Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-12 Planning Board MinutesMINUTES OF THE MEETING CE JUNE 12, 1985 Chairman Rich called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. in the first floor meeting room, 6 Lc,well' Street (old; Library building) with Board members M. Slezak, D. Devine, S. Trainor and J. Wood present. gal so present were Ms. Gal; Wood and Reading Chronicle reporter Nina Gaeta Correspondence Board reviewed mail. Chairman of the Town of Reading from the will be forwarded to Mr. Drew. Executive Session Rich is in receipt of a land map Town Clerk. A note of thanks Sir. Devine asked that the Board defer any discussion on the letter from the Administrative Assistant until later in the meeting when they would like to go into Executive Session for this discussion. Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Board voted 4-1-0 to adjourn later in the meeting to executive session for the purpose of.discussing personnel matters and not to convene back into open session upon the following roll call vote: Mr. Devine - aye Mr. Slezak aye Mr. Wood - nay Ms. Trainor - aye Chairman Rich - aye Interim Report on John Street Land Study by MDM, Pam McKinn ,iris. McKinney gave a report of progress She passed out a review of the options considered for building on this site (attached). From all accounts, Ms. McKinney stated that there is no market for residential construction on a landfill. What the site constraint costs will be can be further determined after meeting with Maley « Aldrich on June 17th. Ms® McKinney reported that they were looking at the 3 options as outlined in the `KErP''' Develop the entire site privately * Develop the site with the BPW located: on the 8.32 acres as designed,,with the remaining land being developed privately Reconfigure and relocate the BPiti garage and develop the remaining land privately. iM=DiM'I was also looking considering; the cost What type/kind of die and what will Lid' the and issues have been the program. at what "character" this site should have factors of building on a farmer landfill. velopment can support costs for development public cost/benefit? After these questions answered, core=es the `poi; of implementation of Ms. McKinney spoke of the advantage of having a corporate headquarters located directly across the street. This could be the keystone in developing this parcel of land. As she currently foresees the market, it looks like a combined use (office park, light research and development, and hotel.) might he best. According to current vacancy rates, office construction has peaked and is beginning to be saturated. Burlington has had a bmi l.'ing moratorium and Woburn is considering instituting one The landfill will be coming on market at a good target time, as r the .prop off in construction, will already have taken place and the tuning of the development will be crucial to answering a need for new office space a Ms. McKinney stated that the landfill site is a prime sites located between Routes I and 93 on Route i-95(128). This development can be a planned office development with an image similar to that of Burlington Goods or unicorn Parka Rental rates for this type of development are currently yielding between $16-1 /sq.ftm Current land values for this type of site are from $150-350, 000/acres Burlington is now the most prestigious location and the land is selling in the Burlington Woods area for $350,000/acreo Mr. Devine asked if the oration of the town owning the land had been or will he explored. Ms. McKinney responded that this is a possibility that will be looked at in the final stages of the study. The possibilities for this are: the town ovens the land and then solicits developers for the sites on a long-term lease basis; the town could develop the site and have more control over what type of development takes ?lace on the site, - thus providing the town with long-term income from the property. Other topics discussed were: compatible uses for development on the site; supporting uses for the developments, e.g., restaurants, shops to serve the development capacity of roadways to handle traffic from development capacity of utilities and services for the development; management issues - design criteria., tenancy, image and character of development; staging of development, including back 17 acres; massing and citing of developments on land.7 balance in cost and economic sense for the developer aN for the town. In summary, Ms McKinney stated that the first. };part of the report, including Haley and Aldrich's hydrogeological analysis, will be ready by the first of July. After finding out what the cost constraints for this site will be, it will be determined what use, or mixed use, might be advisable for development on this site. The report will be presented to the Board by July 4th, distributed to appropriate hoards for, their review, and MDM will meet with the Planning Board during the first full week of July, (tentative date of July 10, 1985) Work Program - Progress Reports Fair Housing: Mr. Carroll and Chairman Rich m4et a Will meet with Fair Housing Committee on Thursday, June 20th, and hope to compile data and define tasks, goals and response dates. Woburn Planning Board - Callan/West Street development: The Woburn Planning Board has receives' the application from Callan on his development off West Street in the W lmington/Reading/Woburn line. Chairman Rich attended this meeting and informed the Woburn Planning Hoard of the Town of Reading's concerns regarding traffic on West Street, water, sewer, police and fire services for the development and the crossing of residential land in Reading ror access to Office Parlr/Lr,dustrsal zoned land in. Woburn. Mr. Callan will have seven weeks to file his final plans with Woburn for this development. Mayor Rabbitt spoke on behalf of the project. in order to :love forward with this development, Mr. Callan will have to ask for the granting of 3 variances from Woburn for this development due to conservation problems. Site Man Review: Mr. Slezak is reviewing the material, has gatherer' further information and will speak to some planners for their input. A report will be forthcoming at a later meeting. Cluster Zoning/Single-Family: No further report at this time from Mr. Devine. Reuse Rezoning reached with the Center. He is lc Permit process. - maintaining building; Mr. Wood asked about wha Selectmen and Mr. Rivers Joking at reasons why/why Mr. Wood asped about the the historical character t agreements had been regarding the Community not to have a Special following mattersz of the Community Center - adequacy of parking on this site; - plantings and buffer area from surrounding residential properties - review by Board of Survey for traffic flow; - om„ rgency access for fire, police and ambulance equipment. Chairman Rich reported that Mr. Eugene Nigro is the liaison from the Board of Selectmen to the Planning Board. Mr. Wood will speak with err. Nigro for answers to these questions. Technical Assistance/MAPC - Site Flan Review The letter from the Planning Board was unanimously voted to be signed and sent to the Selectmen for their signature in support of seeking the free, 2-week, technical assistance from MAPC for site plan review/design review criteria. Meeting Schedule Planning Board voted the following meeting schedule; June- 19th - tentative meeting scheduled, cancelled; June 24th - Special. Town Meeting; June 26th - next Planning Board sleeting, including meeting with BPW/T°etcalf & giddy re: aquifer protection; July Ad - receipt of MDM f=irst stage report Julys 10th - meeting with MDM, Pam McKinney reports on Tasks l and 2 of contract. Executive Session The question of the propriety of the action to vote executive session at the beginning of the meeting was discussed. In order to he sure that the requirements of the lace were met and upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Board again voted to go into executive session, to comp= out with a statement at the end of executive session, before final adjournment, by the following roll call vote; xr a Devine - aye Mr m Slezak aye Mr a Wood - nay Mss Trainor - aye ay_ e Chairman Rich - aye At 9:45 P.M., the Planning Board adjourned to executive session At 11:00 P.M., the board resumed their discussion in open meeting and stated that the Planning Board would be arranging a meeting with the BPW for Monday, June 17th to discuss improving communications between the two boards ® Ms m Gaeta from the Chronicle asked for a statement from the Chairman. Nothing further was givens Ms. Gaeta responded to questions posed by Chairman Rich about the last BPW meeting. There teeing no further business before the Board, it was unanimously voted to adjourn at 11:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, John B. Wood Clerk MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF EXECUTIVE SESSION OF JUNE 12, 19850 At 9:45 P.M., the full hoard continued the meeting in executive= s`e'ssion m There were no other pieople. present besides Ms a Plansky, the Administrative Assistant for the Planning Board. Mr. Devine asked Mr. Wood his reason for not wanting to discuss the matter of personnel in executive session, Mr. Wood stated that he felt that the entire issue was public anyway and felt that the ratter should be discussed openly and p3ublicly. The Board then discussed the issue of the incidents of June: 7, t°J. The Board had received at home: letter from Ms. Plans y (attached) regarding Superintendent Pletcher' s remarks o from DPW copies of BPW minutes, letter regarding the aquifer protection meeting and a letter in response from Mr. Anthony Fletcher (attached) regarding the incident of June 7th. In his statment, Mr. Fletcher states that the incident portrayed by Ms. Plansky is untrue and dramatically fictionalized. He does state that he stated in a. conversational tone, with 4 other people present, that if [Ms. Plansky] ever made a true statement regarding BPY°J, he would personally come over and applaud [her] Ms a Trainor stated that she felt that the issue should be handled by the individuals involved. Chairman Rich agreed m Mr m Devine and Mr. Slesak stated that they disagreed. The, Superintendent of Public Works has no right to harrass, even by his own admitted statement, a fellow employee. Although the Planning Board, may see their staff position as a department head, it is a union position. The power of the Superintendent of DPW should not be allowed to be freely and willfully exercised in a harassing manner over any town employee A Mr m Devine stated that it was the Board's responsibility to see that the staf=f is protected from this kind of harrassment and that the issue: of the staff's iob performance be clearly answered Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously doted to meet with the Board of Public Works on next Monday, June 17th, to discuss the personnel issues and to help opera better channels of communication between the two boards. The Board unanimously voted to close the executive session at 11:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted, John D. Wood, Cleric MINOT, DeBLOIS & MADDISON, INC. PROGRESS REPORT AND PRELIMINARY MARKET FINDINGS JOHN STREE'T' LANDFILL STUDY READING, MASSACHUSETTS JUNE 12, 19e5 AGENDA I a REVIEW OF STUDY PROCESS A. Market Analysis/Development Programming B. Environmental Analysis C. Development Impact Analysis D. Implementation Strategy I I n PROCESS TO DATE A. Minot, Deis l of s & Maddi sor'i B. Haley & Aldrich III. PRELIMINARY MARKET FINDINGS A. Potential Development Uses 1A Residential 0 Inappropriate use for site given location, site conditions, cost implications 2e Office o Steady growth in the demand for office space in the competitive suburban market o Office using employment growth of fir% per year o New construction activity of roughly 1 million square feet per year o Market area vacancy in the range of 20q largely a function of competitive location in the market Projected 19£35 development of 4.5 million square feet o Rents range between $14.00/sf and $24.00/sf based on location in the market o Land values (i..?rt1.tY)prr'ived) range between $75,000 and $350,000 per acre based on location in the market o Major office competition for the site includes„ Burlington Woods Unicorn F''ar Ceritenti al Park: Cherry H i l l Essem Center, Corporate Place MINOT, DeBLOIS & MADDISON, INC Industrial n Steady growth in the demand for industrial space in the competitive suburban market o Industrial employment growth of 4% per year o New construction activity of roughly million square feet per year o Market area vacancy in the range of 8% q largely a function of competitive location in the market o Projected 1?85 development of 800,000 square feet o Rents range between $7.50/sf and $11.1:0/sf based on location in the market o Land values (unimproved) range between $.75 and $1:. 25 per sf based on location in the market 0 Major industrial competition for the site includes. Oak Park Middlesex Technical Center- Centential Park Cherry Hill Cor°p+or +.te Pl pace 4. Hotel n Steady growth in the demand for hotel as a function the competitive suburban market for office and industrial space n New construction activity geared primarily to the inn class hotel; several in the planning stages in the market area o Market area occupancy in the range of 60°f ; largely a function of competitive location in the market n room rates range between -1:50 and -t100 based on location in the market 0 Land values (unimproved) r'ange between $75,000 and =f'350,000 per acre based on loca.'t:.ion in the market o Major hotel competition for the site includes-. Marriott Burlington Raddison Fer.ncroft Colonial. Hilton Howard johnson King's Grant Sheraton Rolling Green Holiday Inn 5. Retail 0 Competitive nature of market suggests that retail uses of the site be confined to those ancillary use-.-.-, which will be required to support and compliment high quality office/R&D and hotel development