Elderly housing at the COA

Last year, Deb Raymond, the COA Director, mentioned to me that it would be an ideal situation if the town could build elderly housing on town owned land to the east of the COA and DeMello school. The siting would place the residents within easy access to the COA and its activities and to the Bullard health clinic. Additionally, some or all the housing may count toward the town's affordable housing stock. Perhaps we could encourage an inter-generational partnership between the school and the residents (reading buddies, tutors, etc.) It seems like a great idea.
What is missing is a plan. Together with the Dartmouth Housing Authority ...

... and the Community Preservation Committee (CPC), the town needs to develop a plan to implement this idea and to identify funding and grants for the project.
I hope to work with interested partners to get this started. The cost will not be something the town can do in one year, but if we have a plan, we can take it to the various funding sources and see if they will support it.
One of the areas where the CPC has spent the least funds is affordable housing which is part of their mission. I would like to see funds from the CPC tax surcharge held in reserve every year and earmarked for this project.
What are your thoughts about this project? Click here to read on!

Faunce Corner-Rooute 6 congestion hearing Monday

The Select Board will have a public hearing this Monday to get input on the suggestion from the Southeastern Planning and Economic Development District. I wrote about the proposal in this post previously.

If you would like to give input, please attend on Monday. Click here to read on!

Faunce Corner - Route 6 congestion

At last night's Select Board meeting, we heard from representatives of the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District (SRPEDD) on a study which they conducted to relieve congestion in the Faunce Corner Road and Route 6 corridors.
Specifically, SRPEDD recommended realignment of Tucker Road across from the terminus of Hathaway Road on Route 6. You can link to the report here.
The plan calls for a traffic light to be installed at the newly created intersection and removal of the light at Tucker Road. This alignment will allow travelers from Hathaway Road to turn onto Route 6 at a light and will help relieve traffic which backs up on Route 6 from the Tucker Road light into the intersection with Faunce Corner Road, blocking travelers from Old Westport Road and those traveling along Route 6. It will also reduce the number of accidents at Tucker Road and Hathaway Road which are dangerous intersections with frequent collisions.
The Select Board decided to hold a public hearing ...
... on the plan at our June 7th meeting. The proposal will be expensive and will require taking of some lands and buildings. One possibility to reduce the expense would be to route the realignment of Tucker Road through the North Dartmouth Library property. This would require that the library be demolished to make way for the roadway.
I support this proposal and would like to see it done. The traffic snarls at Route 6 and Faunce Corner Road and the accidents are going to get worse and soon. Traffic is already to the point where the backups occur almost daily with normal traffic and are horrendous from Thanksgiving to Christmas. The net result is that it makes the area less attractive to business because travelers are going to avoid having to deal with it and go elsewhere.
It is not that I do not want a library in North Dartmouth, I do. But given the choice between gridlock and the present library, I would choose the new road. There was a proposal a few years ago to build a new library building on Cross Road on land adjacent to Potter School. The town owns the land. I would like to see that done along with the road realignment. I see the building as a multi-use facility with a library, senior center, and perhaps a police substation. There is plenty of room on the site. Why not have a playground there as well?
If you would like to put your two cents worth in at the public hearing, please attend the Select Board meeting on June 7th.
See you there.
Click here to read on!

Padanaram Bridge Construction 4/26 to 5/7

From our police department via Nixle

Community Message has been issued by the Dartmouth Police Department.
Wednesday April 21, 2010 12:42 PM EDT

Padanaram Bridge under Construction from 4/26/10 - 5/7/10

Dartmouth Police remind you that the Padanaram Bridge will be under EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION (Bridge will be operational for Vehicle/Maritime Use) from Monday, April 26th - Friday, May 7th, 2010 from 630am-400pm.

Expect delays and consider planning an alternative route.

For full details, go to https://local.nixle.com/alert/1920547/.

Contact Information:
DARTMOUTH POLICE
508-910-1735

This is not the Apponagansett Bridge on Gulf Road.
Click here to read on!

Apponagansett Bridge maintenance closure

From the Department of Public Works via Mr. Cressman

This is related to a bridge inspection that took place several months ago. Due to the inspection weight limits had to be posted and the use of the bridge by District 1 fire apparatus had to be negotiated. This closure is to correct those deficiencies.

David Cressman, Executive Administrator

TOWN OF DARTMOUTH

PUBLIC NOTICE


PROJECT SUBJECT TO WEATHER PERMITTING
BRIDGE CONSTRUCTION

APPONAGANSETT BRIDGE AT GULF ROAD WILL BE CLOSED

Wednesday, April 21 - Friday, April 23, 2010
7:00 AM-5:00 PM

Local Detours Will Be Posted
WE ARE SORRY FOR ANY INCONVENIENCE THIS MAY CAUSE

PER ORDER OF: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

You heard it here first. HA!
Click here to read on!

Lincoln Park Legislation on House agenda

From the Orders of the Day for Thursday February 4th, 2010 in the House of Representatives

214. [H611] Bill creating the Lincoln Park infrastructure financing district in the town of Dartmouth (House, No. 611).

Click here to read on!

Lincoln Park District and eminent domain

The Town Meeting passed an article at the Fall 2008 Town Meeting which authorized the town to seek a Special Act of the General Court to form a development district at Lincoln Park which had the power to issue bonds and to levy assessments and betterments upon property owners in the district in order to pay off the bonds. I posted about the warrant article and legislation here and here again.
The developers complained in August that the town has held them up as I posted here.
Attorneys for the town and the developers as well as the town's bond counsel have been kicking around the wording for the special act for months now. Everyone points the finger at the other guy for the delay but I am not interested in who to blame, I just want to get some housing started at Lincoln Park so that the town doesn't have to pay back the 40R grant of $350,000 next year.
Having said that, I am also not willing to just sign off on any proposal. It seems pretty straightforward that the act should authorize the creation of the district to sell bonds to make infrastruture improvements. That is what the Town Meeting voted to do. The rub comes when the proposed legislation ...

... goes well beyond what the warrant article detailed. That increased scope has been the objection of the town to getting the Special Act wording approved.
In this case, the parts of the proposed Special Act that I cannot support are provisions to give the new quasi-governmental body the power to condemn property in eminent domain takings. That would even be OK with me if it were limited to the land within the district. I don't really know why it is needed since I assume they could deed themselves an easement when the property is conveyed. But as I read the proposed act, the power would extend outside the Lincoln Park district. That is not what Town Meeting voted for and I don't think it is a good idea either.
What are your thoughts?
Click here to read on!

Wind Turbines approved for Clean Renewable Energy Bonds

This news from Dr. DiPippo of the Alternative Energy Committee.

Hi all,
I just heard from Simon Thomas that our application to the IRS for $2 million of CREBs has been APPROVED!
The cut-off sum was $2.5 million. We are not alone in Mass as 4 other projects were also approved.
This is huge for us in terms of financing the project. Everything just got even better than Pete calculated. This means that we will be able to float bonds at about 1% to cover about 20% of the anticipated total cost, thus saving us roughly $50 thousand per year over the financing period. Now all we need to do is get a bank to take the bonds. BofA has the main bank in this market. Ed: Cover yourself with glory before you leave us!
All the more important for us to get that NSTAR interconnect study commissioned since there will now be a flood of towns seeking net metering with NSTAR and the other Discos.
Best regards,
Ron DiPippo, Ph.D.

Information on Clean Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs) at this link.
The town is planning a public forum ...

... on the Dartmouth wind turbine project in order to inform the public. Tentatively date is the first week of December. I will publish the time, date and location when it is finalized.
Discos above is short for electric power distribution company, not nightclubs that play Bee Gees music.
Cue negative comment from Frank1 ........ Now!
Click here to read on!

Capital Improvement procedures

The Finance Director, Mr. Iacaponi, forwarded this information from the Department of Revenue on capital improvement budget articles.
He also reviewed Dartmouth's policies as follows,

Good Morning:
Please review the attached information from the Department of Revenue
Technical Assistance Section regarding Capital projects.

The Town of Dartmouth's policy (past) practice has been:

1. Capital item of $10,000 or more

2. Useful life of three years

3. Bonding - Useful life of 5 years or more

4. Combine items if less than $10,000 (such as Technology items.

Thank you.
Ed Iacaponi

There will be an opportunity to fund some capital improvements at the Fall Town Meeting. The Capital Improvement Planning (CIP committee will be meeting ...

... to formalize their recommendations before the Fall Meeting. Check here for the schedule (no meetings of the CIP are scheduled this week)
What projects would you like to see the town fund? Why?
Click here to read on!

More recycling is needed

The Fall River Herald News reports in this article that the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) has cited local businesses and schools for inadequate recycling efforts. We need more of this in my view. Singapore recycles all solid waste, Europeans recycle much more than we do. Measures also need to be instituted, packaging standards, etc., that reduce the amount of stuff that gets thrown out.
Dartmouth has seen a huge decrease, ...

... on the order of 50%, in the amount of trash produced after a pay as you throw system was implemented. Other communities should consider the approach.
Click here to read on!

Plymouth Rock Studios infrastructure spending in doubt

The Fall River Herald News has two articles today about the proposed Plymouth Rock movie studio. In this one, state Senate leader Murray casts doubt on the funding for infrastructure improvements. The Governor's office disputes her statement and says the funding will be available. Another article, see here, details the potential for 2000 jobs ...

... if the project is built.
Even during tough financial times such as the current ones, this is the type of government spending that should be done. By providing a modest investment now the state and its residents can realize earnings in the long run. Let's hope that the Governor and legislature can get together on this project and bring it to fruition.
Click here to read on!

For those hoping for more state aid!

From the Governor's Online Forums,(Link here) which are being hosted by Chancellor MacCormack of UMass Dartmouth, comes this little tidbit,

If you cut costs by laying off every employee in state government, you’d still have a $1.1 billion deficit. If you eliminate every state human services agency—Mental Health, Public Health, Transitional Assistance, Developmental Disabilities, etc—you would still be short $700 million. Since the state faces a combined budget deficit of approximately $9 billion in the next two fiscal years, the federal stimulus will be part of but not the entire solution. ...How would you raise new revenue? Which services would you cut? Which services would you preserve, and how would you pay for them?

For a pie chart that shows how the state spends our money, click here
The state and local rules for things like vacation, sick time, and pensions are the same or very similar in most cases. These issues are certainly a part of the problem.
But as you can see from the statement above, the bottom has fallen out of the revenue collection. The General Court has not done enough to correct that. I would like to see

... a graduated income tax to go with the sales tax hike that is likely to pass. Although I also think the flat income tax that Pennsylvania uses has a lot of merit. The rate is fairly low but here's the kicker, no deductions on earnings. If you make $20,000, you send in $600, if you make $200,000 send in $6,000. I would also support a tax on gasoline which is dedicated to mass transit and road repair only (not tolls, not more roads).
Even if the state emptied out the Stabilization Fund, they can't keep up the contributions to education and local aid. So much for next year might be better!
Click here to read on!

40R projects founder

The 40R project at Lincoln Park has apparently missed an important deadline set out in the permit that was issued last July. I wrote about the timeline requirement in this post. The deadline for submitting a proposal for Phase 2, which has to include housing, was May 1st. To my knowledge, that proposal has not been filed. The permit allows the town to seek relief in a number of ways, one of which is to ask the developer to convey a parcel to the town on which the town can build in order to provide housing. The issue in getting some sort of housing started is that the state Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) paid ...

... $350,000 to the town when this 40R project was approved. If the town cannot show progress on the project, the money must be repaid to DHCD. Projects are reviewed for compliance in November.
On the other proposed 40R project for Reed Road, it seems I was premature in stating that the application was going to DHCD. The interim Executive Administrator has not signed off on the application as yet. The holdup is that town agencies, such as the Smart Growth Committee, Planning Board, all other permitting officials, the Police Dept Traffic Unit, etc. have not had time to review and weigh in on the application. The Select Board will review the issue on Monday night. If you feel strongly one way or the other on the Reed Road project let your Select Board members know.
Click here to read on!

Reed Road project sent to DHCD

The Select Board voted last night to send an application to the state Department of Housing and Community Development(DHCD) to qualify the project of 162 units of housing on Reed Road as a 40R development. There are some advantages to the town in having this project qualify as a 40R development. Namely that the state will provide funds to offset the impact of the development, MGL Chapter 40R section 9. The payment would be $200,000 for the project and $3,000 per unit of housing. The total is $200K plus $3K times 162 or $686,000. These funds are only available if the project is qualified as a 40R project.
The developer is asking that the Reed Road project ...

...be added as an amendment to the Lincoln Park Smart Growth Overlay District (LPSGOD) bylaw. The first step, which was initiated last night, is to have the DHCD qualify the project as a 40R. Then the Planning Board must approve an amendment to the LPSGOD bylaw in accordance with MGL Chapter 40A section 5. The Planning Board would recommend the LPSGOD bylaw amendment to Town Meeting which would then have to vote to approve the bylaw revision.
At that point, the developer would submit plans to the Permit Approval Authority(PAA) of the LPSGOD. The PAA is a special board created by the LPSGOD bylaw and is comprised of 3 members, one member of the Select Board, one member of the Planning Board, and one member of the Zoning Board of Appeals. The current membership is Kathleen Horan McLean, John Haran, and Roger Tougas. I think that the Select Board needs to appoint a currently serving member to the PAA. This is no reflection on Ms. Horan McLean. The language of the bylaw is plain and says a member of the Select Board, not a designee. I think that having a serving member adds accountability to the PAA since a current member would be responsible to the voters for their actions on the PAA and I believe that was the intent of the bylaw as well. As Ms. Horan McLean correctly pointed out last night, the PAA has no role in recommending the project for qualification as a 40R project or formulating an amended bylaw. Their responsibility begins when the developer submits a plan for review. Under the bylaw, the PAA has the sole authority for review and approval of the development plans.
I am not in favor of this project because I believe that the development will overburden the infrastructure in the area. The developer could still go forward with the project as a 40B development. MGL Chapter 40B section 21 allows developers to bypass local zoning and planning boards by applying to the state for a permit. The bypassing of local zoning is allowed as long as a certain percentage of the housing is "affordable" as defined by state regulation. So this development could still be built under 40B and still create infrastructure problems for the town. Having a 40R designation would provide some funds to ameliorate the impacts, but not sufficient funds to cover most of the impacts to roads, schools, water and sewer systems. So the dilemma is, do you go along with trying to get a 40R designation and get some funds for impacts, or do you force the developer to try to go the 40B route, possibly still have the project developed and not get anything. I am willing to take my chances that the 40B project may not go forward, rather than definitely have a 40R project go forward.
There are several questionable areas for this project as a 40R project and it may not even pass muster with the DHCD.
The first is that is does not meet the density requirements. In order to show the required density of 20 units per acre for most of the townhouse units, the "zone" is the size of the building foundation. This is 162 units on 40 plus acres. A true look at the project is that the density is 4 per acre, not 20.
The purpose of a smart growth district is to encourage development were infrastructure already exists. That is not the case for this project. The infrastructure of roads, sidewalks, etc. would have to be built to support the project. this is the definition from the MGL 40R section 2

“Eligible locations”, (1) areas near transit stations, including rapid transit, commuter rail and bus and ferry terminals; (2) areas of concentrated development, including town and city centers, other existing commercial districts in cities and towns, and existing rural village districts; or (3) areas that by virtue of their infrastructure, transportation access, existing underutilized facilities, and/or location make highly suitable locations for residential or mixed use smart growth zoning districts.

I contend that the Reed Road location meets none of the three criteria.
What do you think about this project? Tell us in comments below
Click here to read on!

Public Hearing on Reed Road 40R project

There will be a public hearing on Monday, April 13th at 6:30PM at the Select Board meeting for the proposed amendment to the Lincoln Park Smart Growth Overlay District(LPSGOD).You can find the zoning bylaw for LPSGOD here(MS Word format). The amendment would add land at 449 Reed Road. The land in question is 1.4 acres identified as Map 48,lot 11 and 36+ acres identified as Map 52, lot 8 on the Assessor's records. If you wish to speak in favor or in opposition of the development please attend this hearing. You will be allowed to speak.
This project is proposed ...

...under Mass General Law, Chapter 40R I have quite a few questions about this project. The first is whether or not amendment of the LPSGOD requires Town Meeting approval. I also think it requires application to and approval by the state Department of Housing and Community Development as well as the LPSGOD Plan Approval Authority. I hope to get these and other questions answwered Monday at the hearing
Click here to read on!

Town receives $870,381 in Chapter 90 funding

The town has been informed that the town's portion the state's $150 million Chapter 90 funds will be $870,381 for FY 2010 which begins on July 1, 2009. The town's 10 year Chapter 90 contract was signed ...

... in 2008 and is posted at the Executive Office of Transportation (EOT) website
Click here to read on!

Quinn window project wins state approval

Ed iacaponi emailed me this information,

Please be advised that the Quinn Elementary School window replacement project has been approved by SBA at their board meeting on Mar 25, 2009. They have placed it in the repair and renovation category. They will be issuing an approval letter shortly. We will be able to proceed with this project once assigned a project number.

Ed

Edward Iacaponi
Director of Budget & Finance / Treasurer
Town of Dartmouth

The Town Meeting had appropriated funds ...

...contingent upon the match by the SBA.
This project will now proceed.
Click here to read on!

Wind Power lnterconnect Study

The Select Board heard a preliminary report from the Alternative Energy Committee (AEC) on Monday night. The Committee recommended the installation of two 1.65 MW Vestas wind turbines on town land in the Paskamansett Valley. The site is owned by the town for water wells and is adjacent to the waste water treatment plant which will use power from the turbines. The AEC asked to fund an interconnection study by the electric utility, NStar. The study, which costs $2500, will determine if the distribution in the area can handle the output from the turbines and detail any protective relaying equipment that the power company would require. The Select Board voted...
...to fund the interconnect study from an expense budget or Reserve Fund transfer.
As presented, the wind power project would cost between $8.5 to 10.5 million dollars and the town would realize a $550K annual savings per turbine for the 25 year life of the wind turbines. That return gives the project an 8-10 year pay back, following which time the town would realize savings.
Initiating the interconnect study moves the town one step closer to having the project ready to go if federal or state grants should become available for such alternative energy projects. Other financing methods are also possible given the favorable economic analysis of the installation.
The turbines would sit atop 80 meter (263ft) towers and have a capacity factor of 30% given a 6.5 m/s average wind regime. The 30% capacity factor means the installation's average output over a year would be 495KW per hour per turbine
The town would have to permit the machines in accordance with the recently adopted commercial wind turbine bylaw. Further study and information would be required to meet the strictures of the wind turbine bylaw specifically with regard to impacts on surrounding residents.
UPDATEA previous post on wind turbines can be found here
Click here to read on!

Governor Patrick considers gas tax hike

From the Boston Globe website here, comes news that Governor Patrick is considering a gas tax hike along with other measures. What do you think?

Mostly benefits Boston area residents as I see it.
Click here to read on!

DPW funding for FY10

The Director of the Department of Public Works(DPW), Mr. Hickox, gave a very good presentation last night on the effects of a 15% reduction in the overall budget of his department. Mr. Hickox pointed out that the reduction would result in the 7 fewer employees and would severely impact the capability of the highway and construction divisions. He noted that the roadways and bridges in Dartmouth represent the largest asset of the town and that failing to maintain that asset can result in higher costs in the future.
I agree with the assessment ...

... that road maintenance has to be a high priority. Maintaining what we have will prevent the need to replace road surfaces at a much higher cost. I also agree that the budget reductions in the highway and construction divisions would hurt their ability to function effectively. A 15% reduction in the DPW budget would cut over $400K from that department. Mr. Hickox needs to restore about $260K of that $400K to maintain the current staffing of the highway and construction divisions. The Select Board voted to decrease the reduction in the DPW budget by that $260K amount.
That reprieve may be short-lived depending upon the outcome of collective bargaining with the town employee unions. The FY10 budget does not include any money for wage and salary increases. If increases are negotiated, the funding for the remainder of the budget will probably result in the need for layoffs.
Curt Brown has an article in today's Standard Times on this issue.
Click here to read on!