Tax relief via more business?

Officials weigh commercial boost

Town revenues could increase by as much as $50 million within a decade under proposals to allow business expansion currently being studied by Lexington officials. But the price tag for managing the added traffic could cut down on savings for taxpayers.

Meanwhile, a public forum this Saturday will help shape zoning changes related to the proposals.

Local planners are doing the numbers now and do not yet know how residential taxpayers would fare under the changes, some of which may come before Town Meeting for a vote next spring.

"We've had the pressure of a poor economy, we've had consistently increasing expenses, we've had overrides, and some have lost," said Mollie K. Garberg, cochairwoman of the Lexington Vision 2020 Economic Development Task Force, which recently presented its proposals to the local Planning Board and Board of Selectmen. "There's a great need to investigate alternative sources of revenue other than going to the taxpayer."

After about 20 years of unparalleled residential growth but with brakes on commercial expansion, this bedroom community is beginning to feel an economic pinch. Municipal officials here - as in Belmont and around the state - are seeking a commercial revival by making it easier for businesses to build out and up. The officials say that could help underwrite soaring town expenses.

Lexington's revenue projections now assume 4 percent to 4.5 percent growth in the tax levy annually, including new residential and commercial construction, but a rise in expenditures each year of 5 percent to 6 percent, according to the new task force report.

Commercial expansion could close the gap, but to achieve it, the town must revise zoning bylaws and allow faster granting of permits for construction, the report says. It targets three areas for new growth - Hartwell Avenue, Spring Street/Hayden Avenue, and Forbes Road. All currently have significant commercial development.

If Town Meeting approves the proposals, the town could see $1 million worth of growth each year, with a possible $50 million added to municipal revenue in 10 years, depending on the general economic climate, Garberg said.

The report also calls for requiring developers to incorporate environmentally sound technology and energy conservation measures and devising a strategy to mitigate the extra traffic resulting from their projects.

Local officials agree that it will be a delicate balancing act to decide who will foot the bulk of the bill for traffic abatement, which can be costly if it involves widening roads, installing traffic lights, and the like. One possibility is for the town to issue a bond and have taxpayers pay for improvements over time; another is for developers to pay the freight. Or there could be a combination of both.

"It's all a question of what is fair and workable," Planning Board Chairman Charles Hornig said in an interview last week. "There isn't a single right answer. When everyone is speaking from their self-interest, it's obvious they would want someone else to pay for it. Some people are going to be happy, and some unhappy, however it comes out."

Hornig conceded that planners do not yet know how much commercial growth would be needed to lower residential taxes nor whether the cost of traffic mitigation would wipe out the benefits for taxpayers.

"We haven't done an analysis of that question, but the preliminary numbers that have been talked about would seem to indicate that it doesn't have to be a wash," Hornig said.

He said the town will hold a public forum Saturday at 9:30 a.m. at the Cary Library, 1874 Massachusetts Ave., to discuss possible changes to the zoning code to increase the floor-area ratio and what that would mean for municipal revenue, residential taxes, and traffic. The forum will help the Planning Board fashion proposals for Town Meeting next spring, he said.

The action comes after planning officials got a rude awakening last spring, Hornig said, when Town Meeting members voted on a zoning measure that would have allowed an increase in the size of commercial buildings.

The bylaw, proposed by the Lexington Chamber of Commerce, would have increased the floor-area ratio - the allowed size of a building as compared with the area of the lot on which it sits, excluding wetlands - from the current .15 to .35. At the higher ratio, many buildings could build up to three stories.

The measure was only eight votes shy of passage, and the five Planning Board members all voted against it.

"Town Meeting members sent a loud message to the Planning Board," Chamber Vice President Larry Smith, a real estate developer, said in an interview last week. "It really sent a message to the board to get this fixed."

Smith, who had drawn up the proposal, said he believes voters were expressing frustration with rising taxes that he believes could be alleviated by new commercial growth.

"Basically, Lexington was being left behind in the rear-view mirror as far as economic development was concerned," Smith said.

Connie Paige can be reached at connie_paige@yahoo.com.