2017 Belmont Town Meeting, Night 2, Special Town Meeting LIVE

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Town meeting again.

Hello to the second night of the annual Belmont Town Meeting at Belmont High School. 

Tonight’s topics will be booze, pot and the CPA with a special town meeting called to vote on changes to the town’s liquid licensing bylaw concerning transfer of licenses than a vote supporting a temporary moratorium on retail sales of marijuana and finally votes to approve or deny items on the Community Preservation Committee’s request list.

7:09 p.m.: We are starting a bit late, even for Belmont, which starts every meeting five minutes past the scheduled start time. 

Moderator Mike Widmer is explaining why he will not allow non-Town Meeting members to speak on Article 10, the Welcoming Town article. Belmont has representative Town Meeting, and so each member can not just express their opinion but also members in their precincts. 

First up tonight is Bill Lovallo who is speaking on the Belmont High School Building Committee. You can go here to see where the building committee is at this time. Some news is made tonight as Lovallo said the committee would select one of the three configurations which will be studied by this time in 2018. 

7:25 p.m.: Article 6, the temporary moratorium of establishing retail marijuana operations, is being read and explained. This isn’t a controversial article, as the town is following the state in asking for a 6-month delay to July 1, 2018, in creating a bylaw on the rules and regulations for the sale of recreational marijuana.

7:30 p.m.: The Special Town Meeting is being convened concerning the transfer of all-alcohol licenses. Widmer said the focus of the two articles would NOT be the relitigation of why we are here. i.e., the Loading Dock, but on the feasibility of the new rules.

Selectman Mark Paolillo, who is presenting the articles, explains that in 2013, the town made an oversight that the non-transferability language in previous all alcohol licenses, was mistakenly not added on six new licenses. The selectmen always wanted to grant licenses to enhance businesses, never to be a windfall or an asset for the businesses.

Under the articles, all licenses will be non-transferable. If Town Meeting approves, the measure will need legislative approval. Until then, all licenses are transferable. Why make restaurant licenses also non-transferable? Just for uniformity. 

Restaurant licenses provide viability to the business community, nothing more.

Tomi Olson, Pct. 5, and chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee is seeking to amend the first article by adding the phase “for use at any other location.” 

Erin Luben, a member of EDAC, who wrote the amendments, believe the town should allow transferability of licenses because owners may need to sell a license to leave a business or simply sell it. No one would buy a restaurant or store that sells liquor/beer/wine. What the articles would do is undermine businesses in town. The new language will allow a business to sell it to a new owner at the same location or bringing it to a new site. That is pro-business.

Ralph Jones, Pct. 3. is opposing the new language since it makes a license an economic asset. It should not be bought or sold. We want to avoid what occurred in 2016, and we want clear language. The Olson/Luben amendment will muddy the waters. The important concept is that the amendment allows decisions to be decided by business owners and not the town. 

Anne Marie Mahoney, Pct. 8, said as a former selectman who granted the licenses made a compact with the town that the licenses would not be a commodity for large corporations that buys and sells and could lead to corruption as seen in other locations in the state.

Dr. David Alper, Pct 6, said that food licenses are not transferable and why should it be. 

George Hall, town counsel, said with transferability, the business owner selects who can buy the license. If it goes back to the town, there is a far greater number of entities who can apply for the license, so it’s far more fair. 

Jim Williams, Selectman, said Town Meeting has a goldilocks choice, either no transferability, full transferability or something in-between. Williams said he voted in favor of the amendments because it can promote business activity.

Adam Dash, said the words of the amendments are very small but the effect is very large. It’s in Belmont’s best interest to have a larger number of buyers rather than who the business wants. He said the amendment is actually anti-business as it limits the number of businesses which can seek the license. 

Roy Epstein, Warrant Committee, said there are many gray areas with businesses – a parent selling to a child, change the location to increase business etc. – so he is willing to approve the amendments and hope that nothing really bad happens.

The question has been moved to suspend debate and it passes easily. So after the introduction of the article, the amendment and debate: exactly 90 minutes. 

The vote on the amendment by Tomi Olson. 37 to 226. Defeated.

Finally, a vote on the first amendment on requesting the legislature to end transferability for retail all liquor licenses: 244-18 in favor. 

9:30 p.m.: Now up is to end transferability of the 26 restaurant – also known as pour – licenses. There are 13 licenses currently held by business owners. It passes 223-19.

9:40 p.m.: Up now is the marijuana moratorium which delays by 6 months until June 31, 2018 when the town is required to have a permitting process and a bylaw on where a retail business can be located. This article follows the state’s 6-month delay on the creation of a state control board.

Don Mercier, Pct. 8, requested the delay be increased to June 30, 2019. Widmer said that was too substantial a change and is rejected. 

Article 6 passes on a voice vote.

9:55 p.m.: Now up is the annual CPC projects, numbering five this year. This should go by quickly.

With Treasurer Floyd Carman leading the way, the projects are:

$336,000 to restore the Grove Street tennis courts. Approved by voice vote.

$173,200 to repair and restore portions of Sherman Garden. Approved by voice vote.

$24,125 to preserve historical artifacts and create a mini-museum at the Sons of Italy state headquarters which is located on Concord Avenue. Bob McLaughlin, Pct. 2, said while he loves this sort of project, it’s not a Belmont project. By OK-ing this one, how do you deny any other ethnic organizations? Crowley said he had is own forgiving but this is an important cultural 

Belmont Day School, Residents Waiting on Dover Decision

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Residents at the Planning Board meeting Tuesday night.

The Board of Selectmen’s Room in Belmont’s Town Hall was stuffed to the rafters with residents Tuesday night, May 2 as the Planning Board reopened the public hearing to hear from both sides of a now controversial development planned at a private school on Belmont Hill.

By the end of the 90-minute meeting, it was apparent the Planning Board’s next step rests on a legal interpretation by Belmont Town Counsel George Hall whether the Belmont Day School could be required to undertake a pair of potentially time-consuming and expensive independent reviews of the impact the proposed develop could have on local traffic levels and stormwater.

The Belmont Planning Board.

It is an action the Day School’s legal representative considers mute due to the state General Law 40a (3) (2) – known as the Dover Amendment – protecting education and religious entities from land use regulations; the same legal standard used more than two decades ago to build another contentious project in town, the Boston LDS Temple.

“We need to bear in mind the Dover Amendment, which means in situations like this, where there is a proposal to build a structure for an educational purpose, we are limited to imposing reasonable regulations,” said Acting Planning Board Chair Barbara Fiacco of the construction of an indoor gym/classroom space and a new road/driveway at the Day School, a private kindergarten/elementary/middle school located off Concord Avenue on Day School Lane.

The Day School has reported it would want construction on the project to begin in the fall of 2017 with a September 2018 opening.

Speaking of the Day School, Kelly Durfee Cardoza from Avalon Consulting opened the meeting telling the board the school had met with abutters and carefully attempted to address some issues immediately such as moving a dumpster away from the border with the town’s cemetery. 

Kelly Durfee Cardoza, Avalon Consulting

Cardoza also told the board the school would introduce a Transportation Demand Plan which when implemented would use a series of actions such as car pooling, traffic monitoring, establishing a commuter ride system and stagger arrival and departures to reduce the level of traffic to and from the school.

The two camps opposing the Day School’s plans – reportedly the two groups have no intention of joining their efforts due to longstanding animosity among certain neighbors – believe the construction of what is being dubbed “The Barn” will increase enrollment and subsequently bring additional vehicle traffic onto the section of Concord Avenue which residents note is jammed during the morning and evening rush to work and home.

Opponents also believe a new access road/driveway into the school off Concord Avenue will lead to unsafe driving conditions, possible drainage issues and disturb those visiting the town’s Highland Cemetery.

One group has hired an independent traffic consultant, Robert Vanasse of Vanasse & Associates, Inc. who told the board the Day School’s traffic study is insufficient in several areas of concern, including not mentioning the weekday half-mile queue of cars on Concord Avenue in the morning and afternoon, the causes of accidents in the vicinity of the school, and the high rate of speed along the roadway.

Robert Vanasse, Vanasse & Associates

Vanasse said while he was not opposed to having the new roadway to the school to be used for “emergencies only,” adding a new intersection on busy Concord Avenue.

Also, the town’s Cemetery Commission has written to the Planning Board on its concerns about stormwater, traffic and the loss of what many are calling “the decorum” of those who purchased plots in the graveyard as traffic on the new roadway will be mere feet from the site.

Stormwater management was also questioned whether the current infrastructure would be able to support a new road which would direct rainwater and snow runoff. 

But standing in the opponent’s attempts to restrict the effects of the new construction is how wide the Dover Amendment protects the Day School’s rights.

“The board should think carefully about whether they have the authority to request a peer review for the traffic study both under your site plan review bylaw and under the Dover Amendment” as both only allows for a review of “internal” traffic – within the school property – and not offsite matters, said Robinson & Cole’s Katherine Bailey.

Robinson & Cole’s Katherine Bailey

After a limited number of residents spoke mostly in favor of the school’s expansion, the Planning Board brought their own set of questions, including from the Board’s Raffi Manjikian who quired whether the school had an operation maintenance plan to ensure the previous material under the roadway will not fail after a limited number of years. 

Many of the questions posed by the Planning Board were seeking assurances from the Day School it would have plans in place and programs ready to meet all contingency issues regarding the main concerns of traffic, stormwater and being neighborly to the town’s cemetery. 

While the issue of requiring a third party peer review remained only conjecture at the meeting, Board member Joseph DeStefano asked the Day School to voluntarily submit to the second audit “as being part of this community” rather than seek legal advice from the town counsel.

When Fiacco said she wanted to hear from Hall on the board’s right to require the review, Bailey asked, “in the interest of timeliness” if the Day School could join in that discussion outside the public meeting.

If Hall decided a peer review is warranted, Bailey asked if the review could be started before the next public meeting “so to keep the process moving.” Fiacco tentatively agreed to the request if a Planning Board representative is present. 

Since the Planning Board determined at the beginning of the meeting it would not make a final decision; the next public meeting will be reopened on Tuesday, May 23.

2017 Belmont Town Meeting, Night 1 LIVE

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Belmont Town Meeting

And welcome to the first night of the 2017 annual Belmont Town Meeting being held in the Belmont High School auditorium, Monday, on May Day.

I have been told by Town Clerk Ellen Cushman that tonight’s meeting will attempt to vote on the first six articles in the warrant. That will include setting a standard 25 mph speed limit throughout town (article 3), revamp the Demolition Delay Bylaw (Article 4), update and codify a “signs” bylaw (Article 5) and accepting a temporary moratorium on the establishment of retail marijuana stores in town (article 6).

7:05 p.m.: Town Moderator Mike Widmer calls the meeting to order. The invocation is read by Pastor Cheryl Minor of All Saints Church.Boy Scouts Troops 304 and 377 along with Girl Scouts from Troops 62578, 79207, 85470 and 72490 present the flag while Girl Scouty Clarice O’Neil, a Butler 2nd grader, leads the meeting in the Pledge of Allegiance. The national anthem is sung by the Belmont High School senior A Capella.

7:22 p.m.: The new and re-elected town meeting members are sworn in by Town Clerk Cushman.

The Town Meeting honors the long-serving members. Mark D’Andrea (44 years) gives some practical advice to Town Meeting: Speak up when you come to the microphone.

7:28 p.m. A wonderful appreciation of Ruth Kaplan, who died at 98 in February.

7:30 p.m.: Town Moderator Mike Widmer said that there is “significant confusion” about the difference between an article and the motion. He also spoke about “scope” of an article under debate. It will be important when getting to articles such as pay as you throw and the Welcoming Town amendment. It will not be a debate about the Trump administration and its policies or be making any conjecture on the impact on the town’s finances by passing the article, he said. 

7:40 p.m.: And we are underway: Article 3 which is the speed limit article. Should Belmont reduce the “statutory speed limit” in thickly settled areas (basically all but three stretches or road in Belmont) or where there are special speed regulation; about 12 streets such as Goden, Lexington, School, and Clifton, to 25 mph.

Discussion: (lots of members already in line on this one) Joel Semuels, Pct. 6, worries that a minor traffic ticket could cause a $200 surcharge for six years on their insurance. Glenn Clancy, director of Office of Community Development, basically admits that the police has a great deal of “discretion” on giving tickets, admitting that if you are going just a bit over the speed limit, it’s unlikely you’ll be getting a ticket.

Bob McLaughlin, Pct. 2, (a proud owner of a Porsche) said he wished he could travel faster than second gear. He said he didn’t believe raising five mph isn’t that much safer. “What governs best, governs least.”

Rachel Berger, Pct. 2, while supporting the amendment, believes that it is enforcement not speed limit that will make roads safer.

Sue Bass, Pct. 3, agrees that it’s is enforcement that is important, especially signs that tell the speed limit.  She would also like to see more raised crosswalks.

Clancy said many communities are taking action in reducing speed limits which he believes will “recondition” how drivers throughout the region to drive at lower speeds, and if it takes ten years, will make roads safer.

Brooke McKenna, Pct 5, said lowering the speed limit may “not be a perfect solution,” – there could be more enforcement – but it is the first step towards safer roads. Slower speeds would result in higher survivability rates to victims of car accidents 

Paul Roberts, Pct. 8, said the way roads are used have changed – more bikes and pedestrians sharing the road – and smartphones putting more cut-through traffic onto local roads. “Don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good.”

Corinne Olmsted. Pct. 1, also brings up the issue of cut-through traffic that is sent through Belmont via traffic-avoidance software. Reducing the speed limit could make the town less attractive to those drivers.

Jack Weis, Pct. 1, said he’s opposing the amendment because it’s a “one size fits all” solution which doesn’t work on the major “commuter” roads that crisscross the town. If drivers don’t believe the speed is “practical” they will see how much above the limit they can go.

The question has been moved! One hour of debate. Whew!

And for some reason the vote was not registered, which had one member quip, “It’s the Russians.” 

So we go to a voice vote. It’s almost quaint to hear the yeas and nays. And the ayes have it. The speed limit in Belmont will soon be 25 mph with a few exceptions.

Next up, the Demolition Delay Bylaw amendment. Widmer reminds anyone who has a financial interest in a property impacted by the bylaw must mention it.

The bylaw, which originally passed in 2013, is being renewed due to a sunset clause. It only applies  to a limit number (182) of specific buildings, there is an appeals process, and it does not prevent demolitions, said Lauren Meier, the co-chair of the Historic District Commission. The most significant change is increasing the term of the delay from 6 to 12 months. “It’s not an undue financial burden,” Meier said.

You can read about the 2017 bylaw here.The Board of Selectmen and the Planning Board gave unanimous support to the renewal of the bylaw.

Some real opposition to the amendment by several members – many who opposed the bylaw in 2013 – who are aspirated by increasing to 12 months the delay.

The complains includes a restraint of private property rights, using the bylaw as a “lever” against a homeowner, there is a financial penalty on the property and, really, if some developer wants to tear down a historic building, he’ll just thumb their nose at the town, six months vs. 12 months. Meier said the bylaw isn’t perfect but it does give public notice and provides the community a way to have a voice on these issues. Good give and take on an issue that effects only two percent of the housing stock.

The motion called and here is the vote: 183 to 72 in favor – the bylaw passes.

9:55 p.m.: Now the “signs” amendment, sponsored by the Planning Board. Barbara Fiacco, vice chair of the Planning Board, presents the amendments briefly to the old bylaw which are 30 years old. Standing signs would be reduced to being no more than five feet high; window signs would be reduced from 50 percent to 20 percent of the total window area; there was no regulations and awnings and sandwich board sign; temporary signs will be reduced for 60 days; flashing signs and string of lights would be prohibited and you will have to maintain your sign. Non-commercial signs would be allowed in all zoning areas just to keep in within a recent Supreme Court ruling. What’s non-commercial? Schools, non-profits, religious 

Small business owners and some members feel some of the restrictions – strings of lights, a sign saying “Drive slow” – are nitpicking. What about those commercial signs for landscaping firms in the strip of land between the sidewalk and the street – known as the town’s right of way? It now has to be removed after 90 days or after the work is done, whatever is shorter. 

Vince Stanton, Pct. 3, then Bob McGaw, Pct. 1 and later Jack Weis, Pct. 1, were acting as copyeditors to the article, changing the wording for clarity.

What about the farmers market? The smaller ones in people’s yards have to be taken away after 90 days (it’s currently 100 days). 

Finally the questions end and the vote takes place. And it’s a big “Yes” margin, 186 – 46.

The meeting is now adjourned until Wednesday, May 3. 

Three Routes Presented As Finalists for Belmont’s Community Path

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Screenshot of the presentation from Pare Corp of one of the three top-ranking routes.

And now there are three.

After more than a half a year of analysis and study, the project management team conducting a feasibility study of a community path in Belmont presented to the public three possible routes that “scored” the highest.

“It was listening to the public and performing a great amount of analysis to come up with the highest ranking routes,” said Amy Archer of Pare Corp. who presented the top three trails to about 70 residents who braved a windy, rainy Wednesday night, April 26 to attend the ninth public meeting held by the firm.

Archer said Pare will return in June to present its recommended route to the Belmont Board of Selectmen which will either accept, reject or ask for more options. If it approves the route, the path could be completed by the fall of 2021.

The feasibility study was approved by Town Meeting in May 2016 to recommend a single route that would best serve residents and function as a segment of the Mass Central Rail Trail, a proposed 104-mile rail trail from Northampton to Boston that can be used by bicyclists, walkers, runners, and nature enthusiasts.

In the previous eight meetings, the study explored the dozens of segments of a possible route, graded each using criteria based on engineering standards, cost and comments from the community on what it wanted the path to be. The firm also rejected proposed spans determined “fatally flawed” due to high cost or chronic safety issues.

The three selected routes are similar regarding length – about two miles long – and in the “score” each achieved: the best option with a score of 76 would cost $27.9 million, the second and third – both with scores of 75 – are priced at $31.8 million and $25.1 million.

Each route travels along the northern edge of the commuter rail from Belmont Center to a proposed pedestrian tunnel at Alexandra Avenue where the paths then travel along the south side of the tracks adjacent Belmont High School.

Archer said diverting the paths to the southside rather than continue on land owned by the Belmont Community Forum takes the paths away from the majority of Channing Road homeowners who have long opposed a path adjacent to their property lines. The southside also has the option of not being “squeezed” at its end at the crossing at Brighton Street at the FE French Building.

A major issue confronting the path transversing the southside of the commuter tracks is it will be in the same location as the site of a proposed renovated/new Belmont High School and encroaches on the property of Crate Escape, the dog daycare business at the corner of Brighton.

Archer said talks are ongoing concerning the high school property. Also, the portion of the Crate Escape property that would be used by the path is the loading dock, which is not essential for the business.

The three paths are quite similar traveling from Waverley to Belmont Center, staying on the north side of Pleasant Street. The primary difference is how the trail transverses the Waverley Square Center and the commuter rail station. The higher cost options rely on covering the opening over the location and building walls to support the new construction as opposed to using ramps.

The relatively good news for Belmont is that Archer anticipates that the entire project will be “fully funded” by grants from the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and the MBTA, in part, to the popularity of rail trail projects and that Belmont is a significant segment connecting two sections of the Mass Central Rail Trail.

Any of the paths would most likely qualify for funding if the were direct route and one supported by local officials, noted Archer.

Money could also be coming from the MBTA, according to Community Path Implementation Advisory Committee member Vincent Stanton, as the path would solve a “big problem the MBTA is facing” with making the Waverley Station handicap compliant with the installation of a ramp system that would be part of the community path.

But  the town will be required to pony up “a substantial amount”  for the initial design stage which will cost just under 10 percent of the total cost or about $2 million, funding that could be obtained through grants from the town’s Community Preservation Act account, a request for capital funds, a state legislative earmark, private funds or any combination.

If the route is accepted, it will take nearly four years from the point the design of the path begins to a grand opening, with the final two years the construction phase.

Belmont School Budget Tops $60 Million With Town’s Share $53 Million

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The fiscal 2018 school budget

It got a bit more pricey to educate the kids in Belmont as the School Committee unanimously approved the fiscal 2018 school budget that tops $60 million.

Saying that there were “no surprises” in the final numbers, the School District’s Director of Finance, Business, and Operations Anthony DiCologero said the school department would request $52,969,484 million from Town Meeting in June when the town’s legislative body takes up financial articles.

With anticipated state and federal grants along with revolving fees, the total budget for the coming fiscal year just tops $60 million – actually $60,003,414, DiCologero told the board.

Compared to fiscal 2017, the town’s portion of the school budget increased by 5.7 percent, from $50.1 million to $53 million, an increase of $2.8 million.

Regarding total dollars, salary and wages increased by $2 million with cost of living increases and STEP adjustments moving higher from $185,903 in fiscal 2017 to $773,662 in the proposed 2018 budget, a $588,000 increase between the two years.

Also, health insurance premiums are budgeted to increase by nine percent – a little more than $500,000 – over the fiscal 2017 amount.

DiCologero told the committee the district were carrying forward all teaching positions from 2017 while adding five full-time equivalent positions as provided in the third year of the Financial Task Force Committee budget created the year of the $4.5 million override passed by town voters in April 2015.

Other budgetary issues of note:

  • One additional regular education school bus has been added to the seven bus fleet to accommodate the increase in enrollment.
  • User fees will remain the same in fiscal ’18.
  • General funds were increased by the index the Financial Task Force created.
  • All federal grants in fiscal ’18 are level funded from fiscal ’17 with small contractual increases for staff allocated to the subsidies.

Wednesday’s Comm. Path Feasibility Meeting: $ and Rating the Routes

By 2 Comments

Photo: Community path in Somerville.

The penultimate public meeting of the Belmont Community Path feasibility study will finally focus on how much each of the possible routes running across Belmont will cost and how to find the Benjamins to pay for it.

The meeting, at 7 p.m., Wednesday, April 26, in the Chenery Middle School’s auditorium, will feature the work of Pare Corporation, the firm hired last year by the Belmont Board of Selectmen to be the study’s project manager. 

Wednesday’s gathering – dubbed “Hot Topics” by Pare – is the final public meeting before Pare presents its recommended path route to the Board of Selectmen in May. 

Wednesday’s event, the ninth feasibility study public meeting held by Pare, will focus on presenting four major components in evaluating and analyzing the routes that transverse the town from the Waltham border outside of Waverley Square to the Cambridge city line just off Brighton Street at the Fitchburg Cutoff Bikepath.

The night’s agenda includes:
        • The “Full” Matrix,
        • The study’s evaluation criteria,
        • Cost summaries for the route options, and 
        • Potential funding sources.

Pare will present what it is calling “the Full Matrix”, which is a spreadsheet in which each of the more than two dozen paths evaluated are ranked on a series of criteria, i.e. user experience, design attributes, cost, to determine the suitability of each route.

Town Meeting Preview: Warrant Briefing Monday Night at the Beech

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Warrant Committee Chair Roy Epstein

The Belmont League of Women Voters and Warrant Committee is co-sponsoring the annual warrant briefing to acquaint Town Meeting members and residents with the non-financial articles on the Town Meeting warrant.

The meeting will take place Monday evening, April 24 at 7:30 p.m. in the Beech Street Center, 266 Beech St.

This is an opportunity for Town Meeting members and the general public to ask questions of town officials and department heads concerning any of the warrant articles prior to the 2017 Town Meeting beginning in one week on Monday, May 1. 

Warrant Committee Chair Roy Epstein will preside.

This year, Town Meeting Moderator Michael Widmer will hold an orientation/information session for new Town Meeting members at 6:30 p.m. immediately prior to the warrant discussion. All Town Meeting member is welcome to attend this session.

Housing Trust’s Meeting On Increasing Housing Options Thurs. Apr. 27

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Housing affordability thrust of Housing Trust’s meeting.

Next week, the Belmont Housing Trust will host a public meeting to discuss its Housing Production Plan, which provides a five-year framework and strategy for the development of a variety of housing options to meet the needs of the Belmont residents.

Cosponsored by the League of Woman Voters, the meeting will be held at 7 p.m., Thursday, April 27 at the Beech Street Center, 266 Beech St.

“We’re excited to gather final public input and comments on Belmont’s housing future. The high level of interest in this month’s town election suggests people are really thinking about what we need to do, going forward, to make Belmont a more livable place for all,” said Judie Feins, co-chair of the Housing Trust.

In community meetings over the past year, residents participated in discussions about “imagining Belmont’s housing future,” identifying their interests and concerns about housing in Belmont. Their input was combined with a Housing Needs Assessment based on demographics and economic data to develop the Housing Production Plan, which details production goals and strategies aimed at meeting those needs.

The draft Housing Production Plan is available here.

Participants Thursday will provide additional input before the Plan is finalized and submitted to town officials for approval and action.

The Housing Needs Assessment noted that Belmont’s population continues to rise modestly, with a forecasted need for housing for seniors and new families, including rentals and community housing. Housing costs in Belmont have increased more than 40 percent since 2009, making Belmont less accessible for lower and moderate income households. 

In addition, while nearly a quarter of Belmont households are eligible for affordable housing, only seven percent of Belmont’s housing units are considered affordable. Belmont’s housing is also generally quite old and may have significant maintenance needs.

Massachusetts requires cities and towns to have affordable housing of at least 10 percent of total housing units.  Affordable housing is defined as housing that is affordable to households earning less than 80 percent of Area Median Income – $51,150 for a single person household. 

Once the town’s newest and largest housing developments, Royal Belmont and Cushing Village, are completed, the town will remain 337 units short of the 10 percent benchmark. 

The primary goal of the Housing Production Plan is to identify opportunities to create these 337 affordable units. Those units should, however, meet the needs reflected in the recent assessment. Thus the Plan proposes to create housing for seniors, new families, and for lower income households.

 

The Plan has identified several strategies, including the development of housing near transportation centers, leveraging opportunities on public land, supporting redevelopment of industrial sites, revitalizing existing community housing, and networking with Belmont residents, organizations, property owners and local businesses. 

Stay on Course: Fiore Retains Chair of School Committee

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Lisa Fiore.

While the Belmont Board of Selectmen made a significant change to its leadership after Town Election, the Belmont School Committee decided it would stay the course.

During a possibly record-setting meeting for brevity – the get-together took a mere 25 minutes which included the members having a new group portrait taken – the committee vote Tuesday, April 11 to retain Dr. Lisa Fiore as chair for a second consecutive term.

The professor and administrator at Leslie University helped shepherd the committee through this and last year’s budget process while leading the group as it dealt with issues related to increasing enrollment, the beginning of the course of renovating/building a new high school and the district’s exit from the Minuteman Tech agreement.

The members also voted Susan Burgess-Cox, a Belmont native, and attorney, as vice chair.

The committee Tuesday night welcomed Catherine (Kate) Bowen to the group, having won election to the group on April 4.

IMG_1459

Belmont School Committee’s Kate Bowen.

A program administrator at Harvard and chair of Sustainable Belmont, the Bartlett Avenue mother of two young students said she is looking forward to being a “voice for the Butler [Elementary] School community” on the committee, a neighborhood which she and many who live in and around Waverley Square believe has been missing for the past few years.

14 Roads Slated For Reconstruction in Fiscal ’18

By 5 Comments

Photo: It’s so bad, it’s a winner! (Thanks, Google)

For homeowners on 14 roads in Belmont: Congratulations, you’ve won the bad street lottery.

According to the town’s Office of Community Development, the thoroughfares you live on are deemed so in disrepair – more than half of the roads have a pavement condition index (PCI) rating in the 30s, considered a “poor” grade where travel is “uncomfortable with frequent bumps or depressions” – that it made the cut to undergo a complete reconstruction in fiscal 2018 which begins July 1. 

The “winners” are:

  • Williston Road from Trapelo to Horne (with a PCI rating of 34)
  • Alma Avenue from Bartlett to Belmont
  • Louise Road from Edgemore to Becket
  • Newton Street from Belmont to Fairview
  • Ridge Road from Belmont to White
  • Carleton Road from Washington to Chester
  • Juniper Road from Somerset to Fletcher
  • Branchaud Road from Carleton to Washington
  • Creeley Road from Slate to Hammond
  • Harriet Avenue from Bartlett to Belmont
  • Benton Road from Payson to Oakley
  • Lawndale Street from Oakley to Payson Road
  • Townsend Road from Payson (North) to Payson (South)
  • Payson Road from Oakley to Belmont

The list is subject to change based on the availability of utility work by National Grid to be completed on the roads in 2017. All the work in fiscal ’18 follows the replacement of nearly 100-year-old water mains by the Department of Public Work’s Water Division.