Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2017-07-11 Board of Selectmen Packet
d N AFRO y Town of Reading Meeting Posting with Agenda p„ w» � oINC0 Bard - Committee - Commission - Council: Board of Selectmen Date: 2017 -07 -11 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: General Business _I V Eli 10 :' SLfK 1011 JUL -6 P 3: 52 j Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Agenda: Meeting Called By: Caitlin Saunders on behalf of Chairman John Arena Notices and agendas are to be posted 48 hours in advance of the meetings excluding Saturdays, Sundays and Legal Holidays. Please keep in mind the Town Clerk's hours of operation and make necessary arrangements to be sure your posting is made in an adequate amount of time. A listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at the meeting must be on the agenda. All Meeting Postings must be submitted in typed format; handwritten notices will not be accepted. Topics of Discussion: 1) Reports and Comments a. Selectmen's Liaison Reports and Comments b. Public Comment C. Town Manager's /Assistant Town Manager's Report 2) Open Session for topics not reasonably anticipated 48 hours in advance of the meeting 3) Proclamations /Certificates of Appreciation a. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 4) Personnel & Appointments 5) Discussion /Action Items a. Adopt Hazard Mitigation Plan b. Approve proposed FYI Board of Selectmen Schedule C. Review Reading/ Wakefield Real Estate Sale d. Review Town Manager FYI Goals e. Preview Draft Town Manager FYI Goals f. Establish Town Manager Evaluation Process g. Financial Decision: BOS Survey h. Change of Officer — Chili's 6) Approval of Minutes a. June 13th, 2017 7) Licenses, Permits and Approvals 8) Executive Session a. To discuss Strategy with Respect to Collective Bargaining 9) Correspondence a. Email from Fios TV, re: Programming Change b. Correspondence from Robert LeLacheur, re: Fundraising for fire victims C. FYI Legal Budget Summary 7:20 7:30 7:35 7:45 8:15. 9:00 9:15 9:30 9:35 This Agenda has been prepared in advance and represents a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at the meeting. However the agenda does not necessarily include all matters which may be taken up at this meeting. Page 1 1 DRAFT - BOARD OF SELECTMEN 2017 AGENDAS 2017 71312017 Responsibility Start time July! 11, 2017 Tuesday Office Hour Andrew Friedmann 6:30 ADA Proclamation LeLacheur Adopt Hazard Mitigation Plan Mercier 7:20 Approve proposed FY18 Board of Selectmen Meeting Schedule LeLacheur 7:30 Review Reading/Wakefield Real Estate Sale LeLacheur 7:35 Review Town Manager FY17 Goals LeLacheur 7:45 Preview Draft Town Manager FY18 Goals LeLacheur 8:15 Establish Town Manager Evaluation Process Arena 9:00 Financial Discussion: BOS Survey LeLacheur 9:15 Executive Session To discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining LeLacheur 9:30 July 25, 2027 Tuesday Appoint Boards and Committees VASC 7:20 Hearing Amend Board of Selectmen Policies: Article 3 Licenses Miyares 7:30 Hearing Adopt KENO Policy Miyares 8:00 Finalize Town Manager FY18 Goals Arena 9:00 August 8, 2017 Tuesday Office Hour John Arena 6:30 Planning update Delios 7:20 Economic Development update Corona 8:00 August 22; 2017 ? Tuesday September 12, 2017 Tuesday Office Hour John Halsey 6:30 Town Accountant Quarterly Report Angstrom 7:20 Finance dept Policies Angstrom 7:45 Public Works dept Policies Zager 8:00 Preview Warrant for November Town Meeting LeLacheur 9:00 September 20, 2017 Financial Forum I Wednesday September 26, 2017 Tuesday . Close Warrant for November Town Meeting LeLacheur Office Hour Dan Ensminger 6:30 Santaniello & Review Senior Tax Relief Bd Assessors 7:20 Santaniello & Preview Tax Classification Bd Assessors 7:45 October 11, 2017 Financial Forum II Wednesday Santaniello & HEARING Tax Classification Bd Assessors 7:20 Office Hour Barry Berman 6:30 November 13, 2017 Subsequent Town Meeting I Monday November 16, 2017 Subsequent Town Meeting II IThursday November 20, 2017 Subsequent Town Meeting III Monday November 27, 2017 Subsequent Town Meeting IV IMonday Approve liquor licenses LeLacheur Annrove licenses ILeLacheur FY19 Budget Review LeLacheur December 20, 2017 Wednesday FY19 Budget Review LeLacheur January 8, 2018 School Comm Budget Meeting Monday January 9, 201$ Tuesday Office Hour John Arena 6:30 January 11, 2018 School Comm Budget Meeting Thursday January 16, 2018 School Comm Budget Meeting Tuesday January 18, 2018 School Comm Budget Meeting -Vote Budget Thursday January 24, 2018 Financial Forum III Wednesday February 1, 2018 Town Manager Budget to FINCOM Thursday February 7, 2018 FINCOM Budget Meeting (Schools) Wednesday February 8, 2017 FINCOM Budget Meeting (Town) Thursday February 13 2018; Tuesday Office Hour John Halsey 6:30 February 14 2017` FINCOM Budget Meeting (Misc.) Wednesday Fahr" rnv 15 21)17 1 FINCOM Budget Meetinz - Vote Budget Thursday Close Warrant for April Town Meeting LeLacheur March 7, 2018 FINCOM- Vote Annual TM WarrantArticles Wednesday I Office Hour I Dan Ensminger I I 6.30 - -17 Office Hour Barry Berman 6:30 1'11!111 LV, 6V1V I Aaala aasaa . —".a i ------- U, —s :✓ April 30, 2018 jAnnual Town Meeting III IMonday Office Hour Andrew Friedmann 6:30 May 3, 2018 Annual Town Meeting IV Thursday May 7, 2018 Annual Town Meeting V Monday Future Agendas Executive Session Building Security Review - joint meeting with School Committee and Board of Library Trustees Segalla & Huggins Update: MWRA/North Reading project LeLacheur Update: Library Building Project LeLacheur Discuss Train Depot /Compost sticker LeLacheur Discuss Cell Tower project Percival Discuss Oakland Road land public process LeLacheur Board of Selectmen Policies: Article 1 General Operating Procedures LeLacheur Board of Selectmen Policies: Article 2 Volunteers, Boards and Committees Halsey Percy Avenue: improvements on a private way LeLacheur Downtown Parking Segalla Recurring Items Close Warrant: Nov '17 TM by 9/26 Close Warrant: Apr'18 TM by 2/27 Review BOS /TM Goals Dec & June Semi -ann Appointments of Boards & Committees June Annual Hearing Approve Classification & Compensation June Annual Hearing Tax Classification October Annual Approve licenses December Annual Reports to BOS Town Accountant Report Qtrly Economic Development Director Mar -July -Dec Tri -ann RCTV members Report Semi -ann CAB (RMLD) member Report Semi -ann MAPC member Report Annual Reading Housing Authority Report Annual Reading Ice Arena Report Annual BOS Appointed Boards & Committees Annual INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER of *i Shore ! e Ann, Inc. 27 CONGRESS STREET, SUITE 107 - SALEM, MA 01 970 (978) 741-0077 v /TTY -TOLL Fri EE: (888) 751 -0077 v /TTY FAX: (978) 741 -1138 ° WEB ADDRESS: www.ilcnsca.org Member: Aging & Disability Resource Consortium of the Greater North Shore Beverly May 26, 2017 Danvers your municipality. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Rockport Town Manager Robert W. LeLacheur Jr. Essex Town of Reading Gloucester Town Manager Saugus 16 Lowell Street Hamilton Reading, MA 01867 Ipswich Dear Town Manager LeLacheur: Lynn July 26, 2017 marks the Twenty - Seventh Anniversary of the signing of the Americans Lynnfield with Disabilities Act (ADA). To commemorate this anniversary, the Independent Living Manchester Center of the North Shore and Cape Ann, Inc. ( ILCNSCA) requests that the Town of By-The-Sea Reading proclaim July 26, 2017 as "ADA Day ". The ILCNSCA will designate one of our employees, and perhaps a Board Member, to visit Reading to receive this proclamation Marblehead and we will send a press release to the local press in order to further publicize your Melrose issuing of this important proclamation. Middleton If you can honor this request please contact me, at (978) 741 -0077 x 140 to arrange a Nahant location, date and time for this proclamation issuance event. If possible, we would like to have the issuance event before or during the week of July 17 -21, 2017. If you cannot North Reading arrange to issue your proclamation to ILCNSCA directly, you may send it by mail to me, Peabody Shawn McDuff, Deputy Director, at the address above. Reading For your convenience, I have enclosed a sample proclamation that you may adapt for your municipality. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Rockport me at (978) 741 -0077 x 140 or by email at smcduff @ilcnsca.org. Thank you. Rowley Yours truly, Salem ft4 Saugus Stoneham Shawn McDuff Deputy Director Swampscott Topsfield CC: Mary Margaret Moore, Executive Director; Grant Murphy, Data and Operations Manager, ILCNSCA; Joe Karaman, Board President, ILCNSCA; File Wakefield Enclosure: Proclamation sample Wenham "'SERVICES AND ADVOCACY FOR AN XNDEPENDENT LIFE " - V CO O �I v °a A-� A Ey T� V1 a m� H A N MCI V1 W U CIO ti Q N O bA 4-1 0 N O N Ile N ti 0 'C Q 0 N CIS C O 'p C8 N bA o U � 0 U O O H H � N � H � c� � N U O � O � O N � O o� o p. .o N O N N C b�A bA O °r O � N Cd o N O p N � � la, U N � •� N y, cI 0 'd bb � N by cn U N bb O U Cd t V 4-4 yU � A to X! 4-� O +' � N N N H 4q 7d 'CS ti O iw O O 2: W W W W W H i. it iw Cd o N O p N � � la, U N � •� N y, cI 0 'd bb � N by cn U N bb O U Cd t V 4-4 yU � A to X! 4-� O +' � N N N H 4q 7d 'CS ti O iw O O 2: W W W W W H Saunders, Caitlin From: Mercier, Julie Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 3:44 PM To: LeLacheur, Bob; Saunders, Caitlin Subject: FW: Reading's Haz Mit Plan - Comments Attachments: 2ndrevised_Reading_MA_APA 05_31_2017.pdf Bob, Caitlin, Attached is the revised Haz Mit Plan for the BOS. Also, see the comments in red, below. They add clarification to some of the requested edits. Let me know if you need anything else. Thanks! From: Mercier, Julie [ma ilto :imercier @ci. reading. ma.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2017 12:34 PM To: Cleaves, Sam <SCleaves @MAPC.ORG> Subject: Reading's Haz Mit Plan - Comments Hi Sam, Thanks for calling just now — I hate when I have to deliver bad news to good people! Here are the comments from the Board of Selectmen last night: • Narrative is weak and repetitive, should be tighter and less boilerplate.- FEMA template issue • Charts should be clearer, with more specific detail (such as street addresses) where possible. FEMA template issue • Why does the plan include so many charts — for instance, what is the point of the snowfall chart and why do we need it ?- FEMA template issue • Page 1— last paragraph: are the words "thousand" and "million" in the parens correct ? - edited out "thousand" and gave as a whole number to avoid confusion; left "million" in parens to avoid very long number; the use of thousands and millions is standard financial spreadsheet practice to avoid overly long numbers. • Page 74 —Texaco is now a Shell Station- updated with Shell They are going to review it further and provide more comments at the next meeting. My comments: • Pages 1 and 11— add the October 315` Planning Team meeting- updated • Page 8 — FEMA Funded Projects: can you expand on this? Has the Town ever applied for any grants? Has the Town ever received grants from the other two grant programs ? - gave grant background info and confirmed state info that the town has not received funding from any of the three FEMA grant programs that we are aware of. • Page 8 — Community Profile: given the BOS feedback above, this should be more robust.- updated from Reading Action Plan • Planning Team Members — the list of members should be consistent throughout the document- updated • Public Participation — no one from the public was at the 15t meeting, and no one from the public was at the 2" d meeting for this agenda item- updated 5 a� Please note that public comments that were received during the process were incorporated into the document on pgs. 64, 84 and 101. Please let me know your thoughts and the feasibility for editing the document before the next BOS meeting on July 11`" Thank you! I Julie D. Mercier, AICP, LEED AP Community Development Director Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading, MAO 1867 781.942.6648 (o) jmercier __ci.reading.ma.us Town Hall Hours: Mon, Wed & Thurs: 7:30 am - 5:30 pm Tues: 7:30 am - 7:00 pm Fri: closed 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. TOWN OF READING I F.Y4.11101aAl I WPM I RU 1:1 WA L1 2017 FINAL PLAN Approval Pending Adoption Issued by FEMA May 31, 2017 t MAPC' RMA H,10 READING, MA Map 3: Fl-d ......... TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE [This page intentionally left blank] TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND CREDITS This plan was prepared for the Town of Reading by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) under the direction of the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) and the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR). The plan was funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Pre - Disaster Mitigation (PDM) Grant Program. MAPC Officers President: Keith Bergman, Town of Littleton Vice President: Erin Wortman, Town of Stoneham Secretary: Sandra Hackman, Town of Bedford Treasurer: Taber Keally, Town of Milton Executive Director: Marc. D. Draisen Credits Project Manager and Lead Project Planner: Sam Cleaves Hazard Mitigation Program Manager: Martin Pillsbury Mapping/GIS Services: Cortni Kerr Eliza Wallace Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency Director: Kurt Schwartz Department of Conservation and Recreation Commissioner: Leo Roy Reading Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Julie Mercier Jean Delios Ryan Percival Kim Honetschlager Chuck Tirone Greg Burns Paul Jackson George Strazzere Community Development Director Assistant Town Manager Town Engineer GIS Coordinator Conservation Administrator Fire /EMD Fire Department Assistant Chief DPW /Highway Division TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE [This page intentionally left blank] TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table Section Page I. Executive Summary 1 II. Introduction 5 III. Planning Process and Public Participation 9 IV. Risk Assessment 15 V. Hazard Mitigation Goals 84 VI. Existing Mitigation Measures 84 VII. Mitigation Measures from the 2010 Plan 94 VIII. Hazard Mitigation Strategy 98 IX. Plan Adoption and Maintenance 115 X. List of References 119 Appendix A Meeting Agendas 121 Appendix B Hazard Mapping 125 Appendix C Documentation of Public Participation 135 Appendix D Documentation of Plan Adoption 143 LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Table Table Page 1 Plan Review and Update 3 2 Previous Federal /State Disaster Declarations 6 3 Local Hazard Mitigation Team Members 12 4 Attendance at Public Meetings 13 5 Hazard Risks Summary 15 6 Middlesex County Flood Events, 1996- January, 2107 17 7 Summary of Repetitive Losses and Claims 25 8 Hurricane Records for Massachusetts, 1938 -2012 26 9 Tornado Records for Middlesex County 29 10 Middlesex County Thunderstorm Events, 1995 -2014 31 11 Severe Winter Storm Records for Massachusetts 40 12 Middlesex County Heavy Snow Events, 1965 -2014 41 13 Middlesex County Ice Storm Events, 1995 -2014 47 14 Historical Earthquakes, 1727 -2017 49 15 Middlesex County Extreme Cold Occurrences 55 16 Middlesex County Extreme Heat Occurrences 56 17 Middlesex County Drought Occurrences 57 18 Chronology of Major Droughts in Massachusetts 60 19 2005 Land Use 64 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE 20 Relationship of Potential Development to Hazard Areas 66 21 Summary of Reading Developments 2010 -2015 68 22 Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas 70 23 Estimated Damages from Hurricanes 80 24 Estimated Damages from Earthquakes 81 25 Estimated Damages from Flooding 82 26 Existing Mitigation Measures 92 27 Mitigation Measures from the 2010 Plan 94 28 Mitigation Measure Prioritization 103 29 Potential Mitigation Measures 110 Figure # Figure Page 1 I swich River Gage Height, March-April 2010 24 2 Massachusetts Wildfires 2001 -2009 54 3 Wind Chill Temperature Index and Frostbite Risk 55 4 Heat Index Chart 56 5 Statewide Drought Levels using SPI Thresholds 1850 — 2012 59 6 Change in Frequency of Extreme Downpours, 1948 — 2011 62 71 Massachusetts Extreme Heat Scenarios 63 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE IM X1:4 x�Ily�►�/ •YU010 M Ily1 Hazard Mitigation planning is a proactive effort to identify actions that can be taken to reduce the dangers to life and property from natural hazard events. In the communities of the Boston region of Massachusetts, hazard mitigation planning tends to focus most on flooding, the most likely natural hazard to impact these communities. The Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires all municipalities that wish to be eligible to receive FEMA funding for hazard mitigation grants, to adopt a local multi - hazard mitigation plan and update this plan in five year intervals. Planning Process This is an update of the original Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan, which was adopted by Reading on July, 13 2010. Planning for the Hazard Mitigation Plan update was led by the Reading Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team, composed of staff from a number of different Town Departments. This team met on March 24, 2016, May 23, 2016 and Deleted: and October 31, 2016, discussed where the impacts of natural hazards most affect the Town, goals for addressing these impacts, updates to the Town's existing mitigation measures and new or revised hazard mitigation measures that would benefit the Town. Public participation in this planning process is important for improving awareness of the potential impacts of natural hazards and to build support for the actions the Town takes to mitigate them. The Town's Community Planning and Development Commission hosted two public meetings, the first on June 6, 2016 and the second on January 23, 2017 and the draft plan update was posted on the Town's website for public review. Key Town stakeholders and neighboring communities were notified and invited to review the draft plan and submit comments. Risk Assessment The Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan assesses the potential impacts to the Town from flooding, high winds, winter storms, brush fire, geologic hazards, extreme temperatures, and drought. Flooding, driven by hurricanes, northeasters and other storms, clearly presents the greatest hazard to the Town. These are shown on the map series (Appendix B). The Reading Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team identified 137 Critical Facilities. These are also shown on the map series and listed in Table 20, identifying which facilities are located within the mapped hazard zones. A HAZUS -MH analysis provided estimates of damages from Hurricanes of category 2 and 4 ($18 614 970 0 $6 975 280 as well as earth uakes of ma itudes 5 and 7 Deleted: B 614.97 thousand ($187.37 million to $1,916.84 million). Flood damage estimates range from $8.32 Deleted: ,97528 thousand million to $12.04 million. TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Hazard Mitigation Goals The Reading Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team identified the following hazard mitigation goals for the Town: 1. Prevent and reduce the loss of life, injury, public health impacts and property damages resulting from all identified natural hazards. 2. Build and enhance local mitigation capabilities to ensure individual safety, reduce damage to public and private property and ensure continuity of emergency services. 3. Increase cooperation and coordination among private entities, Town officials and Boards, State agencies and Federal agencies. 4. Increase awareness of the benefits of hazard mitigation through outreach and education. Hazard Mitigation Strategy The Reading Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team identified a number of mitigation measures that would serve to reduce the Town's vulnerability to natural hazard events. One of the most important of these is the completion of drainage upgrade in the Sunnyside Avenue and Fairview Avenues neighborhood. Another action includes drainage upgrades at West Street, programmed and budgeted by the Town's Capital Improvement Plan, a process instituted following a comprehensive drainage and flooding study in 2013 of the Aberjona and Saugus River watershed areas in Reading. Another important multi- hazard mitigation step will be the construction of a new cellular communications tower allowing for faster and more reliable radio communications and response times for Police, Fire and DPW Departments. Overall, the hazard mitigation strategy recognizes that mitigating hazards for Reading will be an ongoing process as our understanding of natural hazards and the steps that can be taken to mitigate their damages changes over time. Global climate change and a variety of other factors impact the Town's vulnerability and in the future. Local officials will need to work together across municipal lines and with state and federal agencies in order to understand and address these changes. The Hazard Mitigation Strategy will be incorporated into the Town's other related plans and policies. TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Plan Review and Update Process Table 1 Plan Review and Update Chapter Reviews and Updates III — Public The Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team placed an emphasis on Participation public participation for the update of the Hazard Mitigation Plan, discussing strategies to enhance participation opportunities at the first local committee meeting. During plan development, the plan was discussed at two public meetings hosted by the Community Planning and Development Commission. The plan was also available on the Town's website for public comment. IV — Risk MAPC gathered the most recently available hazard and land use data Assessment and met with Town staff to identify changes in local hazard areas and development trends. Town staff reviewed critical infrastructure with MAPC staff in order to create an up -to -date list. MAPC also used the most recently available version of HAZUS and assessed the potential impacts of flooding using the latest data. V - Goals The Hazard Mitigation Goals were reviewed and endorsed by the Reading Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team. VI — Existing The list of existing mitigation measures was updated to reflect current Mitigation mitigation activities in the Town. Measures VII & VIII — Mitigation measures from the 2010 plan were reviewed and assessed Hazard as to whether they were completed, in- progress, or deferred. The Mitigation Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team determined whether to carry Strategy forward measures into the 2017 Plan Update or modify or delete them. The Plan Update's hazard mitigation strategy reflects both new measures and measures carried forward from the 2010 plan. The Local Hazard Mitigation Team prioritized all of these measures based on current conditions. IX — Plan This section of the plan was updated with a new on -going plan Adoption & implementation review and five year update process that will assist Maintenance the Town in incorporating hazard mitigation issues into other Town planning and regulatory review processes and better prepare the Town for the next comprehensive plan update. As indicated on Table 25, Reading made progress on implementing mitigation measures identified in the 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan. Several projects have been completed, including dredging the drainage channel at Morgan Park to remove years of accumulated sediment and improve drainage, removing the obstructions from the West Street area drainage system, cleaning the brook along Main Street near Church of the Nazarenes of sediment and other blockages, re- developing a Main Street property using up to date TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE stormwater detention systems that relieved flooding in the Milepost and Haystack Streets neighborhood, installing new drainage systems in the Hopkins Street neighborhood, updating Conservation Commission regulations and adding new aquifer protection to the Town's zoning bylaw. Other projects were partially completed, most notably drainage improvements in the upper Saugus River watershed that impact the Sunnyside and Fairview Road areas, the flooding near the DPW garage on Line Road and flooding along portions of South Main Street, a state highway and MA DOT responsibility about notification and evacuation procedures. There are also drainage projects scheduled to be completed under the Town's Capital Improvement Program, including drainage improvements for the Lowell Street and Willow Street neighborhoods. These mitigation measures will be continued in this 2017 Plan Update. Moving forward into the next five year plan implementation period there will be many more opportunities to incorporate hazard mitigation into the Town's decision making processes. Though not formally done in the 2010 Plan, the Town will document any actions taken within this iteration of the Hazard Mitigation Plan on challenges met and actions successfully adopted as part of the ongoing plan maintenance to be conducted by the Reading Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team, as described in Section IX, Plan Adoption and Maintenance. TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE II. INTRODUCTION Planning Requirements under the Federal Disaster Mitigation Act The Federal Disaster Mitigation Act, passed in 2000, requires that after November 1 2004, all municipalities that wish to continue to be eligible to receive FEMA funding for hazard mitigation grants, must adopt a local multi- hazard mitigation plan and update this plan in five year intervals. This planning requirement does not affect disaster assistance funding. Federal hazard mitigation planning and grant programs are administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in collaboration with the states. These programs are administered in Massachusetts by the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) in partnership with the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR). The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) subcontracted with the Town of Reading to update its local Hazard Mitigation Plans, which was first adopted in 2010. The local Hazard Mitigation Plan update produced under this grant is designed to individually meet the requirements of the Disaster Mitigation Act for each community while listing regional concerns and hazards that impact the Town or City creating the plan. What is a Hazard Mitigation Plan? Natural hazard mitigation planning is the process of determining how to systematically reduce or eliminate the loss of life and property damage resulting from natural hazards such as floods, earthquakes, and hurricanes. Hazard mitigation means to permanently reduce or alleviate the losses of life, injuries, and property resulting from natural hazards through long -term strategies. These long -term strategies include planning, policy changes, programs, projects, and other activities. Previous Federal /State Disasters The Town of Reading, a part of Middlesex County, has experienced 20 natural hazards that triggered federal or state disaster declarations since 1991. These are listed in Table 2 below. The majority of these events involved flooding, while five were due to hurricanes or nor'easters, and four were due to severe winter weather. TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Tahle 2 Previnus Federal /State Disaster Declarations DISASTER NAME (DATE OF EVENT TYPE OF ASSISTANCE DECLARED AREAS Hurricane Bob FEMA Public Assistance Counties of Barnstable, Bristol, (August 1991) Project Grants Dukes, Essex, Hampden, Middlesex, Plymouth, Nantucket, Norfolk, Suffolk Hazard Mitigation Grant Counties of Barnstable, Bristol, Program Dukes, Essex, Hampden, Middlesex, Plymouth, Nantucket, Norfolk, Suffolk (16 projects) No -Name Storm FEMA Public Assistance Counties of Barnstable, Bristol, (October 1991) Project Grants Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Plymouth, Nantucket, Norfolk FEMA Individual Counties of Barnstable, Bristol, Household Program Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Plymouth, Nantucket, Norfolk Hazard Mitigation Grant Counties of Barnstable, Bristol, Program Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Plymouth, Nantucket, Norfolk, Suffolk (10 projects) March Blizzard FEMA Public Assistance All 14 Counties (March 1993) Project Grants January Blizzard FEMA Public Assistance All 14 Counties (January 1996) Project Grants May Windstorm State Counties of Plymouth, Norfolk, (May 1996) Public Assistance Project Bristol Grants October Flood FEMA Public Assistance Counties of Essex, Middlesex, (October 1996) Project Grants Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk FEMA Individual Counties of Essex, Middlesex, Household Program Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk Hazard Mitigation Grant Counties of Essex, Middlesex, Program Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk (36 projects) TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE DISASTER NAME TYPE OF (DATE OF ASSISTANCE DECLARED AREAS EVENT 1997 Community Development Counties of Essex, Middlesex, Block Grant -HUD Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk June Flood FEMA Individual Counties of Bristol, Essex, (June 1998) Household Program Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, Plymouth, Worcester Hazard Mitigation Grant Counties of Bristol, Essex, Program Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, Plymouth, Worcester (19 projects) (1998)' Community Development Counties of Bristol, Essex, Block Grant -HUD Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, Plymouth, Worcester March Flood FEMA Individual Counties of Bristol, Essex, (March 200 1) Household Program Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, Plymouth, Worcester Hazard Mitigation Grant Counties of Bristol, Essex, Program Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, Plymouth, Worcester (16 projects) February Snowstorm FEMA Public Assistance All 14 Counties (Feb 17 -18, 2003) Project Grants January Blizzard FEMA Public Assistance All 14 Counties (January 22 -23, Project Grants 2005 Hurricane Katrina FEMA Public Assistance All 14 Counties (August 29, 2005) Project Grants May Hazard Mitigation Grant Statewide Rainstorm/Flood Program (May 12 -23, 2006) April Nor'easter Hazard Mitigation Grant Statewide (April 15 -27, 2007) Program Flooding FEMA Public Assistance Bristol, Essex, Middlesex, (March, 2010) FEMA Individuals and Suffolk, Norfolk, Plymouth, Households Program Worcester SBA Loan Hazard Mitigation Grant Statewide Program TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE DISASTER NAME TYPE OF (DATE OF ASSISTANCE DECLARED AREAS EVENT Tropical Storm Irene FEMA Public Assistance Statewide (August 27 -28, 2011) Hurricane Sandy FEMA Public Assistance Statewide (October 27 -30, 2012 Severe snowstorm FEMA Public Assistance; Statewide and Flooding Hazard Mitigation Grant (February 8 -09, 2013 Program Blizzard of 2015 FEMA Public Assistance; Statewide (January 26 -28, Hazard Mitigation Grant 2015) Program Source: database provided by MEMA) FEMA Funded Mitigation Projects FEMA offers three grant programs, including: The Pre - Disaster Mitigation Grant (PDM) program for all- hazard mitigation and planning; Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) for flood - related hazards mitigation; and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) which is available after federally declared natural hazard events. State records indicate Community Profile The Town of Reading is 9.9 square miles in size. Interstate Route 93 lies along its western boundary and Interstate Route 95 along its southern and southeastern boundaries. The Town's 2010 population was 24,747 people and there were 9,617 housing units. (2010 US Census) Reading was incorporated as a town on June 10th, 1644. The area that is currently the Town of Reading was known as both Wood End and Third Parrish during its early ,years. The oldest remaining structure in Town is the Parker Tavern, built in 1694 and now operated by the Reading Antiquarian Society. A town meeting voted to fund public education in 1693, and Reading's first public library was created in 1868. The small community played active roles in both the Revolutionary and Civil Wars. Prior to the 1800s, the Town evolved from a series of isolated, subsidence farms to a specialized farming community located around a town center. Reading became a manufacturing: town during the first half of the 19th century. This industry was able to prosper as a result of the construction of the Andover- Medford Turnpike, currently Route 28, which improved access to Boston. Amon the he major businesses in Town were Daniel Pratt's clock factory, Samuel Pierce's organ pipe factory, and Sylvester Hamden's furniture factory. Access to Boston and the southern TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE markets further increased with the arrival of the Boston & Main Railroad to Reading in 1845 Around this time shoe - making had expanded from a cottage industry to larger factories and neckties were also produced in the Town for Just under a century. Several factories were forced to close during and after the Civil War, however, as the market demand from the south declined. After the Civil War, Reading became a predominately residential community, though industrial activity did eventually expand. The forerunner to General Tire & Rubber Company was located off Ash Street. Ace Art, Boston Stove Foundry, and a number of other companies were created in Reading after World War I. In 1986 Reading adopted the Reading Home Rule Charter, which created a Town Manager position that is responsible for the day -to -day government operations. A few elected boards and commissions are responsible for policy and decision making functions Reading's governance structure has changed quite a bit since the town was incorporated reflecting the changing size and needs of the community. When the Town was created in 1644 its government consisted of a Board of Selectmen and a Town Meeting In 1944 a representative town meeting replaced the open town meeting style that had been in place for 300 years Reading's 2005 Master Plan sums up its urban form well: "the traditional New England village structure, with a distinct center, family - oriented residential neighborhoods few business corridors and a surrounding system of natural elements. (Reading Economic Action Plan 2016- 2022) _ The Town maintains a website at Deleted: 9 Deleted: The Town of Reading is a medium size community of 9.9 square miles which lies at a transportation hub. With Interstate Route 93 along its western boundary and Interstate 95 along its southern and southeastern boundaries, as well as a commuter rail station, not only Boston but the seashore, retail shopping malls and employment centers are easily accessible. This accessibility plus the New England character of the town make Reading an ideal residential area. ¶ First settled in 1639, the town was incorporated in 1644. This committee is only one of many volunteer boards, committees and commissions that assist an elected board of selectmen and a representative town meeting in governing the town.¶ (Narrative is taken from the Community Profile on the website maintained by the Department of Housing and Community Development).¶ 9 The Town is governed by a Board of Selectmen with a Town manager. The Town operates under a representative Town meeting format. The 2010 population was 24,747 people and there were 9,617 housing units. (2010 US Census)¶ TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE III. PLANNING PROCESS AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION MAPC employs a six step planning process based on FEMA's hazard mitigation planning guidance focusing on local needs and priorities but maintaining a regional perspective matched to the scale and nature of natural hazard events. Public participation is a central component of this process, providing critical information about the local occurrence of hazards while also serving as a means to build a base of support for hazard mitigation activities. MAPC supports participation by the general public and other plan stakeholders through Regional and Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Teams, two public meetings hosted by the local Hazard Mitigation Team, posting of the plan to the Town's website, and invitations sent to neighboring communities, Town boards and commissions, the local chamber of commerce, and other local or regional entities to review the plan and provide comment. Planning Process Summary The six -step planning process outlined below is based on the guidance provided by FEMA in the Local Multi- Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance. Public participation is a central element of this process, which attempts to focus on local problem areas and identify needed mitigation measures based on where gaps occur in the existing mitigation efforts of the municipality. MAPC is also able to identify regional opportunities for collaboration and facilitate communication between communities. In plan updates, the process described below allows staff to bring the most recent hazard information into the plan, including new hazard occurrence data, changes to a municipality's existing mitigation measures, and progress made on actions identified in previous plans. • Map the Hazards — MAPC relies on data from a number of different federal, state, and 1. Map the Hazards 6. Implement and Update the Plan 2. Assess the Risks & Potential public Damages S. Plan Approval Diput 3. Review and Adoption Existing Mitigation 4. Develop Mitigation Strategies 10 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE local sources in order to map the areas with the potential to experience natural hazards. This mapping represents a multi - hazard assessment of the municipality and is used as a set of base maps for the remainder of the planning process. A particularly important source of information is the knowledge drawn from local municipal staff on where natural hazard impacts have occurred, which is collected. These maps can be found in Appendix B. Assess the Risks & Potential Damages — Working with local staff, critical facilities, infrastructure, vulnerable populations, and other features are mapped and contrasted with the hazard data from the first step to identify those that might represent particular vulnerabilities to these hazards. Land use data and development trends are also incorporated into this analysis. In addition, MAPC develops estimates of the potential impacts of certain hazard events on the community. MAPC drew on the following resources to complete the plan: • Town of Reading, General Bylaws • Town of Reading, Zoning Bylaw • Town of Reading Master Plan 2006 • Aberjona River and Saugus River Drainage Study for Town of Reading 2013 • Town of Reading Open Space Plan, 2012 • Town of Reading Capital Improvement Program 2014 • Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013 • FEMA, Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide; October 1, 2011 • FEMA, Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Middlesex County, MA, 2014 • Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation P1an.2013 • Metropolitan Area Planning Council, GIS Lab, Regional Plans and Data. • New England Seismic Network, Boston College Weston Observatory, http://aki.be.edu/index.htm • NOAA National Climatic Data Center, http: / /www.ncdc.noaa.gou/ • Northeast States Emergency Consortium, http://www.nesec.orW • USGS, National Water Information System, hLtp:Hnwis.waterdata.usjzs.gov/usa/nwis • US Census, 2010 • Review Existing Mitigation — Municipalities in the Boston Metropolitan Region have an active history in hazard mitigation as most have adopted flood plain zoning districts, wetlands protection programs, and other measures as well as enforcing the State building code, which has strong provisions related to hazard resistant building requirements. All current municipal mitigation measures must be documented. • Develop Mitigation Strategies — MAPC works with the local municipal staff to identify new mitigation measures, utilizing information gathered from the hazard identification, vulnerability assessments, and the community's existing mitigation 11 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE efforts to determine where additional work is necessary to reduce the potential damages from hazard events. Additional information on the development of hazard mitigation strategies can be found in Chapter VII. Plan Approval & Adoption — Once a final draft of the plan is complete it is sent to MEMA for the state level review and, following that, to FEMA for approval. Typically, once FEMA has approved the plan the agency issues a conditional approval (Approval Pending Adoption), with the condition being adoption of the plan by the municipality. More information on plan adoption can be found in Chapter IX and documentation of plan adoption can be found in Appendix D. Implement & Update the Plan — Implementation is the final and most important part of any planning process. Hazard Mitigation Plans must also be updated on a five year basis making preparation for the next plan update an important on -going activity. Chapter IX includes more detailed information on plan implementation. The Local Multiple Hazard Community Planning Team MAPC worked with the local community representatives to organize a local Multiple Hazard Community Planning Team for Reading (Local Committee). MAPC briefed the local representatives as to the desired composition of that team as well as the need for representation from the business community, civic organizations and citizens at large. The Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team is central to the planning process as it is the primary body tasked with developing a mitigation strategy for the community. The local team was tasked with working with MAPC to set plan goals, provide information on the hazards that impact the Town, existing mitigation measures, and helping to develop new mitigation measures for this plan update. The Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team membership can be found in Table 5 below. On March 24, 2016, MAPC and MEMA staff held a meeting with the Local Committee to outline the hazard mitigation planning and updating process at Reading Town Hall. On May 23 and October 31,...2016, MAPC conducted_ meetings of the Reading Local Deleted: Committee. The meeting wed organized by Community Development Director Julie Deleted: a Mercier. The purposes of the meetings were to review and develop hazard mitigation Deleted: as goals, review the status of mitigation measures identified in the 2010 hazard mitigation Deleted: as plan, identify new potential mitigation measures and to gather information on local hazard mitigation issues and sites or areas related to these. The meetings also covered measures to be carried forward from the previous plan and to prioritize new measures. The following Table lists the attendees at each meeting of the team. The agendas for these meetings are included in Appendix A. 12 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE The agendas for these meetings are included in Appendix A. Table 3 Membership of the Rea din Hazard Mitigation Planning Team Name Representing Julie MercieL Community Development Directo kgLDelio5, Assistant Town Mana e Ran PercivaL Town En inee Kim Honetschla e GIS Coordinate Chuck TironQ Conservation Administrate Gre Burn Fire/EMD Public Meetings Public participation in the hazard mitigation planning process is important, both for plan development and for later implementation of the plan. Residents, business owners, and other community members are an excellent source for information on the historic and potential impacts of natural hazard events and particular vulnerabilities the community may face from these hazards. Their participation in this planning process also builds understanding of the concept of hazard mitigation, potentially creating support for mitigation actions taken in the future to implement the plan. To gather this information and educate residents on hazard mitigation, the Town hosted two public meetings, one during the planning process and one after a complete draft plan is available for review. Natural hazard mitigation plans unfortunately rarely attract much public involvement in the Boston region, unless there has been a recent hazard event. One of the best strategies for overcoming this challenge is to include discussion of the hazard mitigation plan on the agenda of an existing board or commission. With this strategy, the meeting receives widespread advertising and a guaranteed audience of the board or commission members plus those members of the public who attend the meeting. These board and commission members represent an engaged audience that is informed and up to date on many of the issues that relate to hazard mitigation planning in the locality and will likely be involved in plan implementation, making them an important audience with which to build support for hazard mitigation measures. In addition, these meetings frequently receive press coverage, expanding the audience that has the opportunity to hear the presentation and provide comment. The public had an opportunity to provide input to the Reading hazard mitigation planning process during a meeting on June 6, 2016 held in the Town Hall. The draft plan update was presented at a Community Planning and Development Commission meeting held on January 23, 2017 in Reading Town Hall. Both meetings were publicized as regular meetings of the Community Planning and Development Commission according to the Massachusetts Public Meeting Law. The attendance list for each meeting can be found in Table 4. See public meeting notices in Appendix C. 13 Deleted: Julie Mercier Deleted: Community Development Director Deleted: Jean Delius Deleted: Assistant Town Manager Deleted: Ryan Percival Deleted: Town Engineer Deleted: Chuck Tirone Deleted: Conservation Agent Deleted: Paul Jackson Deleted: Lieutenant, Fire Department Deleted: Greg Bums Deleted: Chief, Fire Department TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 4 Reading Public Meetings Name I Representing Meeting #1 June 6, 2016 Nick Safina Community Planning and Development Commission John Weston Community Planning and Development Commission Dave Tuttle Community Planning and Development Commission Karen Goncalves -Dolan Community Planning and Development Commission Jean Delios Assistant Town Manager Julie Mercier Community Development Director am Cleaves MAPC Meeting #2 January 23, 2017 Nick Safina Community Planning and Development Commission John Weston Community Planning and Development Commission Dave Tuttle Community Planning and Development Commission Karen Goncalves -Dolan Community Planning and Development Commission Jean Delios Assistant Town Manager Julie Mercier I Community Development Director am Cleaves I MARC - Local Stakeholder Involvement The local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team was encouraged to reach out to local stakeholders that might have an interest in the Hazard Mitigation Plan including neighboring communities, agencies, businesses, nonprofits, and other interested parties. Notice was sent to the following organizations and neighboring municipalities inviting them to review the Hazard Mitigation Plan and submit comments to the Town: Town of North Reading Town of Lynnfield Town of Wakefield Town of Stoneham Town of Wilmington City of Woburn Reading/North Reading Chamber of Commerce Reading Conservation Commission Reading Daily Times Chronicle Reading Department Heads See Appendix C for public meeting notices. 14 Deleted: Approximately 5 members of the public Deleted: Approximately 5 members of the public TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Town Web Site The draft Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 Update was posted on the Town's website following the second public meeting. Members of the public could access the draft document and submit comments or questions to the Town. Continuing Public Participation Following the adoption of the plan update, the planning team will continue to provide residents, businesses, and other stakeholders the opportunity to learn about the hazard mitigation planning process and to contribute information that will update the Town's understanding of local hazard. As updates and a review of the plan are conducted by the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team, these will be placed on the Town's web site, and any meetings of the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team will be publicly noticed in accordance with Town and state open meeting laws. Planning Timeline March 24, 2016 Kickoff and Review of Scope Meeting with Hazard Mitigation Planning Team, MEMA and MAPC May 23, 2016 Meeting of the Reading Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team June 6, 2015 First Public Meeting with Reading Community Planning and Development Commission January 23,2017 Second Public Meeting with Community Planning and Development Commission March 17, 2017 Draft Plan Update submitted to MEMA following posting and review May 31, 2017 FEMA issued notice of Approval Pending Adoption 15 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE IV. RISK ASSESSMENT The risk assessment analyzes the potential natural hazards that could occur within the Town of Reading as well as the relationship between those hazards and current land uses, potential future development, and critical infrastructure. This section also includes a vulnerability assessment that estimates the potential damages that could result from certain large scale natural hazard events. Update Process In order to update Reading's risk assessment, MAPC gathered the most recently available hazard and land use data and met with Town staff to identify changes in local hazard areas and development trends. MAPC also used FEMA's damage estimation software, HAZUS (described below). Overview of Hazards and Impacts The Massachusetts Hazard Mitigation Plan provides an in -depth overview of natural hazards in Massachusetts. Previous state and federal disaster declarations since 1991 are summarized in Table 2. Table 5 below summarizes the hazard risks for Reading. This evaluation takes into account the frequency of the hazard, historical records, and variations in land use. This analysis is based on the vulnerability assessment in the Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan. The statewide assessment was modified to reflect local conditions in Reading using the definitions for hazard frequency and severity listed below. Based on this, the Town set an overall priority for each hazard. Reading is not a coastal community and therefore not subject to coastal hazards, storm surge or tsunamis. Tahle 5 - Hazard Risks Summary Hazard Fre uenc ity Massachusetts Reading Massachusetts Reading Flooding High High Serious Serious Dam failures Very Low NA Extensive NA Hurricane /Tropical Storm Medium Medium Serious Serious Tornadoes Medium Very Low Serious Serious Thunderstorms High High Minor Minor Nor'easter High High Minor Minor Winter- Blizzard/Snow High High Minor Minor Winter -Ice Storms Medium Medium Minor Minor Earthquakes I Very Low Very Low Serious Serious Landslides Low Very Low Minor Minor Brush fires Medium High Minor Minor 16 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 5 - Hazard Risks Summary Extreme Temperatures Medium Medium Minor Minor Drought Low Low Minor Minor Coastal Hazards High N/A Serious N/A Tsunami Very Low N/A Extensive N/A Major Urban Fires 1 Low N/A Serious N/A Source, Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, Zu 1 s, mocntted for Kea ding Note: Of the hazards listed in the 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, four categories are not applicable to Reading: coastal hazards and tsunami, due to the town's inland location away from the coast; dams, as there are none in Reading and major urban fires, due to the lack of significant wildfire areas in close proximity to development that could pose a significant threat of urban fire. Definitions used in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan Frequency Very low frequency: events that occur less frequently than once in 100 years (less than 1% per year) Low frequency: events that occur from once in 50 years to once in 100 years (1% to 2% per year); Medium frequency: events that occur from once in 5 years to once in 50 years (2% to 20% per year); High frequency: events that occur more frequently than once in 5 years (Greater than 20% per year). Sevetity Minor: Limited and scattered property damage; limited damage to public infrastructure and essential services not interrupted; limited injuries or fatalities. Serious: Scattered major property damage; some minor infrastructure damage; essential services are briefly interrupted; some injuries and /or fatalities. Extensive: Widespread major property damage; major public infrastructure damage (up to several days for repairs); essential services are interrupted from several hours to several days; many injuries and/or fatalities. Catastrophic: Property and public infrastructure destroyed; essential services stopped; numerous injuries and fatalities. Flood Related Hazards Flooding was the most prevalent serious natural hazard identified by local officials in Reading. Flooding is generally caused by hurricanes, nor'easters, severe rainstorms, and thunderstorms. Global climate change has the potential to exacerbate these issues over time with the potential for changing rainfall patterns leading to heavier storms. Regionally Significant Floods 17 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE There have been a number of major floods that have affected the Metro Boston region over the last fifty years. Significant historic flood events in Reading have included: The Blizzard of 1978 January 1979 April 1987 October 1991 ( "The Perfect Storm ") Considered to be a 100 -year storm. October 1996 June 1998 March 2001 April 2004 May 2006 April 2007 March 2010 December 2010 Local data for previous flooding occurrences are not collected by the Town of Reading. The best available local data is for Middlesex County through the National Climatic Data Center (see Table 6). Middlesex County, which includes the Town of Reading, experienced 86 flood events from 1996 — January, 2017. No deaths or injuries were reported and the total reported property damage in the county was $40.955 million dollars. Damages from the March 2010 floods in Middlesex County totaled $35.2 million, while total damages for all floods since 2005 totaled $40.7 million. There were no deaths or injuries reported. The vulnerability analysis conducted by MAPC estimates a range of damages from flooding of $8.32 to $12.04 million (see Table 25). Table 6 Middlesex County Flood Events, 1996- January, 2017 Location D Date T Type ( (Deaths (Iniuries ( ( Property Damage (40 95M WESTERN 18 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE _ Location Date Type ( Deaths Iniuries i Property Damage MIDDLESEX (ZONE) -111]� WESTERN 05/12/1998 Flood 0 0 10.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) WESTERN 06/14/1998 Flood 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) WESTERN 06/17/1998 Flood 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) WESTERN 04/22/2000 Flood 0 10 O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) ,WESTERN 04/23/2000 Flood 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) WESTERN 04/23/2000 Flood 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) WESTERN 04/23/2000 Flood 0 10 0.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) ,WESTERN 03/22/2001 Flood 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) WESTERN 03/22/2001 (Flood 0 0 1O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) ,MIDDLESEX 103/22/2001 (Flood 0 0 O.00K (ZONE) 03/23/2001 Flood 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) 03/23/2001 Flood 0 0 10.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) �MIQDLESEX(ZONE) 103/31/2001 F ood 0 0 OOOK WESTERN 104/01/2001 0 10 �0.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) (Flood WESTERN 104/01/200-4 Flood 0 0 0 .00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) WESTERN 04/01/2004 Flood 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) IWESTERN 104/02/2004 Flood 0 10 MIDDLESEX (ZONE) I (O.00K ]04/02/2004 Flood 0 0 10.00K MIDDLESEX (ZONE) 19 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Location Date Type I Deaths Iniuries WESTERN MIDDLESEX (ZONE) 04/02/2004 Flood 0 MALDEN 0 WESTERN MIDDLESEX (ZONE) (04/15/2004 -- 11.1___1 Flood 0 ._,......_. (Flood 0 WESTERN MIDDLESEX (ZONE) .._ - - -. 03/29/2005 ( (Flood 0 ...__.._---- -- 0 ---- ---- .- .---- __ --__ WESTERN MIDDLESEX (ZONE) 10/15/2005 Flood 0 0 WESTERN - 11.1.1. . . __1.11___1. '0 (MIDDLESEX (ZONE) 10/15/2005 Flo od 0 ' SOUTHEAST MIDDLESEX (ZONE) 10/15/2005 (Flood O 0 COUNTYWIDE 05/13/2006 (Floodµ 0 0___._..,._,.. -1111. COUNTYWIDE 05/13/2006 (Flood 10 �0 WAKEFIELD 07/11/2006 Flood 0 0 CAMBRIDGE 10/28/2006 Flood IO 0 1.1.1.1 -1.111.. 1.,11.1 SAXONVILLE 04/16/2007 Flood 0 0 _... �FRAMINGHAM (02/13/2008 (Flood _ 10 O MEDFORD 0 105/27/2008 (Flood O O....._..._._.._._.. 1STONEHAM _. - ,06/24/2008 Flood 10 - -- IO - -.- 11.11 --- - �WESTLANDS ._ -.r -- ..-- 106/29/2008 Flood 10 �0 �EVERETT 108/10/2008 (Flood 10 `10'11. -- SUDBURY _- 08/10/2008 (Flood 1 0- - [0 -- NORTH WOBURN 09/06/2008 (Flood O (O (81LLERICA ... 12/12/2008 (Flood ~ O V _._ ,..____.. 10 _.. . 1.1.1.1. (HOLLISTON __..._.. 03/14/2010 _._ _ Flood 0 0 �� FARM HILL _ _ --- _ (03/29/2010 .. _ 1.11.1_. Flood I0 (0 FARM HILL 04/01/2010 Flood �0 �0 (WEST NEWTON ....... 108/28/2011 (Flood (0 10 __.......___ 1.1.1.1. RIVER PINES - -1.111._ .........._,._.. 1.,1.11. 10/14/2011 _. _ (Flood _ . 1 10 1111 1.11.1 1.1.1.1. O _.__.---....... -- NORTH SOMMERVILLE 06/08/2012 Flood 0 0 __ - ..._..... 11.1.1.._. -. 11.11__ - - -� BEAVER BROOK 1 X06/23/2012 Flood 110 0 _ 1111 ...... �MELROSE 06/23/2012 Flood O O TUFTS COLLEGE (06/23/2012 (Flood �0 IO MALDEN (06/23/2012 (Flood ......... 10 .._....___.I0 _ _.._...._.._ ._ TUFTS COLLEGE ..__ - ..___._ (06/23/2012 ._,......_. (Flood O I0 20 Property Damage 100.00K 100.00K 125.00K TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Location Date Type (Deaths Iniuries ( Property Damaee (NORTH WALTHAM (10/29/2012 Flood [O 10 I0 00K IRIVERPINES (06/07/2013 Flood �0 (0 �O.00K (LOWELL 07/01/2013 Flood 10 (0 0.00K - �HARWOOD - -- 07/23/2013 __-- -- Flood �0 10 1O.00K �FRAMINGHAM (09/01/2013 (Flood���p CHELMSFORD CENTER 03/30/2014 Flood �0 �0 35 OOK (NORTH WALTHAM 03/30/2014 (Flood 10 10, 1000K �GRANITEVILLE j03/30/2014 Flood 10 10 16.0,0 K (CONCORD (07/27/2014 1Flood�.,_. I0.._.... - -___ (0 (OOOK INORTH LEXINGTON (08/31/2014 Flood �0 �0 �O OOK �FELCHVILLE (10/22/2014 Flood 0 10 �20 OOK (NEWTON LOWER FALLS x10/23/2014 Flood 0 0 O.00K �BOXBOROUGH 12/09/2014 Flood �0� �0 10.00K (CLEMATIS BROOK 12/09/2014 Flood (NONANTUM 12/09/2014 IFlood �0 �0 �O.00K �SOMERVILLE 12/09/2014 Flood �0 - — --------- -- �30.00K CONCORD 05/31/2015 Flood 0 0 O.00K �NEWTONCENTER OS /31/2O1S Flood �0 �0 [O.00K �FRAMINGHAM 08/04/2015 Flood ..._ �0 _ ._..._. [0 (OOOK._ (NATICK JS/15/2015 jFlood (0 10 _______j5_0 .0_0K_ IFRAMINGHAM 08/15/2015 Flood �NATICK - j09/30/2015 1--i Food� �0 �0_..,- (O.00K �FRAMINGHAM (09/30/2015 Floo 0 �0 �O.00K SILVER HILL (09/30/2015 �Fiood �0 0 (O OOK WILMINGTON 09/30/2015 Flood 0 0 10.0OK �AUBURNDALE 109/30/2015 Flood �0 �0 (GOOK Totals �0 _....... �0 __.. �40.955M Source: NOAA, National Climatic Data Center 21 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Overview of Town -Wide Flooding Reading is divided by topography into three watersheds. Tributary streams that arise in these watersheds flow to the Aberjona, the Saugus and the Ipswich Rivers. The streams are associated with large swamps and marshes that play a significant role in flood storage and control. Flooding from the Ipswich River and its major tributary, Bear Meadow Brook, does not affect many structures because the Town has preserved most of the floodplains as open space. Because most of the development in Reading has been constructed above the floodplains, Reading does not have many serious flooding problems. However, there are areas where flooding occurs during major storms, causing damage to buildings and roadways. Some of the flooding problems may be exacerbated by historical filling of floodplains and routing of streams through culverts in older parts of town. Subdivisions, commercial development, and other large projects permitted in the last 25 years generally includes stormwater management systems designed to detain runoff and thus control downstream flooding. Flood hazard areas tend to be small in scale and clustered in the southern part of town. Walkers Brook and its associated tributaries in southern Reading are the headwaters of the Saugus River in Wakefield. Flooding of property and roadways occur at numerous locations within the watershed and is caused by a combination of system capacity inadequacies and localized capacity deficiencies. A large portion of the basin lies in the moderately dense older portion of the town which affords little or no available land for storage or retention of flood waters. As planned improvements within Reading may impact communities downstream, the mitigation of flood damage to roadways and properties within the watershed is a true urban challenge making resolution of flooding in this watershed the town's highest priority. At the request of the Town of Reading, the consulting firm AECOM performed a study in 2013 (see reference in Section X) to analyze localized flooding and drainage issues within portions of the Aberjona River and Saugus River watersheds. The objectives of this study were to: • Evaluate existing conditions along sections of Walkers Brook (tributary to Saugus River) and the Aberjona River; • Develop alternatives for improvement of the existing channels and conduits; • Identify recommended alternatives; • Provide an estimate of construction costs for recommended alternatives; and • Develop a proposed implementation schedule for the recommended alternatives. AECOM performed a comprehensive site walk of the four study areas with several Town of Reading officials to identify the major problem areas and developed possible alternatives to improve the flooding and drainage issues for each problem area. The Town's general goal for its drainage system is to provide capacity for up to the 25 -year flood event (i.e. 25 -year level of service). 22 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Potential Flood Hazard Areas Information on potential flood hazard areas was taken from two sources. The first was the National Flood Insurance Rate Maps. The FIRM flood zones are shown on Map 3 in Appendix B and their definitions are listed below. Flood Insurance Rate Map Zone Definitions Zone A (1% annual chance) - Zone A is the flood insurance rate zone that corresponds to the 100 -year floodplains that are determined in the Flood Insurance Study (FIS) by approximate methods. Because detailed hydraulic analyses are not performed for such areas, no BFEs (base flood elevations) or depths are shown within this zone. Mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements apply. Zone AE and Al -A30 (1 % annual chance) - Zones AE and Al -A30 are the flood insurance rate zones that correspond to the 100 -year floodplains that are determined in the FIS by detailed methods. In most instances, BFEs derived from the detailed hydraulic analyses are shown at selected intervals within this zone. Mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements apply. Zones X500 (.2% annual chance) - Zone X500 is the flood insurance rate zone that correspond to the 500 -year floodplains that are determined in the Flood Insurance Study In addition, information on areas subject to flooding was provided by local officials. The Locally Identified Areas of Flooding described below were identified by Town staff as areas where flooding is known to occur. All of these areas do not necessarily coincide with the flood zones from the FIRM maps. Some may be areas that flood due to inadequate drainage systems or other local conditions rather than location within a flood zone. Some of these sites were carried over from the 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan. The numbers correspond to the numbers on Map 8, "Local Hazard Areas." Estimated damages associated flooding are shown in Table 25: 1. Sunnyside and Fairview Avenues- Flooding in the Sunnyside Avenue and Fairview Avenue area is due to undersized pipes. The recommended alternative involves increasing the size of the undersized pipes to provide a 25 -year level of service for this residential area. A gate structure would be integrated at the downstream end that would mitigate adverse downstream impacts due to the upsizing of the pipes. This site has not been mitigated since the 2010 plan and remains a high priority site. 2. New Crossing at DPW Garage- A brook located in the upper Saugus River water backs up and floods Causeway Road, the access road to the Reading DPW Department, during 0.02 percent chance storms. The stream culvert is undersized and needs replacing. This remains a high priority for the 2017 plan update. 23 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE 3. Track Road at Line Road- The Track Road area is part of the Walker's Creek watershed area. There are three bridges crossing the creek, all of which impede drainage, but the Harvest Road Bridge presents the biggest drainage problems and the Town has targeted it for rebuilding, although the exact date and cost are undetermined. There are also beaver dam issues blocking drainage. The Town plans to stabilize the creek's banks and remove the beavers for now, as well rebuild the bridge in the future. This project remains a high priority for 2017. 4. South Main Street- This is a MA DOT issue as Main Street serves as SR 28 here. The roadway floods after 1.5 inches or rain. The storm drain line serving the area is undersized and needs to be replaced. - Flooding in the area is due to undersized pipes. The flood flow travels overland through the Enterprise Car Rental facility into the Percy Avenue / Main Street wetlands. The recommended alternative consists of adding a new outfall in the vicinity of Minot Street / Main Street and increasing the size of the pipes above the Minot Street / Main Street connection to provide a 25 -year level of service for this area. A gate structure would be integrated at the downstream end that would mitigate adverse downstream impacts due to the upsizing of the pipes. This mitigation action remains incomplete and remains a high priority for the town in the 2017 plan update. 5. Brook and Ash Streets -- This area is part of Walkers Brook beginning at Ash Street and extending northeast to the Town's corporate boundary with Wakefield at the Salem Street / Route 129 rotary, and represents the most downstream portion of Walkers Brook within the Town. Downstream of this area, Walkers Brook feeds into the Saugus River in Wakefield. The drainage ditch for Brook and Ash Streets is over - silted and there are numerous problems with beaver dams within the upper watershed of Walker's Creek that prevents drainage. This site has not been mitigated since the 2010 plan and remains a high priority for the town in the 2017 plan update. 6. Lowell Street at Intervale Terrace- Located within the upper Aberjona watershed, this site has not been mitigated since 2010 but the Town considers this a high priority site for the 2017 plan. Under Reading's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), the stone -lined channel between Intervale Terrace and Lowell Street that backs up during flooding events will be repaired during 2017. 7. Willow Street/Austin Prep- This site has not been mitigated since the 2010 plan. This site floods due to the same drainage infrastructure problem listed in at Site #8, Lowell Street at Intervale Terrace. This is a high priority site for the 2017 plan update and should be remediated when the channel between Intervale Terrace and Lowell Street is improved under the Town's CIP actions for 2017. 8. Oak Ridge /Cherry Lane (was listed in 2010 plan as Pine Ridge /Cherry Hill) - Located behind Joshua Eaton, this site was partially mitigated when drainage work done by Reading on Pennsylvania Avenue relieved runoff to the area. There are still flooding concerns where ditch discharge goes into the open field behind Joshua Eaton and the site remains a medium priority for the 2017 plan update. 24 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE 9. Haverhill Street at the Town line- This site is a drainage culvert located near where Bear Meadow Brook flows under Haverhill Street close to the boundary with North Reading. Localized flooding of 6 -12 inches occurs on Haverhill Street occurs following very large rain events. The culvert needs to be cleaned on a regular basis. This site remains a medium priority for the 2017 plan update. The most severe flooding since the previous plan occurred during March 2010, when a total of 14.83 inches of rainfall accumulation was recorded by the National Weather Service (NWS). The weather pattern that consisted of early springtime prevailing westerly winds that moved three successive storms, combined with tropical moisture from the Gulf of Mexico, across New England. Torrential rainfall caused March 2010 to be the wettest month on record. One indication of the extent of flooding is the gage height at the nearest USGS streamflow gauging station, which is on the Ipswich River in South Middleton. The USGS gage height, shown in Figure 1, exceeded 8 feet on March 16, 2010 and exceeded 7 feet on March 31, 2010. Normal gage height in March is about 4 feet. Figure 1- Ipswich River Gage Heights, March -April 2010 8.8 8.0 w 7.0 � 6.8 6.8 9.8 9.8 2.8 1.0 USGS 01181600 IPSNICH RIVER AT SOUTH HIOOLETON, He Her Mar Her Her Rpr Rpr RPr OW' Hay es 13 28 27 83 18 17 24 01 2018 2818 2018 2018 2818 2818 2818 2818 2018 — Gage height N Measured page height Period of approved data Source, US Geological Service, National Water Information System Repetitive Loss Structures As defined by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), a repetitive loss property is any property which the NFIP has paid two or more flood claims of $1,000 or more in any 25 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE given 10 -year period since 1978. For more information on repetitive losses see http://www.fema.jzov/business/nfit)/rel2lps.shtm. There are two repetitive loss structures in Reading, the same as the 2010 plan. Both of the properties are single family residences. Table 7 summarizes the number and type of repetitive loss structures located within Reading and the number of losses and total claims associated with them. Table 7- Summary of Repetitive Losses and Claims 1979- 2017 Source: Department of Conservation and Recreation, FEMA Repetitive Loss data Based on the record of previous occurrences flooding events in Reading are a High frequency event as defined by the 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan. This hazard may occur more frequently than once in five years, or a greater than 20% chance per year. Dams and Dam Failure Dam failure can occur as a result of structural failure, independent of a hazard event, or as the result of the impacts of a hazard event such as flooding associated with storms or an earthquake. In the event of a dam failure, the energy of the water stored behind even a small dam can cause loss of life and property damage if there are people or buildings downstream. The number of fatalities from a dam failure depends on the amount of warning provided to the population and the number of people in the area in the path of the dam's floodwaters. DCR defines dam hazard classifications as follows: High: Dams located where failure or mis- operation will likely cause loss of life and serious damage to homes(s), industrial or commercial facilities, important public utilities, main highways(s) or railroad(s). 26 Single Family Other Non - Total Residential Residential Residential Number of 2 0 0 2 Properties Number of 4 0 0 4 Losses Total Claims $27,857.59 0 $27,857.59 Source: Department of Conservation and Recreation, FEMA Repetitive Loss data Based on the record of previous occurrences flooding events in Reading are a High frequency event as defined by the 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan. This hazard may occur more frequently than once in five years, or a greater than 20% chance per year. Dams and Dam Failure Dam failure can occur as a result of structural failure, independent of a hazard event, or as the result of the impacts of a hazard event such as flooding associated with storms or an earthquake. In the event of a dam failure, the energy of the water stored behind even a small dam can cause loss of life and property damage if there are people or buildings downstream. The number of fatalities from a dam failure depends on the amount of warning provided to the population and the number of people in the area in the path of the dam's floodwaters. DCR defines dam hazard classifications as follows: High: Dams located where failure or mis- operation will likely cause loss of life and serious damage to homes(s), industrial or commercial facilities, important public utilities, main highways(s) or railroad(s). 26 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Significant: Dams located where failure or mis- operation may cause loss of life and damage home(s), industrial or commercial facilities, secondary highway(s) or railroad(s) or cause interruption of use or service of relatively important facilities. Low: Dams located where failure or mis- operation may cause minimal property damage to others. Loss of life is not expected. Dam failure is a highly infrequent occurrence but a severe incident could result in loss of lives and significant property damage. Since 1984, three dams have failed in or very near to Massachusetts, one of which resulted in a death. There are no permitted dams in Reading and there have been no recorded dam breaches in the Town. Based on the record of previous occurrences dam failure in Reading is a Very Low frequency event as defined by the 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan. This hazard may occur less frequently than once in 100 years (less than 1% chance per year). Wind Related Hazards Wind - related hazards include hurricanes, tropical storms, and tornadoes as well as high winds during Nor'easters and thunderstorms. As with many communities, falling trees that result in downed power lines and power outages are an issue in Reading. Information on wind related hazards can be found on Map 5 in Appendix B Hurricanes and Tropical Storms • hurricane is a violent wind and rainstorm with wind speeds of 74 -200 miles per hour. • hurricane is strongest as it travels over the ocean and is particularly destructive to coastal property as the storm hits the land. The Town's entire area is vulnerable to hurricanes. Hurricanes occur between June and November. A tropical storm has similar characteristics, but wind speeds are below 74 miles per hour. Since 1900, 39 tropical storms have impacted New England (NESEC). Massachusetts has experienced approximately 32 tropical storms, nine Category 1 hurricanes, five Category 2 hurricanes and one Category 3 hurricane. A hurricane or storm track is the line that delineates the path of the eye of a hurricane or tropical storm. There has been one recorded storm tracks through Reading, a tropical storm in 1861. However, Reading experiences the impacts of hurricanes and tropical storms regardless of whether the storm track passes directly through the Town, and numerous hurricanes have affected the communities of eastern Massachusetts (see Table 8) The hazard mapping indicates that the 100 year wind speed in Reading is 110 miles per hour (see Appendix B). Table 8- Hurricane Records for Massachusetts, 1938 — January, 2017 Hurricane Event Date Great New England Hurricane* September 21, 1938 Great Atlantic Hurricane* September 14 -15, 1944 27 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Hurricane Event Date Hurricane Doug September 11 -12, 1950 Hurricane Carol* August 31, 1954 Hurricane Edna* Se tember 11, 1954 Hurricane Diane August 17 -19, 1955 Hurricane Donna September 12, 1960 Hurricane Gloria September 27, 1985 Hurricane Bob August 19, 1991 Hurricane Earl September 4, 2010 Tropical Storm Irene August 28, 2011 Hurricane Sandy October 29 -30, 2012 *Category 3. Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Hurricane intensity is measured according to the Saffir /Simpson scale, which categorizes hurricane intensity linearly based upon maximum sustained winds, barometric pressure, and storm surge potential. These are combined to estimate potential damage. The following gives an overview of the wind speeds, surges, and range of damage caused by different hurricane categories: Scale No. (Category) Winds(mph) Storm Surge (ft.) Potential Damage 1 74-95 4 - 5 Minimal 2 96-110 6 - 8 Moderate 3 111 —130 9-12 Extensive 4 131-155 13-18 Extreme 5 > 155 >18 Catastrophic Source: NOAA Hurricanes typically have regional impacts beyond their immediate tracks. Falling trees and branches are a significant problem because they can result in power outages when they fall on power lines or block traffic and emergency routes. Hurricanes are a Town - wide hazard in Reading. Potential hurricane damages to Reading have been estimated using HAZUS -MH. Total damages are estimated at $18,614.97 thousand for a Category 2 hurricane and $66,975.28 thousand for a Category 4 hurricane. Other potential impacts are detailed in Table 21. Based on records of previous occurrences, hurricanes in Reading are a Medium frequency event as defined by the 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan. This hazard occurs from once in 5 years to once in 50 years, or a 2% to 20% chance per year. Tornadoes A tornado is a violent windstorm characterized by a twisting, funnel- shaped cloud. These events are spawned by thunderstorms and occasionally by hurricanes, and may occur singularly or in multiples. They develop when cool air overrides a layer of warm air, 28 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE causing the warm air to rise rapidly. Most vortices remain suspended in the atmosphere. Should they touch down, they become a force of destruction. Some ingredients for tornado formation include: • Very strong winds in the mid and upper levels of the atmosphere • Clockwise turning of the wind with height (from southeast at the surface to west aloft) • Increasing wind speed with altitude in the lowest 10,000 feet of the atmosphere (i.e., 20 mph at the surface and 50 mph at 7,000 feet.) • Very warm, moist air near the ground with unusually cooler air aloft • A forcing mechanism such as a cold front or leftover weather boundary from previous shower or thunderstorm activity Tornado damage severity is measured by the Fujita Tornado Scale, in which wind speed is not measured directly but rather estimated from the amount of damage. As of February 01, 2007, the National Weather Service began rating tornados using the Enhanced Fujita- scale (EF- scale), which allows surveyors to create more precise assessments of tornado severity. The EF -scale is summarized below: Fu'ita Scale I Derived Operational EF Scale F Number Fastest 1/4 mile (mh) 3- second gust (Mph) EF Number 3- second gust (mph) EF Number 3- second gusts (mph) 0 40-72 45 -78 0 65 -85 0 65 -85 1 73-112 79 -117 1 86 -109 1 86 -110 2 113 -157 118 -161 2 110 -137 2 111 -135 3 158-207 162 -209 j 3 138 -167 3 136 -165 4 208 -260 210 -261 1 4 168 -199 4 166 -200 5 261- 318 262 -317 15 200 -234 5 Over -200 Source: Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013 The frequency of tornadoes in eastern Massachusetts is low; on average, there are six tornadoes that touchdown somewhere in the Northeast region every year. The strongest tornado in Massachusetts history was the Worcester Tornado in 1953 (NESEC). The most recent tornado events in Massachusetts were in Springfield in 2011, Revere in 2014 and most recently in Concord (Middlesex County) on August 23, 2016. The Concord EF -1 tornado damaged 39 homes but no injuries or deaths were reported. (Source: Concord Patch) The Springfield tornado caused significant damage and resulted in 4 deaths in June of 2011. The Revere tornado touched down in Chelsea just south of Route 16 and moved north into Revere's business district along Broadway and ended near the intersection of Routes I and 60. The path was approximately two miles long and 3/8 mile wide, with wind speeds up to 120 miles per hour. Approximately 65 homes had substantial damages and 13 homes and businesses were uninhabitable. 29 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Although there have been no recorded tornados within the limits of the Town of Reading, since 1956 there have been 17 tornadoes in surrounding Middlesex County recorded by the Tornado History Project. Two tornados were F3, three were F2 and twelve were FLThese 10 tornadoes resulted in a total of one fatality and six injuries and up to $7.7 million in damages, as summarized in Table 9. The table does not include statistics for the August, 2016 Concord tornado as total property damage is not yet known. Table 9 - Tnrnndn Records for Middlesex County Date Fujita Fatalities Injuries Width Length Damage 10/24/1955 1 0 0 10 0.1 $500-$5000 6/19/1957 1 0 0 17 1 $5K-$50K 6/19/1957 1 0 0 100 0.5 $50-$500 7/11/1958 2 0 0 17 1.5 $50K-$500K 8/25/1958 2 0 1 0 50 1 1 $500-$5000 7/3/1961 0 0 0 10 0.5 $5K-$50K 7/18/1963 1 0 0 50 1 5K- 50K 8/28/1965 2 0 0 10 2 SOK- SOOK 7/11/1970 1 0 0 50 0.1 5K 50K 10/3/1970 3 1 0 60 35.4 50K 500K 7/1/1971 1 0 1 10 25.2 5K- SOK 11/7/1971 1 0 0 10 0.1 $50-$500 7/21/1972 2 0 4 37 7.6 500K- 5M 9/29/1974 3 0 1 33 0.1 $50K-$500K 7/18/1983 0 0 0 20 0.4 $50-$500 9/27/1985 1 1 0 0 40 0.1 $50-$500 8/7/1986 1 1 0 0 73 4 $50K-$5 OK Source: The Tornado History Project Buildings constructed prior to current building codes may be more vulnerable to damages caused by tornadoes. Evacuation of impacted areas may be required on short notice. Sheltering and mass feeding efforts may be required along with debris clearance, search and rescue, and emergency fire and medical services. Key routes may be blocked by downed trees and other debris, and widespread power outages are also typically associated with tornadoes. Although tornadoes are a potential Town -wide hazard in Reading, tornado impacts are relatively localized compared to severe storms and hurricanes. Damages from any tornado in Reading would greatly depend on the track of the tornado. Generally the downtown, central and southern portions of the Town near the intersection of Routes 28 (Main Street), 129 (Lowell Street), and Woburn Street, are more densely developed and would likely be subject to more damage in the event of a tornado. Based on the record of previous occurrences since 1950, Tornado events in Reading are a Medium frequency event as defined by the 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation 30 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Plan. This hazard may occur from once in 5 years to once in 50 years, or a 2% to 20% chance per year. Nor'easters A northeast coastal storm, known as a nor'easter, is typically a large counter - clockwise wind circulation around a low- pressure center. Featuring strong northeasterly winds blowing in from the ocean over coastal areas, nor'easters are relatively common in the winter months in New England occurring one to two times a year. The storm radius of a nor'easter can be as much as 1,000 miles and these storms feature sustained winds of 10 to 40 mph with gusts of up to 70 mph. These storms are accompanied by heavy rains or snows, depending on temperatures. Previous occurrences of Nor'easters include the following: February 1978 Blizzard of 1978 October 1991 Severe Coastal Storm ( "Perfect Storm ") December 1992 Great Nor'easter of 1992 January 2005 Blizzard/N or'easter October 2005 Coastal Storm/Nor'easter April 2007 Severe Storms, Inland & Coastal Flooding/Nor'easter January 2011 Winter Storm/Nor'easter October 2011 Severe Storm/Nor'easter Blizzard of 2013 February 2013 Blizzard of 2015 January 2015 Many of the historic flood events identified in the previous section were precipitated by nor'easters, including the "Perfect Storm" event in 1991. More recently, blizzards in December 2010, October 2011, February 2013 and January 2015 were all large nor'easters that caused significant snowfall amounts. Reading is vulnerable to both the wind and precipitation that accompanies nor'easters. High winds can cause damage to structures, fallen trees, and downed power lines leading to power outages. Intense rainfall can overwhelm drainage systems causing localized flooding of rivers and streams as well as urban stormwater ponding and localized flooding. Fallen tree limbs as well as heavy snow accumulation and intense rainfall can impede local transportation corridors, and block access for emergency vehicles. The entire Town of Reading could be at risk from the wind, rain or snow impacts from a nor'easter, depending on the track and radius of the storm, but due to its inland location the Town would not be subject to coastal hazards. Based on the record of previous occurrences, nor'easters in Reading are high frequency events as defined by the 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan. This hazard may occur more frequently than once in 5 years (greater than 20% per year). 31 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Severe Thunderstorms While less severe than the other types of storms discussed, thunderstorms can lead to localized damage and represent a hazard risk for communities. Generally defined as a storm that includes thunder, which always accompanies lightning, a thunderstorm is a storm event featuring lightning, strong winds, and rain and/or hail. Thunderstorms sometime give rise to tornados. On average, these storms are only around 15 miles in diameter and last for about 30 minutes. A severe thunderstorm can include winds of close to 60 mph and rain sufficient to produce flooding_ The Town's entire area is potentially subject to severe thunderstorms. The Town does not keep records of thunderstorms, but estimates that at least six to eight occur each year. Some team members recollected severe thunderstorms during the summer of 2014 but could not recollect specific areas that were impacted, only that some trees were knocked and power was lost. The best available data on previous occurrences of thunderstorms in Reading is for Middlesex County through the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). Between 1995 and May 31, 2016 NCDC records show 286 thunderstorm events in Middlesex County (Table 10). These storms resulted in a total of $3.13 million in property damages. There were 10 injuries and no deaths reported. Table 10 Middlesex County Thunderstorm Wind Events, 1995- January, 2017 iLOCATION BEGIN DATE EVENT-TYPE MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES DAMAGE 'MIDDLESEX C- O. 04/04/1995 Thunderstorm Wind (58 kts. 0 10 O.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 07/15/1995 Thunderstorm Wind 0 kts. 0 0 IO.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 07/15/1995 Thunderstorm Wind Okts. 0 0 OOOK (MIDDLESEX CO. 09/14/1995 IThunderstorm Wind iO kts. r0 2 IO.00K, _._ ___ MIDDLESEX CO. 09/14/1995 Thunderstorm Wind Okts. 0 0 O.00K ... ._...__ _.. .._..,..__ ._ .... _ .. .__. _._.- _..__., . _. , MIDDLESEX CO. 10/28/1995 Thunderstorm Wind O kts. � (O 1 O_ IO.00K _- MIDDLESEX CO. 10/28/1995 Thunderstorm Wind O kts. 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX C-0 (10/28/1995 (Thunderstorm Wind IO kts. J0 IO (O.00K (MIDDLESEX 107/08/1996 (Thunderstorm Wind ISO kts. `0 IO 1000K MIDDLESEX CO. � .�.._._ 07/OS/1996 _._...._.. Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts - Ip__. --- ... lo__._ - -. - f0.00K -- (MIDDLESEX CO. (02/22/1997 (Thunderstorm Wind 152 kts (O 10 IO.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 107/09/1997 IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. 0 0 I1.00K [MIDDLESEX CO. (05/29/1998 IThunderstorm Wind soots-. IO O 0.00K (MIDDLESEXCO. 105/29/1998 IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts IO 0 IO.00K (MIDDLESEX CO 105/31/1998 1Thunderstorm Wind I60kts. I0. 10_... O.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 05/31/1998 IThunderstorm Wind 160 kts IO 1 I10.00K 32 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE LOCATION BEGIN DATE EVENT TYPE MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES DAMAGE ...__ [MIDDLESEXCO. . .._._-._ 105/31/1998 .. ............. (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. 10. ._..... -.._. IO ._.__._.._.. 10 OOK MIDDLESEX CO. 105/31/1998 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. (O 0 GOOK --- MIDDLESEX CO. .. _' 05/31/1998 I Thunderstorm Wind 1 - _- - 70 kts 0 0 O.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 105/31/1998 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 07/23/1998 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts10 10 OOOK (MIDDLESEX CO. (09/15/1998 (Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. 10 0 10.00K _ MIDDLESEX CO. ^� (Thunderstorm Wind _156 kts_._...,...IO...._...._ 10_ IO.00K +MIDDLESEXCO. 07/06/1999 Thunderstorm Wind 165 kts I0. 10 IO.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 07/06/1999 Thunderstorm Wmd 160 kts. O.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 107/23/1999 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts (0 [0 (O OOK 1 MIDDLESEXCO. 107/24/1999 [Thunderstorm Wind 50kts ^� IO 10 10.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 107/25/1999 (Thunderstorm Wind ISOkts (0 10 10.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 08/05/1999 - Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts 0 0 GOOK MIDDLESEX CO. 06/02/2000 16,6/,0-2i12, [Thunderstorm Wind r50 is. E 0 IO O.00K [MIDDLESEX CO. 106/02/2000 [Thunderstorm Wind [50 kts. E IO 0 0.00K [MIDDLESEX CO. (06/27/2000 [Thunderstorm Wind (SOkts E .IO_. 0 IO.00K 1MIDDLESEXCO. 105/12/2001 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. E 10 10 [O.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 105/12/2001 [Thunderstorm Wind [50 kts E 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEXCO. 106/17/2001 (Thunderstorm Wind (60 kts E 10 (0 (O.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 06/20/2001 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts E 10 10 O.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 106/30/2001 (Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. E 0 0 O.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 106/30/2001 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 -- ts. E 10 10 10.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/30/2001 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts E 10 10 10.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. _ 106/30/2001 Thunderstorm Wind �r50 kts E 10 0 _ 0.00K 1MIDOlESEX CO. 07/01/2001 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts E 10 0 �O.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. (07/01/2001 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts E O IO (O.00K _..�.... IMIDDLESEX CO. 107/10/2001 TThunderstorm Wind 150 its. E 0 0 10.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 108/10/2001 (Thunderstorm Wind (50kts E IO 0 O.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. (08/10/2 001 (Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts E �0 0 O.00K I MIDDLESEX CO. 108/10/2001 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. E 10 10 10.00K _ (MIDDLESEX CO. .............. ..__. (04/19/2002 _ -w: [Thunderstorm ind 152 kts E (0 10 (5 OOK [MIDDLESEX CO. -_.J [05/31/2002_ -. (Thunderstorm in 150 ktsE "[0 ._ -.. .. 0�_.__ - [2.00K�T- 1MIDDLESEXCO. [06/27/2002 [Thunderstorm Wind MIDDLESEX CO. 06/27/2002 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. E 0 0 S.00K _ IMIDDLESEX CO. (07/15/2002 [Thunderstorm Wind [50 kts.E10 _ i0 2.O OK IMIDDLESEX CO. ��m�T�[ 07/ 23/ 2002m ._..�_.__.__.._IThunderstorm Wind 150kts. E- ...__rO__.._.___._ III- I'5.00K- -._.__ MIDDLESEX CO. 07/23/2002 Thunderstorm Wind 65 kts E 10 0 35.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 08/02/2002 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. E 0 10 2.00K IMIDDLESEX CO.08/02/2002 .Thunderstorm Wind I50 kts E0.__.... _10 2.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 108/13/2003 IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0 25.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 108/22/2003 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 0 0 5 OOK 33 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE LOCATION BEGIN DATE EVENT_TYPE MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES DAMAGE _.... (MIDDLESEX C . O. __ __._____ 108/22/2003 ._ ----- (Thunderstorm Wind — .. _._ 150 kts EG 10 10 110.00K MIDDLES CO. (08/22/2003 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 0 10 15.00K MIDDLESEX CO. (08/22/2003 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0. 110.00K 1MIDDLESEX CO. 107/08/2004 1Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 0 r10.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. T (08/20/2004 Thunderstorm Win, d r50 kts. EG (0 10 10.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. (08/20/2004 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 110 OOK� (MIDDLESEX CO. 08/20/2004 Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. EG 10 0 15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 108/20/2004 Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. EG 10 10 75 OOK �----- MIDDLESEX CO. 1 08/21/2004 1 -- _ Thunderstorm Wind I 150 kts. EG 10 ... 0 15 OOK 1 MIDDLESEX CO. (06/29/2005 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 0 0 10.00K 1MIDDLESEX C0 07/27/2005 (Thunderstorm Wmd 150 kts EG (0 O 15 OOK (MIDDLESEX CO. (07/27/2005 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (0 (0 5.00K (.. _,...-- _.... MIDDLESEX CO. .. _.._. . _ _... 108/05/2005 1ThunderstormWind . 150 kts EG 10 4 11500K (MIDDLESEX CO. 108/05/2005 Thunderstorm Wind 150kts. EG 10 10 (15.001( 1MIDDLESEX CO. 108/05/2005 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 15.00K 1MIDDLESEX CO. 8/14/2005 08/1- Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 0 15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 108/14/2005 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (0 0 IS OOK y 1MIDDLESEX CO. 108/14/2005 �Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 0 15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 104/01/2006 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 18.00K��^ _ 1MIDDLESEXCO. _6_...___ 105/21/2006 Thunderstorm Wind . --- 161 kts EG _ -__ 10 _ 0 75.00K (MIDDLESEXCO. 105/21/2006 1Thunderstorm Wind (61 kts EG 10. 0 20.00K 1 MIDDLESEX CO. (06/23/2006 Thunderstorm Wind 150 t,.EG 6 0 30.00K 1MIDDLESEX CO. 107/11/2006 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 0 10 110.00K 1MI DDLESEX CO. (07/11/2006 Thunderstorm Wind .150 kts EG 10 0 10.00K 1 MIDDLESEX CO. 107/11/2006 Thunderstorm Wind 50kts EG 10 0 1000K (MIDDLESEX C0. 107/21/2006 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (�0 10 (35.00K M IDD LES-E X CO. 107/21/2006 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 11O.00K 1MIDDLESEX CO. 107/21/2006- Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0 10.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 107/21/2006 Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. EG 10 0. 135.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 107/28/2006 Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. EG 10 .._..._...., _..... (MIDDLESEX CO. ,.. ... ,.._........ 107/28/2006 .. ,. .._..,._. .T._ Thunderstorm Wind 150kts. EG 0 0 _.. 10.00K .. - --- 1MIDDLESEX CO. -- 107/28/2006 .. Thunderstorm Wind ." .. 150 kts EG V-- . . 10 . - - - ---- 10.00K 1MIDDLESEX CO. 107/28/2006 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 10 110.00K 1MIDDLESEX CO. 108/02/2006 I Thunderstorm Wind ISO kts. EG 10 10 (15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 105/16/2007 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 0 0 OOK 1MIDDLESEXCO. 106/27/2007 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0 O.00K 1'MIDDIESEX CO. 107/06/2007 1Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 0 0 O.00K (MI DDLESEX CO. 107/09/2007 V (Thunderstorm Wmd 150 kts. EG (0 .. 10 10.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 107/09/2007 `Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (0 0 GOOK 1MIDOLESEX CO. _ 107/15/2007 jThunderstorm Wind .___._. 150 kts EG 0 0 O.00K (��I DL MIDDLESEX CO. 1��i /15 /2007 07 Thunderstorm Wind .. 150 kts. EG,--1 p ..10 --- _.... -. (000K _...._.. 34 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE LOCATION BEGIN DATE EVENT TYPE MAGNITUDE DEATHS INJURIES DAMAGE [MIDDLESEX CO. 07/15/2007 'Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 10.00K __ ........... 1MI DDLESEX CO. ... .. .. 107/15/2007 . __._ _ (Thunderstorm Wind ._... _ _. 150 kts. EG .. [0 _.. 10 _... . 10.00K (MIDDLESEXCO. [07/28/2007 (Thunderstorm Wind ISO kts. EG IO 10 10.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 107/28/2007 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 0 0 GOOK [MIDDLESEX CO. 107/28/2007 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 0 OOK (MIDDLESEX CO. 107/28/2007 [Thunderstorm Wind ISO ktsLLEG_.....[O 10 10.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 107/29/2007 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 0 IO [O OOK 1MI DDLESEX CO. 108/17/2007 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 0 O.00K 1 MIDDLESEXCO. -- --'_ 108/17/2007 [Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts EG 10 0 10.00K I' MIDDLESEX CO. 109/08/2007 Thunderstorm Wind 150 Ms. EG 10. 10 125.00K [MIDDLESEX CO. 105/27/2010 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG IO 0 1100K 1MI DDLESEX CO. 105/27/2010 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG [0 �0 S.00K [MIDDLESEX CO. (05/27/2010 (Thunderstorm in d (50 kts EG IO IO 10.50K !MIDDLESEXCO. 105/27/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG IO IO I1.00K rMIDDLESEX CO. 105/27/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kt-s EG 10 10 LOOK .._...__ (MIDDLESEX CO. _ . _ . 106/10/2010 ._ .....,....._._.. (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (O � 0 ._....._ [20.00K __ ___ (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/10/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. EG 1J0 10 13.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 106/10/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind ISO kts EG 0 0 (5 OOK (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/23/2030 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG (0 0 IS.00K rMIDDLESEXCO 106/23/2010 -WI ind [Thunderstorm 150 kts EG 10 (0 400K MIDDLESEX CO 1 _ i, 06/24/2010 I . __.., Thunderstorm Wind .1, _ 50 kts EG 0 I 0 . _ S.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. (06/24/2010 r. (Thunderstorm Wind 150 its. EG IO 10 . [S.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/24/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 m s. EG r0 [l r0.00K 1MIDDLESEXCO. —16 6/24/2010 [Thunderstorm Wind 50kts. EG 10 IO 5.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. [06/24/2010 [Thunderstorm Wind I50kts. EG 10 0 11.00K [MIDDLESEX CO. �.�06/24/2010Thunderstorm Wind-5i6 W. EG - - -1 -010_ (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/24/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 1.00-K--, 00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/27/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 IO 15.00K [MIDDLESEX CO. 106/27/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG IO IO 3.00K ._._...,,. [MIDOLESEXCO. ._. 106/29/2010 _ _ . _.__.-.._ -._ -.. [Thunderstorm Wind .._. 150kts EG _ (0 _..... 0 .. ._....._.- 10.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/29/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 10 S.00K 1MIDDlESEX CO. (06/29/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 0 [0 GOOK MIDDLESEX CO. 107/01/2010 (Thunderstorm Wmd r50 kts. EG 10 IF r2O.00K MIDDLESEX CO 07/01/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 55 kts. MG 0 0 [&.6O- K (MIDDLESEX CO. (07/01/2010 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG [0 (0 110.00K [MIDDLESEXCO. 107/01/2010 . (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG [0 0 [5.0 OK [MIDDLESEX CO. 107/01/2010 [Thunderstorm Wind [50 kts EG 10 [0 5.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. (07/02/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind ISO kts EG (O 10� I100K [MIDDLESEX CO. [07/02/2010 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG I0 [0 LOOK [MIDDLESEXCO. 107/02/2010 erstorm Wind (Thund-- 150 kts EG �0 0 i5.00K _. [MIDDLESEX CO 107/02/2010 Thunderstorm Wind _.. SO ktS EG 0 IO SOOK 35 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE LOCATION - 8EGIN DATE EVENT ------ --------- -'- (MAGNITUDE - I DEATHS (INJURIES DAMAGE �--MIDDLESEX - CO. [- 07 /03/2010 �._..._.. Thunderstorm Wind I 150 kts EG 0 0 15.00K !MIDDLESEX CO. 107/03/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150kts EG (0 [0 1300K- ,MIDDLESEX CO. 107/03/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (0 10 �3.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 107/19/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG �0 10 (6.00K MIDDLESEX CO. [07/19/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 10 (8.00K __._..... MIDDLESEX CO. ._.._.___...___._ (07/19/2010 Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts EG (0 _ 0 _ 12.00K EX (MIDDLES CO. (07/20/2010 de (Thunrstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 1-0, 15-00K _ MIDDLESEX CO. 07/27/2010 _ Thunderstorm Wind . 150 kts. EG 10 [0 5,00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 08/03/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 160 kts EG 10 0 15.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 108/07/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 0 (5.00K `MIDDLESEX CO, _.... '. "` 108 /07/2010 - � - Thunderstorm Wind a '- j0 kts EG- � -10 - I5.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 109/09/2010 k (Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts EG 0 r0 18.00K MIDDLESEX COam ._ 109/09/2010 (Thunderstorm -W--- in 150 kts EG 0 10 14.00K _ MIDDLESEX CO. 05/09/2009 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 IO (2.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 16,5-12-4-1-2-0- 05/24/2009 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 0 10- . 0 (. .._._._..__. 15 OOK ,MIDDLESEX CO. 107/07/2009 ,Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. EG 10... 10 11.00K MIDDLESEX CO ......... ....... ._ 107 /68 /2009^ -,.. ["Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG ..i0-.,.- 10 __._..... .. 120.00K rMIDDLESEX CO. 107/26/2009 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 0 IO 11 OOK 1MIDDLESEXCO. ,07/26/2009 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 10 ,SSOOK MIDDLESEX CO. 107/31/2009 rThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 0 10 130.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 107/31/2009 (Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG 10 10 15.00K MIDDLESEXCO. ,07/31/2009 ,Thunderstorm Wind --15-0-kts.-EG 10 10 110.00K ,MIDDLESEX CO. 107/31/2009 (Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. EG r0 10 13.00K ,MIDDLESEX CO. 107/31/2009 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. E6 10 10 115.00K (M ID6LESEXCO,,.__. ..--.,- 107 /31 /2009 _._ - �1Thunderstorm -Wind 150kts EG..._..10 � 10_...,.,..._._,- (MIDDLESEX CO. 105/04/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind -. 150 kts. EG 10 [0 130.0OK (MIDDLESEX CO. 105/04/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 1-0 16 17 OOK (MIDDLESEX CO. ,06/01/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 15.00K 1MIDDLESEXCO. (06/03/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 (0 120.00K ,MIDDLESEX CO. 106/03/2010. ,Thunderstorm in 150 - k ts. EG 10 0 11.00K ,MIDDLESEX CO. ,06/05/2010 ,'Thunderstorm in 1"60 kts. EG .10._..._...10w�....__.... 140.00K 1 MIDDLESEX CO. ,06/06/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 '1 125.00K 1 MIDDLESEX CO. ,06/06/2010 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0 13.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 106/06/201() ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 120.001( (MIDDMEX CO. (06/06/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (0 0 150.00K [MIDDLES EX CO (O6/06/2010- !Thunderstorm -Wind 50kts. EG 10 10 �30 OOK ,MIDDLESEX CO. (06/06/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10_ 0. (10.00K ..._._._... .. ,MIDDLESEX CO. .. ....._._ 106/06/2010 _.. _..__,, ....._ _... Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG _ 10 10 _ ------- ....._ 1100.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 106/06/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG �0 0 (25.00K 1MIDDLESEXCO. ,06/06/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 0 0 11.00K _ MIDDLESEX CO. (06/06/2010 ,Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 ,0 (30 OOK 36 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE L CATION BEGIN DATE EVENT_TYPE MAGNITUDE I DEATHS INJURIES DAMAGE (MIDDLESEX CO. 06/06/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG 0 0 1.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 106/24/2010 IThunderstorm-Wind 150 kts. EG 10 IO _ 110.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 106/24/2010 Thunderstorm Wind SO kts. EG r0 10 r2.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 106/24/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 �0 1ZOOK MIDDLESEX CO. 06/24/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 0 0 15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/24/2010 TThunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG 1-0 10 (3.60K (MIDDLESEXCO. , — __ - I-0- 6/- 24 /2010 (ThunderstormWind 150 kts. EG 0 10 I30.00K I MIDDLESEXCO. 06/24/2010 TThunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 10 (LOOK MIDDLESEX CO. 106/24/2010 ,__- .._.__ Thunderstorm Wind _ (50 kts. EG 10 O 15.00K MIDDLESEXCO. 106/24/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG (0 10 I- 100K I'M" I DDLESEXCO. 106/24/2010 IThunder-storm Wind 150kts EGA (0 ID r15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 07/12/2010 TThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (0 10 12S.00K MIDDLESEXCO. 07/12/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 0. _ �SO.00K FMIDDLESEX CO. 07/19/2010 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 0 12S.00K IMIDDLESEXCO. 106/01/2011 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG I° 10 (S.00K 1MI6DLESEXCO. 106/01/2011 TThunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0 13.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 106/09/2011 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 i0- - --- - 115.00K MIDDLESEXCO. 106/09/2011 _ Thunderstorm Wind S0 kts EG 10 10 115.00K� MIDDLESEX CO. 08/02/2011 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG 0 0 LOOK 1 MIDDLESEX CO. (08/19/2011 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 13.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 108/19/2011 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG i0 0 S.00K (MIDDLESEX Co. 08/19/2011 Thunderstorm Wind (50 kts. EG 10 10 115.00K 1 MIDDLESEX CO. (08/19/2011 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0 15 OOK MIDDLESEX CO. 08/19/2011 (Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG 0 0 O.00K 1MIDDLESEXC6. 108/19/2011 [Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 10 IS.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/08/2012 IThuncerstorm Wind 150kts EG 10 10 I25.00K 1 MIDDLESEX CO. 106/23/2012 Thunderstorm Wind 145 kts. EG (0 0 (500K IMIDDLESEX CO. 107/04/2012 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0 I10.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 107/18/2012 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts EG 0 10 115.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 107/18/2012 Thunderstorm Wind 170 kts EG 10 10 1350.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 109/07/2012 (Thunderstorm Wind SO kts EG ,0 0 110.00K (MIDDLESEX CO.v 109/08/2012 _ �Thunderstorm Wind 140 kts. EG (0 10 13 OOK IMIDDLESEX CO. 106/17/2013 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 125.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/17/2013 I- understorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 0 120.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 106/17/2013 Thunderstorm Wind 45 kts. EG 10 0 3.00K IMIDDLESEX CO. 106/18/2013 Thunderstorm Wind 145 kts EG C0 _._ 10 . 110.00Kµ (MIDDLESEX CO. 106/24/2013 Thunderstorm Wind 145 kts. EG (0 0 I3.00K IMI DDLESEX CO. 107/23/2013 Thunderstorm in 150 kts EG 10 _ 10 _ 12000K IMIDDLESEX CO. � � 1- 07/29/2013 . � Thunderstorm Wind . - -ISO kts EG 10 . 10 ..__._.... 15 00K� MIDDLESEX CO. 1- 07/29/2013 Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG 10 IO 15.00K 'MIDDLESEX CO. 107/03/2014 IThunderstorm Wind 37 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE MIDDLESEX CO. 1 5 /28 /201511Thunderstorm Wind 145 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. I 5/28/20151 IThunderstorm Wind SO kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 Thunderstorm Wind 40 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 Thunderstorm Wind SO kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 IThunderstorm Wind SO kts. EG MI DDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 IIThunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. I 8 /4 /2015IIThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 38 LOCATION BEGIN_DATE ( EVENT TYPE (MAGNITUDE f DEATHS INJURIES DAMAGE (MIDDLESEX CO. 107/03/2014 (Thunderstorm Wind 50 Is. EG 0 T I0 75.00K (MIDDLESEXCO. 107/07/2014 (Thunderstorm -Wind I40 its. EG 10, 10 I5 OOK IMIDDLESEX CO. 107/07/2014 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG f0 (O (15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 107/07/2014 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG IO IO S.00K MIDDLESEX CO. (07/07/2014 (Thunderstorm Wind _-.__.._..._.. 150 kts. EG IO 0 S.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 107/07/2014 (Thunderstorm Wind 187 kts EG IO 0 100.00K MIDDLESEXCO. 107/07/2014 IThunderstorm Wind mmf50 kts. EG IO 0 S.00K 1MIDDLESEXCO. 107/07/2014 (Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts EG IO 0. I15.00K !MIDDLESEX CO. r� - 07/07/2014 Thunderstorm Wind r SO kts EG 0 0 25.00K _ __. MIDDLESEX CO. _ (07/07/2014 _ (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG IO IO 15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 107/07/2014 (Thunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG I0 IO 5.00K iMIDDLESEXCO. 107/07/2014 (ThunderstormWind 50 kts. EG 10 2500K . __.__. ,_.__�, (MIDDLESEXCO. ............... 07/07/2014 _. ._ (Thunderstorm Wind - -- ISO kts EG 10 0 IS.00K (MI DDLESEX CO. 107/07/2014 Thunderstorm Wind (SOits E-G ID _ 10" MIDDLES CO. 107/15/2014 (Thunderstorm Wind r! kts EG IO IO 25.00K .._....__ MIDDLESEX CO. ..._. _... _ __.... ......_ 107/28/2014 _ _..._._ IThunderstorm Wind _ . .. __ 150 kts. EG IO .. _.___. �0 _.._.___ SO.00K IMIDDLESEXCO. 109/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind (50 kts EG IO_ I1 -10-.-0-0- - 0.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 109/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 10 10 15.00K (MI DDLESEX CO. (09/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG IO 0 (S.00K 1MIDOLESEX CO. (09/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts EG O 10 S OOK MIDDLESEX CO. 109/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind (50 kts EG 10 IO I300K I- - MIDDLESEX CO. I__ _. - 09/06/2014 I Thunderstorm Wind I 50 kts EG 0 0 10 OOK _ MIDDLESEX CO. -- 109/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG �0 0 __ I3 OOK ._...._. -.__.- 1O6/2014 MIDDLESEXCO. _— ___._._....... I09/ .. _.._...._.._._____ IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. 200K (MIDDLESEX CO. (09/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind �50 kts. EG �0 IO I15.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 109/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind 5'."" 0 kts EG 0 0 S.00K 1MIDDLESEX CO. 109/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG (O 0 �1.00K (MIDDLESEX CO. 109/06/2014 IThunders to- rm Wind 150 kts EG IO �0 h0.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 109/06/2014 IThunderstorm Wind 1-5- 0 kts. EG IO [0 p.00K MIDDLESEX CO. 1 5 /28 /201511Thunderstorm Wind 145 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. I 5/28/20151 IThunderstorm Wind SO kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 Thunderstorm Wind 40 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 Thunderstorm Wind SO kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 Thunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 IThunderstorm Wind SO kts. EG MI DDLESEX CO. 8/4/2015 IIThunderstorm Wind 50 kts. EG MIDDLESEX CO. I 8 /4 /2015IIThunderstorm Wind 150 kts. EG 38 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE LOCATION IMIDDLESEX CO. (MIDDLESEX CO IMIDDLESEX CO IMIDDLESEX CO IMIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEX CO. MI DDLESEXCO. MIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEX CO IMIDDLESEX CO IMIDDLESEXCO. IMIDDLE SEX CO MIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEX CO MIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEXCO. IMIDDLESEX CO IMIDDLESEX CO IMIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEX—C, CO. IMIDDLESEX CO. IMIDDLESEX CO. ____,._..._ IMIDDLESEX CO. Totals BEGIN DATE 8/4/2015 EVENT TYPE (Thunderstorm Wind (Thunderstorm Wind w ([Thunderstorm Wind (Thunderstorm Wind (Thunderstorm Wind (Thunderstorm Wind (Thunderstorm Wind (Thunderstorm Wind (Thunderstorm Wind — Thunderstorm Wind (Thunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind Thunderstorm Wind I IThunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind Thunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind IT n'— Wind IThunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind IThunderstorm Wind Thunderstorm Wind MAGNITUDE 50 kts. EG 45 kts. EG 45 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 145 kts. 45 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG SOkts.EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 50 kts. EG 45 kts. EG (DEATHS 1 011 0 �1 0�1 III 010 X11 0 �I 01��1 0 I 011 I 011 0 I 011 0 0 011 0 �I 0�1 1 010 �I 0�1�1 �1 0�1���1 I 01 I OIU 0 I III 0 01 (INJURIES 01 0 �1 .110...K OBI 1 01 OBI 010 0 01 01 0 01 0 0 01 0 �1 0�1 11 010 O�IO.00K 0�1� �1 OIJ 0 .110.00K 10 �1 0 DAMAGE O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K O.00K �1 O.00K O.00K 8/15/2015 8/15/2015 8/15/2015 8/15/2015 8/15/2015 8/15/2015 8/15/2015 8/15/2015 8/15/2015 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 2/25/2016 3/17/2016 3/17/2016 45 kts. EG I ------ ------ _7_70 0 0 O.00K 3.131M Source: NOAA, National Climatic Data Center Magnitude refers to maximum wind speed. 39 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Severe thunderstorms are a Town -wide hazard for Reading. The Town's vulnerability to severe thunderstorms is similar to that of Nor'easters. High winds can cause falling trees and power outages, as well as obstruction of key routes and emergency access. Heavy precipitation may also cause localized flooding, both riverine and urban drainage related. Based on the record of previous occurrences, severe thunderstorms in Reading are high frequency events as defined by the 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan. This hazard may occur more frequently than once in 5 years (greater than 20% per year). Winter Storms Winter storms, including heavy snow, blizzards, and ice storms, are the most common and most familiar of the region's hazards that affect large geographic areas. The majority of blizzards and ice storms in the region cause more inconvenience than they do serious property damage, injuries, or deaths. However, periodically, a storm will occur which is a true disaster, and necessitates intense large -scale emergency response. Heavv Snow and Blizzards A blizzard is a winter snow storm with sustained or frequent wind gusts to 35 mph or more, accompanied by falling or blowing snow reducing visibility to or below '/4 mile. These conditions must be the predominant condition over a 3 hour period. Extremely cold temperatures are often associated with blizzard conditions, but are not a formal part of the definition. The hazard created by the combination of snow, wind and low visibility increases with temperatures below 20 degrees. Winter storms are a combination hazard because they often involve wind, ice and heavy snow fall. The National Weather Service defines "heavy snow fall" as an event generating at least 4 inches of snowfall within a 12 hour period. Winter Storms are often associated with a Nor'easter event, a large counter - clockwise wind circulation around a low - pressure center often resulting in heavy snow, high winds, and rain. The Northeast Snowfall Impact Scale (NESIS) developed by Paul Kocin of The Weather Channel and Louis Uccellini of the National Weather Service ( Kocin and Uccellini, 2004) characterizes and ranks high impact northeast snowstorms. These storms have large areas of 10 inch snowfall accumulations and greater. NESIS has five categories: Extreme, Crippling, Major, Significant, and Notable. NESIS scores are a function of the area affected by the snowstorm, the amount of snow, and the number of people living in the path of the storm. The largest NESIS values result from storms producing heavy snowfall over large areas that include major metropolitan centers. The NESIS categories are summarized below: 40 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Category NESIS Value Description 1 1 -2.499 Notable 2 2.5 -3.99 Significant 3 4 -5.99 Mia or 4 6 -9.99 crippling 5 10.0+ 1 Extreme Source: Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013 The most significant winter storm in recent history was the "Blizzard of 1978," which resulted in over 3 feet of snowfall and multiple day closures of roadways, businesses, and schools. In Reading blizzards and severe winter storms have occurred in the following years: Table 11- Severe Winter Storm Records for Massachusetts Blizzard of 1978 February 1978 Blizzard March 1993 Blizzard January 1996 Severe Snow Storm March 2001 Severe Snow Storm December 2003 Severe Snow Storm January 2004 Severe Snow Storm January 2005 Severe Snow Storm April, 2007 Severe Snow Storm December 2010 Severe Snow Storm January 2011 Blizzard of 2013 February 2013 Blizzard of 2015 January 2015 Source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration The average annual snowfall for all of Reading is 48 - 72 inches (see Map 6 in Appendix B). The Town of Reading does not keep local records of winter storms. Data for Middlesex County, which includes Reading, is the best available data to help understand previous occurrences and impacts of heavy snow events. According to the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) records, from 1995 to January, 2017, Middlesex County experienced 156 heavy snowfall events, resulting in no deaths, no injuries, and $4.489 million dollars in property damage. See Table 12 for heavy snow events and impacts in Middlesex County. 41 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 12 - Heavy Snow events and Impacts in Middlesex County 1996 — January, 2017 Date Type Deaths Injuries Property Damage 01/02/1996 Heavy Snow � O.00K _ 01/02/1996 Heavy Snow Fo--F O.00K 01/07/1996 Heavy Snow r0 F— 1.400M 01/07/1996 Heavy Snow Fo —F— 1.500M 01/10/1996 Heavy Snow I " I O.00K 01/12/1996 Heavy Snow Fo—Fo— O.00K 02/02/1996 Heavy Snow Fo—F— O.00K 02/16/1996 Heavy Snow �� O.00K 02/16/1996 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 03/02/1996 Heavy Snow Fo--Fo-- O.00K 03/02/1996 Heavy Snow F1— O.00K 03/07/1996 Heavy Snow Fo—I O.00K 03/07/1996 Heavy Snow Fo--F- — O.00K 04/07/1996 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 04/07/1996 Heavy Snow Fo—r0 O.00K 04/09/1996 Heavy Snow (O IOC O.00K 04/09/1996 Heavy Snow I 0 O.00K 12/06/1996 Heavy Snow Fo—F— O.00K 12/06/1996 Heavy Snow �� O.00K 12/07/1996 Heavy Snow f 0 Fo 1.360M 03/31/1997 Heavy Snow Fo—F —. O.00K 03/31/1997 Heavy Snow FIO O.00K 04/01/1997 Heavy Snow Fo —IO O.00K 04/01/1997 Heavy Snow �� O.00K 11/14/1997 Heavy Snow r0 —Fo— O.00K 12/23/1997 Heavy Snow F —o O.00K 12/23/1997 O.00K Heavy Snow F.— FO- 01/15/1998 Heavy Snow FO 0 O.00K 01/15/1998 Heavy Snow Fo— Fo — O.00K 01/23/1998 Heavy Snow Fo O.00K 01/14/1999 Heavy Snow FO 0 O.00K 42 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Date Type Deaths I.j.,ie I Property Damage 01/14/1999 Heavy Snow F— F— O.00K 02/25/1999 Heavy Snow F —_F O.00K 02/25/1999 Heavy Snow O.00K 03/06/1999 Heavy Snow lo F— . O.00K 03/06/1999 Heavy Snow F---r0 O.00K 03/15/1999 Heavy Snow — I O.00K 03/15/1999 —Fo Heavy Snow F0 F -- UOK 01/13/2000 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 01/13/2000 Heavy Snow FO—F-- O.00K 01/25/2000 Heavy Snow —F O.00K 01/25/2000 Heavy Snow Fo O.00K 02/18/2000 Heavy Snow F o O.00K 02/18/2000 Heavy Snow —F-1 o O.00K 12/30/2000 Heavy Snow r0 o O.00K 01/20/2001 Heavy Snow I 0 Fo O.00K 01/20/2001 Heavy Snow I �0 O.00K 02/05/2001 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 02/05/2001 Heavy Snow �� O.00K 03/05/2001 Heavy Snow IO O.00K 03/05/2001 Heavy Snow I 0 F0 O.00K 03/09/2001 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 03/09/2001 Heavy Snow FO — O.00K 03/30/2001 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 12/08/2001 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 12/08/2001 Heavy Snow O.00K OF 0 03/20/2002 Heavy Snow 1 O.00K 03/16/2004 Heavy Snow Fo —lo — O.00K 03/16/2004 Heavy Snow F --10-- O.00K 02/24/2005 Heavy Snow FO- -I 1 O.00K '.. 12/13/2007 Heavy Snow O.00K 12/13/2007 Heavy Snow Fo O.00K 12/16/2007 Heavy Snow IOF O.00K 12/16/2007 Heavy Snow F — O.00K 43 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Date Type Deaths Injuries Property Damage 12/19/2007 Heavy Snow � —�— O.00K 12/19/2007 Heavy Snow —[—I O.00K 01/14/2010 - Heavy Snow 1 1 28.00K 01/14/2010 Heavy Snow Fo o 20.00K 01/14/2010 Heavy Snow F —�— 20.00K 02/22/2010 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 02/22/2010 Heavy Snow I 0 o O.00K 02/22/2010 Heavy Snow F —o O.00K 03/01/2010 Heavy Snow I I O.00K 12/19/2010 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 12/19/2010 Heavy Snow F---F —. O.00K 12/19/2010 Heavy Snow F —F-1 O.00K 12/20/2010 Heavy Snow FO—F-1 O.00K 12/20/2010 Heavy Snow I O lo— 8.00K 12/21/2010 Heavy Snow (0 o O.00K 12/31/2010 Heavy Snow F o O.00K 12/31/2010 Heavy Snow r0 — O.00K 01/10/2009 Heavy Snow FFo— O.00K 01/11/2009 Heavy Snow FO 0 O.00K 01/18/2009 Heavy Snow F. OF O.00K 01/18/2009 Heavy Snow F0 o O.00K 01/18/2009 Heavy Snow Fo—F^ O.00K 03/01/2009 Heavy Snow FO F— O.00K 03/01/2009 Heavy Snow F Fo— O.00K 03/02/2009 Heavy Snow IO o O.00K 12/09/2009 Heavy Snow (0 Fo 15.00K 12/09/2009 Heavy Snow Fo Fo— 0.50K 12/19/2009 Heavy Snow Fo— O.00K 12/20/2009 Heavy Snow F.Fo— O.00K 01/18/2010 Heavy Snow Fo—f0 O.00K 02/16/2010 (Heavy Snow (O 1 O.00K 02/16/2010 Heavy Snow IO O.00K 02/16/2010 Heavy Snow — � SS.00K 44 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Date 'Type Deaths Injuries Property Damage 02/23/2010 Heavy Snow r0 Fo— 8.00K 01/12/2011 Heavy Snow F O.00K 01/12/2011 Heavy Snow - F- -. F_ O.00K 01/26/2011 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 01/26/2011 Heavy Snow 1 F O.00K 01/26/2011 Heavy Snow —F O.00K 10/29/2011 Heavy Snow f 0 0 O.00K 10/29/2011 Heavy Snow (0 30.00K 12/29/2012 Heavy Snow 0 0 O.00K 12/29/2012 Heavy Snow �� O.00K 12/29/2012 Heavy Snow I O.00K 02/08/2013 Heavy Snow Fo —Fo O.00K 02/08/2013 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 02/08/2013 Heavy Snow F --Fo O.00K 02/23/2013 Heavy Snow F 0 -Fo — O.00K 03/07/2013 Heavy Snow r Fo O.00K 03/07/2013 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 03/07/2013 - Heavy Snow I —.�— O.00K 03/18/2013 Heavy Snow Fo — O.00K 03/18/2013 Heavy Snow OF 0 O.00K 03/18/2013 Heavy Snow Fo O.00K 12/14/2013 Heavy Snow FO—[ O.00K 12/14/2013 Heavy Snow �� O.00K 12/14/2013 Heavy Snow Fo--r0 —1 O.00K 12/17/2013 Heavy Snow I F O.00K 12/17/2013 Heavy Snow F0Fo --' O.00K 12/17/2013 Heavy Snow �� O.00K 01/02/2014 Heavy Snow Fo —lo O.00K 01/02/2014 Heavy Snow r —1 O.00K 01/02/2014 Heavy Snow FO 0 O.00K 01/18/2014 Heavy Snow F --1 O.00K 02/05/2014 Heavy Snow O.00K 02/05/2014 02/05/2014 Heavy Snow I — Fo — O.00K 45 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Date Type Deaths I.J.de s Property Damage 02/05/2014 Heavy Snow F-F-1 O.00K 02/13/2014 Heavy Snow O.00K O.00K 02/13/2014 Heavy Snow F lo O.00K 02/13/2014 Heavy Snow F- O.00K 02/18/2014 Heavy Snow -F-F- O.00K 02/18/2014 Heavy Snow F --1� O.00K 11/26/2014 Heavy Snow F0 1� 10.00K 01/24/2015 Heavy Snow F_I O.00K 01/24/2015 Heavy Snow f 0 Fo O.00K 01/24/2015 Heavy Snow F —F-1 . O.00K 01/26/2015 -- Heavy Snow O.00K 01/26/2015 —F Heavy Snow F � O.00K 02/02/2015 Heavy Snow F o O.00K 02/02/2015 Heavy Snow f 0 l 0 O.00K 02/02/2015 Heavy Snow f0 f0 O.00K 02/08/2015 Heavy Snow - F- O.00K 02/08/2015 Heavy Snow F--F- 1 O.00K 02/08/2015 Heavy Snow Fo o O.00K 02/14/2015 Heavy Snow F o O.00K 02/14/2015 Heavy Snow IO Fo --10.00K 02/14/2015 Heavy Snow r0 o O.00K 2/5/2016 Heavy Snow F� Heavy Snow -I� -I I Heavy Snow Fo-I -I Heavy Snow IO —F-1 Heavy Snow F0 F- —1 O.00K 70.00K S.00K O.00K 2/5/2016 I 2/5/2016 I 3/21/2016 I 4/4/2016 I Totals �� 4.489M The Town's overall vulnerability to heavy snow and bjizzards is primarily related to Deleted' blizzards is restrictions on travel on roadways, temporary road closures, school closures, and potential restrictions on emergency vehicle access. Other vulnerabilities include power outages due to fallen trees and utility lines, and damage to structures due to heavy snow loads. 46 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Blizzards are considered to be high frequency events based on past occurrences, as defined by the Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013. This hazard occurs more than once in five years, with a greater than 20 percent chance of occurring each year. Ice Storms The ice storm category covers a range of different weather phenomena that collectively involve rain or snow being converted to ice in the lower atmosphere leading to potentially hazardous conditions on the ground. Hail size typically refers to the diameter of the hailstones. Warnings and reports may report hail size through comparisons with real - world objects that correspond to certain diameters: (Description (Diameter (inches) Pea 0 25 _40.,25-- (Marble or Mothball 0.50 IPenny or Dime IO 75 _._.._. ._.� -- ........_._. Nickel _ _ -- IO 88 Quarter - - -- - - -_ _ I1 00 � - - - -- _ Half Dollar 1.25 (Walnut or Ping Pong Ball 1.50 Golfball -- -- -- --x1.75 _ -------- JHen's Egg _ 2.00 Tennis-Bail�� 2.50 Baseball 2.75 Tea Cup 3 00 Grapefruit 4.00._______- Softball 4.50 mm While ice pellets and sleet are examples of these, the greatest hazard is created by freezing rain conditions, which is rain that freezes on contact with hard surfaces leading to a layer of ice on roads, walkways, trees, and other surfaces. The conditions created by freezing rain can make driving particularly dangerous and emergency response more difficult. The weight of ice on tree branches can also lead to falling branches damaging electric lines. Town - specific data for previous ice storm occurrences are not collected by the Town of Reading. The best available local data is for Middlesex County through the National Climatic Data Center (see Table 13). Middlesex County, which includes the Town of 47 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Reading, experienced four ice storm events from 1995 —2016. No deaths or injuries were reported and the total reported property damage in the county was $6.155 million dollars. Table 13- Middlesex County Ice Storm Events, 1995- January, 2017 Location Date Tvpe Deaths Injuries Damage Totals: F—Fo—Fo 6.155M WESTERN MIDDLESEX �IceStorrn lo (ZONE) [01/09/1998 0 S.0 OK WESTERN MIDDLESEX � (ZONE) 11/16/2002 [1,estrm Fo 150.00K NORTHWEST MIDDLESEX �Fo COUNTY (ZO... 12/11/2010 0 3.000M WESTERN MIDDLESEX IlceStorm �� (ZONE) 12/11/2010 0 0 3.000M Totals: ��� 6.155M Source: NOAA, National Climatic Data Center Ice storms are considered to be medium frequency events based on past occurrences, as defined by the Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013. This hazard occurs once in 5 years to once in 50 years, with 2% to 20% chance of occurring each year. The impacts of winter storms are often related to the weight of snow and ice, which can cause roof collapses and also causes tree limbs to fall which can in turn cause property damage and potential injuries. Winter storms are a potential Town -wide hazard in Reading. The Town's vulnerability is primarily related to restrictions to travel on roadways, temporary road closures, school closures, and potential restrictions on emergency vehicle access. The Town works to clear roads and carries out general snow removal operations, and bans on- street parking during snow removal to ensure that streets can be plowed and public safety vehicle access is maximized. Transit operations may also be impacted, as they were in the 2015 blizzard which caused the closure of the MBTA system for one day and limited services on several transit lines for several weeks. Reading commuter rail operations were significantly impacted. Another winter storm vulnerability is power outages due to fallen trees and utility lines. 48 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Winter storms are considered to be high frequency events based on past occurrences, as defined by the Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013. This hazard occurs more than once in years, with a greater than percent chance of occurring each year. Geologic Hazards Geologic hazards include earthquakes and landslides. Although new construction under the most recent building codes generally will be built to seismic standards, there are still many structures which pre -date the most recent building code. Information on geologic hazards in Reading can be found on Map 4 in Appendix B. Earthquakes Damage in an earthquake stems from ground motion, surface faulting, and ground failure in which weak or unstable soils, such as those composed primarily of saturated sand or silts, liquefy. The effects of an earthquake are mitigated by distance and ground materials between the epicenter and a given location. An earthquake in New England affects a much wider area than a similar earthquake in California due to New England's solid bedrock geology (NESEC). Seismologists use a Magnitude scale (Richter scale) to express the seismic energy released by each earthquake. The typical effects of earthquakes in various ranges are summarized below. Richter Magnitudes Earthquake Effects Less than 3.5 Generally not felt, but recorded 3.5-5.4 Often felt, but rarely causes damage Under 6.0 At most slight damage to well - designed buildings. Can cause major damage to poorly constructed buildings over small regions. 6.1 -6.9 Can be destructive in areas up to about 100 km. across where eo le live. 7.0-7.9 Major earthquake. Can cause serious damage over larger areas. 8 or greater Great earthquake. Can cause serious damage in areas several hundred meters across. Source Nevada Seismological Library (NSL), 2005 According to the State Hazard Mitigation Plan, New England experiences an average of five earthquakes per year. From 1668 to 2010, 544 earthquakes were recorded in Massachusetts (NESEC). Most have originated from the La Malbaie fault in Quebec or from the Cape Anne fault located off the coast of Rockport. The region has experienced larger earthquakes, including a magnitude 5.0 earthquake in 1727 and a 6.0 earthquake that struck in 1755 off the coast of Cape Ann. More recently, a pair of damaging earthquakes occurred near Ossipee, NH in 1940, and a 4.0 earthquake centered in Hollis, Maine in October 2012 was felt in the Boston area. Historical records of some of the more significant earthquakes in the region are shown in Table 14. 49 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 14- Historical Earthquakes in Massachusetts or Surrounding Area Location Date Magnitude MA - Cape Ann 11/10/1727 5 MA - Cape Ann 12/29/1727 NA MA —Cape Ann 2/10/1728 NA MA — Cape Ann 3/30/1729 NA MA —Cape Ann 12/9/1729 NA MA — Cape Ann 2/20/1730 NA MA — Cape Ann 3/9/1730 NA MA - Boston 6/24/1741 NA MA - Cape Ann 6/14/1744 4.7 MA - Salem 7/1/1744 NA MA -Off Cape Ann 11/18/1755 6 MA —Off Cape Cod 11/23/1755 NA MA - Boston 3/12/1761 4.6 MA - Off Cape Cod 2/2/1766 NA MA - Offshore 1/2/1785 5.4 MA— Wareham /Taunton 12/25/1800 NA MA- Woburn 10/5/1817 4.3 MA- Marblehead 8/25/1846 4.3 MA- Brewster 8/8/1847 4.2 MA - Boxford 5/12/1880 NA MA- Newbury 11/7/1907 NA MA - Wareham 4/25/1924 NA MA — Cape Ann 1/7/1925 4 MA — Nantucket 10/25/1965 NA MA — Boston 12/27/74 2.3 VA—Mineral 8/23/11 5.8 MA - Nantucket 4/12/12 4.5 ME - Hollis 10/17/12 4.0 Source: (NESEC). One measure of earthquake risk is ground motion, which is measured as maximum peak horizontal acceleration, expressed as a percentage of gravity (1 g). The range of peak ground acceleration in Massachusetts is from l Og to 20g, with a 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years. Reading is in the middle part of the range for Massachusetts, at 14g to 16g, making it a relatively moderate area of earthquake risk within the state, although the state as a whole is considered to have a low risk of earthquakes compared to the rest of the country. There have been no recorded earthquake epicenters within Reading. 50 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Although New England has not experienced a damaging earthquake since 1755, seismologists state that a serious earthquake occurrence is possible. There are five seismological faults in Massachusetts, but there is no discernible pattern of previous earthquakes along these fault lines. Earthquakes occur without warning and may be followed by aftershocks. Most older buildings and infrastructure were constructed without specific earthquake resistant design features. Earthquakes are a hazard with multiple impacts beyond the obvious building collapse. Buildings may suffer structural damage which may or may not be readily apparent. Earthquakes can cause major damage to roadways, making emergency response difficult. Water lines and gas lines can break, causing flooding and fires. Another potential vulnerability is equipment within structures. For example, a hospital may be structurally engineered to withstand an earthquake, but if the equipment inside the building is not properly secured, the operations at the hospital could be severely impacted during an earthquake. Earthquakes can also trigger landslides. Earthquakes are a potential Town -wide hazard in Reading. The Town has many older buildings that pre -date current building code which could be vulnerable in the event of a severe earthquake. Potential earthquake damages to Reading have been estimated using HAZUS -MH. Total building damages, including business interruption losses are estimated at $187.37 million for a 5.0 magnitude earthquake and $1,916.84 million for a 7.0 magnitude earthquake. Other potential impacts are detailed in Table 22. According to the Boston College Weston Observatory, in most parts of New England, there is a one in ten chance that a potentially damaging earthquake will occur in a 50 year time period. The Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan classifies earthquakes as "very low" frequency events that occur less frequently than once in 100 years, or a less than I% per year. Landslides According to the USGS, "The term landslide includes a wide range of ground movement, such as rock falls, deep failure of slopes, and shallow debris flows. Although gravity acting on an over steepened slope is the primary reason for a landslide, there are other contributing factors." Among the contributing factors are: erosion by rivers or ocean waves over steepened slopes; rock and soil slopes weakened through saturation by snowmelt or heavy rains; earthquakes create stresses that make weak slopes fail; and excess weight from accumulation of rain or snow, and stockpiling of rock or ore, from waste piles, or from man -made structures. Landslides can result from human activities that destabilize an area or can occur as a secondary impact from another natural hazard such as flooding. In addition to structural damage to buildings and the blockage of transportation corridors, landslides can lead to sedimentation of water bodies. Typically, a landslide occurs when the condition of a 51 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE slope changes from stable to unstable. Natural precipitation such as heavy snow accumulation, torrential rain and run -off may saturate soil creating instability enough to contribute to a landslide. The lack of vegetation and root structure that stabilizes soil can destabilize hilly terrain. There is no universally accepted measure of landslide extent but it has been represented as a measure of the destructiveness. The table below summarizes the estimated intensity for a range of landslides. For a given landslide volume, fast moving rock falls have the highest intensity while slow moving landslides have the lowest intensity. Estimated Volume Expected Landslide Veloci ty (m') Fast moving landslide Rock fall Rapid moving landslide Debris flow Slow moving landslide Slide <0.001 Slight intensity <0.5 Medium intensity >0.5 High intensity <500 High intensity Slight intensity 500- 10,000 High intensity Medium intensity Slight intensity 10,000 — 50,000 Very high intensity igh intensity Medium intensit >500,000 Very high intensity High intensity »500,000 Very high intensity Source: A Geomotphological Approach to the Estimation of Landslide Hazards and Risks in Umbria, Central Italy, M. Cardinali et al, 2002 The entire Town has been classified as having a low incidence risk for landslides, less than 1.5 % of the area is involved in land sliding. (Map 4, Appendix B) The Town does not have records of any damages caused by landslides in Reading. Because of this, no specific mitigation measures for landslides have been included in the plan update. Potential damages would depend on how many properties were affected. Given the relatively high assessed value of property in Reading, damages affecting a single residence could exceed $500,000, and damages affecting several homes or business properties could theoretically extend from $1 million to several million. However, there are no data available on landslide damages in Reading, as there are no records of any damages caused by landslides in the town. Should a landslide occur in the future, the type and degree of impacts would be highly localized, and the Town's vulnerabilities could include damage to structures, damage to transportation and other infrastructure, and localized road closures. Injuries and casualties, while possible, would be unlikely given the low extent and impact of landslides in Reading. 52 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Based on past occurrences and the Massachusetts Hazard Mitigation Plan, landslides are of Low frequency, events that can occur once in 50 to 100 years (a 1% to 2% chance of occurring each year). Fire Related Hazards A brush fire is an uncontrolled fire occurring in a forested or grassland area. In the Boston Metro region these fires rarely grow to the size of a wildfire as seen more typically in the western U.S. As their name implies, these fires typically burn no more than the underbrush of a forested area. Wildfire season can begin in March and usually ends in late November. The majority of wildfires typically occur in April and May, when most vegetation is void of any appreciable moisture, making them highly flammable. Once "green -up" takes place in late May to early June, the fire danger usually is reduced somewhat. These fires can present a hazard where there is the potential for them to spread into developed or inhabited areas, particularly residential areas where sufficient fuel materials might exist to allow the fire the spread into homes. The Fire Department responds to approximately 26 brush fires annually. About 10% of these involve significant property damage but none have resulted in any injuries or deaths. Most brush fires are caused by careless disposal of cigarettes and by weather conditions such as lack of rainfall, winds and lightning. The following areas of Town were identified as having the highest potential for brush fires based on past occurrences and their potential for the accumulation of dried vegetation growth. The numbers correspond to the numbers on Map 8, "Hazard Areas ". 10. Undeveloped forested land north of Fairfield Drive. 11. Undeveloped forested land in northeast Reading and Cedar Swamp area. 15. Town Forest -The Town is a 290 acre site located in the northwestern part of town. The Town Forest was created in April, 1930 when over 100,000 red and white pine, spruce, balsam, and scotch pine trees were planted by local Boy Scouts and other interested citizens. ( Source: Town of Reading) 16. Open land area off Grove Street 17. Bear Meadow Conservation Area 18. Camp Curtis- National Guard area 19. Route 93 interstate highway corridor 53 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Wildfires in Massachusetts are measured by the number of fires and the sum of acres burned. The most recent data available for wildfires in Massachusetts, shown in Figure 2 below, indicates that the wildfire extent in Reading consists of .26 - 9 acres burned, with 0- 20 fires from 2001 to 2009. Figure 2 Massachusetts Wildfires 2001 -2009 Source: 2013 Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan Potential vulnerabilities to wildfires include damage to structures and other improvements, and impacts on natural resources such as the Town Forest. Smoke and air pollution from wildfires can be a health hazard, especially for sensitive populations including children, the elderly, and those with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Potential damages from wildfires in Reading would depend on the extent and type of land affected. There could be the need for post -fire revegetation to restore burned properties, which could cost from a few thousand dollars to tens of thousands for an extensive area. However, there are no data on actual wildfire damages. Based on past occurrences and the Massachusetts Hazard Mitigation Plan 2013, brushfires are of High frequency, events that occur more frequently than once in 5 years (Greater than 20% per year) Extreme Temperatures Extreme temperatures occur when either high temperature or low temperatures relative to average local temperatures occur. These can occur for brief periods of time and be acute, 54 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE or they can occur over long periods of time when there is a prolonged period of excessively hot or cold weather. Reading has four well - defined seasons. The seasons have several defining factors, with temperature one of the most significant. Extreme temperatures can be defined as those, which are far outside of the normal seasonal ranges for Massachusetts. The average temperatures for Massachusetts are: winter (Dec -Feb) Average = 31.8 °F and summer (Jun -Aug) Average = 71 °F. Extreme temperatures are a Town -wide hazard. Extreme Cold For extreme cold, temperature is typically measured using Wind Chill Temperature Index, which is provided by the National Weather Service (NWS). The latest version of the index was implemented in 2001 and it meant to show how cold conditions feel on unexposed skin. The index is provided in Figure 3 below. Extreme cold is also relative to the normal climatic lows in a region. Temperatures that drop decidedly below normal and wind speeds that increase can cause harmful wind -chill factors. The wind chill is the apparent temperature felt on exposed skin due to the combination of air temperature and wind speed. Extreme cold is a dangerous situation that can result in health emergencies for susceptible people, such as those without shelter or who are stranded or who live in homes that are poorly insulated or without heat. The elderly and people with disabilities are often most vulnerable. In Reading, 14.9 percent of the population are over 65 and 4.5% of the population has a disability. 55 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE The Town of Reading does not collect data for previous occurrences of extreme cold. The best available local data are for Middlesex County, 1995- 2016, through the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC). There are four extreme cold events on record which caused no deaths and no injuries, property damage (see Table 15). Table 15 — Middlesex County Extreme Cold and Wind Chill Occurrences Date Location Type Deaths Injuries property Damage 2/15/2015 Western Middlesex Extreme Cold /wi170 Chill ❑� 2/16/2015 Northwest Middlesex Extreme Cold /wind Chill 0 0 2/16/2015 Southeast Middlesex Extreme Cold /wiToTo� Chill 0 2/14/2016 W I M iddlesex Extreme Cold /wiTolE Chill � Source: NOAA, National Climatic Data Center Extreme Heat While a heat wave for Massachusetts is defined as three or more consecutive days above 90 °F, another measure used for identifying extreme heat events is through a Heat Advisory from the NWS. These advisories are issued when the heat index (Figure 4) is forecast to exceed 100 degree Fahrenheit (F) for 2 or more hours; an excessive heat advisory is issued if forecast predicts the temperature to rise above 105 degree F. Figure 4- Heat Index Chart 56 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE . Extreme heat poses a potentially greater risk to the elderly, children, and people with certain medical conditions, such as heart disease. However, even young and healthy individuals can succumb to heat if they participate in strenuous physical activities during hot weather. Hot summer days can also worsen air pollution. With increased extreme heat, urban areas of the Northeast are likely to experience more days that fail to meet air quality standards. The Town of Reading does not collect data on excessive heat occurrences. The best available local data are for Middlesex County, through the National Climatic Data Center. From 1995 - 2016, there has been a total of one excessive heat event, with no reported deaths, no injuries, and no property damage resulting from excessive heat (see Table 16). Extreme temperature events are projected to be medium frequency events based on past occurrences, as defined by the Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013. Both extreme cold and hot weather events occur between once in five years to once in 50 years, or a 2 percent to 20 percent chance of occurring each year. Table 16 — Middlesex ounty Extreme Heat Occurrences 1995- January, 2017 DATE EVENT _TYPE DEATHS INJURIES DAMAGE 7/6/2010 Excessive Heat 1 0 0 0 Source: NOAA, National Climatic Data Center Drought Drought is a temporary irregularity in precipitation and differs from aridity since the latter is restricted to low rainfall regions and is a permanent feature of climate. Drought is a period characterized by long durations of below normal precipitation. Drought conditions occur in virtually all climatic zones yet its characteristics vary significantly from one region to another, since it is relative to the normal precipitation in that region. Drought can affect agriculture, water supply, aquatic ecology, wildlife, and plant life. In Massachusetts, droughts are caused by the prevalence of dry northern continental air and a decrease in coastal- and tropical - cyclone activity. During the 1960's, a cool drought occurred because dry air from the north caused lower temperatures in the spring and summer of 1962 -65. The northerly winds drove frontal systems to sea along the Southeast Coast and prevented the Northeastern States from receiving moisture (U.S. Geological Survey). This is considered the drought of record in Massachusetts. Average annual precipitation in Massachusetts is 44 inches per year, with approximately 3 to 4 inch average amounts for each month of the year. Regional monthly precipitation ranges from zero to 17 inches. Statewide annual precipitation ranges from 30 to 61 inches. Thus, in the driest calendar year (1965), the statewide precipitation total of 30 inches was 68 percent of average. 57 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Although Massachusetts is relatively small, it has a number of distinct regions that experience significantly different weather patterns and react differently to the amounts of precipitation they receive. The DCR precipitation index divides the state into six regions: Western, Central, Connecticut River Valley, Northeast, Southeast, and Cape and Islands. Reading is located in the Northeast Region. In Reading drought is a potential Town -wide hazard. The Town of Reading does not collect data on drought occurrences. The best available local data are for Middlesex County, through the National Climatic Data Center. From 1995 - 2016, there has been a total of six drought events, with no reported deaths, no injuries, and no property damage resulting from excessive heat (see Table 17). Table 17 — Middlesex County Drought Occurrences 1995- January, 2017 Date E:ttion Type Deaths Injuries Property Damage 04/12/2012 Western Middlesex Drought F�� 04/12/2012 Southeast Middlesex Drought 0❑ 0❑0 04/12/2012 Northwest Middlesex Drought 0❑ 0❑� 05/01/2012 Southeast Middlesex Drought TT� 0 05/01/2012 Western ]Drought Middlesex 0❑ 0❑� 05/01/2012 Northwest Middlesex Drought 0❑ 0❑� Source: NOAA, National Climatic Data Center Under a severe long term drought the Reading could be vulnerable to restrictions on water supply. Potential damages of a severe drought could include losses of landscaped areas if outdoor watering is restricted and potential loss of business revenues if water supplies were severely restricted for a prolonged period. As this hazard has never occurred in Reading, there are no data or estimates of potential damages, but under a severe drought scenario it would be reasonable to expect a range of potential damages from several million to tens of millions of dollars. However, given the resilience of the MWRA water system due to its large amount of storage in the Quabbin and Wachusett Reservoirs, (equivalent to five years of water demand), severe impacts on the Town is unlikely. For example, even during the multi -year drought of record in the 1960s, there were no severe limitations of supply from the regional water system, which at the time was operated by the Metropolitan District Commission. 58 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Five levels of drought have been developed to characterize drought severity: Normal, Advisory, Watch, Warning, and Emergency. These drought levels are based on the conditions of natural resources and are intended to provide information on the current status of water resources. The levels provide a basic framework from which to take actions to assess, communicate, and respond to drought conditions. They begin with a normal situation where data are routinely collected and distributed, move to heightened vigilance with increased data collection during an advisory, to increased assessment and proactive education during a watch. Water restrictions might be appropriate at the watch or warning stage, depending on the capacity of each individual water supply system. A warning level indicates a severe situation and the possibility that a drought emergency may be necessary. A drought emergency is one in which mandatory water restrictions or use of emergency supplies is necessary. Drought levels are used to coordinate both state agency and local response to drought situations. As dry conditions can have a range of different impacts, a number of drought indices are available to assess these various impacts. Massachusetts uses a multi -index system that takes advantage of several of these indices to determine the severity of a given drought or extended period of dry conditions. Drought level is determined monthly based on the number of indices which have reached a given drought level. Drought levels are declared on a regional basis for each of six regions in Massachusetts. County by county or watershed - specific determinations may also be made. A determination of drought level is based on seven indices: 1. Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) reflects soil moisture and precipitation. 2. Crop Moisture Index: (CMI) reflects soil moisture conditions for agriculture. 3. Keetch Byram Drought Index (KBDI) is designed for fire potential assessment. 4. Precipitation Index is a comparison of measured precipitation amounts to historic normal precipitation. 5. The Groundwater Level Index is based on the number of consecutive month's groundwater levels are below normal (lowest 25% of period of record). 6. The Stream flow Index is based on the number of consecutive months that stream flow levels are below normal (lowest 25% of period of record). 7. The Reservoir Index is based on the water levels of small, medium and large index reservoirs across the state, relative to normal conditions for each month. Determinations regarding the end of a drought or reduction of the drought level focus on two key drought indicators: precipitation and groundwater levels. These two factors have the greatest long -term impact on stream flow, water supply, reservoir levels, soil moisture and potential for forest fires. 59 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Previous Occurrences Reading does not collect data relative to drought events. Because drought tends to be a regional natural hazard, this plan references state data as the best available data for drought. The statewide scale is a composite of six regions of the state. Regional composite precipitation values are based on monthly values from six stations, and three stations in the smaller regions (Cape Cod/Islands and West). Figure 5 depicts the incidents of drought levels' occurrence in Massachusetts from 1850 to 2012 using the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) parameter alone. On a monthly basis, the state would have been in a Drought Watch to Emergency condition 11 percent of the time between 1850 and 2012. Table 18 summarizes the chronology of major droughts since the 1920's. 4 3 g, z B 0 Figure 5 - Statewide Drought Levels using SPI Thresholds 1850 — 2012 Statewide Drought Levels using SPI Thresholds 1850 to 2012 (Actual Drought Levels 2001 to 2012) Month (Source: Mass. State Drought Management Plan 2013) Drought Emergency Emergency Warning Watch Advisory Normal Drought emergencies have been reached infrequently, with 5 events occurring in the period between 1850 and 2012: in 1883, 1911, 1941, 1957, and 1965 -1966. The 1965- 1966 drought period is viewed as the most severe drought to have occurred in modern 60 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE times in Massachusetts because of its long duration. On a monthly basis over the 162 - year period of record, there is a one percent chance of being in a drought Emergency. Drouizht Warnin Drought Warning levels not associated with drought Emergencies have occurred four times, in 1894, 1915, 1930, and 1985. On a monthly basis over the 162 -year period of record, there is a two percent chance of being in a drought Warning level. Drought Watch Drought Watches not associated with higher levels of drought generally have occurred in three to four years per decade between 1850 and 1950. In the 1980s, there was a lengthy drought Watch level of precipitation between 1980 and 1981, followed by a drought Warning in 1985. A frequency of drought Watches at a rate of three years per decade resumed in the 1990s (1995, 1998, 1999). In the 2000s, Drought Watches occurred in 2001 and 2002. On July 8, 2016, following four continuous months of unusually dry weather, Massachusetts Energy and Environmental Affairs (EEA) Secretary Matthew Beaton declared a Drought Watch for Central and Northeast Massachusetts and a Drought Advisory for Southeast Massachusetts and the Connecticut River Valley. As of January 1, 2017, four of the six statewide regions in Massachusetts were listed in Drought Warning, the second highest drought stage. The Cape Cod and Islands Region were listed in the 4 Deleted: and Islands ranked Drought Advisory stage and the Northeast Region was listed in the third ranked Drought Watch stage. The overall frequency of being in a drought Watch is 8 percent on a monthly basis over the 162 -year period of record. Table 18 - Chronology of Major Droughts in Massachusetts Date Area affected Recurrence Remarks interval (years) 1929-32 {Statewide 10 to x50 Water- supply sources altered in 13 communities. Multistate. Statewide 15 to >50 l More severe in eastern and extreme western Massachusetts Multistate 1957 -59 Statewide 5 to 25 Record low water levels in observation wells, i northeastern Massachusetts. 1961 -69 Statewide 35 to >50 Water- supply shortages common. Record 61 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Date Area affected I ecurrence Remarks interval (years) drought. Multistate. __ �. __ . __ ..._ .._... Most severe in Ipswich and Taunton River 1980 -83 Statewide 10 to 30 basins; minimal effect in Nashua River basin. Multistate. Housatonic Duration and severity unknown Streamflow 1985 88 River basin 25 showed mixed trends elsewhere. Probability of Future Occurrences The state has experienced Emergency Droughts five times between 1850 and 2012. Even given that regional drought conditions may occur at a different interval than state data indicates, droughts remain primarily regional and state phenomena in Massachusetts. Emergency Drought conditions over the 162 period of record in Massachusetts are a Low Frequency natural hazard event that can occur from once in 50 years to once in 100 years (I% to 2% chance per year), as defined by the Massachusetts State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013. Impacts of Climate Change Many of the natural hazards that Reading has historically experienced are likely to be exacerbated by climate change in future years. This is particularly true for flooding caused by extreme precipitation and extreme heat. These are described in more detail below. Climate Change Impacts: Extreme Precipitation Reading's average annual precipitation is 42 inches. While total annual precipitation has not changed significantly, according to the 2012 report When It Rains It Pours — Global Warming and the Increase in Extreme Precipitation from 1948 to 2011 intense rainstorms and snowstorms have become more frequent and more severe over the last half century in the northeastern United States. Extreme downpours are now happening 30 percent more often nationwide than in 1948 (see Figure 6). In other words, large rain or snow storms that happened once every 12 months, on average, in the middle of the 20th century, now happen every nine months. 62 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Figure 6- Changes in Frequency of Extreme Downpours, 1948 — 2011 Decrease in Frequency Increase in Frequency F� •— C' f— . —i • —+ -100% —50% —10% 10% 50% 100% • • •• • • • • • • • �• • • • _ • .• • •• t••• • • � • i • • + ••• • •�� ?off � • • • • • • • • • • •• ••+• •6� • • • • • • 0.* •� f.•• �• i. • • • •�• • • •• n- • • • N :111 • • :• • °, Source: When It Rains It Pours — Global Warming and the Increase in Extreme Precipitation, Environment America Research and Policy Center, July 2012 Not only are these intense storm events more frequent, they are also more severe: the largest annual storms now produce 10 percent more precipitation, on average, than in 1948. In particular, the report finds that New England has experienced the greatest change with intense rain and snow storms occurring 85 percent more often than in 1948. At the other extreme, changes in precipitation patterns and the projected future rising temperatures due to climate change (discussed below) will likely increase the frequency of short-term (one- to three - month) droughts and decrease stream flow during the summer. Climate Change Impacts: Extreme Heat Recent temperature trends suggest greater potential impacts to come due to climate change. In the report "Confronting Climate Change in the U.S. Northeast," (2007), the Union of Concerned Scientists presented temperature projections to 2099 based on two scenarios, one with lower carbon dioxide emissions, and the other with high emissions. 63 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Figure 7 - Mass. Extreme Heat Y= "° Scenarios i Between 1961 and 1990, Boston ' > experienced an average of 11 days per {\ '` year over 90 °F. That could triple to 30 < days per year by 2095 under the low 19611 go'' emissions scenario, and increase to 60 1 --11 ' days per year under the high Z- 2010 -2039 emissions scenario. Days over 100 °F � could increase from the current 2040 -2069 average of one day per year to 6 days 2070 -2099 with low emissions or 24 days with high emissions By 2099, 2`0410 --20 9 , Massachusetts could have a climate t similar to Maryland's under the low 1 emissions scenario, and similar to the 2070 -`2099 Carolinas' with high emissions (Figure 12). Furthermore, the number of days with poor air quality could r ® Higher- Emission Scenario quadruple in Boston by the end of the tower - Emission Scenario 21st century under higher emissions scenario, or increase by half under the lower emissions scenario. These extreme temperature trends could 'v have significant impacts on public health, particularly for those individuals with asthma and other respiratory system conditions, which typically affect the young and the old more severely. Source: Union of Concerned Scientists Land Use and Development Trends Existine Land Use The most recent land use statistics available from the state are from aerial photography done in 2005. Table 19 shows the acreage and percentage of land in 20 categories. If the four residential categories are aggregated, residential uses make up 46% of the area of the Town (2,936 acres). Commercial and industrial combined make up 3.9 % of the Town, or 251.15 acres. One public comment stated that they felt that unofthe forest Deleted: much or category should be listed as forested wetlands. 64 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 19- 2005 Land Use Land Use Type Acres Percent Cropland Pasture Forest Non Forested Wetland Mining 6.37 22.90 2314.45 275.79 6.171 0.1 0.4 36.3 4.3 0.1 Open Land 101.65 1.6 Participation Recreation 174.33 2.1 Spectator Recreation 0 0 Water Recreation 1.237 0 Multifamily Residential 53.756 0.8 High Density Residential 0 0 Medium Density Residential 2430.43 38.1 Low Density Residential 451.87 7.1 Commercial 174.96 2.7 Industrial 76.190 1.2 Urban Open 148.55 2.3 Transportation 128.34 2.0 Waste Disposal 3.71 0.1 Water 0 0 Woody Perennial 11.41 0.2 Totals 6,382.16 100 For more information on how the land use statistics were developed and the definitions of the categories, please go to http: / /www.mass. ov /mgis /lus.htm. Economic Elements Reading is a prosperous suburban community with a number of economic development assets: a busy downtown with commuter rail service, direct access to both Routes 129/I- 95 and I -93, and an increasingly well- educated and well paid workforce. The Town remains primarily a residential community however, with little commercial and industrial development. The local job base is small and dominated by lower paying retail and service jobs while most residents commute to work in other communities. The Town's tax base is heavily dependent on residential properties, with only 7% of the tax base attributable to business. There is essentially no additional undeveloped business -zoned land in Reading, but there are opportunities to add to the Town's business tax base through revitalization of the downtown and redevelopment of vacant and underused properties nearer the highways. (Reading Master Plan) 65 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Historic, Cultural, and Natural Resource Areas Reading has a rich history dating back to its first settlement in 1639 when it also included what would become the current towns of Wakefield and North Reading. In 1769, the Town took on the boundaries it has today, with the meetinghouse built on the town common serving as the political and religious center of the community. The railroad came to Reading in 1845 and brought about the conversion of residential areas to commercial and industrial uses. Today the Town has two historic districts with an inventory of 270 properties, 90 of which are on the National Register of Historic Places. Culturally, the Town has its own symphony orchestra, the Reading Symphony Orchestra, founded in 1931 and has two community theater groups and the Reading Art Association as well. The Parker Tavern is a 1694 saltbox style home now restored and used as a public museum. (Reading Master Plan) Heavily influenced by earlier glaciers, Reading is generally low -lying and is located within the headwaters of the Ipswich and Saugus Rivers. The highest point is Dobbins Hill at 232 feet above sea level and there are numerous glacial features such as drumlins, kames, eskers interspersed with the numerous small ponds, wetlands and floodplains that make up more than 30 percent of the Town's land area. Prior to the adoption of wetland protection bylaws in the 1970s, many low areas in the Town were drained and built out, often contributing to the flooding problems experienced today. Due to its topography, most of Reading's active recreation areas are in the south and central part of town, while the north offers the Town Forest and numerous trails and open areas for hiking, snowshoeing and other natural resource based recreation activities. (Reading Open Space and Recreation Plan) Development Trends Reading evolved from an outlying and isolated collection of farms to a specialized farming community centered on a village center, to a minor center for the manufacture of everyday commodities, to a residential suburb. From 1951 to 1981, Reading's land use changed from being only 32% urban to 51% urban, shifting from agricultural, forest and wetlands to a residential uses. By 2011, 61% of the Town's area was developed, with that trend continuing today. (Reading Open Space and Recreation Plan) Development trends throughout the metropolitan region are tracked by MAPC's Development Database, which provides an inventory of new development over the last decade. The database tracks both completed developments and those currently under construction. The database includes 7 developments in the Town of Reading since 2010, of which 6 are completed and 1 was under construction or planned for beyond 2016. The database also includes several attributes of the new development, including site acreage, housing units, and commercial space. The 7 developments in Reading include a 66 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE total of 625 housing units, 53,482 square feet of commercial space, and are sited on a total of 45.43acres (see Table 21). In order to characterize any change in the Town's vulnerability associated with new developments, a GIS mapping analysis was conducted which overlaid the development sites with the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map. The analysis shows that two of the developments, Mariano Drive and Perfecto's Cafe, are located within a flood zone. Recent and Potential Future Development MAPC consulted with Town planning staff to determine areas that have been recently developed or may be developed in the future, based on the Town's comprehensive planning efforts and current trends and projects. These areas are described below. Two of these sites are in a flood hazard zone, with both located in an X zone with only a 0.2 % chance of flooding. The only other hazard that varies with location within the town is landslide risk. All of the developments are in the areas defined as "Low Landslide Incidence." Other hazards are categorized at the same level throughout town. For snowfall, all of Reading is in the zone of 48 to 72 inches average annual snowfall. With respect to wind, there is no variation across different sites in the town; the hazard map depicts the entire town of Reading within a 100 -year wind speed of 110 miles per hour. (See hazard maps in Appendix B). Table 20 Relationship of Recent and Potential Development to Hazard Areas Parcel Landslide Flood Zone risk Bethune Avenue Mariano Drive Lyle Estates Randall Road Reading Woods, 1 Jacob Way Oaktree, 30 Haven US Post Office Redevelopment, 136 Haven Street Johnson Woods Phases 1 and II, Johnson Woods Drive Reading Village 40B, 31 -41 Lincoln St and 2 -12 Prescott St Low incidence Low incidence Low incidence Low incidence Low incidence Low incidence Low incidence Low incidence Low incidence 67 Brush Fire Area No 18.96% in X: 0.2% Annual No Chance of Flooding No No No No No No No TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Beacon Court, 40B, 45 Beacon Low No Street incidence St. Agnes School, 172 -186 Woburn Low No Street incidence MF Charles Building, 600 -622 Main Low No Street incidence Perfecto's Cafe, 285 Main Street Low 24.22% in X: 0.2% Annual No incidence Chance of Flooding 258 -262 Main Street Low No incidence Artis Senior Living, 1100 Main Low No Street incidence Reading Public Library, 64 Low No Middlesex Avenue incidence Criterion Child Enrichment, 186 -190 Low No Summer Avenue incidence 68 z a z O TF V E� GS z A W ii W O z 3 0 F W F A ►~7 r 0 N 0 N O O N Q a O A un b �i w O N h O1 Cl) C CL � N W c Lp C C O1 E J W_ O CL O N d' a N > vN Q) O � � tp N N N 00 _ O 76 v a c 0 N K X 5 C a X_ C n N N O N O O O O N O N Q 00 0 °o 00 00 `r v W m M N m Ln r.. LL cr N O" v w O i- M O M S V Ln N CN Ln O N U' tD Z � Z O � x M m 00 Mme.. O^ ^ u N Q N O p � N W Z C W W J a C w = v N Z O~ O N v C V a W D ~ c a > v H v ui v m N O ++ O •� J ZU O O O N v W c 0 o a ° °m Q ,H O z 'H-' O1 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Critical Infrastructure in Hazard Areas Critical infrastructure includes facilities that are important for disaster response and evacuation (such as emergency operations centers, fire stations, water pump stations, etc.) and facilities where additional assistance might be needed during an emergency (such as nursing homes, elderly housing, day care centers, etc.). There are 137 facilities identified in Reading. These are listed in Table 22 and are shown on the maps in Appendix B. Explanation of Columns in Table 22 Column 1:/D#: The first column in Table 10 is an ID number which appears on the maps that are part of this plan. See Appendix B. Column 2: Name: The second column is the name of the site. If no name appears in this column, this information was not provided to MAPC by the community. Column 3: Type: The third column indicates what type of site it is. Column 4: Landslide Risk: The fourth column indicates the degree of landslide risk for that site. This information came from NESEC. The landslide information shows areas with either a low susceptibility or a moderate susceptibility to landslides based on mapping of geological formations. This mapping is highly general in nature. For more information on how landslide susceptibility was mapped, refer to hftp://pubs.usgs.gov/pp---/`pl 183/pp 1183. html . Column 5: FEMA Flood Zone: The fifth column addresses the risk of flooding. A "No" entry in this column means that the site is not within any of the mapped risk zones on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM maps). If there is an entry in this column, it indicates the type of flood zone. Column 6.13rush Fires- Areas determined by Local Hazard Mitigation Team to be at risk for brush fires 70 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2015 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA Within Within D Flood Zone Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding 246 -001 Reading Baptist Child Care Low No No No Day School incidence 246 -002 Christian Child Care Low No No No Cooperative incidence Preschool 246 -003 Humpty Dumpty Child Care Low No No No School incidence 246 -004 Sandra Lane Child Care Low No No No Nursery School incidence 246 -005 Sawyer Nursery Child Care Low No No No School incidence 246 -006 Reading Child Care Low No No No Extended -Day incidence Activities Program 246 -007 Little Treasure Child Care Low No No No School House incidence 246 -008 Burbank YMCA Child Care Low No No No Preschool incidence Program 246 -009 Perry, Linda Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -010 Van Horn, Susan Child Care Low No No No L. incidence 246 -011 Becker, Mary Child Care Low No No No Ellen incidence 246 -012 Blake, Gayle K. Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -013 Bouchard, Jeanne Child Care Low No Track No F. incidence Road at Line Road 246 -014 Gingras, Linda H. Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -015 Melanson, Child Care Low No No No Barbara incidence 246 -016 Reading Extended Child Care Low No No No Day at Killam incidence School 71 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA Within Within D Flood Zone Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding 246 -017 Reading Extended Child Care Low No No No 72 Day at Joshua incidence Eaton 246 -018 Kariger, Diane L. Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -019 Tinney, Suzann Child Care Low No No No M. incidence 246 -020 Callahan, Louise Child Care Low No No No M. incidence 246 -021 Tucker, Susan Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -022 Driscoll, Child Care Low No No No Catherine H. incidence 246 -023 Miller, loan Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -024 Zaccardo, Patricia Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -025 Thayer, Debra Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -026 Gard - Bruce, Anna Child Care Low No No No P. incidence 246 -027 Pustorino, Child Care Low No No No Concetta incidence 246 -028 Brown, Krystal Child Care Low No No No Gayle incidence 246 -029 Melanson, Child Care Low No No No Patricia incidence 246 -030 Evangelista, Child Care Low No No No Alison incidence 246 -031 Reynolds, Dawn Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -032 Lievenbruck, Child Care Low No No No Nadine incidence 246 -033 McWeeney, Child Care Low No No No Kathryn incidence 246 -034 Bartalini, Rockell Child Care Low No No No M. incidence 246 -035 Whelan, Child Care Low No No No Katherine M. incidence 246 -036 Giuliotti, Virginia Child Care Low No No No 72 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA Within Within D Flood Zone Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding incidence 246 -037 Doucette, Shirley Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -038 Austin School Low No No No Preparatory incidence School 246 -039 Alice M Barrows School Low No No No incidence 246 -040 Walter S Parker School Low No No No Middle incidence 246 -041 Joshua Eaton School Low No No No incidence 246 -042 J Warren Killam School Low No No No School incidence 246 -043 Birch Meadow School Low No No No Elementary incidence School 246 -044 Reading Police Emergenc Low No No No Department y incidence Operation s Center 246 -045 Reading Town Municipal Low No No No Hall Office incidence 246 -046 Reading Fire Fire Low No No No Department Station incidence 246 -047 Reading Fire Fire Low No No No Department Station incidence 246 -048 Reading Police Police Low No No No Department Station incidence 246 -049 Wood End School Low No No No Elementary incidence School 246 -050 DPW Garage Municipal Low No No No Office incidence 246 -051 Louganis Water Water Low No Water Town Treatment Plant Treatmen incidence Treatmen Forest t Facility t Plant 246 -052 Reading Power Low No No No Municipal Light Substatio incidence substation n 73 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA Within Within D Flood Zone Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding 246 -053 Arthur W School Low No No No Coolidge Middle incidence School 246 -054 Reading School Low No No No Memorial High incidence School 246 -055 Reading Senior Senior Low No No No Center Center incidence 246 -056 Camp Curtis Hazardou Low D: Possible But No No Guild, MA s incidence Undetermined Materials Hazard 246 -057 Hodson Oil Hazardou Low No No No s incidence Materials 246 -058 Mass Highway Hazardou Low No No No Dept. Facility s incidence Materials 246 -059 New England Tel Hazardou Low No No No & Tel Company s incidence Materials 246 -060 DPW Garage Hazardou Low No No No s incidence Materials 246 -061 Cumberland Hazardou Low No Track No Farms (Mobil gas s incidence Road at station) Materials Line Road 246 -062 Louganis Water Hazardou Low No Water Town Treatment Plant s incidence Treatmen Forest Materials t Plant 246 -063 Cumberland /Exxo Hazardou Low No No No n (gas station) s incidence Materials 246 -064 Main St Hazardou Low No No No Petroleum, LLC s incidence (Mobil) Materials 246 -065 Reading Hazardou Low No No No Petroleum (gas s incidence station) Materials 246 -066 Reading Car Care Hazardou Low No No No Center(gas s incidence 74 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA Within Within D Flood Zone Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding station) Materials 246 -067 Reading Square Hazardou Low No No No Shell (Gas s incidence Station) Materials 246 -068 Reading Service Hazardou Low No No No Inc. Mobil on the s incidence Run Materials 246 -069 Main Street Hazardou Low No No No Sunoco s incidence Materials 246 -070 East Coast Gas Hazardou Low No No No s incidence Materials 246 -071 Motiva Hazardou Low AE: 1 %Annual No No Enterprises hell s incidence Chance of FDeieted: Texaco gas station) Materials Flooding; with BFE 246 -072 West Street Hazardou Low No No No Mobil (Gas s incidence Station) Materials 246 -073 Amico, Tonya Child Care Low No No No Marie incidence 246 -074 Clock Tower Kids Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -075 Coffill, Patricia Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -076 Cunningham, Child Care Low No No No Dawn incidence 246 -077 Dillaway, Ann A. Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -078 Ellington, Holly Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -079 Gaunci, Anne Child Care Low No No No Marie incidence 246 -080 Malcolm, Loretta Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -081 Yang, Yi Fang Child Care Low No No No incidence 246 -082 Nichols, Kristina Child Care Low No Fairchild No incidence Drive 75 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA Within Within D Flood Zone Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding 246 -083 Cedar Glen Elderly Low No No No Housing incidence 246 -084 Peter Sanborn Elderly Low No No No Place Housing incidence 246 -085 Reading Housing Elderly Low No No No Authority Housing incidence 246 -086 Longwood Place Elderly Low No No No Housing incidence 246 -087 Sawtelle Family Nursing Low No No No Hospice House Home incidence 246 -088 Daniels House Nursing Low No No No Nursing Home Home incidence 246 -089 Wingate at Nursing Low X: 0.2% Annual No No Reading Home incidence Chance of Flooding 246 -090 EKS 2 Corporation Hazardou Low No No No Shell Station s incidence Materials 246 -091 Auburn Street Water Low No No No Water Tank Storage incidence Tank 246 -092 Bear Hill Stand Water Low No No No Pipe Stand incidence Pipe 246 -093 Batchelder Road Sewer Low No No No Sewer Pumping Pumping incidence Station Station 246 -094 Charles Street Sewer Low No No No Pumping Station Pumping incidence Station 246 -095 Haverhill Sewer Sewer Low No No No Pumping Station Pumping incidence Station 246 -096 Collins Avenue Sewer Low No No No Pumping Station Pumping incidence Station 246 -097 Joseph Way Sewer Low No No No Pumping Station Pumping incidence Station 246 -098 Strout Avenue Sewer Low No No Town 76 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA Within Within D Flood Zone Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding Sewer Pumping Pumping incidence Forest Station Station 246 -099 Grove Street Sewer Low No No No Sewer Pumping Pumping incidence Station Station 246 -100 Brewer Lane Sewer Low No No No Sewer pumping Pumping incidence Station Station 246 -101 Small Lane Sewer Sewer Low No No No Pumping Station Pumping incidence Station 246 -102 West Street Sewer Low No No No Sewer Pumping Pumping incidence Station Station 246 -103 Longwood Road Sewer Low No No No Sewer Pumping Pumping incidence Station Station 246 -104 Lothrop Road Water Low No No No Water Booster Booster incidence Station Station 246 -105 Sturgis Park Sewer Low No No No Sewer Pumping Pumping incidence Station Station 246 -106 Revay Well Public Low No No No Water incidence Supply 246 -107 Reading Well # 13 Public Low No No No Water incidence Supply 246 -108 Reading Well # 15 Public Low No No No Water incidence Supply 246 -109 Reading Well # 2 Public Low No No Town Water incidence Forest Supply 246 -110 Reading Well # 3 Public Low No No Town Water incidence Forest Supply 246 -111 Reading B -Line Public Low No No Town Well Water incidence Forest 77 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA D Flood Zone 78 line Within Within Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding No No No No Town Forest No No Supply 246 -112 Reading 66 -8 Public Low No Well Water incidence AE: Regulatory No Supply Floodway 246 -113 Reading Town Public Low No Forest Well Water incidence No No Supply No 246 -114 Reading Well # Public Low No 82 -20 Water incidence Flooding Line Road Supply X:0.2 %Annual 246 -115 Mill Street Bridge Bridge Low Flooding Line Road incidence 246 -116 Rte. 28 Bridge Bridge Low Road at incidence 246 -117 MWRA Water Public Low No Supply Pipe Water incidence No No Supply No 246 -118 193 over West Bridge Low Street Bridge incidence 246 -119 Apache Pass Municipal Low Mass Highway Office incidence DPW Facility 246 -120 195 over Rte. 28 Bridge Low Bridge incidence 246 -121 Track Road Bridge Bridge Low #1 incidence 246 -122 Track Road Bridge Bridge Low #2 incidence 246 -123 Track Road Bridge Bridge Low #3 incidence 246 -124 Mineral Street Bridge Low Bridge incidence 246 -125 129 Railroad Bridge Low Bridge incidence 246 -126 Reading Internal Medical Low Medicine Offices Facility incidence 246 -127 MWRA Summer Sewer Low 78 line Within Within Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding No No No No Town Forest No No Town Forest AE: Regulatory No No Floodway AE: Regulatory No No Floodway No No No No No No No No No No No No X:0.2 %Annual Track No Chance of Road at Flooding Line Road X:0.2 %Annual Track No Chance of Road at Flooding Line Road AE: Regulatory Track No Floodway Road at Line Road No No No No No No No No No No No No TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 22- Critical Facilities and Relationship to Hazard Areas PDM_I NAME TYPE Landslides Within FEMA Within Within D Flood Zone Locally Brush Identified Fire Area of Area Flooding Avenue Sewer Pumping incidence Pumping Station Station 246 -128 Hallmark Health Medical Low No No No Building Facility incidence 246 -129 Reading Municipal Low No No No Municipal Light Office incidence Department 246 -130 RCN Inc. Studio Broadcast Low No No No Facility incidence Child Low 246 -131 Bruce, Sheila Care incidence No No No Track Road at Child Low Line 246 -132 Goddard School Care incidence No Road No MBTA Train /Bus Train Low 246 -133 Station Station incidence No No No Montessori Low 246 -134 School School incidence No No No Nesaratnam, Child Low 246 -135 Rathikumary Care incidence No No No Child Low 246 -136 Sousa, Michelle Care incidence No No No Water Low 246 -137 Water Tower Tower incidence No No No Vulnerability Assessment The purpose of the vulnerability assessment is to estimate the extent of potential damages from natural hazards of varying types and intensities. A vulnerability assessment and estimation of damages was performed for hurricanes, earthquakes, and flooding. The methodology used for hurricanes and earthquakes was the HAZUS -MH software. The methodology for flooding was developed specifically to address the issue in many of the communities where flooding was not solely related to location within a floodplain. Introduction to HAZUS -MH HAZUS- MH (multiple- hazards) is a computer program developed by FEMA to estimate losses due to a variety of natural hazards. The following overview of HAZUS -MH is taken from the FEMA website. For more information on the HAZUS -MH software, go to http: / /www fema og_v/plan/prevent/hazus /index.shtm 79 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE "HAZUS -MH is a nationally applicable standardized methodology and software program that contains models for estimating potential losses from earthquakes, floods, and hurricane winds. HAZUS -MH was developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) under contract with the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS). Loss estimates produced by HAZUS -MH are based on current scientific and engineering knowledge of the effects of hurricane winds, floods and earthquakes. Estimating losses is essential to decision - making at all levels of government, providing a basis for developing and evaluating mitigation plans and policies as well as emergency preparedness, response and recovery planning. HAZUS -MH uses state -of- the - art geographic information system (GIS) software to map and display hazard data and the results of damage and economic loss estimates for buildings and infrastructure. It also allows users to estimate the impacts of hurricane winds, floods and earthquakes on populations." There are three modules included with the HAZUS -MH software: hurricane wind, flooding, and earthquakes. There are also three levels at which HAZUS -MH can be run. Level 1 uses national baseline data and is the quickest way to begin the risk assessment process. The analysis that follows was completed using Level 1 data. Level 1 relies upon default data on building types, utilities, transportation, etc. from national databases as well as census data. While the databases include a wealth of information on the Town of Reading, it does not capture all relevant information. In fact, the HAZUS training manual notes that the default data is "subject to a great deal of uncertainty." However, for the purposes of this plan, the analysis is useful. This plan is attempting to generally indicate the possible extent of damages due to certain types of natural disasters and to allow for a comparison between different types of disasters. Therefore, this analysis should be considered to be a starting point for understanding potential damages from the hazards. Estimated Damages from Hurricanes The HAZUS software was used to model potential damages to the community from a 100 year and 500 year hurricane event; storms that are 1% and .0.2% likely to happen in a given year, and roughly equivalent to a Category 2 and Category 4 hurricane. The damages caused by these hypothetical storms were modeled as if the storm track passed directly through the Town, bringing the strongest winds and greatest damage potential. Though there are no recorded instances of a hurricane equivalent to a 500 year storm passing through Massachusetts, this model was included in order to present a reasonable "worst case scenario" that would help planners and emergency personnel evaluate the 80 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE impacts of storms that might be more likely in the future, as we enter into a period of more intense and frequent storms. Tahip 23 - Estimated Damages from Hurricanes 100 Year 1 500 Year Building Characteristics Estimated total number of buildings 8,647 Estimated total building replacement value (2010$) $3,275 Millions of dollars Building Damages # of buildings sustaining minor damage 190 1,243 # of buildings sustaining moderate damage 13 185 # of buildings sustaining severe damage 0 8 # of buildings destroyed 0 4 Population Needs # of households displaced 0 14 # of people seeking public shelter 0 0 Debris Building debris generated (tons) 3,790 11,470 Tree debris generated (tons) 1,216 2,937 # of truckloads to clear building debris 29 155 Value of Damages (Thousands of dollars) Total property damage (buildings and content) $18,614.97 $66,975.28 Total losses due to business interruption $549.32 $3,333.24 Estimated Damages from Earthquakes The HAZUS earthquake module allows users to define an earthquake magnitude and model the potential damages caused by that earthquake as if its epicenter had been at the geographic center of the study area. For the purposes of this plan, two earthquakes were selected: magnitude 5.0 and a magnitude 7.0. Historically, major earthquakes are rare in New England, though a magnitude 5 event occurred in 1963. 81 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table -24 Estimated Damages from Earthquakes 82 Magnitude 5.0 Magnitude 7.0 Building Characteristics Estimated total number of buildings 8,647 Estimated total building replacement value (2010 $) Millions of dollars $3,275 Building Damages # of buildings sustaining slight damage 2,565 220 # of buildings sustaining moderate damage 1,321 1,648 # of buildings sustaining extensive damage 336 2,492 # of buildings completely damaged 82 4,273 Population Needs # of households displaced 351 5,446 # of people seeking public shelter 272 2,703 Debris Building debris generated ( million tons) 0.07 0.60 # of truckloads to clear debris (@ 25 tons /truck) 2,760 24,000 Value of Damages (Millions of dollars) Total property damage $187.37 $1,916.84 Total losses due to business interruption $12.05 $180.43 82 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE The HAZUS -MH flood risk module was used to estimate damages to the municipality at the 100 and 500 return periods. These return periods correspond to flooding events that have a 1% and a 0.2% likelihood of occurring in any given year. Table -25 Estimated Damages from Flooding 83 100 Year Flood 500 Year Flood Building Characteristics Estimated total number of buildings 8,647 Estimated total building replacement value (2010 $) $3,275 Millions of dollars Building Damages # of buildings sustaining slight damage ( 1 -10 %) 129 149 # of buildings sustaining moderate damage (11 -50 %) 18 37 # of buildings sustaining substantial damage ( >50 %) 0 0 Value of Damages Total property damage (millions of dollars) $8.21 $12.04 Total losses due to business interruption $0.12 $0.57 83 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE V. HAZARD MITIGATION GOALS The Reading Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team reviewed and discussed the goals from the 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan for the Town of Reading. The Team modified their 2010 goals to reflect a more inclusive and streamlined approach for this plan update. All of the goals are considered critical for the Town and they are not listed in order of importance. 1. Prevent and reduce the loss of life, injury, public health impacts and property damages resulting from all identified natural hazards. 2. Build and enhance local mitigation capabilities to ensure individual safety, reduce damage to public and private property and ensure continuity of emergency services. 3. Increase cooperation and coordination among private entities, Town officials and Boards, State agencies and Federal agencies. 4. Increase awareness of the benefits of hazard mitigation through outreach and education. VI. EXISTING MITIGATION MEASURES The existing protections in the Town of Reading are a combination of zoning, land use, and environmental regulations, infrastructure maintenance and drainage infrastructure improvement projects. Infrastructure maintenance generally addresses localized drainage clogging problems, while large scale capacity problems may require pipe replacement or invert elevation modifications. These more expensive projects are subject to the capital budget process and lack of funding is one of the biggest obstacles to completion of some of these. The Town's existing mitigation measures are listed by hazard type here and are summarized in Table 25 below. Flooding — Existing Town -wide mitigation Reading employs a number of practices to help minimize potential flooding and impacts from flooding, and to maintain existing drainage infrastructure. Existing Town -wide mitigation measures include the following: National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) — Reading participates in the NFIP with 36 policies in force as of the November 30, 2016. FEMA maintains a database on flood insurance policies and claims. This database can be found on the FEMA website at 84 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE https• / /www fema f4ov/noiicy- claim- statistics - flood - insurance /policy- claim - statistics- flood- insurance /policy- claim -13 The following information is provided for the Town of Reading: Flood insurance policies in force ( as of November 30, 2016) 36 Coverage amount of flood insurance policies $9,473,200 Premiums paid $47,554 Total losses (all losses submitted regardless of the status) 21 Closed losses (Losses that have been paid) 18 Open losses (Losses that have not been paid in full ) 0 CWOP losses ( Losses that have been closed without payment) 3 Total payments (Total amount paid on losses ) $63,750.43 The Town complies with the NFIP by enforcing floodplain regulations, maintaining up- to -date floodplain maps, and providing information to property owners and builders regarding floodplains and building requirements. Massachusetts State Building Code — The Massachusetts State Building Code contains many detailed regulations regarding wind loads, earthquake resistant design, flood - proofing, and snow loads. The Town has adopted the state building code. Street sweeping — The town does most of its street sweeping in -house but hires a contractor in the spring to supplement the towns' efforts. The town has two vacuum sweepers. Every street is swept once in the spring and other problem areas throughout the town are swept several times a year. Catch basin cleaning — The town has an older Vac -All and a catch basin cleaning truck. Every basin is cleaned every other year and all the work is done in- house. Stormwater utility — In 2007 the Town initiated a stormwater utility fee. All property owners receive a bill similar to their water and sewer bills. The fees go to a dedicated fund that the DPW may use for equipment and labor to maintain the drainage infrastructure. Roadway treatments — Because of the towns' reliance on groundwater, a salt and sand mix is used to treat the roads. Straight salt is used only when there are severe icing conditions. Otherwise, the town uses calcium chloride. The use of sand contributes to siltation in streams and within culverts. Plans and Studies: The Town has completed a study related to drainage issues including: 85 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Aberjona River and Saugus River Drainage Study Summary Report, AECOM, 2013. The objectives of this study were to: • Evaluate existing conditions along sections of Walkers Brook (tributary to Saugus River) and the Aberjona River; • Develop alternatives for improvement of the existing channels and conduits; • Identify recommended alternatives; • Provide an estimate of construction costs for recommended alternatives; and • Develop a proposed implementation schedule for the recommended alternatives. The Reading Zoning Bylaw Establishment and Purpose of Districts The zoning bylaw establishes one overlay district relevant to hazard mitigation: the Flood Plain District. Section 10.1 of the zoning bylaw states that the purposes of the Floodplain District are to: • Ensure public safety through reducing the threats to life and personal injury; • Eliminate new hazards to emergency response officials; • Prevent the occurrence of public emergencies resulting from water quality, contamination and pollution due to flooding; • Avoid the loss of utility services which if damaged by flooding would disrupt or shut down the utility network and impact regions of the community beyond the site of flooding; • Eliminate costs associated with the response and cleanup of flooding conditions; • Reduce damage to public and private property resulting from flooding waters. The Floodplain District is established as an overlay district. The Floodplain District includes all special flood hazard areas within the Town of Reading designated as Zone A and AE on the Middlesex County Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for the administration of the National Flood Insurance Program. Certain uses are allowed as of right and others are allowed under a Special Permit from the Zoning Board of Appeals. FEMA updated its Flood Hazard mapping of Reading in 2010 and these maps were adopted at Town Meeting. Aquifer Protection District- Section 10.3 establishes an Aquifer Protection District. The APD covers the now unused well fields in northwest Reading along the Ipswich River and allows a limited percentage of impervious area to increase groundwater recharge and reduce runoff. Site Plan Requirements - Section 4.6.5.1 requires that all site plans must conform to the subdivision regulation and DEP storm water regulations. Site plans must minimize the area of wetland vegetation displaced and the extent of stormwater flow increase from the site, and soil erosion, and threat of water pollution. 86 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Stormwater Management Bylaw and Regulations- Reading is in the final stages of drafting a stormwater bylaw which it expects to adopt in 2017. The Town has established a stormwater enterprise fund and charges a stormwater fee based on the amount of impervious area found on the lot. Single and two - family homes pay a flat annual fee. The fees are used to clean and maintain the Town's stormwater drainage system. Subdivision Regulations- Section 7.4.4 of the Town's subdivision regulations require that all projects must meet the state's Department of Environmental Protection 1996 Stormwater Management Policy and any subsequent amendments to it. Section 6.2.3, Criteria for Decision, states that all Definitive Subdivision Plans must have available storm drainage capacity to accept stormwater runoff without adversely affecting other developed or undeveloped properties. Public Education on Stormwater -The Town DPW maintains a web page on stormwater management frequently asked questions at: http://www.readinizma.gov/collectoL/Da2es/storm-water-faqs. Open Space and Recreation Plan — The Town's 2013 Open Space and Recreation Plan identifies the Town's open space areas, as well as properties that could be acquired for open space, which serve a number of different purposes including mitigation of flooding and storm damage. Goal Four of the plan is to "Protect open space for wildlife habitat and watershed protection ", with its objectives including to "Conserve and manage Stormwater ", "Educate the public on habitat and watershed issues ", Acquire additional open space for wildlife habitat, wetlands protection and aquifer protection" and to "Monitor environmental threats imposed by development with and outside of Reading." Flooding — Existing Site ite Specific Mitigation 2010 Plan Flooding Areas of Concern mitigation measures and existing status Sunnyside and Fairview Avenues- Flooding in the Sunnyside Avenue and Fairview Avenue area is due to undersized pipes. The recommended alternative involves increasing the size of the undersized pipes to provide a 25 -year level of service for this residential area. A gate structure would be integrated at the downstream end that would mitigate adverse downstream impacts due to the upsizing of the pipes. This site has not been mitigated since the 2010 plan and remains a high priority site. New Crossing Road at DPW Garage- A brook located in the upper Saugus River water backs up and floods New Crossing Road, the access road to the Reading DPW Department, during 0.02 percent chance storms. Public comment suggested that repairs to the sanitary sewer in the area may have impacted the area's drainage patterns. The stream culvert is undersized and needs replacing. This is a medium priority for the 2017 plan update. 87 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Track Road at Line Road- the Track Road area is part of the Walker's Creek watershed area. There are three bridges crossing the creek, all of which impede drainage, but the Harvest Road Bridge presents the biggest drainage problems and the town has targeted it for rebuilding, although the exact date and cost are undetermined. There are also beaver dam issues blocking drainage. The town plans to stabilize the creek's banks and remove the beavers for now, as well rebuild the bridge in the future. This project remains a high priority for 2016. South Main Street- This is a MA DOT issue as Main Street serves as State Route 28 here. The state is considering reconstructing this section of Route 28. The roadway floods after 1.5 inches or rain. The storm drain line serving the area is undersized and needs to be replaced. - Flooding in the area is due to undersized pipes. The flood flow travels overland through the Enterprise Car Rental facility into the Percy Avenue / Main Street wetlands. The recommended alternative consists of adding a new outfall in the vicinity of Minot Street / Main Street and increasing the size of the pipes above the Minot Street / Main Street connection to provide a 25 -year level of service for this area. A gate structure would be integrated at the downstream end that would mitigate adverse downstream impacts due to the upsizing of the pipes. This mitigation action remains incomplete and remains a high priority for the town in the 2017 plan update. Brook and Ash Streets -- This area is part of Walkers Brook beginning at Ash Street and extending northeast to the Town's corporate boundary with Wakefield at the Salem Street / Route 129 rotary, and represents the most downstream portion of Walkers Brook within the Town. Downstream of this area, Walkers Brook feeds into the Saugus River in Wakefield. The drainage ditch for Brook and Ash Streets is over - silted and there are numerous problems with beaver dams within the upper watershed of Walker's Creek that prevents drainage. This site has not been mitigated since the 2010 plan and remains a high priority for the town in the 2017 plan update. Morgan Park - Another site associated with the upper Saugus River watershed area, the open channel that had been flooding the park area following rain events has been cleaned by the Town in 2008 when the new Parker turf field was installed. The site is no longer a priority and will not be carried forward for 2017. 150 West Street and surrounding streets- The West Street drainage system was rebuilt in the last five years and this area is no longer flooding. This site will not be carried forward for 2106 update. Lowell Street at Intervale Terrace- Located within the upper Aberjona watershed, this site has not been mitigated since 2010 but the Town considers this a high priority site for the 2017 plan. The stone -lined channel between Intervale Terrace and Lowell Street that backs up during heavy rain storms is slated for repair under Reading's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). 88 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Willow Street /Austin Prep- This site has not been mitigated since the 2010 plan. This site floods due to the same drainage infrastructure problem listed in at Site #8, Lowell Street at Intervale. This is a high priority site for the 2017 plan update and should be remediated when the channel between Intervale and Lowell Street is improved under the Town's CIP actions for 2018. Main Street (Church of the Nazarenes) and neighboring streets- This site was mitigated within the last two years and no longer floods. It is no longer a priority for 2017and will not be carried forward. Milepost and Haystack Roads- This site was mitigated when a detention basin was constructed on the lot as part of the Calaruso's Restaurant development in 2011. The site is no longer a priority and will not be carried forward into the 2017 plan. Oak Ridge /Cherry Lane (was listed in 2010 plan as Pine Ridge /Cherry Hill)- Located behind Joshua Eaton, this site was partially mitigated when drainage work by Reading on Pennsylvania Avenue relieved runoff to the area. There are still flooding concerns where ditch discharge goes into the open field behind Joshua Eaton and the site is low priority for the 2017 plan update. Haverhill Street at the Town line- This site is a drainage culvert located near where Bear Meadow Brook flows under Haverhill Street close to the boundary with North Reading. Localized flooding of 6 -12 inches occurs on Haverhill Street occurs following very large rain events. The culvert needs to be cleaned on a regular basis. This site remains a medium priority for the 2017 plan update. Dams There are no permitted dams in Reading. Existing Wind Hazard Mitigation Measures Tree- trimming program — The Town has a Park and Forestry Division with a four person crew, a brush grinder and a bucket truck. The crew does preventative maintenance and clean -up after storms on all Town owned property. The Reading Municipal Light Department also maintains power line areas. Vegetation management plan- The Town conducts an annual survey of all its street trees to check for dead or dying trees or limbs that need to be pruned back. It responds to Reading residents calls on trees that need maintenance and removes hazardous trees as needed. The Parks and Forestry Division also recycles all trees, chips and brush as part of the Town's recycling and composting programs. 89 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Massachusetts State Building Code — The Town enforces the Massachusetts State Building Code whose provisions are generally adequate to protect against most wind damage. The code's provisions are the most cost - effective mitigation measure against tornados given the extremely low probability of occurrence. If a tornado were to occur the potential for severe damages would be extremely high. Existing Winter Hazard Mitigation Measures Roadway treatments — Because the Town now relies primarily on the MWRA for its drinking water supply it uses little sand and instead uses calcium chloride to treat roadway areas because the use of groundwater for drinking water is now quite limited. Catch basin Cleaning: The Reading DPW clears snow from clogged catch basins to prevent flooding. Massachusetts State Building Code: The Town enforces the Massachusetts State Building Code, which contains regulations regarding snow loads on building roofs. The Town has adopted the state building code. Existing Brush Fire Hazard Mitigation Measures Permits required for outdoor burning - Open burning of brush is allowed by permit only from January 15th to May 151 each year provided the following conditions are met: 1. Burning shall be limited to brush, branches, cane, driftwood, and forest debris from other than commercial land clearing operations. No open burning of grass, hay leaves, stumps, tires, or rubbish allowed. 2. Permits are valid for two (2) days and may be purchased for $15.00 in advance at the Reading Fire Department. 3. Permit holders who desire to burn must. each day for permission to burn. No fire shall be started before 10:00 a.m. and all fires shall be fully extinguished by 4:00 p.m. of the same day. Subdivision review - The Fire Department is involved in reviewing subdivision plans from conceptual design through occupancy to ensure that there is adequate access for fire trucks and an adequate water supply. Existing Geologic Hazard Mitigation Measures Massachusetts State Building Code —The State Building Code, updated in 2010, contains a section on designing for earthquake loads (780 CMR 1612.0). Section 1612.1 states that the purpose of these provisions is "to minimize the hazard to life to occupants of all buildings and non - building structures, to increase the expected performance of higher occupancy structures as compared to ordinary structures, and to improve the capability of essential facilities to function during and after an earthquake ". This section goes on to state that due to the complexity of seismic design, the criteria presented are the minimum 90 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE considered to be "prudent and economically justified" for the protection of life safety. The code also states that absolute safety and prevention of damage, even in an earthquake event with a reasonable probability of occurrence, cannot be achieved economically for most buildings. Section 1612.2.5 sets up seismic hazard exposure groups and assigns all buildings to one of these groups according to Table 1612.2.5. Group II includes buildings which have a substantial public hazard due to occupancy or use and Group III are those buildings having essential facilities which are required for post - earthquake recovery, including fire, rescue and police stations, emergency rooms, power - generating facilities, and communications facilities. Existing Multihazard Mitigation Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) allocates funding over 5 year periods for stormwater improvements and flood prevention. Some of the projects in the CIP for drainage infrastructure and flood prevention originated from the comprehensive water and drainage study the Town completed in 2013. Stormwater CIP projects include: Bond Street Drainage Improvements Grove Street Drainage Sturgis Park Bank Stabilization/Headwall Main Street Drainage Minot Street Drainage Saugus River Improvements Aberjona River Improvements Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) FYI $ 80,000 FYI $ 150,000 FY18 $ 200,000 FY18 $ 900,000 FY18 $ 450,000 FY24 $ 4,000,000 FY24 $ 2,200,000 Every community in Massachusetts is required to have a Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. These plans address mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery from a variety of natural and man -made emergencies. These plans contain important information regarding flooding, hurricanes, tornadoes, dam failures, earthquakes, and 91 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE winter storms. Therefore, the CEMP is a mitigation measure that is relevant to all of the hazards discussed in this plan. The Town of Reading's current CEMP was updated in 2016. Emergency Management Team (EMT) Reading is a member of the 16- community Mystic Region Emergency Planning Committee. The Mystic REPC meets 10 times during the year and works to conduct and coordinate emergency exercises and procedures throughout the area encompassed by its members. Natural Hazards Public Education- Reading's Public Health Services maintains a link to a Public Health Emergency Prep Guide at: http: / /www.readingma.gov /sites /readingma /files /file /file /emerg_planning guide .pd Table 26- Summary Existing Hazard Mitigation Measures Hazard Area Mitigation Measure Update /comments Flooding Town -wide Participation in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP ) Effective / 36 policies in force Massachusetts Building Code Effective Floodplain District Updated /Effective Stormwater Management Bylaw and Regulations Adopt in 2017 Street sweeping Effective Catch basin cleaning Effective Zoning: Site Plan Review, Planned Unit Development Stormwater Management, Planned Residential Development, Gateway Smart Growth District Effective Stormwater Enterprise Fund Effective Town cleans & inspects catch basins every other year. Effective Public Education on Stormwater Effective 2013 Open Space and Recreation Plan Effective Existing Site Specific Flooding Mitigation Effective Wind Town -wide Town tree - pruning management follows MGL Chapter 87 Effective Recycling program for brush, trees and chips Effective Vegetation management plan for rights of way Effective State Building Code addresses wind standards Effective for new construction 92 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 26- Summary Existing Hazard Mitigation Measures Hazard Area Mitigation Measure Update /comments Winter- Town -wide Regular snow removal operations and roadway Effective Related treatments Catch basin cleaning to maintain drainage Effective State Building Code addresses snow load Effective for new standards construction Fire Town -wide Outdoor burning permits Effective Fire Town -wide Subdivision review Effective Geologic Town -wide State Building Code addresses earthquake Effective for new standards construction / Town has many older buildings Multi Town -wide Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Effective /Up to hazard date Multi Town -wide Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan Effective/Up to hazard (CEMP) date Multi Town -wide Emergency Management Team (EMT) Effective hazard Multi- Town -wide Public Health Emergency Prep Guide Somewhat hazard effective; links should be updated to include reference to natural hazards planning and response 2006 Master Plan Add Climate Adaptation to next plan update Local Capacity for Implementation Under the Massachusetts system of "Home Rule," the Town of Reading is authorized to adopt and from time to time amend a number of local bylaws and regulations that support the town's capabilities to mitigate natural hazards. These include Zoning Bylaws, Subdivision and Site Plan Review Regulations, Wetlands Bylaws, Health Regulations, Public Works regulations, and local enforcement of the State Building Code. Local Bylaws may be amended each year at the annual Town Meeting to improve the town's 93 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE capabilities, and changes to most regulations simply require a public hearing and a vote of the authorized board or commission, such as the Community Planning and Development Board or Conservation Commission. The Town of Reading has recognized several existing mitigation measures that require implementation or improvements, and has the capacity within its local boards and departments to address these. The Reading Department of Public Works and Engineering Department will address the needs for catch basin cleaning, repairs and upgrades to drainage infrastructure. The Town's Community Planning and Development Commission will address the updates to the Master Plan and implementation of the Zoning Ordinance, Floodplain District, and Subdivision Rules and Regulations. The Conservation Commission will oversee implementation of the Wetlands Bylaw and the Open Space Plan. The Department of Public Works together with the Community Planning and Development Commission and Conservation Commission will coordinate implementation and enforcement of the Stormwater Bylaw. VII. MITIGATION MEASURES FROM THE 2010 PLAN Implementation Status of the Previous Plan At a meeting of the Reading Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee, Town staff reviewed the mitigation measures identified in the 2010 Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan and determined whether each measure had been implemented or deferred. Of those measures that had been deferred, the committee evaluated whether the measure should be deleted or carried forward into this Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017Update. The decision on whether to delete or retain a particular measure was based on the committee's assessment of the continued relevance or effectiveness of the measure and whether the deferral of action on the measure was due to the inability of the Town to take action on the measure. Table 27 summarizes the status of mitigation measures, and mitigation projects completed are described in more detail below. 94 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 27- Mitigation Measures from the 2010 Plan Mitigation Lead Current Status Include in Measure Priority Implementation 2017 Plan/Priority 1. Sunnyside and High DPW Not completed: Fairview Aves. The recommended alternative Yes- High involves increasing the size of the undersized pipes to provide a 25- year level of service for this residential area. 2. New Crossing High DPW Not completed: at the DPW A brook located Garage in the upper Yes- High Saugus River watershed backs up and floods Causeway Road, the access road to the Reading DPW Department, The stream culvert is undersized and needs replacing 3. Track Road at High Not completed: Line Road The town plans to rebuild the Yes- High bridge, remove beavers and stabilize stream banks. 4. South Main High MA DOT- Route Not completed: Street 28 The storm drain Yes -High line serving the area is undersized and needs to be replaced. 95 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Mitigation Lead Current Status Include in Measure Priority Implementation 2017 Plan/Priority 5. Brook and High DPW Not Completed: Yes -High Ash Streets The drainage ditch for Brook and Ash Street is over - silted and there are numerous problems with beaver dams within the upper watershed of Walker's Creek that prevents drainage. 6. Morgan Park High DPW Completed: The open channel No that had been flooding the park area following rain events has been cleaned by the Town when the new Parker School turf field was installed. 7. 150 West High DPW Completed: The Street and West Street No surrounding drainage system streets was rebuilt in the last five years and this area is no longer flooding 8. Lowell Street High DPW Not completed: at Intervale Stone -lined Terrace channel between Yes -High Intervale and Lowell Street that backs up during flooding events 96 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Mitigation Lead Current Status Include in Measure Priority Implementation 2017 Plan[Priority 9. Willow Medium DPW Not completed: Street/Austin This site floods Yes -High Prep due to the same drainage infrastructure problem Lowell Street at Intervale 10. Main Street Medium DPW Completed: This (Church of the site was No Nazarene) and mitigated within neighboring the last two years streets. and no longer floods. I I.Milepost and Medium DPW Completed: This Haystack Roads site was No mitigated when a detention basin was constructed on the lot as part of the Calaruso's Restaurant development in 2011 12. Oak Medium DPW Not completed: Ridge /Cherry this site was Yes - Medium Lane (was listed partially in 2010 plan as mitigated when Pine drainage work Ridge /Cherry by Reading on Hill Pennsylvania Avenue relieved runoff to the area. There are still flooding concerns where ditch discharge goes into the open field behind Joshua Eaton 97 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Mitigation Lead Current Status Include in Measure Priority Implementation 2017 Plan/Priority 13 Haverhill Low Conservation Not completed: Street at the town Commission Localized Yes - Medium line flooding of 6 -12 inches occurs on Haverhill Street occurs following very large rain events. 14. Brush Fires — High Fire Completed: The No Additional Town has firefighting acquired the equipment equipment and (lightweight hose this is not an and portable issue for the small pumps) 2017 plan update 15. Review and Medium Planning/Conser Partially No revise local vation/Engineeri completed: The bylaws and ng Conservation regulations on Commission storm water and updated its floodplains regulations in 2012. The Town is reviewing and planning to adopt a stormwater management bylaw in 2017 16. Land Medium Conservation No parcels were Yes Acquisition / acquired since Protection of 2010 and there Open Space are no specific target parcels: Ongoing long term 17. Hunt Medium DPW Completed: No Memorial Park Channel causing flooding was dredged 98 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Mitigation Measure Priority Lead Implementation Current Status Include in 2017 Plan/Priority 18. Hopkins Medium DPW Completed: No Street retention pond and drainage work done 19. Water Low DPW Completed: plant No treatment plant decommissioned with switch to MWRA; minor flooding on access road to it Reading has made considerable progress on implementing mitigation measures identified in the 2010 Hazard Mitigation Plan, including upgrading drainage at Morgan Park, the West Street neighborhood, Main Street near Church of the Nazarene, and the area near Milepost and Haystack Roads. It also added new forest firefighting equipment and adopted a new Open Space and Recreation plan in 2013. The Town completed a comprehensive drainage study for portions of the Aberjona and Saugus River watersheds located within Reading in 2013 and has incorporated drainage system upgrades into a comprehensive and ongoing capital improvement planning and implementation process. The Town also adopted new conservation regulations, and is working to complete its stormwater management bylaw. Overall, nine mitigation measures from the 2010 plan will be carried forward in the plan update, mostly drainage projects that were identified by the 2013 drainage study. Moving forward into the next five year plan implementation period there will be many more opportunities to incorporate hazard mitigation into the Town's decision making processes. The challenges the Town faces in implementing these measures are primarily due to limited funding and available staff time. This plan should help the Town prioritize the best use of its limited resources for enhanced mitigation of natural hazards. 99 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE VIII. HAZARD MITIGATION STRATEGY What is Hazard Mitigation? Hazard mitigation means to permanently reduce or alleviate the losses of life, injuries and property resulting from natural hazards through long -term strategies. These long -term strategies include planning, policy changes, education programs, infrastructure projects and other activities. FEMA currently has three mitigation grant programs: the Hazards Mitigation Grant Program (HGMP), the Pre - Disaster Mitigation program (PDM), and the Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) program. The three links below provide additional information on these programs. http://www.fema.;zov/aovemment/grant/hmgl)/index.shtm http://www.fema.gov/govemment/grant/odm/index.shtm http://www.fema.gov/aovemment/)zrant/fma/index.shtm Hazard Mitigation Measures can generally be sorted into the following groups: • Prevention: Government administrative or regulatory actions or processes that influence the way land and buildings are developed and built. These actions also include public activities to reduce hazard losses. Examples include planning and zoning, building codes, capital improvement programs, open space preservation, and stormwater management regulations. • Property Protection: Actions that involve the modification of existing buildings or infrastructure to protect them from a hazard or removal from the hazard area. Examples include acquisition, elevation, relocation, structural retrofits, flood proofing, storm shutters, and shatter resistant glass. • Public Education & Awareness: Actions to inform and educate citizens, elected officials, and property owners about the potential risks from hazards and potential ways to mitigate them. Such actions include outreach projects, real estate disclosure, hazard information centers, and school -age and adult education programs. • Natural Resource Protection: Actions that, in addition to minimizing hazard losses also preserve or restore the functions of natural systems. These actions include sediment and erosion control, stream corridor restoration, watershed management, forest and vegetation management, and wetland restoration and preservation. • Structural Projects: Actions that involve the construction of structures to reduce the impact of a hazard. Such structures include storm water controls (e.g., culverts), floodwalls, seawalls, retaining walls, and safe rooms. • Emergency Services Protection: Actions that will protect emergency services before, during, and immediately after an occurrence. Examples of these actions include protection of warning system capability, protection of critical facilities, and protection of emergency response infrastructure. (Source: FEMA Local Multi- Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance) 100 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Regional and Inter - Community Considerations Some hazard mitigation issues are strictly local. The problem originates primarily within the municipality and can be solved at the municipal level. Other issues are inter - community issues that involve cooperation between two or more municipalities. There is a third level of mitigation which is regional; involving a state, regional or federal agency or an issue that involves three or more municipalities. Regional Partners In the densely developed communities of the study area, mitigating natural hazards, particularly flooding, is more than a local issue. The drainage systems that serve these communities are a complex system of storm drains, roadway drainage structures, pump stations and other facilities owned and operated by a wide array of agencies including but not limited to the Town of Reading, the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA), Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MA DOT) and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA). The planning, construction, operations and maintenance of these structures are integral to the flood hazard mitigation efforts of communities. These agencies must be considered the communities regional partners in hazard mitigation. These agencies also operate under the same constraints as communities do including budgetary and staffing constraints and numerous competing priorities. In the sections that follow, the plan includes recommendations for activities to be undertaken by these other agencies. Implementation of these recommendations will require that all parties work together to develop solutions. Inter - Community Considerations Saugus River Watershed — As in the 2010 plan, the Town of Reading recognizes that planned improvements within Reading may impact communities downstream and therefore, the mitigation of flood damage to roadways and properties within the Saugus River watershed is a true urban challenge making resolution of flooding in this watershed the town's highest priority. Main Street, MA SR 28- This section of Main Street is a state highway maintained by MA DOT. The drain line serving the section is undersized and needs to be replaced. There is an undersized granite culvert that runs under State Route 28 that impacts the Fairchild Drive neighborhood during heavy precipitation events that need to be cleaned by MA DOT. Finally, during heavy snow events, MA DOT plows sometimes leave large snow drifts in front of Reading residents' homes and driveways on Route 28, blocking access. One public comment noted that flooding on Track Road impacts houses in neighboring 101 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Wakefield and it related to a MA DOT culvert that crosses State Route 129. Process for Setting Priorities for Mitigation Measures The last step in developing Reading's mitigation strategy is to assign a level of priority to each mitigation measure so as to guide the focus of the Town's limited resources towards those actions with the greatest potential benefit. At this stage in the process, the Local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team had limited access to detailed analyses of the cost and benefits of any given mitigation measure, so prioritization is based on the local team members' understanding of existing and potential hazard impacts and an approximate sense of the costs associated with pursuing any given mitigation measure. Priority setting was based on local knowledge of the hazard areas, including impacts of hazard events, the extent of the area impacted, and the relation of a given mitigation measure to the Town's goals. In addition, the local Hazard Mitigation Planning Team also took into consideration factors such as the number of homes and businesses affected, whether or not road closures occurred and what impact closures had on delivery of emergency services and the local economy, anticipated project costs, whether any environmental constraints existed, and whether the Town would be able to justify the costs relative to the anticipated benefits. Table 28 below demonstrates the prioritization of the Town's potential hazard mitigation measures. For each mitigation measure, the geographic extent of the potential benefiting area is identified as is an estimate of the overall benefit and cost of the measures. The benefits, costs, and overall priority were evaluated in terms of: Estimated Benefits High Action will result in a significant reduction of hazard risk to people and /or property from a hazard event Medium Action will likely result in a moderate reduction of hazard risk to people and/or property from a hazard event Low Action will result in a low reduction of hazard risk to people and /or property from a hazard event Estimated Costs High Estimated costs greater than $100,000 Medium Estimated costs between $10,000 to $100,000 Low Estimated costs less than $10,000 and/or staff time Priority 102 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE High Action very likely to have political and public support and necessary maintenance can occur following the project, and the costs seem reasonable considering likely benefits from the measure Medium Action may have political and public support and necessary maintenance has potential to occur following the project Low Not clear if action has political and public support and not certain that necessary maintenance can occur following the project 103 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 28- Mitigation Measure Prioritization Mitigation Action Geographic Estimated Estimated Priority Coverage Benefit Cost Flood Hazard Mitigation Sunnyside and Fairview Sunnyside and Aves.- Upgrade undersized Fairview High High High drainage pipes and install Aves. gate structure neighborhood New Crossing@ DPW New Crossing Medium High Medium Garage -. The stream culvert Road area is undersized and needs replacing. Track Road at Line Road- Walker's High High High The town plans to stabilize Creek the creek's banks and watershed remove the beavers for now, neighborhood as well rebuild the bridge in area the future South Main Street -. The Main High High High storm drain line serving the Street/Route area is undersized and needs 28 to be replaced. - Flooding in the area is due to undersized pipes Brook and Ash Streets- The Brook and High High High drainage ditch for Brook and Ash St. Ash Street is over - silted and Neighborhood there are numerous problems with beaver dams within the upper watershed of Walker's Creek that prevents drainage. Stream will be cleaned and beavers relocated. Lowell Street at Intervale Lowell Street High High High Terrace- Old, small stone and Intervale culvert that backs up during Terrace flood events will be replaced neighborhood with larger culvert. Willow Street/Austin Prep- Willow High High High This site floods due to the St. /Austin same culvert problem listed Prep area for Lowell Street at Intervale 104 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 28- Mitigation Measure Prioritization Mitigation Action Geographic Estimated Estimated Priority Covera a Benefit Cost Oak Ridge /Cherry Lane- Oak Ridge Medium Low Low Drainage culvert that needs and Cherry cleaning on a bi- annual Lane area basis. Haverhill Street at the Town Haverhill Medium High Medium Line -- This site is a drainage Street area culvert located near where Bear Meadow Brook flows under Haverhill Street close to the boundary with North Reading. Localized flooding of 6 -12 inches occurs on Haverhill Street occurs following very large rain events. The culvert needs to be upgraded. Grove Street- needs drainage Grove Street Medium High Medium system upgrade as the neighborhood culvert draining area is too small. Fairchild Drive- undersized Fairchild Low Low Low granite culvert running Drive under Route 28 needs to be localized cleaned. This is a MA DOT impact responsibility Duck Road /Main Street- Localized Low High Medium area floods during heavy flooding rain events here due to undersized drainage culverts Wind Mitigation Measures Update the town -owned tree Town -wide High Low Medium inventory and risk assessment data base Brushfire Mitigation Install new cellular tower to carry fire /police and Town -wide High High High emergency radio signals. Winter Storm Hazard Mitigation Evaluate public buildings for Town -Wide Medium Low Low ability to withstand snow 105 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 28- Mitigation Measure Prioritization Mitigation Action Geographic Estimated Estimated Priority Coverage Benefit Cost loads; retrofit if needed to greatest degree feasible. Work with MA DOT to Portions of eliminate drifting and Route 28 Medium Low Low blocking in of houses on localized Route 28 by state plows impact Earthquake Mitigation Determine which buildings may be most vulnerable to earthquake damage and conduct a structural Town -Wide Medium Low Low assessment if needed. Assess the vulnerability of roadways and utilities in high liquefaction Localized Low Low Low susceptibility areas. Dam Mitigation There are no town- NA NA NA NA owned dams in Reading. Extreme Temperature Mitigation Site Design to increase tree plantings near buildings, increase the percentage of trees used Town -Wide Medium Medium Medium in parking areas, and along public ways. Promote Green Building and Cool Roof designs Town -Wide Medium Low Medium Assess placement of cooling centers at Town -wide Medium High schools, senior center and emergency shelters. Drought Mitigation Promote drought tolerant Town -Wide I Medium Low Medium 106 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 28- Mitigation Measure Prioritization Mitigation Action Geographic Estimated Estimated Priority Covera a Benefit Cost landscaping and site design measures Climate Resilience /Ada tation Incorporate climate resilience /adaptation Town -Wide High Medium High components into the next Master Plan update. Potential Mitigation Measures The potential mitigation measures are provided in this section and summarized in Table 28. Flooding and Drainage Infrastructure Reading completed a comprehensive drainage study for the Aberjona River and the Saugus River in 2013. The objectives of the study were to: • Evaluate existing conditions along sections of Walker's Brook (tributary to Saugus River) and the Aberjona River • Develop alternatives for improvement of the existing channels and conduits; • Identify recommended alternatives • Provide an estimate of construction costs for recommended alternatives; and • Develop a proposed implementation schedule for the recommended alternatives. Many of the flooding and drainage infrastructure projects listed in this plan update originated from the 2013 study and the Town has since adopted a regular five year Capital Improvements Program which is being used to address infrastructure needs including those for drainage, fire and winter storms. Potential flooding and drainage mitigation measures are detailed in Table 29. Wind Hazards The Town would like to update its current public tree inventory and risk assessment database. While the Tree Warden conducts regular "windshield surveys" of the Town's trees near public right of ways and responds to public calls to remove dead or diseased trees, updating the database would make the program more effective and help prevent future wind damage. 107 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Fire Hazards Install new cellular tower to carry fire /police and emergency radio signals. Replacing the current cell tower mounted on the one of the Town's water tanks will allow faster response times and improved communications for all fire coverage, including brush fires, police and emergency provider response. One public comment also suggested that alternatives to replacing the cell tower include a reliance on older radio technology should be considered. Winter Hazards Evaluate public buildings for ability to withstand snow loads; retrofit if needed to greatest degree feasible. Earthquakes Earthquake building assessment Determine which buildings may be most vulnerable to earthquake damage and conduct a structural assessment if needed. Earthquake infrastructure assessment Assess the vulnerability of roadways and utilities in high liquefaction susceptibility areas. Extreme Temperatures Site Design guidelines to increase tree plantings near buildings, increase the percentage of trees used in parking areas, and along public ways. Promote guidelines for Green Building and Cool Roof designs. Assess placement of cooling centers at schools, senior center and emergency shelters. Drought Promote guidelines for drought tolerant landscaping and site design measures. Climate Change Incorporate climate resilience /adaptation components into the Town's next Master Plan update. The Master Plan was last updated in 2006. 108 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Introduction to Potential Mitigation Measures Table (Table 29) Description of the Mitigation Measure — The description of each mitigation measure is brief and cost information is given only if cost data were already available from the community. The cost data represent a point in time and would need to be adjusted for inflation and for any changes or refinements in the design of a particular mitigation measure. Priority — As described above and summarized in Table 29, the designation of high, medium, or low priority was done considering potential benefits and estimated project costs, as well as other factors in the STAPLEE analysis. Implementation Responsibility — The designation of implementation responsibility was done based on a general knowledge of what each municipal department is responsible for It is likely that most mitigation measures will require that several departments work together and assigning staff is the sole responsibility of the governing body of each community. Time Frame — The time frame was based on a combination of the priority for that measure, the complexity of the measure and whether or not the measure is conceptual, in design, or already designed and awaiting funding. Because the time frame for this plan is five years, the timing for all mitigation measures has been kept within this framework. The identification of a likely time frame is not meant to constrain a community from taking advantage of funding opportunities as they arise. Potential Funding Sources — This column attempts to identify the most likely sources of funding for a specific measure. The information on potential funding sources in this table is preliminary and varies depending on a number of factors. These factors include whether or not a mitigation measure has been studied, evaluated or designed, or if it is still in the conceptual stages. MEMA and DCR assisted MAPC in reviewing the potential eligibility for hazard mitigation funding. Each grant program and agency has specific eligibility requirements that would need to be taken into consideration. In most instances, the measure will require a number of different funding sources. Identification of a potential funding source in this table does not guarantee that a project will be eligible for, or selected for funding. Upon adoption of this plan, the local team responsible for its implementation should begin to explore the funding sources in more detail. Additional information on funding sources — The best way to determine eligibility for a particular funding source is to review the project with a staff person at the funding agency. The following websites provide an overview of programs and funding sources. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) — The website for the North Atlantic district office is http://www.nae.usace.army.mil/. The ACOE provides assistance in a number of types of projects including shoreline /stream bank protection, flood damage reduction, flood plain management services and planning services. 109 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Massachusetts Emergencyanagement Agency (MEMA) — The grants page http: / /www.mass.gov /dem /programs /mitigate /grants.htm has a useful table that compares eligible projects for the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program and the Flood Mitigation Assistance Program. Abbreviations Used in Table 29 FEMA Mitigation Grants includes: FMA = Flood Mitigation Assistance Program. HMGP = Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. PDM = Pre - Disaster Mitigation Program ACOE = Army Corps of Engineers. DHS/EOPS = Department of Homeland Security /Emergency Operations DEP (SRF) = Department of Environmental Protection (State Revolving Fund) USDA = United States Department of Agriculture MA DOT = Massachusetts Department of Transportation DCR = MA Department of Conservation and Recreation CIP= Capital Improvement Program HMPT= Hazard Mitigation Planning Team CIP= Capital Improvement Plan 110 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 29 — Potential Mitigation Measures Mitigation Lead Time Estimated Potential Funding Measure Priority Implementation Frame Cost Sources FLOODING Sunnyside and Fairview High Public Works Long High -part Reading Capital Aves.- Upgrade undersized Term of larger Improvement drainage pipes and install FY Saugus Plan/Town Bond gate structure 2024 River (CIP) remediatio n package $2.5-4.0 million New Crossing@ DPW Medium Public Works Long High Reading Capital Garage -. The stream culvert Term $300,000 Improvement is undersized and needs FY Plan/Town Bond replacing. 2021 CIP Track Road at Line Road- High Public Works Short High MA Small Bridge The town plans to stabilize Term $500,000 Replacement the creek's banks and 2017- Program remove the beavers for now, 2019 as well rebuild the bridge in the future South Main Street/State High Public Works Short High MA DOT/ Reading Route 28 -. The storm drain Term $900,000 CIP/'Town Bond line serving the area is FY undersized and needs to be 2018 replaced. - Flooding in the area is due to undersized pipes Brook and Ash Streets- The High Public Works Long High -part Reading Capital drainage ditch for Brook and Term of larger Improvement Ash Street is over - silted and FY Saugus Plan/Town Bond there are numerous problems 2024 River (CIP) with beaver dams within the remediatio upper watershed of Walker's n package Creek that prevents drainage. $2.5-4.0 Stream will be cleaned and million beavers relocated. 111 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 29 — Potential Mitigation Measures Mitigation Lead Time Estimated Potential Funding Measure Priority Implementation Frame Cost Sources Lowell Street at Intervale- High Public Works Long High- part Reading CIP/Town Old, small stone culvert that Term of larger Bond backs up during flood events FY Aberjona will be replaced with larger 2024 River culvert. remediatio n package $2.2 million Willow Street /Austin Prep- High Public Works Short High- part Reading CIP/Town This site floods due to the Term of larger Bond same culvert problem listed 2018 Aberjona for Lowell Street at Intervale River remediatio n package $2.2 million Oak Ridge /Cherry Lane- Low Public Works Long Medium Reading DPW Drainage culvert that needs Term $5,000- Budget cleaning on a bi- annual 2017- $10,000 basis. 20124 Bi- annually Haverhill Street at the Town Medium Public Works Medium High Reading CIP/Town Line -- This site is a drainage 2019- $150,000 Bond culvert located near where 2020 Bear Meadow Brook flows under Haverhill Street close to the boundary with North Reading. Localized flooding of 6 -12 inches occurs on Haverhill Street occurs following very large rain events. The culvert needs to be upgraded. Grove Street- needs drainage Medium Public Works Short High Reading CIP/Town system upgrade as the Term $300,000 Bond culvert draining area is too FY small. 2017 and 2018 112 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 29 — Potential Mitigation Measures Mitigation Lead Time Estimated Potential Funding Measure Priority Implementation Frame Cost Sources Fairchild Drive- undersized Low Public Works Long Medium MA DOT granite culvert running under Term $5,000- Route 28 needs to be 2017- $10,000 cleaned. This is a MA DOT 2024 Bi- annually responsibility Duck Road/Main Street- Medium Public Works Medium High Reading CIP/Town area floods during heavy rain 2019- $150,000 Bond events here due to 2020 undersized drainage culverts WIND RELATED HAZARDS Medium DPW Long Low Reading DPW Update the town -owned tree Term Staff time Budget inventory and risk 2017 -2022 assessment data BRUSHFIRES High Fire Short High CIP Reading Install new cellular tower to Term $500,000 CIP/Town Bond carry fire /police and 2017 -2018 emergency radio signals. WINTER STORMS Evaluate public buildings for Low Building/HMPT Long Low Staff time / Town ability to withstand snow Term Estimated general operating loads; retrofit if needed to 2017 -2024 costs less budget greatest degree feasible. than $10,000 and/or staff time Work with MA DOT to Low Public Works Long Low CIP Staff time / eliminate drifting and Term Estimated Town general blocking in of houses on 2017 -2024 costs less operating budget Route 28 by state plows. than $10,000 and/or staff time EARTHQUAKES 113 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 29 — Potential Mitigation Measures Mitigation Lead Time Estimated Potential Funding Measure Priority Implementation Frame Cost Sources Determine which buildings Low Building/HWT Long Low Staff time /Town may be most vulnerable to Term Estimated general operating earthquake damage and TBD costs less budget conduct a structural than assessment if needed. $10,000 and/or staff time Assess the vulnerability of Low Public Long Low Staff time/ Town roadways and utilities in Works /HMPT Term Estimated general operating high liquefaction 2017 -2024 costs less budget susceptibility areas. than $10,000 and/or staff time EXTREME TEMPERATURES Site Design to increase tree Medium Planning / Long Low Staff time / Town plantings near buildings, Conservation Term Estimated general operating increase the percentage of 2017- costs less budget trees used in parking areas, 2024 than and along public ways. $10,000 and/or staff time Promote Green Building and High Building/Planning Long Lo Staff time / Town Cool Roof designs. Term Estimated general operating 2017- costs less budget 2024 than $10,000 and/or staff time w Assess placement of cooling High Fire /HMPT Short Low Staff time / Town centers at schools, senior Term Estimated general operating center and emergency 2017- costs less budget shelters. 2018 than $10,000 and/or staff time DROUGHT 114 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Table 29 — Potential Mitigation Measures Mitigation Lead Time Estimated Potential Funding Measure Priority Implementation Frame Cost Sources Promote drought tolerant Medium Planning / Long Low Staff time/ Town landscaping and site Conservation Term Estimated general operating design measures. 2017- costs less budget 2022 than $10,000 and/or staff time CLIMATE RESILIENCE / ADAPTATION Incorporate climate High HMPT/Planning/ Long Medium Town general resilience /adaptation Conservation/ Term Estimated operating hinds / components into the next Public Works/ 2017- costs Staff time Comprehensive Plan. Public Health 2022 between $10,000 to $100,000 115 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE IX. PLAN ADOPTION AND MAINTENANCE Plan Adoption The Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 Update was adopted by the Board of Selectmen on [ADD DATE]. See Appendix D for documentation. The plan was approved by FEMA on [ADD DATE] for a five -year period that will expire on [ADD DATE]. — To be completed following MEMA and FEMA review. Plan Maintenance Although several of the mitigation measures from the Town's previous Hazard Mitigation Plan have been implemented, since that plan was adopted there has not been an ongoing local process to guide implementation of the plan. Such a process is needed over the next five years for the implementation of this plan update, and will be structured as described below. MAPC worked with the Reading Hazard Mitigation Planning Team to prepare this plan. After approval of the plan by FEMA, this group will meet on a regular basis, at least annually, to function as the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team, with the Director of Public Works designated as the coordinator. Additional members could be added to the local implementation team from businesses, non - profits and institutions. The Town will encourage public participation during the next 5 -year planning cycle. As updates and a review of the plan are conducted by the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team, these will be placed on the Town's web site, and any meetings of the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team will be publicly noticed in accordance with Town and state open meeting laws. Implementation and Evaluation Schedule Mid -Term Survey on Progress— The coordinator of the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team will prepare and distribute a survey in year three of the plan. The survey will be distributed to all of the local implementation group members and other interested local stakeholders. The survey will poll the members on any changes or revisions to the plan that may be needed, progress and accomplishments for implementation, and any new hazards or problem areas that have been identified. This information will be used to prepare a report or addendum to the local hazard mitigation plan in order to evaluate its effectiveness in meeting the plan's goals and identify areas that need to be updated in the next plan. The Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team, coordinated by the Director of Public Works, will have primary responsibility for tracking progress and updating the plan. Begin to prepare for the next Plan Update -- Given the lead time needed to secure funding and conduct the planning process, the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team will 116 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE begin to prepare for an update of the plan in year three. The team will use the information from the Mid -Term progress review to identify the needs and priorities for the plan update and seek funding for the plan update process. Potential sources of funding may include FEMA Pre - Disaster Mitigation grants and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. Both grant programs can pay for 75% of a planning project, with a 25% local cost share required. Prepare and Adopt an Updated Local Hazard Mitigation Plan — FEMA's approval of this plan is valid for five years, by which time an updated plan must be approved by FEMA in order to maintain the Town's approved plan status and its eligibility for FEMA mitigation grants. Once the resources have been secured to update the plan, the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team may decide to undertake the update themselves, contract with the Metropolitan Area Planning Council to update the plan or to hire another consultant. However the Hazard Mitigation Implementation Team decides to update the plan, the group will need to review the current FEMA hazard mitigation plan guidelines for any changes. The Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan Update will be forwarded to MEMA and DCR for review and to FEMA for approval. Integration of the Plans with Other Planning Initiatives Upon approval of the Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 Update by FEMA, the Local Hazard Mitigation Team coordinator will provide all interested parties and implementing departments with a copy of the plan and will initiate a discussion regarding how the plan can be integrated into that department's ongoing work. The plan will be reviewed and discussed with the following departments during the first six (6) months following plan adoption. During updates of any city department's plans or policies, the relevant portions of this mitigation strategy will be incorporated. • Fire Department • Emergency Management • Police Department • Public Works Department • Engineering • Planning and Community Development • Conservation Commission • Parks and Recreation • Public Health • Building Other groups that will be coordinated with include large institutions, Chambers of Commerce, land conservation organizations and watershed groups. The plans will also be posted on a community's website with the caveat that local team coordinator will review the plan for sensitive information that would be inappropriate for public posting. The posting of the plan on a web site will include a mechanism for citizen feedback such as an e -mail address to send comments. 117 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE The Hazard Mitigation Plan will be integrated into other Town plans and policies as they are updated and renewed, including the Reading Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan, Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, and Capital Investment Program. 118 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE [This page intentionally left blank] 119 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE X. LIST OF REFERENCES Reading Capital Improvement Program, FY 2016 — 2024 Reading Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, 2016 Reading Master Plan, 2006 http: // www. readingma• tzov /n lanning- division/vages /the - master -plan Town of Reading: Aberjona and Saugus River Drainage Study Report, AECOM, 2013 Open Space and Recreation Plan for the Town of Reading, Reading Conservation Commission, 2013 http://www.readingma.,gov/open-space-pla Reading Town By -Laws http: / /www. readingma. gov /town- clerk/pages/bylaws- and - regulations Reading Zoning By -Law http: / /www.readingma. gov/ town- clerk/paages/bylaws- and - regulations Reading Subdivision Regulations http: / /www. readingma. gov/ town- clerk/pages/bylaws- and - regulations Environment America Research and Policy Center, When It Rains It Pours — Global Warming and the Increase in Extreme Precipitation, July 2012 FEMA, Flood Insurance Rate Maps for Middlesex County, MA, 2012 FEMA, Local Mitigation Plan Review Guide; October 1, 2011. MA Emergency Management Agency, State Hazard Mitigation Plan, 2013 http/ /www mass og v/eopss /docs /mema/resources /Flans /state - hazard - mitigation- plan/section -0l- introduction - cover - and - executive- summary.Rdf MA Geographic Information System, McConnell Land Use Statistics, 2005 MA Office of Dam Safety, Inventory of Massachusetts Dams Metropolitan Area Planning Council, Geographic Information Systems Lab New England Seismic Network, Weston Observatory, http: / /aki.bc.edu /index.htm Northeast States Emergency Consortium, website http: / /www.nesec.oriz/ 120 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE NOAA, National Climatic Data Center, website U. S. Census, 2010, and American Community Survey, 2013 USGS, National Water Information Center, website [This page intentionally left blank] 121 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE APPENDIX A HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING TEAM MEETING AGENDAS eading Hazard Mitigation Plan 201 Update Meeting #1 Thursday, March 24, 2016, 10 a.m. Reading Town Hall 10:00 Welcome and Introductions 10:05 Overview of FEMA Hazard Mitigation Planning Presentation by Marybeth Groff from MEMA Questions/Discussion 10:45 Review of Project Scope and Milestones 122 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE See handout materials Sam Cleaves, MAPC 10:55 Questions /Next Steps 11:00 Meeting Adjourn Meeting Agenda Local Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Town of Reading, Berger Room May 23, 2016,11:00 AM - 12:30 PM Local Team Meeting #2 (Information Gathering) a) Hazard Mitigation Planning Map Series and Digitized Ortho Photo Map b) Review 2010 mitigation actions c) Identify Critical Facilities d) Identify local hazards: i) Flood Hazard Areas ii) Fire Hazard Areas (brushfires /wildfires) iii) Dams iv) Ice jams V) Thunderstorms Vi) Drought Vii) Extreme Temps Viii) Tornadoes ix) High winds X) Snow and Blizzards xi) Ice storms Xii) Earthquakes Xiii) Landslides xiv)Future Potential Development Areas e) Review Plan Goals and Objectives- see over 123 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE f) Discuss Public Involvement and Outreach i) Identify local stakeholders ii) Schedule first public meeting g) Identify draft priority projects and funding for update Project Overview MAPC is working with Reading to update its plan to mitigate potential damages of natural hazards such as floods, winter storms, hurricanes, earthquakes and wild fires, before such hazards occur. The federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires that all municipalities adopt a Pre - Disaster Mitigation Plan for natural hazards in order to remain eligible for FEMA Disaster Mitigation Grants. This FEMA planning program is separate from ongoing homeland security initiatives, and is focused solely on addressing natural hazards, although some of the data collected for this plan may be useful for other aspects of emergency planning as well. Recommended goals to align with State 2013 Plan and FEMA Guidelines: 1. Prevent and reduce the loss of life, injury, public health impacts and property damages resulting from all identified natural hazards. 2. Build and enhance local mitigation capabilities to ensure individual safety, reduce damage to public and private property and ensure continuity of emergency services. 3. Increase cooperation and coordination among private entities, Town officials and Boards, State agencies and Federal agencies. 4. Increase awareness of the benefits of hazard mitigation through outreach and education. 124 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Meeting Agenda Local Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan Town of Reading, Berger Room October 31, 2016,11:00 AM —12:30 PM Local Team Meeting #3 (Recommendations /Draft Plan) (1) Review and finalize Critical Facilities (2) Review and finalize local hazard identification (3) Review vulnerability analysis (4) Review Existing Mitigation Measures (5) Discuss Potential Mitigation Measures 125 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE APPENDIX B HAZARD MAPPING The MAPC GIS (Geographic Information Systems) Lab produced a series of maps for each community. Some of the data came from the Northeast States Emergency Consortium ( NESEC). More information on NESEC can be found at htti): / /www.serve.com/NESEC /. Due to the various sources for the data and varying levels of accuracy, the identification of an area as being in one of the hazard categories must be considered as a general classification that should always be supplemented with more local knowledge. The map series consists of eight maps as described below. The maps in this appendix are necessarily reduced scale versions for general reference. Full sized higher resolution PDF's of the maps can be downloaded from: https:HmMe-org.sharefile.com/d- s67316042bae47d48 Map 1. Population Density Map 2. Potential Development Map 3. Flood Zones Map 4. Earthquakes and Landslides Map 5. Hurricanes and Tornadoes Map 6. Average Snowfall Map 7. Composite Natural Hazards Map 8. Hazard Areas Map]: Population Density — This map uses the US Census block data for 2010 and shows population density as the number of people per acre in seven categories with 60 or more people per acre representing the highest density areas. Map 2: Development — This map shows potential future developments, and critical infrastructure sites. MAPC consulted with Town staff to determine areas that were likely to be developed or redeveloped in the future. The map also depicts current land use. Map 3: Flood Zones — The map of flood zones used the FEMA NFIP Flood Zones as depicted on the FIRMs (Federal Insurance Rate Maps) for Middlesex County as its source. This map is not intended for use in determining whether or not a specific property is located within a FEMA NFIP flood zone. The currently adopted FIRMS for Reading are kept by the Town. For more information, refer to the FEMA Map Service 126 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Center website hq: / /www.mse.fema.gov. The definitions of the flood zones are described in detail on this site as well. The flood zone map for each community also shows critical infrastructure and repetitive loss areas. Map 4: Earthquakes and Landslides — This information came from NESEC. For most communities, there was no data for earthquakes because only the epicenters of an earthquake are mapped. The landslide information shows areas with either a low susceptibility or a moderate susceptibility to landslides based on mapping of geological formations. This mapping is highly general in nature. For more information on how landslide susceptibility was mapped, refer to http://pubs.usjzs.gov/pp/vl 183/1)pl 183.html. Map S: Hurricanes and Tornadoes — This map shows a number of different items. The map includes the storm tracks for both hurricanes and tropical storms, if any occurred in this community. This information must be viewed in context. A storm track only shows where the eye of the storm passed through. In most cases, the effects of the wind and rain from these storms were felt in other communities even if the track was not within that community. This map also shows the location of tornadoes with a classification as to the level of damages. What appears on the map varies by community since not all communities experience the same wind - related events. These maps also show the 100 year wind speed. Map 6: Average Snowfall - - This map shows the average snowfall. It also shows storm tracks for nor'easters, if any storms tracked through the community. Map 7. Composite Natural Hazards - This map shows four categories of composite natural hazards for areas of existing development. The hazards included in this map are 100 year wind speeds of 110 mph or higher, low and moderate landslide risk, FEMA Q3 flood zones (100 year and 500 year) and hurricane surge inundation areas. Areas with only one hazard were considered to be low hazard areas. Moderate areas have two of the hazards present. High hazard areas have three hazards present and severe hazard areas have four hazards present. Map 8: Hazard Areas —For each community, locally identified hazard areas are overlaid on an aerial photograph dated April, 2010. The critical infrastructure sites are also shown. The source of the aerial photograph is Mass GIS. 127 rr O d 9 0 CIO N 1, 9 < c- (92 all g Z E0 w 00 < e 0 d 9 0 CIO N z a a z 0 F d C7 h �, A� a Q N x Z �, A d w O z 3 0 H rn N AH O * fit 1xif ill 72 1.2 W S3 R68 qq qgRg N'i !ll 964 O Jill 1, i '4 j I R ;1 rr O o T O sit z a a, z 0 H H �w A N p" N z r� A Q w O z 3 0 N WQ O 11 AIR of 1� i gill I 111; t- 'A I j 14, V�,A .......... . . .. .... . < g auj 11 AIR of 1� i gill I 111; t- 'A I j 14, V�,A .......... . . .. .... . z a a z 0 N H �w �F A N Pa" N z r� A Q w O z 3 0 H 5 S TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE APPENDIX C DOCUMENTATION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Amanda Linehan, Communications Manager, Metropolitan Area Planning Council 617- 933 -0705, alinehankmapc.org CALENDAR LISTING / MEDIA ADVISORY READING'S NATURAL HAZARDS PLAN UPDATE IS FOCUS OF JUNE 6 PUBLIC MEETING Meeting to present an overview of the update of Reading's Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan and solicit public comments Who: Reading residents, business owners, representatives of non - profit organizations and institutions, and others who are interested in preventing and reducing damage from natural hazards. What: The Reading Emergency Management Team (EMT) will hold a public meeting to present an overview of the pending update of the Town of Reading's Natural Hazards Mitigation Plan. The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) is assisting the Town on the plan update, and a representative of MAPC will present an overview of the plan update. The Town of Reading adopted its first Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2010, which was approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The plan identifies natural hazards affecting Reading such as floods, hurricanes, winter storms, and earthquakes, as well as actions that the Town can take to reduce the impacts of these hazards. FEMA requires that plans be updated regularly, so MAPC is assisting the Town prepare an updated plan. When: June 6, 2016, 7:30 PM Where: Reading Town Hall, 16 Lowell St, Selectmen's Meeting Room 136 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE MAPC is the regional planning agency for 101 communities in the metropolitan Boston area, promoting smart growth and regional collaboration. More information about MAPC is available at www.mapc.org. Amanda Linehan, Communications Manager, Metropolitan Area Planning Council 617 - 933 -0705, alinehan(a_mapc.org CALENDAR LISTING / MEDIA ADVISORY READING'S DRAFT HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN TO BE PRESENTED AT JANUARY 23 PUBLIC MEETING Meeting to present the 2017 update of Reading's Hazard Mitigation Plan and solicit public comments Who: Reading residents, business owners, representatives of non - profit organizations and institutions, and others who are interested in preventing and reducing damage from natural hazards. What: The Reading Emergency Management Team (EMT) will hold a public meeting to present an overview of the draft Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan Update 2017. The Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) is assisting the Town on the plan update, and a representative of MAPC will present an overview of the plan update. The Town of Reading adopted its first Hazard Mitigation Plan in 2010, which was approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The plan identifies natural hazards affecting Reading such as floods, hurricanes, winter storms, and earthquakes, as well as actions that the Town can take to reduce the impacts of these hazards. FEMA requires that plans be updated regularly, so MAPC is assisting the Town prepare a 2017 updated plan. When: Monday, January 23, 2017, 7:30 PM Where: Reading Town Hall, 16 Lowell St, Selectmen's Meeting Room 137 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE MAPC is the regional planning agency for 101 communities in the metropolitan Boston area, promoting smart growth and regional collaboration. More information about MAPC is available at www.mapc.org. READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN — NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES OF READING, MA Notification / Email Lynnfield- Kathy L. Randele- krandele @town.lynnfield.ma.us North Readine Danielle McKnijzht— dmcknight@northreadingma.eov Stoneham- Erin Wortman- ewortman @stoneham - ma.gov Wakefield Paul Reavis — preavis @wakefield - ma.gov Wilminjzton - Valerie Gingrich- vgingrich @wilmingtonma.gov Woburn Tina Cassidy- tcassidy @cityofwobum.com Additional Organizations: Reading/North Reading Chamber of Commerce Reading Conservation Commission Reading Department Directors — DPW, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, FIRE, POLICE, TOWN CLERK, RECREATION AND BOARD OF HEALTH. Reading Daily Times Chronicle 138 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Only conies around once every 5 years! Scheduled for Monday, June 6, 2016 7:30 PM Reading Town Hall — Selectmen's Meeting Room Come, share your thoughts! Sam Cleaves, Senior Regional Planner at MAPC, will present an overview of the process and seek stakeholder input on the following: r Local hazards Vulnerable areas r Critical facilities & infrastructure Priority mitigation measures 139 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Scmart C;rowr£r & Regional Cotlabori�8iorr, MAPC METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING COUNCIL What is the Hazard Mitigation Plan Update? Hazard Mitigation planning is a proactive effort to Identify actions that can be taken to reduce the dangers to life and property from natural hazard events. The Town of Wilmington adopted a hazard mitigation plan in 2008 and FEMA regulations require that the plan be updated every five years. Why Is this plan Important? The Federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 requires that a city or town have an approved hazard mitigation plan in order to qualify for federal fundingfrom the following grant programs: • Pre - Disaster Mitigation Competitive (PDM -C) • Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) • Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) Additionally, the plan provides a municipality the opportunity to review potential vulnerabilities to natural hazards and develop measures that can reduce or mitigate these vulnerabilities and be Included in the local planning process. What goes into a hazard mitigation plan? A hazard mitigation plan assesses the municipality's risks and vulnerabilities to natural hazard events such as flooding, hurricanes, winter storms, and earthquakes. MAPC uses statewide data and information directly from the community to make this assessment. The plan includes a set of goals related to the overall goal of hazard mitigation planning, an assessment of existing mitigation measures, and a set of new mitigation measures that will serve to advance the plan goals. The plan update will also look at Implementation progress that has been made on mitigation measures from the previous plan. What is the Local Hazard Mitigation Committee? The Local Hazard Mitigation Committee includes and coordinates with representatives from a number of different Town departments including Public Works, Engineering, Health, Community Development, Emergency Management and Fire. This committee provides the local on- the - ground knowledge necessary to write this plan including Information on local hazard areas and current mitigation measures. This committee also identifies and prioritizes mitigation measures to be included in the plan. How can the public become Involved in the Hazard Mitigation planning process? Public participation is very Important to the hazard mitigation planning process. FEMA requires a minimum of two public meetings. As a first draft of the plan is developed. the Town will provide an online link where the plan can be viewed and comments may be provided by the public. 60 Temple Place, Boston, MA 02111 • 617. 451.2770 • Fax 617- 482 -7185 • www.mapc.org Jay Ash, Preidern laichelle Clccolo Vice- Preilden( Marilyn Contrea5.5ecretory Glaw S. Shepard. >,er�uaer Malc Dralsen, fxenrtioe Director 140 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE Town of Reading •" k Meeting Posting with Agenda „{ I,i.lyrlJ ` m WN CL.NK ',"0 N G, MrAG5, Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Community Planning and Development Commission 2016 NAY 2S P W 51 1 Date: 2016.06 -06 Time: 7:30 PM Building; Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: General Business Meeting Called By: Julie Mercier on Behalf of Jeff Hansen Notices and agendas are to be posted 48 hours in advance of the meetings excluding Saturdays, Sundays and Legal Holidays, Please keep in mind the Town Clerk's hours of operation and make necessary arrangements to be sure your posting is made in an adequate amount of time, A listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at the meeting must be on the agenda. All Meeting Postings must be submitted In typed format; handwritten notices will not be accepted. Topics of Discussion: • 7:30PM: Call to Order • 7:30PM: Hazard Mitigation Plan Update Overview of Process Stakeholder Input • 6:30PM: Potential Zoning Bylaw Amendments for 2016 Site Plan Review Minor Edits • 9:30PM: Planning Updates and Other Topics - Approval of CPDC Minutes of May 9, 2016 - Discussion of meeting with BOS on June 21, 2016 Yhls Agrndo hxs bcrn prrpprnd In advance and rrprese -cis a usury of toplrs thax the 6- 1, ,I pe1,, will he d*cussrd at tho moenng. 110 -1e1 MC a0110a Coos not nocessarlly IrvelutlC all Tatters 1Vh:c4 tray be token lip at lhiy n'Mling, pago 1 1 141 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE F Town of Reading Meeting Posting with Agenda RECEIVED 09 ; r+wfi CLERM Board - Committee - Commission - council: Community Planning and Development Commission ion JAN 18 A 8' 101 Date: 2017 -01 -23 Time: 7:30 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: General Business Meeting Called By: lulie Mercier on Behalf of Nick Safina Notices and agendas are to be posted 48 hours In advance of the meetings excluding Saturdays, Sundays and Legal Holidays. Please keep in mind the Town Clerk's hours of operation and make necessary arrangements to be sure your posting is made In an adequate amount of time. A listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at the meeting must be on the agenda. All Meeting Postings must be submitted in typed format; handwritten notices will not be accepted, Topics of Discussion: • 7:30PM: Cali to Order • 7:30PM: Public Meeting, Hazard Mitigation Plan Update • 8:00PM: Continued Public Hearing, Definitive Subdivision - "Randall Road Extension" Mark G. Hall, 0 Randall Road & 25 Springvale Road • 9:OOPM: Public Hearing, Definitive Subdivision Mass Equity Investments LLC, 1260 & 1264 Main Street • 10: OOPM: Planning Updates and Other Topics - Approval of CPDC Minutes of lanuary 9, 2017 this Ag-dh l— barn prepared h, adva,ce and reorosn as a Ilstlnp er topics that the ch- reasonah`y an11d.stes w:'1 he dscsiss.,d at t- eh—1,,. 11 -ever the agenda decd nci necoa'sarliy inoude all iatt— tYhlch may bn taken yp at this meeting. Page I f 142 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE [This page intentionally left blank] 143 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE APPENDIX D DOCUMENTATION OF PLAN ADOPTION 144 TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2017 UPDATE [Please print on Town letterhead] CERTIFICATE OF ADOPTION BOARD OF SELECTMEN TOWN OF READING, MASSACHUSETTS U_ A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE TOWN OF READING HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN 2015 UPDATE WHEREAS, the Town of Reading established a Committee to prepare the Town of Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 Update; and WHEREAS, the Town of Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 Update contains several potential future projects to mitigate potential impacts from natural hazards in the Town of Reading, and WHEREAS, duly- noticed public meetings were held by the EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TEAM on June 6, 2016, and February 23, 2017 WHEREAS, the Town of Reading authorizes responsible departments and /or agencies to execute their responsibilities demonstrated in the plan, and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Town of Reading BOARD OF SELECTMEN adopts the Town of Reading Hazard Mitigation Plan 2017 Update, in accordance with M.G.L. 40 §4 or the charter and bylaws of the Town of Reading. ADOPTED AND SIGNED this Date. Name(s) Title(s) Signature(s) ATTEST 145 FINCOM FY18 Meeting Schedule (All meetings are shown in bold and begin at 7:30pm held in Town Hall, unless noted) 2017 July 26 Regular Meeting September 20 Financial Forum I — Financial Overview (location TBA) September 26 Deadline for BOS close Warrant for November Town Meeting October 11 Financial Forum II — FY19 Budget Guidance (location TBA) October 11 FINCOM vote on any November Town Meeting Articles November 8 Regular Meeting November 13 Subsequent Town Meeting begins December 12 Town FY19 Budget meeting with Selectmen December 13 Town FY19 Budget meeting with Selectmen December 18 School Public Hearing FY19 Budget December 19 Town FY19 Budget meeting with Selectmen December 20 Town FY19 Budget meeting with Selectmen 2018 January 8 School Committee FY19 Budget meeting January 11 School Committee FY19 Budget meeting January 16 School Committee FY19 Budget meeting January 18 School Committee FY19 Budget meeting January 24 Financial Forum III: Establish FY19 Baseline Budget (location TBA) February 7 FY19 Budget Meeting (Schools) February 8 FY19 Budget Meeting (Town) February 14 FY19 Budget Meeting (Other) February 15 FINCOM vote Detailed FY19 Baseline Budget February 27 BOS deadline to close Warrant for April Town Meeting March 7 Regular Meeting — vote Town Meeting Articles April 3 Local elections April 23 Annual Town Meeting begins June 27 Regular Year -end Meeting Z$ GF RFq�'y Office of the Town Manager .-1 b 16 Lowell Street 639' INC aRp�RP Reading, MA 01867 To: Board of Selectmen From: Robert W. LeLacheur, Jr. CFA Date: July 5, 2017 RE: Tax Title property sale 781 - 942 -9043 townmanager@ci.reading.ma.us www.readingma.gov /town - manager At a recent meeting, Wakefield Town Administrator Steve Maio, our regional shared Assessor Victor Santaniello and I discussed two adjoining parcels that each town holds in Tax Title. The total combined lot is very small: Wakefield owns 2,725 ft2 (86 %) and Reading owns 436 ft2(14 %). Attached please find a parcel map that shows the Reading portion represents the frontage on Brook Street, while the Wakefield portion has a small abandoned house to the rear portion. We visited the site, and then agreed to jointly sell the two parcels. As you can see from the pictures that Steve took that day, the property has fallen into disrepair. Although the Board of Selectmen does not play a formal role in selling tax title property in Reading, I wanted to make sure to advise you and the public of our intentions. Steve has suggested splitting the proceeds by the square footage allocation, which I agree with. Victor has said that each parcel will continue to be valued and taxed individually. Right now the assessed value of the Reading parcel is $100. Steve has recently had a similar discussion with his Board of Selectmen. I will keep the Board apprised as we go through a formal procurement process, and once complete will suggest that any net proceeds to proposed to Town Meeting as a deposit into the Sale of Real Estate revolving fund. AM* I own Ot Kewing, MA 0 ti �< m m /:r /v'7 .y �o die my 5, 1U1 / Property Information Property 008.0- 0000 - 0122.0 ID Location 0 BROOK ST Owner ROBERTS STEPHEN T NANCY ROBERTS (9 MAP FOR REFERENCE ONLY NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT Town of Reading, MA makes no claims and no warranties, expressed or implied, concerning the validity or accuracy of the GIS data presented on this map. Parcels updated 1/1/2016 Properties updated 1/1/2016 0 Q "� Ia 1" = 66 ft I., of Use 50- � as . W r M N M CL � N U 0 ¢ d Cl- Q d W d d D- J - �.. CD p� CV O CD p W O 0 V) O (Cb oO ~ M d ul) in n (D Z CL O vl O Vi 0 V J N < 0 ®_ m O cC ca L o N N U o Q 0 0 c� r w Tui cli y - N O N N N N U " U j o Z z w J a ° °� ��w o z of J O W W W W W O W ¢ Z Z r._. 0 Cl } } } } 0 a D 0 0 o O o o O o 0 0 O O O O O Q O O O OIO 0 0 0 0 O _ Z 6 > N > O co Z d 0- Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 O N m r- O y_. > Z ~ O O U w m -o OO o l o °o o F, -O4 J @ m U U Q v cc m w N> O O O J Z O (n (J) O O O 010 0 0 0 0 d N J Q O O rn > O O 010 0 0 0 0 E a } < N V) m N Q m O N N ) � N O O O J O N O U N � N M C) � Z � O Q _ v O O Z 06 co- W ¢ n O S` V c� W p CL O a- Z Z r U O c O ~ � E z I LU LUH � °rn W� 00 CO m O' O U a m F N W Lli Q N V) d d O 2 ti F° M a W K W W w W W L, Z C (A C.i 1 O 111 N M S N < c U c C7 o w �- @ VS O N N NN N N N C2 Co 00 j 00 M M •- •- � 'o V U d O U O :� } � cnJ V} W w Of cr , m N .� W W N U < 10- t-°' p0... .4--J N N N N N N NJ N N N V) (f� Z U O c O ~ � E z LU LUH W 00 CO m O O F N W Lli O O d d O 2 ti O M z K ¢ ¢ 00 or Z C 1 o N M N p c c c O U �- N O w 00 03 00 z uj W cn0 W � W' W W m Z Y Om O ¢ o Q ¢ o0 (5 > a- N c- p c c V d o c d 0. O O U ~ S S m C E m O W C W c > o a w < F z EE U c E Q N () E z m Z 00 O N O O d d O 2 O m ¢ Q d d U LL O J J OO cnJ 0 Q Of Of cr N .� W W N U .4--J N N O o 76 O F M pE U - 0 d N o c N W o N (n a N � c ¢ c6 rn o N Z g C) z � ED Z U C Z c 0 E a o co Q ¢ 3 0 U 0 a U � 00 N o Q = N 0 @ o Z N W > c) GL' E m �2 U W Z o o w J � OJ J a @ N ° F Lli > N LIJ J Z � d � N v° O n 0 > U W 'o O W Q d Uj m U V .O -¢ - -- .. O o U d t� a ci E O_ o n N cn > O @ p - W A U O F-- 1p N O N o O p QJI c � o c p Q O P z m Q LL v qt� N W cOa J:. W o c C-� O Z a r N O LL— Cn - O 4 i ..¢ H m m C~J '� w .. U aci v W N Q °z U E 'Fu cn U oo Q N o c W D N +-' �� N U N m U ~ Ln 23 Z) < ;T.-- O w IL Cl) Z N m'> 0 U- U V) 0 LL O @ J col) L: O ® �D CD LU ry < cu LL < co LL C a) LL 0 C LL w IL Cl) Ln LU U- �4 go < 2 2 (D Z N m'> 0 U- U V) 0 LL O @ J @ L: O ® �D CD LU ry < cu LL < co LL C a) LL 0. a) CO CL o D C7 co 0 C7 -Fa CL- LL- d' .0 .c F-- 02 <2E E 0 E —0 C, =3 w E .2 '2 ca LU a> LU -562, L *IZ-5-O LLJ B co > E; C, LLJ LLJ X U) 0 LL c CL C, C5) ui 0 F— LU Lx- F— > T��" -70 3: w x sj- ui ,- J�j E U- 0 U LU w - uj V5 o FDOMT),' 0 (A [TT]--] r--FTT � F-T-T-T r&—T--J— T--7— T&I Ln LU U- �4 go < 2 2 (D oo Cl 8 (D Z N m'> 0 U 0 LL O @ J @ L: O �D CD < cu LL < co LL C a) LL 0. a) CO CL o D C7 co 0 C7 -Fa CL- LL- .0 .c F-- 02 <2E E 0 E —0 C, =3 w E .2 '2 ca a> C4 -562, L *IZ-5-O LLJ B co > E; C, LLJ LLJ X U) 0 LL c CL C, C5) ui 0 F— LU Lx- F— -70 3: < LU 61 E U- oo Cl 8 (D Z N m'> U O O @ J @ L: O �D CD cu LL U- co LL C a) LL 0. a) CO CL co 0 -Fa .0 .c F-- 02 E .2 '2 ca C4 B co > C, U) L.0 0 Lx- F— -70 3: < LU 61 E U- 0 U LU w - 0 C/) o CL 0 (A BOARD OF SELECTMEN William J. Lee Memorial Town Hall PAUL R. DINOCCO, Vice Chairman MF.,HREI",N BU1 "r EDWARD P. DOMBROSKI, JR. BRIAN E. FALVEYd ANTHONY LONGO PETER J. MAY " ANN MCGONIGLE SANTOS ONE LAFAYETTE STREET WAKEFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS 01880 (781) 246 -6390 Fax (339) 219 -4160 Memo to: Town Departments Re: 28 Redfield Road "y Date: May 2, 2017 From: Steve Maio TA STEPHEN P. MAIO Town Administrator SHERRI A. DALTON Executive Secretary Enclosed please find some infonnation on the above referenced property (which has been taken in tax title foreclosure by Wakefield). .I would like to put the property out to bid (if we have clear title as a portion of the property is in reading as well). As is our practice, please indicate if your department has any Municipal use for the property. I wish to present this to the Board of Selectmen at their meeting on May 22, 2017. Please respond to me by May 12, 2017. �G 80 1286PG172 0 QUITCLAIM DEED LrY kN We, Stephen T. Roberts and Nancy Roberts of 28 Redfield Road, Wakefield, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, ati c c being married, for consideration of $1.00 and per the terms of a divorce Agreement filed with the Middlesex Probate and Family c Court, Docket No. 99D 0977 -DV1 � Cv grant to Nancy Roberts, individually with quitclaim covenants x the land in partly in WAKEFIELD and partly in READING, both in b said Middlesex County, bounded and described as follows: 0 a From the boundary marker on Brook Street, 397.72 feet from the ,tl w corner of Ash Street and said Brook Street, thence the line runs w d v SOUTHERLY along said Brook Street, 32.97 feet; thence; x N SOUTHEASTERLY by land now or formerly of Lucius Beebe, 100 feet; thence; NORTHERLY by land of unknown owners, 32.97 feet; thence a A a NORTHWESTERLY by land of unknown owners, 100 feet to the point r of beginning. H W W " Said Brook Street is also known as Redfield Road. 0 a Said premises are conveyed subject to taxes for the current year, zoning laws of the Towns of Reading and Wakefield and subject to and with the benefit of restrictions, rights and easement of record. For previous title, see deed to Harry M. Efter and Madeline Efter from John E. McKee, recorded with Middlesex South District Deeds, Book 11803, page 543, and deed to Stephen T. Roberts from Harry M. Efter and Madeline Efter, recorded with South Middlesex 0 U3 1286PG 173 Registry of Deeds, Bdok 12499, Page 459 and deed from Stephen T. Roberts to Stephen T. Roberts and [Nancy Roberts, recorded with South Middlesex Registry of Deeds, Book 22820, Page 190. Il-- Witness our hands and seals this °' day of March, 2000. r� ancy its StephXn T. Roberts COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS 1 I W( �, March 3 2000 Then personally appeared the above -named NANCY ROBERTS and acknowledged the foregoing instrument be her free act and deed, before me. ��j� c�,� KI/, N tary Public My Commission expires :�f2 /o / jai a d,I -� s.rV , ss. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS March2o, 2000 Thera personally appeared the above -named STEPHEN T. ROBERTS and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his free act and deed, before me. �� -- otary b N l ?; My Commission expires : U3 w Q w U- 0 w w 0 a m o � r a O di KC mN O Op O ¢ ~ N N t_Ntqq � K N ro G d as �a�ro � LIJ to z w v pXp ��tLLi. WLL15 O wIr Q ALI c m m � li tl y � o W � Cii U in • y a p Z a o m > > is LL V O O J O m A CV S LL r ' � c O } N O N O t2 T t0 o r°Di oNO w O O Ql U UV ¢ a�i O � pOO N r p O N u0'9 Ol {= Ud o -a � Q O yy• (� co cn N U ¢ N -�Zy U oscns0. > 5 $U O a4� HZE �O c m m � li tl y � o W � Cii U in • y a p Z a o m > > is LL V O O J O m A CV S LL r ' � c O } N O N O t2 T t0 o r°Di oNO >�I} ¢ 0 Ooo t0 0 U O r b lt) to } :f3 0 N Z vL w U UV ¢ a�i {= Ud -a � o O yy• -�Zy oscns0. Nw HZE ° O LL o rL F McE F- !Z m m E p, v m� a� x >�I} ¢ 0 Ooo t0 0 U O r b lt) to } :f3 0 N Z vL O 0 M 00 uj N a W M M W U) Q M ¢n O F- W tL Y LU W 4 tU ce c- o a m w C-5 a o a a SC r> v o O op o1 R S a LL 2 I v r fJ 0 N 0 0 .S3 0 r U c m h 0 r d O e IL W W ui m a m o r F m LL a IWlLL�� �W 11 o �-^ D N c M c r V N ai U r fJ 0 N 0 0 .S3 0 r U c m h 0 r d O e IL W W ui m a m [SEAL) , COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS LAND COURT DEPARTMENT OF THE TRIAL COURT Case No.: 14 TL 149222 Iilllllllllllllllilllllll IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 201 0 1200 JUDGMENT IN TAX LIEN CASE 8k: 85779 Pg: 215 Doc: NOT Page: 1 of 1 0712312015 01:39 PM Town of Wakefield VS. Nancy Roberts This case came on to be heard and was argued by counsel, and thereupon, upon consideration thereof, it is ADJUDGED and ORDERED that all rights of redemption are forever foreclosed and barred under the following deed(s) given by and /or the tax taking(s) made by the Collector of Taxes for the Town of Wakefield in Middlesex County and said Commonwealth: Land Type Tax Taking Date Book No. Paize No. Recorded 06/04/2010 54961 314 By the Court: Deborah J. Patterson Attest: Certificate of Document No, Title No. A TRUE COPY ATTEST: Deborah J. Patterson Ppnnpnrr Recorder Entered: June 26, 2015 K:ILAND000RTFORMMLCrL003A.DOC TD: 4112/05 Daterrime Printed: 6126115 8:56 AM T ON 5���' ` Town Manager FY17 Goals actual actual actual actual Goals/ Working Groups 30-Sep 31-Dec 31-Mar 30-Jun Financial Sustainability 96% 100% 100% 100%------ 1 Comprehensive financial review --..---1oo.%' 100% 2 Local Real estate Tax Policy 100% 100% 100% 100%1 3 Projects outside of Tax Levy go%! 1009/C 100% 100%, 4 Gather feedback on the balance of resources and services 100% 100% 5, Provide In o mation to the Community Operational Efficiency 27% 55% 87% 98% 6 Resource sharing with other communities & organizations 1 90%1 109% 7 Master Plan for Human/Eider Services 25% 50% 80% 100% 8 Gather internal operations data 25%1 50% 75% 90% 9 Conduct Peer comparisons as warranted & relevant 50%1 75% 100% 100% 10 Continue to integrate and leverage technology 1 5k., 90% 100-X — ------ 11 Review BOS Policies - Article 2 Appointed Boards 90%1 90% 1 2 13 Improve Boards communication with BOS & community Cable Negotiations: complete by Nov, 2018 (FY17 portion) 10% 10% 50% 50% 50% 25% 75% 85% 14 Website continuous improvements 50% 75% 90% 100% 15 Complete Library Building project/communication needs 1 75%, 100% 100% 100% 16 Jargeted Review of General Bylaws (Nov'16 Town Mtg)-- 90%1 —0% 10R.1 i00%",-- 17 - Revi e - w -- BO - S , Policies - Article 1 Oper. Procedures/Charter 40% 80%. 18 Review BOS Policies - Article 3 Licenses 25%1 90% 90% -90%1 19 Complete Legal Review - union contracts 20 Complete Review of Town Personnel Policies 50%1 60% 90%, - Long Term Planning 32% 65% 82% 100% 21'Ec Dev- Downtown(zoning, parking, initiatives/projects) 250/.J 50% 60% 100% 22�E-c-bev: Other Priority Development areas (zoning, mktg) 25 - % 60% 100% 24 Assess condition of Town Bldgs/space needs; roads; wtr/swr) 25%1 75% 90% --.--.-'1o0-%' 25 Assess status of all Town owned land (include Oakland Rd) 509/0 1000/0 --100%- ----l00% L ITOTAL - equally weighted 45% 71% 86% 95% Reading 2020 FY17 Working Groups & Goals R2020 -1 Financial Sustainability Lelacheur Chair; Angstrom, Miller, °Fr,cr e nv,=, Santaniello; Halsey Goal #1 Comprehensive financial review through FY2025 & FY2030 100% Complete. Financial review modelling done through 2030; extensive public review & discussion. Goal #2 Local Real estate Tax Policy 100% Complete. Home Rule Petition approved by September Town Meeting; extensive public discussion. Goal #3 Projects outside of Tax Levy 100% Complete. This goal is to identify projects and plan a strategy moving forward. September Town Meeting approved a Capital Plan (blue pages), where the Facilities department (now under Town control) presents more detailed information. Goal #4 Gather feedback from the Community on the balance of resources and services 100% Complete. Three Community Listening Meeings held; September 1st Community Financial Forum is planned. If an October Override fails, this topic may need revisiting for FY18 budget cuts? Goal #5 Provide Information to the Community 100% Complete. Several public meetings have been held and extensive douments have been released and reviewed. Overviews written on both Senior Tax Relief and the Override for September TM. Town Manager and a Selectman have released information to the print media. R2020 -2 Operational Efficiency Angstrom Chair; Delios, Jenkins, Furilla, Cabuzzi, LeLacheur; Ensminger Goal #6 Resource sharing with other communities & organizations 100% complete. The Town is always looking for regionalization opportunities to provide efficiency/ savings. Currently, the Assessor position is regionalized with Wakefield. In FY16 a Regional Housing Coordinator was hired. This position is shared with Saugus, N. Reading and Wilmington. North Reading has been very helpful with a transition in our Health division and we are exploring options to continue a relationship in conjunction with our new Health Agent. We are in ongoing discussions with 8 -10 communities for a range of issues, with a focus on DPW. Goal #7 Master Plan for Human /Elder Services 100% complete. The UMass Boston Gerontology Institute has produced a Master Plan for Elder Services. This will be combined with the survey by the MAPC into a final plan. Since the Override failed, no forward action that requires funding should be expected on this plan for now. A new facility perhaps widening to be a Community Center should be considered. Goal #8 Gather internal operations data 90% complete. The FY18 budget process incorporated many changes in terms of presenting information to Town Meeting. DPW Policy review is final step and that is nearing completion. Goal #9 Conduct Peer comparisons as warranted & relevant 100% complete. The Economic Development Liaison and Town Manager have built an extensive Peer Community database that will be previewed with the Selectmen on April 20th. While the immediate use is for studying levers of economic development, the framework can tackle many other areas within the organization. Broadly, there is better statewide school data than there is municiapl government data. Goal #10 Continue to integrate and leverage technology 100% complete. An employee committee helped change our community alerts vendor to Code Red, which works well with our other systems. Next year we will more closely examine some MUNIS features. R2020 -3 Communication Kraunelis Chair; Lannon Waring, Zager, Miller, Furilla, Jackson, Clark, Feudo, LeLacheur; Se*tGa) Goal #11 Review Selectmen's Policies - Article 2 Appointed Boards 90% complete. The Executive Assistant and Town Manager have compiled an extensive background and foundation on all appointed boards, including local and state legislative impacts. Remaining work is an agenda item to discuss next steps, scheduled for May /June '17. Goal #12 Improve communications between Appointed Boards & both BOS and the community KEY =_> 50% complete. Progress on this goal received a major setback when the Community Services Director position needed to be eliminated after the failed Override (it was vacant at the time). This item will need to be discussed further, a scaled back effort in Public Services will give more support to the ZBA as they are very busy with 40B projects. Staffing support for volunteer boards is a challenge. Goal #13 Cable Negotiations: complete by November 2018 8_5% complete (FY17 portion). We have solicited feedback from area towns and from Town Counsel on what legal help to enlist. We have collected all legal contracts and are reviewing the agreement with RCTV. Currently RCTV is conducting a survey of the community. Annual Town Meeting has just approved funding for legal services, so we have begun the procurement process. Goal #14 Website continuous improvements 100% complete. A migration to a new software under the some vendor allows for handheld devices to have much better functionality with the website. Following this transition, departments reviewed their portions of the website to make sure content is current and accurate. The Town may have too much information available, compared to Peer Communities. Content will be a future focus. Goal #15 Complete Library Building project and Assess Communication needs 100% complete. The Library Building project has been extremely challenging and certainly shows the wisdom of creating a Permanent Building Committee to oversee any future projects. The Town acquired the services of a good Owner's Project Manager, but a large portion of work has fallen on the shoulders of the Facilities Director, Assistant DPW Director and Town Manager in descending order. Future projects should consider town staffing to ensure that a strong inside hands remains in control, in conjunction with the PBC. The former Library Director and the Architect worked offline against protocol and we are doing our best to bring the project in under budget. 5da R2020 -4 Policy Burns Chair; Kraunelis, Segalla; Jenkins, Kinsella, Perkins, Schena, LeLacheur; Arena) Goal #16 Targeted Review of General Bylaws (Nov'16 Town Meeting) 100% Complete. Several General Bylaws suggested by Town Counsel were completed by November Town Meeting; the Bylaw Committee has created a list of changes meant for November 2017 Town Meeting. Goal #17 Review Selectmen's Policies - Article 1 Operating Procedures /Charter 80% Complete. We have reviewed policies internally, and have discussed with Town Counsel. Some of the Policies have rarely if ever been followed. A periodic policy review should be undertaken after this comprehensive review is complete. Town Manager Policies also exist in a similar fashion, and should be folded into Selectmen's Personnel or other Polices as is appropriate. A KENO policy is needed for FY18. The review and change to the Liquor licenses policy is complete. The Board of Selectmen approved the Liquor license Changes. A Home Rule petition was filed and was passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor. The issue with fingerprinting has been resolved. Goal #18 Review Selectmen's Policies - Article 3 Licenses 90% Complete. Excellent progress has been made on most of these licenses. Remaining areas to be investigated either relate to economic development efforts or new societal items (such as Uber or Air BNB). Goal #19 Complete Legal Review of all union collective bargaining contracts 95% Complete. All FY18 contracts have been ratified and approved by the BOS except for Facilities. The retired HR Administrator has completed a thorough review of all AFSCME contracts (4 unions: DPW & Facilities). We will assess the legal work needed for FY18 after July 1st as she will continue in this role. Goal #20 Complete Review of Town Personnel Policies 95% Complete. An employee committee has met to discuss these policies for over one year. In terms of attracting and retaining employees, policies and compensation both play key roles. The HR Director has presented a draft version to the Selectmen. After all FY contracts are settled, the Town Manager will meet with all Town Unions to review this draft version - this cannot begin until Facilities have settled however. The Selectmen should see a final suggested versdion within 30 -60 days of the Town Manager/ union meeting. R2020 -5 Long Term Planning Delios Chair; LeLacheur, Huggins, Kinsella, Lannon, Mercier; Berman Goal #21 Economic Development - Downtown(zoning, parking, initiatives /projects) 100% Complete. The foundation for many of these initiatives has been laid (i.e., 2009 Parking Study; the EDSAT; the recent Ec Dev Action Plan; a recent $15,000 grant in April '17 for Wayfinding; and Town Meeting approval of an expanded 40R downtown smart growth district. Next year we will review the need for studying downtown parking, as we had delayed awaiting a 40R decision. Goal #22 Economic Development - Other Priority Development areas (zoning, marketing) 100% Complete. See comments under Goal #9 for a discussion of Peer Community research; an Ec Dev Liaison was hired to work on this project to establish a solid foundation of information for future use. An Economic Development Director was hired mid fiscal year and has already established significant working relationships with developers. Both of these positions will continue into FY18 and work on website improvements and marketing material. Planning and management staff met with the state on issues regarding developing the so- called Green Triangle (Walker's Brook area) and that PDA will be the key focus for FY18. Goal #23 Economic Development - Housing (zoning, demographics, projects) 100% Complete. The town currently has five (5) 40B projects including (1) a past approval at 45 Beacon Court that has not moved forward; (2) a spring 2015 application to the state that has not been approved for Lyle Estates (meanwhile a 4 -lot subdivision is being reviewed by CPDC); (3) an August 2015 project that received a comprehensive permit from the ZBA in February 2017 for Reading Village near the train depot; (4) Schoolhouse Commons which is currently in front of ZBA; and (5) a large multi family project on Eaton & Lakeview has been filed with the state. The town has received a one-year 'safe harbor'reprieve from the state, so the latter project is not fully 'cleared'. The Metro North Reg'l Housing Svcs Office is led by Reading and includes North Reading, Wilmington and Saugus working collaboratively. Goal #24 Assess condition of Town infrastructure (Bldgs - existing /space needs; roads; wtr /swr) 100% Complete. A final draft of the building security study (conducted by an independent consultant under the direction of the Facilities Director, Superintendent of Schools, Police Chief and Town Manager) is complete with initial cost estimates. We will review next steps including Executive Sessions needed to review with the elected Boards, and determine a funding path moving forward. For exisiting buildings, the PBC has worked with the Facilities Director and will begin their annual reviews at Nov'17 Town Mtg. Goal #25 Assess status of all Town owned land (include Oakland Road) 100% Complete. Town Counsel has completed an evaluation of Oakland Road, including all relevant documents and past Town Meeting actions. November Town Meeting approved the first steps needed to clear the legal issues, April 2017 Town approved the second steps which clear the title. The BOS will next determine a public process to discuss possible uses of the property. Meanwhile, the PBC has worked with the GIS Administrator and complied an extensive list of town -owned land. 5a1, D RAFT Town Manager FY18 Goals 7/5/2017 Goals/ Working Groups Staff Lead Others - suggestions welcome FinanceAngstrom 1 Local Real Estate Tax Policy Santaniello LeLacheur, Angstrom 2 Override - Financial Overview LeLacheur Angstrom 3 Override - Town Priorities LeLacheur All department heads 4 Override -Communication Kraunelis Miller 5 Charitable Giving Kume Miller, Lannon /Waring Operations LeLacheur 6 Finance Department Policies & Procedures Angstrom Kume, Licari 7 Public Works Policies & Procedures Kinsella Zager, Percival, Isbell 8 Employee Retention Delios Perkins, Kraunelis 9 Building Security Study Huggins Cabuzzi, Segalla, Clark, GBurns, Jackson, LeLacheur 10 Public Safety /Emergency Mgmt Staffing & Training Segalla Clark, GBurns, Jackson, Policy Kraunelis 11 Review of General Bylaws Kraunelis Town Counsel, Bylaw Committee 12 Personnel Policies Perkins LeLacheur, Kraunelis 13 Legal Review - Collective Bargainning Agreements LeLacheur Kraunelis, Perkins 14 Board of Selectmen Policies LeLacheur Delios, Kraunelis 15 Affordable Housing Production Plan Delios Mercier Long Term Planning Delios 16 DPW Yard /Cemetery Garage Zager Kinsella, Huggins, Cabuzzi, LeLacheur 17 Cell Tower /Water Storage Kinsella Percival, GBurns, Isbell, Zager, LeLacheur 18 Senior /Community Center Delios Huggins, Cabuzzi 19 Master Plan - Options & Approaches Mercier Delios 20 Economic Development Priorities Corona Delios, Mercier, LeLacheur Community Lannon 21 Cable Negotiations Kraunelis Furilla, Miller 22 MWRA /North Reading project Zager Kinsella, Isbell, Percival, LeLacheur 23 Historical Preservation /Archival Lannon Waring, Gemme, Mercier 24 Volunteer Boards - Training Gemme Delios, Kraunelis, LeLacheur 25 Community Events Kraunelis Fiorente, JBurns TOTAL - equally weighted 0� OF RF9O�� Town of Reading Employee Performance Review 639 : INC ORYO�P NAME: Bob LeLacheur POSITION TITLE: Town Manager DEPARTMENT: Administrative Services DIVISION: To Ma e SUPERVISOR: Board of Selectmen DATE OF REVIEVK November 15, 2016 INTRODUCTION The annual performance review is a communication tool designed to help employees understand their roles, continue to learn, and participate in the improvement of the organization. The substance of the program is a focus on communication between employees and supervisors. This document is built on the following assumptions: o Employees need to know what is expected of them and how their supervisor views their performance. o Employees want to work, do a good job, and take responsibility. o Motivation to contribute and achieve requires a sense of purpose. o Employees and supervisors are partners in this discussion. Each annual review of the Town Manager is public, once it is circulated to a quorum of the Board of Selectmen or released to the public at a Selectmen's meeting. OBJECTIVES OF THE PERFORMANCE REVIEW PROGRAM Enhance communication between an employee and a supervisor. Dialogue should be continuous during the year and may include coaching, guiding, and clarification of job responsibilities within the context of larger organizational goals. This Review form is a summary of the year's efforts in this regard, and is a formal written record of that summary. Develop employees. Identify interests in professional development and opportunities for development. This may be related to either current or future positions within the organization. • Support continuous quality improvement throughout the organization. Emphasis should be on guiding and empowering employees 11 -15 -16 �` Employee Performance Review Part I: List Objectives /Projects from the previous review period. Use this section to briefly explain positive results, delays in success. TMgr - Please see attached Reading 2020 FY16 Working Group & Goals. Following a brief discussion of incomplete goals only: Master plan for human /elder services (75 %) — much discussion at Board and staff level, with a revised approach to hire an outside consultant (UMass), subject to FY17 grant funding. Improve Board communication (75 %) — considerable effort at the staff level to improve communication, simplified by the change to full -time positions in Community Services. The next step involves guidance from the Board of Selectmen as the appointing authority. SeeClickFix rollout (90 %) — evaluation of this tool took longer than expected. The software is pretty good, but as always the quality of data input is crucial — some staff training done here and more is needed. Changes such as this go slower because of relatively thin staffing levels (scarcer training time available). Hazard mitigation plan (80 %) — planned as an inside project but with staff turnover an outside consultant was required, after grant funding secured. Downtown parking (50 %) — waiting to see tenant makeup of MF Charles, as a residential component had been planned at various points. DPW Facilities (75 %) the Permanent Building Committee was formed and took over the Cemetery building project mid -year as requested by Town Meeting. Efforts to move DPW will be restarted in the fall 2016. While important, that portion has suffered by lack of bandwidth — see the next item. Library building project (90 %) — significant delays and issues required a lot of management effort to resolve and try to keep the project afloat. OPM and Facilities Director have done an outstanding job. Overseeing a significant building project is not something the town can handle easily, although in the future under the Permanent Building Committee this should be streamlined as control is removed from building staff and volunteer proponents. Oakland Road property (75 %) — what was thought to be a simple and final step by Town Counsel revealed that many past steps were inadequate. November 2016 Town Meeting will be asked to fix those missteps, and then authorize the Selectmen to sell the property. Zoning bylaws (75 %) — November 2016 will finish up all but the final Sign Bylaw, now set for November 2017 Town Meeting. General Bylaws (75 %) — Bylaw Committee unable to meet so Town Manager asked Town Counsel to step in to assess impact of Charter and make needed GB suggested changes. Some new GB also will result from federal stormwater regulations. BOS policies (60 %) — we have prioritized some items to be examined and changed, this item fell low on the BOS priority list during the year. Legal review of union contracts (75%)_,— completed at staff level, next step. is Labor Counsel 11 -15 -16 and possibly the former HR Administrator to assist. TMgr (Cont.) - Financial Review (90 %) — much work needed during the summer 2016 in advance of a FALL Override vote. TOTAL 90% - a fair accomplishment for the year, given that the incomplete goals above are either lower priority of a multi -year task. The Library building project was an impediment to better results, but seemed the higher priority to complete the right way, as close to the budget as was possible. Too often in the past, projects such as this one cut corners, which in the longer run were not ideal. Part II: Employee Core Competencies: The following items represent important skills and competencies related to this employee's primary job functions and the supervisor's perspective on the employee's level of attainment. The number in each column denotes the number of Selectmen whoagree with the rating. Note: Add to position. For attached list. his list 3 -4 additional core competencies from the attached list which are directly related to this supervisors there are 4 additional competencies listed as "4 Managerial Competencies" on the Competency Comments: Use this area to elaborate on any `below standard' areas listed above. Any areas of `below standards' must list some specific actions required to address improvement in that area. Part III: Development Plan: Use this space to identify continuing education, professional development, or new skills that an employee and supervisor agree upon that will lead to improvement in the current job, future advancement, or career growth. 1. TMgr - Continue and expand regular meetings with area Managers and Mayors. 2. TMgr - Improve attendance at MMA and MMMA meetings. 3. KS - Invite PBC into executive sessions when warranted. Will help them make better long term decisions about new projects and town needs. 4 BB - Continued development of working groups. 11 -15 -16 Competency Area Below Standard Meets Standard Exceeds Standard 1. Customer Service 2 3 2. Communication 2 3 3. Quality of Work 2 3 4. Dependability /Reliability 2 3 5. Skills /Knowledge 3 2 6. Productivity 2 3 7. Judgment 2 3 8. Flexibility/Willingness to Adapt 3 2 9. Teamwork 2 3 10. Ethics and Standards 1 4 11. Safety 3 2 12. Change Management 4 1 13. Leadership 2 3 14. Managing Others 3 2 15, Strategic Thinking 2 3 Note: Add to position. For attached list. his list 3 -4 additional core competencies from the attached list which are directly related to this supervisors there are 4 additional competencies listed as "4 Managerial Competencies" on the Competency Comments: Use this area to elaborate on any `below standard' areas listed above. Any areas of `below standards' must list some specific actions required to address improvement in that area. Part III: Development Plan: Use this space to identify continuing education, professional development, or new skills that an employee and supervisor agree upon that will lead to improvement in the current job, future advancement, or career growth. 1. TMgr - Continue and expand regular meetings with area Managers and Mayors. 2. TMgr - Improve attendance at MMA and MMMA meetings. 3. KS - Invite PBC into executive sessions when warranted. Will help them make better long term decisions about new projects and town needs. 4 BB - Continued development of working groups. 11 -15 -16 5. JA - Improve contacts and information flow with State /Federal officials as a resource (example: Camp Curtis Guild use; rotary restriping, MWRA project with N. Reading, Senior tax relief as relates to larger State initiatives). Part IV: Future objectives: The following Objectives /Projects have been determined to support town, department and individual needs. These objectives /projects become the subject matter of Part I of the review process for the next review. Include for each objective /project the resources /support required and estimated timnfrnmP TMgr - Please see attached Reading 2020 FYI Working Group & 25 Goals. Good progress in general as we are about 45% complete through the first three months. DE — Continue to drive pursuit of opportunities for public / private partnerships (e.g., Elder Services, provision of downtown parking). DE — Focus our new marketing hire on redevelopment of the entire Industrial area, including all currently developed properties on the east side of the tracks north of Newcrossing Road. DE — To the extent possible, champion an FY'l8 zero -based budgeting approach for both town and school expenditures. All budget possibilities need to be considered, including adjustment of the traditional Town / School split up or down. Part V: Supervisor comments: Supervisors may wish to summarize the review or elaborate on an area not addressed '(11UUCY.II UIIJ P1UGGJJ DE — Bob continues to perform in his job at a high level of competence. He was especially effective in his communication of override information to Reading voters. He has continued to adjust staffing to provide superior public service, as he did in the Public Services Department. He has built a culture of trust with all Town employees through his candor and personal integrity. This trust will be a key factor in FY'l8 budgeting, which will be challenging due to the override vote. JH - The Town Manager's competency ratings are exceptional in my opinion as noted......... Regarding the goals; naturally given the intense focus on "Financial Sustainability" over the past year has led to near completion in all categories of this goal. Given the outcome of the recent override vote a re- visitation of the details is obviously necessary with an acknowledgement of available revenues. This also leads to the importance of examining and adjusting goals in all other areas. It is logical that these areas are slower to completion given the uncertain financial implications. It is now however in my opinion important to aggressively tackle the remaining goals. KS - Town Manager LeLacheur has done an exemplary job in running the town over the past year. He continues to give more value than his pay scale, something that happens in Reading far too much for the employee's standpoint, but the residents are very lucky for it. What he excels in: not rushing to judgment, looking at solutions from all angles, being able to strategize future needs of the town against budgetary restrictions, great organizational skills and a strong ethical approach to managing staff, as well as himself. BB - Over the past year, two projects consumed much of the available band width of the TM and the Board. Those were successful completion of the library project and the overall financial condition of the Town, leading to the prop 2'/2 override vote . It is important to note that without the 11 -15 -16 ��A supervision of the TM, this project had the potential to go way over budget, not get done on time and /or result in litigation. The fact that this project has a small budget gap but no corners cut is an example of his good stewardship. The process leading to the calling of a Prop 2'h override vote was a model of good governance. No fewer than 20 public meetings were held, including a number of listening sessions with the public. The quality of the financial analysis provided to the Board and the public was sophisticated and thorough, and did not pre- suppose a result. The continued information provided to residents is easy to follow . Compared to past override efforts, residents have thorough information to make their decision. Going forward, the biggest priority in my mind is relocating the DPW garage, as well as creating the other development opportunities sited in the MAPC report. The utmost hiring priority is the Economic Development Planner. The TM has put forth the Working Group model as the vehicle for moving forward the goals and objectives of thre Town. Other than the group I participate in, I'm not sure if the other groups are meeting. I like the fact that each group has a Selectman, so not all of the work falls upon an already overworked staff. My fear is that if the override does not pass, much of the attention going forward will be managing the fallout of a shrinking FY18 budget. This has ability to push other priority projects to the side. Leaning on the skills and commitment of all the Selectmen is something the TM will need to utilize more in the coming year, as the challenges will surely be many. JA - It is hard to find gaps that are significant enough to warrant remedial mention. Not captured in the prior areas is the cheerful evenhanded disposition and can -do attitude that you demonstrate in most discussions. Part VI: Employee comments: Employees may wish to elaborate on an area not addressed through this process or comment on any part of this process. / have read and discussed this review with my supervisor and objective /projects for the coming year have been established which along with daily job responsibilities, applicable policies and town by -laws and contracts will be the basis for my next performance review. Employee Signature Supervisor Signature Department Head Date 11 -15 -16 �� 5 Core Competencies Listed in Part II of the Employee Performance Review Form 1. Customer Service: Willingness to provide consistent high - quality service using tact, courtesy, patience and discretion during interactions with all customers (staff, public, outside agencies). 2. Communication: Exchanges information well, both verbally and in writing, listens and processes information appropriately. 3. Quality of Work: Accurate, thorough, neat. 4. Dependability /Reliability: Completes assigned work in a timely manner, keeps commitments, punctual. 5. Skills /Knowledge: Possesses or acquires necessary skills, knows procedures, meets the requirement of the job description. 6. Productivity: Handles multiple priorities, works well despite frequent interruptions, works effectively under pressure, completes a reasonably expected amount of work in the time allotted. 7. Judgment: Make effective decisions, uses logical thought processes, maintains confidentiality. 8. Willingness to Adapt: Willing to maintain and update skills to meet the changing requirements of the position including utilizing new procedures and adapting to new technology. 9. Teamwork: Ability to establish working relationships with others and promote productive cooperation. 10. Ethics and Standards: Exhibits a high moral standard of conduct that sets an example for others to follow. 11. Safety: Follows safety policies and procedures, uses safe work habits, reports and corrects unsafe conditions or practices. Core Competencies In Addition to Those Listed in Part II 1. Creativity: Seeks new ideas and approaches, excels in developing new perspectives and demonstrates a high degree of originality. 2. Flexibility: Receptive to new ideas and approaches, adapts to changing priorities. 3. Goal- Oriented: Sets realistic and effective goals and priorities and steps to reach them. 4. Initiative: Self- starter, makes suggestions for improvements, seeks new challenges, takes on new tasks without direction. 5. Interpersonal Skills: Interacts well with own department and other agencies, team member, cooperates with colleagues. 6. Negotiating: Ability to influence others in a positive manner to effectively achieve results. 7. Organizational awareness: Consistently works towards department and Town goals, makes suggestions for improvement. 8. Planning and Organization: Manages time well, plans ahead, structures work logically, identifies potential problems and resolves. 9. Professionalism: Presents self in an appropriate manner, good work attitude and conduct. 10. Self- Development: Enhances personal knowledge, skills and abilities, seeks opportunities for continuous learning. 11. Work Habits: Consistently demonstrates a commitment to his /her work by giving the best effort at all times. Four Managerial Competencies 1. Change Management: Define and implement procedures and /or technologies to deal with changes in the work environment to ensure that the Town and employees profit from changing opportunities. 2. Leadership: Influence a diverse group of individuals, each with their own goals, needs and perspectives, to work together effectively for the benefit of the Town. 3. Managing Others: Has the ability to direct employees, the public towards its goals, using its resources in an effective and efficient manner. 4. Strategic Thinking: Process by which an individual envisions the future and develops strategies, goals, objectives and action plans to achieve that future. 11 -15 -16 Town of Reading Board of Selectmen Survey JULY 2017 In October 2016 the Board of Selectmen (BOS) placed a Ballot Question in front of Reading voters, asking for an operational Override, for the first time since 2003. About 37% of Reading voters turned out at the polls and voted NO to this question at a Special Election. The BOS is considering placing another operational Override question before the voters at the annual Town election scheduled in April 2018. To help guide their deliberations, the Selectmen are asking for your assistance by completing the following survey. The survey is anonymous, and space is provided at the end to ask questions or bring ideas forward. Thank you very much for your consideration and for your assistance! 1. Did you vote on Question 1 on the October 16, 2016 special election? (circle one) a. I voted YES (please respond only to Question 2a.) b. I voted NO (please respond only to Question 2b.) C. I did not vote (please respond only to Question 2c.) 2a. If you voted YES, please circle all that apply and then skip to Question 3: a. Recent cuts to the Town budget had me concerned about services. b. Recent cuts to the School budget had me concerned about services. c. Proposed cuts to the Town budget (such as Police & Fire) had me concerned. d. Proposed cuts to the School budget (such as Teachers & curriculum) had me concerned. e. Presentations by Town and School leaders convinced me that further cuts would be needed unless we passed an Override. f. Keeping up service levels protects the resale value of my home. g. I always vote for overrides. h. Other (please explain) 2b. If you voted NO, please circle all that apply and then skip to Question 3: i. The Town did not justify the need for an Override and explain where the funds would be used. j. The Schools did not justify the need for an Override and explain where the funds would be used. k. The Override request was simply too Large. I. 1 am retired and am on a fixed income (if you have not yet heard about our new Senior Tax Relief program, please send us an email!) m. I never vote for overrides. n. Other (please explain) 0 2c. If you DID NOT vote, please circle all that apply and then skip to Question 3: o. I didn't realize the election was happening. p. I intended to vote but could not get to the polls. q. I didn't feel informed enough about the issues. r. I didn't believe the issues were relevant to me. s. Other (please explain) 3. 1 would Vote YES on an April 2018 Override if (circle all that apply): a. I knew there was such a request being made. b. The Override request was smaller in size. c. There was more clarity about how the funds would be spent. d. I had a ride to the polls. e. The Selectmen and School Committee convince me they have cut costs as much as possible. f. Other (please explain) 4. Please tell us where you typically gather your information about local activities, such as the information about an Override? (check all that apply) a. Reading Advocate, Daily Times Chronicle, or other print news source. b. Town of Reading website. c. Social Media pages (which ones ?): d. Board of Selectmen /School Committee meetings on RCTV. e. Attending a Community Listening session. f. Conversation with Town /School employees or elected officials. g. Conversation with neighbors. h. Other? (please list) S. Reading compares itself to 25 other Peer communities in Massachusetts for many statistical and demographic evaluations. Compared to these Peers, where do you think the average annual tax bill for a Reading single family home is? a. $1,000 or more higher annually than Peer average tax bills. b. Between $500 and $1,000 higher than Peer averages. c. About the same as Peer averages. d. Between $500 and $1,000 lower than Peer averages e. $1,000 or more lower than Peer averages. f. I have no idea. 0 6. 1 would Vote YES on an April 2018 Override if (please select one answer): a. Even if the amount were over a $1,000 annual increase. b. Only if the amount were $750 or less annually. c. Only if the amount were $500 or less annually. d. Only if the amount were $250 or less annually. e. I would not vote YES for any amount. 7. Which of the following statement best describes your use of the Reading Public Schools (RPS) (please select one answer): a. I have not had any children attend (or plan to attend) the RPS. b. I have children that are too young, but plan to attend the RPS. c. I have children currently attending the RPS. d. I had children graduate from the RPS, but none attend today. 8. For statistical purposes my age is: a. Below 18 b. 18 -25 c. 26 -35 d. 36 -45 e. 46 -55 f. 56 -65 g. 66 -75 h. 76 or older 9. For statistical purposes, I have lived in Reading for: a. Less than 3 years. b. Between 3 and 6 years. c. Between 6 and 10 years. d. Between 10 and 20 years. e. Between 20 and 30 years. f. More than 30 years. Thank you again for your assistance with this survey! if you have any questions about Reading's finances (or anything else) please contact us at 10. Finally, is there anything you want to share with us as we deliberate on the state of the Town of Reading's finances? M d , > wt a Jean M. Lorizio, Esq. Chairman June 2, 2017 LOCAL BOARDS Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of the State Treasurer Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission 239 Causeway Street Boston, MA 02114 Telephone: 617-727-3040 Facsimile: 617-727-1510 Andover, Auburn, Bellingham, Braintree, Burlington, Chelsea, Danve-rs, Dedham, East Springfield, Hadley, Leominster, Lowell, Plainville, Plymouth, Raynham, R jog, Somerset, West Springfield, _ Walpole, Wareham, West Bridgewater, Westford, and Wilmington The Commission has received a request from Pepper Dining, Inc. d /b /a Chili's for a change of in the above -noted cities and towns. Due to the magnitude of these transactions, the Commission has received the information and documents provided by the licensee. The review was to determine whether the contemplated transaction is consistent with the provisions of M.G.L. c. 138. Based upon our review, we are satisfied that the transaction is consistent with the purposes of the law and would not result in the individual corporate licenses being deemed to be out of compliance with the applicable statute. Accordingly, this letter sets forth our recommended procedure for the processing of these applications. Arrangements have been made for the Corporation to pay all of the $200 application fees directly to the Commission. Therefore, no fee needs to be collected. The Commission has reviewed and accepted copies of the following documents and instruments: 1. Monetary Transmittal Form 2. Change of BeneficialInterest Application 3. Beneficial Interest- Individual 4. CORI S. Vote of the Board of Directors 6. Business Structure 7. Pepper Dining Inc., MA Locations Where there will be no change of existing managers, the Commission will not require that a Managers Form be completed, nor will the Commission require background information on the managers as such information should already be on file. The applicant will contact you directly for processing the application. Please forward to the Commission the Form 43. The Commission will require no other forms, documents or information in connection with these applications. Should you or your town/city solicitor have any questions or require information or assistance, please contact Investigator Jack Carey at (617) 727 -3040, extension 736. Sincerely, c /L Ralph Sacramone Executive Director Ted Mahony, Chief Investigator Ray Melville, Licensing Program Coordinator Andrew Uptom 4v PEPPER DINING, INC. D /B /A Chili's 74 Walkersbrook Drive Reading, MA 01867 APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF OFFICER Table of Context 1. Monetary Transmittal Form 2. Change of Beneficial Interest Application 3. Beneficial interest- Individual 4. CORK 5. Vote of the Corporate Board 6. Business Structure 7. Pepper Dining Inc., MA Locations Andrew Upton DiNicola, Seligson & Upon, LLP Six Beacon Street, Suite 700 Boston, MA 02108 P. 617 -279 -2595 F. 617 -426 -0587 The Con:n:omvealth of Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission 239 Causewew Street Boston, MA 02114 w)j, w.nwss.goMabcc RETAIL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES LICENSE APPLICATION MONETARY TRANSMITTAL FORM APPLICATION SHOULD BE COMPLETED ON -LINE, PRINTED, SIGNED, AND SUBMITTED TO THE LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY. ECRT CODE: RETA CHECK PAYABLE TO ABCC OR COMMONWEALTH OF MA: $200.00 (CHECK MUST DENOTE THE NAME OF THE LICENSEE CORPORATION, LLC, PARTNERSHIP, OR INDIVIDUAL) CHECK NUMBER IF USED SPAY, CONFIRMATION NUMBER A.B.C.C. LICENSE NUMBER (IF AN EXISTING LICENSEE, CAN BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY) 00021 -RS -1016 LICENSEE NAME Pepper Dining, INC. ADDRESS 6820 LBJ Freeway CITY/TOWN Dallas STATE F7 ZIP CODE 75240 TRANSACTION TYPE (Please check all relevant transactions): ❑ Alteration of Licensed Premises ❑ Cordials/Liqueurs Permit ❑X New Officer /Director ❑ Transfer of License ❑ Change Corporate Name ❑ issuance of Stock [] New Stockholder ❑ Transfer of5tock ❑ Change of License Type ❑ Management/Operating Agreement ❑ Pledge of Stock ❑ Wine& Malt to All Alcohol [] Change of Location ❑ More than (3) §15 ❑ Pledge of License ❑ 6 -Day to 7 -Day License ❑ Change of Manager ❑ New License ❑ Seasonal to Annual [] Other THE LOCAL LICENSING AUTHORITY MUST MAIL T1 1S TRANSMITTAL FORM ALONG WITH THE CHECK, COMPLETED APPLICATION, AND SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS TO: ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CONTROL COMMISSION P. O. BOX 3396 BOSTON, MA 02241 -3396 0 The Comrawmvealth of Massachusetts ---- - - - - -- Alcoholic Beverages Control Convisission 239 Cariseway Street Boston, MA 02114 fv�v�r : nw�.rs.gov /ahcc AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR A CHANGE OF BENEFICIAL INTEREST OR TRANSFER /ISSUANCE OF STOCK Please complete this entire application, leaving no fields blank. If field does not apply to your situation, please write N /A. 1. NAME OF LICENSEE (Business Contact) Pepper Dining, INC. ABCC License Number 00021 -RS -1016 Reading City/Town of Licensee g 2. APPLICATION CONTACT The application contact is required and is the person who will be contacted with any questions regarding this application. First Name: Andrew�I Middle: F. Last Name: Upton Title: Attorney Primary Phone: 617- 279 -2595 Email: Andrew.Upton@dsu- law.com 3. BUSINESS CONTACT Please complete this section ONLY if there are changes to the Licensee phone number, business address (corporate headquarters), or mailing address. Entity Name: I WA Primary Phone: N/A Fax Number N/A �1 Alternative Phone: N/A Email: [WA Headquarters) Street Number: 6820 Street Name: LBJ Freeway City/Town: Dallas State: Texas Zip Code: 75240 1 Country: USA ❑x Check here if your Mailing Address is the some as your Business Address Street Number. Street Name: City/Town: State: Zip Code: Country: 5h111 AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR A CHANGE OF BENEFICIAL INTEREST OR TRANSFER /ISSUANCE OF STOCK 4. CURRENT OWNERSHIP (Before Change in Beneficial Interest) Please list all individuals or entities with a director indirect, beneficial or financial interest in this license. This pertains to the current licensee (before change in beneficial interest occurs). Name Title/ Position %Owned Other Beneficial Interest Bryan McCrory Officer 0 None PROPOSED OWNERSHIP (After Change in Beneficial Interest) Please list all individuals or entities with a direct or Indirect, beneficial orfinancial interest in this license. An individual or entity has a direct beneficial interest in a license when the individual or entity owns or controls any part of the license. For example, 'rf John Smith owns Smith LLC, a licensee, John Smith has a direct beneficial interest in the license. An individual or entity has an indirect beneficial interest if the individual or entity has 1) any ownership interest in the license through an intermediary, no matter how removed from direct ownership, 2) any form of control over part of a license no matter how attenuated, or 3) otherwise benefits in any wayfrom the license's operation. For Example, lane Doe owns Doe Holding Company Inc., which is a shareholder of Doe LLC, the license holder. Jane Doe has an indirect interest in the license. A. All individuals listed below are required to complete a Beneficial Interest Contact - Individual form. B. All entities listed below are required to completea Beneficial Interest Contact- Organization form. C. Any individual with any ownership in this license and /or the proposed manager of record must complete a CORI Release Form, Name Title / Position % Owned Other Beneficial Interest Christopher Green Officer 0 None Daniel Fuller Officer 0 None &-I ADDITIONAL SPACE The following space is for any additional information you wish to supply or to clarify an answer you supplied in the application. If referrencing the application, please be sure to include the number of the question to which you are referring. APPLICANT'S STATEMENT I, Denise Moore I the: ❑sole proprietor; ❑ partner; Ocorporate principal; ❑ LLCJLLPmember Autivrimd 5ignatory of Pepper Dining, INC ,hereby submit this application for change oraenefirial lnterest Name of the Entity /Corporation . TransaWon(si you are appiylr4br (hereinafter the "Application "), to the local licensing authority (the °LIA ") and the Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission (the "ABCC" and together %qth the LLA collectively the "Licensing Authorities") for approval. I do hereby declare underthe pains and penalties of perjury that I have personal knowledge ofthe information submitted in the Application, and as such affirm that all statement and representations therein are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I further submit the following to be true and accurate: (1) 1 understand that each representation in this Application is material to the Licensing Authorities' decision on the Application and that the Licensing Authorities will rely on each and every answer in the Application and accompanying documents in reaching its decision; (2) 1 state that the location and description of the proposed licensed premises does not violate_ any requirement of the ABCC or other state law or local ordinances; (3) 1 understand that while the Application is pending, I must notify the Licensing Authorries of any change in the information submitted therein. I understand that failure to give such notice to the Licensing Authorities may result in disapproval of the Application; (4} 1 understand that upon approval of the Application, I must notify the Licensing Authorities of any change in the Application information as approved by the Licensing Authorities. I understmnd that failure to give such notice to the Licensing Authorities may result in sanctions including revocation of any license for which this Application is submitted; (5} 1 understand that the licensee will be bound by the statements and representations made in the Application, including, but not limited to the identity of persons with an ownership or financial inter-est In the license; (6) 1 understand that all statements and representations made become conditions of the license; (7) 1 understand that any physical alterations to or changes to the size of, the area used for the sale, delivery, storage, or consumption of alcoholic beverages, must be reported to the Licensing Authorities and may require the prior approval of the LicensingAuthorities; (a) I understand that the licensee's failure to operate the licensed premises in accordance with the statements and representations made in the Application may result in sanctions, including the revocation of any license for which the Application was submitted; and (9) 1 understand that any false statement or misrepresentation will constitute cause for disapproval of the Application or sanctions Including revocation of any license for which this Application is submitted. 5;gnature: Date. �� t -i %!'( Title: Dan:se t-too�zr Vi' -0 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CONTROL COMMISSION (Formerly known as a Personal Information Form) Please complete a Beneficial Interest - Individual sheet for all individual(s) who have a direct or indirect beneficial interest, with or without ownership, in this license. This includes people with a financial interest and people without financial interest (i.e. board of directors for not - for -profit clubs). All individuals with direct or indirect financial interest must also submit a CORI An individual with direct beneficial interest is defined as someone who has interest directly in the proposed licensee. For example, if ABC Inc is the proposed licensee, all individuals with interest in ABC Inc are considered to have direct beneficial interest in ABC Inc (the proposed licensee). An individual with indirect beneficial interest is defined as someone who has ownership in a parent level company of the proposed licensee. For example, if ABC Inc is the proposed licensee and is 100% owned by XYZ Inc, all individuals with interest in XYZ Inc are considered to have an indirect beneficial interest in ABC Inc (the proposed licensee). Salutation Mr. First Name Christopher Middle Name Lee = Last Name Green Suffix Title: Employee Social Security Number Date of Birth 1120/1975 Primary Phone: [972-980-9917 Email: ro -- J Mobile Phone: Fax Number I— Alternative Phone: Street Number. 6820 Street Name. LBJ Freeway City/Town: Dallas State: Texas Zip Code: 175240 Country: JUSA XN Check here if your Mailing Address is the same as your Business Address Street Number: Street Name: City/Town: State: Zip Code: Country: Types of Interest [select all that apply) ❑ Contractual ❑ Director ❑ Landlord ❑ LLC Manager ❑ LLC Member ❑ Management Agreement © Officer ❑ Partner ❑ Revenue Sharing [] Sole Proprietor ❑ Stockholder ❑ Other Citizenship / Residency Information Are you a U.S. Citizen? (.` Yes C'. No Are you a Massachusetts Resident? C Yes t: No you ever been convicted of a state, federal, or military crime? (';.Yes G' No If yes, please provide an affidavit exolaininathe charees. d n� ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CONTROL COMMISSION BENEFICIAL INTEREST CONTACT - Individual (continued) Ownership / Interest If you hold a direct beneficial interest�� Using the definition above, do you hold a direct (-Direct (: Indirect in the proposed licensee, please list t�J or indirect interest in the proposed licensee? the %of interest you hold. If you hold an indirect beneficial interest in this license, please complete the Ownership / Interest Table below. Ownership / Interest If you hold an indirect interest in the proposed licensee, please list the organization(s) you hold a direct interest in which, in turn, hold a direct or indirect interest in the proposed licensee. These generally include parent companies, holding, companies, trusts, etc. A Beneficial Interest - Organization Form will need to be completed for each entity listed below. Name of Beneficial Interest - Organization FEIN 0 N/A Other Beneficial Interest List any indirect or indirect beneficial or financial interest you have in any other Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages License(s). Name of License Type of License License Number Premises Address 23 Licenses in MA §12 On Premises Various Various, see attached Familial Beneficial Interest Does any member of your immediate family have ownership interest in any other Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Licenses? Immediate family includes parents, siblings, spouse and spouse's parents. Please list below. Relationship to You ABCC License Number Type of Interest (choose primary function) Percentage of Interest Reason for suspension, revocation or cancellation Prior Disciplinary Action Have you ever been involved directly or indirectly in an alcoholic beverages license that was subject to disciplinary action? if yes, please complete the following: Date of Action Name of License State City Reason for suspension, revocation or cancellation 0 ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CONTROL COMMISSION (Formerly known as a Personal Information Form) Please complete a Beneficial Interest - Individual sheet for all individual(s) who have a direct or indirect beneficial interest, with or without ownership, in this license. This includes people with a financial interest and people without financial interest (i.e. board of directors for not -for -profit clubs). All individuals with direct or indirect financial interest must also submit a CORI An individual with direct beneficial interest is defined as someone who has interest directly in the proposed licensee. For example, if ABC Inc is the proposed licensee, all individuals with interest in ABC Inc are considered to have direct beneficial interest in ABC Inc (the proposed licensee). An individual with indirect beneficial interest is defined as someone who has ownership in a parent level company of the proposed licensee. For example, if ABC Inc is the proposed licensee and is 100% owned by XYZ Inc, all individuals with interest in XYZ Inc are considered to have an indirect beneficial interest in ABC Inc (the proposed licensee). Salutation Mr. First Name Daniel Middle Name Salem Last Name Fuller Suffix Title: Employee Social Security Number Primary Phone: 972 -986 -9917 Mobile Phone: Alternative Phone: C] Date of Birth 5/12/1982 Email: Froberto.frano@b(inker.com �1 Fax Number I-. Street Number: 6820 Street Name: LBJ Freeway City/Town: Dallas State: Texas Zip Code: 75240 Country: USA ❑X Check here if your Mailing Address is the some as your Business Address Street Number: Street Name: City/Town: State: Zip Code: Country: I J Types of Interest} (select all that apply) Contractual ❑ Director ❑ Landlord ❑ LLC Manager ❑ LLC Member ❑ Management Agreement ❑x Officer ❑ Partner ❑ Revenue Sharing ❑ Sole Proprietor ❑ Stockholder ❑ Other Citizenship! Residency Information Are you a U.S. Citizen? (:. Yes (' No Are you a Massachusetts Resident? (` Yes (!- No Have you ever been convicted of a state, federal, or military crime? O Yes C.•`,, No If yes, please provide an affidavit { �� explaining the charges. ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES CONTROL COMMISSION BENEFICIAL INTEREST CONTACT - Individual (continued) Ownership /Interest !, If you hold a direct beneficial interest������ Using the definition above, do you hold a direct (- Direct f Indirect in the proposed licensee, please list or indirect interest in the proposed licensee? the % of interest you hold. If you hold an indirect beneficial interest in this license, please complete the Ownership / Interest Table below. Ownership f Interest If you hold an indirect interest in the proposed licensee, please list the organization(s) you hold a direct interest in which, in turn, hold a direct or indirect interest in the proposed licensee. These generally include parent companies, holding companies, trusts, etc. A Beneficial Interest - Organization Form will need to be completed for each entity listed below. Name of Beneficial Interest - Organization FEIN 0 N/A Other Beneficial Interest List any indirect or indirect beneficial or financial interest you have in any other Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages License(s). Name of License Type of License License Number Premises Address 23 Licenses in MA §12 On Premises Various Various, see attached Familial Beneficial Interest Does any member of your immediate family have ownership interest in any other Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Licenses? Immediate family includes parents, siblings, spouse and spouse's parents. Please list below. Relationship to You ABCC License Number Type of interest (choose primary function) Percentage of Interest Reason for suspension, revocation or cancellation Prior Disciplinary Action Have you ever been involved directly or indirectly in an alcoholic beverages license that was subject to disciplinary action? if yes, please complete the following: Date of Action Name of License State City Reason for suspension, revocation or cancellation i�il Commouzoealth of Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Comrnissiou 234 Causeway Street, First Floor Boston, MA 02114 CORI REQUEST FORM JEAA rtL LORIZIO, ESQ. CHAIRMAN The Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission ( "ABCC ") has been certified by the Criminal History Systems Board to access conviction and pending Criminal Offender Record Information ( "CORI "). For the purpose of approving each shareholder, owner, licensee or applicant for an alcoholic beverages license, I understand that a criminal record check will be conducted on me, pursuant_ to the above. The information below is correct to the best of my knowledge. ARCCLICENSEINFORMATION LAST NAME: Green 1 FIRST NAME: Christopher MIDDLE NAME: MAIDEN NAME OR ALIAS (IF APPLICABLE): PLACE OF BIRTH: DATE OF BIRTH: 11/20/1975 SSN: MOTHER'S MAIDEN NAME: I 1<1 a„,,,,,t DRIVER'S LICENSE #: GENDER: MALE • HEIGHT: 6 THEFT INDEX PIN (IF APPLICABLE). STATE LIC. ISSUED: ems � WEIGHT: iB4��JJ EYE COLOR: 18lue CURRENT ADDRESS: yTrail CITY/TOWN: ICarroliton STATE: E= ZIP: 75010 -- FORMER ADDRESS: CITY/TOWN: STATE: U ZIP: I PRINT AND SIGN PRINTED NAME: Christopher Green APPLICANT /EMPLOYEE SIGNATURE: On this Sts lz a `T= before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Christopher L C�ieert Ime of document signer), proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were driver license be the person n or attached document, and acknowledged to met t�t,e) (she) signed it voluntarily for stated purpose. `Y..zyM.rF tlobedo Fuu �r State O€T xas DIWSIONUSEO Y - NamlfsTeofrr The 00 W dUy V ft kdet %N Mamba b to W mmpieted by tome tpVL ms that t— b— l—d n Memky The" `* H# Numbs by the DUL CWO" a{wda u t gUmd to p,ovide A WbWM the eppertWfy to kKkule this kdp dm to estate the st y of the MFJ fegut" prxeas. ALL CM fegnn fetmt tbtt hdude *" fkW en ABCC LICENSEE NAME I CrfY /FOWN: Various OFMOm LKZ4BER, Y 11i.P Pe )Ser �1ar r m LAST NAME: Green 1 FIRST NAME: Christopher MIDDLE NAME: MAIDEN NAME OR ALIAS (IF APPLICABLE): PLACE OF BIRTH: DATE OF BIRTH: 11/20/1975 SSN: MOTHER'S MAIDEN NAME: I 1<1 a„,,,,,t DRIVER'S LICENSE #: GENDER: MALE • HEIGHT: 6 THEFT INDEX PIN (IF APPLICABLE). STATE LIC. ISSUED: ems � WEIGHT: iB4��JJ EYE COLOR: 18lue CURRENT ADDRESS: yTrail CITY/TOWN: ICarroliton STATE: E= ZIP: 75010 -- FORMER ADDRESS: CITY/TOWN: STATE: U ZIP: I PRINT AND SIGN PRINTED NAME: Christopher Green APPLICANT /EMPLOYEE SIGNATURE: On this Sts lz a `T= before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared Christopher L C�ieert Ime of document signer), proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were driver license be the person n or attached document, and acknowledged to met t�t,e) (she) signed it voluntarily for stated purpose. `Y..zyM.rF tlobedo Fuu �r State O€T xas DIWSIONUSEO Y - NamlfsTeofrr The 00 W dUy V ft kdet %N Mamba b to W mmpieted by tome tpVL ms that t— b— l—d n Memky The" `* H# Numbs by the DUL CWO" a{wda u t gUmd to p,ovide A WbWM the eppertWfy to kKkule this kdp dm to estate the st y of the MFJ fegut" prxeas. ALL CM fegnn fetmt tbtt hdude *" fkW en DEBORAIIB. GOLBDBERG TREASURER AND RECEIVER GENERAL Commonwealth of Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Cotnrnission 239 Causeway Street, First Floor Boston, MA 02114 CORI REQUEST FORM .MANM LORWO, ESQ. CHAIRMAN The Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission ( "ABCC ") has been certified by the Criminal History Systems Board to access conviction and pending Criminal Offender Record Information ("CORY). For the purpose of approving each shareholder, owner, licensee or applicant for an alcoholic beverages license, I understand that a criminal record check will be conducted on me, pursuant to the above. The information below is correct to the best of my knowledge. i ABCCLirt NS 17 1NFORMATION ASCCNUMBER: Of DMMMG Ua8490 UCENSEENAME: Pepper Dinitag, Inc. — CITY/TOWN: Various I I = ; __.. LAST NAME: Fuller FIRST NAME: Daniel MIDDLE NAME: Salem MAIDEN NAME OR AUAS (IF APPLICABLE): PLACE OF BIRTH: Phoenix AZ DATE OF BIRTH: 5/12/1982 SSN: ^'WEFT INDEX PIN (IF APPLICABLE): MOTHER'S MAIDEN NAME: DRIVER'S LICENSE #: STATE UC ISSUED: ex '►' GENDER: MALE 1 91 HEIGHT: 6 I. WEIGHT: 55 EYE COLOR: Brown CURRENTADDRESS: �1 Crry/TOWN: Sunnyvale STATE: ZIP: 75182 FORMER ADDRESS: CrTY/TOWN: STATE: p ZIP: AND SIGN ,PRINTEDNAME: DaanieiFuller APPUCANT/EM PLOYEE SIGNATURE: On this I 081s. "I I before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared ,Dante) Fuller of document signer), proved tome through satisfactory evidence of identification, which were driverslicense to be the person whose n ed document, and acknowledged tQ me that she) signed it voluntarily its stated purpose. vy"er Roberto Fran �b Notary Public State of Texas " ?or. My Comrn.Exp)res 07.11.2017 uorAaY D1 SIONUSEO LY smut srm crt The 00 W*,, ft SIT bdn PIN NumbwBW Mu+npinedbythwe 0011 -0"1 hm I. —twami M 1d.-ft n-1, PIN N.A. b, tM DUL GetttRed a(e ww* art nWbeo to Fwd& aU appium the .pp-4 m itd.'da N4 4tta.maattM to atttve tM +m.raty or ul. colu tegont Wro 1. AM CO I11 t M-- Inn- tlut k -k-t -" Odd .n rNk CORPORATE VOTE FOR CHANGE OF BENEFICIAL INTEREST This is to certify that at a meeting of the directors of Pepper Dining, Inc. It was voted to apply to the Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission and the appropriate Local Licensing Authorities for a Change of Beneficial Interest to disclose certain changes in the roster of Officers and /or Directors for the Licensees In Massachusetts, as indicated in Exhibit A attached hereto, and to authorize Attorney Andrew Upton to execute any and all documents needed therefor. [signature Page Follows] 0 The foregoing statement is made under penalty of perjury on AIN-Y % , 2017 BY: d�W- --kbo- — TITLE: Moove, lyf Mass. Corporations, external master page Page 1 of 2 Corporations Division Business Entity Summary ID Number: 208384658 Summary for: PEPPER DINING, INC. Request certificate New search The exact name of the Foreign Corporation: PEPPER DINING, INC. Entity type: Foreign Corporation Identification Number: 208384658 Date of Registration in Massachusetts: 02 -21 -2007 Last date certain: Organized under the taws of: State: DE Country: USA on: 11 -28 -2006 Current Fiscal Month /Day: 06/30 Previous Fiscal Month /Day: 06/30 The location of the Principal Office: Address: 6820 LBJ FREEWAY City or town, State, Zip code, DALLAS, TX 75240 USA Country: The location of the Massachusetts office, if any: Address: 303 CONGRESS ST. City or town, State, Zip code, BOSTON, MA 02210 USA Country: The name and address of the Registered Agent: Name: CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY Address: 84 STATE ST. City or town, State, Zip code, BOSTON, MA 02109 USA Country: IThe Officers and Directors of the Corporation: I Title Individual Name Address PRESIDENT CHRISTOPHER GREEN 6820 LB] FREEWAY DALLAS, TX 75240 USA TREASURER E. DENISE MOORE 6820 LB] FREEWAY DALLAS, TX 75240 .USA SECRETARY CHRISTOPHER GREEN 6820 LB] FREEWAY DALLAS, TX 75240 USA Mass. Corporations, external master page Page 2 of 2 ASSISTANT SECRETARY DANIEL FULLER 6820 LBJ FREEWAY DALLAS, TX 75240 USA VICE PRESIDENT DANIEL FULLER 6820 LBJ FREEWAY DALLAS, TX 75240 USA DIRECTOR CHRISTOPHER GREEN 6820 LSJ FREEWAY DALLAS, TX 75240 USA Business entity stock is publicly traded: i.,.1 The total number of shares and the par value, if any, of each class of stock which this business entity is authorized to issue: Total Authorized Total issued and Class of Stock Par value per share outstanding No. of shares Total par No. of shares value CWP $ 0.01 1,000,000 $ 10000.00 0 Confidential D Merger _i Consent Data Allowed Manufacturing View filings for this business entity: 4LL FILINGS kmended Foreign Corporations Certificate knnual Report knnual Report - Professional kppllcation for Reinstatement View filings] Comments or notes associated with this business entity: II �I New search 0 PEPPER DINING, INC. MASSACHUSETTS LOCATIONS Andover 131 River Road MA 01810 00045 -RS -0026 Bellingham 257 Hartford Ave. MA 02019 00042 -RS -0086 Braintree 170 Pearl Street MA 02184 00062 -RS -0130 Burlington 108 Middlesex MA 01803 00051 -RS -0160 Chelsea 1040 Revere Beach Pkwy MA 02150 00086 -RS -0202 Plymouth 2 Plaza Way MA 02360 00185 -RS -0984 Danvers 10 Newbury Street MA 01923 00024 -RS -0264 Dedham 930 Providence Hwy MA 02026 00016 -RS -0274 E. Springfield 302 Cooley Street MA 01128 00347 -RS -1126 Hadley 426 Russell Street MA 01035 00039- RS-0482 Leominster 42 Orchard Hill Park Dr. MA 01453 00092 -RS -0608 Lowell 26 Reiss Ave. MA 01851 00224 -RS -0630 Plainville 107 Taunton Street MA 02762 00001 -RS -0978 Raynham 500 S. Street W MA 02767 00014 -RS -1012 Reading 70 Walkersbrook Dr. MA 01867. 00021 -RS -1016 Somerset 825 GAR Hwy. MA 02726 00044 -RS -1128 W. Springfield 1175 Riverdale Street MA 01089 00041 -RS -1418 Walpole 120 Providence Hwy MA 02032 00054 -RS -1314 Wareham 2885 Cranberry Hwy MA 02538 00081 -RS -1328 W. Auburn 826 Southbridge Street MA 01501 00046 -RS -0054 W. Bridgewater 726 W. Center Street MA 02379 00042 -RS -1366 Westford 137 Littleton Rd. MA 01886 00033 -RS -1442 Wilmington 207 Main Street MA 01887 00020 -RS -1482 .READING POLICE DEPARTMENT 15 Union Street - Reading, Massachusetts 01867 Emergency Only: 911 - All Other Calls: (781) 944 -1212 - Fax: (781) 944 -2893 Web: www.ci.reading.ma.us /police/ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Change of Manager- Pepper Dining d/b /a "Chili's" Chief Mark D. Segalla Reading Police Department 15 Union Street Reading, MA 01867 Chief Segalla, June 29, 2017 As directed by your Office and in accordance with Reading Police Department Policy and Procedures, I have placed together an Executive Summary of the application for Change of Manager at "Chili's" (70 Walkers Brook Drive). Due to the magnitude of these transactions, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission has received the information, determined that the transaction is consistent with state law. There will be no change of existing managers, therefore the Commission will not require that a Managers Form be completed, nor will the Commission require background information on the managers as such information should already be on file. I find no reason why the Change of Manager application should not go forward. Respectfully Submitted, Lt Richard P. Abate Criminal Division Commander te` �Xx�p �. Town of Reading Meeting Minutes 0639, tNCO'RQO�P� Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Board of Selectmen Date: 2017 -06 -13 Building: Reading Town Hall Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: General Business Attendees: Members - Present: Time: 7:00 PM Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Session: Version: Chair John Arena, Barry Berman, John Halsey, Dan Ensminger, Andrew Friedmann Members - Not Present: Others Present: Town Manager Bob LeLacheur, Elder Services Director Jane Burns, Police Chief Mark Segall, Fire Chief Greg Burns, Town Engineer Ryan Percival, Bill Brown, Michelle Sanphy, Nancy Docktor, Sally Hoyt Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Topics of Discussion: The meeting was called to order by Chairman John Arena at 7:00 PM. Selectmen Liaison Reports Mr. Friedmann noted the Housing Authority is offering assistance to anyone displaced from the fire. He attended the Human Relations Advisory Committee meeting. Mr. Berman noted he attended one of the RCTV listening sessions and it had a good turnout and engagement. He also attended the fundraiser at Meador Brook for the fire victims and thanked Jodi Roche and Danielle Curren for putting that together. Mr. Ensminger also attended one of the RCTV listening sessions, the one aimed at youth and education. There is an online survey for residents to fill out with their feedback. Mr. Halsey has been working with some town staff to go through the policy revisions. He noted they will probably need a couple more meetings to go through it all. Mr. Arena attended the School Committee meeting which was also a ceremony for retiring teachers and teachers hitting milestones in their careers. He attended the RCTV listening session aimed towards the local government. He also noted he would like to ask the board to officially appoint him as the Board appointee to the Human Relations Advisory Committee. Mr. Halsey made a motion to appoint Mr. Arena to the Human Relations Advisory Committee as the Board of Selectmen's appointee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Ensminger and approved with a 5 -0 -0 vote. Public Comment Bill Brown made a comment that the Cemetery Committee does work on the cemeteries not just DPW. Michelle Sanphy asked the Selectmen to keep the override discussion on their agendas so the public can follow along. �\ Page 1 1 June 13t`', 2017 Board of Selectmen - Page 2 Town Manager's Report Mr. LeLacheur talked about the recent fire the town endured and the response the town had. He thanked Elder Services with assisting. The Senior center was collecting donations and approaching $50,000. As of right now they are planning on dividing all donations equally between all residents in the building. Mr. Arena wanted to commend all public safety for their work at the fire and all of the other towns and cities that also helped us out as well. Mr. Berman wanted to point out the towns bond rating is still a triple A and that is something to be proud of. Square Liquors Parking Request The Police Chief Mark Segalla explained the owner of Square Liquors at 13 High Street has requested the two parking spots directly in front of his business be changed to 15 minute parking. There was never a problem until a fitness studio opened behind them. The police asked Square liquors to try and work it out with the owner but there was no resolution made. The Chief noted there is no 15 minute parking anywhere else in town and it would be very hard to enforce. It may be easier to enforce 30 minutes. Mr. Berman noted 30 minutes seems reasonable and should keep out the gym goers because their classes are over 30 minutes long. Mr. Ensminger made a motion to make the two parking spots on 13 High Street in front of Square liquors 30 minute parking spots. The motion was seconded by Mr. Berman and approved with a 5 -0 -0 vote. Hearing - Driveway Curb cut at 69 Hanscom Ave Mr. Ensminger read the hearing notice. Engineering denied the request because it does not follow their policies. The request was then brought to PTTTF where ' eompromisett W as V^rCXdVd Because it is a slow road, PTTTF said the applicant could widen their driveway to 20 feet. The owner noted because of the shape of the driveway it makes it difficult to get out. Mr. Ensminger made a motion to close the hearing for 69 Hanscom Ave, seconded by Mr. Berman and approved with a 5 -0 -0 vote. Mr. Ensminger made a motion to approve the driveway curb cut for 69 Hanscom Avenue as proposed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Berman and approved with a 5 -0 -0 vote. Public Safety Training `% � Our Public safety departments have been doing joint training sessions on how to respond to a dangerous person /rapidly changing situation. They have met 23 times in the past 16 months. There have been trainings with the supervisors and then all the officers. The trainings have greatly benefited both the departments and helps them work together when responding to any call. The goal is to continue this every year with changing goals, venues and situations. Both the Fire and Police Chief gave a huge thank you to all the officers and firefighters who set up this training. Chief Segalla noted it was amazing to watch the supervisors set up and run this training and watch the officers who had to respond. Mr. Halsey noted the coordination between the two departments is exceptional. They debriefed at the end of every situation with brutal honesty. Mr. LeLacheur gave a big thank you to George Danis for letting them use the property for these trainings. The State'bomb squad even mentioned how well the two departments worked together when they came to help with the bomb scare a couple weeks prior. He commended both Chiefs. Mr. Halsey noted it is so important to fund and staff these departments adequately. Page 1 2 �,Ya June 13"', 2017 Board of Selectmen - Page 3 Senior Tax Relief Update Town Assessor Victor Santaniello explained the way the senior tax relief will work. It will be based on a number of factors including if you received your tax circuit breaker and if you own your home in Reading for more than 10 years. It will also depend on how many people apply and what the Town and Board of Selectmen vote to shift to the other tax payers. The application that has been created is currently being reviewed by Town Counsel. The time frame of when people will be able to apply will be during August. Jane Burns, Elder Services Director, noted she will start advertising around the senior center and in their notices and papers. Council on Aging - Needs Assessment by UMass Boston Gerontology Center for Social and Demographic Research The goal for this assessment was to generate information on the older population in Reading and the needs of senior residents. They used demographic data, focus groups, informant interviews and comparisons with peers to collect information. The results conclude Reading needs to plan for substantial growth in the senior population in the next 10 years. More than one third of the homeowners are seniors. The Pleasant Street Center is very widely used and there are some high priority recommendations for the center. One recommendation is to improve accessibility; like the need for a bathroom on the first floor. There is also a huge need for just more space in general. Mr. Arena asked if there is any way to expand the current building and Jane Burns replied they are really at their limits in that building. Some other recommendations included expanding opportunities for property tax work off program, strengthening the mental and behavioral health programs, additional outreach to family caregivers, and expanding intergenerational programs. Elder Services Update Elder Services Director Jane Burns noted they just completed their master plan. The department has nurse advocacy which takes care of hospital visits and rehab, medicine management and health planning. The memory cafe was started for residents with memory loss and their caregivers. In Reading, 15.2% of residents over 65 are living with dementia. The Pleasant Street Center had over 15,000 visits this year and they average 68 people daily. Planning for the future for elder services includes looking at space constraints, increase staffing and more transportation. Mr. Halsey noted it sounds like we have outgrown the space at the Senior Center and it is only going to get worse. Budget Timeline Town Manager Bob LeLacheur briefly talked about a draft timeline for next year's budget meetings. They are looking to move the schedule up about a month in order to get more information out to the public earlier about an override vote. Vanessa Alvarado asked if we could take last years' numbers and add the cuts from this year to get a general number needed at this time to get the conversation started. A punch list is needed from the schools of top priorities. Mr. Berman showed a draft override survey he created to put out to residents to gather their thoughts about the last override and figure out why it failed. Keno The Town Manager consulted with Town Counsel about the question of Keno in Reading. It was noted the board could take a vote to remove the prohibition of Keno at an open meeting. The board would then need to create a policy to put in place. The board will take and vote on applications on an individual basis. The board discussed not putting this into effect until August first after they have time to create a policy. Page 1 3 June 13th, 2017 Board of Selectmen - Page 4 Mr. Ensminger moved that the Board of Selectmen consider all future KENO applications submitted on or after August 1St, 2017 pursuant to M.G.L. c.10, §27A on an individual basis, rather than object to all such applications generally, and further authorize [the Town Manager /Town Counsel] to notify in writing the Lottery Commission of this vote. The motion was seconded by Mr. Halsey and passed with a 5 -0 -0 vote. At 10:50 Mr. Ensminger made a motion to go into Executive Session to discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining and that the Chair declare that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining position of the body, and to adjourn, not returning to Open Session. The motion was seconded by Mr. Berman and the motion passed with the following roll call vote: Mr. Friedmann - Yes Mr. Berman - Yes Mr. Ensminger - Yes Mr. Halsey - Yes Mr. Arena - Yes Page 1 4 Saunders, Caitlin From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: BOS packet Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: LeLacheur, Bob Thursday, June 29, 2017 3:59 PM Saunders, Caitlin Fwd: Fios TV Notice image002.png; ATT00001.htm; image003.png; ATT00002.htm; Customer Notice - BH LTV.pdf; ATT00003.htm From: <iill.m.reddish @verizon.com> Date: June 29, 2017 at 3:46:01 PM EDT To: <iill.m.reddish @ verizon.com> Subject: Fios TV Notice Dear Municipal Official: This is to notify you of certain changes to Fios® TV programming. On or after June 19, 2017, Blue Highways /LAFF TV programming on channel 247 was removed from the Fios TV channel lineup by the content provider. Verizon began notifying subscribers through the Fios® TV Message Center beginning on or around June 26, 2017. A sample customer notice is attached. Access to the Fios® TV channel lineup is available 24/7 online at verizon.com /fiostvchannels. We realize that our customers have other alternatives for entertainment and our goal is to offer the best choice and value in the industry. Verizon appreciates the opportunity to conduct business in your community. Should you or your staff have any questions, please contact me. Sincerely, verizom' Fioso TV Programming Change On or after June 19, 2017, Blue Highways /LAFF TV programming on channel 247 was removed from the Fios TV channel lineup by the content provider. Similar programming may be available in your local channel lineup. Check your channel guide for details. �aa OFRFq� -mac Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street 16 P� Reading, MA 01867 -2685 3'9' /NCOCiPO¢ FAX: (781) 942 -9071 Email: townmanager @ci.reading.ma.us TOWN MANAGER Website: www. readingma.gov (781) 942 -9043 Julieann M. Thurlow President /CEO Reading Cooperative Bank 55 Walkers Brook Drive Reading, MA 01867 June 28, 2017 Dear Julie, On behalf of the entire community, please accept my thanks to you personally and to the Reading Cooperative Bank for your fundraising efforts on behalf of the victims of the recent fire at 52 Sanborn Street. This letter also serves as my authorization on behalf of the Town of Reading to advance funds to individual unit owners from the "Town of Reading and RCB Schoolhouse Condo Fire Relief Fund ". Sincerel , Robert W. LeLacheur . CFA Town Manager V C= 3 -, 7" If 0 VD I I V Vl N 111 N N N 00 M N 00 N Ol O 00 m W m 0 0 10 m n oo m m N i.n m m n m v o M N N N ^ rl r1 N N N N to a/T In to 't/T N LT t/1 an t/? LT VT In th N N ._ ID CL i m �! 1 L m -. O �. fV lD . o� 1p V' o M W I� m N W o w V m m l �-1 W O r1 V tf1 N V l0 m t0 16 V r ! M N N N V <y' rV to V N r-1 om V �Y - _ oo o D In Ol N -o v L+ ti v>• v>• vl vr, an an +n yr and V>• an yr an an O n M n N M Ol m O !- oo I, w n tD oo N t/1 j N V lD V l0 O tD O W O lfl = In N M LD r-1 N O N. cY V M @ � I an vT.___ v>• air +elan an I � +n � andanl an 1 ani an to i'an_- 1vOV oo N N °v N N W Flo lD �iv ✓1 m a o oo kD m v '-I m I, W 4 y W y N `1 W M O to ti __.. { N IN'�I M m M O m� m N V N� Io, ti i .til N V N Zo and 1 to an I t � +n7an vt- �i_- 1II N 'N M . : N M -d' to lD O n N o ! - M -- - � lI O - W oo �:WI O L} I VT I an -- - - -N -- V} V} d .O Y a r-4 W N d' lD W W m O d' l v lD N M N N O N M M N N V 1 W ID 1� W V M al O W M! O H O t0 O- Ol tT Ln M In .n to alt. an +n vl .n I an an I .n I .n vl! v>• v.; rlt• +n v* to � W I V o dt i h N d' i W O. W _ lM-- � N N Wn to oo O W V 1 N � tl� Q .n l i I +n an +n +n. v>• to an an an ' an , yr I an +n an 7 -, L f l cvl W m O M Ol O l. V W N N N N ' i .-i m H H V a-i o O O . o N N m N N Ol W H I W V o N m O n N O \ b \ \ Ln , 1� N � o N -oa M V O N N Vl N M w N w O ONl N O 1� W M V O N' to N N W m ._._ _ ^ M M O N O O O o0 O O O Ln N Ol N M .-L Ol to N Vl Ol LD Ll a' to C V Lfl Ol — N W W_ M o0 o0 tD W �--1 .-i N M z N M 'i V `-1 N v N Ln Oi M i N m t/P 'Ln to LT /R oV/ N /o vY o to V 0 0 O O O O O o _ o .} o o o 0 0 0 o 0 o o 0 0 0 0 O O O O o o o 0 0 o o O o 0 O O O O 0 o! 0 0 O 0 O o O O 0 0 O� o O o O Ln O Ln o O o O o O o O o O o LP 0 Ln o 1 0 O O O O O vl O O LP O o 0 o 0 0 0 0 in u1 Ln 0 Ln 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 0 o c 0 O O O p O. O LA Vn O Vf w o0 N Ih N of O LO Vl Vl N .-i LP Ln V1 I� N L o O N r r Lt1 N O N oN N N N N O N N tD m �4 in a/' J t-L m N 01 tD (Ln O oo o O O O o O O O O LA O - n Ln l0 O O W W O O 0 LA 0 0 V 0 C O M O O M O Q W N W C of Ln o Ol Ln Ln Li O to I- o f Ln O M In W I al N N O Ln n M O O Ill N Ln N Ln Ln p t!i M lD N r r: m tD D O M M N W M O O W O oo N I Co N O O N fl V n Ln n n V: Ol N W N lD N N W V m D n r! lD V l0 V O O n N G ID D Q7 W O O ei to h a> c{ d n N lD N O to n L/1 O M V O V tD rI O N! N � 'j. W N V N � N � to Lr� � oo tD N � Q n O n V r � M 01 W M, N M r-t M W ~ • -1 N N H tin N tmp t/} in to V} NI VT V1 -VT an l/T <hI L1 V}I N V1 I -V? V} N VTI VTj V)! J N LT: VT V? V} VT VT VT LY F J h: H H! H f H H f- • I- 00 F- f- L L L L L v\ L O - n N ~ O O Ol aL, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 a t- _ o of _ -? o> f O -' O }O-• 0 N N O O o) 2i _O Q C L O C O O 0\ c CO V V J C J V\ J E m @ W Q H C C N -I GILL O U.� m~ N- N ` i