Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984-04-23 Special Town Meeting MinutesSPECIAL TOWN MEETING Reading Memorial High School April 23, 1984 The meeting was called to order by the Moderator, John W. Faria, at 8:00 P.M., there being a quorum present. ARTICLE 1. On motion of Maureen T. O'Brien it was voted that the attached report of the Board of Public Works Facility Relocation Committee, presented by Douglass L. Barker, was accepted as a report of progress. ARTICLE 1. On motion of Maureen T. O'Brien it was voted to lay Article 1 on the table. ARTICLE 2. On motion of Maureen T. O'Brien it was voted to lay Article 2 on the table. ARTICLE 3. On motion of Russell T. Graham it was voted that the Capital Outlay Plan as provided for under Article III, Section 2 of the By -Laws of the Town as adopted at the Subsequent Town Meeting of November 1983 and as amended at the Annual Town Meeting of April 1984 be amended as follows: FY 85 ADD as follows: PUBLIC WORKS BPW garage and related facilities 3,000.0 Environmental assessment 50.0 Engineering, architectural & borings 174.5 BOARD OF SELECTMEN Land acquisition 1,600.0 ARTICLE 5. On motion of Maureen T. O'Brien it was voted to take up Article 5 out of order. ARTICLE 5. Maureen T. O'Brien moved that the Town vote to rescind the vote taken on November 17, 1983 under Article 10 of the Warrant for the November, 1983 Subsequent Town Meeting, which vote authorized the Board of Selectmen to sell upon certain specified terms and conditions 15.229 acres of land, more or less, shown as Parcel 2 on Assessors' Plat 46, presently occupied by the Department of Public Works, to the Analytic Sciences Corporation (TASC). This Article was voted in the Negative. 14 voted in the affirmative 136 voted in the negative ARTICLE 5. John W. Price moved for reconsideration of the vote under Article 5. On motion of Nils L. Nordberg it was voted to lay the motion to reconsider on the table. ARTICLE 4. Maureen T. O'Brien moved that the Town vote to rescind the vote taken on November 21, 1983 under Article 6 of the Warrant for the November, 1983 Subsequent Town Meeting, which vote authorized the Board of Selectmen to sell the land described in the Motion made under Article 10 of said Warrant to the Analytic Sciences Corporation (TASC) pursuant to the terms and conditions specified in the Motion made under said Article 10 and upon certain other terms and conditions. This Article was voted in the Negative. 14 voted in the affirmative 136 voted in the negative ARTICLE 6. table. ARTICLE 7. table. ARTICLE 8. table. On motion of Barry E. Hampson it was voted to lay Article 6 on the On motion of Barry E. Hampson it was voted to lay Article 7 on the On motion of Barry E. Hampson it was voted to lay Article 8 on the ARTICLE 14. On motion of Barry E. Hampson it was voted to take up Article 14 out of order. ARTICLE 14. Robert J. Tulikangas moved that the Town transfer the care, custody, management and control of the land, or portions thereof described as follows: Beginning at a point on the northeasterly sideline of John Street; Thence N 43 -26' -00" a distance of 531.10 feet, along the northeasterly sideline of John Street, to a point, said point being a point of curvature; e) n/� Special Town Meeting April 23, 1984 Thence by a curved line to the right, having a radius of 1,000.00 feet, a distance of 269.78 feet to a point, said point being a point of tangency; Thence N 70 -52' -40" E a distance of 88.14 feet to a point; Thence N 84 -55' -30" E a distance of 263.67 feet to a point; Thence S 81 -01' -00" E a distance of 628.05 feet to a point; Thence S 43 -26' -00" E a distance of 100.00 feet to a point; Thence S 46 -34' -00" W a distance of 706.31 feet to a point, said point being the point of beginning of this description; said parcel containing 8.32 acres more or less which constitute a portion of what is commonly known as the Town of Reading landfill, from various officials and Boards of the Town of Reading to the Board of Public Works for use as a site for the Board of Public Works garage and related facilities. On motion of Carl H. Amon, Jr. it was voted to lay Article 14 on the table. ARTICLE 10. On motion of Carl H. Amon, Jr. it was voted to take up Article 10 out of order. ARTICLE 10. Richard C. Rudolph moved that the Town establish a Public Works Study Committee, appointed by the Board of Selectmen, whose purpose will be to study all the present and future needs for services to the Town of Reading provided by the Department of Public Works and to identify the most cost - effective means for delivering such services; the scope of said study to include an assessment of immediate building and exterior space needs, the potential for contracting out certain services now performed by the Department, and the potential for self funding certain services now performed by the Department, or any other matters concerning said DPW pertinent thereto; said committee to include one (1) member each from the Board of Public Works, Planning Board, and the Board of Selectmen, and five (5) citizens at large not associated with the DPW, and will include as a consultant the Superintendent of Public Works or his nominee; chairman of said committee to be chosen from among the five at -large citizens. Said committee shall report and make any recommendations thereto to the 1984 Fall Town Meeting. This Article was voted in the Negative On motion of Maureen T. O'Brien it was voted that this meeting stand adjourned to meet at 7:30 P.M. on Thursday, April 26th, 1984, in the Reading Memorial High School auditorium. Meeting adjourned at 10:52 P. M. 165 Town Meeting members were present. A true copy. Attest: �/ GJ �. Lawrence Drew Town Clerk TOWN OF READING OF' R zt4 6�9: INCORQO4 BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY RELOCATION COMMITTEE REPORT TO SPECIAL TOWN MEETING APRIL 23, 1984 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The committee deeply appreciates the timely support and cooperation it has received. We are particularly thankful to: • Miss Cynthia Burbine, Board of Public Works, for her clerical assistance • The Engineering Division of the BPW for their research and preparation of maps • Messers W. Bergeron and E. McIntire, Asst. Superintendents of the BPW for their time and input 0 Mr. Barry Hampson for his many contribu- tions and his subcommittee for their preparation of the proposed RFP on site analysis s Mr. Ben Nichols for his Land Bank Com- mittee Report. 1 . i TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION SUBJECT I. Origin of Committee II. Introduction III. Present Site IV. Proposed Needs V. Potential Alternatives VI. Recommendations VII. Town Meeting Motions VIII. Closing Thoughts IX. Appendix L PAGE 3 3 5 5 8 10 11 12 13 1. Origin of Committee The Public Works Facility Relocation Committee was created by ARTICLE 2 of the December 1, 1983 Town of Reading Town Meeting. The Committees' purpose will be "to select a site for the relocation of the Public Works facility necessary to effect the potential conveyance of land as voted under Article 10, and to produce preliminary plans and cost estimates for such relocation. Said Committee shall produce such plans to be presented to Town Meeting no later than the subsequent Town Meeting of 1984." The Committee, appointed by the Moderator, consisted of the following members: Douglass L. Barker Charles R. Arthur, Jr. Francis B. Robie Paul C. Dustin Frank H. Baggs, Jr. Richard L. Sullivan Robert J. Tulikangas Board of Public Works Planning Board Conservation Commission Board of Selectmen Town Meeting Member Town Meeting Member Town Meeting Member The following are associate members: Edward D. McIntire, Jr William R. Bergeron, PE Randolph R. Harrison, Jr. II. Introduction Asst. Supt. of Public Works - Operations Asst. Supt: of Public Works - Engineering Finance Committee 1 The Committee met for the first time on January 4, 1984 and has met every subsequent Wednesday, less one snow cancellation, to conduct its assigned task. Douglass L. Barker was elected Chairman of the Committee and Frank H. Baggs, Jr. was elected Secretary. The Committee's initial focus was the selection of possible relocation sites. The Committee reviewed a list of 187 potential sites. The initial review was from a listing of sites prepared by the Land Bank Committee. An additional com- puter 'Listing from Town Records was prepared for all private and publicly owned sites with a useable land area of 4 acres or more. The Committee agreed to try to select a site which would continue the existing consolidation of BPW operations. The present BPW facility has 0.89 acres of building space and approx. 12 acres of outside area. The present snow dump con- tains an additional 4.0 acres and this dumping site could con- tinue to be separate. 3 Additional sites were also recommended to the Committee by the Planning Board and citizens of the town. The Committee systematically reviewed each of the potential sites. A majority of the sites were rejected for the following reasons: 1. Site in a flood plain area. 2. Hazardous waste spillage on the site could potentially .contaminate the Ipswich River watershed. 3. Site was only accessible through thickly populated residential areas. 4. The site owner advised the Committee in writing a preference not to sell the property for BPW use. Committee meetings were well attended by concerned citizens who in general provided the input concerning protection of the watershed and, "We do not want the DPW in our neighborhood." The Committee after much deliberation narrowed the new site selection to four potential sites -- The John Street landfill, the Nike Site, Haverhill Street, Adams - Gentile property, and the Dubitzky property. A public hearing was held on March 14,1984 to obtain public input relative to these sites. This meeting was attended by 134 citizens and telecast by Cable T.V. Substantial citizen input was also received to retain the BPW at its present location. Four petitions were received relative to citizen preference. In order to provide Town Meeting with all necessary information, the committee selected an appraiser to determine a fair property value for the two privately owned sites. This was done to provide realistic comparisons of the sites being considered. Also, such information will be helpful should Town Meeting wish to further consider either o•f these sites. The space requirements for a new BPW operation were obtained by: 1. Requesting and obtaining recommended space requirements from the BPW. 2. Utilizing data generated from a survey of facilities of surrounding towns. The committee obtained a $7,500 transfer from the Finance Com- mittee for the purpose of acquiring professional appraisal L services. In order to minimize expenditures, the Committee took advantage of BPW personnel expertise to estimate site preparation and building costs. III. Present Site 1. Indoor Areas The present John Street site of the Town of Reading Board of Public Works (The Department) presently uses 37,778 sq. ft. of indoor building space. This indoor building space is contained within 5 separate buildings: the "old" garage, the "equipment storage" garage, the incinerator, the unheated storage building and the salt storage building. Contained within this space are vehicle and equipment maintenance shops, storage areas (heated and un- heated) and office space for supervisory personnel. The Department also uses 1,200 sq. ft. located in a building at the Bear Hill Nike Site for storage of Parks and Recreation equipment. This space will be consolidated in the new facility. The Department's Administrative and Engineering offices are located at the Reading Town Hall Building, occupying 2,913 sq. ft. Therefore, the Department is presently occupying 41,891 sq. ft. of indoor space. 2. Outside Areas The Department uses approx. 9 acres of land at its present location for outside storage of equipment and materials. 3. See Table A on page 7. IV. Proposed Needs 1. Indoor Areas The BPW projects requirements of 44,160 sq. ft. This area is to be used for vehicle maintenance and storage, super- visory offices, maintenance shops and material storage. However, if administration and engineering offices are relocated to this new facility, an additional 3,000 sq. ft. would be required. Therefore, the Dept proposes occupying 47,160 of Indoor Space. 2. Outside Areas The BPW projects the necessary outside areas (exclusive of buildings) at the proposed new facility site of approximately five (5) acres minimum. This area is to be used for roadways and driveways, parking areas (employee and visitor), fuel pump- ing facilities, pipe, loam, gravel and sand storage, salt and sand mixing area, nursery area and other storage pertinent to the BPW operations. 3. See Table A on page 7. 6 TABLE A I. BUIDLING AREA PRESENT (S.F.) -REQUESTED (S.F.) 1. Shops & Storage 10,837 12,600 2. Personnel 2,022 41000 3. Equipment Maint. 3,286 5,000 4. Equip. Storage (unheated) 8,600 9,600 5. Equip. Storage (heated) 10,873 9,600 6. Salt Storage 3,360 3,360 Sub -total 38,978 44,160 7. Admin., Engineer & BPW 2,913 3,000 Totals 41,891 47,160 II. OUTSIDE AREAS Nursery area 7,500 (S.F.) Cut Tree Storage 2,500 Wood Chip Storage 2,500 Water Pipe Storage 8,000 Gravel, Stone, Cold Patch 28,800 Loam Stock & Shredder Oper. 24,000 Drain M.H. & Pipe Storage 5,400 Snow Plow Storage 1,750 Salt, Sand & Mixing Area 241000 Used Pipe, Curbing, Manholes 12,500 Grass Area 241000 Roadways & Drive Ways 62,600 Gas Storage & Pumping Facil. 4,800 Parking 12,000 Totals =9 acres 220,350 (S.F.) = 5.06 acres V. Potential Alternatives The Committee reviewed many sites throughout the town. As a result of our deliberations, we arrived at the following four sites: ' The Landfill The town owned landfill site is a 33.62 acre parcel with about 25 acres being usable. It is an industrial zoned area located on John St. across from the present facility. The topography is variable and the soils are mainly of refuse fill. The proposed site would occupy 8.26 acres of the landfill and would be located on John St. to the left of the present entrance to the disposal area. It is a triangular shaped area bordered by the drainage ditch on the front and through the left side. In order to make this location buildable, the drainage ditch which runs along the front and cuts across the site would require its piping or relocation parallel to John St. The refuse presently on this site would have to be moved to another part of the landfill. Sewer and water lines would have to be. set on pilings as would the foundations of the buildings. There is a possibility of extraordinary maintenance of buildings, roadways and parking area of the site due to continued settling. The choice of this portion of the landfill would have a minimal effect on future industrial development of the area, while allowing for good buffers between the site and residential areas. Being located on John St. just 2.0 miles from the geo- graphic center of town, it gives good access to all parts of town with little change in traffic flow. The location of the B.P.W. on this site does not pose a threat to existing or po- tential water supplies. The Dubitzky Property The Dubitzky property is located on lower Salem St. There are two parcels of property which make up the 9.5 acre site. The first is a 3.4 acre business zoned lot where Gallahues Market and a Flea Market (formerly Stones) are located. The second parcel is an undeveloped 6.1 acre residentially zoned lot bounded by a brook on the northwesterly side. Much of this tract appears to be old filled land and the rear of the site is within the flood plain. The undeveloped parcel alone would not be suitable for the B.P.W. because the site is located on a curve in the road, access would be unsafe and the wetlands to the rear of the site would make it difficult to place the buildings and provide adequate buffers for nearby residences. Both par- cels must be considered if the B.P.W. is to be located here. 8 V The location on Salem St. is 1.9 miles from the geo- graphic center of town and has good access to all parts of town, however during rush hours, the roadway becomes congested and will impede the response of B.P.W. equipment. The facility will increase the traffic volume on Salem St.�by 500 vehicles per work day. The location allows for adequate buffering from residential areas, and location of the B.P.W. on this site does not pose a threat to existing or potential water supplies. There is a lease on the Gallahues' building which would have to be bought out. The Flea Market is rented on a month to month basis. The Adams - Gentile Land The Adams - Gentile site is a 21.1 area parcel with 15.8 acres being level and useable. It is zoned residential and currently has operating greenhouses as well as five homes. There are two alternatives for locating the B.P.W. on this site. The first alternative would include the land with all of the buildings. The property is now accessed by a private road off Pleasant St. just below the Little League Park. This road is completely unacceptable for D.P.W. use, therefore access would be from Salem St. through privately owned residential property. The second alternative would be to purchase the easterly part of the land. This portion contains no houses but does have a substantial part of the greenhouse activities. The tract involves 13.5 acres'of the property. Access to this land, most likely, is through some town owned land and then between the Dubitzky commercially and residentially zoned land. Some land taking would have to occur to achieve this access to the property. The town owned land through which an access road would pass is within the flood plain. Sewerage and water are available on this site with either option. Either alternative would place the facility 1.8 miles from the geographic center of town. Giving good access to all 'parts of town, however Salem St. becomes con- gested at rush hour. The facility will increase the traffic volume on Salem St. by 500 vehicles per day. The site allows for adequate buffering from residential areas and the location of the B.P.W. on this site does not pose any additional threat to existing or potential water supplies. The Nike Site The Nike Site is town owned land located off Haverhill St. It consists of about 24.4 acres of land. There are remnants of its former use with a cement block building used by the police and a large concrete pad holding three large silos built into the ground. There is a small embankment used as a back- stop for a shooting range. The entryway into the location is too narrow for B.P.W. use and would involve land taking. The entrance from Haverhill St. is on a curve and situated near a school. It is in a residential neighborhood and is across the street from a church. This site seems to abound in water. The water table appears to be very close to the surface of the land. The silos are continually full of water. This site is a water impoundment area which flows to the Ipswich River through the Cedar Swamp. This water also flows into an area of swampland used by Lynn - field Center for its well fields. The access roadway would be difficult to buffer, but in general the site provides excellent buffer potentials for residential property. Its location on'Haverhill St. places it 2.5 miles from the geographic center of town and gives fair access to other parts of town. Depending on the location of the facility on this site, the B.P.W. could pose a potential threat to our future water supplies as well as increase the traffic volume on Haverhill St. by 500 vehicles per day. Sew- age and water would have to be brought in a substantial dis- tance from the street. VI. Recommendations It is the judgement of this Committee that the B.P.W. facilities should be relocated on the Northerly portion of the landfill. The Committees' opinion is based upon the data gathered and reflects what it feels is the overall impact on the town. The selection of this portion of the landfill would have a minimum effect on any neighborhood situation. It would cause no additional threat to present or potential water supplies. It would not alter any established traffic patterns and would enable the establishment of acceptable buffers from adjoining neighborhoods. Approval of Article 14 on the warrent will transfer control of the above site to the B.P.W. In order to be able to bond this project over twenty (20) years, it will be necessary to appropriate funds only under Article 18. The committee has been advised by the Town Treasurer that Engineering and Architectural fees are only bondable for five (5) years and moving costs can only be bonded if it is included in Article 18. Therefore, in view of the financial constraints facing the town, the committee urges you to approve funding under Article 18. 10 VII. Town Meeting Motions Recommended By Committee MOTION UNDER ARTICLE 14 Moved: To transfer the care, custody, management and control of the land, or portions thereof described as follows: (Description of proposed site) which constitute a portion of what is commonly known as The Town of Reading landfill, from various officials and, Boards of The Town of Reading to The Board of Public Works for use as a site for The Board of Public Works garage and related facilities. Board of Public Works - Facility Relocation Committee MOTION UNDER ARTICLE 18 Moved: That the sum of Three Million One Hundred Eighty Five Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($3,185,500.00) be raised by borrowing and said sum be appropriated to the Board of Public Works for the purpose of construct- ing a Board of Public Works' garage and related facil- ities on a site to be designated by the Town Meeting, including site preparation, construction and /or recon- struction, originally equipping and furnishing said facilities and all other costs incidental thereto including costs of architectural, engineering and construction services, inspection and costs of financ- ing in connection therewith; and to authorize the Board of Public Works to proceed with the construction of said garage and related facilities and to authorize said Board to enter into any and all contracts and agreements necessary therefor and incidental thereto, including without limitation, contracts for, architec- tural, engineering and construction services and to do all other acts and things necessary and proper for carrying out the provisions of this vote. Board of Public Works - Facility Relocation Committee 11 VIII. Closing Thoughts Fellow Town Meeting Members, this hasn't been easy. Three months of weekly meetings have brought us to a decision of necessity. The fact is, there are no suitable sites for a new B.P.W., facility. Every possible site has raised a legiti- mate reason for not going there. Yet, a site had to be selected, because the town's financial situation required it. Our decision was based on town priorities, a lesser of evils approach. The industrial development potential for part of the John Street Landfill has been sacrificed, rather than to adversely affect citizen's neighborhoods, force people to sell their homes, or compromise a future town water supply. The choice has been made, and it is our hope the best one for the Town of Reading. 12 IX APPENDIX The following reports are included to assist Town Meeting Members in their evaluation of the Committee's recommendations. 1. Public Works Facility and Operation Survey 2. Prospective Site Information Sheets 3. Haley & Aldrich study of present D.P.W. site for hazardous materials. 4. Site Financial Analysis 5. Estimated Facility Cost. JI 13 31 W 2 O H t-; O y F-I H M-+ V rte+ O 3 V r-� p C.r 1 533x0'IdN3 30 .p N CC O n ON O� C'1 p # qVioz 3ISt'M I algos > > > > I > > IHOI'I NOIIV,dlsiNIW(rd > I > > I > I > I > > MawclIIIa3 i 30tQHN3INIi�h 1 I I � I ONIQ•III1H II3HI0 cts 3 w 2i0 W > zLaz >I> >I > > > > lual km 0 Cl) W I I m i cn SX"Cl I j /x2IIS32103 I uams (> i > > I > > i ` >i > I >; I > > I > x3IdM i I I I I I I Om33NION3 I :s. N DC O G a LM I I C F < 3 U •+ M !'1 Z X J I i ! I I I � I EXGtAv I w W n i I ¢o F<cn< u n %O N v1 p f") J Z N I O� I c•! c'1 J F C O N e0 I i I I I _ w -•• ' O [^.� W to O+ O� n p I N I I j C', ! � I < 0 U a 1+ p n N �n ^ n l C D` C` O G 6 F< < 0Wma.0 o 0 E..==cn m I , •• Z X M O O ^ C"1 ^ O I •-• I O O I CT co M J O! O O O I O( O O N p CT I F F W J J O n �O �O o O J I •• c+1 ,< < C� v GO n O � Q` CC N O� of J I J O+ •••• •-• O l O N O� I O n I X Z w N ^ N n M N Cl) t•7 D\ N N j N Op p Ln cc Ln J N "D \ \ < I F > t I a� I j c'^f I N M1 n cN:•.w3 .= O D O N c"1 o O o J i J o J o ' •••• � C` 10 W rn n O CC £ O10 ., ... J I � IJ. C Z , O O O O O O O O Co O O 10 O O F O O O C b O C Ln O o O J O O a M O CT O O C O I n O O O N O O O C1 n J p CO G. N .N•� N N N N N N N N I N P•1 rN- w 00 00 E N L ep L N a A L a C c L •r c0 t 1+ a C o L v1 a > a N a •••+ w t a u: 3 c w ••, R L eC a > C � %• 'C C •°•� Y O L •C C . a a O a z x C) X eo C a p W w c l¢ 3 3 3 1 v v 3 SANITARY LANDFILL GENERAL. INFORMATION LOCATION Opp. 1.81. John Street PRESENT OWNER Town of Reading B.P.W. TOTAL LAND AREA 33.62 Acres USABLE LAND AREA 25 Acres (Approx.) PRESENT USE Sanitary Landfill ZONED Industrial. CITIZ.EN'S CONCERNS SAFETY (TRAFFIC) No change from exisitng. POTENTIAL_ FOR BUFFERS Excellent IMPAIT ON NEIGHBORHOOD Property valuation; possible negative effect on future industrial development. I.-AND TAKINGS Nnne ENVIRONMFNTAI._ TSSUES DEOE requirements re' Landfill re -use EXISTING SOILS Poor and unstable EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY Variable SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS UTIL..ITY REQUIREMENTS Main Extensions required - on piles ACCESS ROAD REQUIREMENTS New access required FOUNDATION CONCERNS Piles - methane gas consideration BUFFERS Depending on location within site LOCATION Direct access to center of Town via John & Washington Sts. Ij 15 j- I L DUBITZKY PROPERTY GENERAL INFORMATION LOCATION Salem Street opposite Libby Avenue & Ciao State Road PRESFNT OWNER Aaron Dubi.txky TOTAL_ LAND AREA 9.5 Acres (? Lots) USABLE LAND AREA 7.8 Acres (21 Lots) PRESENT USE Residential /Commercial ZONED S -10 (Business) CITIZEN`S CONCERNS SAFETY (TRAFFIC) - High traffic volume; roadway curve POTENTIAL FOR BUFFERS Fair IMPACT ON NEIGHBORHOOD Property valuation; noise of operation LAND TAKINGS Willing seller; possible lease problem ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Proximity to wetlands EXISTING SOILS Unknown EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY Flat SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS UTTLITY REQUIREMENTS Service connections required ACCESS ROAD REQUIREMENTS None FOUNDATION CONCERNS Unknown (Existing buildings on site) BUFFERS Concern on three (3) sides of property LOCATION Direct access to center of Town via Salem Street 16 ADAMS - GENTILE PROPERTY GENERAL INFORMATION L(IrATTON Ofr Pleasant Street near Salem Street PRESENT OWNER Adams - Gentile TOTAL LAND AREA 20.1 + 1.0 (L Salem) USABLE LAND AREA 14.5 + 1.0 (C Salem) PRESENT USE Residential /Commercial. ZONED S -10 (Residential) CITIZEN'S CONCERNS SAFETY (TRAFFIC) - Traffic volume; congestion on Salem Street and surrounding streets. POTENTIAL FOR BUFFERS Good to excellent IMPACT ON NEIGHBORHOOD Property valuation; noise of operation; off -hour, operation. ..AND TAKITNGS Necessary for house and land; willing sellers. ENVTRONMENTAL ISSUES Proximity to wetlands EXTSTING SOILS Unknown - no apparent problem EYISTING TOPOGRAPHY Flat. SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS UTILITY REPUIREMENTS gain Extensions to site required ACCESS ROAD REQUIREMENTS New access required FOUNDATION CONCERNS Unknown (Existing buildings on site) BUFFERS Necessary on access road only LOCATION Direct access to center of Town via Salem Street 17 �1 r__. D NIKE SITE GENERAL INFORMATION LOCATION Ono. 300 Haverhill Street. PRESENT OWNER Town of Reading - Selectmen TOTAL LAND AREA 24.4 Acres USABLE LAND AREA 19.2 Acres PRESENT USE Municipal ZONED S -40 (Residential) CITIZ.EN'S CONCERNS SAFETY (TRAFFIC) Sight distance school, traffic volume, turning radius of trucks, curve in Haverhill Street near access road. POTENTIAL FOR BUFFERS Good to Excellent IMPACT ON NEIGH140RHOOD Property valuation, noise from operation, off -hour operations. LAND TAKINGS Necessary at this site - land only for access roadway. ENVIRONMENTAL_ ISSUES Possible future well site; in Ipswich River Watershed. EXISTING SOILS Unknown - no apparent problem. EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY Flat SITE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS UTILITY REQUIREMENTS Main Extensions to site required ACCESS ROAD REQUIREMENTS Widen existing access road. FOUNDATION CONCERNS Unknown (existing buildings on site) BUFFERS Necessary on access roadway only LOCATION No direct route to center of Town. HALEY & ALDRICH, INC. ®� Main Street P.O. P.O Box 60 Cambridge. MA 02142 Tel. 617/492 -6460 TASC 1 Jacob Way Reading, MA 01867 Consulting Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists Attention: Mr. Harry B. Silverman Subject: Site Assessment Reading DPW Property John Street Reading, Massachusetts Gentlemen: r'e : Qr., h J' 'ho-+es h L,. EtlTM1d G le "54- �'eT�C Murp'• ,:)Omd C Thcm;9C Eo�-ro 5 n ^re Pete- L LeCN J054'n J 17 February 1984 File No. 5379 This letter summarizes the results of our recent investiga- tions of the Reading DPW site. The purpose of our studies was to determine the possible presence of oil and hazardous materials on the site as defined by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Hazardous Materials Release Prevention and Response Act (Chapter 21E). As part of our work, we have researched past site usage and history of development and have completed a field investiga- tion and sampling program at the site. During the period 27 December 1983 to 5 January 1984, 31 test pits were excavated to allow visual classification of the soil and fill materials present at the site. In addition, 4 hollow stem auger probes and 9 test borings were completed. Eight groundwater moni- toring wells were also installed to allow samples of ground- water to be obtained and groundwater surface elevations to be determined. Our study has found petroleum product on the groundwater sur- face in the vicinity of the southeast wing of the DPW build- ing. The presence of the petroleum product places the site under the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts Hazardous Mate- rials Release Prevention and Response Act. No other portions of the site were identified as being applicable to Chapter 21E. If the free product is removed from the groundwater, it is our opinion that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Depart- ment of Environment Quality Engineering would not require further remedial action at the site. Affiliate: Branch Office H & A of New York Haley & Aldrich. Inc Rochester. New York Portiano. Maine TASC -2- 17 February 1984 Based on our research, the source of the petroleum is probab- ly a past fuel line leak. The DPW's use of kerosene to clean asphalt trucks in the area may also contribute to the prob- lem. The use of kerosene to clean the trucks without collec- tion and proper disposal of the spent kerosene should be ter- minated. The fuel line leak resulted when a nearby tree trunk was re- moved. The possibility of a similar incident can be pre- vented by proper location of the tanks and management of vegatation. New construction practices at environmentally sensitive areas can utilize containment systems for under- ground fuel storage tanks to prevent loss of product into the environment. These systems could consist of waterproofed concrete vaults or petroleum compatible synthetic membrane envelopes. Previous testing by Whitman & Howard as well as confirmatory tests during our studies, indicate the presence of elevated levels of groundwater conductivity and sodium and chloride at some well locations at the site. It is probable that these levels are a result of past highway salt storage and handling practices at the site. Improved handling and storage requirements can minimize the impacts of highway salt on the environment. Maintaining bulk salt under cover minimizes contact with precipitation and loss into the ground. Using paved mixing areas with col- lected surface waters can also aid in minimizing impacts on the environment. Thank you for inviting us to participate in this study. If you have any questions or require additional information please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely ours, HALEYI� L RICH, INC. W Wesley E. Stimpson Vice President WES /kmh 0134s SITE FINANCIAL ANALYSIS SITE EXPENSES LAND ACQUISITION COST ROADWAY DRAINAGE WATER /SEWER /ELECTRIC DEMOLITION EXCAVATION FILL SUB - STRUCTURE RELOCATION SITE EXPENSES CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES ARCHITECTURAL & ENGINEERING BUILDING INSPECTION FEES MOVING TOTAL CONSTRUCTION EXPENSES TOTAL COST OF RELOCATION 21 ADAMS /GENTILE LANDFILL DUBITZKY NIKE FULL PARTIAL 1,558.0 775.0 286.0 5.0 78.0 71.5 15.0 143.0 3.5 30.0 5.5 35.0 5.0 5.0 18.5 25.0 50.0 20.0 10.0 258.0 197.0 20.0 59.0 10.0 362.0 995.0 1,603.0 911.5 471.5 89.0 145.5 145.5 145.5 145.5 145.5 1,940.0 1.940.0 1,940.0 1,940.0 1,940.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 65.0 40.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 2,190.5 2,200.5 2,200.5 2,200.5 2,200.5 3,185.5 3,803.5 3,112.0 2,672.0 2,289.5 21 B.P.W. FACILITY RELOCATION JOHN ST LANDFILL SITE ARTICLE 18 r. 1. ENGINEERING & ARCHITECTURAL FEE'S $ 145,500 2. EXTRAORDINARY CONSTRUCTION COSTS a. Piling 12,000 if @ 17 204,000 b. Reinforcing 74T @ 1,125 83,250 c. Concrete 650 cy @ 115 74,750 d. Relocate Refuse 158,000 cy @ 1 158,000 e. Fill to Cover Refuse 12,700 cy @ 4.25 54,000 f. Loam over Site 5800 cy @ 8 46,000 g. Gravel Fill Replacement 30,360 cy @ 6.50 197,000 h. Sewer Main Extension 700 if @ 50 35,000 i. Drainage Relocation 715 if @ 200 143,000 995,000 3. BUILDING COSTS - SEE NEXT PAGE $1,940,000 4. FEES a. Engineering, borings, Soils Analysis 29,000 b. Resident Inspection 60 wks @ 600 361000 WINW41 SUBTOTAL - CONSTRUCTION COSTS $3,145,500 5. RELOCATION EXPENSES a. Rigger /Mover Estimate 20,000 b. Labor Expense - 12,600 c. Equipment Expense 7,400 SUBTOTAL - RELOCATION COSTS $ 40,000 Total Project Cost $3,185,500 22 B.P.W. FACILITY RELOCATION JOHN ST. LANDFILL SITE BUILDING COSTS 23 J J Present Proposed Est. Cost/ Total Item Area Area Sq. Foot Cost 1. Personnel, Facilities a. Radio Room b. Toilet Areas c. Locker Room d. Boiler Room e. Lunch Room Total 2022 sf 4000 sf $48 $192,000 2. Department Shops a. Water Dept. 1488 b. Sewer Dept. 297 c. Meter Repair 1596 d. Sign Shop 543 e. Highway Dept. 1579 f. Park Dept. 2922 g. Forestry Dept. 1574 h. Storage 838 Total 10,837 sf 12,600 sf $42 $529,200 3. Vehicle Maint. 3,286 sf 5,000 sf $70 $350,000 4. Vehicle Storage a. Heated 10,873 sf 9,600 sf $26 $ 249,600 b. Unheated 8,600 sf 9,600 sf $21 $ 201,600 5. Salt Storage 3,360 sf 3,360 sf $15 $50,400 6. Site Improvements a. Fuel Storage L/S $60,000 b. Paving, Curbing, Etc. L/S $67,000 c. Site Drainage, Utilities L/S $45,000 d. Exter. Lighting L/S $15,000 Total $ 187,000 Totals 38,978 sf 44,160 sf $39.86 $1,760,000 7. Relocate B.P.W. 2,913 sf 3,000 sf $60.00 $ 180,000 Offices Totals 41,891 sf 47,160 sf $41.14 $1,940,000 23 J J R J, y (3 k rl r 3 o 'r /%q w J 4 '17 .� 5.48 - •-1 r i 5 AL j ` ;'4 ra,7 , , :. i vim_ � v '• •, // r. %;' .'� tea% ` �� i •) /i OPTION C _ ' 1. Existing Bldg /Razed '- 2. Existing Garage / 3. New Garage 4. Salt Storage (Existing) , - �" 5 Gas Pumps .. 60 B.P.W. ��^� -� �• 7. Shops r B. Shops 9. Maintenance Garage 10. •50 ft. Right of Way /; 11. 2Q ft. Easement 1 Total Area = 15.223 Acres \ 1 in. += 200 ft. \ 501 R.Q.W.= 1.6.50 Acres 20' Easement = 0.333 Acres Proposed DPW = 5.480 Acres Available for - 1 % Development 7.760 Acres _ti BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY OPTION: Remain at present site This proposal provides that the BPW Facility utilize only 5.48 acres of the existing John Street site.. The existing main structure would be torn down, with the vehicle storage building and the salt storage buildings remaining as part of the new facility plan. A new main structure will be constructed at the West end of the property and would provide for all department activities with a new centralized vehicle maintenance center as the prominent feature. Space to house all of the Town Hall activities of the BPW is included below under Item E. Construction: A. Extraordinary costs 1. Structural Concrete - Spread Ftngs /Walls 2. Gravel Surcharge 3000 @10 3. Demolition B. Construction - Building: Personnel, Facilities 4000 s.f. @ 48 General 10200 s.f. @ 42 Vehicle Maint. 5000 s.f. @ 70 Vehicle Storage 11360 s.f. @ 26 Site Improvements L.S. C. Architectural Fee @ 7.50 D. Fees, Testing, Inspection TOTALS A,B,C,D E. Board of Public Works 3000 s.f. @ 60 $110,000 30,000 10,000 $150,000 192,000 428,400 350,000 = 295,360 84,000 $1,349,760 116,100 55,000 $1,670,860 180,000 $1,850,860 R f (3 © 5.48 K � pia = - -_ j ,'f ,." '•! i . � y' �` \ ' ', •� �„ f �r\ - O go tr 1 �p �l Vii•. � ` j ! \ / 7 ( . // y OPTION C l 4� 1. Existing Bldg/'Razed �\ �\ \ ,•r ��_� 2. Existing Garage / \ yf' 3. New Garage , 4. Salt Storage (Existing) �� „�.� •\ 5. Gas Pumps 6. B.P.W. 7. Shop \ \\ 80 Shops 9. Maintenance Garage 10. .50 ft. Right of Way �• 7; 11. 20 ft. Easement . / Total Area = 15.223 Acres \ in. 200 ft. 50' R.(T.W.= 1.6.50 Acres • 1 = —' 201 Easement = 0.333 Acres - / Proposed DPW = 5.480 Acres Available for Development 7.760 Acres �� � i .'� _/i r{. - • it ^ - BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY OPTION: Remain at present site This proposal provides that the BPiti Facility utilize only 5.48 acres of the existing John Street site. The existing main structure would be torn down, with the vehicle storage building and the salt storage buildings remaining as part of the new facility plan. A new main structure will be constructed at the West end of the property and would provide for all department activities with a new centralized vehicle maintenance center as the prominent feature. Space to house all of the Town Hall activities of the BPW is included below under Item E. Construction: A. Extraordinary costs 1. Structural Concrete - Spread Ftngs /Walls = $110,000 2. Gravel Surcharge 3000 @10 = 30,000 3. Demolition 10,000 $150,000 B. Construction - Building: Personnel, Facilities 4000 s.f. @ 48 = 192,000 General 10200 s.f. @ 42 = 428,400 Vehicle Maint. 5000 s.f. @ 70 = 350,000 Vehicle Storage 11360 s.f. @ 26 = 295,360 Site Improvements L.S. = 84,000 $1,349,760 C. Architectural Fee @ 7.50 116,100 D. Fees, Testing, Inspection 55,000 TOTALS A,B,C,D $1,670,860 E. Board of Public Works 3000 s.f. @ 60 180,000 $1,850,860 'i �I 1. J \J l • � / (3 � Q 5.48 Ac' W � \ Illy — �-_ _ - _ OPTION C 1. Existing Bldg/'Razed 11 o. 2 Garage Existing 9 30 New Garage q. Salt Storage (Existing) ` f =�� �\/ •�� 5. Gas Pumps 6 B.P.W 7. Shops 8. Shops �\ 9. Maintenance Garage 10, •50 ft. Right of Way lI. 20 ft. Easement -• -� � Total Area = 15.223 Acres \ 1 in. = 200 ft- 50' R.U.W.= 1. &50 Acres 20' Easement = 0.333 Acres Proposed DPW = 5.460 Acres 1� Available for Development = • 7.760 Acres BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY OPTION: Remain at present site This proposal provides that the BPW Facility utilize only 5.48 acres of the existing John Street site.. The existing main structure would be torn down, with the vehicle storage building and the salt storage buildings remaining as part of the new facility plan. A new main structure will be constructed at the West end of the property and would provide for all department activities with a new centralized vehicle maintenance center as the prominent feature. Space to house all of the Town Hall activities of the BPW is included below under Item E. Construction: A. Extraordinary costs 1. Structural Concrete - Spread Ftngs /Walls = $110,000 2. Gravel Surcharge 3000 @10 = 30,000 3. Demolition 10,000 $150,000 B. Construction - Building: Personnel, Facilities 4000 s.f. @ 48 = 192,000 General 10200 s.f. @ 42 = 428,400 Vehicle Maint. 5000 s.f. @ 70 = 350,000 Vehicle Storage 11360 s.f. @ 26 = 295,360 Site Improvements L.S. = 84,000 $1,349,760 C. Architectural Fee @ 7.50 116,100 D. Fees, Testing, Inspection 55,000 TOTALS A,B,C,D $1,670,360 E. Board of Public Works 3000 s.f. @ 60 180,000 $1,850,860