Loading...
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