Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-05-24 Community Preservation Act Study Committee MinutesTOWN OF READING COMMUNITY PRESERVATION ACT STUDY COMMITTEE (CPA) MINUTES OF MEETING MAY 24, 2001 r r ..x> ,MASS. 2 P 112-- 0o Call To Order With a quorum being present, the meeting was called to order at 7:40 PM by the chair, Kim Honetschlager. Members present at the meeting were Kim Honetschlager, Jack Downing, Paul Dustin, Richard Howard, Tim Kelley, Patricia Lloyd and Richard Schubert. Also in attendance and representing their organizations were; Nancy Eaton, of the Conservation Committee and Gladys Montgomery-Jones of the Ad Hoc Open Space and Recreation Planning Task Force. General Business Notes The following points were noted during the meeting and are entered here in the minutes + Our staff person may change from the Town Manager's office to Fran Fink, the Conservation Administrator. This potential change has still to be confirmed A projected schedule of committee meetings was passed out for review and comment. The meeting dates were acceptable to the committee; however, details of the specific presentations need to be finalized. The meeting dates are: May; 24 and 31 June; 7, 14, 21, and 28 July; 5, (no meeting scheduled) 12, future dates beyond this were not specified. • There was a short discussion concerning the Committee's reporting to the Board of Selectmen. Rick Schubert said that he would confer with the Selectmen and get back to the committee, regarding meeting dates and content. Report of the "Ad Hoc Open Space committee" Gladys Montgomery Jones gave overview reports of both the: Open Space and Recreation Plan - 2001, Town of Reading, Executive Summary, and Summary: Open Space Beyond 2000: Public Opinion Survey Report Ad Hoc Open Space and Recreation Planning Task Force Reading Massachusetts - September 29, 2000. A copy of each of these documents is appended to these minutes. She noted that the "Public Opinion Survey" was taken on the day of the spring town election in 2000. The majority of the survey responses were obtained at the polls; however, other survey forms were provided at other locations around the town. It was felt that with the statistically large number of responses the survey could be considered to be a reasonable representation of the voters that day. A principal conclusion from the survey is that Reading does not have enough open space. Report from the Recreation Committee Jack Downing of the Recreation Committee gave a lengthy overview of the present availability of playing fields or recreational activities. The following points were noted during his presentation: + Currently there are around 4,000 participants in organized athletics extending over a season from April to Sept/Oct. The fields are used generally in the late afternoon and on weekends Page 1 of 2 OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION PLAN - 2001 TOWN OF READING Executive Summary Reading's Open Space and Recreation Plan - 2009 is a formal inventory and planning document developed from existing Town, State and Federal information, from citizen input, and from the results of a town-wide survey. The 2001 plan is an update of the Town's first plan, written in 1995. The current plan concludes that the overarching open space and recreation goals of the community are to preserve the quality of life and the aesthetic character of Reading. Residents wish to maintain Reading's quality of life by protecting the environment, especially water supply and wildlife habitat, by providing ample, useable and accessible open space and recreation facilities for all residents, and by preserving the New England character and less-dense suburban character of the town. In the Open Space and Recreation Plan Survey - Spring 2000, survey respondents and, by extension, Reading residents strongly support acquisition of additional open space. By 76% or larger majorities, they agreed Reading should acquire more open space for ball fields and playgrounds, for watershed protection and wildlife, and for passive recreation. Other priorities identified by respondents include the need for better accessibility to, more information about the Town's open space, and additional open space and recreation amenities, including bike trails and hiking/nature trails that could be provided on existing Town-owned land. Majorities of respondents would be willing to pay more taxes for open space purchases, favor funding the purchase of open space as a standard part of the Town's capital plan, and would support a local referendum like the Community Preservation Act to fund open space, historic preservation, and affordable housing. Support for acquisition and funding is strong regardless of household composition or length of residency in Reading. Reading has lost substantial amounts of open space over the years and stands to lose significantly more in the near future. A buildout analysis of Reading completed in the spring of 2000 by the Executive Office of Environmental Affairs estimates that there are 727 additional developable acres in the Town, or an additional 771 residential lots. New homes on these lots would require an additional 10.7 miles of roadways, and the home owners would use an additional 153,769 gallons of water per day. 2,050 new residents are forecast for the Town at buildout, including an additional 382 school children. If these forecasts are even close to accurate, Reading will experience a major loss of open space, at a time when residents will need and demand expansion of passive and active recreation spaces. Survey comments reveal the community's sense of loss over changes to the character of the town. If we are not proactive in meeting the Town's recreation and open space needs, the quality of life in Reading will change significantly. 5/23/01 The major goals formulated in this plan are: 1. Provide high quality habitat and a healthy environment 2. Provide ample open space and recreation space 3. Make recreation and open space accessible to all 4. Preserve the character of the town 5. Provide connection between open spaces 6. identify new funding sources for recreation and open space The two priority action items identified in the plan are: To explore the enactment of the Community Preservation Act locally To acquire additional open space for playing fields, passive open space, wildlife habitat, and watershed protection. What has the Town of Reading accomplished since the Plan was written in 1995? It acquired Sledge Woods and Marion Woods with State self-help grants, received land and conservation restrictions from individuals, partnered with the YMCA to build a new indoor "town pool", developed new playing fields off Symonds Way, and pursued a field and playground maintenance program. The 1995 Plan grouped its goals and objectives under the acronym ACE for acquisition, connection, and enhancement. The accomplishments listed above illustrate these goals. But two other watchwords arise out of the last five years' achievements - partnership and funding - two new watchwords that will be increasingly important over the next five years. Creative funding mechanisms and new funding sources are critically important if Reading is to make forward progress in open space acquisition, new recreational field development, and the enhancement of our existing open spaces and facilities. In the face of continuing development pressure and recurring budget shortfalls, we are at a critical juncture for securing our open space and recreation future. Reading must not stop moving forward. Task Force members: Kim Honetschlager, Chair Camille Anthony Claire Bolger J. Ronald Boucher Nancy L. Eaton Gladys Montgomery-Jones Catherine Martin Richard Schubert Karen Mullins, Conservation Administrator Citizen Board of Selectmen Recreation Committee Reading Open Land Trust Conservation Commission Citizen Finance Committee Community Planning & Development Commission Staff Liaison 5/23/01 Summary: Open Space - Beyond 2000: Public Opinion Survey Report Ad Hoc Open Space and Recreation Planning Task Force Reading, Massachusetts - September 20, 2000 About the Survey Reading's Ad Hoc Open Space and Recreation Planning Task Force is charged with updating the Open Space and Recreation Plan first written in 1995. One aspect of this is a public opinion survey of Reading residents about their use of and attitudes toward the Town's open space sites. Earlier this year, the Task Force developed a questionnaire, with reference to the 1995 document, and handed out 1657 copies. The questionnaire was distributed at the special election in April, Town Hall, the Public Library and Senior Center. 740 survey forms were returned (a 45% return rate). Given that nationwide opinion surveys are considered valid using samples of 1200 people, the return of 740 questionnaires in Reading is significant. Highlights of Findings • 86% of respondents disagreed that "Reading has all the recreation and conservation land it needs". When it comes to quantity of conservation land, such as the Town Forest, respondents, by a 50-to-41% plurality, indicated they were not satisfied. With respect to the quantity of recreational space for children and youth, a 47-to-38% plurality were not satisfied. With respect to the quantity of recreational space for adults, 52% indicated they were not satisfied. In 1995, when identical questions were asked, 51 % reported being satisfied with the quantity of recreational space for children, compared to 38% satisfied this year. Significant majorities said the Town should invest in open space acquisition and amenities. While priorities vary with age of household members, this opinion trend held true across the board, irrespective of age of people in the household. • 86% agreed "Reading should acquire more conservation land to protect our watershed and wildlife", a figure that rose to 90% among respondents whose households include senior citizens or infants/pre-school age children. • 76% agreed that "Reading should acquire more open space for ballfields and playgrounds". Support for this is largest among families with children: 89% of those with infants/preschoolers agreed, compared to 86% of those with elementary-age children and 87% of those with middle-schoolers. • With regard to financing open space, 84% of the sample agreed that "open space should be a standard part of the Town's capital plan". 71% said they "would support a local referendum to adopt a state Community Preservation Act which would place a 1% to 2% surcharge on new real estate transactions to fund open space, historic preservation and affordable housing in Reading" 63% said they "would be willing to pay more in taxes so Reading could purchase additional open space". Notably, these attitudes were recorded just as Reading voters were defeating an operating budget override. Summary: Open Space - Beyond 2000: Public Opinion Survey Report - September 20, 2000 • When asked what conservation areas they use or enjoy, 85% of respondents checked the Town Forest, 30% Bare Meadow, and 23% Kurchian Woods. With respect to recreation, the top ranked facilities were 57% respondents reporting they use or enjoy the Birch Meadow Complex, 51 % for Imagination Station, 45% for Ipswich River Park (North Reading) and 43% for Memorial Park. Reported use/enjoyment patterns of active recreational facilities varied with household composition. Notably, of all the items checked, the one with the most reported use/enjoyment is the Town Forest. • Asked to select from a 20-item list of additional conservation and recreational activities those five which they would most like to have in Reading, respondents indicated their priorities as Bike Trails (65%), Hiking/Nature Trails (53%), Conservation Areas (36%), Family Picnic Area (34%), Birdwatching/Wildlife Habitat (29%), Athletic Fields (28%), Canoe Facilities (26%), Community Gardens (24%), Outdoor Pool (23%), Sledding Hills (21%), Children's Play Areas (20%), Cross-Country Ski Trails (19%), Skateboarding/In-Line Skating (17%), Fishing Areas (14%), Tennis Courts (13%), Outdoor Skating (11%), Basketball (7%), Archery/Shooting (61/o), and Volleyball (3%). Interestingly, respondents place at least as high a value on conservation and passive recreation being out and active in nature as the Town has traditionally placed on team sports and athletics. • Respondents' priorities regarding open space amenities they would most like to see in Reading changed according to the ages of people in household: • Among respondents with infants/pre-schoolers, the top five priorities were bike trails (71%), children's play areas (50%), hiking/nature trails (45%), family picnic areas (43%), and athletic fields (36%); (an outdoor pool, at 35%, almost made their list). • Among those with elementary school age children, the top five priorities were bike trails (71 hiking/nature trails (45%), athletic fields (39%), family picnic area (36%), and an outdoor pool (34%). • Those with middle-schoolers in their households wanted bike trails (66%), hiking/nature trails (45%), athletic fields (40%), canoe facilities (33%), and conservation areas (31 (an outdoor pool, at 30% almost made their top five list). • Among those with high-schoolers in their households, the top five priorities were bike trails (56%), hiking/nature trails (55%), conservation areas (37%), canoe facilities and athletic fields (both at 34%), and family picnic area (33%). • Among respondents whose households include senior citizens, the highest ranking priorities were biking trails and hiking/nature trails (both at 55%), followed by birdwatching/wildlife habitat (48%), conservation areas (46%), family picnic area (34%), and community gardens (24%). 1. Summary: Open Space - Beyond 2000: Public Opinion Survey Report - September 20, 2000 3 Some respondent comments "Open space for passive and active recreation is of the utmost importance!" "I know it is difficult and expensive, but in the long term, protecting open space and increasing.recreational areas will actually improve Reading's property values." "I wish the town & people tried more saving Blueberry Hill at the end of Longwood Road overlooking 93. The developer took a dozer up there and destroyed everything. It was a special place. Now it's destroyed. "Protect conservation areas and wetlands. All new construction is not progress." "More quality recreation areas are needed. I'm pleased to see this on the town's agenda." "I would like to see current available open space such as. Longwood Farm zoned for ball fields and passive recreation such as Ipswich River Park is used. We will never get open spaces back once they are developed for houses." "There's not enough undeveloped space for children!" "Make our town pretty - not a Route 1." "The town should purchase any remaining land that could be used for development. The infrastructure, i.e. schools, water supply, etc., cannot stand any further development. You can't have enough open space." "The trees and open space in Reading are disappearing much to fast! Every clearing of green areas I see brings tears!" "We have to get into the car and drive to find a safe place to cycle with our two children." "Reading badly needs more.bike trails for biking and roller blading!" "I would like to see more soccer fields, but not at the expense of conservation land." Summary: Open Space - Beyond 2000: Public Opinion Survey Report - September 20, 2000 4 h "We have 1500+ children in Reading soccer. We need fields for them. Buy Longwood and make some soccer fields so the kids have a safe place to play." "Give places for our adolescents to gather safely. There's not too much for them to do if they are not involved in sport programs." "As a senior citizen, I would like to see an all-purpose trail through Reading for all to use." Town of Reading Open Space & Recreation Plan Survey - Spring 2000 1. Please indicate whether you strongly agree, agree, disagree, or strongly disagree with each of the following statements: a. Reading should acquire more open space for ballfields and playgrounds . Strongly agree 272 39% Agree 257 37% Disagree 118 17% Strongly disagree 49 7% Sum: 696 b. Reading should acquire more conservation land to protect our watershed and wildlife . Strongly agree 413 57% Agree 214 29% Disagree 71 10% Strongly disagree 32 4% Sum: 730 c. Reading should acquire more land for hiking, canoeing cross-country skiing and birding , . Strongly agree 352 49% Agree 225 31% Disagree 105 15% Strongly disagree 33 5% Sum: 715 d. Reading has all the recreation and conservation lands it needs. Strongly agree 314% Agree 71 10% Disagree 351 50% Strongly disagree 253 36% Sum: 706 e. I would be willing to pay more in taxes so Reading could purchase additional open space. Strongly agree 167 23% Agree 287 40% Disagree 146 20% Strongly disagree 113 16% Sum: 713 f. I think the purchase of open space should be a standard part of the Town's capital plan . Strongly agree 268 37% Agree 340 47% Disagree 64 9% Strongly disagree 48 7% Sum: 720 g. I would use Reading's recreation and conservation lands more if 1 knew more about them . Strongly agree 258 37% Agree 346 49% Disagree 80 11 % Strongly disagree 20 3% Sum: 704 h. I would support a local referendum to adopt a state Community Preservation Act which would place a 1 % to 2% surcharge on new real estate transactions to fund open space, historic preservation and affordable housing in Reading? Strongly agree 242 34% Agree 263 37% Disagree 99 146/6 Strongly disagree 99 14% Sum: 703 2. With respect to recreational space for children and youth, are you satisfied with the a. quality? Yes 385 55% No 209 30% Not a concern 104 15% Sum: 698 b. quantity? Yes 254 38% No 314 47% Not a concern 99 15% Sum: 667 3. With respect to recreational space for adults, are you satisfied with the a. quality? Yes 349 51 % No 262 38% Not a concern 77 11% Sum: 688 b. quantity? Yes 243 37% No 344 52% Not a concern 72 11% Sum: 659 4. With respect to conservation land, such as the Town Forest, are you satisfied with the a. quality? Yes 400 59% No 221 33% Not a concern 58 9% Sum: 679 b. quantity? Yes 269 41 % No 328 50% Not a concern 58 9% Sum:. 655 5. Of the following additional conservation and recreational activities, which five (5) would your most like to have in Reading? (Please check no more than five.) a. Archery/shooting 40 6% h. Family picnic area 21934% o. Skateboarding/In-line skatin 108 17% b. Athletic fields 17728% 1. Fishing areas 90 14% p. Hiking/Nature trails 342 53% c. Bike trails 41565% j. Basketball 457% q. Sledding hills 137 21% d. Canoe facilities 16826% k. Volleyball 213% r. Tennis courts 83 13% e. Children's play areas 13120% I. Outdoor pool 14823% s. Birdwatching/Wildlife habita 189 29% f. Community gardens 153 24% m. XC ski trails 125 19% t. Outdoor skating 69 11% g. Conservation areas 232 36% n. Other (Please specify) Respondents: 642 6. Which recreation areas do you currently use or enjoy? (Please check all that apply.) a. Birch Meadow Complex 346 57% g. Memorial Park 263 43% I. Sturges Park 134 22% b. Field House 203 33% h. Washington Park 100 16% m. YMCA pool 230 38% c. Hunt/Little League 80 13% I. Pearl Street schoolyard 44 7% n. Burbank Ice Aren, 236 39% d. Imagination Station 308 51% j. School playgrounds/fields 213 35% o. Senior Center 49 8% e. Meadow Brook Golf Club 109 18% k. Ipswich River Park (N. Reading) 274 45% f. Other (Please specify) Respondents: 607 7. Which conservation areas do you currently use or enjoy? (Please check all that apply.) a. A.J. Schneider Woods 12 3% f. Maillet 7 2% b. Bare Meadow 113 30% g. Thelin Bird Sanct. 25 7% c. Kurchian Woods 90 23% h. Town Forest 325 85% d. Lobs Pound Mill/Marion Woods 37 10% L Sledge Woods 9 2% e. Other (Please specify) j. Pinevale 10 3% Respondents: 383 8. How do you prefer to get your information about using Reading's open space ? (Please check all that apply.) a. Reading Notes 260 40% b. Reading Community TV 181 28% c. Local newspapers, such as the Advocate and the Chronicle 503 78% d. A Recreation Guide mailed to your home 332 51% e. Reading's Website (www.ci.reading.ma.us) 172 27% f. Other (Please specify) g. Not interested in this sort of information 10 2% Respondents: 649 9. How long have you been a resident of Reading? (Please check one.) a. Less than 5 years 100 15% c. 11-19 years 135 20% b. 5-10 years 130 19% d. 20+ years 306 46% Sum: 671 10. What Precinct do you live in? (1 through 8) Precinct 1: 90 15% Precinct 2: 58 9% Precinct 3: 47 8% Precinct 4: 87 14% Precinct 5: 64 10% Precinct 6: 77 13% Precinct 7: 83 14% Precinct 8: 105 17% Sum: 611 11. What are the age categories of the people in your household? (Please check all that apply.) a. Infant/Pre-school ,131 20% d. High School (9-12) 109 17% b. Elementary School (K-5) 231 35% e. College and Adult 570 87% c. Middle School (6-8) 130 20% f. Senior Citizen (65+) 133 20% Respondents: 656 Town of Reading Open Space & Recreation Plan Survey - Spring 2000, page 2 Potential Areas for Greenways/Trails/Paths Bare Meadow: Potential for additional trails: easterly to, Haverhill Street; Proposed Wood End Cemetery, northeasterly to north Reading; westerly through Fairbanks Marsh toward Main Street; paved wheelchair/stroller accessible trail from parking lot, through meadow and back through woods. Lobs Pound Mill/Marion Woods: Re-establish fishing area. Potential for Developing local historical site. Town's logo is based in part on the former mill at this site. Potential for trail development from west side of Mill Street back toward Town Forest; from east side of Mill Street along Ipswich to Main Street to Fairbanks Marsh; from parking area to upland woods. Kurchian Woods: Potential for trail development from Pacey parcel to Buckskin across Franklin Street to Fox Run to Town Forest. Potential for bike trail. Town Forest: Potential for fishing or canoe access to Ipswich River. Needs access improvements for everyone. Develop trail from new access from Lynn Village Way off Roma Lane. Add signage for bike use of existing access roads. West Side: Potential for trail/greenway from Town Forest, past golf course, down west side of town to MBTA property near Lowell Street. Continue down Causeway, Reading Municipal Light Department to Sheehan and Xavier Conservation Areas to Reading Open Land Trust parcel off West Street. Create new signage. MaiIlet/Morgan/Somes: Potential for trail from Lowell Street southwest to Hancock Street. Footbridge across Aberjona. Trails from Lee and Hunt Streets to merge with this trail. Cross railroad tracks into Thelin Bird Sanctuary. Thelin Bird Sanctuary: Potential for trail from Hancock Street through Thelin to Willow Street at Thomas Conservation Area. Wood land/Aberjona/Higgins: Potential for greenway linking Lowell Street to Birch Meadow School and recreation complex (Pitman Bike Path). Also from Rice Road down hill to merge with Birch Meadow. Drive. Trail linkage from Birch Meadow to Henzie/Criterion. Aberjona/West: Potential for trail along stem of Aberjona from West Street to Woburn line. Pinevale: Potential for additional foot bridges across stream and seasonally wet areas. Memorial Park: Potential for paved bike/walWstroller trail around perimeter.