Current Model Has Stopped Working in Lexington
Why?
Elementary School Projections
Actual
Projected Nov 2006
14
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Current Model Has Stopped Working in Lexington
Why?
Elementary School Projections
Actual
Projected Nov 2006
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Jan 2010
15
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Current Model Has Stopped Working in Lexington
Why?
Elementary School Projections
Actual
Projected Nov 2006
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Jan 2010
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Jan 2011
16
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Current Model Has Stopped Working in Lexington
Why?
Elementary School Projections
Actual
Projected Nov 2006
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Jan 2010
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Jan 2011
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Nov 2013
17
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Current Model Has Stopped Working in Lexington
Why?
Elementary School Projections
Actual
Projected Nov 2006
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Jan 2010
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Jan 2011
2000
2200
2400
2600
2800
3000
3200
3400
2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023
Projected Nov 2013
Approximate capacity current use
18
In-Migration is Dominating Births
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
1995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013Lexington Births & K Enrollment 5-years later
Births K enroll200020052010 2013
19
Lexington Births as Percentage of
Enrolled Kindergartners
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013
20
Net In-Migration is Significant in All Grades
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Entering not K Leaving not G12
21
Net In-Migration is Significant in All Grades
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
"Excess" Net In-Migration
22
• Outline the enrollment working group’s (EWG) charter
• Provide overview of enrollments and current methods
•Share findings regarding enrollment increases
• Provide preliminary guidance on enrollment forecasting
Presentation Objectives
23
1.Changing demographics
•Family size
•Age of home buyers
•Oldest child at date of
purchase
2.Mansionization
3.Accelerating growth in
housing stock
•Single family
•Apartments
Possible Growth Factors Considered
4.Accelerating real estate
turnover rate
•Greater likelihood of families
making home purchases
•Greater rate of families
moving into apartments or
condos
5.Movement from private
schools to public schools
24
Large Factors
• More families with children in apartments and condos
• New apartments and condos (somewhat expected)
Small Factors
• Family size in apartments – small increase
• Family size in single family homes – small decrease
Findings: Accounting for Increasing
Enrollment, 2003-2013
25
105% of net growth attributable to condos and apartments
Change in Number of LPS Students by
Residence Type (2003-2013)
Condo SFD Multi APT Hotel /
Motel Other unknown
count 127 1 -13 384 12 -16 -8
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
NumberofStudents
26
Number of families has increased by about 500
Change in Number of Families by
Residence Type (2003-2013)
Condo SFD Multi APT Other unknown
count 99 34 5 323 9 32
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
NumberofFamilies
27
LPS Students by Apartment Complexes
Student growth includes new and pre-existing facilities
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013NumberofStudents(stacked area graph)
28
• Many Students do not progress from K->Graduation
– Nearly 50% of 10th graders did not start in Kindergarten
Almost 40% were not in 2nd grade
– Nearly 30% of 6th graders were not in LPS for 2nd grade
• This is a corollary to in-migration at all grade levels
Finding: Unexpected Volatility in Student Tenure
29
• Outline the enrollment working group’s (EWG) charter
• Provide overview of enrollments and current methods
• Share findings regarding enrollment increases
•Provide preliminary guidance on enrollment forecasting
Presentation Objectives
30
• What are the limits to enrollment growth?
• How much more room available in the faster growing
apartment / condo residential category?
• How rapidly might growth occur?
• What is the potential growth in single family dwellings?
Major Questions
31
Potential Drivers
• LPS Reputation
• Economy
• Regional Housing Market
• Aging and Departure of Residents
Hypotheses About Drivers
These factors are all
relative and difficult
to forecast
They involve
understanding
regional and global
trends
Even 3- to 4-year forecasts likely to have large uncertainty
32
Flexibility is critical
when planning in the face of uncertainty
• Consider multiple scenarios for future enrollment trends
• Create solutions that are flexible and can be adapted
Key Observation
33
Proposed Next Steps for EWG
Forecasts are possible, although uncertain
Process Action
Methodology Development • Model drivers and estimate
“headroom” for growth
• Estimate uncertainty ranges
• Outline low/mid/high growth scenarios
Elementary School
Forecasting
• Integrate school and municipal data to
improve records, especially for ages
0-5; track changes on a quarterly
basis
Middle School / High School
Forecasting
• Forecast with age progression but
monitor closely for pattern change
34
Looking Forward
In the longer term:
Plan for a range of enrollment
scenarios…
even scenarios which pose
difficult questions
Key challenge for school and town leadership
35
What Would We Do With Enrollment Scenarios?
Can Lexington influence out-migration, and thereby affect
outcomes which occur?
Body / Function Action
School Master Planning • Design for high variability
• Design for high/med/low scenarios
School Committee • Define capacity, classroom size, and
allowable facility configurations
• Plan land use, capital, and operating
expenditure for high/med/low scenarios
School and Town Financial
Committees
• Evaluate high/med/low scenarios for
impact on capital and operating budgets
36
• Migration patterns dominate births for enrollment prediction
• Housing preferences are changing
• Consider multiple scenarios for future enrollment trends
• Create solutions that are flexible and can be adapted
Flexibility is critical
when planning in the face of uncertainty
Conclusions
37
Discussion
38
Backup
39
•LPS Student Rolls: 2000 – 2013
•Town Census: 2000 – 2014 (complete, archival)
•Town Assessors data: 2007 – 2014
•Town Permit Database: 2004 – 2014
•Federal Census: 2000, 2010
Data Sets Used by EWG
Data sets:
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
DATE: 3/17/14 STAFF: Lynne Pease ITEM NUMBER: I.7
SUBJECT:
Article Positions and Selectmen Article Presenters
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At this meeting you will be taking positions on as many articles as time allows. Attached is a
table that lists all of the articles to be taken up at the 2014 Special and Annual Town Meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDATION / SUGGESTED MOTION:
STAFF FOLLOW-UP:
Selectmen’s Office
ARTICLE POSITIONS 2014 ANNUAL TOWN MEETING ARTICLE SPECIAL TOWN MEETING PRESENTATION DM PK NC JP MC AC CEC SC Article 2 Cary Memorial Building Upgrades Article 3 Amend Article 5 of Nov. 2013 STM, Renovation to Community Center ARTICLE FINANCIAL ARTICLES PRESENTATION DM PK NC JP MC AC CEC SC Article 4 Appropriate FY2015 Operating Budget Article 5 Appropriate FY2015 Enterprise Funds Budgets Article 6 Appropriate for Senior Service Program Article 7 Establish and Continue Departmental Revolving Funds Article 8 Appropriate the FY2015 Community Preservation Committee Operating Budget and CPA Projects: a) 39 Marrett Road – Community Center Renovation D&E and Sidewalk b) Visitor Center – Design Phase c) Hastings Park Gazebo Renovations d) Historical Commission Inventory Forms for Listed Buildings e) Battle Green Streetscape Improvements f) Vynebrooke Village Renovations g) LexHAB Set-Aside Funds for Development of Community Housing at the Busa Property h) Lincoln Park Field Improvements i) Park and Playground Improvements j) Park Improvements – Athletic Fields k) Park Improvements – Hard Court Resurfacing
ARTICLE FINANCIAL ARTICLES (continued) PRESENTATION DM PK NC JP MC AC CEC SC l) Parker Meadow Accessible Trail D&E m) CPA Debt Service n) Administrative Budget Article 9 Appropriate for Recreation Capital Projects Article 10 Appropriate for Municipal Capital Projects and Equipment a) Center Streetscape Improvements and Easements b) DPW Equipment c) Street Improvements and Easements d) Storm Drainage Improvements and NPDES Compliance e) Hydrant Replacement Program f) Comprehensive Watershed Storm Water Management Study and Implementation Measures g) Mass Avenue Intersections’ Improvements and Easements h) Sidewalk Improvements and Easements i) Dam Repair j) Town Wide Culvert Replacement k) Town Wide Signalization Improvements l) Traffic Island Renovation m) Ambulance Replacement n) Heart Monitors o) Replace Town Wide Phone Systems- Phase III p) Network Redundancy and Improvement Plan – Phase II Article 11 Appropriate for Water System Improvements
ARTICLE FINANCIAL ARTICLES (continued) PRESENTATION DM PK NC JP MC AC CEC SC Article 12 Appropriate for Wastewater System Improvements Article 13 Appropriate for School Capital Projects and Equipment Article 14 Appropriate for Public Facilities Capital Projects: a) School Building Envelope and Systems b) LHS Heating Systems Upgrade – Phases 2 and 3 c) Municipal Building Envelope and Systems d) Repairs / Replacements/Upgrades: School Building Flooring Program School Window Treatments Extraordinary Repair Interior Painting Program Middle School Nurses Stations Renovation and Update of Diamond Kitchen and Cafeteria Clarke School Gymnasium Dividing Curtain e) School Paving Program f) East Lexington Fire Station Physical Fitness Room g) Public Facilities Bid Documents h) Middle School Science, Performing Arts and General Education Spaces i) Clarke School Elevator Upgrade j) Clarke School Auditorium Audio Visual System k) Fire Station Headquarters Design
ARTICLE FINANCIAL ARTICLES (concluded) PRESENTATION DM PK NC JP MC AC CEC SC Article 15 Appropriate to Post Employment Insurance Liability Fund Article 16 Rescind Prior Borrowing Authorizations Article 17 Establish and Appropriate to and From Specified Stabilization Funds Article 18 Appropriate to Stabilization Fund Article 19 Appropriate from Debt Service Stabilization Fund Article 20 Appropriate for Prior Years’ Unpaid Bills Article 21 Amend FY2014 Operating and Enterprise Budgets Article 22 Appropriate for Authorized Capital Improvements ARTICLE GENERAL ARTICLES PRESENTATION DM PK NC JP MC AC CEC SC Article 23 Amendments to the District Agreement of the Minuteman Regional Vocational School District Article 24 Public Transportation in Lexington (Citizen Article) Article 25 Establish Qualifications for Tax Deferrals Article 26 Amend General Bylaws – Wetland Protection ARTICLE ZONING/LAND USE ARTICLES PRESENTATION DM PK NC JP MC AC CEC SC Article 27 Amend Zoning By-Law – Allow For-Profit Educational Uses in the Neighborhood Business and Residential Districts (Citizen Article) Article 28 Amend Zoning By-Law - Allow For-Profit Educational Uses in the Neighborhood Business District and Remove Size Limitation (Citizen Article) Article 29 Amend Zoning By-Law – Allow For-Profit Educational Uses in the Neighborhood Business District (Citizen Article)
ARTICLE ZONING/LAND USE ARTICLES (continued) PRESENTATION DM PK NC JP MC AC CEC SC Article 30 Amend Zoning By-Law – Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers 3/17 Article 31 Amend Zoning By-Law – Site Plan Review for Projects over 10,000 SF 3/17 Article 32 Amend Zoning By-Law – Technical Corrections 3/17
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
DATE: 3/17/14 STAFF: Lynne Pease ITEM NUMBER: I.9
SUBJECT:
Appointment/Resignation – Human Rights Committee/Arts Council
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Human Rights Committee has requested that Bonnie Brodner be appointed.
Victoria Campos has submitted her resignation from the Council for the Arts.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDATION / SUGGESTED MOTION:
Motion to appoint Bonnie Brodner to the Human Rights Committee for a term to expire
September 30, 2016.
Motion to accept the resignation of Victoria Campos from the Council for the Arts, effective
immediately.
STAFF FOLLOW-UP:
Selectmen’s Office
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
DATE: 3/17/14 STAFF: Lynne Pease ITEM NUMBER: I.10
SUBJECT:
Approve and Sign Eagle Letters Congratulating Ian Davis, Thomas Elliott and David Whitman-
Kinghorn
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
You are being asked to sign letters of commendation for Boy Scout Eagles Ian Davis, Thomas
Elliott and David Whitman-Kinghorn. See attached letter requesting the commendation and the
proposed eagle letter.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDATION / SUGGESTED MOTION:
Motion to send letters of commendation to Ian Davis, Thomas Elliott and David Whitman-
Kinghorn congratulating them on attaining the highest rank of Eagle in Boy Scouting.
STAFF FOLLOW-UP:
Selectmen’s Office
March 17, 2014
Thomas Elliott
Troop 160
St. Brigid Parish
2001 Massachusetts Avenue
Lexington, MA 02421
Dear Thomas,
Congratulations on attaining the highest rank in Scouting. We know the trail to
Eagle has not always been an easy one and we recognize that you have had to work hard
to get this far. Your time in positions of leadership within Troop 160, and the successful
completion of your Eagle project, speaks to your dedication.
Being an Eagle is so much more than just another rank. It is a recognition of what
you have achieved so far, but of more importance is the implied promise you have made
to maintain the ideals of Scouting into your adult life.
We know that your family and fellow Scouts are proud of you and will look to
you to be a leader as you continue your journey beyond Eagle.
Again, congratulations and good luck in all your future endeavors.
Sincerely,
Deborah N. Mauger, Chairman
Peter C. J. Kelley
Norman P. Cohen
Joseph N. Pato
Michelle L. Ciccolo
March 17, 2014
Ian S. Davis
Troop 160
St. Brigid Parish
2001 Massachusetts Avenue
Lexington, MA 02421
Dear Ian,
Congratulations on attaining the highest rank in Scouting. We know the trail to
Eagle has not always been an easy one and we recognize that you have had to work hard
to get this far. Your time in positions of leadership within Troop 160, and the successful
completion of your Eagle project, speaks to your dedication.
Being an Eagle is so much more than just another rank. It is a recognition of what
you have achieved so far, but of more importance is the implied promise you have made
to maintain the ideals of Scouting into your adult life.
We know that your family and fellow Scouts are proud of you and will look to
you to be a leader as you continue your journey beyond Eagle.
Again, congratulations and good luck in all your future endeavors.
Sincerely,
Deborah N. Mauger, Chairman
Peter C. J. Kelley
Norman P. Cohen
Joseph N. Pato
Michelle L. Ciccolo
March 17, 2014
David Whitman-Kinghorn
Troop 160
St. Brigid Parish
2001 Massachusetts Avenue
Lexington, MA 02421
Dear David,
Congratulations on attaining the highest rank in Scouting. We know the trail to
Eagle has not always been an easy one and we recognize that you have had to work hard
to get this far. Your time in positions of leadership within Troop 160, and the successful
completion of your Eagle project, speaks to your dedication.
Being an Eagle is so much more than just another rank. It is a recognition of what
you have achieved so far, but of more importance is the implied promise you have made
to maintain the ideals of Scouting into your adult life.
We know that your family and fellow Scouts are proud of you and will look to
you to be a leader as you continue your journey beyond Eagle.
Again, congratulations and good luck in all your future endeavors.
Sincerely,
Deborah N. Mauger, Chairman
Peter C. J. Kelley
Norman P. Cohen
Joseph N. Pato
Michelle L. Ciccolo
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
DATE: 3/17/14 STAFF: Lynne Pease ITEM NUMBER: C.1-5
SUBJECT:
Consent
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
1. Approve a two-day liquor license for the Steve Eastridge to serve beer at the BBQ
festival on May 17, 2014, from 11:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., and on May 18, 2014, from
12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m. on Hastings Park. See attached plan. Police have reviewed and
will require 4 police detail.
2. Approve signing a certificate that a flag was flown over the Battle Green on February 24,
2014 in recognition of Gary W. Gerst’s 42 years of service in the United States Army.
3. Approve inserting in the next tax bill information on Solarize Lexington-Bedford.
4. Approve the minutes of January 13, 2014, January 27, 2014, February 3, 2014, February
12, 2014 and February 24, 2014.
5. Approve the Executive session minutes of January 13, 2014, January 27, 2014, February
3, 2014 and February 24, 2014.
See attached information.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
RECOMMENDATION / SUGGESTED MOTION:
Motion to approve the Consent Agenda.
STAFF FOLLOW-UP:
Selectmen’s Office
Certificate of AuthenticityThis American flag is presented to GARY W. GERST, in recognition of his 42 years of service to this nation in the United States Army. This is to certify that on February 24, 2014, the Town of Lexington, Massachusetts flew this American Flag over the Lexington Battle Green, the Birthplace of American Liberty, and the site of America’s oldest war memorial where the Lexington Minutemen militia confronted the British Army on April 19, 1775 in the opening shots of the American Revolution. Deborah N. Mauger, ChairmanLexington Board of Selectmen
Join Your Neighbors in a Rooftop Revolution: Solarize Lexington-Bedford!
Lexington and Bedford were selected by the Commonwealth to participate in the current round of the
Solarize Mass program aimed at reducing the cost and increasing adoption of
small-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) systems.
tems.
tems.
Is your home or business a good candidate for solar? The best homes for
solar receive very little shade and have roofs that face toward the south. To request a
free, no-obligation solar assessment for your home or business, contact our selected
installer, Astrum Solar. Go to http://go.astrumsolar.com/solarizelexingtonbedford
o
r call 1-800-903-6130.
Can you afford solar? Special Solarize Mass pricing, combined with government incentives and tax
credits, make this a good time to go solar. Both purchase and lease options are available. The more
households who purchase solar panels, the less expensive they are for everyone.
The program will run through June 30, 2014. For more information, you may contact
Lexington’s Solar Coaches Marcia Gens and Fran Ludwig at
SolarizeLexington@gmail.com, or go to http://www.lexingtonma.gov/solar.
Join Your Neighbors in a Rooftop Revolution: Solarize Lexington-Bedford!
Lexington and Bedford were selected by the Commonwealth to participate in the current round of the
Solarize Mass program aimed at reducing the cost and increasing adoption of
small-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) sys
Is your home or business a good candidate for solar? The best homes for
solar receive very little shade and have roofs that face toward the south. To request a
free, no-obligation solar assessment for your home or business, contact our selected
installer, Astrum Solar. Go to http://go.astrumsolar.com/solarizelexingtonbedford
o
r call 1-800-903-6130.
Can you afford solar? Special Solarize Mass pricing, combined with government incentives and tax
credits, make this a good time to go solar. Both purchase and lease options are available. The more
households who purchase solar panels, the less expensive they are for everyone.
The program will run through June 30, 2014. For more information, you may contact
Lexington’s Solar Coaches Marcia Gens and Fran Ludwig at
SolarizeLexington@gmail.com, or go to http://www.lexingtonma.gov/solar.
Join Your Neighbors in a Rooftop Revolution: Solarize Lexington-Bedford!
Lexington and Bedford were selected by the Commonwealth to participate in the current round of the
Solarize Mass program aimed at reducing the cost and increasing adoption of
small-scale solar photovoltaic (PV) sys
Is your home or business a good candidate for solar? The best homes for
solar receive very little shade and have roofs that face toward the south. To request a
free, no-obligation solar assessment for your home or business, contact our selected
installer, Astrum Solar. Go to http://go.astrumsolar.com/solarizelexingtonbedford
o
r call 1-800-903-6130.
Can you afford solar? Special Solarize Mass pricing, combined with government incentives and tax
credits, make this a good time to go solar. Both purchase and lease options are available. The more
households who purchase solar panels, the less expensive they are for everyone.
The program will run through June 30, 2014. For more information, you may contact
Lexington’s Solar Coaches Marcia Gens and Fran Ludwig at
SolarizeLexington@gmail.com, or go to http://www.lexingtonma.gov/solar.