Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-10-24 Board of Selectmen Packet' ' 1 9-1� , 11 M►� WHEREAS: Anton's Cleaners, a Massachusetts family -owned business, has organized and operated the annual "Coats for Kids" Winter coat drive since 1994; and WHEREAS: Over the past 11 years, "Coats for Kids" has collected 372,397 good quality, used Winter coats. Anton's Cleaners has donated $3.9 million in cleaning costs to assure each coat was clean and in good condition; and WHEREAS: In Eastern Massachusetts, more than 240 public, private and parochial schools have been steadfast supporters and the largest source of coats for the past two years; and WHEREAS: "Anyone who needs a coat will have it" continues to be the underlying theme and the driving force as "Coats for Kids" continues into their 12th year helping local children have a warm Winter. NOW, THEREFORE, WE, the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Reading, Massachusetts do hereby proclaim the week of October 23, 2006 to be Coats for Kids. Day in the Town of Reading, and urge all citizens to take cognizance of this event and participate fittingly } in its observance. THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN Ben Tafoya, Chairman James E. Bonazoli, Vice Chairman Stephen A. Goldy, Secretary Camille W. Anthony Richard W. Schubert aa, I antons.com October 10, 2006 Ben Tafoya, Chairman Town of Reading Board of Selectmen 16 Lowell St Reading, MA 01867 40 Oval Road, Quincy, MA 02170 tos te). 341 66 ZnJ C A ! i QM 10: 51 Dear Mr. Tafoya, Earlier this week, Gov. Romney issued a proclamation declaring October 16, 2006, as Coats for Kids Day in the state of Massachusetts. The proclamation recognizes the success of Anton's Cleaners' Coats for Kids winter -coat collection drive, which over the past 11 years has collected and distributed 372,397 coats to those in need throughout Eastern Massachusetts and Southern New Hampshire. The town of Reading has been very involved in Coats for Kids. Last year, the Anton's Cleaners store(s) in Reading took in coats from local residents. In addition, two schools in Reading participated in the drive by holding winter -coat collection drives. In all, residents of Reading donated 2,992 coats to Coats for Kids, which were then distributed by our Distribution Partners — the Salvation Army, Massachusetts Community Action Program (MASSCAP) and Cradles to Crayons — to those in need. In recognition of your community's involvement in Coats for Kids, we ask that you join the governor in proclaiming a "Coats for Kids Day" in Reading sometime between October 15 and November 15, 2006. In doing so, we ask that you encourage the residents of your community to donate winter coats that are free of rips, stains and broken zippers — the kind of coat you would give to a friend — so that those who are in need of a warm winter coat will be able to have one. Should you choose to acknowledge Coats for Kids, please let us know so that we may recognize the honor. You may contact us through the Coats for Kids hotline at 800 - 659 -0069. You can also contact us at that number if you have any questions, need more information about Coats for Kids. or if you would like a representative of Anton's Cleaners to appear before your board in regard to this request. In the meantime, I thank you for your consideration. Best regards, Charles A. Anton, President Anton's Cleaners Enc: Copy of Coats for Kids Day Proclamation signed by Gov. Romney & Sec. of State Galvin Promotional Partners Distribution Partners Supporting Partners Citizens Bank Gradies "' o Graham Communications a MASSCAP f u r n i t u r e iGf ..Cr�� /0�1rj �'I communiryao'Ro� :oaueon m. Package Supply Y✓PX7 � II0370 N 7 C.,. J_I\ Notj�Sf a stores.. Ai op A ucl xnMU aid.um Km FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Jonathan Bloom T 617/328 -0069 F 617/471 -1504 J_Bloom @grahamcomm -com State Proclaims October 16, 2006, Coats for Kids Day Governor Romney urges all in the Commonwealth to participate in winter coat drive BOSTON, MA (October 10, 2006) — Gov. W. Mitt Romney, in recognition of the widespread community effort that is at the root of the success of Anton's Cleaners' annual Coats for Kids winter -coat collection drive, have proclaimed October 16, 2006 as Coats for Kids Day in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. In proclaiming Coats for Kids Day, Gov. Romney called for people across the state to participate in the drive, saying that he "urge[s] all the citizens of the Commonwealth to take cognizance of this event and participate fittingly in its observance." During each of the last 11 years, Anton's Cleaners has conducted a "Coats for Kids" drive, the goal of which has been to collect good - quality, used winter coats for those in need. All total, the program has collected 372,397 coats and Anton's Cleaners has donated more than $3.9 million in cleaning costs to make sure the coats were received in good condition. A large portion of the success of Coats for Kids has been driven by broad -based community support from businesses that have collaborated with Anton's Cleaners for this effort. These businesses read like a "Who's Who" among Massachusetts corporations and include: • Promotional Partners: FOX25, the Boston Bruins and (new this year) Jordan's Furniture. • Corporate Collection Partners: Citizens Bank, State Street Corporation, Blue Cross- Blue Shield of Massachusetts, Delta Dental of Massachusetts, Fidelity Investments, Columbia Construction Company, and many others. Promotional Partners Distribution Partners Supporting Partners •� Grcxdie Citizens sank S I .e Ii�ra$$caP Graham Communications Msssschusss Assjo rniture '. CY(�yOi'�S ill cammuNty A9nn Package Supply WFXT•BOSTON N.+jJ 5+a Stores.," Mt c,.Puriuical esnsn+u,a o. • Distribution Partners: MASSCAP, the Salvation Army and Cradles to Crayons. Over and above the participation from these corporations, more than 240 public, private and parochial schools in Eastern Massachusetts have collected coats in each of the last two years. The efforts of these students have made Bay State schools the largest source for coats. "We would like to thank Governor Romney for declaring October 16 Coats for Kids Day and we hope this proclamation will help make this year's Coats for Kids drive the biggest, most successful drive we've ever had," says Charles A. Anton of Anton's Cleaners. "With utility costs continuing to rise in the northeast, and with a bitter cold winter ahead of us, a lot of people are depending upon the success of this drive." Residents of Eastern Massachusetts and Southern New Hampshire can help by donating good - quality, used winter coats — the kind you would give to a friend to wear — to Coats for Kids. The drive runs from October 16, 2006, through January 15, 2007, during which time coats can be dropped off at any of Anton's Cleaners 43 locations throughout Eastern Massachusetts and Southern New Hampshire or any of Jordan's Furniture's four locations in Avon, Natick and Reading, MA, or Nashua, NH. Once donated, the coats are distributed to those in need through Coats for Kids Distribution Partners including MASSCAP, Cradles to Crayons, the Salvation Army and Southern New Hampshire Services. " Anton's commitment to helping families in needy is truly inspiring," says Joe Diamond, Executive Director of MASSCAP. "Each year the number of coats contributed goes up and each year more and more disadvantaged families are able to stay warm in the winter. Hopefully people will follow the Governor's call and help out by donating coats." Anton's Cleaners is a family -owned business with 43 stores in eastern Massachusetts and southern New Hampshire. For more information about Coats for Kids or to sign up as a Corporate Partner, visit www.antons.com or call the Coats for Kids hotline at 800 - 659 -0069. M APPOINTMENTS TO BECOME EFFECTIVE OCTOBER 20, 2006 Ad Hoc Community Preservation Act Study Committee 9 Vacancies Appointing Authority: Board of Selectmen Present Member(s) and Term(s) Vacancy (CPDC) Vacancy (Conservation Commission) Vacancy (Housing Authority) Vacancy (Recreation Committee) Vacancy (Finance Committee) Vacancy (Historical Commission) Vacancy (Selectman) Vacancy (Resident) Vacancy (Resident) Candidates: Bill Brown Tom Ryan Mark Wetzel (ConsCom) Israel Maykut (CPDC) Karen Flammia (Housing Authority) 3al. Section - Ad Hoc Community Preservation Act Study Committee There is hereby created an Ad Hoc Community Preservation Act Study Committee which shall exist until June 30, 2007, or until such earlier date the Ad Hoc Committee may have completed its work. The Ad Hoc Community Preservation Act Study Committee shall consist of nine (9) members appointed by the Board of Selectmen for terms expiring 6 -30 -07 or such earlier date that may be determined. In selecting the membership, the Board of Selectmen shall attempt to fill the membership as follows: ♦ One member from the Community Planning and Development Commission from members recommended by the CPDC; o One member from the Conservation Commission from members recommended by the Conservation Connnission; ♦ One member from the Reading Housing Authority from members recommended by the Housing Authority; ♦ One member from the Historical Conunission from members recommended by the Commission; ♦ One member from the Recreation Committee from members recommended by the Committee; One member from the Finance Committee from members recommended by the FINCOM; ♦ Two residents of the Town of Reading not otherwise members of any of the above Boards /Committees /Commissions, but who may be members of Town Meeting or of any other Board, Committee, or Commission of the Town other than those named above; ♦ The Board of Selectmen shall designate one of their members to serve as a member and liaison to the Ad Hoc Advisory Committee. The mission of the Ad Hoc Community Preservation Act Study Committee is to learn as much information as possible about the Community Preservation Act; to evaluate the Community Preservation Act and its applicability to the Town of Reading,. to advise the Board of Selectmen on the advantages and disadvantages of adopting the Community Preservation Act for the Town of Reading, and to offer the Board of Selectmen a ranking of the options and the reasons for the ranking in adopting the Community Preservation act.. The Ad Hoc Study Committee shall be responsible to: ♦ Review the Town Master Plan, Recreation Facilities Plan, Conservation Plan, Open Space & Recreation Plan, and all other relevant documents currently available, including but not limited to plans and inventories of the Historical Commission and the Housing Authority, as they relate to the goals of the Community Preservation Act; ♦ Review the components of the Community Preservation Act and determine their advantages and disadvantages to the Town of Reading; ♦ Develop a plan to review milestones in this process with the Board of Selectmen; and e Develop the criteria by which the options will be measured;, ,?6( -)- ♦ Work with staff and the Board of Selectmen to secure community input into the choices and options available to the Town for possible adoption of the Community Preservation Act; ♦ Based on discussion with the Board of Selectmen, draft a proposed Town Meeting Warrant Article and Referendum language for review by Town Counsel. e Recommend to the Board of Selectmen a ranking of the options for adoption of the Community Preservation Act in Reading, with the criteria as to how the rankings were selected. The Ad Hoc Community Preservation Act Study Committee will complete all of its work by June 30, 2007 (or such date as the Board of Selectmen may extend the deadline). The Committee will make an interim report to the Board of Selectmen in early January 1007 in order that the Board of Selectmen may consider whether or not to bring the issue before the Town Meeting at a late January or early February 2007 Special Town Meeting. In conducting its work, the Ad Hoc Committee will be bound by all of the rules and regulations of the Town of Reading and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Staff will be assigned to work with the Ad Hoc Committee through the Town Manager. 3 �� . 5) AM 10: 08 Name: t l aw Date: (Last) (First) (Middle) � -- 5 1"- �� 7 Z Address:- f V Tel. (Home) Tel. (Work)_ (Is this number listed?) Occupation:, >Lit, 2 a # of years in Reading: Are you 'a registered voter in Reading? e-mail address: Place a number next to your preferred position(s) (up to four choices) with #1 being your first priority. (Attach a resume if available.) Animal Control Appeals Committee Advisory Board Audit Committee Board of Appeals Board of Cemetery Trustees _Board of Health Board of Registrars Committee Celebration Committee Cities for Climate Protection Commissioner of Trust Funds Community Planning & Development Comm. Conservation Commission Constable Contributory Retirement Board Council on Aging Cultural Council Custodian of Soldiers' & Sailors' Graves Economic Development Committee Finance Committee Historical Commission Housing Authority Human Relations Advisory Committee Land Bank Committee MBTA Advisory Committee Metropolitan Area Planning Council Mystic Valley Elder Services Recreation Committee RMLD Citizens Advisory Board _Telecommunications and Technology Advisory Committee Town Forest Committee Water, Sewer and Storm Water Management Advisory Committee West Street Historic District Commission V 6t-h e r 4 IM I-vt vk I Y11 RI-e— r -e [I t/ -J-Kr el �'i Please outline relevant experience for the position(s) sought: A Y t-11414 1'. D N CL E R ti Ass. Name: 90 M4T ;Tj Date: Lo - Y_ Last) (First) (Middle) Address ."2 -2 ,hg�y Tel. (Home�z d Tel. (Work) - I (Is this number listed?) Occupation: # of years in Reading: Are you'a registered voter in Reading? Yp-Y e-mail address:6oksme -14T V, cox/� Place a number next to your preferred position(s) (up to four choices) with #1 being your first priority. (Attach a resume if available.) Animal Control Appeals Committee _Aquatics Advisory Board Audit Committee Board of Appeals Board of Cemetery Trustees Board of Health Board of Registrars Bylaw Committee Celebration Committee Cities for Climate Protection Commissioner of Trust Funds Community Planning & Development Comm. Conservation Commission Constable Contributory Retirement Board Council on Aging Cultural Council Custodian of Soldiers' & Sailors' Graves Economic Development Committee Finance Committee Historical Commission Housing Authority Human Relations Advisory Committee Land Bank Committee MBTA Advisory Committee Metropolitan Area Planning Council Mystic Valley Elder Services Recreation Committee RMLD Citizens Advisory Board Telecommunications and Technology Advisory Committee Town Forest Committee —Water, Sewer and Storm Water Management Advisory Committee k West Street HJstoriic District Commission West C V A,_0 #0C CC&f,&Tj_r7_ � Please outline relevant experience for the position(s) sought: V Dom„ U,(-CzqL gas� It Page of Schena, Paula From: Wetzel, Mark Sent: Thursday, October 10.2O0011:3V8AM To: Fink, Fran; Hochanbeikner, Peter 8oheno.Pauka Cc: Barbara Stewart; Doug Greene; Jamie yWaughan; Leo Kenney; mkmetzel@yahon.00m; Mark Wetzel work; Rebecca Lonooy new; Will Finch; VNU)am Hecht Subject: RE: CPA Study Committee I will volunteer to represent the Conservation Commission on the ad hoc committee Principal, Environmental Infrastructure New England/New York Stantec Ph: (978) 692-1913 Fx: (978) 692-4578 The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stanteo's written authorization. UyomarenntMheintendedmcipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately. From: Fink, Fran [ma ikofOnk@d. reading. ma. us] Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2005 11:34 AM To: Hechenbkaikner, Peter; Schena,Pau|n Cc: Barbara Stewart; Doug Greene; ]urnie Maughan; Leo Kenney; m|vvetze|@yahoo.corn; Mark Wetzel work; Rebecca bong|eynaw; Will Finch; William Hecht Subject: CPA Study Committee Hi Peter and Paula, The Cons Com talked about the Ad Hoc CPA Committee during their meeting last week, but no one was able to make o commitment toparticipate. We've had on unusually heavy agenda for a couple of months and everyone is scrambling to keep up with it. |om copying the Commission on this email omareminder. |f one of them wants ho step forward, |om sure the rest would support the nomination. | know that the BOG wants e nomination by tomorrow for their agenda next Fran , lO/I9/2000 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Reilly, Chris Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 11:32 PM To: Hechenblelkner, Peter Subject: FW: Monday Night Chris Reilly Reading Town Planner 16 Lowell St. 01867 781-942-6612 fax 781-942-9071 htt-://www.ci.reading.ma.us/ ma.us /plannin John Sasso [mailto:sassojI@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 2:57 PM To: Reilly, Chris; Chris Reilly Subject: Monday Night Page I of I ta I () - I q,,Vb& Please convey to Peter that we have nominated Israel as our representative to the CPA ad hoc. Regards, John Sasso _3q / 10/17/2006 Page I of I Schena, Paula Frmnn; Heohenb|eikner.Poter, Sent Tuosday, October 17.200011:41 AM To: Schena.Pouha Subject: FW: CPA Study Committee From: Linda Whyte [maUUo: .net Sent: Tuesday, October 17,2UO610:29AM lo:Heohenbleikner Peter Subject: CPA Study Committee Hi Pete' Just informing that RHA Board member, Karen L Flanlniawil| be our nominee hothe CPA Study Committee. If you should need anything further on this, let me know. Lyn lO/l7/2O06 TOWN OF READING, MA I:L�I�b�i Cel�7la�l Rev: September 19, 2006 PLANNING SUBCOMMITTEE y.(LI, HOUSING PLAN INTRODUCTION This Housing Plan was submitted to the State in accordance with the Planned Production regulation promulgated by the Department of Housing & Community Development (DHCD) in December 2002. Under these regulations an affordable housing plan is a plan that identifies the housing needs of the community and the strategies by which the municipality will make progress in facilitating the development of affordable housing. The plan must contain at least the following three sections: Section 1. Comprehensive Housing Needs Assessment Overall, the plan must establish a context for municipal action with regard to housing based on a comprehensive housing needs analysis that examines: 1. Community demographics including information on the racial/ ethnic composition and special needs of the community and HUD MSA region. 2. Existing housing stock characteristics; 3. Development conditions and constraints and the municipality's ability to mitigate those constraints; and 4. The capacity of municipal infrastructure, such as schools, water /sewer systems, roads, utilities, etc. to accommodate the current population as well as future growth. Section 2. Affordable Housing Goals and Strategies In this section, the plan must include: • A discussion of the mix of housing desired, consistent with identified needs and feasible within the housing market, including rental and ownership for families, individuals, persons with special needs, and the elderly; • A numerical goal for annual housing production that meets or exceeds the .75% threshold; • A timeframe or schedule for production of units; and • An explanation of the specific strategies the community will use to achieve its housing production goal, including identification of one or more of the following: 1. Geographic areas in which land use regulations will be modified to accomplish affordable housing production goals; 2. Specific sites on which comprehensive permit applications are to be encouraged; 3. Preferred characteristics of residential development, for example infill housing qlgl.e development, clustered houses, and compact development; and/or ' 4. Municipally owned parcels for which development proposals will be sought. A community's plan may also address other local actions to accomplish its housing goals. Section 3. Description of Use Restrictions This section of the plan must describe the long -term use restrictions that will be placed on the affordable housing units. Include details on the time period covered by the deed restriction and how the future sale or rent price will be calculated. In accordance with the regulation, cities and towns may: Develop and adopt an affordable housing plan for approval by DHCD; and • Request certification of compliance with the approved plan by demonstrating an increase in units that are eligible to be counted on the state Subsidized Housing Inventory (S111) within one calendar year of at least 3/a of one percent (.75 %o). of total year round housing units (based on the 2000 Census) pursuant to the plan. For information about which counts on the SHI, please visit: http://www.rhass.gov/dhcd/ToolKit/EligSumm.doc. In a certified municipality, decisions by the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) to deny or approve with conditions comprehensive permit applications will be deemed "consistent with local needs" under MGL Chapter 40B for a one year period following certification that it has produced .75% of total housing units or two years if it has produced 1.5% of total housing units pursuant to the approved plan. "Consistent with local needs" means that the decision will be upheld by the Housing Appeals Committee (HAQ. A challenge for Reading is whether the planned production standard of .75 of I% is realistic. On the one hand, if the Town relied entirely on new construction to provide more affordable housing units, the rate of production would have to increase significantly. Under this approach, new comprehensive permit units would overshadowing market -rate housing development. On the other hand, under existing housing market conditions, affordable housing unit production within the single family neighborhoods is extremely low and relies primarily on small scale private incentives. At this point, the town does not have a tracking mechanism to measure housing affordability improvements within the neighborhoods, an example of which are accessory apartments. A combination of measures addressing both comprehensive and standard permits is a more pragmatic approach to resolve the affordable housing gap, executed in stages and involving all neighborhoods. The shortage of land for new development or redevelopment has been evident for many years in Reading. BACKGROUND The history of Reading's housing stock spans several centuries, from early colonial farm buildings to contemporary, multi - family apartment buildings. The evolution of Reading's q,j-"? housing reminded fairly static through the 1940s, when the predominantly single - family dwellings were complimented with a variety of housing types. Subdivision tracts became common through the 1950s and 60s, and former farm properties were developed to accommodate the growing demand for suburban residential coinciding with the construction of Route 128, growing affluence and the middle class migration from the inner city. More recently in the 1970s, 80s and 90s larger condominium and apartment buildings were constructed in or adjacent to Reading's commercial corridors, which offered easy . access to regional transportation such as Routes 128 and 93. While Reading continued to be a principally suburban commuter shed to Boston and the office development on Route 128 and Reading's increasingly white collar residents, the Town eventually became a. focal point for large -scale commercial and residential development as growth expanded outward from Boston's inner metropolitan core. The period since the 1991 Master Plan has seen substantially development of subdivisions, rehabilitated single family housing and more dense, multi - family housing such affordable projects under the State mandated Chapter 40B statute. These developments have ranged from 2 lot subdivisions in well - established residential neighborhoods to substantial, 200+ unit condominium and rental developments on the periphery of Town. It's clear as housing demand increases for a variety of housing types in Reading due to its well regarded school system, proximity to commuter links and sustained property values, the Town will continue to see more intensive development on the dwindling supply of buildable land. Section 1. Comprehensive Housing Needs Assessment 1.1 DEMOGRAPHICS AND HOUSING STOCK CHARACTERISTICS • Sub - Regional conditions Housing market conditions, housing needs and barriers affecting the production of low - and moderate - income housing originate in domains significantly larger than Reading. The Town is a member of the North Suburban Planning Council (NSPC), a voluntary association composed of eight towns and one city that aims to facilitate cooperative regional planning. The status of affordable housing in the NSPC sub - region is as shown in the following table: Community 2000 Census Year Round Housing Units Percent SHI Units Shortfall Burlington 8,395 11.2% +100 nnfield 4,249 2.3% -327 North Reading 4,839 2.1% -382 Reading 8,811 8.2% -158 Stoneham 9,231 5.5% -415 Wakefield 9,914 5.7% -426 Wilmington 7,141 9.8% -14 Winchester 7,860 1.8% -645 Mourn 15,312: 8.5% -229 Source: DHCD Subsidized Housing Inventory, June 2006. UrLike other towns and cities where restrictive zoning regulations require homes to consume a large amount of land per dwelling unit (an acre or more), the great majority of single family zoned neighborhoods in Reading allows for lots of one -third to one -half acre. From that perspective, the town contributes proportionally less to the regional affordability problem by allowing higher densities than other suburbs in the NSPC sub- region. Recent Population and Household Trends Population trends are among the key factors driving housing demand. After experiencing a slight decline, Reading's population grew 5 %, to 23,708 persons, from 1990 to 2000. This growth rate parallels the region's growth rate. However, based on projections, Reading's population can be expected to decline slightly over the next 20 years (see Figure 1). Meanwhile, the number of households in Reading, which increased 10% from 1.990 to 200.0, is expected to continue to increase over the next twenty years. This is not a unique trend - nationally, household size is shrinking, resulting in more households. Reading's household size shrunk from 2.84 persons per household in 1990 td 2.73 in 2000, representing a 4% decrease. As we will see, this increase in the population and the number of households led to declining vacancy rates and escalating housing costs. In 2000, Reading had 3.7 persons per square acre. FiLyure 1. Po ulation and Household Trends and Projections, Reading. Year Population # % Change Households # % Change 1980 22,678 -- -- -- 1990 22,539 -1% 7,932 -- 2000 23,708 5 % 8,688 10% Projected: 24% . Non - Family Households 2010 23,500 -1% 8,973 3% 2020 22,865 -3% 9,085 1 1% Sources: U.S. Census and MAPC. • Household Composition Reading is primarily composed of family households — 74% of all households are family households. By comparison, only 61% of the region's households are families. Conversely, 26% of the households in Reading are non- family. Non - family households inc.'.ude households with one person or room -mate situations — i.e., those in the household are• not related. Fieure 2. Breakdown of Household Type iri Readin , 2000. % of Total Households Type of Household Reading Region Families 74% 61% Married- Couple Families 64% 47% Single-person Households 22% 30% Married & Single - Parent Households With Children under 18 38% 31% All Households with Persons Age 65+ 27% 24% . Non - Family Households 26% 39% Source: U.S. Census, 2000. Y14 # Five percent of Reading's households are headed by a single parent. Just over 150 Reading residents live in group quarters. Most of these persons live in nursing homes and a small percentage live in group quarters for persons with developmental disabilities. It is worth noting that 7 % of those over age 65 live with a relative other than a spouse (e.g., with their adult children, with a sibling, etc.). Also, 25% of those over age 65 live alone, 80% of whom are women. Analyzing the age composition of residents helps to identify current and future housing needs. To show this relationship, we clustered age groups to relate them loosely to various stages in the housing market (Figure 3). For example, the age 20 to 34 age groups tend to form households for the first time and are likely to rent or to buy a smaller starter home. The trade -ups (age 35 to 54) have generally accumulated more wealth, may have a larger family, and often drive the demand for larger and more expensive homes in a community. The empty nesters (55 -64) are called such because often their children are grown and have moved out, so they may be ready to downsize to smaller, easier to maintain units. Lastly, the early (65 -74) and "wiser" (75 +) seniors have special housing needs also. Some prefer to move back in with family, some may continue to live on their own, and some may find it necessary to move to assisted living facilities or a nursing home. If these various age groups can not find housing in Reading to meet their needs, they may have to leave the community. From 1990 to 2000, Reading saw: ➢ A decrease in the household formation age group. Reading is not alone in this trend — this age group has decreased in the region also. ➢ Large growth in the middle years (35 to 54), putting pressure on the trade -up market. ➢ Youth and the older population remained relatively stable from 1990 to 2000. Population projections indicate that Reading's household formation group could rebound by 2020 and that the trade -ups may decrease over that time period. A decrease in this latter group could open up more family housing units for younger families. The trade - Lips, however, still would comprise the largest portion of Reading's age groups. The projections also indicate an increase in empty - nesters and early seniors. This could result in a need for smaller units. �(J 01 Figure 3. Reading's Age Groups — Trends and Projections. Figure 4. Number of Reading Residents in Each Age Group from 1990 to 2000 (table) 1990 2000 Preschool (0-4) 1,518 1,701 School Age (5-19) 4,253 4,904 Household Formation (20-34) 5,072 3,501 Trade-Ups (35-54) 6,534 8,071 Empty Nesters (55-64) 2,266 2,162 Early Seniors (65-74) 1,651 1,752 Seniors (75+) 1,245 1,617 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 il:7' Ts LL Ro [a 1990 4.000 02000 E Z rEll 02010 3,000 6"1", f 4 02020 2,000 000 . M a � vii n"I" Preschool (0-4) School Age (6-19) Household Trade-Up (35-54) Empty Nesters (55- Early Seniors (65- Wiser Seniors I Formation (20-34) 64) 74) (76+) Now Ab­1.t—M:1.t­o1ydi,1da &­= U.S. Cn­.ndMAPCPqjwi.,%, Figure 4. Number of Reading Residents in Each Age Group from 1990 to 2000 (table) Source: U.S. Census. FINDING Despite a possible drop in population, the trend toward increasingly smaller household sizes will continue to drive demand for housing units. Reading will likely remain a predominantly family community. This, combined with the large proportion of trade-ups, may contribute to the demand for larger family-size housing units. However, if the number of trade ups decreases, as projected, this demand could lessen somewhat. An increase in empty nesters and early seniors may fuel a need for smaller units that are easy to maintain, assisted living facilities, and nursing homes. M 1990 2000 Preschool (0-4) 1,518 1,701 School Age (5-19) 4,253 4,904 Household Formation (20-34) 5,072 3,501 Trade-Ups (35-54) 6,534 8,071 Empty Nesters (55-64) 2,266 2,162 Early Seniors (65-74) 1,651 1,752 Seniors (75+) 1,245 1,617 Source: U.S. Census. FINDING Despite a possible drop in population, the trend toward increasingly smaller household sizes will continue to drive demand for housing units. Reading will likely remain a predominantly family community. This, combined with the large proportion of trade-ups, may contribute to the demand for larger family-size housing units. However, if the number of trade ups decreases, as projected, this demand could lessen somewhat. An increase in empty nesters and early seniors may fuel a need for smaller units that are easy to maintain, assisted living facilities, and nursing homes. M Housing Supply • Quality and Characteristics of Reading's Housing The number of housing units in Reading grew at a steady pace from 1980 to 2000, reaching 8,823 units in 2000. Reading's 9% increase in housing units from 1990 to 2000 outpaced the rate in the region, which was 5 %. In 2000, only 1.5% of Reading's housing units were vacant; this rate is half of the region's rate. This low vacancy rate reflects the tight housing market that the region is experiencing. Fimm- 5- C.hnnge in Housing Units and Vacancy Rates, Reading. Year Housing Units # % Increase Vacancy Rates All Units Rentals Homeowner 1980 7,486 -- -- -- `- 1990 8,104 8.3% 2.1% 3.5% 0.6% 2000 8,823 8.9% 1.5% 3.1% 0.3% Source: U.S. Census. Three - quarters of Reading's housing units are single - family detached units. This proportion is substantially greater than the region; only 6% of Reading's housing units are located in two- family houses. From 1997 to 2002, building permits were issued for 12 multi - family units and 124 single - family units. Fi ,aure 6. Type of Structure that Housing Units are Located In, Reading; 2000. 20 to 49 Units, 3% 50 + Units, 4% 10 to 19 units, 4% 5 to 9 units, 2% ; 3to4 units, 3% }, r 2 units, 60% 1 unit attached, 3% 1 unit detached, 74% Source: U.S. Census Reading's housing units are 82% owner- occupied and 18% are rentals. These percentages have remained relatively unchanged since 1980. Reading's proportion of owner- occupied units is significantly greater than the region's rate of 57 %. � .�- R Figure 7. Housing Tenure, Reading, Subregion, and Region, 2000. 100% i tl 80% 60% ED Owner Occupied i r x . ay ❑ Renter Occupied 40% �18% 24% 20% - 18% 0% Reading Subregion MAPC Source: U.S. Census In terms of age, Reading's housing stock is fairly diverse. One -third of the housing units were built prior to 1940. These houses; while adding to Reading's historical fabric, can mean a need for rehabilitation (including upgrades to meet current building codes), repairs, and lead paint removal. A large number of housing units were built from 1950 to 1970 and a fair number of units have been built since then. Figure 8. Year Housing Units Built in Reading, 2000. 1990 - March 2000 8% 1980 -1989 10% w�i;. 1939 or earlier tYIT r� ;. 1970 -1979 10% 1960- 1969K�`kp�i 13% �;�`1� ;a��; a�; =f°'���'.4iiT�l�'. 1940 -1949 w . 10% 1950 -1959 Source: U.S. Census. 17% Z4 / 0. i tl i r x . ay �18% 24% In terms of age, Reading's housing stock is fairly diverse. One -third of the housing units were built prior to 1940. These houses; while adding to Reading's historical fabric, can mean a need for rehabilitation (including upgrades to meet current building codes), repairs, and lead paint removal. A large number of housing units were built from 1950 to 1970 and a fair number of units have been built since then. Figure 8. Year Housing Units Built in Reading, 2000. 1990 - March 2000 8% 1980 -1989 10% w�i;. 1939 or earlier tYIT r� ;. 1970 -1979 10% 1960- 1969K�`kp�i 13% �;�`1� ;a��; a�; =f°'���'.4iiT�l�'. 1940 -1949 w . 10% 1950 -1959 Source: U.S. Census. 17% Z4 / 0. • Zoning Allowances Reading is predominantly zoned for single- family houses with minimum lot sizes ranging from 15,000 to 40,000 square feet. The current zoning bylaw does provide options for other types of housing developments. These options may present opportunities to address Reading's housing needs. Briefly, these options include: 1 Accessory apartments are allowed by special permit in single family districts and Business A, but only in dwelling units that existed prior to August 1, 1982. 2 Two family units are allowed in A -40 and Business A. Business A zones also allows apartments. 3 Nursing homes are allowed by special permit in the 5 -20 district. 4 Residential uses, to some extent are allowed in the Planned Unit Development — Industrial Overlay Districts (PUD -I). Relief from certain dimensional and intensity requirements are allowed if the developer provides affordable units on or off site. 5 Planned Unit Development - Residential (PUD -R) is another type of overlay zone which allows single family units, two family townhouses, apartments, and elderly housing, among other uses. Ten percent of the units must be affordable and up to half of these can be provided off site. 6 A Planned Residential Development (PRD) Overlay is allowed by special permit in the single family districts and A -80. There are two types of PRDs. General (PRD -G) requires a minimum lot size of 60,000 square feet and encourages affordable units. Municipal (PRD -M), allowed on current or former municipally owned land of at least eight acres in size, requires the provision of affordable units. 7 Municipal Building Reuse District is an overlay' district that allows the redevelopment or reuse of surplus municipal buildings. Ten percent of the units must be affordable. • Affordable Housing Stock in Reading According to the state's Subsidized Housing Inventory, which officially keeps track of all housing that qualifies under M.G.L. Chapter 40B, 404 housing units in Reading are considered affordable - this equals 4.6% of the housing stock. (M.G.L. Chapter 40B, Sections 20 -23 is a state statute that enables local Zoning Boards of Appeals (ZBAs) to.issue a single "comprehensive permit" for residential developments that include affordable housing, even if the proposal does not conform to local zoning requirements. The law, also known as the Comprehensive Permit or "Anti -Snob Zoning" Law, sets a goal of 10% low -to- moderate income housing in each community. If communities with less than 10% deny a comprehensive permit or set excessive conditions for approval, the proponent may appeal to the state, which can order the ZBA to issue the permit. The purpose of this 1969 law is to address the shortage of affordable housing statewide by reducing unnecessary barriers erected by local zoning and other restrictions.) FicmrP 9_ Crnhgidized Housing Gan in ReadinLy, as of February 2003 Total Year -Round Units 8,823 Subsidized Units (on DHCD list) 675 10% Goal 882 Deficit 207 Source: Mass. Dept. of Housing and Community, Development, Feb. 2003. Affordable units in Reading include: 8 The Housing Authority owns 115 units — 73% are for elderly or handicapped persons, 20% are for families, and 8% are for special needs persons. 9 Another 290 units are privately owned. These range from assisted living facilities to other forms of elderly housing and family housing. In addition, a small number of group homes for persons with developmental disabilities are scattered throughout Reading, mostly in renovated houses. 10 The Town recently approved another 200 plus units under 40B. These are primarily two bedroom units, with some one and three bedroom units. This list does not yet include recently approved 40B projects, which would bring the total to approximately 650 affordable housing units (7 %). As new market -rate units are created, the number of affordable units needed to reach and m '.ntain the state's goal of 10% will increase. Another hindrance to maintaining 10% are the units with "expiring use restrictions." These are properties built under programs that require affordability only for a fixed number of years, after which owners may choose to sell or rent the units at market rate. As a result, 114 units will expire in 2010 and most of the remaining private units will expire between 2013 and 2046. While it is possible that some of these units will still be kept affordable, there is no guarantee. A community can take steps to keep these units affordable. • Housing Supply Findings In 2000, MAPC conducted Build -Out Analyses for communities in the region. A Build - Out Analysis estimates the amount of development and related impacts if all land in a community is developed according to the current zoning by -law. In Reading, the analysis indicated that an additional 770 single family units could be constructed in Residential Districts S -15, 5 -20 and 5 -40. The analysis equated this increase in units with an addition of 2,000 residents, 380 new students, and roughly 11 miles of new roads. This analysis was based on those uses allowed as of right in Reading's zoning districts — not those uses that require a special permit nor the potential for overlay districts. Figure 10. Future Housing Units Based on Build -Out Analysis, Reading. Zone Minimum Lot Size Total New Units Residential District S -15 15,000 sq. ft. 176 Residential District 5 -20 20,000 sq. ft. 531 Residential District 5.40 40,000 sq. ft. 64 Total New Units 771 Source: MAPC and Reading Zoning Bylaw, March 2003. FINDING Reading is predominantly zoned for single - family houses with minimum lot sizes ranging from 15,000 to 40,000 square feet. The current zoning by -laws do provide options for other types of housing'developments, such as planned residential and unit developments, accessory apartments and mixed use. Although multi - family production has seen temporary increases with periodic real estate booms, based on zoning and the historically low production of other -than- single - family units, it can be expected that most of Reading's future housing stock.will remain single family houses on average half -acre lots. The likely result will be a continuation of high housing costs and'fewer opportunities for low to moderate income households, empty nesters, and elderly. Based on zoning and the historically low production of other - than - single - family units, it can be expected that most of Reading's future housing production will be single family houses on half -acre lots. The likely result will be a continuation of high housing costs and fewer opportunities for low to moderate income households, empty nesters, and eld -rl,y. Linking Supply, Demand & Affordability Linking Supply, Demand & Affordability When housing prices increase at a faster pace than incomes, housing becomes less affordable for all income groups and can be particularly challenging for low and moderate income households. When people are spending too much for housing, it becomes difficult for employers to attract new workers, residents have fewer dollars to spend in the community, and some may ultimately leave the community. 0 The Cost of Buying a Home Reading has seen its housing sales prices increase substantially from the late 1990s though the present. The median sales price for a single family house reached $362,000 and condominiums reached $237,000 in 2002. +,� / Figure 11. Median Home Sales Prices, Reading. Another way to analyze affordability is to see how many households are paying 30% or more of their income toward a mortgage – this is considered the maximum percentage that a household can afford to pay. By this standard, the 2000 Census indicates that 20% of Reading's home owners can not afford their mortgage. . We analyzed whether Reading's housing stock is affordable to households in the region that fit in the moderate or middle income categories. We focus on moderate and middle income since it can be assumed that housing needs for low income households can be met best by rental housing. A rule of thumb is that a Household can afford a house that is no more than 2.5 times its annual household income. Data from 2002 indicate that moderate income household in the region (which earns up to $62,650) can afford a house priced up to $157,000. Reading's median sales price in 2002 was $362,000 for a one - family house —or $205,000 more than what the region's. moderate income households could afford. The Town's median sales price for a condominium in 2002 was $237,000. While the median sales price for a condominium is more affordable than a single - family house, it is still at least $80,000 too much for moderate income households. Middle income households in the region (earning up to 150% of the median, or $121,200 in X002) could afford a house priced up to $303,000. It appears that, in 2002, the median sales prices for Reading's single family units were at least $59,000 more than what a middle income household could afford. Condominiums in Reading, however, appear to be affordable for many middle income households. y..�ly We also analyzed whether Reading's housing stock is affordable to Reading's residents. Figure 12 compares the median home value (as reported by home - owners in the census) to median household income. The gap between income and housing values increased from 1980 to 2000 — this chart shows that housing values were four times the median household income in 1990 and 2000 while in 1980, the median housing price was only 2.5 times the median income — i.e., affordable. Figure 12. Housing Affordability Gap in Reading. • The Cost of Renting The affordability of rental units is another important factor to evaluate. The census shows that median monthly rents in Reading were $340 in 1980, $706 in 1990, and $739 in 2000. These rents seem low — they are as reported by tenants in 1999 and they reflect rents paid by in -place tenants who may be long term and have rents that rise only incrementally from year to year. Newcomers seeking market rentals today most likely face considerably higher rents. The 30% affordability rule discussed above applies to renters also — a household should not be paying 30% or more of its income towards rent. According to. the 2000 Census, 31% of renters in Reading were paying too much. High housing costs have the most severe impacts on those on the lowest rung of the income ladder. Figures 13 and 14 show which age groups and income groups are paying too much for rent in Reading. It appears that a substantial percentage of all age groups are unable to afford their rent. Large percentages of households that earn less than $35,000 per year are also paying too much for rent in Reading. q,kris, Figure 13. Rent- Burdened Tenants by Age Group, Reading, 2000. Figure 14. Rent - Burdened Tenants by Income Group, Reading, 2000. 0 o 80% `o. 60% CO 70% 60% x S 0 50% i s t 40% i co c� 1� 30% of E 40% X 11L 20% 10% R 0 0% 1� "�U'y � S7 7! Y $10,000- $20,000- a 30% $10,000 7 � $34,999 $49,999 i� �I '" � Income Group Source: U.S. Census ID 20% 10% O 0% 15 -34 25 -34 35 -44 45 -54 55 -64 65 -74 75+ Age Group Source: U.S. Census. Figure 14. Rent - Burdened Tenants by Income Group, Reading, 2000. 0 o 80% CO 70% 60% x S 50% i s t 40% i c� 1� 30% of E X 11L 20% 10% R 0 0% 1� "�U'y � S7 7! Y $10,000- $20,000- $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000 + $10,000 7 � $34,999 $49,999 i� �I '" x•.� Income Group Source: U.S. Census Figure 14. Rent - Burdened Tenants by Income Group, Reading, 2000. 0 o 80% CO 70% 60% x CZ 50% 40% c� 1� 30% of E X 11L 20% 10% R 0 0% o Less than $10,000- $20,000- $35,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000 + $10,000 $19,999 $34,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 Income Group Source: U.S. Census S Incomes in Reading Reading's median household income in 2000 was $77,059. Figure 15 indicates that Reading is predominantly a middle to upper income town, with approximately one -third of the households middle income and one third upper income. Conversely, 31% of Reading's households were considered low to moderate income in 2000. These figures have not been adjusted for family size. x of �.� S Incomes in Reading Reading's median household income in 2000 was $77,059. Figure 15 indicates that Reading is predominantly a middle to upper income town, with approximately one -third of the households middle income and one third upper income. Conversely, 31% of Reading's households were considered low to moderate income in 2000. These figures have not been adjusted for family size. The Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development also provides data on the number of persons that are low to moderate income. According to 2000 data, 21.5% of the Town's population is considered low to moderate income. It comes as no surprise that home- owners have a higher median income than renters. While homeowners in Reading had a median annual income of $83,884 in 2000, renters had a median of $32,485 — less than half. The median income for those over age 75 was even less, at $25,104 (see Figure 16). Figure 15. Estimated Number of Households in Each Income Group in Reading, 2000 Upper Income , 3114,36% Low Income, Not adjusted for family size. Source: Estimates based on U.S. Census. Middle Income, 2850,33% 19% Moderate Income, 1047, 12% q� 1 -3 1 Figure 16. Median Household Income by Type of Household, Reading, 2000. • Current Affordable Housing Needs in Reading Waiting lists for subsidized units indicate present and future needs. Discussions with the Housing Authority and with some of the private providers indicate that elderly may have to wait one to two years for a subsidized unit, while a wait for a family unit can be three to five years. The Housing Authority has approximately 140 Section 8 applicants on its waiting list, 40 on an elderly and disabled waiting list, and 21 on a waiting list for family units. A small portion of those on the Authority's list are from Reading. The Section 8 and family waiting list are currently closed. It is important to keep in mind that waiting lists contain persons outside of Reading and that an individual can be on more than one waiting list.. Regardless, there appears to be a gap between the need for elderly units and family units and available units in Reading. 11 Lower income households are paying too much for rent in Reading, and moderate and middle income households struggle to afford housing in Reading. 12 28% of Reading's households have incomes below the low and moderate income limits that are appropriate for subsidized housing. 13 A large percentage of all age groups can not afford their rent. There is a need for more rental units that meet the needs for various life stages. 14 Reading is at risk of losing over 100 affordable units by 2010, when they may "expire ". 15 Reading has taken action to increase its affordable housing stock and meet housing needs. Conclusions While Reading overall is a middle to upper income town, low, moderate and middle income households find it difficult to afford rents and mortgages in the Town. The senior and elderly population are particularly burdened and in light of the current waiting lists for subsidized units the need will likely increase in the future. Additional efforts are $90,000 — �.��.&�... m E $76,453 $80,000 — -- a o �a — $70,000 -- ----- - - - - -- - -... $60,000 o 0 o $50,000 $32,485 �a $40,000 $25,104 r $30,000 3 t�j if l} •! i ' .^ , '. tilt eU N ' r 74 i j C $20,000 ^ $10,000 I tll 75 Years & Older Renters All Ow ners (Owners & Renters) Source: U.S. Census. • Current Affordable Housing Needs in Reading Waiting lists for subsidized units indicate present and future needs. Discussions with the Housing Authority and with some of the private providers indicate that elderly may have to wait one to two years for a subsidized unit, while a wait for a family unit can be three to five years. The Housing Authority has approximately 140 Section 8 applicants on its waiting list, 40 on an elderly and disabled waiting list, and 21 on a waiting list for family units. A small portion of those on the Authority's list are from Reading. The Section 8 and family waiting list are currently closed. It is important to keep in mind that waiting lists contain persons outside of Reading and that an individual can be on more than one waiting list.. Regardless, there appears to be a gap between the need for elderly units and family units and available units in Reading. 11 Lower income households are paying too much for rent in Reading, and moderate and middle income households struggle to afford housing in Reading. 12 28% of Reading's households have incomes below the low and moderate income limits that are appropriate for subsidized housing. 13 A large percentage of all age groups can not afford their rent. There is a need for more rental units that meet the needs for various life stages. 14 Reading is at risk of losing over 100 affordable units by 2010, when they may "expire ". 15 Reading has taken action to increase its affordable housing stock and meet housing needs. Conclusions While Reading overall is a middle to upper income town, low, moderate and middle income households find it difficult to afford rents and mortgages in the Town. The senior and elderly population are particularly burdened and in light of the current waiting lists for subsidized units the need will likely increase in the future. Additional efforts are likely needed to meet their needs, along with the needs of all income groups. The waiting list and relative low supply of subsidized family units may indicate that Reading's single parent households and low to moderate income families face a daunting challenge affording housing in Reading. It it important to remember that Reading has made significant progress toward meeting the state's ten percent goal and, as we will see, has many assets in place to help the Town to meet current and future housing needs. The following table summarizes the potential outcome of two development scenarios for the year 2020: the "Current Trend" and the "Build- out ". The horizon year 2020 assumed to be the point in time that Reading will need to meet the 10% affordability criterion as set forth by M.G.L. Chapter 40B. (Data from Figures 1 & 10 have been used in order to assemble this table.) 17. Readine Build -Out Projection 8,863 All units 2004 * 8,863 9,085 All units, 2020 projection 9,634 ** 222 New units built between 2004 -2020 771 650 Affordable units in 2004 650 908 All Affordable units, 2020 projection, 963 necessary to comply with 10% criterion 258 Necessary new affordable units for 2020 313 258 /222 > 100% 2020 : % of new affordable units within 313 / 771 = 41% all new units * 004 data extrapolated from Figure 1 ** There is a view shared among the Master Plan committee members that a more detailed analysis of the Reading Wetlands Map may actually decrease this number. As noted in previous chapters, the vast majority of new housing units — based on current zoning and trends — will be single- family residences. This analysis does not account for the main route of introducing high densities with affordable units in Town, that is through comprehensive permits authorized under M.G.L. Chapter 40B, or other recent avenues like Chapter 40R, under evaluation. Transit opportunities and community character are the main prisms through which the Reading is evaluating the regulations of 40R smart growth districts. The result of the first scenario is that, even if all the new units built between 2004 and 2020 are affordable, it will not be enough to meet the 10% criterion. In the second case, Reading will need to ensure a 41% of all new units between 2004 and 2020 as affordable in order to meet the 10% criterion. This is a highly unlikely outcome under current and mid -term housing market conditions. Reading will need to secure the construction of affordable units through projects following zoning overlays or comprehensive permits. µ4- iy FINDING Town zoning allows medium density residential developments under PRD (overlay districts resembling Cluster zoning) and PUD-R (overlays for large parcels allowing a medium density), ' while the State encourages LIP for community involvement and some impact mitigation as an alternative to conventional comprehensive permits authorized under M.G.L. Chapter 40B. Other avenues such as Chapter 40R State permits or mixed use overlay districts are means to introduce affordable units in Town and should be investigated as to their applicability, flexibility and long-term impacts. Market forces and State directives necessitate the need for planning proactive housing policies and incentives to avoid abrupt changes in the Town's character. This inevitable process, which has started for Reading several years ago, will target appropriate locations that can support the inevitable higher residential densities that new developments bring. 1.3 CAPACITY OF MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVENTORY OF BUILDINGS Reading has 16 major public facilities for administration and public services, public works, public safety, and education. Town Hall The Town Hall, facing the Common at Lowell, Salem, and Woburn Streets, consists ori;;inally of two buildings, the Municipal Building, built in 1917, and the Old Library, also built in 1917, both renovated and connected together in 1989. It houses the administrative offices of the Town Manager, Town Clerk, Finance and Collections, Accounting, Assessors, Public Works, Human services, and Community Development. In adc.ition it house one large meeting room, for major Boards and Commissions, and two smaller meeting rooms. It is adequate in size and condition to meet projected future needs. Public Library The Public Library, occupying the former Highland School, built in 1895 and renovated in 1984, is located at the corner of Middlesex Avenue and Deering and School Streets, in the older residential neighborhood west of downtown. It houses all public library functions, principally reference, circulation, administration, adult and children's rooms, historical room, and two meeting rooms. It is adequate in size and condition for projected future needs. Public Works Garage The Public Works Garage was built in 1987 on New Crossing Road, replacing an antiquated facility, now demolished, on Walkers Brook Drive. It houses all Public Works vehicles and vehicle - maintenance, as well as some associated administrative offices. It is of adequate size and condition to serve projected future needs. qS 67- J Police Station The Police Station, on Union Street just east of Reading Square, was built in 1999. It houses all police functions as well as central dispatch for police and fire protection. The new station is a state of the art facility with expanded roll -call space, office space, locker and shower facilities for female officers, physical fitness equipment, contraband and evidence storage, equipment storage, general storage and a community meeting room. Central Fire Station The Central Fire Station, located on Main Street just north of the Common, was built in 1990 as a three -bay facility, housing Fire Department administration, one engine, one ladder truck, and one ambulance. For projected future needs it is adequate in condition and in size, provided that the West Side Fire Station is retained. The Town converted the previous Central Fire Station on Pleasant St. into a permanent Senior Citizens Center. West Side Fire Station The West Side Fire Station, on Woburn Street between Prospect and Berkeley Streets, was built in 1956, and houses one engine and one fire -alarm truck. It also houses the mechanic shop. While some renovation will be needed in the future, it is of adequate size to function as a satellite station. Senior Center The new Senior Center on Pleasant St. replaces the Old Police Station and contains several meeting rooms and a modern kitchen for ongoing senior activities. The Center is staffed entirely by elder volunteers who conduct activates coordinated and administered by the Town's Office of Elder Affairs contained in Town Hall. The Senior Center also serves as public hearing venue for various Board, Committee and Commission meetings. School Buildings Schools (with 1990 enrollment levels): 9) Joshua Eaton Elementary School, built in 1948 at the corner of Summer Avenue and Oak Street: 18 classrooms, 458 students. 10) Birch Meadow Elementary School, built. in 1957 on Arthur B.Lord Drive between Birch Meadow Drive and Forest Street: 18 classrooms, 406. students. 11) Alice M. Barrows Elementary School, built in 1964 on Edgemont Avenue, off West Street: 15 classrooms, 324 students. 12) J. Warren Killam Elementary School, built in 1969 between Charles and Haverhill Streets: 26 classrooms, 542 students. 13) Walter S. Parker Middle School, built in 1927 on Temple Street, off Woburn Street and Summer Avenue: 24 classrooms. 418 students. 14) Arthur W. Coolidge Middle School, built in 1961 on Birch Meadow Drive: 24 classrooms, 408 students. 15) Reading Memorial High School, on Oakland Road just south of Birch �� zz. Meadow Drive, built in 1954 and enlarged in 1971: it also houses the administrative offices of the school system: 91 classrooms, 974 students. This facility was undergoing renovations and new construction as of 2005, including demolition of the 1954 portion. 16) Wood End Elementary School, on Sunset Rock Lane just off Franklin St. New construction completed in 2005. The following school buildings have been closed and turned over to the care and custody of the Board of Selectmen and have been converted or slated to be converted to other purposes: 1) The Old High School, between Sanborn and Linden Streets, was sold to the private sector in 1986 and converted to residential condominiums. 2) The Prospect Street - and Lowell Street schools were demolished and the land sold for single - family house lots in 1980 amd 1977 respectively. 3) The Pearl Street School, on Pearl Street between Thorndike and Charles Streets, was built in 1939 and abandoned as a school in 1984. Consisting of 24 classrooms, the building was rented to a variety of commercial tenants, and in part used since 1988 as a temporary Senior citizens Center. The building was sold and after an addition was added it operates as an assisted living facility. In addition, the School Committee turned over to the Town the Batchelder Field property . (37.14 acres) on Franklin Street which is now Wood End Cemetery. The School Committee site on Dividence Road (11.6 acres) and on Oakland Road (4.6 acres) are not projected to be needed for new school facilities. ADMINISTRATION OF SERVICES AND FACILITIES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Director of Public Works — The direct control of the department is under the Director of Public Works. The policy, rules and regulations of the department of public works are established by the Board of Selectmen. The Town Manager is responsible for the overall supervision of the department. The Public Works Department is responsible for all public works activities: water supply and distribution; protection of natural resources; sewers and sewerage systems; streets and roads; parks and playgrounds; refuse collection, disposal and recycling; forestry services; and maintenance of all municipal buildings and grounds except those of the School Department and municipal light. y,'& as "1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY This department is comprised of the.police, fire, animal control and civil defense. All of these functions are under the policy direction of the Board of Selectmen and the administrative direction of the Town Manager. Police Department — the police station in Reading is located on Union Street. There is no jail as such but rather a lock up where persons are confined temporarily awaiting bail or arraignment before the Middlesex Court in Woburn. Reading has approximately 40 permanent police officers. These officers are hired and work under civil service regulations. Reading Police Department protects and serves the public through police action. They provide services in several board areas: crime prevention and suppression, crime reduction, investigation of crimes and apprehension of offenders, movement and control of traffic, the maintenance of public order and public emergency services. Fire Department — There are two fire stations in Reading. The central station is on Main Street, near the center of Town and additional station is on the west side of Town on Woburn Street. Firefighting and control and fire prevention are the main jobs of the fire department. The Fire Department also manages ambulance service for the Town and provides a high level of emergency care. Inspection of commercial and manufacturing properties, school, apartments, nursing homes and other buildings used by the public are an important part of the department's work. The department also checks fire alarm systems in new construction for proper location and tests for proper installation and operation and conducts a similar inspection for smoke detectors whenever private homes change ownership. The department's personnel, who are under civil service, number approximately 50. Board of Library Trustees — 6 members elected for overlapping 3 year terms, unpaid. The Board of Library Trustees controls the selection of library materials, has custody and management of the library and its property, and administers monies received as gifts or bequest. The actual maintenance of the library building and its grounds is the responsibility of the Town Manager. SCHOOL DEPARTMENT There are 8 public schools in Reading — 5 elementary, 2 middle, and 1 senior high school. The Reading school system has been the recipient of numerous state and national awards and staff members have also been highly recognized. In addition to strong academics, the school system also stresses a strong after school athletic program and an arts and music program. Superintendent of Schools — The superintendent is the chief architect of the educational program in the community'and the chief administrator of the programs and policies qs,-�q r decided upon the School Committee. He attends all School Committee meetings and supervises the school curriculum, personnel and property. FINDING Before the Charter was adopted many of the officers and committees were independently elected, resulting in a lack of coordination and cohesiveness. The Charter provided for the appointment of most of these positions. However a few important boards continue to be elected, allowing voters to maintain direct control over them so that the boards can retain their independence. These boards include the Board of Selectmen, the School Committee, the Library Trustees, the Municipal Light Board and the Board of Assessors. The administrative branch of government is organized into operating agencies each headed by a director. TOWN INFRASTRUCTURE Public Water — Until recently,. the Town owned and operated a public water system, with approximately 100 miles of distribution mains and lines serving the entire Town. The water was drawn exclusively from groundwater through wells, in the Town Forest and the Revay Swamp (Ipswich River watershed). Eight wells are located within the 100 - Acre Wellfield in the Town Forest, with a maximum combined pumping capacity of 7.55 -mgd (million gallons per day); however, due to groundwater contamination traced to North Reading, one of the larger- producing wells was taken offline and aerated to oxidize petrochemical pollutants. There are two wells in the Revay Swamp, with a combined pumping capacity of 1.22 -mgd; the smaller of these served as a back -up, while the larger had been out.of service due to salt contamination from Interstate Highway -93 and the near -by State Public Works highway maintenance and storage yard on Lowell Street. The two sources of recharge to the groundwater supply were permeability through the ground surface in the aquifer area, and subsurface infiltration from the Ipswich River and its minor tributaries. Average water consumption equaled 1.91- million gallons per day (mgd) in 1990; and throughout the period from 1980 to 199.0 has fluctuated between a low of 1.70 -mgd in 1982 and a high of 2.64mgd in both 1985 and 1986. Maximum water demand in 1990 was 3.81 -mgd and has fluctuated between 2.84 -mgd in 1989 and 4.34 -mgd in 1983. Commercial and industrial enterprises account for 14% of the Town's water consumption. Average consumption is projected to equal 2.11 -mgd in 2010, and maxirrium consumption is projected to equal 3.90 -mgd in 2010, both within existing ranges. While voluntary water consumption reductions have been sporadically imposed during periods of excessive drought, there has generally not been a problem with meeting peak water demand q,�_gr I As the Town was entirely dependent for potable water on groundwater sources, the safeguarding of the water quality and quantity of the aquifer and of the river water, which replenish the groundwater, was critical. The aquifer is vulnerable to reductions in impervious surface caused by land development, to snow - removal and ice- control pry Itices of the state and municipalities, to the use of fertilizers and pesticides by property owners, to leachate through contaminated soils and from leaking underground fuel storage tanks, to erosion and contaminated surface runoff, and to sewage infiltration from faulty septic systems and sewer mains. The aquifer is protected by an Aquifer Protection overlay District, specified in the Zoning By -Laws. This district includes those parts of the Ipswich River watershed upgradient of Revay Swamp and the Town Forest Wellfield. It does not protect the groundwater sources of any wells which may be developed in Bare Meadow or Cedar Swamp. The largest unsewered area of the Town is partially located in the aquifer district, and several homes in that are with sewer availability still retain septic systems. The Aquifer Protection District contains a commercial area, in which 3 gasoline stations and several commercial parking lots are located, posing.potential, if not actual, dangers of contamination of groundwater from leaking underground tanks and from surface runoff. The Zoning By -Law restrictions relative to the Aquifer Protection District do not apply retroactively to preexisting land -uses, and they contain some ambiguity regarding the application of the 20 %- maximum impervious lot area to the subdivision of existing lots. Furthermore, since the physical extent of the aquifer includes lands in North Reading and Wilmington, not subject to Reading's Zoning By -Laws, the protection of the quality and quantity of groundwater is subject to measures which can only be taken by other jurisdictions. Beginning in May 2006, the Town of Reading began to purchase up to 21 million gallons of supplemental drinking water from the MWRA. This was to occur annually from May through October. The supplemental use of MWRA water was solely intended to help reduce the stress on the Ipswich River. Drinking water was also to continue to be produced from the Reading Louanis Water Treatment Plant. The chronology of events leading to the supplemental use of MWRA water began as a recommendation of the 1999 Ad Hoc Water Supply Committee and approval by Town Meeting in November of 2003. Filings and approvals were received from the Department of Environmental Protection, Water Resources Commission, Legislature, Governor, and final approval by the MWRA Board of Directors on November 16, 2005. In May of 2006, faced with increasing construction costs for a new treatment plant, environmental issues with the site for the new plant, and growing unease with the safety and viability of the water- supply, Town Meeting voted to pursue buying all of its water from the MWRA and decommissioning the Louanis Water Treatment Plant. The intent wa-; to supply the Town with 100% MWRA within 3 to 5 years pending the regulatory approval process. Reading will continue to apply and enforce town -wide progressive water conservation measures. Ho never, no longer able to meet safe drinking water requirements the Town filed a Notice of Project Change with MEPA asking for an additional 610 million gallons, or 829 million gallons total based on the previously permitted 2.27 mgd (million gallons per day) demand. Under emergency consent order, on August 31, 2001 the water treatment plant stopped processing water and Town began to purchase 100% of it water from the MWRA. The consent order requires approval of the project change by June of 2007. Public Sewer The sewer system is owned and operated by the Town and serves approximately 87% of all properties within the Town. While some individual properties throughout the Town are not yet connected to available public sewer, the only major unsewered areas are in the vicinity of Mill and Short Streets and Main Street north of Mill street, and the westerly portion of Longwood Road. There are approximately 90 miles of sewer line within the Town, with 9 pump or lift stations, and with 5,971 local service connections. The system, through 2 outfalls, along the Aberjona River in the west, and along Summer Avenue in the south, and through a small collector in the Border Road/West Street area, discharges into the regional sewerage system operated by the Massachusetts Water Resources Au�hority (MWRA), with principal treatment at Deer Island in Boston Harbor. Reading's water is pumped out of the Ipswich River basin and is discharged through the sewer system into Boston Harbor. This diversion deprives downstream communities in the Ipswich River basin of potential water flow, and causes riparian rights throughout the basin to be of increasing concern. A long -term program, with required participation by developers building new subdivisions, has largely been effective in eliminating inflow and infiltration of st6rmwater and groundwater into the system. The operation of the sewer system, as well as the water system, is overseen by the Department of Public Works, and is on an enterprise basis, by which the full costs of operations is borne by the water and sewer users, and not through local property taxes. The Water and Sewer Advisory Board recommends all rate changes to the Board of Selectmen. The MWRA projects the installation of metering at the 2 outfalls to determine and charge the Town accurately for the sewer volume entering its system from Reading. Town policy has been to require new development to tie into the public sewer system and to require conversion to public sewer when residential septic systems fail, Still, there are still hundreds of septic systems in the Town, regulated and monitored by the Board of Health. Electrical (RMLD) In 1891, the Massachusetts Legislature passed.a law enabling cities and towns to operate their own gas and electric plants. This act marked the beginning of public power in the nat'on, planting the seed that eventually grew into Reading Municipal Light Department. On October 2, 1891, the citizens of Reading held a Special Town Meeting where the first of two required votes was taken to exercise the Town's authority under Chapter 370, Section 1, of the new state law. Those who attended the meeting unanimously voted to study the feasibility of operating a publicly owned power plant within the community. After several years of study, another Special Town Meeting to discuss the matter was held on May 21, 1894. On August 14 of that same year, voters agreed to appropriate go bonds totaling $50,000 to finance construction of a light plant. Reading's generating station began producing electricity for 47 streetlights and 1,000 incandescent lamps on September 26, 1895. l In 1908, Lynnfield residents applied to RMLD for electric service for their community. They were quickly joined by North Reading residents, some of whom were so eager to obtain electric service that they wired their homes in anticipation. Preliminary negotiations were already underway to furnish a minimum of 200 streetlights in Wilmington, with assurance that 100 customers would apply for service. Special legislation was enacted on April 8, 1908, authorizing the Town of Reading to sell and distribute electricity to Lynnfield, North Reading and Wilmington. As a result, R1V LD began delivering power to Lynnfield Center on December 10, 1909; to North Reading in 1910 and fo Wilmington in 1912. As more customers were added, it became necessary for the plant to increase its capacity and update its generators. The demand for electricity had increased to such a degree that by 1925, the generation equipment was inadequate to carry the peak load. A portion of the current was purchased from Boston Edison Company, and by 1926, the Reading Municipal Light Board had entered into an agreement to purchase all required current from Boston Edison. There have been .decades of advancement and achievement since those early days of electricity, but some things have remained constant. After more than 110 years, RMLD is _still committed to reliable service at competitive rates, maintaining that commitment requires astute planning, innovative ideas and close attention to detail. The Gaw substation on Causeway Road in Reading, constructed in 1969 -1970, marked a milestone in allowing RMLD to connect to the grid and purchase power from almost anywhere on the northeast power pool. Recent technological advances at RMLD include a fiber optic cable network that links all sut,3tations for state -of -the -art system monitoring and control. Computer systems are also state -of- the -art, and now include a sophisticated website. Even meter reading is modern and efficient, with an automatic system that uses radio transmitters. for optimal accuracy and efficiency. In June 2000, construction was completed on a distribution substation connected to 115,000 -volt transmission lines in North Reading, designed to accommodate growth and enhance the entire system's efficiency and reliability. Because reliability is key, RMLD has an ongoing. preventive maintenance program aimed at solving problems before they occur. Today, RMLD serves more than 27,000 customers in its four -town service area. A professional staff of 80+ employees brings a broad scope of utility experience to RMLD's daily operation, including an up -to -date understanding of the evolving energy market. With its peak demand for electricity at more than 155 megawatts, RMLD purchases electricity from a number of different sources through long -and- short-term contracts. RNfL,D supports in- lieu -of -tax payments, community development and energy education programs. This includes energy conservation programs, school safety projects, school -to- work partnerships, outreach to senior groups, community support and active memberships in local civic groups. Communication Infrastructure /Cable Advancements in technology have resulting in a changing landscape for many services offered directly to Town residents. Specific items include the prevalence of high -speed broadband, DSL and now laser technology access to the internet offered by companies such as Verizon, Comcast, and whole host of other competitors. The local phone service market has been opened up to competition with local number portability allowing consumers to keep their home phone number if the switch. Cable TV, once a market controlled by capital intensive cable operators is under fire from satellite TV companies as well as telecommunication (phone) firms that are poised to provide higher bandwidth access over improved networks. Cellular service has improved dramatically and federal law has allowed placement of cell phone towers in neighborhoods regardless of local zoning. Even the Town has improved its internal infrastructure, and much of the day to day Town business is conducted via email, with information posted regularly on the Town's website. The impact of this changing landscape has yet to be fully understood. One example may be in the area of Cable TV. As the current broadband service provider (Comcast) customer base is eroded by satellite and other competitors (Verizon), their commitment to the Town to support public service programming (RCTV) may become less attractive given the resulting landscape. The Town will have to understand these type of issues as it crafts policy and negotiates for license renewals with these organizations. FINDING The Town owns and operates a public water system, with approximately 100 miles of distribution mains and lines serving the entire Town. The operation of the sewer system, as well as the water system, is overseen by the Department of Public Works, and is on an enterprise basis, by which the full costs of operations is borne by the water and sewer users, and not through local property taxes. The sewer system is owned and operated by the Town and serves approximately 87% of all properties within the Town. RMLD serves more than 27,000 customers in its four -town service area. Recent technological advances at RMLD include a fiber optic cable network that links all substations for state -of- the -art system monitoring and control. Advancements in technology have resulting in a changing landscape for many services offered directly to town residents. Specific items include the prevalence of high -speed broadband, D.15.L and now laser technology access to the internet 4 4"-0 Reading's Road Network Reading has approximately 100 miles of streets and roads within its borders, aside from portions of Interstate Highway 95 (also known as state Highway 128), which is located on the south and southeast of the Town, and Interstate Highway 93 on the west. Highway network: There is one system interchange within Reading, the I- 93/I -95 cloverleaf and four service interchanges, located adjacent to the Town's boundary: I- 93/Route 129 (Lowell street), I- 95/Route 28 (Main street), I- 95/Walkers Brook Drive, and I- 95/Route 129 (Salem Street). Both interstate highways (I -93 and I -95) operate during weekday commuting peak hours above capacity that they are often subject to functional inadequacy, causing significant congestion overload on local Reading streets, particularly along streets, which parallel or connect between these highways. Currently, the Massachusetts Highway Department is conducting a planning study whose ultimate goal is to broadly define. the problem of the interchange - its regional and local nature - anc:..provide for a pool of potential. short-term and long -term improvements. Reading's arterial streets, carrying large traffic volumes and serving as principal local routes as well as regional routes, include: 16 Main Street (Route 28), 17 Salem Street and 18 Lowell Street (Route 129). These three arterials intersect at the Common in the middle of Town, and are lined almost uninterruptedly with commercial and densely developed residential uses. Minor arterial streets include: 19 Haverhill Street (residential), 20 Walkers Brook Drive (commercial and industrial), 21 Washington Street (residential), 22 Woburn Street (commercial through Downtown and otherwise residential) and 23 West Street (almost entirely residential). Collector streets, collecting artcxial streets in Town, are: 24 Franklin Street 25 Grove Street 26 Forest Street 27 Charles Street 28 Washington Street traffic from neighborhood streets and feeding into the 29 Fligh Street 30 Summer Avenue 31 South Street 32 Hopkins Street 33 Willow Street According to Town records, recently documented average daily traffic (ADT) volumes in the arterial/collector network are: Figure 3. Reading Traffic Loads Chart Reading Traffic Loads Chart 1990 2004 % change South Main street (Sta #S002) . -22,200 31,800 143% Main street through Downtown 16,200 18,200 112% �4,3 0 1# Main street at the North Reading line . 14,500 n/a n/a West street 7,000 8,800 126% Lowell street 16,600 14,300 86% Salem street 14,600 19,400 133% Walkers Brook Drive 12,700 23,900 188% Woburn Street 9,400 8,800 94% Washington Street 9,100 12,400 136% Haverhill street 8,700 n/a n/a, Source: Town Records and Master Plan Committee 97follm Reading's streets and street network were established over a long period in the past, and the physical nature and layout of these streets contribute significantly to the character and visual amenity of the Town.'These physical characteristics present many constraints to the smooth and efficient flow of traffic and contribute to congestion, frequent unsafe conditions for motorists and pedestrians and poor access to residential and commercial properties'. Within both the physical character of the street network and the qualities that identify the character of the Town, there is a definite limit to the volume of traffic which can safely and sensibly be accommodated. Transit in Reading Since 1990, the number of vehicles in Reading has increased at a rate nearly four times faster than that of population (19% and 5% respectively). The use of public transit has somewhat increased given the improvements in the Commuter Rail system that the MBTA conducted in the 1990s. Commuting by Reading residents has remained scattered to a multitude of locations throughout the northern part of the Metropolitan area, with the single occupancy vehicle as the main mode of commuting to work. Commuter Rail: At present, the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) operates twenty -one commuter trains each weekday in each direction between Reading and Boston (with an average travel time of 34 minutes); of these nine continue to and from Haverhill (with an-average travel time of 65 minutes). During peak morning period (6 -9AM) there are six trains from Reading into Boston North Station and, similarly, during peak evening period (4 -7PM) six outbound trains to Reading. One third of the peak trains to and from Boston does not continue to Haverhill but terminate in Reading. On weekend days and holidays six commuter trains operate in each direction to and from Boston, all of which serve Haverhill. The local commuter rail stop is at the Depot, in the center of Town. Weekday boarding counts at Reading (Spring 2004) average 667 commuters, 85% of which are in the morning peak period. The 567 morning boarding passengers access the commuter rail in the following manner: . 34 325 park in spaces for Reading residents (57 %) y,X,311 35 110 park in spaces for Out -of -Town commuters (20 %) 36 40 park in private lots and on the street (7 %) 37 92 walk, bike or are dropped -off (16 %) The 667 Reading hoardings are the highest on the Haverhill Line (14 %) and comparable to the 769 Woburn Anderson RTC boardings on the Lowell Line (within 87 %). Bus Service: The MBTA operates two bus routes from the Depot only through the southeastern portion of the Town to Wakefield and to the Malden MBTA -- Orange rapid transit (subway) line; the Merrimack Valley Transit Authority operates two busses daily between Reading Depot and Andover and Lawrence. CONCLUSION. • ADEQUACY OF INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT PLANNED PRODUCTION. The Town's overall infrastructure contains adequate capacity and capital facilities for existing build out and anticipated short term development. The Town also periodically reviews and assesses its 10 Year Capital Plan to insure that infrastructure will be maintained and sustained for projected growth. As part of the permitting processes for pla -ined production outlined in the Housing Plan the Town'expects to continue the policy and practice of requiring mitigation from developers, financial or otherwise, for the impacts of their proposed projects, including infrastructure improvements. Therefore, as needs are identified through staff level and consultant review of individual permitting applications, the Town expects to require -as conditions for approval- adequate improvements and upgrades to systems, resources and capacity to allow for development under this Housing Plan, while protecting and enhancing natural, cultural and historical assets consistent with the 2005 Master Plan. Section 2. Affordable Housing Goals and Strategies CONSISTENCY WITH EO 418 COMMUNITY PLAN AND 2005 MASTER PLAN The goals and objectives below are consistent with the Town of Reading's adopted EO 418 Community Plan and 2005 Master Plan. Policies & Strategies Current institutions, Town administration and Boards (Selectmen and Planning) have limited resources to fully develop the housing policies that Reading needs, policies ranging from new projects to preservation and from zoning amendments to extended planned programs. Numerous advocacy, technical and consulting roles have to be assigned so that a pro- active position in housing can be manifest within the Town government, the Town administration and among the residents. SHORT TERM (1 -2 YEARS) Goal 1 Establish a strong public commitment to housing and develop proactive housing policies. Objectives: A. Strengthen existing housing non - profits in order to ensure potential programs and funding strategies in Reading. Action Strategies: Create New Housing Partnership (HP) with the Objective to Coordinate Housing Related Action Strategies under the Master Plan. • Town Manager to recommend Charter for HP • Board of Selectmen appoints HP members y -8-33 2. Pursue Additional Funding for Housing Using the Community Preservation Act (CPA) • Board of Selectmen appoints new CPA Committee to not only prepare the recommendation for implementing the CPA but also to identify the programs to be funded by it • Town Meeting considers CPA warrant article • If Town Meeting approves, ballot question to create and fund CPA is placed on the ballot for Town election • Submit CPA funding.request to State 3. Town to negotiate with developers for contributions (funds) toward the Affordable Housing Trust Fund as mitigations for various project impacts B. Pursue an increase in town involvement to improve on communicating the housing goals to residents. Action Strategies: 1. Establish a process between the Housing Partnership, the Board of Selectmen, the CPDC and the Housing Authority that sustains the communication and monitoring of the housing goals of the 2005 Master Plan and the importance of fulfilling them. Affordability Housing Affordability is one of the greatest challenges of the current generation. Housing supply has dwindled while demand has increased, driving prices ever higher. This dynamic creates a financial strain on even fully employed individuals, let alone young families with only 1 wage earner or the elderly with limited means. In addition to a critical social issue, the lack of affordability hampers recruitment of a skilled workforce for the local and regional economy, given lower costs of living in other competitive wage markets. The Town relies on civil servants to maintain quality of life; a diverse and affordable housing stock is needed to retain these individuals and insulate the elderly from substandard housing. As of early 2003, only a 9% of cities and towns in the Commonwealth met the 10% affordability criterion of M.G.L. Chapter 40B. Reading, belonging to the vast majority of non - conforming communities, needs to take steps to increase its affordable units and avoid the likelihood of having, of its zoning regulations and Master Plan recommendations bypassed by developers. The impact that comprehensive permit developments have into the Town life can be illustrated in several layers: abrupt increases of density, alienated housing enclaves disconnected from the surrounding fabric, localized spikes in the Town's traffic flow, sudden changes in school population, unbalanced loads in resources and infrastructure. INTERMEDIATE TERM (1 -5 YEARS) Goal 2 Increase affordable units Objectives: A. Encourage rehabilitation and reconstruction of existing buildings for low and moderate - income multi - family housing. B. Encourage new developments consistent with Reading's character and identity and meeting state mandated affordable housing goals. Action Strategies: 1. Monitor the state -level Building Code changes 2. Review existing residential Zoning.By -Laws to determine opportunities for encouraging reuse of. multifamily housing for affordable units . 3. Prepare zoning article which would allow cluster development (PRD) in all S -15 and S -20 zoning districts provided one in eight units is affordable and $30,000 /market unit is contributed to Housing Trust Fund for market units abovelbelow eight • CPDC prepares zoning article • Town Meeting considers zoning article PLANNED PRODUCTION # of Affordable Units /yr Total #of Units /yr Annual Units 14 132 q-,t -3 Y 4. Modify Section 4.3.2.8 (Accessory Apartments) of the Zoning Bylaws to remove the restriction that an accessory apartment must be occupied prior to 1982 in all districts that allow residential use. • CPDC prepares zoning article • Town Meeting considers zoning article PLANNED PRODUCTION # of Affordable Units /yr Total ##of Units /yr Annual Units 1.25 25 5. Identify locations appropriate for BOS Sponsored LIP projects. (Refer to EO 418 MAP 4) PLANNED PRODUCTION # of Affordable Units /yr I Total #of Units /yr Annual Units 25 J 100 6. Housing Authority creates affordable units using funds from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund PLANNED PRODUCTION # of Affordable Units /yr Total #of Units /yr Annual Units 12 2 Downtown Mixed -use developments in downtown can maximize the use of valuable space by allowing for compact developments. These developments of increased density ate easier to sustain themselves by providing for various options of marketable units, from low rent to high end. In addition, the downtown itself can be revitalized after business hours, with downtown residents in less need of a second car due to the proximity of the Depot. Goal 3 Address mixed -use zoning in Town (Refer to Mixed -Use Opportunities Map) Objectives: A. Introduce mixed -use zoning in the Downtown and around the Depot Action Strategies: 1. Prepare a zoning article that would allow residential units on all floors except the street portion of the first floor of properties in the Business B zoning district. • CPDC drafts zoning article q,�-3 � - B. Review 40R/40S for consideration of additional zoning changes Action Strategies: 1. Review current Mixed Use Overlay Zoning against 40R/40S requirements 2. Make recommendations for changes to Zoning By -Laws to adopt 40R/40S districts TOTAL INTERMEDIATE PLANNED PRODUCTION PLANNED PRODUCTION IT # of Affordable Units /yr Total #of Units /yr Annual Units 66 1 209 Diversity In a context larger than affordability, housing diversity is essential to building a strong community. The demographic changes occurring in the Region impose a wide range of housing needs and Reading will need to address these needs with Town -wide strategies. Though we may not cope with all the elements of social diversity at the same time, the least we can expect is for our parents and children to have a realistic option of staying in Town. In the early stages of Reading's development to a New England Township, diversity was evident in the size of households, housing types and in the mixing of uses within the neighborhoods. Today, diversity - a core element of Reading's character and identity - is being lost, a loss which deeply affects the future of the community, not only as built environment, but also as people. LONG TERM (5 -10 YEARS) Goal 4 Promote a common understanding of the affordability issue Objectives: A. Establish a comprehensive permit policy or guidelines adopted jointly by the Board of Selectmen, CPDC and Housing Partnership. B. Align town boards, committees and commissions to the goals set forth by the Housing Partnership. Zq � C. Housing partnership to work with developers from the initial (pre -site approval) meeting through the comprehensive permit process D. Housing partnership to establish a close working relationship with non - profit developers in the NSPC sub - region. E. Analyze the 2010 census as it relates to the MPAC demographic projections for Reading and the housing needs chapter of the 2005 Master Plan and adjust this Plan. Goal 5 Promote Diversity in housing types & households Objectives: A. Avoid exclusionary zoning and mansionization by "spreading" diversity of housing types to all neighborhoods. B. Provide incentives for small scale age- focused housing (over 55, young couples, nursing homes, etc). To make elderly housing development realistic :and attractive to a wide -range of incomes, establish communication channels with qualified developers for over -55 housing project developments which offer choices to a diverse group of citizens. C. Provide tax - relief for elderly homeowners who grant the Town a right of first refusal to purchase their home at a reduced price. Neighborhood Design Historically, the early settlements that developed to urban centers /villages in New England were laid out in a method known today as Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND). TND in suburban communities is the basis for a balanced human experience of the built environment as part of a larger natural environment. On one hand, the size and diversity of buildings within the neighborhood "color" the experience of residency in Reading. On the other hand, the human scale of the neighborhood itself, the comfortable distance to the village center, the variety of land -uses and the uniqueness of the natural resources "color" the experience of the community of Reading. y--&3g Goal 6 Promote Neighborhood preservation Objectives: A. Establish the fundamental elements of Reading neighborhoods. Engage Town meeting members as weel as the broad public in forums about rading neighborhoods and conduct open -house events that present those elements. B. Associate historic preservation with Reading's character and engage the Realtor's association in the discussion about historic features. C. Establish general planning guidelines for new developments as part of CPDC's proactive planning incentives and in conjunction with Massachusetts Climate Protection Plan. D. Amend the mixed -use zoning article to allow for multi- family developments with an affordability share in those areas of the Downtown where single - family housing exists as a non - conforming use. E. Compete for housing and community development state funds in an effort to develop mechanisms aimed at retaining elderly Reading residents at their homes. Goal 7 Promote Long Term Solutions for Affordability (Refer to EO 418 Map 4) A. Reduce limitations on the conversion of single - family units to two - family units. PLANNED PRODUCTION # of Affordable Units /yr Total #of Units /yr Annual Units 50 100 B. Encourage infill development particularly near commuter rail station. C. Simplify and streamline regulations and procedures and review zoning and subdivision bylaws to see if there are measures that add to the cost of housing that could be reasonably amended or eliminated, while allowing restricted development of nonconforming lots subject to linkage contributions for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. qS 3q ? D. Take steps to retain expiring use properties as affordable housing. Establish an open/available to the public affordability tracking web page. E. Offer rehab loans and /or grants to low to moderate income persons with funds from the state CDBG, HOME consortium, or other sources. F. Accept donated or reduced -price property. G. Identify vacant and underutilized properties that may be suitable for housing. Setup a GIS system that does the following on a per precinct basis: - evaluates infrastructure and its capacity - tracks number of affordable units - tracks potential developments This system can serve as a geographical overview of where the affordable units go and where not. H. Adopt mixed use at the Addison Wesley Site. If the proposed development introduces a number of jobs that impacts local and regional housing, specify appropriate mitigation measures (e.g., linkage, inclusionary zoning, provision of affordable housing). I. Identify municipal facilities that will soon stop meeting state standards and target them as future municipal housing projects. Award those projects to developers that offer the best affordable housing use, rather than the highest purchase price. TOTAL LONG TERM PLANNED PRODUCTION PLANNED PRODUCTIONI Minimum Finaximum -I Annual Units 100 ! F200 Section 3. Description of Use Restrictions STATEMENT ON USE RESTRICTIONS . Affordable units must serve households with incomes no greater than 80% of the area median income in which the unit is located. Units must be subject to use restrictions or re -sale controls to preserve their affordability as follows: For new construction, a minimum of thirty years or longer from the date of subsidy approval or commencement of construction. For rehabilitation, for a minimum of fifteen years or longer from the date of subsidy approval or completion of the rehabilitation. Alternatively, a term of perpetuity is encouraged for both new construction and rehabilitation. Units are or will be subject to an executed Regulatory Agreement between the developer and the subsidizing agency unless the subsidy program does not require such an agreement. The units have been., or will be marketed in 'a fair and open process consistent with state and federal fair housing laws. Lt 4141 • • • • • Reading Ho u*sing Plan 200,6 • • • s o • to • • • • Next Ste-�20 19 W 9 The purpose of this presentation is to: Communicate the status of Reading's Housing Plan Activities — Rev i6ew the current -Goals & Objectives Solicit feedback 0 • • . Wackground • Reading has yet to achieve > 10% affordable housing — Continue to be subject to 40B developments — Future state funding may be at risk • A housing plan provides the community with a vision for how we can achieve the 10% goal — Once certified by -DHCD, provides for cooling off period from 40B I s — Must meet minimum annual affordable housing gains equal to 0.75% or greater (66. units per year) �1 a 0 income an- d Affordability Median Incomes Boston M.SA Reading Andover $72,900 $86300 $97,000 Cost of 1 i le house that counts towards % Boston MSA Reading Andover $170,000 $1701000 $1709000 Source: On Board Real Estate Information Company e e Overview To determine Reading's 40B number the. State uses deciennial US Census... v Total Affordable 2000 Census Housing Units 8,823. 420 4.7% ... the next Census in 2010 will reflect current units produced since the 2000 Census • 91274 675 • J r: 0 • Plan Findin. gs — Housing- Trendj • Predominantly family community — Smaller Households — Decreasing trade ups — Increase in empty nesters & early seniors — Temporary* increase in multi-family • Zoning — Primarily single-family housing — Lot sizes from 15,000 to 40,000 sf. — Options for PRD's, accessory apartments & mixed use. • Market Forces & State Housing Directives — PRD & PUD-R — Chapter 40B & 40R State permits ISilli • 0 Plan Findings:-., Infrastructure Planned to grow With the community for the foreseeable future. • Public Water, Sewer, Drainage, Roadways • Private — Electric — CA/TV Slide 8 isms The Town's transition from its own public water system to MWRA supply addresses a critical long -term developmental constraint for both housing and business. RMLD and other public /private utilities service the town's electrical and communication needs Reading's streets and street network were established over a long period in the past, and the physical nature and layout of these streets contribute significantly to the character and visual amenity of the Town. These physical characteristics present many constraints to the smooth and efficient flow of traffic and contribute to congestion, frequent unsafe conditions for motorists and pedestrians and poor access to residential and commercial properties. Within both the physical character of the street network and the qualities that identify the character of the Town, there is a definite limit to the volume of traffic which can safely and sensibly be accommodated. maykut, 10/11/2006 0 • • • e • e 0 e • • * 0 mm.e'diate Go- als 1. s • s e L Goal 1: Establish a strong public ccmri-i;itment to housing and develop proactive housing policies • Strengthen existing housing non - profits &pursue funding — Create New Housing Partnership (HP) —Pursue CPA — Add to Affordable. Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) • Communicate the housing goals to residents — Establish communication processes vim\ j 1 • • • • 0 • e Goals Goals 2 -3 • • s o s s o • W s • Goal 2: Increase Affordable Units •Encourage rehabilitation and reconstruction — Monitor state building code changes, review existing by -laws, and encourage multifamily housing reuse • Encourage new developments — Cluster development (PRD) — Accessory apartments — BOS sponsored LIP projects — Creates affordable units using AHTF 0 . • 40 0 • • O • O Goal 3: Address mixed -use zoning in Town • Introduce mixed -use zoning — Initial action has been adopted for downtown — Parking task force .working to. remove development obstacles A Review 40R/40S — Review mixed use overlay ZBL against 40R/40S requirements — Make recommendations for changes to adopt 40R/40S districts i ® i i • i i O e e Results of Intermediate Term- Efforts Need to create an additional 66 units of affordable housing each year Planned Production. # of Affordable Units/Yr Total # of Units/Yr Cluster Zoning 4 32 Accessory Apartments 25 25 LIP 25 100 Housing Authority 2 2 Mixed Use /40R -S 10 50 Total 66 209 G`- o • Affordable Housing C'erti flcation - Getting to 10% • - Total Affordable 1 rt • • s • s e s • e • • S Potential De Velol R(- II'1- Pleasant St. 4 4 Current 40B (PSP) 52 52 Johnson Woods -Back 10 110 17 SUB TOTAL 166 73 Reading Public Schools Student Enrollment 1990 2000 2005 2006 2007 Elementary (K-5) 1,730 2,012 2,000 1,974 Middle School- (6-8) 826 961 High School (9-12) 974 11210 Special Ed 42 Totals 3,530 4,213 Census, ages 5-19 4,253 4,904 1 e e Public Schools Impact • Higher - density housing generally has fewer school -age children per household • Household size and population age trends lead to stable or slightly declining enrollment • Reading is known for quality education, yet cost per student is relatively low • Current buildings already planned for growth • 0 s • s • s • Goals , . 0 • Goal 4: Promote a common understandinp, of the affordability issue • Establish a comprehensive permit policy • Align goals set forth by the HP • HP to work with developers • HP to establish relationships with non-profit developers • Make- adjustments to plan based on 2010 census • 2 • Goal 5 -, Promote Diversity in housing types and • Avoid exclusionary zoning and mansionization • Provide incentives for age - focused housing (e.g., over 55) • Provide tax-relief for elderly homeowners who grant the town a right of first refusal to purchase their home at a reduced price Vv e e •Establish the fundamental elements of Reading neighborhoods • Associate. historic preservation. with Reading's .character • Establish general planning guidelines • Amend the mixed -use zoning article to allow for multi- family developments • Compete for housing and community development state funds p(""'� • • e • s o • s i 0 0 0 Goal 7: Promote Lang Term solutions for affordability (1 ) • Reduce limitations on the conversion of single- family units to two - family units • Encourage infill development • Simplify and streamline regulations and s 0 0 procedures Take steps to retain affordable housing. expiring use as Offer rehab loans and /or grants Accept donated or reduced -price property ® • ® e s e e o a i loal.7: Promote Long Term solutions for affordability (2) • Identify vacant and underutilized properties that may be suitable for housing using GIS • Adopt mixed use at the Addison Wesley Site • Identify municipal facilities that could be used as housing projects n • • Results of Long Term Efforts • Given the uncertainty of projected needs, the desired result is to create new affordable units under State guidelines to meet and maintain the 10% inventory. S s 0 NOV Next, Steps (2) *CT 2006 e Presentation of Housing Strategies to BoS ii• Report 1 Town Meeting DEC 11• JAN 2007 e BoS Plan approval FEB 2007 *Present Final Plan to Special Town meetin,;_U4 •" ii 1 of Plan to DHCD APR.2007 • s *CT 2006 Creation of CPA Ad Hoc Committee by NOV 2006 DEC 2006 JAN 2007 • CPA Ad Hoc Committee Report to BOS 'FEB 2007 MAR 2007 APR 2007 • CPA on the Ballot s • Next Steps (4) OCT 2006 NOV 2006 • CPDC Preparation of zoning changes DEC 2006 — Accessory Apartments — PRD /Cluster Zoning JAN 2007 _ Johnson Woods FEB 2007 e Adopt zoning changes in Special- Town Meetin(,,-u4 .- 2007 Begin 40R/40$ 11 d i LEGAL.NOTICE CO . JQWROF READING. To' the' 1nh °abitant ,::o :'tt e` T6wrr:of Reading:.: please. take notice, that the Board of, Selectmen csf:the'Tovtrn, 6. Reading will hoar_. a publ;lc`, ,hearing "on.Tuesday; 'Q.Ctober; 24 :�Op6`at.: 0. P. M. �. Jn S,elecimen.s . eeting..Raor%; 16.` Lpwuell..,tre.et, ,Ffead:_ng -MaS§achusotts Pn ;an amend ment to FY 2007 water rates. A copy of the proposed rates are on*file in th'e Town GlerWs Office during regular business hours.. All interested .parties riiay appear in person, may submit their comments, in writing, or- may.-email town manag.er.@ci. reading.ma.us. By order of Peter I. Hechenble'ikner, Town Manager .10/17 i. , To: Peter I Hechenbleikner, Town Manager From: Ted McIntire, Director of Public Works '�VA Date: October 19, 2006 FY2007 Water Rates At their meeting of October 11, 2006 the Water, Sewer & Storm Water Management Advisory Committee voted 4-0 to recommend a water rate of $6.49 per one hundred cubic feet effective with the December 10, 2006 billing a minimum of $12.98. They also recommend using $300,000 from the Water Reserve Fund. The Committee feels that the Water Reserve Fund is less likely to increase under the MWRA option. When the Town was producing its own water there were generally two potential methods of increasing the Reserve Fund. One would be any unexpended funds in the Water Budget that would go back to the Reserve Fund and the second was, during periods of increased demand, the plant would produce additional water during the regular work day by increasing the flows from the wells into the treatment plant at only an incremental cost to produce the additional, water. The revenue generated from that additional water demand would be billed to the consumer at the going rate per one hundred cubic feet. Now that we are purchasing MWRA water, if there is any increase demand, the Town pays a flat rate for that additional use at the full cost per million gallons. Regarding the use of $300,000 from the Water Reserve Fund, the Committee felt that there is a need to maintain a healthy reserve fund at this time due to the fact that there will be future capital improvements necessary for additional piping and disinfection equipment after the water treatment plant is demolished. �c� Water Rates — Four sets of Significant Cost Factors Summer 2006 (FY07) - Increase from $4.78 to $5.59 (+ $600k; +17 %) • +$650k Summer MWRA water • $520k purchase water • $130k buy -in debt service Fall 2006 (FY07) Increase from $5.59 to $6.50 (+ $675k; +16 %) ® + $1 million phase -in year - round: purchase N1WRA water Summer 2007. (FY08) — Increase from $6.50 to $7.62 (+ $850k; +17 %) • + $800k water main work o + $450k water main debt (past work) o + $350k water main capital (current work) • + $775k complete transition to full MWRA water o + $500k purchase water o + $275k MWRA full buy -in debt service • - $1.2 million Water treatment Plant costs Summer 2008 (FY09) — Increase from $7.62 to $9.10 ( +$1.1 mil.; +19 %) • + $680k MWRA full buy -in debt service • + $150k NIMIJU water cost increase C� W #I Water Reserve Fund Options for FY07 -FY09 Budget use $900k in total Budget Changes Case #1 Case #2 Case #3 Case #4 Use of Reserves ($000s) 300 - 300 -300 350- 300 -250 400 - 300 -200 500 - 300 -100 Water Rate Increase( %) 36 -17 -19 34 -19 -20 33 -20 -21 30- 23 -23. New rate for FY07 $6.50 $6.42 $6.36 $6.25 $ '�"-(l-.60)1 $ 0.01 Components of Water Rates 0.00 0.06 Assuming case #1 above 000 $ 028 $ Adopted Annual Suggested Projected Protected Budget Adopted REVISED IFuII =MWRA ' Full-MWRA" , (Revised) Budget Budget 1.; . Budget j ` Budget,, FY - 2006 FY - 2007 FY - 2007R - FY` -' 2008: .� ,: F,; ; FY'-"1 09 Water Rate $ 4.78 $ 5.59 $ 6.49 $ 7.62 $ 9.10 Water Treatment Total $ 2.57 $ 2.09 $ - 1.97 $ ' 037 Water Distribution Total $ 1.07 $ 1.25 $ 1.25 MWRA water (summer) $ - $ 0.88 $ 0.88 MWRA water (full) $ - $ - $ 1.35 Overhead & Misc. $ 1.23 $ 1.37 $ 1.44 Use of Reserves $ (0.09) $ - $ (0.40) $ _(0 Water Treatment Total W/o 37%' 30% 5% 4% Water Distribution Total 22% 22% 19% 33% 28% MWRA water (summer) 0% 16% 14% 15% 13% MWRA water (full) 0% 0 % 21% 31% 38% Overhead & Misc. 26% 25% 22% 21% 20% Use of Reserves -2% 0% -6% -5% -4% Budget Budget Budget Changes Changes Changes FY07 -07R FY0711-08 FY08 -09 $ (0.12) $ '�"-(l-.60)1 $ 0.01 $ 0.00 0.06 $ 000 $ 028 $ 007 _ $ 0.07 $ 0.14 $ 0.24 $ (0.40) $ (0.00) $ - Water Conservation Program Town of Reading, Massachusetts October 2006 The purpose of this report is to summarize activities implemented to-date for the Town of Reading's water conservation program (WCP) and to present the estimated water savings that have resulted from the program. This report is organized as follows: 1. Water Conservation Program Background 2. Water Conservation Program Components 2.1 General public education and outreach 2.2 Residential water audits and residential retrofit program 2.3 Rebate program for water saving fixtures 2.4 Municipal building retrofit 2.5 School education and outreach 2.6. Leak detection and system-wide water audit 3. Overall Estimated Water Savings 4. Planned Activities for Fiscal Year 2007 1.0 Water Conservation Program Background In July 2003, the Town of Reading commenced a four-year $1 million water conservation program. The purpose of this initiative is to reduce the demand for water from the Ipswich River Basin. The program represents one of many actions the Town is taking to alleviate withdrawals from the Ipswich River. The Department of Public Works (DPW) staff and the project consultant, Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. (CDM), met on July 15, 2003 to review the WCP and to coordinate the planned implementation of different components in phases over the next few years. Several planning meetings were held between the Town's DPW staff, CDM and the public outreach subconsultant, Jenny Mendez-1senburg, throughout the fall and winter of 2003 to plan the WCP including: ■ General public education and outreach • Public education and outreach for large users ® Complimentary residential water audits and installation of retrofit devices ■ Rebate program for water saving devices ■ Installation of water-saving devices at municipal buildings ■ School education and outreach ■ Town-wide leak detection ■ System-wide Water Audit Page 1 of 12 ydI . Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 The majority of the work during the initial phase focused on researching similar water conservation programs in other states to gather information for the implementation of the rebate and municipal retrofit program. In addition to developing print materials, CDM and its public outreach subconsultant, focused on designing material and content for the Town's website. Some of the materials developed included fact sheets for high efficiency washing machines and low-flush toilets, applications for the rebate program and program guidelines. The fact sheets were made available to the public at Tow-ri Hall and the local library and are currently on display. In August and September 2003, the DPW staff, CDM, and public outreach subconsultant prepared for a Town-wide kick-off meeting to launch the WCP. The public information meeting was held on September 17, 2003. The purpose of the meeting was to increase the public's awareness of the importance of water conservation, discuss the Town's water conservation program, encourage participation in the program, and answer questions. The WCP remains active and conservation funds remain in the WCP budget to support and promote water conservation efforts in the Town and will continue. 2.0 Water Conservation Program Components This section describes the different components of the WCP and recent activities associated with each component implemented to-date. , 2.1 General Public Education and Outreach A public awareness program was developed to inform and educate consumers on the value of saying water. Water conservation materials and information including fact sheets are currently available at no cost through schools, libraries, and Town Hall. The Town website was updated with details about the WCP, including the rebate and water audit components of the WCP. Letters, flyers, and bill stuffers providing relevant information on the overall program were developed and distributed to encourage participation in the various components of the WCP. Additional outreach efforts are being coordinated and will continue to be implemented. Despite the fact that the Town does not currently have a significant number of large commercial and industrial users, the Town plans to contact its largest users and encourage them to participate in the Town-wide program. Activities Completed m A town-wide mailing, consisting of a fact sheet on the WCP and an informational letter was sent in September 2003. ■ Notices announcing the kick-off meeting for the WCP were placed in the local newspaper and inserted in customer water bills. Page 2 of 12 Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 ■ A presentation explaining the various aspects of the WCP was made by DPW and CDM staff to approximately 40 residents that attended the kick-off forum at the Reading Senior Center on September 17, 2003. ■ A letter providing a brief description of the WCP and offering a complimentary water audit was sent to the 300 households with the highest water consumption rates in August 2003. ■ The letter noted above was supplemented with a reminder postcard which was mailed in October 2003. ■ Information outlining the various elements of the overall WCP was incorporated into the Town's website in March 2004. ■ A letter offering rebates for products purchased since July 1, 2003 was mailed to every household along with an application and program guidelines in March 2004. ■ A workshop was held in the evening on March 29, 2005 to educate multi - family property owners, condominium associations, and small business owners. The purpose was to encourage their participation in the audit and rebate programs by demonstrating the economic benefits of conservation. Approximately 213 letters were mailed to invite owners to attend the informational workshop. Although attendance was limited, a few people called the rebate hotline and the Energy New England (ENE) subconsultartt to request rebate and water audit information available to multi-family and condominium owners. ■ A letter inviting homeowners to take part in the complimentary water audit program and rebate program was sent to the next 400 residential households with the highest water consumptions in November 2005. ■ Information regarding the cash incentives associated with the rebate program and complimentary water audits was posted in the Reading Advocate News and Daily Times Chronicle Newspaper in December 2005. ■ Notification about the ongoing water conservation program is included in various bill stuffers, including the "Public Works Newsletter" which is printed quarterly. The newsletter /bill stuffer is included in quarterly customer water bills and encourages residents to take advantage of the many benefits offered by the water conservation program. ■ Information about the water conservation program and how residents can benefit from participation is actively advertised on the Town's local cable access channel Reading Community Television - on the Community Bulletin Board and issues of Your Community Connection which is sent to all Reading mail addresses. Page 3 of 12 Z/ d Water Conservation Program D October 2006 2.2 Residential Water Audits and Residential Retrofit Program As part of the WCP, the Town offers residents a complimentary water audit to help them learn how water is used in their home and to identify opportunities for conservation. The utility company, ENE was retained by the Town to perform the water audits and to install retrofit devices. The residential water audits include the following: ■ complimentary educational material, ■ installation of free water-saving fixtures including low-flow showerheads, aerators for bathroom and kitchen faucets, nozzles for garden hoses to control the volume of the spray, and displacement bags for older model toilets, N a comparison of water use patterns in the home, ■ evaluation of outdoor water use, ■ leak checking, and ■ a report with recommendations. The water audit and residential retrofit program is currently ongoing. The initial goal of the water audit program was to conduct up to 100 complimentary residential water audits within the 4-year period. The Town successfully reached the target goal within implementation of the first 3 years of the program and continues to offer complimentary water audits to residents. To- date a total of 135 complimentary water audits were provided to Reading homeowners and 668 retrofit devices installed free of charge. Residents currently receive complimentary water saving devices (retrofit devices) during their water audit. The Town has a separate retrofit program in addition to the water audit program. The goal of the retrofit program is to provide up to 2,000 complimentary water conservation devices to residential homeowners, which includes complimentary retrofit devices that are installed during the water audit. The Town is evaluating a plan to distribute complimentary retrofit devices at Town Hall where home owners can sign-in and pick up various retrofit devices. Some of the water saving devices that are provided to homeowners during a typical complimentary water audit have included: Earth Showerhead (2.0 gpm) • Rated # 1 showerhead by leading industry organization ■ 9-Jet Turbo Massage is adjustable: gentle needle spray to forceful jet ■ Non-aerating spray means less temperature loss ■ Self-Cleaning • CSA Certified ■ California Energy Commission Certified Page 4 of 12 Z Ot t1. Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 ■ Pressure-enhancing Niagara Power • Non-removable flow compensator • Installs easily by hand ■ Meets or exceeds ANSI specifications ■ 10-year Warranty Standard Aerator (Bathroom —1.5 gpm) ■ Innovative dual-thread system to accommodate both male and female applications ■ Meets or exceeds ASME standards ■ Flow rates at 80 PSI maximum n CEC Certified Flip Aerator (Kitchen -- 2.2 gpm) ■ Unique fingertip control allows the user to temporarily halt the flow of water without readjusting the temperature controls ■ Great for washing, shaving, etc. ■ Fits male and female faucets ■ CSA and CEC certified Swivel Aerator (Kitchen — 2.0 gpm) ■ Swivel action allows you to reach every comer of the kitchen sink ■ Features dual spray, double ball joint, brass top ball with inside &. outside threads (brass connector) ® Meets or exceeds ASME standards Toilet Displacement Bag (3.75 gpm for 6 flushes) • The Tank Bank is the easiest device to use to save water -- fill to top, snap to close and hang in toilet tank ■ Every flush saves water with maintenance-free Toilet Tank Displacement Bag ■ Constructed of Pon-corrosive materials that resist microbes & fungal growth ■ Its anti-evaporation snap/airlock means the bag never needs refilling and prevents odors Water Miser 6 position Garden Nozzle ■ Water-saving design allows setting pattern independent of flow rate ■ Non-slip comfort handle grip, rust resistant stainless steel latch ■ Brass hose inlet, with brass adjuster rod and nut ■ Instant on/off control ■ N2157A has a metal handle & 5 year guarantee Page 5 of 12 yes Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 ■ 6 precision spray patterns which includes: MIST - For raising humidity and misting leaves SHOWER - For watering delicate plants CONE - Strong, wide pattern for cleaning, sweeping & rinsing SOAKER - Gentle flow for deep watering JET - High powered spray for blasting dirt away FLAT - For washing and rinsing Activities Completed ■ The first phase of the WCP involved conducting residential water audits and installing retrofit devices. As part of the first phase, the DPW staff identified and compiled a list of the top 300 largest residential water users to target for the water audit program. ■ A letter providing a brief description of the WCP and offering a complimentary water audit was sent to the 300 households with the highest water consumption rates in August 2003. ■ The letter was supplemented with a reminder postcard which was mailed in October 2003. ■ As noted previously, notification about the ongoing water conservation program, specifically the water audit and rebate programs is included in various bill stuffers, including the "Public Works Newsletter" which is printed. quarterly. The newsletter /bill stuffer is included in quarterly customer water bills and encourages residents to take advantage of the many benefits (free water audits and cash incentives) offered by the water conservation program. ENE has conducted water audits and provided conservation kits in 135 homes, see details below. Water-Saving (Retrofit) Devices Installed WaterAuditsby Total Aerator Aerator Leak, Defection 'Toilet Displacement Low-Flow Drip Garden s e Rain Irrigation rear I customers (Bathroom) I .- (Kitchen) Tabs (sets) Bags Showerhead Gauge Gauge Timer. Year2003 70 42 34 158 44 42 1 24 29 13 Year2004 25 2 11 52 0 15 1 17 9 4 Year2005 13 1 5 17 0 4 0 1 2 0 Year2006 26 0 2 71 0 9 0 23 9 .3 Program To Date 135 45 52 310 44 72 2 70 51 22 Estimated Total Gallons Saved 1,688,000 216,800 459,315 318,000 693,795 per Year The estimated water savings above are based on an average of 2.64 persons per occupied U.S. household (Handbook of Water Use and Conservation by Amy Vickers) and estimated savings for retrofitted devices as shown previously (e.g., low-flow showerhead saving of 2.0 gpm). Page 6 of 12 �d 6 Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 2.3 Rebate Program for Water Saving Fixtures The rebate program was developed to provide eligible town residents and property owners with cash rebates for purchasing and installing water saving fixtures. These fixtures include ultra low flush toilets, high efficiency washing machines, rain sensors, and rain barrels. A list of appropriate devices and manufacturers that qualify as part of the rebate program is provided to customers as part of the public education and outreach component of the program and is available on the Town's website. A hotline number was established in Fall 2003 at the water treatment plant to receive resident inquiries regarding the rebate program. Incoming calls on the hotline are monitored by the public outreach sub-consultant on a daily basis. Rebates are issued after a completed application is approved and a verification site visit is completed by the Town. The program guidelines and application form are available on the Town's website. Rebates of up to $120 are offered to customers who have purchased a low-flow toilet beginning in July 1, 2003. The customer is responsible for providing the Town documentation that a low- flow toilet was purchased and installed. For those customers purchasing a high efficiency washing machine, rebates of $200 are available. Rebates are also available for customers who purchase a moisture sensor for their irrigation system. The rebate amount available to customers who purchase a moisture sensor for an irrigation system is up to $25. Customers can also benefit from a recent addition to the rebate program' rain barrels that store precious rain water. The rebate amount available to customers who purchase a rain barrel (The Great American Rain Barrel TM or similar) is $25. The response from residents calling the hotline has been extremely positive. Most have embraced the need to conserve water and the cash incentive serves to motivate them to replace old inefficient fixtures and appliances. To-date the Town has approved 762 rebate applications totaling approximately $145,860. Activities Completed ■ An introductory letter offering rebates for products purchased since July 1, 2003 was mailed to every household along with an application and program guidelines in March 2004. ■ The same bill inserts and informational letters that were mailed for the water audit also provided information regarding the rebate program. ■ From program inception through September 2006 a total of 803** customers submitted rebate applications. Of these, 41 customers were determined ineligible to receive rebates and 762 were eligible for the rebate program as follows: Page 7 of 12 qd 7. Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 Total Number of Customers and Rebates July 2003 - September 2006 *Applications received through September 30"' that are eligible but have not yet been processed (also referred to as rebates in progress below) in the Town's system. A total of 339 applications representing 370 rebate units were received from March 2005 through September 30, 2005. The estimated savings for toilet units and washing machines units presented above, are based on information from the Handbook of Water Use and Conservation by Amy Vickers, May 2001. Total Rebate Costs July 2003 - September 2006 Low Flow jotal 'Ultra Low Clothes Rain Rain .Total Customers.. Rebate, Flow Toilet : Washers ,Sensor Units, Barrel $50.00 Units Units, Units $116,000.00 $364.08 Applications in progress = 41 44* 8* 34* 2* 0 Eligible Customers = 721 785 178 680 15 0 Total = 762 829 186 614 17 0 Estimated Gallons Saved Per 6,600,000 1,960,000 4,640,000 Unknown 0 Year *Applications received through September 30"' that are eligible but have not yet been processed (also referred to as rebates in progress below) in the Town's system. A total of 339 applications representing 370 rebate units were received from March 2005 through September 30, 2005. The estimated savings for toilet units and washing machines units presented above, are based on information from the Handbook of Water Use and Conservation by Amy Vickers, May 2001. Total Rebate Costs July 2003 - September 2006 Low Flow Clothes, Rain Sensor Rain Barrel., Rebate Costs Toilet Washer $971.00 $6,800.00 $50.00 -0- = $7,821.00 (Rebates in progress) $21,277.06 $116,000.00 $364.08 $400.00 = $138,041.14 (Rebates issued) = $145,862.14 (Total anticipated $22,248.06 $122,800.00 $414.08 $400.00 disbursements) 2.4 Municipal Building Retrofit As part of the overall WCP, the Town set aside funds to ensure that all municipal buildings are retrofitted with water-saving devices, in compliance with the state Water Resources Commission performance standard. All municipal buildings have been retrofitted with water- saving fixtures including low-flow toilets, low-flow showerheads, and faucet aerators. To date, all buildings have been retrofitted and ENE conducted water audits at each of the facilities. Activities Completed ■ In 2003, all of the municipal buildings were surveyed to prepare a count of existing fixtures for use in developing the Request for Proposals to retain a contractor. ■ A contract was awarded to Robert Irvine & Sons in August 2004. m Retrofitting of all existing municipal buildings was completed in September 2004. (Note, the High School and Barrows, which are under construction at the time will be completed by August 2007.) Page 8 of 12 Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 a Water audits at each ofthe municipal buildings (all Town Hall, library, fire stations, Light Department, DPW water treatment plant, etc.) commenced io March 2OO4and was completed in April 2005. Municipal Building Retrofits Total Units Installed' Urinal Units,. Paucet Units at Municipal Buildings Tbilet:Units Installed Installed. Installed 250 130 35 85 Estimated Gallons Saved Per Year Male 494 gpy Male 260 gpy 986 GPPNR The estimated savings are based ouinformation from the Handbook nf Water Use and Conservation by Amy Vickers, May 2001. 2.5 School Education and Outreach The of water purpose uzcuz�ozuz� cuusezvuuuz� ��e�mthe existing school curriculum to inform the next generation of consumers. Through a partnership with the 2v[VYRA and with funding provided by the water conservation program, teachers participating intbi program will have the option of using fun and educational exercises, games and booklets in their science classes for students to learn the importance of water and natural resource conservation at an early age. The plan for this program involves meeting with school officials and department heads to discuss incorporating water conservation educational materials into the existing school curriculum atvarious grade levels. Activities Completed w In August %004, the DPW staff, CI%M and public outreach were invited to present the W{3, school program hothe Superintendent and school principals at their monthly meeting. The goal of this initial meeting was tol\ introduce the concept of establishing water conservation na part of the curriculum io the public schools oem way to educate future generations mn the importance ofcmneervingvvoterund2\eoDottheir support for e school education program. n On September I02004[ZMand the public outreach coordinator met with Dennis Assistant Superintendent of Schools, tu discuss program options. m A Massachusetts Water Resources curriculum was sent tothe high school science coordinator tn November 2O04 for reference. a Additional meetings were held in August, September and October 20O6 with Mr. John Doherty (Assistant Superintendent n[ , Ms. Chris Redford (K-0instructional mathematics specialist), aodMr ,MegIebookco Public Education Outreach ~ Page Qof12 �=� o Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 Coordinator) to re- establish dialog with the Reading school system and develop a strategy to implement the School Education task of the Reading Water Conservation Program. ■ Plans are underway for several MWRA presentations, combined with student hands -on activities, tentatively scheduled for December 2006 for all 3rd grade level students. Take home information consisting of water conservation brochures /fact sheets and retrofit devices will be provided to all 3rd grade level students. 2.6 Leak Detection and System -Wide Water Audit The Town will continue its current practice of annual system -wide leak detection, as part of the water conservation program. In addition, a system -wide water audit was conducted to evaluate potential ways the Town may be able to conserve water in the treatment and distribution system. 2.6.1 Leak Detection The Town has performed annual distribution system leak detection surveys since 1999. Approximately 217 million gallons of water have been saved over the past 8 years by identifying and repairing leaks in the distribution system. It is estimated that the leak detection program has resulted in Town savings of about $263,000. 2.6.2 System -Wide Audit The Town of Reading completed a water audit of its water distribution system in November 2004. The water audit was prepared as part of the Town of Reading's application for admission to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) Waterworks System and request for an Inter -Basin Water Transfer. The water audit examined water data for the years 2000 through 2003. The purpose of the audit was to evaluate: 1) the Town's water withdrawal from the source supply; 2) the amount of water produced and supplied to the Town; 3) the amount of water consumed by the customers; 4) the calibration of meters; and 5) potential water losses (unaccounted -for water) in the distribution system. Water loss (or unaccounted -for water) in Reading's distribution system ranged from 2 to 7 percent, which is well below the Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP) standard for unaccounted water in stressed basins (below 10 percent) as presented in the "Guidance Document for Water Management Act Permitting Policy," April 2, 2004. Page 10 of 12 qd / 0 r Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 3.0 Overall Estimated Water Savings Summary of Program Water Savings (Estimated) Town of Reading Massachusetts Program :.Estimated Water Savings (Million ;Gallons) Rebates (water saving devices installed) 6.6 MG anticipated yearly savings Leak Detection' 16.5 — 45.6 MG per year since 1999 Municipal Building Retrofits* 5.0 MG anticipated yearly savings Residential Water Audits & Retrofits 1.6 MG anticipated yearly savings *The above municipal estimates are based on 4,250 students and the Municipal Building Retrofit Table on Page 9. "The Estimated Water Savings reported for Leak Detection in April 2005 were reported incorrectly. The above estimate reflects corrected reporting. 4.0 Planned Activities for Fiscal Year 2007 The Town and its consultants are currently coordinating the following activities in Fiscal Year 2007 to encourage participation in the various components of the WCP. ■ Incorporate an Irrigation Water Audit component to the WCP. The irrigation water audit conducted by ENE takes a comprehensive look at how to save water used for landscaping. The irrigation audit will include an inspection of any automatic irrigation systems and will result in a report with recommendations that may include: improvements to controls such as rain sensors; repairs and improvements to piping and sprinklers; water pressure correction; and landscaping improvements to soil, turf and plants. ■ Continue the WCP efforts. ■ Continue dialog with Reading School Education Department to develop a long-term strategy to establish a sustainable water conservation curriculum/ method of incorporating water conservation efforts in the Reading school system. ■ Several N1WRA presentations, combined with student hands-on activities, are tentatively scheduled for December 2006 for all 3rd grade students. ■ Prepare take home information packets for all 3rd grade students. The packets will likely include water conservation brochures/ fact sheets and some of the retrofit devices offered by the Town as part of the complimentary water audit program. ■ Develop a portable "Tortm of Reading— Water Conservation Program" display for all age levels to be circulated between the schools, Town Hall and the Reading Library. The WCP display Page 11 of 12 4411 Water Conservation Program Update October 2006 will provide background details regarding the WCP,, water conservation materials including brochures and fact sheets, and sample retrofit devices. ■ Continue to identify some of the largest multi- family /condominium owners with the highest water usage rates from the list of invitees that was prepared ed for the 2005 workshop. Contact some of the largest users via phone calls or mailings that include details on the water audit and rebate programs. ® Conduct additional mailing of the next 400 residential households with the highest water consumptions. The letter will invite homeowners to take part in the complimentary water audit program and rebate program. ■ Provide complimentary water saving devices at Town Hall for interested residential homeowners. ■ Continue to identify and contact large industrial and commercial users to encourage their participation in the conservation program. ■ Continue to develop a brochure for a town-wide distribution mailing. The brochure will be based on the design and content of the Town's WCP webpage. Page 12 of 12 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, Gs. Officer's Return, Reading: By virtue of this Warrant, |. OD notified and VY8[D8d the inhabitants of the Town of ReadiDQ, qualified to vote on Town @fhai[a' 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 � J. Warren Ki||2nl School, J33 Charles Street Precinct 2 Registry of Motor Vehicles, 275 Salem Street Precinct Reading Police Station, 15 Union Street Precinct Joshua Eaton School, 385 Summer Avenue Precinct Town Hal|, 16 Lowell Street Precinct Austin Preparatory School, 101Willow Street Precinct 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 November 13, 2006, the date,set for the Subsequent Town Meeting in this Warrant. | also caused an attested copy ofthis Warrant to be published in the Reading Chronicle iD the issue Of Robert H. Prince, Constable A true copy. Attest: Cheryl A. Johnson, Town Clerk , SUBSEQUENT TOWN MEETING (Seal) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Middlesex, ss. To any of the Constables of the Town of Reading, G: 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 K8ennnhG| High School Auditorium, 62 Oakland Road, in said Reading. on K8onday. November 13' 2006. ot seven-thirty o'clock in the ew8OiDQ' at which time and place the following articles are to be acted upon and determined BXC|U8|Ve|y by Town Meeting K8ernbeF8 in accordance with the provisions of the Reading Home Rule Charter. ARTICLE I To ha8[ and act on the FepVdo of the Board of Selectmen, Town Accountant, Treaauner-CoUector, Board of Assessors, Director of Public Works, Town Clerk, Tree VV@rd8D, Board of Heo|th, School Com0ittee, Contributory Retirement BO8Pd' Library Trustees, K8uOiCip@| Light Board, Finance CVnlmiUe8' Cemetery Trustees, Community Planning 8' Development Comnmoisaion, Conservation Commission, Town Manager and any other Board nr Special Committee. Board ofSelectmen , The following reports are expected tVbe given under this article: ° RyWLD annual report � Report on Affordable Housing Planned production * Status ofMVVFA water purchase ° Report 0oSubstance Abuse Initiative L State of the Schools T0���extent possible, the reports are included io the back Of this report so that only a mzuzumary report will bn given Yerbo]}y at Town Meeting. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Commiftee Report: No report. ARTICLE To choose all other necessary Town Officers and Special Committees and determine what instructions eh8U be given Town Officers and Special Committees, and to see what GuOO the Town will raise by bO[n}VViDg or t[8OGfe[ from available funde, or otherwise, and appropriate for the purpose of funding Town [}ffica[G and Special Committees to carry out the instructions given to them. or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen 2 qZ2"l Background: There are no known instructional motions at this time. As a general rule, Instructional reports are reserved for the last evening of Town Meeting, and the Moderator requests that any Town Meeting member who intends to offer an instructional motion let him know at least one session in advance so that he can let Town Meeting members know that in advance. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Committee Report: No report. 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 Background: The following amendments are proposed to the FY 2007 — FY 2011 Capital Improvements Program (CIP). These amendments need to be included in the CIP in order for Town Meeting to consider funding them under the various articles at Town Meeting. The full revised CIP is included in the blue pages in the back of this report. The following are proposed modifications to the CIP approved at the Annual Town Meeting. FY07: $ 1,500 added to Window& Door (Kil lam) BLS -102B (line J3) $ '5,000 for Boiler feed (Birch Meadow) BLS -122A (line J3) ($ 5,000) removed for Kitchen (Birch Meadow) BLS-121A (line J3) $ 25,000 for Wide Area Network FIN-209A (line J15) $ 20,000 for Financial Systems planning FIN-220 (line J6) $ 9,000 for Handguns & Associated Leather PSP-220 (line J19) $ 20,000 for Fuel system replacement PWE-400 (line J10) $ 42,600 for Playgrounds (Wood End) PWP-011013 (line J14) $525,000 for Downtown Improvements PWR-560 (line J11) $ 29,705 for Roadwork on Governor's Drive PWR-560* (line J11) *Funded by Sale of Real Estate FY08-FY1 1: — $125,000 for Playgrounds (Imagination Station) PWP-010A — $300,000 for Artificial Turf at a Middle School PWP-030 — $500,000 for Artificial Turf at a second Middle School PWP-031 — $1.0 million for Artificial Turf at a baseball field PWP-031 When the Capital Improvements Plan was approved by Town Meeting at the Annual Town Meeting, the amount of funding included in the budget for capital was significantly less than the funding required for projects in the CIP. The recommendation made at the time was to see how Free Cash and other cash reserves stood in the fall, and consider funding further capital projects in November. Cash reserves now stand at almost $1.1 million above the FINCOM goal of 5% of revenues. The recommendation is to use approximately $700,000 for additional one time capital projects, to use approximately $1O0.DOObJ balance the FY2OO7 budget and t0 place 8|0nst $3OD.0OO into the stabilization fund. Finance Committee Report: Bylaw Committee Report: No report. ARTICLE 4 To see if the Town will vote to authorize the payment during Fiscal Year 2OO7Vfbills remaining unpaid for previous fiscal years for goods and services actually rendered to the Town, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Background: The Town has $136'55Oin unpaid bills related k} the severe flooding that occurred in May of 2006. FEK8/\and our insurance company will reimburse 10096 of these bills. There were two ways to handle the Costa ro|8b9d to the flooding. One would have been to declare an emergency ut the time of the flooding and deficit spend. The second VV8V is to appropriate funds, as we are doing in this motion and show the anticipated reimbursements as a onetime local receipt. This motion will take o 9/10 vote of Town Meeting. Finance Committee Report: Bylaw Commiftee Report: No report. ARTICLE To see U the Town will vote to amend one or more of the votes token under Article 15 of the Aoh| 24, 2006 Annual Town Meeting na|@bDg to the Fiscal Year 2007 Municipal Budget, and Gee what sum the Town will raise by borrowing or transfer from available fundo, or otherwise, and appropriate as the nasU|t of any such amended VVbeo for the operation of the Town and its government, or take any other action with respect thereto. Finance Committee The following FY 2007 budget transfers are proposed for consideration at the 2006 Subsequent Town Meetinq: Account Line Description Decrease Increase B26 Community Services Salaries — $146,799 transfer Town Clerk & staff, and Elections to Finance Department C12 Finance Salaries— transfer Town $146,799 Clerk & staff, and Elections from Community Services . Lq B27 Community Services Expenses — $44,647 Increase transfer Town Clerk & staff, and DPW —Water Salaries (reduced $139,844 Elections to Finance Department Water Supply staff due to MWRA C13 Finance Expenses — transfer Town $44,647 Clerk & staff, and Elections from DPW —Water Expenses (MWRA $1,013,000 Community Services water purchase) C12 Finance Salaries — sick-leave DPW —Water Expenses (reduction in $18,500 buyback & overlap for retirement; Water Supply direct expenses due to replace with Assistant Town Clerk MWRA conversion) C13 Finance Expenses — fund pay DPW —Water Expenses (reduction in $20,000 classification study Benefits due to reduced Water F12 DPW Parks & Forestry Expenses Supply staff) $6,750 shade trees ($3,750) and Veteran's DPW — Water Expenses (repay $183,714 flowers ($3,000) $500,000 BAN for WTP Design Bui8lding maintenance offsets other debt savings) 24210 Debt Service — BAN interest for Subtotals $53,395 $1,196,714 Barrows, to be reimbursed by the Net from Water Reserves 1$869,142 MSBA when audit is completed this winter ($48,074); Interest on refunded taxes ($5,351) — completes internal Finance Department audit on Tax Title/Deferred Taxes billing errors from 1996-1999 Subtotals $191,446 $290,091 Net from Free Cash 1$98,645 Account Line 2escription Decrease Increase Ll DPW —Water Salaries (reduced $139,844 Water Supply staff due to MWRA L2 DPW —Water Expenses (MWRA $1,013,000 water purchase) L2 DPW —Water Expenses (reduction in $129,456 Water Supply direct expenses due to MWRA conversion) L2 DPW —Water Expenses (reduction in $58,272 Benefits due to reduced Water Supply staff) L2 DPW — Water Expenses (repay $183,714 $500,000 BAN for WTP Design offsets other debt savings) Subtotals $327,572 $1,196,714 Net from Water Reserves 1$869,142 Finance Committee Report: Bylaw Commiftee Report: No report. ARTICLE 6 To see if the Town will vote pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 53E1/2 to authorize the use of a revolving fund for the purpose of: w Operating public health clinics and any related expenses which fund shall be credited with receipts from clinic fees and third party reimbursement administered under the authority of the Health Services Administrator acting with the approval of the Town Manager; and to determine the total amount of expenditures during Fiscal Year 2OO7which may be mode from such fund, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen The Reading Health Division seeks third party payments for onumber of immunizations oOVehDg approximately 1/8 the administrative cost of influenza, pneumonia and meningitis prevention vaccines. The Funds are used to augment the influenza vaccine supply from the State department of public health to insure vaccine for the homebound clients and first responders. Health uses these funds for meningitis prevention vaccine for adolescents, and materials for cho|eGtePn|, g|uCOsR. and Tuberculosis screening clinics. K8|n|nna| clinic client fees are also deposited into this fund to offset vaccine, and clinical supply costs. The necessary uDlVunta used for clinic supplies each year directly from the revolving fund is approximately $25.000. Finance Committee Report: Bylaw Commiftee Report: No report. ARTICLE 7 To see if the Town will vote. pursuant to W1eeo. General Laws Chapter 30B, Section 12' to authorize the School Committee to enter into o contract/lease, including all extensions, renavvo|e and oobona, for the provision of educational banking services to serve the Reading K8enloha| High School ooDlnOUDitv, said banking facility to be located at the Reading Memorial High Gchoo|, for a period greater than three years but not exceeding 20 years upon such terms and conditions determined by the School Committee, or take any other action with respect thereto. School Committee q'OL Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Commiftee Report: No report. ARTICLE 8 To see what sum the Town will vote to oppPOph8tg by born3VVOg, whether in anticipation ofreimbursement from the State under Chapter 44. Section O' Massachusetts General Laws, or pursuant to any other enabling authority or from the tax levy, o[ transfer from available hJnde. or [dhanmiee' for highway projects in @CcnPdGnoe with Chapter 90, Massachusetts General Lavxs, or take any other action with naepoot thereto. Board ofSelectmen The purpose Of this Article is 10 make Chapter 90 funds for road improvements available h/ the Town. The Article authorizes debt iO anticipation ofreceipt of the grant but the TOVVD has never sold debt for these projects. The funds will not be borrowed, but authorizing the bO[[OVViDg @|lVVVs the CODlUlUOitv to plan for projects with the certainty that they will befunded. The current amount of$1O7'g05ie3supplemental Chapter QD allocation that inonaaoaa the currant Oeoe| year allocation to $536.511 available for highway construction. Finance Committee Report: Bylaw Commiftee Report: No report. ARTICLE 9 To see what sum the Town will transfer from the "Landfill Closure and Post-Closure Monitoring Fund" established by Article 4 of the December 8' 2002 Special Town Meeting in accordance with the requirements, of the Enterprise Fund Agreement between the Town of Reading and the Department of Environmental Protection ua|aUms to the Town's municipal solid waste disposal faci|ity, to the Sale of Real Estate Ac:ount, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen In January of 2003. the Town signed @ contract with DEP establishing a "Closure Account" to fund the necessary activities to achieve the rudimentary closure of the Landfill should the developer fail to :nnnp|et8 the c|O8UPe according to DEP F8qUin*nneDts. On March 21, 2006' we received notification from DEP that they had issued a [||oSUne Certificate for the Reading Landfill. According to the ogneerDROt, upon the issuance of G Closure Certificate' the Town is allowed to transfer all the remaining funds in the Closure Account to the Sale of Real Estate account. That oMOVuni with accumulated interest ia$2'415.42O. Finance Committee Report: No report. 7 ~*� ARTICLE 10 To see if the Town will vote to amend the vote taken under Article 5 of the January 13.2003 Special Town Meeting toappropriate by borrowing, ortransfer from available funds, or othe[Nise, an ndditioO8| sUDl of money for the purpose of no8WOg extraordinary repairs and/or additions to the Reading K8annOha| High GChVV| at 62 Oakland Road, including the costs of engineering and architectural feee, p|@Os' dVcUnoeOts, cost estimates, and related expenses incidental thereto and necessary in connection therewith, said sum to be expended by and under the direction of the School Committee; and to see if the Town will vote to authorize the School Building Committee, the School Committee, or any other agency of the Town to file applications for grant(s), loan(s), exclusion(s), and/or other sources of additional funding to be used to defray the Cost of all or any port of the cost of the project; and to nee if the Town will vote to authorize the School Committee to enter into all contracts and agreements as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Article, or take any other 8:t|Vn with respect thereto. School Committee Finance Committee Report: Bylaw Commiffee Report: No report. ARTICLE 11 To gee what sum the Town will mote to appropriate for the construction of a playground at the Wood End School to provide for handicapped access and fencing, such moneys to be spent under the direction of the Town Manogor, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board ofSelectmen As courtesy to the Playground Committee Even/ child deserves a right ho nka/ and to enjoy th8 experience of just being a kid. Children, regardless of their abilities should be able 10 play at a playground to the highest keve|Ofthei[oxvnabi|itv The Community Playground 8t Wood End will b8 universally accessible to children of all 8bi|0ae. G0 often children with die8bi|0aa are prevented from taking part in typical playground activities, costing them opportunities for great developmental gains and the opportunity tV just have fun. The Community playground at Wood End has been designed to be o true Reeding community playground that meets several objectives: • A||ovv adults and children with physical disabilities full ocoeoa to a Reeding Playground • Expand the, playground as p|anOed, so that there is e vva|binQ distance playground in all areas Vftown. 0 8 Y • Provide all community members a safe, challenging area to rest and play while using the ball fields. In addition, to these stated objectives there is now the additional benefit of having an alternate playground in town while plans are made to renew the Imagination Station area. Given the unexpected return of almost $50,000 from the school department budget, and the fact that the $200,000 recreational grant from the state has already been allocated to two artificial playing fields, we ask Town Meeting to allocate these funds to play for the specialized surfacing needed to provide full access. The Community Playground at Wood End **Budget/Financial Statement 10- Sep -06 Playground Construction Estimated Costs . Playground Equipment & Installation $69,900.00 ADA Compliant Walkway with Donor Bricks $7,600.00 Wood Fiber Fill $5,400.00 Rubberized Surfacing to Provide True Handicapped Access $37,000.00 Benches $2,000.00 Replacement Tools $500.00 Fundraising Costs* $2,000.00 Total Budgeted Costs $130,000.00 EXPENSES through September 10, 2006 Mailings Printing Website Domain Name Envelopes/Stamps Total Expenses to Date DONATIONS through September 10, 2006 Money Received from Individuals & Families Money Received from Businesses Money Committed from Individuals & Families but not yet received Money Committed from Businesses but not yet received Grants Received CVS/Pharmacy $5000 Eastern Bank $1000 Home Depot $3000 Government (local & state & federal) $730.00 $650.00 $25.00 $50.00 $1,455.00 $49,218.00 $10,843.00 MOM [A5/ Wood End PTO Donation $2'45400 These funds are being received aoexpenses are incurred. Total Funds Committed/Received as of September 10, 2006 $73,715.00 Finance Committee Report: Bylaw Commiftee Report: No report. ARTICLE 12 To see if the Town will vote tO authorize the Board of Selectmen 10 release all of the Town's right, title and interest in a twenty /30\ foot vVkdg drainage 8@8e0OeDt located upon the property at 37 Joseph VV8y' Assessor's K88p 191. Parcel 47' presently owned by Stephen A. and Julie A. VO8Qe|in. as shown on e p|GO entitled ''P|aO of Land in Reading' MA Showing Easement Abandonment", prepared by Middlesex Survey Inc. Land Surveyors of 131 Park Street, North Reading, MA 01864 dated September 2O,2000,or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen The purpose of this Article is to authorize the Board of Selectmen to abandon an unused drainage easement located within the property of 37Joseph Way. The property owner at 37 Joseph Way has requested that the Town abandon an unused drainage easement located within their property. The easement was established during the creation of the original subdivision and was never utilized. Additional sewer, drainage and utility eoeeOlen[e were subsequently established and taken by the TnvvD which follows the actual course of the installed utilities. Since the original easement is not used and no longer needed, the Department of Public Works recommends that the portions of he original easement lying outside the limits of active easements be abandoned. LOT 47 JOSEPH WAY Finance Commiffee Report: No report. 10 �\ Bylaw Commiftee Report: No report ARTICLE 13 To see if the Town will vote to transfer the care, custody and control to the Board of Selectmen any and all of the following parcels of land which are in the care, custody and control of the School Department: and to discontinue as the Board of Selectmen deem necessary any and all portions of the following public ways that lie within nr abut those parcels: Cold Spring Road, Grandview Avenue, Tower Road, Chestnut Street, Oakland Road or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw tommiftee Report: No report. ARTICLE 14 To e8H if the Town will accept the provisions of K8oaG. General Laws c. 39. Section 23D as to all GdiudiC8toryheahOgs conducted by all Town Bo8nds, Committees and Commissions, or take any other action with respect thereto. Board of Selectmen In Mullin v. Planning Board of Brewster 17K8e8G.Aoo.[t. 13S(1g83)the Massachusetts Appeals Court ruled that any member of amunicipal board who does not attend 2 public hearing as well as all continuations thereof, on an application in which the board will ultimately render on acUudioatory deoioion, e.g. the grant of special permits, variances, subdivision approval, etc. will be disqualified from participating in the decision making process, i.e., they cannot deliberate or vote on the matter. The neGU|t of this [U|e is that in situations where the public hearing may be extended over time, a board may lose its voting members and may have to begin anew the entire public hHGhOg n*eU|tiOg in an inefficient process, or be confronted with the possibility that the relief requested will be constructively granted. To meeo|V8 this issue, the Legislature recently enacted M.G.L. Chapter 39' 823C>Vvhich' upon |000| acceptance, 8||oVVs any board nOannbHrVvhorn|sGes one meeting to participate in the process UpVD the following conditions: * Before any such vote, the rnernbH[ shall certify in writing that he/she has examined all eV|dRDca received at the missed e8GsiVn, which evidence shall include an audio or video recording of the missed session o[a transcript thereof. I * This written certification becomes part of the record of the hearing. Finance Committee Report: No report. Bylaw Commiftee Report: ARTICLE 15 To see if the Town will vote to adopt the following General Bylaw regulating construction hours and noise limits, or take any other action with respect 5.5.8 - Construction Hours and Noise Limits 5.5.8.1 - Purpose. The intent of the bylaw iGbJ regulate the hours during which construction and dOD0O|iUnD activities may take place VVKhiD the TOVVD and otherwise to limit the impact of such activities on nearby residents and business. 5.5.8.2-Definition w "Construction" ohoUTDeaO and .include the construction, FRCoOstnucUOD, alteration, repair, demolition and/or narnova| of any bui|ding, structure or substantial port thereof if such xVnrh requires o building permit, razing permit, electrical permit' plumbing permit' gas permit, or mechanical permit. ^C0netructioO" shall also include excavation that involves the use of blasting 'ackhornnnena, pile drivena, bookhoea and/or other heavy equipment. "Construction" shall also include the starting of any machinery related to the above; deliveries, fueling of equipment, and any other preparation or mobilization for construction which creates noise or disturbance on abutting properties. 5.8.8.3 - Hours. No pe[aOD shall perform any construction within the TOVVD except between the hours of: ° 7:OOa.rn. and 8:0Op.Ol, Monday through Friday; ° 0:00 a.nn.to5:00 p.rn. on Saturdays; 0 None OD Sundays and legal holidays. 5.2[8.4- Exemptions. The reathobODs set forth in this bylaw shall not apply to any work performed as follows: w By any Federal or State Department, Reading Department of Public Works, the Reading Municipal Light Department and/or any contractors working directly for these agencies; m By resident on or in connection with his neeideOce, without the aid of hired contmecto[s, whether or not such residence is a detached single family home; * In the case nf work occasioned by genuine and imminent emergency, and then only to the extent necessary to prevent loss or injury topereons or property. 12 °�_ 5.3.0.5- Permits. The Chief of Police or his designee (the Chief), may in his reasonable diec[etnn, issue permits in response to written applications authorizing applicants to pedbnn construction during hours other than those permitted by this bylaw. Such permits may be issued upon a determination by the Chief' in COO8U|t8tion with the Building Inspector, the Town Engineer orother Town staff, that literal compliance with the terms of this bylaw xVOU|d create an UDFGa8Vnab|e hardship and that the work proposed to be done (with or without any proposed mitigative measures) will have no adverse effects of the kind which this bylaw seeks toreduce. Each such permit shall specify the person authorized to oCt' the dates on which or within which the permit will be effective, the specific hours and days when construction otherwise prohibited may take place, and any conditions required by the Chief to mitigate the effect thereof on the community. The Chief may promulgate 8 form Vf application and charge @ reasonable fee for each p8[0Oi1. No permit may cover a period of more than thirty days. Mitigative rneoSUn8S may include notice to residents in the surrounding area, and other mitigation as determined by the Chief. b.3.8.8- Unreasonable Noise. Regardless of the hour or day of the week' no coOotRJCbOn shall be performed within the Town in such a vV@y as to create unreasonable noise. Noise shall b8 deemed unreasonable ifit interferes with the normal and ugU8| activities of residents and businesses in the affected area and could be reduced or eliminated through reasonable mitigative measures. 5.3.8.7 - Cnov of Bvhavv The Building Inspector shall deliver @ copy of this bVkavv to each person 10 VVhOOu K ienU88 G building p80ni[ F8ZDA permit, (d8CthC8| permit, plumbing permit, g@8 p8O0ii or Ol8ChGOic8| permit at the time that the said permit ioissued. 5.3.O.8- Enforcement. The Police Department Zoning Officer and/or other agent designated by the Town Manager oh8U enforce the restrictions of this bylaw. Fines shall be assessed and collected in the amount ofupto $3OO.OD for each violation. Each day Vr portion thereof that a violation continues shall constitute G separate offense. Any alleged violation of this bylaw may, in the sole discretion of the enforcing agent, be made the subject matter of non-criminal disposition proceedings commenced by such agent under K8.G.Lu.4O'§21D. Board ofSelectmen Finance Commiftee Report: No report. Bylaw Commiftee Report: ARTICLE 16 To see if the Town will Vote to onoeOd the GeO8n3| Bylaws of the Town of Reading by adding the following Section 5.2.10 entitled "Sight Triangles:" 13 5.2.10 Si-ght Triangles 5.2.1(l1 Definition A sight triangle is defined as that area formed by the intersection of property lines and u straight line joining said property lines to the street or right of way atGpoint 25 feet distant from the point Vf their intersection. For corner lots, the sight triangle is determined from the point of intersection of their tangents. 5`2.1O.2 Corner Lots EXC8Dt in the Ooxvn[oxvn bUaiOeGG district, no building, fence, Vv@U' landscaping, parking of vehicles, signs, or the placement of or growing of any other obstruction between the height of 2}6 feet and a height of 8' shall be located VV|th|O the sight triangle so as to obstruct visibility in a manner that will jeopardize the safety of vehicles or pedestrians. For purposes of this bylaw, the Downtown business district |adefined aG that portion of the BUGiOeGS B Zoning District that is generally bounded by the MBTA rail line, Woburn Street and a line east ofMain Street. 5.2.1(l3 Residential Districts On any lot in 8 residence district, OO building, f8OC8. wall, landscaping, parking vehicles, of signs, orth8 placement of or growing of any other obstruction between the height of 21/2 feet and 8 height of 8' shall be located within 5 feet of the front lot line unless it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Chief of Police that such vegetation or structure will not naethCt visibility in such @ way as to hinder the safe entry or exit of vehicles from any driveway to the street. 5.2.1(I4 Exemptions (B) Principal buildings existing oDg lot ot the time of adoption Of this bylaw shall not be required to conform to this bylaw. Shade trees planted by the Town of Reading, mailboxes, street and traffic signs, and ub|Uv poles are also exempt from the provisions of this bylaw. (b) Fences of defined herein as a fence constructed so that its vertical surface area is unobstructed, enabling motorists and pedestrians t0 have a clear view through such fence (e.g.. o fence of chain-link or post and rail cnnetruction). Board OfSelectmen After receiving numerous complaints relating to sight lines at intersections throughout the com0UDity, the Parking Traffic Transportation Task Force reviewed the option ofasight triangle by-law. K was discovered that other communities in the area have similar . The purpose of the by-law is to enable the town to regulate a segment of property at street intersections so as to offer vehicle operators and pedestrians on unobstructed view of an intersection. On co[O8F |ots, an area 25 feet in either direction intersected by straight line is the area that would be regulated. Obstructions taller than 2 }6fmetend lower than 8feet xVoU|d be regulated. 14 Additionally, section 5.2.10.3 would prohibit obstructions within 5 feet of the front lot line in order to give pedestrians and motorists entering the street from 8 private driveway de8[ unobstructed view. Any such obstruction could be permitted by the Chief Of Police or his designee UpVD o finding that Public Safety was not hindered by such obstruction. The following photos and diagrams illustrate the problem and the proposed Figure 1- Bancroft at Lowell Finance Commiftee Report: No report. Bylaw CommlifteeERport � v��' and you are directed to serve this Warrant by posting an attested copy thereof iDatleast one (1) public place in each precinct of the Town not less than fourteen (14) days prior to November 13. 2000. the dote set for the meeting in said VVanont, and to publish this Warrant in a newspaper published in the ToVVD, or providing in a FDaDDe[ such as 8|8CtV}Oic SUbnliSGiOD, holding for pickup Or 08i|iDg' an attested copy nfsaid Warrant to each Town Meeting Member. Hereof fail not and make due return ofthis Warrant with your doings thereon to the Town Clerk at or before the time appointed for said meeting. Given under our hands this 26th day of September, 2006. Robert H. Prince, Constable 16 Ben Tafoya, Chairman James E.Bonazo|i' Vice Chairman Stephen A.Gnldv.Secretary Camille W. Anthony Richard VKSchubert SELECTMEN [}FREADING . �& Board of Selectmen Meeting September 26, 2006 For ease of archiving, the order that items appear in these Minutes reflects the order in which the items appeared on the agenda for that meeting, and are not necessarily the order in which any item was taken up by the Board. The meeting convened at 7:00, p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts. Present were Chairman Ben Tafoya, Vice Chairman James Bonazoli, Secretary Stephen Goldy, Selectmen Camille Anthony and Richard Schubert, Recreation Administrator John Feudo, Fire Chief Greg Burns, Assistant Town Manager /Finance Director Bob LeLacheur, Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner, Paula Schena and the following list of interested parties: Joan Neary, Mac McIntire (Reading Advocate), Joe D'Alessio, Dan and Joan Cotter, Kate Thibeault, William Griset Jr., Michael Slezak, Dennis Collins, David Tuttle, Linda Phillips, Caryn Hayes, John Sasso, Jean Pierre, David Zeek, Debbie McCulley, Michelle Hopkinson, Bill Brown, Nick Safina, Angela Binda, Heidi Bonnabeau, Christine Brungardt, Mary Ellen O'Neill, Lorraine McCarthy, Jack Russell, J. A. Roy, Frederick and Joan Doherty, Thomas Loughlin, Al Garbarino, Russ Graham, Jay Lenox, Attorney Arthur Krieger, Theresa Petrillo, Marie Hickey, Rosemarie Hrubi, Lois Halligan, Fire Fighter Paul Damocogno. Reports and Comments Selectmen's Liaison Reports and Comments — Selectman Camille Anthony noted that the I -93/95 Subcommittee met to review plans. There will be a public meeting at Coolidge Middle School on October 25, 2006 to review plans and for questions and answers. Selectman Stephen Goldy noted that the Fire Department's Open House is October 14, 2006. The Friends of Reading Recreation had the Town Forest Road Race and it was.a big success. Vice Chainnan James Bonazoli noted that the Nurse Advocacy Task Force met and is looking at financial aspects. He and Selectman Camille Anthony met at Jordan's regarding the lighting. He indicated that it looks like the shields are in place. ,There seems to be some confusion over the facade lighting and what needs to be done, and there is also an issue of the hours that the lights are shut off. Chairman Ben Tafoya noted that the Library received two grants, and he congratulated the staff on their hard work. Public Comment — Michelle Hopkinson of 21 Sherwood Road handed a list of endorsers for Reading C.A.R.E. Jay Lenox of 10 Sylvan Road noted that Reading C.A.R.E. has doubled. A shopping mall is not the right proposal for the property, and he asked that the Board of Selectmen vote unanimously to reject the developer's request. Board of Selectmen Meeting — September 26, 2006 — Page 2 Attorney Arthur Krieger noted that he represents certain neighbors on South and Curtis Streets. He also noted that this project will have an impact on people's daily lives, and this development will by hugely detrimental to the community. Town Manager Report The Town Manager gave the following report: • Housing Forum — September 28th • Financial Forum is October 18th • Memorial Park planning. • Memorial Park cy pres. • Manholes on Lowell Street and Haverhill Street are being repaired. • Hunting season. • LED lighting for holiday lights. • School kids from Archstone — Four elementary, two middle school, one High School — total of seven students in the first 112 housing units for which occupancy has been approved. At that rate, the total number of school aged children in the development would be 13, compared to the projection of 20. • Board of Selectmen's "Walls and Talk" in the Birch Meadow Area — Notes will be in the next packet. The Board of Selectmen has been asked to do another "Board Walk" in the South Street neighborhood. Do you want to do it? When — October 22nd has been mentioned. • Road Construction: Edgemont Avenue and Arcadia Avenue road overlay are done. • Eagle Scout candidate Mike Iapicca did a collection of materials for the Mission of Deeds as his Eagle Scout project on September 16th. • The 2006 public flu clinics are set up for the following dates: Wednesday, November 8, 2006 Killam Elementary School 2:00 p.m. - 4:00 p.m. For Reading residents 65 and older Tuesday, November 14, 2006 Coolidge Middle School 5:00 p.m. — 7:00 p.m. For adult Reading residents Thursday, November 16, 2006 Parker Middle School 5:00 p.m. — 7:00 p.m. For adult Reading residents Personnel and Appointments Badge Pinning — Fire Fighter Paul DamocoQno — Chief Greg Burns and Fire Fighter Paul Damocogno were present. Chief Burns reviewed Fire Fighter Damocogno's background and pinned on his badge. Board of Selectmen Meeting — September 26, 2006 — Page 3 Discussion /Action Items Close Warrant for Subsequent Town Meeting — The Town Manager reviewed the Warrant for the Subsequent Town Meeting. He noted that Article 6 is to establish a public health clinic revolving fund because we take money in and pay money out so we need an account. Article 7 is to authorize the School Department to enter into a contract with a bank at the Reading Memorial High School. Article 9 is to move the Financial Assurance Mechanism monies into the Sale of Real Estate Fund. Article 10 is for additional money for the High School project. Article 11 is on the Warrant as a courtesy to provide funding for handicap access to the Wood End School Playground. Article 12 is for the release of easement for Joseph Way. Article 14 is regarding the property on Oakland Road. The School Committee voted to release any care, custody or control of the property. The plan is to put the property up for sale. Article 14 is to accept the Mullin's decision that would allow members of Boards and Committees to view a video of a meeting they missed and still be allowed to vote. Article 15 is a bylaw regarding construction hours and noise. It is the same bylaw that was presented previously because it addressed all of the issues that were raised. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that the definition of construction was not clear. Vice Chairman James Bonazoli noted that this bylaw is too limiting to a homeowner. Selectman Stephen Goldy noted that Town Meeting was not comfortable with this before and it has not changed. He suggested taking it off the Warrant and bringing it back in the Spring. Chairman Ben Tafoya noted that people are entitled to quiet enjoyment on the weekends. The consensus was that Selectman Stephen Goldy and Vice Chairman James Bonazoli will work on this bylaw. Article 16 is the Sight Triangle Bylaw. Vice Chairman James Bonazoli asked how many residents will be affected, and the Town Manager noted that a lot will be affected. There are issues of shrubs, hedges, parking of cars — it's a public safety issue. Selectman Camille Anthony suggested that the Board look at situations during their site walk on October 21, 2006. Selectman Stephen Goldy suggested rethinking the issue of shade trees. A motion by Goldy seconded by Bonazoli to close the Warrant consisting of 16 Articles for the Subsequent Town Meeting to be held on November 13, 2006 at the Reading Memorial High School Auditorium, 62 Oakland Road, Reading, Massachusetts was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. 5 d Board of Selectmen Meeting — September 26, 2006 — Page 4 Decision on Addison - Wesley Proposal — Chairman Ben Tafoya noted that the Board received additional information from the proponent. Selectman Stephen Goldy noted that the Addison - Wesley Working Group gave a final report, and are now asking to do a feasibility study. He suggested having the developer come in next week and see what they offer. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that tonight's packet had information on the Town's Master Plan. Mixed use is a cornerstone. The developer stated this was not viable unless 320,000 square feet. There is also an issue with storm water. Detention basins will be needed and a whole host of other issues. She also noted that the working group recommends a traffic study, and that would have to be from Ash Street to Stoneham because all of Main Street will be impacted. Vice Chairman James Bonazoli noted that the working group discussed having a traffic study done that included the Route 128 ramps. He also noted that the 600,000 square foot office and hotel that had a large amount of impervious surface was approved by Town Meeting. He noted that the water cost increase is going to be enormous, and the Town needs the income from this development. He also noted that the plan was not perfect, and it was unfortunate that the developer was not present with a plan for them to look at. Selectman Richard Schubert noted that the working group has gone as far as they can go. He also noted that this project will not allow the Town to make tax cuts. The character of the Town relative to size and impact will be negative, and people are waiting for a decision and do not want to prolong it any longer. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that she was not interested in hearing the same story again from the developer. Selectman Stephen Goldy indicated that he wanted the developer to come back and tell the Board what they can do and what they can't do. Chairman Ben Tafoya noted that the development of Addison - Wesley is important to the community and it has to be the right project. He also noted that there is no consensus among the Board, and the Board needs to decide tonight that they are not in favor of the current proposal and tell them what we will accept. The Master Plan was trying to discourage retail growth. He noted that the Board has communicated with the developer during a very long process and the proposal has not changed. He suggests working with Pearson to find the right partner. Vice Chairman James Bonazoli noted that he doesn't agree that the project is too large. He indicated that his vision is different and the details need to be worked out with the developer. He indicated that this should go before Town Meeting and the Selectmen should support it. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that she doesn't have the energy to keep going through the same issues. The developer can go to Town Meeting. She doesn't approve of the proposal and noted that retail is totally different from office/hotel. s Board of Selectmen Meeting — September 26, 2006 — Page 5 A motion by Schubert seconded by Goldy that the Board of Selectmen support the current proposal that W/S has for the Addison - Wesley site as of 9/22/06 failed by a vote of 1 -4 -0, with Tafoya, Goldy, Anthony and Schubert voting against proposal. Selectman Stephen Goldy noted that it is important to bring this current proposal to closure but he still wants to talk and give them a vision. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that this is one of the largest pieces of property in Town and CPDC was not part of the process. Lifestyle Centers in California have a Main Street as a village and they usually don't have big box stores. The Town Manager recommended a design charette that would include a design visioning for the community, and invite the community to talk about what they want on the site. This would help have sustainable development and smart growth on that site. Review Status of Imagination Station — The Town Manager noted that the Board of Health ordered Imagination Station closed for several issues. Recreation Administrator John Feudo and the Recreation Committee went out to the site, and the Recreation Committee is recommending demolishing and building a new one on the site. Leathers & Associates did the design of the original playground. The Board can do one of three things - Leave it as it is, demolish and do nothing, or demolish and rebuild. John Feudo noted that he had correspondence with Leathers & Associates regarding a retrofit. He went to Belmont last year and looked at a retrofit. There were issues with matching of materials. He recommends using plastic and metal for materials. He also noted that density of the playground has been a problem because the parent is on one side and the kids are on the other. Selectman Stephen Goldy noted that he spoke with Leathers & Associates, and they indicated that the cost to retrofit is the same as replacing it. There are also plaques, art work and towers there that are special. The Town Manager noted that when he develops the capital plan for next year, he will include money for Imagination Station. If we use metal and plastic, we can do the work in phases. He also noted that it should be a boundless playground; i.e., handicap accessible. We would also utilize the art work, plaques, signs, etc. A parent mentioned to him that the parents should be in the middle of the playground with shade and the rest of the playground around it. The Town Manager suggested putting a skateboard park in the parking lot. Vice Chairman James Bonazoli asked for the estimate cost of demolition. John Feudo noted that DPW will demolish it, and it will cost $3,000 - $5,000 to have the material removed. Selectman Richard Schubert asked why the cost of replacing the playground is so expensive. John Feudo noted that it was due to the infrastructure. Selectman Stephen Goldy noted that also includes the cost of design, tools, etc. SAS Board of Selectmen Meeting= September 26, 2006 — Page 6 The Town Manager noted that it would be best to go with a rubberized surface because it lasts longer and lower maintenance. He also noted that Imagination Station is made of wood and more labor intensive. He would also like to stay with the same manufacturer. Vice Chairman James Bonazoli asked about the timing of the project because he doesn't want it to become a parking lot. The Town Manager noted that the demolition will begin almost immediately, and they will look at the first phase of construction next July. Chairman Ben Tafoya noted that he spoke with residents who worked on Imagination Station. He would like to see a plan for what parts and pieces will be saved. He would also like to see something there as soon as possible. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that the Town needs a new fire truck, and she's not sure if there's room in the Capital Plan for Imagination Station. The Town Manager noted that the fire truck is scheduled for 2008 and this could be phased in if need be. Selectman Anthony suggested doing a master plan for that whole area this Winter. Debbie McCulley, former General Coordinator of Imagination Station, noted that she is disappointed to hear that the Selectmen want to demolish Imagination Station. She was told only the surface material needs to be replaced, and that originally there was money for maintenance. She suggested that the Town make an attempt to do what needs to be done such as sanding and sealing. If the play area is too dense, then take out a few pieces and put in benches. She also suggested having Leathers & Associates do an analysis for $1500. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that she is not comfortable with the whole financial aspect. She also noted that the Town does not have to provide the salve thing at every location, and she doesn't want to put it in the Capital Plan if we have to take something out. The Assistant Town Manager noted that the Finance Committee is developing a capital policy with a minimum amount. We need to plan for playgrounds and we need to think about the priorities of the community. A motion by Schubert seconded by Anthony to have an analysis of Imagination Station done for $1500 was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. Review Goals Status — The Town Manager noted that there are 15 top priority goals. We are doing a lot of work in finance and technology, replacement of the website, replacement of the financial forum, inventory training, and also development of an internal feedback mechanism for the public to provide systematic comment on the conduct of the Town's volunteer government. This should also include ethics training and best practices in agendas and meetings. The hour being late, Chairman Ben Tafoya recommended rescheduling the Goals and Action Status Report for October 10, 2006. say Board of Selectmen Meeting — September 26, 2006 — Page 7 Approval of Minutes A motion by Anthony seconded by Bonazoli to approve the Minutes of September 5, 2006 was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. A motion by Schubert seconded by Anthony to adiourn the meeting of September 26, 2006 at 10:45 p.m. was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. Respectfully submitted, Secretary s �o Board of Selectmen Meeting October 3, 2006 For ease of archiving, the order that items appear in these Minutes reflects the order in which the items appeared on the agenda for that meeting, and are not necessarily the order in which any item was taken up by the Board. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts. Present were Chairman Ben Tafoya, Vice Chairman James Bonazoli, Secretary Stephen Goldy, Police Chief Jim Cormier, Town Counsel Ellen Doucette, Public Works Director Ted McIntire, Town Engineer George Zambouras, Town Manager Peter Hechelibleikner, Assistant Town Manager/Finance Director Bob LeLacheur, Paula Schena and the following list of interested parties: Bill Brown, Paul Guazzaloca, Jay Lenox, Carmen and Anthony Cavallo, Attorney Joshua Latham, Attorney Brad Latham, Attorney Chris Coleman, George Katsoufis, Bill Connors, Kevin Furilla, Kim Honetschlager, Arvind and Anju Patel, Police Officers Christine Agnone, Kristen Stasiak and Corey Santasky, Elaine Webb, Kathy Greenfield. Reports and Comments Selectmen's Liaison Re-ports and Comments — Selectman Richard Schubert noted that he attended the Housing Forum, and indicated that it is important to promote and advertise meetings regarding 40S regulations. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that "Your Connnunity Connection" is in the mail this week and includes a Holiday Guide. She also noted that the crosswalk over Palmer Hill needs a sign. When people are driving from Wilmington, they are almost on top of the crosswalk before seeing the school zone sign. Selectman Stephen Goldy reminded folks that the Fire Department's Open House is October 14, 2006. He has received a number of e-mails regarding the Selectmen's vote on Addison-Wesley, and he lobbies again to sit down with the developer. Selectman Richard Schubert noted that the opportunity is still there - it's up to the developer now. Chairman Ben Tafoya noted that if we have the developer in, then -the Board of Selectmen should know what they want and offer an alternative. Chainnan Ben Tafoya noted that the Selectmen received an e-mail that stated the Selectmen had discussion and reacted in 45 minutes. He indicated that he personally participated in 23 meetings and, in addition, there were two CPDC meetings and neighborhood meetings, and they were always open and willing to listen. Selectman Richard Schubert noted that the design charette is an opportunity to come up with an alternative. Vice Chainnan James Bonazoli noted that he looked into what it takes to do a charette, and the Board has already had a tremendous amount of public input. It doesn't make sense to spend money on a charette. He would like to bring the developer back to discuss alternative plans. S-k]' Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 3, 2006 — Page 2 Selectman Richard Schubert noted that the size of the development is the key issue. The developer refused to go below 320,000 square feet because it is not economically viable. The developer is not willing to negotiate so we would not be working with the same developer. The Board decided to put this on the October 17, 2006 agenda for further discussion. Town Manager's Report The Town Manager gave the following report: • The Town Manager noted that Simms' Jewelers celebrated their 50ti' Anniversary in the same location. • John Feudo sent him an e-mail regarding Leathers & Associates who will be doing the assessment of Imagination Station on November 4th. • The Town Manager reviewed the schedule for the flu clinics. The Comeast Care Days is October 7, 2006. ® Julie Thurlow has been promoted to President of the Reading Co -Op Bank. Proclamations /Certificates of Appreciation Proclamation — Tootsie Roll Drive — Paul Guazzaloca, from the I"'iights of Columbus was present to receive the Proclamation. A motion by Goldy seconded by Schubert to proclaim October 5 -8, 2006 as Knights of Columbus Weekend for the Physically and Mentally Challenged Children was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. Discussion /Action Items Highlights — Technology — Bill Connors, Kevin Furilla and Kiln Honetschlager were present. Bill Connors noted that the Technology Division supplies the computer network, network design, telephone system, e -mail, hardware and software support and training, and software support for the school system. Projects that they are working on include the Wide Area Network (WAN), centralized telephone and data systems, centralized access and standardized communication. The Town Manager noted that the WAN includes connecting all of the municipal buildings including the schools, and we will be asking for money at Town Meeting. Mr. Connors noted that we have a 20 year old financial system, and they are looking at replacing the financial software. They are also going to develop a new website and looking at a complaint tracking form, pen-nit tracking, on -line bill payments, and on -line program scheduling. He also noted that they will be asking for money at Town Meeting for the new web page. Mr. Connors noted that they are also looking at document storage and retrieval, and Ms. Honetschlager is working with the RMLD's GIS person. Ms. Honetschlager noted that the last fly over was in 1998. She maintains the existing GIS layers and is developing new layers. She makes maps including thematic maps and spatial analysis. She updates the zoning maps, and the water and sewer GIS layers are being finalized. She also noted that the RMLD might be interested in hosting an interactive mapping on the website. 5"p. Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 3, 2006 — Page 3 School Committee Member Elaine Webb noted that it is important to have accurate information, and the Town needs a good municipal program for the financial forums. The Town Manager noted that we will be asking for funding at the Annual Town Meeting. Swear in new Police Officers — Police Chief James Cormier introduced the three new Police Officers: Christine Agnone, Kristen Stasiak and Corey Santasky, and family members pinned on their badges. Hearing — Change of Location and Change of Manager — North Side Liquors — The Secretary read the hearing notice. Attorney Chris Coleman was present representing the applicant Arvind Patel. The Town Manager noted that North Side Liquors was burned out of their former location, and they have been working diligently to relocate. They are applying for a change of location and a change of manager. Attorney Coleman noted that they are moving to 150 Main Street. It has 92.5 square feet of space. The correct plan that is part of the application is the plan with the cooler on the right side. They will have the same employees. Anju Patel spends the most time there, so she will become the Manager. The Town Manager noted that CPDC has made some requirements. Selectman Camille Anthony asked it they will be in operation by December 31, 2006. Mr. Patel indicated that he hopes to be in by November. Attorney Coleman noted that they have to wait for the ABCC approval and for the landlord to do the curb cut, etc. A motion by Goldy seconded by Bonazoli to close the hearing on the change of location and change of manager for North Side Liquors was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. A motion by Goldy seconded by Anthony to approve the change of location of the Package Store License of North Side Liquors to 150 Main Street, and the Board approved the change of manager to Anju Patel, subject to the following conditions: • Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and on an ongoing basis, the applicant shall conform with all bylaws, rules and regulations of the Town of Reading, including but not limited to the sign portions of the Zoning By- Laws, and compliance with the site plan waiver requirement of CPDC ; • All permits must be applied for and received; • The business must begin operation at this site no later than 12 -31 -06 was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. Review Local Authority to Approve Traffic Regulations — The Town Manager noted that there have been concerns that some of the traffic regulations the Selectmen are putting in place are not legal. 6,13- Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 3, 2006 — Page 4 Town Counsel Ellen Callahan Doucette was present. She noted that the Board of Selectmen can erect stop signs and yellow parking zones without State approval if they conform with the State Manual. The Uniform Traffic Control Device gives guidance and standards. Guidance provides discretion and the standard tells you what you cannot do. Guidance is not mandatory. The Town Manager noted that means the Selectmen cannot change the color or shape of a stop sign. Where they place the stop sign, there are guidelines that should be followed unless there is a good reason not to follow. Police Chief James Connier noted that staff has to get the information to help the Board of Selectmen snake their decision. A lot of tunes the traffic study does not support a stop sign. The Board of Selectmen has the ability to vary but they need something more concrete to vary. The Parking, Traffic and Transportation Task Force does a lot of research, and comes back to the Board of Selectmen with recommendations. He suggests having staff develop guidelines so that decisions are not made on emotions. There needs to be standards in place and if the Selectmen are not going to use the State guidelines, then they should create their own. Town Counsel noted that the Town cannot deviate too much. The State can revoke any regulation that the Selectmen implement that doesn't meet regulations. The Town could also lose Chapter 90 funds. Chief Cormier noted that if the Town Engineer used engineering concepts, then he could justify deviation. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that all the stop signs they have put up are a traffic calming measure. She feels that the guidelines are wrong for the Town of Reading. She also feels that it doesn't snake sense to wait until there are crashes before putting up a stop sign. Public Works Director Ted McIntire noted that an engineering study can include geometry, hills, angles, etc. He also noted that the PTTTF uses the State guidelines. Staff feels that it is a waste of their time to review because once the request comes to them, they know the decision is already made. Vice Chairman James Bonazoli noted that he realizes we can't have the police on every street but traffic calming measures need to be iimple.mented. If staff can't recommend a stop sign, then give him an alternative. Town Counsel noted that if the Board of Selectmen votes to put up a stop sign, then it is legal and no resident should detenmine otherwise. Chief Cormier noted that the Police will enforce all stop signs and if someone wants to challenge it, then they can take it to Woburn Court. Selectmen Camille Anthony and Richard Schubert will work on developing guidelines. ��u Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 3, 2006 — Page 5 Hearing — Amendment to the Venetian Moon Liquor License — The Secretary read the hearing notice. The Town Manager noted that Attorney Joshua Latham and Venetian Moon owners Carmen and Anthony Cavallo were present. Attorney Latham noted that the Venetian Moon serves over 1000 customers per week. There is a two hour wait for tables on the weekends. Approximately 60% of the customers are out -of- towners. They are proposing a massive expansion to 4,000 square feet. They propose 125 seats in the basement with a bar, accessory live music and a function room. They will be moving the main entrance. For security, they will have alanns, video scanning, and the liquor will be behind the bar or in a locked room. The employees attend serve safe classes, and the restaurant has insurance. The Fire Department is requiring him to install a vertical lift. The building will have sprinklers. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that the Board of Health has requirements, and they need to be adhered to before the Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Elaine Webb asked the owners of the Venetian Moon to be a partner in the Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse. A motion by Anthony seconded by Bonazoli to close the hearing on amending the Venetian Moon Liquor License was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. A motion by Schubert seconded by Anthony to approve the plan for alterations to the Venetian Moon Restaurant for an all alcoholic liquor license at 680 Main Street in accordance with the plans dated 9 -5 -06 by Trimark United East, subiect to the following conditions • Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and on an ongoing basis, the applicant shall conform with all bylaws, rules and regulations of the Town of Reading, including but not limited to the sign portions of the Zoning By- Laws, and compliance with the site plan waiver requirement of CPDC; • All permits must be applied for and received, including any variances to the State building or handicapped access codes; • Construction of improvements must begin no later than 45 days from the date of issuance of the license, and the business must begin operation in its new configuration not later than 120 days therefrom; • Applicant will install, maintain and continue to operate the security systems as represented at the hearing was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. Entertaiiunent License — Venetian Moon — The Town Manager noted that the owners of the Venetian Moon have applied for a live entertainment license. The box area on the plan is where the band will be. The live music will only be in the basement during certain hours. It will be accessory to dining and there will be no adult entertairunent. cJ. Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 3, 2006 — Page 6 Attorney Latham noted that the background music will be light jazz, piano environment. Sound proofing is being installed, and the music will not be loud. Selectman Richard Schubert asked what the process is if there is an issue with sound. The Town Manager noted that the police should be called to take action, and they would notify him the next day. The Selectmen can revolve the license if need be. Vice Chairman James Bonazoli noted that he is concerned that the tables will be taken out of the basement and it will become a bar room. The Town Manager noted that there is a restriction of 15% for seating at the bar. Selectman Stephen Goldy asked if any other establishments have a live entertainment license. The Town Manager noted that Savory Tastes Cafe has live entertainment two days per week, and Bear Rock Cafe has live entertainment on Friday nights. Elaine Webb, representing the Old South Church, asked that the live entertainment not interfere with religious activities on Sundays. Attorney Latham indicated that will not be a problem. A motion by Schubert seconded by Anthony that the Board of Selectmen approve the live entertainment license for Venetian Moon at 680 Main Street expiring 12- 31 -06, subject to the following conditions: • Live music will be allowed only in the basement area as designated on the plan dated 9 -5 -06 by Trimark United East, filed with the Board of Selectmen; • Live music will be allowed only between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 11:30 p.m. on Mondays through Fridays, and 1:00 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays; • Live music shall be accessory to dining and will be allowed only while food is served; • There shall be no adult entertainment; • There shall be no dancing by patrons or entertainers; • No tickets may be sold, nor other charge made for admittance to the live musical entertainment; • The license holder will ensure minimization of sound and noise from the live music, including keeping exterior doors closed; • The live music shall not be audible from any residential premises, or audible from and nearby church facility or interfere with worship activities; • The license holder will at all times abide by the rules and regulations issued by the Town of Reading applicable to entertainment licenses was approved by a vote of 4 -1 -0, with Goldy opposed. Establish Ad Hoc Community Preservation Act Study Committee — The Town Manager noted that CPDC is requesting that the Board establish a Community Preservation Act Committee. Chairman Ben Tafoya suggested making the tern expire June 30, 2007. 5,.kb Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 3, 2006 — Page 7 Selectman Camille Anthony suggested taking out the Board of Selectmen selecting the Chairman. She also suggested an interim report to the Board of Selectmen by early January 2007. A motion by Anthony seconded by Goldy to approve the policy establishing an Ad Hoc Community Preservation Act Study Committee was approved by a vote of 5 -0 -0. Review 1281I -93 Position — The Town Manager noted that Mass Highway is holding a public hearing on October 25, 2006 at the Coolidge Middle School. Selectmen Camille Anthony and Richard Schubert will speak for the Selectmen at this hearing. Selectman Richard Schubert reviewed the plans. He noted that plan H3 -C has an option to consider relocating the Washington Street ramp in Woburn. Most of the changes are within the existing right of way. Two loop ramps will be eliminated, and a fourth lane will be added on Route 128 both ways. The concept of how this is constructed is important. Town Engineer George Zambouras noted that the State does not have to do all of, the work at once - they can phase it in. When construction is being done, we will lose one lane on Route 128 and that will add to local traffic. The Town could request closed loop signals. Chairman Ben Tafoya asked how much closer this will come to the community. Selectman Richard Schubert noted that in the South Street area, it is not closer but the elevation is higher. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that when capacity is being added, it's easier to get noise barriers. Mr. Zambouras note that we will get better ones — Class A. George Katsoufis noted that this is a plan to address a critical hot spot. He also noted that transit solutions are not the expertise of Mass Highway. There are no takings with this plan, and there will be a significant improvement to our local streets. There are also non - highway recommendations are well. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that her concern with plan H2 is that the south loop is too high. The Assistant Town Manager asked how far away they will study the traffic flow. Mr. Katsoufis indicated West Street, Main Street up to Summer, Route 129 for a couple of'blocks, and Walkers Brook Drive up to John Street. The Town Manager noted that Washington Street needs to be added. This will be added to the October 17, 2006 agenda. Approval of Agreement with Reading Housing Authority re: 75 Pleasant Street — The Town Manager noted that this agreement implements the site plan that was previously approved. The Town will provide the labor for the parking lot. ,�,p Board of Selectmen Meetina — October 3. 2006 — Pa2e 8 Attorney Brad Latham noted that in order to get DHCD approval, the Reading Housing Authority has to prove that they have site control. A motion by Goldy seconded by Anthony to approve the agreement between the Town of Reading and the Reading Housing Authority re: 75 Pleasant Street was approved by a vote of 5-0-0. _Approval of Historical Preservation Restrictions — 420 Franklin Street — The Town Manager noted that there are historic preservation restrictions on 420 Franklin Street. Kathy Greenfield, Chairman of the Historical Commission, noted that this half house at 420 Franklin Street is the most historical house in Reading. They reached an agreement with the developer who will subdivide the property and build a new home, behind it. The Town Manager asked what is the Town committing to do. Ms. Greenfield noted that the developer is granting the preservation restriction. The house cannot be moved, demolished, etc. Any changes to the house needs approval of the Historical Commission. She also noted that there was one change on Page 4d. The grantor wanted to add the other half of the house but the Mass. Historical Cominission would not agree. There are very few half houses in existence. A motion by Anthony seconded by Bonazoli to approve the preservation restriction agreement between the PRZ Properties, Inc. and the Town of Readinlz regarding the property located at 420 Franklin Street was approved by a vote of 5-0-0. Approval of Minutes A motion by Anthony seconded by Goldy to approve the Minutes of September 12, 2006 was approved by a vote of 5-0-0. A motion by Goldy seconded by Anthony to approve the Minutes of September 16, 2006 was approved by a vote of 4-0-1, with Bonazoli abstaining. A motion by Goldy seconded by Anthony to approve the Minutes of September 28, 2006 was approved by a vote of 4-0-1, with Bonazoli abstaining. A motion by Anthony seconded by Schubert to adjourn the meeting: of October 3, 2006 at 11:00 D.M. was approved by a vote of 5-0-0. Respectfully submitted, Secretary Board of Selectmen Meeting October 10, 2006 For ease of archiving, the order that items appear in these Minutes reflects the order in which the items appeared on the agenda for that meeting, and are not necessarily the order in which any item was taken up by the Board. The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Selectmen's Meeting Room, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts. Present were Chairman Ben Tafoya, Secretary Stephen Goldy, Selectmen Camille Anthony and Richard Schubert (arrived at 7:45 p.m.), Assistant Town Manager /Finance Director Bob LeLacheur, Town Manager Peter Hechenbleikner, Paula Schena, and the following list of interested parties: Joe and Natalie Westerman, Harry and Marilyn Simmons, Clark McCormick, Dennis Collins, Joe Angeloni, Richard Marshalsea, Peter Lattanzi, Mary Graham, Nell Cohen, Al Garbarino, Bob Murphy, Michael and Nina Einelianoff, Andrew Nastri, Bernard and Maria Donohue, Joan Benevides, Rosemarie Hrubi, Kathy Zimbone, Paul. Millette, Angela Binda, Joe Ferraro, John Pack, Priscilla Squires, Lori Halligan, Joan Neary, Mike Lyons, Mary Ellen O'Neill, Michelle Hopkinson, Nick Safina, Joe D'Alessio, Charlie Russo, Lois Pike, Camille McCormick, Andre and Mike Caggiano, Colleen O' Shaughnessy, Joan and Dan Cotter, Rosemarie DeBenedetto, Judy Brolak, Stacey McKenna, Margaret Cahill, Krissandra Holmes, Cynthia.Green, Dan Busa, Robyn Mather. Reports and Comments Selectmen's Liaison Reports and Comments — Selectman Camille Anthony noted that there will be a public meeting with Mass Highway on October 25, 2006 at the Coolidge Middle School regarding the Route 128 /I -93 Interchange project. She also noted that Bill Webster sent an e- mail with some concerns and asked the Board to take a look at them. Selectman Stephen Goldy noted that the Street Hockey Tournament that the Friends of Reading Recreation sponsored went well. He also noted that the Fire Department's Open House is Sunday from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Public Comment — Joe Ferraro of 109 Avalon Road noted that the Board of Selectmen voted against the Addison - Wesley, project on September 26, 2006. He agrees with that vote and doesn't understand why the Board would discuss reconsidering the proposal. He feels that the vote of disapproval should stand. He also noted that the Working Group sent the document to the developer. W/S Weiner was fully aware of the Working Group's recommendations and they put forward their best project. Paul Millett of 25 Fairview Avenue noted that he is a Civil Engineer. He has read the traffic reports and supplemental reports. The Selectmen concerns regarding traffic, drainage, etc. are very practical. He also noted that there will be storm water issues when they put buildings and pavement on the majority of 24 acres. He noted that many citizens are willing to work to design a charette. There are many professional residents in Reading. "r-C/ Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 10, 2006 — Page 2 Joe Angeloni of 18 Beech Street noted that he works in Burlington next to Wayside Commons. The Commons has four entrances and the traffic is still a nightmare. Dennis Collins of 12 Beech Street noted that the new Shaw's in Wakefield slowed traffic down. He has friends who work at Wayside Commons, and they have stated that the traffic is awful and there are only three stores open. Chairman Ben Tafoya noted that there was an e -mail from Karen Hayes representing Reading RRED in tonight's packet. Town Manager's Report The Town Manager gave the following report: The Town Manager noted that there is an e -mail that Dickinson did install the shields. Tom Lemons has indicated that accomplishes what we wanted so a letter has been sent to Dickinson. Representative Tierney's Office contacted him regarding the Change a Light /Change the World Program. He has referred there to the Cities for Climate Protection Committee. The Town Manager noted that the Town needs donors to purchase LED Christmas lights for the Common. It will cost $500.00 for two boxes to cover two trees. This is a pilot program to help reduce energy costs. Personnel and Appointments Board of Registrars — The Board interviewed Krissandra Holmes for one position on the Board of Registrars. Anthony moved and Goldy seconded to place the following name into nomination for one position on the Board of Registrars with a term expiring June 30, 2007: Krissandra Holmes. Ms. Holmes received three votes and was appointed. Northern Area Greenway Committee — The Town Manager noted that the committee met last week. Selectman Camille Anthony reminded the Town Manager that there is supposed to be a subcommittee to look at funding. Goldy moved and Anthony seconded to place the following names into nomination for two positions on the Northern Area Greenway Committee with terms expiring June 30, 2007: Joan Hoyt (Town Forest Rep.) and Francis Driscoll (Recreation Rep.). Both applicants received three votes and were appointed. Discussion/Action Items Public Comment — Liquor Package Store Licensees re: Question 1 — Cynthia Green, spokesperson for the off - premise alcohol retailers, noted that she is educating the public on Question 1 on the November ballot. She also noted that Question 1 is sponsored by the Food Association for grocery stores and convenient stores. The wording of Question 1 is very vague. The number of licenses depends on population. Reading would be eligible for nine licenses. She noted that Reading will never have nine grocery stores so the licenses will go to convenient stores in the same area where licenses already exist. "r-c Z- Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 10, 2006 — Page 3 Selectman Richard Schubert arrived at 7:45 p.m. Ms. Green noted that she spoke with Police Chief Jim Cormier, and he indicated that he will need additional police power to enforce. If a package store sells to a minor, then they have to close. If a convenient store sells to a minor, they don't have to close their store, they just can't sell wine. She also noted that alcohol needs to be controlled and convenience should not be an issue. Selectman Camille Anthony asked if this passes, do the Selectmen have to issue. The Town Manager noted that it is discretionary to the Town. The Selectmen cannot discriminate or act arbitrarily. Any licensee can only have three licenses. If the Selectmen deny, it will probably be appealed. Dan Busa, owner of Busa's Liquors, noted that he spoke with the League of Women Voters who is a spokesperson for the Food Association. She indicated that there will be no appeal. It's up to the local authority. The ABCC usually does not act upon this type of issue. There are 2200 licenses for package stores in Massachusetts, and they are owned by 1800 people. Any one entity can only own three licenses. Robyn Mather, owner of The Wine Shop, noted that the Wine Shop is unique and has a connection with the community. Customers don't want alcohol to be sold everywhere their children go. A lot of 16 year olds work in stores and she's sure the parents don't want them working with alcohol. Selectman Stephen Goldy noted that this would change the character of Reading. A motion by Goldy seconded by Schubert to recommend rejection of the Massachusetts Food Association for consumer convenience in wine sales, Question I on the November ballot, was approved by a vote of 4-0-0. Selectman Camille Anthony noted that the Selectmen need to take a stand with the substance abuse initiative in Reading. Chairman Ben Tafoya noted that the Selectmen have been very clear where they stand with convenient stores and liquor licenses. Close the Warrant for the State Election — The Town Manager noted that the Election will be held at 55 Walkers Brook Drive. The set up will be a little different to help with cueing. It is better to have all voting at one location. A motion by Goldy seconded by Anthony to close the Warrant for the State Election to take place on November 7, 2006 from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. at 55 Walkers Brook Drive was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. �c3 Board of Selectmen Meeting — October 10, 2006 — Page 4 Preview and Recommend Articles at Subsequent Town Meeting — The Town Manager reviewed the Articles on the Warrant. He suggested requiring reports to be written as part of the Warrant and then a brief summary at Town Meeting. The Town Manager noted that Article 3 is to amend the Capital Improvements Plan. The Finance Committee has a policy to keep 5% in the reserve fund. There is $1,075,000 more in reserves than expected. He suggests using $700,000 for additional capital. The Assistant Town Manager noted that the Finance Committee has looked at debt capital models but hasn't decided what amount yet. As debt declines, the reserves increase. The Finance Committee wants to come up with a number that will be respected and used. The Town Manager noted that type of plan will allow us to maintain our buildings so they don't have to be replaced sooner than needed. The Assistant Town Manager reviewed the Fall capital. He noted that the Finance Committee wants to know what is catch up capital and what is regular capital. Selectman Stephen Goldy asked how long artificial turf lasts, and the Town Manager noted that it is longer than 10 years. The Town Manager noted that for the Downtown project, the State will not pay for extras from Haven Street to Washington Street. He had proposed having the RMLD do all of the lights but that was too creative for Mass Highway and they won't accept that. He suggests a debt authorization for $525,000. The Assistant Town Manager reviewed Article 4 regarding amending the FY 2007 Budget. He noted that the Town Clerk staff has moved from the Community Services Budget to the Finance Budget. There will be an increase in hours in the Town Clerk's Office by making the Assistant Town Clerk full time. The Town needs to hire a consultant for the Pay and Class Study at $20,000. Money is needed for shade trees and veterans' flowers. There is extra interest to be paid on the borrowing for Barrows. The audit has not been done yet but the interest is reimbursable from MSBA. There is also the cost of going with the MWRA. The Town Manager noted that the Selectmen will vote on the Warrant Articles on October 24th. Action Status Re-port — Gazebo Circle — The Town Manager noted that the Town is out to bid with George Zambouras' plan. Anything coming out of the detention basin and Gazebo Circle will be taken care of. Jordan's Furniture — The consultant has signed off and we should be getting the report from the code consultant. Imagination Station — The Leathers & Associates consultant is coming on November 4, 2006. Timothy Place — We are going to court this month. S� q Board of Selectmen Meeting — October '10, 2006 — Page 5 Selectman Camille Anthony requested a timeline on MWRA buy -in with a list of milestones. The Petroleum Bylaw is being drafted by Town Counsel and will come back to staff for their review. The drainage on Haverhill Street will be done this Fall. Goals Review — The Town Manager reviewed the 15 highest priorities. 1. He will be requesting $20,000 for consulting in purchasing the financial and_ computer platform; 2. The Capital Improvements Plan involving stakeholders using new software; 3. Develop a building maintenance plan; 4. Employee training on technology including the webpage; 5 Emergency preparedness for key employees - will also do elected official training; 6. Internal Communications — Department Head Retreat will include schools and RMLD — civility in the community and sustainability; 7. Employee information on web page; 8. Educate Boards, Committees and Commissions on ethics, best practices, agendas and meetings; 9. Feedback mechanism on Boards, Committees and Commissions; 10. Calendars that interconnect members of Boards, Committees and .Commissions with staff; 11. Revised budgeting system; 12. Affordable Housing Plan; 13. Evaluation of the Reading Public Library; 14. Identify consultants for the DPW Management Study; 15. The Reading Coalition Against Substance Abuse. The Assistant Town Manager noted that these goals will be helpful in budgeting. On motion by Schubert seconded by Goldy, the Board of Selectmen voted to adjourn the meeting of October 10, 2006 at 10:55 p.m. by a vote of 4 -0 -0. Respectfully submitted, Secretary SAS OF R�gOf� �O�ty CJ Ati .MR. � G39' INCORY��� THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Number: 2006 -3 Fee: $50.00 TOWN OF READING This is to certify that AUSTIN PREPARATORY SCHOOL, 101 WILLOW STREET, READING, MASS. THE ABOVE NAMED NON - PROFIT ORGANIZATION IS HEREBY GRANTED A SPECIAL ONE -DAY LICENSE FOR THE SALE OF ALL ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES TO BE SERVED ON THE PREMISES AT A FUNCTION. ON THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2006 BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 6:30 P.M. TO 9:00 P.M. Under Chapter 138, Section 14, of the Liquor Control Act. Holders of one day licenses shall provide a bartender and/or servers who are trained and authorized to make decisions regarding continued service of alcoholic beverages to attendees. There shall be no self service of any alcoholic beverage at any event approved as a one day license. This permission is granted in conformity with the Statutes and Ordinances relating theretQAArex ires at 9:00 p.m., October 19, 2006, unless suspended or revoked. "n'77 jo :d" ' f1l f-7 Date Issued: October 13, 2006 �' Ur M a. rXic 0 THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS Number: 2006-19 Fee: $50.00 TOWN OF READING This is to certify that CAC FOODS, INC. d/b/a VENETIAN MOON RESTAURANT, 680 MAIN STREET, READING, MASS. IS HEREBY GRANTED A LIVE ENTERTAINMENT LICENSE subject to the following conditions: 1 Live music Will be allowed only in the basement area as designated on t ' he plan dated 9/5/06 by Trimark United East, filed with the Board of Selectmen. 2. Live music will be allowed only between the hours of 5:00 p.m. and 11:30 p.m. on Mondays through Fridays, and 1:00 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. 3. Live music shall be accessory to dining and will be allowed only while food is served. 4. There shall be no adult entertainment. 5. There shall be no dancing by patrons or entertainers. 6. No tickets may be sold nor other charge made for admittance to the live musical entertainment. 7. The license holder will ensure minimization of sound and noise from the live music, including keeping exterior doors closed. 8. The live music shall not be audible from any residential premises, or audible from any nearby church facility or interfere with worship activities. 9. The license holder will at all times abide by the Rules and Regulations issued by the Town of Reading applicable to entertainment licenses. This license is granted in conformity with the provisions of Chapter 140 of the General Laws as amended by Section 183A of the Acts of 1949 and expires on December 31, 2006, unless sooner suspended or revoked. IIMO her , undersigned have hereunto affixed thporofficl. natures. 0.104 Date Issued: October 18, 2006 October 8, 2006 Rebecca Longley 550 Summer Ave. Reading, MA 01867 Reading Town Clerk Reading Town Hall 17 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 To Whom It May Concern: I have been a member of the Reading Conservation Commission for the last three years. I have enjoyed working with all the members and the Administrator, Frank Fink. Unfortunately, my work schedule is preventing me from attending meetings and devoting the necessary time to review applications. I am resigning my membership as of October 11, 2006. Sincerely, 1 LCD G , Rebecca Longle Cc: Fran Fink, Conservation Commission Administrator Mark Wetzel, Conservation Commission Chairman U14 October 2006 Dear Friend of Mission of Deeds: Mission of Deeds (MOD) will once again launch a BUY -A -BED campaign during the 2006 holiday season. Concerned over the growing number of children and families without beds, MOD is mounting an all out campaign to raise $10,000 to insure that children in the local area are not sleeping on the floor. MOD received requests for over 900 beds this year alone and project growth to 1000 -1200 for 2007. These quantities far exceed the number of beds which are donated to us. This means that we need to purchase most of these beds — mattresses, box springs and frames. At this time, our annual budget for purchasing beds is $60,000 per year. MOD is struggling to bring in enough funding to purchase these new beds. We hope to get as many local businesses as possible involved in this important community effort. CAN WE COUNT ON YOU? You will ask your clients /customers to donate $1.00 and write their name on a green bed (see attached) that you can prominently display in your place of business. Publicity for the 2006 BUY -A -BED campaign will begin in October. The campaign will run from November 15, 2006 until December 30, 2006. If you sign up by November 1, 2006, you business will be listed in our press releases and also on the posters that will be displayed in Reading, North Reading and surrounding towns. A volunteer from MOD will contact you upon receipt of this letter. Meanwhile, if you are interested or want more information, please call MOD at 781- 944 -8050. Sincerely, Bruce C. Murison W�.' � C 4 C Y�'10 8 i Robert H. Prince, J.D. 30 Stuart Avenue Dracut, MA 01826 October 16, 2006 Ms. Cheryl Johnson, Town Clerk Board of Selectmen 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867 Re: Town Constable Dear Cheryl: L C&O EPIK �9 b I have recently re-located my residence from Reading to Dracut. Accordingly, I am submitting this as my formal letter of resignation as a Reading Constable, effective immediately. Thank you for allowing me to serve the Town as a Constable. P S* re YI e�� Robert H. Prin e, J.D. cc: File • Mitt Romney Govemor Kerry Healey John Cogliano Lt Govemor seaefary October 17, 2006 Luisa Paiewonsky MW Commissioner MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF TRANSPORTATION North Reading/Reading — Main Street Bridge over the Ipswich River Project File # 603473 r , a, D Peter Hechenbleikner, Town Manager Town of Reading 16 Lowell Street .G Reading, MA 01867 c Dear Mr. Hechenbleikner: Transmitted herewith, for your use and information, is a copy of the Design Public Hearing Notice for the referenced project. The Design Public Hearing has been scheduled for Wednesday, November 15, 2006 at 7:00 PM at North Reading Town Hall. This hearing date has been coordinated with Edward McIntire, Town of Reading Director of Public Works, George Zambouras, Town of Reading Town Engineer and David Hanlon, Town of North Reading Director of Public Works, If you have any questions regarding this hearing or the project in general, please contact the Project Manager, Shawn Holland, at (617) 973 - 7242. Sincere y, David Anderson, P.E. Director of Project Management DA/sh Attachment: CC: Town Clerk — Reading g� l THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING A Design Public Hearing will be held by MassHighway to discuss the proposed Main Street bridge over the Ipswich River project located at the North Reading and Reading town line. WHERE: North Reading Town Hall Selectmen's Office, Room 14 235 North Street North Reading, Massachusetts WHEN: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 at 7:00 PM PURPOSE: The purpose of this hearing is to provide the public with the opportunity to become fully acquainted with the proposed Main Street bridge over the Ipswich River project. All views and comments made at the hearing will be reviewed and considered to the maximum extent possible. PROPOSAL: The proposed project consists of replacing the Main Street bridge over the Ipswich River. The new bridge will be a pre - stressed, concrete box beam, single span structure with four travel lanes and sidewalks on both sides. New abutments founded on steel piles will be installed behind the existing abutments. The bridge will remain open during construction with two lanes of traffic at all times. A secure right -of -way is necessary for this project. Acquisitions in fee and permanent or temporary easements may be required. MassHighway is responsible for acquiring all needed rights in private or public lands. MassHighway's policy concerning land acquisitions will be discussed at this hearing. Written views received by MassHighway subsequent to the date of this notice and up to five (5) days prior to the date of the hearing shall be displayed for public inspection and copying at the time and date listed above. Plans will be on display one -half hour before the hearing begins, with an engineer in attendance to answer questions regarding this project. A project handout is available on the MassHighway website listed below. Written statements and other exhibits in place of, or in addition to, oral statements made at the Public Hearing regarding the proposed undertaking are to be submitted to John Blundo, P.E., Chief Engineer, Massachusetts Highway Department, 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116. Such submissions will also be accepted at the hearing. The final date of receipt of these statements and exhibits for inclusion in the public hearing transcript will be ten (10) days after this Public Hearing. The community has declared that this facility is accessible to all in compliance with the ADA / Title II. However, persons in need of ADA /. Title II accommodations should contact Juan Flores by phone VOICE (617) 973 -7281, TDDY (617) 973 -7306 or email ivan.flores(a mhd. state. ma.us. Requests must be made at least 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing. In case of inclement weather, hearing cancellation announcements will be posted on the MassHighway website httn: / /www.mass.gov /mhd. LUISA PAIEWONSKY COMMISSIONER Boston, Massachusetts JOHN BLUNDO, P.E. CHIEF ENGINEER 9 d� Page 1 of 1 nblelkner, ��` Heche , Peter From: Leigh Anne Bell [leighbell @verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 5:29 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Park Square Hello, I have to say that I am glad that you decided to revisit the Park Square development. It is my understanding that the Care group doesn't believe that there are so many people for this project. Unfortunately allot of people don't want to say that they are for it in fear that they will be ridiculed, harassed, or business boycotted. I find that to be so sad, really. That a few ill mannered people can have such an effect on this town and selectmen. If you don't want to be blamed for what may or may not happen, then why can't this go to a town vote. We botched more than a few projects in this town. If people really wanted an 55+ development then we should have not made it so difficult for Marriott. If we wanted more playing fields, then we should have accepted Home Depot's first proposal. To me it makes more sense to go with the devil that you know than the devil that you don't know. Try to work things out with the developers to make a that area a place Reading can be proud of. Last spring, I cant tell you how many families I witnessed (as I was driving to work on Walkers Brook Drive) walking on a Sunday morning with coffee from Starbucks. Or how many families I saw just hanging out having breakfast at Bear Rock Cafe and Starbucks. it was really nice. Wouldn't it be nice to have somewhere else to go for families to walk to and hang out. Thanks for your time, Leigh Anne Bell 1% m 10/11/2006 Page I of I Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Nancy Drees [ndrees@staffingnow.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 8:11 AM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Excessive Traffic Impacts of New Shaw's in Wakefield Dear Board of Selectmen and Reading Residents: While visiting friends who live in Reading last weekend we discussed the Addison Wesley site and the proposed mall. After hearing about the size of the proposal and knowing the difficulty of the location, I felt compelled to write to you to make you aware of the negative effects I'm experiencing from the recently opened Shaw's Supermarket on Water Street in Wakefield. I live in the Greenwood section of Wakefield, hold a membership at the Reading Athletic Club, my family enjoys the benefits of Lake Quannapowitt and I work in Danvers on Route 114 along a busy stretch of malls near Route 128. Ever since the Shaw's opened (which also has only one entrance/exit) the traffic has become as congested as Route 128 during peak hours making it very difficult to travel through Wakefield causing back-ups in all directions; adds 20 minutes to my commute to work; and, at times, adds 10 minutes to my drive when I go to the Reading Athletic Club forcing me and others to use neighborhood side streets that were once quiet and peaceful. I feel terrible, especially since I know people on these streets, but what am I to do when I have to get to Danvers after dropping my children off at school and need to be at certain places on time? I can't leave earlier for work because of the school's drop-off times and my company should not, and will not, allow my arriving late. I have had to seek other options for drop-off and pick-up that in some cases is costing me money. If this is the effect to me and on my town with a single supermarket, I can't imagine what effect a 60 store, 400,00 sf mall will have on Reading and my friends I care too much about my friends to not tell you this and warn you what a single store is doing to my community. I encourage you and others to come to Wakefield during peak shopping hours to get the best sense of how much this is affecting us. Good luck. I hope you find an alternative. Sincerely, Nancy Drees 41 Greenwood Avenue Wakefield, MA 01880 ova 10/11/2006 Page lm[I Hechenblelkner, Peter xb From: Paul Mortimer [pauhnWi Sent: 8otunjnv. October 07, 2006 12:54 PM To: Reading -Selectmen Subject: The super sized mail Thank you for not allowing o shopping mail ofthe proposed magnitude togo forward, something smaller would be acceptable. In the 250 range. Thanks, again, Paul. 'hull l0/l0/%U06 Page I of 1 Hechenblelkner, Peter From: Mary Ellen LaCroix [mehlacroix@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 8:13 OM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: lifestyle center Dear Selectmen, As a longtime resident of Reading I write to encourage you to work toward the development of the proposed Park Square Development in Reading. While I would prefer that nothing be placed there, I think that it is naive to consider that to be an option. I would much prefer a group of stores that conducted business during normal hours than to have Reading be inundated with another huge apartment complex which will bring untold numbers of people to the town. Please know that I support the idea of Park Square. Sincerely, Mary Ellen LaCroix 10/10/2006 3, , To: Peter Hechenbleikner Page 1 of 1 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Bess Rikeman [bessrikeman @comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 1:09 PM To: Town Manager; Reading - Selectmen Cc: Town Manager Subject: Park Square at Reading To: Peter Hechenbleikner Town Manager and Board of Selectmen Reading, MA I'm emailing you to let you know that I am totally in favor of the Park Square project. I think it will be a tremendous asset to our town, both for its attractiveness and the economic assistance we will realize. I worked for Addison- Wesley for 23 years, and even then, we always had a problem with South St and surrounding areas. They even had the town make us install a chain link across the only other exit out of the AW site. This, of course, tied up the traffic at closing time where Jacob Way merged with South St. The residents on South St resented us using their street. Well, I say that's too bad. I live on Forest St and the traffic between the hours of 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and between 3:00 and 6:00 p.m. is horrendous. It's similar to the Main St traffic. Motorists use Forest St as a cut -off to Route 93, and during school hours, the traffic is extremely heavy. We have three schools in this area. When I first moved to Reading (43 years ago), the traffic wasn't bad at all on Forest St. But I feel we have to go with the flow and adapt. So my message to people on South St is "Lighten up" ... we all have to adjust - that's progress. Thank you for your consideration. Bess Rikeman 86 Forest St. 10/10/2006 too Page 1 of 1 L/C_ Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Laurie Meehan [Imeehan1 @comcast.net] Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2006 7:29 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Park Square at Reading Dear Selectmen, I am extremely disappointed in the September 26 vote of the Board of Selectmen to vote down the proposal for the Park Square at Reading. Many of the local residents are eager for this to be approved. My neighbors and' friends talk of this often and hope it will be approved. I am confident that if you took a town vote that more would be in favor of this than opposed. One of the best additions to Reading has been the Walkers development. would hate to see this opportunity for Reading ruined by the Selectmen. Please work diligently with the developers. Thank you Laurie Meehan 11 Latham Lane 1 10/10/2006 Page I of I YL Hechenblelkner, Peter From; RichCommao Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 4:51 PM To: Reading -Selectmen Subject: Park Square yNy name ia Rick Comuoo| have lived i Reading for the past 1O years. |amO glad to see that the town ofReading is going to reconsider it's decision the development of Park Square. I believe this project would be a great addition to the town of Reading. I would.not like to see the possible alternative of a residential development which will put un undue strain on the school system and our town services. Rick Cammso Leigh Enterprises LTD 87 Walkers Brook Drive Reading, K4A018G7 781-632-1360 lU/6/2006 Hechenblelkne Peter From: Sent: Friday, October 06, 2006 3:0.1 PM To: ReoU|ng - be|ectmen Subject: Park Square Project I an writing to urge you to re-examine your previous vote supportive of the multi-use proposal by.tbe developer and Board of Selectman are putting this project in jeoDazdy| that this project is being stonewalled and worried about density housing. Don't let this turn into another missed Theresa Brestoo � i /� � � `~ on the Park Ggoaze project. I am appalled that actions by the My neighbors and Z are astounded the alternative prospect of high opportunity for our town. . Page I of I Hechenblelkner, Peter From: Chris Joyce [cpjoyce@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 9:35 AM To: Reading - Selectmen My name is Christopher Joyce and I am a Reading resident, 167 Woburn St I was very disappointed to learn of your vote against the Park Square development. I hope you please re- consider, this is just the type of project Reading needs. 10/12/2006 rl- . Page 1 of 1 LAC Hechenbleikner, Peter From: andreagarb @comcast.net Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 4:51 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Today's NorthWest Section There is a very interesting article in today's Globe about the future of the former W.R. Grace site now that Decathlon USA has backed out of its agreement to build a new store. The town of Woburn is echoing many of the same concerns Reading has with the Addison - Wesley site. Whatever is developed on the 12 acre site in Woburn is going to further add to traffic issues in Reading as well and needs to be incorporated into the traffic study. It is interesting to note that what was due to be built was 79K retail and 17K office - almost 50% less dense when compared similarly to the Addison - Wesley proposal recently voted down (2 x 96,000 sq ft. on 12 acres = 192,000sq ft on 24 acres vs 440,000sq ft on 26 acres per S.R. Weiner's proposal). I would like to again urge that the Board strongly suggest to Pearson that we move away from S.R. Weiner immediately and open the door for more suitable proposals from other potential developers. The value of their land is declining every month that they delay the inevitable. Andrea Garbarino 10/13/2006 Page 1 of 2 c. I C Hechenblefter, Peter From: William Webster [billwhome @juno.com] Sent: Saturday, October 07, 2006 1:35 PM To: billwhome @juno.com Cc: jblau stein @mapc.org; melissa.callan @hou.state.ma.us; Michael. Lindstrom @state.ma.us; dcooke @vhb.com; adisarcina @hshassoc.com; ddizoglio @mbta.com; mdraisen @mapc.org; Adriel. Edwards @state.ma.us; rflorino @ci.stoneham.ma.us; Bob.Frey @state.ma.us; Joshua .Grzegorzewski @fhwa.dot.gov; THarwood @cityofwoburn.com; Town Manager; blucas @mapc.org; elutz @hshassoc.com; justin.martel @hou.state.ma.us; amckin non @hshassoc.com; thomaslmclaughlin @comcast.net; John.Mcvann @fhwa.dot.gov; pmedeiros @sigcom.com; Kenneth.Miller @state.ma.us; carmen .o'rourke @hou.state.ma.us; jpurdy @louisberger.com; kpyke @louisberger.com; Reilly; Chris; wschwartz @thecollaborative.com; kstein @hshassoc.com; Tafoya, Ben; frederick .vanmagness @hou.state.ma.us; rmayo @mass - trucking.org Subject: Re: NE Quadrant Ramp Traffic Increases I would like to re- iterate the concern I have, and raised at the 10/04/06 ITF meeting, about the additional ramp traffic that would be added to the Northeast (NE) quadrant under the H2, H3A, H3B and H3C alternatives. Under these alternatives, the two existing ramps in the NE quadrant would remain in place, and would basically stay as they are currently with some possible geometric tweaking. These are the 93N to 1285 ramp, and the 128S to 93N ramp. The traffic counts that exist now would remain the same. The 93N to 128S ramp has the highest traffic count of all ramps in the interchange, and the 1285 to 93N ramp has one of the lowest, if not the lowest traffic count. Under alternative H2, the 128S to 93S ramp in the NW quadrant would be removed, and replaced with a new ramp from 1285 passing through the NE quadrant under 93 to the NW quadrant, and over 128 into the SW quadrant to connect with 93S. I believe this ramp carries one of the higher traffic counts. Under alternatives 1-13A, 1-1313 and H3C two ramps would be removed, the 128S to 93S ramp in the NW quadrant and the 128N to 93N ramp in the SE quadrant. These would be replaced by two new ramps. One is a new ramp from 128S passing through the NE quadrant over /under 93. to the NW quadrant, and over /under over 128, depending on the alternative. The second is a new ramp from 128N in the SE quadrant passing over /under 93 passing through the NE quadrant to 93N depending on the alternative. In addition; alternatives 1-13A and 1-1313 employ the use of two flyovers, while H3C has one flyover and one fly under. Aside from the visual impact of flyovers, I would think they would add to the noise factor, as opposed to fly unders. The key point is that there would be significant additional ramp traffic flowing through the NE quadrant. Under the H2 alternative, traffic from one of the busiest ramps would flow through the NE quadrant in addition to the existing traffic. Under the H3A, 1-1313 and H3C alternatives, traffic from two ramps would flow through the NE quadrant, effectively doubling the ramp traffic counts that exist currently. This would add significantly to the noise and pollution that impacts the neighborhoods adjacent to the NE quadrant. The goal of the ITF is to come up with a solution that will improve safety and congestion 10/10/2006 g (a Page 2 of 2 at the interchange. This should not be done at the expense of the neighborhoods. Under the above noted alternatives, neighborhoods in the NW and SE quadrants would benefit from improvements that reduce the amount of traffic, and/or move it further away from homes. This is very positive byproduct of the study, but the solution should not have a negative impact on other neighborhoods. It is imperative that if any of the above noted alternatives are ultimately endorsed by the ITF, measures must be included in the chosen alternative that ensure that the noise and pollution impacts in the NE quadrant are significantly.improved over current conditions,.and at least, no worse than they.are today. Environment and noise consultant Rich Letty stated that the primary source of noise is from the two mainline highways, 128 and 93. While this may be true relative to the overall interchange, ramp traffic generates a significant amount of noise in the adjacent neighborhoods. The ITF is supposed to be offering a solution that improves all aspects of the current conditions, not worsening some of them. For what it is worth, alternative H4, with all of its drawbacks, seems to be the most neighborhood friendly alternative. It appears to reduce the traffic affecting the neighborhoods in all quadrants since it looks like the remaining loop ramps carry less traffic, primarily from the CD roads. Thanks, Bill Webster THAG 10/10/2006 Page 1 of 1 yc Hechenbleikner, Peter From: chickadeehilidaycare @comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 4:56 PM To: selectmen @ci.reading. ma. us. To the Selectmen: Although we can not attend tonight's meeting, we wish that the Board of Selectmen continue to work toward identifying a more suitable development than a 60 store, 400,000 square foot shopping mall for Reading at the Addison Wesley Pearson site. Thank you for your service to the town, Alison and Derrick Evangelista Bear Hill Rd 10/18/2006 Page I of I qC Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Joann Takehara Sanford Do.take@verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 4:18 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Addison Wesley Pearson site Please continue working a better alternative than the Park Square proposal for the Addison site. Thanks you, Joann 52 Hopkins St 60 10/18/2006 Page lofI 4C Hechenblelkner, Peter From: GDLFPAUL1@axd.cnm Sent Tueaday, October 17.2O0O517PM To: Reading 'Selectmen Subject: Addison Wesley Site Please explore alternate solutions to what is built on this site. Traffic problems are probably the most'criUcal concern. I'm sure no-one wants tohave an every day traffic nightmapee|mi|ortothetroffioppob|enmotheTopoOe|dFoirbhngotoRoute!fnonitheRteS5|ntenseotionnUthe way to Newburyport! Paul McCarthy 287 South St ~ ����� Page 1 of I Hechenbleikner'Peter, ' From: heidi[ho|d'eny@vahzon.neU Sent: Tuesday, October 17.2UO05:43PK8 To: Reed\ng - Geeotmen NOTO PARK SQUARE BOS. |am unable to attend the meeting tonight, butwantedtobrieMvoonvaymy thoughts on Park Square. Here are the simple facts. At the August 9th Addison Wesley Working Group Sclar and other executives from W/S Development made it very clear that 320,000 square feet of retail is necessary for the project to ba profitable and competitive. Ad the September 22ndBO8 meeting you were very.o|ear that 32O.UOD square feet of retail io too much for that site. The Addison Wesley Working Group also stated that 320,000 square feet of retail is too much. Let's take WV8 Development at their word and finally move on. |thoobeen2yeeroofoQonizingdiacuonione. It is obvious that we are not in agreement now and never will be. It would be nice to have the town work together on a project that we can all be proud of. Thank you for your time. HaidiBonnabeau 9S. lU/l8/2006 Page 1 of 1 4C Hechenbleikner, Peter From: cwfarley @comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 5:53 PM To: selectmen @ci.reading. ma. us. Subject: Addison Wesley Proposal I appreciate the strong leadership you have shown by voting down the proposed development on the Addison Wesley site. I also appreciate the time you took to thoroughly review this proposal and come to an informed (and correct) decision. I grew up in Burlington and have seen firsthand the negative impacts of a mall and traffic in my town. It is the main reason I moved to Reading. Please continue to work hard to find a more suitable project for this property. Thank you, The Farley's Curtis Street 0 MA 10/18/2006 4C, Hechenblelkner, Peter From: murph786@comcast.net Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 6:46 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: [POSSIBLY SPAM] Importance: Low From: murph786@comcast.net [ Save Address To: www,selectmen@ci.reading.ma.us Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 22:41:51 +0000 Dear Selectmen, As you all concider weather to continue discussions with the devolper on the Addison Wesley property, that you consider our loss of quality of life on the west side of town that a devolpment of this size and nature would do . You have previously listened to concerns of the residents on Grove St and closed the compost center on Sundays because it effected the quality of life the weekends (for 4 hours) this development would effect every day and every hour of our lives, I ask that you would consider our concerns also. This proposal does not work for this poperty. Sincerely, Di Page 1 of 1 L-1c Hechenblelkner, Peter From: Sharon Petersen [sipetersen @verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 7:13 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Addison Wesley Pearson site Dear members of the Board of Selectmen, Although I can not attend tonight's meeting, I wish that the Board of Selectmen will continue to work toward identifying a more suitable development than a 60 store, 400,000 square foot shopping mall for Reading at the Addison Wesley Pearson site. Thank you, Sharon Petersen 25 Holly Road V 10/18/2006 Page I of 1 VC_ Hechenbleikner, Peter From: Dennis Collins [dxcollins@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 7:17 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Cc: Hechenbleikner, Peter Subject: Thank You for Your Common Sense Approach Importance: High Thank you again for your objective, common sense approach to the W/S Development proposal and for your leadership in recognizing the developer's tactics and lack of cooperation. Reading deserves better and, in my opinion, is in a driver's seat position as its desirability for any developer is obvious. As I follow this process and review and analyze information from the groups formed to oppose and support the development as proposed, it is clear to me where the strongest credibility lies. While everyone in Reading has the right to their opinion, I am concerned about the obvious "developer-filtered" information and in many cases outright misleading information that has been disseminated through RRRED as well as the undisclosed professional relationship with the developer of its chairperson n and the group's organizer and primary source of information, a non-resident commissioned broker of the deal. Those relationships alone should be cause for deep concern and, in my opinion, discredit the organization as a legitimate source of , information for our residents. Reading residents are relying on their information to form their positions, making them in most cases misguided. Their approach and tactics are insulting. My family appreciates your continued, steadfast position and look forward to working with you to shape a mutually beneficial project. Moving forward, we offer any assistance and input to the extent that we can to ensure a responsible future for our children. Sincerely, Dennis & Patti Collins 12 Beech Street Reading, MA 01867 781-779-2839 10/18/2006 Hechenblefte Pete Fmxmn; Jack Sent: Tuesday, 17,2006 11:44 AM To: Reading -Gekectnlen Subject: BO8 meeting To Whom It May Cmooezo; Z can not attend tonight's meeting, but I wish that the Board of Selectmen continue 10 work toward identifying a more suitable development than a 60 store,' 400,000 og' ft. shopping mall for Reading at the Addison Wesley Pearson site. Thank you Susan and Jack O'Leary Ell 1 Page 1 of 1 LIC Hechenblefter, Peter From: Beth and Bob Mello [bbmello @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:19 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Addison Wesley Pearson Development Although I can not attend tonight's meeting, I wish that the Board of Selectmen continue to work toward identifying a more suitable development than a 60 store, 400,000 square foot shopping mall for Reading at the Addison Wesley Pearson site. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/476 - Release Date: 10/14/2006 a- i 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 46, Hechenbleikner, Peter From: David Ventola [dpventola @comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:22 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Regarding Addison Wesley Pearson Site Dear Board of Selectmen, Although I can not attend tonight's meeting, I wish that the Board of Selectmen continue to work toward identifying a more suitable development than a 60 store, 400,000 square foot shopping mall for Reading at the Addison Wesley Pearson site. David Ventola 22 Strawberry Hill Lane Reading, MA 01867 phone 781 - 944 -4243 email: dWentola@comcast.net I.- - 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 4/L Hechenbleikner, Peter From: sheila clarke [smwclarke @verizon.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 8:41 PM To: Hechenbleikner, Peter Subject: Design Charette Peter - After watching the BOS meeting this evening, I would like to volunteer to become involved in the Design Charrette project. However, I am not clear on what the process is for choosing community members. I believe my being a member of the Economic Development Committee, as well as my passion for smart growth within Reading would make me a great addition to the team. I appreciate being considered and look forward to your thoughts - Sheila Clarke Qa 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 L4 Q-1 Hechenbleikner, Peter From: mariannedowning @comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 3:36 PM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Thanks for being proactive on the Addison Wesley.matter Dear Selectmen: I write to thank all of you, especially Rick Schubert, for moving forward with a process to bring the Town together as it seeks a plan for the Addison - Wesley site that meets Reading's needs, both now and in the future. Rick and his plan get to the heart of what I heard time and time again as I helped CARE get signatures or spoke with neighbors, comments like: "Can't the selectmen do something ?" "All this town does is react." "The town is going to drag this out so much that we'll be stuck with 40B or the Lifestyle Center as our only options." I think combining Rick's idea of working with CPDC, residents, the landowner, and others in the town to craft a zoning amendment, combined with Steve and Jim's suggestions to build on the working group document and use the design charrette process, combined with the suggestions of the other Selectmen to include independent professionals and not those developers who have their own interests, will work to bring a result that everyone in Reading can be proud of. Reading deserves nothing less, and I appreciate the vote by each of the Selectmen to go forward with this process. Sincerely, Marianne Downing 13 Heather Drive 10/18/2006 Page 1 of 1 Hechenblelkner, Peter From: nomall01867 [nomall01867 @comcast.not] Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 9:06 AM To: Reading - Selectmen Subject: Thank you Members of the Board, Thank you for your continued efforts regarding the Addison Wesley Pearson site. Your 5 -0 vote demonstrates that the Board is in agreement that any development at AW /P is secondary to defining a process that will work to repair the 'strategic damage' done to our community. By bringing in a professional to frame the development options, defining our affordable housing plan, then involving BOS, CPDC, Pearson and members of the community to refine the plan, every resident can feel that they are part the process and the energy expended will be in one direction. Furthermore, this process will put Reading in a position to be proactive instead of reactive. Reading CARE stands ready to help you in any way. Thank you very much. Jay Lenox 10/18/2006