Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-05-11 Special Town Meeting Minutes,r Adjourned Annual Town Meeting Meeting adjourned 10:29 P.M. 101 Town Meeting Members present. A true copy. Attest: May 8, 1989 Doris M. Fantasia Town Clerk SPECIAL TOWN MEETING Reading Memorial High School May 11, 1989 The meeting was called to order by the Moderator, Paul C. Dustin, there being a quorum present. The Invocation was given by Leslie H. York, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. ARTICLE 14. On motion of Maria E. Silvaggi, it was voted to take Article 14 out of order. ARTICLE 2. On motion of Russell T. Graham, it was voted to take Article 2 from the table. ARTICLE 2. The attached report of Thomas J. Stohlman, Chairman of the Community Planning and Development Commission, was accepted as a Report of Progress. ARTICLE 2. On motion of Russell T. Graham, it was voted to table Article 2. ARTICLE 14. Daniel A. Ensminger moved that the Town authorize the Board of Selectmen to acquire all or any part of the following described land with the buildings thereon currently believed to be owned by Summit Towers Company, located at 168 Hopkins Street and shown on Town of Reading Board of Assessors' Rev. Jan. 1, 1986, Plat 13 as Lot 50, together with such right, title and interest as said Lot 50 has in Fourth Street, in fee or rights of easement therein by eminent domain under the provisions of Chapter 79 of the General Laws of the Commonwealth of Mas- sachusetts and any other enabling authority, and to acquire said land or any part thereof in fee or rights of easement therein by gift, purchase, or otherwise, for the purpose of providing access to the land currently owned by the Town of Reading commonly known as the Reading Bear Hill property (which access will also facilitate the development of part of said Reading Bear Hill property into needed housing), and that the Town appropriate the sum of Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000) from the Sale of Real Estate Funds to the Board of Selectmen to pay for appraisals of said property and to pay for the acquisition of said land or rights of easement therein, or to be used for payment of land damages or other costs and expenses of such acquisitions, and to authorize the Board of Selectmen to enter into agreements with private parties or state and federal agencies for financial and other assistance in connection with such acquisition, and to do all other acts and things necessary and proper for carrying out the provisions of this vote; and move that the Town vote to authorize the Board of Selectmen to grant, from time to time and to one or more parties, easements or other rights in the land ac- quired hereby to use said land for all purposes for which streets, roads and ways are commonly used in the Town of Reading in common with all others legally entitled thereto and to estab- lish that the minimum amount of One Dollar ($1.00) be paid for any such grant of easement or other right in such land, and to authorize the Board of Selectmen to grant in each instance such easement or other right for such amount or larger amount and upon such other terms and conditions as the Board of Selectmen shall consider proper and to deliver all documents and take such other actions as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this vote. 00 REPORT TO TOWN MEETING ON WARRANT ARTICLES 13 -14 May 10, 1989 Pursuant to Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws, legal notice of a public hearing on articles 13,15 -18 was placed in the Reading Chronicle on April 25, 1989 and May 2, 1989. Article 14 was also included in this notice. This hearing was held at the Lecture Hall of the Reading Memorial High School at 7:30 on May 9, 1989. This is a report with recommendations submitted to Town Meeting by the CPDC. Summa ry Article 13: PRD Overlay District Article 14: Lot 50 Acquisition Article 15: Acorn Lane Easements Article 16: Car Wash Article 17: Child Care Article 18: Child Care Comments Article 13: PRD Overlay District RECOMMENDED 4 -0 -1 Member Favaloro abstaining. RECOMMENDED 5 -0 -0 RECOMMENDED 5 -0 -0 RECOMMENDED 5 -0 -0 NOT RECOMMENDED 4 -0 -0 Member Howard absent NOT RECOMMENDED 4 -0 -0 Member Howard absent RECOMMENDED 4 -0 -1 Member Favaloro abstaining. The attending public appeared to accept the idea of the need for an overlay district, but some supported "trimming and cutting" the district to suit their particular needs. The majority of the board felt that this article should be passed in its' entirety. Given Town Meetings' experience at "trimming and cutting" this overlay district, this seemed to be the wisest course of action. This will give the town the widest number of options in its' effort to complete the Bear Hill sale. Commissioner Favaloro felt that, if possible, he would have to wait and see Town Meetings' action on Article 14 before being able to make a recommendation. 7J Article 14: Lot 50 Acquisition RECOMMENDED 5 -0 -0 A straw poll of the attending public showed a majority opposed to this article, citing the uncertainties involved in litigation and the Towns' historical reluctance to obtain property by eminent domain. The property owner was present and stated that the Town had not yet contacted him regarding the purchase of the property. He also stated that he would be willing to enter into negotiation, for the sale of the land. Board members noted that the article's wording included many forms of land acquisition including simple purchase and acceptance of it as a gift. Before the Selectmen could enter into formal negotiations with the owner, Town Meeting would have to give them that authority. The Board also felt that eminent domain should remain as an option to the Selectmen. The examples of litigation brought up by the public seemed to contain vastly different circumstances than those at Bear Hill. Readings' historical reluctance to take land by eminent domain has been rooted in careful weighing of the public good and the potential turmoil that a taking could impose on a household. The board felt that the factors that historically have applied, insufficient public good and household turmoil do not apply here. The land owner stated that he, too, had intended to use the parcel for access to the Bear Hill site. The vast majority of the public present, including the owner, agreed that this site represented a better access point in terms of overall public good. Finally, by its' nature eminent domain should be used as a last resort. The owner is entitled to a fair price for his entrepreneurial efforts. The town should have the best possible access to this site. Should the town offer a ridiculously low price, eminent domain proceedings help protect the owner's best interest. Should the owner really be demanding a monopoly on the rights to develop Bear Hill, eminent domain proceedings help protect the towns' best interest. Article 15: Acorn Lane Easements RECOMMENDED 5 -0 -0 There was no opposition to this article all present spoke in favor of it. A petition was presented showing that all abutting property owners supported the article. The board felt that vacating the easements of a previously approved 3 -lot subdivision would allow the owner to proceed with the building of a single home on the property and so benefit the neighborhood. Article 16: Car Wash RECOMMENDED 5 -0 -0 There was no opposition to this article, all present spoke in favor of it. The Attorney General rejected this by -law last year due to a defect in the public hearing notice. Due to the overwhelming vote in favor of it the CPDC felt it should be put to a vote again this session and strongly supports its' passage again. Article 17: Child Care Article 18: Child Care NOT RECOMMENDED 4 -0 -0 Member Howard absent NOT RECOMMENDED 4 -0 -0 Member Howard absent Although public sentiment seemed to favor the need for more clarity in the by -law regarding child care, most felt this proposed change did not sufficiently clarify the by -law. Lack of appropriate standards, fear of business "creep ", wording that might make home child care too difficult and day -care facilities within existing business impossible were all cited as reasons that the problem needed further study. A straw poll of the public revealed that there was a strong preference for such facilities in business zones and not in residential zones of any description. All of the commission members present agreed not to recommend this article to town meeting. The CPDC will work with the petitioner and other interested parties to have some suggestions for Fall Town Meeting. Respectfully Submitted, Tom Stohlman, Chairman 7 Special Town Meeting May 11, 1989 A certain parcel of land in Reading, bounded and described as follows: Easterly by Fourth Street, two hundred and 36/100 feet Southwesterly by Hopkins Street, one hundred forty -eight feet; and Northwesterly by lot 4 as shown on the plan hereinafter men- tioned, one hundred thirty -eight and 01 /100 feet. Said parcel is shown as lot 5 on said plan. All of said boundaries are located as shown on a subdivision plan, filed in the Land Registration Office, a copy of which is filed in the Registry of Deeds for the South Registry District of Middlesex County in Registration Book 617, Page 126, with Cer- tificate of Title No. 97476. 65 voted in the affirmative 69 voted in the negative 2/3 vote required This motion was voted in the negative. ARTICLE 14. Daniel A. Ensminger moved to reconsider Article 14. ARTICLE 14. George V. Hines moved to table Article 14. This motion was voted in the negative. ARTICLE 14. Daniel A. Ensminger moved to reconsider Article 14 without eminent domain. 78 voted in the affirmative 51 voted in the negative 2/3 vote required This motion was voted in the negative. On motion of John W. Price, it was voted that the Special Town Meeting stand adjourned to meet at 7:30 P.M. on Monday, May 15, 1989, in the Reading Memorial High School Auditorium. Meeting adjourned 10:37 P.M. 126 Town Meeting Members were present. A true copy. Attest: Doris M. Fantasia Town Clerk ADJOURNED SPECIAL TOWN MEETING Reading Memorial High School May 15, 1989 The meeting was called to order by the Moderator, Paul C. Dustin, there being a quorum present. The Invocation was given by Reverend James A. Cann of the Old South Methodist Church, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. On a point of Personal Privilege, Robert I. Nordstrand, presented the following resolution to Michael T. Sullivan, in absentia: