City Council – 06/17/2014

DATE 06/17/2014
TIME 7:00 pm
ADA Yes
LOCATION Council Chamber, Woburn City Hall, Common Street, Woburn, MA, United States

Meeting Agenda

Below is the pasted journal for ADA Compliancy. See attachment to download the full version.

CITY OF WOBURN

JUNE 17, 2014 – 7:00 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL

 

Roll Call

                                                Anderson

Gaffney

                                                Concannon

Gately

DiTucci

Mercer-Bruen

Drapeau

Raymond

                                                                 Haggerty

_________________________

 

VOTED to dispense with the reading of the previous meeting’s Journal and to APPROVE, all in favor, 9-0.

_________________________

 

Motion made and 2nd to suspend the rules for the purposes taking the following matter out of order, all in favor, 9-0.

_________________________

 

RESOLVED Be it Resolved by the Woburn City Council to allow Larry Guiseppe, Director of Veteran’s Services, to address the Woburn City Council relative to the efforts of Richard Gately, the Woburn Historical Society, the City of Woburn Veterans Office and the City of Woburn United Veterans Council to place a plaque at the Woburn Armory site.

 

s/President Haggerty and Alderman Gately

 

Larry Guiseppe, Veterans Agent stated that there is an interest in maintaining certain architectural features at the former Armory building and in installing a plaque at the building, that the “MVM” over the front door represents the Massachusetts Volunteer Militia and he asks that this remain in place, that Great Seal of the Commonwealth appears at the top of the front entrance and he asks that this remain in place as well, that he asks for a plaque to be affixed to the building with information on the history of the building, and that the owner has agreed in principal to pay for and install the plaque. Veterans Agent Guiseppe distributed a letter dated June 16, 2014 with attachments to the

City Council. Kathy Lucero of the Woburn Historical Society stated that hundreds of National Guard units came out of the Armory building since its opening in 1917, that the last unit to come out of the building was in 1998, and that the building was used mainly for World War I and World War II activities. No further action was taken. _________________________

 

Under suspension of the rules, motion made and 2nd to take the following matter from the

Committee on Finance, all in favor, 9-0. On the Order to appropriate the sum of $40,000.00 from Cemetery Interest Fund Account to various Cemetery Accounts, motion made and 2nd that the Order be adopted, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: June 19, 2014                       s/Scott D. Galvin June 19, 2014

_________________________

 

Under suspension of the rules, motion made and 2nd to accept a communication as follows dated June 16, 2014 from David Dunkley, Director of Facilities, Woburn Public Schools and add it to the Order of the Day as a late filed matter, all in favor, 9-0.

 

Dear Mr. Haggerty, President of Woburn City Council,

 

The School Department is seeking approval from City Council to extend the deadline for current capital projects. The Council has set aside $30,000 for paving. We are planning on repaving the back of the Linscott School. Mr. Corey, City Engineer, is putting together a paving bid which will include this project. He is grouping several paving projects together to increase the overall tonnage to provide for an opportunity for better pricing. The current stipulation on capital funds is that they must be encumbered by June 30, 2014. This bid will not be back and opened before that date. We are asking that you grant the School Department and extension for these funds. The work must be completed prior to the opening of school this coming September. I thank you and the full council ahead of time for this consideration.

 

Sincerely, s/David Dunkley, Director of Facilities

 

Motion made and 2nd that the Order dated January 23, 2014 for an appropriation in the amount of $2,684,500.00 for various capital projects be amended with respect to the sum of $30,000.00 for schools systemwide repave parking lots and playgrounds in that such funds neither encumbered or disbursed by September 28, 2014 shall revert to General Fund, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: June 19, 2014                       s/Scott D. Galvin June 19, 2014

_________________________

 

Motion made and 2nd to return to the regular order of business, all in favor, 9-0.

_________________________

 

MAYOR’S COMMUNICATIONS: None.

_________________________

 

PUBLIC HEARINGS:  

 

On the petition by John P. Flaherty and Kathryn A. Flaherty to further amend the 1985

Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended, by adding a new definition for “Church

Buildings” in Section 2 Definitions and by adding a new Section 27 “Adaptive Reuse of Church Buildings” as set forth in the petition. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. A communication dated May 29, 2014 was received from Attorney Joseph R. Tarby, III, Esquire, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 as follows:

 

Re: Proposed Amendments to Section 2 and 27 of the 1985 City of Woburn Zoning Ordinance, as amended

 

Dear Mr. Campbell:

 

Please be advised that I represent John P. Flaherty and Kathryn A. Flaherty of 28 West Street, Woburn, Massachusetts in connection with the above-referenced matter. I

respectfully request that the City Council Public Hearing on this matter presently scheduled for June 17, 2014 be continued to the City Council meeting on July 15, 2014. If you need any further information please contact me. Thank you.

 

Very truly yours, s/Joseph R. Tarby III

 

Motion made and 2nd to accept the communication and make it part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. Motion made and 2nd that the PUBLIC HEARING be CONTINUED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY

COUNCIL ON JULY 15, 2014, all in favor 9-0.

 

*************************

On the petition by Herb Chambers 128, Inc., c/o The Herb Chambers Companies, 47

Eastern Boulevard, Glastonbury, Connecticut 06033 for a special permit pursuant to Section 7.3 and Section 15 of the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended to allow for the alteration, change and extension of the existing nonconforming use (overnight parking of commercial vehicles) to allow for the storage, reconditioning and preparation of motor vehicles at 285 Locust Street. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. was received from Attorney Joseph R. Tarby, III, Esquire, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 as follows:

 

Re: Special Permit Petition of Herby Chamnbers 128, Inc., 285 Locust Street, Woburn, Massachusetts

 

Dear Mr. Campbell:

 

As you know I represent Herb Chambers 128, Inc. on the above-referenced matter. I respectfully request that the City Council Public Hearing on this matter presently scheduled for June 17, 2014 be continued to the City Council Public Hearing on July 15, 2014. If you need any further information, please contact me. Thank you.

 

Very truly yours, s/Joseph R. Tarby, III

 

Motion made and 2nd to accept the communication and make it part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. Motion made and 2nd that the PUBLIC HEARING be CONTINUED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY

COUNCIL ON JULY 15, 2014, all in favor 9-0.

*************************

On the petition by Alderman Gately concerning the structure or structures located in the City of Woburn, County of Middlesex, Commonwealth of Massachusetts known and numbered as 20 Garfield Avenue, Woburn, Massachusetts, for the purposes of determining whether said structure or structures are a public nuisance, a nuisance to the neighborhood, a dilapidated or dangerous building or other structure, as said terms are used in Massachusetts General Laws Ch. 139, Sec. 1, and if so, enter an order adjudging it to be a nuisance to the neighborhood, or dangerous, and prescribing its disposition, alteration or regulation. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. A communication dated May 29, 2014 was received from City Solicitor Ellen Callahan Doucette as follows:

 

Re: 20 Garfield Avenue – Nuisance Property

 

This memorandum shall serve as the response to the City Council’s request for an opinion regarding the possibility of filing a Petition to Enforce the State Sanitary Code and for the Appointment of a Receiver (“Receivership”) pursuant to M.G.L. c. 111, §127I for the property located at 20 Garfield Avenue (the “Property”) which is presently before the City Council as the subject of a public nuisance hearing. A copy of the City Council’s request is attached hereto for reference.

 

As a preliminary matter, the hearing scheduled for June 17, 2014 should not go forward unless the City Council can demonstrate that written notice of the nuisance hearing, as required by M.G.L. c. 139, §1 was provided to the owner of the Property or in this case (as discussed hereinafter), was provided to the individual or individuals authorized to act on behalf of Ms. Schenck’s estate. A decision on the condition of the Property is not enforceable if the requisite statutory notice was not provided.

 

To determine if a Receivership would be appropriate, it is necessary to first asses the ownership status of the Property. The record owner of the Property, now deceased, was Jennie Schenck (“Ms. Schenck”) by a deed recorded with the Middlesex South District Registry of Deeds in Book 4365, Page 247. Ms. Schenck died on July 18, 1968.

 

On October 4, 1995, the City recorded a taking for non-payment of FY1993 real estate taxes with said Deeds in Book 25713, Page 148. According to the Treasurer/Collector, the current balance due on the tax title account is approximately $64,000. The City’s Petition to Foreclose on the tax title is pending in the Land Court with a hearing scheduled for June 5, 2014. According to the Land Court record, there are approximately 18 heirs of Ms. Schenck who may have an ownership interest in the Property. Previously, some of the heirs indicated a desire to retain the Property, and the Land Court provided time for them to redeem the tax title. However they have not done so. [An attempt was made to renovate the property in 2008 but building permits were not obtained and the Building Commission issued a stop work order.] It is possible that the Land Court may give them additional time at the June 5, 2014 hearing.

 

In addition, though Ms. Schenck passed away in 1968, a petition was never filed with the Probate and Family Court to appoint an executor or administrator for her estate, which would include the Property. In my opinion, the absence of an individual or individuals with the authority to act on behalf of Ms. Schenck’s estate further complicates this matter.

 

After receiving the City Council’s request, I met with the Mayor and the

Treasurer/Collector to discuss the status of the Tax Lien case and to assess whether a Receivership or the Tax Title process would be the most expeditious way to address the condition of the Property. The advantage of allowing the Tax Title process to proceed is that the City will become the fee owner of the Property, and all proceeds from the auction of the Property are retained by the City. The disadvantage is that there may be a significant period of time before that auction can occur in which case the Property may be secured by the city, but it will not be rehabilitated.

 

The advantage of a Receivership is that once appointed, the Receiver will take possession of the Property and if feasible, rehabilitate the Property and auction it. However the Receiver’s lien takes precedence over the City’s tax title account. Depending upon how much money is spent to rehabilitate the Property and the price at which the Property is sold at auction, the City may or may not recover the entirety of the tax title account which is a distinct disadvantage. Any remaining funds will be paid into the Court for the benefit of Ms. Schenck’s heirs.

 

Based upon all of the foregoing, I am undertaking the following course of action. To obtain inspection reports from the Building Commissioner and Health Agent regarding Building and Sanitary Code violations that may exist at the Property. Evidence of Code violations is a necessary requirement for the filing of a Petition for Receivership. If the Land Court does not grant the heirs additional time, I will discuss with Tax Title counsel how quickly the Property could be auctioned. If however the Land Court grants the heirs additional time within which they may attempt to redeem the Property from Tax Title, in all likelihood I will file the Petition for Receiver to avoid further delay in addressing the condition of the Property.

 

Should the City Council have additional questions or require further assistance regarding this matter, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

 

Very truly yours, s/Ellen Callahan Doucette

 

A communication dated June 12, 2014 was received from City Clerk William C. Campbell as follows:

 

Re: Nuisance Hearing – 20 Garfield Avenue

 

Following the City Council Order adopted on May 20, 2014, I undertook to serve the owner of 20 Garfield Avenue with notice of a public hearing pursuant to M.G.L. Ch. 139, Sec. 1, et seq. to be held on June 17, 2014.

 

In order to make service, I researched available records to determine the current owner ot the property. According to the records on file with Board of Assessors, the owner of the property is Jennie A. Schenck with a mailing address of 20 Garfield Avenue. I also researched records using the Middlesex South District Registry of Deeds online search tool and found a notice of taking for non-payment of taxes dated September 29, 1995 at Book 25713, Page 148 and a notice of complaint to foreclose a tax lien dated April 14, 2005 at Book 45309, Page 440. Both documents were under the name of Jennie A. Schenck. I found no indication of a conveyance of the property. I also reviewed records of death and found no record under the name Jennie A. Schenck. As has been the practice in earlier proceedings under this statute, service was attempted by both certified mail return receipt requested and first class mail postage prepaid.

 

Subsequent to this action, I was informed by the City Solicitor that she had information indicating that Jennie A. Schenck was deceased with a date of death on July 18, 1968. Based on that new information, I made an additional search of the records of death on file with this office and found a death certificate under the name of Janie A. Schenck of 20 Garfield Avenue on July 18, 1968. Since that time both the notice sent by certified mail and the notice sent by first class mail have been returned by the U.S. Postal Service with the notation “not deliverable as addressed – unable to forward”.

 

s/William C. Campbell, City Clerk

 

Motion made and 2nd that the two communications be received and made part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. Alderman Gately stated that the City Solicitor is attempting to locate the heirs of the owner of the property, and that the City Solicitor suggested that the City Council take no action on the matter while other measures to address the issues at the property are pursued. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. Motion made and 2nd that the PUBLIC HEARING be CONTINUED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 16, 2014, all in favor 9-0.

 

*************************

On the petition by Woburn Truck & Auto, Inc., 1095 Main Street, Woburn,

Massachusetts 01801 for a special permit pursuant to Section 7.3 of the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended to allow for the alteration and extension of the preexisting nonconforming use (motor vehicle junkyard) to allow heavy manufacturing at 1095R Main Street; Lot 04-01-01, 04-01-02, 04-01-03, 04-01-04; Kensington Avenue;

03-06-02, 03-05-05 Ingelow Avenue 03-05-06; Florence Avenue 03-05-12. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. A report was received from the Committee on Special Permits as follows: “ought to pass, with the conditions as follows:

 

  1. The Plan of Record shall be the plan entitled “Proposed Site Plan, 1095R Main Street, Woburn, Mass.” Scale 1” = 40’, dated February 21, 2014 and revised on June 4, 2014, prepared by Edward J. Farrell, Professional Land Surveyor, 110 Winn Street, Suite 203, Woburn, MA.
  2. The Petitioner shall install the walls and landscaping shown on the plan entitled “Illustrative Site Plan, Woburn Truck and Auto, 1095R Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts” dated March 25, 2014 prepared by Prato Associates, Incorporated, 27 Chestnut Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803.  The Petitioner shall install the landscaping, eight (8) foot wall and six (6) foot privacy fence as shown on the Plan.
  3. Deliveries to and from the Site shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday – Friday and 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. on Saturdays.  There shall be no Sunday hours.
  4. The Petitioner shall install a twenty-four (24) hour video surveillance system.
  5. Each transaction conducted on the Property shall be videotaped.
  6. The Petitioner shall install a sign at its entrance notifying all customers that their transaction is being videotaped.
  7. The Petitioner shall meet with the Chief of Police as requested by the Chief to review business operations and the security measures installed by the Petitioner on the Property.
  8. The gate to the Property shall be locked each day at the close of business.
  9. Except for oil and gas used in connection with the Petitioner’s business operations, no oil or gas shall be stored on the Property.
  10. All deliveries from the Property by the Petitioner or any of Petitioner’s vendors shall be limited to Monday – Friday.  No outgoing deliveries shall be allowed on Saturdays or Sundays.
  11. The Petitioner shall provide on the Property a sufficient dust control system.
  12. The Petitioner’s outside manufacturing operation shall be limited to Parcel 1, Parcel 2, Parcel 3 and Parcel 4 as shown on the Plan.
  13. This Special Permit shall not be transferrable.
  14. The Petitioner shall require the individual selling the metals produce a Massachusetts or state-issued photo identification, and maintaining a copy of the same in the record of transaction.
  15. The Petitioner shall ascertain the identity of any business, organization, society, corporation etc., selling the metals by requiring him to provide a Massachusetts or state-issued identification number, and the dealer shall maintain a copy of such identification in the record of transaction.
  16. The Petitioner shall keep a daily transaction log, in the English language and such log information shall include:
    1. Name, date of birth and residence of the person with whom such a transaction was made,  or company  or organization name and principal address with whom such a transaction  was made;
    2. The date and time when such a transaction occurred
    3. The price paid for the article;
    4. A description  of the article, including  type, weight and quantity;
    5. The license plate number  and state of issue of the vehicle being used by the person offering  the article to transport  the article to the registrant’s place of business  and
    6. A written statement  from the person offering the article stating that he or she is in lawful possession of the article being offered.
  17. A Petitioner may not accept from any individual, who is not company affiliated or an authorized contractor of the manufacturer, municipality, government or utility, the following items: (a) guardrails;
    1. manhole covers
    2. cables used only in high voltage transmission lines;
    3. historical markers;
    4. cemetery plaques;
    5. full sized new materials, such as those used in construction;
    6. equipment tools used by contractors;
    7. bleachers from an athletic field;
    8. traffic signs;
    9. beer kegs;
    10. railroad scrap metal and
    11. materials that have been reported stolen through the Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries, Inc. (ISRI) alert system. A list of the materials named above which are deemed unacceptable shall be prominently posted on a large sign at a location close to the scale.
  1. The record file shall be retained by the Petitioner for a period of one (1) year from the date of the transaction. Accompanying documentation may be destroyed following the one year period. If documentation is stored electronically, said documents must be stored or backed-up by any current electronic means and may be deleted at the completion of the one year period.
  2. During the one year period, the log shall be open for inspection by the state and local police upon reasonable request.
    1. if following notification, either verbally or in writing, from a law enforcement officer that specific scrap materials have been reported as stolen. If the Petitioner is in possession of the scrap material in question shall hold that scrap material intact and safe from alteration, damage or commingling and shall place an identifying tag or other suitable identification upon the scrap material.
    2. A law enforcement  officer making a verbal request shall provide the petitioner, upon request, with the officer’s name, badge number and department contact telephone  number so that the scrap processor or recycling  facility operator may call back to confirm the identity of the law enforcement officer.
    3. Within 48 hours of notification by the law enforcement officer or 48 hours of the receipt of the material, whichever is later, the Petitioner shall notify the law enforcement officer that scrap material matching the law enforcement officer’s description is on the premises.
    4. The petitioner shall hold the scrap material for a period of time as directed by the applicable law enforcement agency, up to a maximum of 48 hours following notification, unless extended pursuant to sub-section (f) of Section 4 of this section.
    5. A law enforcement officer shall not place a hold on any scrap material unless that law enforcement officer reasonably suspects that the scrap material is lost or stolen. The request to hold scrap material shall be as specific as possible by using descriptive language, including, but not limited to, the type and style of the

material, length or weight or any other such description to identify the material to be held. Any hold that is placed on scrap material shall not exceed 48 hours, and the scrap material must be returned to the owner or released when the hold has been released or has expired.

    1. A holding period may be extended beyond 48 hours only upon the order of a clerk-magistrate after the clerk-magistrate has determined that probable cause exists that the scrap material is lost or stolen.
    2. The petitioner that receives material that does not meet the description materials being sought by a law enforcement officer may dispose of that material at its discretion.
  1. A Special Permit Review of conditions will be conducted after six months.
  2. The Special Permit is non-transferable.
  3. The height of the Scrap Metal piles shall not exceed fourteen (14) feet in height.
  4. Prior to commencing its manufacturing operation, the Petitioner shall file with the City Clerk an acknowledgement that it has reviewed and understands the language set forth in Section 11.3.12 Procedures for Special Permits of the 1985 City of Woburn Zoning Ordinance which states that:  “The City Council, by a two-thirds (2/3) vote, shall have the power to modify, amend or rescind its approval of a Special Permit, or to require a change in the approved Special Permit.  All of the provisions of the issuance of a Special Permit, relating to its submission and approval, shall, so far as apt, be applicable to the approval of the modification, amendment or rescission of such approval of a Special Permit which has been changed under this section.”

 

A communication dated June 17, 2014 was received from Jeffrey M. Hull, Town Manager, Town of Wilmington, 121 Glen Road, Wilmington, Massachusetts 01887 as follows:

 

Re: Scrap Metal Processing Yard at 1095R Main Street

 

Dear City Council Members:

 

I was recently made aware that the City of Woburn has opened a public hearing on a request to alter and extend a special permit for Woburn Truck & Auto, Inc. located at 1095R Main Street.

 

It is my understanding that the existing special permit allows a motor vehicle junkyard at this site. Further I understand that approval of the request before the City Council will increase the allowable operations and result in the site being used as a scrap metal yard.

 

The location of this property is adjacent to the Wilmington border and is accessible via Border Avenue in Wilmington. Further the business generally feeds traffic onto Route 38, which serves as a connector to Route 128 through Woburn, Route 3 and 495 through Wilmington and Route 93 through Wilmington.

 

The Town of Wilmington believes that such an operation will increase truck traffic as the heavy trucks of varying sizes associated with this type of operation access and exit the scrap metal yard. With the existing level of traffic on Route 38 seeking to access Route 128 and heading north from Route 128, it is highly likely that streets in Wilmington will become the major route to and from the site leading to increased heavy truck traffic through residential areas in our town.

 

If the City Council is inclined to approve this type of business, I respectfully request a truck restriction or conditional requirement on the special permit to direct the applicant to file a traffic plan with the City that restricts trucks leaving this site from traveling north on Route 38 and using Wilmington as a means to reach Interstate 93.

 

Sincerely, s/Jeffrey M. Hull, Town Manager

 

A communication dated June 17, 2014 was received from Joseph R. Tarby, III, Esquire, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 as follows:

 

Re: Special Permit Petition of Woburn Truck & Auto, Inc., 1095R Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts

 

Dear Mr. Campbell:

 

I respectfully request that the above-referenced Petition be given leave to withdraw without prejudice. If you need any further information, please contact me. Thank you.

 

Very truly yours, s/Joseph R. Tarby, III

 

Motion made and 2nd to accept the committee report, the communication from the Town of Wilmington and the communication from Attorney Tarby and make them part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. Alderman Raymond stated that although the petition may be withdrawn he still wants to enter into the record his reasons why the petition should be denied, that the issue as to whether scrap metal processing is manufacturing should be determined before proceeding, that scrap metal is not manufacturing under a CMR definition, that the City Solicitor said that cases on this issue were not definitive in deciding the issue, that if scrap metal processing facilities are determined to be manufacturing then the use will be allowed by right in the entire I-G zoning district without a special permit if less than 15,000 square feet, that the proposed use would be substantially more detrimental than the current use of the property, that the used truck parts business has not operated in that location for a few years so there is no traffic, that a sign at the property diverted people to a facility in Billerica, that there is limited line of sight at the intersection with Main Street, that this would be the only scrap metal processing facility between New Hampshire and the Boston area, that here would be hundreds of trucks from pick-ups to container vehicles going to and from the property on a daily basis, and that there is a dangerous curve on Main Street in that area. Alderman Raymond offered his remarks in writing to be made part of the official record of these proceedings. Attorney Tarby stated that he had no additional information or comments to add. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Janet Skoog stated that she owns 1023 Main Street, that she has difficulty getting in and out of her driveway due to the volume and speed of the

traffic on Main Street, that this use will attract more traffic including trucks, that scrap metal may fall off the trucks creating a hazard, and that the special permit should be denied. Linda Raymond, 10 North Maple Street stated that she is opposed to the project, that the petitioner stated he would operate this the facility however Scrap It, Inc. is advertising this as a new location, that Scrap It, Inc. is a $1,000,000.00 business with sites in Everett, Chelsea and New Hampshire, and that she has seen Scrap It, Inc. trucks parked in front of her house and her tires have been slashed. Ms. Raymond offered a report to the City Council for the record. Motion made and 2nd that the document be received and made part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. Joseph Wells, 45 Harrison Avenue stated that he is not for or against the proposal, that the Holland brothers have been in the city for many years, that they have run legitimate businesses in the city for years, that no matter what goes into that location traffic will be generated, that mitigation money has not been used to make roadway improvements, that the business use will not attract crime, and that any business will generate traffic. Gerry Kehoe, 61 Water Street stated that this section of Main Street is treacherous, that she cannot understand how traffic will not worsen in that area, that this is a residential area, that North Woburn was quiet when she was younger, that this is a much busier area now, and that she is opposed to the business operating at this location due to the smell, the fumes and the diesel. Paulette Uvino, 5 Ashburton Avenue stated that she wants the petition denied, that people want to live in a safe and clean environment, that the business will draw customers from all over Middlesex County, that this is a cash based business and could attract crime, that there will be numerous vehicles going to and from the site from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. six days per week twelve months per year, that will not be safe for pedestrians in the area with the additional scrap business trucking, that she wants a safe and clean business that is not environmentally dangerous, and that because the junkyard business was operating from the location for fifty years does not make the scrap processing facility and appropriate use. Motion made and 2nd to close the public hearing, all in favor, 9-0. Motion made and

2nd that the MATTER be GIVEN LEAVE TO WITHDRAW WITHOUT PREJUDICE,

AS AMENDED with the amendment as follows: That the written comments of Alderman Raymond be made part of the permanent record although not endorsed by this vote, all in favor, 9-0.

 

*************************

On the petition by Lynch-Cantillon Funeral Home, Inc., 263 Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 for a special permit pursuant to Section 7.3 and 15 of the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended, to allow for a new entryway and exterior alterations to the structure located at 263 Main Street within the Groundwater Protection District. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. A communication dated June 11, 2014 was received from Erin E. Wortman, City Planner/Grant Writer, Woburn Planning Board as follows:

 

Re:  Lynch-Cantillon Funeral Home Inc. – 263 Main Street – To allow for a new   entryway and exterior alterations to the structure pursuant to Sections 7.3 and 15.

 

Dear Mr. Campbell and Members of the City Council:

 

At the meeting held on June 10, 2014, the Planning Board voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council, regarding the Special Permit application of LynchCantillon Funeral Home at 263 Main Street to allow for a new entryway and exterior alterations to the structure, subject to the condition that the Plan of Record shall be entitled “Cantillon Funeral Home, 263 Main Street, Woburn, Massachusetts”, dated March 25, 2014 and prepared by Keenan Survey, 8 Winchester Place, Winchester, MA 01890.

 

If members of the City Council have any questions or concerns regarding the foregoing recommendation, please feel free to contact me.

 

Sincerely, s/Erin E. Wortman, City Planner/Grant Writer

 

Appearing for the petitioner was Attorney Joseph R. Tarby, III, Esquire, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 and he stated that the property is located in the S-1 zoning district, that the funeral homes is a by-right use in the zoning district, that the petitioner has been in business since 1888, that the petitioner is one of the oldest family owned businesses in the city, that the petitioner seeks to renovate the exterior of the structure, that the property is nonconforming because the building does not meet the side setback or front setback requirements, that with the new front entrance the front setback will be increased from 3.4 feet to 8.2 feet, that there will be two dormers with false chimneys, that there will be two new side dormers, that but for the fact that the property is a nonconforming structure a special permit would not be needed for these improvements, that a new roof may be installed, that the petitioner requests a finding that the improvements will not be substantially more detrimental than the current structure, that it has been some time since the last renovation of the building, that the building will stay within the same footprint with the exception of moving further away from the front lot line, and asks that the record reflect a new roof might be constructed. Attorney Tarby offered an exterior rendering of the improvements for the City Council to review. Motion made and 2nd that the document be received and made part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. Alderman Gately stated that this is a clean business, and that he has no issue with the changes. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. Motion made and 2nd that the public hearing be closed, all in favor, 9-0. Motion made and 2nd that the SPECIAL PERMIT be GRANTED, AS AMENDED with the amendments as follows: 1.

That the Planning Board recommendations be adopted as conditions of the special permit, 2. That the City Council makes a finding that the improvements to the building are not substantially more detrimental than the current structure, and 3. That if it is determined that a new roof is required for the structure such further improvement is deemed not to be substantially more detrimental than the current structure and the roof may be installed subject to requirements of the Building Commissioner, all in favor, 9-0.

 

*************************

On the petition by The Wendy’s Company, 4288 West Dublin-Granville Road, Dublin, Ohio 43017 for a special permit pursuant to 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended, Section 5.1(29), Note 16 to modify a Special Permit granted December 30, 2004 as follows: 1. Amend Condition 1 by replacing the existing Site Plan of record with the plan entitled “Site Development Plans for Wendy’s” prepared by Bohler Engineering, 352 Turnpike Road, Southborough, Massachusetts 01772 dated May 15, 2014; 2. Amend

Condition 3 which states “that the hours of operation shall be as follows: (a) restaurant – 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., (b) drive through – 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m.” as follows: “(a) restaurant 10:00 a.m. to midnight, (b) Drive thru – 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m.”; 3. Amend Condition 15 which states “that the façade shall be constructed of brick as shown in the illustration marked ‘Concept B’ received in City Council on December 7, 2004” with  revised plans filed with the Special Permit Petition; 4. Amend Condition 22 which states “that all signs shall be externally illuminated” as follows: that “all signs shall be internally illuminated,” 5. Amend Condition 23 that states “That the free-standing sign be no more than fifteen (15) feet in height and thirty (30) feet in area consistent with requirements of the B-N zoning district in the 1985 Woburn Zoning Code, as amended” by deleting same; and 6. Amend Condition 26 that states “that no exterior banners on the roof, windows or building sides be allowed” by deleting said condition, at 303 Montvale Avenue. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. A communication dated June 11, 2014 was received from Erin E. Wortman, City Planner/Grant Writer, Woburn Planning Board as follows:

 

Re: The Wendy’s Company – 303 Montvale Avenue – To allow for the modification of the Special Permit Decision dated December 30, 2004 by amending conditions 1, 3, 15, 22, 23 and 26.

 

Dear Mr. Campbell and Members of the City Council:

 

At the meeting held on June 10, 2014, the Planning Board voted to forward a favorable recommendation to the City Council, regarding the Special Permit application of The Wendy’s Company at 303 Montvale Avenue to allow for the modification of Special

Permit Decision dated December 30, 2014 to amend Condition 1 and 15. Further, the Planning Board voted to send an unfavorable recommendation to the City Council with respect to amending Conditions 3, 22, 23 and 26.

 

If members of the City Council have any questions or concerns regarding the foregoing recommendation, please feel free to contact me.

 

Sincerely, s/Erin E. Wortman, City Planner/Grant Writer

 

Appearing for the petitioner was Attorney Joseph R. Tarby, III, Esquire, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 and he stated that the property is located in the B-H zoning district, that the fast food use with a drive-thru component is allowed in the zoning district with a special permit, that in 2004 a special permit was granted for the restaurant, that the petitioner will renovate the building to bring it in line with the national brand, that the revision to the site plan is the installation of a canopy to shelter customers from rain or snow at the order board, that the petitioner seeks to extend the closing hours of the restaurant and the drive-thru by two hours for each, that it is more economical and efficient to have LED internally illuminated lights rather than externally illuminated lights, that the petitioner is looking to use energy efficient internally illuminated lighting, that there is currently a condition that the signs be consistent with those in the B-N zoning district but this property is in the B-H zoning district, that the sign will be 16 feet eight inches in height which is just 1.8 feet taller than the current sign but less than the allowed 30 feet, that the signs will be 48.9 square feet in area which is less than the allowable 100 square feet in area, that the petitioner requests the prohibition on banners be eliminated and that the petitioner be allowed to do what other businesses can do under the zoning ordinances, and that the intent is to increase the height of the sign by 1.8 feet and the size of the sign by 18 square feet in area. Attorney Tarby offered a rendering of the proposed sign for the City Council to review. Motion made and 2nd that the document be received and made part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. Gary Sadler, Upland Architects, Inc. 250 E. Main Street, Suite 13, Norton, Massachusetts 02766 stated that he is the architect for the project, that the current building is a mass of brick with a false mansard roof and small windows, that other buildings in the area have a mix of exterior surfaces and roofs, that the petitioner intends to remodel the building and give the building a facelift using metal banding and more glass, that the style of the building is unique but keeps with the style and use of materials in the neighborhood, that the use of the materials makes the building more appealing and more windows makes the dining room more noticeable from the street. Chad Adams, Regional Construction Manager, The Wendy’s Company stated that the proposal is a corporate program and in addition the building needs a refresh, that they are trying to make up for years during which there was no upkeep of the property, that there is an intention to bring customers into the restaurant rather than rely on the drive-thru component, that area competitors have hours that allow them to be open longer, that the nearby McDonald’s drive-thru is open 24 hours per day, that the petitioner wants to take advantage of the late night business and to increase customer convenience, that the mansard roof is only a design fixture, that the petitioner will not be raising the roof line, and that the only change to the roof line would be the red architectural feature called a blade on the front which will be taller than the current building. Alderman Mercer-Bruen stated that the building was approved with the knowledge of the nearby residences and was designed in that manner, that the building has a colonial design, that she will not support extending the hours of operation, that this facility is much closer to residential uses than the nearby McDonald’s or Bickford’s restaurants, and that late night uses can attract people who have been out late partying. Alderman Gately stated that there is a restaurant with a drive-thru component in his ward, that the outside ordering board caused a problem for the neighbors, that a police detail was hired to control the issue, that late night hours can cause issues for neighbors, and that he will not support the extension of the hours of operation. Alderman Raymond stated that the petitioner’s location is different than the other businesses in that area because of the proximity to the residences compared to the other businesses. Alderman Anderson stated that he wants to visit a site that has been updated including the internally lit signs. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Mike Linehan, 13 Albany Street stated that his property is nearby the petitioner’s property, that midnight is late enough for any business to operate in that area, that the dumpster is emptied late in the overnight, that the drive-thru speaker faces his house, and that the light from the signs reflects into his yard. Kathy Bailey, 4 Utica Street stated that there are restrictions on the petitioner’s business because it is located in a residential neighborhood, that these restrictions are to protect neighbors from noise, trash, lights and other disruptions, and that the proposed changes do not fit the character of the neighborhood. Motion made and

2nd that the PUBLIC HEARING be CONTINUED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON AUGUST 12, 2014 AND THAT THE MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON SPECIAL PERMITS, all in favor 9-0.

 

*************************

On the petition by (deletions in strikethrough, additions in bold): 11.3 Procedures for Special Permits – 1. The applicant shall submit a written application for a special permit with 1912 Copies to the City Clerk. The application shall also be subject to Rules and Regulations adopted by the City Council pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 9, and incorporated herein. No application shall be accepted or considered complete that does not have any necessary variances required from the Board of Appeals. All appeal periods associated with granted variances must be expired before an application is submitted. If there is a dispute between the building commissioner and the petitioners on whether a variance is necessary this dispute must be presented to the Board of Appeals for resolution. No application with such disputed variances shall be considered complete and shall not be accepted until the Board of Appeals makes a decision. 2.  The City Clerk, within three (3) business days of receipt of the application, Shall distribute nine (9) copies of the application and all other required special permit submission materials to the City Council, (8) (2) copies to the Planning Board  Director and one (1) copy each to the

Conservation Commission and the City Engineer for review and comment. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. A communication dated June 11, 2014 was received from Tina Cassidy, Planning Director, Woburn Planning Board as follows:

 

Re: Alderman Rich Haggerty – Zoning Ordinance Amendment – To amend Section 11.3 Procedure for Special Permits

 

Dear Mr. Campbell and Members of the City Council:

 

At the meeting held on June 10, 2014, the Planning Board conducted a public hearing on the above referenced zoning change. Please be advised that following the hearing, the Planning Board voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council that the proposed amendment be adopted, subject to the following additional change to the last phrase of Section 11.3.2 (language to be stricken shown in cross out):

 

“…and one (1) copy each to the Conservation Commission and the City Engineer for review and comment.”

 

If members of the City Council have any questions or concerns regarding the foregoing recommendation, please feel free to contact me.

 

Sincerely, s/Tina Cassidy, Planning Director

 

A report was received from the Committee on Ordinances as follows: “ought to pass.” PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. Motion made and 2nd that the public hearing be closed, all in favor, 9-0. Motion made and 2nd that the COMMITTEE REPORT be ADOPTED, AS AMENDED with the amendment as follows: That the recommendations of the Planning Board be adopted, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: June 19, 2014                       s/Scott D. Galvin June 19, 2014

_________________________

 

CITIZEN’S PARTICIPATION:  None.

_________________________

 

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

 

PUBLIC SAFETY AND LICENSES:

 

On the petition by Cambridge Road Auto Service, Inc. dba Woburn Plaza Shell, committee report was received “ought to pass”. Motion made and 2nd that the COMMITTEE REPORT be ADOPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor June 19, 2014 and ten days having elapsed without same being approved, said License became effective without his signature on July 1, 2014.

 

************************* PERSONNEL:

 

On the matter regarding the search for a Human Resources Director, committee report was received “return to City Council with recommendation to accept proposed job description with salary listed as commensurate with experience.” Motion made and 2nd that the COMMITTEE REPORT be ADOPTED, as amended with the amendment as follows: That the City Council authorizes the Human Resources Director to advertise to fill the vacancy in the office of Human Resources Director, all in favor, 9-0. Presented to the Mayor June 19, 2014 and ten days having elapsed without same being approved, said Order became effective without his signature on July 1, 2014. _________________________

 

NEW PETITIONS:

 

Petition by Shamrock Running Club, P.O. Box 602, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 for a Special Event Permit to allow a road race and health walk in the area of Spence Farm on July 4, 2014. Motion made and 2nd that the SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT be GRANTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: June 19, 2014                       s/Scott D. Galvin June 19, 2014

 

*************************

Petition by M&L Transit Systems Inc., 60 Olympia Avenue for renewal of a Common

Carrier License for two (2) vehicles. Motion made and 2nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND LICENSES, all in favor, 9-

0.

 

*************************

Petition by Robson Lugad Dias, 2 Westgate Drive #202, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 for a new Livery License for one (1) vehicle. Motion made and 2nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND LICENSES, all in favor, 9-

0.

 

*************************

A Conservation Easement and Restriction was received from Anthony Ferranti and

Michelle Ferranti pursuant to Sections 31, 32 and 33 of Chapter 184 of the Massachusetts General Laws granting to the City of Woburn in perpetuity and exclusively for conservation purposes a Conservation Restriction on a certain land located in Woburn, Massachusetts consisting of approximately 5,542 square feet of land, more or less, as shown as “Conservation Restriction Area” on a plan of land in Woburn, Massachusetts entitled “Conservation Restriction Plan of Land, 7 Arbor Lane in Woburn, MA” and recorded herewith (the “Premises”), for Grantors’ title, see deed recorded in said Registry at Book 32451, Page 498. Alderman Gaffney stated that this petition will allow a deck to be constructed at the home with a stairway to an existing deck. Alderman Gately stated that the area is an unbuildable wetland, and that the city should accept the restriction.

Motion made and 2nd that the CONSERVATION RESTRICTION be ACCEPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: June 19, 2014                       s/Scott D. Galvin June 19, 2014

 

*************************

A communication dated June 9, 2014 with attachments was received from Attorney Brian D. McGrail, 599 North Avenue, Suite 7, Second Floor, Wakefield, Massachusetts 01880 as follows:

 

Re: C.N. Wood Realty LLC, 200 Merrimac Street – Woburn, Massachusetts

 

Dear Mr. Clerk:

 

C.N. Wood Realty LLC respectfully requests a minor change/modification to its Special Permit issued by the City Council on April 15, 2014, that allowed an addition to be constructed on the existing building as an extension or alteration of a pre-existing nonconforming structure or use at 200 Merrimac Street, Woburn, Massachusetts.

 

Upon completion of the building permit plans two changes have been discovered as follows:

 

  1. The footprint of the addition is being reduced to 9,000 square feet as compared to the 9,550 allowed by the Special Permit.
  2. All six (6) of the overhead bay doors are be located on the rear of the addition. Originally, two (2) of the six (6) overhead bay doors were to be located on the side of the addition.

 

Both changes are shown on a new Sheet C-1 Layout & Materials Plan prepared by Allen & Major Associates, Inc. dated January 28, 2014 with a final revision date of June 6, 2014.

 

Thank you for your consideration and please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions.

 

Very truly yours, s/Brian D. McGrail, Esq.

 

Alderman Gately stated that this request should be approved, that this will be an improvement over the original proposal, that he spoke to the Building Commissioner regarding the matter, and the Building Commissioner did not express and concern. Alderman Mercer-Bruen stated that the City Council’s standard is that a minor modification is a scrivener’s error, and that at the very least this matter should be sent to

the Committee on Special Permits for review. Motion made and 2nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON SPECIAL PERMITS, as amended, with the

conditions as follows: That a communication be forwarded to the Building Commissioner inquiring as to whether he has any objections to the request, all in favor, 9-0. _________________________

 

COMMUNICATIONS AND REPORTS: None.

_________________________

 

UNFINISHED BUSINESS OF PRECEDING MEETING: 

 

On the notice of intent to move for reconsideration filed by President Haggerty relative to his vote in support of the motion to approve the FY2015 Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund budget.  Motion made by President Haggerty and 2nd to allow reconsideration of the vote to approve the FY2015 Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund budget, all in favor, 9-0. President Haggerty stated that this will clarify the vote on the amount of the Water and

Sewer Enterprise Fund budget. Motion made and 2nd that the WATER & SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGET including indirect costs in the sum of $19,899,042.97 be ADOPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: June 19, 2014                  s/Scott D. Galvin June 19, 2014

_________________________

 

APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS: None.

________________________

 

MOTIONS, ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS:

 

 

RESOLVED Be it Resolved that the City Council requests the Planning Director to

prepare a presentation for the City Council on the benefits of Planned Development Districts. The presentation should include but not be limited to proposed areas where a Planned Development District might be considered, an explanation of the process of developing and adopting a Planned Development District, provide examples of successful and unsuccessful Planned Development Districts, and provide action items for the City Council should the Council wish to move forward with the development of such districts.

 

s/President Haggerty

 

Motion made and 2nd that the RESOLVE be ADOPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor June 19, 2014 and ten days having elapsed without same being approved, said Resolve became effective without his signature on July 1, 2014.

 

*************************

ORDERED     Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Woburn that the provisions of M.G.L. c. 200A, §9A be accepted to provide the Treasurer/Collector with an alternative procedure for the disposal of abandoned funds held in the custody of the city.

 

s/President Haggerty

 

Motion made and 2nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON ORDINANCES, all in favor, 9-0.

 

*************************

ORDERED     Be it Ordained by the City Council of the City of Woburn that the city hereby accepts Section 3 to 7, inclusive of Chapter 44B of the General Laws, otherwise known as the Massachusetts Community Preservation Act, by approving a surcharge on real property for the purposes permitted by said Act, including the acquisition, creation and preservation of open space, the acquisition, creation, preservation and support of historic resources, the acquisition, creation, preservation, rehabilitation and restoration of land for recreational use, the acquisition, creation, preservation and support of community housing, and the rehabilitation and restoration of such open space and community housing that is acquired or created as provided under such Act; that the amount of such surcharge on real property shall be one percent (1%) of the annual real estate tax levy against real property commencing in Fiscal 2016; and that the city hereby accepts the following exemptions from such surcharge permitted under Section 3(e) of said Act:  property owned and occupied as a domicile by a person who would qualify for low income housing or low or moderate income senior housing in the city as defined in Section 2 of the Act;  $100,000 of the value of each taxable parcel of residential real property, and $100,000 of the value of each taxable parcel of class three, commercial property, and class four, industrial property as defined in section 2A of chapter 59, of the General Laws;

 

Be it further Ordered that if a majority of the voters voting on said question vote in the affirmative, then the provisions of the Act shall take effect in the city on July 1, 2015;

 

Be it further Ordered that the city clerk inform the secretary of the commonwealth no later than September 5, 2014 to place the following question on the November 4, 2014 state election ballot:

 

“Shall this city accept sections 3 to 7, inclusive of chapter 44B of the General Laws, as approved by its legislative body, a summary of which appears below?”

 

Be it further Ordered that the city solicitor communicate with the secretary of the commonwealth no later than September 5, 2014 for the purposes of submitting a fair, concise summary of the law to be acted upon for printing on the November 4, 2014 state election ballot with said question

 

s/President Haggerty and Alderman Drapeau

 

Alderman Drapeau stated that this is a worthwhile proposal, that the CPA was not approved the last time it was on the ballot in Woburn but this is a different proposal, that the last proposal was a 3% surcharge and this is a 1% surcharge with certain exemptions in place, that the CPA allows the city flexibility in purchasing open space, that adopting the Order allows the voters to make the decision, that this action approves moving the matter to the ballot, and that the city could use the revenue to fund the library project. Alderman Raymond stated that this is an excellent ballot question, that the committee working on the matter will find it difficult to explain to voters the reason for the vote, and that he suggests that the group attend neighborhood meetings to inform the public. Alderman Anderson stated that a new school, library addition and fire station projects will be coming soon and these will require additional tax levies, that the city will control those projects, that a 1% surcharge is an additional $1,000,000.00 in new taxes, that the City Council should not be a rubber stamp for a ballot question, that the petitioners can use the petition method by gathering signatures from 5% of the voters but that will be difficult to do, that the meals tax is an example of another recent new tax, that the group has done a good job, that spending is up 2½% to 4%, and that this tax is also on the commercial side. Alderman DiTucci stated that the meals tax was to be used for the purchase of open space but is being sent to the General Fund, and that if this ballot question passes the funds will go to open space purchases. Alderman Mercer-Bruen stated that this proposal is for another tax, that the city does a fabulous job managing open space, that she does not share the opinion to approve an additional tax, and that the petitioners can obtain the signatures. Alderman Concannon stated that this Order does not impose a new tax but will allow taxpayers to decide whether they want the CPA. Alderman Gately stated he will support the proposal as this will be beneficial to the community. Motion made and 2nd that the ORDER be ADOPTED, 7 in favor, 2 opposed (Anderson, Mercer-Bruen opposed).

Presented to the Mayor: June 19, 2014                  s/Scott D. Galvin June 19, 2014 *************************

President Haggerty stepped down from the chair and Alderman Anderson assumed the chair.

 

*************************

ORDERED The City of Woburn hereby petitions the Great and General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to enact the following proposed Special Act:

 

An Act authorizing the licensing authority of the City of Woburn to issue additional licenses for the sale of all alcoholic beverages to be drunk on the premises.

 

Section 1.

 

Notwithstanding Section 17 of Chapter 138 of the General Laws, the licensing authority of the City of Woburn may grant six (6) licenses for the sale of all alcoholic beverages to be drunk on the premises under Section 12 of said Chapter 138.  The licenses shall be subject to all of said Chapter 138, except Section 17.

 

Section 2.

 

The licensing authority of the City of Woburn shall restrict the licenses granted under Sections 1 and 2 of this Act as to number and to persons, corporations, organizations, and entities located in the following locations:

 

  1. Three (3) licenses for the sale of all alcoholic beverages to be drunk on premises to be available for the property known as 369 Washington Street, as more specifically shown on a plan which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Woburn.

 

  1. Two (2) licenses for the sale of all alcoholic beverages to be drunk on premises known as 399 Washington Street, as more specifically shown on a plan which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Woburn.

 

  1. One (1) license for the sale of all alcoholic beverages to be drunk on premises to the property and building presently known as The Crestview Plaza, 36 Montvale Avenue, Woburn, Massachusetts as more specifically shown on a plan which is on file with the City Clerk of the City of Woburn.

 

(The properties identified in subparagraph (a) – (c) above being referred to in this Act as a “Permitted Location”.)

 

Section 3.

 

License granted under this Section shall not be transferable to any other person, corporation or organization for a period of three (3) years from the date of original issuance or three (3) years from the enactment of this legislation, whichever is later.   Any transfer in violation of Sections 2(a), (b) or (c) of this Act shall render said license null and void.

 

Section 4.

 

Notwithstanding Sections 12 and 77 of Chapter 138 of the General Laws, the licensing authority of the City of Woburn may restrict the licenses issued pursuant to this Act to holders of common victualler licenses.

 

Section 5.

 

If a license granted under this section is revoked or no longer in use at the location of original issuance, it shall be returned physically, with all of the legal rights and privileges pertaining thereto, to the licensing authority which may then grant the license to a new applicant only at the same location under the same conditions as specified in the act provided that the applicant files with the licensing authority a letter from the Department of Revenue and a letter from the Division of

Unemployment Assistance indicating that the license is in good standing with those entities and that all applicable taxes, fees and contributions have been paid.

 

Section 6.

 

This Act shall take effect upon its passage.

 

s/President Haggerty, Alderman Gately and

Alderman Mercer-Bruen

 

President Haggerty stated that the additional liquor licenses will support economic development at the Crestview on Montvale Avenue and at the former W.R. Grace site and former Crestview auto dealership both on Washington Street, that this is the first step in allowing an opportunity to develop these properties, that the license commission would retain jurisdiction and control over the licenses, that he is not aware if anyone is waiting for a liquor license, and that the licenses will be issued for a certain address but not a particular entity. Alderman Mercer-Bruen stated that the W.R. Grace property was purchased and proposals for using the property are coming together none of which requires a zoning change, that these new licenses will help develop the property, and that one proposal is for a hotel with a restaurant as well as other restaurants in the area. Alderman Concannon stated that liquor licenses should be a local matter, that he is not aware of the potential uses of the Washington Street parcels, that he would like to see the parcels developed, that six licenses would be earmarked for specific locations, that he wants to know if there are businesses that have been waiting for a license, and that the City Council should get answers to these questions. Alderman Gaffney stated that the State has been looking into amending the process to allow cities and towns to determine whether additional liquor licenses should be granted in their community. Motion made and 2nd that the ORDER be ADOPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: June 19, 2014                  s/Scott D. Galvin June 19, 2014

 

*************************

Alderman Anderson stepped down from the chair and President Haggerty assumed the chair.

 

*************************

ORDERED     Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Woburn that Title 3, Revenue and Finance, of the Woburn Municipal Code be amended by adding the following new Article and Section:

 

VI. Demand Fees – Unpaid Taxes

 

3-34  The Treasurer/Collector shall charge a fee of $10.00 for each written demand issued for unpaid real estate, personal property and excise tax, which fee is to be added to and collected as part of the tax, as authorized by M.G.L. c.60, §15, effective as of July 1, 2014.

 

s/President Haggerty                                           Per request of Mayor and

Treasurer/Collector

 

Motion made and 2nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON ORDINANCES, all in favor, 9-0.

_________________________

 

Motion made and 2nd to ADJOURN, all in favor, 9-0. Meeting adjourned at 8:54 p.m.

 

A TRUE RECORD ATTEST:

 

 

 

William C. Campbell

City Clerk and Clerk of the City Council

 

 

Feedback