Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-11-25-TMG-minTraffic Mitistation Group Meeting November 25, 2008 Present: Richard Canale, David Cannon, Elaine Dratch, Jeanne Krieger, Sudhir Murthy, Arthur Smith, Jerry Van Hook, Gail Wagner, Susan Yanofsky Beal TDM Negotiations ➢ TMG as a committee was not part of the Beal TDM negotiations. ➢ Town Manager felt negotiations could not involve an entire committee. Negotiations are difficult in an open session. ➢ Payment to town mitigation fund and neighborhood traffic mitigation was addressed. ➢ Escrow payment for trip reduction was being manipulated by Beal to their advantage. As a consequence, the Town may reconsider this requirement in the future. Review of Charge for Traffic Mitigation Group ➢ Charge states "new" development as focus. ➢ Board of Appeals reviews changes to existing properties. TMG input would be useful to the Board of Appeals when reviewing "change of use." Design Advisory Review and Communications Advisory Board have been helpful in reviewing issues before the Board of Appeals. ➢ Elected Boards, such as Planning, develop bylaws. Current tasks before the Planning Board are Parking and Hartwell Avenue (floor area ratio). Town boards and committees addressing transportation issues are available for input. ➢ Bylaws should be specific, but flexible. ➢ Planning Board will review Hartwell Avenue on December 10, as it will appear as a Warrant Article at Town Meeting. ➢ Infrastructure improvements need to address "mobility" not just traffic. ➢ Staff works on implementation of bylaws within the scope of their expertise. ➢ Town, developers, and outside funding sources need to share responsibilities for large infrastructure projects. ➢ Outside funding sources such as State Highway or Moore Grant may stipulate terms that cannot be negotiated by the Town. TDM Traffic Improvement Contributions ➢ How much choice should developer have in earmarking TDM contributions? ➢ Examples from local municipalities were noted showing that at times city or developer has specified TDM funded projects. ➢ A formula based on a percentage basis was raised. Example: 75% of TDM funds must be used in development area and 25% Town's discretion. ➢ It is easier for the Town to manage funds based on town's discretion. ➢ Wording of bylaws can establish leverage for Town if challenged. �iclPVValkc ➢ Streets designated as arterials should have sidewalks on both sides. ➢ The amended Town bylaw does not hold a developer responsible for sidewalks if none exist adjacent to the property being developed. This is not in the best interest of the Town. Sidewalk Committee may consider reviewing. ➢ Spring Street sidewalk meeting December 3, 7pm, Cary Memorial Hall. Project is part of a State Moore Grant and includes intersection at Spring St and Marrett Rd. Minutes submitted by Gail Wagner, Transportation Services, Nov 4, 2008 Next Meeting, December 23, 9:30 am, Room 111