HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-25-CEC-min Y Minutes of the
Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
April 25, 2018
APRIL 19'"
�d N4i„'47�r
Location and Time: Town Office Building, Parker Room; 7:30 A.M.
Members Present: Charles Lamb, Chair; David Kanter, Vice-Chair & Clerk; Rod Cole;
Frank Smith; and Sandy Beebee (remote participation)
Member Absent: Wendy Manz
Others Present: Melissa Tintocalis, Economic Development Director; Megan Zammuto,
Economic Development Coordinator; Sara Arnold, Recording Secretary
Documents Presented:
• Notice of CEC Meeting, April 25, 2018
• Hartwell Zoning Initiative: Vision and Market Alternatives, March 8, 2018, Slide
Presentation prepared by Economic Development Department
• Draft Minutes of CEC Meeting, April 23, 2018
Call to Order: Mr. Lamb called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. He authorized
Ms. Beebee to participate remotely because she was unable to attend the meeting in
person. He identified all those in attendance and indicated that all votes would be by roll
call.
Economic Development Office Presentation on Hartwell Avenue Zoning Initiative
("Initiative"): Ms. Zammuto reported that, at the request of the Board of Selectmen, the
Economic Development Department has been working with the Economic Development
Advisory Committee and consultants to explore opportunities for increasing commercial
activity in Lexington that would help decrease the current disproportionately high local-tax
burden on residents. Hartwell Avenue, between Bedford Street and Maguire Road, has
been identified as having the most potential for such growth, assuming some changes are
made to Lexington's zoning bylaws, such as increasing the allowed floor area ratio and
building height.
Using presentation slides, Ms. Zammuto reviewed seven planning principles and provided
examples of how those principles might enhance the look and functionality of today's
Hartwell Avenue businesses. Feasibility assessments of the identified area favored
research and development laboratories, some office space, and incorporating up to 500,
small, residential units that would be added over approximately 30 years, using about
10-15% of the space.
Before participating in the discussion, Mr. Kanter advised that he lives in the condominium
complex that abuts the Hartwell Avenue/Bedford Street ("Jug Handle") intersection, but he
saw no need for him to recuse himself from this information discussion of the Initiative. He
then noted that the traffic issues all along Bedford Street (including into Bedford), through
that intersection, and on Harwell Avenue have long been problematic and numerous
previous efforts have not identified any practical solutions. Therefore, his opinion is that this
Initiative has already gone at least far enough—if not too far—without there being a
completed traffic study that covers the potential range of net, additional, traffic resulting
from the increased activity with the Initiative and identifies credible, timely, opportunities to
address what is most likely to be the further exacerbated traffic flow. Otherwise, he sees it
Page 1 of 3
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
April 25, 2018
as unwarranted to spend time and funds about pursing more-intense development on
Hartwell Avenue and Bedford Street. Mr. Lamb said he concurs.
Ms. Zammuto reported that a traffic study has been started; other next-steps include a cost
benefit analysis and identifying ways to pay for enhancements, noting that there may be
State programs that would provide some funding assistance. Ms. Tintocalis added that the
Hartwell Avenue/Bedford Street "jug handle" is included on the State's Transportation
Improvement Program's list and noted that this intersection is a regional problem because
Bedford Street is an entrance to the Town of Bedford.
Ms. Tintocalis explained that zoning changes might include some required criteria or design
standards. There could be less control on use and more control on design. She noted that
Hartwell Avenue is now in a Transportation Management Overlay District that can make
requirements of developers, but there has been no development since the district was
created.
In addition to stressing traffic issues, questions/concerns expressed by this Committee
included, but were not limited to, the following:
• This and any associated presentation needs to have explicit identification of the
extent of the Town's right-of-way (if any) when presenting any areas within the
boundary of the Initiative.
• Will the apartments be taxed at the commercial tax rate or the residential tax rate?
• The fiscal analysis should include the impact of development incentives such as tax
breaks, and/or subsidies.
• The Boston Sports Club is part of the neighborhood, but is it warranted to include it
for increased activity?
• There should be an inventory of the current buildings identifying end-of-life estimates
to provide an understanding of one measure as to when new development might be
anticipated. Ms. Tintocalis noted that a time-line for leases may be more critical than
end-of-life information because owners frequently make upgrades between leases.
• Businesses on Hartwell Avenue should be developed to provide a good balance
with, and sensitivity to, the activities in Lexington's central business district.
• There should be coordination with the Base Commander at Hanscom Air Force
Base.
• Land ownership issues need to be identified.
• The percent of laboratories and/or pharmaceutical companies should be considered.
• As the primary reason for the Initiative is seen to be to enhance commercial tax
revenue so as to increase its contribution versus the residential tax revenue, the
projection, over time, for that outcome must be explicitly quantified in each
presentation—with the applicable qualifiers at each stage of developing the Initiative.
• How would housing impact the school population?
There was discussion about including low- and moderate-income housing on
Hartwell Avenue and the need for the Town to remain safely, and thus, well above the 10%
threshold of housing on the State's Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI) to protect the Town
from developers being allowed, under the State's General Law Chapter 40B, to build higher
Page 2 of 3
Minutes of the Lexington Capital Expenditures Committee (CEC) Meeting
April 25, 2018
density housing than is currently allowed per the Town's zoning Bylaws. It is recognized
that the 2020 Federal Census will provide a new total-housing count for the recalculation of
whether Lexington is still above the 10% threshold. Also always a risk is the State
redefining which of Lexington's housing qualifies for inclusion on the SHI.
This Committee participated in an on-line survey created by the Town to gauge the Town's
citizen issues related to this Initiative. The instant result showed traffic as the biggest
concern of this Committee.
Discussion of matters related to this Committee's Report to the 2018 Annual Town
Meeting (ATM): Mr. Kanter reminded the Committee that he will be producing a new
version of that Report that will incorporate the changes identified in the Updates/Errata
document that was released on April 20, 2018, and placed on file at the April 23, 2018,
session at that ATM. The new version, as is the case with the original Report, is made
available on-line in the Town's Website. The print run of the new version will be limited and
when the Committee was queried, Mr. Lamb, Ms. Beebee, and Mr. Smith said they wished
to join Mr. Kanter in having a printed copy. Mr. Kanter will also query key Town staff on
their wishes for a printed copy and the Cary Memorial Library has already indicated they
wish copies.
Approval of Minutes: Mr. Kanter presented the Draft Minutes of the CEC meeting,
April 23, 2018. A Motion was made and seconded to approve those Minutes as presented.
Roll-Call Vote: 5-0.
Member Concerns: Mr. Lamb commented that this Committee has been functioning with
six members since last fall when Jill Hai resigned and noted that discussion about asking
the Town Moderator to appoint a seventh member to this Committee had been postponed
at a previous meeting. Mr. Smith said that it was his understanding when he joined this
Committee a year ago that there would be seven members to help balance the work load
and felt this would be valuable. Ms. Beebee, Mr. Kanter, and Mr. Cole did not feel strongly
one way or the other, but thought there could be some benefits to having seven members.
Mr. Lamb found that having six worked well over the past year and would be inclined to
leave it at six. He noted that a larger Committee can be difficult to manage. No one wanted
to make a decision without the benefit of input from Ms. Manz. Mr. Lamb agreed to discuss
the issue with Ms. Manz and the Town Moderator.
Adjourn: A Motion was made and seconded at 9:10 A.M. to adjourn. Roll-Call Vote: 5-0.
These Minutes were approved by the CEC at its meeting on May 16, 2018.
Page 3 of 3