Town Council - Ordinance & Rules Committee

Braintree Town Council MEMBERS Sean Powers, Chairman Committee on Ordinance & Rules David Ringius, Jr, Vice- Chairman One JFK Memorial Drive Charles Kokoros, Member Braintree, Massachusetts 02184 Timothy Carey, Member Charles B. Ryan, Ex-officio May 9, 2018 MINUTES A meeting of the Committee on Ordinance & Rules was held in the Johnson Chambers on Wednesday, May 9, 2018 beginning at 5:00pm. Chairman Powers was in the Chair. Clerk of the Council, Susan Cimino conducted the roll call. Present: Sean Powers, Chairman Charles Kokoros, Member Timothy Carey, Member Not Present: David Ringius, Jr, Vice- Chairman Also Present: Joseph Reynolds, Chief of Staff Ed Spellman, Finance Director John Goldrosen, Town Solicitor James Arsenault, DPW Director Christine Stickney, Director Planning and Community Development Elizabeth Mees, Historical Commission Ronald Frazier, Historical Commission Kate Nedelman Herbst, Historical Commission There was a moment of silence for all those serving in our armed services, past and present, and the meeting was opened with the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Approval of Minutes • April 24, 2018 Motion: by Councilor Kokoros to approve minutes of April 24, 2018 Second: by Councilor Carey Vote: For (3 - Powers, Kokoros, Carey), Against (0), Absent (1 - Ringius), Abstain (0) May 9, 2018 Committee on Ordinance & Rules 1 of 5 New Business • 18 025 Mayor: Demolition Delay Ordinance or take up any action relative thereto Joseph Reynolds, Chief of Staff stated the Demolition Delay Ordinance is something the Town has been looking at for a number of years now. The driving force is the Historical Commission. Christine Stickney, Director Planning and Community Development stated this was prepared for the Historical Commission by the Town Solicitor’s office a couple of years ago. It allows for some time to take a look at the structure to determine if it is deemed to be historic in nature and if it is worthy of preservation, photography or to keep components of it. This would be for structures 75 years in age or older. There is a 6 month delay. When the applicant applies for the building permit there is a 6 month delay where they present their plans to the Historical Commission. The Historical Commission will make a decision whether or not it is historically significant to have a Public Hearing to move it forward or if they determine it is not significant they will tell the building inspector it can be raised. Councilor Kokoros stated 75 years is not that old. Is there any flexibility to increase the age of the buildings beyond 75 to 100 years? A 6 month delay is a pretty significant delay for someone to have to wait. It could put someone in financial hardship. Christine Stickney, Director Planning and Community Development stated the Historical Commission could get an answer to the applicant within 45 days if they deem a structure to not be of significance historically. The Historical Commission holds meetings every 30 days. They would be able to at least say it is not significant and it could move forward. Councilor Kokoros stated I know how government works and this could put someone in a tough bind as far as the time period. I would love us to identify all the structures deemed historical in value. I want to be cautious in this restriction in somebody’s property rights. Elizabeth Mees, Historical Commission stated this by-law would not determine what a property owner can and cannot do. It is merely a pause so we can have the time to document properties. We can discuss the 75 years. 75 years would be for structures constructed prior to 1943. Braintree is one of the oldest municipalities within Massachusetts. We have a beautiful stock of 18 century structures. It would be a shame to lose those. As it stands right now anyone can come in with the proper permit filing and can remove those structures. This is meant just to be a pause. Councilor Kokoros stated I can’t support 75 years. I would support 100 years. Councilor Powers stated he feels 100 years is too long and 50 years is too short a time. He stated 75 years seems like a good balance. He does not want to put any more burdens on homeowners. There are set and definitive timelines with this ordinance so it cannot be dragged on. Councilor Carey asked about the definition in determining a structure significant. Elizabeth Mees stated it would be due to its history, use and any certain people connected to a structure. Councilor Carey asked about Public Hearings and if it would be a substantial impact to the home/property owner. Christine Stickney stated the advertising cost and notification to abutters is probably a cost the applicant would occur. May 9, 2018 Committee on Ordinance & Rules 2 of 5 Councilor Kokoros stated I certainly would not support putting the burden on notifying abutters on the individual owning the property. What happens if a property owner wants to demolish a home more than 75 years old that is deemed historic? Christine Stickney stated the historical commission primarily wants to be able to document. They want to have the time to go into and document these structures. Councilor Kokoros asked what if a person does not want them to come into their property. What do you do then? Christine Stickney stated I would defer to the Town Solicitor if the Town implements this they are subject to it. I do not know what remedy comes if they don’t let you in their home. Councilor Kokoros stated I think that would violate my rights as the property owner. Elizabeth Mees stated the documentation would probably be someone from the Historical Commission. We would hopefully take some photos from the public way and work with the property owner. If it was their desire to demolish their building we would work with them. These conversations happen day in and day out. The intent is not to limit the use of the property or gain entry or violate privacy in anyway. It is to achieve a solution we are all comfortable with. It is considered an advantage to the town. It implies we respect our history. Councilor Kokoros stated I have a problem with 6 months. It is just too long of a period of time. Christine Stickney stated the longest it could go is 6 months but the shortest would be 30 days. The way it is written right now within 45 days you would be heard and it is determined whether your house is historically significant. Now let’s talk about what will be done to document it. If you are not deemed significant you get a quick answer. If you are deemed significant you as the property owner and the historical commission have a discussion about what’s going to happen. Councilor Powers asked how would 120 days be or 4 months to render a decision? Elizabeth Mees stated we are all volunteers. We meet once a month. When something comes up it is advertised, then we meet and it is brought forth and could possibly be continued so that is really where the time comes in. Councilor Powers stated Councilor Kokoros states 160 days is too long of a time. As a compromise how would 120 days be sufficient? Christine Stickney stated that would be more realistic giving us the time to advertise. Councilor Kokoros stated we also do not have clarification on who would pay for the advertising and to the process. We should be identifying properties age. Councilor Powers asked is there any liabilities in identifying homes. Is there a way to compile a list of homes 1943 and older. Kate Nedelman Herbst, Historical Commission stated trying to identify structures of significance could be a potential liability and financial impact trying to identify every building in the town. Councilor Kokoros stated I would like an estimate on how many properties we are talking about. Just to know how many properties fit into the 75 year old plus category and the 100 year old category. Joe Reynolds stated perhaps we choose not to take a vote this evening, if the committee agrees and we could step back and discuss points noted. May 9, 2018 Committee on Ordinance & Rules 3 of 5  Councilor Powers stated this would be an effort to table this to a future meeting. Councilor Carey stated I would like clarification on what is the full responsibility of the property owner. Councilor Kokoros stated “Motion to Table Order 18 025 to a future meeting” Motion: by Councilor Kokoros to Table Order 18 025 to a future meeting Second: by Councilor Carey Vote: For (3 - Powers, Kokoros, Carey), Against (0), Absent (1 - Ringius), Abstain (0) • 18 026 Mayor: FY2019 Operating Budget or take up any action relative thereto (Storm Water Ordinance) James Arsenault, DPW Director stated the federal mandates separation with drainage with sewerage and the next phase of the EPA requirements is now looking at the drainage system. This is to make sure the drainage is functioning properly and there is no impairment to streams and rivers. This is all being driven from EPA requirements. Stormwater is rain or snow that drains to the nearest water system without any treatment and pollutes the natural habitats. The old approach was general maintenance and cleaning and minimal treatment. The new possible water treatments are bio- treatment areas. The new approach improves public health and safety and meets all the requirements of the clean water act 2016 MS4 – Stormwater program. We achieve this new approach by creating and implementing a Stormwater Master Plan. Environmental regulations are changing. There are stricter requirements and fines for not complying with EPA Stormwater Program. In 2016 EPA and MassDEP co-signed the final permit in April 2016 and it will become effective July 1, 2018. To become authorized to discharge stormwater, a Notice of Intent (NOI) must be submitted before September 29, 2018. The list of impaired waters in Braintree include: Cochato River, Monatiquot River, Town Brook and Weymouth Fore River. The proposed Stormwater Utility Fee is for single family and up to 3 family properties year 1 is $6.25 per quarter or $25 per year on the Water/Sewer bill. 4 plus family, commercial, industrial & tax exempt pay the same but per ERU (equivalent residential unit) which is multiplied per 2,780 SF of impervious surface on the parcel. We do have some latitude if there is undue hardship. We can look at that and make a decision if that is justified. Councilor Powers stated this is an example of an unfunded federal mandate that forces us to impose these fees on our residents. Councilor Kokoros stated I do not like to impose a fee of any kind but because the respect for you and your team and all the expertise and that you all put us in a good position so we do not have to pay any fines with this new mandate. Thank you to all your staff members explaining this thoroughly. May 9, 2018 Committee on Ordinance & Rules 4 of 5  Councilor Kokoros read the following motions for favorable recommendation to the full Council: MOTION: That the Town Council vote to amend Title 3 of the Town's General Ordinances, by adding "Chapter 3.13: Stormwater Enterprise Fee", as filed with the Office of the Town Clerk. Motion: by Councilor Kokoros Second: by Councilor Carey Vote: For (3 - Powers, Kokoros, Carey), Against (0), Absent (1 - Ringius), Abstain (0) MOTION: That the Town Council vote to amend Title 13 of the Town's General Ordinances, by adding "Chapter 13.14: Stormwater Management", as filed with the Office of the Town Clerk. Motion: by Councilor Kokoros Second: by Councilor Carey Vote: For (3 - Powers, Kokoros, Carey), Against (0), Absent (1 - Ringius), Abstain (0) Old Business • None It was unanimously voted to adjourn the meeting at 6:43 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Susan M. Cimino Clerk of the Council Documents provided for Meeting • 18 025 Mayor: Demolition Delay Ordinance or take up any action relative thereto • 18 026 Mayor: FY2019 Operating Budget or take up any action relative thereto (Storm Water Ordinance) May 9, 2018 Committee on Ordinance & Rules 5 of 5