Mtg notes: Selectmen 08.09.12 (2) – Town Mtg articles, Nep Valley traffic, MPD budget glitch

August 13, 2012

by Frank Schroth

The board at their meeting on 8/9 reviewed articles for fall town meeting. They include: 1) a zoning overlay article for assisted living facilities 2) how to manage ~$198K of additional state aid. The town budget was completed prior to final state aid being announced. The Warrant Committee will have a recommendation for this which may be to put in “Free Cash” or the Stabilization Fund 3) Accept enrolling in a program with MWRA that enables town to take out interest free loans and 4) appropriation for demolition of town’s portion of Hendries building. This article may be pulled it an alternative funding strategy is identified.

The Selectmen had an item on agenda to authorize the demolition of 131 Eliot Street. They did not vote to authorize it. Who demolishes what and when and how it is funded continue to be open questions. It are unresolved. According to Hurley one option is to declare a state of emergency over the building’s condition; but a state of emergency, as he noted, is generally called as a result of storm damage. Building Inspector Prondak “completely disagreed” with the developer’s argument that the town had to take down its portion of the building at the same time as the developer. The town owns the parking lot and the section of the building above it. Prondak noted that “We’ve had a collapse and we cannot wait for a special permit.” There is an ongoing hearing before the Planning Board on the issue. If the town orders it (the demolition) they need an appropriation to take their portion down. Keohane suggested that the town have Connelly, the developer, cover the cost of taking down the town’s portion of the building and then deducting that cost from the P&S cost. Hurley said a similar proposal had been made earlier and declined. The appropriation is likely to be addressed at Town Meeting

The long-standing traffic issue at Neponset Valley Parkway and Brush Hill Road will remain open. It has been a concern of residents for quite some time. Residents of Fuller Village have long criticized the area as being exceptionally unsafe. Deborah Felton, Director of Fuller Village and Bob Sheffield, a member of the Fuller board, addressed the board during Citizen Speak requesting that they move forward with a solution to address the problem. There has been a recommendation to square of the intersection which would improve sight lines where the two roads meet. Two factors have delayed any action. One is opposition from the Brush Hill Neighborhood Association. Roxanne Musto of the association reiterated their opposition during Citizen Speak and cited support from state senator but did not identify who that was. The other is the jurisdiction of the various roadways that come together. The DCR and MA highway are two agencies that need to be involved in any comprehensive solution. Chief Wells, Chai of the Traffic Commission, recommended that the town wait for the findings of a report due out in 30 days. His primary concern is that any action taken in advance of that might create unforseen consequences. “For every action there is a reaction.” he said. Member Keohane asked if they could address the intersection itself. The other recommendations in the works involved a much more comprehensive look at the road layout. He suggested a “piecemeal” approach. The Selectmen took Chief’s recommendation to wait thirty days. They also agreed it is a very dangerous intersection. Bill Clark, Town Planner, said his daughter was in a head on collision there and Member Keohane said it is only a matter of time before someone gets killed.

The board reviewed with the Town Accountant and Police Chief a special audit isse having to due with a budget over run . An accounting error was flagged for their attention. Three to four days of overtime pay were not reported corectly. Payments need to be recorded within two weeks of being made according to Department of Revenue regulations. The Town would either need to report the revenue after the two-week period or record it when made – in either case Hurley said the town would likely get a “slap on the wrist” from the DOR for a violation. The amount was estimated to be ~$7500 but the exact figure was unavailable. Hurley told Chief Wells that there were ways to address budget overruns if the town receives notice.

2 Responses to Mtg notes: Selectmen 08.09.12 (2) – Town Mtg articles, Nep Valley traffic, MPD budget glitch

  1. Pete Jackson on August 13, 2012 at 9:04 am

    It is important for the Board of Selectmen to realize that the cost of the developer taking down the Town’s part of the building is already figured into the P&S price. If he gets his permit part of his site development costs is to take down the town owned building and to do whatever site clean-up is necessary. Contrary to what is suggested above, if the town is forced to invest in removing its part of the building, the P&S should be nullified or at least renegotiated to reflect the town’s investment.

    As to an obligation for the town to take down its building, there is none. If the developer takes down his portion of the building, he is obligated to support the town’s building. The town taking down its building at its cost would be a windfall for the developer. This should be considered in any negotiation.

    Lastly, I believe the opportunity presented by Senator Joyce to get a state grant to support public infrastructure improvements, which costs would otherwise fall to the developer, is a great opportunity to change the dialog about this project. It is an opportunity that should be embraced by the developer, the Planning Board, and the Board of Selectmen.

  2. Steven Connelly on August 14, 2012 at 8:58 am

    In response to Mr. Jackson:
    1.) The P+S purchase price is predicated on recieving a special permit utilizing the full benefit of the zoning bylaw.Currently, the proposal has less than the minimum residential unit count allowed and double the amount of commercial space that we,as applicants, want to provide.We are not recieving a quality application of the bylaw from the planning board.
    2.)We are not “forcing” our town to demolish the structure.The public saftey officals of our town have determined that in the interest of public safety,the entire structure needs to be removed.This means the town pays to take the town owned structure down and we pay to take our structure down because the town has ordered us to do so.The parties of this P+S agreement are responsible for any expenditures on their respective properties until the agreement is consummated.Mr. Jackson has advocated to have the structure removed.
    3.) The town has a deeded obligation to remove the structure. The town has not performed on this obligation for over eight years.We have no obligation to the town.
    4.) If Mr. Jackson had his way,the proposal would have already been rejected by the planning board before Senator Joyce presented this opportunity.Mr. Jackson’s comment on embracing the Senator’s possible funding is self-serving, in my opinion.
    5.) P+S purchase price $400,000
    Purchase price from MBTA $167,000
    Estimated tax revenue $250,000
    Estimated town demo cost $170,000
    Possible state funding $1,000,000

    Total Loss to town $1,987,000
    My opinion is that the planning board should embrace this zoning compliant proposal because it is the best interest of the town both financially and for the quality of life in the area.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Advertisement

Hungry in Milton?
Join us for lunch
every Friday
afternoon

Friends + Followers

Follow us on Twitter, friend us on Facebook or both!

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 102 other subscribers

Milton Weather

Advertisement