Be Well Belmont Holding Health and Activity Dialogue Sunday

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Be Well Belmont logo.

Residents and families are invited on Sunday, Oct. 18, to attend a community-wide dialogue on healthy eating and staying active sponsored by Be Well Belmont.

The free event, which is open to everyone in town, will take place from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. at the Beech Street Center.

The event will provide the public an opportunity to share their thoughts on making Belmont a healthier community.

Be Well Belmont’s overriding goal – which is a project of the Belmont Food Collaborative – is to promote healthy eating and being active in Belmont through education, programming and improving access to opportunities for the whole community. The group collaborates with town government, schools and community groups.

Early successes include:

  • A screening of the documentary “Fed Up” in March.
  • Funding the crossing flag pilot program started by Safe Routes to Schools.
  • A successful series of cooking classes are focusing on healthy recipes with locally produced food.
  • Collaborating on a National Food Day initiative.

A community needs survey is underway:

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/bewellbelmont

For more information about Be Well Belmont, visit its website.

Trash Talk: Belmont’s Heading For a New Way on Take Out The Garbage

By 5 Comments

Photo:

Belmont has a standing appointment each week with a town service it can not do without. 

And it’s not the Board of Selectmen. 

Town trash collection impacts every visitor, resident, business, and school in Belmont, and is as essential as water and electricity. The prospect of dealing with one’s garbage as some communities require – bagging, storing and hauling to a waste station – is a non-starter for many modern suburbanites.

So the early morning cacophony of squealing brakes and large compactors crushing tons of garbage arrives as sweet music to the ears of Belmontians.

According to town officials, residents and businesses are happy with the service – as long as the containers don’t fly off on blustery Spring days.

But this familiar service is likely to change, possibly significantly, as Belmont’s current trash and recycling collection contract with Somerville-based F W Russell and Son expires in June 2016.

In a presentation to the board by Department of Public Works Director John Marcotte and the town’s recycling coordinator, Mary Beth Calnan, the board – which will approve the subsequent contract – will need to be cognizant of changes in the trash collection industry while encouraging the public to embrace the new features.

“We want to do this in a way that people feel educated and that it’s not rushed,” said Belmont Town Administrator David Kale who with Marcotte is leading the town’s effort on crafting a new contract. 

“If you tell people ‘You’re going to pay money for … an extra container or there [are] no more bulky items, I think that’s a change that you have to let people know about, so it’s not as painful [if it happens,]” said Kale. 

The Selectmen appear willing to take an extended and deliberate approach before signing a new contract.

“Any changes will be a big deal for folks,” said Selectman Mark Paolillo. 

“The radical changes that could take place years from now in terms of automated waste collection where the industry is going, I get it,” said Paolillo.

“Getting input today we could somehow inform our next contractor we may want to change it a little bit,” said Paolillo.

One approach the Selectmen is gravitating towards is extending the current contract with Russell – one of the largest residential trash collector in Massachusetts – by a year or 18 months to allow “our public process” to be completed, said Selectmen Chair Sami Baghdady. 

The current $1.07 million contract calls for weekly collection of an unlimited number of barrels or bulk items – you take it to the curb, they’ll take it away – Monday through Thursday from just about 10,000 locations around Belmont. While Russell will take just about everything, appliances ($20) and anything with a CRT monitor ($15) cost extra, said Marcotte.

According to the state’s Department of Environmental Protection, Belmont is not such a trashy locale; at three-quarters of a ton of trash produced per household annually, the “Town of Homes” is well below the state’s goal of one ton of garbage annually from each pickup point.

Belmont compares nicely to neighboring towns such as Lexington with a five bag/barrel limit producing .74 tons of trash per household, Bedford with a single, 48-gallon barrel limit generating just under .9 tons. Only Arlington, with its three, 32-gallon barrel restriction, produces less at .63 tons.

On the recycling end, Belmont uses a biweekly dual stream recycling system separating paper and containers, at a yearly cost of $376,285. The material is sold in the commodity market with Belmont’s “cut” already calculated in the contract, said Marcotte.

Belmont’s yard waste is collected biweekly curbside 36 weeks. When the leaves begin falling, it is collected weekly.

While Belmont’s current garbage and recycling collection agreement has worked well, significant changes occurring in the removal industry will bring changes in collecting trash, according to Marcotte.

The first is automated collection in which a truck with a side arm picks up barrels and dumps the contents into a hopper. Firms like this mechanism as it reduces the number of employees and their associated costs.

But there is a large investment upfront for the town in purchasing the “carts” each household and business will be required to use.

Also, using carts will end resident’s unlimited trash collection and the free removal of “bulky” items that would require a traditional garbage truck.

The second is single-stream recycling in which a single container holds all materials. The upside is that it makes recycling much easier and in turn Belmont’s low recycling rate will increase.

The downside, according to communities using this system, is that many residents will put regular trash into the recycling bins, reducing net recycling percentages. And costs will jump as processors charge a “tip” fee based on what it takes in.

According to Marcotte, Belmont’s current dual stream system is “cleaner” (especially with paper products) which is more valuable to processors as it can be sold as commodities to large-scale recyclers in locations as far away as China.

Marcotte said the town will need to begin the process in the next month “because [the expiration date of the old contract] will be before us before you know it.”

Yet Baghdady said “the community needs to participate in the process of making a big change in the way trash is disposed [of].”  

Final Nighttime Paving Schedule Set from Waverley to Cushing Sq

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Nighttime paving from Waverley to Cushing squares begins Oct. 19.

The western half of the $17.1 million Trapelo Road/Belmont Street Reconstruction Project is scheduled to be completed just before Halloween, according to town officials, nearly two years to the day since Massachusetts Department of Transportation-financed construction began in 2013.

After work crews tear up and place an intermediate surface in Cushing Square, the final pavement will by laid overnight beginning on Oct. 19.

The night work will begin at 8 p.m. and conclude at 5 a.m., according to town officials. Residents along Trapelo Road will be informed of the construction schedule.

The time line for the work is:

  • Tuesday, Oct 13: Start milling the remaining section of Trapelo and Common Street at Cushing Square.
  • Thursday, Oct. 15: Paving intermediate course on Trapelo at Cushing Square.
  • Monday, Oct. 19: Night paving begins at Mill Street continuing throughout the week to complete final paving at the east side of Cushing Square
  • Monday, Oct. 26: Final pavement markings to begin.

Work continues along the eastern/Belmont Street portion of the two-mile project, with a spring 2016 completion date.

Light Board Approves New Solar Power Policy; Tariffs Run Until 2017

By 1 Comment

Photo: The Working Group shaking hands with the Light Board after turning in their recommendations. 

On a dank and rainy day in which solar panels wouldn’t have a chance to work, the Belmont Light Board – made up of the members of the Belmont Board of Selectmen – approved unanimously a new solar power policy for homeowners and small commercial businesses on Sept. 30. 

The policy and tariff, set forth in a series of recommendations by the Temporary Net Metering Working Group, was filed with the state’s Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs the next day, Oct. 1.

The recommendation’s acceptance ends years of contentious debate – including a bitter debate at the annual Town Meeting in May – between solar advocates who sought a progressive tariff to promote its use in Belmont and those who questioned subsidizing homeowners who installed solar power panels which they decried as an inefficient and a costly method to reduce carbon usage.

Holding 17 public meetings in a little less than two months, the Working Group – made up of economist and Warrant Committee member Roy Epstein who served as chair, attorney Stephen Klionsky and  “Jake” Jacoby, the William F. Pounds Professor of Management, emeritus at MIT’s Sloan School – worked meticulously creating the policy and setting the tariff, hearing from those who advocated for a highly progressive subsidy but always following its own scholarly course, rejecting the political rancour that fueled much of the previous debate.

“[The recommendations] are a triumph of economics,” said Epstein two weeks ago when the group presented to the Light Board a draft of the recommendations.

“What I’ve seen and what I’ve heard, you’ve helped unite people on this issue,” said Light Board Chair Sami Baghdady, of the Working Group which the board appointed in June.

The establishment of a stable tariff is expected to lead to more solar arrays on Belmont rooftops as it will provide solar companies “a level of financial certainty” as they provide their service in town.

In addition, the town will start an aggressive public information push promoting solar power to residents. 

The recommendations to Belmont Light included:

• Creating a tariff which will only apply to solar arrays with a capacity of 250 kilowatts (kW) or less, which encompasses residential and most commercial sites.  Potential industrial scale solar is not included.

• Each solar user will pay the same rate for the electricity it receives from Belmont Light as any other rate payer.

• When a solar user generates more electricity than it uses, it will be paid a “buyback” price of 11 cents per kWh by Belmont Light. That rate will be in effect until Dec. 31, 2017 when the price will be adjusted once a year using a formula created by the Working Group.

“It’s fairly automatic,” said Epstein.

• The amount due to the solar household for the electricity it delivered back to Belmont Light each month will be credited to the household’s bill. If the amount of the bill is negative, the household will not make a payment to the utility and the “negative” amount becomes a credit used towards the customers next bill.

• The policy has a limit of one megawatt on the aggregate solar capacity in Belmont. The Working Group said that would equal about 280 residential homes. Once that level is reached, the Light Board will assess if there are any problems and can then bump the benchmark upwards.

• The group also recommends that Belmont immediately capitalize on a 30 percent federal tax credit that is likely to expire at the end of 2016 by organizing a “Solarize Belmont” campaign, involving residents, citizens groups as well as the utility’s energy consultant, Sagewell, to encourage residents to “go solar.” 

The Group was split on addressing possible compensation for moving away from retail net metering.   The majority recommends a potential one-time credit to about six households who were the earliest adopters while the minority would allow retail net metering to continue for all current solar households for the next three years.  The Light Board will decide on a compensation policy at a later date. 

“[The Working Group’s] charge had two pieces to it; be fair and don’t discourage solar … and I think we did that,” said Jacoby. 

Major Water Main Break Closed Common Street Sunday

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Teens will be teens.

A section of a major water main that runs along Common Street ruptured Sunday afternoon, Oct. 4, closing a portion of the main thoroughfare from Cushing Square to Belmont Center for most of the night.

The 12-inch pipe – the largest main used by the town – blew out at approximately 4:10 p.m. A witness said a sudden geyser of water erupted from the corner of Warwick Road and Common where the break took place under the pavement.

Department of Public Works crews arrived after police closed Common Street from Raleigh to Chester roads at 4:30 p.m. to begin the process of turning off the water main before repairs could take place.

Michael Santoro, director of the DPW’s Highway Division, told the Belmontonian Monday, Oct. 5, the main – laid in 1934 – had a 10-foot split running down the middle of the pipe.

Santoro suspected the split was caused “because of age. You can tell as it cracked bell to bell,” said Santoro. 

Water service was interrupted for homes on the east side of Common Street after the DPW shut off the main while a resident said his house on Bay State Road was suffering from low pressure.

Due to nearby gas and electrical lines, crews had to proceed slowly with its work, finally securing a new section at approximately 4 a.m. Monday morning, said Santoro. 

 

Compromise ‘Town Green’ Plan Wins Selectmen, Residents OK

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Lydia Phippen Ogilby with Paul Roberts before the Belmont Board of Selectmen. 

When the Belmont Board of Selectmen voted Monday night, Sept 28 unanimously, to approve the “enhancement” plan for the green delta in Belmont Center, a round of applause rang out throughout the crowded meeting room in Belmont Town Hall.

But hold on. Wasn’t the ever-changing blueprint for the redevelopment of the parcel abutting Belmont Savings Bank the catalyst for a four-month long, running battle that included the calling of a Special Town Meeting, competing citizen’s petition, condemnations, yelling and the need to have a police officer at one meeting to “keep the peace?”  

The answer to those questions is “yes.” But through the efforts of two individuals, Belmont found a compromise design that meets the demands of protagonists from both ends of the issue.

“We actually ended up in a much better spot as a community. This is a really good answer whether you call it a compromise or an enhancement, it’s much nicer,” said Belmont Selectman Mark Paolillo. 

While many residents can claim parentage of the new space – resident Bonnie Friedman and the director of the Office of Community Development Glenn Clancy were two named by others – two former selectmen were praised for bridging the gap between those mostly senior citizens who sought to reintroduce parking and a pass through roadway in front of the bank and those who fought for the parcel to become a new “town green” with the space abutting the bank.

(A history of the dispute and the Special Town Meeting can be found here.)

Rojas’ blueprint for the 17-foot wide pass through incorporated the dual requirements of parking while creating a “pedestrian friendly space” using the same brick and concrete being used throughout the Belmont Center Reconstruction Project.

See details of the plan here.

When the roadway is closed off at the intersection of Moore Street during non-peak hours – the Selectmen agreed to hold public discussions on the best times when to shut down the avenue – the area becomes a pedestrian-friendly area.

“It really looks like a plaza,” said Rojas, noting the green space is larger than in either of the previous two plans. 

While Rojas created the plan, Ralph Jones played the role of diplomat, bringing the different sides together both after the Special Town Meeting while urging the Selectmen – which had final say on the design – to take a last stab at finding a middle ground.

“[Jones] is able to move between the Selectmen and the residents and begin the compromise,” said Friedman last month when ideas were being passed between the opposing camps.

Some areas of the design – such as extending the crosswalk along Moore Street to enhance pedestrian safety – will be reviewed, the bulk of the construction work will be completed before the end of the construction season in the next two months. 

For Lydia Phippen Ogilby, the long-time Washington Street resident whose petition began the series of events in May, said the actions of the past five months “has stirred up this community which as been asleep for a long time.”

Accessibility Key at Initial Meeting on Waverley Square Station’s Future

By Leave a Comment

Photo: The meeting on Waverley Square station. 

After hearing a ten-minute presentation on the future of Belmont’s two commuter rail stations in Belmont Center and Waverley Square, Board of Selectmen Chair Sami Baghdady got down to brass tacks.

“Am I hearing … that both stations would be closed, and there would be one central station possibly on Pleasant Street?” Baghdady asked interim MBTA General Manager Frank DePaola, who was leading the initial community meeting held at Town Hall on Monday night, Sept. 28.

“The short answer to that is ‘yes’,” said DePaola.

“What we’d like to talk about is where’s the best investment that has the best return not only for the MBTA but also the town,” said DePaola. 

An overflow audience of residents attended Monday’s Selectmen’s meeting to hear the first details from the MBTA on the future of the Waverley Square station – one of the least populated stops with only 117 passengers using the train each weekday – which for the past two years has been out of compliance with federal and state accessibility laws which would allow physically challenged riders and the elderly access to the trains.

The state review was triggered when the MBTA performed significant work on the Waverley Square platform in 2012.                      

With an order from the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board [AAB] mandating the MBTA to show progress towards a solution, and then either re-engineer the site with higher platforms, a series of ramps and elevators or have the state shut down the facility.

The MBTA has developed two plans for Waverley; one a comprehensive redesign and remodeling with a price tag of $30.3 million, and a cheaper alternative of $15.7 million. The high construction cost for the complete blueprint is due to the need to keep the towering retaining walls in place and building an elevator shaft on the site.

Depaola told those in attendance that the “cheaper” plan is unlikely to meet the requirements set forth by the AAB, which appears determined that the station is either revamped or closed, said DePaola.

While not included in the handout distributed to the Selectmen, the MBTA’s preferred option is the construction of a new, accessible station on a straight portion of the commuter rail line.

As Baghdady and others urged the MBTA to come to future meetings with only proposals to redesign and upgrade the 80-year-old stop, DePaola said he would prefer to locate a modern station in Belmont along the tracks near to the existing site.

“The current location is down in a deep cut so if we could move a little distance either way and have less vertical distance so it might be able to allow us to avoid the construction of an elevator,” DePaola said. 

He pointed to a new station being constructed in South Acton, which cost $20 million including land acquisition. DePaola noted the MBTA has land rights along stretches to the east and west of the Waverley Square station that could be used.

Questions of accessibility at Belmont Center 

While much of the discussion concerned Waverley Square, the MBTA noted that the Belmont commuter rail station in Belmont Center has accessibility issues, particularly its location on a curved section of the track making it “nearly impossible” to build an elevated platform to service the trains, said DePaola.

“So the idea of having two fully accessible stations … would probably not be able to happen because of the physical constraints at Belmont Center,” said DePaola. 

If Waverley is upgraded, the likely scenario is to close Belmont Center shortly and build another station near that site, he said.                                                                                                                                                                             

While the overwhelming sentiment of those residents who filled the Selectmen’s Room (many who came at the urging of Precinct 4 resident Judith Sarno) is to renovate the existing below-grade stop at the intersection of Church Street and Trapelo Road, that solution may not meet the MBTA’s own criteria.

Speaking to the Belmontonian after the meeting, DePaola said the MBTA does not view the Waverley Square station as a single location, rather, as a “project [that] is being evaluated in conjunction with other transit projects in the district.”

DePaola the MBTA proposes all new capital projects in January, a deadline he would like to see an agreement with the Board of Selectmen. 

An important part of the evaluation benchmark for moving a project forward is the cost efficientness of making large renovations at the current location.

“As we’re looking at several competing projects, it’s more likely we will spend money making a site accessible or building a new station that has 420 daily riders than one with 117 [at Waverley],” DePaola said.

DePaola noted the MBTA has a $7 billion capital budget backlog for projects “so there are more than enough projects in need of funding.” 

When asked if the MBTA would close the Waverley stop if the high cost of revamping the current site does not result in a significant increase in service and daily passengers, DePaola said “that maybe where we’re forced to go if we can’t identify the funds to upgrade it.”

“But at this point its too early to go to any conclusions. We want to seek an alternative that we can advance it into the mix of projects seeking capital funds,” DePaola told the Belmontonian. 

The Board of Selectmen and many neighbors expressed that “at a minimum, we need at least one station that’s handicapped accessible … and certainly that’s Waverley,” said Baghdady.

The MBTA will return in the next few week to Belmont to conduct a “design charrette” allowing the public to view plans and give their input to the process.

But Baghdady made it clear that “the consensus you’re hearing tonight is we’d like the station to remain in its current location, … rather than, honestly, wasting time looking at other locations in town.”

Selectmen Set to Vote on Compromise Design for ‘Town Green’

By 1 Comment

Photo: The image of the compromise design for the “Town Green” parcel of the Belmont Center Reconstruction Project.

A compromise design for the “Town Green” parcel of the $2.8 million Belmont Center Reconstruction Project is being praised by leaders of the effort who sought to make the area bordered by Leonard Street, Concord Avenue and Moore Street into a pedestrian-friendly green space. 

Created to incorporate the competing demands of the two sides of the issue that boiled over into a contentious Special Town Meeting in August, the new design appears to allow greater pedestrian access during off-peak times when the pass thru in front of the Belmont Savings Bank is shut to traffic and parking.

The Belmont Board of Selectmen, which requested the third plan for the “delta” after the Special Town Meeting, will discuss and vote on this enhancement at its next public meeting, Monday, Sept. 28, at 7 p.m. in Town Hall.

A history of the dispute and a report on the Special Town Meeting can be found at this link.

For one of the leaders of those residents who successfully passed a Special Town Meeting article on Aug. 6 urging the Selectmen to return to the Project’s original design for the delta, this effort is a success.

“It’s a great compromise after many months of frustration with the design, disappointment with the process, efforts to resolve the conflict short of Town Meeting, collecting signatures, Special Town Meeting in the summer, and extensive dialogue in the last month,” said Bonnie Friedman, who, with Paul Roberts, led the citizen’s petition that called for the Special Town Meeting. 

The third plan – dubbed the “enhancement” design – created by landscape architect and former Selectman Andy Rojas creates a brick and concrete pass thru that becomes a pedestrian walkway during off-peak hours. (see design plan here)

“The result looks beautiful. It integrates the Green in a way that Plan B and even Plan A were unable to achieve. Because of that, the Green Space looks bigger than Plan B or even Plan A.  The ‘driveway’ is more like a plaza now which can be enjoyed in all sorts of ways when the road is closed,” said Friedman.

Friedman gave much of the credit for the new design to another former selectman, Ralph Jones, who worked to help forge movement towards a compromise blueprint that the Selectmen agreed to at its Aug. 17 meeting.

Paul Roberts said Rojas’ design “certainly looks better than what we have now, and better than Plan B.”

“Rojas did a great job on short notice, and he is owed thanks on this,” said Roberts.

Issues remain in the new design for Friedman and Roberts.

Friedman points to safety in crosswalks, if there are enough curb cuts for strollers and wheelchairs, the number of benches and tables and what sort of barrier to use to limit access.

“Most importantly, the selectmen will be deciding on what constitutes ‘off-peak hours,'” said Friedman.

“I would love to see the [pass thru] open just rush-hour weekday mornings when Leonard Street potentially backs up. The fewer hours [it] is open, the fewer conflicts between pedestrians, bicyclists, and cars.  Those hours might also adapt over time as we can use our Green,” she said. 

Roberts also sees problems with the new design as it doesn’t “put pedestrians on an equal footing with automobiles and that offered a real space for residents in the Town Center to congregate without having to negotiate around automobile traffic.”

Roberts also questioned if town officials and transportation experts have vetted the Rojas design.

“Has a transportation engineering firm reviewed it? Have public safety officials signed off on this plan?” asks Roberts, wondering if limits on the size of vehicles and thru traffic need to be established.

Roberts also advises the Selectmen to allow the plan to be reviewed by the public and domain experts over a couple of weeks before voting on it.

“To simply repeat the errors of May 28 by throwing this plan up on the overhead and adopting it then and there without a full vetting by the public would be a tragedy and proof that the [Board of Selectmen] have not learned their lesson, nor heeded the many complaints of concerns of the voters who elected them,” which he calls “a dangerous course in politics.”

Belmont Could See One, Both MBTA Commuter Stations Closed In Favor of New Stop

By 2 Comments

Photo: Waverley Square station in Belmont.

Since before the Civil War, Belmont has been home to a pair of stations along the rail lines running through town – one at Belmont Center and the other in Waverley Square – serving commuters and commerce from nearly the beginning of the town’s incorporation.

But that arrangement is under threat as a two-year-old state mandate ordering the MBTA to make one of the stations accessible to the handicap will likely lead the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority to close one or both stations and construct a new facility with parking, likely along Pleasant Street.

Belmont has “to contemplate the possibility that we may eventually need to close at least one of our commuter rail stations,” said State Sen. Will Brownsberger in an email to constituents.

The public process on determining the closing and construction of stations will begin soon as the MBTA is preparing to come before the Belmont Board of Selectmen in the near future, according to Brownsberger.

But so far, the Selectmen had yet to receive word from the MBTA on the future of Belmont’s stations. 

“All I know is what I read in Will’s note,” said Board Chair Sami Baghdady, after attending the School Committee meeting earlier in the month.

While the MBTA would finance renovations to the existing structure or the creation of a new station, Baghdady said he is prepared to work with the Authority on reaching a final plan that incorporates the community’s concerns and viewpoint.

“We need an open and public process in which many questions will be answered,” said Baghdady.

The MBTA is within its rights to build a station along the rail lines on property it owns without the city or town’s OK, “but I believe they will understand they’ll need to be responsive to the community during the planning phase,” Brownsberger told the Belmontonian on Wednesday, Sept. 16. 

No specific location has been advanced for a new station, yet in the past, officials have pointed to the location of the depot for North America Central School Bus at 1000 Pleasant St., within a few hundred feet from Star Market.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 2.42.11 PM

Brownsberger said MBTA management inform him the state’s Architectural Access Board has ordered the transportation authority to improve access to the Waverley Square commuter rail station to allow handicap citizens to take public transportation.

Brownsberger wrote the AAB determined more than two years ago “that recent improvements to Waverley station trigger an obligation to make the station accessible. Under state disability access law, structures can remain inaccessible indefinitely, but if an owner improves a public facility substantially then they need to make it accessible.”

And time is running out for the MBTA to get the job done, originally being told by the state to fix the problem by Jan. 1, 2015.

While the order only applies to the station at Church and Trapelo, the question of inaccessibility will soon be an issue at the Belmont Center station. While there has not been significant improvements at the stop on the commuter rail bridge adjacent to Concord Avenue has not had any improvements that would trigger an overhaul, the MBTA said the station’s platform is falling part and will need to be repaired.

Because of its state is disrepair, “the MBTA expects to need to make investments that would require an accessibility upgrade,” said Brownsberger, noting the cost to upgrade Belmont Center station would be expensive since the stop is on a curve, creating dangerous gaps between the platform and the doors, making accessibility a challenge.

With the estimated cost of bringing the Waverley Station – which lies several dozen feet below the street grade – up to code is estimated at $35 million, and likely just as expensive at Belmont Center, the MBTA is floating an idea that the town had once examined in the 1990s.

Screen Shot 2015-09-16 at 2.51.01 PM

Rather than spend millions on restoring both stations, it would be advantageous for the MBTA to build a modern station at a point along Pleasant Street between Belmont Center and Waverley Square where the tracks are both straight and close to the surrounding grade. A new station could also include parking and could also be combined with development along Pleasant Street, said Brownsberger.

A Pleasant Street Station is not a new idea, said Brownsberger.

“Twenty years ago, I chaired the South Pleasant Street Land Use Committee. We considered the possibility of a new single station to replace the two existing Belmont stations,” said Brownsberger, a plan the committee ultimately recommended against at that time.

A single station, argued the committee, would mean longer walks for many commuters. People were also concerned that a parking lot on Pleasant Street would be used primarily by out-of-town commuters, bringing more traffic to town.

Also, a pedestrian overpass would be needed to allow residents and commuters to access the station from across the tracks within easy walking distance of many Belmont neighborhoods, some kind of pedestrian overpass would be needed, said Brownsberger.

An overpass would bring more foot traffic and probably drop-off vehicles to the areas off Waverley Street between the town field and the town yard — neighborhoods who already feel pressured by traffic from the town yard, the committee concluded. 

While there are challenges facing a new station, Brownsberger said that Belmont has “to contemplate the possibility that we may eventually need to close at least one of our commuter rail stations.”

Brownsberger said the MBTA is scheduling a meeting with the Selectmen to “discuss the challenges and options in greater detail and to design an appropriate public process for decision-making.”

“State Rep. [Dave] Rogers and I are committed to assuring the MBTA moves in a deliberate and transparent way on this issue, and we look forward to working with the Board of Selectmen and with all concerned,” said Brownsberger.

“We need to go through a transparent and public process to examine all the potential options,” he said.

School Committee Gives Initial Nod to Proposed New Rink/Rec Center

By Leave a Comment

Photo: Bob Mulroy.

The Belmont School Committee gave its initial “OK” Tuesday night, Sept. 8, for a youth sports organization to begin the process that could result in the construction of a new multi-purpose town recreation center. 

“We are not just looking at our needs, but … of the entire community,” said Bob Mulroy, who gave the presentation for Belmont Youth Hockey Association, which is leading the project that would include an NHL-sized skating rink, a second “half” skating surface that would transform into a field house for half the year, modern locker rooms, a community fitness center, and many more amenities.

While the proposal has received high marks from public and elected officials in August when the Board of Selectmen was presented with the proposal, those deciding the fate of the project are taking a long-view of the process. 

“I see this as the first step … I don’t see this as a significant substance discussion but just to understand what the proposal is before us,” said School Committee Chair Laurie Slap, as the committee members voted the proposal was “worth exploring.”

The $6.5 million complex – which would include off-street, on-site parking – would be overseen by a non-profit public/private partnership that would incorporate a wide array of town departments, the school committee, youth hockey and funders on the board.

In exchange for the land to build the center, Belmont schools, and high school teams will have use of the facility at no cost. 

Both sides acknowledge the first significant hurdle to clear is where to locate the center. Under BYHA’s ideal scenario, the complex would be built on the current home of the Belmont High softball team abutting the Mobile service station and across Concord Avenue from the Belmont Public Library.

But that is the same site where in May 2013 the school committee rejected a request by the Board of Library Overseers to place a new $19.5 million town library, actually killing the hopes of supporters for more than a decade.

The alternative location would place the recreation center on the existing rink footprint, across Concord Avenue from the Underwood Pool.

“We are aware that fields are crucial in town, and we are not looking to reduce that [amount],” said Mulroy.

The proposal would both help find solutions to real recreational needs – providing adequate changing space and locker rooms for all sports teams – in Belmont as well as replace the 45-year-old “Skip” Viglirolo Skating Rink, which Mulroy described as “toast.”

The rink, with gaps in the walls, few comforts, and antiquated mechanical systems, has past its useful life “long ago,” said Mulroy.

Belmont Youth Hockey is the rinks biggest customer, taking three-quarters of the available rental time.

Mulroy told the meeting the cost to renovate the current structures to current code would be the same as building a new recreation center. 

Under the current blueprint, the proposed center would include:

  • A 25,000 sq.-ft. NHL-sized rink (approximately 200 feet by 85 foot).
  • A half-sized skating rink used for seven months then transformed into a field house for tennis, soccer and community events.
  • Six modern year-round locker rooms.
  • A 5,000 sq.-ft. health club/gym open to the public.
  • Exercise classrooms.
  • A skate shop.
  • Concession stand.
  • Meeting rooms.
  • Athletic offices.
  • A trainers/medical center.

The proposed building would cost between $8 and $9 million, with construction priced between $6 to $7 million financed with private debt. The cost of field renovations would be $1 million with the funds coming from a Community Preservation Committee grant and the final $1 million used to outfit the new space and purchase equipment.

The reasoning behind adding a second, smaller rink to the NHL-sized sheet of ice is financial, said Mulroy. Under economic models of similar existing arenas in New England, Mulroy said the Recreation Center will take in just over $1 million in income annually with expenses of $600,000 for a net “profit” of just under $500,000 a year. 

Mulroy told the Belmontonian after the meeting that several funding sources are prepared to step forward to provide the debt financing. 

Mulroy said he anticipated the planning and design stage – when the details on financing, governance, and zoning will be hammered out – to take a year with construction an additional nine months. He believes the entire project will take 24 months to complete.

From the town’s perspective, the private/public venture is a win/win on many fronts; it is financially sustainable without requiring town funding to run, it takes an enormous expense off of the town’s “to-do” list of capital projects, and it provides Belmont with a new facility at limited cost.

While amenable to the project, School Committee members joined Board of Selectmen Chair Sami Baghdady that many details on financing, governance and a myriad of issues “will need to be flushed out over time” before final approval is granted. 

Member Elyse Shuster suggested that the school committee use the proposal to begin a discussion on the “whole [Belmont High School] campus” as an integrated whole. 

“I would encourage us to think about integrating the [the high school’s Higgenbottom Pool] and making it a true recreational facility,” she said.