Test, test, test. Hey, hey, hey. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Hey Charlie, so I find ourselves lucky here. >> People in Boston digging out for more than 16 in of snow. That's on top of
what was already on the ground. Neighbors say snow removal has been Hey, hey, hey. Yeah. I'll be Heat. Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey.
Melanie Charlie, can you hear us? You hear us? Okay. I am broken sword some kind of comment on Facebook about I couldn't tell that no no a friend of mine
Yeah. 26 other sport. to bless. She is Yes, he should be. special. Let's go. Everyone's ready. All right, we're going
to count in the meeting. Go in five, four, 3, two, one. >> Thank you. Um, I'm Bernard Green, chair of the Brooklyn Select Board, and this is the regular meeting of the select
board for February 24, 2026. Let's start off with announcements and updates. And I'd like to lead off by um thanking um the town staff, particularly the DPW sanitation division and other
DPW employees, the police and fire departments, and many other town staff for their work to ensure that we survived this winter blizzard uh that we just went through. Um I'm quite impressed by how well they've uh cleared our streets. It's not perfect. I mean,
I've heard complaints from people, but given how difficult the uh the weather was and how uh harsh was the snowfall. Um I think we have to give them thanks. I think I speak for the entire board on that. If I don't, they'll let me know.
But there any other updates or announcements? >> Quick one from me. >> Okay. Um I just want to um thank uh on behalf of the um I'm trying to remember if there was one or two uh or more other select board members attending uh the
ifar uh on Saturday uh it's held at St. Paul's Church in Brooklyn and um this this uh Brooklyn Muslim friends have been doing this for several years now and um as a courtesy to the select board they've invited us to attend. It's been
a wonderful event to attend over the years and uh I I guess I claim personal privilege to at least mention that um St. Paul's is the church that I attend regularly and as someone who who does
attend church regularly there, it was so gratifying to see the entire sanctuary filled and every space available for a table for people to have a nice dinner on. uh was made available. Three
different rooms, uh many many different tables, an unbelievable buffet. Um but really the highlight of the event was um if people will allow me to permit me to say so uh was the panel that spoke from
several different faith traditions and talked about commonalities and differences um among Christian, Jewish um and Islamic faith traditions. uh one one of the best discussions of that that I've think I've
ever witnessed and ve very much if you'll excuse the I think it's a pun food for thought. I mean we had you know food for dinner but we had food for thought. Uh and so um uh an event that I hardily recommend to folks in the future um it's held every year that's called
the ifar um and it's um on the at at sunset um um on the last day of Ramadan. Um they mark uh this officially at sunset with a very nice tradition distribution of dates and everybody has
a sweet treat um to um sort of sweeten the moment of the the end of Ramadan. So thank you again to that organization. Good people. >> David. >> Yes. I just want to note a Brookline
connection of sorts to the uh US Olympic gold medal winning hockey team. Oh, good. >> Uh that won on Saturday morning our time. It was the third time that the US national team has won a gold medal at the Olympics. Previously, it had been
1960 and 1980. I bring that up because a member of the 1960 gold medal US hockey Olympic team was Jack Karine for whom we have uh facilities named after who was a 38-year firefighter here in the town of
Brooklyn. And so any opportunity we have to remind the town of our heroes from the past I think is worth doing. >> Yeah, definitely. >> Paul. >> Yeah. Uh thank you, Bernard. So, I want to uh remind everybody for each week I
do this until I don't have to do it anymore. We are in the the tail end of gathering additional community input on our comprehensive plan. Uh there's a survey which is easily accessed via a link. So,
you don't have to go to a workshop, you don't have to go trudge through the snow and ice and mud. um you just need to sit at your computer for a little bit and fill out a survey. So um but importantly the survey closes March 2nd which is
Monday. So um speak now or forever hold your piece. Uh but it really is important. We we need to we've heard from a lot of folks. I think we're approaching uh 500 um responses on top of the almost 600 for the first round.
Um but now is the time to to speak up. It's really important that we hear from everybody, as many people as we can. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any other comments? Uh Chad, >> just quickly, I wanted to highlight, I apologize for not doing this last week, um that um the our recreation department
was once again uh given statewide recognition. They won the 2026 regional impact award in recognition of their leadership in preserving and sustaining the Brooklyn Adult and Community Education Program. Um this comes on the heels of them winning um the agency of the year for the equity initiative last
year. So it's for two years running the um the rec department who's been honored statewide for their um their excellent work. So I just wanted to shout out the rec team. Congratulations to them and for all the good work that they do. >> Thank you. Next uh public comment. Let's see. Is
Melanie on? >> Melanie is online. >> I am online. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can. Perfect. Thank you for joining us for public comment. This is an opportunity for us to hear your perspective on the issues in Brookline that matter to you. Each
person speaking tonight is limited to three minutes. You don't need to use the entire time, but you may if you like. Once 15 minutes has been met, there is an opportunity at the conclusion of the select board's business for additional comments. Members of the public sometimes raise questions during public
comment. We may be able to provide a quick answer to a question, but are more likely to work with staff to get a more thorough answer and respond over email. The on-screen timer will flash orange when you have 30 seconds remaining and red when your time is nearly up. Please conclude your remarks at that time. If
you have more to say, you are welcome to send an email to board members expressing your thoughts in greater detail. Any person wishing to speak must begin their comment by identifying themselves with their full name, either their Brooklyn precinct number or street address, and the specific topic on which
they wish to speak. The board encourages, but does not require that remote users turn their video on when commenting. We do have a lot of people signed up for public comment, but it's agenda item specific for the MBTA tree removal or
for the MBTA green line update. So, um I I just have them listed for those time spots. And if anybody's online and wishes to speak, please raise your hand. There are over 30 people in the online room. >> Nobody's indicating that they wish to
speak. >> Okay, let's move on to find this. Um, first, uh, like to move approval of the minutes for February 17, 2026. Anyone have any corrections to those
minutes? >> Okay. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak, >> I. >> Paul Warren, >> I. >> David Pearlman, >> I. >> Michael Rubenstein. >> I votes I. Next, I'd like to ask the board to approve in omnivous fashion uh,
questions 4B through 3 N. I'm sorry, 4B through 4N. in our miscellaneous calendar unless someone would like to pull out one for discussion. Seeing none, uh, all in favor of items 4B through 4N, please indicate by saying
I. John Vasco, >> I. >> Paul Warren, >> I. >> David Pearman, >> I. >> Michael Rubenstein, >> I. >> Chair votes I. Okay. Next, boards and commissions annual reports. Presentation by Park and Recreation
Commission Chair Clara Bachelder and Vice Chair Teresa Mooney. I see Clara on the screen. >> Teresa is also here. >> Okay. >> She may have stepped. >> Oh, there she is. She's waving.
>> Hi. >> All right. So, so proceed. We have a presentation um that I think Tim is going to uh move ahead as I request. Thank you
all for having the park and recreation commission um join you to present our annual report. Uh Teresa, as you know, is here. She's the vice chair and I'm Clara Bachelor and I am the chair. Next slide.
Um I you'll see the commissioners listed on the left. I we have two new two new members. Uh Debbie Hesselith, I'll get her name right. Hatil >> Herodas. >> Herodotus. Thank you. And Michael Okconor. We're pleased that they joined
us. And we want to thank Jim Carroll and John Pan for their service as they have stepped off the commission. As you all know, the Park and Recreation Commission is a policymaking board dedicated to providing the town with year-round highquality indoor and outdoor
recreation activities for all residents, regardless of age, ability, or background. We recognize that parks and recreational opportunities play a vital role in creating a healthy, vibrant, and connected community. Next, please.
just to let you know what we've been up to over the past year since we spoke to you last. Um over the past year, the commission members, various commission members have served on the community preservation act committee, the open space and recreation plan committee, the
bridal path design review committee, peer school design committee, pier school playground design review committee, the naming committee. Uh we helped we served on the committee that select selected the Lars Anderson
skating rink OPM and the design team and we also established and served on the Griggs Park design review committee. Next please. Um some of our accomplishments that we'd like to point out. We reviewed and
approved capital improvement projects for fiscal year 2627. We established the Griggs Park Design Review Committee. As I mentioned before, we reviewed and passed a and updated pricing schedules for the Jack Curine
Ice Skating Rink and the Evelyn Curraine Aquatic Center, the summer camp programming, and the community nature programming. We reviewed and updated equity initiative and financial aid policy. We continue to monitor the green dog program.
We supported the merger um of the Brooklyn adult and community education from the Brookline public schools to the recreation department. I really have to commend the recreation department on this. Um we helped plant the Maywaki forest at the Florida Ruff and Ridley
School. We helped select uh a designer for the Lars Anderson Park cultural landscape report and we helped select consultant for the rig the Griggs Park storm water and drainage design and we established a working group to help
draft uh RFP that's request for proposal for the outdoor pool feasibil feasibility study and I think um Teresa is going to do the next slice. >> Thank you. So, um, our commission reviewed,
discussed, and supported, uh, several community preservation act applications for the, um, fiscal year 2026, and they're all listed here. Uh, I'll highlight a couple of them, but the, uh, outdoor ice rink design and public
review process, the coolage playground tennis court design, and the Ridley tennis court design, the community gardens at Elliot Recreation Center, which um, is a new project. very excited about Emory Woods, the burying grounds,
foster fence restoration, the Rose Garden trellis restoration, an inventory of all of the trees in our town, um Putterham Woods Trail Enhancement, which is again another very exciting project, and the golf um clubhouse historical
window restoration. Additionally, we uh supported CPA projects for the upcoming fiscal year which include the Lars Anderson Park green infrastructure, drain improvement, ecological restoration.
Again, the old burying grounds tomb restoration and tree inventory as well. Some of our capital achievements um which if you have not seen any of these, highly recommend everybody check them out. the swimming pool, the indoor
swimming pool got a beautiful faceelift, just reopened to the public a couple months ago. Um, and it focused on our dehumidification uh of the of the swimming pool, but also interior updates. Um, and like I said,
much needed and looks beautiful. Uh, additionally a redesign and construction of the school early education center courtyard which is shown on the right there and a completion of the Putterham Woods Trail System which was a phase one
project and um again very much worth checking out. It's beautiful. Um that is a a very fast overview and highlight of many many works uh months and meetings of work uh on behalf of the
commission. But I just want to quickly note that um we could not do this work without the support and dedication of Millie, the director of parks, and Tim, our director of recreation. They're both excellent leaders and we're really lucky
to have them um in partnership with the commission. So, wanted to highlight them. Um and we will take any questions that you have from the select board. >> Any questions from the select board? >> David. >> David. So I'm curious about to uh what
extent does park and recreation collaborate with the Potterham Golf Course on some of the recent decisions that are being made there. So for instance, I've noticed that there's uh increased illumination at night. Uh also
the uh restaurant closed for the season. Do these types of decisions percolate through parks and wreck? Uh, and if so, what was the thinking behind any decisions that have been made there recently? >> I I'm I'll go first and Teresa, if you
want to add something. You know, we're kept a breast of what's going on in terms of the restaurant not being open in the winter months. They just couldn't uh it wasn't financially feasible. there weren't weren't enough people using the
restaurant and so they worked that out with um I guess the golf course and Tim reported to us and so we are aware of it. We were not part of the decision but we totally understand and didn't we thought it was too bad. I know that they
do have some dinners that that are very highly um attended, but it's it's not something they can operate on a daily basis because they just don't get get enough business in the winter. We're kept a breast of all the what's happening at the golf course. Um
Justin comes and gives us reports. We served on the committee, the redesign committee where they're they're right now in the middle of improving drainage so that the golf course doesn't have to close as often when we have wet weather.
Um, and I also wanted to say that it actually was four years ago that the recreation department bought a snowmobile and a trail groomer, but we haven't had snow for four years. But we we've got it in spades this year and we've gotten a lot of comments and how
great it's been for the public um Brooklyn residents free of charge to to ski at the golf course. They groom the trails. I've gone several time. It's it's really nice. If you don't have skis, they'll rent you skis. They've turned their golf the pro shop into a
ski shop. And so we we take part in the discussions when they're redesigning. We serve on those committees. Um I don't Teresa or Tim, you want to add anything else? >> I would I'll just add on the
illumination question that is an ongoing discussion item right now. I know Tim and his team over at the golf course are doing um some research and work right now to to determine um impact and think more about that project. We have not
made any decisions on that and it's something that will come back to the commission in the in the coming months, but I don't know Tim if there's any more details you have there. >> Well, even right now though, there are some lights on the along tree branches it appears and I'm just wondering when
that was put in and the purpose. >> I'm not I'm not aware of that, Tim. Are you? Yeah, just landscape lighting was put in um over the summer um just to illuminate the areas around the clubhouse um just for the evenings when the clubhouse is still open and the and
the restaurant is open. >> Okay, Paul. >> Yep. Uh thank you and Claire, I can relate to your story about the snowmobile because I've experienced that with my snowblower that I purchased and have used it many many times >> in two days. Um so thank you. I I have
two questions. The the first one relates to the green dog program. You had mentioned that you're monitoring it. Um and I think is there a green dog um community advisory group to the to park and wreck? >> There there is a green dog committee.
>> Okay. And >> is there any um is there a intentional activity to kind of assess the green dog program, how it's going? uh you know things that are working and things that might be able to be improved.
>> I think it's a continual discussion that you know people love the green dog program and we always have issues with people who don't follow rules. Some people just think rules are not for them. And that will be a continual um
issue for as long as long as and we have we have park rangers who try to be there to inform people when they're not supposed to have their dog off leash, etc. We are all, you know, we look at expanded hours. We get complaints when we have to close the fields because
they're wet. It is something that we're continually working on. Um, I don't know if we we've done a a a systematic study where we've rec I know they they record the complaints,
but I don't know if there's been a systematic study of what hours are the worst. Teresa might might know that she she used to have a dog. >> Yes. I serve on the green dog subcommittee. Um there there was a change of leadership of it relatively
recently and we um so we are regrouping. We've also had some new members join and I believe that we're going to be rekicking off our subcommittee meetings uh in the coming months. But it uh like Clara said there is ongoing discussion
on all of those items. I will say that the commission evaluated the opportunity to build an exclusive dog park in recent years and the plans did not go through due to a lot of commentary and feedback from the members of the public and
questions from members of the commission. So that is something that you know we may be revisiting in the future but we have a lot of work to do before we can get there. So, in the meantime, we're trying to work on ways to improve the green dog program and and
make um you know, continue to make Brookline a friendly space for dog owners. >> Sure. Yeah. And I and I thank you for that. I I too am a dog owner. I have Maggie, Golden Retriever. She loves to run free when she can. Um but I I do think that perhaps um you know the in
the future the board could give some direction to park and wreck to actually um you know have this subcommittee work on assessing the program again what's working what where improvements could be um I I think people love the program um
I love the program I know there's some people that dislike the program it's just the way it it it is um but I think there could it hasn't really been reviewed in a long time and there could be some improvements on operating hours, where we're allowing this. Um, how do we
educate the public um as to what, you know, specifically their requirements are uh in order to comply, how we how we work the program in collaboration with other uses of our of our limited park space. Um, and then also, as you said,
enforcement and what does it mean if uh >> Sorry, >> that's okay. um if you you know if you continue to not follow the rules, what does that mean to you as someone who's a a license holder for the Green Dog program? Are there some consequences? So, I just think it would we would
benefit from leveraging the community advisory group to help advise uh to answer some of these key questions. So, perhaps in the future we could we could ask ask that of you. Um my second question, >> can I just say we would we would love to work with you.
>> Okay. Mle has her hand up, I assume, related to your first question. Okay, >> Millie, you're muted. >> Try and >> Okay, great. Apologize for that. I was not able to unmute myself or turn on my
video. Okay, here I am. Uh so I just wanted to add um to the green dog comment that um in um last year sometime last year we did do a community survey uh regarding the green dog program and
um our park ranger uh was uh working to um >> get a create an analysis based on that survey. So, as Teresa mentioned earlier, as we restart our green dog community um sorry, committee subcommittee back up
again, uh we will be using that survey as a basis to um kind of think about like where the program uh will head um in the future. So, just wanted to mention that. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um and then can I go on to my second question, Bernard, uh briefly? So,
switching gears, uh, to Lars Anderson Park, um, Claire, the the DPW garages that are up there, um, which I've toured a number of times, um, is is that the
best use of that space, uh, that, you know, that area for for storing, uh, various dilapitated equipment and other things? Um, or is there is there a
I guess it's kind of a loaded question. What are your thoughts about that space and can we repurpose it for that's more in keeping with Lars Anderson and the purpose of Lars Anderson? >> I I know that it's been looked at in the past. We have to find a place for what's
the space is used for now to put that equipment. But um I'm gonna Millie don't don't mute yourself. Please come back. I would like I would like you to address that more because I think everyone agrees it would be nice to beautify that
space. Uh agreed Clara and um as of right now Paul like there are uh quite a bit of uh DPW uh parks and open space related items stored there and also some of the historic elements from around the park
um is stored in there. Um and you know as you all are aware we're also doing a cultural landscape report uh for the park and um you know as part of that report we'll be um researching and reviewing the the modern-day history not
just like when you know the state was um originally built and you know as part of that there might be some review of recommendations of what that space could be and you know obviously we have to work more on that uh reviewing that
space further uh but it will be a start. >> Okay. Thank you Michael. >> Thank you very much. Um I'm wondering you mentioned the tree inventory in both the fiscal year 26 work and the fiscal
year 27 work. Uh, I'm wondering if you could speak to um when you expect that work to be completed and what the outputs of that work would be and how the community might start thinking about using that information for uh various
other uh considerations of the town. >> I I would just like to add one thing on on that subject. It is an inventory of the trees in our public parks. It's not um it's it's not the street trees and
it's not all the all the trees in Brooklyn. It's it's the public parks and it will really help um the department maintain their tree canopy in terms of you know our climate action. We really want to have a robust
tree canopy. And so this will help uh give give the reference document that they need to keep track of all these these trees. And the these studies are being funded by our comm um community
preservation act money. So you want to go on add more to that? >> Yes, absolutely. Um so as Clara mentioned um you know we are actually very close to um up to date with the inventory of our public street trees
where we are lagging a little bit behind is in our um inventory of our parks and open space. So this is an effort uh for our uh for DPW team to gather upto-date inventory of the trees um and u through
throughout all our park parks and open spaces. Um so in terms of completion timeline uh for FY26 we're fairly close to wrapping that up and uh for FI27 as soon as we receive uh approval in the
town meeting um we we can get that going fairly fast as well. So you know again um the CPA um grant for the tree inventory has been extremely um crucial for us like getting up to date information and we use that information
as we undergo the uh capital improvement projects for different park renovations and um you know have current and up-to-date information and also in addition to that um you know it really helps us like monitor the health of the trees
that you know we might be able to do something about as we undergo these uh um park and open space renovations. And once the inventory is done typically that goes to our um larger um you know
tree inventory database in GIS and a version of that is actually available to the members of public um to be used online as well. So if you're interested then at that point about a tree in a uh in a public space and u you know you can
actually look at the some information regarding that. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. I don't see any other questions. Thank you Claire Teresa Millie. Is that how you pronounce your
name? I'm sorry. Okay. Uh and Tim uh for what I thought was a very informative presentation. and uh it's important for us to be up to date on what is happening uh in the various committees and and commissions. So, thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Next, boards and commissions interviews. Uh Brookline Commission on Disability. We have one applicant, uh Eningga Fermenti, who I assume is online. I don't see her in the waiting room.
>> Okay. Um, we'll have to be in touch with her. Maybe she'll join later on and we can uh have our interview at that point or we'll just reschedule. Okay. Uh, let's move on. Um, >> MBTA Green Line update.
>> I would just note um you noticed this for approximately 6:30 p.m. and it's 6:10 now. Oh. >> Do you want to maybe talk about like the reserve fund transfer request which is item 11? >> Yes. Let's do that. Thanks for noticing that. >> Um, >> and then Warren articles. Uh, is that
going to be a long discussion? >> Well, uh, there's there's two aspects of that. One of them will probably be long and one of them might be short. So, um, do you want to talk? Maybe it's up to you. What do you want to >> Well, let um, >> yeah, pardon me. >> I was going to just say let's let's keep it moving so we can do some other things
if Bernard's comfortable with it. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Should we shut talk about the reserve fund transfer request? Okay. >> Um, I would like to transmit a request to the advisory committee for a reserve fund transfer of up to $25,000 to follow up to the report Clifton Allen Larson did last year regarding the schools. Um,
they have quoted that price. I'm going to try and get it down, hence the up to and I will present a final number, not to exceed that number to the advisory committee uh when we have it. Um I've talked to the school team about this. Obviously, the school committee needs to weigh in still, but given that the select board is not meeting for another
two weeks and that time is of the essence as we move towards election season, I would like to be able to do this. Clifton Lson Allen thinks that they would be able to do this fairly quickly. um expenditures and revenue study committee has actually teed up a kind of response document to the original CLA report that would basically
be the foundation of what they would be working off of. They would take that document and test its assumptions so that the community could hopefully be satisfied that an outside independent source had verified that the schools have taken concrete action since that
report was issued. Um last year you may remember that the select board actually paid for CLA's uh uh report. Um this time around unfortunately you know we just we don't have the uh the money available in our accounts to to foot that bill and we had actually received
from the advisory committee members on ENRSC encouragement to go to the advisory committee to keep them apprised of the process and make make them feel that they have some buyin in this as well. So >> great any questions Paul? >> So Chaz the intent would to be to have
have this done uh pretty quick. Yes. >> Right. What what's the what do you think the turnaround time will be? >> They they believe they could do it in two to three weeks. >> Okay, great. Great. >> Any other question? >> Okay, I'd like to move approval of the um um reserve fund transfer of up to two
uh $25,000 for the Clifton Larson Allen updated report. Any uh discussion? Any further discussion? No. All in favor? John Vancoyak? >> Yes. >> Paul Warren. >> Hi. David Pearman. >> Hi. >> Mike Rubenstein.
>> Hi. >> And chair votes. I >> um is there something we can talk about override or the >> Well, we can talk about 10A maybe the warrant articles that are not the um Chestnut Hill. Okay. Um overlay. >> Um so there are a few articles. Uh the
warrant closes tomorrow. Um we've have received some notes from folks. Um you can bring your uh warrant articles in up until noon tomorrow. They do have to physically be in this space. I know it's hard. The town hall was closed the start of this week, but we will have it will be open and available for you to submit
more articles tomorrow up until that noon deadline. So, please uh the select board office door locks at noon promptly. Um this is required under state law. So, we have to do this. So, please if you're going to submit a warrant article um do it tomorrow. Tomorrow is the absolute drop deadad
date. Um the select board has traditionally discussed articles that you might file. Um there are two other than the Chesnut Hill West um that we would suggest you consider. One is about fund establishment of an override stabilization fund. Um right now we are
talking about potentially if an override is proposed creating an override stabilization fund that would basically um hold revenue in reserve uh to spend in future years of a potential override. um just to make sure that that is on the
warrant so that if that is the structure ultimately that you recommend for an override that it can be implemented by town meeting as part of the FY27 budget. If you um again if that's not the ultimate decision of the select board in terms of how to implement uh a potential override you just don't have to move you don't you don't move the argument. So
nothing is lost by putting it on the warrant. Um it's just a good thing to have in your pockets so that you have that available to you. The other is um the committee on town organization and structure um has put together a draft warrant article to resolve the issues
regarding the competing warrant articles about people serving on boards and commissions um that have control over um financial documents. Um they would uh appreciate it if the select board would be the sponsor of that article and submit it. Um it's been submitted to you by CTOS
um and they're just asking for your blessing to um submit that under the select board's name. Okay. Uh Paul. >> Yeah. I just uh want a quick question. Um scope is always an important factor when putting articles on the warrants. And if we're
>> if we're sponsoring the articles and and for the warrant without actually seeing what the scope is. Um you know, of course you can you can't expand scope. Um is there any risk with either of these articles that they would be scope sensitive? Um maybe not the first one,
but possibly the second one. I don't know. Nope. Uh I think in both cases the um the COS warrant article is very simple. Um it deletes all that language about you know financial control and just leaves it leaves it as is. Um so no
member of the committee shall be um um uh for the advisory committee no member of the committee shall be an employee of the town. Al shall or shall hold elective office of town government other than town meeting member or constable. That's it. That's all would read going forward. would eliminate the language about um standing border committee
members having charge of the expenditure of money. Um you know theoretically I think the moderator might entertain a motion to restore some of that language. Paradoxically you know it's you know even you're >> you're you're changing less even though you're leaving more in and so that might
be within scope. Um but it's not as though that there could there would be a significant modification there. Okay. >> And again the override >> stabilization fund. No I don't think there would be. I do have a quick question for can I have a stabilization fund. >> So um if we decide that we want a
stabilization fund but we don't want to fund it through maximizing up to the capacity of the override. Yeah. Instead we want to use money from free cash waterfall or some other way. Um would we be able to use the the the
stabilization fund that way? >> Yes. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Okay. Um, apologies. Yes. Thank you. Should have had a request to put on the closed captions here, which we will do. >> Okay. >> Oh, okay. We're on. >> Thank you, Regina.
>> So, uh, we have, uh, votes on two items, stabilization fund and the COTOS warrant article. Any questions or >> And the vote is to put it on the warrant. Is that what we're pardon? >> And the vote is to put it on the warrant. >> Yes. And then u with respect to cos uh
whether we want to be the petitioners or let them be the petitioners. Uh I move I'm sorry. Did you Oh, okay. >> I'm I'm sorry. I just I'm a little unclear about you know us being the petitioners. I don't feel like I've had a thorough review of whether this is the
right idea or not. And all of a sudden um by offering to be the sponsors for this, we're kind of committing ourselves to making the case for it. Right. Right. I I you know CTOS is basically standing by and they said if the select board doesn't want to sponsor it they will
submit it on their own. Um but they wanted to offer you the opportunity to to sponsor it. So it wasn't a situation of you know you have to do it or it doesn't make it on the warrant. They will they will submit it either way. Um but they wanted to because this this was an issue that came up at the select
board and they wanted to be collaborative with you in resolving this. They thought that it might make sense for you to be the sponsor of the article. >> Paul, >> so I guess um John raises a good point. If if we sponsor it, we're still going to have a public hearing and we have to
vote whether favorable action or not, right? >> Yeah. >> Would it be weird for us to vote? Okay. So maybe so maybe having C2 and be the spons, you know, filing it and then that frees us. >> Yeah. >> Uh to to vote whatever way we want. if you feel like you'd be hindered by
sponsoring. >> I'm I'm I'm also just wondering in the process if if we are the sponsors, does that put a responsibility on the select board to go to all the various committees that might look at it? >> Good point. >> Excellent point, Michael. Excellent.
>> Okay. So, let's uh let's me move uh the cos article and uh to be petition to have cos as the petitioner. Okay. So, uh, can we put them all together? Stabilization fund and COS. Um, with the
petitioner being COS >> for for that one >> for that one art. >> The stabilization would be the select board. >> Yeah, that's okay. All in favor of stabilization fund warrant article with select board as petitioner
and the COS warrant article with COS being the petitioner. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. Jonathan Skoyak. >> Hi. >> Paul Warren. >> Hi. >> David Bman. >> Hi. >> Michael Rubenstein. >> Hi. >> Chair. Hi. >> Okay. And we'll take up the other
article, other piece of this later on. Is there anything else we can do in 10 minutes? >> How long is the How long is the Chestnut Hill discussion? There's two components. There's a motion. Be >> a long What about the override? I mean, is that just is it telling us what the options
are? Well, I mean, I can give you a little update on where the process is, and I know um you know, select board members wanted to talk a little bit about the potential reductions in a no override scenario. Um so, I'll I'll call up that list from or that um item from
the financial plan presentation that we did last week. Um this come up in a second here. There you have it. Um this is the these are the proposed reductions that would be made and again proposed in a no override
scenario. Um for FY27 um it does not include FY28. Um and you can see here the number of full-time employees and where these items come from. Um >> is this list in our packet? >> Yeah. Yes, it's >> Can we move the
>> the caption? Yeah, I'll try. Sorry, I can probably do it from here. >> Thanks. You want to move it to the top right? That's probably the best place for it. Yeah, that might block part of it there. But this Do you want me to move it again or is it okay? >> No, this is this as long as everyone can see everything. Okay.
>> Um, so this is this this document talks about what would be cut in this in these scenarios and the budget book goes into a little more detail about what this is in practice. Um, it's moving two positions onto soft money, a position in
recreation and a position in health. Um it is um eliminating a uh uh mechanic position and uh a laborer position in the department of public works. It's cutting the services and supplies budget of DPW as well as their professional
technical budget. Um it cuts 2.4 people in finance. Those are assistant level positions that um provide a lot of support to the smaller divisions um and kind of would have an impact on their operations. You know, one of the things that has been helpful to us is having
capacity in the assessing and payroll departments to, you know, deal with these issues. If there's, you know, assessing is one of those things where it's good to have more assessing capacity so that we can accurately project our taxes. Um, it's really important to have payroll because if you miss payroll, you get hit with triple
damages. Um, so that's one of those things where it's very important to have capacity in payroll because you don't want to be you don't want to lose it. Um, and so, um, >> can I ask which which of these cuts are
going to affect out the residents of of town? >> I mean, all all of them in ways big and small, you know, >> really direct way, >> right? I mean, I think in a direct way, the most big the biggest thing you'll see is that library hours will decrease. We have a reduction in part-time personnel hours for the library, which effectively means that we will be able
to be open less frequently. Um, the farmers market would go away. um um we would not be able to um um rehire those six police positions that we've currently left vacant. Um the capacity in the planning department would
decrease. Um and so you would see in FY27, you know, a a degradation of services um that would be difficult to swallow. And then in FY28, which we did not talk about here, um that's really when the largest of the budget busting
items comes due, which is the um fire department contract, um there's a tale of that contract that costs will cost us $910,000 to implement. Um and I should note that these reductions do not take into account the $800,000 in uh overtime
deficit that we are projecting in FY27. So we would have that deficit to deal with in FY27. that would persist into FY28 and then we would have this this um $910,000 amount that we would have to address in some way. So, we're looking at around
$1.7 um million there. Um the finance department just reminded me that one of the things that will be impacted as a practical matter on this is people seeking help with their residential exemptions. That that process will be slower. Um you know, the the work the
the work will just slow down. Um, and our capacity to be proactive as opposed to reactive will be reduced. Um, >> David, >> yes. I have a question about the police line item personnel, seven for $59,000.
I'm I'm guessing from what you said earlier that this would be a combination of not filling six current vacant positions, right, and in addition to that eliminating one more who I guess earns 59,000. >> Correct. Yeah, that's a it would be a um
someone at the traffic desk. It would be a position it would be a position at the traffic desk would be eliminated in addition to not filling those six positions. But because we already hold those six we already take the salary savings from those six positions, the net fiscal impact would be zero. Um it wouldn't we wouldn't gain anything, we
wouldn't lose anything. But we have been saying to the public we have these positions, we're just not filling them. We would just we would stop saying that to the public. We would say those positions are cut. >> Yeah. Um, and then just another question I have, what led to essentially this chart? How are these
decisions made that this is what would happen in the events that an override doesn't pass? Because there are some line items that I think maybe we could live without if an override didn't pass. And there are others that I find a little curious. So, we tried to balance this out across all the departments. We
looked at at at departments budgets in terms of you know we looked at a number of factors. One of which is what were what were the most recent additions to the department. You know are we are we roll back services to an earlier time. We looked at you where where have we seen money left in the budget year in
and year out. Um where are there um you know where where where can we try and basically um make make do with less um you know um for example ODICR the service reduction there is a reduction in language access services. We
obviously we have an obligation to provide language access and we will do that but we will just have to do it with with less money and it will take longer to do. Um similarly in the fire department that position is a is a relatively new position. It was a position that used to be done by a
civilian. Um we we brought it into the uh the uniformed fire prevention division. Uh and we made that position a lieutenant. Um in in part to address the potential for increased um need with short-term rental laws coming into effect. Um we can go
back um you know is it is it is it the preferable outcome? No. the chief would prefer a a you know a unformed officer to be doing that work. Um but the realistic situation is when you've got that much of a gap in the fire budget,
we have to make at least some cuts there. And you know, the select board, I don't love losing our services. You know, >> part of why we're going to the advisory committee and asking for money is because that budget has been cut every year. Um but you know the select board
our our if we're asking other departments to make cuts I feel like we need to do the same thing. Um and so we take a look at our budget and make those cuts as well. So it's a combination of what do we what do we see out there as u that might be left on the table um over
a couple years and what would be the what would be the least amount of harm that we would do in this uh if we did this. And for example, early on we talked about things like cutting a building inspector um and we got a lot of push back on that um because the building inspectors are already so
overworked and that work is so critical and so we restored that building inspector position. We found cuts elsewhere. Um, one one element that concerns me a little bit from the uh list you gave behind the rationale is that if there are certain departments that are not spending all of the money
allocated to them, reduce their line item and I can see the logic to that to one extent, but there's the downstream consequence of encouraging departments to spend every last dollar so that they don't get cut in the future. That's right. And I worry about creating an
incentive to spend for the sake of spending. Not that our departments do that, but it it might subconsciously push them in that direction. >> I agree. Um I that's why I that's why I don't like doing it. That's why, you know, in the past two years where we've had to make more modest reductions. I've talked about how I don't like that idea
of, you know, well, you didn't congratulations on being fiscally responsible on cutting your budget. Um you know, that creates a perverse incentive. Um and we know that these budgets are variable year over year. So what we look at is we look at the rolling average. We don't look at any one given year and say, "Oh, you've got
this money. Um, you got it this year, so you'll clearly you'll have it next year." We know that's not the case. And it's it's going to be hard, right? It's going to mean that these these departments are going to be asked to do a lot of the same things that they're being asked to do now with less resources. And the answer may well be
I'm sorry, you know, but the maintenance and upkeep for example of the of the landscapes that we manage is going to is going to is going to decrease in in you know quantity and quality. Um you know just taking DPW as an example. You know
the downtime of our of our um of our snow plows for example. We've had machines go down during this blizzard. Um and we have mechanics out there fixing them. you know, we have one fewer mechanic, it's going to mean more downtime and that's going to mean a longer turnaround in terms of getting the roads cleared. Um, there are
consequences to this. Um, but again, when we talk about what's the least amount of harm, you have already done a good job, I think, eliminating any potential, you know, lowhanging fruit in the last two years of your budget process. Now, we are really at the bone.
Um, >> let me ask a question first. Um, you said the farmers market would go away, but you only showed $50,000 from the farmers market coupon, right? >> Are there other costs that or are there other things that um are on the list
that would cause the farmers market to go away? >> I mean, that's that's just it, right? The fundamental operation of the farmers market is through that coupon program. you know, if we eliminate that, you know, and you know, we eliminate the that's that's pretty much just >> we, you know, we also would probably realize some salary savings in terms of
DPW setting it up and the police moni monitoring it and so forth, but we're not taking those savings. Um, it's just a matter of acknowledging that that's something that we we really like doing, that the community really likes, but unfortunately, >> people talk about core services. It's
not a core service. It's only $50,000, but he's Yeah, >> I think these John and Michael, I think, >> thank you. Thank you. Um, is this list consistent with what um reductions are represented in the uh
balanced budget that's in the budget book? >> Yes. >> U so it pretty much covers all of them and and more. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Well, I mean, yeah, that's that's it, right? This is this is what's in the budget book right now. >> Oh, okay. This is th this this is just a cleaner way of presenting it in kind of
one one place. >> Okay, great. Thanks, >> Michael. >> Um, a couple of questions. Um, one, back to that sort of police personnel line. Um, you said that we had already taken the savings for those six positions that
have been held open. >> Yes. >> Do you know what the how much savings that was? >> It's roughly $600,000, which is the cost which If you look at the potential override proposal, you'll see $600,000 to the police department to restore those positions
>> in in addition to the 59,000. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> So, the 59,000 is for is for a non-uniform position, a non-sworn position, >> a civilian position. >> I had thought we left them open but didn't fill them. And so, in other words, they were funded and the money
went into uh precash. No, or um we we used them directly to fund the contract. Um and so the money didn't go to free cash. It went to operating expenses. Um and so on paper, the department says we have 138
potential sworn members of which six are six are not being staffed. Six are being >> But they're being paid. >> No, they're not not individuals, but the money is going somewhere. >> The money the money is going to fund the contracts. The money is going to fund the other police officers. Um so
And and I guess my question related to that is um you know I have heard from some constituents concerns about the level of enforcement of various things >> and I'm wondering whether there is a
trade-off being made there between reducing the number of police officers and our level of enforcement and sort of how those trade-offs work. >> Yes. I mean, as as a practical matter, if you have fewer officers on the street, um you know, what what the chief
has done as part of this is on certain shifts and you know, for example, over the summer when leave usage is higher, um we shift to a summer staffing model um and we have fewer people on the shifts, particularly the overnight shift, um um where those where we see
the most leave usage. Um, and what that means is the chief is able to staff, you know, up to fewer position. She has a flexible staffing model. Basically, she's able to have fewer officers out. Again, it's not ideal, but she doesn't think it's a public safety risk. What it
does mean though is that there are fewer people available for enforcement activities for, you know, the fewer opportunities for if you only have, you know, x number of xus 2 number of officers out there, then what they're going to prioritize may not necessarily be, you know, for example, waiting at a
red light. Um, you know, they're going to be focused on different kinds of prevention. >> Well, and Michael, >> sorry. And and I know that we have a police overtime budget where we're continually um dipping into reserves for
that purpose. And I'm just wondering how much of that dipping into the reserves is exacerbated by not having these six positions because it seems like there's a there's a several numbers that are all need to be sort of presented together
and tie out to know what the actual value of that personnel is. I so I think the last year's overtime reserve fund transfer was related to a number of factors. So so and only some of that could be attributed to this this these
open positions. Um to be clear would help if we had those positions filled. That overtime number would have gone down had we had six additional available officers to take those shifts as opposed to being um having them out for overtime. Um but if we um some of the
other issues there have just been you know Historically, right, the police department and the public safety business office had been running in such a way that if one account ran low, there was money. There was always money in the other accounts that could be transferred over. Um, and as a result, the
department hadn't really right-sized its budgets for a couple of key items like training, like equipment, and so forth because they said, you know, we always we all it always ties out at the end of the year. Um, and under the current leadership, both police both both the police and fire chiefs as well as the
PSBO team have really been diligent working with Charlie Young to try and try to try and stop that practice to try and get that practice to be much more tight in terms of this is the amount of money we actually need for equipment. this is the amount of money we actually need for you know uh um you know any any
number of things you know training services um you know um there's a there's a operating capital item for you know vehicle replace replacement and so forth that those items are all being right sized um but what that's meant in practice is sometimes that you know that
that didn't then tie out in terms of the override budget last year this this year knowing that there's been a lot more strict control on overtime and the usage and how that's worked. And that's meant that our projected overtime deficit for the police department is much lower than
it was last year. Last year it was in the, you know, several hundreds of thousands of dollars. This year, to the extent that we're going to have one, it's going to be much smaller. Um, so yes, this this does this did contribute to that. Um, but there were other issues that PSBO and the teams uh the finance
teams have really been working collaboratively to address that makes us feel confident that we're not going to see an overtime reserve transfer for the police of that magnitude in the near future. >> Yep. Uh thank thanks Bernard and thanks
Jez for uh for bringing this up. I had asked to have this on the agenda because I I felt like we needed to talk more about it when the school committee was wrestling with closing a budget deficit um to make up make up a significant gap
last year. If you remember um they spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to close that gap. Um I think initially the uh the superintendent brought a num something similar to this. Here's the list we're going to cut. Um and the school committee said, "Let's take a
step back and have a discussion about what what are the alternatives?" Like what what is this the final list or could we have a discussion about other services um and other options to be able to close that gap other than this list?
Um I I think this board would benefit from that and the public would benefit from that uh discussion because I I honestly don't and David kind of hinted this at the beginning. I don't understand how this was derived. I heard what you said, but I don't know what what options are to the board. Uh
perhaps there's other things that we could decrease in order to salvage some other things here. And I and and frankly, I'm not even going to begin to talk about it because it would frighten people. Um but I do think that that would be a really helpful discussion for the board to have. Um
you know, just open honest discussion about, you know, how do we prioritize the services to the community? Um, I know that this is staff's list of priorities, but it isn't necessarily the select board's list. Um, so I I would offer that as a first comment. And then the second is the importance of that
discussion because I think it informs the next step, which is how we position the operating override and what it would fund. Um, I will tell you honestly from my perspective, I greatly value public safety. I greatly value the fire department. You've heard this. It's I've been shy about it in executive session.
and I haven't been shy about it publicly. Um, I'm deeply concerned about the message to the community that we're going to close a fire station possibly or we're going to eliminate uh an engine company possibly. We're going to eliminate six uh police officers. I don't think it's possible. I think we're
saying we're doing it here. I don't necessarily agree with those at this point because I don't know what the alternatives are and I think we need to have an alternatives uh discussion before uh we commit to these numbers. But these these are only in there
assuming that an override fails. >> Correct. >> Or that there is no override. >> Correct. >> Yeah. >> Um I but I and what I will what I will say to that is that process that the school committee went through with the prior superintendent, you know, the kind of menu option. What wound up happening
there was what you what you described, right? the superintendent came in and said, "Here are here here's here are all the options I I recommend to I I I could reasonably think of to cut. Choose choose enough to close the gap." And what happened was one, the school
committee was unable to do that and ultimately you had to do it for them. Um you you you know, remember they came to you asking for your help to close a $2 million gap that they weren't able to do that they weren't able to countenance closing. They weren't just weren't able
to make that choice. And the message that you sent to them was use your circuit breaker. Um, cut the cut the Lincoln school playground, you know, delay the Lincoln school playground. >> That was one of the options that they hadn't considered and they had a new option. So, I guess my point is, Jazz, that that that just the process of
having that discussion was really helpful. I I I the the other thing that the current superintendent has told me was that that process was actually harmful to her operations because the the pressure to keep certain things that she would would have recommended cutting no questions asked and then the cuts
that were you know the pressure that was put on the school committee was cut central office staff cut central office staff the central office is dead weight we don't like them cut them so and the school committee said okay we'll do that now if you look at what the school's budget is for FY27. They're adding
positions back to the central office because they cut too much. Um, and they w, you know, they made a decision from a political proc from a political standpoint that was not sustainable from an operational standpoint. um you know, they cut a data analyst, they cut a
communications person, they cut all of these things, and they they did all of that in a way that then wound up harming school operations and probably drove up their budget deficit for this year in a way that they didn't intend. So, I'm not saying no. I'm happy to to give options
and talk through these these things, but what I'm saying is when you when you open that door, when you say we're going to have this conversation, um you you do then run into that issue of this is too sacred to cut um and we're going to make cuts that are going to be more harmful
to our operations in the long term for the sake of avoiding that difficult conversation. Yeah. >> And so I just want to be very cleareyed in if we're going to do that and have that conversation because the other thing is that gap in the fire department is $910,000. That's larger than several town
departments, right? That is an order of magnitude big and that doesn't even include the overtime. So you're talking about $1.7 million. That's bigger than planning. That's bigger than IT. That's bigger than HR. that's bigger than you know the you know so so
>> you know when you say cut something else >> I struggle to come up with something that wouldn't touch that department and >> I struggle to then go back to my other department heads and say sorry I know the gap is in the fire department but I've been told to cut you >> y
>> um and that's where I think we've got to be cognizant of what the knock-on impacts of that are >> may I um so I appreciate the time Um, and Chess, I first, you know, I greatly respect your opinion on this. Um, and
it's a difficult conversation. I I can only speak from my own my own personal view. Um, when when we're facing the challenges that we're facing. I do think we have to look at the budget holistically. We can't stay within a department and say that department
because their cost increase because they're they're a union, you know, and there there's some, you know, collective bargaining obligations that we get we get saddled with. Um, that's no fault of the chief, right? That's that's that's what this board has decided to do. Um,
and I don't necessarily think that we should just say that because it because the cost for that specific line item is increasing or that department that that they should they should own it all. Frankly, I would put fire protection and public safety as one of the highest uh
priorities for for for the community and the budget. And there are other things that I would sacrifice to make sure that we continue to have the level of public safety uh that keeps the public and our first responders safe. Um I do think that overrides other other areas in the
budget. I that's that's I think the conversation we have to have. Um I I don't know where all the other uh budgets stand. Um I don't know what all the opt what all the options are, but again that's just my view uh about this. >> Yeah. Hi baby
>> to Paul's point I think it's helpful for us to look at the other options not because we don't value your expertise and judgment but as a part of this process in presenting this chart to us today there may have been a stage where
you were uh saying well we could cut A B or C any one of those three would be viable I'm going to go with A and all three of those are vetted by you but you ultimately chose on. And so having the opportunity for the board to look through those other options that would
be viable, that would not completely interfere with the uh efficient operation of town government, but might uh but this body might think that one of those other options could be a little better than what was ultimately in this
chart. Uh I would be interested in looking at those items. >> Well, I think the the other aspect of this is we went to the departments. So let's let's go back to the last time that the budget had to be seriously cut which was during co when we when we went through that what we did what we did was
we went to the departments and said if you had to cut 10% of your budget how would you do it and the departments didn't like it and they but they put together a roadmap and they said here it is here is our austerity budget here's how we would cut 10% we went and we presented it to the select board and the
select board said okay we know it we know we know what this is at the time and we're going to if we have to go through with this we town meeting. By the time town meeting came around, our finances looked better than expected. It was not necessary to make those cuts. Um there was there's the ability to continue services as they
were. Nevertheless, town meeting voted to make those cuts. So if you put out options A, B, and C on the table, you run the risk of town meeting taking A, B, and C. And so, especially if and you run the risk of in a no override scenario, the relationship between the
town and the schools becoming adversarial and the schools then taking this discussion that you're proposing and using it as a roadmap and saying the town's got money, cut everything. Um, and I have to tell you right when we made our initial presentations to the
departments, we said if you disagree with this, find us something else that gets us roughly the same amount of savings. So this represents the department's highest and best analysis of what they what they could afford to lose. Um I think if you start putting
alternatives on the table and having a discussion about them, you really do run the risk of people saying ah see there is more money in the budget. And what the departments would say is no the reason why we told you we didn't want to do that was because it would have such a dilitterious effect on our budget on our
operations. So, you know, I I understand what you're asking for and I understand, right, the point is if there is an option B that doesn't involve closing a company, what is it? Because that's that's that's the message I'm really hearing and I I while I struggle to do
that, I respect that the board has to make those decisions and so I will do my best to get you that information. What I'm saying is be careful because ultimately you you people may want you know the people the people people who pass the budget or town meeting um and
if you put options on the table town meeting may take them um >> Bernard. So I so I'm glad you said that. I actually think this is going to be a hellish town meeting. Um not because of Chestnut Hill or the other zoning change that's coming on that table. I think
it's going to be for the budget. I think we're going to be we're going to be uh facing a very difficult um set of circumstances and we're going to see all kinds of uh amendments to the budget. Uh and that's what's going to happen. It's going to it's going to it'll be the way
that town meeting will prioritize. Um I necessarily don't want to hide the ball uh and and try to have this discussion on the floor of town meeting, but to vet what the options are, I don't think that opens Pandora's box for people grabbing. I think it actually helps inform the
discussion in a way that people can really understand the trade-offs. I certainly don't understand the trade-offs right now. Um, you know, I had mentioned to you on the phone the other day when I asked to bring this up. Um, you know, I would take the million and a half from the housing trust fund, stick it into that override
stabilization fund that you have and start putting money in that stabilization fund to prevent the problem with the with the overtime, which is a short-term fix. It might cover a couple of years, but it buys us time. I mean, I value I value affordable housing, but I value the safety of the
individuals who live in affordable housing more than the creation of affordable housing. And if we don't have fire protection and public safety protection, um, what are we doing? So, that that's just where I'm at. I'll defer to the rest of the board about whether we want to do it this way or
not, but I do think a further discussion about it. Um, and we can put some guardrails around it. So, so that we because and I and I'll say one more thing. I know how much uncertainty and doubt and fear that that conversation with the school committee created for
the school department, right? It created a lot of uncertainty. If we can confine it in a way, I value every one of our employees uh and the services that they provide. But somehow we have to have a discussion like this at some point.
Well, so so much hinges on on the override and and we're going to reach that step before we get to town meeting. >> Um, so, you know, I think a lot of this just has to be geared towards what what are we going to recommend in
terms of size of an override, whether there should be an override. I think for sure certain there will be some recommendation of some form of override and and then it gets to the very thing that Chaz, you know, is is is trying to investigate um uh if an
override fails, you know, then what what are the vulnerable parts of the budget? If a if an override of a certain amount succeeds, then what are the vulnerable parts of the budget? Uh but until we know the outcome of that whole override discussion, we might not we might not
need to, you know, put all these guard rails on on things. That's that's just my sense of it. Michael >> um I think to Paul's point of sort of having a fuller discussion and what I what I think I heard from you Chz in
terms of the process is that one of the things that is not present in this chart um which includes you know the list of things that would be cut and the dollar savings as a result are the downside tradeoffs that we get from losing these
this funding or these positions or whatever Um, and and I think that not having that information presented concurrently with with the information that's up there, I realize
it makes the presentation more complex. But not having that information makes it that much harder to have an informed discussion because, you know, I don't know, for example, whether you know the police personnel line it, you
know, what necessarily the consequences of that are or as you explained it the consequences of some of the other positions that have been described. Um and and I think it's really important for us as we look at
these numbers to understand the consequences absolutely in parallel as well as potentially for other options that would come forward. >> Go ahead. Just I agree with those points, Michael. And also, for example, we have a lot of
development taking place and planning as we well know and of all these line items, the department that loses the most is planning. >> And so just having an understanding of these tradeoffs and what we lose, it helps for two reasons. One, it informs the discussion here. And two, it informs
the broader public in town meeting because to address one of the points that uh you made about your concern of town meeting sort of willy-nilly deciding, well, let's cut this, let's cut that, it was already proposed. In in fairness, a town meeting, if there's not
really that information provided about why uh that would have an adverse impact on town services, then I could see why a block of town meeting would want to remove it. But if we have those explanations about what we lose, what we gain, then that would inform the town
meeting vote as well. >> I mean, ultimately, right, what happens what happened what's happened at town meeting for the last two town meetings, last time there was some procedural chicainery that was tried and was thankfully shut down by the moderator. Um, is they've tried to basically strongarm me into increasing revenue.
Right? That's the one, you know, I have no authority, direct authority over anything except that. Um I I'm the person who sets the revenue number. Um and they basically said, "You're hiding money. Um cough it up." And I continue to explain to people that
there is no magic revenue number. That the reason why we the complex reasons why we budget the way we do. Um but there's that visceral emotional appeal to it. There's there's always more money in the banana stand. You know, you're gonna you're going to be able to you you you have it. You must have it. Um just
give it to us. Um, and I I and I don't mean to say that to cast dispersions on the town meeting members who do an incredible amount of work. Even folks who are not, you know, part of these committees, part of the day in dayout process, they take their jobs very seriously. So, I don't mean to denigrate town meeting members at all. Um, but the
message that reaches them, um, and the professionalism now with which that message is deployed by the statewide teachers union in particular is frightening. um they pull this in other communities and they pull it very well. Um they they come in with a big song and
dance about how your town is hiding money from you. Uh and then they amend the budget. Um and it's it's brutal. It's it's it's it's brutal to the operations of every other department. Um, I I I share Paul's fear that we're going to see some some
decisions being made for political reasons that are going to be really damaging on the budget if there is no override. Um but I also share John's thought which is all of this is contingent on the question and so I think what might be helpful here is expenditure revenues is meeting tomorrow
to talk about the next steps in the broader override process when they are going to transmit their report to you in about two and a half weeks. At that juncture you have three weeks to decide what you want to do in this process and that will include a meeting that will include your your dayong work session.
Um, so you will have that time over the course of this that that period to talk about this in more detail and I will come prepared to have those conversations with you if those are the conversations that you want to have. Um, but I would say maybe in terms of the
next steps here, >> letting the expenditures and revenues process play out over the next two and a half weeks because they have something to say about this too. >> Yeah. >> And then coming back to you with that >> have one closing thought. >> Sure. So, so Chaz, uh, my the thing that
I'm most worried about is a message to the public for an operating override that says if you don't fund this, we're going to close a fire station or if you don't fund this, we're going to uh, you know, get rid of a ladder company. Um, I I am absolutely opposed to that messaging going out to to the town. And
if there's So, I would like to explore alternatives to to prevent that from happening. Okay. Okay. any uh further discussion of that? uh not on this specific point, but in terms of the timing of when we consider an
override ballot question, uh probably sooner is better so that there's more time for the various other bodies to be able to uh work on positioning and having an understanding of the ramifications and also being able
to prepare for the parallel budgets in the event that the override fails. I worry a little bit that if we wait until the midnight hour uh of the deadline on March 31st that we're going to short circuit all those processes and I hear
John's point about well we'll know after election day but that leaves very little runway time in the event that an override fails or if we have a uh multiple levels multiple questions and we don't know which level gets supported
if any at all we need to be working on contingency plans earlier. A town meeting could run into June and by June 30th. You need to know what your budget's going to be for the following year. >> So, uh we'll get the initial recommendation from the the um
expenditure and revenue committee study committee on the 17th. >> Yeah. You you'll have so the deadline for them is the 13th so that you can have it to review it. you're not it's not going to hit your desks and then you have to go to the meeting and talk about it.
>> Yes. So meeting on the 17th and then the 24th uh you know we could vote then or if you know we still want to have further discussions we have until the 31st uh midnight I'm told so >> 11:59.
>> So if at all possible I think it would be better if we review it on the 17th and vote on it on the 24th. >> Yeah. That's That's the plan. And plan B is 31st, >> right?
>> Okay. Um, let's move on. I see that, uh, let's see. Uh, Jim Lee is, uh, >> well, you've got the MBTA presentation first. >> Yeah. But I want to see if he's on the disability committee. Um, is there do
you know about uh our interviewee? Um, I I do not I I Okay, knew that she was uh scheduled, but why she didn't show up, I I honestly don't know. >> Okay, no problem. Okay, let's go to the MVTA update.
>> Okay. Um, >> that's you, >> Bill. Um, Smith, are you online? >> I am online. Uh the MBTA will be presenting this evening and uh Gwen
Dunlie and Matt Conover are those individuals and I believe they are online. I saw them enter the meeting earlier this evening. >> We will promote them. Thank you. >> They're promoted. They should be ready
to go. Thanks, Melanie. >> Evening, folks. I'm gonna give Gwen just a second to get the deck up and we'll start going through it. >> There it is. >> Is this a public hearing? >> There's a public hearing for the >> for the trees, but not for the
>> the overall presentation. Gotcha. Okay. >> Good evening. It's nice to be back in front of the select board. My name is Matt Conover. I work at the MBTA and I support our capital teams in delivering major projects. As the board knows, I'm also a Brookline resident and a C branch writer have a vested interest in
ensuring this project success for both the MBTA and the town. I'm joined this evening by Gwen Dun Levy, deputy chief of integrated transit programs, who leads the GLT program and this project's construction. >> Tonight, we'll cover our station bystation improvements and talk about
next steps. You may recall we presented the first two stations, Tapen and Englewood, last fall. Today, we're sharing details on the remaining stations. We've incorporated lessons learned from those two stations to ensure that we meet the accessibility standards required while minimizing
disruption to the existing environment. Currently, there are nine stations on the C branch that are inaccessible. This project will upgrade six stations by widening and raising the platforms to meet accessible standards. As part of the project, we will also combine
Brandon Hall and Fairbbrank Street station to improve travel times and ensure that the new type 10 vehicles can serve all the stations on the lot. This is a well- thoughtout design that addresses the challenging geography of this location while impacting the lowest number of trees, which we'll talk about
later. The consolidated station will maintain access for the 400 daily boardings that we see at these two locations. Lastly, we will close Kent Street station due to its proximity to Haw Street and to further improve travel times. Working with the town staff,
elected officials, the public, technical experts, we've balanced the trade-offs required to develop a project that provides equal access to all and minimize negative impacts. For those familiar with the nine stations I mentioned, the challenges will be familiar. Safety and traffic
risk. Stations like St. Hall lack physical barriers forcing people onto the curb and into the path of automotive traffic. There's a severe lack of space. Narrow platforms at stops like tapen cannot accommodate strollers or mobility scooters. They create pinch points and
safety hazards. Accessible barriers, steep slopes, and uneven surfaces make boarding treacherous, especially in icy and rainy conditions. It's also impossible for wheelchairs and walkers to navigate. Obstructions. Trees and poles block paths and create physical conflicts with
the new type 10 trains. There's a lack of wayfinding. Poor signage makes it difficult for riders to identify each stop. And there's also a lack of lighting. Many of the stations along this line are solely provided light by the existing street lights. Our team has heard from numerous individuals who
cannot access the green line from the station in front of their own home due to some of these challenges. At the completion of the project, the entire C branch will be accessible and the issues that I just described will be addressed through station consolidation, closures, and reallocations to ensure
accessibility. The MBT expects to see a 3 to 7% decrease in travel times. The project will bring improved wayfinding and lighting for customers. We have set aside dedicated funding for tree planting, which will be done under the guidance of the town arborist. Importantly, we've developed major
accessibility improvements, including station enhancements that I described, compliant pedestrian crossings, ramps, and additional accessible parking spaces. Lastly, this project will not preclude the future bridal path, which I look forward to taking advantage of when I'm not riding the green light.
This project is a result of years of collaboration between the MBTA and the town. Through numerous public engagements with town residents, elected officials, and stakeholders, we've developed a final plan that provides significant improvements while minimizing negative impacts. Further,
this plan complies with all state and federal environmental regulations. The MBTA has gone above those minimum requirements, including engagement with a wildlife biologist to ensure that the urban wildlife is properly protected as part of this project. This project will ensure that the green line is accessible
for all and leave a lasting improvement along the Beacon Street corridor. Now I will turn it over to Gwen. We'll talk about the project the project specifics at each station. >> Thanks Matt. My name is Gwen Dunlvy. I'm the deputy chief of integrated transit programs overseeing the Green Line
Transformation Group which manages a holistic set of projects aimed at modernizing the Green Line. I should be familiar to some of you as I've been delivering projects along the green line including in Brookline for the past six years for the MBTA and presented at this board in the fall regarding the Tapen
and Anglewood stations. Uh as many of you already know, in order to provide safe accessible platforms this community deserves, there are a number of impacts to the existing streets required to allow the space needed for the updated platforms. Before we dive into the details at each
station, there are a couple overall points I'd like to start with. The first of which is that none of the station upgrades that we're talking about today will result in the removal of an existing crossing or an accessible parking space. Some will have their
location shifted, but they will all be retained. Secondly, we have been hard at work with the town staff for the past year to minimize these impacts. Every single station has had multiple layouts reviewed to find the version that would have the least impacts to not just the
trees and parking, but all town infrastructure. We'll go through the specific impacts at each station, working from west to east along the line, excluding the stations that have already been reviewed and approved by this committee. First up is Dean Road. Here we look at
the current condition. You see some station passengers standing on the thin strip of a asphalt located between the traffic and the tracks. This is pretty similar amongst all the stations that we are upgrading with this project and demonstrates many of the challenges for riders that Matt had mentioned just a
moment ago. Uh before we review the future layout of Dean Road, we should discuss how we choose platform positions. Impacts to trees, parking, travel lanes, and the efficiency of travel are all factors we consider. But at its core, this project
is an accessibility project. One of the primary parts of making accessible station is having accessible paths of travel. And a big part of this is related to the slope of that path. There are maximum slopes as part of ADA requirements. And in some locations, including Dean Road, the location we can
place the platforms is controlled by the slopes in the area. On this slide, we show uh the slope of Beacon Street around Dean Road. graphic shows the slope in the direction parallel to Beacon Street. When moving from west to east along
Beacon Street in this area, the slope is increasing. West of Dean, it is between a half of a percent and about 1.5% which is within ADA requirements. Um, and labeled where the proposed station is. But if you move east of Dean, this continues to increase up to about 3%
significantly more than that 2% that is allowed, which is where the existing outbound platform is located now. Due to this increasing slope, we must locate both platforms to the west side of Dean Road. This situation also occurs in a couple of other locations, including
near Fairbanks Street um and St. Paul Street, and is a driving factor of the platform locations at all of these stations. Uh the MBTA is committed to the town to do everything we can to maintain the character and green space along the historic Beacon Street corridor and are
hoping to leave the space overall better when we finish this project than it is at the start. In close collaboration with the town of Brooklyn and their arborist, our team has developed the tree planting plan that is part of this presentation today. In this area of this station, a total of nine new tree or 10
new trees, nine new trees will be planted. Um this includes a dedicated tree lawn uh that the new TRA trees will be planted in. Um to ensure the trees thrive uh and have the best chance of success, a one-year maintenance period
and warranty will be provided for these and all trees that we will be planting to ensure that they are well established uh when we turn them over to Brooklyn. Uh the new trees will be planted between two and a half and three inches in diameter. uh as both the project's arborist and the town arborist have agreed that this is statistically the
best size for trees to successfully establish themselves um and will often catch up in size to larger plantings fairly quickly as they are being planted at the ideal size for them to uh take hold and begin growth. This is all to try to make sure that when the project is complete and we
leave the town and the new stations be surrounded by green space like the rest of this corridor. I also want to add that uh we will present in the various slides is the worst case scenario. Uh we will continue to work with the town on adjusting locations of shelters,
electrical equipment and possibility of planting uh additional trees if possible. Um if we come up with any additional plan plantings we can place on this corridor or outside this area, we are committed to do so. Um, we have a
budget dedicated specifically to tree plantings in the town of Brooklyn as part of this project. Um, the tree plantings that we show here, we do not expect to take up that whole budget. So, there will be money left over for additional plantings that we will work with the town to determine the best locations for.
Um, just focusing right now on Dean Road, there are a total of 10 trees that will need to be removed. Uh, mostly in the location of the outbound platform. Uh, and nine new trees can be planted. Um this includes hackberry, ginko, oak
and elm varieties. All varieties have been determined in uh conjunction with the town arborist uh for what will best fit the character of the corridor and be well established in this type of growing environment. Um reviewing the specific trees that
will be impacted in this location. Uh starting with the three trees in the northwest corner of where the station is located. It is three oaks between 20 and 30 in in good to fair condition shown here.
Two sycamores and a crab apple. Uh this is more towards the northeast side of where these station platforms are varying between 22 and 12 in uh in size. These are poor to good condition uh for
these trees. Uh the last set of trees are uh three smaller trees. Two Siberian elms and a crab apple as long as well as an oak. The oak being 22 in. Uh the smaller trees being 4 to 6 in. Um one of
those elms is already dead. The other is in poor condition. Uh the crab apple was not caught in the original tree survey that we did. Uh but will be surveyed as part of the project as we move forward. Also as we overview this over whole
project we will talk about the parking uh at this location much like many others uh parking is impacted by the work that we are doing. Um the primary impact for all of these stations is the parallel parking along Beacon Street. Um to make these platforms accessible they
must get wider uh to give those accessible paths of travel uh which typically will encompass taking a lane. In most cases, this is a parking lane that will be uh removed to make room for the platform. And the extra space that is left over after removing that truck
parking lane is used for these tree lawns. Um even without the tree lawn though, uh there's not enough room at these stations to fit three lanes plus the platform itself. in this specific location. Um the angled parking will be
reconfigured uh and we will retain all the angled parking spaces uh with just a shift of where they're located and a shift of the position of one of the accessible parking spaces. Uh 13 on street parking spaces will need to be removed and this includes shifting location of one of the accessible
parking spaces on the uh eastbound side of Beacon Street. We also want to review the crossings that will be impacted here. Um, as mentioned earlier, there are no crossings being taken away, only crossings being added or adjusted. In
this case, the two crossings uh at Dean Road will remain. The one to the west will be upgraded as well as uh the crosswalk uh south of of the station. and a new crossing will be added at the far west end of the
station to allow two exits from the station and crossings at both ends. Uh we also show in this slide the bridal path concept on the future station station uh north of the platform itself. This is not necessarily exactly what the
bridal PLA path will look like, but just a demonstration to show that we are keeping all of our infrastructure back from what the current proposed concept is to make sure that we are not precluding the building of the bridal path because of anything that we are installing uh as part of this project.
Our next station up is the Fairbank Street Brandon Hall Consolidated Station. Um, where this is located is a little different than many of the others because it has this steep wooded slope to the north side of the tracks. While not as close to traffic, these stations
feature the similar thin strip of asphalt which is utilized as a platform. And this location adds the additional challenge of providing equal accessible access to the station down the slope for those who live along the westbound side of Beacon Street.
Uh due to how close these two stations are, they will be consolidated during this project into a single new accessible station uh as shown in the bottom half here. Um this will allow us to save additional trees and reduce travel times along the line. That being said, we will still maintain all access
points to the station with a walkway along the area between the parking and the tracks and maintain and provide equal access to through this project with the installation of the two new accessible ramps adjacent to existing stairways down the slope from Beacon
Street westbound. The project team has worked hard with the town to find the configuration of these ramps that would be least impactful to the trees. They reviewed dozens of different options including which side of the stairs to place the ramps, keeping the ramps towards the top or the bottom of the
slopes, using ramps or slope walkways, and different foundation types for the ramps. Uh all to find the configuration that will be the least impactful on the trees and avoid the largest, most mature trees. The final location of the station
was also chosen after reviewing numerous different options. But as Ira mentioned while reviewing Dean Road, our choices are limited here due to geography. Not only we hindered by the slope, which is more significant closer to Fairbank Street, but also we need to locate the platform on a relatively straight
section of track to minimize gaps between the platform edges and the doors of the trains when the train pulls into the station. Uh we worked hard to find a location that met all the accessibility needs but also impacted the fewest and smallest trees. This area has some very large trees, some exceeding 40 in in
diameter, but all of those were avoided with the chosen configuration. Additionally, the T will be addressing storm water drainage in the area uh disturbed by the new platform ramps to protect the integrity of the slope. Uh so here we show both the before and
after version of this location. Uh total before 63 trees will be removed at the station, but many of these are what are called volunteer trees. Uh trees that grow up from acorns falling off some of the larger trees and are fairly small.
um in creating this new station uh in the new plantings, there'll be 17 new trees planted um almost entirely along the uh eastbound Beacon Street uh in the tree lawns and planting areas along that
area. Um these will include maple, sweet gum, hackberry, coffee tree, oak, and elm varieties. again as uh chosen working between the project team and the town arborist.
Going into the specific impacts, we will start at the ramp near the Fairbank Street Station, current Fairbank Street Station. Um all the trees here are relatively small compared to some of the other trees in the area. Uh the first set are the eastern end here of the
Fairbank Station ramp. Uh this is a half dozen trees between four and one and a half inches in size. They are all in good conditions, but all are those volunteer trees growing up from um some of the acorns falling off the larger trees in the area.
On the western side of where this ramp is going to go, we have another variety of trees between 11 and 2 in in diameter. Between good and poor condition here, uh this is about 10 more trees at this location.
Moving on to the station platform itself. We have a little over a dozen trees. Uh one is a little larger at 15 in, but the rest are between 9 and 1 and a half in. Many of these were not caught in the original tree
survey. Uh partially due to size and partially due to the various changes in configuration to try to find uh the best variety. So although they were cataloged as being there, the specific condition assessments have not been done yet, but will do in future tree ser be done in future tree surveys the project will be
doing. Um lastly at the station, we'll look at the ramp closer to Brandon Hall. Um these are the stations on the eastern end of that ramp. Again, these are mostly volunteer oaks, uh varying in size between 12 and one and a half
inches. Uh mostly in good condition. Um and then at the western side of where that ramp is going to be again majority of oak uh with a couple of cherry and a maple tree um between 12 and one and a half inches inside mostly in good
condition but also those volunteer trees. Uh moving to the parking impacts. Um this is one of the stations that we have a positive impact. Um, reconfiguring the parking spaces, adjusting the spacing,
uh, and shifting them out a little bit allows us to come back with two additional parking spaces from what is currently there. Uh, there are currently 45, uh, parking spaces along the back of where these platforms are located. And once the uh, reconfiguration is done,
there will be 47 um, the three accessible spaces that are there currently will be maintained. Um and then we will look at the uh crossings. So all the existing crossings will be maintained again. There'll be
one additional track crossing at the west end of the new platform. Um and we'll have those two new uh ramps uh next to the staircases coming down from Beacon Street westbound. All of which will be ADA compliant. We
also again show the bridal path concept uh just to demonstrate that we are keeping that in mind with all of these designs to make sure we are not uh precluding that future build. Uh here we have a rendering of what the
future station may look like. Um this has been updated from what we showed at the tree planting committee a few weeks ago um to better demonstrate what it will look like. still limited by the technology um and having to use graphics to try to put this into place, but this
is a better representation uh to show that you know the majority of this slope is not going to be affected by this project. Just the specific locations of the ramp and the platform itself. The rest of that wooded slope and the thousands of trees that are on there will be uh maintained.
Moving up next to Summit, um we have a similar situation that we had at many of the other stations here with narrow platforms close to traffic on one side and close to the parking on the other uh with trees and other obstructions along the platform making it impossible for
someone with uh accessibility needs to uh navigate this easily. Uh in this location there are eight trees that need to be removed uh and eight new trees that are proposed to be planted. Those include in the tree line
and at the location of the existing outbound uh station platform which is going to be shifted. Um there was a lot of different configurations that were reviewed here. Uh but we were able to find one working with the town that preserved all of the parking and limited
the impacts to trees and were able to maintain that left turn lane um on Beacon Street westbound uh with this configuration. Uh the one caveat here is we were unable to fit a treeon on that westbound Beacon Street and still
maintain all the lanes. But in this case, with the plantings on the southern tree line and where the station used to be, uh it was determined that with the high volume of that left turn lane, it did not make sense to try to take take that lane to make room for a treeon uh
in this location. Uh similar to other locations, the new tree plantings include Hackberry, Elm, Coffee Tree, and Ginko. And we can review the specific trees being impacted. Uh the first three are two ash and a sweet gum 10 to 14 in in
diameter and good to poor condition. Uh the next three again ash and sweet gum 8 to 14 inches in diameter. These are all in relatively poor condition. Uh and the final true are two ash trees
in fair conditions 12 in in diameter. Next looking at parking. This is another station that has a little bit of a win. Um, with the reconfiguration um, updating the spacing of these parking spaces and shifting them out a little bit away from the station allows us to fit one additional parking space
from what is there now. Moving from 16 to 17 parking spaces along the back of the platform and maintaining that accessible parking space. Um, and in this case, uh, the track crossings will remain basically the same
that they are now. slight adjustment in location, but that's very slight. Uh, generally going to be pretty similar to what is there currently. Again, keeping the bridal path in mind and making sure we're not building in a way that will pro preclude that future bridal path.
Our next station is St. Paul. This is another station that we talked about earlier where the slope on one side uh works and one side does not to make an accessible uh platform. But again, we have an existing condition where we have a very narrow platform with poles,
trees, and other obstructions in the way that would make it very difficult for someone with accessibility needs to navigate. Looking at the before and after of this station, uh, when it comes to tree plantings, um, with the added tree lawns
and the move of the station from the west side of St. Paul Street where it is too steep to the east side where we can put that accessible station. Um we do have to remove six trees. Uh but we can put back 15. Uh most of those where the
old station is being removed. Um of those 15, sweet gum, coffee tree, uh planet tree, oak, and elms all being selected here. Um looking at the trees impacted, the first three in good condition, oaks and
sweet gum between 12 and 5 in in diameter. Um the LA later three uh three oaks between 12 and 24 uh between good and poor condition for these three trees. Uh here when we impact parking uh there
are going to be uh a total of four of the angled parking spaces that need to be removed to make the width for that uh accessible stations and the walkway out of to leave the accessible exit. Um and seven on street parking spaces that are
going to have to be impacted uh to widen the platform enough for that accessible path. Accessible parking space will be maintained as always. Um looking at crossings, this is another instance where we will maintain the existing
crossings with a slight shift um and add an additional crossing to have those two exits from the platform to meet those fire code requirements for those safe paths of travel. Uh again showing the bridal path, make sure we're not precluding that future
build. Uh here we have another rendering. This is going to be pretty typical for all of the stations with the exception of Fairex Brandon Hall which is a little different. Um showing you know the new platforms, updated accessible crossings,
various amenities, signage, benches, um say police call boxes, emergency call boxes, uh etc. uh and the tree lines of course the backs of those platforms. Next is Kent. This is the station that
will be closed as part of this um project. That does mean when we look at the uh impacts of this platform, they're all positive. Uh here is what it looks like currently. Um again, narrow platforms like the rest, close to
traffic. Um here we don't remove any trees because we're not building any platforms here, but we do have space to plant six new trees um along the space where we move removed that inbound platform. Um and there are already trees planted along where the outbound platform was. So we're not showing any
plat new plantings there, but the existing trees there will be maintained. Um here we'll be planting uh mag hackberry sweetgum and pin oaks uh as the new trees to be planted in this area. Um no other impacts here. We're
not impacting parking or crossings. All of that will be maintained the way that it is now. Um lastly we're going to look at street. Um again current configuration uh has both plat inbound and outbound platforms across from each other west of Haw
Street. Um the town had invest asked the team to investigate as one of our many options uh maintaining this configuration due to the impacts of moving the platform east of the intersection would have. Um and after significant coordination with not only the town but Masto as well it was
determined that this would likely be the best choice. Um it does come with the downside of the need to remove the U-turn lane. Uh like the rest of the platforms on the narrow side of Beacon Street, creating accessible pathways requires the
widening of the current platform area. Even without the tree lawn, just an accessible walkway would be too wide to fit into the current space and requires the walking area along the tracks to be expanded. The road in this area is not wide enough to allow this without removing a lane. In most cases, it's the
parking lane that's impacted, but here west of Haw Street, there is no parking lane. And instead, the third lane is used for U-turns. The MBTA conducted a detailed traffic study of the corridor and determined that the use of this lane is low, far below any of the other
turning lanes in the corridor. At peak, it was between 40 and 50 cars in an hour. Um, Brookline staff followed up with an independent confirmation of this and came out with similar results and found it was mostly vehicles turning uh and circling for parking.
Uh, here is the future station configuration um with that left turn lane removed. Um, with that in mind, between the widen stationed and the 5-ft tree lawn, it basically takes up the entirety of the space that uh would typically have that
U-turn lane. Um, and we have both platforms west of Haw Street, uh, similar to what is how it is configured today. Um, here we can take a quick look at what the alternative was. This was part of the original design and some of the
impacts that that would have had. Um there's a 27in heritage pinoke uh that would have to be removed at this location as well as eight on street parking spaces that will be saved um with our current updated design. Um and considering that many of the people uh
circling and using that U-turn lane are looking for parking maintain that parking is a good alternative uh that hopefully has less people circling. Um, we also reviewed the alternative uh
options for making that U-turn move. Uh, there are four of them. Two of them can take place once you've already reached Haw Street. That includes uh taking a right turn on Carlton and circling around or continuing down uh to the Park Street U-turn and using that.
Uh the other two alternatives, if you realize you're going to have to make a U-turn before you reach Haw Street, there is a left turn onto St. Paul that can make that, as well as a right turn onto Ken Street that brings you out at Haw right at that same intersection. Um all four of these alternatives result in
a detour of less than half a mile and only about 1 to three minutes of additional driving. Um and you have quite a few options here, uh depending on your needs. Overall, we looked at the low uh turning counts, the ability to retain not just
the eight on street parking spots that we showed in that design, but one of the angle parking spots to get that second exit from the station. Um, saves that from us from having to have any tree removals here. Saves that 27inch pinoke. Um and the four alternate uh circulation
methods that I have here led to the decision to move forward with a design that removes that U-turn lane. Um looking at trees again because we made this choice to keep the station where it is now. There are no trees removed with this design. There is room
to plant 13 new trees in the tree lawns. um ginko, coffee tree, uh planet tree, oak and elm. Uh both both sides of the platform can get treelons and uh filling in a spot in the existing tree planting
area that I think is missing a tree. Currently looking at the parking, we lose one angle parking space. Um where we put that uh safe exit from the platform um
to have those two forms of egress. Uh the accessible parking space in this area is maintained and not affected by the project. And when it comes to pro crossings, crossings will be in the same place. They'll be upgraded uh to be more accessible, but we won't have change
there. And as always, we show the bridal path to show that, you know, the infrastructure that we're installing will not be a detriment to that future bridal path uh location. Uh in summary, looking at first the trees, um there's a total of 98 uh trees
that will be replanted that we're showing currently. That is the minimum. Uh we will continue to work with the town to find more locations to plant additional trees. Uh this is in contrast to the total of 96 trees that will be removed. 50 are the smaller younger
trees less than 6 in or less in diameter. Uh and 46 are those larger mature trees. Um just to give a little context to this um this is about a 40% reduction for the original design on this project. Um we've been working hard
with the town to find the different options that will reduce those tree impacts. So, we've had seen some pretty significant results in those efforts um overall throughout that process. Um one thing that we didn't really mention but is also important is um
protecting and maintaining the existing trees along the corridor. Um we have worked hard to look at state city MVTA guidelines on how to protect the existing trees. Uh this includes uh fenced in areas where you have groups of
trees and you're not doing construction in between them. Uh as well as protections around individual trees that may be closer to construction and not have the ability to have a large fenced in area. As well as um hand removal techniques for asphalt that may be on
top of root systems or with roots interming mingled so you're not damaging those roots with the large equipment that you might use otherwise. Uh lastly, in summary of the parking impacts that we'll see, um when it comes to the angled parking along Beacon
Street, that is basically a net zero. You have a couple of stations where you gain a couple of parking spaces, a couple that you remove. >> Uh the biggest impacts are Dean Road and St. Paul Street where you are taking that uh parallel parking lane uh to widen the platform and add that tree
line where you lose about 10 at each location a little more um for overall parking impacts. With that, I want to thank the select board and everyone here today for listening to this presentation and learning a little more about these uh stations. We look forward to your
decision and we are open to any questions or comments you may have. >> Okay, any questions? John, >> my first question is uh we have a quite a few people who want to comment on this. So we left time to hear from them. >> Yes, there's a public hearing scheduled
both for the and we we said that um we would take comments both about this and the trees. There's a formal tree protection hearing but the proposal as well after the proposal was given. So yes, there's time built into your schedule for this. >> Okay. Um uh I'm going to try to keep my questions very brief. Um I you know in
listening to this and I' I've I've listened to it several times at several different meetings and um it's I always am struck by how um you know how mysterious it is that there seems to be
um some some authority somewhere to make all of these decisions on um you know we're going to remove a parking space here, we're going to remove trees there, we're going to take away a U-turn there. Does this board actually have any power to say no to the U-turn removal? Does it
have any power to say no to the parking space removals? Does it have any power to say no to the um tree removals? >> Yeah, >> we do. >> Well, I mean that was three separate that was three separate questions. >> That was a question. Really? I mean >> I think we do, but
>> yes, you do. But then you run the risk of the tea going to court and forcing you to do it. Um >> well then we don't >> well you but again you this is where we're trying to work collaboratively with and we for months collaboratively with the tea and the community to get to
where we are. >> Yeah. And good for that. Yeah. >> Um you know so it's it >> the tea right could >> you know the tea doesn't have to be here and doing this process and we really thank them for going through this. We
know it's it's a lot. Um but right the ult ultimately, you know, you do have the authority to say no and you could fight it in court if you wanted to. Um but query whether again you want to be in that position. Um it's can you do it?
Yes. >> Delay it'll delay this process or this project is extremely important. >> Well, I wouldn't do I mean I wouldn't suggest that we do it if we if we have no legal uh leg to stand on. for example, to say no to the removal of the U-turn at O Street. But if I thought we
did have a legal leg to stand on and I thought there were enough people who were be inconvenienced by that change um uh because you know 60 people who take make that U-turn in an hour, that's a big number if you ask me.
And so we're just going to inconvenience the 60 people per hour, I guess. Um, maybe we should say no if we have the power, but if we don't, I'm not going to bother. >> U Mike, do you have a hand up? >> Uh, I do, but I think Paul was
so um I appreciate John's question. I also uh want to thank the the T for the presentation. Uh just for setting the stage a little bit here, there has been a group which Michael and I have been participating in grueling for it's been a long time we've been meeting with
these folks. I actually feel like I've almost gotten too close to it to tell you the truth. Um but um that that that I want to really just acknowledge the TE's willingness to work with us. >> Um they've made trade-offs. They listened. They've made changes. We've
gone, you know, back and forth uh with an intent of trying to minimize the tree impact, minimize the parking impact, minimize the impact on traffic. Um, you know, there there are impacts on parking long term if when you start considering the bridal path, which I know you have a
number of concerns about, John. Um, and I can tell you that I really do I appreciate all that they've done. I think they've done a good job. I will admit, um, the I've been good with all of this. Um, and I'm I'm ready to support it except Haw Street. Um, and
the reason why is I experience haws every day. >> And I, you know, and I have increasingly been hearing from my neighbors and constituents really very concerned about uh limiting access uh to uh to Cottage Farm in the back side of uh Koolage
Corner, that area uh because of eliminating the U-turn. Um and I and there's there's trade-offs. I mean, I think this is a choice for us, right? It's not it's not legally required that we eliminate that. I think it's been it's been a choice to try to limit the impact on on the tree canopy and some of
these older these older trees and larger trees. But I do I want to talk a little bit about this if I may because I think this is really important. And I do want to say at this point um I I did express this with with the tea multiple times about my really wrestling with this left
turn loss of a left turn um and what I perceive to be the cost of uh the benefits of of of losing it versus as well as the costs. Um the first thing about um and I appreciate um Gwen's u you know comments about going down to
Park Drive. That's how I get home. I do go down to Park Drive and I bang the U-turn. >> Um, I can assure you it's it's not easy because there is no left dedicated left turn there. You're basically waiting in the travel lane until traffic goes past Park Drive and then you can get to that
little U-turn and you can bang around and there's there's there's no accommodation for any cars to wait and still let traffic uh go through. And we have no control of that because it's Boston. So, it's not it's they could change that at some time and we'd have no control. Um, it's also the 1 to 3
minutes, um, you know, could be at at the lowest times of 11 o'clock at night when I'm coming back from this meeting. U, but I can tell you dur when traffic's busy, especially at any time uh, in the St. Mary's business district, um, every I won't say every, but the delivery
trucks, the Uber drivers, the Uber Eats, um, you know, the scooters that pick up food, they take the right-hand travel lane next to the parking lane. And so effectively going through St. Mary's, the business district between um St. Mary's Street and Carlton Street is one
lane. Um so there there's no quick way. Um I um I think that that you know this isn't just a few people uh trying to access uh trying to get home, which is basically this. I'm sure maybe there's some people circling to get parking, but
this is this is how you get home. Uh and we're asking people to to really go quite a ways out of their way uh you know to get home and actually get into an area that that begins you start talking about more safety issues. You put more traffic turning at Park Drive
to come back through St. Mary's that is already a treacherous stretch during any type of uh nighttime hours where the restaurants are open for take for takeout. So um I'm very concerned about that. Um I've wrestled with it for a long time. I'm I'm prepared prepared
personally to support every other station. Um but I'm I'm I would request that that the T maybe take another pass at Haw Street. Um I uh the member of the transportation board, Richard Murphy,
has reached out. I know he's reached out uh to to Bill uh and and and I think Dan, he's reached out to me and some other folks uh in uh in in the precinct one uh town meeting delegation with a possible alternative, which I had never thought of, which was bumping the
platform for the in for the inbound um west a little bit to make room for maybe three cars to turn. I don't know if that's a solution, but um I'm comfortable with everything but this this one station. It is really a major impact for uh for the community on on
this end of Beacon Street. Michael. >> Um so first of all uh I want to echo uh Paul's remarks about um all of this is tradeoffs um really because even in the in the case of H Street I mean the the
one that I've actually been hearing more about is the question of the access ramps at uh Brandon Hall and Fairbanks um which have an impact on a number of trees on the slope. Um but you know again when you step through the
tradeoffs of uh whether or not to keep two access points where you can position the uh platforms and then the access points from the outbound side of Beacon Street um and all of the effort that the
T has actually uh taken on in order to minimize the tree impact. Um, I I've heard something of saving the tree that contains some an owl that is currently nesting, which um I I and others appreciate. Um,
and also uh to take into account the needs of senior citizens who are coming across um across be the outbound side of Beacon Street and require uh really need both access points. Um my understanding
is the access points are about 600 feet apart. Um roughly a tenth of a mile or more. Um to the to the question of Haw Street um I I wonder if you can bring back the slides that show the various
travel paths because that was those slides were new to me today. I don't think we had seen those in previous meetings. Um, so I I just wanted to bring those up for a second. Yep. Give me one second to find my way
back there. Thank you. Okay. Okay. So, and and so is there so it's the it's the red arrow that's being removed, right? And the two
alternatives are the light purple and the dark purple. >> Yes, those are the two alternatives that you can make once you've reached H Street. And that is in addition to the um other two alternatives that we
suggested which you can make prior to reaching Har Street if you need to turn around. >> Yeah, this is the first time uh Michael that we've seen this circular uh going down um
Monmouth Street I guess. >> Is it down road? Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That one there. Yeah. Um I've never I've never seen that actually propo as proposed uh about it. And I may I make a
comment about that just with Michael here. Um just for perspective um there's that if you go down Carlton Street then you're going to take a right onto Monmouth. Uh there's a church there. That church runs programs uh throughout
the summer. Um, you know, there's a lot of, uh, uh, activities that are going on at that church. Uh, you know, th this particular portion of Monmouth Street is quite narrow. Um, there's usually cars,
uh, lined up in front of the church for parking. um you know bumping all that traffic down that short stretch of Monmouth Street um you know would have an impact uh honestly on the safety of of the kids
that are in that that summer program. They do a day camp and it's they're all right right out there on the lawn. Anyway, I >> I'm really uncomfortable with with just the h street solution and I always have been. I've wrestled with it. Um and again I just I think it needs it needs a
little more time or thought to see if there's an an alternative uh so that we don't lose that left. I think that left is very costly. >> I know Gwen I know that you spoke about one of the um previous design alternatives that
got rejected in favor of moving moving this. And so I I'm presuming that we don't want to put this back on the table. Um, you know, I think that the cost of
that, Michael, was the loss of some a significant tree, >> right? >> Uh, that was that was it. Um, and then, um, you know, the the the the thing that the solution that I think it was Richard
Murphy, uh, the transportation board member had suggested was pushing the platform, the inbound platform back 50 feet or so, uh, which would allow I don't know how many feet he had.
It would lose two smaller trees. Um, but it would make room for three cars to sit in the queue there. It would narrow the platform, but I assume it would still be My question is, would it be ADA accessible? I don't know. >> Um, but that that would require moving
the tracks. >> No. >> Well, no. >> So, I I can comment. I have seen that proposal and it does not allow the maintaining of all three lanes and putting an ADA require uh compliant walkway. >> Okay. Okay. So, the walkway would not be ADA compliant.
>> Correct. >> So, the only alternative is that that pushing that platform east, right? >> Yeah. >> In the lo in the loss of the big tree. And that's and that's the cost. Um, and you know, it's a big cost, but it it may
be worth it given the feed the extensive feedback that I've been getting uh from from constituents in that area. John. >> Um, I didn't want to leave the impression that, you know, Haw Street is is the only issue. And this is why I'm
anxious to hear from some of the public who have come tonight. There's there's a group that has been working on the um combined uh Fairbanks uh uh Brandon Hall um station idea. um that have a lot to say about that idea and and they're
they're angling for and I think it's very reasonable that they want would like to have this a little bit more time to you know just as you described this process of negotiation between the T and the and members of the public and our transportation department and our DPW
that's all great that's all great and I'm really glad to hear that Michael and Paul have been part of that um and and they're just asking for a little bit more time and and we'll hear from them soon um to um t take a closer look at this this Brandon Hall Fairbank Street
situation um in in several respects, but the big one is um if we're going to combine two stations into one um and why would it take, you know, t two ramps um and not just one ramp? Um there's
there's existing two diff separate stairways to Beacon Street um to the to the station platform from Beacon Street from outbound Beacon Street. Um and we're going to reduce that to one stairway. Um but the only thing that
stays at two is the ramps and and the ramps are great um in that they provide disability access. um you know, one uh would provide disability access, two would provide twice as much disability access. Um in a sense that who knows how
many would use the one to the west and how many would use the one to the east. Um but it be come at a cost of a of a significant number of trees. And um it just kind of begs uh the question of uh if one stayaway is good enough,
shouldn't one disability ramp um be good good enough? >> It depends. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe question. But it it so you've teed up the the the public hearing. Well, and maybe before before
we get into any sort of back and forth on this question, we should have the public hearing. Well, what I'd like to uh know is what are our options in terms of making further changes to the uh project here? >> I mean, Bill, if you want to talk about
that or the T team wants to talk about that. I I would just say, you know, we're to your point, Paul, we've had this kind of grueling monthsl long process. you send it back to the drawing board, there's always the chance that the tea will disengage and just say
thank you, but we have a legal obligation to do this and you can either work with us or or not. Um I don't think we want to be in that position and I don't know if they are there, but I will say that for example on the issue of like um signal prioritization after that
conversation the T just said we're done. We're not coming back. That's it. We're done. Um so I would caution us to think carefully about what changes are proposed um
because the to come with a plan that's been the process proc has gone through months of work and back and forth and discussion and to say to send it back to the drawing board.
>> I don't know. What is what do you mean by send it back to the drawing board? >> Well, I mean that's what I'm saying. It's it's the question of what what changes are you talking about and and you know what what the trade-offs are. It's a relatively simple change like >> there was something that was proposed. Can we go back to that? I think that's easier to deal with than can we have an
extra three months. >> I don't Yeah. So I don't I don't fully May I Bernard? >> Sure. >> I don't fully understand what John what and it would be good to hear from the public and John asked a question about why two ramps versus two rams versus one. Um, and there is currently no one
ramp solution that's been designed. The the Hos Street uh inbound, which I think we've all we've all wrestled with. Um, there is a design which is an alternative and we right and and it's it's already been designed. It's just push the thing push the inbound east on
the other side of of the intersection and that would solve the problem, but it would come at a cost of a big tree, 27 in tree. I I'm not sure what you're proposing which which to go up from two ramps to one or whatever the design is. I think that would be a significant
redesign which we haven't seen that proposal at all that design proposal >> currently. I mean, if if you I think it's up there. The the two ramps that are currently in the design, you know, one is at Brandon Hall and the other one
is by 1550 Beacon Street um and goes down to where the Fairchild station uh goes and is a is a >> Fairbags >> Fairbags, I'm sorry. Um and heads then heads east towards the Brandon Hall
station. Um, now if you made the assumption that it would be reasonable to keep the closer one rather than the farther one and you eliminated the one at 1550 Beacon Street, you know, you would have
to eliminate both the ramp and the stairway because you cannot have a stairway without a ramp because that's not equal access, right? But in doing so, what that means is that all of the
people who live west of that point or somewhat clo somewhat to the east of that point who would use that ramp are then going to have to trudge a tenth of a mile to the other ramp. And considering that 1550 is the Ibu Senior Life Senior Center,
>> that that's a that in my mind is the tradeoff there. And you know, aside from the value of those stairs. I think there is there is some, but somebody more expert than me should weigh in on that. That in my mind is the tradeoff there
for eliminating that the ramp and the stairwell. And that ramp and stairwell is is like three mature trees of seven, seven, and 11 in and a number of saplings. And my only point was that I you know um
at some point we're going to be asked um do do we think that there should be more time given just for the the group that has worked with the tea, you know, on this um to spend a little bit more time on it. That's all that's all I was suggesting is that we'll hear from them
and I hope we get to that. Um, >> and and uh I'm I believe that they should be given more time to discuss that because it it just kind of begs a lot of questions. >> Let's ask when is that an option?
>> Um, we've reviewed all of the different options that we can design and this is the best one. I don't we I mean I don't know what the more time would be. We've been working on this design for I think three or four years now. Um, I don't think there is more time that would
create a different design than this. Um, as I think Michael pointed out, equal access is critical and a required part of this project. Um, the town I guess could make the decision to demolish those stairs and then there is no access
there. So, we would not be required to provide that equal access. But barring that, I don't see another design that would be put forward through on this. Um, if the vote was no, I don't there's no there's no
like alternative design that we would start exploring. Um, but that would be up to the town's decision to to make how they would want to move forward with this. >> We're not going to have a vote on this. We will be voting on the tree removal. >> Yeah. >> Request
>> tonight. >> Tonight. Yeah. So, I mean, the only thing we can do is I don't know, tell me if I'm wrong, urge you to reconsider. Um, >> I think, yeah, we we were just given an
update. Yeah. >> Um, and there's really no next step unless we want to ask them to to take a next step. >> Well, the only thing I would I would add, Bernard, is that um if if you approve the tree removals because
we're doing an appeal, right? All right, we're dealing with um if you if you support if you deny the appeal, you're basically supporting the removal of the trees based on the configurations of all these stations, right? That's that's what we would be doing. Um we still haven't done
the grant of location. The grant of location is where you're ultimately authorizing um the tea to do what they want to do. Um I I can say that again the the the design for um for Fairbanks,
you know, all of this has gone through an extensive amount. And I guess I'd like to hear from the public to understand what what people have to say about both of these issues. Um I know where my my head's at a little bit, but public comment often has me change my mind. So maybe we should hear from the public for now.
>> Okay. Let's first hear from the um appeal of the tree removal. I was going to say, yeah, if you want to hear from the the um the tree warden and the tree protection committee. The tree protection committee submitted a letter just now very very quickly saying that they were supportive of the ultimate
decision. Um there's an appeal and the opportunity to be heard there. Um if you want to um Jack, are you online? >> Yep, I'm here. >> Okay. you want to talk briefly about the the tree aspect of this and then we can open maybe what we'll do if it's okay
with the board is we open it up to public comment more generally there are people who have signed up to speak on both topics both plan more broadly and then yes I'm sorry >> I'm so sorry yes >> yes I think that's the I was wondering if we had someone there on that front
thank you um so Jack if you want to start and then we'll have the chair speak and then open it up to folks who want to be heard on either issue >> both issues Yeah, thank you. Hi everyone. Jack Schlifer, tree warden, urban forestry manager and town arborist. And as people
have said, we've been working very extensively and collaboratively with the MBTA on this project. So I wouldn't be here and willing to give it any encouragement if that weren't the case. Um, so there's there's been a thorough process and I personally believe that
we, you know, are making trade-offs, but we're at the best solution that we've been able to find through this really robust design process. I um have heard a lot of community concerns about Brandon Hall and Fairbanks. And I am grateful for the MBTA for their willingness to
take a bunch of steps. I think Gwen showed um a walkthrough on Haw about how we've made some of those decisions and what some of that process has looked like. There's really been that for every station. So, you know, originally the platform was an extra 75 ft, I believe,
longer. At Brandon Hall Fairbanks, we're able to shorten that. That saved a whole bunch of trees, changing the configuration of the ramps, um, changing the way in which they'll be installed and really worrying about the tree protection, making sure that some of the historic trees lining the outbound upper
beacon are able to be preserved because that's a really um, amazing row of old oak trees. We know that there's a a screech owl that lives in one of those. So, we've, you know, really taken all of that to heart and tried to come to the best solution. They're able to replant
98 trees and we have a one-year warranty on those. And then the town will be assuming responsibility for their care and maintenance, which will fall under our forestry team. And then we're also, you know, willing and eager and committed to working to identify any other replanting locations along Beacon
Street. Um, and I think, you know, we'll we'll be able to do that. We're really focused on the platforms and the like the area right around them in this conversation, but there's more that we'll be able to do in collaboration with MBTA and also as a forestry team. So, overall, I am encouraging of this. I
think that the ADA access is extremely important and um yeah I'm I'm happy to answer other more specific questions and respond to the community but uh I think we've come to the best solutions that we can for many of these platforms and it's been you know the large design but also
small details like where are the shelters going to be where are there going to be any other pieces of equipment making sure that those are all moved to minimize impacts on trees tree rooting space tree lawns and overall um community assets and community health
because that's what this all feels like it's about to me. So that's an an overview. Um and I know that the tree planting committee has put a lot of thought into this as well, but I'll leave it at that and I'll answer any other questions as they come up. >> Okay. I'd like to hear from the tree planting committee
because this is a request rem to to overturn a decision of the tree planning committee. Um and uh so we'd like to hear your your decision. >> Uh hello everyone. I'm Liz Erdman. I'm the chair of the tree planting committee and uh the three of us, Pamela Templar,
Hugh Madison, and I wrote the letter that uh that you received earlier explaining some of the reasons behind our decision and also what has um how how the last two meetings, how the last two tree hearings went. Um we had our
first public hearing on February 3rd. The final plans came right before the meeting and we felt that um we didn't have enough time to really review them and vote that night. We had a lot of public feedback and so um we asked the
commission with disabilities if we could join them the next week and have our vote at that hearing. So we had a second hearing on February 11th um where again we heard from a number of people second meeting had um a different slant where
we had people with disability needs advocating and we had people um opposing the designs and the tree removals uh coming together. So it was actually um helpful to see the different communities coming together and sharing sharing
their their thoughts. In both meetings we spent a lot of time talking about the two ramps. So what we understand is that the Americans with Disability Act basically requires that you have the
same access for PE people who don't need it and people who do need um mobility assistance. So the there's two means of egress required from each train and those ramps would be the means of egress
from from Upper Beacon Street. Um residents who live in Upper Beacon Street talked about the fact that without those ramps they have to go to Washington Square and walk. That's the only you have to go to Washington Square and Coolage Corner. Um those are the
only two stations with ramps at this time. So um a huge impact having the ramps, a huge impact now not having them. We uh we did hear that during the during the hearings. Um, we also learned about the screech owl
that's nesting. Um, it is our understanding that the town is going to be putting owl boxes along the Brandon Hall area and there's been outreach to a boy scout troop to help with setting up the owl boxes. So, uh, the MBTA between
the two meetings looked into the screech owl and, um, I think they they they also, uh, developed a plan to make sure that it's not interrupted during during the, um, construction.
Um so so we essentially uh voted unanimously to uh approve the removal request for the 96 trees and the replanting of the 98 trees. Um we
also uh had a lot of back and forth with the MBTA to get the geolocation of the trees to be removed. Uh, our team plans to um map those in GIS and monitor the new plantings and where the
plantings came from and have have visuals that can be shared with the public showing what's going on from the tree perspective as the project unfolds. So, any questions? >> Okay. So after our hearing, we're going
to be asked to vote for uh either approving or disapproving the decision of the tree planning committee. >> So I understand. >> So we're clear on this. Can >> I ask a question? >> Yeah. >> Um do we do we have the ability to um to
approve a a portion of it and not the other? So for example, if we u and I I would like to hear from the public first, but if there is a if there is a station design that uh that the tree committee in because of the number of trees we're moving um if we upheld their
decision, can we a can we uh have everything but that like so for example if haw if we want to hold out haw because we want to reconsider that and you know bump it which would have an impact on a tree Um, are we able to do that, Jez?
>> Yes. >> Okay. Um, thank you. >> I have a question. How many trees in the in what you approved are slated to be removed at Haw? >> Uh, I don't think
>> What What's that, Gwen? >> Zero. >> So, is not affected by this vote at all? Well, if if the if the uh station went across the street, there's >> it would impact a tree. >> There's there's one large one and two
other there's there's a row of trees that would >> Right. But doesn't doesn't that tree removal have to go back to the planning committee anyway? Yes. So the tonight >> on on the >> on the appeal doesn't affect
>> hos well the reason why may I >> uh the reason why I bring this up Michael is I think this board needs to give a directive if we do want to seriously consider the alternative to haw which is already designed right I think that we there's some way to communicate that than just leaving them
in limbo and if we say we approve you know I realize it's not in the scope but if we could add that as a conditional approval of the tree removal that we ask the MBTA to reconsider uh bumping the
station to east which would impact a tree would then have to go through the tree planting committee uh you know for for removal and we'd have a s probably a similar public hearing but I just want to make sure that and again this is just my sole opinion and we may hear more from the public if we do want to give
that directive I think they need to hear that tonight because they can't lose Okay. >> And all we would be doing is saying go back and see if this works. >> Yeah. >> Um it's not it's not really directing them to do anything but just >> well we
>> back to us I assume. >> Right. So well let me can I maybe I can I ask GR just a quick question. So the if we wanted to reconsider uh the the h turn and ask you to
implement the is the east the you know the station going across h street which you already have the design for. Um I is that feasible? Feasible maybe. When you say we already have the design for we did some very
initial design work on that. We definitely do not have that as developed as this design. So it would be a delay to the work that we are doing. Also this change in design was directly because the town of Brooklyn DPW staff asked us to go back to the drawing board redesign
the station on the other side of the intersection. So we would have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on design at Brooklyn requests that Brooklyn would then say actually we don't want this go back to what you did before. So is it feasible? Possibly. But there would be
cost impacts to doing so and time impacts to the project. >> Yeah, I I I understand that and and again as you know as you know we've talked about this at length about my my concerns about this uh eliminating the left turn is forever. So, you know, that's just let's hear from the public,
but I think it's an important issue. >> John, >> well, I just I'm not sure I understood correctly something that that uh that Gwen said. Um, when did when did Brookline say uh they they want to eliminate the Haw U-turn?
>> Jess, >> I mean, Bill could talk, but I mean, we we were told to prioritize the the tree in that situation that it was unacceptable that we would lose the trees and the parking spaces there. So, by the select board. >> Not that's not by the select board, but by you know, over the course of these
conversations, right, the select board, the the team that was negotiating said that doesn't that's that's not going to fly. We can't lose those parking spaces and and that trend that big tree. Is there a solution that saves it and this was the solution? >> This is Bill Smith with uh Department of Public Works. I'd also add, not only is
there the one heritage tree that would be removed, which is actually more of a 30 plus inch diameter, uh I think it's 35 to 40 as I taped it at breast height in the field. Uh there are two other trees that will be
impacted that weren't captured there. And those eight curbside parking are in a utilization area exceeding 90% on average. Uh those were the were two items or two
issues that really affected our uh our uh guidance to the MBTA to to consider removing the left the U-turn eastbound to westbound which when I went out to verify the counts had no
just happened to have equal 25 during the morning peak and 25 vehicles during the afternoon peak which is the least along the corridor. Um and we felt there was we we looked or and wrestled and
looked at all the ways that a resident on Amry for example if you can't say that I can't get there from here that there are alternatives for those not both circulating for parking or circulating to go home.
>> Right. And so I I guess I'd really like to Bernard hear from the public, but I I will >> I just want to just uh tee up what it is that we're going to be Yeah. asking and voting for after we hear of the public. >> Yeah. Well, I Well, certainly the tree
currently isn't in the appeal, the two the trees that he's mentioned, >> right? But you're asking that we we we look at that or instruct them to. >> Yeah. Well, let's hear let's hear from the public. Um, I think it would, you know, one station ultimately we're going to have to give a grant a location for
that station for all of them. And I I think based on the feedback that I've heard, I think we've all heard to some extent, and I've heard a lot, uh, because of where I live, um, you know, it's it it would be worthwhile considering that this station be
reconsidered for because even the impacts that Bill mentioned. So I don't take it lightly that this bill this does have a significant impact on those who live there. So um >> okay so why don't we open up the public hearing uh with respect to the um
decision of uh tree planting committee uh that is being appealed by um >> I would say we als we also held the public comments at the beginning of this meeting for the the plan more generally. Right. So maybe you want to you want to take those and then because we have we
have just two people who signed up in advance. Maybe you take those folks you take the folks who signed up for the tree and then you take public comment more generally from folks who didn't sign up. >> So who are the two people signed up to talk about the tree >> uh the design?
>> We we have two people that signed up to talk um just the design in general. First is James Lee, the chair of the BCOD online and he's been promoted so he can speak whenever he's ready. >> Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I signed up to to
talk about the plan, not the uh tree appeal. So, I just want to I this this was mentioned by someone a few minutes ago that this is a legal obligation. This came about over 20 years ago when
landmark case and the MBTA on consent decree said, "Okay, we're going to make the stations accessible." The blue line's accessible, red line's accessible. Orange line,
this is the final leg of that promise. This is the final leg of that promise. So level platforms, cross slopes that meet ADA compliance, pathways that meet ADA compliance
is the law and it is literally civil rights infrastructure and more importantly it's access for our friends and neighbors here in Brooklyn. And I don't like to bring up
this statistic because I don't wish it upon anybody, but if you're 20 years old, you have a 25% chance of having a disability at some point in your life. And if you're lucky, it's going to be a
temporary disability. You might break an ankle. Maybe you might be physically weak from recovering from an illness or something. But I can tell you right now, if you break an ankle, you're not going to be getting on the tea down at Dean. And you're not going to be getting on the tea at Tapen.
You're not going to get on the tea at Fairbanks, Summit, or St. Paul. And if you're in a wheelchair, I brought this up before. If you're in a wheelchair, to get on and off the tea, I hate to use this word, it's just humiliating.
It's humiliated. And it's not necessary. It's not necessary. So, we have gone back and forth with the tea. I would encourage everybody to consider this plan and consider the fact
that it's going to give access to everybody in Brooklyn to everything that Brookline has to offer. And I will conclude with that. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Our next person signed up for this topic
is Abby Swain. And Aby's ready to to she's promoted. She's can be speak whenever she's ready. >> Hi there, Melanie. Is your um countdown clock supposed to be operating? >> Yes. Thank you. >> Wishing that upon myself. I just want to
say um I'm really excited about this project. Um my son grew up in Brooklyn and since his ski injury at age 24, he's used a wheelchair. Um, currently stretches. It's >> closer closer to the mic, Abby. >> Oh,
okay. Look a little funny. >> Um, something happened. Okay, >> we may have lost her, but we'll we'll we'll come back >> when she when she comes back online. We'll >> back.
>> Is she back? >> Can you hear me now? >> There we go. Yeah. Okay, >> start again. Sorry, we had trouble hearing you. >> Maybe she should turn off her video. Dad, >> maybe turn off your video. Abby back and I'm
uh you can forget my video. Can you hear me? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Okay, great. Um I don't look that great on camera anyway. Um so there are long stretches of the sealine where um a wheelchair user can't get on or off a
train. And not only do you have to push a long distance, you have to push through whatever weather and inclines and pavement conditions prevail. Um, I've pres uh participated in several years of meetings on the sealine accessibility project and on other
projects that contribute to fulfilling the NBTA's overall obligation under the terms of that court order that Jim talked about. And I think that designs for um the Sealine project are elegant and practical. I think the two ramps at
Fairbanks and Brandon Hall are necessary to avoid hardship and hazard for those with mobility challenges. And regarding HAS, I'd say there's a big difference between inconveniencing drivers and discriminating against transit riders with disabilities. I really encourage the select board to respect the
importance and urgency of this moment. I don't want to be ashamed of my community money secondguessing the TE's expertise at this late hour. Thanks. Thanks for your patience too with the
audio visual. >> Okay. Um so let's start with the general uh public hearing. >> Um so yeah, there's if folks have signed up in advance, Melanie, for the tree p portion of this, we can hear them and then we'll hear general public comment. Okay, first signed up for the tree
portion is Evelyn Murphy. >> Okay, I'm on. First of all, thank you for this opportunity. Uh, I am Evelyn Murphy. I'm precinct 10 and I've lived in Brooklyn for 48 years. And I want to start by thanking both
Erin Chute and Jack Schaefer for listening to about some thoughts on the Brandon Hall Fairbanks stop. You listened and you've been respectful and frankly I only heard about this as long as I've lived I've only heard about
this since late last fall. So I come at it with a respect for um being um for those of you who have worked very hard on it and I appreciate your
willingness to include us. I also want to thank the MBTA team, uh, Matt, Adam. You've listened as we've talked about the mature trees and and our concerns at
Fairbanks and Brandon Hall. So, so in all as I listen to this discussion I'm I'm struck by everybody's willingness to try and come to the best wisest solution and one that a come that fits within as Jim said the law that has taken 25 years to actually come
to this requirement here but I also know as a former lieutenant governor and prior to that the secretary of environmental affairs and economic affairs I've managed big projects and I've pushed them through and I Understand the very small steps even at the end can make a
major difference and involve that pleases and and has positive impacts on all of the people who are affected. plan for a brief time only and I and I'm in order to to assess
a slightly different approach to access at that at that place. Um, and it can be done without stopping the rest of it, but I think it's very important to take a short period of time. Brookline residents, we all are aware of climate
change. We know that these mature trees are important to save and protect because of what they do with climate change. I leave to my colleagues to explain this and a couple other people who are going to talk to you tonight. But I want to be very clear. I think the assessment can be done without delaying
the implementation of the entire sea line. And I respect what Jim said earlier about how long it's taken to get to this place. So I ask you to vote tonight or make clear the vote to advance That's the MBTA sealine plans with a set
aside for the Brandon Hall Fairbanks stop. Put a time limit on it. One month, two months, whatever you think is right to review some options at this for access at this site and then that's it. And after that, the entire plan can
be in effect. But I think it's very very important to take one final look and make some make some decisions on those trees that are in our best all of our best interests. So, thank you. >> Next, we have Olivia Fischer. >> Can we do that? >> Hi, my name is Olivia Fischer Fox. I'm
from Precinct 4. Um, and I believe a slide of the Fairbanks Brandon Hall proposal was sent to my members of the select board today and to which I would like to speak. Um, and I I want to echo um the the former speaker and with my
thanks and gratitude for everybody who's worked on this project very hard, especially the MBTA and the Select Board for all your hard work. Um, as as somebody with mobility issues myself who has to wear leg braces to walk, um, I want to thank the Commission on Disability for their work for people
like me and others with more severe disabilities. I attended MBTA's presentation to both the Commission on Disability and to the Tree Planting Committee. The presentations were slightly different, which may be why the two groups focusing on different aspects of the project seem to be at odds when
perhaps they shouldn't be. On that slide of the Fairbanks Brandon Hall proposal, boxed out on the westbound side is the Fairbanks stop and boxed out on the eastbound side is the Brandon Hall stop. And assuming that we keep both access
points, the MBTA developed a solution that keeps the most trees. That said, if the stops are being consolidated, why can't the access points also be combined? There are only 640 ft between them.
So the proposal before you asks, what if you just kept a single access point perhaps at Fairbanks, the one on the left that is closest to the senior housing. This would save 14 mature trees. From my perspective, people with
disabilities need trees, too. Like everyone else, we benefit from the cooling, healing, air purification, and carbon sink. I'm grateful for the proposal in the petition before you that aims to both upgrade the Brandon Hall
Fairbank stop and retain more trees where the greatest number are currently slated to come down. Thank you for your consideration. Next, we have Alyssa Plazagna. She's on the phone. She's having internet issues.
Alyssa, can you hear us? Uh, hi uh Alisa Floza, precinct 8. Um before I uh provide my comments, I did want to offer a clarification because um I think you know at least as we interpreted the proposal, it seems to have started from the premise that there
are two staircases today and and so those need you know those are going to remain and then we're going to make them uh compliant and um but at the same time the this the station itself is being consolidated. So I think um it might
have been uh Michael Rubenstein who commented that you know because the current near the Brandon Hall uh access point that that of course would the Brandon Hall uh uh access point would of course
remain but um at least based on the data that we've seen the there are more far more riders at from Fairbanks than there are today from Brandon hall and in particular there's the senior um housing
at 1550 Beacon Street. So I guess one thing to question is if you know why couldn't you have that staircase and the platform where it is proposed or staircase access point with the with the new ramp um and the platform where it's proposed. I mean we we are going to be
expecting all of the people who use Fairbanks to then travel to where the platform is. So, if it's appropriate for the people at Fairbanks to do that, why wouldn't it be appropriate for everyone to do that? I guess that's that's a question. But what I wanted to comment on is climate change, which is clearly a
concern for um most Brookline residents. We adopted a net zero goal um for by 2040. We established a zero admissions advisory board and we've invested in a sustainability department that is diligently working on a climate action
resilience plan. We also have residents uh advocacy groups that are pushing for electrification and reduced reliance on gas-powered cars, whether that's by switching to EVs or just driving less because they're living in transit oriented housing. But we can stop
driving our gas powered cars and we can electrify all of Brooklyn and climate change will still be coming for us because climate change knows no borders. And with our federal government actively undermining clean energy efforts while
pushing a fossil fuel agenda, we desperately need green infrastructure for adaptation and to provide resilience. Um, and you know, despite this, it we are still losing a large number of trees
for various reasons in town. You might think that a few trees won't make a difference. What we're talking about here potentially would be, you know, 14 mature trees. As Olivia said, we'll be replanting. So, what's the big deal? But it will be decades decades before any
newly planted trees provide any shade, cooling, or other meaningful climate benefits. And during that time frame, it's just going to get hotter and hotter. Something that might sound a little bit ridiculous given the weather we have right now. Um, but you know when
you're boiling waiting for the tea or struggling with asthma that's exacerbated by >> your time is up >> or perhaps just >> Next we have Cara Peterson. >> Hello. Um, I'm Dr. Cara Peterson at Precinct 11 on Beacon Street and I'm a
very regular Summit and Brandon Hall station user. Um, I'd also like to comment specifically about the Branden Hall Fairbanks consolidation plan as it stands as part of the MBTA accessibility project, which we all need. The argument
has been articulated persuasively actually just by the last couple of speakers um for preserving Brandon Hall's full environment by closing its access point instead creating an ADA compliant Fairbanks access point ramp
and stairs in place which benefit a greater number of local residents. to restate just one of these arguments. Fairbanks access points have more users, especially at 1550 Beacon. I realize that you're all tired of this
project and want to move approval of Brandon Hall's consolidation along without further consideration. The MBTA has indeed worked to mitigate tree loss and everyone is tired about of having to re revisit these concerns. But that said, um, as an academic
researcher and instructor, I would say that the most important things usually require revision and deeper consideration, even if it's much easier not to do that. Simply put, if asked, local residents want Brandon Hall's 14 mature trees and their surroundings
preserved. We want them saved for a whole host of the greater environmental benefits just elucidated. We're not asking that the whole MBTA project be reconsidered. Once the special Brandon Hall area is altered as proposed, despite good faith efforts thus far to
replant, it will be lost for our lifetimes. And this happens too often. As fairly new to Brooklyn, I'm definitely new to attending Brookline town meetings. And as one of your constituents, I would like to note how hard it is to navigate the Byzantine
process of how committees and boards work. It's difficult for us locals to figure out how to reach you about what's important to us. Nevertheless, I've been told that there's a record turnout at many recent meetings because of the importance of this matter. Right now, I'm speaking for neighbors of mine. Many
of us who've taken significant time, we don't really have to write emails, letters, create videos, take photographs, pour over plans, reach out to neighbors, attend meetings, all in order to ask various officials and now the select board to put the plans specifically for Brandon Hall back on
the table. So, your constituents have indeed been doing our best to speak to you even if we can't attend all these meetings. So, please listen to us. Please revise. Thank you. Next we have Kate Silba. >> Hi, thank you. Um I'm Kate Silba. I live
on Emory Street. Um I just wanted to say first of all that um I'm incredibly excited about this project. Um it's really overdue. Uh accessibility on the tea um the combination of accessibility on on public transportation incredibly important and I'm just very very excited
that it's happening. Um, I did want to say, um, with respect to how cooked the project is, I mean, I feel a little bad showing up this late. We did write letters in from Amory Street earlier.
Um, I was trying to demonstrate you could not go to meetings and still be engaged. Um, I did I was CCD on some some interaction with Aaron Chute and it might have been by accident that she CCed me, but there was somebody at the bottom named Brian Kaine who's the
executive director of the MBTA advisory board and he said the te was agnostic about the U-turn at Haw that um they did the current design to address issues that have been raised by Brookline. Um, and
so I it might be that the U-turn and Haw happened later. I don't know what the order of things was, but you know, people on my street are very concerned about it. I I understand there's a lot of trade-offs happening, but it is quite alarming when you
see a design that limits access to your to where you live. Um, I do feel like over the decades, um, the Cottage Farm neighborhood has frankly taken a lot of for the fact that
pathways and roadways have been built to prevent people from driving through Cottage Farm. Um, and you know, the BEu arranged some one-way streets and various things that make it difficult to actually drive through Cottage Farm. But um but this is actually one of the two
points in which you can enter cottage farm. You can enter it from from you know the Freeman side or you can enter it there. Otherwise you have to go to Carlton to enter it. Um anyway it's very difficult to drive through. Um I am
someone who hardly drives. I probably ride the tea more than I drive. I walk everywhere. Uh but um it still does feel like a serious loss of access to the house. I I said in my letter to you guys that if you drive down
into town uh with this Hall Street thing taken out, you'll have a left turn at St. Paul, which is a terrible left. I mean, it's a dangerous left. It's a dangerous pedestrian left. It's a dangerous uh driving left. There's a lot of backed up. You won't get to turn again until you get down to Beacon. I
just wanted to suggest that you keep the U-turn at Haw and just take out the turnout because you can build the station as in take out the turnout. That's actually what Paul Warren was describing down in Boston which is far more trafficked. But you could if you really don't have that many people
turning on it, leave the U-turn, take out the turn lane. That would be my suggestion. You keep the design. >> Next we have Shaun Lynn Jones. Hello, I'm Sean Lynn Jones, uh, president of the Brooklyn Greenspace Alliance, a town meeting member from Precinct One, and I live at 53 Monmouth
Street if you need that for the record. Uh, I have been planning to say something about Brandon Hall and Fairbanks, but I think the previous speakers, especially Evelyn Murphy, have said it all so eloquently that I'll just say I agree and leave it at that because
I do want to comment on Haw and on the project more generally. In general, I'm very happy first that there's been so much cooperation between the town staff, Jack Schlifer, Erin Shoot in particular, and the MBT on this. I'm delighted that there will be ADA compliance and I'm
also very happy that this is a project that's going to make the Green Line C branch better for everyone in so many ways. Move stations, better wayf finding. Uh I could go on but I won't take up my whole three minutes on that. Um it's just been a matter of finding
the balance between preserving trees, parking, and maintaining that accessibility that they're striving for. and it's been a great um effort on almost every station uh so far. On pause, here's my basic message to the
select board. Do not take a vote on pause tonight uh that would approve or disapprove any particular design. Leave that question open. Let the transportation board discuss it tomorrow and get some more uh input. Uh there are
and I know it's not a question of tree removal approval because there are no trees being uh removed so it's not really coming under that category. There are costs to moving the station to the east the platform to the east. So loss of up to three trees. One of those trees
is not 27 in as was shown tonight but at least 32 in as was shown in the February 3rd slide presentation to the tree planting committee. Bill Smith said it might even be 35 to 40 inches. That's a big tree. The 32 inch mark is significant because town meeting just
voted to designate such trees heritage trees and extend additional policies to protect them. Uh back in November, there are eight parking spaces that would be lost by adopting that design. And that's a huge cost in an area that's the St. Mary's commercial district and also an
area that provides parking for the medical building at 11:01 Beacon Street. And as you've heard from the MBTA, there would be delays going through with that design. So I would be very cautious about approving it. Now I can't go into great detail because I don't have that much time, but there are alternative
routes and alternative plans for preserving the ability to reverse direction on Beacon Street between St. Paul where there is a U-turn and Park Drive Otabon Circle where there's a U-turn in Boston. My neighbor Kate Silva just mentioned one of them. keep the
U-turn at Haw and only have one travel lane and one lane for waiting for that U-turn. You can also add a U-turn at either Kent or Carlton. And here's the thing, all three of those plans would not require the MPTA to reconsider its
design of stations as part of the accessibility project. And that's a great advantage to those compared to relocating the platform and sending them back to the drawing board. So, for all those reasons, um, let's keep an open mind on pause and see if we can come up with the solution. The tradeoffs are
difficult. The trade-offs are terrible. Time is up. >> I think we can work this through. Thank you very much. >> I don't see any other hands raised. >> Sounds like someone >> disagrees. I think you had you did have Dick Ben I
believe. >> Oh, there he is. He disappeared. >> Thank you. Um Dick Bena, town meeting member, precinct 14, and I uh just have one comment with regard to Haw Street.
Uh Sean Lynn Jones just alluded to the fact that 11:01 Beacon Street uh which is on the corner of Haw and Beacon Street eastbound uh is a large medical office building. And the Uturn at Haw
Street is used by patients of that medical office building to access parking westbound on Beacon Street. Um, I would urge you, I don't know whether this has been raised by anybody, but I would urge you to take that factor into
account and the use of that U-turn by not just by residents of the area, but also by patients who are utilizing that medical office building. Thank you very much. >> Okay. Are there any other >> No hands are raised.
>> Okay. So, um is there a an official um um or is there a is there someone who has made an official opposition to your decision as
a tree planning committee? I what what are we uh voting to or what's what's the appeal that we're voting for? >> Yeah. Could you come up to the >> microphone? Sorry. >> And have we closed the public hearing? >> Um, not yet.
>> Yeah, we we have one other person. >> I just want to get clear what it is we're voting because a lot of things have been proposed and they're sort of not on our agenda and and probably not very practical. >> Yeah, that the halls is all new. So, we
had not heard anything on that. We have been asked to reconsider the Fairbanks Brandon Hall design. Um I think what what you heard this evening a lot of why not have it at Fairbanks? Why not
have the ramp at Fairbanks? We don't want it at Brandon Hall. Um and what we were what we understood was the ground is not level at Fairbanks. you couldn't have the the station there.
That came up in one of the meetings. And the um the ADA has two means of access from every station. So the I was under the impression that you would need two means
to get up to Beacon Street from the station to meet ADA compliance. Uh so the requests were to reconsider those ramps. >> Okay. I guess it's not clear to me. I I
thought that the the the uh the appeal was of the tree committee's decision with respect to permitting the removal of trees. And that's how it's articulated in in the agenda. But as a practical matter,
if you reverse the tree protection committee's decision, then they would be unable to do this work. So it is a way of blocking the work. >> Okay. >> But did but but our but our vote is to approve or disapprove the tree committee's um vote or decision.
>> And you know, if that means that everything is blown up, that's that's a separate issue. Paul. >> So I'm confused because they would the tree committee would only be in front of us if there was an appeal. >> Yeah. Isn't there >> was there anal? Yes. >> Oh, there has been appeal. There has been.
>> I guess I'm also confused about why we haven't heard from the appellant in in in this case. >> You I mean the people who've made public comments have made the appeal. >> I >> the two people who spoke tonight wrote letters saying they opposed the project.
>> Gotcha. Okay. >> Okay. Okay. Uh Cara Peterson and Evelyn Murphy both wrote letters which I believe are in the package. >> And and in fairness, I didn't hear that they opposed the project. They they asked for a re-evaluation of Brandon
Hall, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> So, just to clarify, there the the appeals were were numerous for the tree planting committee. Um, and those were all letters that were submitted um as
part of the board packet. >> Okay. >> So, so the so the vote we're taking is the vote on the appeal, >> correct? There's there's no there's no vote pending on the green line project itself >> on on haw or any of that stuff. That's
still in progress. >> Um, you know, the T it's going to be before the T- board. there ultimately be an application for a grant of location and that's that's your decision point at that juncture but again >> to the to the tease point you know I I let's well let's let's not go down that
path what's in front of you tonight is the tree is the tree portion >> okay that's all I'm concerned about uh Paul >> yeah I just have a a question for uh for staff or or the tea um the the dual access the two ramps for Brendan Hall um
is there a legal requirement for uh two forms of egress on on the platform or can you have a platform with only one one entry point and exit? >> There is a legal requirement for two forms of egress, but they do not need to
both go up to Beacon Street westbound. You could have two forms of egress to Beacon Street e eastbound, but if you have multiple forms of access to Beacon Street westbound, you would have to have those also be compliant. So the only way we could remove one of those ramps is if
Brooklyn committed to demolishing one of their sets of stairs. >> Okay. And I >> or I guess closing it off permanently. >> Thank you, >> John. Yeah. A and on that question uh what is the distance uh from the between the two
sets of stairs because uh assuming and correct me if I'm wrong on this but assuming one of the sets of stairs is direct excuse me is directly at the stop um but the other one is at the the stop that's being eliminated. Um you know that's a long enough distance that there
was at one time and you know unfortunately no longer will be in the future two different stops. you know, you you get on or off at one and then you travel on the tea and then you get on or off at the other. And um that's a big distance. So to what extent do we
realistically expect that a lot of people will be accessing the Fairbanks Street um stop via the stairway at Brandon Hall? A and e even if they are they can travel the distance to the
stair to the ramp to the Fairbank Street stop and it's the same distance as they'd be traveling from the bottom of the ramp to to the u you know Fairbank Street stop the bottom of the ramp at Brandon Hall or maybe not maybe you can correct me on that.
>> Can we get an answer when are you about to give an answer? So I think the request from the uh people of the town were to remove the Branden Hall stairs. So those who live
let's say Brandon Holler east east of that on Beacon Street would have to travel the you know 600 however many feet along Beacon Street westbound to the west to get to the Fairbank stairs or ramp go down and then travel back in
the opposite direction to get to Brandon Hall because the request from my understanding from the people who comment was not to get rid of the Fairbank stairs but to get to the get rid of the Brandon hall stairs and ramp uh which are the ones that are right at that station platform.
>> That answer didn't make sense to me. Sorry. Why would they why would be they go back to Brandon Hall uh if if their if their purpose of their trip is to go from Brandon Hall to the Fairbanks Street stop? >> Their their proposal was to move the
station to Fairbanks. Yeah. >> So they're saying there's more people at Fairbanks. Why is the station closer to Brandon Hall? Yeah. >> And and then this the ramp goes with that because there's more trees on the Branden Hall ramp than on the Fairbanks
ramp. >> Yeah. But but getting back to to the question I started with, what is the difference between traveling the distance from Brandon Hall to Fairbank Street at the top of the two sets of stairs and at the bottom of the two top
of the two sets of stairs at the platform level? It's you're traveling an extra distance that you didn't used to have to travel whether you do it at the top of the stairs or you do it at the bottom of the stairs. But what about the top of the ramp versus the bottom of the ramp? Is there a difference there?
>> Um I mean there is a difference because at the top side of Beacon Street it's a pretty steep slope. Um whereas the bottom side is not nearly as steep. So there is that accessibility need. Um there's not necessarily a difference in
distance. Um but again uh the platform cannot go at Fairbank Street and be accessible due to the uh geography of that location. It has to be closer to Brandon Hall. So if we were to follow the request of the town members and close the Brandon Hall ramp. Uh members
who live closer to Brandon Hall of the West Side would have to travel to where the Fairbanks ramp or stairs were, come down and travel back to where the Brandon Hall future Fairbanks Brandon Hall station would be. >> Yeah. But to be clear, there's no ramp
at either stop right now, right? >> We'd be gaining a ramp at at Fairbanks and and and and we would preserve the existing stair at Fairbanks. Right. Right. >> So this the stairs are not accessible.
So >> Well, no, I know that. >> So the the ADA is saying if you have access for some people but not all, you have to make >> No. No. But I'm assuming the elimination of >> take it out. Take it out entirely. >> Yeah,
>> that's what they're asking. >> Well, what they're asking is to keep is to keep one is to keep the other station, which is not possible, right? Like that's the ultimate the I I I hear two different asks here. I hear an ask that's that is more fundamentally structural which is don't close one
station close the other and the T has said that's not possible from an ADA compliance standpoint and so you're kind of you're with if that's off the table for compliance reasons then you're left with this question of do you want the stair do you want that extra staircase
there or not and what you see you're saying John is I don't you know is is it really is is there a tangible benefit there to the community to have that staircase if it's not going to be going down to a station if you're still going to have to go and walk >> Yeah. Yeah. to the station seems to what your your point is and I think the Tre I
don't want to speak for the T but when your your position I think if I'm understanding you is okay but if that's the case then the town has to close the stairs there um no ramp no stairs that's the that's the deal >> right that that is correct and I think
the specific request from the town members was to close the stairs and remove the ramp that are where the station future station will be because that is the ones that impacts more of the larger trees. So you would be left with a situation where you would keep the Fairbanks stairs and put a ramp
there, but the platform would be at Brandon Hall. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Mike Mike had his hand up and then Dave >> um I think my comment has become obsolete. So please David, >> so just curious, why would we want to
remove the stairs at Fairbanks >> even if the platform is not there? It's a way of getting down from the hills. >> I don't think anybody's proposing that, are they? >> Well, it sounds like we would need to close it. So is it close just close it or why close it? Why not leave it available? >> I I I can't speak for the appellants. I
mean, I you know, I I thought I thought we all heard what they were saying and I thought it was that >> Yeah. I I thought if you keep it open, you have to put a ramp there, >> right? And that that that's the issue >> if you keep it open. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I'm sorry.
>> And and is the the senior living um uh apartment building is at that location as I understand. >> Right. Okay. >> So, I personally would support leaving the stairs and putting a ramp. I don't know why we would want to take away that
access point from a senior living center. >> Well, can we get back to basics? Um if you don't mind. Where is which station is the MBTA saying should be the future station at one and only station? Is it Fairbanks or is it Brandon Hall?
>> It's a combined. It's in between where they both are. >> All right. In the middle. >> It's in the middle. >> Can you bring up the map? >> Give me one moment and I will bring that back up. Okay. Um
so for that question uh the new platform is in between the current Fairbanks and Brandon Hall stations but it is much closer to Brandon Hall. Um it has some overlap with the existing Brandon Hall station but it does move uh a bit west
closer to Fairbanks. >> Bernard, can I make a quick comment? Um, I just I to maybe cut off torturing ourselves tonight. I believe there's probably three votes to uh to uphold the
tree planting committees >> and and that's the narrow issue that >> that's the narrow issue. I think there's I think right now tonight there's there's three votes. But I do want to add one more comment to that and I know h is a separate issue because it's not part of this. Um, you know, I heard and I I really appreciated this why I always
like to wait for public comment. Um, although I always don't do that. Um, I heard alternate solutions for Haw. There could be maybe a left at Kent. There could be a left at Carlton. Maybe there could be a left at Haw without a divided
thing. Um, I would hope that that the transportation board and the DPW might evaluate those options and come back to us without having to impact the TE's plans for the station. So that would be my ask >> and I'm prepared
>> and and um Erin Shu is on on the Zoom here and she can convey that suggestion. Yeah. >> To Brian King at the transportation board. >> Okay. Um let me um find my notes here.
So um I'd like to unless there are any further discussion and I'd like to close the hearing. >> Um >> only one question on my part. >> Sure. Uh what is the um compelling reason that
we have to take this vote tonight specifically as as it applies to the Brandon Hall Fairbanks because all the appellants are asking for is is a little bit more time to have a little bit more discussion with the
MBTA on these issues >> on the on the tree plant the tree committees. >> Yeah, they they are attempting to maximize the number of preserved trees. >> So, >> and and they they believe they have
grounds for a discussion of whether that could be done >> via a slightly different um approach to the the the stop that's being created and you know would simply involve access via the existing Fairbanks Street stop
with its stair and with its ramp. Okay. Well, >> so I and and Erin could probably refine this or correct it, but there's a there's a sequence of events that's happening. I think tomorrow night is the transportation board meeting, right, on the entire plan. >> Right.
>> Right. So, you know, they're that entire plan um is going to be reviewed and they'll make some comment to us. I don't think they actually vote, but they do make a comment to us. And then when is it coming back to us? On the 10th. >> Yeah, >> March 10th. So, I mean, you heard the the appellants asked for months of time
to reconsider and redesign. >> Did they really? I thought I heard them as just for some >> one or two months. Yeah, it depends on what it is. >> But we we we really have to vote tonight. It in order not to disrupt that process.
So, I'd like to um just vote. I mean, if it if we turn it down, then you know, some people get what they want and it goes back to the drawing boards, I guess. So, I'd like to move approval. Um, we don't have a real vote here.
>> You can move to affirm the decision of the tree >> Okay. I I move that we affirm the decision of the tree planting committee uh hearing on uh February 11th, 2026. Um, pursuant to MGL chapter 87. You put
that in the record. All in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vascoyak. >> No. >> Um Paul see Paul Warren. >> Hi. >> David David Burlman. >> Hi. >> Michael Ruben side. >> Hi. >> And chair votes eye. Okay. Thank you
Liz. >> Okay. Next issue or next item is uh see we already talked about Warren are those chestnut hill west. >> Okay. How are we going to do this? Who's gonna make a presentation? Michael, you
>> is there a presentation this up? I mean, I can I can I can start with with comments if you like. >> Um, but I think there was a >> So So what what we're what we're doing is voting on whether to uh urge the uh
planning department to prioritize putting together a zoning amendment to be introduced at a special town meeting within the town meeting. Um that would include their 14127 proposal as well as alternative
proposals I guess 127 12127. Um so I mean that's a narrow issue that we're we're voting on whether to to urge or to tell the planning department to go forward with that work >> and and >> may I yeah
>> may I start? >> Of course. >> Okay. Um f well first of all I want to I want to acknowledge two things. Um the first thing that I'd like to acknowledge is that this resoning will over time lead to significant change in the Chestnut
Hill neighborhood and that we as a town are asking neighbors to absorb this change. While opinions may differ on whether this change is beneficial, I think we can all recognize that this change is substantial.
And second, I want to acknowledge that the anticipated construction for this change is disruptive to the neighborhood. Large construction projects, even if they are contained on site, will invariably disrupt the rhythms and routines that people are
accustomed to. Um and over the course of the last 24 months while the study project has been going on and particularly in the last few months as as this particular pro proposal has taken shape there's been a lot of of conversation about the trade-offs of
various choices but I think it's important to recognize that this is significant change and that construction is disruptive. Um, now to the point of the motion. Um, the the thing that we are voting on tonight is a direction to
the planning board as you described. Um, and I've circulated a motion and a revision to that motion. I'm sorry to the I make that that mistake a lot to the planning department. um and to bring back the warrant articles
specifically back here for a vote on March 10th. Um and for that vote to be to put whether or not to put those warrant articles as they are finalized and
crafted onto the warrant. Um there are two steps following that. um for the warrant articles um as part of this direction and I think it's important that we include all of them so that everybody has a clear understanding of the planning department's work going
forward in order to make this uh to provide all the options that that we have at this point and potential future options. Um the next step is to complete the study report so that we have all of the pieces that have been
contemplated during the chest metal study uh including the traffic study, the design guidelines, the commentary on the town protections, etc. um as well as the amendments that are proposed based
on negotiations that we would need to have with city realy on the 12127 program option because th those proposals though I've outlined them in a memo have not been finalized with
negotiations with city realy the zoning changes to make 1227 uh program are relatively straightforward and well understood. Um, but the changes to the memorandum of agreement in particular still would need
some work to work out. Um, and I know that there are also ongoing discussions and considerations uh both amongst the neighborhood and the community as to uh what the ideal um uh options might be
worth considering whether it's 12127 or whether it's something else. and also to have a better understanding of the things that have been done and are already built into both the zoning, the memorandum of agreement and the tax certainty agreement that specifically
address issues um that have been raised by the neighborhood and by the community. Um, now Meredith is Mooney has provided me a list of those that are based on the slide that that they presented earlier
about town uh about neighborhood issues that were raised and some of the things that were done and I I can sort of go through the list if that's helpful to the select board or I know that Meredith is on the line and I think she could go through the list as well. Um, but that's
where we are and that's the vote we have on the table. >> Okay. Any discussion? >> U Meredith part. Okay. >> Do you want to hear from Meredith first? >> Yeah, let's let's hear from Meredith first. Um, Meredith, do you want to add
anything? >> Nothing to add at this time. >> Nothing to add. Okay. I gave you an opportunity. Okay. Paul. Um, yeah. So, I'm gonna I'm gonna take a few minutes, Bernard. Um, >> uh, which I know I I always warn you so that you don't you don't get upset with
me as I go on. >> Um, so first I do there's one thing to Michael's motive before I lose this thought. Um, I do think based on what we heard from Newton, Newsome City Councilors, uh, some, you know, some town meeting
members from, uh, I think precinct 14, um, I do think we should re eliminate, uh, the zoning changes that are being proposed over by Star Market. Um, I would take those out and do them later. There's no compelling reason to do it right now. It's created a lot of issues
with our our friends and colleagues over at Newton. Um, and I think there's no reason to rush that. Um, so that would be for future discussion, but I I do think we should take that out from from >> Aren't Aren't those changes related to the turnaround uh in Newton that
>> they're part of the turnaround? Yep. It's >> So So I mean, we're only taking out something that's not really affecting them. >> Well, it Well, it Well, no, it affect it also affects us because >> Yeah, it affects us. >> It certainly affects us. It also affects uh the the shopping district. There's been almost no community engagement
about the zoning and the height and the density there. This was this was just added on at the last minute. But that's but so anyway, I would ask that if it comes before us, I will offer that amendment. I'm sure that's going to be amendment at town meeting. Um but so I
just I don't think there's support for it and we should just take it out. I think it's confusing the whole matter. Um but I do I want to take a step back um and and and provide a little context here. So I the way I the reason why I'm sitting here uh on the select board
started for me getting involved uh you know I knew nothing about the town. I knew nothing about politics. I knew nothing about how the town functioned. I actually think I believed we were a city uh when I first moved to to to Carlton Street. Um and I suddenly learned about town meeting and town meeting members
and stuff. Um, but I entered I entered Brookline as an advocate, as a a neighborhood advocate, someone who cares and cared deeply for neighborhoods that um and my
experience when I first moved to Carlton Street in the St. Mary's district was, you know, almost the tyranny of the majority. Something was being done to St. Mary's uh that the the the the that end of town did not want but yet the
majority of the rest of the town wanted um and and you know just by by luck it was a a technicality that stopped it but at that time I didn't there was no one on the select board who was supporting my efforts including our my good friend and chair Bernard but you know everybody
had a perspective um I I am troubled and that's the best and unsettled. I lose sleep over this about what's going on with Chestnut Hill. Um I I remember when we we initiated the study um supporting
it, approving its initiation, it was intended to create a vision, a communitydriven vision for the future of the Chestnut Hill business district. uh shortly after the project started I got a because I was the chair of the
comprehensive plan I got a phone call was very shortly after the the study get got get started I got a chair I got a call from the chair of the committee saying Paul guess what we've had a developer come forward and they you know they're they're they want to propose something and from that mo from that
phone call for on the entire initiative got sucked up into ch into city realy what city realy wanted what our potential 20story building $9 million in revenue
the entire concept and purpose of the initiative was lost. It was completely lost. We at that time it quickly happened because I got many phone calls and complaints. We stopped
listening to the people that we appointed to this commit this staff committee. the five local area town meeting members, they got shut down. The neighbors got shut down. We heard over and over that that the committee was
broadcasting and speaking in to uh the neighborhood but not listening to the neighborhood. Now, I know there were some tweaks made, but ultimately um what I hear and what I feel strongly about is the neighborhood wasn't listened to. the wants and needs of self
Brookline were not listened to. They were ignored and and I'm going to use strong language here. They were steamrolled into this solution. Um and and how do I know that? Because a majority of the staffled committee does
not support what's being proposed. the five town meeting members that we asked to spend time. You know, this takes a huge amount of effort to spend time and dedicated working on the committee um oppose what's being proposed. They don't support 14 stories. They don't support
12 stories. They support 10 stories or less. Um and and Mark Zerillo, who I had a long conversation with and he wrote a letter to us, he opposes it. He says this is not ready. Um, we have to ask
ourselves as a board and as a community, what the heck are we doing? If we put something together like this, and it's supposed to be communitydriven, and suddenly the community that surrounds this area that has to, Michael, you so eloquently said, has to
live with the change. They're opposed to it. We heard from, I believe, all town meeting members in South Brook line except for two in 14, 15, and 16 who opposed this plan. We have to ask ourselves what the hell went wrong.
Something fundamentally went wrong here. And I believe what fundamentally went wrong here is we put revenue and the wishes of the developer ahead of the community. It's counter to the comprehensive plan which town meeting
voted for which is communitydriven planning. It's counter to what the charge of the committee was, which was let's listen to the community about a future vision for the commercial district. We lost all that. We shifted to a single developer. And I think when
you do that, you're always going to have a bad outcome. And I I really believe that this initiative, what we have done to this local community, I will say it to this local community will set a precedent for many, many years about how
development happens in Brooklyn. Developers should de development in Brooklyn and planning should never happen driven by a single developer for their financial benefit. there is mutual benefit, but when you start with the developer bringing you a rock and saying
this is what we want because and frankly I'm going to I'm going to defend uh the the Bobby Allen's group and city realy. I think this was our fault. We told them bring us the biggest thing you could bring to generate the most revenue and that's what they brought us. And then we said well that's not perfect bring back
something else. And then they spent money to do that and then we said well that's not perfect let's bring something else. This is our own fault. It's a lack of leadership. It's a failure of the committee. Um, and I have to tell you, I I'm not comfortable um with what's being
done. Certainly with 14 stories, I'm not comfortable with 12. I think it's a half-ass negotiation and I believe it's all going to fail at town meeting because Michael, if you put 14 on the warrant and then you have an amendment which is to 12 I and you will have a
referral motion. I believe what may occur, high probability, the referral motion will fail because you need a 50% vote. You've organized through your petition campaign that you ask people to sign um to to sway us to 14 stories. Um
you have you have more than 50% of town meeting. So that means they'll block any amendments. But there's a third of town meeting South Brooklyn and others within Brooklyn, town meeting general that make
up a third and they will vote down 14 stories. So I don't think this thing passes town meeting. That's my view. I think you've read the the politics of it wrong. I think you've read the electorate long at town meeting the votes and I think this thing is doomed
to fail. um >> enough it will fail. >> Well, I but I that's what I believe and so my what I would suggest is I think this isn't ready. I think we're rushing right now to try to cobble together a compromise. Um and I don't see a compromise coming together in any time
frame that could be supported uh and and advocated for in time to get the votes. Um remember I did the MBTA Communities Act. I'm almost done. Bernay I told take a few minutes. Um, we h we we we had plenty of time to be able to build the
coalition to get the votes at town meeting. I don't think you have that time here. Um, so I'm just I'm that's my feelings about this. Um, I've given a lot of thought about it. I'm deeply concerned about what we're doing and what we've done. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Michael, did you have your hand up?
>> Um, I mean I I've spoken and Paul has spoken. Okay. >> Be happy to hear from the others. I have plenty of response but I'm sure other people have more to say than that. >> Yeah. And you know one one thing that you know I'll say is that u you know we have
clamor all clamoring all over this town about commercial and development about economic development. Um this may not be a perfect uh proposal but you know I think that you we have to deal with it seriously because this is what the
community is demanding. Um, I mean, not this, but commercial economic development and and and the impediments that are thrown in the way of that um is are consider are viewed as as undermining our ability to to shift
some of the tax burden off of uh residential properties onto a commercial and and um other taxpayers. John, >> thanks. Um, thanks Michael and thanks Paul. Um, but I find myself in need of
of um clarification of some essential points here. Um, are are we tonight um making a decision on whether to put on the warrant article a um provision for a 14 127
uh iteration? My understanding is no or not my understanding. We are not doing that. We're just telling the the planning department to come back to us with a zoning amendment that would include a number of options including 14
including 12tory um you know maximum height uh zoning. >> Right. So so um can we be a little bit more specific? Are we asking the planning department to provide say two different versions the 14127 version and a 12127 version? Is that
>> my understanding? Right. Right. Meredith or or >> I I think what's being I mean what I what I understand from your conversations is I mean the cleanest way to do that would be to offer one warrant article and offer your own amendment to it. Um so basically remember you can you
can amend a warrant article by subtracting which you can't add to it. Yeah, >> you start with your maximum if if this is what you want to do and then you take away and that's easy to do because you can because as I understand it the structure of how you even get to a potential 14story building is this bonus
>> provision which says so the zoning is as the planning department would draft it would say maximum height is 12 stories except in this one limited circumstance where it could be 14 and you just chop out that part that says except in that one limited circumstance so that the maximum is 12 all
and that can be subject to further amendment on the floor of town meeting. It could drop to 10. It could drop to wherever someone makes a motion that can command a majority of support could go. >> Um the trick to it is there are the other aspects of the of the proposal
that then need to move to shift it. So by telling the planning department there are two options that we are willing to countenance that we want to send out for the process. one that allows for a potential 14tory bonus and one that doesn't but keeps it at 12, keeps the
maximum at 12, we would then have to negotiate with the developer in order to get um anou for the benefits that would reflect the change in revenue as a result of that change. So you would have
you would you it would it would take some doing to make that all happen basically, right? But it's pos so you would basically be through, you know, the procedural nature of it, you would be getting two different proposals, right? But we would be structuring it in a way that would be as clean as possible at town meeting,
>> right? Um, and so I I if if the way that things unfolded was that there was a vote of the select board to put a 14127 to to get the planning department to prepare um for for consideration by town meeting a 14127
but also a vote by the select board to also prepare an amendment that would be 12127. Um I don't think there's anything sort of untoward in the psycho board asking for both, right? >> No. And in fact, we would if that if that's what you would consider, we would
ask for that. Yeah. um you know because the the other way that that makes it cleaner is that it's then both of those motions are your own motion so that you can just accept your own amendment and then there's so for example if you go through this process >> if you do this if you put this and an amendment out there and ultimately you
know say this goes through advisory and planning and you know additional community >> hearings and at the end of it you say you know what what we really want is 12 you can just accept your own amendment. >> Yeah. And then that's the only thing that comes before town meeting, >> right? And and um the order of the vote at town meeting would be amendment
first, >> right? >> Yeah. Yes. Yeah. At 50%. Yeah. >> Which any potential Paul mentioned there might be a referral motion. You might you might draw any procedural motion first. Um then any substantive amendment, then the main motion.
>> So, you know, perhaps down the road, but not tonight. That's exactly what we might do. Yes. as a select board, but we're not facing that decision tonight. >> No, all you're asking is for staff to do the do the leg work to get it ready to put on the warrant. Um, and if you don't want to do that, then we'll drop it. Um,
but this is right. This is the kind of >> we're at crunch time now. If we want to get >> if we want to move forward with this in any fashion, we need the direction from you to do it. Yeah. Um, and then >> if you can still decide at the end of that, yep, we've taken a look at it. We're not going to call a special. We're
not going to put it on the warrant. Um or you could decide we are going to put it on the warrant in this fashion with the amendment teed up so that you could accept your own amendment later on. All you know you're you're keeping your options open until town meeting. Um but you're you're the go-time decision is
not tonight is just we need staff needs your your your blessing to do this leg work otherwise it doesn't make any sense. And and that's what you have framed in the form of three votes, a vote, three votes, two votes. >> You mean for tonight? >> For tonight,
>> there's a single motion that has three parts to >> component parts. >> Component parts too. >> All of Rome is divided. >> Yes. Okay. Um so uh and you heard what I said, you know, is the sort of lay of the land
here. >> Yes. Can you can you say without fear of contradiction that the threepart vote that you are calling for tonight is consistent with that as the final result? >> The the the only clarification that I
would make is that in order to get this onto the warrant to the committees etc. there is a staging process because planning cannot do all of those things at once. Mhm. >> So there is the specific order is to
complete the warrant articles first, the study report so that we have all of the information at the ground level. Um and then the 12127 amendments which still in parallel will need to be negotiated and finalized, but that work can happen in
parallel while the planning department finalizes the >> warranties. And this is all on the assumption that we're we can accomplish this in time for there be for it to be done at a at the town meeting as such. Not a special within that time.
>> Oh, it would have no >> It would have to be called as >> it would have to be called as the warrant closes. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. >> With that deadline has already passed. >> Okay. So Paul, does that sort of >> Well, yes. >> What's your resp?
>> Yeah. So, um, one I, what Michael's proposing is a way to do it for this town meeting, right? Put on the 14, put on whatever the amendment is that we think would be the alternative. Um, and then, you know, ask the the staff to go do that. I
>> I I understand that. >> People say it has to be a special. >> Well, well, there Well, there's a Well, the warrant closes tomorrow, so there's not this is not going to be on the warrant tomorrow. It'll be on a special. But but what I would like to offer, Michael, as an amendment to your motion
um is that um that we remove that piece that's on the north side of Beacon by Star Market and take that out. I instead of amending it, um I think we should just the select board has the ability to say this thing is not ready. It we've
got a lot of work that we have to do with Newton. Take that out for now. um for your as part of your motion. >> Um Mer Meredith, is there any reason why you can't do it in that way? >> Me meaning uh you you work on the 14
127 and 1227 amendment and amend it amendment to the amendment. um but not include the um north of Beacon
or north of Borlston property. I mean, if we get the direction tonight from the select board that you want the transit oriented subdist removed, then we would move forward with preparing the zoning that doesn't include that for your consideration on the 10th. Um,
alternatively, we could move forward with the zoning um, as it's been presented with the four subdists and you can make a decision on March 10th. Um, we might need some additional time to revise before we could file and finalize it. >> I will say we we've been invited we've
we've scheduled a meeting with Newton for tomorrow. Um, so we're the planning the planning departments are going to meet tomorrow. I'm going to meet with the mayor and some of these council members to try and get some additional feedback on this and bring it back to
the board. >> Briefly, Bernard. >> Yeah. >> U so Chaz, my you know it, it would be great if we could just point to Newton and say that's the reason why it's not ready. Yeah. >> It's also not ready because it hasn't been discussed with the community. Remember this was added. There was no
there was no community engagement about creating six-story buildings, residential buildings over there. Um it was added on at the end. Um and so I again talk about community input. There was almost zero on that part. >> Meredith had her hand up.
>> I I would just say for clarification that the transit oriented subdisted as part of the planning framework for this area for quite some time. Um, I think, you know, as we were fine-tuning
the parameters around the height and density for the district south of Boilston Street, there was some difference to where we landed for those subdists in terms of what that would look like in the transit oriented subdist. But I mean just in characterizing it as transit oriented
there's sort of the um implication that that is an area that you know would be more oriented towards greater density um and like lower parking requirements. That's sort of like the definition of transit oriented. So I I um I have heard
the feedback regarding uh the transit oriented subdist. I don't think it's a fair characterization to say that it was just tacked on at the end. Okay. Um, what I'd like to propose is that we ask planning to go forward with all of the zoning and we can take out,
you know, the area north of Beacon Street. >> Okay. >> How Beacon Orson Street at a later point, which would also give us an opportunity to get feedback from the meeting with Newton uh tomorrow as well as, you know, just get more have more of
an opportunity to discuss the pros and cons of this. and also its relationship to relationship or not to the need for a turnaround uh further down Boston Street
in actually Newton. So, okay. So, I'd like to move that. Um could you articulate uh what it is we're moving, Mike, since you're >> uh Sure. Um I I want to make one other one
other comment um in terms of Paul's character Paul's characterization. Um the >> I I know you've got you've taken a lot of grief from Paul from Paul, but let's >> He hasn't got any grief from me. Come on. >> Let's let's not >> Okay, >> you characterize it.
>> That's fine. That's fine. Uh um so do you want me to just read the motion or do you want me to explain? >> Yeah, read the motion. And I think yeah you you >> okay you have so I hereby move that the select board direct the planning department to provide to the select
board no later than March 10th 2026 a draft warrant article draft warrant articles related to Chestnut Hill commercial area resoning for the board's consideration and potential filing as follows one article for reasonzoning the
Chestnut Hill commercial area substantially similar to the planning department's recommend commendations of February 3rd, 2026. Parenthetically, that is the 14127 program. um and one or more articles as needed for authorizing
the select board to enter into a memorandum of agreement and a tax certainty agreement as negotiated with city realy and further to following the delivery of said warrant articles to provide to the
select board a complete draft of the Chesnut Hill commercial area study report and further to to following the delivery of said warrant article and said draft prefa prep prepare draft amendments
related to Chestnut Hill commercial area resoning and in coordination with ongoing negotiations between the town and city realy deliver set amendments to the board's cons for the board's consideration and potential filing as
follows one amendment to the above zoning warrant article for eliminating the 175 ft bonus height in the CHC4 subdist of the proposed chest Chestnut Hill commercial area zoning overlay district resulting in a maximum height
of 150 ft in the CHC4 subdist that will limit uh the CHC4 subdist 12 stories. Um and amendments as needed to the memorandum of agreement and tax certainty agreement such that they align
with the amended zoning warrant article and reflect the outcome of said ongoing negotiations. So there are three parts. There's the original warrant article, there's the report, and then there's the amendments. We can also
produce the amendments or pro uh before March 10th produce an amended version if we so decide. Um then uh that includes or excludes the CHCOM subdist. Removing that I think is relatively straightforward. And it's
particularly more straightforward because it doesn't require amending either the memorandum of agreement or the tax certainty agreement. >> Okay. So the original amendment does include the test of transportation >> the the the
>> but but you have a process for taking it out. >> Yeah. That can that we can put into place if we need to. >> Okay. Um all in favor of Michael's motion uh please indicate by saying I. John Vancoyak >> I. >> Paul Warren
>> uh for all the reasons that I mentioned uh prior I vote no. >> Okay. Uh David Pman >> I. >> Um I Rubenstein >> I >> and chair votes I. Okay. That was relatively painless.
Relatively. >> It was painless. I see Jennifer Depazo's back in the back smiling. So I guess that's good. I think she's smiling. >> She's smiling. >> Yeah. Okay. Okay. Uh next, I think the
final item is the uh boards and commissions um uh appointments for the diversity, equity, inclusion, and community relations um commission. So, becau, excuse me,
little leg cramp. Sorry. >> Oh. Oh, >> sitting too long. Those are the worst. >> Yeah. Okay. Because of the open meeting law restrictions we work under, I consulted with John, who is a leazison to the uh uh diversity, equity, inclusion, and community relations
commission and uh with the chair of the commission, Kevin McKenzie, uh on their suggestions for filling the four open seats on the commission based on on the commission. Based on those discussions, I propose a
slate to be voted by the select board. The slate is comprised of Phillips Thyman, uh, Massu Hawk, Zaryana Keras, Kashken Jones, and Victoria Fernandez. Select board members can also propose other
names for discussion in place of one or more of the people on this slate. Uh, I recommend that the terms of the four new members commence on August 1st, 2026, so they get a bonus six months on their
term and end on August 31st, 2029. And this will avoid having too many expiring terms in one year. Um, any discussion or anything? >> Hopefully after serving, they'll fill that as a bonus. >> Pardon me. >> Hopefully after serving they'll fill that with a bonus,
>> right? It'll either thank us or curses. >> Yes. So, there's one question I have. You're saying that the term would begin in August, so they wouldn't start until August. >> No, I I'm sorry, I missed misspoke. Um, I suggest it start now. >> Start now.
>> We we we um we time their term beginning August. >> Three and a half year term. >> Okay. >> It just makes it easier in terms of when when everyone expires, >> right? >> Okay. >> Yeah. And the bylaw is actually kind of
unique in that it requires everyone to sort of turn over in August. I'm not all at once, but you know, every group that has to turn over, they require it happen in August, right? Your wife, but that's the way it is. Yeah. >> Okay. So, I move approval of that slate.
Uh, all in favor, please indicate by saying I. John Vanscoy. >> I. >> Paul Warren, >> I. >> David Furman, >> I. >> Michael Rubenstein. >> Hi. and chair bosai. And that according to my notes is the end of the meeting except we have public
comment. >> And I see that there's a hand raised in the audience. >> Um Regina Frolley and we will see if anyone else would like to comment online, but I'll let you go first. >> Thank you. Um
don't rely on AI. I looked it up because I spent a lot of time today trying to find the deadline for submitting a warrant article on the town's website and I couldn't find it. And I spent a lot of time I did find that there's only
240 town meeting members with eight at large. In other words, it isn't updated at all. It has a lot of inaccurate information. That said, thank you to the um town administrator. I now know it's tomorrow at noon and the problem I have
is that on Thursday, this is very significant. I hope you find it. It it is. I went in as you know many of you are experienced that they always say go see town council. >> I can't hear you. >> Go see town council and get help with
the wording of your warrant article. So on Thursday I went to the cler the um town council's office. We have, as far as I know, still got five working lawyers, a couple of of paras,
maybe even three paras now. Um, that said, there were two people working and none of them was a lawyer. So, if I can get this thing together that I wrote for tomorrow by noon, uh, it'll be what it'll be. But I didn't have the advice of counsel and I would
have liked it. So I know everybody gets two days off now. That's a whole different discussion. Uh staff people, but you would think that an office at this especially at this time of year would have at least one trained person
in the office who could have helped the somebody doing last minute warrant articles. Instead, all five were not working that day. And I wasn't offered an alternative. So, they were very nice, the two people there, and I'm very grateful to their courtesies, but I would have needed somebody who could
have helped me with the language. So, that's what I wanted you to know. And that AI was totally wrong about the deadline. So, thank you. >> Thank you, Regina. Okay. Uh Melanie, is there anyone on uh the Zoom who would like to speak?
>> Nobody is indicating that they would like to speak. >> Okay. Uh we'll close public comment and end the meeting. Thank you everyone. >> Yeah, state of Well, it's halfway. >> Recording stopped. >> Halfway over. Appreciate I