HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-02-07-TMG-minMEMORANDUM
TO: Traffic Mitigation Group
FROM: Scott W. Schilt
DATE: February 10, 2006
SUBJECT: February 7, 2006 Meeting Notes
The Traffic Mitigation Group (TMG) held its first meeting on Tuesday, February 7, 2006 at
3:00 PM in Room 111 of the Town Office Building. In attendance were core members Jeanne
Krieger, Wendy Manz and Judith Uhrig, Town staff David Cannon, Scott Schilt and Gail
Wagner, and ancillary member Jerry VanHook. The following notes summarize the discussion.
D Engineering and Planning Staff will jointly chair the TMG, as there will be different tasks
undertaken by the TMG that fall under the respective departments (i.e. Engineering/DPW for
Town projects vs. Planning for mitigation activities resulting from development proposals).
D The Group reviewed the charge from the Board of Selectmen. The core group will be made
up of staff from the Engineering and Planning Departments, the chairpersons of the Board of
Selectmen, Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals. Ancillary members,
representing committees with transportation interests, will be involved on an as needed basis
to make recommendations to the core group. The TMG will review larger development
projects to coordinate negotiations and oversee implementation of traffic mitigation
commitments, as well as to prioritize other significant town transportation initiatives. The
TMG will meet once a month and/or on an as needed basis.
D A list was reviewed of current development projects where mitigation commitments have
been proposed or will be needed. The projects included the AvalonBay development at the
site of the former Metropolitan State Hospital, the Patriot Partners' Lexington Technology
Park, and the proposed rezoning of the Sheraton Hotel.
D For AvalonBay at Lexington Square, the TMG will need to determine which mitigation
projects to fund with the $250,000 commitment negotiated by the Town during the rezoning
of the property. Confirmation is needed on when the funds will be received, and if there were
any priority recommendations made in traffic studies done when the project was permitted.
Ms. Krieger noted that a sidewalk along Concord Avenue was a need in the area. Ms.
Wagner noted that financial contributions negotiated for LEXPRESS commence when
building permits are issued, and the funds will be used for general operating expenses until
LEXPRESS begins to provide service to the site. It was noted that consideration should be
given to improvements to the Waltham Street/Concord Avenue intersection, and that the
Board of Selectmen had appropriated $25,000 for work on the intersection. Mr. Cannon
stated that Engineering has evaluated the intersection, and improvements will require
significant geometric changes and land takings to widen the street to provide turning lanes.
Mr. Schilt stated that he would compile background information about the AvalonBay
project, and the TMG should discuss the project in greater detail at its next meeting.
D The mitigation commitments from Patriot Partners were discussed. Ms. Wagner stated that
she submitted a cost of living adjustment request to Patriot Partners, which amounts to
approximately $350 in additional funding for LEXPRESS contributions. Mr. Schilt outlined
the study currently being done at the Marrett!Spring!Bridge intersection, noting that four
proposed options will be presented at the Planning Board meeting on February 8, 2006. The
TMG will need to review these options at their next meeting, and, based on the public
feedback received at the Planning Board meeting, determine how to proceed with the
remaining funding committed for transportation improvements by Patriot Partners. Ms.
Krieger questioned how much intersection improvements generally cost, and whether
MassHighway could be approached for funding improvements at Marrett/Spring /Bridge. Mr.
Cannon stated that the consultants doing the intersection study had recently met with
MassHighway officials, and they were receptive to most of the alternatives. The consultants
felt confident that the project could be placed on MassHighway's Transportation
Improvement Program funding list in the near future. More discussion will be needed to
determine how the project can move forward under the new process outlined in the new
MassHighway Design Guidelines. He emphasized that MassHighway looks for projects that
are completely ready to go forward, and that have significant public support.
D Mr. Cannon noted that there was a need for a townwide survey to ascertain where
transportation improvements are needed, and a model should be developed to assess impacts
and priorities. He inquired whether a portion of future monetary mitigation commitments
from developers could be devoted to this study.
D The proposed redevelopment of the Sheraton property had mitigation commitments during
the rezoning of the property in 1989 that have been fulfilled even though the property was
never redeveloped. The current proposal does not spell out any additional mitigation outside
of signal timing improvements and commitments to develop a transportation demand
management (TDM) program. Ms. Wagner stated that more funding for LEXPRESS should
come from the developers, and contributions could be based on precedents established by
other development projects of a similar magnitude.
➢ Ms. Uhrig stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals has boilerplate information that they use
to request TDM commitments from applicants, but questioned who was responsible for
enforcing them. It was thought that perhaps the TMG should be responsible for monitoring
the TDM programs approved under special permits. Ms. Wagner stated that she occasionally
receives reports from management companies, but that many building managers are
unfamiliar with the reporting requirements when she requests them. It was agreed that a
better process was needed to review TDM proposals, and that the commitments should
include clear language requiring specific reporting procedures, triggers for implementation,
formulas for financial commitments, and mechanisms to ensure new building tenants are
aware of the commitments and their responsibilities. The TDM language proposed for the
AvalonBay project was noted as a good example. Ms. Wagner stated that she and Maryann
McCall - Taylor had compiled a list of sites where TDM programs were required, and the
TMG should update and review this list, and begin the process of ensuring compliance with
the commitments.
➢ Additional projects for the TMG to undertake were also discussed. It was recommended that
the TMG prepare a list of areas where improvements are needed, and then determine
priorities for funding. Ms. Wagner suggested that consultation with the Transportation Safety
Advisory Committee, the Police Department and the MAPC study of transportation
improvements needed in Belmont, Waltham and Lexington would be a good place to start.
o Ms. Krieger noted that the Selectmen were committed to following up on a request at last
year's Town Meeting for improvements to the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and
Maple Street, possibly paired with a study of the Massachusetts Avenue and Pleasant
Street intersection.
o Mr. VanHook said that pedestrian and bicycle safety along Hartwell Avenue is a priority
for the Bicycle Committee.
o Other areas mentioned included the Worthen Road and Bedford Street intersection, and
pedestrian safety at the rotary at Diamond School.
Mr. Schilt stated that identified problems should be more than just someone's pet peeve. He
added that quantifiable measures, such as accident data or existing traffic counts for the
identified areas would help to determine if there are problems.
➢ It was agreed that a homework assignment for the TMG would be to check with various
committees to identify priority areas for improvements and compile a list for discussion at
the next TMG meeting. Mr. Schilt offered to compile the list with inputs e- mailed to him
prior to the next meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 PM. Mr. Schilt will submit a query to the Group to identify
the next meeting date and time. The first Wednesday or the second Tuesday in March was
suggested. It was agreed to have one more meeting of just the core group in order to get a
program established, and . then ancillary members would be invited to attend subsequent
meetings.