09-06-23 Public Works Committee Report
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View 09-06-23 Public Works Committee Report as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 1,416
- Pages: 8
Town Council Town of Watertown Committee on Public Works, Meeting June 16, 2009 Report: June 23, 2009 The Committee met June 16th at 5pm in the Council Chambers to discuss 1) traffic calming on Maplewood St; 2) Ridgelawn Cemetery expansion; 3) policy on betterments; and 4) fees for business recycling. Present were: Susan Falkoff, Chair; Steve Corbett, Vice-chair; Vincent Piccirilli, Secretary; DPW Superintendent Gerald Mee; Deputy Superintendent Sue Tamber; Mary Haley, DPW; Steven Magoon, Director of Community Development & Planning; Alice Wadden, Recycling Advisory Committee; Mari Ryan, Bicycle-Pedestrian Committee; Ruth Thomasian and Joseph Butler, Trees for Watertown; Ann Asnes, Bellevue Rd; and Christine Laubenstein, Watertown Tab & Press. Policy on Betterments: As a follow up to the draft ordinance distributed on the March 12th meeting (copy attached), Mr. Magoon gave a brief review of sections 8.06 Curb and Sidewalk Installation Funding and 8.07 Procedural prerequisites to performance betterment financed granite curbing or sidewalk improvements. Discussion followed on several points: •
Councilor Falkoff asked of this proposed betterment policy was in accordance with the Department of Revenue’s policy “Betterments and Special Assessment” dated April 2001. Mr. Magoon will look into this and report back. The document is available at http://www.mass.gov/Ador/docs/dls/publ/misc/betterments.pdf
•
It was clarified under 8.07(c) that the 51% vote of abutting owners is based on one vote per property, and not based on frontage. Councilor Corbett though this is too low and perhaps should be 75%.
•
Councilor Piccirilli asked if the requirement to prepare engineering drawings in 8.07(f) was excessive, considering that the town does not prepare drawings for rehabilitation projects where the street geometry is not changed, and only uses typical cross-sections. Mr. Magoon said there should be some flexibility if the work is straightforward, and perhaps the requirement should be “only if required by the DPW Superintendent”. If street calming measures are requested, then drawings would be needed.
•
Mari Ryan asked what the costs are for curbing. Mr. Mee stated that it depends on quantity, but granite is about $28 to $35 a foot, and asphalt $5 to $15. The cost of the sidewalk must also be considered.
•
The question was raised about whether a property owner may choose to pay full price to have new curbs and/or sidewalks installed in front of their property, as is currently required by the DPW of developers of any new project that requires site plan review. It was agreed that this would be permitted provided that the new curb is granite and the new sidewalk is concrete; that the materials match the prevailing materials on the street; and that the proposed work is approved by the DPW Superintendent to insure that the work will not cause any safety, grading, or drainage issues.
•
Mr. Magoon will revise the document for further review.
Page 1 of 3
Committee on Public Works Report – June 23, 2009 Traffic Calming on Maplewood Street Mr. Mee presented a plan that he developed for traffic calming on Maplewood St, because of long-standing complaints from the neighborhood about speeding traffic that uses it as a cutthrough. •
Maplewood St from Arlington St to Edgecliff Rd was scheduled for mill & overlay rehabilitation, and Mr. Mee would like to extend the mill & overlay to School St and incorporate traffic calming measures. By adding these measures as part of the rehabilitation, they can be done at a much lower cost than if they were done as a retrofit.
•
The first element would be three “raised tables” mid-block between Hillside Rd, Langdon Ave, Winsor Ave, and School St. These would be about 12 feet long, and would not go all the way to the curb so as not to interfere with drainage and to prevent vehicles from going up on the sidewalk. These are not “speed bumps” which can cause vehicles to go out of control if they are hit at high speed.
•
Mr. Magoon stated that the Planning Department supports this measure. The Committee voted unanimously to approve the installation of speed tables as described.
•
The second element would be a reconfiguration of the confusing intersection of Maplewood St, Edgecliff Rd and Summit Rd. Parts of this intersection are up to 40 feet wide, and the roads will be straightened out and narrowed down to perhaps 25 ft wide by the placement of new asphalt curbs. This will improve sightlines and slow traffic.
•
Mari Ryan pointed out that there are no stop signs at Maplewood for Summit Rd, Irma Ave, Kimball Rd, and Templeton Parkway. Mr. Mee said under state law stops signs are not required, but he would be willing to petition the Traffic Commission to have stop signs installed after the construction is complete.
•
Mr. Mee said the Maplewood project will begin in July, and he will update this Committee on the status of the entire road rehabilitation project in the July meeting.
Ridgelawn Cemetery Expansion Mr. Mee presented a preliminary design concept for the remaining triangle of undeveloped cemetery land defined by the Waltham border, Partridge St, and Highland Ave. Ridgelawn Cemetery is filling up, with about 135 burials per year, and there are only about 30 unsold plots left. Burial space is rapidly disappearing in Massachusetts cities, and burial practices are changing with more of a trend toward cremation, and this design concept addresses both of these issues. •
The concept envisions above-ground structures for caskets and urns, five gathering areas for ceremonies, and a new workshop. There will be about 4700 crypts about 36” x 30” x 120” for caskets, and about 700 12” x 12” niches for urns.
•
Above-ground crypts are now in use at Calvary Cemetery in Waltham and Mt Auburn Cemetery. These structures would be between 10 to 17 feet high, depending whether they were on flat areas or built into a hillside.
•
Mr. Mee did not have the exact figures with him, but he said the Town charges $800 for a burial plot, which can hold two caskets stacked on top of one another. There is a $400 charge per burial for a casket, and $150 for an urn. Mr. Mee said we also need to Page 2 of 3
Committee on Public Works Report – June 23, 2009 re-examine our charges for burial plots, noting that surrounding cemeteries charge thousands of dollars. •
Ms. Thomasian spoke about the value of planting trees in the cemetery.
•
Mr. Mee noted that this is a long term project, and not all of it will be built at once. He is also making plans to put in perhaps 100 new burial plots at the Warren St end to accommodate burials for the short term.
•
Mr. Mee would like to continue discussions of this concept with local funeral directors, and requested this be scheduled for the September meeting.
Fees for business recycling: As a follow up from the March 12, 2009 and April 1, 2008 meetings, we continued discussion on the possibility of curbside recycling for commercial customers, as well as trash fees for commercial customers who choose to have the town collect their waste. The fees have not changed since 1993. •
Ms. Tamber discussed preliminary findings from a survey of surrounding communities. Most do not provide commercial trash collection and some provide it on a limited basis. Only one requires businesses to recycle. More information is needed before the DPW can make a recommendation on curbside commercial recycling pickup.
•
Regarding trash fees for businesses, the DPW will study this further and make a recommendation based on what private haulers are charging. Mr. Mee questioned whether it makes sense to continue commercial trash pickup at all now that we no longer have to meet minimum tonnage at the incinerator.
•
Ms. Wadden asked about recycling pickup at the Boys and Girls Club. Many bottles are used there and recycling would have educational value. Mr. Mee said that since this is a town-owned property, he will have Allied pick up their recycled material.
Other issues: •
Snow Removal Practices: Mr. Mee said he needs to update the survey results and prepare policy changes for the joint committees to discuss. He would like to do this in September.
The proposed date for the next meeting is July 15th at 5 pm. The agenda will be further review of the street and sidewalk policy, update on street and sidewalk construction, and trash fees. The committee adjourned at 6:50 pm. Report submitted by: Vincent Piccirilli
Page 3 of 3
Councilor Falkoff asked of this proposed betterment policy was in accordance with the Department of Revenue’s policy “Betterments and Special Assessment” dated April 2001. Mr. Magoon will look into this and report back. The document is available at http://www.mass.gov/Ador/docs/dls/publ/misc/betterments.pdf
•
It was clarified under 8.07(c) that the 51% vote of abutting owners is based on one vote per property, and not based on frontage. Councilor Corbett though this is too low and perhaps should be 75%.
•
Councilor Piccirilli asked if the requirement to prepare engineering drawings in 8.07(f) was excessive, considering that the town does not prepare drawings for rehabilitation projects where the street geometry is not changed, and only uses typical cross-sections. Mr. Magoon said there should be some flexibility if the work is straightforward, and perhaps the requirement should be “only if required by the DPW Superintendent”. If street calming measures are requested, then drawings would be needed.
•
Mari Ryan asked what the costs are for curbing. Mr. Mee stated that it depends on quantity, but granite is about $28 to $35 a foot, and asphalt $5 to $15. The cost of the sidewalk must also be considered.
•
The question was raised about whether a property owner may choose to pay full price to have new curbs and/or sidewalks installed in front of their property, as is currently required by the DPW of developers of any new project that requires site plan review. It was agreed that this would be permitted provided that the new curb is granite and the new sidewalk is concrete; that the materials match the prevailing materials on the street; and that the proposed work is approved by the DPW Superintendent to insure that the work will not cause any safety, grading, or drainage issues.
•
Mr. Magoon will revise the document for further review.
Page 1 of 3
Committee on Public Works Report – June 23, 2009 Traffic Calming on Maplewood Street Mr. Mee presented a plan that he developed for traffic calming on Maplewood St, because of long-standing complaints from the neighborhood about speeding traffic that uses it as a cutthrough. •
Maplewood St from Arlington St to Edgecliff Rd was scheduled for mill & overlay rehabilitation, and Mr. Mee would like to extend the mill & overlay to School St and incorporate traffic calming measures. By adding these measures as part of the rehabilitation, they can be done at a much lower cost than if they were done as a retrofit.
•
The first element would be three “raised tables” mid-block between Hillside Rd, Langdon Ave, Winsor Ave, and School St. These would be about 12 feet long, and would not go all the way to the curb so as not to interfere with drainage and to prevent vehicles from going up on the sidewalk. These are not “speed bumps” which can cause vehicles to go out of control if they are hit at high speed.
•
Mr. Magoon stated that the Planning Department supports this measure. The Committee voted unanimously to approve the installation of speed tables as described.
•
The second element would be a reconfiguration of the confusing intersection of Maplewood St, Edgecliff Rd and Summit Rd. Parts of this intersection are up to 40 feet wide, and the roads will be straightened out and narrowed down to perhaps 25 ft wide by the placement of new asphalt curbs. This will improve sightlines and slow traffic.
•
Mari Ryan pointed out that there are no stop signs at Maplewood for Summit Rd, Irma Ave, Kimball Rd, and Templeton Parkway. Mr. Mee said under state law stops signs are not required, but he would be willing to petition the Traffic Commission to have stop signs installed after the construction is complete.
•
Mr. Mee said the Maplewood project will begin in July, and he will update this Committee on the status of the entire road rehabilitation project in the July meeting.
Ridgelawn Cemetery Expansion Mr. Mee presented a preliminary design concept for the remaining triangle of undeveloped cemetery land defined by the Waltham border, Partridge St, and Highland Ave. Ridgelawn Cemetery is filling up, with about 135 burials per year, and there are only about 30 unsold plots left. Burial space is rapidly disappearing in Massachusetts cities, and burial practices are changing with more of a trend toward cremation, and this design concept addresses both of these issues. •
The concept envisions above-ground structures for caskets and urns, five gathering areas for ceremonies, and a new workshop. There will be about 4700 crypts about 36” x 30” x 120” for caskets, and about 700 12” x 12” niches for urns.
•
Above-ground crypts are now in use at Calvary Cemetery in Waltham and Mt Auburn Cemetery. These structures would be between 10 to 17 feet high, depending whether they were on flat areas or built into a hillside.
•
Mr. Mee did not have the exact figures with him, but he said the Town charges $800 for a burial plot, which can hold two caskets stacked on top of one another. There is a $400 charge per burial for a casket, and $150 for an urn. Mr. Mee said we also need to Page 2 of 3
Committee on Public Works Report – June 23, 2009 re-examine our charges for burial plots, noting that surrounding cemeteries charge thousands of dollars. •
Ms. Thomasian spoke about the value of planting trees in the cemetery.
•
Mr. Mee noted that this is a long term project, and not all of it will be built at once. He is also making plans to put in perhaps 100 new burial plots at the Warren St end to accommodate burials for the short term.
•
Mr. Mee would like to continue discussions of this concept with local funeral directors, and requested this be scheduled for the September meeting.
Fees for business recycling: As a follow up from the March 12, 2009 and April 1, 2008 meetings, we continued discussion on the possibility of curbside recycling for commercial customers, as well as trash fees for commercial customers who choose to have the town collect their waste. The fees have not changed since 1993. •
Ms. Tamber discussed preliminary findings from a survey of surrounding communities. Most do not provide commercial trash collection and some provide it on a limited basis. Only one requires businesses to recycle. More information is needed before the DPW can make a recommendation on curbside commercial recycling pickup.
•
Regarding trash fees for businesses, the DPW will study this further and make a recommendation based on what private haulers are charging. Mr. Mee questioned whether it makes sense to continue commercial trash pickup at all now that we no longer have to meet minimum tonnage at the incinerator.
•
Ms. Wadden asked about recycling pickup at the Boys and Girls Club. Many bottles are used there and recycling would have educational value. Mr. Mee said that since this is a town-owned property, he will have Allied pick up their recycled material.
Other issues: •
Snow Removal Practices: Mr. Mee said he needs to update the survey results and prepare policy changes for the joint committees to discuss. He would like to do this in September.
The proposed date for the next meeting is July 15th at 5 pm. The agenda will be further review of the street and sidewalk policy, update on street and sidewalk construction, and trash fees. The committee adjourned at 6:50 pm. Report submitted by: Vincent Piccirilli
Page 3 of 3
Related Documents
09-06-23 Public Works Committee Report
June 2020 3
Public Works
June 2020 4
Public Works Employment
November 2019 7
