Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-05-11 SB Packet - ReleasedAGENDA SELECT BOARD MEETING Monday, May 11, 2026 Select Board Meeting Room 1625 Massachusetts Avenue 6:30 PM 1.Acceptance of Gift: Lexington Pickleball Club Donation to Adams Park Hard Courts 2.Approve Proclamation: Wilda Ward's 100th Birthday 1.Review: Draft Environmental Procurement Policy 6:35pm 2.Work Session - Presentation: Housing Partnership Board Updated Recommendations on Housing Policy and Strategy 6:50pm 3.Work Session - Discussion: Select Board FY2026-2027 Goals Next Steps and Preparation for Financial Policy Summits 7:40pm 4.Discussion: Townwide Referendum Regarding 2026 Annual Town Meeting Article 31 Regulation of Refuse Disposal and Potential Vote to Call for Special Election 8:05pm 5.Reorganization of the Select Board 8:15pm 1.Anticipated Adjournment 8:20pm 1.Meeting Information Meeting Packet: https://lexingtonma.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=5 *Members of the public can attend the meeting from their computer or tablet by clicking on the following link at the time of the meeting: https://lexingtonma.zoom.us/j/86343561893? pwd=oXKQDdIdatm6cK4k5pbTMMCVODdQYa.1 join.zoom.us Meeting ID: 863 4356 1893 Passcode: 436053 An Act Relative to Extending Certain State of Emergency Accommodations: https://www.mass.gov/the-open-meeting-law The next scheduled meeting of the Select Board will be held on Friday, CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION ADJOURN MEETING INFORMATION 1 May 22, 2026 at 9:00am via hybrid participation. 2 PRESENTER: Select Board Chair ITEM NUMBER: 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING AGENDA SECTION TITLE: CONSENT AGENDA AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Acceptance of Gift: Lexington Pickleball Club Donation to Adams Park Hard Courts SUMMARY: At the September 8, 2025 meeting, the Select Board approved a Donation and License Agreement which authorized the Lexington Pickleball Club, at the Pickleball Club's own cost, to proceed with adjustment of the fence and the painting of pickleball court lines on the existing surface of the tennis courts at Adams Park with the Pickleball Club's intent to give as a donation to the Town. As defined in the agreement following completion of the project, the Town can accept the donation. At the time the Town elects to accept the donation, the Donor shall transfer any applicable warranties for the line painting work to the Town, free of all liens, within one (1) month from the date of completion of the Project. The project has been completed. The Select Board is now being asked to formally accept this donation to the Town from the Lexington Pickle Ball Club for the adjustment of the fence and the painting of pickleball court lines at the Tennis Courts at Adams Park. PROPOSED MOTION: to accept the donation to the Town from the Lexington Pickle Ball Club of the adjustment of the fence and the painting of pickleball court lines at the Tennis Courts at Adams Park. FOLLOW-UP: Recreation Department 3 PRESENTER: Select Board Chair ITEM NUMBER: 2 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING AGENDA SECTION TITLE: CONSENT AGENDA AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approve Proclamation: Wilda Ward's 100th Birthday SUMMARY: Category: Decision-Making The Select Board is asked to approve and sign a proclamation recognizing Wilda Ward on the occasion of her one hundredth birthday, May 12, 2026. PROPOSED MOTION: To approve and sign a proclamation recognizing Wilda Ward on the celebration of her one hundredth birthday. Move to approve the consent. ATTACHMENTS: 2026 Wilda Ward 100 Years Old.pdf 4 Town of Lexington, Massachusetts SELECT BOARD OFFICE Proclamation Whereas: Wilda Ward celebrates her 100th birthday on May 12, 2026, and will be honored on June 7, 2026; and the Town of Lexington takes this opportunity to recognize a remarkable woman whose century of life has been marked by generosity, vitality, creativity, and devotion to others; and Whereas: Wilda was raised in Lexington, riding her pony everywhere and joined the Lexington Mounted Patrol as a teenager, and took part in our cherished local tradition by helping escort Paul Revere on Patriots’ Day; and Whereas: throughout her life, Wilda has met the needs of her community with energy and initiative, first by founding and operating Lincoln Country Day School at a time before kindergarten was mandatory, and later by building a second career in bookkeeping and accounting that she continued with commitment and pride into her ninth decade; and Whereas: Wilda married Alan Ward in 1946, and together they built a life in Lexington, purchasing a home here nearly 80 years ago, where she remains a treasured presence in the community; and Whereas: Wilda has long shared her compassion and faith through the First Baptist Church in Lexington, serving as lector, greeter, and in many other roles, and after the loss of her husband she created a Wonderful Widows Group that brought comfort, companionship, outings, and support to many others; Whereas: Wilda’s civic spirit and wide-ranging interests are reflected in her longtime involvement with the Daughters of the American Revolution, Arlington Friends of Drama, and the Massachusetts Air and Space Museum, where her love of history and especially World War II aircraft has continued to inspire others; and Whereas: Wilda has been a devoted member of the Lexington Arts and Crafts Society for many years, first as a woodworker and later as a decorative artist, embracing new learning, developing her talents, and bringing enthusiasm, excellence, and friendship to the creative life of the town; and Whereas: at LexArt Wilda served on the membership committee, represented the Society at Discovery Day, supported its operations with practical wisdom, was honored with the LexArt Volunteer of the Year Award in 2019 for her outstanding service, professionalism, and cheerful spirit and is the special honoree of the current LexArt exhibit Art of Life, Art for Life; and Whereas: Wilda is admired by all who know her for her warmth, humor, wisdom, curiosity, remarkable memory, and gift for making every person feel seen, welcomed, and valued, and she continues to inspire those around her through her love of people and her constant desire to be of service; NOW, THEREFORE, WE, THE SELECT BOARD of the Town of Lexington, Massachusetts, do recognize WILDA WARD on the celebration of her one hundredth birthday, with gratitude and affection, and extend to her our warmest congratulations and heartfelt thanks for a lifetime of service, friendship, creativity, and love shared with the Lexington community. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have set our hands and caused the seal of Lexington to be affixed herewith on the 11th of May 2026. JILL I. HAI, CHAIR JOSEPH N. PATO DOUGLAS M. LUCENTE MARK D. SANDEEN VINEETA A. KUMAR 5 05/11/2026 6:35pm PRESENTER: Maggie Peard, Sustainability and Resiliency Officer ITEM NUMBER: 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING AGENDA SECTION TITLE: ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Review: Draft Environmental Procurement Policy SUMMARY: Category: Informing MassDEP now has a requirement that municipalities have an environmental purchasing policy in place in order to be eligible for most of their waste and recycling grants. The Town is likely to to apply for such a grant to support the upcoming changes to the waste collection system, and we must have a policy in place by June 1 to do so. The attached Sustainable Purchasing Policy is based off of the template provided by MassDEP and has been reviewed by the Purchasing Director, as well as all members of the Senior Management Team. No objections have been raised by any staff members. PROPOSED MOTION: DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: ATTACHMENTS: Sustainable Purchasing Policy_Draft.docx 6 Sustainable Purchasing Policy Town of Lexington Background: The Town of Lexington recognizes that procurement decisions of our employees and contractors have significant impacts on the environment. By including environmental, public health, and waste reduction considerations in our purchasing decisions, along with price, performance, and product availability, we can remain fiscally responsible while promoting practices that minimize waste and environmental impacts. The purpose of this document is to establish the framework for a sustainability-based purchasing program for the Town of Lexington. Purpose: Goals of this policy include making purchasing decisions that: 1. Minimize waste and prioritize reuse by identifying alternative options to purchasing equipment and new or single-use products; 2. Support recycling markets by purchasing products with post-consumer recycled content that are recyclable after use; 3. Conserve energy and natural resources (e.g., water); and 4. Minimize environmental impacts from pollution, greenhouse gases, and toxic/hazardous materials. Policy Statement: To meet the above goals, the Town of Lexington will, whenever feasible:  Purchase products and services offered through the Operational Services Division’s Environmentally Preferable Products and Services Guide.  Prioritize donation and reuse before disposal of goods or equipment; and whenever possible, utilize the State Surplus Property Program.  Adhere to Federal Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines, or other established criteria, for minimum recycled content levels when purchasing office supplies.  Prioritize purchasing products that are durable, long lasting, reusable or refillable, and avoid purchasing single use products. The Town of Lexington is committed to sustainable purchasing and empowers employees to be innovative and to demonstrate leadership by considering environmental and public health impacts when making purchasing decisions. 7 Town Policy and State Law It is the intent of this policy to complement existing Town and State laws and policies. When such laws or policies are updated to accommodate a more rigorous standard, the policy shall likewise adopt those standards. Policy Review: The Sustainability & Resilience Officer, in coordination with the Procurement Officer, shall be responsible for periodically evaluating the policy to determine if any changes or updates should be incorporated to better align the policy with other Town efforts or policies. A policy review shall be completed within two (2) years of its effective date, and then at least every three (3) years after the initial review. Effective Date: This policy shall take effect upon adoption by the Lexington Select Board. This Sustainable Procurement Policy is hereby adopted and approved by: Signature Date 8 05/11/2026 6:50pm PRESENTER: Wendy Manz, Housing Partnership Board, Ravneet Grewal, Betsey Weiss, Nanette Byrnes ITEM NUMBER: 2 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING AGENDA SECTION TITLE: ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Work Session - Presentation: Housing Partnership Board Updated Recommendations on Housing Policy and Strategy SUMMARY: Category: Informational Member of the Housing Partnership Board will present the results of their work, initiated following the July 2025 Joint Meeting on Affordable Housing, to evaluate best practices and recommend strategies for expanding and diversifying housing in Lexington. The documents attached to this packet provide a summary key findings and recommendations developed by four working groups focused on: increasing affordable housing to 10% of total units; expanding housing diversity in size, type, and price point; advancing a community-supported plan for Lexington Center; and strengthening community engagement and transparency in housing initiatives. The presenters will provide a topline overview of their work to date. The Housing Partnership Board seeks Select Board feedback and next steps. DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: ATTACHMENTS: HPB Topline Presentation HPB UPdate - Achieving 10% HPB UPdate - Expanding Housing Options HPB UPdate - Center Zoning Exploratory.pdf HPB Update - HPB Community Outreach 9 Housing Partnership Board Presentations to the Select Board on May 11, 2026 Introduction to Housing Partnership Board Presentation to the Select Board FOUR HOUSING PRIORITIES FOR LEXINGTON •Achieving a true 10% by increasing the number of affordable housing units in town from the current 5.9% to 10%. •Expanding housing options by creating more diverse housing sizes, styles, and price points throughout town. •Developing a community-supported plan for housing in Lexington Center. •Engaging the Lexington community more broadly in the housing project, through better dissemination of information, public participation and discussion, and more transparent public process. 10 Recommended Housing Action Steps for the next “6 months” 6 Achieving a True 10% Affordable Housing: 1. Create an Affordable Housing Overlay District Committee (AOHDC). •Use Arlington’s AHODC as a model. Include Town staff, members from the Housing Partnership Board, Affordable Housing Trust, Planning Board, Historic Districts Commission, Select Board, and a resident. 2. Assign the task of making a list of potential parcels for housing on town- and state-owned land to volunteers and town staff. Creating More Diverse Housing Options: 1. ADUs •Designate a Select Board member to attend the Abundant Housing and Boston Indicator’s presentation of their new report ADUs Turn One: Regulatory Barriers to Production in Massachusetts and Ideas for Further Reform on May 20, 2026. 2. Multi-Resident Transit Adaptive Reuse Zones •Work with the Town Manager to authorize town staff to create multi-residence bonuses for historical or cultural preservation of buildings. 3. Support identification of starter home ( Chapter 40 Y) parcels as a basis for eventual creation of Chapter 40Y districts. Developing a Community Supported Housing Plan in Lexington Center: 1. Work with the Planning Board to change side street zoning in the Center to allow for more flexible first floor uses including first floor residential housing. 2. Add economic, business, and housing expertise to the Historic District Commission appointees or liaisons. 3. Appoint a Center Housing Committee lead by the Center Committee and including Town Staff, the Planning office, Economic Development, Center Committee, Historical District Commission, Planning Board, Select Board, a Developer, and residents to conduct a community-informed process of rezoning the Center to encourage more housing, potentially through form-based zoning. Engaging the Lexington Community in the Housing Project: 1. Support HPB and the Lexington High School Design Hive in providing a comprehensive housing website to act as a current hub for information on housing. 11 Recommended Housing Action Steps for “12-24 months” Achieving a True 10% Affordable Housing: 1. After identification of Affordable Housing Overlay District parcels, work with the Planning Board to create Affordable Housing Overlays Districts. 2. After identification of potential town and state parcels, initiate Right For Proposal’s to affordable housing developers. 3. Support efforts to secure additional funding for affordable housing including optimize CPA housing funds and AHT funds for housing, linkage fee funds in 2027 and following years, research grants from state and nonprofits, and support EOHLC applications. Creating More Diverse Housing Options: 1. Meet with ADU and modular home developers to explore Lexington-specific financial barriers. 2. After identification of Chapter 40Y parcels, initiate a request for proposals to encourage landowners to come forward to create starter homes rather than a conventional subdivision. Developing a Community Supported Housing Plan in Lexington Center: 1. Review and implement the recommendations of the Center Housing Committee (CHC) for Lexington Center that include affordable and varied housing options attractive to various demographics. Work with the Planning Board will be needed to accomplish this recommendation. Engaging the Lexington Community in the Housing Project: 1. Convene semi-annual meetings of the Select Board, the Town Manager, the four housing organizations and the Planning Board to share information. 2. Support Housing Partnership Board hosted community panel discussions to address housing topics of concern, disseminate accurate information and engage the community. 3. Continue support of the website 12 Achieving a True 10% Affordable Housing Housing Partnership Board May 11, 2026 Working Group includes Harriet Cohen, Chris Herbert, Margaret Heitz and Betsey Weiss 13 Housing Partnership Board The Town’s Housing Goal: A True 10% Affordable Units ▪10% of Lexington housing units should be deed-restricted affordable units. ▪Background: The Massachusetts Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI) includes market-rate units in developments that qualify as affordable under Chapter 40B. ▪What’s needed? Lexington total housing stock:12,252 units To attain a true 10% affordable: 1,225 units Current deed-restricted affordable:723 units Needed to reach the 10% goal: 502 units ▪Where will we be in the future? With the newly proposed MBTA developments which will add to the affordable units through the 15% inclusionary unit requirement , we will still be short of our goal by 394 deed-restricted affordable units, even assuming all permitted and formally proposed MBTA development units are built. 2 14 3 MBTA Dwelling Units (DU) Deed-Restricted Affordable Units (DRAU) at <=80% AMI Total # of Deed- Restricted Units Denominator is number of Lexington Housing Units 10% of Total Housing Units Percent Deed- Restricted New Deed- Restricted Units Needed to Achieve 10% Goal CURRENT March 2026 SHI TOTAL-including market rate units 1356 1356 12,252 1,225 11.07%131 Subtract market rate units counted on SHI -667 689 12,252 1,225 5.62%-536 Count LexHAB’s existing Non-SHI 32 721 12,252 1,225 5.88%-504 Count LHA’s missing 2 SHI units 2 723 12,252 1,225 5.90%-502 FUTURE: Building Permits for MBTA Developments and Deed- Restricted Affordable Units Building Permits for 518 DU Building Permits for 77 DRAU 800 12,770 1,277 6.26%-477 Proposed MBTA Developments and Deed- Restricted Affordable Units Proposed 1,014 DU Proposed 147 DRAU 947 13,784 1,378 6.85%-431 1591 Lowell Street 40b 40 units coming 987 13,824 1,382 7.14%-395 LexHAB new SHI units 2 new units 989 13,826 1,383 7.15%-394 POTENTIAL Future Total 989 13,826 1,383 7.15%-394 15 Housing Partnership Board How do we achieve a True 10% Affordable Goal? ▪Since land costs are very high and construction costs are steadily rising, there are two paths for the Town to support the production of more deed restricted, affordable housing by: ▪Implementing land use regulatory zoning to require or incentivize affordable housing development. ▪ Securing more financial support to make affordable housing financially feasible. 4 16 Housing Partnership Board Land Use Regulatory Zoning ▪Implement inclusionary zoning that requires a set percentage of a development to be affordable. ▪Currently, MBTA Communities Districts Zoning allows 15% inclusionary zoning on specific parcels. ▪Establish an Affordable Housing Overlay District (AHOD). ▪Allows higher density. ▪Provides relief from other requirements (such as parking). ▪Expedites the approval process for 100% affordable developments. 5 17 Housing Partnership Board Obtaining Additional Financial Support ▪Securing grants or loans. Sources include, but are not limited to: ▪Additional CPA revenue ▪EOHLC (Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities) funding ▪LIHTC funding (requires developments of 40 or more units, all of which must be affordable) ▪Linkage payments from commercial development ▪Real estate transfer fees (if enacted by the state and Town) ▪Soliciting donations of privately owned property (LexHAB has done this). ▪Using town-owned or state-owned land when available. 6 18 Housing Partnership Board What the Town Has Been Doing in Pursuit of Achieving a True 10% ▪ Lexington’s Affordable Housing Regulatory Achievements: ▪(2023) The Town adopted the Special Residential Development with an affordable component. ▪(2023) The Town adopted a 15% inclusionary zoning requirement for developments in MBTA Community Districts under Article #34. ▪Currently permitted and being built are 388 MBTA dwelling units including 57 affordable units. ▪Developers have applied for building permits for 422 MBTA units, including 64 affordable units. ▪Developers have submitted a site plan review for 722 MBTA units, including 103 affordable units. ▪If all 1,532 MBTA units are built, this would yield a total of 224 affordable units. ▪Frozen parcels under the 2023 Article #34 may yield additional affordable units with 15% inclusionary zoning requirement. ▪ Lexington’s Affordable Housing Fiscal Achievements: ▪(2006) Passed the Community Preservation Act which provided funds dedicated to housing for the first time in Lexington. ▪(2023) Established the Affordable Housing Trust (AHT) to provide financial support for affordable housing and has increased the share of CPA funds to the AHT for the past 3 years. ▪(2024) Donated the Lexington Woods parcel at 591 Lowell St. and AHT spearheaded the 40-unit 100% affordable development on this parcel. ▪(2026) Approved a commercial linkage requirement that will require future commercial development to contribute to affordable housing. ▪(2026) Town Meeting passed a Home Rule petition for a residential linkage requirement. 7 19 Housing Partnership Board How do we get to a true 10% without adding a large volume of market rate housing? ▪When more market rate dwelling units/homes are built, the total housing stock (the denominator) increases, so more affordable units are needed to reach a true 10%. ▪How to achieve a true 10%? ▪Build more 100% affordable developments with no market rate units such as: ▪The 40 units at Lexington Woods. ▪The 4 LexHAB ADUs, if state-funded. ▪The potential16-32 new LHA deeply affordable units on Wood St and/or North St. ▪The Federal ( HUD) Repositioning Program allows the conversion of LHA single-family site parcels to multi-family housing. These 100% affordable units will increase total housing stock (the denominator). They increase truly affordable units (the numerator) more quickly, increasing their percentage. ▪Create and implement an Affordable Housing Overlay District (AHOD) zoning regulation on certain parcels which requires units built in the AHOD have 100% affordable units. 8 20 Housing Partnership Board ▪Form an Affordable Housing Overlay District Committee similar to Arlington’s to explore the potential use of Affordable Housing Overlay Districts ▪Including Town staff, members from the Housing Partnership Board, Affordable Housing Trust, Planning Board, Historic Districts Commission, Select Board, and a resident. ▪Explore the potential for housing on Town- and state-owned land. ▪Obtain more financial support to subsidize land and development costs. ▪Optimize CPA housing funds and AHT funds for housing. ▪Apply for housing-related grants. ▪Support affordable housing developers’ applications for EOHLC and LIHTC funding. 9 Achieving a True 10%: Short-Term Strategies (next 6 months) 21 Housing Partnership Board Achieving a True 10%: Long-Term Strategies (next 12-24 months) ▪Create Affordable Housing Overlay Districts (AHOD). ▪AHODs encourage 100% deed-restricted developments in areas conducive to greater housing density. ▪In 2020, Cambridge pioneered the AHOD approach. This has led to more than 800 units built or approved. ▪In 2024, the Brookline Housing Advisory Board commissioned a study to examine the potential for establishing an AHOD. ▪In 2025, Arlington’s Town Meeting approved forming a Committee to explore options for adopting an AHOD and is working toward a proposal for Town Meeting in 2027. ▪Continue to pursue additional funding to subsidize the costs of affordable housing. ▪Continue to support state passage of real estate transfer fees. ▪Pursue opportunities to use Town or State land. ▪459 Bedford St. is used by the National Guard as an Armory. ▪173 Bedford St. is still needed for Town swing space until approximately 2035. ▪Depot Parking Lot - 2023 Housing Feasibility Study link: Affordable-Housing-Feasibility-Study-February-9-2024 10 22 Housing Partnership Board Achieving a True 10%: Next Steps ▪Create an Affordable Housing Overlay District Committee this year. Use Arlington’s AHODC as a model. ▪Include Town staff, members from the Housing Partnership Board, Affordable Housing Trust, Planning Board, Historic Districts Commission, Select Board, and a resident. ▪Assign the task of exploring the potential for housing on town- owned and state-owned parcels. ▪Make a list of potential parcels for housing. ▪Support efforts to secure additional funding for affordable housing. ▪Optimize CPA housing funds and AHT funds for housing. ▪Linkage fee funds in 2027 and following years. ▪Research grants from state and nonprofits. ▪Support EOHLC applications. Thank you 11 23 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Background *OpenGov reports run by staff members 1 State of the ADU: Last 12 months: 11 ADUs, several planned ADUs retracted Teardowns and New Construction FY26 to Date: 55 teardowns, 41 New Construction SF Permits 24 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Specific Near-Term Strategies By-right ADUs, Multi-residence Adaptive Re-Use, and 40Y Starter Homes 2 Incentivize conversion of underutilized parcels or teardowns into starter homes: ●ADUs: Provide more by-right options, especially accessible units, preserve existing special permit options, advocate for permitting changes ●Adaptive Re-Use: Offer multi-unit bonuses when a historical/cultural resource building is preserved ●Standardized plans/guidelines to reduce costs. ●Identify sites for a 40Y starter home district using a scorecard developed through multidisciplinary input 25 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Make ADUs Possible 3 ●Identify and reduce barriers to ADU construction ○By-law and Regulatory Changes ●Preserve existing option to add an ADU under existing Lexington regulations by special permit allows homeowners more options should they simply want an in-law apartment in an owner-occupied home ●Add additional Protected ADU by-laws to allow for larger accessible units or simply allow State regulation to stand without changes to our by-laws. ●Where a special permit ADU is not appropriate, the special permitting process can deny. ○Explore public-private partnership with ADU builders ○Support staff in providing feedback to the state regarding ADU building and utility code. 26 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Short Term Strategies 4 ●Identify and reduce barriers to ADU construction ○Fixed costs are high -900 sq ft of living space doesn’t pencil out ■2 new construction homes recently backed out of adding ADU due to additional costs ○Fire alarm separation (required 2+ systems), 2 means of egress ○All electric requirement can push over the existing service, requiring service upgrade ○HERZ rating requirement for ADU puts unnecessary burden (rating requirement had to be increased because the formula involves dividing by total dwelling volume). ○Attached ADUs more difficult requiring fire & electrical separation and individual access to utility shutoffs 27 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Multi-residence Adaptive Re-Use 5 ●Identify transitional or historical areas (between commercial or higher density and lower density residential) for Multi-Residence Transit Zoning - Adaptive ReUse (Newton) to allow unit bonuses for preserving existing buildings & footprints. Newton: 34 homes already in adaptive reuse projects as of Feb 26: https://www.bostonindicat ors.org/upzone_update/20 26/modest-zoning-reform 28 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: 40Y - Small enough & big enough What is a "Starter Home"? ●Size Limit:Single-family homes capped at 1,850 sq. ft.of heated living area. ●Bedroom Mix:At least 50%of homes in a district must have 3+ bedrooms (supporting families). ●Optional ADUs:Municipalities may allow Accessory Dwelling Units up to 600 sq. ft. ●Increases municipal revenue/acre without continued mcmansionization currently providing vital revenue increases. 6 29 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: $$ 40Y Municipal Incentives $$ ▪Zoning Incentive Payment:A one-time state payment upon district adoption (typically $10,000 to $60,000 based on unit capacity). ▪Production Bonus:A payment of $3,000 per unit created (recently proposed to increase to $6,000 in some legislative drafts). ▪Chapter 40S Reimbursement:Provides "school cost insurance" to cover the cost of educating children moving into the district. ▪Payments are to the General Fund: Discretionary (can be used to buy down additional affordable units) 7 30 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: 40Y District Requirements ●Density:Minimum "By-Right" density of 4 units per developable acre. ●Affordability:For projects with 13+ units, at least 10%must be affordable to households at or below 110% of Area Median Income (AMI) or rent + utilities 30% of 1/12 of the area median income and be deed restricted for no less than 30 years, ●Age-Restriction Prohibited:Units cannot be restricted to seniors or specific demographics. ●Permitting:Projects must be allowed with Site Plan Review, bypassing lengthy and subjective special permit processes. ●Design Standards are allowed 8 31 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Standardize Plans & Standards 9 ●Explore standardized plans and design standards ○ADUs (keep abreast of State’s progress on releasing plans) - Dept LUHD ○HPB collaborates with Dept LUHD to identify where form-based guidelines can be used (ie. Historic Districts) 32 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: What Can Selectboard Do? ADUs: 1.Attend the Abundant Housing and Boston Indicator’s presentation of their new report ADUs Turn One: Regulatory Barriers to Production in Massachusetts and Ideas for Further Reform 2.Meet with ADU and modular home developers to explore Lexington-specific financial barriers 3.Sign on to letters of feedback sent to the state by Dept of LUHD. MRT Adaptive Reuse: 1.Work with Town Manager to greenlight staff time: staff continue exploration of multi-residence bonuses for historical or cultural preservation of buildings in collaboration with the HPB. 40Y: 1.Greenlight stafftime: staff continue working with HPB, of potential areas where a 40Y district could be proposed. 2.Initiate a request for proposals to encourage landowners to come forward to do a 40Y rather than a conventional subdivision. 10 33 Housing in Lexington Center: Supporting Vibrancy, Foot Traffic, and Long-term Economic Health Housing Partnership Board May 11, 2026 34 Housing Partnership Board Why Mixed Use Development and Denser Housing in the Center ▪In both Lexington and Massachusetts, the cost of housing is rising quickly and there are not enough affordable opportunities for young families, downsizing elders, and the local workforce. ▪That makes it increasingly difficult for young families, downsizing seniors, and members of our workforce to live here. ▪Housing near a central district offers particular advantages to the community and residents, including: ▪Access to all of Lexington’s public transportation (bike, MBTA, the REV, and Lexpress) ▪Foot traffic for businesses ▪Environmental sustainability Lexington Housing Needs Assessment (June, 2025)35 Housing Partnership Board Current Center Zoning •The boundaries of the Central Business District (CB) – the thick red line - were set in 2023. •Most Center parcels limited to 25 feet/2 stories •Roughly 50 separate property owners •Aging buildings often require substantial upgrades •Empty storefronts can remain vacant for long periods •Very little new mixed-use housing has been built •Current zoning makes most housing construction in the Center economically difficult 36 Housing Partnership Board Why Housing is Not Being Built ▪Developers and other experts consistently cited: ▪High land and construction costs ▪Expensive parking requirements ▪Financing challenges for mixed-use projects ▪Uncertainty around taxes and approvals ▪Complex redevelopment conditions in the Center 37 Housing Partnership Board Near Term Actions ▪1. Allow More Flexible First-Floor Uses on Side Streets ▪Permit residential use on selected side streets (Wallis Court, Muzzey and Clarke) ▪Encourage reuse of underutilized buildings ▪Create housing with minimal streetscape change ▪Apartments more affordable than new construction ▪2. Add Housing and Economic Perspectives to HDC Review ▪Incorporate housing and business expertise ▪Better align review with town goals 38 Housing Partnership Board Create a Lexington Center Housing Committee ▪Purpose ▪Develop a shared vision and zoning plan for the Center▪Affordable, varied housing options ▪Participants: ▪Center Committee (lead), Planning Board and office, Historic District Commission, Select Board, housing development and business representatives, residents, and economic development expertise▪With strong staff support▪Community input ▪Goals:▪Support housing and economic vibrancy ▪Preserve historic character ▪Build broad community input and support 39 Housing Partnership Board Form-based Zoning ▪Defines the look-and-feel of a neighborhood by capturing the community vision for a neighborhood in its physical character ▪Neighborhood-specific, not town-wide ▪Building scale and appearance ▪Relationship to the street ▪Parking and public space ▪Predictable design standards ▪Unlike conventional zoning that focuses on separating uses, form-based zoning helps define the kind of neighborhood a community wants to create. Information from: What Is a Form-Based Code? | Planetizen Planopedia and Form-Based Codes: An Introduction 40 Housing Partnership Board Why it fits Lexington Center ▪Compatible with historic districts ▪Built around public participation ▪Respects neighborhood character ▪Creates more predictable outcomes ▪Helps guide context-sensitive redevelopment From: eTools: Form-based Codes 41 Housing Partnership Board Form-based Zoning: Belmont From information at: Belmont Center Zoning Project | Belmont, MA FB1: Edge ▪Buildings up to 2.5 stories ▪Architectural appearance consistent with single- and two-family homes, but commercial and office use allowed. FB4: Core ▪4 to 5 story buildings ▪Urban street wall with minimal set backs ▪Flat roofs allow for green or roof-top uses Two districts: two very different appearances to reflect citizen priorities for each neighborhood 42 Housing Partnership Board Requested Direction from the Select Board ▪Support formation of a Lexington Center Housing Committee ▪Advance side-street zoning flexibility ▪Strengthen housing and economic input into Historic District Commission review 43 Housing Partnership Board Form an Affordable Housing Overlay District Committee similar to Arlington’s to explore the potential use of Affordable Housing Overlay Districts including Town staff, members from the Housing Partnership Board, Affordable Housing Trust, Planning Board, Historic Districts Commission, Select Board, and a resident. Explore the potential for housing on Town- and state-owned land. Obtain more financial support to subsidize land and development costs. Optimize CPA housing funds and AHT funds for housing. Apply for housing-related grants. Support affordable housing developers’ applications for EOHLC and LIHTC funding. 9 True 10%: Short-Term Strategies 44 Housing Partnership Board True 10%: Long-Term Strategies Create Affordable Housing Overlay Districts (AHOD). AHODs encourage 100% deed-restricted developments in areas conducive to greater housing density. In 2020, Cambridge pioneered the AHOD approach. This has led to more than 800 units built or approved. In 2024, the Brookline Housing Advisory Board commissioned a study to examine the potential for establishing an AHOD. In 2025, Arlington’s Town Meeting approved forming a Committee to explore options for adopting an AHOD and is working toward a proposal for Town Meeting in 2027. Continue to pursue additional funding to subsidize the costs of affordable housing. Continue to support state passage of real estate transfer fees. Pursue opportunities to use Town or State land. 459 Bedford St. is used by the National Guard as an Armory. 173 Bedford St. is still needed for Town swing space until approximately 2035. Depot Parking Lot - 2023 Housing Feasibility Study link: Affordable-Housing-Feasibility-Study-February-9-2024 10 45 Housing Partnership Board Achieving a True 10%: Next Steps Create an Affordable Housing Overlay District Committee this year. Use Arlington’s AHODC as a model. Include Town staff, members from the Housing Partnership Board, Affordable Housing Trust, Planning Board, Historic Districts Commission, Select Board, and a resident. Assign the task of exploring the potential for housing on Town- and state-owned land. Make a list of potential parcels for housing. Support efforts to secure additional funding for affordable housing. Optimize CPA housing funds and AHT funds for housing. Linkage fee funds in 2027 and following years. Research grants from state and nonprofits. Support EOHLC applications. 11 46 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Community Outreach 1 47 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Website Mock-Ups 2 48 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Website Mock-Ups 3 49 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Website Mock-Ups 4 50 Achieving a True 10% Affordable Housing Housing Partnership Board May 4, 2026 Working Group includes Harriet Cohen, Chris Herbert, Margaret Heitz and Betsey Weiss 51 Housing Partnership Board The Town’s Housing Goal: A True 10% Affordable Units 10% of Lexington housing units should be deed-restricted affordable units. Background: The Massachusetts Subsidized Housing Inventory (SHI) includes market-rate units in developments that qualify as affordable under Chapter 40B. The chart on the slide that follows shows newly proposed MBTA developments will add to the affordable units through the 15% inclusionary unit requirement. What’s needed? Lexington total housing stock:12,252 units To attain a true 10% affordable: 1,225 units Current deed-restricted affordable:723 units Needed to reach the 10% goal: 502 units Where will we be? We will still be short of our goal by 394 deed-restricted affordable units, even assuming all permitted and formally proposed MBTA developments are built. 2 52 3 New Deed- Restricted Units Needed to Achieve 10% Goal Percent Deed- Restricted 10% of Total Housing Units Denominator is number of Lexington Housing Units Total # of Deed- Restricted Units Deed-Restricted Affordable Units (DRAU) at <=80% AMI MBTA Dwelling Units (DU) 13111.07%1,22512,25213561356 CURRENT March 2026 SHI TOTAL-including market rate units -5365.62%1,22512,252689-667Subtract market rate units counted on SHI -5045.88%1,22512,25272132Count LexHAB’s existing Non-SHI -5025.90%1,22512,2527232Count LHA’s missing 2 SHI units FUTURE: -4776.26%1,27712,770800Building Permits for 77 DRAU Building Permits for 518 DU Building Permits for MBTA Developments and Deed- Restricted Affordable Units -4316.85%1,37813,784947Proposed 147 DRAU Proposed 1,014 DU Proposed MBTA Developments and Deed- Restricted Affordable Units -3957.14%1,38213,82498740 units coming1591 Lowell Street 40b -3947.15%1,38313,8269892 new unitsLexHAB new SHI units -3947.15%1,38313,826989POTENTIAL Future Total 53 Housing Partnership Board What Would It Take to Achieve the True 10% Affordable Goal? Addressing the major barriers, which are high land and construction costs. Supporting the production of deed-restricted affordable homes by following two paths: Implementing land use regulatory zoning to require or incentivize affordable housing development. Securing more financial support to make affordable housing financially feasible. 4 54 Housing Partnership Board Land Use Regulatory Zoning Implement inclusionary zoning that requires a set percentage of a development to be affordable. Currently, MBTA Communities Districts Zoning allows 15% inclusionary zoning on specific parcels. Establish an Affordable Housing Overlay District (AHOD). Allows higher density. Provides relief from other requirements (such as parking). Implements an expedited approval processes for 100% affordable developments. 5 55 Housing Partnership Board Obtaining Additional Financial Support Securing grants or loans from town finances. Sources include, but are not limited to: Additional CPA revenue EOHLC (Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities) funding LIHTC funding (requires developments of 40 or more units, all of which must be affordable) Linkage payments from commercial development Real estate transfer fees (if enacted by the state and Town) Soliciting donations of privately owned property (LexHAB has done this). Using town-owned or state-owned land when available. 6 56 Housing Partnership Board What the Town Has Been Doing in Pursuit of Achieving a True 10% Lexington’s Affordable Housing Regulatory Achievements: (2023) The Town adopted the Special Residential Development with an affordable component. (2023) The Town adopted a 15% inclusionary zoning requirement for developments in MBTA Community Districts under Article #34. Currently permitted and being built are 388 MBTA dwelling units including 57 affordable units. Developers have applied for building permits for 422 MBTA units, including 64 affordable units. Developers have submitted a site plan review for 722 MBTA units, including 103 affordable units. If all 1,532 MBTA units are built, this would yield a total of 224 affordable units. ( slide 13) Frozen parcels under the 2023 Article #34 may yield additional units with 15% inclusionary zoning requirement. Lexington’s Affordable Housing Fiscal Achievements: (2006) Passed the Community Preservation Act which provided funds dedicated to housing for the first time in Lexington. (2023) Established the Affordable Housing Trust (AHT) to provide financial support for affordable housing and has increased the share of CPA funds to the AHT for the past 3 years. (2024) Donated the Lexington Woods parcel at 591 Lowell St. and AHT spearheaded the 40-unit 100% affordable development on this parcel. (2026) Approved a commercial linkage requirement that will require future commercial development to contribute to affordable housing. (2026) Town Meeting passed a Home Rule petition for a residential linkage requirement. 7 57 Housing Partnership Board How do we get to a true 10% without adding a large volume of market rate housing? When more market rate dwelling units/homes are built, the total housing stock (the denominator) increases, so more affordable units are needed to reach a true 10%. We currently have 5.9% of truly affordable units. In the unlikely event that all proposed 1,532 MBTA units with 15% inclusionary units are built, 7.15% of the units will be deed-restricted affordable units, leaving a deficit of 394 affordable units. How to achieve a true 10%? Build more 100% affordable developments with no market rate units such as: The 40 units at Lexington Woods. The 4 LexHAB ADUs, if state-funded. The potential16-32 new LHA deeply affordable units on Wood St and/or North St. The Federal ( HUD) Repositioning Program allows the conversion of LHA single-family site parcels to multi-family housing. These 100% affordable units will increase total housing stock (the denominator). They increase truly affordable units (the numerator) more quickly, increasing their percentage. Create and implement an Affordable Housing Overlay District (AHOD) zoning regulation on certain parcels which requires units built in the AHOD have 100% affordable units. 8 58 Housing Partnership Board Form an Affordable Housing Overlay District Committee similar to Arlington’s to explore the potential use of Affordable Housing Overlay Districts including Town staff, members from the Housing Partnership Board, Affordable Housing Trust, Planning Board, Historic Districts Commission, Select Board, and a resident. Explore the potential for housing on Town- and state-owned land. Obtain more financial support to subsidize land and development costs. Optimize CPA housing funds and AHT funds for housing. Apply for housing-related grants. Support affordable housing developers’ applications for EOHLC and LIHTC funding. 9 True 10%: Short-Term Strategies 59 Housing Partnership Board True 10%: Long-Term Strategies Create Affordable Housing Overlay Districts (AHOD). AHODs encourage 100% deed-restricted developments in areas conducive to greater housing density. In 2020, Cambridge pioneered the AHOD approach. This has led to more than 800 units built or approved. In 2024, the Brookline Housing Advisory Board commissioned a study to examine the potential for establishing an AHOD. In 2025, Arlington’s Town Meeting approved forming a Committee to explore options for adopting an AHOD and is working toward a proposal for Town Meeting in 2027. Continue to pursue additional funding to subsidize the costs of affordable housing. Continue to support state passage of real estate transfer fees. Pursue opportunities to use Town or State land. 459 Bedford St. is used by the National Guard as an Armory. 173 Bedford St. is still needed for Town swing space until approximately 2035. Depot Parking Lot - 2023 Housing Feasibility Study link: Affordable-Housing-Feasibility-Study-February-9-2024 10 60 Housing Partnership Board Achieving a True 10%: Next Steps Create an Affordable Housing Overlay District Committee this year. Use Arlington’s AHODC as a model. Include Town staff, members from the Housing Partnership Board, Affordable Housing Trust, Planning Board, Historic Districts Commission, Select Board, and a resident. Assign the task of exploring the potential for housing on Town- and state-owned land. Make a list of potential parcels for housing. Support efforts to secure additional funding for affordable housing. Optimize CPA housing funds and AHT funds for housing. Linkage fee funds in 2027 and following years. Research grants from state and nonprofits. Support EOHLC applications. 11 61 Supplemental Information 12 62 0BR 1BR 2BR 3BR 4BRTenureDistrictFilesStatus DateStatusFiled#IDUs#DusAddress 52417OwnVO-Waltham-Concordhttps://lexingtonma.viewpointcloud.com/records/888842024-10-09Completed Site Plan Review2024-04-226465-7 Piper Road 12182OwnVO-Bedford-Worthenhttps://lexingtonma.viewpointcl oud.com/records/89324 2024-12- 17Building Permit2024-04-3043289-93 Bedford Street 421OwnVO-Bedford-Bikepathhttps://lexingtonma.viewpointcl oud.com/records/88897 2025-04- 10 Completed Site Plan Review2024-05-1407231 Bedford Street 2356999RentVO-Waltham-Concordhttps://lexingtonma.portal.ope ngov.com/records/109218 2025-10- 08 Completed Site Plan Review 2024-06-2428187329-331 Concord Avenue 339716616RentVHO-Hartwell-Westviewhttps://lexingtonma.viewpointcloud.com/records/941272025-04-10Building Permit2024-07-304731217 Hartwell Avenue 42416OwnVO-East-Lexingtonhttps://lexingtonma.viewpointcl oud.com/records/94025 2025-11- 05 Building Permit2024-08-20644 217-241 Massachusetts Avenue 307715035RentVO-Bedford-Worthenhttps://lexingtonma.viewpointcl oud.com/records/96318 2025-03- 12 Applied for Building Permit2024-10-07442923-5 Militia Drive 2914RentVO-Bedford-Reedhttps://lexingtonma.viewpointcl oud.com/records/97104 2025-01- 30 Completed Site Plan Review2024-10-25325185-189 Bedford Street 14268010RentVHO-Hartwell- Westview https://lexingtonma.viewpointcl oud.com/records/99194 2025-11- 26 Applied for Building Permit2024-12-11201307 Hartwell Avenue 8OwnVO-Waltham-Concordhttps://lexingtonma.portal.ope ngov.com/records/101348 2025-09- 25Applied for Site Plan Review 2025-02-1008952 Waltham Street 126969OwnMFO-Bedford Northhttps://lexingtonma.portal.ope ngov.com/records/114092 2026-03- 11 Applied for Site Plan Review2025-12-0822150475 Bedford Street 25111154RentVHO-Hartwell-Woodhttps://lexingtonma.portal.ope ngov.com/records/115620 2026-02- 25 Applied for Site Plan Review2026-01-2344290131 Hartwell Avenue 9VO-Marrett-Springhttps://lexingtonma.portal.ope ngov.com/records/115833 Applied for Site Plan Review2026-01-2609419 Marrett Road 8164522768702241,532Total 1%11%34%50%5%646Median / Percentage 13 February 3, 2026, Planning Board MBTA Development Chart 63 14 Housing Definitions from Lexington’s Planning Board Zoning Regulations and Housing Site Inclusionary Dwelling Unit: A dwelling unit, the sale, lease, or rental of which is permanently restricted with limits on the household income of occupants, sale price, and rent through a deed rider or other restriction acceptable to the Town in conformance to the Lexington Moderate Unit Income Guidelines or as regulated as a Local Action Unit under the EOHLC Local Initiative Program. Affordable Housing: Affordable housingis generally defined by the income of the household in relation to housing costs. For example, HUD identifiesunits as affordable if gross rent (including costs of utilities borne by the tenant) is no more than 30% of a household's net adjusted income (with a small deduction for each dependent, for child care, for extraordinary medical expenses, etc.) or if the carrying costs of purchasing a home (mortgage, homeowners association fees, property taxes and insurance) is not more than typically 30% of income. If households are paying more than these amounts, they are described as experiencing housing affordability problems or cost burdens; and if they are paying more than half of their income for housing, they have severe housing affordability problems and cost burden. The current maximum HUD Area Income Limits for the Boston Area, 2025 are listed here: 2025 income limits, maximum sales prices and maximum affordable rents based on area median income (PDF). These figures are published by the U.S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and are revised every year based on the median income for the Boston area. 64 Housing Partnership Board Town Owned Land Identified as Potential Sites for Housing as of 5/4/2021 15 ZONING WITH ARTICLE 39*POTENTIALCOMMENTTYPE ACRES LAND SQ FT LANDPARCEL IDOWNERSTREET ADDRESSPARCEL# RS?NOVacant Land. Wetland and 100 foot buffer - may not be buildable. VACANT0.210,80013-200Town of LexingtonBanks Ave00130002001 GC?MAYBE52.7 feet of frontage. Wetland and 100 foot buffer - may not be buildable. VACANT0.312,57324-60Town of LexingtonBridge Street00240000602 RSYESNOBack portion of Belfry. (Property Record Card - Zoning Map shows GC) VACANT0.834,23149-164ATown of LexingtonClarke Street004900164A3 RSYESNO50' of frontage the town… (?)VACANT0.15,00051-14BTown of LexingtonGrandview Ave00500000944 RSYESNO50' of frontage the town…VACANT0.15,00051-14ATown of LexingtonGrandview Ave5 RSYESNO50' of frontage the town…VACANT0,15,00050-94Town of LexingtonGrandview Ave6 RSYESNO50' of frontage.VACANT0.15,75032-50Town of LexingtonGrapevine Ave00320000507 GCYESNOPotentialDEV IN PROGRESS 3.1135,72668-44Town of Lexington591 Lowell St680000448 RSYESNO50' of frontageVACANT0.15,75032-60Town of LexingtonMarrett Rd00320000609 GCYESNOWood Street…Odd triangle [long narrow triangle between wood street and Rt 128] VACANT0.210,00051-82Town of LexingtonMassachusetts Ave005100008210 GC?NOAccess off Philip Road? Wetland and 100 foot buffer - may not be buildable. VACANT0.835,53815-55BTown of LexingtonMoreland Ave001500055B11 GCYESNOOdd lot - entrance to H.S.VACANT0.210,50049-55Town of LexingtonMuzzey St004900005512 RSYESNO54' of frontage.VACANT0.28,11359-137BTown of LexingtonOxbow Road005900137B13 RO?NO100' x 100' lot. Wetland and 100 foot buffer - may not be buildable. VACANT0.210,00054-20Town of LexingtonYoung St005400002014 GCYESNOFletcher ParkVACANT1.877,91648-170ATown of Lexington1557 Massachusetss Ave48-17A15 GCYESNOBelfry HillVACANT0.311,30049-166Town of Lexington1884 Massachusetss Ave004900016616 GCYESNOOdd shape - unbuildable.VACANT0.210,70075-10Town of LexingtonLowell St007500001017 * Use §135-6.2 of the zoning bylaw to permit construction on a substandard lot. 8.7 Removed Parcel ID 68-44 acreage from total5.6Remaining acreage = 65 The End 16 66 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options WorkGroup Join the Conversation lhpbexpandinghousingoptions@gmail.com | Ravneet Grewal (Chair), Paul Linton, Melanie Thompson, Joyce Murphy 1 67 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Background Congratulations from Global Scholar and Lexington Native, Bill McKibben via personal email: "The growth of multi-family housing in Lexington is the most positive development in many decades—a nod to equity, efficiency, and a working future less dependent on fossil fuels. The Planning Board needs to make sure it continues." 2 68 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Background Lexington Land Use Inventory (2020) https://www.lexingtonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2242/Land-Use-Inventory-PDF?bidId= *Multi-family numbers added to 2020 Land Use Inventory numbers 3 69 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Background *OpenGov reports run by staff members 4 Placeholder for teardown and ADU data from staff 70 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Over-Arching Strategy 5 ●Provide clear, objective standardized plans and guidelines with context-sensitive modifications ●Provide multiple pathways to smaller units ●Provide a range of sizes and price points ●Integrate sustainable designs in planning & explore ways to reduce costs ●Increase municipal revenue streams without mcmansionization by ●providing clear, objective pathways to cluster housing and missing middle housing typology replacements on underutilized lots Pathways: zoning, planning reviews, permitting, conservation Cluster Housing: housing that concentrates (clusters) housing on a portion of land so that another portion can be preserved for open space or conservation. Missing Middle: Does not refer to income, but rather the building and unit mix form. It is a typology between large apartment complexes and the SF house. Underutilized: Marginally or significantly declining use particularly in a high infrastructure area (vacancies, low improvement value/land value, projected employment, low floor area/permitted floor area. 71 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Specific Near-Term Strategies By-right ADUs, Multi-residence Adaptive Re-Use, and 40Y Starter Homes 6 Incentivize conversion of underutilized parcels or teardowns into starter homes: ●Provide more by-right ADU options, especially accessible units, preserve existing special permit options, advocate for permitting changes ●Offer multi-unit bonuses when a historical/cultural resource building is preserved ●Create standardized plans/guidelines to reduce costs. ●Identify sites for a 40Y starter home district using a scorecard developed through multidisciplinary input 72 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Short Term Strategies 7 ●Identify and reduce barriers to ADU construction ○Fixed costs are high - 900 sq ft of living space doesn’t pencil out ■2 new construction homes recently backed out of adding ADU due to additional costs ○Fire alarm separation (required 2+ systems), 2 means of egress ○All electric requirement can push over the existing service, requiring service upgrade ○HERZ rating requirement for ADU puts unnecessary burden (rating requirement had to be increased because the formula involves dividing by total dwelling volume). ○Attached ADUs more difficult requiring fire & electrical separation and individual access to utility shutoffs 73 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: ADU Bldg Dept Checklist 8 1. Utilities & Energy Compliance ●Fossil Fuel Free & All-Electric: The new dwelling must be entirely electric. Per local bylaws, no gas or fossil fuel infrastructure is permitted. ●Energy Code (HERS): A HERS rating is mandatory. You must submit the HERS model and building summary. ●Electrical & EV Ready: If adding a parking space, an EV (Electric Vehicle) plug is required per energy code. ●Metering: A separate electrical meter/source of power may be required. ○Action Item: Please provide your plans for electric service. ●Water & Sewer: Both units must have independent access to their respective water mains, electrical panels, and HVAC systems. ○Action Item: Confirm if water/sewer will tie into the existing home’s main lines. ○Action Item: Identify the source and location of the new water heater. 2. Building Code & Fire Safety ●Means of Egress: The dwelling must have two independent means of egress. You cannot exit through the existing dwelling unless using a dedicated common entry/exit separated by a 1-hour fire wall. ●Fire Separation: Provide UL design details and locations for all fire separation assemblies. ●Alarms: Independent smoke and CO detectors are required. A separate permit from the Fire Department is mandatory. ●Mechanical Permits: Ensure your mechanical contractor applies for their permit before starting work to ensure compliance with the new energy code. 3. Site Plan & Zoning ●Parking: Provide a site plan locating the specific parking space dedicated to the new dwelling. ●Short-Term Rental Restriction: Formally acknowledge that neither dwelling will be used for short-term rentals (e.g., Airbnb). ●Addressing: After the permit is issued—but before the rough framing inspection—you must obtain a formal house address from the Town Engineer’s Office. 4. Required Inspections & Surveys ●Utility Coordination: Coordinate sewer and stormwater inverts prior to any work. ●Foundation Survey: A full site survey must be submitted to the Town of Lexington immediately after the foundation is poured. ○Note: Work may not proceed until the Town verifies that the foundation matches the approved plans. 74 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Make ADUs Possible 9 ●Identify and reduce barriers to ADU construction ○Preserve existing option to add an ADU under existing Lexington regulations by special permit allows homeowners more options should they simply want an in-law apartment in an owner-occupied home ○Add additional Protected ADU by-laws to allow for larger accessible units or simply allow State regulation to stand without. ○Where a special permit ADU is not appropriate, the special permitting process can deny. ○Explore public-private partnership with ADU builders ○Support staff in providing feedback to the state regarding ADU building and utility code. 75 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Short Term Strategies 10 ●Identify transitional or historical areas (between commercial or higher density and lower density residential) for Multi-Residence Transit Zoning - Adaptive ReUse (Newton) to allow unit bonuses for preserving existing buildings & footprints. ●Newton: 34 homes already in adaptive reuse projects as of Feb 26: https://www.bostonindicators.org/upzone_update/2026/modest-zoning-reform 76 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Short Term Strategies 11 ●Identify transitional or historical areas (between commercial or higher density and lower density residential) for Multi-Residence Transit Zoning to allow unit bonuses for preserving existing buildings ○In Progress: Department of Land Use, Housing, and Development exploring feasibility of compiling eligible areas based on: ■Historical or Cultural resources inventory ■Existing transit or target transit and commercial zones bordering lower-density residential areas 77 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Standardize Plans & Standards 12 ●Explore standardized plans and design standards ○ADUs (keep abreast of State’s progress on releasing plans) - Dept LUHD ○HPB collaborates with Dept LUHD to identify where form-based guidelines can be used (ie. Historic Districts) 78 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: 40Y Starter Homes 13 79 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Small enough & big enough What is a "Starter Home"? ●Size Limit: Single-family homes capped at 1,850 sq. ft. of heated living area. ●Bedroom Mix: At least 50% of homes in a district must have 3+ bedrooms (supporting families). ●Optional ADUs: Municipalities may allow Accessory Dwelling Units up to 600 sq. ft. ●Increases municipal revenue/acre without continued mcmansionization currently providing vital revenue increases. 14 80 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: 40Y District Requirements ●Density: Minimum "By-Right" density of 4 units per developable acre. ●Affordability: For projects with 13+ units, at least 10% must be affordable to households at or below 110% of Area Median Income (AMI) or rent + utilities 30% of 1/12 of the area median income and be deed restricted for no less than 30 years, ●Age-Restriction Prohibited: Units cannot be restricted to seniors or specific demographics. ●Permitting: Projects must be allowed with Site Plan Review, bypassing lengthy and subjective special permit processes. ●Design Standards are allowed 15 81 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: $$ 40Y Municipal Incentives $$ ▪Zoning Incentive Payment: A one-time state payment upon district adoption (typically $10,000 to $60,000 based on unit capacity). ▪Production Bonus: A payment of $3,000 per unit created (recently proposed to increase to $6,000 in some legislative drafts). ▪Chapter 40S Reimbursement: Provides "school cost insurance" to cover the cost of educating children moving into the district. ▪Payments are to the General Fund: Discretionary (can be used to buy down additional affordable units) 16 82 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: 40Y’s Sustainability Standards ●Stormwater & Open Space: Districts must incorporate sustainable development standards (e.g., bioswales, minimizing site disturbance). ●Design Standards: Towns can implement objective design guidelines (scale, materials, siting) to ensure homes fit the neighborhood character. ●Approval Process: Communities draft a bylaw, seek EOHLC (Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities) approval, and adopt it via a simple majority vote. ●Waivers: Can apply for waivers of regulations to the Secretary of the EOHLC with justification. 17 83 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: 40Y Strategy Where should 40Y districts go? ▪Overlay in areas with ▪higher lot size and frontage requirements than other parts of Lexington ▪smaller, older, or dilapidated homes that may be torn down ▪larger lots or a series of lots that could ▪be developed together to create a comprehensive livable modified perimeter block morphology ▪particularly where residents would be intolerant of higher density options such as 40R districts 18 84 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: 40Y Siting Score Card 19 Criteria Evaluation Factor 1 Point (Poor)3 Points (Moderate)5 Points (Excellent) Development Potential Developable Acreage Significant wetlands/slope (>40% of site). Mixed terrain; requires creative clustering. Primarily flat, contiguous developable land. Density Yield Supports <4 units/acre due to constraints. Supports exactly 4 units/acre (state min). Layout easily supports 5+ units/acre cluster. Infrastructure Utility Access No sewer/water; requires major extension. Existing water/sewer at street; capacity limited. Existing high-capacity sewer and water on-site. Emergency Access Requires massive road/cul-de-sac. Standard road frontage; standard turnarounds. Supports "Alternative T-turn" fire access. Natural Resources Tree Canopy Requires clear-cutting for site viability. Can preserve some perimeter trees. Large mature trees can be preserved as centerpieces. Stormwater (LID) Poor drainage; high phosphorus risk. Standard topography; requires engineered tanks. Ideal slopes for natural bioswales/infiltration. Invasives Pristine native forest (no impact).Minimal invasive presence. Significant invasives; project funds restoration. Connectivity Walkability Remote; no sidewalks or transit.Within 1/2 mile of a bus stop or bike path. Walkable to Lexington Center or East Lexington. Zoning Buffer Abuts high-density commercial/industrial. Mid-neighborhood; potential character clash. Ideal transition between commercial and residential.85 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Selected Precedents & Resources APPENDIX A – MUNICIPAL & STATE DOCUMENTS State-Level References ●Starter Homes Program (Chapter 40Y): https://www.mass.gov/info-details/starter-homes-program-chapter-40y ●Draft Regulations (760 CMR 69.00): https://www.mass.gov/doc/760-cmr-6900-starter-homes-program-draft-regulations/download ●Massachusetts General Laws – Chapter 40Y: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleVII/Chapter40Y Mansfield, MA ●Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments – Multigenerational Overlay (40Y): https://www.mansfieldma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/12079/Proposed-ZBLs-08-27-25 ●Future Housing Zoning Recommendations: https://www.mansfieldma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/11736/Future-Housing-Zoning-Recommendations Sudbury, MA ●Housing Production Plan (2025): https://www.sudbury.ma.us/planning/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2025/01/Sudbury-HPP-2025.pdf ●Select Board Packet – May 20, 2025: https://www.sudbury.ma.us/selectboard/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/05/05-20-25-Select-Board-Packet.pdf ●Select Board Packet – June 10, 2025: https://www.sudbury.ma.us/selectboard/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2025/06/06-10-25-Select-Board-Packet.pdf 20 Lincoln, MA ●Planning Board Minutes – October 14, 2025: https://www.lincolntown.org/sites/g/files/vyhlif1241/f/minutes_pb_10-14-25.pdf Dartmouth, MA ●Planning Board Minutes – May 5, 2025: https://www.dartmouthma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif4391/f/minutes_pb_05-05-25.pdf ●Planning Board Minutes – June 23, 2025: https://www.dartmouthma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif4391/f/minutes_pb_06-23-25.pdf ●Planning Board Minutes – September 29, 2025: https://www.dartmouthma.gov/sites/g/files/vyhlif4391/f/minutes_pb_09-29-25.pdf Newton, MA ●Multi-Residence Transit Zoning Summary: https://www.newtonma.gov/government/planning/zoning-and-development#docacc ess-7c1854d50853302e893cd40082de3702 86 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: What Can Selectboard Do? ADUs: 1.Attend the Abundant Housing and Boston Indicator’s presentation of their new report ADUs Turn One: Regulatory Barriers to Production in Massachusetts and Ideas for Further Reform 2. Meet with ADU and modular home developers to explore Lexington-specific financial barriers 3.Sign on to letters of feedback sent to the state by Dept of LUHD. MRT Adaptive Reuse: 4.Write a letter of support to LUHD and Town Manager encouraging the exploration of multi-residence bonuses for historical or cultural preservation of buildings in collaboration with the HPB. 40Y: 5.Write a letter of support to LUHD and Town Manager encouraging the exploration, with HPB, of potential areas where a 40Y district could be proposed. 6.Initiate a request for proposals to encourage landowners to come forward to do a 40Y rather than a conventional subdivision. 21 87 Housing in Lexington Center: Supporting Vibrancy, Foot Traffic, and Long-term Economic Health Housing Partnership Board May 11, 2026 88 Housing Partnership Board The Case for Mixed Use Development and Denser Housing in the Center In both Lexington and Massachusetts, the cost of housing is rising quickly and there are not enough affordable opportunities for young families, downsizing elders, and the local workforce. That makes it increasingly difficult for young families, downsizing seniors, and members of our workforce to live here. Housing near a central district offers particular advantages to the community and residents, including: Access to all of Lexington’s public transportation (bike, MBTA, the REV, and Lexpress) Foot traffic for businesses Environmental sustainability Lexington Housing Needs Assessment (June, 2025) 89 Housing Partnership Board Current Center Zoning •The boundaries of the Central Business District (CB) – the thick red line - were set by Article 36 of 2023. •This is part of the Lexington Historic District and all development requires a certificate of appropriateness from the Historic Districts Commission (HDC). •The Center is mostly small parcels, with approximately 50 different owners. •Current height limit: 25’ and 2 stories, which makes residential development uneconomic. •Due to the lack of redevelopment over time, older buildings can require significant investment to meet current building codes and operational requirements, slowing the filling of empty storefronts and impacting vitality. •There is one mixed use project currently proposed at 16 Clarke St. This would be the first new building since 2009. The parcel is grandfathered into prior zoning under Article 34 with a 52-foot height limit. There is one other frozen parcel in the CB. 90 Housing Partnership Board Community Support for Housing in the Center Increasing housing in Lexington Center has a firm foundation of support. Lexington Next Comprehensive Plan, Goal 3.2.1: Revitalize Lexington Center, September 28, 2022: “Encourage housing on upper stories above retail stores” Phasing: Immediate (years 1-5) Lexington Center Committee: “For retailers to remain and flourish in our center business district, we need to support them by encouraging more foot traffic and vitality / buzz that will come by adding new multi-family housing development in the Center.” - Committee memorandum to Town Meeting Members supporting Article 34, April 3, 2023 Lexington Center Charettes: In November, 2023 close to 150 citizens participated in workshops about the future development of Lexington Center. “Lexington Center: The Journey Forward”, prepared by Mullin Associates Inc. and Fuss & O’Neill A lack of market and non-market housing in the Center was identified as a challenge and the report “strongly urges” the town to create more housing on upper stories downtown. “by increasing the heights of several buildings through zoning revisions, there is an opportunity for additional housing downtown.” 91 Housing Partnership Board Consulting Report Support for Housing in the Center Coordinated Action Across two decades of consultant work, Lexington Center vibrancy is framed not as a single capital project but as the outcome of coordinated action, including: curated mixed uses, smart parking management, high-quality pedestrian environments, active programming tied to tourism, sustained governance, and housing near the core. Curated Mix of Uses (Retail, Dining, Housing, Civic) A critical mass of restaurants, cafés, experiential retail, and upper-story residential is repeatedly identified as the foundation of an active, all-day center. Ground-floor activation paired with housing or office above improves foot traffic beyond peak hours. Sources: Lexington Center: The Journey Forward (Mullin Associates / Fuss & O’Neill), Center Retail Strategy Report (2019) Housing as an Economic Engine and Producer of Tax Revenue Studies identify new multifamily and mixed-income housing near the Center as a way to support retail, restaurants, and use of mass transit. Source: Economic Feasibility Analysis – Proposed Multi-family Housing (MBTA Section 3A)(Fougere Planning & Development, 2023) Demonstrates market and financial logic for Center and Center-adjacent housing 92 Housing Partnership Board Challenges Developing Housing in the Center: Developer Interviews What we heard from local developers: Land and construction costs make the economics of building unaffordable. To illustrate the current economics of residential building: with current building costs plus land, a 1,500 sq ft house would cost $750K to build before any profit. Cost of building larger developments include additional expenses including an elevator, strict fire rating and code requirements. Taxes. High commercial rates (double the residential rate and will be going up.) Lack of clarity on how the tax rate would work for mixed use development. Particularly a problem if all units are charged at the commercial rate. Tradeoffs. Under current zoning, if a developer builds more housing in the center, could they end up losing retail and that tax base due to parking and other requirements? Complexity of permitting and zoning is also an issue, but this had less impact on developer thinking than economics. 93 Housing Partnership Board Challenges Beyond Zoning Parking Current supply of parking (street and underground) in Center is working but additional height would necessitate more parking. That parking’s location will be an important part of any consideration of new housing in the Center. Lexington Place and 16 Clarke Street design have most or all parking underground - this is expensive and may be holding back redevelopment of other parcels. Financing It’s difficult for developers to get projects financed right now if they have a commercial or affordable component. Even 100% residential can be difficult. For affordable developers, 40 units minimum viable for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit. Equity investment In the current environment it’s also difficult to get equity investment in commercial real estate. Every commercial renter will need leasehold improvements. Reviews The Historic Districts Commission (HDC) issuance of its certificate of appropriateness for new construction is time consuming and expensive 94 Housing Partnership Board Recommended Near Term Strategies (12-18 months) Consider side street zoning changes to allow for more flexible first floor uses including residential On the side streets in the Center - Wallis Court, Muzzey and Clarke – residential is not currently allowed on the first floor. Today this would require a special permit. Potential benefits of more flexible first floor uses: Minimal to no changes to the existing streetscape Apartments could be more affordable than new construction Would give owners more flexibility Could spark upgrades to buildings as units are repurposed Potential to make more of an underused resource Consider adding economic, business, and housing expertise to the HDC The Select Board favors backgrounds in the law, history, architecture and aesthetics, graphical design, as well as membership in the local business community in appointing HDC members Given the town’s priorities, it could be advantageous to add housing and economic development to the list. Alternatively, or in addition, the Select Board could consider adding economic and housing liaisons to the HDC and/or town staff 95 Housing Partnership Board Recommended Near to Longer-Term Strategy Near term (>12 months) Create a Special Committee to establish a vision for Lexington Center that includes more affordable and varied housing options attractive to various communities and then build a plan to realize that vision –Recommend this Committee be led by the Center Committee as it touches most of the key constituencies Other towns that have undertaken similar projects have done so with strong staff support and this would be important for Lexington’s efforts to succeedEnsure all critical groups are part of the process, including the Planning office, Economic Development, Center Committee, Historical District Commission, Planning Board, Select Board, a Developer, and local residents with diverse opinions regarding housing Longer term (18-24 months) Once formed this committee would begin working to establish the vision and build the plan Recommended goals: Create more housing to support the economic vibrancy of local businesses and a more vibrant streetlifeEncourage renovation of current buildings to support economic vibrancyInclude form-based zoning (details in next slides) A critical part of this will be gathering input from across the Lexington communityLexington could benefit from the guidance of the Center for New Urbanism or a similar group (more on that coming too) 96 Housing Partnership Board An Idea for Lexington Center: Form-based Zoning The idea behind form-based zoning: define the look-and-feel of a neighborhood Form-based codes seek to capture the community vision for a neighborhood and then produce it in physical form Conventional zoning isn’t geared to producing a specific community vision or physical outcome – but rather to separating uses from each other. That doesn’t produce the neighborhoods we want. Form-based zoning is typically used in one or a few neighborhoods, not town-wide Examples of elements typically included in form-based zoning Information from: What Is a Form-Based Code? | PlanetizenPlanopedia and Form-Based Codes: An Introduction Building height Building appearance Building use Lot size Outdoor lighting Setbacks Landscaping (including benches and other outdoor amenities) Parking (automobile and bicycle) Signage Fences and walls 97 Housing Partnership Board Form-based Zoning Benefits Supports Compatibility with Historic Areas Results in development compatible with the historic nature of a neighborhood. If implemented in the Center, would use HDC’s expertise and guidance to help ensure this compatibility. Requires Extensive Public Participation Community participation is critical to successful form-based zoning. Respects a Neighborhood’s Character (as defined by Center and town residents) Guides compatible in-fill development and redevelopment. Achieves a Predictable Physical Result Elements in the code are requirements, not guidelines. Allows by-right development: developers receive approval if their designs comply with the zoning. Provides predictability for developers, decreasing time and expense of building. From: eTools: Form-based Codes 98 Housing Partnership Board Neighboring Towns with Form-based Zoning Brookline: Harvard Street Form-Based Zone Standards Belmont Belmont Center Overlay District (BCOD) Center Gateway Overlay District (CGOD) Somerville Boynton Yards Urban Design Framework Union Square Neighborhood Plan Milk Square Area Urban Design Framework Littleton: Village Common Also see Littleton Common Form-Based Code – an overview of the code and process from the consulting firm that helped Littleton create the code Bedford: Cottage Overlay District - form-based zoning applied as an overlay district Cottage Overlay District overview (from The Bedford Citizen) and the Planning Board description Pittsfield, Amhearst, Lowell, and Northampton also use form-based zoning 99 Housing Partnership Board Form-based Zoning Case Study: Belmont 29% of all edits made to the bylaw and 40% of the bylaw’s pages are the direct result of public input From information at: Belmont Center Zoning Project | Belmont, MA Managed transition from a semi-residential district to an urban commercial district 100 Housing Partnership Board Form-based Zoning Case Study: Belmont From information at: Belmont Center Zoning Project | Belmont, MA FB1: Edge Buildings up to 2.5 stories Architectural appearance consistent with single- and two-family homes, but commercial and office use allowed. FB4: Core 4 to 5 story buildings Urban street wall with minimal set backs Flat roofs allow for green or roof-top uses Two districts: two very different appearances to reflect citizen priorities for each neighborhood 101 Housing Partnership Board Building Support: Community Engagement and Transparency Outreach to and inclusion of community input is a central tenant of Form-based zoning and there are resources available to help build support for zoning changes. Facing a rising need for more varied and affordable housing, the town of Brattleboro (along with the state of Vermont) underwent an assessment by the Center for New Urbanism https://www.cnu.org/and its project for code reform https://www.cnu.org/our-projects/project- code-reform Its process involves community input, focuses on resident needs, and is non-partisan and focused on shared values. Project for Code Reform offers: Training, education, and tools for local governments focused on building political will and community understanding around zoning reforms Training on alternative code approaches such as form-based codes Support for Legacy Projects/charettes Staff and Faculty that can offer technical assistance 102 Housing Partnership Board Next Steps for the Select Board Create a Lexington Center Zoning Committee with a member of the Planning Department, the Select Board, the Planning Board, the Lexington Center Committee, the Historic Districts Commission, Housing Partnership Board, Affordable Housing Trust, Economic Development Advisory Committee, a developer, and residents with diverse backgrounds. Their goal: to create new zoning requirements that support more market–rate and affordable housing in the Center, thereby boosting foot traffic, increasing vibrancy, and benefitting retail shops, restaurants, services, offices, and entertainment venues. To do so in a way that builds community support. And that addresses special needs of our Center including parking and the preservation of historical sites. Work with the Planning Department, Planning Board, and the Lexington Center Committee to update the zoning for the side streets in the Central Business District boundaries to permit residential first floor zoning. This would likely necessitate two zones, CB1 (Massachusetts Avenue in the CBD) and CB2 (side streets in the CBD) Add liaisons to the HDC: a Center Business owner, a Housing Partnership Board member, and perhaps a member of town staff 103 Housing Partnership Board Opportunity for Affordable Housing on Town Land Non-profit subsidized development of affordable housing in perpetuity One developer active in Lexington suggested that the one economically viable path to creating substantial affordable housing in the Center given current circumstances would be: An overlay district covering Town-owned property, in which the Town gives away or provides the land at very reduced cost This is the process that has supported the proposal at 591 Lowell Street, and how a number of towns in the Commonwealth have recently developed needed housing. 2023 report on town-owned land In 2023, the town hired LDa Architecture & Interiors to study the feasibility of affordable housing on three parcels of town-owned land including two in the Center. (Report) Depot Lot: The consultants found affordable housing to be feasible under a simplified, all-residential model with significant subsidy. The greatest challenges: maintaining ~300 public parking spaces, historic district requirements, sewer, potential soil contamination, impacts on the busy town center. CVS Lot: same as above, though on a much smaller scale and with heightened site constraints including tight space and need for circulation and service to the store fronts. NOTE: In its efforts to address parking in the Center, the Lexington Center Committee seeks a determination from the Select Board on whether these lots will be built on so that reconstruction of the failing parking lots (currently in the queue of Capital projects) can be moved forward. 104 Housing Partnership Board Center Zoning Timeline Center zoning has evolved over time – residential building was not permitted during red years 1912 – No zoning, but buildings were typically 2.5 stories. Some still stand. 1924 - Center is zoned for the first time as a business district, residential apartments allowed by right, no height limit. 1950 – 55-foot height limit put in place, apartment buildings and multifamily residential eliminated1956 - Historic district created1962 – Zoning changed to 3 stories, 45 feet1965 -Mass Ave widened1968 –Becomes possible to build a 3-story building with upper story apartments, with a special permit1986 – Zoning limited to commercial uses, 2 stories, 30 feet.1987 - Height cut to 25 feet, 2 stories permitted2009 - Lexington Place - 50 Waltham – 30 2- and 3-bedroom apartments, 3 affordable - becomes the first apartments built in the Center in a century. Town Meeting approved the underlying zoning (CD10 ) through two Town Meetings in an onerous Planned Zone process.2023 – Zoned for 52 feet high maximum, 4 stories, first floor commercial use required2025 – Zoning reverted back to CD bylaws (25 feet height, 2 stories) by a vote of Town Meeting. This is lower than what is permitted for a single-family home outside of the Center. 105 Housing Partnership Board The Center Faced Similar Issues 50 Years Ago •In 1966 a major study was undertaken of the Center and how to increase its vibrancy. Many of the findings remain informative today. •The authors determined that “to effectively guide design in the Center agreement should be reached among the many who regulate and influence design decisions there as to what is being sought. •They recommended this include the Planning Board, HDC, “Selectmen,” the volunteer professional Design Advisory Group, “businessmen representatives” •Rather than focus on the style of architecture, they advocate a Visual Design Plan that focuses on these questions: •Where should there be buildings, where are there places we care enough about to acquire if necessary? •Where can large structures appropriately rise, where should only small structures exist?•Which structures have function or location making an aggressively assertive design appropriate, which should be “background” structures? •“This design effort, then, will not result in a blueprint purporting to tell each building owner exactly what he should do with his property, but rather will set general limits, suggest themes, and perhaps offer a palette of elements to be drawn on in specific design. •“The space, mass, and void relationships in the Center are appropriate elements for design consideration.” •They discussed providing guidelines for the design of building exteriors “in such as way there is assurance that each building will contribute to the overall design scheme without tying the hands of the designer of individual structures or damping their creativity” •Following a 1958 church addition facing the green, there was a Superior Court ruling that “in effect, the Historic Districts Commission is limited to consideration of the style of doors, windows, and cornices, rendered them impotent to control the most critical elements involved in "appropriateness." •“The commercial center of Lexington is lacking in structures of unusual interest, either historically or architecturally.” •“The commercial structure of the Center are, almost without exception, of very ordinary design quality, and certainly none merit a special trip for examination.” •Notes the “lack of clear relationships among the major components of the Center along Mass Avenue” •“The height of buildings on Mass Ave is generally inadequate to give a sense of street enclosure.” 106 Housing Partnership Board The Role of the Historic District and Commission The Historic Districts Commission (HDC) issues a certificate of appropriateness for new construction in the historic district. The Lexington Historic Districts Special Act does not allow consideration of height. Zoning governs allowable heights. HDC is made up of nine community volunteers, 5 full members, 4 associate. Appointed by the Select Board, they are expert in design, architecture, and history. The current proposal for a mixed use, multifamily development at 16 Clarke Street illustrates the process for HDC approval. This parcel is frozen under 2023 MBTA zoning: 52 feet high maximum, 4 stories, first floor commercial required This application was initiated September 9, 2025. It has not yet been designated a formal hearing, but has progressed as a series of informal hearings since that date. With HDC input and feedback including from a HDC liaison to the project, the developer’s architect has fully revised the proposed designs twice and continues to make adjustments. The third approach was more positively received than earlier ones. Appropriateness is determined based on precedent including precedent in building materials. There are no written guidelines. 107 Housing Partnership Board Housing in the Center: Key HDC Guidelines Lexington HDC Guidelines Distribution Draft 1-9-19.docx H. NEW CONSTRUCTION 1. General Principles and Goals for New Construction The New Construction Guidelines are intended to ensure that new buildings in the Districts will be compatible with their immediate surroundings and the applicable District in terms of siting, setbacks, scale, design, materials, and site improvements. The goal is to protect the integrity of the Districts by ensuring that new construction respects Lexington's architectural heritage and sense of place. New construction should be in harmony with the old and at the same time be distinguishable from the old so that the evolution of the Districts can be interpreted correctly. These Guidelines are not meant to restrict creativity but to ensure the Districts against unsympathetic designs. Diversity and creative use of design and materials is important to ensure that new construction is differentiated from the Districts' historic architecture. 3. Scale and Massing Similar to the analysis for siting, the scale of the new building, including height and massing, must be appropriate to and compatible with the development patterns of the applicable District. As with siting, the Commission may take into account historical precedent for that lot if an historically significant building once stood on that site. If the streetscape upon which the new building will be located has, or had, a strong historic context of buildings with similar heights and composition of parts, proposed new construction should reflect that historic context. Conversely, if a streetscape has a more heterogeneous context, with buildingsof different forms, heights, setbacks and component parts, the Commission should consider what is most appropriate for the proposed building based on form and use. General Law - Part I, Title VII, Chapter 40C, Section 7 First paragraph effective until February 18, 2025. For text effective February 18, 2025, see below.] Section 7. In passing upon matters before it the commission shall consider, among other things, the historic and architecturalvalue and significance of the site, building or structure, the general design, arrangement, texture, material and color of the features involved, and the relation of such features to similar features of buildings and structures in the surrounding area. In the case of new construction or additions to existing buildings or structures the commission shall consider the appropriateness of the size and shape of the building or structure both in relation to the land area upon which the building or structure is situated and to buildingsand structures in the vicinity, and the commission may in appropriate cases impose dimensional and set-back requirements in addition to those required by applicable ordinance or by-law. When ruling on applications for certificates of appropriateness for solar energy systems, as defined in section one A of chapter forty A, the commission shall also consider the policy of the commonwealth to encourage the use of solar energy systems and to protect solar access. The commission shall not consider interior arrangements or architectural features not subject to public view. The commission shall not make any recommendation or requirement except for the purpose of preventing developments incongruousto the historic aspects or the architectural characteristics of the surroundings and of the historic district.  108 Housing Partnership Board Building Height on Frozen Parcels in the Center The building height in the Center on parcels frozen under the 2023 Article 34, MBTA Communities Act, which was in the Multi-Family Overlay District-MFO, allowed for heights up to 52 feet. Properties in the Lexington Historic Districts with zoning freezes under the MFO zoning are allowed heights up to 52’. The Lexington Historic Districts Special Act does not allow consideration of height. Zoning governs allowable heights. The Special Act (Chapter 447, Acts of 1956, as amended) governs Lexington's Historic Districts which was" accepted at a [Lexington] Special Town Meeting held November 19, 1956 (Article 5.). “ The Town of Lexingtonsuccessfully petitioned the MA. State legislature and was granted its own HDC Special Act in 1956. The HDC Special Act link is : https://lexingtonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/2049/Historic-Districts-Enabling-Legislation-PDF states on page 11 that "Chapter 447, Acts of 1956 accepted at a [Lexington] Special Town Meeting held November 19, 1956 (Article 5.)." The HDC Special Act as amended provides for the authority of Lexington HDC and the scope of its review. Height is addressed in Section 9(a)(4), 3rd paragraph: “In passing upon appropriateness the commission shall consider, among other things, the historical value and significance of the building or structure, the general design, arrangement, texture, material, and color of the features, sign or billboard involved and the relation of such factors to similar factors of buildings and structures in the immediate surroundings. The commission shall not consider relative size of buildings and structures, or detailed designs, interior arrangement and other building features not subject to public view. Lexington HDC Guidelines Distribution Draft 1-9-19.docx The HDC Guidelines are guidelines for the HDC, applicants and owners. The HDC Guidelines do not govern a building's size or massing in Lexington's Historic Districts since the 1956 Special Act does not permit the " commission[ the HDC] to consider relative size of buildings and structures. “ MGL Chapter 40C Section 7, which was enacted by the State in 1960 and amended in 2023 and 2025, does not govern Lexington. The Town of Lexington never adopted/accepted MGL Chapter 40 Section 7 because Lexington had already petitioned the MA. State Legislature and was granted its own HDC Special Act in 1956. The link for MGL Chapter 40C Section 7 is General Law - Part I, Title VII, Chapter 40C, Section 7  NB1 109 Housing Partnership Board Housing in the Center: Recent Relevant Studies Lexington Center: The Journey Forward (Center Charrette Report)(workshops Nov. 18–19, 2023) —Prepared by Mullin Associates Inc. and Fuss & O’Neill; explicitly frames options to make Lexington Center “vibrant, prosperous, walkable,” and includes observations about market niches and demand generators. Lexington’s Strategic Tourism Marketing Plan (2020)(dated Feb. 17, 2020) — Town “secured consulting services from Open the Door” to analyze target audiences, integrated marketing, and revenue streams, explicitly linking tourism growth to Center/Battle Green economic vitality and visitor spending. Center Parking Management and Implementation Plan (final 09/12/2014) — a comprehensive parking management approach positioned as enabling a “vibrant future,” building on earlier consultant work and DHCD’s Downtown Initiative. (Lexington Website) Lexington Parking Technical Services – Final Report (Massachusetts Downtown Initiative)(2010) — by Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates; analyzes utilization patterns and “downtown” parking dynamics that directly affect retail/restaurant vibrancy. Lexington Battle Green Area Master Plan (approved 03/14/2011) — by Past Designs LLC; while focused on the Battle Green, it explicitly treats the surrounding streets/streetscapes and calls for follow-on work on parking/traffic/ped access—key levers for Center vibrancy and visitor conversion. (Lexington Website) Economic Feasibility Analysis – Proposed Multi-family Housing for MBTA (Section 3A)(03/30/2023) — prepared by Fougere Planning and Development, Inc. (with partners listed in the report). Not a “Center-only” study, but it provides market/financial feasibility logic that often underpins Center-adjacent zoning capacity and mixed-use economics. (Lexington Website) Other Lexington Center / CBD vibrancy PDFs (not always “consultant authored,” but directly on-point) Center Streetscape Design Review Ad Hoc Committee – Final Report to the Board of Selectmen (01/19/2017) — not a consultant report, but a detailed professional-grade design review explicitly aimed at supporting commerce, tourism, and a “vibrant, welcoming environment” in Lexington Center. LexingtonNEXTComprehensive Plan – Goal 3: Economic Vitality (09/28/2022) — townwide but repeatedly spotlights Lexington Center as a priority commercial district; includes economic activity baselines and “third places” framing tied to district vibrancy. LexingtonNEXTComprehensive Plan Presentation (PowerPoint PDF)(2022) — summarizes objectives including “Improve Lexington Center so that it becomes more of a destination.” (Lexington Website) Center Retail Strategy Report (2019)— this is repeatedly referenced as a core revitalization document and is posted as a Lexington Document Center PDF, but the web tool intermittently failed to fetch the file content. You should still be able to access it from the Town site here: (Lexington Website) Lexington Center Parking Study (2001) — by VHB; this is explicitly cited as foundational in the 2010/2014 Downtown Initiative work. Included here only becauselater studies build on it. (Lexington Website) 110 Housing Partnership Board Housing in the Center: Potential Resources DHCD (Department of Housing and Community Development) An assessment by Center for New Urbanism https://www.cnu.org/and its project for code reform https://www.cnu.org/our-projects/project-code-reform MDI (Mass. Downtown Initiative) One Stop for Growth NB1 111 Housing Partnership Board Key Questions for Long-Term Strategies If current zoning is not encouraging renovation and new building what changes to height or other aspects would? How can the town encourage more housing of all types in the Center? Should there be a focus on housing for older residents? What are the right parking requirements? Could different parts of the Center benefit from different zoning? Could we create a set of clear design guidelines that include visual representations? NB1 112 Housing Partnership Board Belmont’s Form-based Code Different code requirements (building type, usage, setbacks, residential requirements) reflect the different characters of two areas Section-10-BCOD-FINAL 113 Housing Partnership Board Belmont’s Form-based Code Developers know that if they follow these building requirements that their developments will be approved Improves predictability, removes uncertainty Makes development more economical and provides a faster timeline to development Section-10-BCOD-FINAL 114 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Community Outreach 1 115 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Website Mock-Ups 2 116 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Website Mock-Ups 3 117 Housing Partnership Board Expanding Housing Options: Website Mock-Ups 4 118 05/11/2026 7:40pm PRESENTER: Jill Hai ITEM NUMBER: 3 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING AGENDA SECTION TITLE: ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Work Session - Discussion: Select Board FY2026-2027 Goals Next Steps and Preparation for Financial Policy Summits SUMMARY: The Select Board's FY 26-27 goals were adopted in December 2026. This discussion is a check-in on progress, as well as a discussion on next steps to continue forward progress, identify any impediments and determine what resources/collaborations may be warranted. Staff will also have updates on progress toward the goals they have achieved. Upcoming meetings are scheduled for individual Select Board members and SMT members working on particular goals. The Board will also discuss goals for June 10, 2026 Financial Policy Summit as well as the annual Financial Summits for FY28 budget. DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: ATTACHMENTS: Select Board FY26-7 Goals.pdf 119 FY2026-27 Select Board Goals and Goal Statements Note: Goals and goal areas are presented in no particular order, and the list does not reflect any prioritization. Each goal was assigned to one member of the Board to move it forward. All goals will be continually reevaluated. December 2025 1. Complete the Lexington High School Project (Joe Pato) 1.1 Proactively drive actions to meet planned timelines with MSBA and legislature. 1.2 Identify opportunities to lower the cost and impact on residential taxes 1.3 Engage residents to explain and address tax implications 2. Clean, Healthy, Resilient Lexington (Mark Sandeen) 2.1 Incorporate Capital Projects Solar Canopy Integration Policy into business practices 2.2 Continue decarbonizing municipal buildings and electrifying municipal vehicles according to the High-Performance Building Policy and Fleet Electrification Policy 2.3 Reduce waste generation while increasing composting and recycling according to the Zero Waste Plan 3. Economic and Community Vibrancy (Vineeta Kumar) 3.1 Propose options for next steps for revitalizing the center 3.2 Integrate the external equity officer position into the fabric of the community 3.3 Propose strategies for enhancing economic opportunities in all business districts 4. Fiscal Stability (Doug Lucente) 4.1 Avoid operational overrides 4.2 Identify options for revenue diversification and commercial tax base growth 4.3 Convene conversations on long-term financial challenges and policy guidance. 5. Livable Community (Jill Hai) 5.1 Evaluate a true 10% affordable housing goal 5.2 Advance the Bicycle and Pedestrian access plan and Traffic Safety Group recommendations as a means of increasing safety and multi-modal and public transportation 5.3 Propose strategies to enhance a sense of community and connection, taking into consideration health, safety, and systemic barriers. 120 PRESENTER: Board Discussion ITEM NUMBER: 4 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING AGENDA SECTION TITLE: ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Discussion: Townwide Referendum Regarding 2026 Annual Town Meeting Article 31 Regulation of Refuse Disposal and Potential Vote to Call for Special Election SUMMARY: Category: Discussion Article 8 of the 1929 Special Act to create the Representative Town Meeting form of Government in Lexington, provides that an action of Town Meeting may be overturned if: 1) a petition signed by at least 3% of registered voters is submitted to the Select Board within 5 days following the end of Town Meeting, not including Sundays. This means it must be submitted by Saturday May 9th. 2) The Select Board then must call for an election within 10 days of such submittal. Assuming it is submitted on May 9th, this would be required by May 19, which is before our next scheduled meeting. Therefore, if such a petition was submitted by the deadline, the Board will discuss tonight dates on which to hold such election and vote to call the election on the date resolved. Approximate cost of a stand alone special election is $45,000. According to the Town Clerk, if a referendum were held alongside the November election, costs would be significantly higher, as the Clerk's office would need to run two simultaneous elections. The Clerk's office has been informed by the State, that the Town may not hold a special election in conjunction with a primary election. The election date should be at least 35 days after the date on which it is called. PROPOSED MOTION: Move to call a town-wide special election on the ___ of ____, 2026, to determine whether the Town should vote to approve the action of Town Meeting, amending section 90-9 of the General Bylaws to (1) provide for free residential trash disposal up to a threshold level to be set by the Select Board and (2) permit the Select Board to charge reasonable fees for trash disposal in excess of that baseline and that the Town Clerk be authorized to prepare the ballot and take all actions necessary to conduct the election. 121 05/11/2026 8:05pm DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 122 05/11/2026 8:15pm PRESENTER: Kim Katzenback, Executive Clerk ITEM NUMBER: 5 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON SELECT BOARD MEETING AGENDA SECTION TITLE: ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Reorganization of the Select Board SUMMARY: Category: Decision-Making Following the dissolution of the 2026 Annual Town Meeting, the Select Board is required to elect a Chair and Vice-Chair for the upcoming term. The Board will vote to appoint a new Chair and Vice- Chair to serve beginning July 1, 2026 at which time the elected officers will assume their respective roles and responsibilities for the ensuing year. PROPOSED MOTION: Motion to elect _______ Chair of the Select Board. Motion to elect ________ Vice-Chair of the Select Board. Effective July 1, 2026 DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 123