[Falco]: Mr. Clerk, are you ready?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I am ready, Mr. President.
[Falco]: OK, great. We'll begin. The 24th regular meeting of the Medford City Council will now come to order. Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Present. Vice President Caraviello? Present. Councilor Knight?
[SPEAKER_55]: Present.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Marks? Present. Councilor Morell? Councilor Morell? I saw her in here. Councilor Scarpelli is present. President Falco. Present. I know I saw Councilor Morell. I saw Councilor Morell. Yeah, I just didn't hear her.
[SPEAKER_42]: Has she been made a host so that she can shut her mute off?
[Adam Hurtubise]: She's been made a co-host. Yes.
[Morell]: Sorry, I just, I got kicked out. I'm back.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Oh, sorry. Welcome back. I'll take that as present.
[Falco]: I am present. All seven members are present. At this point in time, I ask everyone to please rise to salute the flag.
[SPEAKER_32]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you.
[Falco]: This is being broadcast live on channel 22 for Comcast and channel 43 on Verizon. Pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the Open Meeting Law, General Law, Chapter 30A, Section 18 and the Governor's March 15, 2020 order imposing strict limitation on the number of people that may gather in one place, this meeting of the Medford City Council will be conducted via remote participation to the greatest extent possible. Specific information and the general guidelines for remote participation by members of the public and or parties with the right and or requirement to attend this meeting can be found on the City of Medford website at www.medfordma.org. For this meeting, members of the public who wish to listen or watch the meeting may do so by accessing the meeting link contained herein. No in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological means. In the event that we are unable to do so, despite best efforts, we will post on the City of Medford or Medford Community Media website an audio or video recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting. I want to thank everyone for attending tonight. We have a number of hearings tonight. Hearings 20-381. This is a notice of a public hearing, legal notice, City of Medford, Massachusetts, Medford City Council Chapter 94 zoning. The Medford City Council will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 7 p.m. via Zoom remote videoconferencing relative to the petition by Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn to amend Chapter 94 Zoning, Chapter 94-148D, Table of Use Regulation for Use 18, multiple dwelling not over three stories in height, in Use 19, multiple dwelling not over 75 feet or six stories in height. Will use 18 or 19 is presently allowed by right, yes. The proposed amendment would require a special permit from the city council, SPC, requiring that at least 25% of the total gross floor area of the development contain non-residential uses permitted by right, of which are authorized pursuant to a special permit in the underlying zoning district where relevant overlying zoning where relevant overlying zoning districts. As drafted, the amendment would take effect in the APT-1, APT-2, APT-3, and C-1 in MUZ zoning districts. The full text of the amendment may be viewed in the office of the city clerk at Medford City Hall, room 103, or the city's website at http://www.medfordma.org. slash community development by clicking on the current CD board filings. A Zoom link for this meeting will be posted no later than July 24, 2020. So at this point in time, I would declare the, actually, if I may, this paper did go to the, actually, Let me just read the rest of this, if you could give me a second. To participate remotely outside of the virtual platform, questions and comments may be submitted via email to ahertubise, that's A-H-U-R-T-U-B-I-S-E, at medford-ma.gov. For accommodations, call 781-393-2425. TTY 7813932516 pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the Open Meeting Law, General Law, Chapter 38, Section 18 and the Governor's March 15, 2020 order imposing strict limitation on the number of people that may gather in one place This hearing of the Medford City Council will be conducted via remote participation to the greatest extent possible. Specific information and the general guidelines for remote participation by members of the public and or parties with the right and or requirement to attend this meeting can be found on the City of Medford website at www.medfordma.org. For this meeting members of the public who wish to listen or watch the meeting may do so by accessing the meeting link contained contained to be posted not later than July 24, 2020, no in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access proceedings in real time via technological means. In the event that we are unable to do so, despite best efforts, we will post on the City of Medford or Medford Community Meeting website an audio or video recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting. By order of the Medford City Council, Adam L. Hurtubise, City Clerk, this was advertised in the Boston Globe July 13th and July 20th, 2020. We also have received correspondence from Andre LaRue, who's the chair of the CD board. That's dated July 20th, 2020. And I'm going to read that now, that's regarding Council Resolution 20-381, Proposed Amendment to Chapter 94 Zoning, Section 94-148D, Table of Use Regulations for Use 18, multiple dwelling not over three stories in height and Use 19 multiple dwelling not over 75 feet or six stories in height to require at least 25% non-residential uses. Following the duly advertised public hearing conducted on June 18, 2020, in July 16, 2020, the Community Development Board voted to recommend that the Medford City Council adopt the proposed amendment In the commercial 1, C1 in mixed-use zones, MUZ zoning districts, with the following changes. For the proposed footnote to use 18 and use 19, number 3, remove the words 25% of the total floor area and replace with the first floor. Two, for the proposed footnote to use 18 and use 19. Number three, add the following language after the words overlying zoning district or business or professional office retail sales. Consumer service business or eating place as defined in section 94-2 definitions. Following considerable discussion, the Community Development Board made no recommendation on the proposed amendment to the APT apartment one in APT, apartment two zoning districts. Thank you for your consideration of these recommendations. Audrey LaRue, chair. At this point, I declare this public hearing open. Would anybody like to speak in favor? Anyone like to speak in favor of the petition? Yep, let's see, we have Chief of Staff, Dave Rodriguez.
[Dave Rodrigues]: Thank you, Mr. President, and sorry, I was looking for the raise hand function, I couldn't find it, so I just did it the old fashioned way. I appreciate the comments that were made by the Community Development Board, their careful consideration that was made after a number of meetings that were constructive and of thoughtful and very substantive. And the mayor agrees with the changes that are recommended by this community development board. She thinks that it achieves the policy objectives that were put forth and spurred off a good conversation that happened at the city board at that time. So we hope the council will give it careful consideration as well.
[Falco]: Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez. Would anybody else like to speak in favor of the petition? Okay, seeing and hearing none, I declare this portion of the hearing closed. Now I open this up to anyone in opposition of the petition. Is there anyone in opposition that would like to speak?
[Caraviello]: Mr. President, I see someone has a hand up. Navarre?
[Falco]: Yes, Will. Okay. One minute, please. Please have your name and address for the record.
[William Navarre]: Thank you, Mr. President. I hope you can hear me. Great. William Navarre, 108 Medford Street, apartment 1B. The goal as I understand this, Mr. President, and I might not be super familiar with the changes. I'm not sure if we're still considering whether or not it'll be an apartment one and an apartment two, but I'm commenting as if it is that. The goal as I understand it is to increase the commercial tax base. I have major equity concerns with that. The present system of taxation gives a discount to housing owners, by taxing housing land and housing improvements at a lower rate than ones that are commercial. However, on the other side of that, it provides an incentive to create housing that housing seekers will enjoy. And this seems to subvert that. housing owners continue to get their discount. And it's really tough for housing seekers to have supply built for them because you got to put in commercial in order to do that. So I'm a little bit concerned that this is going to hamper housing production. All right. And I would suggest the alternative proposal that if the city wants to see more commercial go in, they consider removing that disincentive to commercial, the higher mill rate, which encourages you to put in housing rather than commercial. You can just look at some of the assessments, Mr. President. You can see that even though the bill rate is nominally higher in commercial, you can see that as a relation to land value, this is sort of what you start with and you hope they build up. You can see that the commercial properties often pay a smaller ratio of their land value in taxes. And that's because some commercial is not very developed. An obvious example would be on Mystic Avenue. But the new housing is, of course, well-developed, with lots of assessed improvements at each dollar of assessed land value. Even at Wellington Plaza, where it's legitimately developed, it's not an empty lot, at 760 Fells Way, I think that's where the stop and shop is, sort of that wing of the plaza. They pay less as a ratio of land value than the housing across the way at Five Cabot. You might say that's a luxury development, but that means that they're paying a lot of improvement taxes. So when you get down to it, if you want to extract more from commercial, you can often do that just by having a flat land value tax, where you don't tax extra for the homeowners and the apartment owners for having buildings, you tax based on the value of the land that they deprive to others. And since the rate is flat, and no matter what you put there, you pay the same amount of tax, that creates a free field with no favor. All right. Thank you. We're going to take away the incentive to leave land unproductive, vacant or blighted. The tax would furthermore encourage the owners of land on Mystic Avenue to sell it or develop it. And that's true whether or not the city decides to rezone it residential. They don't have to pay much taxes right now. They can wait and wait and wait until you rezone it residential. And some people don't want to do that and that's fine. They got to do something. A land value tax doesn't even need to be a sudden and abrupt change that's got to cause chaos or anything. You can do it slowly. Maybe one year the taxes are going up a bit. You put all the increase on the land. Maybe they're going down a bit. You take off the decrease off buildings. So it doesn't have to be a sudden change that shocks the system. We need, and I should say that generally when you do that, homeowners, especially lower income homeowners and lower income neighborhoods generally get more of a tax break and less of a tax hike when you do it that way, rather than flat on each. So it's not through this, the increase for homeowners, it's usually a decrease. We do need more commercial city of Medford, but we also need more housing in the city of Medford. And we can get more of both by removing the tax break for those who hold land out of use in the form of parking lots, vacant lots, and low intensity businesses like the sprawling large car dealerships that are really glorified parking lots on Mystic Avenue. That's how we can get more commercial in our city. That's how we can get more housing in the city by using the land productively, by removing the discount for blight. and waste, and most of all, speculation as you wait for the city to improve around you to become richer or for the city council to rezone. They should build what it's zoned for, they should build commercial Mystic Valley, and they shouldn't be holding land hostage waiting for that. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Thank you, Mr. Navarre. Let's see, we have... Name and address for the record, please.
[Catalo]: Hello Kelly Catalo, 46 Otis Street in Medford on I understand that we need to do zoning changes, Mr. President. But first of all, I don't think that this should be happening in the middle of the summer and the middle of a pandemic when we can't even all be in the same room. There are people that wanted to be part of this meeting tonight, but they can't communicate via a screen. So if at some point you decide to put this off to another date, there are people that have valuable information to add to this that would like to be in the council chambers and do so in person. What I will say is the way that this is written to bring commercial into apartment 1, apartment 2, or apartment 3 zones, I will tell you some of the apartment 1 zones. If you're going up Oakland Street, which is across the street from City Hall, that's all houses. But the right side of that is apartment 1 zoning. If I lived up there, I would not want stores or commercial property put in there. If you go down Riverside Avenue underneath the bridge from Medford Square, The right side of that is apartment one zoning. I wouldn't want stores all over there. When we go down Main Street in Medford, we're talking apartment one and apartment two zones, and it just doesn't work for that. As far as the mixed use zoning districts, Medford Square, we've been asking for mixed use zoning for 30 years. I would love for that to be part of this amendment here. that we can have apartments as well as commercial. And it's not that we're trying to take away things, but we have a lot of vacant storefronts across our city, and you're going to see a lot more due to COVID in people working from home. I love the recommendations from the Community Development Board, except for one. I don't think that you should require the commercial to be ground level, because maybe the commercial piece is something that's on the same lot, like what we're seeing across the street from Wegmans, We still have a bank on the lot. Maybe that bank makes up that 25% that is needed in that zone. The other thing that we're seeing is a lot of the apartment houses and the complexes that are being built are talking with companies like WeWork, and maybe that's on the sixth floor, but it's a level of commercial property for people to be able to work at home. Thank you. Thank you.
[Falco]: Anyone else against? In opposition? Okay, we have Derek Anderson. Name and address for the record, please.
[Anderson]: Oh, Derek Anderson, 16 Myrtle Street. Thank you, Mr. President. I am against this proposal. I would like to second a lot of what Kelly has just said. Mixed use is very important for our community. Adding more commercial is very important. I love the idea of having commercial in some of those apartment zones and commercial zones that are affected by this amendment. I'm thinking particularly along Salem Street, a great place for it. But there are places that are affected by this amendment. Kelly's mentioned a number of them. I think Riverside Ave, everything along Riverside Ave from downtown Medford to Locust Street, from Riverside Ave to the river would be affected by this. So there would be no multi dwelling apartments greater than two units, unless it's an attached single family home that would be allowed in that entire section of town from now on, unless they put in 25% commercial. There just aren't developers out there that are going to build that kind of stuff. This is a ban on multi-dwelling housing in a number of areas of our city. It's completely inappropriate to try to have this sort of quick fix zoning amendment to what is really begging for a comprehensive zoning process. And I know that our community development group is doing a housing plan. resilience plan, they're going out for comprehensive planning, all those things can feed into real zoning reform, and I'm optimistic that that can happen. But we need to let that process unfold. This kind of quick fix is going to have lots of unforeseen issues. And I'm extremely concerned, particularly that there's a requirement for city council to approve, case by case, every single application that's proposed for multi-dwelling. That's a huge change from where we're at right now. It's totally inappropriate to put city council in that place. I assume that you guys don't wanna be put in that position. I certainly wouldn't wanna be put in that position of having politics inserted into every single application. And it's just the wrong way to go about this. Point of information Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: This is a public hearing in favor or against. It should be ended. We have 35 items on the agenda. If we allow the dialogue to continue for four or five minutes on every item on the agenda this evening, we're going to be here until tomorrow morning. I appreciate what Mr. Anderson has to say and I agree with him. I'm not going to be supporting the zoning amendment this evening. I'm going to vote to reject it. for the reasons that I stated when it was introduced. However, in the interest of getting through the agenda, Mr. President, I think it might be important for us to maybe limit the time of public participation this evening. We have 35 items on the agenda.
[Falco]: Okay, Councilor Knight. Derek, did you want to conclude?
[Anderson]: Sure, and I appreciate your position, Councilor Knight, and I apologize for taking a lot of time. I am passionate on this. I'll just conclude, it's inappropriate to have City Council involved in this. This is a citywide ban that's totally inappropriate. This is not the way to do it. We do need commercial. I like the intent, but the implementation is wrong, and I'm against this.
[Falco]: Thank you very much, appreciate it. Is anyone else in opposition of this? Anyone else in opposition that would like to speak?
[Knight]: Motion to close the public air.
[Falco]: We have one more person. Let's see you, Roberta Cameron. Would you like to speak?
[Roberta Cameron]: Yes, thank you. I just wanted to mention one thing that I'm concerned about the the the uses that would be allowed within those districts are not necessarily the uses that are compatible with our vision of what mixed use looks like. It's that the underlying commercial uses that would be required to be located, co-located with commercial, with residential buildings are not necessarily the uses that would be compatible with that type of building. So I just wanted to add that to the argument.
[Knight]: Was that opposed, Mr. President?
[Roberta Cameron]: Yes, opposed.
[Knight]: Thank you.
[Falco]: Thank you, Roberta. Is there anyone else in opposition? Anyone in opposition that would like to speak? OK. Hearing and seeing none, I will this portion of the hearing close. Now I'll ask if the council has any questions or comments that they'd like to make.
[Knight]: Motion to reject the zoning amendment, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Okay, on the motion of Councilor Knight to reject the zoning amendments.
[Scarpelli]: Second, Council President.
[Falco]: Seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Any questions from the Council?
[Marks]: Mr. President?
[Falco]: Yes, okay, Councilor Marks.
[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. You know, we are in the process, as many residents know, we hired an attorney to help us with our review of our zoning ordinances that haven't been reviewed in over 30 years. I think many people in this community realize that there are many changes that need to happen, many updates. And I would agree with some of the previous speakers that we really do need to look at a comprehensive amendment. And I appreciate the fact that the mayor is trying to put forward what she believes is in the best interest of the community. However, I'd like to look at a total picture when I arrive at a decision, and I don't believe this arrives at that. There is an issue, Mr. President, I've raised on many times. before the council and regarding zoning is the fact that we're seeing many buildings pop up that have very little community feel and community impact other than providing additional housing. And I've always stated, Mr. President, that we have to make sure that we're not just creating big blocks residential places that really have no community feel. So whatever I do as a member of the council, I'm going to be cognizant of the fact that I will be mindful of adding a component, like we mentioned about mixed use and so forth, and whatever votes I take, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. Any other questions or comments from the council? Councilor Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Mr. President. Just that I think Derek said it very well and Councilor Marks as well. I'm supportive of some of the ideas around this, but I want to see it happen as part of a larger process.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Bears.
[Rodriguez]: Any other questions from the council?
[Falco]: Okay. On the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli to reject this to reject the zoning amendment. Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Mr. President, I just want to clarify. A yes vote on this motion is a vote to reject. Is that correct? You are correct. Here comes the roll call. Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight?
[Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the zoning amendment has been rejected. Notice of a public hearing, 20-042 legal notice, City of Medford, Massachusetts, Medford City Council, chapter 94, zoning. The Medford City Council will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, July 28, 2020, at 7 p.m. via Zoom remote video conferencing relative to a petition by the Medford City Council to amend chapter 94 zoning revised ordinances of the City of Medford to allow to allow for and regulate adult-use marijuana establishments in the city of Medford with an aim to minimize any adverse impacts that marijuana establishments may have on adjacent or nearby properties and to provide standards for placement, design, siting, safety, security, modification, and discontinuance of central establishments subject to reasonable conditions that protect public health. safety, and welfare. The full text of the amendment may be viewed in the Office of the City Clerk, Medford City Hall, Room 103, or on the city's website at http://www.meffittma.org slash department slash community development by clicking on the current CD board filings. A Zoom link for this meeting will be posted no later than July 24th, 2020. This was advertised in the Boston Globe on July 13th and July 20th. We have actually since received a response from the CD board and from Andre LaRue, the chair, dated July 22nd, 2020. regarding Council Resolution 20-042 proposed amendment to Chapter 94 zoning to allow for and regulate adult use marijuana establishments. Following a duly advertised public hearing conducted on July 16, 2020, the Community Development Board voted to recommend that the Medford City Council adopt the proposed amendment with the following changes. Number one, more specificity be added to the ordinance relative to allowed locations for marijuana establishments, including a revision of section 94-148D table of regulations. And number two, consideration of drafting edits contained in the attached document. Thank you for your consideration of these recommendations. And that's from Andre Leroux, the chair of the CD board, the Community Development Board.
[SPEAKER_42]: Mr. President. Motion to continue the public hearing to a date certain following a committee of the whole meeting with the Community Development Board to go over the recommended changes.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor. On that motion, Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I have Councilor Knight's motion as a, hang on, as a motion to continue the hearing to a date certain for meeting in Committee of the Whole with members of the Community Development Board to go over the proposed changes.
[Knight]: Yeah, so I'm following a meeting of the Committee of the Whole.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, hang on.
[Knight]: I would assume that can be done between now and our next regularly scheduled meeting, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Yes, that's what I will be aiming to do.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, following a meeting with the committee, in committee of the whole with the community development board.
[Knight]: Or representative thereof, whoever wants to go over these changes, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Okay, do you have that councilor, Clerk Arteries?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes, I do.
[Falco]: Okay, let's see, we have a question from Councilor Bears, Councilor Bears.
[Bears]: Just if President Falco or Councilor Knight, do you know where we are on the ticking clock on this zoning change? Is there a date?
[Falco]: I did check with City Solicitor Scanlon today. We have 90 days from when the hearing opens. So today, but this is something that I think really needs to be addressed sooner than later. We've been working on this for a while. So I'll be aiming to set up a committee, the whole, as soon as possible.
[Bears]: Great. And both taking COGS legal and just, we need to get this done. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thank you. Mr. President, my understanding is that if it's continued to a date certain and you actually name the date, it also does not have to be re-advertised. Okay.
[Knight]: I would move to name the date as the next regularly scheduled city council meeting, Mr. President.
[Falco]: That sounds good to me, which would be- 28th of August. Again, August 25th. 25th.
[SPEAKER_55]: Mr. President.
[Marks]: Councilor Marks. I would also ask that KP Law be invited for advice as well as the acting city solicitor. Absolutely. They've both been instrumental in- Councilor Marks, is that an amendment? If you want that in the form of amendment, that's fine. I'll use it as an amendment.
[SPEAKER_55]: Seconded, Mr. President.
[Knight]: Or you can add it as part of the main motion, so we don't have to vote on it twice.
[Falco]: That's fine. On that motion by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli.
[Knight]: As amended by Councilor Marks.
[Falco]: As amended by Councilor Marks to continue the hearing to a date certain, which would be August 25th. But we will have a committee the whole meeting before that meeting to discuss the changes.
[D'Antonio]: So moved.
[Falco]: On that motion by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight?
[Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes. 20-478, notice of a public hearing. Petition for grant of location, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts, electrical transmission line. Medford, Massachusetts City Clerk's Office, you are hereby notified that by order of the Medford City Council, a public hearing will be given via Zoom at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, July 28th on a petition of Tufts University for permission to install an electrical transmission line beneath Boston Avenue near the intersection of College Avenue and to locate poles, wires, and fixtures, including the necessary sustaining and protecting fixtures along and across the public way herein named said poll locations to be located substantially in accordance with the revised plan marked Boston Avenue. Menford, Massachusetts will be filed in the Office of the City Clerk on June 4, 2020. A Zoom link for this meeting will be provided no later than Friday, July 24, 2020. Wherefore, it prays that after due notice and hearing, as provided by law, it be granted a location for and permission to erect and maintain poles and wires, together with such as standing and protecting fixtures as it may find necessary, said electrical transmission line be erected substantially in accordance with the revised plan marked Boston Ave, Medford, Massachusetts, and available for inspection in the office of the city clerk, Medford City Hall, room 103, 85 George P. Hassett Drive, Medford, Massachusetts, 02155. Also, for permission to lay and maintain underground laterals, cables, and wires in the above or intersecting public ways for the purpose of making connections with such poles in buildings as each of said petitioners may desire for distributing purposes. The following are the streets and highways referred to. Boston Avenue in the vicinity of the new power plant building near the intersection of College Avenue. Location approximately as shown on plan filed in the office of the city clerk. This was approved by the city engineer with the following conditions. The engineer division recommends that the grant of location be approved with the following conditions. One, the grant of location, GOL, is limited to approximately 60 feet of electrical transmission main described in the GOL document as follows. Number two, excavation of Boston Avenue is an installation and maintenance of eight by six underground electrical conduits and wires together with such sustaining and protecting fixtures as may be necessary for the transmission of electricity under and across Boston Avenue, a public way approximately 500 feet north of the center line of the intersection of Boston Avenue and College Avenue, said location request. touched athletic utility district, Medford, Massachusetts, and filled, filed in the office of the city clerk the plan. The work consists of installing approximately 55 linear feet of electrical duct bank to an electric manhole as shown on the plan and to connect to conduits of petitioner's property and property of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation. Number three, before starting work, the contractor shall notify DIGSAFE and shall obtain all applicable permits from the engineering division. The project must obtain a street opening permit pursuant to section 74-141 of the city ordinances prior to commencing work. The SOP application must include a proposal for temporary and permanent street restoration to be considered as a condition. Please see additional comments below on street restoration. The SOP application must also include a traffic management plan. Number four, no other utility structures, conduits, duct banks, pipes, or other appearances are adversely impacted. Tufts shall ensure that all sewer, water, and drain lines are marked prior to any excavation. Any disturbed concrete sidewalk panels shall be replaced in kind. Asphalt must be replaced with asphalt. Five, the sidewalk and street temporary and permit restoration shall be done in consultation with the engineering division and per the requirements. of an approved street opening permit. The recent resurfacing of Boston Avenue stopped short of this location due to the anticipated and ongoing construction related to both Tufts University projects and the Green Line Extension project. Also, the City of Medford intends to add a pedestrian crossing in this vicinity using funds obtained from the MBTA related to mitigation for the GLX project. The engineering division recommends that in lieu of performing final street restoration, a contribution be negotiated and agreed upon with the city engineer that approximates the construction cost value of finished street restoration. The cost should take into consideration. in consideration roadway mill and overlay restoration with a curb-to-curb offset of 25 feet, including setting curb stones and sidewalk restoration and mill and overlay restoration encompassing Tufts University utility patches from the intersection of College Avenue to the limits of Dolan Hall. This contribution will go towards final resurfacing of this section of Boston Avenue. This will provide a consistent final pavement surface along this section of Boston Avenue. Number six, pavement markings must be restored. Number seven, the project site must be swept daily and shall be kept free of debris for the duration of the installation. Number eight, a copy of the MWRA permit and associated plans must be submitted to the engineering division prior to releasing a street opening permit. Number nine, the plan indicates open trench construction There is existing concrete barrier structure and cable guardrail that must be removed for the installation of the transmission line. These two elements should not be replaced. The engineering division recommends that the petitioner coordinates sidewalk surface restoration with the Greenline Extension Project as there is sidewalk scope for that project on the east side of Boston Avenue. Any temporary restoration must meet accessibility standards. The sidewalk on the west side is likely to remain and should be permanently restored to concrete upon completion of the crossing. Approved by the Superintendent of Wires, call 781-393-2425 for any accommodations and or aids. Plans can be reviewed at the City Clerk's Office, 781-393-2425, Adam L. Hurtubise's City Clerk. I declare this public hearing open, open to those in favor of the petition. Is there anyone that would like to speak in favor of the petition? Rocco, I'm trying to unmute you now. Oh, there we go. Name and address for the record, please.
[DiRico]: Rocco DiRico. Work address is 14 Capen Street in Medford at Tufts University. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, members of the City Council and neighbors. My name is Rocco DiRico. I'm the Director of Government and Community Relations at Tufts University. We are here to seek a grant of location permit to connect a new academic building that we're building, the Cummings Center. to our central energy plant. This is a utility connection for the Cumming Center. As some of you may know, Tufts University has set the ambitious goal of being carbon neutral by 2050. So we've built our own central energy plant to help with that goal. And what we'd like to do, if approved, we'll dig a trench underneath Boston Avenue to lay conduit cables connecting the central energy plant to the Cumming Center. This also has the additional benefit of connecting Halligan Hall, Cousins Gym, the Tisch Fitness Center, and Gancher to our central energy plant, as the other buildings on our campus are attached to. If approved, the project can start in August and will take about three to four weeks. The working hours will be normal working hours, Monday through Saturday, between 7 AM and 6 PM. Boston Avenue will remain open. There may be times when we need to close one lane and close the other lane, but it will remain open. throughout the project. Our goal is to complete the project before Labor Day, before schools reopen and there's increased traffic in the area. We've had a robust communications plan for the Cummings Center, and this is part of the project. We've had eight community meetings on this project. We have a public website for the project. I meet with a neighborhood working group that's made up of neighbors once a month. We also send monthly email updates to our neighbors. I've had several meetings, phone calls, and emails to neighbors about this project. And on this particular grant of location request, I have called and or emailed everyone on the abutters list in preparation for tonight's meeting. I am joined tonight by Ruth Bennett, who is our director of strategic capital programs. And we also have our contractors here tonight, council or the audience have any questions about the project.
[Falco]: Thank you, Rocco. Is there anyone else that would like to speak in favor of this project? Yes.
[Rodriguez]: If you could please have your... Aaron, I'm trying to unmute you. There we go.
[SPEAKER_42]: Everyone must hate this. She can't talk. She's being muted. This is the first time it's happened.
[Falco]: What everyone's like, I'm trying to unmute you. It doesn't seem I gotta go.
[Caraviello]: Okay.
[Rodriguez]: Oh, no. Are you trying to unmute? No. Okay. Thank you, everyone, for your patience.
[Knight]: Mr. President, this is the public hearing portion. It's either opposed or against, right?
[Falco]: Yeah. Is there anyone else that wants to speak in favor of this project? Erin, I can't get you to, I'm trying to unmute you and it won't let me. Erin.
[Bears]: Something should come up on your screen when he presses the button that says unmute. There you go, you're unmuted.
[DiBenedetto]: You're unmuted. I was trying to do that. It wasn't allowing me and then they asked me not to. But anyway, Erin DiBenedetto, 21 Hamlin St. First of all, I'm all for putting more of the energy through their power system as long as it's quiet, and it has been for quite a bit. I also need to comment that the construction that's going on up across right now, they're not being neat with keeping things off the street. Even tonight as I walked by, there was piles of sand and rock in the street with cones wrapped around it. and some trash bags behind a barrier that really doesn't, that barrier doesn't need to be there. I've called a couple of city Councilors and Vice President Rick Caraviello has been very helpful in getting them to clear that area so the street stays wide and safe for both pedestrians and cars.
[Falco]: I apologize for interrupting, but we need to keep on topic with this project here.
[DiBenedetto]: It goes to speak as just when they're doing the Boston Ave project, I hope that they keep that area safe and clean as they do it. It's a great improvement for their community, but while they're building, they need to be aware of the hillside community. Also, I would like to be re-added to the emails that Rocco mentioned. I just want to be clear that not all- What information, Mr. President?
[Falco]: What information, Councilor Layton?
[Knight]: This is a public hearing. It's either we're in opposition or we're in favor of the project. We go, again, I understand we're coming from Marion, but we have 35 items on the agenda. If we continue down this road, we're going to be here all evening. The common practice that's always been with the council has been public hearing in favor or opposed. When we've had people come to the podium in the council meetings, we've told them, Stop, public hearing in favor or opposed.
[DiBenedetto]: Okay, I respect that Councilor Knight. I just wanted to make sure that the project is safe for the residents as well. So yes, I'm in favor.
[Falco]: Perfect, thank you very much Sharon. Does anybody else that would like to speak in favor of the project?
[Ruma]: Thank you very much. My name is Laurel Ruma. I live at 149 Burgett Avenue, directly behind the current Cummings building and the proposed construction. So I had a number of qualifying questions that needed sort of a quorum to be answered, including, I'm assuming Tufts now has permanent access easement under Boston Avenue, and I'd like to know what payment structure the university worked out with the city for that permanent access.
[Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe granted locations and personal property tax are attached to any type of grant location in the underground infrastructure that they put in through the assessor's office. And I do believe that that itemization is determined after they complete the work and construct what it is that they need to construct so that we can tax it appropriately.
[Ruma]: Okay, so I understand that also the payment for the new sidewalks will be deferred and so the green line construction is put in. I would just like to make the point that this neighborhood does need very specific enhancements, including dead end signs. We need a parking mitigation plan, but most importantly, we would like Tufts to withhold some of that money and buy curtains or blinds or drapes for the building so the lights don't shine into the neighborhood. As of now, we're already looking at a massive light pollution, and it only has construction lights up. So I just want to make clear that the neighborhood is very aware that this is a continual encroachment and building of the Tufts so-called athletic utility district and we are still the rest of the city living here. So we too would like attention paid to this neighborhood.
[Falco]: Thank you very much. Is there anyone else that would like to speak in favor of the petition? Hearing and seeing none, I declare this portion of the hearing closed. Is there anyone that would like to speak in opposition of the petition? Anyone in opposition? Hearing and seeing none, I declare this portion of the hearing closed. Are there any questions from the council? Yes, Councilor Morell.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. President. Rocco, thanks for being here. And I know we talked yesterday about this, but I just wanted, if you could address just for the public and the rest of the councilors how the anticipated length of this work and project from start to finish.
[DiRico]: Thank you, Councilor Morell. Sorry, after six months of Zoom, I'm still figuring this out. But yeah, so we anticipate a total project to take three to four weeks once we can begin. And as I said, it'll be all normal working hours during the day and only Monday through Saturday as is typical working hours in Medford.
[Morell]: Okay, thank you.
[SPEAKER_32]: Any other questions from the council?
[Knight]: Mr. President, I do believe Councilor Scarpelli has a question.
[Falco]: Oh, I'm sorry, Councilor Scarpelli.
[Knight]: He's muted.
[Falco]: Oh, let me find him.
[Knight]: Good luck.
[Falco]: That's what I was going to say. Actually, he's right here. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. There were some questions that when I asked, it was already taken care of. So thank you.
[Falco]: Okay, thank you.
[Marks]: Mr. President.
[Falco]: Councilor Marks.
[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I would ask that the city of Medford and Tufts University put together a list of contacts for area residents, a clerk of the work that would be responsible for the project, and any questions that residents may have.
[Falco]: Would you like to add that as an amendment? Okay, yes. Okay, any other questions?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor, I'm sorry, Clerk Hurtubise. I'm still working on Councilor Marks' amendment. Councilor Marks, you're asking the Tufts and the city put together a list of, and I lost you there, it got a little garbled on my end.
[Marks]: A list of project contact names and numbers, as well as the city of Medford to have a clerk of the works that is responsible for the project. And I know Mr. DeRico said he has a list of abutters and so forth. I'm sure he can disseminate some information that way and the city can also add it to its city website and local community access as well. So residents know that they have a place and a person to talk to if need be.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. Let's see, Vice President Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, and I think Mr. Benedetto spoke earlier on the concerns about keeping the sidewalks and equipment clear from the work area. So if you could make sure that gets done too, it would be appreciated.
[DiRico]: Yes, Councilor.
[Falco]: Thank you, Vice President Carmielo. Any other questions from the council?
[SPEAKER_41]: Move for approval as amended, Mr. President.
[Falco]: On the motion of council tonight to approve as amended by Councilor Marxie and seconded by?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Second.
[Falco]: Councilor Bears, Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears.
[Bears]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Vice President Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Let me see these on you, one minute.
[SPEAKER_50]: Yes. Perfect. President Falco.
[Falco]: Yes, 70 affirmative, zero in the negative. Motion passes.
[DiRico]: Thank you, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Thank you very much, Rocco. Notice of a public hearing, legal notice 20-479, petition for grant of location, National Grid Incorporated of North Andover, Massachusetts, and Verizon New England Incorporated, Medford, Massachusetts, City Clerk's Office. You are hereby notified that by order of the Medford City Council, a public hearing will be given via Zoom at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, July 28, 2020, on a joint petition of National Grid Incorporated and Verizon New England Incorporated for permission to locate poles, wires, and fixtures, including the necessary sustaining and protecting fixtures along and across the public way here and after name to be located substantially in accordance with the plan marked number 29567848 Winthrop Street, Medford, Massachusetts, April 4, 2020, and filed in the office of the city clerk on May 11, 2020. The Zoom link for this meeting will be provided no later than Friday, July 24, 2020. We are for a praise that after due notice and hearing as provided by law, it be granted a location for a permission to erect and maintain poles and wires gathered with such sustaining and protecting fixtures as it may find necessary. Set electrical transmission line to be erected substantially in accordance with the plan marked number 29567848. and available for inspection in the Office of the City Clerk, Method City Hall, Room 103-85 George P. Hassett Drive, Method, MA 02155. Also, for permission to lay and maintain underground laterals, cables, and wires in the above or intersecting public ways for the purpose of making connections with such poles and buildings as each of said petitioners may desire for distributing purposes. The following are the streets and highways referred to. Winthrop Street National Grid to relocate one J-O pole on Winthrop Street near Victory Park beginning at a point approximately 25 feet southwest of the center line of the intersection of Winthrop Street near Victory Park. Relocate number 265 on Winthrop Street, seven feet away to the Package of the sidewalk for the installation of Eversource facilities. No tree removal shall be required. Location approximately as shown on the plan filed in the office of the city clerk. This was approved by the chief engineer with the following conditions. Number one, the grant of location are limited to the relocation of one joint owned pole in the underground services associated with the pole relocation. Number two, before starting work, the contractor shall notify DIGSAFE and shall obtain all applicable permits from the engineering division. The project must obtain a street opening permit pursuant to section 74-141 of the city ordinances prior to commencing work. Number three, no other utility structures, conduits, duct banks, pipes, or any other apparatances are adversely impacted. National Group shall ensure that all sewer, water, and drain lines are marked prior to any excavation. Any disturbed concrete sidewalk panels shall be replaced in kind. Asphalt must be replaced with asphalt. Number four, the project site must be swept daily and shall be kept free of debris for the duration of the installation. Number five, the proposed work is located adjacent to Victory Park and its access points. National Green must coordinate with the Metro DPW Parks Division to maintain access to the park and mitigate impacts to the use of the park. Number six, the work is close to existing bollards and the plan does not indicate removal or replacement of bollards. The bollards shall remain in place. Number seven, There are multiple trees that have canopy that will be impacted by the relocation of the associated overhead wires. The contractor must coordinate any required tree trimming prior to start of work with the Method DPW tree warden. Number eight, the new pole location appears to be within the root zone of the adjacent tree. Protection measures for the tree roots must be coordinated with the Method DPW tree warden. Number nine, shutdowns associated with the service transfer for the pump station must be coordinated with the station owner. This is approved by the superintendent of wires. Call 781-393-2425 for any accommodations, aids. That's from Adam L. Hurtubise. Plans can be reviewed or viewed in the city clerk's office at 781-393-2425. I declare this public hearing open to those in favor of the petition. Anybody that would like to speak in favor of this petition? Do we have Verizon with us tonight?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Mr. President, I notified National Grid, Vincent LoGiudice, he accepted the meeting and is aware. There's another National Grid grant location on tonight as well. So I'm not sure if somebody who is in the queue is representing National Grid or Verizon tonight.
[Falco]: Okay, is there anyone here on the meeting that is representing National Grid or Verizon?
[Knight]: Mr. President, I do think it's important to point out that this measure has been recommended by the city engineer. And as part of the Eversource project, I do believe that that area will be resurfaced curb to curb on the completion of the Eversource project. So I think that's something that's important to point out. If in fact there is any disruption or trenching that's done in that area, come completion of the Eversource project, it will be resurfaced curb to curb. I can certainly confidently vote for this paper this evening in approval. However, I would defer to the rest of the council as to what direction they want to take, whether they want to receive them at a table of matter or a table of matter until the applicant comes back is fine with me. That's been a normal practice in the past, but I'm comfortable voting on it this evening. I wish you good luck.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Any other councilors who want to comment on this or make a motion?
[Marks]: Mr. President? Councilor Marks? Mr. President, as many residents are aware, we're undergoing a major infrastructure project going on right now with Eversource that's coming down Winthrop Street. And there's going to be much disruption to the area, as well as South Street and Mystic Ave. And I did have a couple of questions. using the existing trenches that will be dug by Eversource? Or will they be creating their own trenches? They also mentioned underground laterals and cables and wires. Is that going to be part of the extensive digging and trenching that Eversource is going to do for their electrical transmission? So I have a number of questions, Mr. President. I'm not sure if, you know, we don't meet until the end of August. So I'm not sure if time is of the essence. I don't know if we have our city engineer on tonight as well. I thought I may have seen his name. Mr. Clark, do you know if he's on?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I do not see him, Councilor, but I'm scrolling through now.
[Falco]: We can, I mean, we can maybe, if you want, and I showed the representative from Verizon or National Grid is maybe having problems logging in. We can maybe table to the end of the meeting. I don't know if the clerk can reach out to him.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'm going to reach out right now.
[SPEAKER_41]: OK. Motion to table, Mr. President. Actually, motion to continue the public hearing. So August 25.
[Falco]: What if they show up in like 10 minutes?
[Marks]: Why don't we just move it to the end of the meeting? And then if they don't show up, Mr. President, I would agree with Councilor Knight. Because there's already a major project going on there, and I'm not sure the extent of this project. We don't know the hours of operation. We don't know if they're going to be working in conjunction with National Grid and Eversource. I really don't know anything about the project. So that's what I would ask, that we move this to the end of the agenda calendar.
[Falco]: Okay, so why don't we table this for now and hopefully someone from Verizon or National Group will log in and we can take it up towards the end of the meeting. So Council Member Marks, was that a motion to table? Motion to table, and then we can see if the city clerk can get a hold of someone.
[Marks]: Okay. Second, Vice President.
[Falco]: On the motion of Council Member Marks to table, seconded by Vice President Caraviello, clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes, 70 affirmatives, you're on the negative. The motion is tabled.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Mr. President, while you read the next hearing notice, I'm going to call National Grid, because they're also, I believe, on this next hearing. You are correct.
[Falco]: OK, notice of a public hearing. Legal Notice 20-480, Petition for Grant of Location, National Grid of North Andover, Massachusetts, Medford, Massachusetts City Clerk's Office. You are hereby notified by the order of the Medford City Council, a public hearing will be given via Zoom at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, July 28, 2020 on a petition of National Grid Incorporated for permission to locate poles, wires, and fixtures, including the necessary sustaining and protecting fixtures as it may find necessary for the transmission of electricity under and across a public way here and named to be located substantially in accordance with the plan marked number 2577-3968 Salem Street, Medford, Massachusetts, May 14, 2020. Resume link for this meeting will be provided no later than Friday, July 24, 2020. We afford praise that after due notice in hearing, As provided by law, it be granted permission to excavate the public highways and to run and maintain underground electric conduits together with such sustaining and protecting fixtures as it may find necessary for the transmission of electricity, said underground conduits to be located substantially in accordance with the plan marked number 25773968 Salem Street, Method, Massachusetts and available for inspection in the office of the City Clerk, Medford City Hall, Room 103-85, George P. Hassett Drive, Medford, Massachusetts, 02155. The following are the streets and highways referred to. Number 25773968, Salem Street, National Grid, to install approximately 25 feet of 2x4 conduit for existing manhole MH478B. on Salem Street Southwest to a 31 to 35 Salem Street. The conduit is for the purpose of providing electrical service to 35 Salem Street. Location as shown on plan filed in the office of the city clerk. Excuse me. This was approved by the chief engineer with the following conditions.
[Marks]: Mr. President, I would move that we suspend the reading of the remaining remainder in that this be placed and tabled with is not a representative from National Grid, that it be placed at the end of the agenda as well. Okay, on the motion of Council... Was there another comment?
[SPEAKER_42]: Just a second, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Oh, okay, I'm sorry. Okay, Council, on the motion of Council marks to table, seconded by Councilor Knight. Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Hold on a second. Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. Let's see. Let's see, well, before we begin, let's see if we have someone from Comcast with us tonight.
[SPEAKER_42]: You don't want to read that?
[Falco]: I don't mind reading it, but I figured I might as well ask. Let's see, Clerk Hurtubise, do you know if anyone from Comcast is on with us tonight?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I know that David Flewelling is aware of the meeting and accepted the Zoom link.
[Falco]: OK. If there's anyone from Comcast, can you please raise your hand? Okay, I do not see anybody from Comcast. I'm not sure if you do. On the motion of Councilor Knight to table, seconded by Councilor Bears. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'm sorry, motion to table? Councilor Knight. Seconded by Councilor Bears. Councilor Bears. Yes. Vice President Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes, the matter is tabled.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay, I believe that was all the hearings, right, Clerk Hurtubise? I believe so. Hold on just a moment, let me just double check. Yes, we move on. The next item on the agenda is the motions, orders, and resolutions.
[SPEAKER_42]: Great, thank you. Mr. President, I withdraw paper 20483.
[Falco]: Okay, paper 20-483 has been withdrawn by Councilor Knight.
[SPEAKER_41]: Mr. President, I also withdraw paper 20487.
[Falco]: Okay, 20487 has been withdrawn by Councilor Knight. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Okay. Motions, orders, and resolutions. 20-484 offered by council all night. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council hold a committee of the whole to discuss the future of the Medford Fire Headquarters with the representatives from the Mayor's Task Force, Local 1032, and the Director, Finance Director, and Fire Chief. Council all night.
[Knight]: Mr. President, I find this is a rather self-explanatory resolution. What I'm asking for is a committee of the whole meeting with the administration and representatives of the fire department and the fire union to discuss the future of our fire headquarters, fire training tower, and the like, Mr. President. We've had many discussions over the past three or four years relative to these projects, and many commitments were made. And I just would like to see where we stand in this process. I know we face very trying and scary financial times right now, the picture isn't beautiful. However, I think it's important that we maintain some of the commitments that we made, and at the very least communicate with friends of the fire department as to where we stand, what's going on, and what commitments still remain on the table moving forward. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to support the resolution. This is really just an effort to get more information, to find out where we are from a capital planning standpoint related to fire safety services, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Did any councilors have any comments or questions regarding the resolution? Does the resolution have a second?
[Scarpelli]: Seconded, Mr. President.
[Falco]: I believe we have a second. Councilor Scarpelli, okay. Are there any questions or comments from the public regarding the resolution? Okay. Hearing and seeing none, on the, let's see, on the motion of Council Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. Sending the affirmative, zero to the negative, the motion passes. 20-485 be it resolved, I'm sorry, 20-485 offered by Councilor Knight, be it resolved that the City Clerk be directed per Section 2-592 of the Ordinances of the City of Medford to provide the Medford City Council with copies of any application filed with Article IV Site Plan Review Sections 94-331 through 94-336 of the Ordinances of the City of Medford within seven days of receipt thereof. Councilor Knight?
[Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, this is just a resolution providing a directive to the city clerk to forward us certain informations that come to his office. All too often, as a city councilor, you know, when you're down at CB Scoops getting an ice cream, someone will come up to you and say, hey, what's going on at this address or this location? You say, what are you talking about? I have no idea. And they say, well, there's doing construction over there. What's the story? Well, I've never received a paper on that. Pursuant to the way that projects are filed through site plan review, they have to be submitted to the clerk's office, Mr. President. So what this is is just directing the city clerk when any item that's subject to site plan review comes across his desk to include it in our council packets so that we're aware of it and then we can do our due diligence to be well informed about the certain projects that are going on. So what this is is asking the city clerk to provide us with information The city clerk was never directed to do this in the past, so what we're doing is just taking a step to ensure that we receive this information. I think Adam's doing a great job. This is no reflection on the work that he's doing. This is a new responsibility that we're tasking upon him, like we do probably every other week. We give him something else to do. I think pretty soon we'll have to look at giving this guy a raise or some more vacation time, Mr. President, if he's able to take it. being said, this is just an opportunity for us to gain information and gain certain documents related to projects that are being performed in our community that are subject to the site plan review. Those are the same projects that are also subject to our inclusionary housing ordinance. So I think it's very important, Mr. President, that we're aware of that before the shovel goes in the ground.
[Falco]: Well said. Thank you Councilor Knight. Let's see on the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by
[Caraviello]: Second, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Seconded by Vice President Caraviello. Are there any questions or comments from the council? Any from the public?
[Morell]: Okay, hearing and seeing none, on the motion of councilor. I'm sorry? Sorry, President Falco, I see Laurel has her hand up. Oh, yes, I'm sorry. Let's see.
[Falco]: Laurel, there you are. Apologize. I'm gonna try to unmute you. There you go. Name and address for the record, please.
[Ruma]: Thank you, Laurel Ruma, 149 Burgett Avenue, Medford. So I just want to be clear that site plans do not, Tufts University is not required to file site plans with the city. However, I would like this amendment to specifically say that any plan that Tufts University files also should be brought before the city council. Okay, thank you.
[SPEAKER_41]: For clarification, Mr. President,
[Knight]: Resolution does nothing to change the existing ordinances. It does nothing to change the approval process. All it does is allow us to be informed with documentation. It's really a request for public records that's an ongoing request for public records that when they come into the clerk's office, we get a copy of it, but it's not doing anything to change the existing ordinance or the existing approval process. That's not the intent of this piece of legislation, and it's not something I'm willing to amend to reach that fire at this point in time.
[Ruma]: Absolutely understood. Councilor, it's just the point that when people ask what's happening at that address or this address, people also ask what's happening at Tufts University. They also have addresses within the city. Therefore, if a plan comes before the city clerk, it should also come before the city council.
[Rodriguez]: Thank you. Let's see. I'm going to try to unmute you again. There you go. Name, address, and record.
[DiBenedetto]: Thank you, President Flanagan. Erin DiBenedetto, 21 Dearborn Street. I agree wholeheartedly with the addition of Tufts filing that. We don't know in our neighborhood what is happening and what construction is happening. And if the city council is where I go to when I ask those questions. So it would be really nice if you had that information as well. So I'm hoping that the council or one of the councilors will amend the amendment to include Tufts University.
[Falco]: Thank you. Any other questions or comments from the public? Okay, hearing and seeing none.
[Marks]: Mr. President.
[Falco]: Councilor Marks?
[Marks]: I would ask that if the council is all right with that, that we amended to allow for any correspondence from Tufts University to be passed off to us as well.
[SPEAKER_41]: Motion to sever.
[Falco]: Councilor Knight, I missed you. Can you say again?
[Knight]: I'd offer a motion to sever.
[Falco]: To sever? Okay. So you want that to be a B paper then?
[Knight]: I don't want it to be any paper, but the councilor is adding it. So I'm asking that it be severed.
[Falco]: Councilman Marks, should that be a B paper?
[Marks]: A B paper is fine, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Okay. So thank you, Councilor Marks. Clerk Hurtubise, do you have the wording on the B paper?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Council Marks' B paper is to allow any correspondence from Tufts to be included as well in these types of communications.
[Falco]: That's accurate?
[Marks]: That's accurate.
[Falco]: OK. So what we will do is we will vote on the B paper first. That B paper was offered by Council Marks. Does that B paper have a second?
[Bears]: Second, Mr. President.
[Falco]: That B paper is seconded by Councilor Bears. Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears?
[Bears]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Vice President Caraviello?
[Caraviello]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight?
[Knight]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Marks?
[Marks]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Morell?
[Morell]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli?
[Scarpelli]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. On the main paper, the main resolution offered by Council, and it's seconded by Vice President Caraviello. Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'm going to second. Councilor Bears. Yes. Vice President Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell.
[Falco]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Falco.
[Falco]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes. 2-0-486 offered by Councilor Knight. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council receive a report from the Chief of Police regarding the events of July 4th. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Yes, Mr. President, it's been brought to my attention. I think it's been brought to all of our attention. All of us in the community are well aware that a series of unfortunate events occurred on the night of July 4th down along Willis and Conger Street, I do believe, Mr. President, where there was an assault on police officers, shooting of fireworks, throwing of M-80s, quarter sticks of dynamite at our police officers under their cars. Just a scene of unrest. in violence, Mr. President, against our police department, against members of our public safety community. Our fire department, our police department, we're on the scene. So I'd just like to get a report, Mr. President, because unlike some people in this community that feel as though Facebook is the gospel of news, I don't. I feel as though if we're going to find out what's going on in this community, we should get official reports from the people in the department heads that are responsible for that. So with that being said, I'm bringing this initiative forward so I can have a better understanding of what happened down there, Mr. President, because I really don't know. The information that I've received about this has all been from media outlets and fake news outlets. So with that being said, I'm hoping that we can get a report directly from our chief of police.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Bears]: Second, Mr. President.
[Falco]: So that motion is offered by Councilor Knight and seconded by Councilor Bears. Are there any questions from the council regarding the motion? Any questions or comments from the public? Diane, if we could please have your name and address for the record, please.
[Sullivan]: Yes, Diane Sullivan, Jerome Street, Medford. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm curious, will we have the same type of report on the events of July 15th at City Hall?
[SPEAKER_41]: If a council has the option to offer that resolution, it will be brought up for a vote.
[Knight]: But as of right now, the issue that's before this council is the issues and events that happened on the evening of July 4th. And I would move for approval on that paper, Mr. President.
[Scarpelli]: Okay. Second, Mr. President. Okay.
[Falco]: Any other questions or comments?
[Rodriguez]: One minute. Matt, did you have any hand up? I just want to make sure.
[Rodriguez]: OK.
[Morell]: On the motion of council night. Mr. President. Yes. There's a new hand up. Joanna.
[Anderson]: Let me, one minute.
[Falco]: Joanna, name and address for the record, please.
[Quatieri-Mejia]: Joanna quit hearing me. He had 35 early out of Medford. Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to say that I too would like to see the report from the chief of police for July 4th incident. Thank you.
[Falco]: Okay. Let's see. Uh, any other questions or comments? Okay. Seeing and hearing none on the motion of council and I seconded by Councilor, I believe it was Councilor Bears.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Please call the roll. Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes, seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. 20-488 offered by Councilor Knight being resolved at the Medford City Council. Extend its deepest and sincere condolences to the family of Elaine Honeycutt on her recent passing. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. For those of us that have been around the community, we're all well aware of the Honeycutt family and the contributions that they've made to MedFed. We look at Bill Honeycutt and the work that he does with John Brewer's Tavern and the volunteerism and the donations that he makes to the community. We look at Steve Honeycutt and the work that he did on the Disability Commission before his passing. And here we have Mrs. Honeycutt, who recently passed away, who's done such a great job raising children that had such a focus on community and such a focus on giving back. It's just very sad to see her leave. She was an integral part of this community. She did great work raising her children, and she's raised them to be great participants in social capital and the social fabric I mentioned, Mr. President, and she will surely be missed. So with that being said, I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in expressing deepest condolences and sincere condolences to the Honeycutt family in their time of loss.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Vice President Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Again, I want to echo Councilor Knight's comments. The Honeycutt's contribution to the city of Medford go so far from donations they made to the contributions to the disabilities of members of the community. So again, I thank them for all their work and send my condolences to their family also.
[Marks]: Thank you, Vice President Caraviello. Councilor Marks. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank Councilor Knight for putting this on the agenda. You couldn't meet a kinder, gentler woman. She was truly what represented this community in everything she did, Mr. President. And she was a loving wife. mother, grandmother, sister, and just a truly great woman, as was mentioned by my colleagues, that raised a tremendous family that still continues to give back to this community, and she will be sorely missed. If I could, Mr. President, I'd like to have this meeting named in her honor, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Falco]: Thank you, Council.
[Knight]: I second the motion, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Councilor Knight, I'm sorry, I missed that.
[Knight]: I second the motion.
[Falco]: OK. Thank you. Any other comments? So as we offer our deepest and sincere condolences to the Honeycup family, I'd ask everyone at this time to please rise for a brief moment of silence. Thank you. And on the motion of Councilor Mark, seconded by Councilor Knight, that this meeting tonight be dedicated to the family of Elaine Honeycutt on her recent passing. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. 20-489 offered by Councilor Knight, be it resolved that the Medford City Council request that the city administration meet with the Hormel Commission in the leadership of Allentown Catholic High School to establish a plan to allow graduation ceremonies at Hormel Stadium. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Mr. President, it's my understanding that this issue has been resolved, that Arlington Catholic has decided to take their business elsewhere. However, I do find it quite unfortunate the series of events and circumstances that led up to Arlington Catholic having to go somewhere else to hold their graduation. The O'Melle Commission granted a permit, Arlington Catholic wrote a check, and they were unable to hold their graduation due to concerns around COVID-19. However, at the same time, Medford High School, who has a class that's twice the size, is holding graduation ceremonies at Homel Stadium. So for the interest of just fairness, Mr. President, I don't understand why this happened or how this happened. I just find it unfortunate that the number of children that graduated from Island and Catholic that have Medford roots or are Medford residents are probably up to 30% or 40% of the senior class. And to have them want to hold their ceremonies here in Medford This shows what a great relationship we have with Huntington Catholic and the amount of people in this community that believe in faith-based education and that send their children to Huntington Catholic but also remain members of our community that contribute quite a bit. So I just found that unfortunate, Mr. President. It's about the kids. And I'd like to get a report back from the city, but after filing this resolution and after the agenda was published, I did receive a lengthy response from the chief of staff that I admittedly glanced over and haven't had the opportunity to really get into and to read, Mr. President. So I will be offering to receive and place this paper on file until I can perform my due diligence and read the report that Chief of Staff Rodriguez forwarded to my email account and all of ours earlier in the week. But with that being said, I do find it unfortunate that, you know, things had to turn out this way. And I think that, you know, as the months and days go by, we need to come to grips with what's going on in the world, but also what's going on in this community and how we can continue to better provide services under whatever they want to call this new normal or whatever it is. I don't think there's anything normal about it, Mr. President. I think it's craziness. You can go into Target, but you can't go into City Hall. You got to wait in line to go in City Hall, but you can't go into Target. It's getting nutty. I think that it's time that we figure out what course we're going to take, what direction we're going to go in. get a game plan together and let's stick to it. I know that there's a lot of uncertainty, there's a lot of dynamic pieces and moving pieces and moving parts, Mr. President, but for us to not be able to provide for those families and those kids a graduation ceremony after all that they've had to put up with since St. Patrick's Day is a little bit unfortunate and I would have liked to see it handled a little bit differently. But with that being said, Mr. President, I will take the time So with that being said, Mr. President, I will offer to receive and place this item on file. However, there was a lot of concern about it that was brought up over the last several weeks. So I felt it was warranted to place it on the agenda this evening.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Light. On the motion of Councilor Light to receive and place on file, seconded by- Second.
[Caraviello]: Second.
[Falco]: Vice President Caraviello, Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears. Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Council Knight? Yes. Council Marks? Yes. Council Morell?
[Falco]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Falco?
[Falco]: Yes, 70 affirmative, zero on the negative. The motion passes. Clerk Hurtubise, if I may, as you'll make sure, I received. So do we have the Verizon representative on the line?
[Adam Hurtubise]: We have the Comcast representative on the line. It's Mr. Flewelling from Comcast.
[SPEAKER_42]: Mr. President, motion to suspend the rules to take the Comcast public hearing petition off the table.
[Falco]: Okay, I have a motion to suspend the rules to take the Comcast public hearing from the table, seconded by?
[Bears]: Second, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Councilor Bears, clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes, 70 affirmative, 0 in the negative. Motion passes. The rules are suspended. And we will now take, I believe it's 20481. Am I correct, Clerk Hurtubise?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I believe that's accurate. Hang on a second. Let me double check the records for the agenda. Yes, 20481. The number you're looking to unmute, Mr. President, is the 617279 number. It's under Councilor Schiappelli on my screen. I can try to unmute him if you'd like. Yeah, could you please?
[Scarpelli]: Mr. Flanagan? Good evening. Yes, good evening.
[Falco]: Okay, so let me, this one here, I did not, I'm gonna read that now. So, notice of a public hearing, legal notice 20-481, petition for grant of location, Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, Medford, Massachusetts, City Clerk's Office. You are hereby notified that by order of the Medford City Council, public hearing will be given via Zoom at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, July 28, 2020, on a petition of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC.
[Marks]: Mr. President? Yes. I motion that we waive the remainder of the reading and have the petition to give us a brief synopsis of the work that will take place.
[Falco]: Yes, if you could. Is this Mr. Flewelling?
[Flewelling]: Yes.
[Falco]: If you could please give us a brief synopsis.
[Flewelling]: Yeah, sure. Good evening. Dave Flewelling, Comcast, Woobin, Massachusetts. We've received a request from the Hyatt Hotel to bring a new conduit to that address. We'll be starting at the existing Comcast vault, excavating into place two four-inch PVC conduits, 52 feet plus or minus, to a two-foot by three-foot vault in the sidewalk. And then from the newly placed vault, we'll be excavating into place one four-inch PVC conduit, three feet plus or minus, onto the private property of the hotel.
[Falco]: Okay. Thank you. So at this point, I would declare the public hearing open. Actually, before I move any further, I just wanted to note that this year has been approved by the chief engineer with the following conditions. The engineering division recommends that this grain of location be approved with the following conditions. Number one, the grain of location is limited to approximately 52 feet of conduit. Proposed vault and service conduit as described in the petition. Starting at the existing Comcast vault excavating to place two four-inch PVC conduits 52 plus or minus to a proposed two-by-three vault in the sidewalk. From the newly placed vault excavating to a place one four-inch PVC conduit, three plus or minus and continue on to private property. Number two, before starting work, the contractor shall notify DIGSAFE and shall obtain all applicable permits from the engineering division. The project must obtain a Street opening permit pursuant to section 74-141 of the city ordinances prior to commencing work. At a minimum, the street opening permit application must include a street restoration plan and traffic management plan for review and approval. Number three, no other utility structures, conduits, duct banks, pipes, or any other appearances are adversely impacted. Comcast shall ensure that all sewer, water, and drain lines are marked prior to any excavation. Number four, the sidewalk and street restoration shall be done in consultation with the engineering division in further requirements of an approved street opening permit. This must include a site inspection with the permit officer to determine the extent of pavement restoration. The concrete sidewalk must be replaced in kind and cleanly cut at the control joints. The bituminous concrete pavement over the trench shall be milled and overlaid to an offset approved by the engineering division. The brick-stamped concrete edging shall be replaced in kind. Number five, pavement markings- President, if I could stop you on that point for a moment? Yes.
[Knight]: Will the resurfacing be done in a curb-to-curb fashion, or is this going to be grounded inlay in a trench?
[Falco]: Mr. Flewellen, could you comment on that, please?
[Flewelling]: Yeah, we're going to go by whatever the city engineer determines on the paving restoration. So we're going parallel across the street. So, you know, I don't know if that really would be considered curb to curb.
[Knight]: The chief of state will have a comment on that as to what the street restoration plan would be for this. Dave, do you have any idea around Mr. Rodriguez?
[Dave Rodrigues]: I'm not familiar enough with the project. I'd have to defer to Tim McGibbon, but I'm happy to talk with him about that. I'll see if I can get him on the call right now. I'll see if I can text him and get him on.
[Knight]: Excellent, thank you. No, it's just, it's always been a common question we've always asked about, you know, ground opening permits and restoration. And when, you know, our roads get reopened, what happens is we get a trench and the trench ends up being garbage in 18 months. And you know, the contractor is supposed to come back and let it sit for six months and replace it, then it'll be good as new, but that never happens. So we've been pushing for curb to curb restoration on projects like this.
[Dave Rodrigues]: If it's a preference, it's always going to be curb to curb, of course.
[Knight]: Yeah, Mr. Fleming, I'm just, I'm explaining to the Comcast petitioner. and why I ask, you know, but I understand, you know, the need for the project. I don't like why they ask this here. And I apologize for interrupting, but I just figured it would be easier to ask the question while it was on the table, as opposed to going back to it after you're finished voting. So thank you.
[Falco]: Number five, pavement markings must be restored. Number six, the project site must be scrubbed daily and shall be kept free of debris for the duration of the installation. Number seven, Riverside Avenue is a highly traveled roadway for vehicles as well as pedestrians. A detailed TMP must be submitted to the engineering division for review and approved prior to receiving a street opening permit. The TMP must include accommodations for pedestrians in addition to vehicles. Number eight, the plan does not indicate drain lines or laterals. Drainage pipes beneath the conduit must be replaced. Number nine, the conduit must cross MWRA infrastructure. Copies of the MWRA permit must be submitted to the engineering division prior to releasing a street opening permit approved by the superintendent of wires. Call 781-393-2425 for any accommodations and or aids. Adam L. Herneby, City Clerk. These plans can be viewed in the City Clerk's office at 781-393-2425. At this point, I would declare the public hearing open, open to anyone in favor of this project. Mr. Flewelling, I would assume you're in favor?
[Flewelling]: Correct, yes.
[Falco]: Okay, thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak that is in favor of the project? Okay. Hearing and seeing none, I declare this portion of the hearing closed. Is there anyone in opposition of the project? Anyone in opposition that would like to speak? Hearing and seeing none, I declare this portion of the hearing closed. Let's see. Are there any questions from the council?
[Marks]: Mr. President? Councilor Marks? Will there be any disruption to the flow of traffic in roughly how long will this project take?
[Flewelling]: The project should take roughly under a week, say five days, weather permitting. There will be some disruption to traffic. We already have a traffic plan prepared and ready to submit with the street opening permit that does take into account the pedestrian traffic.
[Marks]: And when will most of the work be done? During the day or at night?
[Flewelling]: We can do it during the day or we can do it during the night. Again, we'll abide by whatever directions are given on the street opening permit. If it calls for night work, we'll do the work at night. If it calls for day work, we'll do it during the day.
[Marks]: I will leave that call, Mr. President, up to the city engineer and the city administration. Thank you, Councilor Marks.
[Falco]: Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: I just would recommend, Mr. President, that if night work is going to be discussed, we take the appropriate steps. We do have two senior buildings right across the street from that location, and we don't want to disrupt. that elderly population that live in our senior buildings, if in fact we can avoid that. So I certainly appreciate Councilor Mark's position on this and I too will support the paper this evening and await the report of the city engineer relative to the curb-to-curb repayment.
[Falco]: Thank you Councilor Marks and thank you Councilor Knight.
[Dave Rodrigues]: Yeah, I do have some interest. I just spoke with him on the phone. So this is a perpendicular trench. It's not a parallel trench. If it was a parallel trench, we'd certainly consider the curb-to-curb. But with the perpendicular trench, we'll just offset to be consistent with the current pavement condition. So we'll try to blend it in as much as we can. It will be a mill and overlay. We won't do full depth on something like this, because it could cause more damage than it's solving. So we can get a little bit more information for you on that. But just to clarify, it's a perpendicular trench on a parallel trench where a curb would be appropriate.
[Knight]: It is pretty much curb to curb because it's going across the street.
[Dave Rodrigues]: It's just going across. Yeah, it's just more narrow.
[Knight]: Mr. Rodriguez, that's plenty. I'm no engineer. So any other information you give me that you want me to read, I'm not going to understand anyway.
[Dave Rodrigues]: I literally had to take notes because I'm dumber than Tim is, so I had to just say what he said.
[Knight]: Sounds good. Excellent. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
[Falco]: Thank you. Thank you, Chief of Staff Rodriguez. Thank you, Council. Any other questions from the Council? Okay. Hearing and seeing none, is there a motion on the floor?
[SPEAKER_42]: Move approval, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Second. On the motion of Council, I'd like to approve, seconded by Councilor Marks. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell?
[SPEAKER_55]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. 70 affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes.
[SPEAKER_41]: Motion to revert to the regular order of business, Mr. President.
[Falco]: I'll motion of Councilor Knight to revert back to the regular order of business. Seconded by? Second. Councilor Marks, Clerk, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Also bears. Yes. Vice president Kirby yellow. Yes. That's a night. Yes. That's a marks. Yes. That's a morale. Yes. I'll just go Pelly. Yes. President Falco.
[Falco]: Yes. 70 affirmative zero and the negative. The motion passes. We will now revert to the regular order of business motions orders and resolutions to zero dash four nine zero offered by Councilor Marks. He resolved that the speeding and signage on Washington street in spring street area be discussed. Councilor Marks.
[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. And I believe there may be one or two residents from the area on with us tonight that would also want to speak. So I just want to let that be known. I received a number of phone calls and emails, Mr. President, from area residents in the Washington Street, Spring Street, Bradshaw Street area regarding speeding traffic. This is not common to this particular area. We receive calls constantly throughout the community. And one issue that I've brought up over many years was instituting traffic calming initiatives like they do in many other communities. I've been on the city of Cambridge website, the city of Somerville, and we don't have to recreate the wheel, many of the initiatives are out there and things that we can take advantage of. One, Mr. President, that I believe our city has fallen short on the mark is the raised crosswalks that I've mentioned for the last at least 10 years. Back several years ago, Mayor McGlynn offered to do a pilot program with three raised crosswalks. And to date, we have only implemented one of the three that was studied and approved. And that is on Winthrop Street. I would ask Mr. President in the interest of public safety, in the interest of taking our roads back from speeding traffic, that this particular area of Washington, Bradshaw, Spring Street, receive a traffic study, a formal traffic study on speeding cars, as well as the need for additional signage, Mr. President, in the area. And the day after, I believe it was, that I received one of the emails, I got a follow-up email from the same gentleman that said he witnessed a young boy get hit in the street by a car, Mr. President. I don't think it was very serious, but it was enough, Mr. President, to alarm residents of what is taking place in their neighborhood. So I would ask Mr. President, in the interest of public safety, that our Traffic Commission quickly move forward on the creation of a traffic study in this area, the implementation of traffic calming initiatives, whether it's widening sidewalks, whether it's putting road markings, whether it's a raised crosswalk, blinking lights, whatever it might be, Mr. President, to increase safety in the area, I think would go a long way. We've, as a council, have mentioned this ad nauseum regarding many other streets in the community. And I really believe, and this is no reflection on any current administration, but we really do a poor job when it comes to controlling the speed within our community. And when people don't feel safe taking their dog for a walk or taking their child for a walk or going for a jog, you know there's a concern in the community. And many of our secondary roads are becoming cut-through roads with all the Waze applications and other applications people are using, and drivers are finding any which way to get through our neighborhoods. And that's creating much of the chaos we're hearing about on our streets. So I would put that in the form of a motion, Mr. President, that that be sent to the Traffic Commission, and they look at additional signage on those streets. and the commission of a traffic study for implementation of some traffic calming initiatives. And I believe we have Ed Serino from the area and maybe Tony Mosca, I believe also may be on the Zoom meeting tonight.
[Falco]: Okay. I'm gonna try to find them if you could, I think the clerk has a question in the meantime.
[Adam Hurtubise]: If I could ask Councilor Marks a question, I got most of Councilor Marks' amendment. I'm taking the request for a traffic study as an amendment to your motion, Councilor, am I correct in doing that? Well, it's currently not part, yeah, so it would be an amendment to my motion. So from what I have been able to write down as you spoke, the amendment is for a traffic study in the area of Washington, Bradshaw, and Spring Street. request for a traffic study and additional signage and to ask the Traffic Commission to move forward with this study as soon as possible.
[Marks]: Correct. And any other traffic calming initiatives that the city can think of?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Any other traffic calming initiatives? Thank you, Councilor Marks. Mr. President, can I interrupt one more time? It's about a previous topic. John Jankowski from National Grid has been trying multiple times to get on the call. So he is here, and he called me in my office when Councilor Marks was speaking. So National Grid is trying to get on this call, and I know that Mr. Jankowski was on earlier as well. So we'll try to figure that out.
[Falco]: OK, let's continue with this, and then we'll figure out.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I apologize for the interruption. I just didn't want to lose that piece.
[Falco]: All right, we got Mr. Serino. Could we please have your name and address for the record?
[Serino]: Ed Serino, 49 Bradshaw Street, Medford. Thank you, Mr. President. I also want to thank Councilor Marks for being involved in this. And also, if someone's still on from the mayor's office, I talked to the mayor a few times. You witnessed something with me last year on spring and a ribbon cutting. Unfortunately, with the part of spring where I'm at, people need to speed up. If they're coming down from Haines, they speed down. I grew up on Riverside Ave. I spoke to the council many times before about my aggravation with parking and speeding in the city, especially growing up on Riverside. And also working for Anheuser-Busch for 35 years. I've been a liaison with the company and the city. We always try to be a great neighbor. And part of that is the safety of our vehicles going on the road. But as Councilor Mark said, my opinion is, it's not if when a tragedy is going to happen, it's when. My daughter is 22 years old now, so I'm not doing this for me, but I can tell you as I petitioned my neighbors for the past two weeks for signatures, I had more people from Pembroke and Carolina, which are our neighboring streets, approach me to also sign, and I told them you can't sign. I'm just trying to make Bradshaw itself six to nine during the school hours, residents only, putting the temporary speed bumps that I see on Bonner, because it's getting bad. I've had a couple of, I won't say confrontations, but I will say the young man's lucky that I'm not in my 20s and single, because it would have been a different conversation. When people, I'm in a new vehicle now, I almost got hit. People swear there's kids coming by on motorcycles. And I really think it's gonna be tragic when someone gets hit. I will say the mayor did have a Mr. Blake from the engineering department sent me a very detailed email a few weeks ago on the plans he has for the area. One thing that he wrote in, which I think is what I'm trying to do on Bradshaw, is the city is looking at a shared street initiative that will help alleviate some of these issues. So I get it with COVID, everyone's stretched thin. I have had call traffic a few times because the other problem we have here, which makes the speeding tougher, all the rentals from Riverside and Spring, they all come to Bradshaw because we're not permit parking. I had an issue today. We had to go outside and move a car. A fire truck could not make a swing because there were people blocking the intersection across from us. And thank God we were home to do that and open that up. So again, I want to thank everybody for their time. I know this is a citywide issue, but I really think that Councilor Marks hit it on the head that not only can we do better, but we need to do better. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_32]: Thank you very much.
[Falco]: Let's see. Paul, Paul, can we please have your name and address for the record?
[Fombelle]: Hi, Paul Fombell, I'm on 33 Douglas. And I'll be brief. I support all of the ideas for citywide traffic enhancements. My question or comment is, I would encourage it to be a much broader perspective as opposed to those limited streets. I live off of Summer Street between Main and Winthrop, and that's a NASCAR strip during rush hour every morning and every afternoon. And people are cutting through, and so I guess my question is, why are we limiting it to these several streets that very clearly have a need and not more of a citywide initiative? Because that Berry Park is right there. There are kids. I have two little kids. And Berry Park is right in the middle of that race strip. And cars go flying by every day. And there's little kids playing in the park, kids playing in the basketball courts, tennis courts. There's needs for this in a much broader perspective. That's all I got.
[Falco]: Mr. President. Thank you, Paul. Yes, Councilor Marks.
[Marks]: I agree with the previous speaker, and I would ask that Todd Blake, our traffic engineer, look at a citywide approach. This council has been requesting that for many years, and we tend to take things up piecemeal, like we did on Salt Street and many other streets, because there hasn't been a formalized approach to look at the entire city. So I am in full support of looking at the entire city, but as I get calls and emails I react to those calls, Mr. President, and I would ask that Todd Blake be as part of my motion that he look at a citywide approach to traffic calming issues as was mentioned by the previous speaker. Thank you.
[Falco]: Not so much. Do you want to amend your motion to include
[Marks]: If we could, Mr. President, thank you. I've got it, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Thank you. I've got it, Mr. President. So on that motion of Councilor Marks, seconded by Councilor Knight, as amended by Councilor Marks, we have another comment, I believe. Kelly, did you have your hand up? I'm going to try to unmute. There you go.
[Catalo]: Name and address. Hello, Kelly Catalo 46 Oda Street in Medford. So, Councilor Marks, thank you very much. I've been in this neighborhood for many years, off of Washington Street, and we just recently got a sidewalk. Thank you Rick Caraviello, I've been complaining to you for years. a crosswalk because from these side streets to Riverside Ave, there's kind of a cut through where the people can walk with their dogs and we can run and we can get to the lake. And we want everybody to be able to enjoy our river. But going across that sidewalk, even though we have the sidewalk, Washington Street is a speedway. And everyone's trying to avoid Riverside, and they're trying to avoid Salem Street. I love the idea of the raised crosswalk, that if that crosswalk could turn into a raised crosswalk from Otis over to, I think it's Pembroke that it opens to, that would be awesome. I do appreciate what's happening on Summer Street. I know what goes on over there as well. We've got traffic issues everywhere. But this particular issue, thank you for bringing it up. Thank you.
[Falco]: Any other comments? Any other comments or questions from the public? Move approval. Now we have one more. Let's see, it looks like, I believe it's Caitlin Murphy. Name and address for the record.
[Murphy]: Hi, Caitlin Murphy, 51, starting now. I hope you can hear me because I'm on my walk. I live in the area. I have two small children that have been walking down the street with my stroller, and people are driving 40 to 45 miles an hour, and it needs to stop. So I fully support this. Thank you, Councilor Marsch, for bringing it to the Council's attention.
[Falco]: Thank you, Kayla. Let's see. Derek Anderson, name and address for the record, please.
[Anderson]: Hi, Derek Anderson, 16 Myrtle. I just want to thank Councilor Marks for introducing this. I totally agree. I wasn't aware of a petition on this. I live near the intersection of Washington and Spring, so I'm very aware of this. I drop children off in that area. And just from September to March of this past school year, I witnessed on at least three occasions kids almost getting hit by cars zooming past buses, to which point the buses are actually parking diagonally across Spring Street to try to slow those vehicles down. So it's definitely an issue in that location. So I'll just voice my support for this. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_32]: Thank you.
[Falco]: Yes, we have, let's see, Carolyn Morrison. Name and address for the record, please.
[Morrison]: Hi, Carolyn Morrison, 26 West. I just wanted to voice my support as well for this motion. I've seen the raised crosswalk work on Winthrop Street between 16 and Boston Ave. And living on West Street, it's a popular cut through from Winthrop to Route 16, and cars are flying down the road all the time. So I also support a more citywide look at this, because it is a problem.
[SPEAKER_55]: Okay, thank you.
[Rodriguez]: Okay, we have another comment. Let's see, Joanna.
[Quatieri-Mejia]: Joanna, name and address for the record, please. Joanna Quintero Mejia, 35 Early Ave. I'm actually calling about my mom's house on Woburn Street, from High Street to Suffolk Street. And I've lived there my whole life. It's like a show for my whole family. We sit in the window sometimes during the bad weather and just watch the cars come off of high and take that turn onto Suffolk. You know, it's a cut through. Somebody was hit by a car there not long ago, actually. And a street sweeper actually turned over when I was a kid. But that's a horrible, horrible turn right there. If you know what I'm talking about, it's high to Woburn to Suffolk. and we watched them do complete donuts, taking the corner there. So that should be something to look at also, but thank you for letting me speak. Thank you. Thank you.
[Falco]: Any other comments?
[Rodriguez]: Jennifer Kerwood.
[Kerwood]: Hi, I just wanted to echo what everyone else has been saying. I really do think this is a citywide issue. Oh, sorry, I have to say who I am. Jennifer Kerwin, 43 Willis Avenue. Thank you for letting me speak. As I said, I live on Willis Avenue. Everyone is using it to avoid Mystic. And with all of the stop signs, as it's a crisscross of one ways, it's also a bus route. Everyone's playing chicken every morning. I know that right now, obviously, with school being out and not knowing what that will look like come September. It has been a massive issue, like a rude, rage-inducing people rushing to get to work, dropping their kids off, doing whatever, and you basically, there's no movement. I've witnessed almost like fisticuffs and people beeping and just laying on the horn because they can't get through because there are cars parked on either side. And so once someone makes a turn off of Harvard, there's no way to see what's ahead of you. And if there's no way to go, everyone's just at a standstill. It's blocking traffic. And I'd also like to say that the one time that I needed emergency services, a fire truck could not get through. So I don't know if that's an issue of having too many cars, having cars being parked on both sides, bad, you know, poor parking jobs, but I do think that Well, considering changes to the way the traffic flows, one thing we could do is turn this into a revenue source at some point, because there could be fines involved. And that's the best way, unfortunately, to implement new changes. That's all. Thank you.
[Falco]: OK, let's see. It doesn't appear that there's any more questions or comments regarding this. So, Clerk Hurtubise, did this have a second?
[Adam Hurtubise]: I believe the original motion was Councilor Marks as amended twice by Councilor Marks with Councilor Knight second.
[Falco]: Perfect. Okay, great. On the motion of Councilor Marks as amended by Councilor Marks twice and seconded by Councilor Knight. Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears.
[Bears]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Vice President Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Marks, thank you. Yes. Councilor Morell. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Falco.
[Falco]: Yes, 70 affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. 2-0-491 offered by Vice President Caraviello. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council ask the Building Commissioner to address the City Council on the recent changes to the residential building permit process. Vice President Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, over the last week or so, I've gotten many calls with regards to a change in the building permit process for homes that are over 75 years old or older. From what I have been told, it was part of the historical commission, something that was passed some years ago. And for some reason, it's now being enforced four years later. And if I could have the building commissioner, I think I saw him here.
[Falco]: He's on the line. Paul Mochi, the building commissioner with us. I'm going to try to, there you go. You're unmuted, Paul, if you wouldn't mind.
[Mochi]: Thank you, Mr. President. Good evening, councillors. To address your question, Councilor Caraviello, about a week and a half ago, we had a meeting with the store commission and the mayor's office regarding some of the conditions in the demolition delay ordinance, as you said, was passed several years ago. And what the discussion really evolved around was- Mr. President, Mr. Mochi, I'm sorry to interrupt.
[Knight]: But I think just a few years ago, the only changes that we made to the demolition delay ordinance was homes that were constructed within 75 years and expanding the demolition delay from six months to 18 months. But the legislative body made no other changes other than that. So that's what I think is making this confusing to us. You know, when we made those changes to the demolition delay ordinance, that was it. It was just those two items. It wasn't this broad sweep to say, you know, start changing the way that you practice. I think that that's what the issue is. But I just wanted to correct what you said there, that when we changed the demolition delay ordinance, all we did was change from houses built before 1900 to houses built within the last 75 years. expanding the demolition delay period from six months to 18 months. So I think that's very important that we point that out. There's been no passage of an ordinance that changed anything that we did here, other than the amount of time that the demolition delay was in place and the age of the home that was subject to demolition delay.
[Mochi]: Yes, that's correct, Councilor. And that was, as you said, the ordinance was for the demolition delay and those were the two changes of 75 years and increasingly time period from 12 to 18 months. But what the discussion, as I was saying, really revolved around was some of the wording. If you look in the actual ordinance itself right now, it talks about demolition of the structure, which is pretty clear. And then part of that same definition, it also elaborates where it states that or any part thereof. And I think that's where some of the questions were concerned about is a total demolition of a total demolition, as I said, that's self-explanatory, but the different parts thereof that were in the definition of the demolition in the historic ordinance, that was where some of the questions were discussed in this meeting. And as a result of that, the historic commission has a pamphlet that they have, and it's got commonly asked questions section. And that was really the main focus of the meeting and in that a section of several bullet points about different scopes of work that can be performed on different properties. And since that meeting, to answer your question, also Councilor Caraviello, about a week and a half ago, so we've been working with the Historic Commission very closely. I'm in touch with the chairman almost on a daily basis right now, and I've also looped her into a software program so that she has access to the permits that are currently under review and what type of jobs that those permit applications entail. And right now, we're still, it's a fairly new process for us. They said it's about a week and a half old. And we're still working through exactly what comes under their purview and what doesn't. So what we started out as a guideline were the four bullet points in their pamphlet under the commonly asked questions section. And then because of the broad scope of work that's done in a lot of residential properties. We're just kind of, I guess, slowing the process down right now and make sure that we're on the same page in terms of what needs to review by the historic commission and what doesn't really come under their peer review. And as Councilor Knight said, that was a big part of the question right now.
[Knight]: Councilor Knight. So it's my understanding that under the current application that the historic commission is using for a demolition delay. If someone wanted to change the windows out on their home, maybe move them six inches to the left, six inches to the right, they'd have to go before the historical commission in order to get an approval to do that?
[Mochi]: Well, that's some of the things we're working on right now, because there are some provisions in those bullet points to address windows. And I think it's kind of hard to paint some of these items with a broad brush. Because there are certain sections that reference interior renovations where windows are affected. And there's another section that says that, you know, it may not be required a purview. So again, it's not to be too vague about that, but we're trying to work through that. Because I think we need to get, you know, definite instructions for homeowners.
[Knight]: Let me ask you, if someone came today to your office and said, I want a permit to not take these windows out, blow them out and put a huge picture window in, would they be allowed to get that permit or would they have to go to the historical commission?
[Mochi]: That's what we try to come to terms with. A lot of times what we'll do is look at the elevation drawings and plans. And if it's, I think the way that, and we should be finalizing some of this very shortly. I think what happens is also, what the scope of the work looks like from the exterior. If it's, in my opinion, the way I'm interpreting it right now is if it's a minor window changes and it doesn't really affect the aesthetics of the outside too much, no, they don't. I don't think they're really too concerned with that. But if it's something that's gonna affect the, again, the exterior layout and design of the building, I think that's some of the window changes they wanna take a look at.
[Scarpelli]: Point of information, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Point of information, Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: I hate to interrupt, but Mr. Mochi, if let's say my neighbor who has a house that is 80 years old and she's a senior citizen and she needs to redo her windows, we have to now wait and get approval from the historical mission to get approval to get these. This could be a huge burden, financial burden on our seniors. The only reason why I know this. as my brother-in-law purchased a home, didn't know it was a historical site, and what would have cost him $5,000 for windows turned into over $25,000. I find this a little scary.
[Mochi]: Well, I think there's also, in that section I was referring to, Councilor Scott, there's some notation in that also that routine maintenance, and it does include windows under routine maintenance, and I don't think that's That particular project we need to review now. Thank you. Sorry.
[Knight]: Mr. Moki, through the president, Mr. Moki. Underneath the new standards that are trying to be implemented now, interior work would also have to be, certain interior work would also need to have to be approved by the historic commission. Am I understanding that correctly?
[Mochi]: Yes, it could be subject to that. If I could read you one of the bullet points, council, it may help you. Yes, please. One of the bullet points that we have implemented since this meeting states that the gutting of a building's interior to the point where exterior features such as window, doors, walls, et cetera, are impacted. So again, it could be this.
[Knight]: So in essence, if somebody wanted to make their house handicap accessible after a tragic event that happened in their family, they'd have to go before the historic commission to make the house handicap accessible as well? A circumstance could arise in that? It could potentially arise, yes. Somebody wanted to rip down a deck and put a ramp in, move a door so that they can meet the requirements of making a wheelchair pass through, they'd have to be subject to these requirements?
[Mochi]: Well, I don't think in that particular example you gave, no. I don't think they would be because it's a state zoning act which gives exemption to handicap ramps for accessibility to one or two families. So in that particular case, I don't think that they would need to review that, no.
[Knight]: And is this commonplace in other communities that the Historical Commission goes this far and gets this far involved in building and development?
[Mochi]: I'm not sure, I haven't had a chance to see what some of our surrounding communities are doing on that right now, so I'm not sure about that.
[Knight]: And also, Mr. Mochi, can you answer, or maybe we'll offer this as a B paper? I know you can't answer off the top of your head, but can we get a report back from the administration? Since amending the demolition delay ordinance, how many homes that have been subject to demolition delay have actually been restored to the historic state? Because I mean, we have an operative ordinance in there, but if it's not meeting the objectives, and now it's turning into this second layer of a building department, I don't know if that's good public policy, Mr. President. If we haven't saved any houses or restored any houses, and all this is doing is creating another layer of bureaucracy and another layer of government, the government within a government, for individuals to get permitting to make home improvements on the largest purchase that they make in their life, their kingdom, their castle, their home. I think this might have to be looked at. This certainly doesn't fall within the scope that I feel as though would be the intent of the legislation at the time it was passed or at the time that it was amended. So I'd like to offer that as a B paper. If we can find out how many homes since amending the resolution have actually been saved and restored, as opposed to how many wanted to demolish an old and decrepit building like Pacelli's and do something that might add some substantial community gain and also some tax revenue to the community. You know, how many of those projects just went to the wayside, and the building's still the building that it was, and the demolition delay, all it did was kill the sale, or kill the redevelopment or repurposing of a property. I think that's important to look at, Mr. President, because, you know, if the goal is to restore historic homes, and our demolition delay ordinance isn't meeting that goal, then why do we have it?
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Let's see, so we have a number of people that have their hands up, but I believe Councilor Caraviello, did you?
[Caraviello]: Yes, Mr. President. Mr. Mulkey, again, the building department generates about a million and a half dollars to the city and building permits, correct?
[Mochi]: Yes, that's sometimes a little more than that lately, but that's a little more than that.
[Caraviello]: Again, and here we are, you know, we've got a $10 million deficit, and here we are pushing money away, which is a little confusing to me. And, you know, the historical commission meets once a month. What are you going to, what are they going to do when there's 40 people that are going before them, you know, with permits?
[Mochi]: Well, I'm sorry, go ahead, Konstantin.
[Caraviello]: They only meet once a month, and they don't have any funding to hire people to sit there and sort through all these. People could be waiting two months for a building permit.