| October 9, 2007 |
|
City Council Meeting
Minutes
October 9, 2007
City Council Chambers
7:00 p.m.
Action: Councilor St. Hilaire moved approval of the September 10, 2007 meeting minutes. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
6. Councilor Werner presented a resolution in recognition of the services of F. William Mitchell, Jr. (9-33)
- Consent Agenda Items –
Note: Items listed as pulled from the consent agenda will be discussed at the end of the meeting following unfinished business.
Action: Councilor Lemieux moved to approve the consent agenda, as amended with items 8 and 34 removed for discussion at the end of the agenda. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Councilor Blanchard noted that she and Councilor Black had attended a meeting at Delta Dental in which there had been considerable discussion regarding the Quarry Dogs and moved that Council vote to suspend the rules to allow Tom Raffio and Tim Sink to give a five minute presentation with regards to the Quarry Dogs. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Tom Raffio, Northeast Delta Dental CEO, explained that rumors have been circulating that the Quarry Dogs are being sold and that the team will seek a new playing venue. He stated that because of these rumors, he and Mr. Sink have enlisted the support of over twenty prominent business and civic leaders and held a meeting to find out what is going on. Mr. Raffio indicated that the new potential owner, Barry Wadsworth, and his marketing officer, Karen Rella, were also in attendance at the meeting and that there was a fever pitch of enthusiasm and support by all in attendance. Mr. Raffio read from a prepared statement from Mr. Wadsworth and Ms. Rella on file at the City Clerk’s Office which states that “their goal is to work with the residents of Concord, business and community leaders to continue to build off the excitement, passion, energy and commitment that is already in place.” He indicated that this support and commitment is vital to the future success of the Concord Quarry Dogs. Mr. Raffio indicated that time is of the essence and continued reading that “the Wadsworth Sports Group has stepped up to save the Quarry Dogs but needs a little help to find a way to, at the very least, break even and is confident that everyone can work together to make this happen and also feels that if Concord loses a New England collegiate baseball league team it will almost be impossible to get a team back.” The statement continued “I think we need to build for the future and together we can make the Quarry Dogs a winner for all. The Wadsworth Sports Group is very excited about becoming a member of the Concord team.” Mr. Raffio indicated that the group is not for a hand out but for data that they can bring to the league meeting this week and understands that any letters of support that the city can give the Quarry Dogs cannot be linked to future negotiations. He noted that several letters in support have been received from businesses and what is needed is a macro sense of the enthusiasm that the city has to keep the Quarry Dogs in Concord.
Councilor Nyhan noted that he feels that the reason that the Quarry Dogs have not been successful so far is because nobody is going to the games. He inquired as to what sort of plans are in place to draw more fans to the games and what types of considerations the group is looking for in the future. Mr. Raffio responded that the group has a myriad of ideas to get people into the stands, understanding that it is going to be a combination of getting ten to twenty businesses to become corporate sponsors to help increasing the attendance. He noted that there are a number of ideas in process with working with businesses to sell the tickets and they are going to make it an event that people will want to go to. He noted that the group has indicated that the Memorial Field facility is one of the best in the league. Mr. Raffio noted that the group clearly understands that the concessions are tied up for another year but would like to at least discuss this opportunity down the road understanding that the city’s show of support may or may not ultimately conclude concessions.
Councilor Black moved to ask the City Manager to provide a letter of support to try to keep the Quarry Dogs in Concord. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Nyhan noted that he feels that before the city decides they want to commit to the Quarry Dogs, other viable options for baseball should be considered.
Councilor Black noted his support of the Quarry Dogs indicating that the games are a wonderful family night out. He further noted his disappointment in the attendance to the games explaining that the reason for this is because it has been run by people who are part-time amateurs and after attending the meeting he was favorably impressed with this group who will probably have a good chance at filling the stands.
Councilor Blanchard noted her support of the Quarry Dogs.
Councilor Lemieux inquired whether there are any financial implications involved and if so what are they. City Manager Tom Aspell responded that the existing contract with the Quarry Dogs expired September 30th, 2007 and any new contract would be negotiated, building off of the previous one and looking at all the different aspects. He explained that what Council has done in the past is to try to at least make sure that it pays for its own costs. Councilor Lemieux inquired as to what costs the city is obligated to pay under the current agreement. Mr. Aspell responded that the city pays for energy, lights, and the preparation of the field which totals approximately $386 per game times twenty two games. Councilor Lemieux questioned whether Council had just voted to assess charges for field preparation to local teams. Mr. Aspell indicated that to be correct. Councilor Lemieux pointed out that the city is charging local volunteer teams to prepare the fields and yet the Quarry Dogs would require the city to pay these expenses. Mr. Aspell clarified that the city charges the Quarry Dogs per game explaining that three years ago when the city entered into the contract that just expired, City Council was asked to waive a one year portion of this which amounted to approximately $11,000 a year at that time and pointed out that roughly $12,000 to $15,000 in revenue is received from the Quarry Dogs to offset these costs. Mr. Aspell noted that those costs will need to be looked at and anticipate them in the future.
Councilor Nyhan pointed out that the local groups would like to use the field and questioned whether it was realistic that if the city does enter into a new contract with the Quarry Dogs, the American Legion, the Over Thirty League, and Babe Ruth could also have games on this field. Mr. Aspell responded that they could but whether or not they would have games on days that they want to have games would be another question because it is very difficult to have more than one organized game per day because of the preparation time involved. Councilor Nyhan inquired whether this can at least be considered in writing the contract. Mr. Aspell explained that when Council authorizes him to enter into a contract, Council prefers not to see the contract but occasionally there are types of contracts that Council wants to know the details on and this could be one that Council wants to let the public know in advance and to be able to comment on.
Councilor Black’s motion passed with no dissenting votes.
Referral to the Downtown Solid Waste Committee and the Solid Waste Advisory Committee
Action: This item removed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
Items Tabled for a November 13, 2007 Public Hearing
From the City Manager
Consent Reports
Consent Resolutions
30. Resolution honoring and memorializing Leonard “Red” Brochu for his dedication and contributions to the City of Concord. (For presentation in November)
31.
Resolution in recognition of the services of Richard Mason.
(For presentation in November)
Action: This item removed for discussion at the end of the agenda.
Consent Communications
**End of Consent Agenda**
A. Resolution approving changes to the boundaries of the Penacook-Boscawen Water precinct, a village district located in Boscawen and Concord, New Hampshire; together with reports from the City Solicitor and General Services. (8-10) (9-17)
Action: Mayor Pro Tem Bouley welcomed Boscawen Selectmen, Mr. Maloof, Mr. Davis, and Mr. Wright. He explained that this public hearing is a joint hearing with the Town of Boscawen Board of Selectman.
City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that the last joint hearing with Boscawen had been held in 1891 and indicated that Attorney Jim Raymond and Janet Levy, engineer for the precinct, were present to do a brief presentation to explain why this is being done. Mr. Aspell explained that what is being done is to take care of a number of issues that have occurred over the last 100+ years to bring not only the Town of Boscawen into conformance with its district regulations but also incorporate pieces of Concord that should be part of this district.
Attorney Jim Raymond, Upton and Hatfield, explained that the water precinct is a village precinct under New Hampshire law and because it straddles both communities, both the Concord City Council and the Town of Boscawen Selectmen have to approve any boundary change. He further explained that, under the statute, because it is a joint hearing of both boards, each will then vote separately. Attorney Raymond noted that this was brought forward on a petition under the statute, if Concord and Boscawen both approve it goes to a vote by the residents in the precinct and in any new areas that are going to be added. He indicated that the election is tentatively scheduled for October 30th. He pointed out that this precinct was established in 1891 by a similar action by the Board of Aldermen and Board of Selectmen and the boundaries have pretty much stayed the same ever since but in 1972 they were changed and in the process they inadvertently lopped off an area that includes Crescent Street and a few other areas. He pointed out historical information explaining that in 1891 a lot of land in Boscawen did not have a lot of value so that where the boundary lay on the ground was less critical and as development occurs you have to start locating exactly where it is so the old description, which is very vague, doesn’t work any more where actual location and boundary become important for development. He noted that the area surrounding Crescent Street is on the wrong side of the river and when the description was changed in 1972 it followed the river instead of the boundary between Concord and Boscawen.
Janet Levy, engineer, pointed out that each of the Councilors has a map of the Penacook-Boscawen water precinct including the petition. She explained that the original 1891 boundary included most of Boscawen, Ward One in Concord and “any place else they deemed they thought they might add in” explaining that this included most of Penacook until 1935. She noted that the new boundary was written in 1972 and appeared to be based upon a map but that the actual document for the boundary was not tied to the map. Ms. Levy explained that in 1972 there was a boundary that included an eastern boundary of the Boston and Maine Railroad, the southern boundary of the Contoocook River, a northern boundary of the county complex, a western boundary that is very vague. She pointed out that the 1972 boundary left out the Crescent Street area of Boscawen, left out the town park, left out the town dump, and since then the precinct is no longer using the Walker Pond as a water supply and currently has new wells located at the county farm which is not included within the boundary. She explained that the supply doesn’t necessarily have to be within the boundary but would like it to be included within it. Ms. Levy indicated that the commissioners had asked her to provide a boundary and pointed out that the proposed boundary begins with the 1972 boundary which is the Boston and Maine Railroad traveling along the Contoocook River and include the ten properties that are on Crescent Street, which are currently being served. She pointed out the emergency connection to the City of Concord and indicated that the boundary then travels 4,500 feet down the Contoocook River until it hits Hardy Brook and continues northerly until hitting a property bound. Ms. Levy indicated that it is totally on Boscawen tax maps and every point and every line is now on the property boundary which will encompass the water system and still will service all the way to Walker Pond in which a pump station is still maintained but is no longer used as a water supply. She continued explaining that the property boundary goes out the county complex, a main user for the Penacook – Boscawen water precinct, and includes the new wells continuing down along the railroad track to the proposed well field which is projected to be needed within ten to fifteen years. She added that the boundary then continues down to included Jamie Welch Park and connect back down to the Boston and Maine Railroad.
Referencing the map, Councilor Lemieux inquired as to what the green line represented. Ms. Levy explained that the green line is the line between Concord and Boscawen in which the precinct currently serves approximately seventy customers on Elm Street in Concord.
The Mayor Pro Tem Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor Pro Tem closed the hearing.
Councilor Lemieux moved to suspend the rules to allow action to be taken on this item. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
38. Resolution approving changes to the boundaries of the Penacook-Boscawen Water precinct, a village district located in Boscawen and Concord, New Hampshire; together with reports from the City Solicitor and General Services. (8-10) (9-17)
Councilor Blanchard moved approval of the resolution. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Mr. Maloof of the Boscawen Board of Selectmen noted his appreciation of the opportunity to be present this evening and indicated that the Town of Boscawen would like to vote on this item at this time. Mr. Davis of the Boscawen Board of Selectman made a motion to approve the resolution. The motion was duly seconded by Mr. Wright of the Boscawen Board of Selectmen and passed with no dissenting votes. Mr. Maloof of the Boscawen Board of Selectmen stated that the Town of Boscawen thoroughly endorses this expansion of the boundaries of the Penacook – Boscawen water precinct and has voted in the affirmative.
B. Report from the Director of Real Estate Assessments regarding a request for a discretionary preservation easement for property located at 69 Mountain Road, owned by Charles and Ann Winterling, in accordance with RSA 79-D. (9-14)
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview.
Kathy Temchack, Director of Real Estate Assessments, explained that RSA 79-D allows a property owner to request a discretionary preservation easement for historical agricultural property. She noted that, historically, Council has asked that the Heritage Commission to review the request and make a recommendation to the Council on whether or not they should accept or reject the request. She explained that if Council approves the request, it is for a minimum of ten years and there is a percentage between 25 and 75 percent that would be reduced from the assessment of whatever agricultural building and land has been requested by the property owner. Ms. Temchack noted that in exchange the property owner agrees to maintain the property in good working order which has to stay in effect for ten years.
Charles Winterling, property owner of 69 Mountain Road, indicated that he has lived at this property for thirty five years and noted that the property is currently on the New Hampshire Historical Registry because of its historical value and its relationship to the culture of Concord. Mr. Winterling provided a detailed history of the property explaining that it provides a very good example of the architecture at the time, its use in the agricultural realm and provides considerable aesthetic value to the community.
Councilor Coen inquired as to whether there is a report from the Heritage Commission. Mr. Winterling explained that the Heritage Commission was involved in placing the house on the historical registry and have visited and evaluated the property. Ms. Temchack responded that the Heritage Commission reviewed the application and in order to qualify or be recommended for this one of three criteria must be met: a scenic enjoyment; a historical importance; or physical or aesthetic features. She indicated that the Heritage Commission believed that the barn represented all three of these criteria and is recommending that there be a 75 percent exemption granted for the land and the building that the barn encompasses.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor Pro Tem declared the hearing closed.
C. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title II, Traffic Code, Chapter 18, Parking, Article 18-1, Stopping, Standing and Parking, Section 18-1-9, Bus and Taxicab Stands, Schedule VII, Industrial Park Drive, Regional Drive; together with report from the Assistant City Planner. (9-16) (Communication from Concord Area Transit submitted)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview.
Councilor Lemieux inquired whether there is any cost to the city if this is approved. Mr. Aspell indicated that there is no cost to the city if approved.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor Pro Tem declared the hearing closed.
D. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title II, Traffic Code; Chapter 17, Vehicles and Traffic; Article 17-4, Operation of Motor Vehicles; Section 17-4-16, Speed Limits, Schedule XVII, Millstream Lane; together with report from the Traffic Operations Committee in response to a communication from Councilor Blanchard and residents of Millstream Lane requesting that the posted speed be reduced from 30 MPH to 25 MPH along Millstream Lane. (6-10) (9-12)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview pointing out that included within the report is a speed alteration study and that there was a very successful neighborhood meeting and the neighborhood as well as the Engineering Department unanimously recommended that the speed be reduced from 35 mph to 25 mph.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor Pro Tem declared the hearing closed.
E. Ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances, Title II, Traffic Code; Chapter 17, Vehicles and Traffic; Article 17-4, Operation of Motor Vehicles; Section 17-4-1, Stop Required Before Entering a Through Street, Schedule V, Stop Intersections, Bentwood Street and Maplewood Lane; together with report from the Traffic Operations Committee in response to a communication from Councilor Blanchard and residents of Millstream Lane requesting that stop signs be installed on Bentwood Street and Maplewood Lane at their intersections with Millstream Lane. (9-13)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that at the same neighborhood meeting as mentioned during the previous public hearing, it was determined that the stop approach should be put in place.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor Pro Tem declared the hearing closed.
F. Resolution appropriating the sum of $100,000 and authorizing the issuance of bonds and notes for fire apparatus replacement, forestry units, CIP #4; together with report from the Fire Department. (9-15)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview referring to the staff report outlining the suggestions in terms of the use of these dollars which was approved as part of the budget: two pickup trucks for $20,000 each; $7,000 to $10,000 each for self contained skid units; $15,000 for ancillary and unexpected costs associated with the retro fits. He pointed out that the costs for these items total $75,000 and that Council’s first action would be to reduce the appropriation from $100,000 to $75,000 and that staff may come back at another point depending on what the needs are for the remaining $25,000.
Councilor Blanchard inquired as to what is a skid unit. Acting Fire Chief Tim McGinley explained that a skid unit is a self contained unit which contains the fire pump, the discharge valves, and the tank of water.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor Pro Tem declared the hearing closed.
G. Resolution authorizing the City Administration to enter into a purchase and sales/development agreement with Mark Carrier Construction, Inc. for redevelopment of “Scandia Hall” located at 14 Knight Street, Concord; together with report from City Administration. (Supplement report received)
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that the staff report recommends that this item be tabled for a month due to the developer and his attorney reviewing the proposed development agreement. He indicated that since this resolution was advertised as a public hearing, the hearing would need to be opened.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley declared the hearing open. There being no public testimony, the Mayor Pro Tem declared the hearing closed.
Councilor Bennett moved to table this item until the November Council meeting. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
October 9, 2007 Public Hearing Action
Action: Action on this item taken with public hearing item A.
Action: Councilor Rogers moved approval. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Lemieux indicated that he feels that there is a flaw in the state law that allows the city to give a tax exemption for a barn and not a house noting that for every historical barn in the city, there are dozens or more houses that are significant in which there is no allowance for.
Councilor Rowe inquired as to the amount of the abatement. Mr. Aspell responded that the amount is approximately $228.72 a year adding that the abatement would be for ten years.
The motion to approve passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Nyhan moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Blanchard moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Blanchard moved approval. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Councilor Nyhan moved approval. The motion was duly seconded. Councilor St. Hilaire moved to amend the resolution amount to $75,000. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Councilor St. Hilaire noted that it has occurred to him that the Police Department doesn’t have any vehicles to access some of the roads and inquired whether it would be worthwhile to see if there can’t be some discussion about what the Police Department can get for four wheel drive vehicles, for example if they purchase them along with the Fire Department there could be a benefit in the costs if purchasing more than one vehicle. He asked that city staff investigate this when the Fire Department comes back with the additional $25,000.
Councilor Nyhan’s motion to approve, as amended, passed 13-0 on a roll call vote with Councilors Bennett, Black, Blanchard, Bouley, Coen, Lemieux, McClure, Nyhan, Rogers, Rowe, St. Hilaire, Stetson and Werner voting yes.
Action: This item tabled until the November Council meeting.
Councilor Jan McClure
Action: Councilor St. Hilaire moved approval of the appointment. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
William McGonagle – from Alternate to Regular Member
Action: Councilor St. Hilaire moved approval of the appointment. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Matthew Newton
Action: Councilor Bennett moved approval of the appointment. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Reports
Action: City Manager Aspell provided a brief overview explaining that staff and consultants will be providing a brief presentation on the study noting that Council will be listening to the presentation and giving staff any feedback and directing staff to then proceed to a public hearing sometime within the January or February timeframe.
General Services Director Chip Chesley introduced Pat Connolly, Weston and Sampson Associates Senior Vice President, and Chris Woodcock, Woodcock Associates. Mr. Chesley indicated that discussions occurred at meetings as to the necessity to have the fiscal assets that are available to deliver water to both drinking water and emergency purposes and also necessary to make sure the financial framework is in place to sustain the operation. Referencing the report, he explained that there are two broad goals listed within it but tonight staff is focusing on the rate structure and how to capture the various costs of the system from the various users. He indicated that when developing a rate structure the components of the system they need to look at the components of the system that develops and provide fire protection to those constituents and what their demand is as well as how it provides water supply to those constituents and what those cost figures are. Mr. Chesley explained that when looking at wastewater rates, they look at flow and strength. He indicated that the intent this evening is to discuss the rate structures themselves and noted that the proposals that are going to be discussed are revenue neutral and will not increase the bottom line revenues derived by either the wastewater fund or water fund.
Pat Connolly, Weston and Sampson Associates, provided an overview of the key items that the project accomplished and was intending to accomplish: 1) establish and identify the fiscal goals for the water and wastewater enterprises; 2) analyze historic water and wastewater expenses and revenue projections; 3) analyze the city’s water and sewers enterprise performance from a bond rating company perspective; 4) review and make recommendations regarding the current chart of accounts; 5) examine and recommend water and wastewater rate structure alternatives and then recommend the most suitable rate structure or changes to the existing rate structure that benefit the city; 6) estimate ways to fund both current and future expenses and develop a computer model that will enable the city to update rates in the future as may be needed. He added that all of these items were accomplished. Mr. Connolly provided an overview of the goals that were identified and discovered that became the basis for the work including: 1) equity - to make sure there is fair and equitable rates that reflect the cost that different customers impose on the system; 2) sustainability – that rates are provided that promote the sustainability of the city’s water supply; 3) revenue stability – rates and charges that result in more predictable annual revenues consistency; 4) business retention – a rate structure should not discourage commercial and industrial customers and should not overly favor residential customers or any customers to the detriment of non-residential customers; 5) promote conservation – rates should not encourage the wasteful use of water.
Chris Woodcock, Woodcock Associates, indicated that as far as the rate structures and the alternatives there are a number of alternatives and options that they are recommending: 1) replace the current minimum water charge with a service charge; 2) continue assessing the public fire protection charges and charge reflecting the capacity that can get through different sized pipes; 3) public fire protection charge – he indicated that the city uses an availability charge which is unique in a sense because it recovers costs from each property based on the value of the structure of the property. The one major change is that right now the amount of money the city is charging through this availability charge exceeds what the cost in providing service for fire protection and the recommendation is a reduction in this charge but still retaining the charge; 4) the structure of the water rates – recommends the reduction of the four steps within this down to three steps explaining that typically the number of steps is based on the pipes and types of customers; 5) add an irrigation rate. Mr. Woodcock indicated that the recommendations for wastewater include: 1) that the city should continue to use a uniform wastewater rate; 2) it is recommended that the city have a surcharge for high strength wastes; 3) a fairly significant increase to the wastewater investment fees, the amounts that are charged to new properties and new connections to hook up to the wastewater system. Referencing the table at the end of the report on page 34, Mr. Woodcock explained that this shows what the impact of the combined water and wastewater bill along with the availability charges. He indicated that the overall impact of the recommendations is that residents will see a very small increase in their combined water/sewer availability bill as a result in the change of rate structure and irrigation customers will see the largest increase, those who are using water during peak demand periods, the expensive water and customers with private fire connections will see somewhat of an increase in their bills but not a lot; and availability charges will vary depending upon the assessed values of the structures.
General Services Director Chip Chesley explained that overall the purpose of this effort is to better and more accurately recover the costs of providing service of wastewater and water services to the customers and noted that the proposed change is revenue neutral.
In regards to the irrigation meter, Councilor Nyhan inquired whether it is a requirement that homeowners that have irrigation systems have a separate meter. Mr. Chesley responded that currently it becomes more of an issue with commercial accounts where they like to have a credit on their wastewater bill with irrigation meters and if the city were to go forward with the irrigation charges it would then be a requirement to have a separate irrigation meter system.
Referencing the contract with the Town of Boscawen and their use of the sewage treatment plant, Councilor Blanchard inquired as to where the revenue comes into this structure. Mr. Chesley responded that Boscawen is charged on flow and strength of the waste that they send to the city. He explained that there is an estimate at the beginning of the fiscal year as to what those charges are going to be and at the end of the fiscal year there is a reconciliation.
Councilor Coen inquired as to what percentage is the fire protection versus regular homeowner use for water. Mr. Woodcock explained that the amount of water that was used is very small, less than half percent to one percent citywide. He explained that it is not the water cost or the cost of treating the water that is in the fire protection but is the cost of having an eight inch pipe instead of a four inch pipe, the cost of having much larger pumps, the cost of having storage facility half of which are generally available for storage. Councilor Coen inquired whether a factory or a commercial structure would be the same premise. Mr. Woodcock indicated that the availability charge portion, the charge for fire protection, what is recommended is a reduction of about sixty percent in that charge noting that currently the charges are covering more than what the cost is with having the water available. He added that the demand on the water system is the same be it to a private building or to a public hydrant explaining that the difference between the public fire charge and the amount charged per hydrant is not the same and that is why there is the decrease in availability charge for public and slight increase for the private. Councilor Coen, referencing moving forward with the five safety codes that more homes will be sprinkled and inquired as to what type of impact this would have. Mr. Mr. Woodcock responded that they are generally going to be a small size connection and it is his understanding that for the most part in a residential single family home there is a one or two inch connection explaining that four inch or less is $82 a year and a typical commercial building would be for an example eight inches which would be $500 a year. He indicated that if there gets to be a large number of residential homes with one or two inch connections, he suggests adopting a rate for these smaller ones.
Councilor St. Hilaire noted that it was indicated that individuals would be required to get irrigation meters if the rate was required. Mr. Chesley responded that if the city moves forward with this proposal relating to irrigation meters with new construction of irrigation systems placed at a house then an irrigation meter would be appropriate. Councilor St. Hilaire inquired whether there was any reason why the consumer wouldn’t be allowed to choose whether they want the meter or not. Mr. Chesley responded that this is something that can be looked at. Bob McManus, General Services, explained that the city does require both domestic and commercial accounts to have irrigation meters with the reason being the cost connection noting that staff is very careful of the irrigation water that may be drained back into the house and contaminating the drinking water of the home. Mr. McManus indicated that the pipe is brought into the home, is split, an irrigation meter is placed on with the purpose being to prevent cross contamination. Councilor St. Hilaire inquired whether houses that don’t currently have this meter will be grandfathered. Mr. McManus responded that he does not believe that there currently are any houses without an irrigation meter.
Councilor Lemieux noted that the changes are small and spread out but as he looks at the net changes to a monthly bill, the tendency is for bills for commercial accounts to go down and residential accounts to go up. He inquired whether this represents a shift of conscious or unconscious for paying for the burden of the water supply from commercial accounts to residential accounts. Mr. Woodcock indicated that it represents what the cost is of providing water to the various customers and for the most part those larger customers are a little less expensive to serve and primarily reflects the goal of equity and trying to assign costs to those where they are incurred and how they are incurred. He explained that they were mindful of one of the goals of not putting the city in the position of discouraging non-residential customers by charging an excessive amount and also of not putting in rates that would encourage wasteful use by any of the large non-residential customers. Councilor Lemieux indicated that it has been stated that this is revenue neutral but pointed out that there is a fairly substantial decrease in the availability charge which would need to be made up in the cubic footage charge. He inquired whether there is evidence that would suggest the discouragement of businesses locating here because the availability charge is so high. Mr. Woodcock indicated that there is no evidence to suggest one way or another and was purely based on looking at the water portion of the budget and how much of this was related to providing fire protection service independent of what the impact may be.
Councilor Blanchard questioned whether there was any consideration within this study for a fee for maintaining storm water systems. Mr. Chesley explained that this study just looked at the water and wastewater systems.
There being no further discussion, Councilor Lemieux moved to accept the report. The motion was duly seconded. Mayor Pro Tem Bouley noted that it is his understanding that by accepting this report, Council is instructing Administration to develop ordinances and bring them back to Council for a public hearing.
The motion to accept the report passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: City Engineer Ed Roberge provided a detailed overview of his report which outlined the timelines and the neighborhood meetings held on Capital Improvement Project #24, the improvements to the intersection of Mountain Road, Shaker Road, Shawmut Street and I-93. Mr. Roberge identified some of the issues that were brought up as concerns and alternatives included within the Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB) report: the access to the Mobil gas station; the intersection of Eastman Street at East Side Drive in regards to the delays, lack of site distance, and the grade. He explained that the recommendation within the report is to approve the roundabout option, given the strong public support of this option.
Councilor Blanchard noted her concern with the fact that the city has yet to build and experience a roundabout in the city at any busy intersection.
Referencing the public hearing, Councilor McClure indicated that there were several concerns raised by the residents and businesses on Eastman Street and inquired whether this would address those concerns. Mr. Roberge responded that the two biggest concerns raised by the residents on Eastman Street were site distance and the lack of a landing area at the intersection. He explained that they had tried to address this by improving site distance by moving the intersection further away from where it currently is and moving it away from the crest curve so that an improvement could be accommodated there. Councilor McClure, referencing the 2003 report, pointed out that vehicle queuing from the roundabout would block the gas station driveway, which may be alleviated with this plan, but that it doesn’t respond to what moving the roundabout would do to the long queues they expect on Eastman Drive. Mr. Roberge explained that the comparison that the consultant is trying to make is that with traffic signals and adjusting some of the signal times, you can somewhat control the queue and with a roundabout, one doesn’t have the opportunity to adjust the queue. He indicated that in a roundabout there are approaching vehicles in which everyone is in a yield condition so the concern was will the queues at the intersection block off the gas station entrance. He explained that with the new concept before Council this evening, one of the legs of the roundabout is the entrance into the gas station.
Councilor Coen inquired as to the cost of the traffic lights. Mr. Roberge responded that it is estimated at approximately $220,000. Councilor Coen inquired as to the cost of the roundabout. Mr. Roberge indicated that the cost is estimated at approximately $390,000 explaining that these are costs that don’t include design for the facility. Councilor Coen questioned how long it would take to install the traffic lights. Mr. Roberge indicated that the area is currently configured for a signalized intersection. Councilor Coen inquired as to the completion date of the roundabout. Mr. Roberge responded that if Council opted to approve this and move this forward into the capital program, it would be planned for whatever year Council may approve it in.
Referencing the cost, Mayor Pro Tem Bouley indicated that Council had appropriated dollars for CIP #24, there were bonds, impact fee dollars which were used, and appropriated $10,000 for this work and inquired as to how much is remaining. Mr. Roberge responded that what is remaining is approximately $65,000 in funds that staff would earmark for design of either option and depending on what the final cost was for the design of either option, those funds may be earmarked for construction.
Councilor Rowe inquired as to the estimate for $140,000 for the signal cost within the report. Mr. Roberge explained that amount is the straight cost without contingency that was added similar to the roundabout. He indicated that one of the biggest assumptions that is being made is that the conduit that is currently in the ground is still usable and if it is found that it has been crimped, cut, broken or crushed in any manner then new conduit would need to be added which would raise costs. He explained that he took the $140,000 cost estimate on just equipment and installation alone. He indicated that it does not include the contingencies and the multi-lane configuration along Shawmut Street that would be required for the signalization as well.
Councilor Nyhan noted that he shares Councilor Blanchard’s concerns. He indicated that he feels that the roundabout is the best solution and inquired whether staff has any anticipation as to when this design will be brought forward whether a roundabout or a traffic signal. City Manager Tom Aspell indicated that Council will begin discussions on the capital budget next Monday for 2009 through the outyears and noted that Council will want to first hold a public hearing to determine whether or not to proceed in this direction and if Council chooses to move forward, then something would be looked at to build this into the capital budget for 2009 or whatever year Council programs for this. He explained that the earliest it would be acted on would be June 2009 and depending on which way Council goes, design would begin. Referencing the road designs for both options, Councilor Nyhan inquired whether it is the same road design work or separate design work for the roads. Mr. Roberge indicated that there is more road work for the roundabout option and added that there will need to be some road work done on Shawmut Street for the traffic signal.
Councilor Blanchard noted her confusion that if the intersection is already designed and built for signalization why would there be a necessity for design. Mr. Roberge explained that traffic signal design is a unique science and there will be demand models, forecast models, and infrastructure design. He indicated that while the geometry is set for the intersection to accept the traffic signal, the actual equipment design and implementation takes some work.
Councilor Black inquired whether the Franklin Street/North State Street roundabout is currently in process. Mr. Roberge indicated that roundabout is in process. Councilor Black inquired whether that will be the first roundabout. Mr. Roberge responded that Franklin Street/North State Street as well as the Liberty/Auburn/Centre Street roundabout are currently in the works.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley indicated that this has been a long process of what to do at this intersection, lots of choices to be made and not one voice of what people want. He noted that it is no longer an option to “do nothing” and people want something to be done and asked that Council move forward, accept the report before Council this evening and set a public hearing for November and at that point of time move forward as to whether or not to put this in the CIP.
Councilor St. Hilaire moved to accept the report and set this item for a November public hearing. The motion was duly seconded.
For clarification, Mayor Pro Tem Bouley indicated that the public hearing is based on staff recommendation of a roundabout but if the roundabout is not acceptable then staff is also suggesting signalization. Mr. Roberge indicated that he brings forth his recommendation for two reasons: 1) it makes sense at this location; 2) in the past, strong public support indicated support for a roundabout over a traffic signal.
Councilor Lemieux inquired whether a public hearing had already been held in regards to this roundabout. Mayor Pro Tem Bouley indicated that at the public hearing held in 2006, Council had asked the department to come back with costs.
The motion to accept the report and set this item for a public hearing at the November Council meeting passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: City Manager Tom Aspell provided a brief overview referring to his cover memorandum recommending that the city endorse the proposal staying within the city’s goals and budgets as Council has approved over the past year.
Councilor McClure noted that staff has done an excellent job summarizing the many items that the city has done along these lines. She indicated that this is the first time she has seen the language within the resolution and inquired whether staff has had the opportunity to speak to other communities and what they have done with the resolution language to tailor it to their needs and also whether staff has talked to other communities that have done this and compared notes on their experiences with the program. Matt Walsh, Assistant for Special Projects, noted that he has not had the opportunity to speak to those communities and how they may have tailored the language in the resolution. He added that he could do so if Council was interested in this information. Mr. Walsh explained that the suggested format for going forward with this type of initiative is to complete a comprehensive inventory of what the city’s carbon footprint is and then calculate it so the city can be below the 1990 level. He noted that the goal is to be seven percent below what the 1990 carbon footprint was. He further noted that given some the items that the city has done, listed within the report, there is a good chance that the city might already be below that. Mr. Walsh indicated that there is a suggested software package that is offered by a non-profit entity and is unsure whether there is any cost associated with this or whether there is any special expertise or training to use this software. He further indicated that there is normally a suggestion that a special “cool cities” committee be set up for the community to guide efforts in this particular arena.
Councilor McClure noted that it was her understanding that the committee was not going to be a city staff committee but more of an outside community committee. Mr. Walsh responded that the information that he has seen from other groups that have been promoting “cool cities” across the country have been to put together a citywide type of committee with members from local academic institutions, civic leaders, political leaders, clergy, local environmental organizations, local industry leaders, etc. In terms of the work involved in doing this inventory, Councilor McClure inquired whether staff is anticipating that there will be a city cost or that this committee would take that on. Mr. Walsh indicated that it is his understanding that it has been handled in different ways explaining that at this time he cannot rule out that there will not be a city cost. He added that there have been suggestions that interns may be able to handle this noting that he does not know if this is a valid suggestion or not because he is unsure as to all the work that this is going to entail. Councilor McClure questioned whether staff could answer some of these questions if given another month to come back to Council with. Mr. Walsh responded that if Council wanted more information before making a decision that would be helpful.
Councilor Blanchard moved to adopt the United States Conference of Mayors’ Cool Cities Initiative. The motion was duly seconded.
Councilor Nyhan indicated that he has reviewed some of the language contained within the actual referendum/charter and noted that he doesn’t feel that it is necessarily the city’s position to lobby federal and state government as to what they should do with regards to their policies. He noted that if Council accepts the report he is in favor of tasking the newly formed committee at looking at the language and to modify it so that it represents Concord’s interest and not just that of the “cool cities” group.
Councilor Nyhan moved to amend the acceptance of the report to reflect that the committee would be tasked with tailoring the language so that it represents Concord’s interest. The motion was duly seconded.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley asked for a clarification of the motion to amend. Councilor Nyhan noted that the way he understands the charter of the “cool cities” movement is to indicate that Concord is making certain political statements to the federal and state government whereas the city has not had any input from the community or the opportunity as a Council to discuss this language in particular. He indicated that he is asking Council to accept the report before them however prior to endorsing any type of statements within the report, the committee that is to be formed is tasked with developing the city’s own charter statement.
Councilor Blanchard noted that she is not in favor of this if the city is being told that, as a city, we should not be asking the state and federal governments to further make these efforts.
Councilor McClure noted that she feels that this is a very interesting program and could have a lot of benefits to reducing the city’s carbon footprints as a city, saving energy costs, and saving costs to the taxpayers. She indicated that she would like the language to be looked at to make it work specifically for Concord and that the city’s effort is to counteract here locally, the effects of global warming and to reduce the city’s footprint wherever economically feasible and advantageous. Councilor McClure stated that what she is looking at is trying to make this program work more specifically for Concord and let staff also answer some of the questions that were raised about how the program would work, what the structure of the committee might be, and what some of the initial up front costs will be. She emphasized that she is in support of the program but feels that Council needs more information and the language tailored more specifically to what Concord wants to do to reduce the effects of global warming locally.
Councilor St. Hilaire indicated that he agrees, in principle, with Councilors Nyhan and McClure’s statements noting that he feels that all these are already covered within the report. He explained that the goal is to simply reduce the city’s carbon footprint to a level that is seven percent below 1990 levels and that the community will set targets and create an action plan. He noted that by adopting this report this evening, Council is saying that they agree that they have a stake in our own future and agree that something needs to be done in the city’s community. If Council accepts the report, he indicated that Council is saying that the city is going to reduce its carbon footprint and appoint a committee which will determine all the action steps to take. He noted that he feels that if Council decides what they want to list out this evening it will hamper the committee and needs to have a global approach. He noted that he is advocating that Council vote to endorse this plan and have the Mayor set up a committee to look into this further.
Councilor Rogers noted her agreement with Councilors St. Hilaire and Blanchard indicating that she feels that the city needs to move forward on this explaining that this is a concept and getting a group of individuals together to work out the details. She noted that she feels that there should be concern about the economic feasibility if the city does not do this. She indicated that she feels that Council should move forward with what is being proposed this evening noting that the only disadvantage that is listed is that if the city decides not to move forward and continue its commitment to these efforts it may receive bad press.
Councilor Nyhan clarified that he supports moving forward with the initiative but reiterated his concerns with making political statements that the city doesn’t know anything about.
Councilor McClure inquired whether staff feels that this is buying into the concept. She noted that if this is what Council is doing and that the details will be worked out and brought back to Council as to how this will all work out, then she has a different feeling about the proposal. She indicated that she wants more information as to where this is headed and not comfortable, this evening, saying that Council buys into this resolution but is in favor of the concept.
City Manager Tom Aspell explained that if this was simply an energy saving activity he would just be providing Council with a report listing what is being done and what is being saved. He questioned what Council envisions as a city government role in this process: if it is to endorse the concept; to create a committee; appointing a committee; or whether it is a community effort, which is the way he envisions it. He noted that he feels that the whole idea of this is to get the community as a whole participating together. He indicated that if Council wants the city government to be the driver for the community, this will take resources which will take some time. Mr. Aspell explained that if this is an initiative that Council wants staff to be heavily involved with as far as time goes, what are the goals and policies for the coming year. He asked Council whether this is the concept and staff should continue as a local government to handle the city’s own issues or whether Council wants staff to take this out into the community and make a real impact on global warming and carbon footprint, staff needs to know what the city’s role is.
Councilor Blanchard noted that it is her expectation that the whole community becomes involved.
Mr. Aspell stated that he feels to do this correctly, the city needs to participate, become involved and put the resources into this initiative rather than simply signing onto a petition.
Mayor Pro Tem Bouley inquired as to whether the city is currently doing this and participating. Mr. Aspell indicated that to be correct. Mayor Pro Tem Bouley pointed out the six pages of items that the city is currently doing.
Following additional Council discussion, Councilor McClure asked the City Manager how he envisioned this working with the committee. Mr. Aspell explained that if it is working with the Internal Energy Committee to make the city government stronger, then he feels that appointing the committee and bringing all the insights in will help the city do a better job and if it is the other version which is to work as a community together this would need to become a priority and Council would need to say this is an important goal for the community to accomplish. Councilor McClure inquired whether staff would come back to Council with a proposal about how this would work, what city resources would be involved, and what would be prioritized. Mr. Aspell indicated that staff would come back to Council.
Councilor Lemieux indicated that there is a goal contained within the report of reducing pollution levels to seven percent below 1990 levels by 2012 and inquired whether staff knew where those levels are currently. Mr. Aspell responded that this is not known at this time.
Councilor Nyhan withdrew his motion to amend.
The motion to endorse the United States Conference of Mayors’ Cool Cities Initiative passed with two dissenting votes.
New Business
Action: Councilor Blanchard moved to schedule the Manager’s evaluation on Tuesday, October 16th at 7:00 p.m. The motion was duly seconded and passed on a voice vote.
Councilor Stetson inquired whether or not this was a public meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Bouley responded that this would be a non-public meeting.
It was determined that no food would be provided at this meeting.
Comments, Requests by Mayor, City Councilors
Councilor McClure thanked the General Services Department for working diligently and tirelessly with the Nordic community to work out a solution/plan to use the trails at Memorial Field in a more organized fashion. She also thanked the community members in attendance at these meetings.
Comments, Requests by the City Manager
Mr. Aspell introduced the new Deputy City Manager – Development Carlos Baia.
Consideration of items pulled from the consent agenda for discussion
Items 8 and 34 were pulled from the consent agenda to be discussed following unfinished business items on the agenda.
Referral to the Downtown Solid Waste Committee and the Solid Waste Advisory Committee
Action: Councilor Bennett indicated that he has spoken to Grace Taylor, Executive Assistant at CenterPoint Church, and noted that the church had been previously charged $650 a month and since the school has been moved to the former Centennial Senior Center building the church is being charged $550 a month. He indicated that the church produces approximately six to twelve bags of waste every two weeks and inquired whether this church could be excluded from the downtown solid waste district.
Councilor Bennett moved to refer this communication to the Downtown Solid Waste Committee and the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Action: Mayor Pro Tem Bouley asked for an explanation between the previous information submitted and the new information submitted this evening.
City Planner Doug Woodward introduced Michael Barwell, communications consultant representing the Winants, who brought this to the attention of the Conservation Commission. Mr. Woodward explained that the matter that caused this to be pulled from the agenda is a communication from the attorney from St. Paul’s School this afternoon about the last whereas on page one in which he wanted to add the wording “considering the conveyance to Five Rivers Conservation Trust” because the board of trustees of St. Paul’s actually has not met to take a formal action. He noted that this was the only change and believes that this does not affect what the Winants wish to do.
Councilor Rogers moved to substitute the revised resolution with the one previously submitted. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Councilor Lemieux moved approval of the revised resolution. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
Consideration of Suspense Items
10 Sus1 Report from Councilor Bennett, Communications Committee regarding improvements to City Council Chambers.
Action: Councilor Bennett provided an overview of the report explaining that the recommendation is to accept the report and authorize the expenditure of funds to paint, purchase new blinds, and replace existing carpeting within Council Chambers in conjunction with improvements being made by CCTV including the installation of new cameras and moving the production booth to the back of the room.
Councilor Bennett moved approval of the report. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
City Clerk Janice Bonenfant reminded everyone of the Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 6th. She stated that polls will be open from 8:00 am to 7:00 pm and indicated that if anyone had any questions they can call the City Clerk’s Office for assistance. Ms. Bonenfant explained that candidate web pages, giving residents information about the candidates that have submitted information, will be available online next Monday.
Adjournment
The time being 10:00 pm, Councilor Lemieux moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was duly seconded and passed with no dissenting votes.
A true copy: I attest:
Michelle Tiffany
Deputy City Clerk