HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-01-17 Board of Selectmen PacketRE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting Page 1 of 2
Hechenbleikner, Peter
From: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 9:42 AM
To: Reilly, Chris; 'Askin, Richard'
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
The expectation is that SMW will make a presentation on the traffic - not more than 30 minutes.
The Town's peer consultant will present to the Board of Selectmen the information previously requested,
(Saturday counts) and summarize his findings.
The Board of Selectmen and the CPDC will then have an opportunity to ask any questions they have, and then
the meeting will be opened to the public to Q & A.
The CPDC will be there to fully participate as they would like, and of course to observe and listen.
The Board of Selectmen will, at the conclusion, make any further statements that they have, and then close the
meeting.
Pete
From: Reilly, Chris
Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 8:55 AM
To: Askin, Richard
Cc: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
I believe the selectmen expect a presentation by our peer reviewer and then Q&A with public. I don't think the
CPDC expects to play a prominent role-they plan to just observe and take direction from BOS on how they want
to proceed with the access issue so that can be put to bed. Peter can tell you otherwise if a different format is
expected.
Cluis Reilly
Reading Town Planner
16 Lowell St. 01867
781-942-6612
fax 781-942-9071
htti.://www. ei.reading.ma.us/Dlannhia
From: Askin, Richard [mailto:Richard.Askin@srweiner.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 10:07 PM
To: Reilly, Chris
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Thanks Chris.
By the way... have you heard anything specific about the format of the meeting on the 17th?
We still haven't any information on what to expect, e.g., whether we make a presentation, or just Q&A of peer
review, etc
Regards, Richard
From: Reilly, Chris [mailto:creil ly@ci. read i ng. ma. us]
O
1/9/2006
RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting Page 2 of 2
Sent: Sat 1/7/2006 11:18 AM
To: Askin, Richard
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Richard
Thanks for the heads up-I will make sure I address that.
Hope all is well, see you 1.17.
Cluis Reilly
Reading Town Plainer
16 Lowell St. 01867
781-942-6612
fax 781-942-9071
litt-o://www.ei.readinii.ma.us/.Dlaiuiiiig
1/9/2006
Memo
To: Richard W. Schubert, Chairman, Reading Board of Selectman
From Dave Billard, Reading Assessors Office
Date: 01 /12106
Re: Addison-Wesley
Assessed Value of the Addison Wesley Publishing properties
Per your request, please find below the assessed value of each of the eight parcels owned by Addison-
Wesley Publishing for fiscal year 2006. These eight parcels comprise the 22.8 acre site and are
improved with 194,292 square feet of gross building area.
Mao - Parcel FY06 Assessed Value
004 - 011 A
$206,000
004 - 025
$6,733,600
005 - 002
$7,945,100
005 - 005
$166,000
005 - 013
$2,418,000
005 - 016
$468,600
005 - 017
$163,500
005 - 018
$173,200
Total ' '
$18,274,000
0 Page 1
Greenman - Pedersen9 Inc.
Engineering and Construction Services
MAX-2005104.00
January 4, 2006
Mr. Christopher Reilly
Town Planner
16 Lowell Street
Reading, Massachusetts 01867
SUBJECT: Park Square at Reading
Dear Mr. Reilly:
In response to the concerns raised about the Holiday and Saturday traffic levels at the December 6, 2005
Selectmen's Meeting, E&K has provided GPI with additional traffic count data for the Route 28 Corridor. The
data included historical counts obtained from MassHighway for a weekday period from October 2004, as well as
new counts obtained by E&K for December weekend and weekday conditions (12-17-05 thru 12-19-05).
the data is presented in Attachment A and summarized below:
• III general traffic levels have decreased along Route 28 since 2001. With a 21% reduction under
average conditions between 2001 and 2005.
• Based on 2004 and 2005 average conditions, there has been an increase in traffic along Route 28 of
approximately 3%.
• Based on the available data, December traffic levels along Route 28 are approximately 3% higher
than average conditions.
• Based on the available data, June traffic levels along Route 28 (used for the traffic study) are
approximately 5% higher than average conditions. 4
• Daily traffic levels on a Saturday in December are approximately 9% lower than weekday dally
traffic levels. However, traffic levels during the Saturday peak hour are approximately 12% higher
than those during weekday peak hour.
• Daily traffic levels on Sunday in December are approximately 27% lower than the weekday daily
traffic levels and the Sunday peak hour traffic levels are approximately 5% lower than the weekday
peak hour traffic levels.
• Available MassHiahway data was evaluated,to determine trends in traffic levels during the Holiday
season in areas with large retail centers. I-93 near the Braintree Plaza, Route 53 in Hingham near the
retail area, 1-95 near the Burlington Mall and Route I in Westwood were evaluated to compare the
December traffic levels to average conditions as well as conditions in June. With the exception oi'
December 2001 on Rte 53 in Hingham, traffic levels in December were consistently lower than the
average conditions by 1%-12%.
• Similarly, traffic levels in June adjacent to these retail areas were consistently higher than average
conditions by between 2%-13%. Also, June traffic levels were consistently higher than levels in
December by between 7%-15%.
• Based on the existing traffic levels on Route 28 under December 2005 conditions and the projected
traffic anticipated by the proposed project, the following increases are expected.
o Weekday Daily Traffic will increase by 43%ysouth of South Street and 8% north of
South Street
105 Central Street, Suite 3100, Stoneham, MA 02180 Tel: (781) 279-5500 Fax: (781) 279-5501
www.gpinet.com
GPI
Mr. Christopher Reilly
January 4, 2006
Page 2 of 3
o Weekday Peak Hour (PM Peak) will increase by 53% south of South Street and 10%
north of South Street
o Saturday daily traffic will increase by 63% south of South Street and 12% north of South
Street.
o Saturday midday peak hour will increase by 66% south of South Street and 12% north of
South Street.
o Sunday daily traffic will increase by 36% south of South Street and 7% north of South
Street.
o Sunday midday peak hour will increase by 44% south of South Street and 8% north of
South Street.
While it is recognized that traffic levels vary by location and characteristics of the area (i.e. other competing retail,
etc.) the available data in Reading and in the vicinity of other existing retail areas in the state indicate that the
December traffic levels are closely approximated by the average conditions. Similarly the total daily traffic on a
Saturday in December is generally lower than the total weekday daily traffic, however, the Saturday Peak Hour
Traffic is significantly greater than the peak hour during the weekday.
The project will have significant increases on traffic levels south of South Street with lower impacts along Route
28 north of South Street. The proponents engineer is utilizing the Saturday Peak hour as the worst case scenario
for analysis and mitigation purposes which is consistent with the trends and patterns of traffic volumes along Route
28 and other major roadways in the vicinity of retail establishments. Furthermore, based on historic data, June
traffic volumes (as used for the proponents analysis) are generally larger than the annual average volumes.
Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact me directly at (781) 279-5500 ext.
3008.
Very truly yours.
GREE MAN-PEDERSEII'IINC.
John W. Diaz, P.E., P.T.O.E.
Assistant Vice President
4
TRAFFIC VOLUME COMPARISON RTE 28 READING
MHD Sta
66
67
TOTAL
68
69
TOTAL
68
69
TOTAL
68
69
TOTAL
68
69
TOTAL
Peak Hour Volumes
October 01 vs Oct 04
Dec 01 vs Dec 05
2001 Average ADT weekday:
2004 Average ADT weekday:
2005 Average ADT weekday:
Annual Change (01-05):
Annual Change (04-05):
Location
Rte 28 South of 1-95
Rte 28 South of 1-95
Rte 28 South of 1-95
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North. of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
Rte 28 North of South St
-24%
-23%
28,367
21,795
22,487
-21%
3%
Direction
Date
NB
10/18/2004
SB
10/18/2004
Combined
NB
10118/2004
SB
10/1812004
Combined
NB
12-19/20-05
SB
12-19/20-05
Combined
NB
12/17/2005
SB
12117/2005
Combined
NB
12/18/2005
SB
12/18/2005
Combined
NB
SB
Combined
December 05 is
June is approximately
December is approximately
December Daily Traffic
Saturday vs Weekday
Sunday vs Weekday
December Peak Hour Traffic
Saturday vs Weekday
Sunday vs Weekday
Weekday
20,866
15,470
36,336
10,580
11,660
22,240
12,230
10,952
23,182
1,168
776
1,944
4%
5%
3%
Sat
13,868
7,188
21,056
Sun
9,829
7,171
17,000
1,566 1,064
1,566 781
3,132 1,845
higher than Oct 04
higher than average conditions
higher than average conditions
-9% Saturday is 9% lower than Weekday
-27% Sunday is 27% lower than Weekday
61% Sat is 12% Greater than Weekday
-5% Sunday is 5% lower than Weekday
i
TRAFFIC VOLUME COMPARISON RTE 28 READING
RETAIL LOCATIONS
i Location i December t June i Average de
----L------------------------------L--------------J---------------- ---------------1-----------------------------L----------~
_ 1.95 Burlington north of Middlesex _ 157,304 185,351 i 178,250 -12% ; 4% ; -15%
- F------------------------------E--------------------•i--------------------------------------I--------------- i-
I-93 Braintree btw Rte 37 and So E Ex ; 186=437 i 220,047 ; 208=199 ; -10% 6% -15%
- 5 /o
201,459 ; 223,872 ; 212,912
-----ri -_--o
-------------------------------------------__-r- '---°-----°--°-°--------------°----rL°-
' 1 208,187 t 223,521 t 219,598 -5% --rl -------------o
Rte 53 Hingham 10,791 11,700 i 11,015 -2% i 6% i -8%
___________L------_--------_-___---------------- L
11,574 12,709 _ 11,251 1 3% 1 13% 1 -9%
---------------------------------F------------------------------F---------------------i-------------- - - --------------i------_ -o--`---~------- o -----f-----_8%
11,855 ; 12,882 ; 11,992 It
----------------°-----`----`-----------_---__r°------_----------- r--------°°°_-_--_r--------------- T----___-_--_-"-r----- r------
Rte 1 Westwood north of Norwood ; 49,017 ; 53,323 ; 50,383
; -3% ; 611/0
-8%
49,446 53,307
49,773
i
;
~
~
' 7
~a
L..----__-_---...-.---_-_-_-__-L--___-__-_.__-_-----T-------------
47,031 51,550
49,384
.
.-..1-
-5% 4%
~ L-.-_--
-9%
AVERAGE 93,310 104,826
100,276
-7%
5%
11%
SOURCE: MassHighway
% of AVE
Annual
% of AVE
AVE
% of AVE
Month 2001 1 Annual
2002
Change
Annual
(018,02)
Annual
Jan 25,773 91%
26,031
1% i 92%
25,902
92%
r
r
Feb t 25,847 i 91%
26,256
i 2%+93%0
26,052
;92%___
Mar
27,000
95%
-
1
26,800
-1 %
t 95%
26,900
t 95%
Apr I 28,330 t 100%
--..------.----------_---1---------------L-.__---..---__
28
581
I 1 % I 101%
28,456
1-__-------_-
t 101%
Ma
103%
29
302
_
105
29
49$
T61
-
%
;
,
;
-
,
;
.
;
%
-
-
June ; 29,982 t 106%
29,534
; 1 %
I 105%
---r'----_----_---`
29,758
; 105%
Jul t 28,380 t 100%
- y
0,_007
30007 I 6% t _-_106%
29,194_--
i--_103%
Au t 28=336 100%
29,158
I 3%
103%
28,747
'
102%
Sept__-___---- 29,000 102%
----------F------------------------------F-----------------------------------
28,604 1 % 101 %
----=-------------------i--------------- -
28 802
102%
i------------
Oct ; 29,253 ; 103%
28,450
; 101%
28,852
; 102%
Nov ; 28,984 ; 102%
-
27,434
; _o o
5 /o 97 /0
28 209
, 100 /o
-
Dec 30,212 i 107%
28,000
i -7%
i 99%
29,106
103%
AVERAGEANNUAL 28,367 i (
28,196
i -1%
i
28,281
Source: MassHighway Count Station 407 - Stoneham, Rte 28 south of Reading T.L.
Summary: October is between 1-3% higher than average conditions
-
Annual Traffic Levels stable with slight decrease
DAILY TRAFFIC SUMMARY
Percent of Site Traffic to south: 80%
Percent of Site Traffic to north: 15%
Total
Prop South
Existing*
Proposed*'
of South St
Daily
23,182
12,544
10,035
AM PEAK
1,572
262
210
PM PEAK
1,766
1,172
938
Daily
21,056
16,597
13,278
Midday Peak
1,948
1,598
1,278
Daily
17,000
7,572
6,058
Midday Peak
1,719
936
749
* Based on December 2005 Traffic Counts
Based on Traffic volumes by E&K and confirmed b
y GPI
Prop North
Total south
Total north
% Increase
% increase
of South St
of South St
of South St
south of South St
north of South St
Weekday
1,882
33,217
25,064
43%
8%
39
1,782
1,611
13%
3%
176
2,704
1,942
53%
10%
Saturday
2,490
34,334
23,546
63%
12%
240
3,226
2,188
66%
12%
Sunday
1,136
23,058
18,136
36%
7%
140
2,468
1,859
44%
8%
9
RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Hechenbleikner, Peter
From: Askin, Richard [Richard.Askin@srweiner.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 1:49 PM
To: Reilly, Chris; Town Manager
Cc: Brad Latham (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Hi Pete:
Chris asked that I forward the fiscal impact analysis.
Attached please find:
"Fiscal Impact Analysis: Report", dated November 2005
"Fiscal Impact Analysis: Summary of Findings"; dated November 2005
Page 1 of 4
Thank you for describing the format of next Tuesday's public meeting. We look forward to making the
presentation and of course taking questions.
Best Regards, Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: Reilly, Chris [mailto:creilly@ci.reading.ma.us]
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 1:19 PM
To: Askin, Richard
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Richard,
Could you please email peter the latest copy of the fiscal impact analysis?
Thanks
Chris Reilly
Reading Town Planner
16 Lowell St. 01867
781-942-6612
fax 781-942-9071
http://www.ci.readinia.ma.us/-olanning
From: Askin, Richard [mailto:Richard.Askin@srweiner.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 08, 2006 10:07 PM
To: Reilly, Chris
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Thanks Chris.
By the way... have you heard anything specific about the format of the meeting on the 17th?
We still haven't any information on what to expect, e.g., whether we make a presentation, or just Q&A of AomIL
1/10/2006
RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting Page 2 of 4
peer review, etc
Regards, Richard
From: Reilly, Chris [mailto: creilly@ci. reading. ma. us]
Sent: Sat 1/7/2006 11:18 AM
To: Askin, Richard
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Richard
Thanks for the heads up-I will make sure I address that.
Hope all is well, see you 1.17.
Chris Reilly
Reading Town Planner
16 Lowell St. 01867
781-942-6612
fax 781-942-9071
httD://www.ci.readinii.ma.us/planning
From: Askin, Richard [mailto:Richard.Askin@srweiner.com]
Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 10:35 AM
To: Reilly, Chris
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Hi Chris:
How are you?
I just looked at the traffic related documents which have been posted to the Town's web-site.
It appears that peer reviewer's (GPI) report of its findings, entitled "Peer Review Report", is not accessible.
A blank document appears, where a pdf file should be viewable.
If the problem is the file format, attached here is a fresh pdf file, which you might try:
<<GPI-peerReview_11 NOV05.pdf>>
Also, the Traffic Report posted is the Supplemental dated in November.
If you'd like to include the baseline Traffic Report dated August, for reference, here is that pdf file:
<<PSR-Combined Final.pdf>>
If any questions or other needs, pis let me know.
Thanks!
Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: Askin, Richard
1/10/2006
/l
RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 5:40 PM
To: 'Chris Reilly (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Page 3 of 4
Chris, just wanted to make sure you got this e-mail, the attachments totaled over 6 megs.
-----Original Message-----
From: Askin, Richard
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2005 4:30 PM
To: Chris Reilly (E-mail)
Cc: Peter I. Hechenbleikner (E-mail); Brad Latham (E-mail)
Subject: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting
Hi Chris:
1 finally got the report in pdf format.
Here are several pdf files related to traffic recommendations for Addison Wesley.
> Supplemental Traffic Report
> GPI response letter
> news article summarizina BOS Q&A W1 Deer reviewer
If you require anything else please do not hesitate to.contact me.
Thank you,
Richard
Richard K. Askin
W/S Development Associates LLC
Affiliated with: S. R. Weiner & Associates, Inc
Tel-Direct: 617-646-3226 Cell: 617-571-7693
e-mail: richard.askin(Dsrweiner.com
Main: 617-232-8900 FAX: 617-738-1628
1330 Boylston Street Chestnut Hill MA 02467
1/10/2006
0 z
RE: Addison-Wesley Traffic info for web-posting Page 4 of 4
This message (and any associated files) is the property of
S. R. Weiner and Associates Inc. and W/S Development Associates LLC
and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are not
the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this
message, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message
in error, please notify us immediately by calling our corporate office
at 617-232-8900 and deleting this message from your computer.
Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, S. R. Weiner
and Associates, Inc. and W/S Development Associates LLC do not accept
responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this
message, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail
transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard-copy
version of this message.
Any views or opinions presented in this message are solely those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.
1/10/2006
John Connery and Associates
Fiscal Impact Analysis: Report
"Park Square at Reading"; Reading, Massachusetts
(Redevelopment of the Addison-Wesley property, One Jacob Way, Reading)
1.0 Overview
The objective of this analysis is to illustrate the fiscal impact of a 400,000
square foot specialty retail center (also referred to as a 'Lifestyle Center') with
a complementary office component of 40,000 square feet, known as "Park
Square at Reading", located in Reading Massachusetts. For this analysis the
term the net fiscal impact refers to the annual net fiscal benefit (or loss)
related to the proposed development after appropriate municipal service costs
have been deducted from estimated revenues. For the purposes of this
analysis we have employed current taxable values of commercial
development and Fiscal Year 2006 operating budget data as approved by
Town Meeting. In most instances large numbers have been rounded to
promote an ease of reading.
2.0 Summary of Findings
The summary of findings below describe key fiscal impact findings associated
with "Park Square at Reading", a 400,000 sf upscale retail center, including
an office component of 40,000 sf, located in Reading Massachusetts.
PROPERTY TAXES:
"Park Square" will generate $1.219.000 in annual property taxes and at
least $1.137,000 as an annual net fiscal benefit to the Town of Reading
As compared to current annual property taxes on the Addison Wesley
property of $236,000, "Park Square's" annual property taxes of
$1,219,000 per year is an increase of more than 500%.
ASSESSED VALUATION:
"Park Square" will add approximately $97.000.000 to total assessed
valuation and will provide significant new growth tax revenues during the
initial year of operation.
Park Square at Reading: Fiscal Impact Analysis November 2005 page 1
John Connelly and Associates
PERMIT FEES:
"Park Square" will generate approximately $500,000 in initial construction
permit fees and at least a similar amount as individual stores are fitted out
for use. We anticipate total construction permit fees to be in excess of
$1.000.000.
3.0 Municipal Service Cost
Service costs associated with specialty retail and office use are directly
related to municipal departmental budgets. Commercial land uses and new
development traditionally impacts police, fire, and public works budgets.
They may impact, in a very minor way, health and welfare, recreation and
culture and general government service costs. For Park Square, water and
sewer costs will be paid on a usage basis, trash removal will be privately
provided, and construction permit fees will easily cover any costs assigned to
building inspections during construction. Table '1' illustrates the FY 2006
budgets for the departments we have assigned as having some level of
measurable cost impact.
Table `1': Impacted Departmental Budgets
Municipal
FY 2006
Department
Budget
Public Safety
$6,656,941
Public Works/
$4,100,791
Recreation
Community
$1,493,384
Services
Library
$ 942,817
Building
$3,834,459
Maintenance
Total I $17,028,392
As shown above, the impacted departmental budgets total $17 million dollars.
However, it is important to note that said value relates to all land uses in the
community. To estimate the percentage of cost assigned to non-residential
uses (commercial/industrial and institutional uses we have used the
proportional valuation method the Handbook of Fiscal Impact by Burchell and
Listokin. This approach is designed to estimate the percentage of the affected
municipal operating budget that can be assigned to non-residential uses. Not
surprisingly residential uses in almost all communities generate the large
majority of service costs and Reading is no exception. In this instance we
Park Square at Reading: Fiscal Impact Analysis November 2005 page 2
,s
John Connery and Associates
have determined that approximately 6% or $1,100,000 dollars in annual
service cost can be assigned to all non-residential land uses.
Using data provided by the Commonwealth as part of its build-out study, we
determined that the Town of Reading has approximately 6 million square feet
of commercial / industrial and institutional land use. Dividing the estimated
cost of $1,100,000 dollars by the total commercial / industrial / institutional
area provides an average service cost of 18 cents per square foot for non-
residential uses. Our experience with numerous communities in
Massachusetts indicates that the derived value is within the state wide range
of 5 to 25 cents per square foot. Accordingly, with 400,000 square feet of
retail and 40,000 square feet of office space and the estimated non-
residential service cost of 18.5 cents per square foot, the an annual service
cost for Park Square at Reading, using a town wide average, will be
approximately $82,000. Given that Park Square at Reading will be
responsible for almost all traditional municipal services including on site
security, the assigned cost is almost will most likely be related to non-fee
based public safety services, a characteristic not uncommon for essentially
self contained and maintained shopping centers.
4.0 Revenue Generation and Net Fiscal Impact
Park Square at Reading as an income generating property is subject to an
income valuation methodology to generate a total taxable value. Using a
triple net office rental rate of $20 dollars per foot for 40,000 square feet of
office space, and triple net retail rental of $30 per foot for 400,000 square feet
of retail space and assuming a 5% vacancy rate we estimate the total
assessed value to be $97,000,000. At said value, the commercial component
will generate $1,219,000 in gross taxes based on the current tax rate of
$12.57. Subtracting the $82,000 service cost generates a net fiscal benefit of
approximately $1,137,000 for the commercial component.
Park Square at Reading has an annual cost-to-revenue profile that is
consistent with retail centers throughout the region. The strong annual fiscal
benefit of $1,137,000 is essentially the result of tax value of a regionally
significant location and the generally self sufficient operational characteristics
of the facility. In terms of comparison to an operational office park the
Lifestyle Center will generate property taxes in excess of $1,200,000 as
compared to $236,000 for the existing uses, and increase of more than 500%.
5.0 New Growth Tax Benefits
Consistent with State regulations the taxes generated by new growth may be
collected and used as a revenue source for one year before becoming part of
Park Square at Reading: Fiscal Impact Analysis November 2005 page 3
John Connery and Associates
total assessed valuation and subject to mandated levy limitations. This
feature of municipal finance was designed to provide municipalities with
budgetary flexibility and to encourage new growth. As the project is
constructed the appropriate tax year value will be calculated as new growth
revenues. At completion the proposal will have added approximately 80
million dollars to the total assessed valuation of the community.
6.0 Construction Permit Revenue and Utility Connection Fees
In addition to property taxes and excise taxes the proposed residences will
generate building permit, electrical, and plumbing fees. We estimate that the
proposal will generate approximately $500,000 dollars in additional fees for
the general fund during the project build-out period. Said fees will be one
time fees but will constitute a short term immediate fiscal benefit to the
community.
Additionally, as individual store space is leased it will generate a secondary
but major generation of construction permit fees associated with the fitting out
of individual stores. We estimate the additional fees to be, at a minimum,
equal to the initial construction fee revenue. Accordingly, we estimate total
construction permit fees to be in excess of $1,000,000.
7.0 Concluding Comments
Park Square at Reading will generate an increase in annual property taxes
from-the project site by at least 500%. The increase in gross tax yield is a
major advantage for the Town of Reading. However, it is important to note
that even with assignment of service costs the proposal will generate
$1,137,000 in net revenue that can be used by local government for various
municipal needs in the community.
In addition to the long term and sustainable annual fiscal benefit, the proposal
constitutes a major short term benefit generating more than $1,000,000 in
local receipts in permit fees during project construction and individual store fit.
out.
We find that Park Square at Reading offers the community both short term
and long term major fiscal benefits as a result of the re-using existing
underutilized commercial property.
Park Square at Reading: Fiscal Impact Analysis November 2005 page 4
1
John Connery and Associates
Fiscal Impact Analysis: Summary of Findings
"Park Square at Reading"; Reading, Massachusetts
(Redevelopment of the Addison-Wesley property, One Jacob Way, Reading)
Overview
The summary of findings below describe key fiscal impact findings associated with
"Park Square at Reading", a 400,000 sf specialty retail center, including an office
component of 40,000 sf, located in Reading Massachusetts.
PROPERTY TAXES:
"Park Square" will generate $1.219.000 in annual property taxes and at least
$1.137.000 as an annual net fiscal benefit to the Town of Reading.
As compared to current annual property taxes on the Addison Wesley property of
$236,000, "Park Square's" annual property taxes of $1,219,000 per year is an
increase of more than 500%.
ASSESSED VALUATION:
"Park Square" will add approximately $97.000.000 to total assessed valuation and
will provide significant new growth tax revenues during the initial year of operation.
PERMIT FEES:
"Park Square" will generate approximately $500,000 in initial construction permit
fees and at least a similar amount as individual stores are fitted out for use. We
anticipate total construction permit fees to be in excess of $1.000.000.
Fiscal Impact Analysis - Summary of Findings
November 2005
Page 1 of 1
Hechenbleikner, Peter
From: Askin, Richard [Richard.Askin@srweiner.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 4:14 PM
To: Hechenbleikner, Peter
Subject: RE: Everson-12-17-05 (2).doc
Hi Pete:
Thank you for sending this over.
His questions are good. In fact we have addressed and answered these questions in prior presentations and
in the traffic reports. Nevertheless, we will make it a point to cover these aspects at next Tuesday's presentation.
Best Regards, Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: Hechenbleikner, Peter [mailto:phechenbleikner@ci.reading.ma.us]
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 2:53 PM
To: Askin, Richard
Subject: Everson-12-17-05 (2).doc
This is a comment from one of our residnents - I wanted to make sure you had it before Tuesday night.
Pete
This message (and any associated files) is the property of
S. R. Weiner and Associates Inc. and W/S Development Associates LLC
and is intended only.for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are not
the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination,
copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this
message, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message
in error, please notify us immediately by calling our corporate office
at 617-232-8900 and deleting this message from your computer.
Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, S. R. Weiner
and Associates, Inc. and W/S Development Associates LLC do not accept
responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this
message, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail
transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard-copy
version of this message.
Any views or opinions presented in this message are solely those of
the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.
01-1
1/12/2006
Hechenblefter, Peter
From: Ben [ben@planetnw.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 2:36 PM
To: Reading - Selectmen
Subject: EVERSON REVIEW OF E&K TRAFFUC STUDY: REVISION # 1.
R
Everson-12-17-
05.doc (68 KB)
Peter,
Could you include the attached document from Jeff Everson regarding the Edwards & Kelcey
traffic study in this week's packet for the BOS.
Jeff's contact information is enclosed if anyone has a question or comment on his work.
Thank you,
Ben Tafoya
1
O
December 17, 2005
Ben Tafoya, Member, Reading Board of Selectmen
40 Oak Street
Reading, MA 01867
Subiect: Preliminary Review of "Park Square at Reading, a Traffic Study," August 2005,
Redevelopment of The Addison-Wesley Office Park, One Jacob Way, Reading, MA;
Prepared by Edwards & Kelcey (EK), Boston, MA
Dear Mr. Tafoya:
I reviewed the report referenced above. This review treats the following subjects: (A) trip
generation of vehicles attracted by a facility proposed in the above report, (B) origin of
these vehicles, (C) distribution of the vehicles along roadways to the proposed facility
(D) vehicle parking at this facility, and (E) accidents. Other topics treated in the EK.
report were not reviewed nor was the Supplemental Traffic Study considered in detail.
The reason for focusing on items A-E is that these items are seriously flawed, and, thus,
there was no reason to spend time on other issues. The basis for this statement is given
below.
A. Trip Generation
1. The number of vehicles that the proposed facility (i.e., Lifestyle Retail Center)
might attract (i.e., trip generation) depends primarily on the nature of the facility
and its area in square feet.' In many cases, trip generation values can be found in
the Trip Generation Manual compiled by the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE)
based on so-called Land Use Codes (LUC). There are dozens of LUCs for
facilities such as hotels, hospitals, churches, movie theaters, shopping centers,
warehouses, condos, etc.
2. When using this Trip Generation Manual, it is critically important to determine
which of three ITE methods should be used to calculate the trip generation rate for
a given facility type.2 These methods involve the use of either a (1) regression
equation, (2) ITE weighted average, or (3) local trip generation data collected by
the developer when proposed land use is not compatible with ITE land use codes.
3. The report by EK referenced above employed the LUC 820, which pertains to
general commercial (i.e., shopping mall) usage according to the 7c'' edition of the
ITE Trip Generation Manual. There was no justification given by EK that the
unique Lifestyle Retail Center has the same trip generating characteristics as a
shopping mall. It appears that EK used LUC 820 merely for convenience:
"...Land Use Code 820 has been utilized for computational analysis because the
volumes of data from the industry are more readily available." (2"d paragraph,
page 9). The burden of proof is upon EK to either clearly demonstrate that LUC
820 is appropriate for this application, or that EK should collect sufficient trip
generation data for Lifestyle Retail Centers, and analyze this data based on
statistical significance tests.
Since 2002, 101 Lifestyle Centers have been built in the US. ' It is quite likely that
trip generation traffic counts were acquired as part of the planning process for these
centers and could be obtained by contacting the developers. This is the data that
should be used by Edwards & Kelcey, not trip generation data for traditional
shopping malls (i.e., land use code 820).
The Reading Board of Selectmen cannot draw valid conclusions about traffic impacts
based on this report due to unfounded trip generation assumptions by EK
B. Origin of Vehicles
1. The EK report'(page 14) assumes that 80 percent of vehicles heading to the Park
Square Lifestyle Retail Center originate from either the south or from Route 128.
Another 15 percent are derived from the north, while the remaining 5 percent
come from the east. Due to a proposed EK redesigned roadway geometry in the
vicinity of the Addison-Wesley complex, there is no vehicular traffic stemming
from the west along South Street. These numbers (i.e., 80, 15 and 5 percent) are
given without justification or references.
2. In reality, the number of vehicles originating from easterly, northern and
northwest directions with respect to the Lifestyle Retail Center at the Addison-
Wesley complex could be considerably greater than 5 and 15 percent cited in item
#1 above. Conversely, the 80 percent figure could be less. Reasons for this
observation are based on average household incomes. "The average household
income of a lifestvle center shopper, for instance. is $75.000." 3 According to the
Boston Globe, Community Profiles,4 the average household income in Reading is
$95.019: for North Reading, $94.962. for Wakefield, $80.732: for Lynnfield,
$116.914 and for Wilmington, $82.650. Clearly, these communities are not south
of the Addison-Wesley complex and have average incomes above the average
income of those shoppers drawn to Lifestyle Retail Centers. As a point of
comparison, shopping traffic from Stoneham and Woburn may be less than
shopping traffic from the towns cited above because the average household
incomes from this town and city are $71,260 and $67,878, respectively.
3. The distribution of traffic assumed by EK heading toward the proposed center is
totally without foundation. Further, motorists traveling along Route 128 have two
other significant shopping choices, namely Burlington Mall and the North Shore
Mall that offer upscale shopping opportunities similar to those found in a
Lifestyle Retail Center and could otherwise detract from the traffic flow to the
proposed Lifestyle Center in Reading.
The Reading Board of Selectmen has no basis to assess the impact of traffic related to
the proposed Lifestyle Retail Center due to the unfounded traffic distribution assumed
by EK.
co
C. Distribution of Vehicles on Reading Roadways
The distribution of vehicles addressed by the EK report on pages 13-15 is incorrect due to
the unsubstantiated assumptions regarding the origin of vehicles discussed in Section B.
EK should re-exam the vehicle distribution based on a well grounded market survey
related to the likely origin of shoppers heading toward the Lifestyle Retail Center at the
Addison-Wesley site.
The market survey should be used as input to the computer simulation "SYNCHRO"
and new results (e.g., Level of Service) generated for review by the Reading Board of
Selectmen.
D. Vehicle Parking at the Lifestyle Center
Lifestyle Retail Centers feature an architecture where shoppers can park conveniently
near stores of interest. This approach features a direct line of sight to a desired store
without walking through a large parking lot that may be unsafe at night. The EK report
does not address parking availability in general, the architectural difference in parking
between Lifestyle Retail Centers and traditional malls and does not account for an
adequate level of parking space that may or may not be available at the Addison-Wesley
site given the proposed Lifestyle Retail Center is expected to occupy 400,000 square feet.
The traffic study by Edwards & Kelcey did not consider parking accommodations needed
for delivery trucks. Further, parking needed for employees of upscale stores was
neglected. Lifestyle retail centers have 60-80 stores and each store may have 2-4
employees, for example. Thus, employee parking may require 210 (i.e., 70 x 3) additional
spaces.
Specific calculations should be provided by EK to convince the Reading Board of
Selectmen that adequate parking would be available at the Addison-Wesley site.
E. Accidents
The EK report discusses accidents on pages 31 and 32 with an accident data table on page
32. The Mass Highway accident data from 1995-1997 is the subject of a legal. inquiry by
the Office of Inspector General (OIG) in Washington, DC. The basis for the legal inquiry
is alleged fraud that Mass Highway may have committed in the use of accident data
known by them to be seriously flawed (i.e., accidents with no known locations). A
decision from the OIG may be armounced in January 2006. Thus, accident data from
Mass Highway should not be used until allegation of fraud is ascertained.
The Reading Board of Selectmen is cautioned against assuming validity of any
accident data used in the EK report until the matter is resolved by the OIG.
3
F. Editing Comments on the EK Report
The reader of this assessment regarding the EK report is invited to examine Section 4,
Traffic Volumes from pages 9-13, for example. This section features many numerical
quantities without references. Thus, it is difficult, if not impossible, to verify these
numbers. These mistakes represent poor technical writing.
EK is urged to correct these writing errors so that the Reading board of Selectmen can
verify statements made in (lie report.
G. Action Items for EK
Write a completely new report and address items A-F. It may not be possible to treat item
E because the OIG accident fraud case is still pending as of this writing. Even when this
case is settled it is not clear that the Mass Highway would have adequate accident data
available for EK to use.
EK should write a new report from scratch and submit it to the Reading Board of
Selectmen for their review.
H. About the Author of this Letter
The author of this review is a program manager in the field on Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS) and has directed several programs funded by the US Department of
Transportation (DOT). He is an author of a dozen technical papers and reports. His
resume is available upon request.
Very truly yours,
Jeffrey H. Everson, Ph.D., ITS Program Manager
21 Pine Ridge Circle, Reading, MA 01867
781-944-3632 (home); 781-684-4247 (work); 339-227-0585 (cell)
1 Jha, M. and Lovell, D., "Trip Generation characteristics of Free Standing Discount Stores: A Case Study,
ITE Journal on the Web, May 1999 htto://www.ite.ore/membersonly/iteiournal/odf/JEA99A85.t)df
2 Development Assistance Brochure, Trip Generation Guidelines, Public Works, Kent, Washington.
httn://www. ci.kent.wa. us/ocrinitcenter/oubl ieworks/tringenerati on eu idelines.Ddf
3 The new face of retail, Mimicked Main Streets, mall makeovers seek to lure shoppers, San Francisco
Chronicle, May 3, 2005. httn://sfsate.com/cei-bin/article.cai?f--/c/a/2005/05/03/BUGN9CIU49I.DTL
4 httn://re.boston.com/Community/rank detail.asn?RankField=INCCYMEDD
24
TOWN OF HINGHAM
OFFICE OF SELECTMEN
Mathew E. MacIver, Chairman Charles J. Cristello
Philip J. Edmundson Town Administrator
Melissa A. Tully
January 10, 2006
Board of Selectmen
Town of Reading
16 Lowell Street
Reading MA 01867-2601
co
Dear Chairman Anthony:
We understand that W/S Development is proposing to build a lifestyle center in Reading. They have
asked us to share with you our experiences with the development of Derby Street Shoppes in Hingham.
Prior to W/S Development's purchase and development of the Derby Street Shoppes, it was a non-
productive commercial piece of property within the town of Hingham. The completed Derby Shoppes are
now a productive source of tax revenue and provides desired services within the town. The benefits are
both a solid revenue source with limited additional demand for town services and improved quality of
life. In general the community is very pleased to now have the easy accessibility to high quality stores and
restaurants.
Our experiences during the planning and construction phase were generally positive. In general they were
always cooperative and responsive to our concerns. One of our major concerns was traffic issues during
construction and long term traffic impacts. During the construction phase when concerns arose,
communication was easy and solutions quickly found. Since the opening of the lifestyle, center we have
seen an increase in traffic volume within the area. The first couple of weeks were the most difficult, as
there is always some confusion as people get used to access and egress routes. We did find some stop
light issues and exit issues that we were able to iron out fairly quickly. Although there is increased road
volumes surrounding the shopping area we have not found it overwhelming or intolerable. Additionally,
the center is located right next to Route 3 artery, which helps limit the traffic impact on the immediate
areas.
In summary, we have found working with W/S Development a positive experience. They were and
continue to be responsive and cooperative. We have found Derby Street Shoppes to have an overall
positive impact on our community. It has provided a new solid re-occurring revenue source, which
provides additional fiscal stability to our town budget planning process. It has raised the quality of
services available in our community. It has had an impact on traffic volumes, and police and fire calls:
However, we have found the benefits outweigh these minor issues.
Sincerely, .
'Mathew E. MacIver -
`Chairman..
210 Central Street, Hingham, MA 02043-2757 • Telephone (781) 741-1400 • Fax (781) 741-1454
~ ~y
Page 1 of 1
Schena, Paula
From: LYNNCARUSO@aol.com
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:24 PM
To: Reading - Selectmen
Subject: Addison Wesley
Dear Selectmen,
I am responding to a PEP email I received. I am very much in favor of the development of a "lifestyle"
mall. Although the traffic issues may need to be addressed, they certainly should not prohibit the
development. The mall is positioned such that the traffic is not going through the center of town.
Shoppers can quickly come in and out of the mall without affecting the makeup of Reading, which we all
love to keep. The tax dollars brought in are very much needed. The jobs will be very important also.
With the nonexistent growth of the center of Reading, this is a positive addition to the commercial
development in the town. I have lived in Reading for 10 years and feel that the benefits far outweigh
the drawbacks to this development. I hope it goes through.
Sincerely,
Lynne Caruso
30 Zachary Lane
1/13/2006
U
Page 1 of 1
Schena, Paula
From: Paula G [pmgentile@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 1:04 PM
To: drew@pride-com.com; Town Manager; Planning; Reading - Selectmen
Cc: ben@planetnw.com; Kara McWeeney
Subject: Here we go, Reading. Down the road of no return?
Where, oh where is my quiet town of Reading going to?
There is a lot of hype floating about the Addison Wesley Project.
All I can say is it will change the face of this town.
And it seems to me that big business is lining up to get in. Recent comments talked about the need to improve the
overall "appeal" of Reading and the surrounding area.
Oh, I'm sorry, did the nice quiet homes nearby bother you?
I also noted recent comments that the South Street intersection needs a change.
What are you talking about? The intersection is fine and functions well. I should know. I live there. If people
would stop running the red lights then perhaps there would be fewer accidents.
I think the Reading center interchange is where the change is needed. Remove that godforsaken ugly post in the
middle of the road and revamp that!
"The traffic to and from the project will be mostly on Saturday mornings and holidays."
Um, hello???? That's when I want peace and quiet the most!
So glad you are all thinking of me, the little guy.
Another comment I noticed is that the shopping plaza will save time due to less travel for shopping and gas.
What, the three gas stations in a row within the vicinity are not enough? They look lovely, don't they?
I certainly didn't vote for those.
And three supermarkets with a two mile radius are too far to drive? Please.
Four drugstores? Oh yes, definitely. We needed those!!
Again, I urge you to look at the empty Stoneham Redstone plaza stores.
Lovely, aren't they?
C'mon people, get over the propaganda.
People say they chose Reading due to the location and feel of the town.
So did L Reading is nicer as a community town, not an overdeveloped shopping town.
Of course I want the Addison Wesley property developed, and developed properly into something nice for
Reading. Tax revenue, etc.
But do it in such a way that the whole community benefits.
PLEASE pass this email onto anyone who thinks they might be interested.
1/13/2006
a~
6 S . R. WEINER W/S DEVELOPMENT" C b
-0) AND ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED v ASSOCIATES LLC
n
RE: Park Square at Reading
An Invitation to Communicate
Dear Neighbor,
It has been about a year since we last met at an informational meeting at the Addison
Wesley / Pearson Education property to review the plans for the Park Square at Reading
"Lifestyle Center" and listen to your comments and concerns. At the request of the neighbors,
WS Development agreed not to pursue a request for a zone change to allow retail use for the
property at the Spring 2005 Reading Town Meeting.
We concurred that it would be time well spent to study the traffic associated with the
project in order to minimize impacts to the neighborhood and to assure we could provide safe
access to the location. It was our intent to reconvene with our neighbors to go over the traffic
information and to address any concerns.
We have, at the request of the Reading Selectmen, dedicated much time and effort to
studying traffic associated with Park Square, and have provided a detailed Traffic Report and a
Supplemental Traffic Report which detail the traffic issues. Both reports are posted on the Town
of Reading's website http://www.ci.reading.ma.us/planning/. Additionally, at our expense, the
Selectmen engaged the services of Greenman - Pederson, Inc., the Town's traffic engineering
consultant, to review and evaluate the studies and to advise them on the credibility of traffic
studies. The town's traffic consultant submitted its findings in a report dated November 11,
2005 (also posted to the town's website) and subsequently attended two selectmen's meetings to
present the results of the studies and to respond to their questions. These meetings did not
provide the time (or space!) for input or questions from those in attendance including residents
from the neighborhood and representatives from WS Development.
Our goal has been to cooperatively work through issues in order to provide a first class
`Lifestyle' shopping experience that the neighborhood and entire Town of Reading could benefit
from. It has been very disheartening to see the frustration that has evolved in the neighborhood
and misinformation that has arisen due to a lack of communication between us. When we last
met we had every intention to continue meeting with you and to be responsive to issues that are
important to you. Realizing that the `vacant office park' would ultimately change in the future,
we want to be a positive component of the community and to beta good neighbor.
vi5 3iuuy i9th; iiolYl 7 io 9Piv, five will resume tieighbprhood meetings'at Addison-
Wesley to better communicate with you. I would like to discuss issues such as traffic, screening,
lighting, and hear your concerns to address them in a positive manner. Please consider this an
invitation to open the lines of communication and plan on attending. I hope to see you on the
19th. If you are unable to attend and would like to contact me regarding questions or comments,
please feel free to contact me at 617-232-8900 Ext.241 or E-mail me at
Bob.Frazier@SRWeiner.com.
Sincerely yours,
Robert G. Frazier 00
Vice President (02RJ
1330 B O Y L S T O N STREET CHESTNUT HILL - MASSACHUSETTS 02 4 6
P H O N E 61 7 - 2 3 2 - 8 9 0 0 w w w. s r w e i n e r. c o m
Page 1 of 2
Hechenbleikner, Peter
From:
Carl McFadden [cmcfadden@ftmc.net]
Sent:
Thursday, January 12, 2006 11:16 AM
To:
Anthony, Camille; Hechenbleikner, Peter
Subject: Fw: THE PROPOSED ADDISON-WESLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
fyi
Original Message
From: Readina PEP
To: read inaoer)O.comcast.net
Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 11:14 AM
Subject: THE PROPOSED ADDISON-WESLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PEP UPDATE
THE PROPOSED ADDISON-WESLEY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Two Opportunities to ask questions/voice opinions
RCTV CALL-IN SHOW WITH DEVELOPERS
THURSDAY NIGHT (TONIGHT) AT 7PM
The developers of "Park Square at Reading" on the old Addison-Wesley site will be on RCTV, Thursday 1/12
at 7pm. They will be taking calls about the project, so if you have questions for the developers, this is a good
opportunity to ask.
The call in number is: 781-944-8888
OPEN MEETING WITH SELECTMEN
TUESDAY JAN. 17th AT 7PM
PARKER MIDDLE SCHOOL MULTIPURPOSE ROOM
The Selectmen and CPDC are hosting an open meeting for Reading Community to discuss proposed
redevelopment project. Citizens will be given an opportunity to ask questions and offer opinions. As the
developer has not formally submitted an application for re-zoning, this will only be an informational public
hearing. This is an excellent opportunity to raise questions, separate fact from fiction and voice your opinion
about the project.
Process:
• W/S Development Assoc. (the developers) have completed a traffic study
• The next step is for the developers to apply for re-zoning to allow for retail; they haven't done that yet
• The application will go the the Selectmen who then have 14 days to forward it to CPDC
• CPDC will make a recommendation on the application to town meeting, who will ultimately approve/deny
the re-zoning request
• If the re-zoning is approved, the developers will have to go through the state MEPA process before any
construction can begin
Some facts:
• The project will generate $1.1 million annually in local property taxes, which will benefit both the schools
1/12/2006
Page 2 of 2
and the town
• Potential retailers include: Whole Foods, P. F. Chang's, Legal Seafoods, Ann Taylor, Barnes & Noble, J.
Crew, Chico's, Coldwater Creek and others
• The shopping center will be fashioned after the Derby Street Shoppes in Hingham
• The developers are exploring opportunities to support community and arts organizations in Reading
• The property was re-zoned a few years ago to allow for hotel development but Reading has received no
proposals for such a development
Proponents say:
• Reading would greatly benefit by an increase in town revenue; right now we have such a small commercial
tax base that the burden for town services rests mostly on residential tax payers
• The Addison-Wesley space needs to be redeveloped; other more beneficial options (like hotel and office
space) are highly unlikely due to poor demand and over development along 95/128 beltway
• If we don't work with this developer on a more high end, attractive retail project, we may be stuck with a
Wahnart when our financial situation is more desperate
• The development would bring sorely needed jobs to Reading for teenagers and others
• High end shops and restaurants could help make Reading a "destination" town, creating incentive and
opportunities for existing and new local businesses to grow and flourish
• Reading has an opportunity to negotiate for resources to support a thriving community arts culture which
adds appeal and value to the town.
Opponents say:
• Local residents will be burdened with increased traffic flow from out-of-town shoppers
• Shops and restaurants will compete with local businesses
• Main street will be adversely effected by the traffic flow and proposed additional lanes by the highway
entrance
• A "Mall" is a stigma to the town identity and culture
• There is no guarantee that these shops will be successful; if they fail, we might have to live with a Wahnart
or similar chain
This is a major proposal for the town that will impact residents, positively and negatively, in many different
ways. We encourage you to tune in to RCTV, attend the meeting, or at the very least, email the
selectmen and inform them of your views!
Camille Anthony canthonvamci.readina.ma.us
James Bonazoli ibonazoli a.ci.readina. na.us
Joe Duffy iduffv(@.ci.readin2.ma.us
Ben Tafoya btafova(ifti.readina.ma.us
Rick Schubert rschubert(a_7.ci.readina.ma.us
OR
selectmen(@,ci.readina.ma.us
WCI
1/12/2006