HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011- 12-01-CPC-rpt (Needs Assessment Report) Town of Lexington
Community Preservation Plan:
A Needs Assessment
`Ovg MORN
1775
� m A
x
�w 3
Q m
y
APRIL 19'"
�FX1NGT��
January, 2011
Town of Lexington
Community Preservation Plan
Overview
Introduction
In March of 2006, the residents of Lexington voted to adopt the Community Preservation Act
(CPA), which set a 3% surcharge on property tax bills to be matched by State funding from the
Massachusetts Community Preservation Trust Fund. The Lexington Community Preservation
Committee was appointed at that time to make recommendations to Town Meeting for the
utilization of the funds raised under the CPA. In its initial year, FY'07, the surcharge brought in
approximately $2.5 million dollars, which was fully matched with State funds.
Since FY'07, annual revenue from the local surcharge has steadily increased. It now stands at an
estimated $3,263,355 available for FY'12. However, State matching funds, which are drawn
from registry fees, have fallen, a function of falling home sales in Massachusetts over the last
several years. Initially at a 100% match in FY'07, the percentage has dropped to 28%for FYI 2.
This reduction is also due in part to an increase in the number of communities which have passed
the CPA, and therefore compete with Lexington for limited funds. (To date there are 143
communities with CPA by-laws.) There is now legislation before the State legislature that would
ensure a mandatory 75% State match for communities. This bill, which was titled SB 90 in the
2009 Legislative session, received support in committee, and will be reintroduced in the 2010
legislative session.
To date the CPC has appropriated over $23,000,000 in funding for CPA projects in the four
primary categories of Community Housing ($3.6 million); Historic Resources ($5.9 million);
Open Space Preservation ($11.3 million) and Recreational Uses ($2.3 million). Over $6.4 million
of these appropriations have been with State matching funds.
The CPA statute requires that at least 10 %of the CPA funds received in each fiscal year be spent
or reserved for each of the CPA's three main purposes: open space, historic resources, and
community housing. CPA funds may also be also used for recreation projects or for the purchase
of land devoted to recreation. CPA funds that are not expended in one year may be "banked" or
carried over to subsequent years within each main designation. The remaining 70 % of CPA
funds received in each fiscal year is available to be appropriated or banked, according to the
Town's discretion. Up to five percent of the CPA funds raised annually may be used for
administrative activities related to the work of the CPC.
The Lexington CPC consists of nine members, one each appointed by the Conservation
Commission, Planning Board, Housing Authority, Historical Commission, Housing Partnership
and Recreation Committee, and three members appointed by the Board of Selectmen.
1
The CPC is required to study the "needs, possibilities and resources" for community preservation
in Lexington. To that end, the Committee has reviewed existing plans and documents related to
the four purposes designated for funding under the CPA: open space, historic resources,
community housing and recreation.
In reviewing new projects, the CPC:
• Acts as a reviewing body for projects which fall within the CPA purview;
• Acts as a funder, not a developer;
• Seeks to advance community goals previously set forth in public documents that have
received wide review and public input;
• Attempts to meet multiple community preservation goals in its selection of projects to
recommend to Town Meeting, and to the extent possible, in each such project; and
• Communicates its mission and goals to applicants, to other community boards and
committees and to the general public.
After completion of its review, the CPC's recommendations are forwarded to Town Meeting for
final approval.
Purpose
This Needs Assessment("the Assessment")is a summary of the CPC's work in developing
community preservation goals for Lexington. The CPC has attempted to synthesize all planning
efforts addressing the four purposes identified in the CPA. The Committee has reviewed
Lexington's current resources and has outlined the needs and possibilities for community
preservation activities which will enhance open space, recreation, historic resources and
community housing. The CPC has set out the guidelines it will use to evaluate project proposals
as well as the process it will follow during this undertaking.
This Assessment sets out the goals and aspirations of the CPC as it begins its fifth year of
implementation. The purpose of the Assessment is to:
• Provide a clear statement of both broad and specific goals that lie behind the CPC's
recommendations; and
• Lay out the specific framework the CPC will use in formulating its recommendations,
both for the guidance of applicants and the understanding of Town Meeting.
Goals
Lexington's committees and commissions have a long-standing history of carefully assessing
Town needs and goals in light of the shared values of its residents. The Lexington
Comprehensive Plan, the Open Space and Recreational Plan, and the Town's Consolidated
2
Housing Strategy and Plan were created in this spirit. (For a complete list of Plans, Documents
and Studies that are used as CPC sources, see Appendix I). The CPC expects that the CPA will
become a resource for carrying out the thoughtful community preservation recommendations
contained in these studies.
Subsequent sections of this Assessment discuss community goals and projects specific to
preservation within each of the four designated purposes of the CPA. In addition to these goals,
the CPC has articulated a set of guidelines that apply to projects generally. The CPC will use
these guidelines in its review and decision-making process. They are intended to provide
additional guidance to those preparing applications for funding. Not all guidelines will be
appropriate for every project.
Decision-Making Guidelines
The Lexington Community Preservation Committee will only consider proposals that are
eligible for Community Preservation Act (CPA) funding according to the terms of the
statute (M.G.L. c.44B), specifically,proposals for:
• The acquisition, creation, and preservation of open space;
• The acquisition,preservation, rehabilitation, and restoration of historic resources;
• The creation,preservation, and support of community housing (including the
possibility of creating a housing trust for the purpose of preserving or expanding
the affordable housing supply);
• The acquisition, creation, and preservation of land for recreational use; and
• The rehabilitation and restoration of open space, land for recreational use, and
community housing that has been acquired with CPA funds.
Preference will be given to proposals which meet as many of the following general
criteria as possible, and:
• Are consistent with current planning documents adopted by the Town;
• Preserve the essential character of the Town as described in the Comprehensive
Plan;
• Save resources that would otherwise be threatened;
• Benefit a currently under-served population;
• Serve more than one CPA purpose (for example, in linking open space,
recreation and community housing, or the reuse of historic resources for
community housing) or demonstrate why serving multiple needs is not feasible;
• Demonstrate practicality and feasibility, and demonstrate that they can be
implemented expeditiously and within budget;
• Produce an advantageous cost/benefit value;
• Leverage additional public and/or private funds;
• Preserve or utilize currently owned Town assets;
3
• Receive endorsement by other municipal boards, committees or departments; and
• Provide long-term contribution and/or enhancement to the Town.
Process
The Town Manager; Town boards, committees and departments; civic organizations; and
residents may bring proposals for funding to the CPC. Such proposals must be submitted by
November 1, in the form prescribed by the CPC, in order to be considered for funding at the next
(spring) Town Meeting. Except in exigent circumstances, the CPC does not review and submit
proposals to fall Town Meeting. In cases where proposals are contingent upon Town budget
processes, or upon receipt of professional estimates, appraisals and the like, and cannot be
completed by November 1, initial proposals must be submitted by November 1, and completed
proposals must be submitted no later than January 15 of the following year. Proposals submitted
after January 15 will not be reviewed and submitted by the CPC to the spring Town Meeting, but
may, after review, and with the agreement of the applicant, be submitted to a subsequent Town
Meeting.
Under the statute, the CPC does not have the power to appropriate funds for particular projects,
only to make recommendations to Town Meeting. While the power to appropriate CPA funds is
reserved solely for Town Meeting, it may act only upon the recommendations of the CPC. It
may choose to deny or reduce funding for a project recommended by the CPC, but it may not
increase a recommended appropriation. Town Meeting also may not appropriate CPA funds for
any project that is not recommended by the CPC.
The CPC seeks a Town-wide and long-term perspective. The Committee expects to recommend
projects that will have a significant long-term impact on the Town. It may choose to recommend
to Town Meeting that some or all of CPA funds be "banked" or reserved for significant projects
and opportunities in the future. It strives to provide Town Meeting with a strong and consistent
rationale for its recommendations and to create an effective joint process through which
departments, organizations and citizens may gain access to CPA funds for projects that will
enhance the Town.
Further Information
Copies of this document, as well as links to a wide range of community preservation
information, including the Application for Community Preservation Funding, are available on
the Town's Web site at htlp://ci.lexington.ma.us/boards.htm
The General Guidelines and Process set out above apply in combination with category-specific
goals outlined in the next four sections of this Assessment.
4
This Community Preservation Needs Assessment is respectfully submitted to the residents of
Lexington in the hope that it will provide a focus and catalyst for significant enhancement of
community preservation goals in Lexington.
5
Town of Lexington
Community Preservation Plan
Community Housing
BACKGROUND
The majority of Lexington's population is in the middle-income category, earning over 80
percent of area median income. [Areawide Median Income for a family of four in Lexington
was determined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to be $91,800 in
2010]. Eighteen percent of the Town's population falls into the moderate, low, or extremely
low-income categories. Lexington is faced with a declining population in the 18 to 44 age group.
High housing costs make it difficult for young people to afford a home in Lexington, where the
average home price was just under $600,000 in 2010. At the same time, the population over 65
is on the increase. Members of this group often live on fixed incomes. There is a clear need to
create affordable rental and ownership opportunities for young families and senior citizens who
fall into the low-income or moderate-income categories.
Lexington has three housing organizations that provide and advocate for low- and moderate-
income housing.
Lexington Housing Authority (LHA)
The Lexington Housing Authority was established in 1968 pursuant to Chapter 121B of the
General Laws of Massachusetts. Its role is to provide safe, sanitary and affordable housing for
low-income individuals and families, including veterans and the elderly. Housing units
administered by the Housing Authority are supported by either State or Federal funds. The
Housing Authority is governed by a five-member Board of Commissioners, four of whom are
elected by Town voters and one of whom is appointed by the Governor.
Lexington Housing Assistance Board (LexHAB)
In 1983 the Lexington Housing Assistance Board, Inc. was established by an Act of the General
Court as requested by Town Meeting and the Board of Selectmen. The immediate rationale for
LexHAB's creation was the conversion of the former Muzzey Junior High School to affordable
housing. The charge to LexHAB was broadly framed to enable it to look beyond the Muzzey
units in order to provide housing for young families and other residents who could not qualify for
housing provided by the Housing Authority or for whom no LHA unit was available, but who
were nevertheless in need of housing assistance. The Town charged LexHAB, subject to the
direction of the Board of Selectmen, to"investigate and implement" housing alternatives for low,
moderate and middle income families. LexHab provides rental housing to eligible persons and
families whose incomes do not exceed either 60% or 80% of the area median income for the
greater Boston area. Since it is locally sponsored, it is able (in cases where need is equal) to give
6
a preference to applicants who have a Lexington connection through residence, work, or school.
LexHAB is governed by a seven-member board appointed by the Selectmen.
Lexington Housing Partnership (LHP)
In 2003 the Lexington Housing Partnership was formed to promote and support affordable
housing activities and to recommend appropriate actions to the Board of Selectmen and the
Planning Board to further these goals. The LHP Board, appointed by the Selectmen, consists of
21 voting members and six liaisons representing the many committees, groups and individuals
who share a goal of providing affordable housing in Lexington
CURRENT RESOURCES
The Lexington Housing Authority administers 240 affordable units of low/moderate income
housing including apartment complexes at Greeley Village, Vynebrooke Village and
Countryside Village. In addition, the authority owns a two-family house and seven condominium
units. The majority of the units are State-subsidized (153 units)while most of the remainder are
subsidized by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) (77 units).
The units are mostly occupied by seniors and by disabled and handicapped individuals and
families. The Housing Authority also administers Federal Section 8 choice vouchers and
Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program project-based vouchers, which combined, serve up to an
additional 74 units. While none of the Lexington Housing Authority units was purchased with
CPA funds, there have been several CPA-funded projects that have benefitted the Housing
Authority in the last several years. These include window, roof and siding replacement at
Greeley Village, window replacement at Vynebrooke Village, and the funding of a design study
for Vynebrooke Village to identify methods to control on-site drainage.
LexHAB presently owns 63 units, all of which are rented to qualifying individuals or families.
There is no line item in the Town budget supporting LexHAB. It does not receive State or
Federal funds. The seed money for LexHAB was provided by the developers of Potter Pond and
Brookhaven, who donated funds for affordable housing in order to comply with the Planning
Board's inclusionary housing policy. LexHAB purchased units at the former Muzzey High
School, Emerson Gardens and Parker Manor. Five properties (6 units)have been purchased with
CPA funds in the last two fiscal years. A number of units have been donated to LexHAB as a
result of rezoning plans negotiated by the Planning Board and approved by Town Meeting. Two
homes were donated to LexHAB by their owners and were subsequently moved to Town-owned
lots. Utilizing donations and rental income from its housing units, LexHAB has built 12 single
and two-family homes on scattered sites throughout the Town with the help of Minuteman
Technical High School students and the Rotary Club.
7
NEEDS AND GOALS
Preservation and support of existing community housing. An ongoing goal is the
preservation of existing community housing by addressing needed capital improvements that go
beyond normal maintenance, such as the following recent projects:
• Installation of drainage structures and replacement of failing siding at Vinebrook Village;
and
• Replacement of windows and roofs at Greeley Village, (both projects managed by the
Housing Authority).
Both locally and statewide, the demand for housing affordable to low and moderate income
residents exceeds supply. The lack of such housing leads to a loss of diversity at the local level
and a loss of population at the state level as individuals and families abandon Massachusetts for
more affordable areas of the country. The State has sought to foster the creation of affordable
housing through M.G.L. c.40B, which mandates that each municipality have a minimum of 10%
of its housing stock in the affordable category in order to avoid the potential imposition of
housing developments that do not conform to local zoning bylaws.
The Town of Lexington is currently in compliance with the 10%requirement of State law.
Nevertheless, as more market rate housing is constructed, and as price restrictions on some
currently affordable housing units expire, the Town could easily drop below the 10% threshold,
allowing a developer who allocates 25% of a residential project to affordable housing to avoid
being subject to the density and siting restrictions of Lexington's Zoning Bylaw. This provides a
practical incentive for the Town to continue to add affordable units to its inventory.
It is important to recognize, however, that an adequate stock of affordable community housing is
an important Lexington goal independent of the desire to avoid overly dense or otherwise
undesirable housing developments. Beginning as a farming community, Lexington has
developed over its almost 300 years to become a suburban residential and commercial center
with a population that is both ethnically and economically diverse. After World War 11, it
attracted a large number of residents involved in academic and scientific pursuits at nearby
universities. Since then, its excellent schools and other amenities have continued to draw new
residents, many with origins outside the United States. While average household income in the
Town is well above the State average -- $144,000 for Lexington in 2010 -- Lexington's profile
has not been based primarily on the high price of admission, that is, expensive housing. The
Town has evolved as a place of academic and professional achievement with a commitment to
diversity and shared community involvement. The commitment to providing a range of housing
opportunities is a part of the Town's character.
8
RECOMMENDATIONS
As Lexington seeks to provide housing for different age groups and income levels, there are a
number of approaches which might make constructive use of CPA funds:
• Construction of additional Housing Authority units or conversion of existing units in
Greeley Village which would be barrier-free and accessible for elderly residents;
• Acquisition or construction by LexHab of one or two additional affordable rental units
per year on scattered sites throughout the Town;
• Construction of additional affordable units, rental or ownership, on Town-owned parcels
such as the Leary land on Vine Street or the Busa Farm property;
• Support of LexHab funding to acquire housing units in existing multi-family projects
when their affordability restrictions expire;
• Purchase of deed restrictions on existing homes to bridge the gap between current market
prices and affordable prices, so as to preserve smaller homes from tear down and
replacement; and
• Support of first-time homebuyer programs, including the Soft Second Loan Program
administered by the State Department of Housing and Community Development.
9
Town of Lexington
Community Preservation Plan
Historic Preservation
BACKGROUND
The Town of Lexington is rich in cultural resources. Its role in the Revolutionary War has
created a stewardship responsibility of its historical sites that extends to the nation at large; its
later role in commercial expansion due to the arrival of the railroad created a building boom of
late 19th and early 20th century housing stock that continues to distinguish the Town. Structures
of the recent past—Moon Hill, Five Fields and the Peacock Farm enclaves throughout Town,
among others — enhance Lexington's diverse architectural heritage.
Lexington has received national and state recognition of its historic resources: four properties or
areas, the Battle Green, Buckman Tavern, the Hancock-Clarke House, and the Minuteman
National Historical Park, have been designated as National Historic Landmarks by the U.S.
Secretary of the Interior. Ten additional properties are individually listed on the National and
State Registers of Historic Places, in addition to the Town's listed National Register Historic
Districts (The Lexington Green Historic District, the Buckman Tavern Historic District, and the
Sanderson House - Munroe Tavern Historic District) and their contributing properties. The
Metropolitan State Hospital Multiple Property National Register listing, shared with the towns of
Belmont and Waltham, also contains a number of significant buildings. In total, approximately
600 properties are protected through inclusion within one or another of the Town-established
local historic districts (Battle Green, East Village, Hancock-Clarke, Munroe Tavern).
The Town has recognized this wealth: in its "Vision Statement: Fostering a Sense of
Community" prepared by the Vision 2020 group, the first vision listed was that of appreciation
of the Town's history, through the "preservation and celebration of historic Town assets,
including local events and interest points as well as Lexington's national attractions." And in the
Planning Board's 2002 Comprehensive Plan, "The Lexington We Want," the authors
recognizeed that the Town's stewardship responsibility to its Revolutionary War heritage has
been executed "with effective care" but at the same time urged the adoption of a preservation
plan that would rationalize preservation efforts throughout the Town. Lexington's history
enhances its citizens' sense of place, attracting people to come and live here— and stay. The
impact of our historic resources also extends beyond the boundaries of the Town,providing
educational opportunities for the nation's youth and for historical scholars, and bringing
important tourist dollars to nourish the local economy.
CURRENT RESOURCES
To manage these cultural resources, the Town employs a powerful array of tools. They include
oversight by the Lexington Historic Districts Commission, the Lexington Historical
Commission, the Design Advisory Committee and, for those resources located in the Town
Center, the Lexington Center Committee. Two nationally known historic resources are located
10
within Lexington, the Masonic National Heritage Museum and the Minuteman National
Historical Park, which is part of the National Park System.
Historical Districts Commission (HDC)
The Historic Districts Commission of Lexington was established in 1956 by Special Act of the
Legislature to"promote the educational, cultural, economic and general welfare of the public
through the preservation and protection of historic buildings,places and districts through the
development of appropriate settings for said buildings,places and districts and through the
maintenance of said buildings, places and districts as landmarks of historic interest." The HDC
ensures that development or demolition of properties within the four historic districts may
proceed only following a determination of appropriateness. The five full and four alternate
members of the HDC are appointed by the Selectmen, at large, and from candidates proposed by
the Historical Society, the Arts and Crafts Society, and the Cary Library Trustees.
Lexington Historical Commission (LHC)
Similarly, the Lexington Historical Commission was created in 1975 by vote of Town Meeting
"for the preservation, protection and development of the historical or archeological resources" of
the Town. The LHC has prepared an inventory of historical structures located throughout the
Town that documents over 1700 buildings, structures and objects and is accessible through the
Town web site.. The LHC administers the Town's Demolition Delay Bylaw to ensure that
every effort is made to preserve these historically and architecturally significant structures. The
LHC also endeavors to educate citizens on the breadth and importance of Lexington's cultural
heritage. The five members of the LHC are appointed by the Town Manager.
Lexington Historical Society
On a private level, the Lexington Historical Society plays a number of key roles, including the
ownership of the Hancock-Clarke House, Munroe Tavern and the Depot and management of
Buckman Tavern under lease from the Town, as well as through publications, the presentation of
educational programs and the maintenance of an important archive.
The National Heritage Museum
The National Heritage Museum, founded and supported by the Scottish Rite Freemasons , also
provides resources and programs on American history and culture that draw national and
international visitors and complement the cultural management efforts of the Town.
NEEDS AND GOALS
The goals for historic preservation in Lexington are embodied in the criteria for evaluation of
potential CPA projects. The CPC seeks projects that:
11
• Protect,preserve, enhance, restore and/or rehabilitate historic, cultural, architectural or
archaeological resources of significance, especially those that are threatened;
• Protect, preserve, enhance, restore and/or rehabilitate Town-owned properties, features or
resources of historical significance;
• Protect,preserve, enhance, restore and/or rehabilitate the historical function of a property
or site;
• Support the adaptive reuse of historic properties;
• Affect a site within a Lexington Historic District, on a State or National Historic Register,
or eligible for placement on such registers, or on the Lexington Historical Commission's
Cultural Resources Inventory;
• Demonstrate a specific public benefit; and/or
• Provide permanent protection for maintaining a historic resource.
RECOMMENDATIONS
These goals can be addressed, first, through the comprehensive identification of the historic
resources that are at risk in Lexington due to lack of funding, insensitive alterations or deferred
maintenance, or other lack of stewardship. Second, the Town needs to provide the incentives to
promote successful and sensitive rehabilitation/restoration projects, especially those that
incorporate the Standards published by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior, and the adaptive reuse
of historic buildings that have outlived their original purposes. Third, Lexington should be
aware of the full complement of preservation techniques available to us, including the creation of
conservation overlay districts to protect areas where the substantial oversight and control of a
historic district is not warranted or feasible, and the purchase of preservation easements from
owners of historic houses that would equalize their economic value so that they could be sold as
houses and not teardown opportunities. Special attention should be paid to threatened classes of
resources, such as Mid-Century Modernist homes, post -World War II buildings and historic
schools.
Specific projects might include the following:
• Acquisition of historic properties —buildings, landscapes, sites, structures or
preservation easements. CPA funds could help bridge the economic gap to make possible
the acquisition and adaptation of older, historic homes for affordable housing or assisted
living as an alternative to teardown and redevelopment. Lexington CPA funding
contributed to the acquisition and reuse of the M. H. Merriam and Co. Building on
Oakland Street, a former factory that was converted into the Douglas House, a residence
for survivors of brain injuries.
12
• Bricks and mortar repairs, including preparation of plans and specifications for
construction, architectural/engineering assessments, and modifications for accessibility,
and HVAC updates, to historic resources, including modifications for the purpose of
making such historic resources functional for their intended use. Examples of past
projects include the restoration of the Hancock-Clark House and Munroe Tavern. Future
projects could include restoration and rehabilitation of the Barnes Building ("White
House") and the Stone Building (East Lexington Library) on Massachusetts Avenue, and
the Leary farmhouse on Vine Street. Other buildings of concern include the Munroe
School Center for the Arts, the Hancock School Condominiums, the Muzzey Junior High
School Condominiums, the house in front of St. Bridgid's Church at 1989 Massachusetts
Avenue, and the Dana Home.
• Documentation, survey, conservation and restoration of historic landscapes,
including historic burying grounds and monuments. Examples would be recent CPA-
funded projects for restoration of two of the Town's historic burying grounds.
• Application for survey and planning grants for updating existing inventories and
National Register nominations. Past CPA grants have enabled the updating, correction
and posting on-line of the Town's Cultural Resources Inventory, as well as a study of the
MidCentury Modernist movement in Lexington.
• Educational projects such as the implementation of signs or printed brochures regarding
historical resources. CPA funding has enabled the placement of directional and
informational signage throughout the historic center of Town. Many of the Tercentenary
signs formerly located at key intersections have been removed and are especially in need
of restoration and repair. Other suggestions could include the preparation of a guide to
the architectural styles of houses in Lexington and a manual for homeowners of historic
properties providing resources for maintenance and upkeep.
• Preservation of historic documents and archival materials. The Town Clerk is
currently evaluating, restoring and digitizing many of the Town's historic records in a
multi-year project using CPA funding.
13
Town of Lexington
Community Preservation Plan
Open Space
BACKGROUND
Open space is one of the defining characteristics of Lexington, which is now a mature suburb. It
enhances the historical and scenic character of the Town,protects important watershed and
biological values, including wetlands, streams, floodplains and wildlife habitat, affords
opportunities for passive recreational and educational uses, including hiking, walking, bird
watching,picnicing, and nature exploration.
CURRENT RESOURCES
The Town Conservation Commission is entrusted with promoting and managing the Town's
natural resources, enforcing the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act(M.G.L. c. 131 §40) and
acquiring and managing open space. The seven—member Commission is appointed for staggered
terms by the Town Manager with the approval of the Selectmen.
Out of approximately 10,650 acres, Lexington currently has more than 1,350 acres of
conservation land, and approximately 400 acres reserved for recreation, including parkland.
Town fiscal demands and restraints associated with Proposition 2 �/z have been accompanied by
the constant pressure of development, resulting in an absence of land acquisition by the Town
during the past twenty years prior to the passage of the Community Preservation Act. (For a list
of specific parcels that have been identified as priorities for Town acquisition, see the Land
Acquisition Planning Report attached as Appendix C to the 2009 Lexington Open Space and
Recreation Plan, which can be viewed in the Office of Community Development, Conservation
Division.) The CPA has encouraged the acquisition and protection of open space by providing
funds for the outright purchase of land to be owned by the Town or for the purchase of
permanent conservation or agricultural restrictions that provide protection to privately owned
land. Since the passage of the CPA, the Town has purchased the following parcels of land
totaling approximately 54 acres for conservation purposes: the two Goodwin Parcels off Hartwell
Avenue, the Leary Parcel off Vine Street, and the soon to be acquired Cotton Farm Parcel off
Marrett Road and donated Hartwell Avenue Parcel. The Busa Farm Parcel off Lowell Street was
also purchased with CPA funds, though this 7.9 acre parcel was not specifically designated for
conservation purposes.
NEEDS AND GOALS:
The goals for open space include, but are not limited to the following:
14
Protection, through acquisition or conservation restrictions, of parcels of highest scenic and
historic character. Parcels are considered significant if they preserve one or more of the
following:
• Historic landscapes and the visual relationships between historic buildings and their
settings;
• The visual character of the Town,particularly of those areas designated as scenic; and/or
• Open fields and meadows visible from public roads.
Protection, through acquisition or conservation easements, of parcels of highest
environmental value. Parcels are considered significant if they preserve one or more of the
following:
• Wetlands and watershed resources;
• Agricultural land;
• Greenway connections and wildlife corridors; and/or
• Wildlife habitat.
Acquisition of appropriate parcels to enhance recreational and educational opportunities
of open space. Parcels appropriate for this purpose may include but are not limited to the
following:
• Trail connections or access to conservation land;
• Open spaces near schools, and
• Open spaces accessible to people of all ages and abilities.
RECOMMENDATIONS
• The Town should continue to monitor the status of parcels on its Land Acquisition
Planning Report so as to be able to move promptly when such parcels become available
for sale or donation to the Town.
• Because land acquisitions are expensive, the CPC may consider banking CPA funds
designated for open space over the annually required 10% so as to insure some reserves
will be available to initiate such purchases.
15
• The Town should systematically review the status of its current conservation lands to
determine whether they are being protected and used as effectively as possible. For
example, some existing conservation lands may be suitable for community farming.
Others may require capital expenditures to maintain walking trails or access to
viewscapes.
16
Town of Lexington
Community Preservation Plan
Recreation
BACKGROUND
The Recreation Committee's goal is to provide a wide range of quality programs and facilities
for the broad spectrum of Lexington residents. The Recreation Department, supported by the
Town Manager-appointed 5-member Recreation Committee, administers and promotes
recreation and physical education in the Town and manages the public playgrounds, fields and
other recreational facilities —including the public swimming facilities at the Irving H. Mabee
Town Pool Complex and the Old Reservoir.
CURRENT RESOURCES
A most important recreational resource for Lexington is the Pine Meadows Municipal Golf
Course, which is the main revenue source for funding capital improvements through the
Recreation Enterprise Fund. Regular course improvements and upgrades to the facility have
made Pine Meadows a popular destination for local golfers, thus helping to ensure the financial
strength of the Enterprise Fund and its role in supporting Lexington Recreation Programs.
NEEDS AND GOALS
The need for additional recreation facilities, especially playing fields, has increased as activities
have grown to include younger participants and senior adults, gender equality and special needs
issues, longer and multiple seasons, and a greater number and variety of new sports and
activities. The Recreation Department and Committee have proposed recreational uses as part of
the plan for the CPA-funded Busa land purchase, as a response to the long term field deficit
problem.
General recreation goals include:
• Preserve or add new recreational uses of and access to Lexington's natural and
recreational resources;
• Preserve and protect existing playing fields and playgrounds, especially where long-term
drainage problems have compromised the continued recreational use of these areas;
• Acquire land for recreation, including playing fields; consideration should be given to
recreational uses whenever the Town looks to acquire additional open space;
17
• Provide integration of recreational activities, such as the CPA-supported West Lexington
Greenway for bicycles and walkers, with other Town Departments, such as the
Conservation Department; and
• Provide a balance of recreational activities (active,passive and unstructured).
RECOMMENDATIONS
• Additional athletic fields to meet the increasing needs of the many teams. The CPA-
funded Busa Land purchase could satisfy the serious need for a multi-purpose field which
resulted from the loss of 2 3/4 fields during the construction of the Harrington School.
• New active recreational resources, including playing fields and playgrounds, with special
attention to handicapped accessibility, as well as adult/senior and toddler recreational
needs.
• More recreational access/use of open spaces and natural resources (where appropriate),
including areas for hiking, bicycling, cross-country skiing, and fishing.
• Preservation measures to extend the life and use of existing recreational facilities, such as
the CPA-funded drainage projects at the Center Playing Fields, the Old Res, and Pine
Meadows Municipal Golf Course.
18
Town of Lexington
Community Preservation Plan
Appendix I
Plans, Documents and Studies
BOARD OF SELECTMEN
Selectmen's Goal Setting (annual documents 1997-2010)
PLANNING BOARD
• Design Guidelines for Commercial Districts, Volume L Public Improvements (1990) and
Volume IL Private Sector Improvements (David Dixon & Associates; The Halvorson
Company, 1990)
• Report on Housing Characteristics in Lexington: Promises and Performance August 1990
• Land Use Change In the Eighties Lexington, MA April 1993
• New Large Houses in Existing Neighborhoods (Robert A. Boyer, 1994)
• Socio-Economic Characteristics of Lexington, MA Vol. 1: Population April 1994
• Commercial Development in the CRO, CM and CD Zoning Districts April 1997
• New Larger Houses in Existing Neighborhoods July 1997
• Lexington Center Parking Study (Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. 2001)
• Lexington Comprehensive Plan:
Land Use(1/2002)
Natural and Cultural Resources (1/2002)
Housing, Selectmen's Goal Setting (2005)
Economic Development (1/2002)
Transportation (6/2003)
• Lexington Center Analysis (Taintor Associates, Inc., 2004)
19
• Marrett Road/Spring Street/Bridge Street Intersection Study Phase I(7/2005) and Phase
11(5/2006)
• Revised Zoning Map of Lexington (2009)
CAPITAL EXPENDITURES COMMITTEE
• Town Five-Year Capital Plan
2020 VISION COMMITTEE
• Visioning Reports, 2000 —2007
• Report of the Demographic Change Task force—Final, March 19, 2010
COMMUNITY HOUSING
• Lexington Consolidated Housing Strategy (2006-2010)
• Affordable Housing Subsidy Executive Summary (2010)
• Affordable Housing Subsidy Plan (2010)
• Lexington Housing Partnership and LexHAB "Affordable Housing Assistance Program"
Design. Jan. 20, 2010.
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
• Lexington Cultural and Historic Inventory (updated 2010), and on the web at
http//historicsurvey.lexingtonma.gov/index.htm
• "Lexington Reconnaissance Report for the Massachusetts Heritage Landscape Inventory
Program", 2006.
OPEN SPACE/CONSERVATION
• Open Space and Recreation Plan (Updated 2009)
• Priority Habitat and Estimated Habitat Map for Rare Species
20
• BioMap and Living Waters Plans and Map
• Aerial Photo Survey of Potential Vernal Pools
• Priority Resource Map
• Western Greenway Map
• "Lexington Reconnaissance Report for the Massachusetts Heritage Landscape Inventory
Program", 2006.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
• Town Maps
21
Town of Lexington
Community Preservation Plan
Appendix H
Glossary
Affordable Housing
"Low income housing", housing for those persons and families whose annual income is less than
80 per cent of the area-wide median income. The area-wide median income is determined
annually by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for specific
regions, including the Boston Metropolian Area.
"Moderate income housing", housing for those persons and families whose annual income is less
than 100 per cent of the area-wide median income. The area-wide median income is determined
annually by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for specific
regions, including the Boston Metropolitan Area..
"Low or moderate income senior housing", housing for those persons having reached the age of
60 or over who would qualify for low or moderate income housing.
Community Preservation Act(CPA)
The Community Preservation Act(CPA) (MGL c. 44B)is legislation designed to help
communities plan ahead for the preservation of important resources and to raise funds to achieve
their goals. CPA allows towns to levy a community-wide property tax surcharge of up to 3 per
cent for the purpose of creating a local Community Preservation Fund(CPF) and qualifying for
State matching funds. The Fund must be used to acquire and protect open space,preserve
historic buildings and landscapes create and maintain affordable housing, and may be used to
acquire, create or preserve recreational resources. The State will provide matching funds to
communities approving CPA by-laws, which Lexington did in 2006 at a 3%level.
Community Preservation Committee (CPC)
A nine-person committee with individual members appointed by the Conservation Commission,
Historical Commission, Housing Authority, Housing Partnership, Planning Board, Recreation
Committee, and three at-large members appointed by the Board of Selectmen. The Committee
reviews funding applications and makes recommendations to Town Meeting for the
appropriation of CPF monies to support approved projects. It consults broadly with Town
organizations, boards and committees.
22
Community Preservation Fund (CPF)
A separate Town account for the deposit of all surcharges collected and State matching funds.
Sub-accounts of CPF (sometimes referred to as "buckets") have been established to ensure that
required shares of the CPF are either spent each year or allocated to the appropriate reserve
funds. These are:
• Open Space Reserve Fund(minimum of 10% annually)
• Historic Resources Fund (minimum of 10% annually)
• Community Housing Reserve Fund (minimum of 10% annually)
• Unbudgeted Reserve Fund (remaining 70% of funds, less administrative costs)
• Undesignated Fund Balance
• Administrative/Operating Fund (up to 5%)
The CPC is permitted to appropriate up to 5% of the funds for administration and operational
expenses of the Committee. For example, these funds can be used to hire support staff,purchase
office supplies, do mailings and cover the cost of professional services as needed. Any
administrative monies not used in a given fiscal year are returned to the CPF annual reserve
fund.
Recreation projects are eligible for CPA funding but there is no minimum amount specified by
the Act. Beyond these required disbursements, Town Meeting, acting upon the recommendations
of the CPC, will decide the allocation of the remaining 70 per cent of annual CPA revenues. For
example, the CPC could recommend and Town Meeting could allocate the remaining 70 per cent
of annual revenue to one purpose, spread it evenly among all four, or set the funds aside for
future spending. These allocations can be changed each year.
Community Preservation Surcharge
The locally raised share of CPA revenue comes from a surcharge (additional amount of tax) on
real estate tax bills. Lexington voted a 3 per cent surcharge which is separately stated on each
tax bill.
Community Preservation Surcharge Exemptions
Taxpayers currently exempt from real property taxes under Chapter 59 of Massachusetts General
Laws are exempt from the CPA surcharge. In addition, Town Meeting approved exemption of
the first $100,000 of taxable value of residential real estate. Exemptions, as well as the
surcharge percentage, can be changed at any time with the approval of Town Meeting and
subsequent voter referendum.
Historic Resources
"Historic resources" shall mean a building, structure, vessel, real property, document or artifact
that is listed or eligible for listing on the State Register of Historic Places or has been determined
23
by the Historical Commission to be significant in the history, archeology, architecture or culture
of a city or town.
Lexington Community Preservation By-Law
A copy of the By-Law can be obtained from the Town Clerk's Office.
Open Space
Open space shall include, but not be limited to, land to protect existing and future well fields,
aquifers and recharge areas, watershed land, agricultural land, grasslands, fields, forest land,
fresh and salt water marshes and other wetlands, ocean, river, stream, lake and pond frontage,
beaches, dunes and other coastal lands, lands to protect scenic vistas, land for wildlife or nature
preserve and land for recreational use.
For calculation of the 10 per cent minimum allocation for open space, land for recreational use is
not counted,pursuant to Section 6 of the CPA.
Preservation
"Preservation" shall mean protection of personal or real property from injury, harm or
destruction, but not including maintenance.
Recreational Use
"Recreational use" shall mean active or passive recreational use including, but not limited to, the
use of land for community gardens, trails, and non-commercial youth and adult sports, and the
use of land as a park,playground or athletic field. "Recreational use" shall not include horse or
dog racing or the use of land for a stadium, gymnasium or similar structure.
Rehabilitation
"Rehabilitation" shall mean the remodeling, reconstruction and making of extraordinary repairs
to historic resources, open spaces, lands for recreational use and community housing for the
purpose of making such historic resources, open spaces, land for recreational use and community
housing functional for their intended use, including but not limited to improvements to comply
with the American with Disabilities Act and other Federal, State or local building or access
codes. With respect to historic resources, rehabilitation shall have the additional meaning of
work to comply with the Standard for Rehabilitation stated in the United States Secretary of the
Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
24
Updated by the Community Preservation Committee, January, 2011.
Wendy Manz, Chair (Planning Board)
Marilyn Fenollosa, Vice-Chair (Historical Commission)
Joel Adler (at large, appointed by the Board of Selectmen)
Norman Cohen (at large, appointed by the Board of Selectmen)
Jeanne Krieger (at large, appointed by the Board of Selectmen)
Leo McSweeney (Housing Authority)
Sandra Shaw (Recreation Committee)
Betsey Weiss (Housing Partnership)
Richard Wolk (Conservation Commission)
25