Board of Aldermen

Appropriations Committee Meeting Minutes

Thursday, 5 April 2007

Appropriations Committee

Absent: Buonopane

Attending: Planning Board Chairman Mike Cassavoy, Vice-Chairman Richard Connelly, Anne DeSouza-Ward, John Sadowski, Robert Mercado, Gerry Marcus, Carla Francazio

In attendance: City Planner Denise Gaffey; Building Commissioner John Luther

Appropriations called to order by Chairman Brodeur at 7:42 p.m. to hold a Joint Public Hearing with the Planning Board on Order No. 07-132, Proposed changes to Revised Zoning Ordinances, Chapter 235 regulating Home Occupation by amending: Article II Section 235-5. Definitions (Home Occupation); Article V Section 235-17. Table of Use and Parking Regulations; Article VIII Section 235-42. Parking of Commercial Vehicles; Article XIII Section 235-77. Home Occupation – Conditions, as set forth herein

Chairman Brodeur asks that City Planner Denise Gaffey give an overview of the proposal.

Ms. Gaffey says the proposal is for two amendments as pertaining to home occupation; that of non-residential uses that take place and sole proprietors.  The City has seen more and more residents with home offices.  This amendment was proposed by the Planning Board because of the recent onslaught of Home Occupation Special Permit applications.  The Building Inspector has interpreted zoning more strictly recently whereas in the past the Ordinance was interpreted to allow the specific types of home occupations under Section 235-77 paragraph H as long as all other conditions were met. The Planning Board decided to look at this closer and the Zoning Subcommittee researched ordinances in other communities.  Most have some home occupation use as of right.  Ultimately the Subcommittee favored a two-tiered approach as described in the packets consisting of a three page cover letter, three pages describing the proposed amendments, and a one page revised ordinance if adopted.  The two tiered approach first allows home occupation by right.  A big factor is that home occupation would have no negative impact on the neighborhood; other conditions include no outside employees and no more than 10 client visits per week.  The second tier requires a special permit for home occupations that have more than 10 client visits per week and/or involve one but not more than two non-resident employees.  Specific changes to the Home Occupation provisions include amending Article 2 by stipulating that no more than 600 square feet or 40% of the total gross floor area, whichever is less, can be dedicated to the occupation.  Article 2 also does not allow non-resident employees without a special permit.  Article 5 is amended by adjusting the Table of Use and Parking Regulations to permit Home Occupations as of right in the residential districts and the medical business zone.  Article 8 is amended to eliminate the clause pertaining to parking commercial vehicles connected to a home occupation which unintentionally allowed such vehicles to exceed the 10,000 pound threshold for commercial vehicles.  The Zoning Subcommittee spent the most time on Article 13.  It is the most important aspect of this zoning amendment as it defines the criteria associated with an as of right home occupation.  There are four key conditions: that they are unobtrusive, carried on entirely within the dwelling, are not detrimental to the neighborhood, and do not create excessive traffic.  Allowance for signage is eliminated as is the list of home occupations, and the Subcommittee opted against stipulating a maximum threshold of deliveries associated with a home occupation as consumer purchasing patterns indicate a higher number of deliveries to residential areas in the future.  Instead the proposed paragraph G in Article 8 grants the Building Commissioner the discretion to interpret when deliveries become excessive.

Chairman Brodeur opens the hearing for public comment.

Sharon Wynne, 21 Orient Avenue, opposes the amendment saying that by and large the 600 square foot limitation or 40% of the home is too restrictive.  Because the homes in Melrose are large, 600 square feet is nothing.  The direction this is going in is wrong.  Everyone is starting to work out of their homes.  She says the City wants to be less restrictive, not more.

No other speakers come forward.  Chairman Brodeur closes the public input portion of the hearing.

Alderman Conn asks how much of an increase in home occupation applications have been seen in the Building Department.  Ms. Gaffey says there have been a lot of applications in the ZBA – 7 or 8 in the past few months.  The City Clerk's office has been telling other applicants to hold off until this amendment has been reviewed.  Alderman Conn asks how many people in the city are using home occupation.  Ms. Gaffey says she doesn't know, but the City Clerk's office would know by the number of DBA certificates it has granted.  Alderman Conn asks if she knows how many existing home occupations are noncompliant.  Ms. Gaffey says no, but in the existing ordinance, every home occupation requires a special permit.  This proposal recognizes those that won't have any impact on the neighborhood and would be as of right.  Building Commissioner John Luther says his office probably averages two applications per week.  If this passes he expects they would see 30 to 40 in the first month.  A lot of people are waiting for this amendment.  They don't want to spend the money for the special permit process.  Alderman Conn asks if the laundry list of occupations was deleted.  Ms. Gaffey says it was unnecessary and very limiting and there is no way to know what businesses will be prevalent in 10 years.  Mr. Luther says currently applicants include day traders, financial advisors, fine arts studios, some trades, engineers and land surveyors.  Alderman Conn says he understands that the Inspection Services department is stretched to the max and asks how he will monitor if an as of right home occupation has more than 10 clients per week.  Mr. Luther says that word comes via neighborhood complaint.  Alderman Conn says the Planning Board peeled the signage piece out of the ordinance and asks if that is due to the recent signage ordinance.  Ms. Gaffey says the Planning Board felt it was not necessary.

Alderman Infurna says that as a ward alderman traffic is always a concern.  She asks how "excessive traffic" is defined and regulated.  Mr. Luther says if he receives complaints about more than normal traffic he will investigate.  It is difficult to regulate the number of trips but people will notice delivery trucks.  The number 10 was chosen because it allows two trips per day.  Ms. Gaffey says it is tricky but the current ordinance doesn't clearly define it either.  This tries to minimize traffic with the number of employees and the number of trips.

Alderman Seaboyer asks if the fee is one-time or annual.  Ms. Gaffey says there is no fee because it is as of right.  The DBA license is $60 for three years.  If there is a need for a special permit the ZBA standard fee will apply.  Alderman Seaboyer asks how large 600 square feet is.  Mr. Luther says it is four 12x12 rooms.  The average size house in Melrose is 2,000 square feet.  The allotment would be 2/3 of the first floor.  Alderman Seaboyer asks if it matters whether the employees are full or part time.  Mr. Luther says the only distinction regarding employees is if they are nonresident.  Alderman Seaboyer asks how the ordinance applies if the employees never come to the home occupation.  Ms. Gaffey says the language reads "employed therein", within the dwelling.  Mr. Luther says it would be fine if an electrician employs six offsite employees.  Other employers may be travel agents and events planners.  This ordinance does not say there cannot be employees; they just cannot be onsite.

President Mortimer says there is a linguistic issue in the language in Article 13 paragraph I: ". . . if it involves one but not more than two employees who reside outside of the residence . . ." leaves two employees in limbo.  Ms. Gaffey says that means one or two.  President Mortimer says three employees would be forbidden.  Ms. Gaffey says three employees would require a variance and it is probable that office space would be needed elsewhere.  President Mortimer suggests the language be cleaned up.

In reference to traffic in Article 8, Paragraph G, Anne DeSouza Ward says that it might be best to say "traffic will not exceed that normally expected in the residential neighborhood."  She says traffic will vary neighborhood to neighborhood, but this proposal leaves it up to the Building Commissioner.

In response to Ms. Wynne, Alderman Heavey says that the internet allows more and more people to work out of their homes and that this ordinance would not impact persons working for a company from their house.

Alderman Forbes asks if the hours of operation are restricted.  Mr. Luther says no, the only requirement is for it to fit into the neighborhood.  If someone is working on a computer at 2 a.m. it won't bother anyone.  Alderman Forbes asks about a fleet of vehicles starting up at 7 a.m.  Mr. Luther says that only one commercial vehicle is allowed.  Alderman Forbes asks if he doesn't think this amendment should impose an 8 a.m. start time.  Mr. Luther says no.  The City can't tell a person leaving for work at 5 a.m. with a truck that he can't go to work until 8 a.m.  Alderman Forbes asks if there will be a need for home inspections.  Mr. Luther says only by complaint.  The questions on the existing application will be enhanced.  Alderman Forbes asks if there is anything in this to prevent putting a spotlight on a sign on homes.  Ms. Gaffey says signs are not allowed on the wall or building.

Alderman Boisselle asks if Article 13 Paragraph G means that goods and wares shall be stored inside the 600 square feet of the dwelling.  Ms. Gaffey says it isn't written that way; the concern is that goods are stored so that they are not visible from the street and without impact to the neighborhood.  Alderman Boisselle asks if storage comes under other regulations like fire regulations for the storage of cardboard.  Mr. Luther says storage is not something he anticipates regulating on a monthly basis unless he receives complaints of UPS trucks loading and unloading.  Alderman Boisselle says a person selling items on Ebay typically stockpile products are to the ceiling; that may want to be considered.  Mr. Luther says he'll put that on the checklist.  Alderman Boisselle asks if there would be a problem with landscaper's employees leaving their cars on the street.  Mr. Luther says yes but a landscaper would not get a home occupation permit because it is not considered a home-based business.  Alderman Boisselle asks about allowing vehicle sin excess of 10,000 lbs.  Ms. Gaffey says the existing language allows it but this proposal amends it to a maximum of 10,000 pounds.

Alderman Forbes asks where the regulation for signage is under Amendment number 7.  Ms. Gaffey says that the paragraph on signage is being deleted in its entirety.  Mr. Luther says signage is prohibited.

Alderman Wright asks how the City keeps track of home occupation business owners.  Mr. Luther says the City Clerk's office holds the DBA certificates.  Alderman Wright asks what makes a person apply for a DBA.  Mr. Luther says a DBA is needed for a business checking account.  Ms. Gaffey says she thinks there are a number of businesses operating under the radar screen.  Alderman Wright says if the various car brokers and internet brokers had not come in before the Board when they applied no one would know they existed.

Alderman Infurna says if the list of occupations is no longer included and if a special permit is needed for signs, by also deleting the signage language from the ordinance that people may reason that it does not indicate that signage is not allowed.  She suggests that language be inserted prohibiting signs.  Alderman Conn says there is a separate section in the zoning ordinances that regulates signage.  There is no need for a provision in this section as well.  Ms. Gaffey says that the elimination of the signage provision offers a more residential feel but that the Planning Board will review it.

Chairman Brodeur says he wouldn’t want to make all the lawyers that work out of their homes remove the signs from their houses.  In regards to square footage, he asks about home day care providers and the regulations for the number of children.  Mr. Luther says that day care providers would not fall into this at all.  It is out of the scope of this home occupation ordinance.  Chairman Brodeur asks if the 600 square feet is outside or inside the home.  Mr. Luther says it is inside.  Chairman Brodeur asks about outside.  Ms. Gaffey says it is clearly defined as a business that is carried out inside the building.  Chairman Brodeur says the 600 square feet relates to the principal building and asks about a garage.  Mr. Luther says a garage is a sub building and under this ordinance a business is allowed only inside the principal structure.

Alderman Forbes asks if in mixed use properties a person is allowed to expand beyond 600 square feet.  Mr. Luther says this ordinance applies only to residential property.

Chairman Brodeur declares the Public Hearing closed at 8:40 p.m.  He says the Planning Board has 21 days to report back to the Board of Aldermen.  If the Planning Board does not issue a report within 21 days the Board of Aldermen may vote on it.

Public Hearing adjourns at 8:41 p.m.

Chairman Brodeur says that the regular order of business is in order.  President Mortimer motions to open Public Participation, 2^nd by Alderman Boisselle.  All in favor.  No one comes forward.  Alderman Infurna motions to close Public Participation, 2^nd by President Mortimer.  All in favor.

Order No. 07-169, APPROPRIATION Amount:   $208,843.65  From: Capital Stabilization Fund, Transfer Out A/C #84052-59000  To: Various Accounts set forth herein.  Chairman Brodeur says there are five requests: Pine Banks Ballfield #1, Pine Banks Ballfield #2, Police vehicle, PW vehicle and equipment, Cemetery lawnmower.  The CFO has submitted a statement that the funds are available, and the Mayor requests passage.

President Mortimer moves to recommend, 2^nd by Alderman Boisselle.  President Mortimer motions to suspend the rules, 2^nd by Alderman Boisselle.  All in favor.

Mr. Henry Kezer represents the Pine Banks Board of Trustees.  He says he has submitted supplemental material explaining the construction of the new ballfields at the park.  Pine Banks will provide first class artificial fields while staying within the confines of Chapter 393 of the Acts of 1905 with state grants and donations.  The cost of the fields is $115,000 per city for 10 years.

Alderman Forbes asks if the fields have a warrantee.  Mr. Kezer says there is a 20-year warrantee on the fields and the lights, including replacement bulbs, from both the manufacturer and the installer.  Alderman Forbes asks if the same installer was used on the existing field in the back.  Mr. Kezer says he believes so.

Alderman Infurna thanks the Trustees of Pine Banks for all of their work.  She says Pine Banks is a jewel in Ward 5.

Chairman Brodeur says the next item is the police vehicle for $38,500.  He asks Chief Morrissey if it is a police cruiser.  Chief Morrissey says yes.

Alderman Seaboyer asks the Chief to describe the equipment that the cruiser will have.  Chief Morrissey says it will be all new equipment.  The department has used old equipment for the past 10 years and has band-aided the fleet for the past few years.  This vehicle will have digital equipment and radar.

Alderman Boisselle asks if it is coming from a state approved contract.  Chief Morrissey says it is.

Alderman Wright asks if it is a Crown Victoria cruiser and not an SUV.  Chief Morrissey says that is correct.  Alderman Wright asks if there will be side air bags; Chief Morrissey says no.

Alderman Forbes asks how many cruisers this will make.  Chief Morrissey says that depends on the day of the week.  There are only 5 to 6 running cars right now.

Chairman Brodeur asks if $38,500 will get the whole vehicle.  Chief Morrissey says yes.

Chairman Brodeur says the next item is for Public Works for $29,680.87.  Mr. Beshara says this is year two of a lease purchase for a sidewalk plow and a pickup truck originally for Animal Control, but he got her a van instead.  The truck was on order for 18 weeks and it was just delivered this week.  This is the second payment.

Chairman Brodeur says the next item is for the cemetery for $25,000.  Mr. Hughes says it is a request for a mower.  The last mower was purchased 8-10 years ago.

Alderman Boisselle asks what type it is.  Mr. Hughes says it is a Toro that will mow the width between the graves.

Alderman Wright says this costs almost as much as a cruiser.  Mr. Hughes says it is a multifaceted piece of equipment.  In terms of labor it will save money and time.  There are only two full-time laborers and a few seasonal employees in the summer months.  Equipment has become critical and there is a need to reinvest funds into the infrastructure of the cemetery.

Alderman Seaboyer asks what type of multiple uses it is capable of.  Mr. Hughes says it has a mulcher and leaf blower.  Alderman Seaboyer asks if it has a plow attachment; Mr. Hughes says no.

Alderman Forbes asks if it will only be used at the cemetery.  Mr. Hughes says in the past the cemetery equipment has only been used at the cemetery but doesn't have to be exclusive.

On the motion to recommend, All in favor.

President Mortimer motions to adjourn, 2^nd by Alderman Boisselle.  All in favor.

Maribeth Harrington
Clerk of Committees