City Council

HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 Hearing opened at 6:40 P.M. with Councillor Nickel, Chair of the Public Service Committee presiding. All members present except for Councillor Freda and Councillor John Salvatelli. The following PETITION was the subject of the hearing. 11-06 Massachusetts Electric and Verizon New England, Inc.:West Street: Relocate one jointly owned pole on West Street beginning at a point approximately 105 feet southeast of the centerline of the intersection of Granite Street and continuing approximately 8 feet in a southerly direction. Iris Price, representing Massachusetts Electric, spoke in support. Ms. Price said they would like to move the pole 8 feet, per customers request. No one in the audience spoke in opposition. Councillor Marchand asked if the pole being moved was on city or private property. Ms. Price said it is currently on city property and will remain on city property. HEARING ADJOURNED: 6:43 P.M. Lynn A. Bouchard, City Clerk and Clerk of the City Council HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 Hearing opened at 6:45 P.M. with Councillor Marchand, Chair of the Legal Affairs Committee presiding. All members present except for Councillors Freda and John Salvatelli. The following PETITION was the subject of the hearing. 96-05 Joseph D. Spound, Trustee Orangewood Crawford Trust: Amend the Leominster Zoning Map to restore the Industrial zoning district to the entire property identified as Assessors’ Map 227, Lot 5A, located at 111 Crawford Street; land is currently zoned partially Industrial and partially Residence B. Councillor Marchand stated this was a continuance of a public hearing from June 27, 2005. Positive recommendations were received from the Planning Board, the Assessor and the Conservation Commission. A recommendation from the Director of Inspections to Deny and a recommendation from the Director of the Health Department stating his concerns relative to noise and odor were received. Steve Mullaney from Mullaney Engineering and Joseph and William Sound from Orangewood Development Company spoke in favor. Mr. Mullaney said that they met with the Planning Board again in July, as requested by the City Council. They also returned to the Development Review Board on July 21, 2005. Their primary purpose was to speak to the various Department Heads about the issues raised by the Board of Health and the Building Inspector. He said the issues were regarding proximity of property to a residential neighborhood on Beacon Street, and the impact that noise, odor, light and traffic might have if the Industrial District were expanded in that area. Mr. Mullaney said that the overlying concerns were with the particular use as opposed to the district itself and that any use on this site would be subject to Site Plan Review. He said under Site Plan Review, the Planning Board receives recommendations from other departments and have the opportunity to imposing conditions on any Site Plan. Mr. Mullaney stated that the anticipated use for this property is small industrial condominiums for small contractors like plumbers and electricians. He said the proposed building would be 50’ from the residential lot line and there is an existing dense vegetation row of trees that are in excess of 40 years old that would remain. Mr. Mullaney said the nearest dwelling on Beacon Street is 25’ from the lot line, so that means there would be 75’ between buildings. He said that site restrictions imposed by the Planning Board, as well as those already built into the Zoning Ordinance would allow this project to be in harmony with the neighboring properties. He said the applicant would commit to low level lighting, restrictions on hours of operation, and any outdoor storage restrictions that would eliminate any nuisance to the neighbor. Councillor Marchand asked the applicant if they would be willing to limit the hours of operation so that there would not be trucks loading and unloading at all hours. Mr. Spound said yes, they would restrict the hours to whatever seems reasonable and is suggested at Site Plan Approval. Mr. Spound also stated that they have a long history in that neighborhood and they want to be considerate of the neighbors. Mr. Mullaney stated that they have been in contact with the abutters and their main concern is to maintain the vegetative screen that is there. No one from the audience spoke in favor or opposition. Councillor Dombrowski questioned the wording “restoring the Industrial Zoning District”. He asked that if at some point this was all Industrial and then changed to Residential and now they are requesting it be being changed back? HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005, continued Mr. Spound said that to their knowledge it was always Industrial. Mr. Mullaney stated that the maps are unclear because the maps had a thicker line and now on the newer maps it is a finer line. Councillor Marchand asked if the plot plan presented was done by an engineering firm or does the map reflect the existing lines by the Assessors office? Mr. Mullaney stated that they requested, from the Building Department, the exact determination of the boundary lines for the zoning and that they did not receive it. Councillor Rowlands said he also has concerns with the wording in regards to “restoration” and asked if the wording is correct or if we should amend the wording. Mr. Marchand said that the recommendation from the Assessors office had stated that the rear portion of 111 Crawford Street be “restored” to Industrial zoning. Mr. Mullaney stated the applicant has no objections to any amendments regarding the wording of “restoring” in the Petition. Councillor Robert Salvatelli asked what could be done with the property if the zoning remained the way it is currently. Mr. Mullaney said that as the lot stands now, there is ½ acre of Residents B and ½ acre of Industrial. A house could be put on the RB portion but the Industrial portion is not big enough for anything. Councillor Nickel asked about the recommendation from the Department of Public Works. Mr. Mullaney said that the concern Roger Brooks had was with the sewer line that crosses through the property. The DPW has been working with Mr. Spound to relocate that sewer line. He said there is also a drain line that needs improvement and Mr. Spound agreed to do the improvements. Councillor Nickel questioned the height of the proposed building, snow storage and noise. Mr. Mullaney said that the property is in the flight path of the Fitchburg Airport and that any development would have to be approved by the FAA and the Mass Aeronautics Commission who will put restrictions on height. Councillor Lanciani said that on the map it looks like most property is zoned Industrial and Commercial in that area. Councillor Lanciani spoke on behalf of the Spounds and their reputation in that neighborhood. He said that he supports this request. Councillor Rowlands asked if the relocation or easement required by the DPW for the sewer, is going to be on this land? Mr. Mullaney said no, it would be on the adjoining property. Councillor Rowlands said that this project looks like it will be low impact on the neighborhood, but that the issue before them is rezoning it to Industrial. He said in years down the road if they change the type of business at that property it could have an impact on the residents in that neighborhood so they must take precautions when Industrial abuts Residential. Councillor Dombrowski said that it looks like the zoning line between the Industrial and the Residential is the railroad track rather than lot line which results in the splitting of this lot. Councillor Dombrowski said that he agrees with the Petitioner. Councillors Nickel, Dombrowski and Rowlands all said they were in favor of this rezoning petition. HEARING ADJOURNED: 7:15 P.M. Lynn A. Bouchard, City Clerk and Clerk of the City Council HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 Hearing opened at 7:16 P.M. with Councillor Marchand, Chair of the Legal Affairs Committee presiding. All members present except Councillors Freda and John Salvatelli. The following PETITION was the subject of the hearing. 114-05 Ronald J. Booth, An Individual Owning Land to be Affected by Change: Amend Chapter 22, Article II, Section 22-16 of the Revised Zoning Ordinances entitled “Generally Permitted Uses” by creating new subsections 16.9, 16.9.1 and 16.9.2 which will allow by Special Permit from the City Council, one undeveloped lot that has been in existence as of July 1, 2005 and not more than 40,000 square feet, be used for a service building (i.e., restaurant, bank, drug store and the like) intended to support the nearby industrial uses. HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005, continued Councillor Marchand said that the Planning Board will be holding a Public Hearing on this petition on August 23, 2005. Councillor Marchand said the language in Petition # 115-05 submitted by John Souza and the Planning Board and this petition are very similar. He said it is possible that both of these petitions could be combined. Attorney George Watts, representing Ronald J. Booth, said that he has sent correspondence to the Planning Board relative to Petitions #114-05 and 115-05. He stated that the wording is slightly different and that it will be brought up in front of the Planning Board on August 23, 2005. Mr. Watts said that he hopes they can come up with something that addresses both what the Planning Board wishes and what Mr. Booth wants. Councillor Marchand asked if Mr. Watts wanted to submit the amended to his petition this evening or did he want to wait and see what they could come up with tomorrow night with the Planning Board. Mr. Watts said he would prefer to wait until they have the Public Hearing so the matter could be flushed out. Mr. Watts said that he chose the language he did because it is the same language that already exists in the current zoning by- laws. He said that in the table of uses the owner or the operator of an industrial facility, in an industrial zone, would be allowed to build and operate a commercial business if he was given a Special Permit. Mr. Marchand asked if they had specified the size of lots in his petition and how they came up with the acreage. Mr. Watts said they had chosen a Builders Acre. No one from the audience spoke in favor or opposition. Mr. Watts explained that as it is now, only the operators and owners of the industrial uses are able to use this property. What their Petition is asking is that by Special Permit a person that is not necessarily the operator or owner to have this ability. Councillor Rowlands said that he supports the need for this but he would ask that Petitions 114-05 and 115-05 be reduced to one Petition. Mr. Rowlands feels that this would take unusable lots that are industrial and turn them into usable lots. Councillor Nickel asked if there are any differences between the two Petitions in regards to noise or how they will affect the residents in that area. Mr. Watts stated that both Petitions would require a Special Permit by the City Council and those would be issues discussed at that time. HEARING ADJOURNED: 7:27 P.M. Lynn A. Bouchard, City Clerk and Clerk of the City Council HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 Hearing opened at 7:30 P.M. with Councillor Marchand, Chair of the Legal Affairs Committee presiding. All members present except Councillors Freda and John Salvatelli. The following PETITION was the subject of the hearing. 115-05 John Souza, Planning Board Chairman and Andrew Taylor, Acting Planning Director on behalf of the Leominster Planning Board: Amend the Leominster Zoning Ordinance dated July 10, 200l with amendments through December 10, 2004 for the purpose of adding the following: 16.9.2 – In a case of undeveloped lots of 1.5 acres or less in the Industrial Zone by Special Permit of the Leominster City Council a use Variance may be issued for a non-conforming business if it is determined that there is no practical industrial use for this land; the use variance must comply with the zoning requirements for BA District found in the Leominster Zoning Ordinance - Table of Uses. John Souza, Planning Board Chairman was present at the hearing. Mr. Souza said that he has obtained a list from the Assessors Office of small parcels of land that are 1.5 acres and under, some of which would have to be combined together by an ANR Plan and then get a Special Permit to be eligible under this Petition. Mr. Souza said that they came up with the acreage of 1.5 acres and under by looking at what is available and also by how much land a business would need. Mr. Souza said that Business A and Business B are more like transition lots, more limited to what can be put there. Mr. Souza said that he became aware of Mr. Booth’s Petition after theirs had already been worked on for a long time. He said they decided to go forward with their petition but maybe they can put the ideas of both of them together, into one petition. No one from the audience spoke in favor or opposition. Councillor Marchand said that they received positive recommendations from the Building Inspector and the Conservation Commission. The Department of Public Works said they take no position on zoning issues. Councillor Marchand asked Mr. Souza what would happen if one person combined a few small parcels of land and made it into, say over 3 acres. HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005, continued Mr. Souza said that under this petition, the parcel has to be 1.5 acres or under. He said that at the Planning Board Public Hearing, on August 23, 2005, they will be discussing whether the Special Permit should be from the City Council or the Zoning Board of Appeals. Councillor Dombrowski said that he likes the concept of this petition and would like to combine petitions 114-05 and 115-05. He said he also had some concerns with the wording of the petition. He said that the phrase “By Special Permit of the Leominster City Council a Use-Variance may be issued” is confusing and should be reworded to say “A Special Permit of the City Council may be issued”. Mr. Souza said that they are not changing the Zoning; they are changing the use, so it would be a “Special Permit Use- Variance”. Councillor Dombrowski said he understood what Mr. Souza was saying, but he still feels using the term “Variance” is going to be confusing and it should say a “Special Permit for a Change of Use.” Mr. Marchand said they will pass that wording by the City Solicitor and they can make a ruling on the language. Councillor Dombrowski also asked about dimensional requirements and if we will be changing the requirements. Mr. Souza said yes, the dimensional requirements will change as well as the use. Councillor Dombrowski also discussed his concerns with someone owning 10 acres of industrial land and breaking it up into smaller pieces and selling it for residential use. Mr. Souza said they would still have to come before the Planning Board and he doesn’t really see that happening. He said if someone had a big piece of Industrial land, it wouldn’t make sense to sell off an acre or two. He said that this petition is in regards to taking small, unusable, lots and being able to use them for a small home business. Mr. Marchand said that he thinks all these issues should be brought up at the Planning Board public hearing on August 23, 2005. Councillor Rowlands asked if they could put in language that said a building lot size of 1.5 acres as of this date would be eligible. Councillor Marchand said that petition 114-05 specifically states that an undeveloped lot that has been in existence as of July 1, 2005. Councillor Rowlands said that they also should have the lot size of 1.5 acres in the language. He said we should not limit it to the uses allowed in Business A. He said we should leave all options open because they still have to get a Special Permit from the City Council. He said this would allow the City Council to look at each lot individually and decide what would best be suited for that lot. Mr. Souza said that they looked at allowing both Business A and Business B which is less restrictive. He said the primary purpose of this petition is to let these small parcels be utilized with the least amount of intrusion to the residence in that area. Mr. Souza said he wouldn’t recommend anything other than Business A or Business B. Mr. Rowlands said that in order for him to support this it would have to be by a Special Permit of the City Council and they need to add the clause that there is no other practical industrial use for this land. He said he would also consider a Business A, Business B Use Variance for the property. Councillor Rowlands said he would like to see the topic of sub-division of the land discussed at the Public Hearing. Councillor Marchand asked Attorney George Watts if he saw any loop holes in this Petition. Attorney Watts agreed with Councillor Dombrowski regarding the wording with “Use- Variance” and “Special Permit” in the same sentence and feels this needs to be discussed. Councillor Robert Salvatelli said he likes the idea of expanding the use to Business A and Business B as long as the City Council is granting the Special Permit. Councillor Nickel said he is concerned with how much the use affects the residence and feels the more restrictive the better. Councillor Dombrowski asked if there were different dimensional requirements between Business A and Business B. Mr. Souza said yes. Councillor Dombrowski said that if the petition expands to Business A & Business B we would have to make sure the appropriate dimensional requirements are met. He said the intent of this petition is to make these usable lots, but at the same time not allow people to take advantage of this intent. Councillor Marchand asked if they would have to obtain another Special Permit for the property if the use changed. HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005, continued Mr. Souza said yes, they would have to reapply for a Special Permit for a different use. He said that is why it is so important to state that it is a Use-Variance, Special Permit. He said the Special Permit is for the Use of the property. Mr. Souza agrees to speak to Judith Cutler in regards to the wording of this. HEARING ADJOURNED: 8:24 P.M. ______________________________________________ Lynn A. Bouchard, City Clerk and Clerk of the City Council HEARING BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 Hearing opened at 8:10 P.M. with Councillor Marchand, Chair of the Legal Affairs Committee presiding. All members present except Councillors Freda and John Salvatelli. The following PETITION was the subject of the hearing. 1-06 Thomas Shea, on behalf of Margot Xarras, Philip F. Desmarais and Dave Aronson: Change the zoning district of the land located at the intersection of Jytek Drive and Central Street from Industrial to Commercial as shown on Assessor’s Map 499 as lots 12, 21, 22 and 36. Councillor Marchand stated that there is a Public Hearing on this Petition August 23, 2005 with the Planning Board. Councillor Dombrowski asked to be excused because of conflict of interest because he has previously represented one of the Petitioners. Thomas Shea was present. He said that he was before the City Council in May and was at the Planning Board meeting June 7, 2005, with a similar petition. He said that the Planning Board asked him to submit a new petition, to include three other lots. He said this would include two lots on one side of Jytek Park and one on the side of the subject lot. The Planning Board recommended that because they thought it would fit better with the other commercial businesses in that area and would eliminate spot zoning. Mr. Shea said he got signatures of all the abutters and he is before the council tonight with a new Petition that includes those three extra lots. Mr. Souza said that the petition that was before the Planning Board earlier, was spot zoning. Mr. Souza said this property would fall under Petition 115-05. He said he would be able to build his restaurant on this lot because it is less than 1.5 acres without any zoning change. Mr. Souza stated that he is not speaking in favor or against this petition, just for general information. Mr. Souza said that there is a concern that came up recently that commercial zoning would allow Adult Entertainment on that lot. Mr. Souza said that the Planning Board will be discussing this at the Public Hearing and that a recommendation would be brought forward. No one from the audience spoke in opposition. Councillor Rowlands asked that if they were to build a restaurant and then sold the restaurant, would the zoning revert back to Industrial. Mr. Souza said that if it stayed a restaurant with a new owner, it would be fine but if they changed the use of the building, they would have to come back before the City Council for the new use. Councillor Marchand told the Petitioner that at tomorrow nights, August 23, 2005, Planning Board meeting, he could submit a letter to withdraw his petition if he wanted to go with either 114-05 or 115-05. HEARING ADJOURNED: 8:24 ________________________________________________ Lynn A. Bouchard, City Clerk and Clerk of the City Council REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 Meeting called to order at 8:00 P.M. Attendance was taken by a roll call vote; all members present except Councillors Freda and John Salvatelli. A recess was called at 8:02 P.M. to continue the public hearings and hold a public forum. Meeting reconvened at 8:27 P.M. The following COMMUNICATIONS were received, referred to the FINANCE COMMITTEE and given REGULAR COURSE. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 (continued) C-22 Relative to the appropriation of $4,950.00 to the Fire Department Expense Account; same to be transferred from the Emergency Reserve Account. C-23 Relative to the appropriation of $8,000.00 to the Sanitation Drainage Expense Account; same to be transferred from the Emergency Reserve Account. C-24 Relative to the appropriation of $600.00 to the Health Department Expense Account; same to be transferred from the Emergency Reserve Account. C-25 Dean J. Mazzarella, Mayor: Request the sum of $17,200,000.00 be appropriated for the cost of remodeling, reconstructing, making extraordinary repairs to and equipping the Southeast School, and for the payment of all other costs incidental and related thereto, and that to raise this appropriation, the Treasurer, with the approval of the Mayor, is authorized to borrow said amount under and pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 7 and 8 of the General Laws, or pursuant to any other enabling authority, and to issue bonds or notes of the City therefore, and to authorize and direct the appropriate officials of the city to apply for and accept any grants or gifts that may be available to the city on account of this project. The following PETITION was received, referred to the PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, given REGULAR COURSE, and referred to the Police Department. 16-06 Alfred E. LeBlanc, Chief, Leominster Fire Department: Request permission to block off Church Street from West Street to Merriam Avenue on Saturday, October 15, 2005 from 9:30 AM to 2:00 PM for our Fire Prevention Week Open House. The following APPOINTMENTS were received, referred to the WAYS & MEANS COMMITTEE, and given REGULAR COURSE. Fire Department - Jeffrey Nickel – Firefighter Fire Department - Quintin L. Tigs – Lieutenant. Conservation Commission – Scott Buchanan – term to expire April 15, 2007 (to fill unexpired term of Amy Stattel.) Upon recommendation of the FINANCE COMMITTEE, the following COMMUNICATIONS were GRANTED and ORDERED. Vt. 7 “yeas” C-14 Relative to an appropriation reduction of $22,000.00 to the FY 2006 Sewer Expense Account; same reduction amount to be made from the Fiscal Year 2006 Sewer Department Rates to be Collected Account as authorized by Chapter 44, Section 53E of the Massachusetts General Laws. ORDERED: that the sum of Twenty Two Thousand Dollars ($22,000.00) be reduced from the Fiscal Year 2006 Sewer Expense Account; same reduction amount to be made to the Fiscal Year 2006 Sewer Department Rates to be Collected Account. RE: To reduce FY2006 appropriation below actual FY2005 receipts collected. Actual FY2005 sewer rate collections were $2,498,071.89; FY appropriations after deduction is $2,498,000.00 C-15 Relative to the appropriation of $2,149.00 to the Highway Labor Account; same to be transferred from the Emergency Reserve Account. ORDERED: that the sum of Two Thousand One Hundred Forty Nine Dollars ($2,149.00) be appropriated to the Highway Labor Account; same to be transferred from the Emergency Reserve Account. C-16 Relative to the appropriation of $50,000.00 to the FY 2006 Workers Compensation Loss Fund; same to be transferred from the FY 2003 Workers Compensation Loss Fund. ORDERED: that the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) be appropriated to the Fiscal Year 2006 Workers Compensation Loss Fund; same to be transferred from the Fiscal Year 2003 Workers Compensation Loss Fund. C-17 Relative to the appropriation of $13,500.00 to the Sanitation Drainage Expense Account; same to be transferred from the Emergency Reserve Account. ORDERED: that the sum of Thirteen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($13,500.00) be appropriated to the Sanitation Drainage Expense Account; same to be transferred from the emergency Reserve Account. C-18 Relative to the appropriation of $5,200.00 to the Conservation Commission Salary and Wages Account; same to be transferred from the Wetlands Fees Reserved for Appropriation Account. ORDERED: that the sum of Five Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($5,200.00) be appropriated to the Conservation Commission Salary and Wages Account; same to be transferred from the Wetlands Fees Reserved for Appropriation Account. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 (continued) C-19 Relative to the appropriation of $900.00 to the Conservation Commission Expense Account; same to be transferred from the Wetlands Fees Reserved for Appropriation Account. ORDERED: that the sum of Nine Hundred Dollars ($900.00) be appropriated to the Conservation Commission Expense Account; same to be transferred from the Wetlands Fees Reserved for Appropriation Account. Upon request of the PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE, the following PETITION was given FURTHER TIME. Vt. 7/0. 10-06 Richard C. Barnaby, President, DMC Hamilton Street LLC: Accept a portion of Lanides Lane, a public way, in accordance with a certain plan entitled “Street Acceptance Plan of Lanides Lane Extension in Leominster, Mass. July 11, 2005” and vote to abandon a certain portion of Lanides Lane reflected as Abandonment 1 on a certain plan entitled, “Plan of Land in Leominster Mass. being a Subdivision of Land Court Plan 25913C, February 4, 2004” recorded in the Land Court on May 2, 2005 as Documents No: 25913D and 25913E, to accomplish the creation of a street acceptance as reflected on the said Street Acceptance Plan of Lanides Lane Extension dated July 11, 2005, insofar as the purpose of this abandonment is to cure an encroachment onto the layout of Lanides Lane by an existing building on property of Richard J. King. Upon recommendation of the PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE, the following PETITION was GRANTED. Vt. 7/0 11-06 Massachusetts Electric and Verizon New England, Inc.:West Street: Relocate one jointly owned pole on West Street beginning at a point approximately 105 feet southeast of the centerline of the intersection of Granite Street and continuing approximately 8 feet in a southerly direction. Upon request of the LEGAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, the following PETITION was given FURTHER TIME. Vt. 6/0 Councillor Dombrowski abstained due to a possible conflict of interest. 1-06 Thomas Shea, on behalf of Margot Xarras, Philip F. Desmarais and Dave Aronson: Change the zoning district of the land located at the intersection of Jytek Drive and Central Street from Industrial to Commercial as shown on Assessor’s Map 499 as lots 12, 21, 22 and 36. Upon recommendation of the LEGAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, the following PETITION was given LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJIDUCE. Vt. 7/0 6-06 David Rowlands: Place additional “stop” signs at the intersection of Norwood Avenue and King Avenue to create a 4-way stop sign intersection. Upon recommendation of the LEGAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, the following PETITIONS were GRANTED. Vt. 7/0 12-06 Neil Axelrod: Modify Chapter 13, Section 13-24.5 and replace the signs on the west side of Main Street from Ferdinand Passway to Pine Grove Avenue as “No Parking – Any Time” and “Tow Zone” replacing and superseding previous signs and ordinances. 13-06 Captain Thomas J. Bisol, Leominster Police Department: Amend Chapter 13, Section 13-24.5, entitled “Parking Prohibition -Tow Zone” and Section 13-28 entitled “Angle Parking” to implement new parking regulations at the Whalom Lakefront area of Main Street. Upon recommendation of the CITY PROPERTY COMMITTEE, the following PETITION was DENIED. Vt. 7/0 14-06 Richard Sandstrom: Grant permission to place signs at the corner of Vine and West Street, Merriam Avenue near the convenience store, Mechanic Street between Tenth Street and Twelfth Street, at the Merriam Avenue/Abbott Avenue lights and the intersection of Routes 12 and 13 advertising a music festival to be held on September 17, 2005 at Saima Park in Fitchburg. Upon recommendation of the WAYS & MEANS COMMITTEE, the following COMMUNICATIONS were GRANTED and ORDERED. Vt. 7 “yeas” C-20 Relative to the appropriation of $54,175.95 to the C.D.B.G. Housing Rehabilitation Expense Account; $26,921.69 to be transferred from the C.D.B.G. Admin Expense Account, $12,105.82 from the C.D.B.G. Code Enforcement Expense Account and $15,145.44 from the C.D.B.G. Economic Expense Account. ORDERED: that the sum of Fifty Four Thousand One Hundred Seventy Five Dollars and Ninety Five Cents ($54,175.95) be appropriated to the C.D.B.G. Housing Rehabilitation Expense Account; Twenty Six Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty One Dollars and Sixty Nine Cents ($26,921.69) from the C.D.B.G. Admin Expense Account, Twelve Thousand One Hundred Five Dollars and Eighty Two Cents ($12,105.82) from the C.D.B.G. Code Enforcement Expense and Fifteen Thousand One Hundred Forty Five Dollars and Forty Four Cents ($15,145.44) from the C.D.B.G. Economic Expense Account. C-21 Relative to the appropriation of $5,723.40 to the C.D.B.G. Housing Rehabilitation Expense Account; $8.07 to be transferred from the C.D.B.G DPW-Pearl Street Account, $.93 from the C.D.B.G. Multi Service Center Account, $.96 from the C.D.B.G. Montachusett Home Care Account, $235.00 from the C.D.B.G. Mayors Office – State Pool Account and $5,478.44 from the C.D.B.G. Office of Business Assistance Account. REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AUGUST 22, 2005 (continued) ORDERED: that the sum of Five Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Three Dollars and Forty Cents ($5,723.40) be appropriated to the C.D.B.G. Housing Rehabilitation Expense Account; Eight Dollars and Seven Cents ($8.07) to be transferred from the C.D.B.G. – DPW Pearl Street Account, Ninety Three Cents ($.93) from the C.D.B.G. Multi Service Center Account, Ninety Six Cents ($.96) from the C.D.B.G. Montachusett Home Care Account, Two Hundred Thirty Five Dollars ($235.00) from the C.D.B.G. Mayors Office State Pool Account and Five Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Eight Dollars and Forty Four Cents ($5,478.44) from the C.D.B.G. Office of Business Assistance Account. Upon recommendation of the WAYS & MEANS COMMITTEE, the following PETITION was GRANTED. Vt. 7/0 15-06 Scott Atwood: Renew the second hand dealer’s license for the Repair Place at Sears located in the Mall at Whitney Field Under Old Business, Councillor Salvatelli said that Ed Cataldo had been asked to be at this meeting to talk about sign issues; however, he has been on vacation. We will invite him to here at the next meeting, September 12, 2005, to discuss signs on city property. Mr. Marchand said that there was some discussion regarding the legislation that the Mayor has proposed for additional liquor licenses. He asked if they would like to set up an informational meeting with the License Commission invite them to a subcommittee meeting? President Salvatelli said they should have it in Subcommittee. Councillor Marchand said he would set up a subcommittee meeting for the Thursday night before the next City Council meeting. The following ORDINANCE was read once and adopted as presented. Vt. 7 “yeas”. A hearing was held on June 27, 2005 1st Reading Ordinance – amend Chapter 22 of the Revised Ordinances entitled “Zoning” to add a new subsection 16.6.1.5 to Article II, Section 22-16 “Use Regulations” and a new Article XV, entitled “In-Law Apartments” Sections 22-110 thru 22-114 the purpose being to allow by Special Permit of the Zoning Board of Appeals the sharing of a single-family residence with relatives. The following ORDINANCE was read once and adopted as presented. Vt. 7 “yeas”. A hearing was held on June 27, 2005 1st Reading Ordinance – amend Chapter 22, Section 22-26 of the Revised Ordinances entitled “Table of Uses”, by inserting the following entry under “Industrial Uses”: Storage and Distribution of RRA RRA RB RC BA BB C I Home Heating Fuels N N N N N N SPBA Y The following ORDINANCE was read once and adopted as presented. Vt. 7 “yeas” A hearing was set for September 12, 2005 at 7:20 P.M. Vt. 7/0 1st Reading Ordinance – amend Chapter 13, Section 13-77 of the Revised Ordinances entitled “Stop Signs” by inserting “Memorial Drive, against northbound drivers at Nelson Street.” The following ORDINANCE was read once and adopted as presented. Vt. 7 “yeas” A hearing was set for September 12, 2005 at 7:25 P.M. Vt. 7/0 1st Reading Ordinance – amend Chapter 13 Section 13-77 of the Revised Ordinances entitled “Stop Signs” by inserting “St. Jean Avenue, against southbound drivers at Nelson Street.” Under Old Business Councillor Marchand read the following letter regarding the monitoring of the restoration of Pierce Pond into the records: July 11, 2005 AE Project No. FIORE01 Mr. Joseph Bellino Mr. Matt Marrow, Agent Department of Environmental Protection Leominster Conservation Commission Central Regional Office City Hall 627 Main Street 25 West Street Worcester, MA 01608 Leominster, MA 01453 RE: STATUS REPORT NO. 9 – May and July 2005 Monitoring Report Wetland Resource Area Replication and Restoration – DEP File #99-618, Fiore Property, 729 West Street, Leominster, Massachusetts Dear Sirs: This letter provides a monitoring report for the months of May and July 2005, for the wetland replication and restoration that were completed at the Fiore property in August 2004, pursuant to Administrative Consent Order ACOP-CE-03-6W002- AMEND1. Site inspections were conducted on May 26 and July 8, 20045. Observations are summarized below. 1. In general, vegetation and plantings are well established and the site well stabilized, in particular throughout the peninsula area. 2. Herbaceous plantings, in particular soft rush (Juncus effuses), tussock sedge (Carex stricta), and blue flag iris (Iris versicolor), are well established and healthy. Several “volunteer” wetland species are also becoming established, including cattail (Typha latifolia), water dock (Rumex Verticillatus), eastern burreed (Sparganium americanum), foret-me-not (Myosotis scorpiodes), eastern joe-pye-weed (Eupatoriadelphus dubius), and jewel weed (Impatiens capensis). 3. The deciduous trees and shrubs, in particular red maple (Acer rubrum), highbush blueberry (Vacinium corymbosum), northern arrowood (Viburnum recognitum), meadow sweet (spirea latifolia) and red osier dogwood (Cornus Stolonifera) appeared well established and healthy. 4. The restoration areas are more than 75% revegetated. 5. System hydrology is functioning as designed. Due to the wet spring and early summer (3”+- above normal precipitation), Restoration Area B continue to have a depth of water. The continued depth of water appears to have prevented some of the wetland seed mix species from germinating. It is anticipated this area will by damp-dry on the surface by late summer and additional germination will occur. 6. The erosion control matting was in place and evidence of erosion, or siltation of Pierce Pond, were not observed. Some of the silt fencing along the pond edge was down, apparently due to geese that push down the silt fencing. Due to the presence of the coir fiber logs along the edge of the water, establishment of vegetation and erosion control on the earthwork slopes, and the presence of Wetland Replication Area C (depression) along the edge of the pond, there is little chance of significant runoff and associated silt traveling directly to the pond. Therefore, the silt fencing no longer serves a practical function, and it is recommended that it can be removed. Photographs are attached depicting the site conditions in late May and early July, 20005. Re-growth of seasonal vegetation was delayed in the spring of 2005 due to the late winter and high water levels. Yours truly, ALTON ENGINEERING Alton Day Stone, PE Principal Engineer Attachments: Photo Log (6 pages) Cc: Richard A. Nylen, Jr., Esq. Walter Fiore Mr. Robert Salvatelli, President, Leominster City Council Councillor Marchand said that from an environmental aspect, everyone is extremely pleased with the performance of Alton Engineering. Councillor Marchand said that he wanted to thank Alton Stone for being the peace maker and also staying on top of this process. Councillor Marchand, Chairman of the LEGAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, moved that the following PETITION be removed from the table and be placed on the calendar for action. It was so voted. Vt.7/0 Committees report as follows. 96-05 Joseph D. Spound, Trustee Orangewood Crawford Trust: Amend the Leominster Zoning Map to restore the Industrial zoning district to the entire property identified as Assessors’ Map 227, Lot 5A, located at 111 Crawford Street; land is currently zoned partially Industrial and partially Residence B. GRANTED Vt. 7 “yeas.” MEETING ADJOURNED: 9:55 P.M. ___________________________________________________ Lynn A. Bouchard, City Clerk and Clerk of the City Council