HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-06-07 Board of Selectmen HandoutDRAFT MOTIONS
BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING
JUNE 79 2016
Halsey, Sexton, Berman, Arena, Ensmin2er LeLacheur
5a) Move that the Board of Selectmen accept the recommendations of the
Volunteer Appointment Subcommittee as follows:
Animal Control Appeals Com. John Miles 6 -30 -19
Animal Control (Associate) Joyce Gould 6 -30 -17
Audit Committee Barry Berman 6 -30 -19 effective 6/7/16
Board of Cemetery Trustees Ronald Stortz 6 -30 -19
Elise Ciregna 6 -30 -19
Board of Health John Costigan 6 -30 -19
Board of Health (Associate) Nancy Docktor 6 -30 -17
Board of Registrars Kissandra Holmes 6 -30 -19
Climate Advisory Committee Laurie Ann Sylvia 6 -30 -19
Climate Adv. Com. (Associates) Jeffrey Everson 6 -30 -17
Gina Snyder 6 -30 -17
Commissioners of Trust Funds John Daly 6 -30 -19
Commissioner (Associate) Richard Holmes 6 -30 -17
Conservation Commission Jamie Maughan 6 -30 -19
Annika Scanlon 6 -30 -19
Constable Tanya Amico 6 -30 -19
t
Community Planning & Nicholas Safina 6 -30 -19
Development Commission John Weston 6 -30 -19
Council on Aging Steve Oston
6 -30 -19
Sally Hoyt
6 -30 -19
Brian Snell
6 -30 -19
Council on Aging (Associate) Pooja Parsons
6 -30 -17
Cultural Council Nora Bucko 6 -30 -19
Fall Street Faire Committee Leslie Leahy 6 -30 -19
Sheila Mulroy 6 -30 -19
Fall Street Faire Committee (Associate) Allison Ullman 6 -30 -17
Historic District Commission Everett Blodgett 6 -30 -19
Greg Maganzini 6 -30 -19
Historic District Associates Jack Williams 6 -30 -17
Historical Commission Jack Williams 6 -30 -19
Jonathan Barnes 6 -30 -19
Historical Commission (Associate) Virginia Adams 6 -30 -17
Human Relation Adv. Com David Clark 6 -30 -19
Heather McLean 6 -30 -19
Lori Hodin 6 -30 -19
RCTV Board of Directors Stephen Gold 6 -30 -19
cv
Recreation Committee Michael DiPietro
6 -30 -19
Francis Driscoll
6 -30 -19
Lori Russo
6 -30 -19
Recreation Committee (Associate) Mary Ellen Stolecki
6 -30 -17
Catherine Kaminer
6 -30 -17
Gill Congdon
6 -30 -17
Town Forest Committee William Sullivan
Thomas Gardiner
Town Forest Committee (Associates) Nancy Docktor
Michael Bourque
Daniel Ford
6 -30 -19
6 -30 -19
6 -30 -17 - ?
6 -30 -17 - ?
6 -30 -17 - ?
Trails Committee Edward Crowley 6 -30 -19
David Williams 6 -30 -19
Trails Committee (Associate) John Parsons 6 -30 -17
Board of Appeals John Jarema 6 -30 -19
Board of Appeals (Associate) Erik Hagstrom 6 -30 -19
5c) Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the installation of a solar
powered score board at the Little League Field (Tennis Court Field).
Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the installation of the
Morton Field/Moscariello Ballpark sign.
Move that the Board of Selectmen adjourn the meeting at p.m.
Selectmen hear support for lower income residents and override - Dai... http: / /homenewshere.com /daily times_chronicle /news /reading /article...
Selectmen hear support for lower income residents and override
Posted: Monday, June 6, 2016 6:00 pm
By Al Sylvia
READING — The Board of Selectmen Wednesday evening held their first Listening Tour meeting to gauge the opinion of Reading residents
regarding an impending override vote in October. Roughly 60 people attended the two hour session at the Coolidge Middle School in the
town's first step toward the budget override.
Present at the meeting were town officials and four of the five Selectmen (John Arena was absent), three members of the School Committee,
and at least one Library Trustee. They heard a wide range of opinions from opposition to any override to support for significant increases in
the school budget plus full day kindergarten as part of the budget. They also heard support for an unspecified plan to help keep seniors in
their homes. A number of thoughtful questions seeking basic information on the override procedure, the town's budget shortfall in the future,
the voters ability to direct expenditures and efforts to curtail spending were asked and answered.
For the most part the Selectmen and School Superintendent Dr. John Doherty were quiet for most of the meeting except to answer
questions directed their way while Town Manager Bob LeLacheur fielded most of the questions through the moderator for the meeting
Kevin Vendt.
LeLacheur made a presentation on the current budget, Reading's spending compared with peer communities, and what the staffing and
services could look like in fiscal 2018 without additional funds. He told those present "we will provide whatever level of services you are
willing to fund"
The Town Manager explained that the Selectmen were the only ones that could call for an override. He said a Special Town Meeting would
probably be held September 12th to consider the possible override and measures that would help make the budget action more affordable
for lower income residents. I-Ie said the "possible" special election date would be October 18, but that now the Selectmen wanted feedback
from residents.
He also announced should the Selectmen decide to call for an override and a Special Town Meeting there would be a meeting of elected
boards and the finance committee to review actions that would be proposed to the Town meeting on September 1, at the Performing Arts
Center. Residents and business operators would also be invited to the meeting.
LeLacheur then went into a financial overview saying that since the last override 13 years ago the budget had gone up 3.1% annually and
the Finance Committee policy established a free cash goal of $5 million wwhich for next year will be $4Million because $2.15 million was
being used in the fiscal 2017 budget. He added a comparison with peer communities and surrounding towns showed no remarkable
differences except for Reading's lack of commercial tax revenue and the large number of students in the Reading schools 94,407)compared
to the population (25,000). According to the Town Manager roughly 50% of the money goes for schools with the rest split between the
Town, 25% and other items 25 %.
He also at one point mentioned the Town spends $10,000 per student and $100 per elderly resident as significant support was expressed at
the meeting to protect elderly residents. LeLacheur included a series of questions which the town officials would like residents to consider
such as:
What services should be eliminated?
What services that you use would you be willing to give up?
I of 2 6/7/2016 4:47 PM
Selectmen hear support for lower income residents and override - Dai.
What services should be added?
Would you prefer to target fees instead of taxes?
What are you concerned about as a Reading resident?
http: / /homenewshere. com /daily_ times_ chronicle /news /reading /article...
Finally he mentioned the last override added 10% to the budget and stipulated spending on things such as mosquito spraying and road
paving in the first year.
Several people questioned the impending spending of $1 million on lights at Birch Meadow Field with another wanting more money for
the schools wondering why there weren't parking fees for students and trash fees, parking stickers. At one point LeLacheur answered
"recreation is nice to have, it's not the same as essential services" adding we're asking your advice.
Selectman Barry Berman reminded residents that "80% of the budget is personnel" if the budgets are cut "we won't be able to do as good a
job as we do now ".
12016 Homenewshere.cont. All rights reserved. Yhis ntateri al may not be published, broadcast, revnitten or redistributed.
D Copyright 2016, Hornenewshere.com, Woburn, MA. Powered by BLOX Content Management System from TownNews.com. [Terms of Use I Privacy Policy]
2 of 2 6/7/2016 4:47 PM
Schena, Paula
From: LeLacheur, Bob
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 4:00 PM
To: Schena, Paula
Subject: FW: MAPC response to MMA on Zoning Reform
BOS packet
Robert W. LeLacheur, Jr. CFA
Town Manager, Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street, Reading, MA 01867
townmanaaerR@ci. reading. ma. us
www.readingma.aov, please fill out our brief customer service survey at:
http:// readingma- survey.virtualtownhall .net /survey /sid /ff5d3a5fO3e8eb60/
Town Hall Hours:
Monday, Wednesday and Thursday: 7:30 a.m - 5:30 p.m.;Tuesday: 7:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.; Friday: CLOSED
From: Weyant, Elizabeth [mailto:EWeyant @mapc.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 12:50 PM
To: Weyant, Elizabeth
Subject: MAPC response to MMA on Zoning Reform
Dear Mayors and Managers:
The Senate will be debating the zoning reform legislation (Senate 231 1) on Thursday. Before they released the bill,
Senate Ways and Means made changes to the bill that we believe could strengthen the legislation, including measures that
would stimulate additional housing production in appropriate locations. We agree that additional measures to encourage
by -right housing production are needed. Below is MAPC's most recent response to MMA's statement of June 2, on the need
for zoning reform and increased housing production. We urge the Legislature to maintain a balanced approach that
benefits all stakeholders and to pass S231 1.
Please do not hesitate to reach out to me with your thoughts and questions.
Best,
Lizzi Weyant
Government Affairs Manager
MAPC Response to MMA Action Alert on Zoning Reform Legislation, Senate 2311
June 7, 2016
The Metropolitan Area Planning Council strongly supports An act promoting housing and sustainable development
(S. 237 7), which is likely to be voted on in the Senate on Thursday. This historic legislation will give cities and
towns the tools they need to plan for and manage growth more effectively. It will also facilitate increased
housing production, so we can stabilize the price of homes. It will help cities and town to create more affordable
■
units, and to steer growth to more appropriate locations. This is critical for our Commonwealth's economic
competitiveness, as well as for helping to protect our natural and working landscapes.
We have worked with the Massachusetts Municipal Association on many of the provisions in S.231 1 and share
their conviction that many of these planning and zoning tools are desperately needed. Some of the provisions
that will greatly benefit municipalities include:
Development Impact Fees: Impact fees are commonly used in most states and ensure that impacts of new
development are borne by those responsible.
Minor Subdivisions: Allows municipalities to end the Approval Not Required process that prevents effective
municipal review of roadside lot creation. It will allow municipalities — at their option — to replace this broken
process with a minor subdivision ordinance or bylaw.
Master Plans: Updates and streamlines the master planning statute, making planning more effective and less
expensive.
Site Plan Review: Standardizes the process used to review site design and layouts.
Appeals Reforms: Provides for land use dispute resolution, limits frivolous appeals, and streamlines court
appeals.
Variances: For the first time in the Commonwealth, the bill creates a legally defensible and orderly system for
granting variances.
Transfer of Development Rights: Again commonly used in other states, but current law requires that a special
permit be used in transferring development rights, limiting their use in Massachusetts.
These benefits alone would make S. 2311 a critical bill for cities and towns, but the Senate Committee on Ways
& Means has strengthened the bill — and increased the likelihood of its passage in the House — by adding further
measures to encourage housing production in the Commonwealth. We respectfully disagree with the MMA on the
impact that these measures will have on local control and would like to correct the record on some inaccuracies
contained in their action alert from Thursday, June 2, 2016.
Multi - Family Housing: This section asks that municipalities plan and zone "at least one district of reasonable
size" where multi - family housing may be built by- right. It is up to city or town to identify an appropriate location
for the district. The district must also comply with the Wetlands Protection Act and Title 5, and the requirement
may be waived or modified by DHCD for rural communities and communities where no eligible locations exist.
Contrary to MMA's assertion, a municipality may require that a certain percentage of housing units remain
affordable in these districts. In fact, by establishing inclusionary zoning in statute, the bill provides a specific
mechanism for doing so. Communities would also be allowed to employ site plan review in these districts.
This is an important opportunity for communities to meet Chapter 40B housing goals by taking charge of their
own destiny, deciding where and how they want to grow, rather than waiting for developers to dictate that from
the outside.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs): This is a common, straight- forward way to expand housing types and
affordable (though, usually not deed - restricted) homes. This measure would apply to parcels in single family
districts that are 5,000 square feet or greater. This section includes a number of protections for cities and towns,
including the ability to regulate the setbacks, bulk, and height of these apartments. It also allows municipalities to
require that the owner of the home, occupy either the home or the apartment. As the MMA points out, cities and
towns could cap the total number of accessory apartments at 5% of the year -round total housing units. Finally,
the apartments would have to meet all building, health, and environmental codes, bylaws, and ordinances.
Without these provisions, many communities already have ADU's that are illegal. This standardized system would
assure that ADU's are legal, tracked, regulated, and built according to reasonable municipal specifications.
Open Space Residential Developments (OSRD): Such developments marry housing production with the
preservation of open space, whether it be natural resource habitat, forests, or farmland. Contrary to the MMA
post, this section would not require an increase in the number of units allowed in a project. Cities and towns may
include a density bonus and may do so using a special permit. This section also grants municipalities the flexibility
to use a yield plan or a formula to deduct land for roads, wetlands, and other site constraints.
Inclusionary Zoning: Inclusionary zoning is a valuable technique for including affordable homes as a part of
new developments. It can help maintain a community's percentage of affordable homes, which count toward their
Chapter 40B goal. Inclusionary zoning could certainly be applied to the by -right multi - family and OSRD districts
and we would encourage communities to take this approach. We agree with the MMA on the desire to allow
municipalities to decide whether or not to require concessions as part of their Inclusionary Zoning ordinance or
bylaw. We are supporting an amendment that Senator William Brownsberger has filed to this effect.
We are working hard to see Senate 2311 pass because its provisions will encourage better planning,
development, and resource protection in all communities of the Commonwealth. This bill is good for cities and
towns. We are continuing to work to make it even better. We urge you to support it, and to indicate your
support to your members of the Legislature.
Lizzi Weyant
Government Affairs Manager
Metropolitan Area Planning Council
60 Temple Place, 6th floor
Boston, MA 021 1 1
phone: (617) 933 -0703
cell: (540) 509 -4467
�L, vvgxa_r1 Ma
WWWoMOP C1, .O— r-
,'" U
Please be advised that the Massachusetts Secretary of State considers e -mail to be a public record, and therefore
subject to the Massachusetts Public Records Law, M.G.L. c. 66 § 10.
l/
Name
(Last)
Address:
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading MA 01867
Analication for Agnointment to
Boards. Committees and Commissions
(First)
DIQ I
VE-
(Middle)
Phone (Home): / gl — / q �_-3104� Phone (Work):
2016 JUN --7 PN 2: 50
fax: 781- 942 -9070
website: www.readingma.gov
Date:
Phone (Cell): `78- ~ 7/- 3 Which number should be listed? n67-1—
Occupation: -ro —O &-o `- T 61ke�W— A rgq&g & d) \umber of years in Reading:
E -mail address: dry to &-t 7--c R M(1-a . /1 e
Place a number next to your preferred position(s) (up to four choices) with number 1 being your first
priority. (Please attach a resume if available)
Animal Control Appeals Committee
Board of Appeals
Board of Cemetery Trustees
_ Board of Registrars
Celebration Committee
Commissioner of Trust Funds
Conservation Commission
Contributory Retirement Board
Cultural Council
_ Fall Street Faire Committee
Historic District Commission
Housing Authority
MBTA Advisory Committee
Mystic Valley Elder Services
_ RCN Board of Directors
RMLD Citizens Advisory Board
Trails Committee
_ Audit Committee
Board of Assessors
Board of Health
Bylaw Committee
_ Climate Advisory Committee
Community Planning and Development
Constable
_ Council on Aging
Custodian of Soldiers' and Sailors' Graves
_ Finance Committee
Historical Commission
— Human Relations Advisory Committee
_ Metropolitan Area Planning Council
Permanent Building Committee
_ Recreation Committee
Town Forest Committee
_ Zoning Board of Appeals
Other
Please outline relevant experience for the position(s) sought:
1Yj Copsiroeia-A) ionf- Cj-4s &TU B
0
E
E
0
0
0
Ri
cr-
E
O
N
N
U
_
O
v
QA
_
O
O
L
m
m
^'
•�
N
O
cu
.O
0
•�
O
M
cn
}�
cn
Q
m
O
•'
3
V
�
J-
-
'
v
m .�
O
U
-0
•�•
cn
to
m
CL
-0
m
M
N
H
• U
-0
m
C:
T
V
_
m
ca
a
v
N
U
s
cu
N
N
T
�
C6
=
C:
E
Q-
N
;,,,
m
—
Q
O
O
00
�
E
to
U
•
f�
C
fB
U
N
f�
C6
L
O
V
y„.
O
.N
-C4A
G=J
G J
O
>
O
GJ
4.0
N
E
i
O
'
O
=
Ln
=~
v
C:
-O
O
N
.L
O
N
C
fa
-I—
.O
Ul
•�
4J
—
�>
�
N
V
.0
v
a
L
O
o
O
E
N
s
M
��
o
O
>-
3
O
N
c
N
O
z
~
u
Z
O
v
cc
W
a
4�
m
Q
N
t
QC
0
0
Q
N
Q
N
M
�
(3)
N
c
O
4-0
._
4-
N
Cm
�
E
i
a-J
E
.V
i
.4i
of
cu
O
GJ
C6
'C
L
V
O
E
m
._
U
c�
N
f�
N
CL
0
•-
m
m
f�
C
fB
U
N
f�
C6
L
O
(oq
N
V
N
N
N
•"'
GaC
p
�
=
UO
_0
.0
•1+
:�
to
U
cu
to
LM
V
N
Q
E
•1+
dj
N
W Q
._
=
O
E
N
Vf
Ov
C:
cu
O
u
•�
N
V
cn
w
cu
_
N
o
i
o
=
4
N
_
cu
v
N
mS
f�
O
o
}'
—
i
•N
m
bA
CL
V
O
4-1
O
�
•N
�
J
(oq
�;s
4-J
N
O
-n
cQ
N
IA
tA
O
Q-
•>
N
V
on
L
4.j
^
.-.
C
•�
N
V
c
M
O
Q
4-J
V
V
�
CC
p
.�
�O
N
>_
(a
N
-C
4-
o
_
Q
E
Z
4-'
p
v
�
T—
Q
L
•^
E
its
Q
-0
N
Q
E
4a
4Q
N
V
�
4-+
0
4-J
V
N
v
-
>
N
O
^'
^W
Q
J
•O
�
O
4-J
0
H
=
a
Imo--
•�
a)
�;s
O
bb
v
.N
'E
.�
fu
N
-0
cuC -J
wx
E
.
fB
O
a_+
O
4—
lLO
M
� -Fu
L
O
O
:3
�
Q
O
N
v
N
0
cn
4
W
Ln
N
_0
C
i
>
O
c-
fQ
o
co
O
�4-
a-
o
at--p +
O
N
N
E
-a
J
O
i
E
v
N
Z
�
L
0
O
O
O
a
s
N
o
Q
v
.�'
o
c�
}'
O
-0
o
o
w
N
—a
N
Q
O
i
4A
w
:3
w
1--+
V
i
-a
O
-5;
N
4—
N
O
0-
O
U
u
O
c�
N
re
•
m
CL
bA
S
0
L.
LM
6
ui
z
0
u
LLI
O
O4fta
cic
X
ts
-C
3
V�
fto
C
0
E�Z7
::b% c c
4. c 0 dJ O 2
0 •D -
L (A 0 0
V) CA C: 0 .0 .0 0 0
D — — if - .- (A un •(A
E •Oo E Oo -D -D V)
E E E E
O E E E E 0 E E E E
E q 0 E E 0 q u E q o
0 u
U E q 0 U Ln 0 u u 0
V 0 0 U U,U 0 4- U 0 u
CA +-J U tn 4-J •" 401 0
4-1 = tvo Ln 4L
4-J 4-J 4-
= = =
4-ol
a
a m
E m E co
_ _ �, � �___ �= vim=
E
4-J
-0 CO
U
Z
a)
z
1�
Z
IA
•� O
a.
cr. Ea
vs = C U i Q
G N V C: f6
ui
v O p ra
N E .N J O
0
GJ N p W H
•s L
4'.
tn S
y Q
of to
�- �%3 X'>
U
V OTC .0
> Q -� V)
•
O
a-J
•�
O •�
c s
}
o '
O
N
C: +J
fD N
O
L
O
-C N
O C: 0
O
•4-1 a--►
c L„
c E
O c6
N E aA
E O
CU
O Q
N v
E •�,
Ln
L (n
a
E =
v O
4- n
0
U
(-)14
O
�
N
d.+
>
C
V
O
.(A
O
O
N
C
—
O
4-j
t.
a
��
�m
=v
�-
o
�O
.�
°
-�
a
i
=
a
"M
co
c�
?�
4
O
to
,O
��•E
v
u
v
.O
o
—
a
v
>
'V
O
Q
N
E
W
D
=
O
Q
Q
E
V)
U
N
'N
,Q
3
0
—
L
E
v
•N
a
o
`—
L
(D
o
o
z
%M
v
+-j
-0
0
cu
E
��
°o
t
GC
W
°
—
N
�
:3
O
0-
�
O
4-J
v
m
cu
o
a
—0
o
cu
u
E
�•;�
4"
o
co
�o
J�
.
ICU
•i
H=
L
°
�
O
O
?•
O
C
cu
_
°
i
CL.
j
,N
GJ
a
v
v
•N
3:
cu
°
°
cu
y
y
+-j
N
°
OD
4- 4—
to
�o
0
Ln
X
-C
.�
V)
a
C7
(-)14
N
'i
m
E
O
L
to
0
N
0
V
ca
N
0
CL
d1
•
J
a
N
L
E
to
i
m
1�
L
W
J
Z
0
W
0j
i
4�
a
3
a
a
it
a.
3
�N►
v
cc
T
V
H
v
4-
L
Q
f�
U
b.0
N
.X
w
i
U
fa
cC
N
N
L
a-+
U
m
0
CL
N
4-j
CLO
�L
co
c
fu
E
t
c
c
O
.O
Q
0
4-
O
c
O
L
N
c
O
L
U
U
O
cu
i
`•J
O
N
L
cu
f6
d--+
O
f6
c
O
c
O
.O
4-+
O
N
U
L
cu
c
O
N
N
+j
c
O
U
N
N
0
c
cu
4-
O
cu
O
c
O
U
O
.4i
.Q
L
0
N
O
Q
c
cu
Q
N
Ln
v
fB
c
U
ca
L
c
fu
N
c�
L
f�
4-
O
Ln
O
,O
0
4-
U
C6
N
'N
c6
co
fB
L
cu
N
c
Q
Ln
v
L
v
E
E
L
lr' �
cu
O
L
Q
f6
s
.0
tw
cu
cuf�
f�
L
44A-xx
co
N
W
0
J
V
O
V
W
O
C
O
4-J
m
E
E
O
U
W
N
Q
v N
CU
N �
> •CU
>
N cu
L
c
>
cu E
0 C:
v
U
O
L Q
U
N �
>_ —0
U 4.1
N N
�=3
f� cr
U
to
:tl
C
C �C
E N
O
U v
� v
cu
U
C
ca
CL
U
U
f�
N
L
O
a—+
M
O
f6
Q
a-+
O
c6
U
d—+
E
E
C
tB
U
C
H
w
c6
N �
U co
C
O --'4.
C CO
0
CO O
N
O
O
N
CU N �
C O
O
O
0 >
w
N W
� •L
E
'> S
O co
CL
O �>
'N O
f� C
O O
0 � -0
M c:
O co
'> N
•� GJ
GJ y-
O
X
GJ GJ
L s
o
y-
Ns
N �
s i
V �
3
E
E
u
c
v
v
+,
C
0
c
v
cc
B
•
C
�
s
-O
W
GJ
o
O
N
-0
.N
Ln
�
�
C1A
i
,a
E
E
u
c
v
v
+,
C
0
c
v
cc
B
•
C
X
�C
-O
W
GJ
+�
fo
O
N
-0
N
�
�
C1A
i
N
r
�V
�
V
�
O
N
N
C+
O
.Q
—
to
F-
!—O
E
E
u
c
v
v
+,
C
0
c
v
cc
B
•
C
O
V
CC
N
V
Q
Z
C
•O
V
t
L
O
0.
CL
cn
w
M
m
E
-
Es
aA
0
E
4-0
c
0
a
o
V
._
ca
oc
H
(A
c
°G
m
o
0
aXi
bsiA
._
CC
-A
r
r
a�
s
m
c
°
E
C
O
V
N
•_
-
N
N
o
3
3
=
V
CA
q�p
O
w
O_
m
%
V
•O
N
i
•N
oC
'>
0
=
3
N
�E
4r
N
CL
Q
ca
V a
V
m
O
ca
s
H
�'
Schena, Paula
From: LeLacheur, Bob
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 11:27 AM
To: Schena, Paula
Subject: FW: Zoning Reform Discussion 5/31 at 3pm
Attachments: 52144 Senate Ways and Means Zoning Draft.pdf, zoning power point 5.23.pdf, Zoning
Reform Summary - Draft Proposal.pdf
Attachments & email for tonight's BOS packet
Robert W. LeLacheur, Jr. CFA
Town Manager, Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street, Reading, MA 01867
townmanager @ci. reading. ma. us
(P) 781 - 942 -9043; (F) 781 -942 -9037
www.readingma.gov; Please fill out our brief customer service survey at:
http:// readingma- survey.virtualtownhall. net /survey /sid /ff5d3a5fO3e8eb60/
Town Hall Hours:
Monday, Wednesday and Thursday: 7:30 a.m - 5:30 p.m.;Tuesday: 7:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.; Friday: CLOSED
From: Delios, Jean
Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2016 7:47 AM
To: LeLacheur, Bob; Mercier, Julie
Subject: FW: Zoning Reform Discussion 5/31 at 3pm
This is a fairly concise summary of the Zoning Reform Bill. The BOS may find this useful as an overview.
Jean J. Delios
Assistant Town Manager
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867 -2685
(P) 781- 942 -6612
(F) 781- 942 -9071
Town Hall Hours - M, W, Th: 7:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.
Tuesday: 7:30 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.
FRIDAY: CLOSED
j delio s@ ci.reading.ma.us
www.readingma.gov
Please let us know how we are doing by filling out a brief customer service survey at http://readingma-
survey.virtualtownhall.net /survey /sid /8cebfd833a88cd3d/
2�
From: repiasonlewis(u?gmail. com [ma I Ito: repjasonlewis(�gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jason Lewis
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2016 2:07 PM
Cc: Pat Jehlen (SEN)
Subject: Zoning Reform Discussion 5/31 at 3pm
W1
The state Senate will shortly be debating the attached legislation regarding zoning reform. Please find summary
materials. This is significant legislation and we are interested in hearing from you your thoughts on what this legislation
could mean for your community. There are two upcoming opportunities to engage on this.
• First, tomorrow the MAPC will host a webinar walking through the legislation and seeking feedback (further
information below for accessing the webinar).
0 Second, next Tuesday, at 3pm, in the Board of Selectman meeting room in Winchester Town Hall, will be an
opportunity to come discuss the legislation and offer feedback. Please let us know if you're available and able to
attend, or contact our offices with feedback about the proposed legislation.
If you're unable to participate in these opportunities, our offices are of course always open to feedback by phone or e-
mail.
Webinar information: --
Thursday, May 26, 2016 9:30 -10:30 am
Computerlog -in:
https: / /mapcevents.webex. com /ma pcevents /onstage /g.php ?MTID= ecO44dcfba lcd4729e4e28af8baO7ffdf
Call -in number: 1- 415 - 655 -0002
Access code: 666178 343
Thank you,
Jason M. Lewis
State Senator
Fifth Middlesex District
State House, Room 511 -B
Boston, MA 02133
617 722 -1206
Jason.Lewisgmasenate. gov
http://www.facebook.com/SenJasonLewis
Twitter @senjasonlewis
www.senatorjasonlewis.com
Zoning Reform Senate Ways and Means proposed redraft
S. 2144 An Act promoting the planning and development of sustainable communities
Makes several changes to Massachusetts' statutes on planning, permitting and zoning to promote
housing, offer modern zoning tools to cities and towns and incentivize communities to plan for
sustainable growth and provide affordable housing options.
The bill provides statutory authority for important zoning tools, including:
• Site plan review
• Inclusionary zoning
• Development impact fees
• Minor subdivisions /Approval Not Required
The bill includes many pro- housing improvements based on the recommendations of the Special Senate
Committee on Housing including:
• As -of -right zoning required for:
o Multifamily
• Cluster developments
• Accessory apartments
The bill reforms and improves existing zoning tools including:
• Special permits (currently require a super- majority; reduced to a simple majority)
• Zoning amendments (currently require a super- majority; allowed to reduce to simple majority)
• Variances (current standard is difficult to meet and unevenly enforced; replaced with a more
realistic standard to promote development)
• Master planning (modernizes the process to promote sustainable growth)
• Appeals (streamlined appeals process for site plan review and subdivisions; gives judges tools to
limit frivolous appeals)
• Vesting (current law allows developers to submit a preliminary subdivision plan before a vote on
a zoning change, and that submission freezes the town from making a zoning change for 8 years)
The bill extends the duration of certain permits including:
• Building permits (current: 6 months; proposed: 2 years)
• Special permits (current: maximum of 2 years; proposed: minimum of 3 years)
• Site plan review permits (current: varies from town to town; proposed: 2 years)
The bill creates an opt -in section that encourages communities to establish by -right housing and
economic development districts in strategic areas. Municipalities who choose to opt -in receive
incentives and preference for certain state funding in exchange for implementing pro - development
tools.
J
1. Why zoning reform and housing production?
• Why we need to update our planning, zoning, and subdivision
laws, and incentivize housing production
2. Legislative Process
• Stakeholder meetings, changes to the bill
3. Summary of current Legislation before Senate Ways and Means
el)
® Current development trends are not protecting the quality of life in our communities and they are not
providing the foundation for long term economic development.
® Updating our state's outdated zoning, subdivision, and planning laws will:
• Promote economic prosperity by encouraging more housing and mixed -use developments;
• Enhance quality of life by providing modern planning and zoning tools to our municipalities;
• Encourage healthy communities and protect our landscapes by promoting land conservation and
walkable places.
® Incentivize communities to plan ahead for growth through adopting local smart growth ordinances.
The legislation amends Chapter 40A (zoning), and Chapter 41 (subdivision).
The legislation does not amend chapter 408.
Fun fact for caucus: Carl Yastrzemski was a fairly young star for
the Red Sox the last time our zoning laws were overhauled (early
1970s).
3
® The Metropolitan Area Planning Council projects that the state will need
close to 500,000 new housing units by 2040 to accommodate the existing
population and projected growth.
® The Senate President created the Special Senate Committee on
Housing, Chaired by Senator Linda Dorcena Forry with Vice Chair
Majority Leader Harriette Chandler, to recommend a series of policy
changes to address the housing crisis.
* The final report included 19 recommendations to help address our
region's crisis of housing affordability.
® The proposed legislation includes several of these recommendations -
ones that are relevant to zoning and planning.
This draft legislation also addresses housing in MA— which was
not included in the original sustainable development bill.
The Special Senate Committee on Housing formed an advisory
group with experts in various fields including: representatives of
real estate business groups, non - profit housing organizations,
tenants and landlords' organizations, academia, and staff at the
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
4
60,000
50,000
rp
40,000
0.
'C5
Q7
30,000
a
a
� 20,000
M
D
10,000
0
Housing Production in Massachusetts
1960 to Present
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Credit: Massachusetts Housing Partnership
5
® Legislation for consideration, S2144, originated in the Joint
Committee on Community Development and Small Business.
• This bill, or a version similar to it, has been before the legislature
for 4 years.
• Other versions of the bill have been filed by Sen. Chander (LUPA)
and Sen. Eldridge (CLURPA).
® Various groups have weighed in on the legislative proposals...
- Zoning reform proposals have been before the legislature for
years. There have been countless briefings and meetings over
the years.
�J 6
m;
....... ...
POW
IMART RC I MAPC 4
S Q*-
cif
SA
m1r,=. USETTS
A& Mass Auclubon .....
F " 0 W
A W I AVAC C
/IF7, Z
ature C-14
-Aml
qW,
p!
wmv
I ican Audem.v of Pedhitrics
slow
w WO'nom
40watkBostori
VI
NAIOP
'o. - EN,' fAl .[Ai. f -Ii F
"jVa L 0 , MENt AS!,, - -
MASSACHUSETTS
MASSACOWWrTS ASWCIATION— REALTORS'
zj
2 A%
LA�1Lj
® The Senate President convened a discussion group with representation from
both the "Smart Growth Coalition" and the "Real Estate Coalition"
This was the first time in recent history both groups have been at the table
® In recent weeks, the group met for approximately 8 hours to discuss areas of
consensus and to fine -tune those areas
® A subgroup was formed to address technical clarifications and corrections
to the proposed legislation. The subgroup submitted a detailed to the memo
with suggested changes, which were incorporated into the bill by Senate
Ways and Means
The technical subgroup- consisting of the legal teams from both sides -
convened by telephone conference call twice in April. The referenced memo
should not be construed to constitute support of the Real Estate Coalition for
the bill, nor should it be construed to constitute the support of the Smart
Growth Coalition for the bill originally filed by the Real Estate Coalition / Sen.
Rodrigues. Rather, the memo reflects areas of agreement.
2(p 9
I
Incorporating the suggestions from the technical working group,
hours of meetings, and countless pages of testimony, the Senate
Committee on Ways and Means redrafted legislation to:
• offer overdue changes to the MA statutes on planning,
permitting and zoning
• promote housing production
• offer modern zoning tools to cities and towns
• and incentivize communities to plan for sustainable growth.
10
P� 11
• Site plan reviews are when the planning board gets into the layout and design.
• Degree of discretion and scope of review varies by municipality
Proposed legislation provides clear framework for site plan reviews
• The subgroup members agreed on the general policy goal of codifying site plan
review in c.40A for the first time, so parties can understand the basic
parameters of the process without having to read court cases
• The subgroup members also agreed on the general policy goal- that site plan
review is focused on how to arrange the physical elements of a project on the
site.
Consistent with the site plan review policy goals and current MA
case law, the bill reflects technical clarifications and corrections
from the working group with respect to the following:
- Elements of site plan review submission
- No prohibition of by -right use
- Presumption of approval
- No off -site mitigation
- Administrative site plan reviews
- Constructive approvals
- Recordings
- Consultant fees
12
INCLUSIONARY ZONING (IZ)
• Inclusionary zoning refers to municipal and county planning ordinances
that require a given share of new construction to be affordable by people
with low to moderate incomes.
• Mixed income housing is something many municipalities want,
particularly if they are under 10% affordable units and subject to
Chapter 40B
• IZ is a great tool to accomplish this, so that a market rate project is
required to include a certain percentage of affordable unites or gets a
density bonus for providing these units
• A key reform in this bill is that it provides for IZ for the first time, and that
it includes municipal concessions (at discretion of municipality as to
what those concessions would be)
0 t�
`� 0 13
Impact fees are payments required by local governments of new development
for the purpose of providing new or expanded public capital facilities required
to serve that development.
® Legislation codifies the use of development impact fees
• Municipalities will be able to employ this tool, used across the nation, to
ensure prompt and predictable development on a by -right basis.
This proposed framework would replace the ad hoc approach taken now by
municipalities- an approach that encourages use of discretionary "special
permits" that give them leverage to negotiate exactions and mitigation, often
only tenuously related to project impacts.
�( 14
Massachusetts has a unique provision, "Approval not required"
You can subdivide lots that have sufficient road frontage freely
The bill as released from committee included an amendment that intended to
protect the interests of farmers and foresters, by permitting the sale of 2 lots a year
without going through the subdivision process,
As redrafted, which has the support of the MA Forest Alliance-
Applicable land must be classified as forest land under c,61 or as agricultural
land under c.61A
• Up to 2 lots / no more than 50% of the total land can be subdivided
IIt��
115
Requires all communities to permit a reasonable, minimum level of multifamily
housing for increased housing production.
® With significant multifamily housing in great demand, 207 of our 351 cities and
towns have permitted no multifamily housing with more than 5 units in over a
decade and over a third of our communities have permitted only single family
housing. The lack of multifamily zoning is the most significant barrier to building
affordable and market rate housing, and is so basic a requirement that no other
long -term production goals can be achieved successfully without it.
• Recommended by the Special Senate Committee on Housing; Currently included in
a bill (H4140) before the House Committee on Ways and Means
�ti� 16
IN
• Allow property owners to construct one accessory dwelling unit as of right
in existing single - family residential zoning districts on lots above a
reasonable minimum size.
Communities would be able to impose reasonable dimensional setbacks
and reasonable bulk and height limits, but would not be able to use special
permit mechanisms to frustrate or discourage the development and rental
of these units.
• This would clear away unreasonable, existing barriers while giving both
communities and property owner's flexibility.
• Building code will continue to apply to accessory apartments
- In many communities, there is high demand for the option of creating an accessory
dwelling unit in areas that are zoned primarily for single family units. The residents
who seek such accommodation are varied, from elders looking to downsize while
staying in their home and bringing in some supplemental income, to families hoping
to make space for their elderly parents, to parents looking to provide affordable
accommodations for their children as they begin their careers.
This is a particularly pressing issue for those who have a family member that is ill
or living with a disability. By providing for this flexibility to create accessory units,
our residents will be able to make sure their housing fits their needs, whether
they're hoping to age in place or take care of their loved ones.
- Boston Globe op -ed: Dante Ramos "How Grandma can help the Housing Crunch"
(https:/Zwww.bostonglobe.com/ opinion/ 2016 /04/30 /how - grandma- can -help-
housing- crunch/ BBul6fbzcinQ4iEPtsmvVJ /story.html)
- Recently, new rules in Cambridge will make it far easier for owners of one- and two -
family homes to convert basements into the add -on apartments that planning nerds
call "accessory dwelling units." These units will still require special permits, but not
zoning variances, which are much harder to obtain.
�� 17
NWwAym
A Residential Cluster Development, or open space development, is the
grouping of residential properties on a development site in order to use
the extra land as open space, recreation or agriculture.
® Legislation requires communities to establish cluster development by right
in certain districts
® Currently included in a bill (H4140) before the House Committee on Ways
and Means
18
THE BILL REFORMS AND IMPROVES EXISTINC
ZONING TOOLS:
• Special permits (currently require a super - majority; reduced to a simple majority)*
• Zoning amendments (currently require a super - majority; allowed to reduce to a
simple majority *
• Variances (current standard is difficult to meet and unevenly enforced; replaced
with a more realistic standard to promote development)
• Master planning (modernizes the process to promote sustainable growth)
• Appeals (streamlined appeals process for site plan review and subdivisions; gives
judges tools to limit frivolous appeals)
• Vesting (protects the project rather than the land; requires developers to indicate
their intention to develop earlier in the process)
SPECIAL PERMIT EXAMPLE: Newton: A proposed project was narrowly approved in
January 2016, with the developer proposing to build 68 units (and retail) across from a
commuter rail station. Because of the two - thirds majority required to approve a
special permit, 15 of the 23 board members were required to approve. Minutes before
the vote, 14 (or 61 %) were in favor. The defeat was averted, when the developer
agreed to include 5 more affordable units and two board members changed their
minds. While one can argue the ultimate result wasn't bad, most developers wouldn't
have been willing to take the risk of including 33% affordable units in their project with
no assurance of state financial
support. http: / /commonwealthmagazine.org /economy /closed- doors/
S2144 would lower the percentage required for a special permit, down to a simple
majority (with the option to raise it).
ZONING AMENDMENT EXAMPLE: Norwood: A proposed 40R district was defeated at
town meeting in May 2014, with the developer proposing to build 238 units (and retail)
across from the commuter rail station. Because of the two - thirds majority required to
re -zone, town meeting vote of 57% in favor of creating the 40R district was not
sufficient. S2144 would allow a municipality to lower the percentage required for
zoning amendments, down to a simple majority.
�� 19
Special permits (current: maximum of 2 years; proposed: minimum of 4 years)
Site plan review permits (current: varies from town to town; proposed: 2 years)
® Building permits (current: 6 months; proposed: 2 years)
Somerville: Developers first proposed a 14 -unit condo project in 2002 and, after
multiple approvals and appeals, are still in court with a mixed use project (29
homes and a new VFW Post). Along the way, in 2009, the developers faced a
permit deadline because of the initial round of appeals and went to the Board of
Aldermen seeking a one -year extension. While the Board approved the
extension, the political and legal battle over the extension illustrates the problem
of having unrealistic deadlines for use of approved permits. Every request for an
extension creates a new opportunity to undo the approval.
@ 20
® The bill creates an opt -in section that encourages communities to
establish by -right housing and economic development districts in
strategic areas. Municipalities who choose to opt -in receive
incentives and preference for certain state funding
r
21