Meeting Agenda

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

CITY OF WOBURN

AUGUST 12, 2014 – 6:30 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.

_________________________

MAYOR’S COMMUNICATIONS:

A communication dated August 5, 2014 was received from His Honor the Mayor Scott D. Galvin requesting time before the City Council for a presentation on the water meter installation progress. Motion made and 2^nd to suspend the rules for the purposes of hearing from the Mayor, all in favor, 9-0. Motion made and 2^nd to suspend the rules for the purposes of hearing from the Mayor on the issue of the progress in the water meter installation program, all in favor, 9-0. Appearing was Mayor Scott D. Galvin and he stated that the city has upgraded the commercial water meters, that 1,600 residential water meters have been installed to date, that the installation started in Ward 6 and those are substantially complete, that the installers have moved to Ward 5 and Ward 4 then will move to Ward 1 and Ward 2 and finally to Ward 3 and Ward 7 with completion by March 2015, that the neighborhoods meeting arranged by Alderman Raymond helped the city get information to the residents and feedback from the residents as to their concerns and issues, that the commercial sewer rate is tied to water use, that commercial users have requested two meters but that is not allowed, that there is no reason for a second water meter for residential users unless the City Council decides to tie sewer charges to water usage, that there is a question and answer page on the city’s website, that the water rate change would not be any earlier than substantial completion of the installation throughout the city, that the plan is to track usage for a period of time before adjusting rates, that a goal of the program is conservation of water resources, that meter installations requiring plumbing modifications will be inspected by the city’s Plumbing Inspector, that not all meters installed will have to be inspected only those requiring plumbing modifications, that approximately 1% of the installations have any issues, that this rate could go higher but currently is approximately 1%, that he does not know what extra costs the residents are bearing in those situations, that the installation will be substantially completed by March 31, 2015, that the project is going well, and that residents should schedule the installation as soon as they receive the mailer. Superintendent of Public Works John Duran stated that owners of the side by side duplexes with one water line into the

property received a letter with information concerning their options regarding the meters, that it is important for the property owners of duplex units to receive their water bills and not have the bills go to liens, and that it would be difficult to quantify the extra costs to homeowners in those situations where there are installation issues although these are very limited situations. Deputy Superintendent of Public Works Thomas Quinn stated that iron pipes are the most likely cause of issues, and that the shutoffs have not been a concern. Alderman Raymond stated that the only unanswered questions he had coming into the meeting was whether there could be an additional meter for irrigation and that there is concern that water rates would be changed immediately upon installation of the meters, and that issues regarding duplexes and condominiums have been resolved. Alderman Mercer-Bruen stated that a fact sheet for distribution to the residents would be helpful, that some older constituents who are not comfortable using a computer may not be in a position to access the information on the city’s website, and that the city could install the meters and track usage but still have a flat water rate. President Haggerty stated that the Department of Public Works should provide copies of any targeted mailings to the Aldermen so that they are aware of the issues and can respond to questions from the residents. Motion made and 2^nd to return to the regular order of business, all in favor, 9-0.

Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC LANDS, all in favor, 9-0.

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

A communication dated August 7, 2014 with attachment was received from His Honor the Mayor Scott D. Galvin as follows:

President Haggerty and Member of the Woburn City Council:

I have included a copy of a “Roadway Improvements Study”, prepared by Jay Corey the City Engineer as it relates to Woburn Center. The Study is an expansion of a portion of the 1999 Downtown Revitalization Study, and was prepared at the request of the Woburn Redevelopment Authority.

I would like to make a presentation to the city council’s liaison committee regarding this very interesting study, which proposes changes that would improve traffic circulation, pedestrian safety and parking in Woburn Center. Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely, s/Scott D. Galvin

Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON

LIAISON, all in favor, 9-0.

_________________________

Motion made and 2^nd to take the following matter out of order, all in favor, 9-0.

_________________________

A communication dated July 24, 2014 with attachment was received from City Solicitor

Ellen Callahan Doucette relative to pending litigation in the matter of The Woburn Armory LLC v. Paul J. Denaro, et. al., Middlesex Superior Court Civil No. 2012-MICV1528 and a request to meet with the City Council in Executive Session to discuss the matter. Motion made and 2^nd that the matter be heard in Executive Session pursuant to M.G.L. Ch. 30A, Sec. 21(a)(3) to discuss pending litigation with the City Solicitor,

ROLL CALL: Anderson – Yes, Concannon – Yes, DiTucci – Yes, Drapeau – Yes,

Gaffney – Yes, Gately – Yes, Mercer-Bruen – Yes, Raymond – Yes, Haggerty – Yes, Motion passes. President Haggerty announced that the City Council would reconvene in open session following the executive session. The City Council retired from the Council Chamber and moved to the Committee Room at 6:46 p.m. Executive Session. City Solicitor Ellen Callahan Doucette was asked to attend the executive session portion of the meeting and she stated that she has been to court several times regarding this matter and has requested continuances, that the judge before who the matter is pending does not want the matter on the docket if it will not go to trial, that this will be a jury waived matter, that the judge will not schedule the matter for trial if the matter may be resolved, that the judge has suggested that the City Council rescind the demolition order while the recently filed special permit petition is pending, and that the landowner would be giving up rights to proceed with this appeal however the City Council reserves its right to approve a new demolition order if necessary. Alderman Gately stated that the prior order should be rescinded, that the will be meeting with the neighbors and that the new special permit petition is moving forward, that the City Council can enter a new demolition order if necessary, and that the new proposal is for fifteen residential townhouse units and three commercial units. Alderman Mercer-Bruen stated that she wanted reassurance that the action of rescinding the order will not give the owner a sense that he will not have to proceed to secure and improve the property. Motion made and 2^nd that the Order of the City Council effective April 18, 2012 relative to the demolition of the building or other structures located at 320 Main Street aka 286 Main Street and commonly referred to as the Woburn Armory Building be and is hereby rescinded, ROLL CALL: Anderson – Yes, Concannon – Yes, DiTucci – Yes, Drapeau – Yes, Gaffney – Yes, Gately – Yes, MercerBruen – Yes, Raymond – Yes, Haggerty – Yes, Motion passes. The City Council returned to the Council Chamber at 6:55 p.m. Motion made and 2^nd to return to the regular order of business, all in favor, 9-0. President Haggerty stated that while in Executive Session the City Council voted to rescind the demolition Order with respect to the former Woburn Armory building located at 320 Main Street aka 286 Main Street and reserved the right to proceed with further action if necessary.

Presented to the Mayor: August 14, 2014 s/Scott D. Galvin August 14, 2014

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

Clerk’s Note: At the City Council Regular Meeting on January 20, 2015, the City Council unanimously voted to release the minutes of the Executive Session portion of the preceding matter.

************************* 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 August 7, 2014 was received from Attorney Joseph R. Tarby, III, Esquire, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 as follows:

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

Dear Mr. Campbell:

On behalf of my clients, John P. Flaherty and Kathryn A. Flaherty, I request that the public hearing scheduled on the above referenced matter for August 12, 2014, be continued to September 2, 2014. On August 5, 2014, the Planning Board continued its public hearing to August 26, 2014 and referred the Petition to the Zoning Ordinance Review Committee (“ZORC”) for review. As a result, the Planning Board has not yet made its recommendation.

In addition to continuing the public hearing to September 2, 2014, I would also request that the City Council refer the Petition to ZORC as well.

If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you.

Very truly yours, s/Joseph R. Tarby III

Motion made and 2^nd to accept the communication and make it part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. Motion made and 2^nd that the PUBLIC HEARING be CONTINUED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 2, 2014, 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 July 23, 2014 was received from Attorney Joseph R. Tarby, III, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 as follows:

Re: Special Permit Petition/Wendy’s Company, 303 Montvale Avenue, Woburn, MA

Dear Mr. Campbell:

I respectfully request that the City Council public hearing on this matter presently scheduled for August 12, 2014 be continued to the City Council meeting on September 2, 2014. If you need any further information, please contact me. Thank you.

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

Motion made and 2^nd to accept the communication and make it part of the record, all in

favor, 9-0. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. Motion made and 2^nd that the PUBLIC

HEARING be CONTINUED TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 2, 2014 AND THAT THE MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON SPECIAL PERMITS, all in favor 9-0.

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

On the petition by Benchmark Senior Living, 40 Williams Street, Wellesley, Massachusetts 02481-3904 for a special permit pursuant to Section 5.1.19a of the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended, to construct an assisted living/memory care facility and associated improvements at 320 Salem Street. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. A report was received from the Committee on Special Permits as follows: “ought to pass, with the conditions as follows:

The Petitioner shall construct and improve the Site as substantially described in the plans submitted with the Petition for Special Permit entitled: “Benchmark Senior Living #320 Salem Street, Woburn, MA” dated April 25, 2014 and revised on July

25, 2014, Sheets ABB-1, ABB-2, EX-1, C-1, C-2, C-3, C-3A, C-3B, C-3C, C-3D, C4, C-5, C-6, C-6A, C-6B, C-6C, C-6D, C-6E, C-7, C-8, C-9, D-1, D-2, D-3, D-4, D-5,

D-6 prepared by Allen & Major Associates, Inc., 100 Commerce Way, Woburn, MA 01801 (hereinafter the “Site Plan”) although design adjustments and modifications generally associated with (i) preparing so-called “working drawings” or (ii) site conditions shall be permitted so long as such changes do not constitute substantial changes from said plans as determined by the Building Commissioner. In the event that the Building Commissioner determines that the building plans filed with the building permit application are not in substantial conformance with the Site Plan, the Petitioner may request a review of said plans by the City Council Special Permits Committee who shall make a final determination. If the Special Permits Committee makes a determination that the proposed plans are not in conformance with the Site Plan, the Petitioner shall be required to file a Special Permit Petition seeking approval to modify the Site Plan.

All exterior building illumination shall be shielded in such a manner that will prevent direct light from impacting any abutting properties.

During construction, all vehicles must be parking on Site, or the Applicant shall make arrangements for off-site parking for construction employees.

During construction, no vehicles shall be parked on Cedar Street, Washington Street, Salem Street or Carlena Terrace.

During construction, all staging and deliveries will occur on Site.

Exterior construction activities on the Site shall not commence prior to 7:00 a.m. and shall cease no later than 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Saturday and not at all on Sundays. This does not include off site utility and roadway work.

Any ledge removal drilling or detonation of charges on the Site shall not commence prior to 10:00am and shall cease no later than 3:00pm Monday through Friday. No said blasting activities shall be allowed on Saturdays or Sundays. The Applicant shall comply with all applicable pre-blast inspection survey regulations. There shall be no crushing on site.

8A. During the Site redevelopment and construction phases, the Applicant shall maintain all adjoining roadways free and clear of all debris.

8B. Applicant (Benchmark Senior Living) and Landowner (Lindquist Realty Trust) shall comply with the terms and conditions set forth in the Declaration of Restrictive Covenant dated December 10, 2013 and recorded with Southern Middlesex Land Court Registry District at Book 1036, Page 165, Cert# 181315.

9. Upon final approval of design plans by Mass DOT, City of Woburn Engineer and other municipal boards or agencies as appropriate, the Applicant shall cause to be implemented the following traffic improvements, all as shown on the “Proposed Roadway Improvements” plan prepared by Stantec and dated July 29, 2014: a) Realign intersection at Salem Street/Cedar Street to improve safety;

b) Add right turn lane on Cedar Street Northbound approach to Washington Street; c) Coordinate Cedar Street and Salem Street signalized intersections with Adaptive

Traffic Control signals; and

d) Donate Easement to City of Woburn for future widening of Washington Street and Salem Street, which easement area is further shown on the Plan.

The final location of new hydrant(s) and width of proposed driveways shall be coordinated through both the Public Works and Fire Departments (PB Condition).

Pedestrian walkway to be constructed on Applicant’s property from Applicant’s building entrance to the pedestrian crosswalk at the Cedar Street/Washington Street intersection, as shown on the Site Plan.

Pedestrian crosswalks at Washington Street/Cedar Street intersection shall be restriped.

Upon full occupancy of the facility, if it is determined that additional parking is necessary to adequately serve the facility, the Applicant shall install the ten (10) additional parking spaces shown as “Future Reserve Parking” on the Site Plan.

The petitioner shall take efforts to hire Woburn resident employees.

This Special Permit shall apply to Benchmark Senior Living (and any affiliates or successors through merger or acquisition).

That the fire hydrant on Salem Street shall be moved and replaced.

That a Temporary Occupancy will only be issued until such time as the road improvements are completed.

The Petitioner shall provide regular updates, in letter format, to the City Engineer, Department of Public Works and the City Council, and the Petitioner will notify the City Council immediately upon approval from the MassDOT.”

Appearing for the petitioner was Attorney Mark T. Vaughan, Riemer and Braunstein, Seven New England Executive Park, Burlington, Massachusetts 01803 and he stated that he has made detailed presentations at prior meetings, that the proposal is for an 87-unit assisted living facility, that the property is bordered by Cedar Street, Salem Street and Washington Street, that the single-family home will remain which is assured by a covenant filed with the Middlesex South District Registry of Deeds, that the proposal is for an ideal, benign, low-intensity use providing senior housing opportunities, that the project will provide tax revenue to the city without putting a drain on city services, that there will be improvements to traffic conditions, that the petitioner has agreed to a number of conditions to protect the neighbors, that all the requirements under Section 11.5 of the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended have been met, that the petitioner has partners and therefore the language in Condition 15 recognizes those relationships, and that the plan of record is the plan dated 4/25/2014 with the final revision date of 7/25/2014. Motion made and 2^nd that the public hearing be closed, all in favor, 9-0. Alderman Mercer-Bruen stated that she wanted to revise Condition 17 so that the temporary occupancy permit cannot exceed one year, that MassDOT has been reviewing this project since before it was proposed to the city, that she spoke to the petitioner’s attorney and advised that she wanted this reassurance, that there was no issue with the amendment, that she supports the project whole-heartedly, that changes to area conditions abutting the triangular property makes this project suitable, and that the property was a candidate for a Chapter 40B project. President Haggerty stated that petitioner was informed about the proposed amendment to Condition 17 and made no objection. Alderman Concannon stated that he has previously expressed his concerns with this proposal, that rules were in place that would not allow the project to go forward, that the rules were changed to allow the project, that the residents of the city have to be assured that the rules are for a reason, that any change of the rules should provide a significant benefit to the city, that he wishes the best for the project but he is skeptical about the benefit to the city, that the size and location of the project is too much for the neighborhood, that more could have been done to ensure that traffic in that area would benefit, that there has been too much development in East Woburn, and that this project is too much for that area of the city to bear. Alderman Anderson stated that the only reason to justify a zoning change is a project such as this with an assisted living facility, that there is a shortfall of these uses in the city and demographics points to a need, that this will be a good project and beneficial to the neighborhood, that this was an appropriate zoning change, and the proposal will be a great project. PUBLIC

COMMENTS: None. Motion made and 2^nd that the public hearing be closed, all in favor, 9-0. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Motion made and 2^nd that the special permit be amended with the following conditions: 1. That the following second sentence shall be added to Condition 12: The applicant shall re-stripe the intersection of Cedar Street and Washington Street in its entirety a distance of 250 feet in each direction; 2. That Condition 15 will remain as proposed; 3. That mitigation for rodent control shall be provided by the petitioner both during and after construction; 4. That after the word “completed” in Condition 17 the following shall be added “and shall not exceed one year from the issuance of the temporary occupancy permit”; and 5. That after the words “Department of Public Works” in Condition 18 the following shall be added “, Building Commissioner”, all in favor, 9-0. Motion made and 2^nd that the SPECIAL PERMIT be GRANTED, AS AMENDED, 8 in favor, 1 opposed (Concannon opposed).

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

On the petition by NSTAR Electric Company and Verizon New England Inc. for a grant of right in a way on the northerly side of High Street approximately 105 feet east of Main Street to relocate joint occupancy pole 105/2. PUBLIC HEARING OPENED. A communication dated July 30, 2014 was received from Superintendent of Public Works John Duran as follows:

Subject: NStar Petition for pole relocation on High Street

Pursuant to the request from NStar Electric for the relocation of the pole on High Street from its current location to a new location approximately 35.5’ east, I offer the following. I support this proposed relocation which is being requested due to the proposed construction and addition to the former Masotta’s building at 307 Main St. The existing pole can be relocated as long as the transfer includes elimination of the double pole at this location. The new pole should be positioned to not obstruct the driveway from the adjacent property. In addition, the full sidewalk panels should be properly replaced to the City of Woburn DPW Specifications and be handicap compliant.

Please feel free to call with any questions or concerns.

Appearing for the petitioner was Jacqueline Duffy, Right of Way Agent, NSTAR Electric Company and she stated that the petition will allow a utility pole to be moved to accommodate a new project at this location. Alderman Gately stated that the poles are in the way of the project, and that he has no opposition to moving the poles. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Eugenio Ianniciello, 10 High Street stated that he wants to know if there will be impact on his property which abuts the locus, and that there is a utility pole that leans to within two feet of his roof and needs to be straightened. Ms. Duffy stated that she was not aware of the issue, that she will look into the issue of this leaning pole, and that she will work with Mr. Ianniciello on the matter. Motion made and 2^nd that the public hearing be closed, all in favor 9-0. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Motion made and 2^nd

that the GRANT OF RIGHT IN A WAY be APPROVED, AS AMENDED with the

conditions as follows: 1. That the recommendations of the Superintendent of Public Works be adopted as conditions of the grant, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: August 14, 2014 s/Scott D. Galvin August 14, 2014

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

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. A communication was received from the Committee on Special Permits as follows: “back for action”. A communication dated August 11, 2014 was received from City Solicitor Ellen Callahan Doucette entitled “Special Permit Application 285 Locust Street – Third Supplemental Memorandum”. Motion made and 2^nd that the document be received and made part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. Appearing for the petitioner was Attorney Joseph R. Tarby, III, Esquire, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 and he offered an aerial photograph of the locus and proposed conditions for the City Council to review. Motion made and 2^nd that the documents be received and made part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. Attorney Tarby stated that the first public hearing on this matter was held on April 1, 2014, that there have been several additional public hearings, committee meetings and neighborhood meetings, that the petitioner has made a good faith effort to address the concerns raised, that the petitioner offers proposed conditions and a revised landscape plan, that a number of the proposed conditions address concerns with car carriers, that there will be no car carrier deliveries on Saturday or Sunday, that the initial deliveries will be limited to four to five car carrier deliveries per week, that car carriers will enter the property and leave the property by way of Cambridge Road, that the car carriers will be prohibited from using Locust Street east of the property, that signs reading “right turn only” will be installed at the exit from the locus, that there will be no off-loading of the car carriers on Locust Street, that there is more than sufficient room to off-load the vehicles on the premises, that after the initial deliveries there shall be no more than ten car carrier deliveries per week, that the Woburn Police Department will be permitted to issue a fine of $250.00 per infraction for traveling on Locust Street east of the site, that there will be an initial limit of 400 vehicles on site, that after six months the petitioner can add an additional 87 vehicles to the locus to ensure compliance with the special permit, that no input has been received from representatives of the Tudor Glen property other than the contention that the proposed use will be detrimental to the neighborhood, and that 941 calls for police assistance have been placed from the Tudor Glen property between November 2006 and August 5, 2014. Attorney Tarby offered copies of police records to the City Council for review. Motion made and 2^nd that the documents be received and made part of the record, 8 in favor, 1 opposed (DiTucci opposed). Motion made by Alderman Anderson to reconsider his vote to accept the police record documents was 2^nd, 8 in favor, 1 opposed (Gately opposed). Alderman Anderson stated that the records are not relevant to the petition. Alderman DiTucci stated that it was objectionable and offensive to try to divert attention from the petition by these records. Alderman Drapeau stated that these records are helpful, that one issue considered is if the petition is denied what other type of use will go on the locus, that he has heard from a secondhand source that Tudor Glen has made inquiries about purchasing the locus, that the owners of the Tudor Glen should be more cautious about managing their property, and that there are other issues if an apartment development is constructed at the locus. Motion made and 2^nd that police record documents be received and made part of the record, 5 in favor, 4 opposed (Anderson, DiTucci, Mercer-Bruen, Raymond opposed). Kate Connolly, Murtha Cullina LLP, 600 Unicorn Park Drive, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 stated that the legal issue comes down to the City Solicitor’s interpretation of case law, that the opinion only refers to Land Court cases and not to appeals court decisions, that the opinion of the City Solicitor does not apply in this matter, that the petitioner is continuing a use and not changing a use, that the city can have more stringent ordinance provisions than a State statute as long as the ordinance is not contrary to the statute, that the Woburn zoning ordinances are restrictive and mirrors M.G.L. Ch. 40A, Sec. 6 which is not permissive, that the new use need not be allowed in the zoning district but must be allowed within the city, that the City Solicitor states that a property cannot be changed from one nonconforming use to another nonconforming use but these are not the facts in this case, that the proposed use is a continuation of a previous nonconforming use and is not a new nonconforming use, that only the business user and not the use is changing, that the principal use is parking vehicles on 3.58 acres of existing pavement which is the prior use, that the use is the same with a different business, that there is no extension of the existing building footprint or the existing pavement, that the 27,000 square foot building on the site is incidental to the principal use of parking vehicles, that the petitioner is not looking to change the building as the other cases did, that vehicles have been parking on the lot since the late 1950s, that Verizon, NYNEX and Boston Edison have used the locus, that the commercial parking lot use was never intended to exclude single users of an entire lot for a lease payment, that Boston Edison had no restrictions on the hours or use of the streets, that the petitioner hours will be restricted as will the use of the streets, that the petitioners vehicles will use less space on site due to the tandem parking, that there will be 25% fewer vehicle trips than the previous user, that the landscaping improvements will nearly double the open space, that there will be a security system, that there will be updated lighting, that there will be improvements to the Locust Street and Cambridge Road intersection, that Verizon had 40 to 50 vehicles entering and exiting the site with repairs and incidental office space, that there were approximately 60 Verizon employees on site, that the petitioner will remove some pavement to increase the open space, that the petition is not a change of one nonconforming use to another nonconforming use and therefore is not prohibited, that the proposed use is a continuation of a prior nonconforming use and an improvement to the neighborhood and therefore less detrimental, that she spoke briefly to the City Solicitor, that she does not disagree with the City Solicitor on the law but the matters are fact specific, and that the facts of this petition is different than what the City Solicitor was citing. Alderman Raymond stated that the City Solicitor and petitioner’s attorney have different opinions, and that if the City Council has been making a mistake it should not perpetuate the mistake. Attorney Connolly stated that there is agreement about restrictive and permissive ordinances but the interpretation is fact based, that it is the authority of the City Council to exercise discretion in issuing the special permit, and that the City Solicitor’s opinion is her interpretation. Alderman Concannon stated that if the City Council determined that this is a wholly new use and followed the opinion of the City Solicitor then the City Council could not issue the special permit, and that trucks were repaired, trucks were dispatched and trucks were serviced but the ne proposed use is parking new cars which seems to be two different uses. Attorney Connolly stated that vehicles were parked on the site previously, and that dispatching, repairing and servicing comments were to show that the proposed used would be less detrimental as the vehicles would continue to be parked on the site but the servicing, dispatching and repairing of vehicles would no longer take place. Alderman Concannon stated that the property has been looked at as a dispatch center rather than as a parking lot, that these appear to be different uses and the proposed use appears to be a new use, and that the city does not have a permissive zoning code that would allow the change. Attorney Connolly stated that previous city solicitors in this city and other communities have believed that the City Council have the authority to grant the special permit. Alderman Concannon stated that having 487 cars parked on site and an increase of car carriers may be more substantially detrimental. Attorney Connolly stated that there are no appellate cases on the issue and the City Solicitor indicates that the City Council has discretion. Alderman Mercer-Bruen stated that the proposed use is a completely different use, that the prior uses were utility companies serving a public purpose, that the proposed new use is not the same as the prior use at all, and that she agrees with the opinion of the City Solicitor regarding nonconformities. Alderman DiTucci asked if the prior owners parked new vehicles for retail sale on the site. Attorney Connolly stated that this is too narrow of a view, and that the prior owners did park vehicles on the locus. Alderman DiTucci stated that with that argument any business in the city could become a commercial parking lot if there is currently overnight parking of vehicles. Attorney Connolly stated that there would be other criteria to consider as well. Alderman DiTucci stated that this was never the same use, that despite other future uses this property has to be judged on its merits, that the proposed use is not less egregious, that the proposal is not right for the locus, and that on every level the petition fails. Alderman Drapeau stated that every time a legal opinion is requested there can be different opinions and ideas, that the City Council and not the City Solicitor has the authority to decide this matter, that the matter is properly before the City Council, that it is up to the City Council to vote in favor or against the petition, and that the City Solicitor is not the arbiter of the decision the City Council is. Alderman Gately stated that Verizon vehicles would leave the property at all times of the day, that Verizon had some vehicles that never moved from the site, that Verizon employees were sent out to emergency sites and left their vehicles on site for many days, that he does not want to see an operation similar to the previous users, that apartments on the site would not be beneficial, and that the proposal is for a low profile business which is less detrimental to the community. Alderman Anderson stated that the City Council has to look at whether the proposed use is the same as the former use, and that the analysis does not get to whether the proposed use is a less detrimental use until there is a decision as to whether this is the same use.

PUBLIC COMMENTS: Attorney Thomas Gorman, Sherin and Lodgen, LLP, 101

Federal Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02110 stated that he represents Tudor Glen, that the mudslinging is a diversionary tactic from the merits of this application, that Tudor Glen is a conforming use, that what is at issue is a nonconforming use, that the application is for a “change, extension or alteration of a nonconforming use”, that this is an application under Section 7 of the zoning ordinances which governs changes of a nonconforming use, that there is no question that whatever was operated at Verizon was not a commercial use, that two tests apply, that the first test is whether the change complies with the Woburn zoning ordinances, that the second test is whether the proposed use is not substantially more detrimental than the former use, that the petition must pass the first test before getting to the second test, that the City Solicitor is of the opinion that a nonconforming use cannot be changed to another nonconforming use when the new use is not allowed in the zoning district, that a commercial parking lot is prohibited in the R-3 zoning district, that the petition cannot pass the first test and therefore the analysis cannot get to the second test as to whether the proposed use is substantially more detrimental, that the Planning Director also shared this opinion several months ago, that only in certain districts can the use be allowed by special permit, that the denial of the special permit would be consistent with past action, that this decision avoids having a combustible industrial and residential use mix, that the property has been residential since the 1920s and the Tudor Glen property has been conforming since it was built, that Section 7.2 of the zoning ordinances states that nonconforming uses should be restricted with the intention of eliminating the nonconforming uses, that he does not believe that the proposed use is not substantially more detrimental than the former use, and that the proposed use is not allowed. Michael Meaney, Executive Director, Woburn Business Association, Ten Tower Office Park stated that the petitioner offers 32 voluntary conditions, that the proposed use is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the former use, that the petitioner has made efforts to make the use less detrimental to the neighborhood, that Verizon can come back by right to use the property, that another apartment complex is not good for the site, and that Tudor Glen has 300 vehicles parked on their lot on a daily basis. Lillian Hardcastle, 70 Locust Street stated that the area was wooded when she moved to her house, that the school was then built, that soccer games bring hundreds of cars to the site, that she opposes the petition, and that the proposed use will be detrimental to the neighborhood. Joanne Foti, 80 Locust Street stated that the City Council is worried about what use may go on the site, and that the City Council was elected to be the voice of the residents. President Haggerty stated that a utility company could go to the site and use the property without a special permit.

A communication dated August 7, 2014 was received from William Duffy, In House

Counsel, Tudor Glen Village, Inc., 411 Waverly Oaks Road, Suite 340, Waltham,

Massachusetts 02454 relative to the concerns of Tudor Glen Village, Inc. of the impact of the proposed special permit on its property. Attorney Tarby stated that based on the information presented the petitioner has met the legal threshold, and that the proposed use will be the best use of the site. Attorney Tarby offered proposed findings to the City Council for review. Motion made and 2^nd that the document be received and made part of the record, all in favor, 9-0. Attorney Tarby stated that a license for a commercial parking lot was never granted for the locus. Motion made and 2^nd that the public hearing be closed, all in favor, 9-0. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED. Motion made and 2^nd that a condition be added to the special permit reducing the number of vehicles allowed to be stored on site to 300 vehicles, 4 in favor, 5 opposed (Drapeau, Gaffney, Gately,

Raymond, Haggerty opposed). Motion made and 2^nd that the SPECIAL PERMIT be GRANTED, AS AMENDED with the conditions as follows: 1. That the 32 proposed conditions be adopted; 2. That the proposed Findings be adopted; 3. That Condition 4 be amended by adding the word “new” before the words “motor vehicles”; and 4. That an additional Condition 33 be added as follows: 33. A monthly report of the number of vehicles parked on the locus shall be forwarded to the Building Commissioner, 5 in favor, 4 opposed (Anderson, Concannon, DiTucci, Mercer-Bruen opposed), MOTION FAILS.

_________________________

CITIZEN’S PARTICIPATION: None.

_________________________

COMMITTEE REPORTS:

PUBLIC SAFETY AND LICENSES:

On the petition by Winchester Cooperative Nursery School for a special event permit to allow a fun run on October 5, 2014 at Horn Pond, committee report was received “ought to pass, as amended with the condition as follows: ‘hours of event from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.’”. Motion made and 2^nd that the COMMITTEE REPORT be ADOPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: August 14, 2014 s/Scott D. Galvin August 14, 2014

************************* FINANCE:

On the Order to transfer the sum of $175,000.00 from Fire/Ambulance Receipts Acct to Fire/Ambulance Acct, committee report was received “ought to pass”. Motion made and 2^nd that the COMMITTEE REPORT be ADOPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: August 14, 2014 s/Scott D. Galvin August 14, 2014

************************* ORDINANCES:

On the Order to amend 1989 Woburn Municipal Code, as amended, Title 13, Article IV relative to stormwater, illicit discharge/connection and construction site management, committee report was received “ought to pass, as amended, as follows: 1. That the recommendations of the Planning Director be adopted as amendments to the ordinance.” Motion made and 2^nd that the COMMITTEE REPORT be ADOPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: August 14, 2014 s/Scott D. Galvin August 14, 2014

_________________________

NEW PETITIONS:

Petition by Joseph Teta, 11 Crossman Road; Scott M. Bradley, 6 Crossman Road; Fred

Cialdea, 19 Crossman Road; Dianne Cialdea, 19 Crossman Road; Susan McLaughlin, 9

Crossman Road; Amy McLaughlin, 9 Crossman Road; Sharon Bradley, 9 Crossman

Road; Stephen Tonks, 4 Crossman Road; Teresa Tonks, 4 Crossman Road; Amelia

McDermott, 11 Crossman Road; Paula Riter, 15 Crossman Road; Henry Riter, 15

Crossman Road; Joseph Cooley, 17 Crossman Road; and Jim McDermott, 27 N. Maple

Street, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 requesting acceptance of Crossman Road from

Love’s Lane to the terminus and that the roadway be widened and paved. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC WAYS, all in favor, 9-0.

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

Petition by Woburn Students Trying to Make a Difference, 3 Loker Lane, Woburn,

Massachusetts 01801 for a special event permit to allow a fundraising walk around Horn Pond on October 5, 2014 from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. President Haggerty stated that this group has held this event on this weekend for several years, and that the matter was discussed in conjunction with another permit. Motion made and 2^nd that the SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT be GRANTED, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor: August 14, 2014 s/Scott D. Galvin August 14, 2014

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

Petition by Children’s Dyslexia Center- Boston North, 500 W. Cummings Park, Suite 4400, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 for a special event permit to allow fundraising walk on Arlington Road and around Horn Pond on October 5, 2014 from 12:00 noon to 2:00 p.m. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND LICENSES, all in favor, 9-0.

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

Petition by KEG Realty LLC, George Hamilton, Manager, 19 Jefferson Avenue, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 for two special permits pursuant 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended, as follows: 1. Pursuant to Section 7.3 to allow alteration of a pre-existing nonconforming structure to allow for a 38 foot by 12 foot two-story addition, and 2. Pursuant to Section 15 to allow enlargement of an existing use to allow for a 38 foot by 12 foot addition in Ground Water Protection District, at 19 Jefferson Avenue. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO PUBLIC HEARING, all in favor, 9-

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

Petition by Flyers Unlimited, 271 Salem Street, Unit J, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 for a special permit pursuant to Section 5.1.45 of the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended, to allow the sale or rental of automobiles, trucks, truck trailers, and motorcycles, including accessory repair and storage facilities (U-Haul trucks) at 271 Salem Street. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO PUBLIC HEARING, all in favor, 9-0.

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

Petition by Diane R. Kurkjian dba Everydog LLC, 441 West Street, Reading,

Massachusetts 01867 for a special permit pursuant to Section 5.1.35 of the 1985 Woburn

Zoning Ordinances, as amended, to allow for a kennel at 271 Salem Street, Units C and D. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO PUBLIC HEARING, all in favor, 9-0.

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

Petition by JFJ Holdings, LLC, 65 Arlington Road, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 for a special permit pursuant to Section 7.3 of the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended to allow for the change, extension and alteration of the existing nonconforming structure and nonconforming use (three residential units within two structures on one lot) to allow for the addition to one of the structures to provide for a total of four (4) dwelling units (two in each structure) and for a finding the such change, extension or alteration shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood, at 19 Traverse Street. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO PUBLIC HEARING, all in favor, 9-0.

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

Petition by R.C. Olsen Cadillac, Inc., 201 Cambridge Road, Woburn, Massachusetts

01801 for a special permit pursuant to Section 5.1.57a of the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended, to allow for three storage trailers at 201 Cambridge Road.

Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO PUBLIC HEARING, all in favor, 9-0.

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

Petition by Woburn Foreign Motors, 294R Washington Street, Woburn, Massachusetts

01801 for a special permit to modify a special permit dated December 5, 2002 which Decision allowed for the alteration of an existing non-conforming structure by the construction of a covered service drive at 394 Washington Street and Special Permit pursuant to the 1985 City of Woburn Zoning Ordinance, as amended, as follows: 1. Section 5.1 (45) (69) and 7.3 to allow for the sale or rental of automobiles, trucks, truck trailers, and motorcycles including accessory repair and storage facilities; 2. That the new site plan of record be the plan entitled “Site Plans for Woburn Foreign Motors Proposed Redevelopment, 394 Washington Street, Woburn, MA 01801” dated August 7, 2014, prepared by Allen & Major Associates, Inc., 100 Commerce Way, Woburn, MA 01801 (the Plan); and 3. In addition, the Petitioner seeks approval of the following modifications to the existing Site Plan of record: to allow for a stand-alone car wash within the interior of the building, additional parking spaces, transformer; dumpsters and fuel pump, all as shown on the Plan, at 394 Washington Street. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO PUBLIC HEARING, all in favor, 9-0.

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

Petition by Woburn Foreign Motors, 394R Washington Street, Woburn, Massachusetts 01801 for special permits pursuant to the 1985 City of Woburn Zoning Ordinance, as amended, as follows: 1. Section 5.1 (45) to allow for the sale or rental of automobiles, trucks, truck trailers, and motorcycles including accessory repair and storage facilities; 2. Section 5.1 (69) and 7.3 to allow for the replacement of the existing non-conforming six (6) foot fence as shown on the plan with a six (6) foot wall; 3. Section 8.7 to allow for a reduction in the off street loading requirements; 4. Sections 5.1 (69), 7.3 and 13.5 to allow for the alteration of the existing non-confirming signage; 5. Footnote 8 to Section.

6.1 to allow for an increase in the building height from thirty-five (35) feet to forty-five (45) feet, more or less; 6. Section 8.6.3 to allow for an exception to the area and landscaping requirements to allow for alternate landscaping equal or superior in visual appearance; and 7. Sections 12.2.4 and 12.3.2 to allow for the replacement of the existing buildings on the property with a new building containing approximately 152,600 square feet in gross floor area, more or less, at 394R Washington Street. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO PUBLIC HEARING, all in favor, 9-0. _________________________

COMMUNICATIONS AND REPORTS:

A communication dated July 18, 2014 was received from Charles L. O’Connor, Parking Clerk, Police Headquarters, 25 Harrison Avenue as follows:

In accordance with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 90, Section 20½, I am submitting this report to you on the parking violations within the city of Woburn for the period ending June 2014: number of violations issued 544, number of violations paid 291, number of violations outstanding 225, amount collected and submitted to the

Collector’s Office $25,910.60. There exists a backlog of 3,196 tickets from 1982 through

2013. Demand will be sent until all tickets have been paid. Parking fines referred to the Handicapped Commission $4,900.00.

Respectfully submitted, s/Charles L. O’Connor, Parking Clerk City of Woburn

Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be RECEIVED AND PLACED ON FILE, all in favor, 9-0.

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

A communication dated July 24, 2014 was received from Marian Callahan concerning an issue with a taxi cab service in Woburn. Motion made and 2^nd that the MATTER be REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND LICENSES, all in favor, 9-

_________________________

UNFINISHED BUSINESS OF PRECEDING MEETING: None.

_________________________

APPOINTMENTS AND ELECTIONS: None.

________________________

MOTIONS, ORDERS AND RESOLUTIONS:

RESOLVED That the Superintendent of Public Works direct that Montvale Road, Munroe Avenue and Sunset Avenue be repaved using the funds in the Ward Five mitigation funds account.

s/Alderman Mercer-Bruen

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

Presented to the Mayor August 14, 2014 and ten days having elapsed without same being approved, said Resolve became effective without his signature on August 26, 2014.

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

RESOLVED That His Honor the Mayor provide the City Council with a status report on the Salem Street/Wildwood Avenue traffic improvements.

s/Alderman Mercer-Bruen

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

Presented to the Mayor August 14, 2014 and ten days having elapsed without same being approved, said Resolve became effective without his signature on August 26, 2014.

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

RESOLVED That the Mayor authorize the Department of Public Works to proceed with

repairing drainage on the following streets in order to ameliorate the sewer flooding these neighborhoods experience during storms: Crawford Drive at Pond Terrace; Lake Terrace at Lake Circle.

s/Alderman DiTucci

Motion made and 2^nd that the RESOLVE be ADOPTED, AS AMENDED with the amendment as follows: 1. That a copy of the two photographs be forwarded to the Mayor, all in favor, 9-0.

Presented to the Mayor August 14, 2014 and ten days having elapsed without same being approved, said Resolve became effective without his signature on August 26, 2014.

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

ORDERED That the Committee on Personnel provide an update on the status of the search for a new Human Resources Director.

s/Alderman DiTucci

Alderman DiTucci stated that the Committee on Personnel interviewed a selection of candidates, that the number of final candidates has been narrowed to three, that the committee will send letters to all candidates, and that the committee meeting as a committee of the whole will interview the final three candidates. Motion made and 2^nd that Chair of the Committee on Personnel Alderman DiTucci prepare questions for the final round of candidate interviews, all in favor, 9-0. Motion made and 2^nd that a

communication be forwarded from the Committee on Personnel to the candidates not selected for a final interview, all in favor, 9-0. Motion made and 2^nd that the ORDER be ADOPTED, all in favor, 9-0.

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

ORDERED That the Committee on Infrastructure and Public Lands meet to discuss the water metering program.

s/Alderman Gately

Motion made and 2^nd that the ORDER be ADOPTED, AS AMENDED, with the amendment as follows: 1. That the Committee shall meet as a Committee of the Whole on the matter, all in favor, 9-0.

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

RESOLVED That His Honor the Mayor instruct the Superintendent of Public Works to

provide to the Mayor and City Council by August 15, 2014 a list of those roads to be maintained, repaired, improved or constructed during Fiscal Year 2015 using the funds provided to the city in accordance with the Chapter 90 local transportation aid funding by the Commonwealth.

s/Alderman Gately

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

Presented to the Mayor August 14, 2014 and ten days having elapsed without same being approved, said Resolve became effective without his signature on August 26, 2014.

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

ORDERED Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Woburn that Title 12 of the 1989 Woburn Municipal Code, as amended, be further amended by adding a new Section 12-14B as follows:

Section 12-14B City Road Maintenance Schedule

By June 1^st of each year, the Superintendent of Public Works shall establish a road maintenance plan of those roads to be maintained, repaired, improved or constructed during the following fiscal year using funds provided to the city in accordance with the Chapter 90 local transportation aid funding (hereinafter “the Road Maintenance Plan”).
On or before June 15^th of each year, the Superintendent of Public Works shall submit to the Mayor with a copy to the City Council the current Road Maintenance Plan.
On or before July 30^th of each year, the Superintendent of Public Works shall submit to the Mayor with a copy to the City Council a report of all work performed or expenditures made in accordance with the Road Maintenance Plan of the preceding fiscal year.

s/Alderman Gately

Motion made and 2^nd 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 1985 Woburn Municipal Code, as amended, be further amended as follows:

That Section 2-146(E) be amended by striking the words “the approval of the City Council” and inserting in their place the words “Section 33H herein”;
That Section 2-151(C) be amended by adding the words “subject to Section 3-3H herein” after the words “bequests of funds”;
That Section 2-151(E) be amended by adding the words “subject to Section 3-3H herein” after the words “property of significant value”;
That Section 2-157 be amended by adding the words “subject to Section 3-3H herein” after the words “recreational purposes”;
That the first sentence in the fourth paragraph of Section 2-208 be amended by striking the words “approval by the City Council” and inserting in their place the words “Section 3-3H herein”;
That the fourth sentence in the fourth paragraph of Section 2-208 be amended by striking the words “approval of the City Council” and inserting in their place the words “Section 3-3H herein”; and
That a new Section 3-3H entitled “Acceptance of Grants, Gifts and Bequests” be added as follows:

“Section 3-3H Acceptance of Grants, Gifts and Bequests.

“An officer, department, board, commission or committee of the city, may accept grants or gifts of funds from the federal government and from a charitable foundation, a private corporation, or an individual, or from the commonwealth, a county or municipality or an agency thereof, subject to approval of the mayor and city council, and in the case of any such grant or gift given for educational purposes said funds may be expended for the purposes of such grant or gift with the approval of the school committee. The city council, with the approval of the mayor, may, in its sole discretion and authority, accept gifts of tangible personal property on behalf of the city from the federal government, a charitable foundation, private corporation, individual, or from the commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof, and may, in its sole discretion and authority, use said gifts, without specific appropriation thereof, for the purpose of such a gift or, if no restrictions are attached to the gift, for such other purposes as it deems advisable; and the jurisdiction of the city council shall extend to approval or rejection of the location of the intended gifts, including, but not limited to benches, monuments, plaques or any structure or improvements made to city property with such grants, gifts or bequests.”

If any provision or provisions of this ordinance shall be held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable for any reason whatsoever, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions of this ordinance (including, without limitation, all portions of any paragraphs of this ordinance containing any such provision held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable that are not themselves invalid, illegal, or unenforceable) shall not in any way be affected or impaired thereby.

s/Alderman DiTucci

Motion made and 2^nd 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 1985

Zoning Ordinances, as amended, be further amended by deleting from

Section 2, Definitions, the current definitions of Manufacturing, Light and Manufacturing, Heavy, and inserting in their place new Definitions as follows:

MANUFACTURING: Fabrication, processing, packaging, or assembly operation, predominantly from previously prepared materials, to produce durable and/or non-durable finished goods or component parts, free from agents disturbing to the neighborhood, such as odors, gas fumes, smoke, cinders, flashing or excessively bright lights, refuse matter, electromagnetic radiation, heat, vibration or other adverse environmental effect, provided there is no outside storage of materials or finished goods, but excluding heavy industrial operations such as asphalt, block, bottling, concrete, steel or fertilizer manufacturing, heavy forging processes, scrap metal processing, garbage and refuse incineration or the disposal of other material not originating on the premises, except as produced by the City of Woburn. All manufacturing shall be in compliance with Title 9, section 92, Noise Control, of the Woburn Municipal Code.

MANUFACTURING, LIGHT: Manufacturing as defined above,

employing only electric or other generally noiseless and inoffensive motor power, utilizing hand labor or quiet machinery and processes.

MANUFACTURING, HEAVY: Manufacturing other than light manufacturing.

s/Alderman Raymond

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

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

ORDERED Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Woburn that the 1985 Woburn Zoning Ordinances, as amended, be further amended as follows:

That Section 2 Definitions be further amended by adding the following definition to Section 2:

Mixed Use Hotel/Restaurant: A mix of hotel and restaurant uses in one building or in separate buildings on one development lot.

That Section 5.1, Table of Use Regulations, be amended by adding a new line 20(a) entitled “Mixed Use Hotel/Restaurant” which use shall be allowed in the B-D, B-I, I-P, I-P2, I-G, S-2, O-P and O-P93 zoning districts by “P” special permit and shall not be allowed in the remaining zoning districts.

s/President Haggerty

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

_________________________

Motion made and 2^nd 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

CITY OF WOBURN

AUGUST 12, 2014 – 6:30 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL

WOBURN CITY COUNCIL, COUNCIL CHAMBER

Motion made and 2^nd to take the following matter out of order, all in favor, 9-0.

_________________________

A communication dated July 24, 2014 with attachment was received from City Solicitor

Ellen Callahan Doucette relative to pending litigation in the matter of The Woburn

Armory LLC v. Paul J. Denaro, et. al., Middlesex Superior Court Civil No. 2012-MICV1528 and a request to meet with the City Council in Executive Session to discuss the matter. Motion made and 2^nd that the matter be heard in Executive Session pursuant to M.G.L. Ch. 30A, Sec. 21(a)(3) to discuss pending litigation with the City Solicitor, ROLL CALL: Anderson – Yes, Concannon – Yes, DiTucci – Yes, Drapeau – Yes,

Presented to the Mayor: August 14, 2014 s/Scott D. Galvin August 14, 2014 *************************

City Council – 08/12/2014

Meeting Agenda

Roll Call

_________________________

_________________________

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

_________________________

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

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

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

b) Add right turn lane on Cedar Street Northbound approach to Washington Street; c) Coordinate Cedar Street and Salem Street signalized intersections with Adaptive

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

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

_________________________

_________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

_________________________

_________________________