Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2016-09-26 BOS Packet - Released
SELECTMEN'S MEETING Monday, September 26, 2016 Selectmen Meeting Room 6:30 PM AGENDA EXECUTIVE SESSION 1. Executive Session- Exemption 6:Purchase of Real Property, 173 Bedford Street 6:30 p.m. (30 min.) PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comments are allowed for up to 10 minutes at the beginning of each meeting. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes for comment. Members of the Board will neither comment nor respond, other than to ask questions of clarification. Speakers are encouraged to notify the Selectmen's Office at 781-698-4580 if they wish to speak during public comment to assist the Chairman in managing meeting times. 1. Public Comments 7:00 p.m. SELECTMAN CONCERNS AND LIAISON REPORTS 1. Flu Vaccinations TOWN MANAGER REPORT 1. Introduction- Chief Information Officer, Tom Case 2. Retirement-Assistant Town Manager for Finance, Rob Addelson 3. Discuss Appointment to PBC for Fire Station Project ITEMS FOR INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION 1. Public Hearing- Receive Comments on Proposed FY17 Water/Sewer Rates 7:15 p.m. 2. LexEat Proclamation(5 min) 7:35 p.m. 3. Discussion-RCN Ownership Transfer and License Renewal(5 min) 7:40 p.m. 4. Review and Approve Rental Rates - Community Center(10 min) 7:45 p.m. 5. Staff Report- Opioid Epidemic (15 min) 7:55 p.m. 6. Review Public Comments - Stormwater Regulations (15 min) 8:10 P.M. 7. Review Public Comments - Draft Payment-in-Lieu of Parking Policy(30 min) 8:25 p.m. 8. Receive Report from Ad Hoc Center Street Scape Design Review Committee on 8:55 p.m. Tier 1 Deliverables (45 min) 9. Selectmen Committee Appointments (5 min) 9:40 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Water& Sewer Commitments &Adjustments 2. Approve One-Day Liquor License-Wildflower Camp Foundation 3. Approve One-Day Liquor License- Spectacle Management 4. Liquor License Change- Lexington Golf Club 5. Approve Minutes and Executive Session Minutes 6. Use of the Battle Green-Lexington Minute Men Company Change of Command Ceremony ADJOURN 1. Approximate Adjourn Time 9:45 p.m. The next meeting of the Board of Selectmen is Summit 1 which takes places on Thursday, October 6, 2016 at the Samuel Hadley Public Services Building, 201 Bedford Street(Cafeteria). The next regularly scheduled Board of Selectmen meeting is scheduled for Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. at the Cary Memorial Building, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue(Estabrook Hall). Hearing Assistance Device.s Available on Repast �� �� � All agenda time and the order of items are approximate and subject to change. Recorded by LeWedia AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Executive Session- Exemption 6: Purchase of Real Property, 173 Bedford Street (30 min.) PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Carl F. Valente, Town Manager ES 1 SUMMARY: Continue the discussion regarding the Purchase and Sale Agreement being negotiated for 173 Bedford Street. SUGGESTED MOTION: None requested. FOLLOW-UP: DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 6:30 p.m. AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing - Receive Comments on Proposed FY17 Water/Sewer Rates PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Rob Addelson,Assistant Town Manager for Finance I.1 SUMMARY: No vote is request for this agenda item. This is the second of three meetings on proposed Water/Wastewater rates for FY2017. At the first meeting held on September 12, 2016, the Board reviewed the results of FY2016 water and wastewater operations, billed usage and retained earnings histories; the FY2017 water and wastewater budgets as adopted at the 2016 annual town meeting (direct and indirect costs that will serve as the basis for calculating FY2017 water and wastewater rates), proposed changes to the budgets adopted last spring; and, preliminary FY2017 water and wastewater rates. Tonight's meeting is for the purpose of taking public comment on proposed rates. The enclosed PowerPoint presentation is a distillation of information included in your September 12th agenda packet and includes FY16 operating results, water consumption history for FY07 to FY16 including estimates of FY2017 usage proposed to be used in calculating FY17 water and wastewater rates, the FY17 water and wastewater budgets, as amended, to be funded with rate and non-rate revenue, a history of retained earnings, proposed FY17 rates and the impact of proposed rates on various classes of users. Please note that the proposed rates differ from the preliminary rates presented on September 12th due to a revised projection of irrigation usage. The preliminary rates presented on September 12th projected irrigation usage for FY17 at 350,000 HCE Data recently received from the MWRA on August water purchases serves as a basis to revise projected irrigation usage to 370,000 which reduces the combined increase in proposed FY17 water and sewer rates for the average user of 120 HCF from 3.8%, or $49.81 to 2.8%, or$40.97. The third meeting will be held on October 13, 2016, at which time it is anticipated final FY2017 rates will be recommended to the Board of Selectmen for review and approval. SUGGESTED MOTION: None required. FOLLOW-UP: Finance DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 7:15 p.m. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Cl Q'ira, a,,ar fl Qr II'/TVs farm/sar aren a to revised Presentation CD z LLI � LLI U) LLJ ry Q 0 Q LLI U) c) < 0 CN i 0 } ry U) �.o O � M V- V M M L �-o 00 L ,-I I� 00 � '� 00 �_ t- 0 0 Ln Ln 00 (n 00 M 00 m m LO ry 000 � � � Q O m Q m 00 Z L.L W 0� cn Q cn W ,--I O M M Ln Ln Ln Ln a--j •- a--j Ln Ln •- CD O O L U ,-� ,-� L U m 0 0 0 Q m 01 01 0 O 4-J 4-J =3 o =3 o = 0 =3 -0 0 > M- _0 > M- _0 LU Q LU Q O O O W � CD 0 �--� rllft� o0 m ono � 0 oo � � c:;"*% n oC o L� a� a � � � � v cn o 0 ca o 0 _C=5 C-C> o 0 _ o CD co o '� z `� z "o ry :.� Cc> � � o cC Ln � o o co CC> Lf> rn Lf> O C - V CO C F- N C'� 00 CV M 1— � N C� U) U Ef} Ef} {f} Ef} � M_ C � co d7 O N O M N C� CC O O Cl> 00 O Ory O N OCV CV CV d7 d7 M M d7 4 7 M CV LLI N C� lc } lc } � N Lf� O_ 1�_ O_ LLI -C� O C -C> Lf O O O M M N M U o W LLI ~ N Q N ca ca or_ L.LJ " y N N C w y O O o o O o O O O CD O O O O O o0 m m o 0 0 o O O o O O O O O O O O o p 0 0 o O o o O O o 0 0 o O o yy fC V LfJ M p O CO N LO O 00 Cl) O CO v LL � co O N O N M CMO M � N O N M N y N N Cl) W CL d N CO CO N N a7 CO Q�j O M V O V fcp C ON Cl) W N Cl) N Q0 0 V M a7 d CO V � M_ M d M LfJ M p O7 M Cp N N a0 N CO Cp Q CEO O N O N N C-O M N N CEO O N 0 M M N N M d CO a0 I-- 00 O L{J M N M CO N N Cl) O � N M 0 In t"J N M d zo +d. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p O O O O O O CD CDO p Z o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CDai o 0 0 o CD o W N O C-O O N � a7 M coN M W N LO O N 1 N co C-4 M co N N f0 I� O O O 10 a7 V � � � 00 I� O V f�0 a7 O V LfCD MJ O O O O O O CO O CEO W C CO V CO Qj p v N I� � O 00 CO I- l� (�pp LL O N O M 00 00 N N V O C, a V O V LfJ CO O CO CO W LO V a0 LfJ LfJ V V co m U) O O C-0 00 V M O W N N CMO O W 00 � O JN I� N 00 O CO` co LO co CO O V nj Cl) cc TLL � O N O N N r M M � O N � O M N N M V a0 Lo O co V co LO O pp LO V I- CO I= V Y N N W W � O M O co N fM0 CO CO O N O N � CO co coN CO O � cn coO M N O M Clt O� M W �O O � 07 f�0 M M N M yN M_ N O M_ t LL CEO O N CO N M N O ON N a0 M LfJ N M F.- a0 W O CMO CO CO CO O N N N N a7 O M V a0 a0 v y CEO Cl) O � N N O p Lo LO M cc p Z w LL CO N O� N N N CO O� Cl) f0 W O Q O W W V 00 N 07 LO N J fn = N O V M a0 CV a0 _ CO N a0 Lr - r 00 cc a7 LL yy CDW � 00 � M O W Cl) N to O 0 Z ly CO a7 N CO Cl) N CO 07 D7 Cl) O O M O M W O 00 .0 aN0 LfJ V Cl)CD cj: H O Ny a0 V V CO � N a0 W a0 131r- 07 a0 co l.L 00 r- � M M N O� ON LO CD 4m O LL N U Q� CO LO CDV O cn V Cl) P LO N I� N W O LO CO a7 CD 00 CO N r- CO V N LL O O O N M d7 t"J V N V W O t"J Q CM M CO M N N 00 O7 L CO V Lr CI � O r- �y CEO CO O7 00 V M Cl) a7 LfJ � V a0 N C O 00 LO p V O7 CO Cfl Cl) W I� r- N Cl) .0 I.I..I ID N M O V Lo � O �O � N C O V M to _ N CO v Y Coo N V M co V V m O � LL N M a7 O cm LO W V LfJ W � V V V 07 00 a7 O co cm QN O M N N a7 N M V V CV M LfJ CO cn N N 07 O) V Q� N p � V CO � N V N C-O co LfJ m N Cl) 0 (� U z v C? ++ v C? ++ o 4: — o w w w w w 00 w � � Of of Of Of Of Of Of Ofaf v w w w O w o w w w O cn w CO Z ¢ :2i O af Z a af a Z a w C¢-7 o Ox 00 - Q w W O Q ¢ 5 af m j z Z N G w =' w w w 0LL, 0 w CO Oaf c ¢ O- LU C7 _' z¢ w x cn w p = o 0 0 0 o Q Q Q � i\ i\ i\ oozzz o rn moo O � obrn ,-� � z zzz a � W rn ON o ca � o 0 s C? C=; moo LM VOf O W o N M M Ln I\ I\ N Ln %�o N U) LM LM BU) 00 00 all � �--� 00 ,--q � L17 M O O ZZ N M Zo M L17 I\ I\ N L17 %.0 N ,--� N M \ oca � N '— ca .v Ln Em .� DC V 1- 4 flu C Cm%� V Z � O W -&---' W^ v " � O O Q ! cry � Lu C� U) = V O O a� v nw O � c� n ry U. � Q = AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: LexEat Proclamation(5 min) PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Suzanne Barry, Chairman 1.2 SUMMARY: The Board is being asked to sign a proclamation for LexEat Together on the occasion of their first anniversary. Some of the founders of LexEat Together will be at the meeting and would like to take a picture after the proclamation is signed. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve and sign the proclamation recognizing the first anniversary of LexEat Together. FOLLOW-UP: Selectmen's Office DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 7:35 p.m. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D damknllbgothor Pira>a,l;rnntion.. Backup Matorinl Town of e ittc tt, h55 t e OFFICE 01:SELECTMEN SUZANNE E.BA.RRY,CHAIRMAN PETER C.J.KELLFY Proclamation JvSEPH N,PA T O EL: t vi 698-4580 viICHELLE L.CiCCOLO FAA: 'S; 863-946. N 'here s: Lex Eat Together is a volunteer-tun organization that seeks to address the fond insecurity and social isolation that many in our con-imunity experience; and NN'hereas: Lex Fat Together reaches out to and builds connections among a goad spectrum of Lexington residents. , hich includes farnilies, individuals, residents in Lexington Housine Authority conimunittes. the Douglas House. and seniors throe<ahout Lextngton and Whereas: Lex Eat Together serves a Nveekly %neat every Wednesday night, open to anyone who would benefit from a tree, Nutritious meal and companionship, in the heart of Lexington at the Church of Our Redeemer and has served over 2000 meals to guests since its first meal in October 2015: and. Whereas: Lex Eat Together engages volunteers tom across our Lexington community, including members of tinny houses of worship, social groups and etImicities, tapping in to Lexington's enviable history of neighbors helping Neighbors; and Whereas: Lex Fat Together connects guests with Town services and with acencies and programs that inay benefit its guests; and Whereas: Lex Fat Together is celebratingis celebrating its first anniversary in October of 2016 and has built a New and vital cotnanunity in Lexington focused on inclusion of those in geed in our midst, 'OTJ; THEREFORE, T'-E THE BOARD OF SELECTMEN of the Town of Lexington, Massachusetts, hereby recognize Lex Eat Toreter° on their First Anniversary and thank their founding members and their many volunteers for their service, not only to the greater Lexington Conunnunity, but to all people whose lives they, have, touched. IN TT TNESS VFHEREOF, we have set our hands and caused the seal of Lexington to be affixed herewith on the 260' of September 2016. 1625 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE- LEXINGTON,MASSACHUSETTS 02420 e-mail selectmen@1exingtonma.gov AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Discussion- RCN Ownership Transfer and License Renewal (5 min) PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Ken Pogran, Communications Advisory Committee 1.3 SUMMARY: The Chairman of the Communications Advisory Committee will discuss the plan RCN change in ownership and lic ens e renewal. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move that the Communications Advisory Committee be authorized to begin the process of negotiating a renewal cable television license with RCN. FOLLOW-UP: CAC to report back to Board of Selectmen. DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 7:40 p.m. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D 1j a nr o Ravm.anh d Mom)ftonnCAC, ("'over Mom) Request for Motion on Negotiating Renewal License with RCN 9/26/16 Communications Advisory Committee Request for a Motion The RCN cable television license with the Town of Lexington expires on June 29, 2019. By federal and state law and regulations (the "Rules"), negotiations for a renewal license can start between 36 and 30 months prior to the expiration date. RCN notified us on July 18, 2016 that they want to renew the license, which started the clock on the renewal process. The Town must begin preparation for negotiation within six months of the RCN notification— January 18, 2017. The Communications Advisory Committee (CAC) requests that the Board of Selectmen pass a motion substantially similar to the following: "Moved, that the Communications Advisory Committee be authorized to begin the process of negotiating a renewal cable television license with RCN." The following information is provided in support of this request. Regulatory Requirements and Our Plan A two-phase "Formal Process", specified by the Rules and described below, is always in the background to ensure that the renewal license is executed before the current license expires, and that both parties' rights are protected. However, we intend to hold ongoing informal discussions with RCN, as allowed by the Rules, to try to get to essential agreement without the complications of the formal process. The first Phase is "Ascertainment": Request for Motion on Negotiating Renewal License with RCN 9/26/16 - Reviewing the cable operator's performance under the current license, and, - Determining the cable-related needs and interests of the community. We have found in the past that a good way to do this is to: 1. Request input from the Town Manager and the Superintendent of Schools, to determine municipal needs, and, 2. Hold a public hearing, to allow residents to contribute their ideas. Usually, the raw ideas have to be filtered because some requests may be outside the scope of legitimate requests from RCN, others may be satisfied in informal discussions with RCN or the other cable operators as part of their existing licenses, and still other requests may be satisfied by CAC actions to obtain and provide already existing information to the requestor. The CAC will bring the remaining requirements to the Board for their concurrence before sharing them with RCN. Completion of Ascertainment The announcement that Ascertainment is complete is not merely an objective statement that we have a complete, validated set of requirements to present to RCN. It is a tool for controlling the pace of the renewal process, as it initiates Phase 2. Phase 2—Reaching a New License Agreement If the informal discussions have resulted in agreement, all that remains is for the CAC to ask the Board to approve the new terms, update the draft to reflect any changes, conduct a public hearing on the new terms, and have both parties sign. If the parties have not been able to agree on terms of a renewal license 2 Request for Motion on Negotiating Renewal License with RCN 9/26/16 during informal discussions, completion of Ascertainment marks the time at which the CAC will ask the Town Manager to issue a formal RFP to the operator. The technical content of the RFP may be a marked-up copy of the current license. The operator will usually have 30 or 45 days to respond with a proposal and the Town will have four months for discussion and negotiation, after which the CAC will bring its recommendations to the Board, which, after a public hearing on the new terms, must decide whether or not to grant the renewal license. If the renewal license is granted, the Board (as Issuing Authority) and the operator must each sign the final draft. If the Board decides not to renew, there will very likely be a suit by the operator that may be costly to defend, so it is important that the Town meet all the formal negotiation milestones to avoid the appearance of being at fault in court. Time Scale The public hearing as part of Ascertainment may be held in the spring of 2017. The rules require that Ascertainment be completed by Month 30, i.e., six months prior to expiration of the current license. But the proposal process itself can take five months or more, leaving inadequate time to obtain signatures before expiration. On the other hand we do not want to execute the renewal license too early. With a three year period until the current license expires, a lot can happen in the technical and regulatory environments. By delaying official completion of Ascertainment to mid-2018 (about 12 months prior to expiration), we can ensure the RFP incorporates our latest understanding of the direction of the cable business, and still allow sufficient time to negotiate final language and get to an executed renewal license before the current 3 Request for Motion on Negotiating Renewal License with RCN 9/26/16 license expires. Respectfully submitted, Kenneth T. Pogran Chair, Communications Advisory Committee Prepared by: David Becker 4 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Review and Approve Rental Rates - Community Center (10 min) PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Sheila Butts, Director, Community Center 1.4 SUMMARY: A vote is requested on this item. With the Town having operated the Community Center for just over a year, staff is now ready to make the facility available to community groups, in a manner similar to other Town facilities (schools, Library, Cary). IT staff is close to finishing a page on the Town's website whereby community groups can view and reserve space for Town facilities. Attached are the recommended fees for use of the Community Center facility/rooms. These fees are consistent with other rental rates (Schools, Cary) and have been endorsed by the Recreation Committee at their September 14th meeting. The recommended fees were also reviewed with the Community Center Program Advisory Committee at their September 22nd meeting. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve the room rental rates for the Community Center facility. FOLLOW-UP: Recreation and Community Programs staff will implement, along with the Facilities Department. DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 7:45 p.m. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Cl Mom) Rocominmided Rates, C"overmonx) �`+ M Rp� 1775 tie ti O A y�ffi zy� APRIL Ur �FXIN S MEMORANDUM TO: Carl Valente, Town Manager FROM Karen Simmons, Director of Recreation and CQmmunitv Programs (?�' Sheila Butts, Community Center Director DATE: September 9, 2016 SUBJECT: Proposed Fees for Rental of Rooms at the Community Center Since the summer of 2015 a committee of Town Employees has been working to develop a Universal Municipal Facility Use form and fee structure that will allow residents ease of access in requesting meeting room space, and provide a consistent fee structure for all municipal building rentals. The attached information details the fees proposed for use of rooms at the Lexington Community Center. These fees will be presented to the Recreation Committee on September 14. We request that the proposed fee structure be presented to, discussed and approved by the Board of Selectmen at their September 26th meeting. If approved by the Board of Selectmen, we plan on instituting the fee structure in early October. Thank you for your consideration. Cc: Linda Vine,Deputy Town Manager ` ug M RNi e UIS Now H A Town of Lexington f a� � o a Recreation and Community Programs r APRIL I7^ Community Center Division �FXI NG1 Karen Simmons, CPRP Sheila Butts Director of Recreation and Community Programs Community Center Director September 9,2016 Proposed Fees for Rental ofRooms at the Lexington Community Center Large Meeting Rooms(20+people): $30.00 per hour(2-hour minimum) • Room 242 • Room 237 • Room 230/232 (combined) Medium Meeting Rooms(8—16 people): $25.00 per hour(1-hour minimum) • Room 217 • Room 221 • Room 230 • Room 232 Small Meeting Rooms (2—8 people): $20.00 per hour(1-hour minimum) • Room 123 • Room 245 • Room 246 • Room 119 Room 139-Dining Room (50—100 people): $200.00 for a 3-hour block Monday—Friday 5:30—8:30 pm Saturday 9:00am—12:00pm or 1:00pm—4:00 pm $400.00 all day Saturday(9am—4pm) Room 006—Fitness Room $100.00 per hour(1-hour minimum) Additional Fees: • Custodial overtime(rate set by Facilities Department) • AV Technician(rate set by Facilities Department) • LCC Staff(rate set by Recreation&Community Programs) • Police Detail(rate set by Police Dept.) • Fire Detail(rate set by Fire Dept.) • DPW Staff(rate set by DPW) LEXINGTON COMMUNITY CENTER 39 MA TT ROAD,LEXINGTON,MASSACHUSE S 02421 (ace) 1625 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE•LEXINGTON,MASSACHUSE S 02420(mail) Tel: 781-698-4800 Fax:781-861-2747 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Staff Report - Opioid Epidemic (15 min) PRESENTER: ITEM Gerry Cody, Health; Charlotte NUMBER: Rodgers; Human Services; Derek Sencabaugh, Fire*; Chief Corr, Police 1'S SUMMARY: No vote is requested for this agenda item. At the Selectmen's August 15th meeting, the Board requested a report from the staff outlining the Town's programs to address opioid abuse in the community. SUGGESTED MOTION: None requested. FOLLOW-UP: Staff will continue to monitor this problem and adjust response as appropriate. DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 7:55 p.m. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D Stafl Roporrt to ow n,M wnr ig..TMorr Opioiwfl k rw8awutiva, Backup Matorrinl VS MOq 1775 N��c p x p Town of Lexington a ° a Z U APRIL79" l FXINC, To: Carl F.Valente, Town Manager From: Gerard Cody, R.E.H.S. /R.S., Public Health Director Mark Corr, Police Chief Charlotte Rodgers, Director Department of Human Services John Wilson, Fire Chief Re: Opioid Epidemic Date: September 12, 2016 The staff have prepared this interdepartmental report as requested by the Board of Selectmen in order to better understand the use of opioids in the community and the Town's response to this crisis. The report is divided into four sections that we believe will provide an overview of the issues and related challenges. The report will address: 1) opioid use and impacts in the state, county and our community; 2)interdepartmental response to this substance abuse crisis; 3)initiatives planned for the future; and 4) available resources. Section 1 — Statistics on Opioid Abuse and Related Deaths in Massachusetts, Middlesex County and Lexington Data from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health notes that there has been an increase in opioid addiction, substance abuse, overdoses, and overdose deaths in Massachusetts in recent years. Massachusetts has had increasing opioid-related deaths with Four Thousand Four Hundred Sixty, (4,460) of them occurring from 2012-2015 statewide, see chart 2. Lexington has not seen the effects from the opioid epidemic as much as other towns. However, Middlesex County has been impacted by the epidemic. Eight hundred eighteen (818) opioid-related deaths have occurred in Middlesex County in just three years (2012-2015). The Town of Lexington has had five, (5)total opioid-related overdose deaths since 2012, see chart 1. There may have been an increased awareness of the overdoses that have happened in town due to a recent Facebook post. The Facebook page "Heroin is Killing My Town" n nni�� II ���°��' �������a�:.� ' ����.)postedavideo S%�7�m��m� ���d°.� P�r�r�a.d �rqV� ,➢:� q�rggVb.i�, � ��"qV�+I I�.�.r�n��V� �gtl�r.� rtr� µH�.... that was created in Lexington about the opioid epidemic. The post alleges that the Lexington Town Officials have not done enough to combat the epidemic. Statistics: Chart I - Confirmed Ovioid Related Deaths in Lexington 'Confirmed Jnintentional ()1pioid Related Overdose I e Deatfis in Lexington, MA 2012 2015 2.5 2 2 ........... 2 ............................................................I'm 1 .5 1:T 0.5uwuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuw 011,11,1111,IlillllllIll,lllllllllllllllllllilljlllllllllllllllllll,IlljllllllIlljlllllloo 0 '011111 2012 2013 2014 2015 YEAR In Lexington, there have been five, (5) total confirmed unintentional opioid related overdose deaths from 2012-2015. Note: This number could increase as additional cases are confirmed by the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. Comparison of Lexington to area Towns and Cities: (most to least) City/Town # of Deaths—2012 - 2015 Waltham 29 Woburn 24 Arlington 19 Burlington 12 Acton 8 Lexington 5 Bedford 4 Concord 0 Source: MA Department of Public Health, Registry of Vital Records and Statistics. May 2016. lzullzfln[" ) 'j s 11 zly p�I 2 Statistics: Chart 2 - Confirmed Ovioid related Deaths in Massachusetts since 2000 18007 iinfllliiriir ,,,,, d Uiiniiiiin'l°eiin'l°illoiinallI 011pilloilld ir ,,,,, III t ,,,,, Overdose deaths flin Massa c Ih usetIts 2000 2015 1600 1526 14C1C1 1355 1200 C�} 800 615 614 668 ' 561 599 boa r.... 549 525 526 600 468 429 456 4C1(1 338 u, 200 C1 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 L Year Since 2000, there have been Ten Thousand Seven Hundred Forty Three, (10,743) deaths in all of Massachusetts, with a state-wide rate of 17.7 deaths per 100,000 people. Source: MA Department of Public Health, Office of Data Management and Outcomes Assessment, Registry of Vital Records and Statistics. May 2016. dP.. uu��:. . �r�r, �,', rq�q�. �'���,. ���2 h' n�I I„ :b V j zly 20 m q tls'C. 3 Section 2 - What is Lexington doing in response to the opioid epidemic? A. Office of Public Health and Human Services Department: i. Lexington Public Health advertises and conducts four Medical Waste Collection events each year to help rid homes of unused or unwanted medications that could lead to opioid abuse or other addiction related problems. Residents may also drop off unwanted medicines, by appointment, during normal business hours at the Public Health Department. ii. Mental Health First Aid Classes are offered to the general public and Town of Lexington employees as a way to help people learn ideas about how to begin the conversation with loved ones without the stigma of speaking about mental health related issues, including substance abuse. iii. In March 2015, David Neylon, Public Health Nurse completed a training class on Naloxone (Narcan) administration with Lexington Public Schools Nursing staff. iv. In June, the Public Health summer intern, Carly Mitchell, MPH candidate, conducted a project to raise awareness about the Opioid use. Under the supervision of the Health Director, she has produced a brochure and resource business cards, and in collaboration with the Human Services Department has developed the September 20 Opioid Discussion at Cary Hall. Dr. Kevin Hill M.D, an addiction psychiatrist at McLean Hospital, will discuss statistics, treatment options, and how to identify and help a loved one who is abusing. Resource materials and staff members from the Health, Human Services, Police and Fire Departments will be available. V. Various documents and publications are available at the Office of Public Health and the Human Services Department. In addition, these materials will be made available at the schools, the community center, town administration building, police cruisers and other public areas. These materials educate citizens about opioid addiction, prevention, and treatment options. The Resource Business Cards have phone numbers of addiction recovery services, treatment centers, Human Services, and other helplines that are specific to Lexington and the surrounding areas, as well as statewide helplines. a. Business Card: Addiction is not a Choice, It's a Disease b. Business Card: Save a Life—Know the Signs of an Overdose c. Fact Sheet: The Realities of Stigma d. Fact Sheet: Naloxone e. Fact Sheet: Opioid Overdose and Prevention & Reversal f Fact Sheet: A Parent's Guide to Protect your Teen from Alcohol and other Drugs. 4 vi. Narcan is available without the need for a prescription at two pharmacies in Lexington, CVS at 1735 Massachusetts Ave. and Walgreens at 60 Bedford St. per state standing order. vii. The September issue of the Colonial Times (in the "Parenting Matters" column)will feature an article to address opioid use and educate parents about prevention, available resources and treatment options. viii. Human Services staff clinicians are available to provide counseling, consultation and support to parents in Lexington. Kristie Demirev, LICSW, has implemented a series of "Parenting Presentations" by local experts to address a variety of issues faced by parents today. Kristie will also lead a monthly Parenting Support Group at the Community Center that begins in the Fall, 2016. ix. Health Department and Human Services staff will be at the Lexington Farmer's Market on September 27. Information and resources will be available to shoppers—this will include information on opioid use and how to get help. B. Lexington Fire Department: i. The Lexington Fire Department, by the nature of the business, responds to opioid related calls. Each member of the department has undergone training on the identification of an opioid over-dose and the rapid intervention utilizing Narcan. In the event that an ambulance is not the first to arrive at an over-dose, all department vehicles that are normally utilized carry at least two doses of Narcan. ii. Records indicate a growing increase in over-doses in the last three years and an increase in the potency of the narcotics as indicated by the increase in doses per patient; in 2014 we had 14 patients and used 17 doses of Narcan, in 2015 we had 17 patients and used 22 doses, and year to date in 2016 we have had 11 patients utilizing 18 doses, see chart 3. (We are unable to give a definitive number of resident versus non-resident, but many of our patients are transient in nature.) 5 ("hart 3 Number of Patients v. Doses of Narcan given. in. Lexinglon, MA 2014 2016 25 22 20 18 17 17 14 15 10 5 0 2014 2015 2016 YEAR NFla tie:nts nNarcan Doses iii. Narcan has a cost of$72.00 per dose and a shelf life of 18 to 24 months. It is not subject to heat or cold storage issues that other medications are. iv. The Lexington Fire Department is an active member of the Middlesex District Attorney's Opioid Task Force. C. Lexington Police Department: i. The Lexington Police Department is a member of a local police collaborative (Acton, Bedford, Concord, Carlisle, Lexington, Lincoln, Maynard, Stow, HAFB)to fund a Jail Diversion Coordinator/Clinician who works with the Eliot Community Human Services. This initiative is funded by the Department of Mental Health Jail Diversion Program (JDP). The program works to address the mental health and substance abuse needs of those who come into contact with law enforcement through targeted outreach, crisis intervention, and referrals to service. It was a logical extension of this program to expand substance abuse services specifically targeting opioid use. ii. The Central Middlesex Police Partnership (CMPP), representing the same communities as the JDP, was formed to provide a comprehensive education, prevention, and intervention in response to opiate addiction. The two-pronged approach includes recovery based community education and direct intervention/outreach and referral to treatment. The CMPP has applied for additional grant funding from the Police Assisted Addition and Recovery Initiative (PAARI) for the purchase of Narcan and to hold regular community events. 6 iii. The Police Department is finalizing a plan to deploy Narcan in its police cruisers, adhering to the Executive Office of Health and Human Services recommended "How to" guide. We anticipate having Narcan nasal spray in each first aid bag located in patrol vehicles. D. Lexington Public Schools: i. Key Lexington Public School nurses have been trained and have a standing order to administer Narcan. Narcan is stocked in all school buildings where school nurses are working. ii. The Lexington Public Schools have implemented a system wide response, education and protocols for suicide, using the Signs of Suicide program. iii. Lexington Public Schools secured a grant to fund training for 12 counselors and nursing staff members to screen ALL 9t' grade students at the High School for alcohol and substance use. Using the CRAFFT II Screening tool, the students will participate in SBIRT (screening, brief interview, referral/education and treatment). The program will begin in January, 2017, and continue through the school year. Kristie Demirev, LICSW, from Human Services is also trained and will be working alongside the LPS staff as they implement SBIRT. iv. The School Health Advisory Committee (SHAG) has a subcommittee that meets to address issues of mental health and substance use/abuse. V. The Youth Services Committee (YSC)is a group of officials with representatives from the Town, Schools, PTA/PTO and High School Student members who meet monthly to coordinate efforts aimed at parenting education, student support and mental health initiatives. This group is very involved in the Parent Academy held each year in the spring. Student representatives are key members and contribute ideas and information that shapes programming and response to community issues that involve youth. Section 3 — Initiatives and Recommendations 1. A Town webpage is being developed and ready in mid-September on the Public Health Webpage that will provide citizens with information on the opioid epidemic in Massachusetts and Lexington specifically. It will also provide information and links on how to prevent opioid addiction, especially for parents to learn how to keep their home safe and how to educate their children about opioids. The webpage will have resources for treatment and recovery services in and around Lexington, as well as specific information about the types of treatment available for abusers. This will be useful for citizens to become educated, and gather resources to help a loved one, while avoiding stigmatization. 2. Lexington Fire Department staff is available and ready to conduct training on the use of Narcan. 3. Staff from Health, Human Services, Public Schools and the Police Departments are participating in the newly formed "Lexington Community Coalition Youth Initiative". The Coalition sponsored a series of 4 public forums and community conversations in FY 2016 with a goal of supporting alignment between the Town, Schools and Community actions to reach shared goals. Using input from these community conversations and data from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, the Coalition has identified 3 shared community goals for Lexington youth in 2017: • Reduce Alcohol and Substance Abuse • Reduce Atmosphere of Academic Competition • Decrease experience of Loneliness, Depression and Suicidal Thoughts Please note: It is the belief of the Coalition that the 3 goals noted above are interconnected, and that any education/event that addresses one of the goals, helps reach/support all three. 4. Staff from the Public Health Office, Human Services, Police and Fire Departments meet on the 2nd Tuesday of each month to discuss an agenda driven by recent cases of residents "at risk" and community issues. These departments participate in an interdepartmental model of communication and shared response to issues of residents of all ages. As a result of recent events, it is recommended that the focus of the group include: • Develop a written protocol for interdepartmental and community response to crisis situations, • Request monthly updates from the Police Department on the number of Lexington residents impacted by substance abuse, especially those involving youth attending Lexington Public Schools, • Enhance the outreach efforts to families impacted by substance abuse, and • Include a member of LPS staff(nursing or counseling) at these meetings. 8 Section 4 — Available Resources How to Acquire Narcan (Naloxone) in Lexington Narcan is a lifesaving medication that is sprayed into the nostrils to reverse the effects of someone experiencing an overdose from opiates (Heroin, OxyContin, Percocet, Vicodin, and Fentanyl). If you are unsure whether or not someone is experiencing an opiate overdose, there is no harm if you administer Narcan to someone who is not experiencing an overdose. Narcan (Naloxone) can be purchased at two pharmacies in Lexington without the need for a doctor's prescription. Narcan may be covered by some prescription health plans and may require a co-pay, or you may need to pay out of pocket for Narcan. Narcan has a shelf life of 12 to 24 months, does not need to be refrigerated, and can range in price from $40 - $150 when not covered by one's health insurance. In Lexington, Narcan can be acquired from: • CVS Lexington Center- 1735 Massachusetts Avenue- (781) 862- 4080 • Walgreens- 60 Bedford Street- (781) 863-1111 Here are some helpful steps on to acquire Narcan in Lexington: • Have your insurance card ready if you have one • Bring an ID if you have one • The pharmacy tech will input your information and the pharmacist will check the order • Ask for the cost or co-pay before they fill the order If the pharmacy is unable to fill the request, please see the list of pharmacies in Massachusetts that carry Narcan: ��Id „.,, YY gV�r , .,.,,. �ri ",rt�„pq�q�. tl �;4M„ tl�gp�� 4��fl� �:nl+r _ugr� �tl�. ➢r �gV�� d„,"I q���� gbu� d u�",";:::. For more information related to opiate addiction, Narcan or to seek help related to opiate addiction please contact the Massachusetts Department of Public Health at 1(800) 439-2370, or visltq�lld.i �I' iYm7m7.:,.gp�r 6"�pi m.,p��q� ��.�.i tl�� q '� qV�� q�U.11 tl�q �:➢. Il�p r.��tl�gd Ilq�'pgV III II�'��� iVllq ����flll IIg6"qV�r • 9 How Narcan is used and how it works: NOW TO GIVE NASAL SPRAY11 .............. W � �% M«f' px r, �mrmVrrk, WwHm mw�wd jk , , T<�,1, 2 kw Of Co : 'Y r Y4WtA�a1 � r r&Nam*nrowvpvRii�I rv.,.,.,.,., �J � 4draix+ d ry k d 0 16 ui 'l,a)Y1YIP1)� p... Pt 15 rgYPVr d p; . �i�uNw?mn »tvvvrara»rr✓�� �� € P�uDN �^^.m� Yr I ^iou �ouuu000lolll �o nu yrpngo applicator Nasal atorntz r Narr'rrnr �artr Yct�� How it works A prSrescilplrtrn na,s of spraµr rill ea naataxo nre„srptd unUa 9r MO llafnQ d^,WC2 n,can ceraaanforact me,offacts or "n ovora oso OP IU?rrairn or otrwr anpYnd00 n...Narcan ca'PSYp ,'r"Plso lie N'1"Eyecte CS'. An overdose The reversal tl lon rocepators In tray, Naloxorlo lUlts a str(wr)w girl are �w a�rr�uaauprnwrt nVtrauAtrorrlo the tarWr by al apiold. stopriptl le Frtr yll p�ability R t to to allowIdarrrY4atrniryg tr"ar�Ptr i i, it� Irwtt htalcuxcan r �, i i r ".�a'sawrrsrs•ir»urorv�rw��twtrtpureu.raw,rcg P L PE.Bf1r r4"!•,P"B"F m1 PT E-CT Opioid Addiction Resource Information Sheet: 10 Advocates Crisis Support 800-640-5432 Lexington Human Services 781-698-4843 Massachusetts Stop Addiction (Helpline) 800-327-5050 Right Turn (Treatment& Intervention) 781-646-3800 440 Arsenal St. Watertown, MA 02472 Narcotics Anonymous (NA) (Support Groups) 866-624-3578 Al-Anon for MA (Support Groups) 508-366-0556 Learn 2 Cope (Parent-led Support) 508-738-5148 www.leam2cope.org McLean Hospital (Treatment) 617-855-2242 115 Mill St Belmont, Ma 02478 Square Medical (Treatment) 617-916-5069 124 Watertown St. Watertown, MA 02472 Addiction Treatment Center of New England 617-254-1271 77 Warren St. Brighton, MA 02135 Wicked Sober (Intervention) 855-953-7627 11 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Review Public Comments - Stormwater Regulations (15 min) PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: David Pavlik, Senior Engineer; Denise Cameron, Woodard and Curran 1.6 SUMMARY: A vote is requested for this agenda item. At the Selectmen's meeting on July 25, the Board reviewed draft Stormwater regulations. Stormwater regulations are required to be in place under the federal MS4 permit issued to the Town. At the Board's meeting, DPW was asked to continue its outreach to developers on these draft regulations. This has occurred and certain revisions have been made, as explained in the attached documents. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve the Lexington Stormwater Management Regulations, Lexington Code, Chapter 181,Article V1, effective January 1, 2017. FOLLOW-UP: DPW will implement. Town Clerk will include these Regulation in the update to the Code of Lexington. DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 8:10 P.M. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D 1PuIhrk C'r n u its : d R sgrz nse to Draft Rog idation", Backup Matorinl Cd Drafl Sto nawh wter Rog..TMuk.aionrs; Backup Matorinl C0II II ITII IEIRT& IIRTIEGIRITY fill ShOu.adll<Ili I &Oe 110 866,702,6371 IOIRI IE IRIESUILTS Andovei, MassachuseUs 01810 978,557,8150 September 20, 2016 Mr. John Livsey, Town Engineer Samuel Hadley Public Services Building 201 Bedford Street Rm 202 Lexington, MA 02420 Re: Draft Stormwater Regulations Updates Dear Mr. Livsey, Enclosed, please find a draft of the proposed Stormwater Regulations for your review and consideration. This draft has been updated based upon feedback we received from six representatives of the development community during our meeting on September 8, 2016. The following letter provides a summary of the questions and comments received as well as Woodard & Curran's response and recommendations. Comments and questions from the development community are shown in Bold, italicized text,followed by Woodard &Curran's response. Would it be possible for Below-Threshold Projects to obtain a Stormwater Permit directly from the Town of Lexington Building Department during standard Building Permit application process? Yes. The regulations have been adjusted to streamline the permitting process for Below-Threshold projects, as suggested. Section 181-72 Administrative Procedures and Requirements describes this process for applicants. Under the proposed revisions, an erosion and sediment control plan, consistent with the regulations, will be submitted as part of the Building Permit application process, but a separate Stormwater Permit from Public Works will not be required for Below-Threshold Projects. Can the applicability requirements be changed such that housing developments with four or fewer units are classified as Below-Threshold to be more consistent with the applicability section of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook? Woodard & Curran does not recommend modifying the classification requirements of the regulations to exclude housing developments with four or fewer lots. Section 2.3.5 (a) of the Massachusetts MS4 General Permit requires the Town to implement and enforce a program to reduce pollutants from construction projects disturbing greater than (or equal to) 1-acre of land, regardless of the number of units. If the suggested modification was made, the regulations would not be in alignment with the requirements of the MS4 General Permit. Woodard & Curran acknowledges that the MS4 General Permit is inconsistent with the Applicability Standards of the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. Woodard & Curran discussed this inconsistency with the EPA, and confirmed the requirements of the MS4 General Permit as stated in the regulations. The EPA was aware of the inconsistency and anticipates that the Applicability section of the Stormwater Handbook will likely be updated at some point in the future to address the inconsistency. Does an applicant have to submit a Notice of Intent for the Construction General Permit if it is otherwise exempted from the requirements of the Construction General Permit? No. If a project is otherwise exempted from the EPA's Construction General Permit, the application will not be required to submit the Notice of Intent to the Town of Lexington during the Stormwater Permit application process. Language has been clarified within the regulations to only submit the Notice of Intent information if it is applicable. Does an applicant have to obtain the services of a MA-Registered Landscape Architect for C& submission of Landscape Plans? No. There are currently no requirements associated with obtaining the services of a MA-registered Landscape Architect within the Stormwater Regulations. Will an applicant have to submit an application for Stormwater Management Permit if the project is already under review by Conservation Commission? No, a separate Stormwater Management Permit Application will not be required for projects under jurisdiction of the Wetlands Protection Act if approved by Conservation Commission. Additional text has been added to Section 181-71 for clarification. Please clarify which projects are considered above and below threshold. The definitions for Above and Below-threshold projects have been added to the Applicability Section 181 for improved clarity. We look forward to discussing these regulations with the Town of Lexington during the meeting on September 26, 2016. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact us at anytime. Sincerely, WOODARD &CURRAN INC. Denise Cameron Project Manager Enclosure Updated Draft Regulations Town of Lexington 2 Woodard&Curran September 20,2016 Lexington Code, Chapter 181,Article VI STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS § 181-69.General Provisions........................................................................................................................................1 A. Purpose&Authority..............................................................................................................................1 B. Adoption&Amendment........................................................................................................................1 C. Effective Date.........................................................................................................................................1 § 181-70.Definitions.....................................................................................................................................................1 § 181-71.Applicability&Project Classification...........................................................................................................2 A. Applicability...........................................................................................................................................2 B. Project Classification..............................................................................................................................2 § 181-72.Administrative Procedures and Requirements...............................................................................................3 A. Permit Required......................................................................................................................................3 B. Stormwater Management Permit Application........................................................................................3 C. Entry on Land.........................................................................................................................................4 D. Fees........................................................................................................................................................4 E. Permit Application Review Procedures..................................................................................................5 F. Changes to Approved Plans....................................................................................................................7 G. Project Completion.................................................................................................................................7 H. Expiration of Stormwater Management Permit......................................................................................7 § 181-73. Stormwater Management Performance Standards.........................................................................................7 A. Minimum Performance Standards..........................................................................................................7 B. Additional Design Criteria.....................................................................................................................7 § 181-74.Erosion Control Performance Standards.......................................................................................................9 A. Erosion and Sediment Control Design Criteria......................................................................................9 § 181-75. Stormwater Management Plan Contents.....................................................................................................11 A. Project Narrative ..................................................................................................................................11 B. Project Drawings and Specifications....................................................................................................11 C. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan.....................................................................................................11 D. Operation and Maintenance Plan..........................................................................................................12 § 181-76.Construction Implementation&Monitoring...............................................................................................13 A. Surety...................................................................................................................................................13 B. Inspections............................................................................................................................................14 C. Inadequacy of System..........................................................................................................................16 § 181-77.Project Completion......................................................................................................................................16 A. "As-Built'Plans...................................................................................................................................16 B. Certificate of Completion.....................................................................................................................17 § 181-78.Ongoing Inspection and Maintenance.........................................................................................................18 A. Maintenance Inspections......................................................................................................................18 B. Right-of-Entry for Inspection...............................................................................................................18 C. Records of Inspections and Maintenance, Repair,Replacement and Disposal Activities....................19 D. Failure to Maintain...............................................................................................................................19 § 181-79.Waivers........................................................................................................................................................19 § 181-80.Enforcement................................................................................................................................................19 A. Notices and Orders...............................................................................................................................20 B. Purchase,Inheritance, or Acquisition of Property................................................................................20 C. Fines.....................................................................................................................................................20 D. Remedies Not Exclusive ......................................................................................................................20 i § 181-81. Severability..................................................................................................................................................21 APPENDIX A: DEFINITIONS..................................................................................................................................22 APPENDIX B: LOW-IMPACT DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES.............................................................................26 APPENDIX C: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CONTENTS.................................................................27 APPENDIX D: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN CONTENTS......................................................30 APPENDIX E: EXAMPLE INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE CERTIFICATION FORM...........................32 ii Chapter 181, Article VI STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS [Adopted by the Board of Selectmen] § 181-69. General Provisions A. Purpose&Authority The purpose of these Regulations is to protect, maintain and enhance the public safety, environment, health, and general welfare by establishing minimum requirements and procedures to control the adverse effects of soil erosion and Sedimentation, construction Site Runoff, increased Post-Development Stormwater Runoff, decreased Groundwater Recharge, and nonpoint source pollution associated with new development, redevelopment or other land alterations. These Regulations are not intended to interfere with, abrogate or annul any other bylaw, rule or regulation, statute, or other provision of law, including, without limitation, Chapter 114 of the Code of the Town of Lexington (the "Stormwater Management Bylaw"). The requirements of this chapter should be considered minimum requirements, and where any provision of this chapter imposes restrictions different from those imposed by any other bylaw, rule or regulation, or other provision of law, whichever provisions are more restrictive or impose higher protective standards for human health or the environment shall take precedence. B. Adoption&Amendment The following Regulations are hereby adopted by the Board of Selectmen, acting as the Stormwater Authority, as provided in the Stormwater Management Bylaw. The Stormwater Agency shall enforce this chapter and resulting regulations, orders, violation notices, and enforcement orders, and may pursue all civil and criminal remedies for such violations and waive strict compliance with any requirement of these Regulations. C. Effective Date These Regulations shall take effect on January 1, 2017. A copy of these regulations shall be filed with the office of the Town Clerk, with appropriate endorsements, including (1) the date of adoption, the(2) date filed with the Town Clerk and (3) any amendments. § 181-70. Definitions The definitions contained in Appendix A of these Regulations apply to the issuance of a Stormwater Management Permit established by the Stormwater Management Bylaw and implemented through these Stormwater Management Regulations. Terms not defined in these Regulations or in the Stormwater Management Bylaw shall be construed according to their customary and usual meaning unless the context indicates a special or technical meaning. (A0393913.2} Page I § 181-71. Applicability & Project Classification A. Applicability These Regulations apply to all activities governed by the Stormwater Management Bylaw as described below: (1) Any activity that results in a Land Disturbance of greater than one acre of land, or any activity that disturbs less than one acre of land if that project is part of a larger Common Plan of Development that will disturb a total of more than one acre of land; or (2) A new dwelling on a vacant lot, a new dwelling replacing an existing dwelling, or the reconstruction of an existing dwelling that is demolished to the extent of 50% or more of its replacement cost, as determined by the Building Commissioner or designee; or (3) Any development project that: (a) Requires a special permit or a special permit with Site plan review; or (b) Requires approval of a definitive plan under the Subdivision Control Law. Stormwater discharges that are wholly subject to jurisdiction under the Wetlands Protection Act or Chapter 130 of the Code of the Town of Lexington, the Wetland Protection Bylaw, and demonstrate compliance with the Massachusetts Storm Water Management Standards as most recently revised and updated in accordance with revisions to the wetlands regulations, 310 CMR 10.00, and as reflected in an order of conditions or in a determination of applicability issued by the Conservation Commission are exempt from compliance with the Stormwater Management Bylaw and the remainder of these Regulations. B. Project Classification Activities subject to these Regulations are referred to as Projects, Projects fall into one of two classifications; Above Threshold Projects and Below Threshold Projects. (1) Above Threshold Project Classification: Any activity governed by the Stormwater Management Bylaw that (1) results in a Land Disturbance greater than or equal to one acre, or (2) that is part of a larger Common Plan of Development that eventually will disturb more than one acre of land is considered an Above-Threshold Project. Activities governed by the Stormwater Management Bylaw that are Above-Threshold Projects shall be consistent with these regulations in their entirety. Below Threshold Project Classification: Any activity governed by the Stormwater Management Bylaw, but which(1) results in a Land Disturbance less than one acre, and (2) that is not part of a larger Common Plan of Development that eventually will disturb more than one acre of land is a Below-Threshold Project. Projects governed by the Stormwater Management Bylaw that are Below-Threshold Projects shall be consistent with performance standards identified in Section 181-74. Below-Threshold Project Applicants shall only be required to submit the materials (A0393913.2} Page 2 described in Section 181-72 B (2),and shall not be required to comply with the remaining Administrative Procedures and Requirements in Section 181-72. § 181-72. Administrative Procedures and Requirements A. Permit Required (1) Projects that meet the applicability criteria of the Lexington Stormwater Management Bylaw shall require a Stormwater Management Permit in accordance with these Regulations. (2) No Land Disturbance activity shall occur until a permit has been issued hereunder and conditions of approval have been met. (3) No landowner or responsible party shall receive any building or other land development permits required for Land Disturbance activities without first meeting the requirements of the Bylaw and these Regulations prior to commencing the proposed activity. B. Stormwater Management Permit Application An application for a Stormwater Management Permit shall include the materials specified in this section. Additional copies may be requested by the Stormwater Agency. (1) For Above-Threshold Projects, as defined in Appendix A, the Applicant shall file with the Stormwater Agency, three (3) copies of a completed application package for a Stormwater Management Permit. Each copy of the completed Stormwater Management Permit Application package shall include: (a) An Application Form with original signatures of all property owners as well as the Applicant signature if the Applicant is not a property owner; (b) Projections of dates of commencement and completion of construction activities; (c) Payment of the application and other applicable fees; (d) A list of Abutters certified by the Assessor's Office, to be used by the Applicant to provide notice; (e) A list of requested waivers, if applicable. Such a request shall be accompanied by an explanation or documentation and as described in Section 181-79; (f) A Stormwater Management Plan; (g) An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan; (h) An Operation and Maintenance (O&M)Plan; (A0393913.2} Page 3 (i) Above-Threshold Projects subject to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Construction Activities ("Construction General Permit") shall also submit the following with their application unless otherwise waived under 40 CFR § 122.26(b)(15)(i): [1] A Copy of the Notice of Intent to comply with the Construction General Permit; and [2] A Copy of receipt of EPA Authorization letter and tracking number. (j) A surety bond, if required, consistent with Section 181-76 of these Regulations. (2)For Below-Threshold Projects, Applicants shall submit an Erosion& Sediment Control Plan, consistent with performance standards identified in Section 181-74, directly to the Town of Lexington Building Department during application for Residential or Commercial Building Permits. Successful application of and acquisition of a Town of Lexington Building Permit will constitute compliance of Below-Threshold Project Applicants with these Regulations. C. Entry on Land By filing an application for a Stormwater Management Permit, the property owner grants the Stormwater Agency and its agents, officers, and employees permission to enter the Site to verify the information in the application and to inspect for compliance after issuance of the Stormwater Management Permit, including the making of such examinations, surveys, or sampling as the Stormwater Agency deems necessary for such inspections, subject to the constitutions and laws of the United States and the Commonwealth. D. Fees For an Above-Threshold Project, an Applicant shall pay with each submission of an application an Application Fee to cover expenses connected with the administration of and review of the Stormwater Management Permit and a Technical Review and Inspection Fee sufficient to cover professional services. The Stormwater Agency is authorized to retain a Registered Professional Engineer or other professional consultant to advise the Agency on any or all aspects of these applications. Applicants must pay Application and applicable Technical Review and Inspection fees before the review process may begin. Fees shall be calculated as follows: (1) Application Fees for Above Threshold Projects: (a) All projects subject to the Stormwater Management Bylaw: A non-refundable fee of the greater of $300.00 or $0.01 per square foot of the project disturbed area to be permitted, up to a maximum of$1,500.00. (b) Permit Extensions/Modifications: A non-refundable fee of$100.00. (A0393913.2} Page 4 (2) Technical Review and Inspection Fees for Above Threshold Projects: (a) In addition to the above fees, the Stormwater Agency is authorized to require an Applicant to pay a fee for the reasonable costs and expenses for specific engineering and other consultant services deemed necessary by the Stormwater Agency. Payment of such fees may be required at any point in the review and inspection process prior to final Certificate of Completion. The initial amount of this technical review fee shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000.00). The final amount shall be determined by the Town Engineer. If the actual cost incurred by the Town for review of said application is less than the amount on deposit as specified above, the Stormwater Agency shall authorize that such excess amount be refunded to the Applicant concurrently with final action on said application (b) Such fee shall be held in a revolving fund by the Stormwater Agency, to be used to engage independent consultants should the Stormwater Agency determine necessary, based on the characteristics or complexity of the issues raised by the application and/or construction. Such fee shall be governed and administered in accordance with G.L. c.44 § 53G. (c) If prior to Certificate of Completion issuance, the Stormwater Agency finds that the initial deposit is not sufficient to cover actual costs incurred by the Town during the review of the application, the Applicant shall be required to submit forthwith such additional amount as is deemed required by the Stormwater Agency to cover such costs. The Stormwater Agency shall notify the Applicant of such additional amount in writing. Failure to submit such additional amount as required within fourteen (14) days of receipt of said notice shall be deemed reason to deny said application. (d) The Stormwater Agency reserves the right to waive or discount its fees at its discretion. E. Permit Application Review Procedures The Stormwater Agency shall review all applications for a Stormwater Management Permit for completeness. If the Stormwater Agency determines that the application is not complete, the Agency will notify the Applicant in writing, within twenty-one (21) days of receipt of the application, what additional information is required. The permit application review procedures are as follows: (1) Pre-Application Meeting (recommended for Above-Threshold Projects only) Prior to submittal of an application, the Applicant may request a Pre-Application meeting. The Stormwater Agency shall establish the meeting date during the Town's business hours. The meeting shall be held at the Town's Department of Public Works. The meeting will assist the Applicant in submission of a complete Stormwater Management Permit application. (1) Abutter Notification (required for Above-Threshold Projects only) (A0393913.2} Page 5 At the time of application submittal, the Applicant shall provide notice to all Abutters of the application's filing and invite comment to the Agency on said application for a period of seven (7) days. The Agency shall make the application available for inspection by the public during business hours at the Department of Public Works. The Stormwater Agency may, in its discretion, waive this requirement if Abutters have been notified of the same project at other stages of project approval by other Town of Lexington boards or commissions. (2) Final Action The Stormwater Agency shall take final action within twenty-one (21) days of the receipt of a complete application unless such time is extended by agreement between the Applicant and the Stormwater Agency, per subsection 181-72(E)(4) below. The Stormwater Agency's final action, rendered in writing, shall be filed with the Department of Public Works and shall consist of either: (a) Approval of the Stormwater Management Permit Application based upon determination that the proposed plan will adequately protect the water resources of the Town of Lexington and is in compliance with the requirements set forth in these Regulations; (b) Approval of the Stormwater Management Permit Application subject to any conditions, modifications, or restrictions required by the Stormwater Agency which will ensure that the project will adequately protect the water resources of the Town of Lexington and is in compliance with the requirements set forth in these Regulations; or (c) Disapproval of the Stormwater Management Permit Application based upon a determination that the proposed plan, as submitted, does not adequately protect water resources, as set forth in these Regulations, or the application is deemed incomplete. (3) Mutual Extension of Time The required time limits for final action may be extended by written agreement between the Applicant and the Stormwater Agency. A copy of such an agreement shall be filed with the Department of Public Works. (4) Constructive Approval Failure of the Stormwater Agency to take a final action for an application within twenty- one (21) days of receipt of a complete application shall be deemed to be approval of said Application. Upon certification by the Town Clerk that the allowed time has passed without Stormwater Agency action, the activity may proceed as proposed in the Application. (A0393913.2} Page 6 F. Changes to Approved Plans The Permittee must notify the Stormwater Agency in writing of any significant change or alteration in the system authorized in a Stormwater Management Permit before any such change or alteration is made. If the Stormwater Agency determines within twenty-one (21) days that the change or alteration is significant different in nature or character, it shall require the Applicant to submit an amended application and obtain approval of the change from the Stormwater Agency prior to construction. G. Project Completion At final completion of all Above-Threshold Projects, the Permittee shall request a Certificate of Completion pursuant to the requirements of Section 181-77 of these Regulations. H. Expiration of Stormwater Management Permit A Stormwater Management Permit expires two (2) years after the date of issuance. If the project associated with an approved Stormwater Management Permit granted under the Stormwater Management Bylaw has not been substantially completed within two (2) years of permit issuance, a new permit, or a permit extension may be required by the Stormwater Agency. § 181-73. Stormwater Management Performance Standards A. Minimum Performance Standards Except as expressly provided, Runoff from all Above-Threshold Projects shall meet Standards 1 through 10 of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's Stormwater Management Standards and Handbook using current Best Management Practices (BMPS) and these Regulations. Where an inconsistency exists between the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook and these Regulations, the stricter requirement shall apply. B. Additional Design Criteria (1) Landscape Design Performance Standards Site plans and landscape plans for all proposed projects shall take appropriate steps to minimize water use for irrigation and to allow for natural Recharge of Groundwater. Native species and habitat creating species shall be used in all landscape plans to the maximum extent possible. Invasive species shall not be planted in the Town of Lexington. (2) Hydrological Basis for Design For stormwater facility sizing criteria, the basis for hydrologic and hydraulic evaluation of development and redevelopment Sites are as follows: (A0393913.2} Page 7 (a) Evaluation and implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) practices is required to the maximum extent practicable. Guidance on these practices is provided in Appendix B and the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. (b) The condition and capacity of any existing infrastructure that will be connected to or from the proposed development shall be evaluated. (c) The 24-hour rainfall amounts shall be based on the Northeast Regional Climate Center "Atlas of Precipitation Extremes for the Northeastern United States and Southeastern Canada." (rounded to the nearest one-tenth of an inch). (d) The minimum time of concentration for street drainage shall be five(5) minutes. (e) Water velocities in pipes and gutters shall be between two (2) and ten (10) feet per second, not more than five (5) feet per second on paved surfaces, and not more than four(4) feet per second in vegetated areas. (f) Impervious cover is measured from the Site plan and includes any material or structure on or above the ground that prevents water from infiltrating through the underlying soil(including compacted gravel). (g) Off-Site areas shall be assessed based on their "pre-developed condition" for computing the water quality volume (i.e., treatment of only on-Site areas is required). However, if an off-Site area drains to a proposed Stormwater Management Facility, flow from that area must be accounted for in the sizing of a specific Facility. (h) Off-Site areas draining to a proposed Facility should be modeled as "present condition" for peak-flow attenuation requirements. (i) The length of sheet flow used in time of concentration calculations is limited to no more than one-hundred(100) feet. (j) Detention time shall be computed as the time between the center of mass of the inflow hydrograph and the center of mass of the outflow hydrograph. For purposes of choosing a Runoff Curve Number, all pervious lands in the Site shall be assumed prior to development to be in "good" hydrologic condition regardless of conditions existing at the time of computation. (k) Proposed residential, commercial, or industrial subdivisions or ANRs shall apply these Stormwater Management criteria to the land development as a whole. Individual lots in new subdivisions shall not be considered separate land development projects, but rather the entire subdivision shall be considered a single Common Plan of Development. Hydrologic parameters shall reflect the ultimate land development and shall be used in all engineering calculations. (3) Discharges to Water Quality Impaired Waters (A0393913.2} Page 8 The Applicant must determine whether stormwater discharges from the proposed Site will contribute, either directly or indirectly, to the impairment of an impaired water body with or without approved total maximum daily load. The Massachusetts Integrated List of Waters is published every two years and shall be the reference for determination of water body impairment listings. Stormwater management facilities and non-structural stormwater BMPS shall be selected that will control the discharge of the pollutant(s) identified as causing the impairment. § 181-74. Erosion Control Performance Standards A. Erosion and Sediment Control Design Criteria The following erosion and sediment control performance standards must be met. Except as expressly provided, all Stormwater Management Permit projects shall meet Standards 8 of the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's Stormwater Management Standards and Handbook using current Best Management Practices (BMPS) and these Regulations. Where an inconsistency exists between the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook and these regulations, the stricter requirement shall apply. (1) Minimize total area of disturbance and minimize unnecessary clearing and Grading from all construction Sites. Clearing and Grading shall only be performed within areas needed to build the project, including structures, utilities, roads, recreational amenities, post- construction stormwater management facilities, and related infrastructure. (2) Prior to any Land Disturbance activities commencing on the Site, the Developer shall physically mark limits of the allowable disturbance on the Site with tape, signs, or orange construction fence, so that workers can see the areas to be protected. The physical markers shall be inspected daily by the Permittee. (3) Erosion and Sediment Control measures shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and good engineering practices to ensure they perform as intended. (4) Erosion and Sediment Control measures used shall be chosen based on the goal of minimizing Site disturbance from installation of such measures. (5) Stormwater Runoff velocities shall be minimized to the greatest extent practicable. Increases in Runoff velocities due to the removal of existing vegetative cover during development and the resulting increase in impermeable surface area after development must be taken into account when providing for Erosion Control. (6) Protect disturbed areas from stormwater Runoff. Best Management Practices (BMPS) can be utilized to prevent water from entering and running over the disturbed area. Diversions and other control practices to intercept Runoff from higher watershed areas, store or divert it away from vulnerable areas, and direct it toward stabilized outlets may be used. (A0393913.2} Page 9 (7) Sediment trapping and settling devices shall be employed to trap and/or retain suspended sediments and allow time for them to settle out in cases where perimeter sediment controls (e.g., silt fence and hay bales) are deemed to be ineffective in trapping suspended sediments on-Site. (8) Stormwater management facilities to be used after construction shall not be used as BMPS during construction unless otherwise approved by the Stormwater Agency. Many technologies are not designed to handle the high concentrations of sediments typically found in construction Runoff, and thus must be protected from construction related sediment loadings. (9) Sediment shall be removed once the volume reaches '/4 to '/2 the height of a perimeter sediment control system. Sediment shall be removed from silt fence prior to reaching the load-bearing capacity of the silt fence which may be lower than '/4 to '/2 the height. (10)Sediment from sediment traps or Sedimentation ponds shall be removed when design capacity has been reduced by 50 percent. (11)On and off-Site material storage areas, including construction and waste materials, shall be properly protected and managed. (12)Soil stockpiles must be stabilized or covered at the end of each workday. Stockpile side slopes shall not be greater than 2:1. All stockpiles shall be surrounded by sediment controls. (13)Projects must comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations including waste disposal, sanitary sewer or septic system regulations, and air quality requirements, including dust and debris control. (14)Interim and permanent stabilization measures shall be instituted on a disturbed area immediately after construction activity has temporarily or permanently ceased on that portion of the Site. Two methods are available for stabilizing disturbed areas: mechanical (or structural) methods and vegetative methods. In some cases, both are combined in order to control erosion. (15)Temporary sediment trapping devices must not be removed until permanent stabilization is established in all contributory drainage areas. (16)The duration of the exposure of disturbed areas due to removal of vegetation and/or re- Grading shall be stated in writing in a schedule that will be prepared at the time of application for permit and maintained as part of the project records. (17)Dust control shall be used during Grading operations. Dust control methods may consist of Grading fine soils on calm days only or dampening the ground with water. (A0393913.2} Page 10 (18)During construction, all disturbed areas shall be enclosed with compost filter socks in the down gradient direction or in any direction to which erosion can occur. (19)During construction, any Site entrance from a paved,public way shall be improved with a temporary construction entrance built in accordance with the recommendations of the Massachusetts Erosion and Sediment Control Guidelines for Urban and Suburban Areas to prevent soil from being transported onto the street. (20)During construction, catchbasin or other drainage system inlet structures down gradient of the construction entrance shall be protected with silt sacks or other inlet protection device. (21)lf the work produces or distributes soil on public or private ways, that soil shall be cleaned up by the responsible party as soon as possible but in all cases within twenty-four (24) hours. (22)lf the work causes the discharge of soil to town drainage structures, all affected downstream pipes shall be cleaned by the responsible party within three (3) days. § 181-75. Stormwater Management Plan Contents The application for a Stormwater Management Permit shall include the submittal of a Stormwater Management Plan to the Stormwater Agency for all Above-Threshold Projects. The Stormwater Management Plan shall also contain sufficient information for the Stormwater Agency to evaluate the environmental impact, effectiveness, and acceptability of the measures proposed by the Applicant for mitigating adverse impacts from stormwater Runoff. This plan shall be designed to meet the Massachusetts Stormwater Standards and additional criteria established in these Regulations, and must be submitted with the stamp and signature of a Professional Engineer (PE) licensed to conduct such work in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Stormwater Management Plan shall fully describe the project in drawings, narrative, and calculations and shall include the following: A. Project Narrative Required contents of the Stormwater Management Plan narrative are provided in Appendix C of these Regulations. B. Project Drawings and Specifications Required contents of the Stormwater Management Plan drawings and specifications are provided in Appendix C of these Regulations. C. Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (A0393913.2} Page 11 (1) An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan is required at the time of application for all projects. Plan approval by the Stormwater Agency is required prior to any Land Disturbances. The plan shall be designed to ensure compliance with the Stormwater Management Permit, these Regulations, the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook, and the NPDES Construction General Permit (when applicable). In addition, the plan shall ensure that the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards (314 CMR 4.00) are met in all seasons. (2) If a project requires a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) per the NPDES Construction General Permit, the Applicant must also submit a complete copy of the SWPPP as part of its application for a Stormwater Management Permit. If the SWPPP meets the requirements of the Construction General Permit, it will be considered equivalent to the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan described in this Section. (3) The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall contain sufficient information to describe the nature and purpose of the proposed development, pertinent conditions of the Site and the adjacent areas, and proposed erosion and Sedimentation controls. The Applicant shall submit such material as is necessary to show that the proposed development will comply with the design requirements listed below. (4) For larger developments where construction phasing occurs, the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be updated as needed based on changing conditions at the Site. (5) Required contents of the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan are provided in Appendix D of these Regulations. D. Operation and Maintenance Plan (1) An Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan is required at the time of application for all Above-Threshold Projects. The O&M Plan shall be designed to ensure (a) compliance with the Permit, these Regulations and the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook, and (b) that the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality Standards (314 CMR 4.00) are met in all seasons and throughout the life of all of the project's Stormwater Management Facilities. The O&M Plan shall be a stand-alone document, submitted as a digital file, preferably .PDF, in addition to paper copy and shall remain on file with the Stormwater Agency. Compliance with the O&M Plan shall be an ongoing requirement. When applicable, stormwater management easements will be required for all areas used for off-Site stormwater control, unless the Stormwater Agency grants a waiver. To ensure that all stormwater management facilities continue to function as designed, a final O&M Plan shall be submitted prior to issuance of a Certificate of Completion. This Plan shall reflect any modifications made during the permitting process and the Site specific conditions. (2) The O&M Plan shall include, at a minimum: (a) The names, addresses and contact information of the property owner(s). (A0393913.2} Page 12 (b) The signature(s) of the owner(s). (c) The names, addresses, and contact information of the person(s) responsible for Site operation and maintenance, including how future property owners will be notified of the presence of the stormwater management facilities and the requirement for proper operation and maintenance; if responsibility is contracted to a third party, a copy of the maintenance agreement(s)with said third party must be provided. (d) A plan or map drawn to scale showing the location of the systems and stormwater management facilities including existing and proposed easements, catch basins, manholes/access lids, main, and stormwater management facilities along with the discharge point. (e) A description and purpose of all parcel easements shown on the above-referenced drawing. The Applicant shall record all easements with the Middlesex South Registry of Deeds prior to issuance of a Certificate of Completion. (f) An Inspection and Maintenance Schedule for all stormwater management facilities, including what routine and non-routine maintenance tasks are to be performed, when they are to be conducted, who is to perform them, and to whom to report results. (g) A description and delineation of public safety features. (h) Any other information requested by the Stormwater Agency. (3) Stormwater management facilities and practices included in an O&M Plan shall undergo ongoing inspections to document maintenance and repair needs and ensure compliance with the requirements of the agreement, the Plan and Section 181-78 of these Regulations. At a minimum, inspections shall occur once every year. § 181-76. Construction Implementation & Monitoring For all Above-Threshold Projects, the Applicant shall provide the following: A. Surety (1) Stormwater Completion Surety As a condition of issuance of the Stormwater Management Permit, and before the start of any Land Disturbance or construction activity, the Stormwater Agency may require the Applicant to post a surety bond, irrevocable letter of credit, cash, or other acceptable security in an amount sufficient to guarantee completion of the approved Estimated Cost of Construction. The form of the bond shall be approved by the Stormwater Agency, and be in an amount deemed sufficient by the Stormwater Agency to ensure that the work will be completed in accordance with the permit. (A0393913.2} Page 13 If the project is phased, the Stormwater Agency may release part of the bond as each phase is completed in compliance with the permit but the bond may not be released to an amount less than fifteen percent (15%) of the original amount until the Stormwater Agency has received the final inspection report as required by Section 181-77 B (1) of these Regulations and issued a Certificate of Completion. This requirement will be considered met if a surety bond that complies with the provisions of this Subsection 181-76(A) has been required by other Town boards or commissions. B. Inspections Construction Site inspections shall be conducted by the Applicant in accordance with the approved Stormwater Management Plan. Noncompliance issues discovered during inspections are the responsibility of the construction Site operator to resolve in a timely manner. (1) Construction Commencement (a) The Applicant shall notify the Stormwater Agency seven (7) workdays prior to the commencement of construction to arrange for an on-Site, pre-construction meeting. The Applicant's technical representative, the general contractor, or any other person with authority to make changes to the project, shall meet with the Stormwater Agency or its representative to review construction sequencing and the permitted plans and their implementation. (b) The Applicant shall maintain a copy of the approved and signed plans and permits for a Stormwater Management Permit, and documentation demonstrating that conditions of approval have been met, including a copy of the approved Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and, if applicable, an EPA Authorization for a NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges from Construction Activities (Construction General Permit) on the construction Site at all times. (2) Inspections by Applicant (a) To ensure Erosion Control practices are in accord with the filed Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, the Applicant or an authorized representative will conduct Erosion and Sediment Control Inspections at least once every fourteen (14) calendar days, and within 24 hours of the end of a storm event of 0.25 inches or greater, from the start of construction until the Site is permanently stabilized. Inspection frequency may be reduced to once a month if the Site is temporarily stabilized, Runoff is unlikely due to winter conditions (e.g., Site is covered with snow, ice, or the ground is frozen), or, if construction is occurring during seasonal dry periods. The Applicant shall obtain approval from the Stormwater Agency for any change in inspection frequency, including termination of inspections due to Site stabilization. (A0393913.2} Page 14 (b) Erosion and Sediment Control Inspections must include all areas of the Site disturbed by construction activity and areas used for storage of materials that are exposed to precipitation. The individual conducting the inspection must look for evidence of, or the potential for, pollutants entering the storm water Conveyance system. Sedimentation and Erosion Control measures identified in the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must be observed to ensure proper operation. Discharge locations must be inspected to ascertain whether Erosion Control measures are effective in preventing significant impacts to waters of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and United States, where accessible. Where discharge locations are inaccessible, nearby downstream locations must be inspected to the extent that such inspections are practicable. Locations where vehicles enter or exit the Site must be inspected for evidence of off-Site sediment tracking. (c) For each Erosion and Sediment Control Inspection, an inspection report must be completed within 24 hours of the inspection by the Site owner or an authorized representative. The inspection report shall be consistent with construction inspection reporting outlined in the Construction General Permit and shall include the following information, as a minimum: [1] Name, date, and signature of Qualified Inspector; [2] Weather information and a description of any discharges occurring at the time of the inspection; [3] Weather information for the period since the last inspection (or since commencement of construction activity if the first inspection) including a best estimate of the beginning of each storm event, duration of each storm event, approximate amount of rainfall for each storm event (in inches), and whether any discharges occurred; [4] Location(s) of discharges of sediment or other pollutants from the Site; [5] Location(s) of Best Management Practices (BMPS) that need to be maintained and a description of the need for maintenance; [6] Location(s) of BMPS that failed to operate as designed or proved inadequate for a particular location, and/or location(s) where additional BMPS are needed that did not exist at prior inspection; and [7] Corrective action required including any changes to the Stormwater Management Plan necessary and implementation dates. (d) A Stormwater Management Facility inspection by the Applicant's Certifying Professional Engineer, shall be made during construction of the stormwater management system. (A0393913.2} Page 15 (e) The Applicant shall conduct a final inspection near project completion to ensure temporary controls have been removed, stabilization is complete, and final conditions adhere to approved Site plans. (f) A record of each inspection and of any actions taken must be retained by the Applicant for at least three (3) years. The inspection reports must identify any incidents of non-compliance with the permit conditions. Where a report does not identify any incidents of non-compliance, the report must contain a certification that the construction project or Site is in compliance with this permit. (g) If a project requires a SWPPP per the NPDES Construction General Permit, the Applicant must submit all inspection reports completed under that SWPPP to the Stormwater Agency. (3) Town Inspections. (a) At their discretion, the Stormwater Agency (or their assigns) may conduct periodic inspections of the project, to ensure compliance with the conditions of the Stormwater Management Permit. (b) All inspection reports conducted by the Applicant shall be made available during Town inspections. (c) Additional inspections may be conducted as needed if chronic deficiencies are identified. C. Inadequacy of System (1) The Stormwater Agency reserves the right to require corrections or improvements to a stormwater management system after issuance of any Stormwater Management Permit based on the system's performance under actual storm conditions. If the stormwater management system is found by the Stormwater Agency to be inadequate by virtue of physical evidence of operational failure, even though it was built in accordance with the Stormwater Management Plan, it shall be corrected by the Applicant before the Certificate of Completion is released. If the Applicant fails to act, the Stormwater Agency may use the surety bond required pursuant to § 181-76 to complete the work. (2) If the Stormwater Agency determines that there is a failure to comply with the plan, the property owner shall be notified in writing of the nature of the violation and the required corrective actions. A Stop Work Order shall be issued until any violations are corrected and all work previously completed has received approval by the Stormwater Agency. § 181-77. Project Completion For all Above-Threshold Projects, the Applicant shall provide the following: A. "As-Built"Plans (A0393913.2} Page 16 (1) Within ninety (90) days of completion of the project, the Applicant shall submit as-built record drawings. A Registered Land Surveyor must prepare as-built plans that show the "as-built" conditions, including all final grades. All changes to project design shall be indicated in red on plans (or otherwise noted). All work deleted, corrections in elevations, and changes in materials, shall be shown on the as-built drawings and explained in writing. A Registered Professional Engineer shall certify conformance with the plan, and/or identify deviations, if any, from the Stormwater Management Permit. (2) As-built plans shall be submitted electronically to the Stormwater Agency. File format shall be the AutoCAD DWG format and consistent with the current Standard for Digital Plan Submission to Municipalities, published by the Commonwealth's Office of Environmental Information (MassGIS) unless otherwise indicated by the Stormwater Agency. (3) As-built plans shall, at a minimum, include the following information: (a) Limit of work; (b) Post-construction topography; (c) Finished grades of all structures; (d) Invert elevations of all stormwater structures; (e) All surface materials, structures,pavement, utilities; and (f) Off-Site alterations. B. Certificate of Completion (1) Upon completion, the Applicant is responsible for certifying that the completed project is in accordance with the approved plans and specifications by submitting the following material to the Stormwater Agency: (a) Certification by a Registered Professional Engineer that the stormwater management facilities have been installed and are functioning according to the approved Stormwater Management Permit; (b) As-built plan, stamped by a Registered Land Surveyor and electronic copy, submitted no later than ninety (90) days after completion of construction, in accordance with Section 181-77 of these Regulations; (c) Documentation on compliance with all permit conditions; (d) Final Operation& Maintenance Plan; (e) Maintenance contracts in place(if required); and (f) Certified copy of the Stormwater Management Permit and all necessary easements have been recorded at Registry of Deeds. (2) The Stormwater Agency will issue a letter to the Permittee, certifying completion upon receipt and approval of the final inspection and reports and/or upon otherwise determining that all work of the Stormwater Management Permit has been satisfactorily completed in conformance with the Stormwater Management Bylaw and these Regulations. (A0393913.2} Page 17 § 181-78. Ongoing Inspection and Maintenance For all Above-Threshold Projects, the owner of the property on which work has been done pursuant to these Regulations, or any other person or agent in control of such property, shall maintain in good condition and promptly repair and restore all stormwater management Facilities. Such repairs or restoration and maintenance shall be in accordance with approved O&M plan. The Town of Lexington will not accept ownership of stormwater BMPS located outside of street rights of way, and the maintenance of such facilities shall remain the permanent responsibility of the Applicant or his successors and/or assigns. The owner of the property on which work has done pursuant to these regulations for private Stormwater Management Facilities, or any other person or agent in control of such property, shall maintain in good condition and promptly repair and restore all Stormwater Management Facilities in accordance with the O&M Plan and all other applicable approved plans, and all applicable laws. A. Maintenance Inspections The property owner responsible for the operation and maintenance of stormwater management facilities shall retain a Qualified Inspector who shall submit, on an annual basis by January 1st of each year, a written certification to the Stormwater Agency documenting that work has been done to properly operate and maintain the stormwater management facilities consistent with the approved O&M plan. The property owner responsible for the operation and maintenance of a stormwater management system shall prepare records of the all maintenance and repairs, using the example inspection and maintenance form included in Appendix E of these Regulations. (1) Maintenance inspections shall include consideration of the condition of: (a) Pretreatment devices; (b) Vegetation or filter media; (c) Fences or other safety devices; (d) Spillways, valves, or other control structures; (e) Embankments, slopes, and safety benches; (f) Reservoir or treatment areas; (g) Inlet and outlet channels and structures; (h) Underground drainage; (i) Sediment and debris accumulation in storage and fore bay areas (including catch basins); 0) Any nonstructural practices; and (k) Any other item that could affect the proper function of the stormwater management system. B. Right-of-Entry for Inspection The terms of the O&M Plan and any maintenance agreement for the implementation thereof shall provide for the Stormwater Agency or its designee to enter the properly at reasonable times and (A0393913.2} Page 18 in a reasonable manner for the purpose of inspection in accordance with Section 181-72(C) of these regulations. C. Records of Inspections and Maintenance, Repair, Replacement and Disposal Activities Property owners responsible for the operation and maintenance of stormwater management facilities shall prepare records of the installation and of all inspections, maintenance, repairs, replacement, and disposal activities, and shall retain the records for at least five years. These records shall be made available to the Stormwater Agency during inspection of the facility and upon request. For disposal, the record must indicate the type of material, quantity of material, and disposal location. D. Failure to Maintain After notification is provided to the signatories to the Maintenance Agreement of any deficiencies discovered from an inspection of a Stormwater Management System, the owner of the property shall have 30 days (which time may be extended by the Stormwater Agency) to correct the deficiency. The Stormwater Agency shall then conduct a subsequent inspection to ensure completion of repairs. § 181-79. Waivers A. The Stormwater Agency may, at its sole discretion, waive strict compliance with any requirement of the Stormwater Management Bylaw and these Regulations, where it makes a written finding that such action is: (1) allowed by federal, state and local statutes and regulations; (2) in the public interest; and (3) consistent with the purpose and intent of the Town of Lexington Stormwater Management Bylaw and these Regulations. B. Any Applicant shall submit a written request to be granted such a waiver. Such a request shall be accompanied by an explanation or documentation supporting the waiver request and demonstrating that strict application of the Bylaw does not further the purposes or objectives of the Bylaw. C. If in the Stormwater Agency's opinion, additional time or information is required for review of a waiver request, the Stormwater Agency may request consent of the Applicant in extending the time for collection of additional information. In the event the Applicant objects to a continuance, or fails to provide requested information, the waiver request shall be denied. D. Waivers described herein shall not constitute an exemption from any other applicable Federal, State, or local permitting requirements. § 181-80. Enforcement The Stormwater Agency, or an authorized agent of the Agency, shall enforce the Bylaw, Regulations, orders, violation notices, and enforcement orders, and may pursue all available civil, criminal and non-criminal remedies for such violations. (A0393913.2} Page 19 A. Notices and Orders (1) The Stormwater Agency may issue a written notice of violation or an enforcement order to enforce the provisions of the Stormwater Management Bylaw and the Regulations, which may include requirements to: (a) Suspend or revoke any Stormwater Management Permit; (b) Cease and desist construction or Land Disturbances until the Stormwater Agency certifies compliance with the Bylaw and the Stormwater Management Permit; (c) Repair, maintain, or replace the stormwater management system or portions thereof in accordance with the O&M Plan; (d) Perform monitoring, analyses, and reporting; and/or (e) Repair adverse impact resulting directly or indirectly from malfunction of the stormwater management system. (2) The suspension or revocation of the Permit shall not relieve the Applicant of his obligation there under except at the discretion of the Stormwater Agency. (3) If the Stormwater Agency determines that abatement or remediation of adverse impacts is required, the order may set forth a deadline by which such abatement or remediation shall be completed. B. Purchase, Inheritance, or Acquisition of Property Any person who purchases, inherits or otherwise acquires real estate upon which work has been done in violation of the provisions of the Stormwater Management Bylaw and these Regulations, or in violation of the approved Plans under this Section shall forthwith comply with any such Order, and restore such real estate to its condition prior to such violation, as the Stormwater Agent deems necessary to remedy such violation. C. Fines Any person who violates any provision of the Town of Lexington Stormwater Management Bylaw, these Regulations, or order or permit issued there under, may be fined up to $300 per offense. Each day that such violation occurs or continues shall constitute a separate offense. As an alternative to criminal prosecution or civil action, the Stormwater Agency may choose to use the non-criminal disposition procedure set forth in G.L. c. 40, § 21D and § 1-6 of the Code of the Town of Lexington. D. Remedies Not Exclusive (A0393913.2} Page 20 The remedies listed in the Stormwater Management Bylaw and these regulations are not exclusive of any other remedies available under any applicable federal, state, or local law. § 181-81. Severability The invalidity of any section, provision,paragraph, sentence, or clause of these Regulations shall not invalidate any other section, provision, paragraph, sentence or clause thereof, nor shall it invalidate any permit or determination that has been previously issued. (A0393913.2} Page 21 APPENDIX A: DEFINITIONS ABOVE-THRESHOLD PROJECT — Any activity governed by the Stormwater Management Bylaw that (1) results in a Land Disturbance greater than or equal to one acre, or (2) that is part of a larger Common Plan of Development that eventually will disturb more than one acre of land. ABUTTER A property owner (a) directly abutting a proposed project (b) across a public or private street from a proposed project or (c) abutting an Abutter if such is within 300 feet of the proposed project Limit of Disturbance. APPLICANT A property owner or agent of a property owner who has filed an application for a Stormwater Management Permit. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMPS) — Structural, nonstructural, and managerial techniques that are recognized to be the most effective and practical means to prevent and/or reduce erosion, provide sediment control and promote stormwater quality and protection of the environment. Structural BMPS are often constructed as temporary structures to control Site Sedimentation. "Nonstructural" Best Management Practices use natural measures to reduce pollution levels, do not require extensive construction efforts, and/or promote pollutant reduction by eliminating the pollutant source. Nonstructural Best Management Practices include managerial techniques that focus on the preservation and protection of natural features. BELOW-THRESHOLD PROJECT — Any activity governed by the Stormwater Management Bylaw, but which(1) results in a Land Disturbance less than one acre, and (2) that is not part of a larger Common Plan of Development that eventually will disturb more than one acre of land. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION (COC) A document issued by the Stormwater Agency after all construction activities have been completed which states that all conditions of an issued Stormwater Management Permit have been met. COMMON PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT — Any announcement or piece of documentation (including without limitation a contract, public notice or hearing, advertisement, drawing, plan, or permit application) or physical demarcation (including without limitation boundary signs, lot stakes, surveyor marking) indicating imminent or future plans to disturb earth regardless of how many phases or how long it will take to complete said plan. A Site will no longer be considered part of a Common Plan of Development if the following criteria are met: (1) The original plan, including modifications, is substantially completed with less than one acre of the original common plan remaining (i.e., <1 acre of the common plan was not built out at the time); and (2) Work on said Site follows a clear, identifiable period of time of two (2) years or more where there is no construction on the property or other properties that would be part of the same Common Plan of Development, including final stabilization. (A0393913.2} Page 22 CONVEYANCE Any structure or device, including pipes, drains, culverts, curb breaks, paved swales or man-made swales of all types designed or utilized to move or direct stormwater Runoff or existing water flow. DEVELOPER A person who undertakes or proposes to undertake Land Disturbance activities. c DIRECTLY CONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA (DCIA) — The portion of impervious area with a direct hydraulic connection to the MS4 or a waterbody via continuous paved surfaces, gutters, pipes and other impervious features such as conventional pavements, sidewalks, driveways, roadways,parking lots, and rooftops. DISCONNECTED IMPERVIOUS AREA — An isolated impervious area with an indirect hydraulic connection to the MS4 or Waters of the Commonwealth. GRADING Changing the level or shape of the ground surface. EROSION CONTROL The prevention or reduction of the movement of soil particles or rock fragments due to stormwater Runoff. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan as required by the EPA Construction General Permit, or the functional equivalent if a project is not subject to the EPA Construction General Permit. GROUNDWATER All water beneath any land surface including water in the soil and bedrock beneath water bodies. INFILTRATION The act of conveying surface water into the ground to permit Groundwater Recharge and the reduction of stormwater Runoff from a project Site. LAND DISTURBANCE Any action that causes a change in the position, location, or arrangement of soil, sand, rock, gravel, or similar earth material. LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT (LID) — A set of strategies that seek to maintain natural hydrologic systems both during and after the development process. This approach is implemented by engineering a Site so that the Post-Development hydrologic functions remain close to predevelopment conditions by using design techniques that infiltrate, filter, store, evaporate and detain stormwater Runoff close to its source. MASSACHUSETTS STORMWATER HANDBOOK (HANDBOOK) The Stormwater Handbook, as amended from time to time, produced by MassDEP and the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management to be used as guidance for controlling stormwater. Implementation of Stormwater Management Standards shall be in accordance with the Stormwater Handbook. MASSACHUSETTS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STANDARDS The requirements described in the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook, as they may be amended from time to time, that address water quality (pollutants) and water quantity (flooding, low base flow and (A0393913.2} Page 23 Recharge) by establishing standards that require the implementation of a wide variety of stormwater management strategies. These strategies include environmentally sensitive Site design and LID techniques to minimize impervious surface and Land Disturbance, source control and pollution prevention, structural Best Management Practices, construction period erosion and Sedimentation control, and the long-term operation and maintenance of stormwater management systems. The Stormwater Management Standards have been incorporated in the Wetlands Protection Act Regulations, 310 CMR 10.05(6)(k) and the Water Quality Certification Regulations, 314 CMR 9.06(6)(a). MS4 (MUNICIPAL SEPARATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM) — A Conveyance or system of Conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains) designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater, and which is not a combined sewer, owned or operated by a city or town having jurisdiction over disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, stormwater, or other wastes, that discharges to waters of the United States. NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) —As authorized by the Federal Clean Water Act, the NPDES permit program controls water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN A plan that defines the functional, financial and organizational mechanisms for the ongoing operation and maintenance of a stormwater management system to insure that it continues to function as designed. PRE-DEVELOPMENT The conditions that exist at the time that plans for the land development of a tract of land are submitted to the Stormwater Agency with a Stormwater Management Permit Application. Where phased development or plan approval occurs (preliminary Grading, roads and utilities, etc.), the existing conditions at the time prior to the first plan submission shall establish the Site's Pre-Development conditions. POST-DEVELOPMENT The conditions that reasonably may be expected or anticipated to exist after completion of the land development activity on a specific Site or tract of land. Post- Development refers to the phase of a new development or redevelopment project after completion, and does not refer to the construction phase of a project. QUALIFIED INSPECTOR A person knowledgeable in the principles and practice of erosion and sediment controls and pollution prevention, who possesses the skills to assess conditions at the construction Site that could impact stormwater quality, and the skills to assess the effectiveness of any stormwater management facilities selected and installed to meet the requirements of this permit. The inspector must have a practical knowledge of stormwater hydrology and stormwater management techniques, including the maintenance requirements for stormwater management facilities; and the inspector must have the ability to determine if stormwater BMPS and facilities are performing as intended. RECHARGE The replenishment of underground water reserves. (A0393913.2} Page 24 RESOURCE AREA Any area protected under, including without limitation: the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, Massachusetts Rivers Act, or Town of Lexington Wetlands Protection Bylaw. RUNOFF — The water from rain, snowmelt, or irrigation that flows over the land surface that is not absorbed into the ground, instead flowing into streams or other surface waters or land depressions. SEDIMENTATION A process of depositing material that has been suspended and transported in water. SITE —The parcel of land being developed or a designated planning area in which the land development project is located. STOP WORK ORDER An order issued by the Stormwater Agency that requires that all construction activity on a Site be stopped. STORMWATER — Water that accumulates on land because of storms and can include Runoff from urban areas such as roads and roofs. STORMWATER AGENCY — The entity responsible for administering, implementing, and enforcing the regulations adopted by the Stormwater Authority. Section 2 of the Stormwater Management Bylaw designates the Lexington Department of Public Works Engineering Division as the Stormwater Agency. STORMWATER AUTHORITY — The entity responsible for adopting regulations pursuant to the Stormwater Management Bylaw. Section 5(A) of the Stormwater Management Bylaw designates the Lexington Board of Selectmen as the Stormwater Authority. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITY A device engineered and constructed to provide permanent storage and/or treatment of Stormwater Runoff. STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT — A permit issued by the Stormwater Agency, after review of an application, plans, calculations, and other supporting documents, approving a system that is designed to protect the environment of the Town from the deleterious effects of uncontrolled and untreated Stormwater Runoff. (A0393913.2} Page 25 APPENDIX B: LOW-IMPACT DEVELOPMENT PRACTICES Low Impact Development (LID) strategies use careful Site design and decentralized Stormwater management based on natural hydrologic features to reduce the environmental footprint of new growth. This approach manages Stormwater at the source to control the generation of Stormwater, improve water quality, and minimize the need for expensive pipe and complex Stormwater BMP systems. Cisterns and rain barrels can be used to harvest and store rainwater Runoff from roofs, which can help reduce flooding and erosion caused by Stormwater Runoff; an added benefit is that the rainwater contains no salts or sediment, providing "soft" chemical- free water for garden or lawn irrigation, reducing water bills, and conserving municipal water supplies. The Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook contains additional information on specific LID alternatives. Conservation Development Like LID, Conservation Development tries to mitigate the Stormwater effects of urbanization, but it places additional emphasis on protecting aquatic habitat and other natural resources. Conservation Development subdivisions are characterized by compact clustered lots surrounding a common open space. Conservation Development's goal is to disturb as little land area as possible while simultaneously allowing for the maximum number of residences permitted under zoning laws. Prior to new construction, conservation Developers evaluate natural topography, natural drainage patterns, soils, and vegetation. They deploy Stormwater Best Management Practices to help prevent flooding and protect natural hydrology. By maintaining natural hydrological processes, Conservation Development creates conditions that slow, absorb, and filter Stormwater Runoffon- Site. Because future development threatens valuable natural features, Conservation Development provides specific provisions for long-term and permanent resource protection. Conservation easements, transfer of development rights, and other "in perpetuity" mechanisms ensure that protective measures are more than just temporary. Better Site Design The goals of Better Site Design are to reduce impervious cover, preserve natural lands, and capture Stormwater on-Site. To meet these goals, designers employ a variety of methods. To reduce impervious cover, they narrow streets and sidewalks, minimize cul-de-sacs, tighten parking spaces, and reduce the size of driveways and housing lots. To reduce Stormwater Runoff, designers preserve natural lands, using them as buffer zones along streams, wetlands, and steep slopes. They employ landscaping techniques that flatten slopes and preservenative vegetation and clusters of trees. They create open channels and vegetated swales - to increase Stormwater Infiltration, helping to protect streams, lakes, and wetlands. Better Site Design is an integral component of Smart Growth management strategies, which emphasize the preservation of green space. (A0393913.2} Page 26 APPENDIX C: STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN CONTENTS The Stormwater Management Plan shall be consistent with the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Handbook and shall include, at a minimum: (1) Contact Information. The name, address, and telephone number of all persons having a legal interest in the property and the tax reference number and parcel number of the property or properties affected; (2) A brief narrative description of the project including at a minimum: (a) How and where Stormwater will be controlled, where ultimately Stormwater from the Site will reach Waters of the Commonwealth and whether Runoff will discharge to the Town's MS4; (b) Potential building envelopes avoiding environmental Resource Areas and appropriate buffers; (c) Methods to minimize impervious surfaces, and to protect and preserve open space; and (d) A description of any alternative processes or methods that were contemplated. (3) Location map highlighting the project Site; (4) Existing Conditions Statement: A description of existing Stormwater Conveyances, impoundments, wetlands, drinking water Resource Areas, swimming beaches or other critical environmental Resource Areas, on or adjacent to the Site or into which Stormwater flows; (5) The existing zoning, and land use at the Site and abutting properties; (6) The proposed land use; (7) Stormwater Impact Statement: A brief description of the project, how and where Stormwater will be controlled, including: (a) A description of existing Stormwater Conveyances, impoundments, wetlands, drinking water Resource Areas, swimming beaches or other critical environmental Resource Areas on or adj acent to the Site or into which Stormwater flows; (b) A description of any existing Stormwater Conveyances to be retained and any proposed Stormwater Conveyances, impoundments, wetlands, drinking water Resource Areas, swimming beaches and critical environmental Resource Areas on, or adjacent to, the Site into which Stormwater flows; (c) All measures for the detention, retention, or Infiltration of water; (d) All measures utilized for the protection of water quality; (e) Hydrologic and hydraulic design calculations for the pre- and Post-Development conditions for the design storms specified in these Regulations. Such calculations shall include: (A0393913.2} Page 27 [1] Description of the design storm frequency, intensity and duration; [2] A figure graphically showing Time of Concentration (Tc) paths and Tc number based on existing and proposed grades; [3] Soil Runoff Curve Number(CN)based on land use and soil hydrologic group; [4] Peak Runoff rates and total Runoff volumes for each watershed area; [5] Provisions for maintaining during construction the Infiltration capacity of the soil where Infiltration is proposed; [6] Infiltration rates, where applicable; [7] Culvert capacities, where applicable; [8] Flow velocities; [9] Data on the increase in rate and volume of Runoff for the specified design storms; [10] A calculation of the Directly Connected Impervious Area (DCIA) in square feet and as a percentage of the parcel area; [11] A calculation of the Disconnected Impervious Area in square feet and as a percentage of the parcel area. [12] Documentation of sources for all computation methods and field test results. (f) A summary table describing the existing area (square feet) of impervious area, the proposed area of impervious area, and summary of each Stormwater Management Facility and the proposed area of impervious surface to be treated by said facility (square feet); and (g) Soils and soil test pit information consistent with testing protocol outlined in the Massachusetts Stormwater Management Handbook. (8) The Project Drawings shall be consistent with requirements in the Construction General Permit, where applicable, and shall include, at a minimum: (a) Project name; (b) Legend,North Arrow and Scale(include both a scale bar and scale text); (c) Benchmark data, including reference to the starting benchmark; (d) Date of submission and, if applicable, any revision date(s); (e) Names and addresses of the professional engineer and land surveyor who prepared the plans; (f) Existing and Proposed Site Conditions containing: [1] Parcel boundaries/property lines; [2] Names of Abutters; [3] Location(s) of existing and proposed surfaces and structures; [4] Existing and proposed topography at 1-foot intervals; [5] Existing Site hydrology and soil types; [6] Delineation of any flood plains, if applicable; [7] Location(s) of existing easements, existing easements to be retained, and proposed easements; [8] Location(s) of existing and proposed utilities; [9] Stormwater management facilities and non-structural BMPS; and (A0393913.2} Page 28 [10] As necessary, the details of the drainage system components, including stabilization and management techniques to be used with and/ or adjacent to any Stormwater practice. (g) Pre- and Post-Construction Drainage Area Drawing(s) containing: [1] Pre- and post-construction drainage areas; [2] A delineation of existing, existing Stormwater Conveyances to be retained and any proposed Stormwater Conveyances, impoundments, wetlands, drinking water Resource Areas, swimming beaches or other critical environmental Resource Areas on or adjacent to the Site or into which Stormwater flows; [3] Vegetation and ground surfaces (include all impervious cover); [4] Time of concentration(Q; [5] Stormwater flow paths, including municipal drainage system flows; and [6] Location(s) of any test pit(s). Test Pits should coincide with the location(s) of any proposed Stormwater practice(s), including non-structural practices and foundation or perimeter drains. (h) A description and drawings of all components of the proposed Stormwater management system including, at a minimum: [1] Locations, cross sections, and profiles of all brooks, streams, drainage swales, and their method of stabilization; [2] Locations and details for all components of all measures for the Conveyance, detention, retention, or Infiltration of Stormwater, and for the protection of water quality; [3] Notes on drawings specifying materials to be used, construction specifications, supporting calculations; and [4] Proposed improvements including location of buildings or other structures and impervious surfaces,if applicable. (i) Landscaping plan describing the woody and herbaceous vegetative stabilization and management techniques to be used within and adjacent to the Stormwater practice; (j) Stamp and signature of a Professional Engineer (PE) licensed in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to certify that the Stormwater Management Plan is in accordance with the criteria established in the Stormwater Management and Land Disturbance Ordinance and these Regulations; and (9) Any other information required by the Stormwater Agency. (A0393913.2} Page 29 APPENDIX D: EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN CONTENTS If a project requires a SWPPP per the Construction General Permit, then the Applicant is required to submit a complete copy of the SWPPP (including the signed Notice of Intent and approval letter) as part of its application for a Stormwater Management Permit. If the SWPPP meets the requirements of the Construction General Permit, it will be considered equivalent to the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan described in this Section. The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan shall be consistent with requirements in the Construction General Permit, where applicable, and shall include, at a minimum: (1) A legible Site map, showing the entire Site, identifying at aminimum: (a) Existing and proposed Grading plans; (b) Locations of all bodies of waters (including wetlands); (c) Direction(s) of Stormwater flow and approximate slopes anticipated after major Grading activities; (d) Areas of soil disturbance and areas that will not be disturbed(limit of work line); (e) Locations of Site access/egress, including applicable sediment control measures; (f) Locations where stabilization practices are expected to occur; (g) Locations where Stormwater discharges to a surface water (include all roads, drains and other structures that could carry Stormwater to a wetland or other water body, on or off-Site); (h) Locations and details of all erosion and sediment control measures, BMPS, and Stormwater management facilities; (i) Locations for storage of materials, waste, vehicles, equipment, soil, snow, and other potential pollutants; (j) Locations of any Stormwater discharge associated with industrial activity; and (k) Locations of any proposed dewatering facilities. (1) The intended sequence and timing of activities that disturb soils at the Site and the general sequence during the construction process in which the erosion and sediment control measures will be implemented; (2) Upon request by the Stormwater Agency, Applicant shall submit Erosion & Sediment Control narratives, calculations or drawings, demonstrating the following: (a) All pollution control measures (structural and non-structural BMPS) that will be implemented as part of the construction activity to control pollutants in storm water discharges. Appropriate control measures must be identified for each major construction activity and the operator responsible for the implementation of each control measure must also be identified; (b) Structural practices to divert flows from exposed soils, retain/detain flows or otherwise limit Runoff and the discharge of pollutants from exposed areas of the Site. Placement of structural practices in floodplains must be avoided to the degree practicable; (A0393913.2} Page 30 (c) Interim and permanent stabilization practices for the Site, including a schedule of when the practices will be implemented. Site plans should ensure that existing vegetation is preserved where possible and that disturbed portions of the Site are stabilized. Use of impervious surfaces for stabilization should be avoided; (d) Construction and waste materials expected to be stored on-Site with updates as appropriate, including descriptions of controls, and storage practices to minimize exposure of the materials to Stormwater,and spill prevention and response practices; (e) Measures to minimize, to the extent practicable, off-Site vehicle tracking of sediments onto paved surfaces and the generation of dust; (f) Measures to prevent the discharge of solid materials, including building materials, to waters of the United States, except as authorized by a permit issued under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; (g) Pollutant sources from areas other than construction and a description of controls and measures that will be implemented at those Sites to minimize pollutant discharges; (h) Proposed dewatering operations; and (i) A description of all necessary maintenance and inspection activities associated with the proposed erosion and sediment control measures. (3) Any other information required by the Stormwater Agency. (A0393913.2} Page 31 APPENDIX E: EXAMPLE INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE CERTIFICATION FORM (A0393913.2} Page 32 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Review Public Comments - Draft Payment-in-Lieu of Parking Policy (30 min) PRESENTER: ITEM Melisa Tintocalis, Economic NUMBER: Development Director;Aaron Henry, Planning Director; Carol Kowalski 1'7 SUMMARY: No vote is requested for this agenda item. See attached memo. SUGGESTED MOTION: None FOLLOW-UP: Economic Development Office will revise draft Policy, based on the Board's comments. DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 8:25 p.m. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D Cbvor Mom)rgrrnnnurirymg;Feedback on,Draft 11 L011 Q'r,lr`a,y ("'over Mom) D S%, 4 i is Stakrha,kler Feedback ack Backup Matorinl Town of Lexington 1625 Massachusetts Ave. Lexington,MA 02420 Memorandum To: Carl Valente,Town Manager From: Melisa Tintocalis, Economic Development Director Date: September 22, 2016 RE: PILOP Policy Update Recommended action 1. Receive reaction from the Board on the discussion points outlined below. 2. Review comments and revisions with the Planning Board and return to the Board of Selectmen with a revised policy. Summary On July 25, 2016 staff presented the Board of Selectmen the most recent draft of the Payment In Lieu of Parking (PILOP) policy.The Selectmen offered general comments and moved to request that staff seek input from stakeholders through September. In response to the Board of Selectmen's request staff sought input from the following stakeholder groups: 1) Planning Board, 9/7 2) Center Committee, 8/25 and 9/22 3) Lexington Chamber of Commerce, 9/22 4)Zoning Board of Appeals, 8/11 and 9/8 In addition, staff sent written letters to all property owners in the Center Business District, 56 individuals, and hosted a meeting for property owners on September 71h with nearly 23 Center Business District properties represented.The public was also invited to submit comments online or through email. In summary,the input received has been wide-ranging. The policy in its present form lacks solid support. However, through the public process and analysis of the comments staff has identified some agreement on relieving"change of use"from any mitigation payments as well as two emerging perspectives which speak to different approaches to Center growth and development.The differences in the approaches being either to capture the market costs of parking at the risk of stalling development or to promote more intense uses and redevelopment at the risk of subsidizing parking. The following offers background on the issue and staff's analysis of the comments. Attached to this document are dated specific comments from the various stakeholders. Background In June 2014,the Board of Selectmen adopted the Lexington Parking and Management Plan an initiative that increased the community's awareness of parking issues as well as provided a series of parking recommendations including the development of a Payment In Lieu of Parking policy. During the same time the redevelopment of 21 Muzzy was undertaken which included the demolition of two existing buildings and the construction of one new building with an approximately 60% increase in new square footage on the site.The project did not include on-site parking and required a Special Permit from the ZBA to waive the parking requirement of 20 spaces. In August 2014, the ZBA granted the Special Permit subject to the Town and the project's applicant executing an MOU to address the appropriate mitigation payment to the Town given that the project's parking that would need to be absorbed in the public realm. The executed MOU entitles the applicant to purchase or lease parking in another location, offer mitigation, or adhere to an anticipated BOS-adopted PILOP policy. The applicant has opted to wait for the Board to adopt a PILOP policy. For this reason and to advance the implementation of the Parking Management Plan,the PILOP has been under development and review over that last 18 months. The proposed PILOP policy attempts to outline a consistent approach to calculating mitigation payments to adequately manage the demand on the public parking system created from projects that cannot meet the parking requirements of the Zoning Bylaw. Currently projects that cannot meet the Town's parking requirements are allowed to apply for a special permit from the Special Permit Granting Authority (SPGA).The Zoning Bylaw enables this process although the approval of the special permit has been largely at the discretion of the SPGA without adherence to any established guidelines or consideration of the aggregated impacts of these decisions. Planning Board is currently reviewing parking requirements and anticipates presenting Town Meeting with amendments to the zoning bylaw in the spring; the intention is that the PILOP could serve as a step toward the updating of the parking requirements as supported by the community. Discussion Through the analysis of stakeholders' feedback, one comment that resonated with the Chamber of Commerce, Center Committee, and several property owners was to remove "change of use"from the PILOP. The preference is to allow for small businesses to lease and landlords to tenant existing square footage within the Center Business District without being required to pay mitigation payments associated with parking. Supporters of this comment believe it will help small businesses and attract vibrant uses. Below is a summary of the rationale for this comment and potential implications: Comment Rationale Potential Implications Remove change of • Requiring "change of use"within • Removing "change of use" use from PILOP an existing building increases costs would not have a significant for small businesses and creates an impact on the amount of unfriendly business environment. mitigation payments collected. • Vibrant uses the Town wants to attract to the Center tend to have • PILOP policy would likely higher parking requirements (i.e. need to be revised and restaurants& retail). If these types mitigation payments of businesses then are required to adjusted to capture mostly pay even higher rates per the policy capital projects that increase it will detract them from locating in net square footage in the the Center. Center. • Current "parking requirements are • Removing "change of use" a fiction" and should not be used to would receive more support calculate mitigation payments as from business-oriented new businesses come and go into stakeholders. the same space. • Concern would likely remain • Capital projects that increase from other stakeholders that existing square footage and the businesses should "change of uses" in existing contribute some payment to buildings should not be held to the address the incremental same mitigation rates -the scope parking demand generated and the type of investment is often by the use/type of business. significantly different. The section of the PILOP that seemed to highlight the two different perspectives on the policy's objectives (either to capture the market cost of parking at the risk of stalling development or to promote more intense uses and redevelopment at the risk of subsidizing parking) was the payment amount of $8,000 per waived parking space. These comments are summarized below: Comment Rationale Potential Implication $8,000 per • The payment is not equivalent to the • Maintaining the mitigation less space it too low market value/cost to build parking in than the market cost to build Lexington Center (estimated $16,000 to parking presents a chance that $32,000 per space). there may be an increase in redevelopment with • Developers will opt to pay the PILOP mismatched parking supply payment over building parking on-site, requiring the Town to address providing an incentive to build/expand the parking. space without including on-site parking. • The payments at this rate will not add up to allow the Town to pay for building or purchasing new parking spaces. $8,000 per • Costs paid by a landlord or developer • Increasing the mitigation space is too will be passed on to tenants, thereby payment to approximate the high increasing rents and discouraging market costs to build parking businesses from locating in the presents a chance that Center. interest/activity in redevelopment in the Center • Requiring a payment for a change-of- will stall and potential detract use or re-tenanting in an existing desired uses. building would deter the uses the Town has expressed attracting, e.g. restaurant, retail, entertainment, because those uses tend to have higher parking requirements. • Properties will not redevelop, preventing new growth and tax revenue. Additionally, there were comments that were more comprehensive in nature that touched on the policy's intention, its relationship to zoning, need for specifics on the funds use, and need to address alternative modes of transportation: Comment Rationale Potential Implication PILOP lacks a clear • Planning Board is concerned that • PILOP could include more relationship to the policy adds confusion to the explicit it is policy. Zoning Bylaws administration of parking in the CB. • Staff would review revisions with Planning Board. PILOP offers • Developers and property N/A transparent and clear owners generally support the criteria intention behind the PILOP to provide clear and consistent criteria for calculating mitigation payments. Need for a plan on • Most stakeholders agreed that • Additional support for how the funds will be the policy should be explicit on payments would be received used how the funds will be spent. if Town officials identified Preference was expressed for specific projects for parking a concrete plan with improvements. community-supported projects and timeline.This would allow • The projects could include measurement of the specific parking demand mitigation payments and management improvement would likely make the (addressing the following payment more acceptable. comment). PILOP lacks a clear • Planning Board's preference is • Incorporating language to relationship to to incorporate more support TDM strategies could support alternative opportunities for adding be addressed; funds could be modes of transportation demand used to address TDM strategies transportation management strategies that may reduce parking space • Some stakeholders may express needs. that the paramount issue is to provide vehicle parking Town of Lexington PLANNING BOARD Timothy Dunn, Chair 1625 Massachusetts Avenue Richard L. Canale,Vice Chair Lexington,MA 02420 Ginna Johnson, Clerk Tel(781) 698-4560 Nancy Corcoran-Ronchetti planning((Plexingtonma.gov Charles Hornig www.lexingtonma.gov/plaiiiiii7g Michael Leon,Associate To: The Board of Selectmen From: The Planning Board CC: Town Manager's Office Planning Office Date: September 7, 2016 Re: Comments on Proposed Payment In-Lieu of Parking Policy Comments: In response to the Selectmen's request for comments on the proposed draft, the Board discussed the July 25, 2016 draft in some depth at its meeting of August 3, 2016 and raised several comments, detailed below. These comments were revisited and approved by the Board at its meeting of September 7, 2016. The general sentiment of the Board supports the concept of requiring a payment when property owners in the Center request relief from providing dedicated, off- street parking spaces, however it is not ready to support the draft policy in its present form. Concerns include: • Preference for an ongoing, annual payment rather than a one-time payment. • Regardless of payment type, the costs associated with the mitigation payments should relate to actual costs incurred by the Town. • The policy should be explicit regarding its relationship to the Bylaw's existing parking requirements (found in Section 5.1), and express clearly that this is a recommendation of the Selectmen to the Board of Appeals. • There is no mention of the role public transit could play in decreasing parking demand in the Center. • The potential that this Policy, as interim step to broader changes to Section 5.1, may actually confuse the administration of parking in the CB, and ultimately frustrate the bigger changes also under development by staff. While it was not the position of the Board, one member felt strongly that the PILOP policy should not be adopted at this time as it represents an"end run" around Town Meeting and its current zoning rules for parking. pia OfLi?.ri gton Center 1 onintittee August 25, 2016 HUDSON ROOM, Cary Hall, 1605 Massachusetts Avenue Lexington, MA 8:30 am to 10:00 am Payment-In-Lieu-Of-Parking(PILOP)Discussion Notes Richard Brown—Discussed concerns regarding the draft PILOP policy. Felt that the one-time fee of $8,000 per space is too small, and it would discourage developers from building parking on site. Proposed an annual fee of 150% times the cost of renting a space in the center. Felt that the Town needs a better plan about what will be done with the collected funds, and also felt that change of use on the first floor should be allowed without triggering a change in the parking requirements. Pamela Lyons—Would like to consider an annual fee instead of a one-time payment. Joe Pato—Discussed the opportunity to encourage development in Lexington Center. Does not want parking requirements to deter developers from making improvements and refreshing aging buildings with new projects. Elaine Ashton—Mentioned that a PILOP policy should include alternative transportation improvements to encourage the use of walking,biking, and taking public transportation to the center. Michael Boudett—Discussed his concern that if the fee is raised significantly, it may stall development in the center. Considered the possibility separating changes of use and capital projects. Jerry Michelson—Concerned about explaining the 35%increase to a developer. We may have difficulty defending this policy. Would prefer asking for an annual payment instead of a one-time fee, and was concerned that the policy could result in businesses choosing not to build parking. U o�wce Sopmwmfili im„m. 1c, Is ! i ,u 0-I 16,2 UAJOVO" 'Center lComm-Ittee Meeting 21061 moVdAmf�m �i tuuwwmmwar�lmm. u���Ut � V �mmw .- lit C,f anittep vivid PfixIfil; apwp arl"elf co'f Ilr w froo,,"m'the M1Wr,,IVV IVky[o apllrwA Ike Su mLIf ed ihd"p Of Im PIRMP P0110"UV`--ll olowdlid i IVn tla,tv,III0isleff In the 1Yreri��mlw4� mwmn��n! I "I����MLmi�m , l,w�dmmw w�mww � mum � Uw mrmm,l igat am,1p"Ok")e of° o,tx"n Foi,, oV1 waa wl"b u Ibmv,land a fro we nuu boor imi Ne cllaxmvto,$44) 1 w r u 1p°Iw�,���w.l�be ws ROCUM!tm buCIVd 0 ProAd mlo MW we-,, ,or mur"Ndmp, sJg"vfMcugmm�'arHOW;n ling"r as"i"I g,rm,rnl WIll OV"f'0 0 im th1w,oploto-,Wa')lAM 11"U ww m a,e w �. �nw lmll mftAffi��')M Il w d al" Iht#, uwm�r Yuh t �m�m V and,.m mally s, wilia",inmrpla ,t s IIIA,a Pul"Op parorv, m thm co'nawl maid,how of offeck DII,s`' , cal a,cale is V,66Wl of a irlov"lopoc,mp°IIAIIidAjo iVlthlow'$8,4A,p m, 00I0,lligfj',cur VI mew nmPwl�pm��pU V11m,,ft lfba It I1114 ,11 OtIll pri 1womM i 41"thi. r lr ifV111w,tmd? "I"h fi''loormittev,n icted txj,apprimm,Cho,beftiff Rmtoom"I boy ("'cl➢oliffnale,I' jp lloo ur'°1)O,,IhetIpwF doVmd],up Ithis V w mV I V!m�m m 1 w w p 1IJI uIP mw 1Ip00 F Alp" ;ACY pwV'waV'd)th zoofiiV" ,c"i11W P ` To reqNst milaimp,d0sandres"if to iftloomOrmilia,moirm oppropdae 11114,1011foal lu w vlbfq i i / %/iaaaoi i Lexington u rr of Commerce Meyetin 2 1115 PROP P *s-cussi The"Le""' ngtolh Charr0*1 Olf �thPt , og,o � m �� � � � � amd i(rMo d pegd*,ra n lm re a "? 1" "HO'd lWou" uWv� k1 "did not I1 1 that M iW O,(-Lc)uIIVu I �Vr tt� 6��Vr��9 U � ral tlbii tJjmoe,. .rhFty Ire, Wmrl"11i kivubm"n ;oli chr furtheir W embl menna of W I�muua yir¢ lireµ 'In"i voca1*N' "r busilllinesm in th'O IrvcilerfAler t. " i 'fi ,pO W IIIW' �Vq�rlll9� Vd """l�1➢�II;iIUJgli� NWWW' ;W �gy,'W mJlt�@, air Sim,W vv� bit that IN;m0bein w tnug)Ilpiwo.IT"Ib U,V"w4iliire p(jfimt,cOyiu IUd k it, i0sh,w,emblive fir,)Ir deve"lopows to Nrreuflnd pfark"r't' s'u 6Vquicilre IIWi ompok �Imnp l I'm ISM Other uW7 s r s of ejo,IOv"teiIW�re'W��" 'V� ,.�nW boawd Innit"mIV9b"'i Felt'I"'al to t the ils,stry Urrel ,,Y r '01 OfII ler".Olcolfand vm"em tv'rs IiO thlmlt,tOW" nquWu n n r ulhlhjJhiI the Io Yt mul m- lfl leWIh Inutha V `e,tWWVWw`'�IU it in V ilInq`!N`"a!"gl uq; h 'Memblers dq reicu-smiefil r mw�o l llq� mrn '4 PIL,O ICI Y �1�i / / i o Comments on the PILOP draft policy from the Board of Appeals, submitted 9/9/2016 based upon discussions at our 8/11/2016 and 9/8/2016 meetings. Payment in lieu of parking (PILOP) addresses the perception that there are insufficient parking spaces in the Lexington business district. It is intended to place the burden of providing parking mitigation on the developer. Who will pay for the PILOP fees? For new construction developers contend they will pass the costs back to the landowner. Is the cost of the PILOP so onerous that it will preclude new development in the Center? Property owners and landlords will pass the costs on to their tenants which will make the cost of doing business in Lexington higher, discouraging the small, independent retailer. Ultimately the costs of parking will be passed on to the patron or client conducting business in the center business district. How will the PILOP fees be spent? What is the plan for achieving more parking capacity in Lexington center?What are the costs for achieving this plan and how do these costs compare to the $8,000 fee per space payment? Is there a way to access private parking in the center,whether it is underground garage parking or underutilized private lots? Administration Requesting a building permit will trigger most instances for applying a PILOP. Are there other changes in use in the CB district that do not require a building permit and if so, how will the parking implications of such changes by recognized? Jeanne Krieger Chair, ZBA Center Property Owners Meeting Meeting Notes 9/7/16 Hudson Room 12:00—1:00 Updates on the Center Streetscape Ad Hoc Committee were presented by Melisa Tintocalis. Sharon Spaulding requested the members on the Ad Hoc Street Streetscape Committee. Kevin Maguire requested the date on when the Ad Hoc Committee would be going to the Board of Selectmen with their recommendations. He also asked if the Center Committee agenda could be distributed to the property owners.Jerry Michelson, Chair of the Center Committee, agreed to distribute the agenda to the group. He also mentioned the next Center Committee meeting would be September 22, 2017. Melisa Tintocalis presented the concepts of the draft PILOP (payment in lieu of parking) policy. Stuart Rothman discussed PILOP in other communities. Concerned about residential parking, looking to create more parking in the center with the funds. He said that he can't market apartments without parking. Also—time of use should be considered in the policy; pro-rate price depending on when the use will occur. He felt that the center needed parking and that the policy should not serve as "fee to do business" but provide a meaningful contribution to the parking supply. Todd Cataldo asked about Cary Library parking configuration, emphasized creating more parking in the center.Todd favors developing the Library Lot into the medical office lots which border it. He was also eager to see the Town Lot reconfigured to provide more parking. Also mentioned that the PILOP cost may be transferred over to new tenants. John Farrington asked about the 1775 Massachusetts Ave. project and if his project would need to pay the PILOP fee. Joseph Staffano supported having consistent and specific ground rules of what is expected from property owners including the upfront costs of the PILOP. He expressed that the contribution should be towards providing additional parking. And should not be at the ZBA's discretion otherwise it undermines the effort to provide a consistent approach to assessing the project. *Interested in receiving Center Committee agenda's and having the email list distributed to the entire group. FW: Comment on Proposed Board of Selectmen Policy for Payment in Lieu of Parking (PILOP), Draft 25 Jul 2016 9/23/16,11:31 AM FW: Comment on Proposed Board of Selectmen Policy for Payment in Lieu of Parking (PILOP), Draft 25 Jul 2016 Carl Valente Sent:Monday,September 12, 2016 8:42 AM To: Melisa 1. Tintocalis; Carol Kowalski fyi Carl F. Valente Town Manager 1625 Massachusetts Avenue Lexington, MA 02420 7816 8-4545 781 861-2921 (fax) 4 (When writing or responding please understand that the Secretary of State has determined that e ails are a public record and, therefore, may not be kept confidential.) From: selectmen's Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2016 2:25 PM To: suziebarrylex@gmail.com; Peter Kelley<petercjkelley@gmail.com>; Norman Cohen <Ii norm @comcast.net>; joe@joepato.org; Michelle Ciccolo <mciccololex@gmail.com> Cc: Carl Valente <cvalente@lexingtonma.gov> Subject: FW: Comment on Proposed Board of Selectmen Policy for Payment in Lieu of Parking (PILOP), Draft 25 Jul 2016 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... From: David G. Kanter [david@kanters.com] Sent: Friday, September 09, 2016 2:04 PM To: Planning Cc: selectmen's Subject: Comment on Proposed Board of Selectmen Policy for Payment in Lieu of Parking (PILOP), Draft 25 Jul 2016 These comments are to further document the concerns with the proposed policy that I have voiced at previous Board of Selectmen meetings. My Bottom Line: The proposed policy is inconsistent with the stated purpose philosophically, procedurally, and fiscally. It grants an unjustified gift to developers/property owners/etc. ("owners") rather than an appropriate mitigation of the otherwise required supplement to the inventory of actual parking. The proposed policy, therefore, does nothing meaningful to relieve a parking problem that is being aggravated by the increase in parking demand resulting from the development/change of use while the current zoning requirements (e.g., parking table and parking plan) would otherwise demand a real, physical, relief of the https://mail.lexingtonma.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAAA...JfVaUwsplh1AADh18hAAAAJ&a=Print&pspid=_1474644649920_252897718 Page 1 of 2 FW: Comment on Proposed Board of Selectmen Policy for Payment in Lieu of Parking (PILOP), Draft 25 Jul 2016 9/23/16,11:31 AM parking problem. I find the proposed policy is grossly "tipped" in the developer's favor and I find that unconscionable. The Town has acknowledge in prior public meetings that the proposed one-time payment would not now, nor reasonably be expected in the future, provide for the purchase or continued lease of actual parking spaces that would otherwise be required under the current zoning. That should be a "show stopper", by itself. But even if it weren't a "show stopper", as the Town is already pursing every parking-management action that has been deemed appropriate and viable, to provide the owners further relief if they provide "substantive Parking and Transportation Demand Management strategies" for their personnel and customers is granting further relief for just"promises" (Le, those "strategies") on a perpetual basis with never a proven, continuing, achievement of any reduction of the parking demand that additional, real, parking spaces would provide. Also, it should not be, or presumed to be, the Town's responsibility to mitigate the added burden caused by the owners that is driven by a change that is to the owner's extra benefit. In that regard, if the mitigation were to be adequate to offset the added parking burden, then the fact that the mitigation fund would also address bicycle and pedestrian accommodations would be reasonable. However, as I contend the proposed, final, mitigation payments are grossly inadequate to achieve that offset, then the fund has no business spending on what should be the owner's responsibility to assure, in fact, will offset the added parking burden. I do appreciate that the Town has allowed itself to get into a box whereby a policy must be approved in the near term,but that situation must not provide a basis for future applications for a Special Permit by any owners to be granted this draft's proposed mitigation. Further, if the Town wishes to propose any relief by lowering the current zoning demands for additional, physical, parking, that should be brought to Town Meeting for approval before any continuing mitigation policy is approved by the Board of Selectmen. Thank you for considering the above. David David G. Kanter Town Meeting Member for Precinct 7 48 Fifer Lane, Lexington MA 02420-1224 Tel: 781-861-6147; Whone: 617-966-5669; Fax: 781-674-2477 https://mail.lexingtonma.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAA...JfVaUwsplh1AADh18hAAAAJ&a=Print&pspid=_1474644649920_252897718 Page 2 of 2 Comment on draft PILOP policy 9/23/16,11:30 AM Comment on draft PILOP policy vtsdmailer@vt-s.net Sent:Thursday, September 01, 2016 5:01 PM To: Melisa 1. Tintocalis Submitted on Thursday, September 1, 2016 - 5:01pm Submitted by anonymous user: 71. 174.87.77 Submitted values are: Name: Richard Michelson Email: richard@michelsonshoes.com Comments: Subject: Comments About The PILOP and new parking plan. Statements have been made that there has been an improvement with parking in the center since the new program has started. I differ with that - You have to think what has happened. Raised cost of parking moves the customers to other free or more reasonable shopping locations — More vacant stores draw fewer customers — Economy and summer time has slowed business activity- so Yes there are spaces to park but no customers to use them. AS for the PILOP there must be an annual fee so that if and when more parking is established the fee can be dropped. The monies must be only used for Parking Improvements not bikes or transportation. The end project should be a structure to house additional cars at a reasonable cost. The results of this submission may be viewed at: http://www.lexingtonma.gov/node/33633/submission/12413 https://mail.lexingtonma.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAAA...SJfVaUwsplh1AADh18Y7AAAJ&a=Print&pspid=_1474644593919_35858116 Page 1 of 1 PILOP 9/23/16,11:27 AM PILOP pecostello@verizon.net Sent:Tuesday, September 06, 2016 4:00 PM To: Melisa 1. Tintocalis Melissa - If there would be an annual fee, I would be in favor of this program. However,with the current proposal, the Muzzey Street developer would be getting a cheap out for having built on what should have been parking spaces. Those parking spaces are already gone forever-the patients/customers will always need to find parking spaces elsewhere. In my opinion, the program needs more thought. Pat Costello 9 Preston Road TMM Precinct 7 781-862-6435 https://mail.lexingtonma.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAAA...JfVaUwsplh1AADh18bhAAAJ&a=Print&pspid=_1474644376907190629128 Page 1 of 1 RE: Property Owners Meeting 9/23 /6,11ze«w ROG: Property Owners Meeting lOs8Oh Steffano [] nO@|in8@rr8t@i[COOOl Sent:Friday, September 16, 20164:33 PM To: MeganZammu10 Melisa].Tlntoca|is Cc: ]md KadisOKadis@|inearnetaiionm] Megan and Melisa, Thank you for your time a few weeks ago to discuss the PILOP program. As you know, we are very active and involved landlords that are highly vested in the long-term success of our properties. | spoke with the owners regarding some of the details of the PILOP program and wanted to share the following feedback: l. We would like some clarification regarding grandfathering of parking requirements for existing uses vs. existing tenants. You mentioned that ifvvereplaced a tenant with the same use (i.e. ifalDD seat restaurant tenant was replaced with another lDDseat restaurant) we would not have to pay into the P|L[>P program. You also mentioned that the P|L[>Pwould be based around parking requirements at the time of the receipt of certificate of occupancy relating to the reconstruction of the inside of the property. There isn't a scenario I can think where vve would replace a tenant without having a renovate and/or get a new Cof[>. VVewould hope that if use category did not change then we would not have to pay fee. 2. Something vvefound positive about the P|L[>P was that a predetermined criteria for dealing with parking deficiencies creates a fair, consistent and transparent system; however, towards the end of your presentation you mentioned that landlords would have the ability to appeal the P|L[>P payments on a case-by-case basis. Although we welcome the ability to spend less money, we are concerned at the lack of consistency. The lack of consistency seems to be a recipe for discontent. 1 | researched some transactions we have done in other communities (similar in demographics and density to Lexington) that vvewere required to contribute totraffic/parking mitigation measures: a. Our previous contributions have been made to actual measures that will be implemented (curb cuts, traffic lights, new spots) to improve parking/traffic. The P|L[>P program funds will be placed into a earmarked fund with no set plan, which concerns us. Support would likely be more forthcoming if an identified goal which was embraced by the community was identified. One such goal could be an offsite employee parking area with a shuttle bus. | believe many Landlords would embrace the removal of employee cars from prime parking areas in the core retail center. b. When comparing the aforementioned contributions in other communities the per spot cost was materially below$8,DDD per space 4. When we met with you and others from Lexington in the past year we frequently heard that the Town is encouraging retail tenants that will bring a vibrancy to Lexington Center. These types of tenants tend tohave high parking requirements. We feel that the high cost of the PILOP program discourages these type of tenants and encourages uses such as banks, office, etc. xnno.//ma//./ex/nomnma.00v/owa/vae~/mmut~/pw.woteu/u~no«««««—J,vauwon/m««om000«««Jua~p,/ntunon/u~,4r4644nos/o_ooru/roru Page/ o,u RE: Property Owners Meeting 9/23/16,11:32 AM Sincerely, JoselIh E. Ste' ano IIIIII Asset Manager Linear Retail Properties, LLC D: 781-202-3549 1 C: 617-861-1164 L ttE,AR 5 Burlington Woods Drive, S. 107 Burlington, MA 01803 m11ilnealrlretalillmcolrmfl IM 0 91 tits From: Megan Zammuto [mai Ito:mzammuto@lexingtonma.gov] Sent: Friday, September 09, 2016 11:03 AM To: Joseph Steffano; erikrhodin@gmail.com; rbarone@firstcambridgerealty.com; adawong8228@hotmail.com; kerry@salterandkahn.com; kane.mcguire@gmail.com; kevin.m.mcguire@gmail.com; jpt-des@comcast.net; marc.lucus@eversource.com; ses@spaulding.com; rsk@primemgt.com; jerry@michelsonshoes.com; penneung@aol.com; srothman@firstcambridgerealty.com; shglcorp@aol.com Cc: Melisa J. Tintocalis; Claire Goodwin Subject: Property Owners Meeting Good morning, Thank you all for attending the Center Property Owners meeting this week. The discussion was thoughtful and productive, and we appreciate your input on the draft PILOP policy. Melisa Tintocalis will follow up next week with the meeting notes. Attached please find the contact information for the group that met on Wednesday. If you have any edits, please feel free to send them to me. Also, below please find the agenda for the Center Streetscape Design Review Ad Hoc Committee Public Hearing that will be held on Tuesday, September 13th at 7:30 p.m. in Cary Hall. ://www.lexi ton a. gv/sites/lexi ton a/ 'les/uploads/2016-0 -13-ce ers ree sca . Thank you! Megan J. Zammuto Economic Development Coordinator Town of Lexington 1625 Massachusetts Avenue https://mail.lexingtonma.gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAAA...JfVaUwsplh1AADh18oOAAAJ&a=Print&pspid=_1474644719518_887317973 Page 2 of 3 RE: Property Owners Meeting 9/23/16,11:32 AM Lexington, MA 02420 Phone: 781-698-4568 Email: mzamm_uto_@ e ingtonma. ov https://mail.lexingtonma.gov/owa/?ae=ltem&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAAA JfVaUwsplhlAADhl8oOAAAJ&a=Print&pspid=-1474644719518-887317973 Page 3 of 3 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Receive Report from Ad Hoc Center Street Scape Design Review Committee on Tier 1 Deliverables (45 min) PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Howard Levin, Chairman,Ad hoc Center Streetscape Committee 1.8 SUMMARY: A vote is required for this item to receive this report. The Ad hoc Center Streetscape Committee will present its Phase 1 Report on sidewalk materials and lighting. Staff comments will be provided at a subsequent Selectmen's meeting. SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to receive the report of the Ad hoc Center Streetscape Committee. FOLLOW-UP: Staff will provide comments at a subsequent Selectmen's meeting. DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 8:55 p.m. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D Q'ira ,a RUr ti0R Backup Matorrinl D k$a.porrt M'Cbnnn itta.o Backup Matorrinl • 1 . Town of Lexington Center Streetscape Design ReviewHoc Committee PRESENTATION TO BOARD OF SELECTMEN Monday,September 26,2016 7:30 PM Center Streetscape Design Review Ad Hoc Committee Public Hearing September 13,2016 Appointed by the Board of Selectmen Members • Victoria C. Buckley, Commission on Disability Liaisons • Nancy Corcoran-Ronchetti, Planning Board . Elaine Doran, Garden Club • Anne.Laurin Eccles, Historic Districts Commission . Wendy Manz, Capital • Margaret S. Enders, Bicycle Advisory Expenditures • John W. Frey,Tree Committee • Eric J. Michelson, Retailers • Jonathan A. Himmel,Tourism Committee Association • Wendall C. Kalsow, Historical Commission . Glenn P. Parker,Appropriations • Timothy D. Lee, design Advisory Committee . David Wells, Historical Society • Pamela F. Shadley, Center Committee • Ada Wong, Chamber of Commerce • Howard L. Levin, Chair 0 Center Streetscape Design Review Ad Hoc Committee Public Hearing September 13,2016 9/23/2016 .ni v' i N lY� ioi iiViiN�a usr >1N➢ill�� �����Illlllllll llllllllllllr tlnlAll4�lll `i 2 9/23/2016 r-r- r r r r r •r M,,i��i��� „�"��ii 1. ' �UJl�1%/��iiliJ i��t taa « ' r INS i • rr - r r - e- r r r r - ♦ r r � � ,., r-r.-r r r r r ♦ r r s r rr � r r r- - r ,� �'... ioNi�`I,a v,JHrry��...... r-r rr rr - - - r- r r ♦i- �Ik� ��"', �f F'rrxrra the openness crf the T3aatiler C ar-tra:°n tra the ivee:kls°.,daar•arac'rs market, 1,as-ngta'.arr C."e nterr is the f''oi,v r'.s bring l ooilrr Tree hill streets and ralvrn:spaces have ar eas f w.12trrrrl es to r°cicilix and connect ivirth neighbors and ivher.e theaftarrarhi: residents, visitors and errrprla:ay ee„s°shops and chine. It s,rraixced use, iv albcables chcara;actc r, shaded seating, and aare:cas gfgrme en open space are places trr gather and connect. Neighborhood d residents nt,s axraal .l`[rrrrihes thr-oughcraat the tearaYra cc lne to the cente;r„ v hbrcar.y, entert ilia raerat and rraaaaucipraal services aanal fined unique and vibrant retailers. ME WIN I i} ' 't 3 9/23/2016 . . . . .ni . . . - - - - • • Y ii 4 9/23/2016 .ni ® r • r r 1 1 i • r r • r ` • 5 9/23/2016 .ni T r • STRINGER COURSE WIRE CUT BRICK PAVERS BITUMINOUS CONCRETE PAVERS (2 1/4') BINDER COURSE VERTICAL GRANITE CURB SEE VERTICAL GRANITE 3 ..4 SAND ( / 1.5" HIGH IRON EDGE DETAIL CURB SETTING BED (, ) �AND 10"SPIKES S� NEOPRENE MODIFIED PAVEMENT PER .ASPHALT TACK COAT PAVING AND f� SURFACING �*��� ASPHALT TACK COAT VARIES COMPACTED I 6" COMPACTED SUB—GRADE CLASS A CONCRETE GRAVEL SUBBASE BUTT JOINTS, SWEEP W/ (SEE VERTICAL DRY SAND /CEMENT MIX GRANITE CURB DETAI1 MISS L) ii 6 9/23/2016 / ' } Hand-tight 1 16 y "Square,;'N:and J,ra••••lu'uq. t • `i 7 9/23/2016 ,44 � .,,�. ,�„�rv,l.,,m� �'. f �%��J>'°�✓ // � /jay %����%��j������i' i yV ui�ryWuppuuui" QuV00 a'I Jiri�i �� ro f �� ifff 8 9/23/2016 ` . . . r 1 • r `i 9 9/23/2016 .ni um 1I I a `i 10 9/23/2016 r, xi i^ fi rfi fmlTl' A. 11 9/23/2016 • e e 12 9/23/2016 .ni 7 � r ii 13 9/23/2016 • I% r r ii 14 s/z3/zo16 15 a ..,,r rytr ;e= 9 23/2016 / . \} � v � , © w« 1 MEN!t a? «.©»- y v &« < < V 16 �,jS HPR,ryr�,a x o gin. ry. 'C�E'dNGTQ�. TIER 1 REPORT OF THE CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN REVIEW AD HOC COMMITTEE to the LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN SEPTEMBER 26, 2016 Members o Victoria C. Buckley, Commission on Disability o Nancy Corcoran-Ronchetti, Planning Board o Anne Laurin Eccles, Historic Districts Commission o Margaret S. Enders, Bicycle Advisory o John W. Frey, Tree Committee o Jonathan A. Himmel, Tourism Committee o Wendall C. Kalsow, Historical Commission o Timothy D. Lee, Design Advisory Committee o Pamela F. Shadley, Center Committee o Howard L. Levin, Chair Liaisons: o Elaine Doran, Garden Club o Wendy Manz, Capital Expenditures o Glenn Parker, Appropriations o Eric J. Michelson, Retailers Association o F. David Wells, Historical Society o Ada Wong, Chamber of Commerce FOREWORD Following several years of discussion and meetings concerning the proposed renovation and revitalization of Lexington Center (the "Center Streetscape Project"), in April 2016 the Board of Selectmen adopted an Amended Charge establishing a Center Streetscape Design Review Ad Hoc Committee. Over the following weeks, the Board finalized the appointment of members and liaisons to the Committee, and the Committee began work in June. The Charge states as its central objective "To evaluate and make a recommendation on the various design elements (excluding engineering items related to traffic) for the Center Streetscape Project." The Charge divides the work into three separate tiers, with target delivery dates of September 15, November 1, and December 15, 2016. This is the Tier 1 Report to the Board, covering sidewalk materials and installation, and lighting styles. The Ad Hoc Committee undertook a detailed examination of the history of the Center, the advantages and disadvantages of available sidewalk materials and designs, lighting and illumination styles and techniques, conducted research, and hosted expert presentations from consultants, authorities and community members. The process included: • Seven Full Committee Meetings • Subcommittee and Workgroup Meetings • Research into Sidewalk Materials and Lighting Expert Presentations: • Town Engineer, BETA Group, Design Process • Characteristics of Brick and Concrete Materials • Tom Hopkins, Director, Massachusetts Architectural Access Board • Commission on Disability • History and Vision of the Center/Sasaki Report 1966 • Illumination ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 2 The Committee's report was prepared with input from all of the Committee Members and Liaisons, and members of the general public who attended and contributed to its many meetings. The Committee is pleased to present to the Board its Tier 1 Report on the following pages. Also attached is the "Minority Report" submitted by the Commission on Disability. The full report was adopted by a vote of 9-0, including a minority report submitted on behalf of the Commission on Disability. Respectfully submitted, Howard L. Levin, Chair September 26, 2016 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 3 SIDEWALKS The Lexington Center Streetscape Project sidewalk `scope' runs along Massachusetts Avenue from the Cary Library to the intersection of Fletcher, Woburn, and Mass Ave'. 2 The Center Streetscape Design Review Adul,�l � Hoc Committee is specifically tasked with a vision that calls for"providing an inclusive vibrant, welcoming environment ... enhancing and preserving the Center's historic resources ",.. addressing much needed maintenance," and providing safe and comfortable access. As � can be seen in the adjacent photograph, the inclusive, vibrant welcoming environment and the "Center's historic resources" predominantly consists of the brick sidewalk, the brick"gathering areas" flanked by benches, and the colonnade of trees. SIDEWALKS: After careful discussion and deliberation, the majority of the Committee chose the sidewalk material to be wire-cut brick, with the stipulation that it needs to be precisely installed and meticulously maintained. Sidewalks must meet the ADA guidelines as adopted by the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board and Public Rights of Way Accessibility Guidelines. There are concerns about vibration with segmented pavers, yet this health hazard can be minimized with specific design considerations.3 It is the Committee's conclusion that brick is the appropriate functional choice, aesthetic choice, and most responsive to the Project Vision. We further see the project as a thoughtful restoration. The majority of the Committee is mindful of the reservations expressed by the Commission on Disability and others, and their stated preference for a solution that includes cement concrete walkways. After careful study and deliberation, an 8-1 majority of the Committee concluded 1 There are approximately 3900 lineal feet and 61,300 square feet of sidewalk on both sides of Massachusetts Avenue within the project scope. Approximately two thirds of the existing sidewalk areas are brick and the remaining one third are concrete. It is recommended that all of the noncompliant brick and failing concrete be replaced. 2 Although Massachusetts Avenue is a numbered route,the project does not fall within MassDOT jurisdiction and therefore the Town does not have to necessarily follow those standards. 3 Regarding sidewalk vibration aka"roughness:"The US Access Board retained the University of Pittsburgh Human Engineering Department to develop"a standard that will make sidewalks safer and more comfortable for wheelchair users.The proposed standard(WK41917), ... describes a method to collect and analyze data from a sidewalk to determine its roughness."It has been demonstrated that"Roughness can make sidewalks uncomfortable and risky for wheelchair users and others such as parents pushing strollers,postal carriers pushing three-wheeled carts,and people using wheeled walkers." "Roughness"concerns are expected to soon become law and will likely be referenced in guidelines for the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA). ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 4 that cement is an inferior sidewalk material, especially in a heavily salted environment', for reasons of durability, difficulty of repair, vibration characteristics, appearance, and life cycle cost. Further, a mix of cement with brick borders would be especially susceptible to tripping hazards, wheelchair discomfort, ongoing ADA compliance, and other shortcomings arising out of use of dissimilar materials in conjunction with each other, caused in part by differential settlement, expansion and contraction, especially in locales subject to freeze-thaw cycles. 5 RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY 1) SIDEWALK PAVEMENT a) Wire cut, square edge clay brick paver with no spacers, full 4"x 8." No chamfer. b) Color shall have a range from red to dark brown, no orange.6 c) Setting bed shall be an aggregate base compacted to a minimum of 95% density, a bituminous concrete binder course base with a depth from 3"to 4" (thicker where vehicles might have access or as warranted by the snow removal equipment), a V' bituminous concrete leveling course, and modified asphalt adhesive beneath the pavers all of which retard movement and uplift. A cementitious concrete base be should be considered as an additive alternate given the number of interruptions and the width of the sidewalk particularly on the North side of Massachusetts Avenue, or within the base scope in certain locations that require extra base strength. d) Pavers shall be set according to industry standards, including restraints (building, curb, metal edge, etc.) at all paver area edges. e) Joints shall be hand-tight, in the 1/16"but not more than 3/32"range, and be swept with a sand/concrete sand mixture such that the pavers avoid direct contact with one another to minimize breakage. f) Bricks will be laid in a herringbone pattern so that no joint is perpendicular to the main path of travel thus minimizing vibration. This pattern was determined by the University of Pittsburgh to be superior, from a vibration standpoint, to cement concrete sidewalks with their required panel joints. g) Pitch sidewalk adequately to provide necessary drainage, while maintaining compliance with accessibility requirements. h) Install drainage weep holes below the brick as necessary i) Minimize tree root disruption by appropriate selection of plants, root control and maintenance—possibly installing root barriers which force the roots to "grow down" j) All transitions between other elements contained in the sidewalk zone shall have special attention in detailing, installation, and long-term maintenance to minimize differential 4 It was stated that cement theoretically can be made more salt tolerant with special coatings and treatments. However,no information was presented on the long term effectiveness of such special treatments. s Carl C. Oldenburg,AIA,September 15,2016: "This can be readily observed in Lexington,particularly on the south side of Mass Avenue,where the worst cases of changes in level seem to occur where different materials meet. It can also be observed at the new sidewalks at 3rd Avenue in Burlington...,which I understand was designed by the Beta Group and is similar to what their proposal is for Lexington Center. Here we can see significant offsets in relatively brand-new construction where brick meets concrete... [L]ogically a designer would minimize the instances of changes in materials." 6 Visual disabilities,often related to complex neurological issues,can cause sensory noise and problems with depth perception. While no sidewalk material can address all such disabilities,a limited palate of brick colors can provide important visual cues and depth,while limiting senso7 noise. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 5 settlement etc. —this includes but is not limited to tree grates, utility access points, edge restraining strips, and the like. k) The specifications shall include brick similar to the list of materials and installation method described on Exhibit A. 1) Consideration should be given to special borders where the sidewalk meets building facades, in order to ensure smooth transitions into store entrances and visible edges to the sidewalk. m) Final design and installation must conform to the most stringent, government approved accessibility standards, including AAB & ADA. Brick Institute Tech Notes should be used as a guide. n) Sidewalk smoothness will be evaluated to the extent possible using the newly developed "Wheelchair Pathway Roughness Index"from University of Pittsburgh research, which enables objective evaluation of sidewalks and pedestrian pathways to quantify roughness. This standard is currently awaiting adoption by the U.S. Access Board and/or other federal, state and private agencies/organizations to address the accessibility of sidewalk surfaces. 2) HANDICAP CURB RAMPS a) Curb ramp configurations and slopes shall meet the requirements of ADA and AAB. b) The Handicap central ramp aka direct path of travel shall be a brick similar to that above, except that the color shall be lighter for contrast. The triangular wings formed between the main sidewalk sections and the central ramp shall be made of the same brick as in section 1. c) The outer joints of the ramp shall be a dark brick or other appropriate material to define the transition between the horizontal sidewalk and the sloped Handicap Curb Ramp. Use of a dark brick border is intended as a visual contrast signaling a change of grade. d) Installation method shall be as described above. e) The tactile warning strip shall be of cast iron. f) All of the existing ramps need to be replaced with these materials and in the locations in the final plans. 3) OVERSIGHT a. Town shall establish a Project Oversight Committee to work though the DPW with the designer during final design, and the contractor during construction. The selection of designer should emphasize the importance of providing leadership to implement the project in a manner that is consistent with the recommendations and intents of this report. These recommendations are important to maintain continuity and quality control on the decisions, submittals and final construction. The Project Oversight Committee shall include representatives from town committees with appropriate design and construction experience; it would have oversight but not day to day involvement. This citizen group could also assist with continued project outreach and public relations. b. The Ad Hoc Committee strongly believes that the Center Streetscape project will require more critical,professional oversight during the design, bidding, construction, and closeout process than the "standard practice" devoted to Lexington horizontal (roadway) ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 6 construction projects. The Committee recommends that the DPW retain an independent cost estimator, and that during construction there be a full time, dedicated Owner's Project Manager. c. The project should be bid as a construction or renovation project, and not as a highway project using Department of Transportation forms and procedures. d. Specifications shall require the contractor to provide a HANDICAPPED ACCESSIBLE route of travel for pedestrians during construction. e. The bid documents shall require that the installing contractor build a mockup of greater than 8'x8'with full construction section for the sidewalk plus a handicap curb ramp. Approved mockup shall be matched in all subsequent work and can become a permanent portion of the installation. f. The Town should implement a web based, smart phone, community feedback system that "captures locations and pictures of sidewalks defects that you pass by every day" and transmits it to the DPW for evaluation and correction. PeopleGIS and PathVu are systems that currently exist. g. The DPW should develop a definitive site inspection and maintenance protocol, including annual inspections after construction is complete. 4) Notes: a. Curb replacement needs to be considered. We understand that reusing existing curb is a cost savings, however the combination of new and existing curb may not work well, and since brick pavers are to extend to the street curb, the back of the curb will need to be sawn to receive the pavers. b. An adequate budget line item specifically for Center sidewalk maintenance should be included in the town's future annual budget. The budgeted amount should be determined based on the requirements of the inspection and maintenance protocol referred to above. c. The Committee advocates that we fully understand and learn from the deficiencies in the Waltham to Muzzey sidewalk project and avoid repeating those mistakes.7 d. Life Cycle Costs (First Cost and Subsequent Costs)need to be considered. Our research made clear that proper installation will minimize maintenance costs,potentially reducing them below the cost of maintaining other materials. While the Committee advocates the continued use of brick,it is mindful of the criticism expressed about the 2007 brick sidewalk installation on the South side of Mass Ave between Waltham and Muzzey Streets. The critics indicate that the installed brick was not the approved brick,that the slopes are off,that bricks are broken,that the installation is perhaps not ADA compliant,that there are puddles that suggest that the base is settling,and that existing sections of the sidewalk are nearing failure... The Committee recommends each of these criticisms be investigated&repaired where a ro riate durin the Fall of 2016. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 7 EXHIBIT A General Specifications The following detail is the standard being used by the City of Cambridge, and is recommended for use in Lexington by the Ad Hoc Committee. STRINGER COURSE— AFIRE CUT BRICK 1.4 IHIT)IUIN1)UI< U'N(',RETE �C N A7Ef" 1 a 1�'q�"') HInAI�EN C:(A)R sE dERI-IC`AL GRANITE C URr 3 G (SEE VERFIIC:AL GRANITE �0 k ('3/4 SAND k 1,5 HIGH IRON EI`74:E C'URD DETAIL) 'y ".'LITINC, BED AND 10" SPIKES S t ,,,----- NEOPRENE 14d01DIFIED PAWEIWENT PER ASPHALT TACK (,'CJAT SORFACINCa .•rr _ .ASPHALT TACK COAT VA RI E UNDISTURBED EARl1"I —3" Cr7lvlF'ACTEI:Y �As C;d`11VI"AC;TED A'F''JEL 'a�IW3 Fw;E ",;U�-GRAOE C;La .y A C`7 eNM'Ia,'ETE w.. `", 1HUTT JOINT „WEEP W ((SEE VEF!1fCAL 1 GIRANITE C;UrIR3 DRY "-,AJNI',/CEMEINT MIX D ETAI L j SECTION -A NOTES:. 1. SIDEWALK , SHALL h,IAT:)H 'WVIIOTH ANIF 571-Cl'E OF FXIS,TIN,;, 1.INLE'S:C OTHEI",'WI xE NOTE0. 2, BIT.aMINOUS CDNCFETE BINDER COURSE SHALL BE r DEPTH (IIN TWO 3'- COURSES) AT DRIVEWAYS. HEFEIR 41 I"IPC)JECT DRAWIIN5S OR ENCCINEEh'„r INaTROCTICFNS P")IH Lr„'1CATION.", 3, FOR I1413F"IWAL BIRTCK L"S"rOUT PATTERN, SEE DETAIL .2524.8 BRICX 511DE'W"WALK(DETAIL-SECTIIOINI 0�aaaiq CITY OF t,;:AIMDRIDc'E STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND DETAILS SCALE? NI.T.S. 11AT2 1E: 9�ST1��]k� IIEC. SECT10N REF#: E}221D1 252'�_ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 8 LIGHTING High quality lighting, designed to appropriate illumination levels, is one of the most important safety improvements for dusk, dawn and nighttime hours. In addition, street and site lights play an important role during daylight hours, as they are often the tallest elements on the street, and contribute to the character of the environment. The Ad Hoc Committee recommends that the consultant team include a Lighting Designer. We believe that the overall lighting plan and the more intimate pedestrian areas will improve with a specific focus on lighting design. The designer should not only look at illumination levels but also the placement of the different types of lighting, and the consideration of moonlighting, uplighting and holiday lighting to create a vibrant, attractive and interesting center. In addition, the designer should incorporate in the final design enhancement to the safety of cyclists using the roads and cross-walks. The Committee expects that the lighting designer will develop alternatives based on these guidelines for further discussion and evaluation. The Committee has been asked to provide a recommendation on the style of the site lights. The designers are responsible for the final locations, layout, distribution type and electrical connections and controls. Below are the Committee's recommendations for the final lighting design including performance standards for and expectations of the site lighting design. 1) LIGHTING DESIGN PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The final site lighting, electrical, and control plan should: a) Meet IESNA standards for the level of use of our Center. The standards include specific illumination requirements, including "average maintained footcandles" and "average to minimum uniformity ratio". The lighting design should be evaluated and revised as often as necessary to meet the standards. b) Evaluate specific illumination levels needed at crosswalks, and correctly illuminate pedestrians. Consider bicyclists relative to illumination levels. c) Use street lights to illuminate the vehicular areas, and use pedestrian scale lights to illuminate pedestrian areas, for safety and to contribute to ambiance and character. d) Use LED bulbs for lower electricity and maintenance costs. Bulbs should be in the 3000- 3500 Kelvin range for the appropriate color (see the appendix). e) Locate lights in coordination with the street trees, to avoid light/tree branch conflicts. f) Balance the height and visibility of the poles with the desire to minimize the number of poles which can be sidewalk obstructions. g) Design all site lighting with black poles and luminaires, as this may allow different lighting styles to be visually tied together, and will also allow the DPW to more easily repair damage. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 9 h) Adjust the final light selections to fit the needs of each specific area, for example the lengths of street with and without overhead wires. The aesthetic goals shall be maintained for all specific conditions. i) Use these recommendations for the entirety of Mass Ave from the Minuteman Statue to Woburn Street so that there is a consistent illumination level and a consistent aesthetic appearance for this entire stretch. j) Minimize the number, and address the aesthetics of the electrical control panels. Locate them down side streets if possible. Consider artwork on the panels. k) Holiday lighting, used for several months of the year, should be examined and updated. This should include minimizing light scatter effects, and provision of safe and convenient electric supply. The Committee assumes that these general performance standards will be used during final design. 2) LIGHTING RECOMMENDATIONS The Committee knows that there are many different types of existing lights between the Minuteman Statue and the Woburn Street intersection (the area of the Streetscape project). We know that there are many more types of lights around the Battle Green. We have kept this in mind as we make our recommendations for the Center Streetscape lighting. Our recommendations focus on STREET LIGHTS, PEDESTRIAN LIGHTS as well as existing pedestrian lights as follows. a) STREETLIGHTS T04 i) Tall roadway lights should visually disappear, as much as possible. The ���� poles should be in the 20' —30' height range, as low as they can be while still illuminating 6 lanes of travel and parking. We understand that the taller the lights, the greater the area of illumination, and therefore the fewer number of poles; this should be balanced, however, with the aesthetics of the poles and the sidewalk1 obstructions. ii) The luminaires (the light heads) should be as small as possible while providing the correct amount of illumination. The luminaire and arm should be able to be mounted on existing utility poles (for the south side of the east end of Mass T tea' Ave). Poles should be round, and the 270 arm should have some curve/elegance. ------- .-.. ..II. iii) The lighting design should assess 51 "F� ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 10 whether there can continue to be street lighting only on the south sidewalk through the heart of the Center, or if staggering the street lights on both sides of the street is necessary for appropriate illumination levels. Currently there are NO streetlights on the north side of Mass Ave in the heart of the Center and the Committee would like the lighting design to consider maintaining this. iv) The images below are of the type of street light being recommended. I� �toll, ,d Ulk'LI(In � 'µ.alp lip I�f� Ar ors' �..el �l till rnrll LEL;trrz�,anr,p,rm� i Ion Brack,,UBSI O©-I A Prier.UPS IB6 I� ���y n- �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII� I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 11 3) PEDESTRIAN LIGHTS in the heart of the Center and Pedestrian Light Assembly along Mass Ave a) Pedestrian lights in the Town Center should resemble �� the 1965 Sasaki lights. If possible, these lights should be from a catalog and not custom. They should be octagonal,painted black, with smooth round poles and no ornamental top. The top panel should be a solid shield to eliminate light going straight to the sky. They should use LED bulbs. b) These lights should be used in the Center from they statue to the Woburn Street intersection, where pedestrian lights are needed for additional illumination. '... ,t ;line ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 12 PEDESTRIAN LIGHTS IN THE"MUNICIPAL" AREA, BEYOND THE BACK OF THE MASS AVE SIDEWALK The Center area includes lights that are not technically in the "streetscape". We have discussed these, and support their continued use in areas beyond the streetscape area. c) Lights at Cary Hall and Town Buildings, and on town-owned land outside the main commercial core, can continue to be those currently installed at the Town Offices. d) Pedestrian Lights at Depot Square Park: Depot Square Park should maintain its ornamental lights, as this is a park and not a streetscape. Along the sidewalk, add roadway lights as needed for illumination continuity in the street. ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ................ �) �, m " Z�-, M r. 1. m+re�n.J' �k�,Aa%x axx drr bv�m.ie x-,+-mptim n� �,uYw�uwa .yam � �lY Mur m ararnmo8 p�[uR1mY...�m ultkv i ..... ara o. .�svrs'asmuemacm � w � Y'"' $pYlAtil"YYY v tMlaRMYYY�MkY PY�I MANY Y�Y�pYq.m .... aAe.manor .a-m�.... rurr mwm- m� �as..9-m N J Gf Fleclricr�I M�q Cry. �� `v g�,�ry�r � rd Mfg cm ✓ MY�MNiS p 8M L4Y RY'3 7 if,..nnuw mm'rmamzagxrrrar�rrr:�y A aIMIMraze. ,en nw mvsrrawmn.' RWIl fA-fl. iYW a�`nre�i�. �.IIAWlWItW WPan A.W'4rl(Av3AX'W A e� iMN R'JEaNO'£NYb Pedestrian Light in the Center, consistent with existing light, but painted black with LED bulb ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 13 i f — n onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnm ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 14 1 J i I� i Light in the Center Light near Lexx ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... CENTER STREETSCAPE DESIGN AD HOC COMMITTEE REPORT Page 15 Minority Report of the Center Streetscape Design Review Ad Hoc Committee Tier One Sidewalk Materials Purpose of Minority Report This report is being submitted because the Commission on Disability's preferred choice of sidewalk materials is concrete with wire-cut brick on the sides which is cheaper at installation. However the majority of the Ad Hoc Committee voted for wire-cut square-edge brick. There are three major concerns about the choice of brick. First, there has not been enough exploration done by the Committee about concrete as a possible sidewalk material. This was also raised as an issue by a resident in the Public Hearing. A concrete expert was never invited to present in front of the Committee so there was not enough technical information to compare the two materials. The second concern is related to the vast number of complicated factors contributing to the fact that brick is not the right surface for individuals with disabilities. Lastly, there is the difficulty of comparing the importance of aesthetics to the importance of functionality. Commission on Disability and Related Sidewalk Standards The charge of the Commission on Disability is "to ensure that people with disabilities are fully integrated into all aspects of the Town and can participate seamlessly and without barriers. The Commission makes recommendations concerning the implementation of the Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA)within the Town. Members review and recommend policies as they affect those with disabilities, and provide information, guidance, and technical assistance." The pertinent regulations for ADA-compliant sidewalks are: Massachusetts Architectural Access Board Guidelines (2006); PROWAG (Public Rights-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines, 2010) from the US Access Board—best practice guidelines; ADA (Department of Justice) 2010 Guidelines. According to these regulations, sidewalks need to be continuous common surfaces, without level changes more than 1/4 inch; sidewalks must be stable and firm; sidewalks need to have a cross slope less than 2%. Many forms of brick as well as other surfaces may be able to be installed to meet the technical requirements of the ADA. However, the ADA's spirit of universal design, equality and accessibility is bigger than the regulations. Additionally, the 2015 Town Meeting voted unanimously in favor of Article 42, which states: "To provide a welcoming and comfortable experience for individuals of all abilities, the Town will endeavor at all times to use smooth, safe and aesthetically appropriate materials when constructing sidewalks and other passageways on town-owned walkways. Bricks and other small discrete pavers may be used as decorative edge treatments, but shall always be installed to create the smoothest surface possible, ensuring safety for citizens who have trouble traversing uneven surfaces." ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Streetscape Minority Report on Sidewalks Page 1 How Sidewalk Material Choice Affects Disabilities While brick may meet the technical requirements (under very specific circumstances), the Commission on Disability believes it is a surface, except when installed as decorative trim, that is an unnecessary hazard for individuals with disabilities. There are several things to consider. The first is vibration. This has been studied by the University of Pittsburgh. Vibration disturbances are a real and dangerous health hazard. Walkers, wheelchairs, crutches, strollers, shoes and canes can get caught in the seams and then people trip, lose balance or fall. Vibration issues can cause spasticity,pain, loss of balance and disturbances of correct positional seating. However, there are some individuals with disabilities who gain a positive sensation from irregular surfaces. This is a unique and atypical physical reaction to vibration or roughness that is not shared by other disabilities. These disabilities include ALS and Parkinson's. The University of Pittsburgh researchers have been working on a way to objectively measure roughness. Their method is based on the international roughness index approach which is used for vehicular pavements. This is known as the "Wheelchair Pathway Roughness Index". This new objective measure is awaiting approval from the US Access Board to become a standard soon. The focus on the impact of surface continuity on mobility is one area of concern for individuals with disabilities, but there are others. For individuals with neurological issues, brick causes a dramatic and disorienting experience due to sensory overload resulting in ambiguity from signals related to depth perception. Concrete is seen as causing less "neurological noise" and less confusing sensory input. Individuals with vision impairments are unable to discern variation in the surface of bricks and there is no bright contrast on brick sidewalks like there is on concrete accented with brick. High contrast supports all global issues related to wayfinding. Sidewalks that are firm and stable, such as concrete, resist indentation from the forces applied by a walking person's feet and reduce the rolling resistance experienced by a wheelchair. When a pedestrian or wheelchair user crosses a surface that is not firm or stable, energy that would otherwise cause forward motion deforms or displaces the surface instead. Recent research has looked at the internalized reactions of individuals to brick on pathways of travel. The authors examine the impact of urban sidewalks as being "physical locations of inequality for people with disabilities". Bricks are seen as unwelcoming and emphasize the lack of equality for disabilities (Disability and Qualitative Inquiry: Methods for Rethinking an Ableist World by Ronald J. Berger and Laura S. Lorenz, 2015). At the Public Hearing, many senior citizens as well as Commission on Disability members voiced their concerns about wire-cut brick. Current statistics on adults in the US with disabilities from the CDC are staggering: hearing - 16.8%; vision - 9.1%; mobility - difficulty walking 1/4 mile - 7.1%; physical function difficulty - 15.1%. The percentage of adults over 18 years old and with at least one basic action difficulty or complex activity limitation is 32.4%. ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Streetscape Minority Report on Sidewalks Page 2 For adults aged 65+, this percentage is 60.5%, not a minority. The Commission on Disability urges the Committee to listen to its residents with disabilities. Characteristics of Concrete In March 2016, the Commission on Disability invited Craig Dauphinais, from the Massachusetts Concrete & Aggregate Producers Association (MaCAPA)to share his expertise on concrete as a sidewalk material_ MaCAPA represents concrete and aggregate producers and other ready mix suppliers, and their role is related to outreach and education. He summarized the advantages of concrete as being its versatility, durability, and competitive cost. He said proper installation is crucial—if installed correctly the life span can be 40-50 years with little to no maintenance. He noted that when installing concrete one should place the seams at the points where cracking is expected to happen to avoid maintenance. ASTM (American Standard Test Measures) standards also emphasize the crucial importance of careful installation. The key factor in sidewalk longevity is the quality of construction. Even a concrete sidewalk can fail after several years if poor materials are used and good design and construction practices are ignored. A common criticism of concrete is that it is not salt-resistant in colder climates. This is no longer the case as the technology has evolved sufficiently to improve concrete's reaction to salt. Traditional salts (not magnesium chloride) are less damaging to the surface than they used to be. There are salt-resistant concrete mixes as well as additives that enable concrete to be salted. Some of these additives are non-hazardous, environmentally safe penetrating chemical treatments that: increase durability; eliminate trip hazards (flaking, chipping,popping,pitting, dusting, or spalling); reduce maintenance and repair needs after being applied once. Setting/Installation of Concrete The National Research Council of Canada's Institute for Research in Construction emphasizes that: "proper compaction and preparation of the subgrade beneath the concrete sidewalk is essential. The uniformity of the compaction is just as important as the degree of compaction. Uniform compaction diminishes differential settlement of the concrete sidewalk and reduces the chance of crack development." They say that there should be a granular subbase layer between the compacted subgrade and the concrete. They also advise: "To minimize cracking, control joints should be cut into the slab at spacings of about 4 feet transversely across the length of the sidewalk". Other installation and setting have been researched, such as reinforcing concrete with bars when the sidewalk is placed over excavations such as tree roots or sewer laterals, to prevent settling or cracking of the sidewalk. Maintenance of Concrete In terms of maintenance people often think that concrete is more difficult to maintain than brick. Again, this seems to depend on proper installation, which can influence the longevity ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Streetscape Minority Report on Sidewalks Page 3 of the concrete, as well as how quickly repairs are made. There are several maintenance methods: saw cutting (advantage is precision and quality); grinding; patching and ramping; removing and replacing concrete slabs. A report entitled"How to Reduce Sidewalk Trip Hazards on Tight Budgets: Managing ADA Compliance, Risk, and Budget, by Gary Beneduci (2010) provides the following advice about maintenance: "When trip hazards range between a quarter inch and two and half inches, saw cutting is the most effective method to remove trip hazards...Complies with ADA standards for removal and slopes. Meets OSHA recommended standards for slip resistance. Appears clean and neat. Cuts precisely removing trip hazards in difficult-to-reach places. Removes hazards quickly. Stretches budgets...costs about 10 times less than removal and replacement...In summary, with trip hazards 2 1/z inches or less, saw cutting stretches budgets, by lengthening the life of concrete sidewalks that might otherwise be replaced". Aesthetics vs Function Due to the many and varied effects of multiple types of disabilities it can be very difficult to balance the desire for aesthetics with functionality. The Commission on Disability believes that concrete with brick edges is already a reasonable compromise position. Even if the unevenness of wire-cut brick sidewalks could be overcome (as promised), brick is still a problem for those with neurological or sensory issues. While historical significance is often cited as a reason to keep the bricks,parts of Boston's Freedom Trail have decided that it is easier for individuals to negotiate a small strip of brick in concrete. The Commission on Disabilitystresses that the Committee be aware that safe and safety functionality are important, and should always come before aesthetics. The other issue to remember is that if there are problems with roughness, unevenness, or even cross slope on the newly recommended wire-cut brick sidewalks, the people most affected will be those with disabilities, not the ones who wanted that choice of material. Summary of Recommendations of Minority Report The recommendations from this report are as follows: ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Streetscape Minority Report on Sidewalks Page 4 • The Committee needs to seek more information about concrete so that a more in-depth comparison can be made between the two surfaces. Expert information is needed, especially concerning salt-resistant types, installation and maintenance concerns. • There needs to be a full comparison of life cycle costs between sidewalks that are wire- cut brick and those that are concrete with decorative brick edges. The costs of installation appear to be roughly $250 per square yard for brick and $70 per square yard for concrete. Since the Streetscape project involves approximately 61,300 square feet (6,811 square yards) of sidewalks, this cost comparison is crucial. Lexington is facing difficult budgetary decisions currently and project decisions should reflect an understanding of the fiscal restraints. Respectfully submitted, Victoria Buckley September 16, 2016 ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... Streetscape Minority Report on Sidewalks Page 5 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Selectmen Committee Appointments (5 min) PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Suzanne Barry, Chairman 1.9 SUMMARY: Attached is a list of all committees that have members with terms that expire September 30, 2016. Emails were sent to the Chairs of all of your committes requesting that they let us know who wanted to be reappointed, as well as those who did not want to be reappointed. Below are the committees that are ready for reappointment as indicated on the attached list, "Committee Members with Terms Expiring-2016". This list also includes the names of those who do not wish to be reappointed. 2020 Vision Committee Bicycle Advisory Committee Board ofAppeals and Associates Center Committee Communications Advisory Committee Council for the Arts Design Advisory Committee and Associates Economic Development Advisory Committee Energy Conservation Committee F enc e Viewers Gammel Legacy Trust Greenways Corridor Committee Housing Partnership Board Human Rights Committee Human Services Committee Lex. Scholarship & Education Fund Board Monuments and Memorials Committee Sustainable Lexington Committee Tourism Committee Town Report Committee Transportation Advisory Committee Tree Committee Trustees of Public Trusts Water and Sewer Abatement Board Also attached is a current list of the above committees. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to reappoint, as indicated, on the attached list of committees. FOLLOW-UP: Selectmen's Office DATE AND APPROXIlVIATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 9:40 p.m. ATTACHMENTS: Description Type D Cbn m n Ra.r<skpoinrt Backup Ma orrinl D Cbn m n Monnb rr L issts; Backup Ma orrinl Committee Members with Terms Expiring - 2016 Term Expires Service Start Recommendation 2020 Vision Committee 13 members,including 3 elected Boards,3 year tern staggered 9/2016 Margaret E. Coppe member 3/2016 reappoint 9/2016 Dan C. Krupka 2/2010 reappoint Bicycle Advisory Committee 13 Members,3 Year Term(9 citizens plus Sel,PB,CC and Recreation), Sept. 30, staggered 9/2016 Robert W.Hausslein member 9/2010 reappoint 9/2016 -Michael Tabaczynski member 11/2001 reappoint Board of Appeals 5 Members,5 Year Term, Sept.30 staggered, 2 term limit 9/2016 Ralph D. Clifford 4/2016 reappoint Board of Appeals Associates 777-1 6 Members, I Year Term, Sept.30 9/2016 Nyles N.Barnert 9/2015 reappoint 9/2016 William P. Kennedy 9/2014 reappoint 9/2016 Hank Manz 6/2016 reappoint 9/2016 James A. Osten 9/2014 reappoint 9/2016 Frederick D. Wells 12/2013 do not reappoint Center Committee I I Members,3 Year Staggered Term, Sept.30 9/2016 Frederic S.Johnson 12/2002 reappoint 9/2016 Howard L. Levin 10/2003 reappoint 9/2016 Jeffrey Lyon 9/2008 reappoint Communications Advisory Committee 11 Members,3 Year Term, Sept.30 9/2016 David J.Buczkowski 6/2002 reappoint 9/2016 Frank Cai 1/2011 do not reappoint 9/2016 Maria T.Kieslich 1/2004 do not reappoint 9/2016 Kenneth T.Pogran Chair 1/2008 reappoint Tuesday, September 20,2016 Page 1 of 5 Term Expires Service Start Recommendation Council for the Arts 11 Members,3 Year Term,2-term limit, Sept. 30,staggered 9/2016 Leslie Masson 8/2013 reappoint 9/2016 Cheryl Meadow 10/2013 do not reappoint 9/2016 Diana South Treasurer 8/2013 do not reappoint 9/2016 Jessie Steigerwald member 11/2013 reappoint Design Advisory Committee 9 Members, I Year Tenn, Sept. 30 9/2016 Caroline Fitzgerald 8/2015 reappoint 9/2016 Richard Friedson 4/2009 reappoint 9/2016 Bahig A.Kaldas 6/2003 reappoint 9/2016 Timothy D. Lee Chair 3/2006 reappoint 9/2016 Alenka Slezak 6/2003 reappoint 9/2016 Brigitte Steines 7/2010 reappoint 9/2016 Steven A. Vincent 4/2009 reappoint Design Advisory Committee Associates 8 Members, I Year Tenn,Sept. 30 9/2016 Bruce Creager 4/2006 reappoint 9/2016 John W. Frey 1998 reappoint Economic Development Advisory Committee I I members,3 year term, September 30 9/2016 Narain Bhatia 9/2008 reappoint 9/2016 John J.McWeeney Chair 7/2008 reappoint Energy Conservation Committee 9 members, Sept.30 9/2016 Roger Borghesani 9/2011 reappoint 9/2016 Douglas Holmes 1/2015 reappoint 9/2016 Shawn Newell member 5/2008 reappoint Fence Viewers 3 Members, 1 Year Tenn, Sept. 30 9/2016 David J.Buczkowski Chair 1/2002 reappoint 9/2016 Hank Manz 6/2016 reappoint Tuesday, September 20,2016 Page 2 of 5 Term Expires Service Start Recommendation Gammel Legacy Trust 2 Members, 1 Year Term, Sept. 30 9/2016 Marie E.Hill Chair 9/2009 do not reappoint 9 members,3 year staggered,Sept.30 Greenways Corridor Committee 9/2016 Donald Grant 6/2014 reappoint 9/2016 Keith Ohmart Chair 1/2011 reappoint 9/2016 Michael Tabaczynski 1/2011 reappoint Housing Partnership Board 3 Year term, 15 Voting Members,3 Liaisons (Selectmen appoint 12;designated 3 for LexHAB,Hous.Auth. &PB) 9/2016 Harriet J. Cohen Secretary 12/2003 reappoint 9/2016 Nancy Corcoran-Ronchetti member 3/2014 reappoint 9/2016 Mary S.Haskell member 12/2003 reappoint 9/2016 Robert Pressman member 12/2012 reappoint Human Rights Committee 9 members including school,police and senior staff,Liaisons for School and BOS,3- year staggered term, September 30 9/2016 Bonnie Brodner 3/2014 reappoint Human Services Committee 8 Members,3 Year Term-staggered,Sept.30 9/2016 Gail Rogers 4/2014 do not reappoint 9/2016 Bonnie TenPas 5/2015 reappoint Lex. Scholarship & Education Fund Board 1-year term 9/2016 Riaz Adamjee 9/2015 reappoint 9/2016 Mary Czajkowski 9/2015 reappoint 9/2016 Thomas O.Fenn,Jr. Schol. 1997 reappoint 9/2016 Janice Litwin 9/2015 do not reappoint 9/2016 David Williams Chair 1997 reappoint Monuments and Memorials Committee 7 members,3 year term staggered,9/30 appt 9/2016 S.Levi Doran Chair 3/2014 reappoint 9/2016 Gerald E.McGrath member 3/2014 do not reappoint Tuesday,September 20,2016 Page 3 of 5 Term Expires Service Start Recommendation Sustainable Lexington Committee 7 Members,3 year staggered, Sept 30 9/2016 Todd A. Rhodes 8/2010 reappoint 9/2016 Mark Sandeen Chair 8/2010 reappoint Tourism Committee 9 members,one year term,Sept. 30 9/2016 Marsha Baker member 1/2016 reappoint 9/2016 Kerry Brandin 11/2001 reappoint 9/2016 Margaret Coppe 12/2013 reappoint 9/2016 Bernice Fallick 10/2003 reappoint 9/2016 Jonathan Himmel 4/2016 reappoint 9/2016 Trisha Perez Kennealy 10/2012 reappoint 9/2016 Dawn E.McKenna Chair 3/2005 reappoint 9/2016 Willem Nijenberg 1/2014 reappoint 9/2016 Leeying Wu member 11/2014 reappoint Town Report Committee 9 Members, I Year Term,Sept.30 9/2016 Gloria A.Amirault member 12/2010 reappoint 9/2016 Elaine Ashton 11/2015 reappoint 9/2016 Cristina Burwell Coordinator 9/2015 reappoint 9/2016 Suzanne B. Caton 11/2015 reappoint 9/2016 Hank Manz member 7/2014 do not reappoint 9/2016 David S.Tabeling member 11/1998 reappoint Transportation Advisory Committee 7 Members,3 Year Term, Sept. 30 9/2016 Sally Castleman 1978 reappoint Tree Committee 7 Members,3 year term 9/2016 Jewel Kuljian 04/2008 reappoint 9/2017 John W.Frey Chair 10/2001 reappoint Trustees of the Public Trusts 3 Members,6 Year Term,Sept.30 9/2016 Alan Fields Chair 4/1983 reappoint Tuesday,September 20,2016 Page 4 of 5 Term Expires Service Start Recommendation Water and Sewer Abatement Board 3 members,3-year term staggered 9/2016 Loren Wood Chair 11/2007 reappoint Tuesday, September 20,2016 Page 5 of 5 E 0 E E "• o OU p Q U C O -p7 E O_ N Y U U Cl !a\ X DCm NC UU E E OU O E a) L O O N O p OE O L C Mn -° Om C O O C UE m to C,U) : U) O QVU E N 0. W E@ m a r m m 3 > CO O a r O O Cl) OM M UO V W V) V) O V CO (D I� O W d O co U coV O (fl CO to 10 M co C'7 4 O N 1� LO V C? N r- l0 m m � Cfl co O O h r r (0 F- rn M X a a) a (D a) (4 U U V U U LL 0 C)N f� N O co V � O ti CO UC) 1� O UO r (0 Z co M C) N CD W UU) Op p p Ur t(j (N O co V � O t j N M O N m h M UO M h N LO W p O O pN N CON CM0 0ND O CO (p U LO Lt) ((00 CCOO (ND CO O (ND O N CO N .0 Ch (D N � V oD M 00 � V Cp o7 OJ CO tpit) 00 OCL cOD W O O M W M M M r o7 O c0 ~ (o) V 5 s 2, 3 :2, 32 � 3 3 r 3 s 3 s r pl— co co r— ti co co (0 co co co co O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0) O) rn 6) 6) 6) rn ) ) m m m 6) .� U_ y ' ZT co O o O C) O O I O C:) N L O O O N O O O O O O O N pq (n N N N N N N N N N N M M Cl) W 6) N OJ d• N -0. N > N N N N N Q) O O N N N O 0 O O M M 'cY l' V O V V m V -O V -O d' O V N dN' Q' C dN' W O O O- � C) 6 O N O O O O 0 0 O C NO m 0 O O y m Q o Q Q o Q m NX O�Q Q c o U O aE 2 Q � M o 2 N � O N E N 0 N C OO O O O m "OCXN byb o) o 0) m m a) '0 0) m m 0) o)m U) Xm m m X X X X O X l0 O a) ON (D J _I 0 J CO J CO J J N J J mo Ih J O J N J N J w, M W � W 'O � U d O F, N N N N N 4-- O V E E E (n E E U a� y C/] 0 d d ■`H w a E o / O O O t C C m O O C N m CC U Y U G V 3 y c Y i6 Q C W O O X = O L c t m d CL n' U CY d a) N d Q U (Li 3 0 ° Y Y '� L v0 C9 E m o '� C 3 C .,d.. N Q G N z = ¢ a u 0 m o a n u E > > > oo) U U 0 p) a3 E E o � `6 E `6 c E ° ° w o o N E o o 0) N U E E 0 � a) � � o $ o c m c � 0 p w U u! a cm @ > X C a1 U N 0) O .� O -0 m as o a Ud n E E ° Ud N U) E tin ��`` @�`` n O N U .L f6 >, O V V C > O ca) C. o •� U U) O L a3 .N a) a3 Y O .� N •N Q rn E C) a U3 L Y E LbL '00 -00 0- c 0)0) 3 r r E N 3 0 (0) 04 W N 0) 0 co O Cm0 n LO N N I- co I? O 0? O N ID N m O O N (0 W W �F C7 r W co 00 �C v N w N LL � N O h O 1- V LO r V' r- M xO V N co C) r U.) M V Z co (o N N W � 0 C) 00 O 5 O O V OD � ((00 O fh yC G1 O (OO CO M Lo LO a7 O N N aO O O m (mo O N V p V .0 = N O M �''> N O N N N N N (Mo N O '"� � O CO CO (O O O N O ch co (fl O co co (0 O O CO LO (0 (fl O O c0 V � ch W 00 00 r W W W o? N CO M Q h N N d O co co co W co O W O r7 co N O 00 W L L L U L L V L 3 L :C L L L Q O Q O O O O O O O O O O N a) M .O N O O Cl) O N CD O N N "d (n N N N m N N N c3 W 00 00 U P" a O O O O -0 O o O O O 0 C) N N N N N a) N N a) N N N m N N U N N a) N O N C N N V = '' .1 O V O V V O N V 7 "' a) �' 7 V > V E V N O NO N O a O N O NO N O O 1 O Q O O C O N O ❑ O O O � a u, a a oa Qa � a Qa > a oa - a a a> a > a Qa - a ma � a DO C (6 C N C O C N C C E C C C N C N C N C N a o N o � c o o o O o c o 0 0 E o 3 0 0 o N o m 0 0 0 o m o Q t af6i •� E m m o _o 0 m m @ Occm m 0) Q� 'R 'R LL 'x Y 'x () 'R 'x N "x 'R "x 'x o "x N "x o 'x N O a) V a) O a) (D a) M N (0 a) CO N O a) O a) O 0 (4 a) O a) (D a) a) o m 00 a) N J m J N J J J J N J N J (O J CO J J M .J J LO J I— .J •— J r. H 7r Q o O � � M m E N 0 -0 .0 -0 .fl .0 � .0 E O O •p a) Q a) c N E E m E E E E E y AE N o m 0 L a) a) a) a) o a) O m m a) U U J E E U E E E E E c J J E a) N d a � w ) d � d a1 h d 0 d :6 E (n O m m 0) W >, aTi L O C Z i6 N = O v c = a w = d = a) a O m E �1 J 0 _ En m § - 2 o Z _ 0- U) L) E m N c W Z U R SO w C d R •� C m N m C m R (0 V Q R Y E S k \ } ) 0 5 U) . ) e \ \ co / \ ƒ 0 \ % ; 8 8 § 2 § to q ƒ ƒ f 2 E _ƒ & # E k E r 2 . } f a ) E 00 2 m = 2 & 2 \ E 2 . \ / LO4 co . \ \ \ ) \ } \ k2 N f o 4 c = n . \ \ @ / j / / } } 2 O \ § \ o } \ \ } ƒ ) / / / \ / / / / . . ° = w = o = ca \ \ \ / \ a a > o a n o = . \ . ) 2 \ \ e . . - \ \ d \ \ / \ /UM) \ \ \ § \ ) k k \ ) 7 / . 6 \ \ \ \ \ \ _\ \ f E j 1/ 7 j 2 ) 2 / 5 / m \ \ N 2 ) E 5 ® .\ ) C m M k } j \CD @ ci b _ _ § ca } J » \ ) / a } ¢ 2 E O U L O E C C D c E ° r o _ m o U '(p LO N 0 C O U U (�E� O) E /�b3 O N O : ` D) G 2 lJ m N O O Lb C O Y L O W 00 U-) N W V O m 0 C) co 00 0 x U U U. N O O N Z M CO O NO N d M C? N CP O C O N O N t � � O CO CO a) 7 co (C (O (C (C @ O O O O O O 0 N N N N N N U_ L � (n ON N N ON N O CN m 7 _ V V 0 V O O O -O O O O y Q Q p Q N Q Q 0 O W . LL V � 0 H N N H w 64 A s U N CAL C U CL U H � � a � Q d y a E- m a N O p d Q C 0 E N R y N CD •p^S,I �W m m d CE d d itZ Z S U- E o a N U to N _ ] 0T V E 16 E o0 c 0 0 °0 U 0 ° ° O U . E E N O j N m o O E Q 0 2 Ui mo m N m E Um U UO)m U u)>N CO YU V (6 p O _ C C N E O N 0 m (D 0)N N ON—O ON tzp N N N co O C •g � C — E 'E O N 'S, L L o0 N m @ -0 -0 c N o °' 3 T E � V O a °� N N O 0 O O p .L 'D L E E .L m U U NT C tL m E E a> 3 °? 3 a s 3 .� a U) U) V) o. E N_ Lo CO O M r Co m O V CD M r o M O M O M O) CO O r Cl N W O � co (MO IN O (NO (OO Op r co Cl) M co O co M t— 00 M W W coco coo to U U n U U U U LL 0 W C CD O O M lIJ (fl O � O) r colNj d O) N C4 00 CO v O CO O O M O tco` C� n Or o 00 t- O o i O r O O M N r OC Co o O o co M In M d Op CD O' N t� h CO C) N � .O 000 r m coi O op U? W W 00 W 000 co �_ _� _W O r O W _ r _ _ _ _ _ to _ N d M r W O; N O; t: C; W — � O M N M M M M 07 D7 W I- t coI- 3 r r 3 r 3 r 3 3 g 3 t 3 r 3 3 w � I- o m (o o co o o t, o f4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U O O 00 co M O co co n O) ON N O O O O O O O O (n N N N N CV CD N N N N N N N N 7 07 0) � r r W D W co W r CD O O M O @O N a) C) C) CD N O O N N N •p N N N -O N N ON V V p V �' d' -p V V V V N V Ip d' (6 V 0 7 ¢+ Q N N C N N N t0 N N N N - N 7 N p N C N O N C N N N p 0 0 0 p) O O C) 0 0 O O -p C) C) C O Q. O No �' O NC rn Q 2 Q > Q m Q Q � Q m ¢ � Q to Q o Q > Q T Q Q Q Y Q Q Q o _ c vi Ui 'a � C Q C 0) C N C C C t C C C C C d C Na)C co C N C m C N C O N O U O o 0 O O O C O C O O O N O O E O N O N O O O [� O C d C = C C C C Ur C C Ei C T C C Z C O C C Lo C x x x X 'x X x X x U 'x 18, 'x x rn 'x x N 'x sue. tll O) N O N M N N to N to N tU V N O tll N O CO O V tll o N 0 Cl) J M J U') J N J J r J r J V) J r .J M J O) J N J r J N J r J btl aC+ tll M 0 o L o � n m n ., .� m O J to Q C L 1 W O y 3 m O N C N U mE W 0 m C w= y m -rs a -a �, m �. U w s m v� in R W E C .L t C 'O t6 d tv C O a' d A L N q 3 y N E °' - d Z w c� ti = a a in a N 7 U C X 1 N' EOO E E oO E ° m m o o ° Eb U E °o NL 2 ` E U O N O xE NO Np0 � E � 6 EN O 3 U En E N C E N p m ° U cn E ((�l�1 �(��, Y ��`` E _ �i E �° � co U N -O N N (LS V N °O1 cc U Y W c cQ3 ° °) o aN)E N O N N O U°Q N N O co M O) O N Ct C9 L? (N N OP (`N') 'It 00 m o N M �' O h M (p O) O) N M t` N M O (O M Ct N Ln (D M N (C) N N (O O) (O N rt) M � 0? t- N W co U N W r 00 rl- CM (O 0000 CO t" f0 U U U U U U U U U LL Lf) Z W t Nco CIJ N d' O co O N W N 00 N CO CO Co (NO N (n o O N N N CC O �- O r- m W O r O 00 N C N O O M CI' O N CO m M N N CY N (O ('') N N co 0 (O N CO m (p (D CY ti (D N V to CO (O CO O) (O L 00 W N N 07 00 W co ti 6 00 00 (o N OO d m °O co Y co - w N w � m � m m CO CO CO c ti ti 4: co co (o (o co � r-- co r- r- co N CO o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N U_ •> (() m O _ _ _O Ct 'CIS N_ (L) M NO N L d - O O O O O O O O O O O O (n N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (D N V r� Cl) Cl) N wW co (M W m I? N ■—�O. QL0 OOm-'OX OC O caC c co O . OO O COY > O N N N co NO ON N ° d' t7 O a Y It C- 7 N C N N N CQ N N W O O O 0 N Oa) Q Q Q OQ Q O Q Q Q Q QQ m C 2 2 � Q> Oc LL - pvi Q � vi C J C -0 C N CN C C C Co C C N C O N m OO E OO COO O > Lom a� m a °)m � � u) m (o cc m XLL N X X Lo r- NX co NX CO (0 N O N MVQ] N 0) O N N (O N O 0) r- J CO J N J m. J N J - .J (o J J N J LC) J 0) J J J N J ti a M N N .O �~" (DO c CoU V N y ■— CL Y J y C y y C E U 7 N O 0 � p P >' N d l0 N O O d V R U d 3 d •N O y N ..I a U 0. F. m ° m m m :: aNi d Y Q z (D (D N c d O E > m � -a c :° c 0 °m d d o c Z o m 2 o `0 ?: V d 0 a0i � E d � y 0 LL 0 N o Z m Y H E 0 U C_ O O) O E Q N C O C o E cc E E N C @ Y_ N p O \O E 01 > C @ U C, N bA r N 0 C O Q cc 3 c rn E m m W E m c�v L) v O co N � 10 CO tl' O O m 00 o co X m (D m U U U LL O 0 Z CD M 00 N O 00 m 0 N O to 0 W C N ( N _ V O CO (DD O 0 N 0? 0? (0 Q d W - co pp 47 � O� C) O N N N •� d' 'd' co co L d O O O O (n N N N N Fz izz izz Z-25 O M N N N N C. O It =3 CD N O O O CO (D C. Q O m 0 O O O L O) @ 01 O) (D O) U) C 0� C (n C C O N a) (DN CD (D U') J N J J N J N 'O b4 0 cJ i M ■� d w 2 E @ E N N J E J E � O C/) Lr) ■� ,O N h O @ m m (D y o c n O E > r V z 2 m L Q U Q E E o E o ° cUi �E o E o � N coi m o o mom\\ V O U OU O U U co EaE` (6 °� — N N > V O @ L m D1 ��\ -O �O1 v �p`� �01) L M N L .Q L � O cm lE M (0 (6. O t L O L G •� m 'O m N E N N 3 m a) @ N N co E n m T °' L m o E E C c cn W N .- 7 m E Y •ram L U N O m N E U U) L m o E U N n m a CD LO LO LOO co co I" CD W V) V h LO O O N O V LC) LO V O LO N N N L[) I� M M M N 00 co (d U U U U U LL to M O LO h N co O Z LO O o o W a) NCD CO 00 Lo N m CD m °; N N O 00 LLj 00 7 LO O co V 1 ti O CND CCO N N (0D CD O CD O � cMD cND CO r- Lfj O V O t W Lb co 00 00 O 00 CO N W ' co N W tO 07 O W co O0 co W (Y� CO CO O0 co 0000 ~ L� CL0 F- c o r c 0 3 3 c c 0 0 c v O N co 00 O I- r co r- O � co O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N ON N N N N N N N N a) m m CA m m m m m m m m i LO M LO co O M LO M co M M 'a' M M „0 O O O O O CD v N O N O O O O N N N CD N N N N m N N N m N N N LC) m LC) — V) �- m M — SOD bA ca a- to N O N M C O O - O CD CD C. O N N N - N N N N N N N N N a) N N N IA CO O > It It O O @ O O O a) O O C O 2 O 0 0 N O D O O O O d Q Q Q (n Q ° Q Q Q Q Q N Q (n Q C Q �° Q (6 Q Q Q E :EN Q c o C QLV CN C cC � om E o w m o o E ) o o m a M rnO 0) a) 0) m 0) m 0) m 0) a) 0) m o U C O ) O N N N N Jj Co 0OID NQ) ONO N M Q) V J LO J Co CN J N J N .-I LO -i J tf) J M J CO J CO J CO J _1 r.^ U LC ' N En Er- H � L O N ° E U N w a)� U w in C Q ~ L y OL L226 ,� G ` d C O O m C v v E E d E O -°° ° c CD -a F cu Ei H m a 2 E L s a) A L6 7 N 6) f6 m °) V Z o 00) E >, a 44) m a) o a°i as Q O E E c 0 (T c E c o N E EO- O E N O y O L U O U O U O E C N N E E O i C CA O \O N -p O C.) vi N C 0) N (9 @ >�` N C U`O E C V O� O CD U V N N E Q N Cali U r; .� U U O N Y N @ C U f0 T p g a) N N 'UCD w W C C y U "O L CL E 3 .Q N V) N (NO m CD O r V O � r- CD ch CT P- r N co N to r co (fl m CD (D � O O r 6 A V 6 O 4 m co co Co CV (h N O, r CM O N C� (D (O 00 V O? t _ I� _ _ _ O r- � ti CD (O r O co (fl O O O CO (D O — x a� t6 a� U U LL to O z O O (fl CA r CV r M V O O (C') C' V r d O 0 0 � O 0 CD CD CY) 0 CN CO 0? 00 U? O O r O CND T (fl O (O CN CO CD CD (D CNO O (D (D (O � t O V 00 CV O W Cn Cp CO OP coco 0? W W N d O 0 0 r O r O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O r r r (D r (D r r r I'- r r r r r r w O CO (0 (D CD O (D co � O O O (O O N O O _U •> M V) m M co co co O CA L O O O O O O d O O O O O C. O O O (n N N N N N N N N N CO W V ( co co CO t� 7 O O O O N 'O N N N N N O �' O N M N W O M O O O O j CD O - O 0 0 (U C y C C 4 C N C Q C C C O C c- C O cooO O O O O O O Y O •` O G O `O O M 'X U 'X m 'XX 'X 75 LL m 'X ~ 'X _O 'X (D 'X N W V a) LO N N O N V N I� N mN 41 M N CIO J CO J CO J N J N J (O J J N J .J N � m CO CO �_ N c (0 IB L O y J J U N N � y � L C Q C. O 'a -a d c y C O c c E f6 m d y R N `o m a� E J c c_ j F L) `° Y d :: 9 } d W E > (� a- R CY V O Y w_ d •� d f0 c OL v t .,d.. d z z u w m a i- ¢ m` co E o .� O V cV _ m E E 0 O E 0 U O E ,pu`/ O 7 U) b3 (O� U V Q) Oru f6 •� N C m O G N N U U 7 di �� � v 0 00 L? V ch M C W R LL N CD Z CD o d � N N C p M N N O N c0 (0 CO t u? °? co O � (.0 co co c0 0 0 0 0 d rn rn rn U LCD (� (n 00 W w' 7 W C CD O w N C) H d < Q < L a a �, 00 0 (D 0) _1 J am E N cz N 0 0 E C � GJ N c N CD a � _ t F � L N d r U- `�° L) °o. E 0 z a) d E o E U O N Y EO E O C O O O E_ U E p N Cl �p n ` U w N N O fl' U L E — E O 'O C!) — O o c o o f p E o r .m N o m T o 0 U •IQ l.�J m m p I6 01 O N 76 N m .N E O .��n p a NOn a > O tQ ) �1 f77Lp @ ) m � �\ (D N C a) U °) NN Y V c 3 _ `m m °' o0 o ° ° E a) o 2 E 0)W C E O) Z--� L - U d Y O. N N N O to LO W 00 O MO ("J N (00 (OD Or O V (MD (0 m co M M O (D r M co 00 (M N Nc-- N r O N O O co C) 00 0) M V 0000 N CO V r O (fl C? 0? Q) M di rco 00 C° °J r� r 00 00 00 00 r MC? (fl W p) Oro Oro r co r (fl W )C a) CD N 3 N N N N N U U U U U LL N Ul X Z co f r CO CO M U) M O 00 N � ". m o O N (rO 7 p O (N M O O CO 00 N � � O (fJ O O O O O r M � N * O (O N M r M r O r f1U r (O O C? M O '� r M �' N N (D N N CV (D CV O d) L6 d) 00 co co (p M co r (O (fl co O r O 00 M r co W (o Cb 00 CD N b0 M M m (D (p CO Mi Cp 0 N V r N _ o _ _ r CO 4) co O OO OJ 00 O M M 00 co °0 M M co W O tD c0 r L r CD r r- r r r r r r r r r r (D r r L U L 3 L U L L L U L L 3 L L 3 v .d: (o r 00 r r 00 (D r (D co co fB O O O O O O O O O O O 0 N N N N N N N N N N N wQ v rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn rn 0) m W co It L CO co M M M 00 M co M (U CM0 0 0 CD o O o O O •F� a) C:) O O N N N O O O O O O O O O N N N 6 N N N N N N N N N ■� E E Q N O C) O *k m O O O 'O N N N N N N - N > N N a) N m N N N "O N -° N O N N N apj N T N 7 N C N O a' r N Ul Cl O m O °) ° O O O O 0 0 C O a) o � co r o O y o Q Q Q o Q Q Q in Q m Q > Q Q Q 2 o o ° ¢ (n Q m L Q m � E � Q : ui O Q o O p p o c c c c y c E c N c N c E ¢ m c a .y (n o 0 0 3 o 0 0 0 0 o E o o m o m N o ' Q m rn o m rn n o m .01) a°i o ° °) m °) 2 °) °) o Y c m c c — = c c c c c 00 c p o m F Z N 00 LLJ DO N N N cm O O N (C) N d' N O N N N O N C0 N N ° C m N N Q00 J V J _l (`') CO N J r J N J U') _l rf J W N Eww CL .. W C Y/ C L o O O N N U1 A( •yr J J U J y ,+ d V Q y 'a T Je y y ■ — d mO Q 5 c aai a c m E a 0 H p 'c Y U'3 0 a 0 H Q r m Y y m o m a w d U U) L U) c c E E cm CD E m o CD o m m :' > s N > a 3 d W Z m m r d r m a) o o m o m z C9 U- I- -j in In > CP E C N C O 2 * N .D O E * 4l 7� _ EO > N O_ O V N C M O U E 'X O L U L V O E O 7 c Y Ud 0) �EE,, °i � o 0 m O U .O L C E E N O ° c o �' 0 3 a3i 6 N W O Q a n. 3 L) ' � (D of O N m O OW CY) 0) M W c0 O N LO O M N O co U Ln M CDcoM W O D) U N D) p C6 In V CV _ _ f- of _ _ _ I` W I� O O M W W O 01 N OJ � r _ t` r- _ _ X a) N N O N LL O �N fA X z O C) N CO O .O M O O V co m N N (D M C' N I� D) CO (MD M co (9 C? Ib N c0 IT W C� 00 co � co M co coIL C14 r co (D h Il- Q0 CO (0 � o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N (D m m m m m L.1 •> (D N _ (D co LD D) co V co 11J C) C) O O Cl O O O O O O O O O O O O O (n N N N N N N N N N N N N N NO ON N N N 'O N N N O O -O O C', N M N N N C N O N R N 'O CD 'N N N N N O O O O O O N O O J O m O C) c 0 _ C) O Q Q fn Q > Q w Q c Q Q Q > Q Q C, Q N _ e i = o c m e o c c o c vi t= c = c QN o o o o o 0 0 o ° O cn o o o X X X •X N •X X X (D •X (D •X O 'X X X N O O N (D N C) N � N I� tv 'l' N O N O N N /iL�� O i (Y Y O Q, ~ O O O L -0O O L N o o E N S R R 22 L N (p U N U E y c = y vl o, OL Q a rn u d c m R /7 N Y 7 m IL4 T R G1 U O � L p d t c m = L. w aNi R E m R v F /L O CD T � S a CL N Z � - W d U lb. V w a_ Y LL E t6 L C LL "a •C E > m o inn a> 3 C N a r Wl4 a1 7 = ti 7 y R N > Q G z �° Li i= a v o° -°� vsi -°o LY E p cc E lJ U U E o 3 ` aa11 �- N D V N D O N Y E (V fl O rn OU p N C C > U E a L Y � a C W L � L O co ti N O K p LL U 6 O CO 00 z G7 N 00 LI? s03 C d 00 F 3 s 4. co (D R O O N N d a5 a5 C.1 LN O O (n CD N O D) N N a N p o p O a) Q o Q c n Q 3 O N O p O __ D1 X X N J J� d N c cm ca CIO � c � 3 y w\ L W Y 3 H > � O a, E Y y 14 a F- to C m C C d W A > > LL z m = C b O O C N � N GO � c v rn 0 m X LL U y 0 cfl o Z v � 0 O N C 0 co co . ID co co Q d co O N I- ~ I- L L w O O O R O O O C N N N 0 rn rn rn V L (n CV CD N N NN N NO O NO O � o a C 0 O Q 0 0) `Y O X X N J J N N L � G7 L = d o � E 0 U E O E E a U N 0 m cv o co m ° @ o) U 0 No M m 03 o ��011� E Y U� 2) o o `v O O D V P X m L) D p O) � O C: EUp O O C E E X C C (D y C O O l(�J) 03 L N (On Y N Q C Ocm aci m E �- 'U 'V O) N N (6 O to 7 L W E E M o. a .FD -o L 'm m a Y co (ND O M O V r- � � � � co O O Cl) I- co 00 I.- CV r co O LO M O (D V Il- M OO 00 co W .. X a) a) 5 o (C U U U U U LL fN O O 00 V r OO O N V M (D Co N 00 N d) Cfl d N O M O N CEO C, co ONO cq O O CNO V tM 0 CD 0 CO N CND co C) Cfl O coN N coCNO M (o co CNO O (D Z 0? M 07 N a0 00 00 00 CL co d W OJ 00 M M 00 00 M W 00 OO O W r- FD3 s L r s s r 3 v o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N d W 0) CD M M V L 0 O O O N O O O N O O O cc O O N O N ON N N N N O N fA N O O N V '�Y V I- 'ITy 'CI- 0 V N N N O N N N N N U N N N N 6 O O O O -0 O O O p) O O O (D O ayi Q — Q o Q L) Q o Q o Q m Q Q Q Q c Q O 'a N C C C f6 C U ■� Q "LO O F'C Oc .Yn Oc C mC C U) cmE O O C OC i OC OU) O0 O O L0) ) O O) 0) N C C C: Z C: I c S C C x x 0 �t 'X x x x ti O N 1� O) 1 O C' N O N M O) h N O) co N (n J Ln J J J�- c- N J N J N J � J CO M J � J J c- , Q) � dq L O M L C C C N N L � o o o fn N U n Ip - v C 0 N` d CIO (71 0. C O Y Q. O R i •� N vi 3 o o d In o N g C U C � C N C noN p y 'C U J U �n C t C S C f6 G�J Y/ U C al C U' O CU N M LG f� dOf cn c w c LLI 'a R a c Y m X C Z O U d C 0 N 7 (D U Q G Q 'w 0 (7 (n a (D \ AEn \ § C ) 0 \ \ co CO \ ) \ _ / D / / \ ( / \ o a § 5 = 7 7 in ° / . E f d % E $ D 2 2 ® / cc / 0 ƒ } L y \ \ / \ / \ \ \ \ \ § 00 I- co \ \ § (D m )LL . 0 2 = } CO / { \ \ @ ƒ \ / } § \ \ CO d \ � / \ ) / \ \ k \ \ \ \ . \ 2 LO Q % G \ . ? ,. q @ a g \ 3 x a + a = + c o & / \ \ § cn. E @ ± @ @ § ƒ @ @ . § \ i \ � \ \. \ 0' \ � \ k \ \ gM coCD ) 0) CL 0 \ 0) . . � •� g _ _ ± / _ : o c e : \ y (0 � It \ p 3 / n / 2 / \ § \ � R V t \ � co 2 � � © § 7 � � • $ 2 . / [ ; > m m e : . 2 % w { ) r- -J M 2 / & � o u / ) ƒ ° ƒ f / k § 0 U- k 0 co E E c 0 CD E X O N U cn E o E o C N EO •> °U c O U pv co ON E 0 c t O Y a)O m E C N U OEE O E 2) L L > mV O pp CO E O (fl m cN. cO•- NON c c f6 m Mn a) U 3 E f° o E 3 0 > a CU Vy T� 00 Nca 2 t r- c � En c c c a 0 3° W E m ° r- c ° L Y a 3 o m E OD LO C Cl CO M V CD W r co � M 0 U. U U �MM W fn M O O Cl) D) CD { co co co O N c0 M CO V N M � a Z CO O 00 N CO V C) 00 M CO N CDT) M s. N M O (DV CD Ln CO ti W O CD O d r M O CO C? CV N M N tO M O S-'� 0 N N O N N 11 co V co (0N co N N M O CD co (D n (D CD co N (fl � O O aJ Co CD O O O L C? OP 0 00 zt 03 00 CD 00 c0 O, 00 W 00 CL f� t- _ _ i _ _ O0 D7 N W o0 m 00 M 00 co O N M O) 07 O0 co 00 C3 o L t 3 v L L 3 v Q b Q (fl co CD 00 (D M r N cu O o O o O O - O O O - .--i 0 N N N N N N N N N yr'. C) m a U •> CO fl- MO V 7 Cl) C, O _ M M Nco co O O O d O O Cl OCV O O OCV CD ON O O O N C) CD (n N N N N N N N N N N N O N N ^~-' N e-- Cl) - a- N 6) M c- U U N Q) _ 00 a)M N OCV N N N a) '� N N NO N N N p N N N O 'Y d- V V' c N '7 _ V It �T a) V- N 'IT c -'I- V V V) W W N N N N N c 0 N N N N 7 N , NNN a) N C:) p 0 .Q) O _ O a) Q a) O O C) O •p O c 0 c C) J C) CD U O y C: C:) ¢ ¢ N ¢ Q ch ¢ � ¢ N ¢ m ¢ > ¢ a) ¢ ¢ ¢ Q m oO a) = NpnC NC c O c) c UEO Jm O ~ > pa3 ;0 p Om 0) 0) 0 C;) >> O O c)) U O) °) wL` p N LL ~ N la N V O N n cl, N Oc .9 'ct N N �■ J N J N J 1l- J �- C) CD J �- J N J �- J O) J N J �- J N J LO J � z MO dA a O CL N •= co N N m N N N O O c c N L C y N L m L d L p p Q a) U O rr 0 co E E S E E E m n E m e (D n ca a) ° CD m a) (D (D co m a� s m ° m o y v J J cn E E '� E E E J :DE C) >16 '� L■ .. cA U M x 0 cm o w 0 -m L ■� °� UCm>ca, Qca 4) 2�, c RE) M O >, U am o m 0 . _ c = y E aNm ¢ U (n m C-) U -2 7Y =OX yNa) _m5) O xp � C) Um Oa = c '' LU m 0 cm > tL WG (n .0m =o . EE" d 'a a) U Q iG > m m '� Z. z tD CO w = z a �° m U) E o o) o C Q U O p N E _ > Clv� O) (6 E O .m O O N E E o " E q) O C OU O O N 0) .5 O O m c U _ o c E 10 N 'O U y C '(6 X aay`` N O ��011) y O�. N O E qE` ��O`) 0) V C V w C CL O E O O O N U - O O O O E y W� N tt. E v c " Y > E LO _> M O O d) N N M 0? M V to 0) (o �- N O M 00 U C7 lLo N CV Ni OP ll� 0) R M O M M I- r- r � co m M U U U LL bA r Cl) VD y X N 0 M CO (`� co N f� f- M C:) CO M M CO d O N N d1 M m 'O tfj C::, M C CY) NO O V C? M ,C 00 CO W O 07 N O C9 W cM C � M oo W 00 co M W .� d 0 0 .a+ co O co I- CO co h (fl r - U R O O O O O O O O O V) N N N N N N N N - N �.. d M W O) 0) M a) M yOy V � .> O (O V V 'c- O N O N to co co Z O O O L m O o 0 0 o O o 0 0 0 C) 0 (n N ` N N N N N N N N N N '� CO M co r- co4�' (D 85 V) co V 7 a O Q In O w O O O CD -O O O O Q O C) 3 7 Z) V co N N N N N N N N N -0 1, O N 'O N C N N C N C N y N N N N N C N N C N � N C N N N W N C:) CD 0 y 0 O O _ O O N 0 0 0 0 C C) O C) a) O CD 'O y Q Q Q @ Q Q j Q Q Q Q Q > Q Q Q Q Q CZ3 v U 0 Q T ui o O C C C C C C C y C y C y C N C y C C O O -O0 O O O O O MO O N O O O O Q o $ m m@ rn m CDm o) o C j C C 0- C t- C C C In C O C I� X X E— X X (� X X X X N X X N 'X d 'X w, '[Y N Ih N N co N N co N N N tf) N N N M N CO O O ~O wW J �— J OJ J M J t0 J tf') J �— _I � J N J N _) � J J O W � U � d4 ■m E !� M ^y E O ..�. O +� ~ w S O O L N N y y AR L cn y E U .0 y Q) rn ■� �- (D L Q' cf) p) y y � L E w E d L C Y O 7 M ° C d. = Z N U E o V R J 0 O V V O C1 C) N y L N d o m cCL n m a Q ° } Y d° o >, > cn w o'R � £ � 'a � M 'Z 2 m Z LLL m y J Q E O U 3 E E O C E E 0 *E O O U N yr fn OU V7 OU ` @ — N E E c°) -u I-10 � o O7 � o x �a o W 01 c n c o M 1E E c O CO O (6 ":I- y O O) y N C ° U (o co E E o c W C J J 'O Q Q 0) i O ON 0LO O N OO co N N V ' OJ N O) LO L? W OP N ti co co r x N N N m U U U U LL y 0 co LO CD N Z m Cl) co � �_ W F OCD d m (�O ( W N h m (Np (D (p 07 N t co W co 4 O W O O? Qco d t C m co w CC) co t- m (o ca o 0 0 0 o E N N N N N N V •L LO h O LO d' O U') O O a) N O O O O N O 0) O M O O N co N N N N N N y O 0 0 N O p) O O 0 0 -O O a (D O E O O U-O O O U) O O) O) O O) OC CC OOC)_ Q Q)M co m N N 0) co N O 0 CO J (M J ":r J CO J LO J r J O) J O d C d � P5 y y y C � d V] w1 y W � a L C = O y. d ° T V y y O r 07 o y ;; O m a v (� ii rn 0 H d t7 m U) O R aD (n C 0. > E E (n c d 't Z 0 z w c� a c� m° 0 m X O a) C C O vJ 0U N N O i>,a� 0 v� N /@ U LJ U 'V O� 07 y. 0 o Y m = v E N of 0 N ) U (6 W @ U C — O M CO O co O V tf) O O O L W. � OJ x .. `. LL O O N X O o C N co co Z O L. O I, M N d O lf� N D1 O C? L N C '? op o? d00 W w O co co O O 0 N N N N N U_ > to LO to L d fn N N ON m L O arL CD 2 a) O N c U V O o O L Ocq O V U V d' 0-d' 7 V 3 y 0 0 V O � O � O N O d 2 d U 2 3 N O O O '6 O N O N O O ao 0 L 0 0 ■m C C C C C LO C low !R, J J J J Nt J O J V 3 W N cn cL) w y IS �, E m 3 u aa) y v y c E -a F• d o u- x o 2 °; E o O .� LL c v E Q E U d M R O H 0 a a E 'o > C C C C EO m > O m O �7 ON 0 U C f6 (� E C O - C O L p. N C C CD O O Crc V 3 �` L x C E co E m m :E N 0 N N Q 'O Wco E C N L U 1^' Q a) N U O) � IT 0) N � LM � 0 � W LO I- O � X N N N N mU U U U LL y <) M O I-- CO L� m ( V � Z co 'T LO ON CO d) M t0 O) CC) O d n O r 0? O r O) W r M O O ccoo c(o (.0 cNo � m co co � m 0? cv 00 0? h_ co W CV Q w co co (0 co � a)O O O O O O O N N N N N N N d ,a5 m W U i cO V V d' d' O - (n N N N N N N N N w, N Cl) M h h 1� M M W � p 0 O O O O O O 0 N N N N N N N - N N N N N 0 V 7 d' V 7 D It "It a) V N � I- 7 31 N N N N O N _ N NNN N C N cz fp O CD CD O O O _ O O O 0 0 O d O Q O Q N Q Q U) Q Q N Q U) Q V1 Q O Q Q Q M O C m a Zo- CG E 2i -O : Vl :E 01 C C J C C Q O O y O C - -d O 'D O m m O O ' c mW m .N m 'x LL 'x m 'x E 'x x 'x LL 'x 'x x .Z 'x N 'x bA s O O N (O N N O O O O C N O O O N N N CO N to N z ry N �jW C G N M y N_ cn ++ H c L n c � c 9 c n ay _ N -0 f6 E E N E w E ;jr E J E U E J E J E — E U) N .'•"i C O y M U w y d O Y 7 N O) A C N N O Q d o n o Y E o o d chi d aNiE- c x - O R n m U S x a� N N N N f6 O 7 C N W LL Z m N l4 N O 0 O c> U7. > 2 LL I— �- d >, U U) a C LL J G ca c m L) E E O O O C U E U E U N O O O . O lD U O Vr (E E o a E E o (6 O "" @ m N .2OU N j m C.) �0)1 OO 00 E p) 7 N f6 (� O O O T 6 'O C. O p VY` m E _c �_ O a) L u) O Y m _ E E E � m N W C C = co m t- O O V O M O O f` O O M V N N t- O Ul) r co N O O 01 & N Lo r- Z= O O O M tp 0, CO CO N O co OJ OP O? OI 113 W �; co W x Q) N N N cc U U U U a LL "+ c3 r+ 71 co rn O rl- o o uo Lo b Z N C,-� tV V N � O d O m M O) CO N U C N O co co cNo co o cco co o .0 W W N O, 00. V] Q cn co co w co ti QH 0 ON N N O O x 41 m rn U � > to o (o M tf) L d O O O O O O (n N N N ` N N (D (o co N CD O 4°O O O O O N N O O O O m O 0 0 O ca L Q cG N O -O : 2 Q 2 Cn O @ o •o o o -8 a o, c �, o m m �' o �' s m O U) . � . o . � o mQ � (D CDQ) � � ( � 0 N �. w, J J N J N J M J J J W N .� cn tz i V F b3 Q 0 0 0 - Q 0 a c L L 0 L a) W a J J J E J J E E Cn E U O c H d n .� 4) o 72 0 co Q = d C C m O! C C f0 ^y 0 LLJ N d O 16 d E p c p .0 E.. N R C_ > t C m = U om a s V m E a ELd a E m Q m L n a v Z ca z U U y 0 d "- Q e- Z R d � J O W E O U O) t U N Cca Y ON E U , O U>� O) o� N J Y_ E O >, w N W U E N CL O r M O) d) O O 0 co O � W I� cu LL y Z N (O O m W M 'cY C\jLO O O W N C 6 co Cl) m N N O (o � m LO coco t N op OP 00 0? C? CL C W c0 N o� O N w co co (o (o co O o 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N L7 > CO C. fn rn coCD m N m (0 — — co O O N N N N N N N N = N N O N N N O (n O C O O O2 N cG $ Q O M O CO O O O j O O >B U � co N N N O) � V J J M J co J N i J /O QJ V a 3 N Vl H h R �, C ww11 N U Y ■� R C O LL V '7 N ^� O U 10 V LI £ U U) AO z > Y w w Q G 1i = v LU a / 0 � E % CD E § 7 E - § a = § / co j ) ) » f \ CO to 2 � 2 \ 70 \ . \ G . . j 0 } @ § ° S J o $ _ _\ } § \a \ \ \ \ . c \ C cli 2 - r 0 CD «< . / k cq - \ . o @ = o . \ \ & @ j \ § 7 0 o J § m § _ k � / \ ) k \ )� ƒ / . \ \ \ ( \ / \ \ \ \ 5 e 7 E % \ 2 / . / \ @ / ± ) / j @ \ E b 2 j li (D & 3 \ < 7 \ < . 8 / § ) } 3 \ \ ) ) 7 LL $. § $ ] 2 ) 0 \ . `o c 0 rn c E x E °o a) O > fl U cu C f6 C O a E U E N (6 ? O 7 O E N U N O C E h U OU C" Y O (rZ� '� N G .� O O 7 ' vN E O Co �0 72 ui N -O O C i y t V Q `� N N L6 N O O N N U O L (V p E m m o E > a P— N CD W co m co CO O M C? co O? M O N M Cl) m ll d N 'll co N W co N C co O) W m � M co � O Y co LO 00 O x N N N N O N 3 (6 U U U U U U LL y O W co N d co Z O Ih O d m O CO W O N O M M C N W Cfl CV M M O co co cfl ao N m CO (D rn co o� o� co O co 00 6) G- N am � W � M W w � � � F— :3 co m ti m m � N N N N N N d m W m a) V .i d ON N O O O O Cl Cl(n CV N N N N N N c- tzz co LO W co LO W C w' N N N 7 N C N 'O N N C N W fp O O O C O N O m O O j 0 *+ ; � a ma ma > a a> a � a ma as o O O a • '6 C � C O C N C C C C O C Q � O = O O N O N O O U O O C N 5) CIO X 'ZrX O d) N (fl N co N O N O co N O N O N y J � J J J bA bq O ca C C C J J J U O L: N _ LA a d O C_ R C m O C d d y T m N U) d E O R W C N Z N 2� C O •� m E o E U O N U U E 00 N '@ N 0 NO E L p7 E C) 1? 4 0 faah,, (Q O N V U U U N o U a 0 1 O � E U v ` i ` jj O 11 T (��611 C ` U @ U @ U A4 V 0 V A fO (6 0 C E Y N 0 0 V C O E O 0 m N 0 Q C N Y Y 3 O @ 2 0 LbE Y E U .� a F- E �60 .3 E af0i W co a) U) N O) LO O . N O h co D) (0 N C?m co O c+7 O a7 CD � co m (0 N of co N co X N N N N a 3 LL U1 M 0 O) (o fl- CO O O O CO N f� M ICJ r O M O Z (o co O (CO M 0) V C� ti O CO N 0) O O M co d (O V co � M O W 01 to d' O O O L � O O (O to (No coo O) � (o CO COO O CO (Mo r Lo (D � r t W N a1 N r_ W I� W � N CV (O N Q r ti co co U o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N d 0 W 6) 0 m V _ .L (o O M cO O (o M N V 7 d o O O O CD CD ON O O O (n N N N N CD N N N O O 0 O O O O O N N > N N N N N N N N N N O V V V "T Z V d' V q,P V D V �h V N -O N Q N N D N N N t N '6 N N N N y O (p O D O O _ O O O D O m O O O 0 C) co d C Q 0 Q 'O Q Q (n Q Q Q G Q Q' Q Q Q C Q Y C E C C O C C W C U C C C L-• C 0 C Q O C O O O U O 0 O O O O L O O O i O a D O) (` O O) L O m O O O) C O) 0 0) p O) 0) O N In e c m e o c = c � ,c c ca c c c c U (D N (D N N N (D N 'd' N m 2 N 1� N 0 O N (0 V J J �- J d' _1 O J N J d' J D) J N J (D J J (D J y.+ W O O F' L O o> E C 0 N L (6 0 U C � V L T (9 0� .. T > 0 (n a ■N d _le .5 a c 0 p o U Y E d Y C (D V ai = aUi (D t U i A ? z w H a d @ s 2 m U LL V a) a L U (q m W £ cn U (6 C y E c E U) d d r Z E U OU E N @ E C O U @ E (d U O O E O O yr E O U _ C @ f6 U E q OU U N O C @ E @`0 0 �' o m e 0 c E N N >` 0) ��O`` C N CD �L�`` O C E a` � O` (�) V V O @ 3 O V N0 _0 !� ` `pJ` m co bD Q m J m@ E 3 X a m @ W c3 3 E CL @ o ct' N (6 tb O O O N co O) V (o M v t� C, V O V U') (O co m N tl- m to W 'ITm O (h m c0 IT m r.- CO O) !� m V' C? C?CDO O M m � O) r- W (O O N O 0 N co N Co O O co N 0 m 6) tl- � m C? � co r to � N c0 to (O N CO C? t� O CV m co t.- r- t` I- m CO ti I- x N N CO N N N N N N N N tm U U r- U U U U U U U U U LL O to m Lo (D CY) m (o (O O (O c`) O O co (0 co O) V Z ON 'r to - M to co f- W N m � N 'V co co m co C) m m N r 6) m m N O ; N O Oo N m O (MO (OO � O O O O cNo N O (No O (NO cNo ccoo m OD N r S Co m N C? f` O CO W r O Oo CJ o? C? C? N (O Q d O m D7 O O OO CO 00 O 07 O O DD W O W N O N F- .4: m m Co r— r— co co m m co ti . o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, o N N N N N N N N N N N N 4) (O (O co (D c0 co c0 CO CO c0 CO c0 •> (o O to m0 o O L d 0) cq O N O O N cli N O O cOV O N CO co ( c- co (D M (D CO (D �- O O O NN C N N ON ON N -O N N N N V V 'It V C ' ',t It �C)OO O OOOO OU) O O � O o O� aQ � a � a � aaaa a a ¢ o■W� Q OmC m m mC C U > T O O J O O (D O -0 m OCO) OC 000X)0 C` C C •� C ` mCOC L = O L U U)J XJ X X > X X (O N O N Va) @ N X Cl) JN ( @ LN m X �>N>@, OJNCmCf coJt-- J I- J N J t'- J c0JOOJ VJ N co J � MtiO.r J ti E 'O V H T M U .2 ~ N O L O O> C � n @ .D v 2 U U L � Q 7 O y y O _ A O T O N O O d E d O O x j O CL ` 3 w CL o LL 0 V (D @ 4) ` -`O C 'D c 2 F Z Y J U to J 2 fA C7 cOi E E 0 0 .0 U C O U U O `pv U E�� CL O V v0 E O . OC U U LLU CO Q N EC @ O C0) E Nm N 0E co �� O C m p) O C T O co 0) @ m y G Q) N m 0) O ` ` a W - U O to U 5 m to N N Y @ W cu? m .N o O Y 0 E L N Q O) 0) "O tN V Oo coLb co m m n co (0 (O m � L co r- O� L( M N 00 Lo 00 m CO O LS7 V O N co CD �V N CoW d' M I? CAD (D C) h W CO 00 Oi co OJ co N r N Lb co r.- (D co rl- LO 0) r- r- mU CD CD U U U U U U U U W LL to O O (p N O O 0) 1- O (o 7 00 (� c) CO O Z LO W d) O L O D M C co D 0 7 00 ti co n (D (D N O) O r- r O O r N O N LC) o? 7 CO O coN 7 (D (0 (D O LD co � CNO � (D M N LN S 00 W 05 � a0 CU Lb N N N o? N V• � W (4 Q 00 rl r- d O, 00 00 0o W r- 0' OJ 00 O W m h L U L L L L v U L L L L L 4+ to r- r- r � t` r- r-- r- r- � n t` c4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N NN 4) co U .> (D (D (L) (D M V (D L() O M O a) O O O O N O O CD O NO O O N N N N N N N N N N N Lf) h M Ln r r co N co r r 00 M M tb (D O N > Q m M N N N N m N N O N O N U) W ON w, 3 -o a� M Co 0) p W _ N N N N N N N N C Q N w o m o o Q Cl o 0 0 0 o CD <o a o N O S Q O a� p L c •o m e m C c s > c E c � U) C m C 0 Q (6 O N O •J 0 :E 0 a) 0 0 U N 0 E •D C O N -� O N o o ?) C1 `C lT w O m C (n m U O m O m (n C) d1CD _ (fl x LL 5 X X a) (') x � N N 7 (D axi co O �- axi O cn v m a,) m �r m m a $ m o i co J co J N J co J W Z (D J N m m _l co m zt J N m r- J Y/ N C w .� E E R E E ° � c � CL _ c w Ca E N O tC C m C d Y d CDw m C -� y w m d "' F c6 O ` N U U LL 3 O > R A R - Wm Lc m m m 6 a) = a mN o 0 E > d c m R Q c = ?i Lea c s a 3 c d Lo c d .N m O >, m > E d z c� w w L) Y a -i o rn U E N E U >+ O U C O U E p CD CD 57< o 0p O p > E C E _O O > N E o) ° = rn O m �EE11 0 9 aa>`` ) m E V y V a) C•� NI O O C T E a) a3 N to U ..LJ O C co Co W O N N E U Y Y) LCD d O r (D (O O 1- 4 LC) O O) LO � CO M h r OJ X a) a) La U U U LL OJ O N O O M O co CD CD O Lo O OJ CO (.0 CO In V d W � 4 ON O OP Cn O 1 l� N N N t0C) (0 CD O N N O co O CO OJ CO Lp N CO O CV S 07 00 OJ N N N O co G r y W co � W W U L r- 3 L U L yam+ CO CO co CO CO (fl Cfl 0 N N N N N N N U •L O FD 00 0)O O O m � N N N C> N N � W L F- a) � O Q CA V 'It - V 7 dN' V V 7 V N O N N N aj N N N N C N _ y CD O O > O CD O -p C. a) O a3 H c00 Q C Q C Q Q Q Q 'O Q N Q Q Q 2 c Q csi Q X LO X jL X N�c o o o E o J o a) o 0 0 o 0X mO NL) Xm m = m N a LOaQ XO Xa) M X V a) CO a) O > V] ww11 (O J M J J CO J CO J O J J J N W � cz E E d v O Po a CD o o aE) a) E U E cn E N to A ` d a) L o E U O CD E E as C7 H ns 0) i L •C ¢ N lYl N m m p Q ¢ d as m c Cl O R as m c E c y tY CD 'a a v M p E N T) N '= C C > Q _ a) F Z U' W Ln U to Y 2 J E 0 U U @ O O E �(0) U U E U U E E C C U N M C N p O _ O .� O U co @ U U .@ O) O « '0 N E CM Co��E — U Jp V E V 0) V 0 > 00 O N Cn _ O 'O O = N@ L /,U�l @) N C y L h U @ @ � @O O UN N 0U U 'O GW N > N C L L ..O L U 'U _O L W 3 C L L L E E U m t-CD Om d' O O 00 M V) 00 O O co N tC) co co N 0 r- N r- O (`') N CO Ln O MC? O O 00 00 W W r O tl- CO 00 X a) m aD ) a) co U U U U U LL d. fn � Z (D M W LLo 00 co Cl) p W � 00 CJ L O d (00 W O O N O N O r � OO LOO CO O O CNO O coN O Oi CNO N N CO O co L 00 00 00 00 U') 0? 00 - 0? Cfl 1` N' 0?CL OJ d 00 .W 00 00 - O O c0 00 N O c0 ' t� O � r t.- O ti tom- ^ h v L L L 3 L L v .4+ ct' CO co CO r co 00 (O 0 N N N N N N N N CY) 0) Cy) m CY) •> O N V V m O O O O L O O O co O O N N O N m N N N w, O W00 O (1) O O M O O N O N N N N N N N N N 0) N > N N ,It V O d' V N U) N N N N N -O N O N N C N N �� fn @ O C O O M O O co O @ O Q -O O O a) O O y 2 Q o Q Q 0 Q (D Q o Q 0 Q o Q Q Q Q m Q U U) Q0) O N O @ O L O O 'O 'x WN 'Cx C O L V) >) mU_ 0) 0) LOO 0 Q mx x x x x N N N 0) 0 N O N N 0) c) - co ,t x` N J c- J N J J LO J N J -i e- U J 00 J c- .J J y tz M ca Q w c _ o o v o O m ca m 0 0 0 m y d CIO r- tm y t L Q -O 7 47 Q C C � C m 16 V C N C U @ 0� y ifs N = > N y d a U .� y L) E 0 J .� N a) CL Y E- Lea a O J w J li u: Q w 0 m cn >, U Q a c) �, U) m E a ` u �' 0 m m La d r Z Z J c�S d' U U O) 0 C C d C 0 O v^ C �O U N ON O N 0 U E C C '0 N > 0 Y p C O N �U)1 O N -O (�>>�1 Q) L O C a �1 0 brp L V O V .N C • ""' C (6 "a N Y N a) @ y W E m Y Y 3 C 0 O CC) 7 LO co co co IT IT � O f� N 00 I- ip coN N y co � V co � - CYJ 0 N U - - X N U U U Z f6 U LL (D y O CO Z O CDrh M r co N Cl) LO Z L(7 O O O O j- LO O M OCD d N N O � IT (NO N N O CO co O (NO (O (NO (O to cNo cc (fl O CNO (fl (No (N) o� o? o� r? (0 oc CO 0? oo � co o? Q _ d w ram+ CO co t` r- M M t4 O O O O O O O 0 N N N N N N N d W 65 a a00 W U •L' O O CD O to O U) O N O N N O N N N N O V O O O O O N O CD CDO O N N N N N 7 N O N N N N N N �P 7 V d' O -'I- C d' O V 't CD 't 't V V N C N N N N N C N y N 7 N N N 'O N I/1 fn O N O O O > O O O C O C) O -O O O O N C Q > Q N Q fn Q ¢ Q Q Q Q N @ O 'a O C O NL. O N C C U C O C C O C O C C C y C O (ti O O b O CO O L O N O -O O ` OY O O O Q m o> m -a m U m g� m � c a� m a) 0 LLcy)O ID Cl) aXi � aXi o axi v aXi M axi o aXi � aXi Q axi N aXi � axi N J J J J N J V J M J N J LL') _1 RS L � O M d EL W y O y C ~ W d C w+ a) ? N OO a+ 16 L i _N O C C O n d E T L .0 ± J R y a 47 C y N C C O y M a y ) 3 d d d > C c Z v'n -Oi f'> `1� C7 0 Q z z d ) \ \ # E \ \ ƒ / \ \ 2 § « ƒ \f f . / 5 / 2 . . . m § 7 \ } / co § \ . } a) . k It $ ° @ 9 . o ) 7 7 E 7 k Lo OD \ . k ° ° $ 3 p ) \ / . . g m . a a \ \ \ Lo 2 \ \ \ / « I R g ) @ \ U) . . $ E \ [ / k \ / « e $ 7 I g CDg 3 ) j / \ 2 j � � % � o � CL _ z (nCL 2 m ¢ (n ] E O U L N N •@ O N O O E U O r ON O E L U O y V U C p O O � U O Lb NO 3 ? LO m V c7 O W W m U y O O rn r- 0 co M I? N O O co ( m t M CO W C) W Q_ d H 3 r L 3 L v rl- co co D o N N 04 0 d rn rn rn rn U ' r L Cl) O O0 O cq N � W � O O N M� O N O p 0 W �5 I IDE E Q O > O .0 O - 9 m °A N co 0 ,3- N dq W J J J � y ca U M _d L vi Q ti m d i. (n Q Z AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Water & Sewer Commitments &Adjustments PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: David J. Pinsonneault, DPW Director C.1 SUMMARY: Water& Sewer Commitments August 2016 Cycle 9 Water Bills $460,122.57 Water& Sewer Commitments August 2016 Final Water Bills $38,455.69 Water& Sewer Commitments May 2016 Final Water Bills $4,660.28 Adjustments to Water& Sewer/WSAB meeting 8/4/16 ($ 33,221.97) SUGGESTED MOTION: Move to approve the Water& Sewer commitments and adjustments as noted above. FOLLOW-UP: Treasurer/Collector DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type Department of Public Works 1nS Town of Lexington Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds FISCAL YEAR 2017 < "N 9�" August 2016 Cycle 9 Billing ry ��GRANDTOTALS August 2016 WATER $451,514.12 $451,514.12 SEWER $3,502.40 $3,502.40 FEE FOR BEDFORD $5,106.05 $5,106.05 TOTAL: $460,122.57 $460,122.57 To the Collector of Revenue for the Town of Lexington. You are hereby authorized and required to levy and collect of the persons named in the list of woter/sewer charges herewith committed to you and each one of his/her respective portion herein set down of the sum total of such list. Said sum being: Four hundredsixty thousand, one hundred twenty-two doCtitrs era ,S / a And pay the same into the treasury of the Town of Lexington and to exercise the powers conferred by law in regard thereto. DIRECTOR & PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF SELECTMEN 9/26/16 Treasurer/Collector, Director of Public. Works, Water/Sewer Billing '? Department of Public Works 1775 Town of Lexington Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds aps FISCAL YEAR 2017 ANIL Iffr' AUGUST 2016 Final Water Bills IN FINAL$ WATER $24,349.31 $24,349.31 SEWER $14,106.38 $14,106.38 TOTAL: $3,8,455.69 $38,455.69 To the Collector of Revenue for the Town of Lexington: You are hereby authorized and required to levy and collect of the persons named in the list of water/sewer charges herewith committed to you and each one of his/her respective portion herein set down of the sum total of such list. Said sum being: Thirty-eight thousan our hundred fiflyfive d-offars and69100 And pay the same into the treasury of the Town of Lexington and to exercise the powers conferred by low in regard thereto. DIRECTOR Of PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF SELECTMEN 9/26/2016 Treasurer/Col lector, Director of Public Works, Water/Sewer Billing Department of Public Works HMIs Town of Lexington Water and Sewer Enterprise Funds FISCAL YEAR 2016 APFILM �+ MAY 2016 Final Water Bills N OtNALS r WATER $2,1 2l.10 $2,121.10 SEWER $2,539.18 $2,539.18 TOTAL; $4,660,.28 $4,660.28 To the Collector of Revenue for the Town of Lexington. You are hereby authorized and required to levy and collect of the persons named in the list of water/sewer charges herewith committed to you and each one of his/her respective portion herein set down of the sum total of such list. Said sum being: Four thousance six hundredsixty doffars and 8,100 And pay the some into the treasury of the Town of Lexington and to exercise the powers conferred by law in regard thereto. J4 DIRECTOR F PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF SELECTMEN 9/26/2016 Treasurer/Collector, Director of Public Works, Water/Sewer Billing f FY2017 t]15 ADJUSTMENTS TO WATER/SEWER AS RECOMMENDED BY THE WATER AND SEWER ABATEMENT BOARD APIX"Pr r PAGE 1 OF 2 WSAB 8/4/16 BOS 9/26/16 0300745700 7 Augustus Road ($155.19) ($500.43) ($655.62) 851746 2016 0200463700 127 Blake Road ($10.9 ($317.88) ($418.32) 847411 2016 0100112802 17 Bryant Road ($674.25) ($674,25) 827950 2016 0200474800 3 Countryside Village ($251.16) ($1,064,44) ($1,315.60) 847547 2016 0100170102 20 bawes Road ($178.35) ($178.35) 828687 2016 0200440200 10 17iamond Road ($614.79) ($2,002.33) ($2,617.12) 847090 2016 0300694100 19 Emerald Street ($196.32) ($604.00) ($800.32) 851103* 2006 0300890900 17 Fair Ooks Drive ($454.47) ($1,434.03) ($1,888.50) 853578* 2016 0300786400 40 Fifer Lane ($135.60) ($423.36) ($558,96) 852254 2016 02005086600 8 Fulton Road ($60.96) ($197.72) ($258.68) 847976 2016 0200527400 30 Grant Street ($72.84) ($221.1 2) ($293.96) 848242 2016 0200336700 17 John Poulter Road ($109'.95) ($457,06) ($567.01) 845730 2016 0100221800 18 Hilltop Avenue ($103.80) ($332.1 2) ($435.92) 843705 2016 0200381000 11 Ledgelawn Avenue ($21.72) ($71.84) ($93.56) 846313 2016 0100080600 7 Summer Street ($1,783.50) ($7,308.68) ($9,092.18) 841801 2016 0200319500 12 Warren Street ($85.20) ($367.61) ($452.81) 845466 2016 0300669000 6 Conestoga Road ($556.15) ($1,241,68) ($1,797,83) 850789* 2016 0200543800 234 East Street $18.81 ($1,098.65) ($1,079,84) 834107 2016 0100250600 23 April Lane ($592.43) ($1,285.75) ($1,878.18) 844055* 2016 0100290900 11 Briggs Road ($478.66) ($1,029.26) ($1,507.92) 844585* 2016 0200590300 11 Castle Road ($1,099.98) ($1,099.98) 834806 2016 0300637500 2 Fairiand Street ($690.00) ($1,455,20) ($2,145,20) 835993* 2016 0200506100 647 Lowell Street ($414.28) ($896.48) ($1,310,76) 847947 2016 0100296400 5 Mason Street ($114.56) ($215.36) ($329.92) 844651 2016 0300664100 243 Wood Street ($454.36) ($1,316.82) ($1,771.18) 807642* 2016 ($8,280.17) ($24,941.80) ($33,221.97) continued to page 2 FY2017 QLN ADJUSTMENTS TO WATER/SEWER AS RECOMMENDED BY THE WATER AND SEWER ABATEMENT BOARD PAGE 2 OF 2 WSAB 8/4/16 BOS 9/26/16 Continued from page 1 777 ($8,280.17) ($24,941.80) ($33,221.97) It is further recommended to waive all accumulated interest on dis uted bills for which no abatement is recommended: ACCOUNT �Jf /lti Fri�r/^ 7 fNr /!C/°n�w JYr it t l r p°r yr r /^ cry liY f j 'li fEr trrr Di zi'f' ', 'k 4wJdUd ✓,2, r *Although one bill will be adjusted,other bills are included in the calculation It is the recommendation of the Water and Sewer Abatement Board that the Town Collector be authorized to waive interest that has accrued on the bills included herein,unless stated here otherwise,from the due date of the bill until 30 calendar days after the date of written notification to applicantoll the Selectmen's action. THE SUM SET AGAINST THE ABOVE ACCOUNTS IS HEREBY ADJUSTED.. WATER SEWER TOTAL ($8,280.17) ($24,941.80) ($33,221.97) iDIRE OR OF PUBLIC WORKS BOARD OF SELECTMEN 9/26/16 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approve One-Day Liquor License - Wildflower Camp Foundation PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Suzanne Barry, Chairman C.2 SUMMARY: The Wildflower Camp Foundation has requested a one-day liquor license to serve beer and wine at their "Hank Wonder Benefit Concert" which takes place at Battin Hall on Saturday, October 22, 2016 from 6:00 p.m. until 10:00 P.M. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve the consent agenda. FOLLOW-UP: Selectmen's Office DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approve One-Day Liquor License - Spectacle Management PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Suzanne Barry, Chairman C.3 SUMMARY: Spectacle Management has requested one-day liquor licenses to sellbeer and wine in the lobby of the Cary Memorial Building on Thursday, October 6, 2016 from 6:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m. (Manhattan Transfer/Take 6 concert) and on Friday, October 21, 2016 from 7:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. (Art Garfunkel concert). SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve the consent agenda. FOLLOW-UP: Selectmen's Office DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Liquor License Change - Lexington Golf Club PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Suzanne Barry, Chairman C.4 SUMMARY: A change in the manager for the Lexington Golf Club liquor license was approved at the April 11, 2016 board meeting. Subsequently, there was a request from the ABCC for some minor updates to the documents. All requirements have been met and this will replace the original application. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve the consent agenda for a change in the manager for the Lexington Golf Club liquor license. FOLLOW-UP: Selectmen's Office DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Approve Minutes and Executive Session Minutes PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Suzanne Barry, Chairman C.5 SUMMARY: The minutes of July 14, 2016 and July 25, 2016 are ready for your review and approval. The Executive Session minutes of July 14, 2016 and July 25, 2016 are ready for your review and approval. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve the minutes of July 14, 2016 and July 25, 2016. Motion to approve and not release the Executive Session minutes of July 14, 2016 and July 25, 2016. FOLLOW-UP: Selectmen's Office DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Use of the Battle Green- Lexington Minute Men Company Change of Command Ceremony PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: Suzanne Barry, Chairman C.6 SUMMARY: The Lexington Minute Men Company has requested the Battle Green to host a Command Ceremony(with cannon fire) on Sunday, October 2, 2016 from 2:00 p.m. until 4:30 p.m. They have requested either traffic cones or barricades to reserve two parking spaces along the Green on Bedford Road (closest to Harrington). They have received their cannon firing permit from the Fire Department. Town Departments (Police, Fire and DPW) do not have any concerns with this request. SUGGESTED MOTION: Motion to approve the consent agenda. FOLLOW-UP: Selectmen's Office DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016 ATTACHMENTS: Description Type LoxMhnitoMou Backup Matorinl TOWN OF LEXINGTON SELECTMEN'S OFFICE APPLICATION FOR BATTLE GREEN PERMIT The Board of Selectmen issues pen-nits for the use of the Battle Green (see attached regulations). Please fill in this form completely and return to the Selectmen's Office no less than two creeks prior to the requested date. NAME, PHONE NUMBER, and EMAIL ADDRESS OF A RESPONSIBLE CONTACT: James Lee Lexington Minute Men Inc. DATE AND TIME OF EVENT: October 2 2016 NATURE OF EVENT: Lexington Minute Men Company Change of Command Ceremony with cannon fire EXPECTED NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS, SPECTATORS, AND VEHICLES: _ 30 Minute Men, 20-30 guests and spectators, 1 cannon on carriage DURATION OF EVENT: set up beginning at 11:30 AM, event 2:00 — 4:30 PM STATEMENT OF EQUIPMENT AND FACILITIES TO BE USED: Podium and small bleachers SECTION OF THE GREEN DESIRED: Center of green north of flagpole, and the corner of Harrington Road and Bedford Road for cannon position. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The LMM Change of Command Cerernon y is an annual event. This vear cannon will be tared during the event, which was approLed 2 years ago. Permits will be obtained from the LFD for the cannon and LPD will be notified. 046114533 Authorized Signature Federal Identification No. or Social Security Number AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY LEXINGTON BOARD OF SELECTMEN MEETING AGENDA ITEM TITLE: Next Meeting PRESENTER: ITEM NUMBER: SUMMARY: SUGGESTED MOTION: FOLLOW-UP: DATE AND APPROXIMATE TIME ON AGENDA: 9/26/2016