Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011-01-04-SLC-min Town of Lexington Sustainable Lexington Committee Minutes of Meeting of January 4, 2011 A meeting of the Sustainable Lexington Committee (SLC) was held on January 4, 2011 in the Legion Meeting Room, Cary Hall. The full committee was present. Members Present: Mark Sandeen, Chair Rick Abrams, Ken Moraff, Todd Rhodes Guests: George Burnell Michael Daley John Rommelfanger The meeting was called to order at 7:05 pm. Mr. Sandeen reviewed the rules of order by which the meeting will be managed. In order for the committee to address all agenda items in a timely manner, comments from the audience would be welcomed at the conclusion of the committee’s discussion of specific agenda items, at the discretion of the Chair. The audience was requested to keep comments focused on the agenda items under discussion and limit the comment length to three minutes per person, ten minutes overall. The agenda for the meeting was reviewed. The plan for the next meeting (January 25, 2011) is to focus on the energy efficiency program. The November 18, 2010 meeting minutes were approved as submitted. Stormwater Management: Mr. Moraff provided an overview of his discussions with John Livsey (DPW) regarding programs to address surface water management. Key points discussed in this overview and subsequent discussion include the following: The DPW is aware of the new technologies available to address stormwater runoff and has employed some approaches at the DPW facility itself, including permeable pavement. The DPW has found that the permeable pavement employed at the facility is not as durable as standard pavement, but acknowledges that the technology has improved since its implementation at the site. The DPW wants to implement new technologies at a measured pace. For example, they are aware of a pilot project on a section of I-95 in Maine that is using permeable pavement. They will review the costs and benefits of this application of the technology as information becomes available. Page 1 of 4 Mr. Brunell identified that the Town is considering a $22 million road paving program with a goal of getting the town roads to 83% of standard. The recommendation for the consultants is to focus on the main roads (getting them up to standard) and then considering secondary roads based on available resources. The intent is to present the plan to Town Meeting in March to get approval for the funding of the project. If approved, then a plan will be prepared with details of how the paving will be conducted. Mr. Brunell recommended that the SLC interface with the Planning Board o if it has recommendations for alternative technologies or approaches that should be considered as part of this project. Mr. Moraff identified that there are draft town regulations in development that address stormwater management. A key element of these draft regulations is that new development shall not increase stormwater runoff on the property or adjacent properties. These draft regulations only address new construction. Some communities are considering regulations that would also address re-development. Mr. Sandeen identified that the IGCC out of California has also developed standards with a large emphasis on water. The SLC needs to identify who in town is involved in reviewing these o regulations. Mr. Brunell recommended that the SLC contact the Conservation Committee, the Planning Board, and the DPW. He also identified that most re-development in town is “by right” and the Town has limited authority, but the Planning Board has been successful in getting people to do what’s right. The Planning Board can also change by- laws. During his discussion with DPW, Mr. Moraff promoted the idea of running larger, more visible pilot projects in town that would demonstrate the use of new technologies/ approaches. He identified that other towns, such as Franklin, were implementing new technologies and that Lexington could also learn from them. A key point in the planning of such a project would be to match the implementation to an area of town that has experienced stormwater damage (flooding) so that the benefits can be more clearly assessed. The project could address any paved area (street, parking lot, etc.). Mr. Moraff presented a series of slides showing how some of these technologies/ approaches have been implemented in Portland, OR and Edmonston, MD. Additional information is available at the U.S. EPA site “EPA Green Street Guide”. The presentation includes a list of benefits of the new technologies. Benefits discussed during the meeting included: Reduced flooding in the affected area o Reduced strain on the MWRA and pollution in the harbor (that would o result when sewers are overwhelmed by stormwater) Reduced energy consumption related to pumping stormwater o Nutrient retention – keeping nutrients (e.g., fertilizer, etc.) from getting o washed into waterways – a cause of “dead zones” in the waterways. It was Page 2 of 4 Reduced urban “heat islands” – paved areas that retain heat in the summer o Mr. Moraff stated that one area where the DPW would like support from the SLC is in the consideration of Town requirements related to the construction of building foundations. Historically, Lexington had a rule that all foundations had to be at least two feet above the water table. That restriction was removed and homes are being built with foundations that extend into the water table, resulting in situations where homeowners are pumping water out of their basements on an ongoing basis. Mr. Livesley identified that the Conservation Committee was already supporting the idea of reinstating the rule. He requested support from the SLC to take action to help reinstate the rule. Mr. Brunell recommended that the SLC consult with the Planning Board o to get more information about the topic. Mr. Moraff also reported that the DPW is using “old” data provided by the state to size culverts. The committee discussed the importance of considering the potential for larger and more frequent storms when designing/updating the stormwater management infrastructure. Mr. Sandeen, presented the chart of local rainfall intensity (also presented at the September 28, 2010 meeting), which suggests that the intensity of local storms is becoming more intense. The next steps discussed at the conclusion of the stormwater management portion of the meeting were: 1.Review draft regulations (discussed above) to gain a better understanding of what is being proposed and compare them to IGCC regulations. 2.Collect information about the Franklin, MA pilot project, UNH studies and other towns so that we can learn from these efforts. 3.Talk with the Planning Board, DPW and the Conservation Committee to understand what plans they are considering with regard to the proposed town road paving project. Mr. Moraff will work with other committee members to establish responsibilities for completing these tasks. Mr. Sandeen opened the floor for comments: Mr. Rommelfanger recommended that the town take advantage of trying new approaches to help manage stormwater. Mr. Daley commented that impervious surfaces likely cover at most 20% of the town and that programs focused on re-vegetation can also be beneficial (i.e., plants to pull and store water from the ground). For example, Rutland, VT has a program where residents can purchase a tree at cost to plant on their property. The value of rainbarrels to store and use stormwater was also discussed. Mr. Rommelfanger also recommended that the town consider the use of waterless urinals in town buildings to reduce water consumption. The group discussed that the cost/benefits of such a change would need to be assessed, and commented that some businesses in town have already installed waterless urinals. Page 3 of 4 Update on Other Committee Activities: Mr. Sandeen then provided the following updates: SLC Website: Mr. Sandeen and Mr. Abrams met with Candy McLaughlin regarding the potential for an SLC website. Many of the tools envisioned for the website have never been used before by the town, but Ms. McLaughlin was willing to consider them. The committee discussed the idea of using the website to collect data from home owners/contractors when they apply for a building permit (either to drive people to the website or when they apply for the permit at the town office). Mr. Brunell suggested that data could also be collected in the computer currently used to process permits, and recommended that any additional data requirements not generate too much “red tape” for those applying for permits. Electric Car Recharging Station Proposal: The proposal has been submitted with recommendations for stations in the center of town, Hartwell Ave. and Hayden Ave. Planning Board / Richard Canale: Mr. Sandeen and Mr. Rhodes met with Richard Canale, a member of the Town Planning Board and the town representative to MAPC and MAGIC. He recommended that the SLC make a presentation to the Planning Board during the first quarter of 2011 to provide the Board with an overview of the SLC charter and activities. He also recommended that the SLC consider transportation issues in the town. Mr. Brunell commented that while the town has a Transportation Committee and there are town staff focused on LexPress, there is no specific leadership on municipal transportation issues. NextStep Living: Mr. Sandeen and Mr. Abrams met with representatives from NextStep Living to discuss how we might work together to improve residential energy efficiency in town. The company is preparing a proposal for our review. Revolving Funds: Mr. Sandeen summarized options for establishing a revolving fund to help finance energy efficiency projects. Mr. Brunell recommended that we look into opportunities to get funding from the utilities. Mr. Sandeen suggested that savings from town energy efficiency projects (e.g., the street light program) should go back into a fund for future programs. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Todd Rhodes, Scribe Page 4 of 4