Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLexington Executive Park Development Committee report, 1964-03-09 REPORT OF LEXINGTON EXECUTIVE PARK DEVELOPMENT COMMITTFF The Lexington Executive Park Development Committee was appointed by the Board of Selectmen on September 16, 1963 and consisted of the following William T. Welsh, Raytheon Co. Walter S. Baird, Baird Atomic, Inc. Duncan E. Macdonald, Itek Corp. Joseph A. Campbell, Planning Board George C. Sheldon, Board of Selectmen Albert Gray, Jr. , Executive Assistant Board of Selectmen Meetings were held regularly thereafter particularly with representatives of Cabot, Cabot & Forbes and Tropeano & Nylander, representing owners of the largest portion of our presently owned industrial zoned property. The conclusions reached by your -committee will be summarized as follows 1. Reasons for slow development of industrial property. 2. Effect on tax rate of development of land presently zoned. 3. Recommendations for future growth. The reasons for the slow development of Lexington industrial property might be summarized as follows 1. Attitude of Town Boards - past and present. 2. Attitude of Town Meetings. 3. Present zoning restrictions . 4. Other factors. As we all know the attitude of Town Boards at least in the past, has not contributed to Lexington's industrial growth. Many prospects have been forced to spend over a year in negotiation and have finally given up in disgust feeling that the attitude shown did not warrant their spending further time. The same criticism has applied in the past to Town Meetings which have refused to make zoning changes at times when such changes would have meant immediate development. 44 think these instances are known to all and need not be summarized. In our meetings with Cabot, Cabot & Forbes and Tropeano & Nylander the following present zoning restrictions were mentioned as deterrents A. Site development approval. B. 25% coverage rule. C. Lot size. 2. Under our present regulations an industrial pro!pect must submit a very complete plan showing not only the proposed build- ing but also parking facilities, landscaping and other details. Most of this of course is necessary, but this requirement has been a constant irritant possibly more because of the way in which it has been administered. Other industrial areas in Needham and Waltham permit building coverage up to 40% and more of the lot size. Our present restriction calls for 25% building coverage and in some cases this has been a deterrent. Lexington has no industrial land offering smaller lot sizes than five acres and this has definitely prevented many small businesses requiring one or two acres from locating here. We understand, incidently that the Planning Board proposes a so-called Tradesman Park possibly in the Hartwell Avenue land of Cabot, Cabot & Forbes which will permit smaller lot sizes if the Town Meeting approves. The other factors which have slowed our industrial growth are of course our tax rate which is higher than in any of the surrounding industrial areas. The presence of the dump at Hartwell Avenue is an annoyance to present occupants and certainly does not contribute to future development there. The absence of sewer and water to serve the Tropeano & Nylander land is a major deterrent there. It is interesting to note the effect on Lexington's tax rate of the development of land presently zoned. At this time we have 543 acres zoned for commercial or industrial use Cabot, Cabot & Forbes has approximately 300 acres, including land developed and sold. The balance of the Cabot, Cabot & Forbes 'land approximately 160 acres, would contribute, if developed, approximately $416,000 in taxes. The remaining land owned by others could be contributing an additional $600,000 in taxes or a total of about $5.50 on our tax rate. The land presently occupied by Itek, Corp., Raytheon Co. , System Development Corp., and Kennecott Copper Corp. pays $331,1}23 in taxes, or $1.89 on our tax rate. It can therefore be seen that the maximum we can expect in the future, providing all land presently zoned is developed, is an additional return of $5.50 on our tax rate. As for recommendations for the future, having studied the subject quite thoroughly, it was the opinion of our group that we were not in a position to effectively sell tenants on a move to Lexington. Firms like Cabot, Cabot & Forbes and Meredith & Grew who are presently interested in Lexington land will proceed with trained people who can do, in our opinion, a far more effective job of promoting land development than could an unofficial group like ours. It is obvious that Cabot, Cabot & Forbes, since they own their present land and are paying taxes on it, are most anxious to sell it. 3. We believe, however, that there are things that should be done to promote Lexington's industrial growth. These are as follows: 1 The appointment of Mr. Albert Gray, Jr. as a liaison between prospective industrial tenants and Town Boards . This would, we hope, prevent some of the delays and misunderstandings which have hurt our growth in the past. 2. The cooperation of all Town Boards involved is of course necessary. This is a town-wide problem and must be the individual responsibility of the Boards in question. 3. The support at Town Meeting of desirable projects by the Board of Selectmen and other interested Boards is of course necessary. A lukewarm attitude on the part of the Board of Selectmen or the Planning Board, for example; is all that is needed to condemn what might be a worthwhile project. 4. We believe that there are two needed changes in zoning. The creation of one or two acre lots has already been mentioned as the so-called Tradesman Park. The second con- sideration is the possibility of zoning additional land for industry. If this is to be done, it must be done promptly before such land is developed for residential use. We believe that this is a subject which the Board of Selectmen should consider most seriously and if it is in agreement should recommend any areas it approves to the Planning Board for its action. This report summarizes the conclusions of your committee and it is our unanimous request that we now be discharged. We appreciate the opportunity of having made this study and hope that it may serve some useful purpose. George) C. Sheldon, Chairman March 99 1964 3. We believe, however, that there are things that should be done to promote Lexington's industrial growth. These are as follows: 1. The appointment of Mr. Albert Gray, Jr. as a liaison between prospective ihdustrial tenants and Town Boards This would, we hope, prevent some of the delays and misunderstandings which have hurt our growth in the past. 2. The cooperation of all Town Boards involved is of course necessary. This is a town-wide problem and must be the individual responsibility of the Boards in question. 3. The support at Town Meeting of desirable projects by the Board of Selectmen and other interested Boards is of course necessary. A lukewarm attitude on the part of the Board of Selectmen or the Planning Board, for example is all that is needed to condemn what might be a worthwhile project. I . We believe that there are two needed changes in zoning. The creation of one or two acre lots has already been mentioned as the so-called Tradesman Park. The second con- sideration is the possibility of zoning additional land for industry. If this is to be done, it must be done promptly before such land is developed for residential use. We believe that this is a subject which the Board of Selectmen should consider most seriously and if it is in agreement should recommend any areas it approves to the Planning Board for its action This report summarizes the conclusions of your committee and it is our unanimous request that we now be discharged. We appreciate the opportunity of having made this study and hope that it may serve some useful purpose. George) 0. Sheldon, Chairman March 9,, 1964