Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-02-13 Board of Selectmen HandoutTOWN MANAGER'S REPORT Tuesday, February 13, 2007 • Hallmark Development on Walkers Brook Drive - no methadone clinic. • The Main St Improvement Project is being excluded from the upcoming transportation bond bill. This is good news as any project within the bill would get delayed until it passed and most likely loose the bulk or all of this gear's construction season. So hopefully the state doesn't change their mind and the March 13t date will remain firm. • Easement acceptance and releases for 98 Hartshorn to be signed. BOARD OF SELECTMEN AGENDAS February 26, 2007 Special Town Meeting February 27, 2007 Process - National Development I Close Warrant - Annual Town Meeting Hearing I West Street School Zone Hearing I Stop sign - Walnut at Old Farm Traffic issues: Board of Selectmen proposed standards for multi-way stops; Bancroft and Hartshorn multi-way stop; downtown parking - establishment of regulations on Sanborn between Woburn and Lowell?" Children" signs; Vine Street 1 way with parking? Standards for street width and parking regulations; report on use of rented parking on High Street; report on traffic counts on Federal Street; Report on manner of measurement of distances from corners I Follow-up - 128/I93 position March 1, 2007 Special Town Meeting March 6, 2007 Selectmen's Office Hour - James Bonazoli Highlights 1 Sewer Inflow and Infiltration 7:30 8:00 8:15 8:30 9:00 10:30 6:30 7:30 0 WSSWAIAC re follow-up on water issues. 8:00 Progress report - Northern Area Greenway Committee + 8:30 Review Action Status report Review Goals 9:201 Hearing Highlights March 13, 2007 Waiver of driveway/curb cut regulations 37 Pinevale Rd.(John McCracken - 781-307-1591) Park Master Planning - Tennis Court development Review/Discussion - Memorial Park improvements Presentation/Review draft Board of Selectmen policy on 4 way stop intersections I March 27, 2007 - Adopt an Island Reception Presentation of Police Accreditation re-certification { April 3, 2007 Local Election i April 10, 2007 Selectmen's Office Hour - Stephen Goldy Engineering Review Action Status report April 23, 2007 Annual Town Meeting April 24, 2007 April 26, 2007 - Annual Town Meeting April 30, 2007 - Annual Town Meeting 7:00 6:30 Page 1 of 1 Schena, Paula From: Hechenbleikner, Peter Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 4:47 PM To: Schena, Paula Subject: Abandonment of Easement Move that the Board of Selectmen approve the Abandonment of Easement and Acceptance of Easement related to the property at 98 Hartshorn Street pursuant to Article 16 of the May 1, 2006 Town Meeting. 65 2/13/2007 ACCEPTANCE OF THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN We, the undersigned, being the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Reading, Massachusetts, pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 of Chapter 40 of the Massachusetts General Laws, do hereby accept the 15' drainage easement granted to the Town of Reading from David M. Swyter and Suzanne I. Biron for the premises located at 98 Hartshorn Street, Reading, Massachusetts pursuant to Article 16, as approved, by the May 1, 2006 Town Meeting. TOWN OF READING BOARD OF SELECTMEN Ben Tafoya, Chairman Richard W. Schubert, Vice Chairman Stephen Goldy, Secretary Camille W. Anthony Richard W. Schubert COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, ss. February , 2007 On this day of February , 2007 before me, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which was , to be the persons whose names are signed on the preceding or attached document, and acknowledged to me that they signed it voluntarily for its stated purpose. Notary Public My commission expires: 0 ABANDONMENT OF EASEMENT KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: that the Town of Reading, a municipal corporation, having its usual place of business at 18 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts (hereinafter "Town"), acting by and through its duly elected and constituted Board of Selectmen, as the holder of a dominant estate in an easement running over, under and upon 98 Hartshorn Street in the Town of Reading; WHEREAS this easement was created for drainage and is shown as a 20' "Drainage Easement" on a plan entitled "Basement Plan of Land; 98 Hartshorn Street; Reading, Mass. By Benchmark Survey dated February 21, 2006"; WHEREAS, Article 16, as approved, by the May 1, 2006 Town Meeting authorized the Board of Selectmen pursuant to M.G.L. Chapter 40, §3 to abandon said drainage easement and in its place, accept a 15' drainage easement located in and upon the same property; NOW THEREFORE, the said Town of Reading, acting by and through its duly elected and authorized Board of Selectmen, for good and valuable consideration, hereby releases and abandons all of its right, title and interest in and to, above and below, over and across the easement area shown on the plan hereinabove mentioned, to David M. Swyter and Suzanne I Biron, and to their successors in title and assigns. WITNESS our hands and seals this day of February, 2007. TOWN OF READING BOARD OF SELECTMEN Ben Tafoya, Chainnan James E. Bonazoli, Vice Chainnan Stephen Goldy, Secretary Camille W. Anthony Richard W. Schubert (J) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, ss. February , 2007 On this day of February, 2007, before ine, the undersigned notary public, personally appeared proved to me through satisfactory evidence of identification, which was , to be the persons whose names are signed on the preceding or attached document, and acknowledged to me that they signed it voluntarily for its stated purpose. Notary Public My commission expires: (D8 Page 1 of 1 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: tomhatch@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 1:23 PM To: Town Manager Cc: woodland rd private way Subject: damage done to homes during construction dear sir, i am the homeowner of 83 john carver rd., the corner lot. i am a police ofc. in the town of north reading, and have worked numerous road details during the rt.62 construction job. during the time of road excavation and grading, i have seen several digital photo's of damage done to a homes interior walls ie ; cracked plaster/paint due to hydraulic jack hammering and rock excavating. my question is if any damage is occurred during this project, who would be liable? also , there are several houses which have water issues during storms. if no curbing is being installed, would a burro then be placed, and if not, what about the rain/water run off into our yards. i look forward to your reply! respectfully submitted, thomas hatch tomhatch@comcast.net lam' 2/13/2007 Page 1 of 2 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Hechenbleikner, Peter Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 2:34 PM To: 'Nancy Kearney' Cc: Zambouras, George Subject: RE: Proposal to Accept Woodland Street Thanks Nancy - I will copy this for the Board of Selectmen for tonight. I can't address all of the issues that you raise but I can tell you that the street paving with curbing as proposed will keep street drainage on the street until it goes into the new catch basin at the end of the street, so if you had water running from the street area onto your property, that should not happen with a constructed street. I don't believe that the engineers know whether there is rock - they often put a number in the estimate in the event that they hit rock. I don't believe that the project anticipates much excavation - really only for the drainage. When excavation takes place they try to minimize it and any impact on abutters. Pete From: Nancy Kearney [mailto:ndkearney@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 1:45 PM To: Town Manager Subject: Fw: Proposal to Accept Woodland Street Original Message From: Nancv Kearnev To: The LeLacheurs Sent:. Tuesday, February 13, 2007 1:43 PM Subject: Proposal to Accept Woodland Street My name is Nancy Kearney and my husband; Dan LeLacheur and I live at 91 John Carver Rd. I am planning to attend the public hearing tonight 2/13/07 at 8:00 but in the essence of time I thought I should document my opinion and perspective of the proposal to Accept Woodland Street. 1. My biggest concern will be the loss of multiple parking spots during the winter months. In the next few years my children will be old enough to drive I will be forced to reconfigure my yard, eliminating my garden and incurring potentially $10,000 in expenses to create additional parking spots. 2, We currently have a water problem. Last year we installed a carpet in our basement for approximately $3,000 only to remove it several months later due to water damage. I am concerned that altering the street could potentially cause additional water problems for us. The street slopes down toward my house and it is my understanding that roads are designed to be higher in the middle which would potentially increase the water flow into my yard and ultimately my basement. 3. The cost estimates list rock excavation. I have heard that removing rock via professional excavation equipment can cause damage to plaster walls and ceilings. My walls and ceilings are over 50 years old. I am concerned that they would not be able to withstand that type of excavation. 4. Lastly, I am concerned about an additional expense of over $5,000. in my tax bill for a proposal that I do not want. 2/13/2007 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, ss. Officer's Return, Reading: By virtue of this Warrant, I, on notified and warned the inhabitants of the Town of Reading, qualified to vote on Town affairs, to meet at the place and at the time specified by posting attested copies of this Town Meeting Warrant in the following public places within the Town of Reading: Precinct 1 J. Warren Killam School, 333 Charles Street Precinct 2 Registry of Motor Vehicles, 275 Salem Street Precinct 3 Reading Police Station, 15 Union Street Precinct 4 Joshua Eaton School, 365 Summer Avenue Precinct 5 Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street Precinct 6 Austin Preparatory School, 101 Willow Street Precinct 7 Reading Library, Local History Room, 64 Middlesex Avenue Precinct 8 Mobil on the Run, 1330 Main Street The date of posting being not less than fourteen (14) days prior to February 26, 2007, the date set for the Special Town Meeting in this Warrant. 1 also caused an attested copy of this Warrant to be published in the Reading Chronicle in the issue of Alan W. Ulrich, Constable A true copy. Attest: Cheryl A. Johnson, Town Clerk SPECIAL TOWN MEETING (Seal) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, ss. To any of the Constables of the Town of Reading, Greetings: In the name of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, you are hereby required to notify and warn the inhabitants of the Town of Reading, qualified to vote in elections and Town affairs, to meet at the Reading Memorial High School Auditorium, 62 Oakland Road in said Reading, on Monday, February 26, 2007, at seven-thirty o'clock in the evening, at which time and place the following articles are to be acted upon and determined exclusively by Town Meeting Members in accordance with the provisions of the Reading Home Rule Charter. ARTICLE 1 To hear and act on the reports of the Board of Selectmen, Town Accountant, Treasurer-Collector, Board of Assessors, Director of Public Works, Town Clerk, Tree Warden, Board of Health, School Committee, Contributory Retirement Board, Library Trustees, Municipal Light Board, Finance Committee, Cemetery Trustees, Community Planning & Development Commission, Conservation Commission, Town Manager and any other Board or Special Committee. Board of Selectmen Background: This Article appears on the Warrant for all Town Meetings. No reports are anticipated. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bvlaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 2 To choose all other necessary Town Officers and Special Committees and determine what instructions shall be given Town Officers and Special Committees, and to see what sum the Town will raise by borrowing or transfer from available funds, or otherwise, and appropriate for the purpose of funding Town Officers and Special Committees to carry out the instructions given to them, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: This Article appears on the Warrant of all Town Meetings. There are no known Instructional Motions at this time. Instructional Motions are normally held until the end of all other business at Town Meeting. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bvlaw Committee Report: No report. i3 ARTICLE 3 To see if the Town will vote to amend the FY 2007 - FY 2011, Capital Improvements Program as provided for in Section 7-7 of the Reading Home Rule Charter, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Backaround: This Article is included in every Town Meeting Warrant. Town Bylaw prohibits Town Meeting from approving any Capital Expenditure unless the project is included in the Town's Capital Improvements Plan. There are 3 amendments to the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) that are required for this Town Meeting: • FN 003 -Technology Software - $20,000 for a consultant for the financial system. • FN 004 - Technology Wide Area Network - $25,000. • PW-R 004 - Sidewalk/curb/pedestrian safety - Franklin sidewalks - $325,000 from Grant. • PW-W-001 - MWRA water Interconnect - $720,000. Finance Committee Report: BvlaW Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 4 To see if the Town will vote to amend one or more of the votes taken under Article 15 of the Warrant of the Annual Town Meeting of April 24, 2006, as amended under Article 5 of the November 13, 2006 Subsequent Town Meeting, and to see what sum the Town will vote to appropriate by borrowing or transfer from available funds, or otherwise, as the result of any such amended votes for the operation of the Town and its government, or take any other action with respect thereto. Finance Committee Background: The following amendments to the FY 2007 budget are requested at this time: • B8 - Elder/Human Services Salaries - Funding for this years portion of the Nurse Advocacy program L7,000 • E5 - Dispatch Salaries - Funding for hiring of an additional dispatcher - $9,000 • J3 - School Building Improvements - $15.000 Killam Roof - This project appears in the Capital Improvement Program in the amount of $100,000, but the Facilities Director has done further investigation and has determined that the needed repairs can be done for@15,000. A full replacement will be needed in about 7 years. • J6 Town Technology - $20,000 for a consultant for the financial svstem. It is important to have this funding now so that we may proceed with the debt authorization for the financial system at the annual Town Meeting. • J12 - Sidewalk/curb/pedestrian safety - $325.000 Franklin sidewalks - The Town has received a State Grant for this project and the funds must be appropriated in order to be expended. We anticipate being into construction at the beginning of the construction season in April 2007. • J15 - Wide Area Network - $25,000 for Wide Area Network hardware ($15,000 - schools; $10,000 - municipal). This is required in order to connect the WAN to all of the school buildings , and to purchase additional security hardware for Town buildings. I L4 - Water Capital - MWRA water interconnection - $720,000. The cost of constructing the vault and electronics to complete the interconnection between the MWRA system in Woburn and the Town of Reading water distribution system is $720,000. This is an actual bid price plus the cost of engineering and construction services. Funds are available from previously authorized projects, and need to be transferred by Town Meeting to be used for this purpose. K8 - Employee Benefits - covering the cost of benefits for the Nurse Advocate position and the additional Dispatcher - $6,,000. Finance Committee Report: Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 5 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Reading Zoning Map to include within the Business B and Mixed Use Zoning Districts a parcel of land currently within the S15 Zoning District shown as parcel number 21 on Reading Assessors' Map 64, which land is situated on the Westerly side of Sanborn Street, in Reading. Or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Backaround: For the past several months the CPDC has been considering a request by the Reading Cooperative Bank to utilize the property at 16 Sanborn Street, which consists of two parcels of land, for parking for its employees. The property was previously used as a three family house, and prior to that there were a number of commercial uses on the site. The smaller parcel - Lot 21a, is currently in the Business B and Mixed Use Overlay Zoning District. The larger parcel, lot 21, is zoned for R-15 use which permits single family homes. The property was damaged by a serious fire on March 14, 2005. Since the fire, the property stood vacant, and once the bank acquired the property they have demolished much of the structure, making it safe and less of an eyesore. The property is surrounded on one side by the US Postal Service parking lot, on one side by a medical office with parking, and on one side by a single family home. 0 A previous warrant article on the November 15, 2005 Subsequent Town Meeting warrant would have re-zoned this and three abutting properties to Business B. That article was tabled by the Board of Selectmen after concerns raised by residents in the nearby neighborhood that there was not adequate process prior to consideration of such a change. Concerns were expressed that the proposed zoning would eliminate the residential buffer between the downtown Business B zoning and the Woburn Street neighborhood. Subsequent to that time, the Reading Cooperative Bank has acquired the property for use as an employee off street parking lot, and the bank and its representatives have had discussion with neighbors and Town Officials on how to go about achieving their goal. In order to address the concerns of some of the neighbors that the property, if re-zoned to Business B and Mixed Use overlay, could be developed for any purpose permitted in the Business B and Mixed Use Overlay Zoning District, the . bank and its representative developed a proposal to establish a parking overlay district, which is the subject of Articles 6 and 7 on this Warrant. Through the public input process of considering the subject matter of Articles 6 and 7, it was outlined by the Bank's attorney that re-zoning was one of the options considered for this property, but that through Articles 6 and 7 they were trying to address the concerns of neighbors that the property could be used for purposes other than a parking lot. During at least one of the public hearings a suggestion was made by one of the attendees that the simplest thing to do was to rezone the property to Business B. Based on this input the Board of Selectmen decided to place this Article on the Warrant in order to give Town Meeting members an alternative to address the needs of the owner. If Article 5 gets a 213 vote from Town Meeting, then it would be the intent of the movers to table Article 6 and 7 as they would no longer be needed. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bvlaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee voted 4-0-0 to recommend this Article to Town Meeting. The Bylaw Committee felt that this is the most direct and straight forward way to address the need, and to eliminate any other impact in the community. CPDC Report: Action pending. The CPDC is holding its formal public hearing on this matter on February 21, and will have a report to Town Meeting when this Article is taken up. ARTICLE 6 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Reading Zoning By-laws to establish an Employee Parking Overlay District by (a) adding a new Section 2.2.10.1 Employee Off-Site Parking Lot, (b) amending Section 4.2.2. Table of Uses, to add the use of Employee Off-Site Parking Lot, and (c) by adding a new Section 4.11 entitled Employee Parking Overlay District: Definitions 2.2.10.1 Employee Off-Site Parkina Lot: A parking lot situated in an Employee Parking Overlay District that is used exclusively for the parking of non-commercial motor vehicles used by the employees of a business that is located both in a Downtown Business B District (principally traversed by Main and Haven Streets) and within 300 feet of that parking lot. 4.2.2. Table of Uses PRINCIPAL USES RES RES RES BUS BUS BUS IND S-15 A-40 A-80 A B C S-20 S-40 Business and Service Uses Employee Off-Site Parking Lot SPP****** No No No No No No Maybe permitted in an 5-15 District only within an Employee Parking Overlay District (EP District) and only with a special permit under Section 4.11 from the CPDC. 4.11. EMPLOYEE PARKING OVERLAY DISTRICT 4.11.1 Purpose: The purpose of this section is to provide a public benefit by mitigating a severe parking shortage in the Downtown Business B District (principally traversed by Main and Haven Streets) by providing for off-site parking in an Employee Parking Overlay District (EP District) for employees of businesses situated in the Downtown Business B District (principally traversed by Main and Haven Streets) and to do so in a tightly controlled (9 manner which provides adequate safeguards to minimize the impact of such employee parking on residential property. 4.11.2 EP District: Employee Parking Lot Overlay Districts ("EP District") shall take the form of overlay districts covering designated land in the S-15 residential district, but only as are applied to a specific parcel or parcels through a formal and proper amendment to the Reading Zoning Map. For any land within an EP District, an owner may choose to conform either to the zoning regulations which govern the underlying district or to the EP District overlay regulations and procedures set forth by this section, whose specific provisions shall supersede all other provisions in the Zoning By-Laws with respect to the underlying district including, without limitation, use, intensity, dimensional and parking; however, the provisions of any other overlay district shall continue to apply. Employee Parking Overlay Districts shall be overlaid only on designated portions of the S-15 residential district that both directly abut and are within 100 feet of the Downtown Business B District (principally traversed by Main and Haven Streets) and which are specifically placed in the Employee Parking Overlay Districts by the specific action of the Town Meeting. Land that is separated from the Downtown Business B District (principally traversed by Main and Haven Streets) boundary by a portion of a street or a railroad right of way shall not be considered to "directly abut" the Downtown Business B District (principally traversed by Main and Haven Streets) for the purpose of this provision. No more than 100 parking spaces can be allowed in the EP Overlay District. 4.11.3 Special Permit for Emolovee Off-Site Parkina Lot: The Community Planning and Development Commission (the "CPDC"), as the Special Permit Granting Authority, shall have authority to grant a Special Permit to establish an Employee Off-Site Parking Lot ("EPL") within an EP District by a vote of at least four members of the five-member CPDC. The CPDC shall evaluate proposed EPL projects and require all such projects to conform to the Employee Off-Site Parking Lot requirements and standards set forth in Sections 4.11.5 to ensure the benefits to the Town of a proposed project outweigh any adverse impacts before granting a special permit. If a lot is used as an Employee Off-Site Parking Lot, no other principal use shall be located on that lot. 4.11.4 Special Permit Application: An owner who wishes to apply for a special permit to establish an EPL shall submit an application to the CPDC. The application shall identify the business whose employees shall use the employee parking lot. The land included in the application may consist of more than one parcel, but all parcels must tie entirely within the EP District. The process shall conform to the requirements of law and Sections 7.3.1, 7.3.3 and 7.3.4. 6) 4.11.5 Conditions. Reauirements and Standards: The CPDC may grant a special permit to use a parcel within the EP District for an employee parking lot provided all of the following conditions are met to the satisfaction of the CPDC: a. The land must be void of any buildings both at the time when application is made for the special permit and during such time as the lot is used as an employee parking lot. The employee off-site parking lot must have at least sixty feet of frontage on a public way and vehicular access to that lot must be exclusively over that frontage with the driveway opening being within 100 feet of the Downtown Business B District (principally traversed by Main and Haven Streets) Boundary. b. The finished employee parking lot shall provide for surface or below ground parking and shall not contain any above ground parking structures. C. The lot must be within 300 feet distance from the business use that it serves. The CPDC shall impose conditions in any special permit to prevent the lot from being used by persons other than the employees of the business identified as the user of the lot without permission from the CPDC and may establish a monitoring system at the expense of the parcel owner to assure compliance. d. The CPDC may limit the number of parking spaces to 35 parking spaces per EPL or may limit the number of parking spaces to a lesser number if the EPL cannot reasonably and safely accommodate more spaces in the judgment of the CPDC. e. Parking on an employee parking lot cannot be used to meet any applicable zoning on-site minimum parking requirements of the business that it serves, but this shall not preclude a business from utilizing the provisions of Section 6.1.1.1. if the business otherwise qualifies to use Section 6.1.1.1. The parking lot shall be used only during the hours when the business that it serves is operating. Additional hours of use to be determined by CPDC during special permit process. g. Any lighting shall be controlled and directed so as not to shine into abutting property and shall be limited as to design and intensity to the satisfaction of the CPDC. Lot lighting will be turned off not later than the earlier of (i) 9:00 p.m. or (ii) when there are no employees working at the business that is using the lot closes. h. The entrance to the employee parking lot shall be gated to assure control as to the use of the lot in a manner satisfactory to the CPDC. The parking lot design shall be subject to site plan review by the Community Planning and Development Commission, which process may be held concurrently with the special permit process. [q) The CPDC shall impose proper and adequate fencing or vegetative screening from abutting residential property. k. Conditions shall be imposed to assure the ongoing maintenance and cleaning of the lot. Furthermore, the business granted rights for off-street parking must demonstrate active participation in the Town Transit non-profit as part of special permit conditions. M. Furthermore, the business granted rights for off-street parking must demonstrate that their employee parking requirements (i.e., total number of spaces, allocated to employees by all means in town) be less than 90% of total business employee parking requirements (the total number of spaces if all employees drove to work separately). The CPDC may impose additional conditions and limitations in the special permit that it deems appropriate to accomplish the purposes of this by-law. Or take any other action with respect thereto. Community Planning and Development Commission Background: See background under CPDC report below. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bviaw. Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee voted 3-9-0 to recommend the subject matter of this article if article 5 does not pass Town Meeting. CPDC Report: Formal Vote: On January 29, 2007, the CPDC voted 2-2-0 not to recommend Article 6 to Town Meeting. On January 29, 2007, the CPDC voted 2-2-0 not to recommend Article 7 to Town Meeting. Discussion: Although sponsored by the CPDC, this Article was initiated by the Reading Co-operative Bank and has undergone significant public scrutiny, discussion and revision, starting with a meeting with the Board of Selectman a year ago. The CPDC held a number of zoning workshops which culminated in a public hearing held on January 29, 2007. In support of that public hearing, a number of questions had been raised through the process, the questions were researched and answers were provided by Town Staff, Town Counsel, the Board of Selectmen, Atty. Brad Latham (representing Reading Cooperative Bank), the Historical Commission, and the CPDC. That information has been available on the town's website. The CPDC was split on its recommendation of these two By-laws. The following is a brief summary of the CPDC views, both positive and negative, on the subject. CPDC votes in favor of the Article because the CPDC felt that the Article limited the use of the Sanborn Street lot to only employee parking. The lot would remain in the residential Zone and require a Special Permit if used for employee parking. Buffering, lighting, and limited access would be obvious Special Permit conditions. CPDC votes in objection to the Article because it was an inefficient use of the land or because the zoning was too broad a vehicle and had the potential to include other lots adjacent to the Business B district in the future. Many of the comments and questions raised during our hearings had to do with the recently adopted Master Plan and how these Articles reconciled with our Master Plan. In reviewing that document, at a high level, the plan recognizes the need for balance (between growth and use), but it also emphasizes a vision for the Town, one based on character and identity. The Master Plan is to be used as a guide, not as a hard and fast code. But it also states that within the boundaries of what is realistic, we must understand that there are limits to the community's infrastructure. The Mixed Use Zone is an example where we wanted to encourage residential development in the downtown, however one aspect of that by-law required that parking for additional uses (residential) be addressed on site. To date, not one application for a mixed use special permit has been submitted. We heard testimony from numerous business owners, employees and residents that adequate parking in the downtown business district, including availability of employee parking, is an infrastructure limitation to growth. As such, these speakers were fundamentally in support of using the proposed articles as a means to resolve the issue. While many asked that we hold off until the downtown parking ad hoc task force provides its recommendations, some of these recommendations will likely require additional funding and may not be able to be implemented until a few years from now and others are more a matter of coordination within the business community. There is clearly a need for a more immediate solution. A number of individuals, including the Cities for Climate Protection, used this article as a platform for emphasizing the need to address the environmental issues, and offered a number of solutions, such as car- pooling, a local transit authority, and other environmentally friendly alternatives. There are a few conditions of this By-law that require any recipient of a special permit to actively participate in these endeavors. Many of the goals of the Master Plan point toward providing a comprehensive parking solution in Downtown. The CPDC understands that these articles are not that solution. However, how do we reconcile the short and long term needs without allowing interim solutions such as are presented in these articles to keep the downtown business environment vibrant? We further support the idea of having these articles vetted on Town Meeting floor, since it is an important issue critical to the entire town and will set the tone for future business development. Many opinions point to the view that Reading does not support this development and the desire is to maintain a "small village character." But should that philosophy prevail here, where it will deter a highly valued business with a long history in the community from trying to provide for its employees and at the same time making a number of additional parking spaces available for all who wish to visit downtown businesses? While the CPDC has been an advocate of mixed use in the downtown, and we are actively pursuing a 40R district as well, none of this will work without a parking solution. To the credit of Reading Cooperative Bank, which has demonstrated good citizenship throughout its history in Reading, they are trying here to work with the community to come up with an acceptable solution which will enable them both to stay in the community and to serve a longstanding need of the Town. The two votes to recommend these articles directly support the position that this is a positive interim solution to a compelling town-wide need. One vote to not recommend these articles was based on the following explanation. This vote did not turn on whether or not employee parking is a proper use on the specific property sought by Reading Cooperative Bank. Rather, it was based on the question whether the broader parking overlay district, as a necessary component of this initiative, is a sound planning tool to be recommended. The establishment of a broader parking overlay district with potential application to a number of properties rather than with just application to the single site sought by the Reading Cooperative Bank, is necessary because it would be impermissible "spot zoning" to establish such an overlay over just one property. The Reading Cooperative Bank seeks a parking overlay on just the one residential property. No one seeks, envisions, or expects a future request for a parking overlay on any of the other potential residential sites within the proposed district. It was simply that in order to provide today for the right to place such a parking overlay on the property sought by the Bank, it was also necessary to craft the Bylaw as a broader overlay district affecting other potential properties. A broader overlay district which no one wants other than on a single site, appears to this CPDC member to be an unsound planning policy, warranting this vote as a CPDC member to not recommend from a "planning" perspective. Whether or not this overlay district may be in the best overall interests of the Town of Reading because it presents the only means to allow limited employee parking on this one property owned by the Reading Cooperative Bank is an entirely different question; and one not best addressed by the CPDC, but by Town Meeting on behalf of and in the best interests of the entire town. To this CPDC member, the question whether the end (employee parking on the one property owned by the Reading Cooperative Bank) justifies the means (establishing a parking overlay district with potential application to a number of other residential properties for which such use appears inappropriate) is more a legislative policy question properly answered by Town Meeting as the Town's legislative branch than it is a planning policy question within the purview of the Town's planning board. If the Town considers it appropriate to do so, simply because it appears the only means to allow the Reading Cooperative Bank to develop this property as an employee parking lot thereby freeing up parking in the downtown business district for town residents, then that is a matter appropriately within the purview of the town's legislators at Town Meeting. As planning policy, this CPDC member cannot recommend it. Whether it is in the best interests of the overall town is a legislative matter properly to be determined by Town Meeting. You have heard the arguments, seen the property in question, and now must decide what is in the best interests for the community as a whole. Respectfully submitted, John Sasso, Chairperson Brant Ballantyne, Secretary Jonathan Barnes Richard Howard Neil Sullivan CPDC 2 CU ARTICLE 7 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Reading Zoning Map to include within the Employee Parking Overlay District two parcels of land shown as parcels numbered 21 and 21 a on Reading Assessors' Map 64, which land is situated on the Westerly side of Sanborn Street, in said Reading and being shown as Lot No. 48 on a plan of land in Reading, surveyed by Edward Appleton for Rev. Peter Sanborn, dated April 1846. One of said lots is bounded and described as follows: Beginning at the Southeasterly corner thereof on said Sanborn Street, thence the boundary line runs: WESTERLY by land now or formerly of John A. Blunt, one hundred thirty- two (132) feet; thence NORTHERLY by land now or formerly of Mitchell, eighty-two and one-half (82 '/z) feet; thence EASTERLY by land of Dow, one hundred thirty-two (132) feet to Sanborn Street; and thence by said Sanborn Street, eighty-two and one-half, (82 '/2) feet to the point of beginning. The other parcel of land is also situated on the westerly side of said Sanborn Street, abuts the first parcel, and is bounded and described as follows: Beginning at an iron pipe on the Westerly side of Sanborn Street, at land now or formerly of Fred G. Fifield; thence the line runs: WESTERLY by land of said Fifield, one hundred thirty-four and 8/10 (134.8) feet; thence SOUTHERLY by land of Jacob Mitchell, ten (10) feet; thence EASTERLY by land now or formerly of Zelia M. Kingman, one hundred thirty-four and 14/100 (134.14) feet; thence NORTHERLY by Sanborn Street, ten (10) feet to the point of beginning. Said premises are shown as lot one on a "plan of Lots in Reading, Mass. belonging to Zelia M. Kingman", dated September 1916 by Clarence P. Carter, C.E., which plan is recorded in the Middlesex South District Registry of Deeds at the end of record Book 4988. Or take any other action with respect thereto Community Planning and Development Commission Backaround: In the event that Article 6 is approved by Town Meeting, Article 7 would amend the zoning map to apply the parking overlay district to plat 64 lots 21 and 21a - the property known as 16 Sanborn Street. See the map under Article 5. Finance Committee Report: No report. 23 Bvlaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee voted 2-2-0 not to recommend the subject matter of this article. CPDC Report: On January 29, 2007, the CPDC voted 2-2-0 to recommend Article 7 to Town Meeting. See the CPDC background under Article 6. ARTICLE 8 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Reading Zoning By- Laws involving Planned Unit Development-Business (PUD-B), as follows. To add language to the end of Section 4.9.7.4.2.c so that it now reads: Parking/Loading. The parking and loading requirements contained in Section 6.1.1.3 shall apply. Parking spaces shall be at least 8.5 by 18 feet, with provision for larger spaces as required by the CPDC to accommodate short term parking, handicapped and larger vehicles. No parking shall be situated between the front of the building and the front lot line in a PUD-B development. To add language as a new subsection "I" in Section 4.9.5.6.3: Because parking is not allowed in front of the building in a PUD-B development, the CPDC may allow building signage on both the front wall and on the wall of the building facing the parking lot. Or take any other action with respect thereto. Community Planning and Development Commission Background: The owner of the property on Main Street (as shown on the map in the background for Article 9) has developed plans to utilize the property, including the property that is the subject matter of article 9, for retail use. As part of the master planning process, the CPDC has developed design guidelines which would encourage landscaping in the front of commercial building on Main Street, with parking to the rear. This Article if approved would prohibit parking in the front of the building, thereby implementing the CPDC's master plan guidelines in this instance. Additionally, the addition of section 4.9.5.6.3 1 would permit CPDC to allow signs in the front of the building as well as the rear where the parking lot would be located. Approval of plans for development in the PUD-B overlay district is subject to a Special Permit by the CPDC. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bvlaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee . voted 4-0-0 to recommend the subject matter of Article 8. CPDC Report: On February 12, 2007 the Community Planning and Development Commission voted 3-0-0 to recommend Article 8 to Town Meetina. C Z~ ARTICLE 9 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Reading Zoning Map to include within the Planned Unit Development-Business (PUD-B) Overlay District a parcel of land shown as parcel number 14a on Reading Assessors' Map 11, which parcel is shown as Lot One (1) on a plan entitled, "Subdivision of Land in Reading, Mass. For Antonio J. and Alma V. Tambone," Dana F. Perkins and Sons, Inc. Civil Engineers and Surveyors, Reading, Mass. Dated April 11, 1955 and recorded in Middlesex South District Registry of Deeds in Book 8480, Page 359, and is further bounded and described as follows: SOUTHERLY: by South Street as shown on said plan eighty (80) feet; EASTERLY: by Lot 2 as shown on said plan and by land of Antonio J. Tambone and Alma V. Tambone as shown on said plan one hundred and forty-seven and 70/100 (147.70) feet; NORTHERLY: by land of Antonio J. Tambone and Alma V. Tambone and by land of Ten Hill Plumbing and Heating Co., inc. as shown on said plan fifty-seven and 13/100 (57.13) feet; and WESTERLY: by land of Edward and Florence E. McIntire as shown on said. plan one hundred forty-seven and 00/100 (147.00) feet. Containing 10,000 square feet of land more or less according to said plan. Or take any other action with respect thereto. Community Planning and Development Commission Background: Whether or not Article 8 is approved by Town Meeting, the property owner would ask that Town Meeting approve Article 9. Article 9 would amend the Zoning Map by. adding to the PUD-B overlay district, a single parcel of land on South Street. The owner of the land in the PUD-B Zoning Overlay District on Main Street has acquired the land shown as map 11 parcel 14a, and intends to develop the entire holdings of the existing land in the PUD-B and lot 14a as a retail building with access solely from Main Street. Parcel 14a would become parking and buffering for the retail uses. zs - '4 ART14 ti 55'Y 7 J ~r U T1p''~=y~TpY ^ r i . !r Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee voted 4-0-0 to recommend the subject matter of Article 9. CPDC Report: On February 12, 2007 the Community Planning and Development Commission voted 3-0-0 to recommend Article 9 to Town Meeting. ARTICLE 10 To see if the Town will vote to amend Zoning By-Laws Sections 4.9.6.2.h and 4.9.6.10 as follows: 4.9.6.2.h To encourage and promote the establishment of those uses permitted in Section 4.9.6.2(b) within portions of a PUD-R district that are within 300 feet of a Town boundary, no two-family dwellings, or multifamily dwellings shall be built pursuant to a PUD-R Special Permit on land that is within 300 feet of a Town boundary for a period of four years after the adoption of the Zoning By-Law placing such land within the PUD-R Overlay District. 4.9.6.10 Affordable Housina,: The intent of this section is to increase the supply of housing in the Town of Reading that is available to and affordable by low and moderate income households and to encourage a greater diversity of housing accommodations to meet the needs of the Town and to develop and maintain a satisfactory proportion of the Town's housing stock as affordable housing. ' Z~D Any PUD-R development shall provide within the Town of Reading, affordable housing units equal to ten percent of the total residential units in the PUD-R: For property within 300' of the municipal boundary if developed residentially, requisite affordable units shall be equal to twenty percent of the total residential units in this area. When the percentage calculation does not result in a whole number it shall be rounded to the nearest whole number. Or take any other action with respect thereto. Community Planning and Development Commission Backaround: On December 9, 2002, Town Meeting approved the PUD-R Zoning Bylaw, and amended the zoning map to apply that designation to the "Johnson Poultry Farm" property on West Street abutting Woburn, near the Wilmington town line. One of the provisions of the Zoning Bylaw was that the 300' of that property next to the Woburn line, abutting the so called Inwood Office Park, would be developed for commercial purposes, but if after 7 years it could not be developed for commercial )urposes, then it could be developed residentially at 11 housing units per acre (this area s approximately 10 acres). ARTh Since that time the abutting property in Woburn has been approved for multifamily residential development, and is in fact under construction for that purpose. The owner/developer of Johnson Woods has therefore asked the CPDC to consider asking Town Meeting to eliminate the seven year waiting period, since it is apparent that this entire area will be developed for residential purposes. CPDC considered that request, and is also very aware of the Town's need for affordable housing. CPDC has therefore developed the above Zoning Bylaw amendment that would: • Eliminate the seven year "waiting period" for residential development of the site, reducing it to four years which would be December 9, 2006 • Increased the required affordable housing component for 15% of the units to 20%. 2~ Finance Committee Report: No report. Bvlaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee voted 4-0-0 to recommend the subject matter of Articlel0. The Bylaw Committee agrees that the zoning of this property for commercial use sandwiched between two large abutting residential developments is not realistic. The Bylaw Committee also agrees that expanding the supply of affordable housing is an important community goal. CPDC Report: As the original proponent of the Article does not wish to pursue it as currently written, on February 12, 2007, the CPDC voted 3-0-0 to recommend to Town Meeting that Article 10 be tabled. ARTICLE 11 To see if the Town will vote to amend Article 3 of the General Bylaws, Town Offices and Officers, Section 3.4 Finance Committee, by inserting at the end of Section 3.4.6 the following sentence: This provision shall not apply to the appointment of a Finance Committee member to serve as a member of any ad hoc board, commission or committee in the Town of Reading or to any board, commission or committee upon which a member of the Finance Committee shall serve in an ex officio capacity. Or take any other action with respect thereto Board of Selectmen Background: Section 3.4.6 of the General Bylaws states that "Any member of the Finance Committee who shall be appointed or elected to any official body or other committee, shall forthwith upon his qualification in such office, and any member who shall move from the Town shall, upon such moving cease to be a member of the Finance Committee." In the past, the interpretation of "or other committee" had been a standing committee of the Town, such as the CPDC, or Recreation Committee. Recently, however, Town Counsel has offered her opinion that the term applied to all committees, including as hoc committees. It has been the practice during the past several years, to have members of the Finance Committee serve on ad hoc committees, task forces, etc., to lend their financial expertise to such ventures. The proposed Bylaw amendment would make it clear that FINCOM member may serve on ad hoc committees, as they have been doing with distinction for years. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee recommends this article by a vote of 4-0-0. The Committee feels that it is advantageous to have FINCOM members directly involved in the recommendations of many of the Town's ad hoc committees. ARTICLE 12 To see if the Town will rescind the entirety of Section 5.10 of General Bylaws of the Town of Reading, and replace it with the following: U 5.10 Retail Sales 5.10.1 No retail, commercial operation or place of business shall be open for the transaction of retail business between the hours of 12:01 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. 5.10.2 This Bylaw shall not apply to the retail or commercial operation of facilities operated by innholders and/or common victualers and/or taverns where a license has been duly issued for the operation of the same which otherwise restricts or describes the hours of operation of such facilities. This Bylaw shall not prevent a cinema from concluding the showing of a movie that has commenced prior to 12:01 a.m. 5.10.3 For the purposes of this Bylaw, facilities operated by innholders shall include, but not be limited to: an inn, hotel, motel, lodging house and public lodging house or any other similar establishment for which a license is required under Chapter 140 of the General Laws; the term facilities operated by a common victualler shall include a restaurant and any other similar establishment which provides food at retail for strangers and travelers for which a common victualler's license is required under said Chapter; and the term "tavern" shall include an establishment where alcoholic beverages may be sold with or without food in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 138 of the General Laws. 5.10.4 If the Board of Selectmen determine that it is in the interest of public health, safety and welfare, or that public necessity or convenience would be served, the Board of Selectmen may grant, upon such terms and conditions as it deems appropriate, a license under this bylaw to permit the operation of a retail or commercial establishment between the hours of 12:01 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. or any portion thereof. However, a license shall not be issued unless the Board of Selectmen has made the following specific findings with respect to each license application: (a) That the operation of the retail or commercial establishment during the night-time hours will not cause unreasonable disruption or disturbance to, or otherwise adversely affect, the customary character of any adjacent or nearby residential neighborhood; (b) That the operation of the retail or commercial establishment during the night-time hours is reasonably necessary to serve the public health, safety and welfare; or serve a public need or provide a public convenience which outweighs any increase in any of the following impacts on the adjacent or nearby residential neighborhood (or the character thereof): noise, lighting, vibration, traffic congestion or volume of pedestrian or vehicular retail customer traffic that might create a risk to pedestrian or vehicular safety, or other adverse public safety impact. The Board of Selectmen may adopt rules and regulations to govern the administration of the licensing process and in so doing may impose such terms and conditions upon such license as it may consider appropriate. C2A) 5.10.5 The Board of Selectmen shall give public notice of any request whereby a retail or commercial operation or place of business seeks to be open for the transaction of retail business between the hours of 12:01 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. or any portion thereof and shall hold a public hearing within thirty (30) days of receipt of any such request. 5.10.6 Any person violating any of the provisions of this Bylaw shall be punished by a fine of not more than Three Hundred Dollars ($300.00) for each offense, and in the case of continuing violation, every calendar day upon which such retail, or commercial operation or place of business shall remain open for retail business in violation of this Bylaw shall be considered a separate offense. Or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Backaround: In 1988, the Town approved the existing Section 5.10 of the General Bylaws which prohibit retail operation between the hours of midnight and 6 am. This was a direct response to two businesses that were operating during earlier hours and about which the town was getting complaints from abutting residences. Since that time, the Board of Selectmen has approved one business, the gasoline service station on Walkers Brook Drive next to Route 128, to be open 24 hours a day. This has been done following an annual public hearing, and conditions are related to public safety. Following up on a complaint in the fall of 2006, the Town discovered that, a number of retail operations - (primarily coffee shops, donut shops, bagel shops, and gasoline service stations) - have in fact been opening prior to 6 am. All of these early openings have ceased at the Town's direction. The Board of Selectmen has subsequently received two requests to allow establishments to be open earlier than 6 am, but since neither situation fell within the current Bylaw requirements that this be in the interest of "public health, safety and welfare", the applications were denied. The Board of Selectmen then directed Town Counsel to develop Bylaw amendments to allow the Board of Selectmen to give permission at their discretion to open early. The proposed Bylaw amendments would leave the decision on early opening up to the Board of Selectmen on a case by case basis, if the early opening met the requirement of being "in the interest of public health, safety and welfare, or that public necessity or convenience would be served". They Bylaw amendment also establishes criteria to be followed, and allows the Board of Selectmen to establish rules and regulations governing such decisions. The Board intends, as part of the motion, to address two recommendations of the Bylaw committee on numbering of sections, and also to add language that permits the Board to hold a public hearing at the initial request for early hours of operation, but to waive the hearing process for renewal. There are currently 30 vendors licensed by the Health Division to sell coffee in the community, and if all of them were to request early openings, and require a hearing every year, it would be administratively burdensome. On the other hand,. if there were issues during the year with such an operation, the Board would have the option of requiring a hearing and getting public input prior to making a decision on renewal. Finance Committee Reoort: No report. U-36 Bylaw Committee Report: The Bylaw Committee recommends the approval of this article with minor amendments (which will be reflected in the motion) by a vote of 4-0-0. 3~ and you are directed to serve this Warrant by posting an attested copy thereof in at least one (1) public place in each precinct of the Town not less than fourteen (14) days prior to February 26, 2007, the date set for the meeting in said Warrant, and to publish this Warrant in a newspaper published in the Town, or providing. in a manner such as electronic submission, holding for pickup or mailing, an attested copy of said Warrant to each Town Meeting Member. Hereof fail not and make due return of this Warrant with your doings thereon to the Town Clerk at or before the time appointed for said meeting. Given under our hands this 30th day of January, 2007. Ben Tafoya, Chairman James E. Bonazoli, Vice Chairman Stephen A. Goldy, Secretary Camille W. Anthony Richard W. Schubert SELECTMEN OF READING Alan W. Ulrich, Constable C32) Page 1 of 2 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Ellen Doucette [ecdoucette@brackettlucas.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 10:41 AM To: Hechenbleikner, Peter Subject: Re: Rezoning article Peter, This email is in response to your inquiry re: whether or not a an article can be placed on the February 26 STM to rezone Parcel 21, Sanborn Street, to the Business B zoning district without seeking a Planning Board recommendation in accordance with M.G.L. c.40A, sec. 5. At the November 14, 2005 Subsequent Town Meeting, Article 21 sought to place or rezone five (5) parcels into the Business B Zoning District only one of which was Parcel 21. This article was tabled at the request of the Selectmen and not acted upon prior to the adjournment of the Subsequent Town Meeting. As you recall with respect to the Addison-Wesley petition and the discussions regarding the effect of tabling the article as opposed to having it voted upon and perhaps, disapproved, this office took the position that in accordance with Town Meeting procedure, a warrant article which is tabled and not taken from the table for action before Town'Meeting is adjourned acts as a negative action. This would be the same result for Article 21 of the 2005 Subsequent Town Meeting, i.e., it. was negatively acted upon. As you know, M.G.L. c.40A, sec. 5 provides that a zoning amendment which had been unfavorably acted upon can not be resubmitted within 2 years without the recommendation of the Planning Board. However, this prohibition against the resumbittal of zoning amendments is applicable only when the zoning amendment is the same as that which was previously acted upon. There is one SJC case which states that the Planning Board's recommendation under sec. 5 "puts the oriainal bill again before the legislative body for more careful delibertion on the question of its adoption." Kubik v. Citv of Chicopee, 353 Mass. 514 (1968). In my opinion, the Article for the February 26, 2007 STM is not the "original bill" that was negatively acted upon at the November 14, 2005 Subsequent Town Meeting. Therefore I do not believe that a Planning Board recommendation is required. However, if the Board of Selectmen would prefer to lay to rest any potential discussion or argument on this issue, the Planning Board's recommendation might be preferable. Please note however, that the supermajority recommendation (4/5) required for the resubmittal of a zoning petition in accordance with G.L. c.40A, sec. 16 is not in my opinion, applicable to a sec. 5 recommendation. As with all sec. 5 recommendations, only a simple majority of the Planning Board is required. There is no language which requires otherwise. Please call if you have any questions or wish to discuss any of the above. Ellen Original Message From: Hechenbleikner. Peter To: Ellen Doucette Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 3:09 PM Subject: RE: Rezoning article The Board of Selectmen 33 2/13/2007 -,~11 k Q n H ISTORY • Held first meeting with Town Manager in Fall of 2001; • Informed that the Town did not want a 53 single family development but preferred commercial or multi-family with low impact on the school system; • PUD-R was vote in the October 2002 Town Meeting by a vote of 143 in favor to 4 against; • Received approval for 250 40B in April 2003 while working with CPDC to develop the PUD-R alternative; • Worked for more than one year with CPDC to achieve final site plan c~ approval for the PUD-R in June 2004; ~C FAIRNESS • During 15 months of hearings the applicant worked with the Board developed a "layer cake" plan with increasing density; ® The layer cake involved six units per acre in the first 26 acres; The next layer of 12 acres has an agreed upon density of 11 units per acre; It was all within 300 feet within the town boundary of Woburn; ® The Woburn-Inwood parcel has since shifted from 896,000 feet of office space to over 500 units of multi-family housing; ® The CPDC imposed a 10% affordability requirement in the 6 unit per acre portion and a 15% affordability requirement in the 11 unit per acre section; ® We attended 29 meetings or hearings over a 15 month time period ending in the Spring of 2004 after which final decision was made; • The Applicant acted in good faith to abandon its 250 40B approval contained on the original 28 acre site; 0 A* A I I NO ACI 2001 $,2B,()05 2002 $76,609 f2()03 $4,47,237 2OC4 $,28,4#386 205 $,3 121968 2()o 6 $350,000 207 ede6 E,yp sis of Johnson Woods Fiscal impacts on Y Analy Number of Units finished with Certificates of occupancy units Projected 2007 taxes based on assessments for first 19 Units Number of Children under 18 years of age in Market Cost of education at fall 'O6 PPE Net Benefit to Town Net Benefit to Town/Market Unit Number of Affordable Units finished with Certificates of Occupancy Number of Affordable Units under P& S to close this year Units Projected 2007 taxes based on 100% assessments of these rdable Units Number of Children under 18 years of age in these Affo Cost of education at fall '06 PPE of $8,076/ student Net Cost to Town Net Cost to Town/ Affordable Unit Differentialfor each unit changed from Market Rate to Affordable Analysis of increase in Phase 11 to various levels of additional affordability crease from 15% to 25% on Phase 11 Units @ 11 Units/ Acre-per year cost, In Increase from 15% to 20% on Phase 11 Units @ 11 Units/ Acre-per year cos , w Town of Reading 38 $228,000 1 $8,076 $219,924 $5,787 2 7 $14,220 6 $48.456 ($34,236) ($4,891) ($10,678) ($140,955) ($70,477) Ad Hoc Downtown Parking Committee Interim Report to Board of Selectmen February 13, 2007 Background • Task Force established by BOS Policy adopted May 16, 2006 • Seven member committee representing interests of: - CPDC - EDC - Residents - Businesses • Town Manager as Advisor • Meets every third Wednesday of month 0 Term set to expire June 30, 2007 (0 1 Parkinq Supper • Developed consensus of parking supply • Verified by physical inventory; GIs surveys Considered public lots and on street availability within business district EmNovee Needs • Utilized Chamber of Commerce Survey of Downtown Business Owners as a starting point • Independently developed an estimate of needs by applying Institute of Traffic Engineering formula to downtown business buildings and current usage • Results were similar • Estimated shortage of approximately 280 spaces for employees D31 I- Customer Needs • Customer demands developed utilizing Urban Land Institute standards based on the types of businesses and hours of operation • Assumes current occupancy of existing downtown space with associated usage • Doesn't account for changes as a result of new usage (e.g.another Haven Junction) or change in usage (e.g. M F Charles) • At peak times, shortage estimated to be approximately 120 spaces Immediate Recommendation Recommend the Board of Selectmen seek the services of a professional firm to plan and design structured parking facility (s), and • Immediately begin evaluating funding options & Other Options Under Review for June 30 Report • Shared Parking - letter recently sent to downtown landlords/business/apartment owners;-limited early interest, second pass underway as follow up to initial mailing • Satellite Parking; Shuttle Parking (town funded) • Employer funded shuttle service for employees • Several others being considered (DI 4 Board of Selectmen Tracking,L.oq for Current Issues/Projects Date Issue/Proiect/ Identified Problem Resp. Select. Action Needed Follow-uD Dept• Liaison Date Traffic/Parking Issues Ash Street at Main Develop a process to acquire Town. Mgr. Anthony Action required by 2010 to 06130/07 land and build new connection maintain the whistle ban. directly between Ash and Main Contact new property Street, eliminating the grade owner; work with MBTA crossing 11/29/05 Develop a Engineer Bonazoli Need to scope a study and Review comprehensive traffic then seek funding for it. status of study for the Woburn Because the downtown downtown Street, High Street, improvement program will project Lowell Street, Main have an impact on this 12/31/2007 Street area neighborhood, and that impact cannot be determined until the Downtown Improvement project is complete, this item will be programmed for consideration in the FY 2009 budget. 9/16/06 Stop signs at Bancroft Request to make Bancroft at Police Goldy Review to see if it meets 02/27/07 Hartshorn a multi-way stop and warrants for all way stop - move stop sign on Hartshorn take before the Board of closer to intersection. Possible Selectmen. Awaiting installation of a speed table. Board of Selectmen development of standards for multi-way stops 1215/06 Employee/merchant Full utilization Police Goldy Review utilization of these 02127/07 parking on High Street 50 spaces and renters plans - review lottery process Rt. 128/1-93 Monitor and advocate for Anthony & Public Hearing in 2-27-2007; Interchange Reading's interest in keeping Schubert Reading 10-25-06. any improvements to the Scheduled for further interchange to a low impact Board of Selectmen for Reading discussion on 2-27-07; Additional hearing in Woburn on 07 2/13/2007 Board of Selectmen Trackinq Loci for Current Issues/Projects Date Issue/Proiect/ Identified Problem Resp. Select. Action Needed Follow-uo Dept. Liaison Date Development Project s 1/1/90 Gazebo Circle Overflow of detention basin - Engineer Bonazoli The Town Engineer has 01/30/07 flooding has occurred in , done a study and neighborhood during severe determined the course of storms correction. The total cost is estimated to be $55,000. The bond is $30,000. In the past we were willing to share the bond with the developer, but I have informed the developer that we will take the entire bond and do the work. Will look at changes to zoning Bylaw to require interim as-builts to ensure drainage completion. Bids accepted and ready to be awarded, with construction to be done in the spring this-fall. Rights of Entry needed from condo association. Funding from the bond and the storm water enterprise fund. Town Counsel has filed the x/1105 Acida+ser~ Pl f a- T t d 4t b d 44 aRnefi a eya r-a Y a y-su m te -9 - revi w l t 05 Pee 81130107 e GGmp e e- ; r- by-early 8stebsr, T4ieR- sGhedule-Boafd-e AGdGe to public. AINI.Af6 has GOmpleted-its-wG* aad- #ited-a-finaI_reper# wilh-the- BGafd-ef SekwArneR. 1 /1 /85 Downtown Project is out to bid. Engineer Anthony Project is out to bid, with 01130/07 Improvements bids due on March 13. The Town's "non-participating costs" of estimated $650,000 will be on a warrant in April 2007 after the bids are in. 111/07 Inspector General's IG's audit of 1375 Main street Town Schubert Review recommendations 03/31107 recommendations re has generated Counsel and Reading's regulations Affordable Housing recommendations and revise regulations as needed to address issues. Schedule Town Counsel review with the Board of Selectmen in March - Invite ZBA and CPDC. 2113/2007 2 0q3 Board of Selectmen Trackinq Loq for Current Issues/Projects Date Issue/Proiectl Identified Problem Resp• Select. Action Needed Follow-up Dept. Liaison Date 8/22/06 Develop a lighting The Town needs to have Planner and Bonazoli Hire a consultant to develop 03/31/07 section of the Zoning established standards and Town a draft bylaw Bylaw processes for reviewing site Manager lighting for new developments Timothy Place Property owner has built Police, Enforcement started the 03131/07 encroachment on right- improvements into the ROW of Conservatio week of 8-21-06 Ticket of-way the private street n, & Counsel served by RPD. Ticket not paid. Court 10-24-07 Clerk Magistrate found for the Town and ordered the fine to be paid within 90 days (1- 23-07) Fine was paid but no corrective action. Daily fines begun. Suit filed by Town. Property owner has requested a meeting. Sale of Oakland Road The Town owned tax title land Town Tafoya Include as part of 05/01/07 land across Oakland Road from eh Manager, September 16 "Board RMHS is surplus to the Town's Town Walk". This is an article on needs. Planner the November 13 Town Meeting warrant. To be discussed by Board of Selectmen on Dec. 5. Develop process to be implemented in summer 2007 6/15/06 MWRA Buy-in Process the MWRA buy-in for DPW Bonazoli Engineer hired. First 06/30107 the Town's full MWRA use threshold of filing NPC to MEPA met. MEPA decision on NPC delivered in late September ahead of schedule. October 11 last day for comment October. Preparing filing for WRC. Process is on schedule. 2/13/2007 3 Board of Selectmen Trackina.Loq for Current Issues/Projects Date Issue/Prolect/ Identified Problem Resp• Select. Action Needed Follow-up Dept. Liaison Date Policies/Requlations 4/1104 Petroleum Bylaw Regulations to be formulated Fire & Town Goldy Fire Department has been 03/31/07 Counsel doing data collection and posting to an electronic spread sheet. New Town Counsel (Judy Pickett) is reviewing Bylaw and will outline next steps to the Board. Meeting scheduled for this Thursday, September 28. Town Counsel is drafting regulations for the BOS and for the FD. Working Group meeting with Counsel on October 26. Counsel working on revised drafts of policies and regulations. Will schedule BOS discussion in March. Memorial Park Controversy over allowed uses 9/20/05 Mandate landscaping Should the Town develop a to save water bylaw or subdivision regulations Town Anthony At its July 25 meeting with 06130107 Counsel Town Counsel the Board of Selectmen authorized Town Counsel to move forward with the filing of the cy pres petition. Town Counsel had a discussion with AG - additional information sent to AG prior to setting up a meeting here in Reading. Meeting went very well - see notes from meeting Planning Tafoya Refer to CPDC as part of 06/30/06 Master Plan implementation; Town is applying for a grant for an educational program on landscape maintenance Tafoya to talk to CPDC about including this in Master Plan implementation discussion. Ask CCP Committee if they can review this 211312007 4 9 Board of Selectmen Trackinq Loa for Current Issues/Projects Date IssuelProiect/ Identified Problem Resp. Select. Dept. Liaison 9126/06 Master plan for Birch There are some key decisions Recreation Goldy Meadow site to be made on this site and we need a master plan for the area Develop a housing Understand the 40 R and 40 S Town Tafoya production plan programs, and utilizing them Planner and other efforts, develop a housing production plan to eliminate the vulnerability to unwanted 40B projects. Action Needed Follow-up Date Develop a master plan for 04/30/07 the property, including the Imagination Station site. Met 2-13-07 with Rec. Comm. Chair, Board of Selectmen Liaison, Rec. Admin., Town Mgr. Will want to discuss general process, of park planning and improvements with Board of Selectmen. Housing Forum conducted 03131107 on September 28. Application for grant for professional assistance has been submitted. October 24 - presentation to BOS; November 13 - presentation to Town Meeting; Dec. 2006 - BOS approval of filing plan with DHCD; i 1215106 Sight Triangles Review and reconsider in light of Town Meeting rejection of proposed bylaw Police Anthony CA to review tape of Town 01130107 Meeting and develop list of issues raised. Chief to develop questionnaire to Town Meeting members to gauge acceptability of bringing issue back to Town Meeting 12119106 Discuss who/how to address follow-up from citizens emails Town Tafoya Manager 2/13/2007 5 Develop written 03131107 policy/process Board of Selectmen Tracking Loq for Current Issues/Proiects Date Issue/Proiect/ Identified Problem Resp. Select. Action Needed Follow-up Dept. Liaison Date Citizen Complaints 4/30/06 Drainage on Haverhill ditch has silted up and is not DPW Street free-flowing - backs up and affects neighbors property Goldy Work to be done this fall as 12/31/06 part of the storm water management program. Right of entry needed from the Open Land Trust and the property owner John McCracken re Owner paved a portion of the Town 10/12/06 road opening permit tree lawn without a permit Engineer Storm water ponding in front of Town 10/12/06 Paul McKinnon driveway Engineer Drainage ponds in the area of Town 9/16/06 Winthrop Road drainage 108 Winthrop Engineer 2/13/2007 6 Anthony Anthony Bonazoli Engineer needs to contact property owner re potential violation - issue could be appeal able to the Board of Selectmen Property owner has been formally notified. See George Zambouras letter 1-11-07. Hearing tentatively scheduled for March 13 if property owner gets info in on time. Review situation. It appears that the entire street needs to be reconstructed. Is there anything that can be done re ponding in the short term? What is the schedule in the Pavement Management Program. PMP work to start in December. DPW will do some remedial work next spring - See George Zambouras letter 1-11-07. Review to see if the pipe is clear. It appears to the neighbors that part of a ditch was piped 30+/- years ago on the upstream side and that has caused the problem. Gas main trench and residents parking on the shoulder have disrupted the normal flow of drainage - DPW will look at correction next spring. 03113107 06/30107 03/31107 Board of Selectmen Trackinq Loq for.Current Issues/Proiects Date Issue/Proiect/ Identified Problem Resp, Select. Action Needed Follow-up, Dept. Liaison Date Wall was installed when Town did improvements to street as a betterment 30+ years ago. Wall retains private property - and a tree on the private property is buckling part of the wall. Is the wall the Town's responsibility or the owners? It is the owners responsibility and the Town wall is deteriorating - whose Town Engineer has sent a letter 9/18/06 112 Winthrop wall responsibility is it? Engineer Bonazoli telling him that. 12131/06 LetteF sent to FequeSteF RdiGatiRg that would be considered for-future but not arneng-the highest-prier+ties- Gross itfeet r-equest-#er-sidewalks PT-T-E Benazell flew Reviewed---RG,-d4flage from - drainage preperties Mslfltire oldy property issue. 2/13/2007 7 Y9) The 90degree parking garage layout that can be accommodated in the area of the municipal lot behind CVS can provide 70parking spaces per typical floor. 90 degree parking bays are considered the most functional and acceptable for a two-way circulation system inside the facility. The layout is constrained, however, by the geometry of the site. A conceptual cost estimate is shown with a summer 2008 mid-point of construction assumed and with a couple of variations in the capacity of the facility. Assumptions: • The back-yard setback of 20 feet (a standard dimensional control for the Business-B district) is assumed to be reduced to 10 feet with appropriate buffering from abutting properties. • There will be negotiations between the private property owners in the lot and the Town in order to ensure the optimum size for the facility. • The at-grade floor of the facility can provide space for the N-S thru lane (alley function), although ideally the thru lane should be placed outside the footprint • The conceptual cost estimates account for stories above ground; basements would add significant cost for foundation, waterproofing, access and egress issues and potential mechanical ventilation systems for underground spaces. • The at-grade spaces are less because of height clearance issues under the vehicular ramp. • Parking structure to be of precast concrete slabs, columns and beams; elevators and stairs to be steel frame ® Exterior wall to be precast wall with face-brick, with enough openings so that a ventilation system is not required by code. Yearly construction cost escalation is estimated at 6%. Typical floor data: Number of spaces = 70 (including accessible ones) Perimeter = 700 linear feet Area = 25,000 square feet Floor-to-floor = 10 feet Conceptual Construction Cost estimate Number of Total area $/SF Facility cost Facility cost Cost/space spaces in 2006 in 2008 in 2008 3-level facility 180 I 75,000 50.04 $3,753,500 $4,203,000 $23,000 4-level facility I 250 I 100,000 I 46.56 I $4,656,000 1 $5,215,000 I $21,000 Town Accountant Projects Town Accountant Projects • School Construction MSBA Audits • Retirement administration • Complete Barrows expenditure history • Estimates, refunds and transfers reports, bills schedules-Form F • Organization of election of board • Research and respond to auditor request member during Audits • Agenda, correspondence, payroll and bill • Continue filing bill schedules of High paying School Construction project expenditures • Financial Software investigation for progress payments • Organize demonstration • Coordinate the documentation of the • Developing software criteria MSBA contract for High School Funding • Community comparisons Internal Control Safeguarding Assets • Reasonable (not absolute) assurance protecting assets • Unauthorized use or disposition. • Loss, theft, fraud yul?u• • Executed transactions • Appropriately Authorized • Accurately recorded b t'' • Costs of implementing internal control should not outweigh the benefits Current Year Comments • Obtain Capital Asset Software • Overly cumbersome process • Formula revisions required annually • Inadequate audit trail • Improve Student Activity Fund Controls • Evidence that individual activity balances are reconciled with general ledger • Audit accounts every other year • Prepare for Other Post Employment Benefits actuarial calculation Prior Year Comments: a • Internal department audits • Procurement procedures • Grant Eligibility • Athletic and School Lunch records • Written policies • Receipt logs and cash registers i • Discuss Fraud Prevention ?"y • Developed policy' • Presented to employees at meetings Internal Control Summary. . • Errors and irregularities can still occur • Procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions • Degree of compliance may deteriorate • Continuously monitor compliance • Update procedures as necessary 1 woo -Cf -4G OF 5~LECTN O ~ !J IN FT p~~ T "SS J pl a p WO Woo „ PO