Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-12-16 SB-min SELECT BOARD MEETING December 16, 2024 A meeting of the Lexington Select Board was called to order at 6:30p.m. on Monday, December 16, 2024, via a hybrid meeting platform. Mr. Lucente, Chair; Mr. Pato, Ms. Barry, Mr. Sandeen, and Ms. Hai, were present, as well as Mr. Bartha, Town Manager; Ms. Axtell, Deputy Town Manager; and Ms. Katzenback, Executive Clerk. TOWN MANAGER REPORT 1. Town Manager Weekly Update Mr. Bartha stated that December 23, 2024, at 1pm is the deadline to submit citizens petitions in the Select Board Office. DOCUMENTS: Weekly Update 12-13-2024 PUBLIC COMMENTS CONSENT AGENDA 1. 2025 Class II/III License Renewals To approve the 2025 Annual Class II/III License Renewals for the following businesses: CLASS II Auto Engineering - 436 Marrett Road Minutemen Auto Haus - 6 Fulton Road 2. 2025 Common Carrier License Renewals To approve the 2025 Annual Common Carrier License Renewals for the following business to operate the Lexpress buses: COMMON CARRIER M+L Transit Systems Inc. #160 - 60 Olympia Avenue, Woburn M+L Transit Systems Inc. #161 - 60 Olympia Avenue, Woburn M+L Transit Systems Inc. #162 - 60 Olympia Avenue, Woburn M+L Transit Systems Inc. #163 - 60 Olympia Avenue, Woburn 3. 2025 Common Victualler License Renewals To approve the 2025 Annual Common Victualler License Renewals for the following businesses: COMMON VICTUALLER Akame Nigiri and Sake - 1707 Massachusetts Avenue #2 Alexander's Pizza - 180 Bedford Street Avenue Deli - 1806 Massachusetts Avenue BIY Foods - 317 Woburn Street Great Harvest Bakery & Café - 23 Massachusetts Avenue Inn at Hastings Park - 2013-2027 Massachusetts Avenue Ixtapa Cantina - 177 Massachusetts Avenue Love at First Bite Thai Kitchen - 1710 Massachusetts Avenue McDonald's - 690 Marrett Road Nick's Restaurant of Lexington Inc. - 197 Massachusetts Avenue Peet's Coffee & Tea - 1749 Massachusetts Avenue Pine Meadows Golf Club - 255 Cedar Street Royal India Bistro - 7 Meriam Street Taipei Gourmet - 211 Massachusetts Avenue Wicked Bagel - 171 Massachusetts Avenue 4. 2025 Entertainment License Renewals To approve the 2025 Annual Entertainment License Renewals for the following businesses: ENTERTAINMENT Inn at Hastings Park - 2013-2027 Massachusetts Avenue Spirit of India - 321 Marrett Road 5. 2025 Innholder License Renewals To approve the 2025 Annual Innholder License Renewals for the following businesses: INNHOLDER Aloft Lexington - 727 Marrett Road A Element Lexington - 727 Marrett Road B Inn at Hastings Park - 2013-2027 Massachusetts Avenue 6. 2025 Liquor License Renewals To approve the following 2025 Annual Liquor License Renewals: ALL ALCOHOL/ RESTAURANTS Beijing Cuisine 1709 Massachusetts Avenue Ixtapa Cantina 177 Massachusetts Avenue ALL ALCOHOL/ INNHOLDER Aloft Lexington - 727 Marrett Road A Element Lexington - 727 Marrett Road B Inn at Hastings Park 2013-2027 Massachusetts Avenue PACKAGE STORES Nicks Wine and Spirits 1666 Massachusetts Avenue CLUBS Knights of Columbus 177 Bedford Street 7. Approve Design Advisory Committee Charge To approve updated Design Advisory Committee Charge. DOCUMENTS: DAC charge - 12.12.2024, DAC Charge Update REDline VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 to approve the Consent Agenda. ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 1. Future Precinct Consolidation Plan Mary de Alderete, Town Clerk, explained that the proposal is to consolidate polling location precincts in Town to optimize resource allocation, improve voter experience, and enhance overall election efficiency. The Town currently has nine precincts spread across five different locations. Precincts 1 and 5 are located at the School Administration building, currently slated for demolition, and must be moved within the near future. Staff at the Bowman School, which houses precinct 2, have expressed concerns with student safety and holding elections in a school building, as well as lack of parity due to not being able to use the gym during election days. Lastly, precinct 7, located in the lower level of the Community Center, has expressed some voter frustration in finding their precinct within that building, leading to possible voter disenfranchisement. This proposed phased consolidation will involve merging precincts 1, 2, 5, and 7 into the Cary Memorial Building while ensuring accessibility and convenience for all voters, and planning for future, further consolidation. The Cary Memorial Building was chosen due to its central location for all precincts, the fact that it is ADA compliant, and due to it being conveniently adjacent to the Town Office building. The intention is to use the parking lot at the Town Office building complex in order to mitigate both accessibility and parking issues. Mr. Pato agreed that eventual full consolidation will be needed. Bob Pressman, 22 Locust Avenue, stated that he has voted for 50 years at the Bowman School. He stated that this proposal will choke the Center with traffic. Susan Rockwell, 366 Lowell Street and election official, stated that the Center seems like a logical place for precinct 1 to move to. This should not be a huge problem. VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, by roll call, the Select Board voted 5-0 to approve the precinct consolidation plan to move Precincts 1, 5 (School Administration Building), 2 (Bowman School) and 7 (Lower Level Community Center) to the Cary Memorial Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue, for all future elections and to authorize the Town Clerk to notify voters in these precincts of the change. DOCUMENTS: Proposed Polling Consolidation, Precinct Consolidation Presentation 2. Update on the Munroe Center for the Arts Project Mike Cronin, Director of Facilities, explained that this project was approved in April 2023, at Annual Town Meeting. A number of design options were brought to cost estimation, but the cost estimated budget was not able to be reached. The board at the Monroe Center for the Arts then decided to change direction and brought Greg Burchard, Jones Architecture, on board. The addition has since been made a bit smaller, and more efficient, and is now on budget. According to the Integrated Building Design Policy, this is a phase update to the Board. Greg Burchard, Jones Architecture, explained that there are two goals for this project, accessibility improvements and replacing the mechanical system in the existing building. Due to this work, there is an obligation to bring the entire existing facility up to code for ADA and Mass Architectural Access Board. The existing chimney and boiler will be replaced with a new electrified heat pump system, leading to a decarbonization of the building. The proposed addition will include an elevator and new restrooms. The existing building is approximately 21,000 s.f. and the proposed addition is less than 2,000 s.f. The intention is to have the construction documents completed by the end of February 2025 next year, in hopes of starting the project in the spring. Mr. Sandeen asked about the current scope of work versus the original. Mr. Cronin stated that the scope of work is basically identical, but the main difference is the lack of the three-floor stairwell in the addition. Mr. Lucente asked if the building will be usable during construction. Mr. Burchard stated that the intention is to keep the building occupied but this may be a logistical issue. Mr. Lucente asked about the finished product of the building. Mr. Burchard stated that the restrooms will be demolished and built new. The ventilation system fans will be located in the attic of the existing building. Mr. Cronin stated that the hope is to have some leftover funding for finish work. Mr. Pato asked if the project has gone to the Historic District Commission for a Certificate of Appropriateness on this plan. Mr. Burchard stated that this is upcoming. DOCUMENTS: Munroe Center Slide Deck (Dec 2024) 3. Economic Development Advisory Committee and Center Committee Recommendations from Center Charette Report The Board reviewed the recommendations from the EDAC/Center Committee. Bridger McGaw, Vice Chair of the Economic Development Committee, explained that the goal of this is to achieve flexible solutions, allowing the community to succeed as it evolves. The four recommendations include: 1. Prioritize decision(s) regarding the use of town-owned land in Lexington Center. 2. Focus on ways to create more welcoming and inviting entryways from key access points (the parking lots, bike paths, Visitor Center, etc.). 3. Convene a forum of relevant municipal bodies and committees to ensure alignment around the application of new bylaws (signage, MBTA zoning, etc.). 4. Evaluate options for supporting Lexington Center programming. Mr. Sandeen stated that housing is a critical aspect of revitalizing the Center and also a critical aspect of how Town land is used. He would like to keep that as an option. There are very few Town-owned parcels for housing, and these are two of them. He suggested that recommendation #1 should be coordinated with the Housing Partnership Board and the Affordable Housing Trust. Ms. Barry asked about a landlord roundtable, as part of the third recommendation. People come through the Center because it is easy to walk there, and it would be nice to have some points of interest to look at along the way. Any possible housing will likely need to be balanced with whatever else occurs in the Center. Ms. Hai suggested thinking about how any changes would impact the traffic and Parking Management Plan. These items will need to be coordinated with the Parking Management group, and potentially with Traffic Safety Group. Mr. Pato stated that recommendations #2-4 should be set as high priority activities and completed. Recommendation #1 is a longer-term activity. The existing zoning and private sector real estate redevelopment that is occurring need to be considered before pursuing public sector development in this area. These two locations represent significant hurdles in creating housing due to the challenges of the land. Mr. Lucente reiterated the importance of addressing the maintenance and upkeep of properties in the Center. Mr. McGaw stated that the Committee was very clear that any of the properties that are not up to snuff in the Center need to be directly addressed. Elaine Tung, Chair of the Affordable Housing Trust, stated that the Town owned parcels on the Depot lot, Edison Way lot, and 173 Bedford Street are the only current Town owned parcels left that are suitable for truly affordable housing. The Town has the ability to create a sizable number of affordable homes to address those at income levels ranging down to 30% AMI. To create a meaningful number of affordable homes, while leveraging Town resources, Town owned parcels are invaluable. Before any decisions are made on these lots, she respectfully requested that the Board obtain input from all applicable stakeholders, including the Affordable Housing Trust and the Housing Partnership Board. Susan Rockwell, 366 Lowell Street and Lexington Historical Society Board, emphasized the parking issue in this area. Maragaret Heitz, 335 Marrett Road, stated that the applicable stakeholders should be invited to be involved in the housing discussion on this topic. She would like for there to be a day when parking could be considered outside of Town, with other transport options to bring people to the Center, instead of desperately seeking more parking. DOCUMENTS: EDAC Recommendations 4. Update on the Draft of Bill H5126 An Act Authorizing the Town of Lexington Ten Additional Licenses for the Sale of Wine and Malt Beverages. Mr. Bartha explained that the Board should review the language in HB 5216 - An Act Authorizing the Town of Lexington Ten Additional Licenses for the Sale of Wine and Malt Beverages (as modified by the Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure), prior to its advancement to the Committee on Third Reading. Town Meeting requested ten Sale of Wine and Malt Beverages licenses to be issued without strings attached. The legislature came back with wanting to see specific addresses assigned to these licenses. Of the ten licenses reflected in this Bill, three of them are assigned to specific venues. The Board would be free to issue the other seven licenses within any of the three zoning districts. One unique circumstance is that the licenses that are tied to the businesses are actually tied to the locations. If one of the three named businesses were to vacate the location, a new license could be issued at that location but not taken by the business to a new location. Any of the seven licenses within the three districts can be reissued within those districts, not necessarily at the same location. The licenses also have a shelf life. If unissued within three years, any license would go back to the State and the Town would be free to re-request it. Mr. Lucente expressed disappointment with this item. The Town requested something simple to help improve its economic situation and give some flexibility. The legislature took away every ounce of flexibility and made it somewhat impractical. He is disappointed at the lack of transferability, at the time constraint of the three years, and at tying this to specific MBTA zones. Mr. Pato agreed with Mr. Lucente but noted that he believes the Board should accept this and move forward. There was consensus on the Board to accept the changes and move forward with this item. DOCUMENTS: House Bill 5126 (final version), Draft version of Bill (in redline) 5. Discuss Noise Bylaw Revisions Suggested by the Zoning Board of Appeals Ralph Clifford, Chair of ZBA, explained that there are two primary issues to be addressed. The higher priority is the effect of Section 3.2.1 on zoning matters. Section 3.2.1 regulates “accessory uses.” Among the language in the Section, it instructs that all accessory uses must comply with all other Town bylaws. In further reviewing this, there are at least 18 other chapters in the bylaws that could suddenly become relevant to Zoning Board of Appeals decisions. Most of these reviews would thus require expert opinions. As an example, as a consequence of this, the ZBA will have to request that anyone doing any kind of special permit or variance submit an expert's report, indicating that there will not be any violation of the Noise Control bylaw. The request is to change the bylaw so that it no longer refers to all the other Town bylaws. The second area of concern is in terms of how the Noise Control bylaw defines noise, because it does not. The request is to better define this, as it is currently unenforceable. Mr. Sandeen explained that the Board has received numerous complaints from residents that the current Noise bylaw is not adequately protecting Lexington residents from highly disruptive noise that ruins their quality of life, prevents their ability to enjoy their home in peace, their kids from sleeping, and their ability to work from home. Any revision of the Noise bylaw should focus primarily on improving protections for Lexington residents, rather than removing protections. The ZBA suggested establishing a noise standard of 70 dBA. While the NIH, EPA, and World Health Organization have determined that noise levels must be less than 70 dBA to prevent hearing loss, that is an inadequate standard to protect the health, safety and welfare of Lexington residents. The Federal Highway Administration has determined that 70 dBA is the equivalent noise of an interstate highway 50’ away. A study following more than 4 million people for more than a decade found that the risk of dying from cardiovascular disease increased by 2.9% for every 10 dB noise increase and the risk of dying from a heart attack increased by 4.3% for every 10 dB increase in noise for noise levels well under 70 dBA. The latest science shows that noise injury can occur even when a reasonable person does not perceive the noise as harmful. He suggested that any change to the Noise bylaw should continue to provide for lower noise standards during the evening and night hours. Any revision to the Noise bylaw should account for different standards for where this noise is occurring. The proposal seems to read that any noise event of any amount will be allowed to occur between the hours of 11pm-6am. He requested that the Noise Advisory Committee review other municipal noise bylaws and their effectiveness. While he understands that the ZBA has difficulties in addressing noise issues in their role, he does not believe that changing the Noise bylaw protections for residents is the way to address that concern. Mr. Pato stated that he does not believe the specific changes requested to the Noise bylaw should be acted on at this time. He suggested that the Noise Advisory Committee take the concerns raised by the ZBA and use them as part of their direction for how to craft a new bylaw that is more clearly enforceable and addresses many of the concerns Mr. Sandeen raised. He noted that there also needs to be consideration as to the role the ZBA plays in this process. He asked if removing this reference to the bylaws will somehow limit the ZBA’s ability to determine if a request will create burdensome noise. Barbara Katzenberg, Chair of the Noise Advisory Committee, stated that the Committee would like to spend time understanding the changes that were made at Town Meeting, to determine how those changes are working, what the problems are, what kind of complaints are being received, and overall reviewing it more holistically. Jim Kelly, Building Commissioner, suggested bringing the Health Department further into the discussion. Ms. Barry asked about any difficulties for the ZBA in not acting on this right away. Mr. Clifford explained that the ZBA would like to see Section 3.2.1. changed as soon as possible. This has the potential to be very expensive and slow processes down. Ms. Barry asked how to get Section 3.2.1. brought to Town Meeting. Mr. Bartha stated that this will need to go through the Planning Board. Ms. Barry suggested taking a position on Section 3.2.1. to forward it along to the Planning Board. Mr. Bartha stated that this would be communicated to Planning Staff. Ms. Hai stated that the content of the Noise bylaw is under the purview of the newly reconstituted Noise Committee. It should be divorced from the ZBA at this point. However, there should be confirmation that the proposal will not leave the ZBA unable to deny a special permit or a variance, if they would obviously, violate the Noise bylaw. Mr. Lucente stated that all of the changes need to be reasonable at the end of the day. Mr. Clifford noted that the ZBA does not want to change the Noise bylaw but specifically wants a bylaw that works. DOCUMENTS: Zoning Board of Appeals Memo-Noise bylaw 6. Review the Establishment of the Crematory Study Committee The Board discussed a draft charge for the Ad Hoc Crematory Study Committee created by the November 2024 Special Town Meeting (Article 9). Mr. Bartha stated that the charge was modified slightly regarding the makeup of the Committee. Also, it will be important to have someone from the Facilities Department weigh in throughout this process. There was consensus to leave the makeup as seven members, with a Select Board liaison, and to have five community reps. Mr. Bartha stated that he would update the draft with the comments heard. DOCUMENTS: Draft Charge - Ad Hoc Crematory Study Committee (Dec 2024) 7. Review Amendments to the Lexington Human Rights Committee Charge The Board reviewed amendments to the Lexington Human Rights Committee Charge. Mr. Sandeen explained that the current charge included a requirement that several Town employees be appointed as voting members of the LHRC. This draft charge changes those Staff members to liaisons, at the request of Town Staff. This provided an opportunity to lower the number of members from nine to 5-7. He reviewed all of the additional proposed amendments. There was consensus to leave the non-voting liaison language as it is. There was agreement to set the number of members to seven. Staff agreed to review the draft in terms of the comments made this evening and bring it back to the Board at a future meeting. DOCUMENTS: LHRC Charge updates Memo, Changes redline version, Changes clean version 8. Review of Final ARPA Spending Ms. Kosnoff reviewed the proposals for the final ARPA funds. There is currently approximately $34,000 of unallocated ARPA funds. There are three projects still out to bid right now: the East Lexington Bike Path, the wayfinding signs for Greenville Alley and the Lex250 sound and video project. Bids for the bike path project were originally due last Thursday but none were received on time. The bid has been put back out and is due on December 31st. Dawn McKenna, 9 Hancock Street, stated that she previously heard Board members say that Staff should be bold and courageous, to find things that provide economic development and revenue for the Town. She also heard the majority of people say that they wanted a study done for MBTA, but not by using ARPA funds. Yet, what came back is an ARPA funded proposal. Funding could be placed into the Visitor Center Revolving Fund and encumbered to potentially make the part-time Visitor Center Assistant Manager full- time which will be needed for the 250th celebration. Jay Luker, Precinct 1 Town Meeting Member, stated that he supports using the ARPA funding for the MBTA study. VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to allocate the remaining balance of the $500,000 approved for the Lex250 celebration to support all FY2025 overtime expenses for Police, Fire, and DPW; and To approve up to $40,000 of remaining ARPA funds, if available upon project close-out, for a professional study of the impacts of MBTA Zoning; and To allocate any additional unencumbered ARPA funds as of 12/31/2024 to support the townwide compost collection program through 12/31/2026. DOCUMENTS: ARPA Project Spending Summary_12.16.24 Update ADJOURN VOTE: Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Select Board voted by roll call 5-0 to adjourn at 9:28pm. A true record; Attest: Kristan Patenaude Recording Secretary