Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-05-30 JM BOS-PB-min Joint Selectmen and Planning Board – May 30, 2018 Page 1 of 6 Joint Board of Selectmen and Planning Board Meeting Hartwell Zoning Initiative Community Meeting May 30, 2018 Battin Hall—Cary Memorial Building A Joint Meeting of the Board of Selectmen and Planning Board was called to order at 7:10 p.m. in Battin Hall of the Cary Memorial Building for the purpose of holding a Community Meeting about the Hartwell Zoning Initiative. Present for the Board of Selectmen (BOS) were Ms. Barry, Chair; Mr. Lucente; Ms. Hai; Mr. Valente, Town Manager; and Ms. Siebert, Recording Secretary. Mr. Pato and Ms. Ciccolo were absent. Present for the Planning Board (PB) were Ms. Johnson, Chair; Mr. Canale; Mr. Hornig; and Ms. Corcoran-Ronchetti. Mr. Creech was absent. Also present were Carol Kowalski, Assistant Town Manager for Development; Ms. Tintocalis, Economic Development Director; and members of the consulting team: David Gamble, presenter and Urban Designer, Gable Associates; Craig Seymour, Fiscal Impact & Infrastructure Analyst, RKG Associates; Walt Woo, Traffic Consultant, Stantec. Absent from the consulting team was Pam Kinney, Real Estate Market Analyst. Mr. Valente provided background for the initiative which started in 2008 as an attempt to rebalance the tax base toward the commercial sector and away from the residential sector that was increasing in value at a faster pace. He noted that residential value increases had been significant due Lexington’s successful school system and associated Capital School projects and because the town’s commercial zoning had not kept up with what the market is looking for. To illustrate the decline in tax revenue from the commercial sector, Mr. Valente stated that in 1988, 33 cents of every tax dollar came from the commercial tax base; today, only 19.8 cents does. Hartwell Avenue is ripe for reinvigoration and represents the best opportunity to address the imbalance. Some zoning updates have been made since 2008 but they have not been adequate to achieve the Town’s goals. Mr. Valente said the Selectmen and Planning Board hope to bring a Hartwell Avenue rezoning initiative to Special Town Meeting in the fall; public input is vital to this process. Ms. Tintocalis echoed Mr. Valente’s points and added that, if nothing is done to reinvigorate the commercial base and rebalance the tax burden, the percentages will shift another 5% toward residential in the next 10 years’ time. She noted that, over the last 50 years, commercial real estate market preferences have changed with regard to the built environment. Hartwell Avenue was first developed for defense contractors in the 60s and 70s and these companies did not mind single-use buildings with low street visibility. However, the desire now is for interconnectivity and walkable campuses with higher aesthetic/design appeal, workplace amenities, and the availability of transportation modes other than single-occupancy vehicles. Joint Selectmen and Planning Board – May 30, 2018 Page 2 of 6 Ms. Tintocalis said the Hartwell Avenue initiative is about reimagining the corridor and preparing for the next 30 years. Hartwell Avenue provides a unique opportunity to be proactive and to develop sustainable, long-term commercial zoning that will achieve a variety of community goals such as creating environmentally sensitive affordable housing, improving building aesthetics, maximizing open space, and applying smart growth strategies. David Gamble, Urban Designer, Gable Associates, then presented a “vision planning proposal” using a series of renderings that showed both the current and proposed Hartwell corridor. He noted that for the purpose of defining initiative’s first phase, the target area starts near the intersection of Bedford Street and Hartwell Avenue and ends at Maguire Road. The zone’s current uses are commercial and light manufacturing/industrial. Mr. Gamble called the Hartwell initiative a 10 to 30-year plan. The proposal strives to make the Hartwell corridor more pedestrian-oriented, more connected, more authentic, and more attractive. He noted that the street has a raceway aesthetic that includes an over-abundance of impervious parking surface. Buildings set-backs are 60-80 feet from the road and the parking areas are 3-4 times the building footprint. There is currently a 19% vacancy rate. Positive-but-underutilized attributes (which Mr. Gamble called “differentiators” or elements that distinguish Hartwell from other commercial areas) are the Minuteman Bike Path, the surrounding wetlands, and a number of pedestrian-made unmaintained trails. Intentionally connecting to these amenities would be an improvement, as would the addition of short- term/temporary activities (such as food trucks, pop up markets, shipping container seating, and outdoor games areas). The goal is to draw people to meeting/public areas and have them linger. Other improvement strategies are to pull buildings closer to the street and create an interconnective campus that invites pedestrian activity. Not all buildings would need to come forward to the street edge, Mr. Gamble said; but once some do, the development dynamic will change. Developers are more likely to invest in properties once external environments have seen improvement. Towns can incentivize these changes by taking the first steps of adding elements like street trees, sidewalks, trails, and rain gardens to make the terrain more vital and hospitable. Hartwell Avenue itself could be narrowed with a median strip that would slow traffic and eliminate the “racetrack” or “runway” feel. Allowing for building height increases would also open the way to mixed-use residential options. Mr. Gamble suggested that some residential would be appropriate for the corridor but he limited the recommendation to 3 to 4 “anchor” buildings at either end of the corridor. He encouraged residents to think of zoning changes in tandem with form-based codes so that desired aesthetics are achieved. Mr. Gamble listed seven principles as focal points for participant feedback: 1. Capitalize on the natural environment; 2. Diversify transportation opportunities; Joint Selectmen and Planning Board – May 30, 2018 Page 3 of 6 3. Establish a new interface between Hartwell Avenue and the buildings; 4. Make the area into a (not necessarily residential) neighborhood with vitality; 5. Create pedestrian-scale gathering places; 6. Diminish the need for parking. Share parking areas; make properties “work together” instead of separately. Capitalize on reclaimed land by increasing open space, adding walkways, building new buildings or extending existing ones; 7. Establish an “eco-district” with net-zero practices, energy efficiencies. Add green roofs. Maximize use of the land. Consider requiring development to be LEED certified. Going forward, Mr. Gamble encouraged residents to think in terms of incremental steps that would lead to long-term benefits. Using hand-held voting devices, participants were asked to respond to a series of questions to provide input regarding impressions and priorities. Mr. Gamble said responses would not be used as a basis for decision-making or to subvert future conversations about the initiative. Some participants initially objected to the caliber of the questions posed but Mr. Gable stated that the questions had been designed to prompt small-group discussions scheduled later in the format. Some residents objected to the inclusion of Bedford Street in the questions because the presentation had not covered Bedford Street and because acceptable uses would be different for the two areas. Mr. Gamble and Ms. Tintocalis said that the questions were intended to get a general sense of opinion. Particular questions yielded insight into perceived challenges for the initiative. While most people do not like the current character of Hartwell Avenue and Bedford Street, and most residents agree there is sufficient room for new development, there was less agreement about the appropriate mix of uses in the zone and if there should be a residential component. Chris Barnett, 19 Eldred Street, asked how much input the Town has into usage and how inappropriate uses can be prevented; Mr. Gamble replied that zoning is the blunt instrument that controls use categories and creates limitations by prescribing square footage parameters. He asked that the small group discussions to come try to respond to what the appropriate uses might be. Colleen Blauer, 7 Carriage Drive, asked if the Boston Sports Club on Bedford Street is for sale and which properties are included in the “Bedford Street” area under discussion. Mr. Gamble said he is not aware that the BSC property is for sale but it would present an opportunity if it was. Chris Barnett, 19 Eldred Street, noted that the State Armory property is also included in the study area and asked if it is for sale. Mr. Gamble replied, to his knowledge, it is not for sale. In response to the question of what would make the corridor better, 42% of participants voted for “all of the above”, a category that include 1) a greater diversity of uses; 2) less space devoted to Joint Selectmen and Planning Board – May 30, 2018 Page 4 of 6 cars; 3) more robust streetscape; 4) more housing; and 5) more recreational space. The responses for the remaining 58% were split: 19% voted for diversity of uses; 11% for less space devoted to cars; 16% for a more robust streetscape; 0% for more housing; 7% for more recreation space; and 5% for “other.” To the question of “What are the biggest challenges that Hartwell Avenue faces?”, 54% of respondents chose the response “traffic and parking”. Signe Spencer, 122 Grove Street, objected to a conclusion drawn by Mr. Gamble, based on the responses to the last question, that open space was not important; the question had been about challenges, not about relative importance. Mr. Gamble agree with Ms. Spencer and noted that several of the seven principles deal with open space. To the question of “What is the biggest impediment to implementing zoning changes?”, 42% chose “addressing traffic”; 33% chose “achieving consensus”; and 22% chose “infrastructure financing”. Participants then broke into small group discussions around their tables in order to answer two questions: 1) What is your vision for the Hartwell Avenue/Bedford Street corridor? 2) What might a zoning update allow to happen in the Hartwell Avenue/Bedford Street corridor. Written responses from the groups were gathered by Ms. Tintocalis. Spokespeople from each table verbally provided each group’s results: Carol Kowalski, Assistant Town Manager for Development, said that participants at her table felt developers should fully fund infrastructure upgrades; traffic should be addressed; impacts on the neighbors should be considered; smart development would include a mix of businesses and residences; the Town should not be prescriptive about the location of residential units; residential unit square footage should be on the smaller side. Dick Thuma, 149 Wood Street, said his table’s biggest concern was traffic. Participants felt that increased density was fine but there would need to be an effort to protect existing residential neighborhoods from additional cut-through traffic. Improving the tax base for all on the backs of abutters would not be an acceptable result. His table believed traffic should be fixed first; if it is, no one will care about the zoning on Hartwell Avenue. Participants recommended that a traffic plan be devised before asking Special Town Meeting to approve zoning revisions. Maureen Cronin, 3 Briggs Road, said the residents at her table were worried about traffic and “urbanization.” People did not want 10-story buildings and did not want more school age children or cut-through traffic. The history and character of the town should be maintained and protected, similar to what Concord has been able to do. Joint Selectmen and Planning Board – May 30, 2018 Page 5 of 6 Aaron Corso, 421 Bedford Street, said his table agreed that a traffic/public transportation plan should be created before zoning is addressed. Yu Ren, 98 Fifer Lane, said traffic congestion and road conditions were paramount concerns at her table. Participants asked for more accountability for road conditions and that the street would be maintained at a safer level. They did not want to urbanize what is now a suburban area and preferred not to add a high-density residential element to the corridor. Ms. Ren suggested commercial property owners pay more taxes. Robert Peters, co-president of the Drummer Boy Homeowners Association, said his table (with a majority from Drummer Boy) want to preserve the quality of life for abutters to the commercial corridor. They do not want to increase the value of the Hartwell Avenue/Bedford Street commercial properties by making decisions that decrease residential value for the surrounding area. They asked that a plan to mitigate traffic and improve safety on Bedford Street be developed; that no high-density residential units be added; that the zoning plan focus on Hartwell Avenue but leave Bedford Street out of the scope; and that developers pay for street/property improvements. Ashok Patel, asked for consideration to construct a direct connection from Hartwell Avenue to route 95/128. He said no retail should be added to Hartwell in order to protect existing businesses in the Center. Cheryl Lewis, Westview Street, said that traffic was the number one issue for the people who live on her street. In addition, Ms. Lewis noted the need for more senior housing in smaller-sized units in elevator-equipped buildings. Participants liked the idea of shared parking as well as decreasing the overly generous building set-backs. Pedestrians now walk along the edge of Hartwell Avenue without benefit of sidewalks or other protections. Pathways and interconnectivity would provide greater safety and improve aesthetics. Zoning should align to the vision for the area. Len Morse-Fortier, 20 Bernard Street, said traffic and safety were most important. He believes there is no point in talking about what zoning can do until the fundamental problems of access and safety are solved. Mr. Morse-Fortier proposed abandoning the cloverleaf at 128 and Bedford Street and replacing it with a flyover (similar to the Anderson Transportation Center in Woburn). This would keep cars out of what is essentially a residential area. Housing should not be added to Hartwell because of the impact to the schools. Ms. Tintocalis said a follow-up public meeting would be scheduled in the coming weeks. Technical expertise will be needed to craft new zoning language. To move the initiative to the next phase, a number of public meetings will be required. In the meantime, the consultants will continue to process resident input. A flier was distributed listing a variety of ways to stay abreast of “Hartwell North” progress, including visiting the Town website’s economic development page. Joint Selectmen and Planning Board – May 30, 2018 Page 6 of 6 Walt Woo, Stantec, said that existing traffic volume data is now being collected. The team will collaboratively work with the Town and residents to determine the right mix of uses for the corridor. Once the usage is clearer, Stantec will project future traffic loads and identify “trouble spots”. Craig Seymour, RKG Associates, said his team’s job is to carry on preliminary work and look at the fiscal impacts, funding, costs, and solvable traffic issues. He said that density increase is a way to capture greater property value that can then be used to fund improvements to the infrastructure. Ms. Barry (BOS) thanked participants for their time and attention and noted that 650 letters had been sent to abutters of the corridor. Participants’ comments were heard and noted, and they will be considered. As this initiative moves forward, Ms. Barry said it is important that everyone engage in a respectful manner so that all sides can be heard. She encouraged residents to submit further comment via the Town website or by emailing Selectmen, Planning Board, or Ms. Tintocalis directly. Ms. Johnson (PB) said this night’s meeting is the start of the process. She echoed Ms. Barry’s comments and also encouraged further engagement. Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Planning Board voted 4-0 to adjourn at 9:05 p.m. The Board of Selectmen followed suit with a 3-0 vote at 9:06 p.m. A true record; Attest: Kim Siebert Recording Secretary