Needham Select Board, 10/14/25

Levy, Levy

Okay, welcome to the... All right, I'll try that again. welcome to the October 14th meeting of the select board as a reminder this meeting is being broadcast to the town's youtube channel and also being via zoom and by the Needham Channel. And it is being recorded for publication later viewing and administrative purposes. And I believe the Needham Observer is here recording. This is a mic to the Needham channel, but I'll do my best. Is anybody else in the room recording? No? OK.

I just want to recognize that Heidi Frail is online.

Yes. And great. And Heidi is with us online. Okay, so the first thing on our agenda is public comment. And before we start on public comment, for those who haven't been with us for public comment, just a couple of the ground rules. First, each person has three minutes to speak. Marianne Cooley will have a timer. We do not respond to public comment. We're here to listen. So we will, you know, Very interested in what you have to say, but we will not actually respond. So I have four people listed for public comment and obviously anybody else who wants to can afterwards, but we'll start with those who let us know ahead. Janet Boolean, if you'd like to come on up. And if you could just state your name and your address and then.

I'm Janet Boolean and live at 86 Peasdale Road. And you're fine if I read, right? Yes, please. Thanks for letting me speak tonight. This is about the Envision project, specifically about the process. I've attended many of the meetings in person, otherwise I attend via Zoom. In each of the meetings, the words outreach, input, and engagement are mentioned numerous times, always in the context of the committee looking for and encouraging input and then touting the outreach efforts, both past and upcoming. From my vantage point, this isn't true. I've emailed the committee with my thoughts, opinions, and anecdotal information and it has 100% not been acknowledged. I didn't receive an automated response saying it was received. I don't hear from anyone on the committee that it's been received. It's not mentioned or read in committee meetings. I can reach no other conclusion but that they're not interested in input.

Regarding outreach, I think there's some confusion regarding what that means. Outreach is bringing information to the people, not expecting people to attend events about a project they don't even know about. A harvest fair with maybe 200 folks stopping by. Open houses with 300 or so attending. An initial questionnaire with maybe 200 participants is not outreach. and my guess is there's duplication of people participating in the events I just mentioned. I've been screaming from the rooftops that most of Needham's residents do not know what Envision is or they think it's a very small beautification project. They don't know that this is a large capital project that will forever change the driving, walking, and shopping in our downtown, for better or worse, and they deserve to know. In the past year, I've received four great examples of outreach from Needham. First was the water quality report alert.

then watering restrictions, then the potential Pollard project, and most recently the school's performance report. all came via mail to my home. The first three were glossy, oversized postcards that were easy to read and were read. That's outreach. And the outreach cannot just be the questionnaire without proper background information first. That's backwards. First, educate the residents about the project with all of its variables and then send out a questionnaire or a QR code to the questionnaire. An example of not educating residents first is at the Harvest Fair. The committee asked residents what is the most important to them and then they had participants affix a smiley face. next to the category on that chart. One of the choices on the chart was safety. Who wouldn't pick safety? But if you're in the know, Safety to the committee means narrower streets. The general public doesn't know this yet.

Safety shouldn't even have been on the chart. No one is anti-safety. This isn't complicated. I don't know why there's such resistance about making our taxpayers aware of this project and its intentions. I'm afraid that if we don't, we're going to end up in the same situation we did with the MBTA project and no one wants that. Thank you.

Thank you, Janet. You're right on time. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, Stu Carpenter.

Hello, Select Board. I'm Stu Carpenter, 28 Douglas Road. I'm here to speak about the Envision project. My wife Karen and I moved to Needham nearly 40 years ago, and we moved our Copley Motorcar showroom from Copley Square 20 years ago. To say we love Needham is understatement, and this is why I've become alarmed at so many issues as I watch the Envision project unfold. I am alarmed that some members of this board, along with some members of the Envision Committee, are actually advocating to reduce non-resident traffic coming into our beautiful town. This is utterly shocking that the heads of this board and DPW are recommending a two-lane road diet in an effort to create enough downtown traffic so that Waze and Google Maps suggest drivers avoid Needham. This is an insult to every Needham business owner and resident and all should be alarmed.

These elected officials and DBW road proponents are hell-bent on eliminating what they term as regional cut-through traffic. This regional cut-through traffic is exactly why our town of Needham is so wonderful. And these arteries are the pipeline that bring commuters, shoppers, restaurant-goers from the neighboring towns. Needham has Route 135 and Highland Avenue. Wellesley has Route 135 and Route 16. Natick has Route 135 and Route 27. Newton has Center Street, Beacon Street, and Commonwealth Avenue. What do all these cut-throughs have in common? They all handle the cars that bring the folks to the town centers to keep them vibrant. We should be proud that our town of Needham is a destination and we should be welcoming to all.

I am alarmed at the negative discourse emanating from some members of this board along with members of the Envision Committee who are favoring their personal road, diet, and bike lane agendas and who are surprised at the pushback that they are encountering from others on the board, the committee, and residents. It seems to me that certain select board members, certain Envision committee members, and the Envision consultant Apex are all working in concert to push this project forward in their vision and not those of business owners of the vast majority of residents. and only giving lip service to those who do not agree with their road, diet and bike lane plans. The Envision Committee is meant to be a collaborative effort and after watching several meetings, I see little collaboration and get the sense that Apex and the DPW are running this project in the committee. Their lack of preparedness is alarming with their reports, studies, answers, proper survey, public engagement, all delayed to the point where I feel there is absolutely no way for this board to vote on a plan in December.

Doing so would be negligent and irresponsible. I'm alarmed that certain members of the Board Envision Committee and Mobility Committee are unhappy with our not our vision signs that are being shown in numerous businesses throughout town. These signs are the very result of the boards and the committee's lack of transparency early on in the Envision project and are part of the reason that more and more businesses and residents are gaining a voice in the Envision discussion. I am so alarmed with the entire Envision process that I feel we should halt the project altogether and hire a new and unbiased consultant, one that is not promoting the personal road diet and bike lane agendas to some on this board and the other committees. While the project is halted, we contend to the more immediate needs of replacing damaged sidewalks and increasing pedestrian crosswalk and safety. Thank you.

Thank you. Carol Roskam. Yeah, where there's a mic is great.

Can you hear me back there? My name is Carol Roskam. I live at 83 Pickering Street, apartment 207 in Needham. I've lived in Needham a total of more than two decades over two different time periods, this last one being I think 16 or 17 years. I have family here, my late father, one of my sisters, all three of my nephews went to all the public schools K through 12 in Needham, so I have a lot of connection here. I also have a master's degree in planning and I've worked in planning and I worked in affordable housing for the planning department for the County of Los Angeles. Being a resident of Stephen Palmer Apartments, number one, again, brings up the issue of seniors housing that we discussed last week.

last week during the meeting that we had over in the the Park building. Sorry, I forget the name of it. One of the people overseeing the meeting said there is to a point that I raised said there is no affordable housing problem in Needham. And I want to reiterate that if that was true, then there would be affordable housing for all 25 of us to go to, or at least part of us, but there isn't any. And so I really object to people having this perspective and stating there is no affordable housing problem in Needham, especially for seniors. That is an oxymoron. and number two, the fact that last week we were told

after 24-hour notification of that meeting, which we all talked about last week, that we have to vacate six months early I find very problematic. I did contact the Attorney General's office and today in writing, they stated to me in my interpretation, and I'm happy to share the email with you, according to them and my interpretation which could be wrong but I don't think so and that was a public meeting last week according to how the Commonwealth defines public. There were people from the Board of Selectmen there who are not, as I understand it, employees of the town of Needham and therefore it was a public meeting and you were notifying us of this change

The change being that we all thought we were going to have until May of 2027 to vacate Stephen Palmer apartments, not a year from now, Halloween 2026. Another issue is related to this notification. We deserve and require regular communication in a timely manner. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Thank you. Judith McIntyre.

Okay, hi, I'm Judy McIntyre. I'm a tenant at the Stephen Palmer Apartments, and there's a lot I would like to address about... Just say your address. Oh, 83 Pickering Street, Needham, Mass, 02492, Stephen Palmer Apartments. A lot I'd like to address about the situation, but I'm going to stick to this. Last year, about end of August, beginning of September, I had a conversation with Mr. Kevin Keane based on a reference from Senator Garlick's office. I called Senator Garlick's office three times to say, I live at Stephen Palmer. We all know that there is a lease on the building that ends on May 3rd, 2027, at which time the building is supposed to go back to the the town. So I said to Kevin, I said, Hi, you know, I've been referred to you. This is the deal. Some of us are

you know a little concerned that with all the talk about housing and zoning at that time last year we feel like we might fall through the cracks we need a liaison because we need to start planning for the next two years what's going to happen, you know, so on and so forth. And he said, great, we are just starting that process. We're going to hire consultants and so on and so forth. But I had two questions. One, I said, Kevin, Is it a fact that on May 3rd, 2027, the building will be, you know, reverted back to the ownership of the town? We're not going to get extended or anything. And he said, nope. May 3rd's it, 2027. I said, okay, we know what we're working with now. Two, and this was very explicit, I said a tenant in the building happened to see something on an agenda at the planning building down by DeFazio.

It was a proposal that the town might buy out part of our lease from Crown and Shield earlier than May 3rd. meaning we would have to vacate the building earlier than the May 3rd, 2027. He said, no, Judy, that's not the case. What we are suggesting to Crown and Shield management is that going forward, if an apartment becomes vacant, they don't rent it. I said, okay, well, that makes sense. I said, so, okay, we're good till May 3rd of 2027. And he said, yes. Then he referred me to Katie King. He said, she's the person you're going to communicate with. I called Katie. I had a couple of conversations with her. Then she mentioned Alison Steinfeld. and the whole process of hiring a consultancy for the building itself and a consultancy for the tenants. And I guess the funds got approved last October. We received a letter December 6th from the town of Needham

just informing everybody. that May 3rd, 2027, the building was going to revert back to the ownership of the town and would be vacated. And then it went on to inform us, we're getting consultants, you'll be contacted. Well, we never got contacted. I kept, as everybody knows, I would, you know, call or email. We haven't heard from our consultants yet, anything happening. The first communication we got was this beginning of this September saying consultants were coming to look at the building. I called Allison and said, we haven't got connected anyway we went to the meeting and I'll finish up last week at that surprise attack meeting we were told in fact we were going to have six months taken off that lease and as i said to Katie King that six months means nothing to the town but it means a great deal to the people who live there

it's not like we're all 20 year olds who can sleep on somebody's couch and people have lived here raised children had houses and so on and so forth we were counting on that time i was lied to and then I told other people in the building that I spoke to somebody who said we're good till May 3rd, 2027 and we were all led to believe this last year that we were good until there was no indication from anybody this whole past year that we would have to leave early until that meeting last week. And so my request is we get those six months back. That's all I'm asking is for those six months back. Thank you.

Is there anyone else in the room who would like to make a public comment? Okay, come on up. Just state your name and your address.

Right. My name is Peter Lert. I'm also a resident of the State of Oklahoma apartments in 3 Pickering Street. I'm a 76-year-old resident, also a professor of mathematics at Babson College and at UMass Boston. I'd like to endorse the comments of my neighbors concerning the process planned for requiring us to vacate the building six months earlier than necessary and urge you to reconsider Your recommendation on warrant Article 5 to town meeting. In addition, I have a request and a question I hope you will address. My request to the board is that in whatever you recommend to town meeting relating to Stephen Palmer project, that you include an item asking that town meeting designate all the displaced Stephen Palmer residents as being considered Needham residents in the future for purposes of qualifying for affordable or senior housing in the town.

It seems only fair since we would prefer to stay here in Needham, but for the project requiring our relocation. My question to the board and the town manager is whether it is being made clear to town meeting that if it passes Article 5, the town will then be required by Mass General Law 79A to provide relocation assistance. to the displaced Stephen Palmer residents. I've not seen any mention of GL-79A in any of the related materials. This state law requires relocation assistance to residents displaced by any renovation project, public or private, that involves the spending of public funds Town manager and board members have outlined a relocation assistance plan to us residents, but with no mention of the state requirements that are not conditional on when we vacate.

GL79A certainly appears to apply to the board's plan for the Stephen Palmer development, for which it has already created a review committee, which meets tomorrow for the first time. has the town manager or the board considered the requirements of GL79A and whether it applies to the Stephen Palmer project? Has it filed or does it intend to file its relocation plan with the State Board of Relocation? I'd certainly appreciate the board considering my request and addressing my question and its deliberations this evening. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you. Any other public comment? Do we have any online?

Thank you. Okay, so we'll move to our next agenda item, which is that it is 2025 National First Responders Day. So if our first responders can come on up. Sorry. Great to have you all here. And I think we'll have first an update from you, and then we will read the proclamation.

I guess I'll start. That's it.

Thanks for coming.

So I'll just say the American Public Works Association really does advocate for public works as first responders. It's one of the reasons why we're happy to be joined here by fire and police. We always say public works is a silent arm of public safety. and that we provide a lot of the support services for public safety events as well as respond to weather events so we're just happy to to be here in in such fine company and declaring you know the recognition of the work that our staff does.

Yeah, I think, you know, we're all different departments, but I just think it's a great collaborative team effort getting together.

Yeah, I'm grateful for all the officers in my department, the fire department, DPW, for all that they do for the town, not just today but every day, putting their lives out there on the line. I truly appreciate it sitting behind a desk now but I do know what they go through so I really am appreciative of all the work that everyone does.

Thank you. I know how much emergencies take so much resources and so many people to step into the breach. So thank you for doing it. And thank you to DPW and fire and police. That's great. Thank you.

Thanks for being visible, too. I mean, like, you know, with the touch-a-truck days and, you know, every time, you know, you're out, there are always police cars or fire trucks, you know, at the Harvest Fair. The community knows you. Like, you're approachable, and I really appreciate that.

I think that's important. I hope you guys felt all the gratitude for the fire for the family from last week and and from everybody in the community who was following that. I mean, but incidents happen every day that people don't know about. And I know that you're there. So we're all glad for that.

and I think the people of the town know how good you are and I think the people of the town feel safe and the people feel that you're there. when we need you, you know, and for that we're really truly grateful. I will read the proclamation. Town of Needham, 2025 National First Responders Day Proclamation. Whereas first responders, including public works professionals, firefighters, police officers, emergency medical technicians, 911 operators, paramedics, and other emergency personnel stand on the front lines of our communities selflessly serving and protecting the citizens of Needham in time of crisis, and whereas first responders respond swiftly and courageously to emergencies,

often putting their own lives at risk to ensure the safety and well-being of others, whether in natural disasters, accidents, medical emergencies, or public health and safety threats. and whereas it is in the public interest for the citizens, civic leaders, and children in Needham to gain knowledge of and maintain an ongoing interest in understanding of the importance of public wars, police, fire, and other first responder efforts in their respective communities, and whereas 2025 marks the seventh annual National First Responders Day sponsored by bipartisan resolutions in Congress. Now therefore, be it resolved that the Needham Select Board does hereby designate October 28, 2025

as National First Responders Day and urges all residents to join with representatives of the American Public Works Association and government agencies in activities, events, and ceremonies. paying tribute to our public works first responders alongside law enforcement, firefighters, paramedics, emergency medical technicians, 911 operators, and other emergency personnel to recognize the substantial contributions they make to protecting our health, safety, and advancing the quality of life for all. Signed this 14th day of October 2025. So moved.

Second.

Okay. We'll go to a vote.

Heidi?

Yes. Marianne? Yes. Josh? Yes. Kevin? Yes. And the chair votes yes. Thank you. Thank you. I'll say thank you now. Next, we have a public hearing on an Eversource grant of location at 235 Brookline Street. Do we have Joanne Callender, our Eversource representative on the line? We do. Wonderful. Hi, Joanne. Can you hear us?

I can. Good evening.

It's good to see you, Joanne. You want to tell us about this grant of location?

Absolutely. So Eversource is seeking a grand location to install approximately 36 feet of conduit into Brookline Street. And this is to provide service to the new home at 235 Brookline Street.

Okay, thank you. Madam Town Manager, is everything in order? It is. Discussion?

Yeah, in the photo, Taken, that's a good-looking picture of a telephone pole, and that's in front of 234. That's not the house being worked on. It's across the street, just so people know. Correct. All right, very good. It was a good-looking telephone pole. And quickly, who pays for the wire going under the contractor, right?

um honestly i don't know it's either it could be the homeowner okay um yeah okay thank you but not the town not the town no absolutely not the town okay because i was asked Thank you. No, sir.

Heidi, did you have a question or comment? no okay this is a public hearing so if anybody would like to comment on this grant of location is there anybody online Okay. In that case, I'd welcome a motion.

I move that the Select Board approve and sign a petition from Ebersource Energy to install approximately 36 feet of conduit in Brookline Street.

Second.

Well, we'll come to a vote. Heidi? Yes. Marianne? Yes. Josh?

Yes.

Kevin? Aye. And the chair votes yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Joanne.

Have a great night.

You too. okay up next we have a public hearing on proposed updates to our alcohol regulation and Miles Tucker our support services manager come on up good evening Good evening.

I'm here today for night two of alcohol proposals. This is the board's public hearing as the board traditionally holds to allow resident stakeholders licensees to provide any input. Today we received a letter that I forwarded to you right before the meeting from the Board of Health. I understand that we have Chair of the Board of Health, Dr. Ed Cosgrove, as well as Karen Shannon and one of their colleagues Lydia Cunningham on Zoom to provide some input from the Board of Health. I also see we have at least one licensee in the audience. I don't know if they want to provide comment, but unless you have any questions for me initially, I have nothing else for the board tonight. Okay.

Any questions?

We need to hear from the public.

Okay, I guess we'll, this is a public hearing, so. if we have the members of the Board of Health want to I just want to introduce yourselves for everyone.

Sure. Good evening. Steve Epstein, member of the Board of Health, 117 Richdale Road.

Good evening, Karen Shannon, member of the Needham Public Health Division and resident at 13 Bennington Street.

Ed Cosgrove, the chair of the Board of Health and a resident at 17 Laurel Drive.

All right, okay.

Is somebody else- Hi, good evening. Yes, my name's Lydia Cunningham. I also work at the Needham Public Health Division. I'm not a resident of the town. Okay, thank you, Lydia.

Okay, so several of us will speak tonight. I just want to start out that we have some serious concerns about the changes that you're proposing. and I'll deal with the first part which is that we're concerned about extending the hours and the fact that alcohol is a serious problem in Massachusetts. It's responsible for deaths, in the case of Massachusetts, about 2,700 people per year on average between 2015 and 2019. It was involved in, according to our letter, 3,700 assaults, 99 homicides, and 148 suicides in the year 2020.

Fatal crashes involving drivers under the influence of alcohol are more common in Massachusetts than nationwide. 66,000 adults in the state self-reported driving after drinking at least once in the past 30 days. A spokesman from AAA Northeast reported that this July the number of fatal accidents involving alcohol or other drugs in Massachusetts have increased every year since 2020. State police data from 2023 show 34 crashes investigated with suspicion of alcohol impairments. And I'd like to pass off to Karen.

Sure, absolutely. And we believe this letter is provided to you so you'll be able to look at it directly. afterwards, but in my capacity as a substance use prevention coordinator for the town of Needham and overseeing our Youth Substance Use Prevention Coalition, SPAN, the Substance Prevention Alliance of Needham, we work with the data particularly the youth substance use data that I'm sure you're well acquainted with and our 2023 Metro West Adolescent Health Survey again shows that among our high school students Alcohol remains the number one highest use substance among those that we track, including vaping, cannabis, and prescription drugs, for example. We know from the 2023 survey that the lifetime use among Needham High School students is at 48% and our current use is at 30%.

And I want to point out that regionally compared Needham, compared to the other 25 towns that participate in the Metro West survey, reports 9% greater current use than collectively those 25 other communities, so a spread of 99%. So that's not the only data, too. We look at the binge drinking rate. and in the case of Needham, our students at Needham High School report 18% report binge drinking in the past 30 days and compared to the Metro West average of 12%. So alcohol remains a very prevalent substance obviously among our students and it's a concern to us in our work that our community speaks to the messaging around

I think these policies and the alcohol regulations, for example, send a message to our youth, inevitably, about how we as adults perceive alcohol in our community. So I could go on about the data, but I want to give others a chance to speak.

Sure. So as you've heard, alcohol is a problem in our town. You know, we are laggards in this one area compared to our peer groups in the local area where we're leaders in a number of the other areas. What's more, we were looking at the idea of the abeyance of penalties. I think there have been compliance checks twice a year for alcohol since 2018. And only on one occasion, only on one occasion has every vendor passed. We've had multiple times where multiple vendors have failed. and we've had, I think, five vendors that have failed twice and really only once, most recently with the James, has really significant action been taken. And even then, it was mitigated quite a bit by allowing them to have their penalty in the middle of the week when alcohol sales are going to be quite low. What you're doing isn't working.

That one time when we had 100% compliance was over a year ago. We've had two subsequent checks. when the rate of noncompliance has increased. We have another check that will be coming up. We'll have to see what that data shows, but we're not going in the right direction here. So the idea of passing something that would actually mitigate penalties at this time seems really to be the wrong message and the wrong solution for a problem that's actually getting worse, not better.

Thank you. So I saw the letter come in. I haven't had a chance to read it yet. I apologize. But I really appreciate the comments. Could I ask a question? Sure. I agree. The problem is not getting better. How can the regulations help? So maybe another way of asking is how do the alcohol regulations for package stores influence the drinking rates among high school students? I honestly don't know.

So it's, which is obviously a tough thing, right? Part is how are our youth getting alcohol? And we don't have all the answers to that. We suspect mostly they're not buying, but we know that some of them are because we've seen the failures, right? So we know that some of them are actually purchasing. The only thing we can compare it to, I mean, obviously, you folks control the licensing for alcohol. We control the licensing for tobacco. We have six tobacco vendors at this point in town. It's incredibly rare that we have a violation because I know if they violate, they're out for a week. and we accumulate them and what have you, the penalties get quite a bit stiffer. But we are leaders amongst our peer group when it comes to rates of smoking. to the point that when we moved to go to nicotine-free generation, one of the arguments was, hey, what you're doing is already working.

We think we're going to have a healthier population by passing that. But that reg has worked. And it's worked to keep nicotine away from kids. Now, whether or not, you know, you can say there's a direct correlation there. Hard to say, right? Are kids actually purchasing in the stores? Every now and then, sure. Are they getting it from somebody else? Yes, probably. But at least limiting the amount of access, for instance, by not saying, okay, we're going to allow sales up to midnight, is one way to cut that back. Another way is to send a clear message to vendors that we are not going to tolerate selling to underage anymore. We need to have a zero tolerance policy for this. I mean, the most recent science is there is no safe level of alcohol. I mean, that's new. In the past year, I mean, a lot of people still think a small amount of alcohol might be good for your health. No. The data now are at least suggestive that there is no safe level. This is not something we should be encouraging in the community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. I appreciate it and look forward to reading the letter. I also haven't seen it yet. Do we have any other public comment on the alcohol regulations? Anybody online? No? Okay. Well, we will. Is it correct that we'll be voting on this at our next meeting?

Yes. Okay. You can continue to accept comments by email. Yes. So, whatboardatneedmma.gov. Okay. So, yes.

I think we'd be accepting unless we have a discussion at the next meeting about some of the suggestions that have been sent to us. It's not a hard and fast, but yeah.

Okay.

Right. But we'll take it up at our next meeting. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Miles. okay so next up uh madam chair can i just move the consent agenda appointment thank you second okay let's have a vote on that uh heidi Yes. Marianne? Yes. Josh?

Yes. Kevin?

Aye. And the chair votes yes. Thank you. okay so next up we have the Harris Avenue speed cushions pilot Tyler Gabrielski and Justin McCullen come on up and tell us all about it hello

Tom, Shane, Karis, who else is coming up?

This is the speed cushions.

Come on up. I'll sit here. I'm on the committee too. So this I included several materials for this agenda item. This is a pilot program that we would like to launch targeting an area that we've gotten a lot of feedback on from a pedestrian safety perspective. Do you want to speak to that?

Sure. As we all know, thank you for last year approving the regulation change for the turn movements on Harris Ave. This has obviously been a pain point for certain areas, for this area and Harris. and this is a mitigation potentially that we would want to put into our toolbox to be able to use. This is not obviously a permanent solution. It's a temporary solution. In this case, we're looking at it from a nine month Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. that potentially might be something for a more permanent solution long term. But these speed cushions that Tyler, I know the literature that you had in the pre-reads, they are

Custom Dunn for the area and fire apparatus wouldn't necessarily be impeded. because of the width of the tires, et cetera. So from that perspective, obviously the only thing was obviously snow removal, and that's where we would put it up and pull it up. for during the winter. But the areas that we were concerned are the crosswalks in front of Pollard. And I think this is something that that I think will give an impact. It will basically enable people to slow down in front of those areas when there isn't a crossing guard. We obviously, there's crossing guards in the morning and the afternoon, but obviously we know that there are after school programs that go on and there are kids that cross those crossings after the point in which the crossing guards aren't there. And so this would potentially, with this pilot, be able to reduce speeds in those areas. Thank you.

In this location, we have recently installed flashing signage for the crosswalks. However, research has shown that the best way to influence and to slow speeds is for actual changes to the built environment. So these speed cushions, would model something like we have in front of the high school with those raised crosswalks as a portable and modular method of what we call vertical deflection. So as Justin mentioned, the speed cushions are are spaced in such a way that emergency vehicles can drive right through them without needing to stop or slow down. So that is how they're designed. They're also made of a particular material that

it's essentially they're pieces like a puzzle that are put together and can be taken apart when they are to be taken away so seasonally for winter they're adhered into the ground with bolts so we would just take the bolts out disassemble the pieces put them away for the the winter and then put them back out when you know at the end of the season so the objective being to make it so that at that actual crosswalk it's a targeted location where we want to try this speed calming technique and then it may be that they work well and then it's like Justin said another tool in our toolbox to employ at other locations.

Discussion? I don't have any comments. I think this is an excellent suggestion to try, and I look forward to the pilot. You know, Pollard has a long history of being the wild, wild west. and all those crossings and I think something that could bring some sanity to them would be an excellent move on the town's part and increase the safety there.

Is the pilot a pilot for this location with more permanent installations planned or is it a pilot for other places in town where this treatment would be applied?

both. So the because the future of the Pollard is to be determined, this would allow us the flexibility of not investing totally into construction changes before those decisions are made. So they the actual as Justin mentioned the actual devices are sized for the road that you want to employ them on so we couldn't easily take that same one and put them somewhere else but They're relatively low cost compared to other treatments, especially construction changes. So the idea would be that we would be able to do similar custom sizing for different locations in town and see how that goes.

the idea is that it kind of models like a Rage Crosswalk in this case even though it's so it's not it's as close as we can get you know it's right next to the the crosswalk so the markings will still be visible from a distance the The speed cushions have markings on top of them as well, similar to how the race crosswalks at the high school are. it's modeling that raised crosswalk before we are actually committing to construction changes to create that.

But I think the intent is Josh, is to pilot to see. And we have tools that we can measure speed now on almost a real-time basis. that we can then say this is something that is appropriate for this area, you know, from a, and then we can put that into the five-year, you know, capital plans, et cetera, to wherever that ends up being. So the point is to to evaluate and then to see whether that's something that's, you know, we can do it from a long-term perspective.

Yeah, thank you. And one more question. When you say fire trucks can drive through it, does that mean the cushions are only on either side?

So there's spacing between them where that's been sized for the wheelbase of a fire engine or other emergency vehicle so that... essentially they drive slightly to the left and there'll be enough room for their tires to go straight through without actually impacting the cushions.

you'll see the design if you see it in the packet you'll see that that there are two for each of the for each direction of Harris or wherever. But yes, as Tyler was saying, they can move through and not be able to be impacted.

Yeah, because passenger vehicles, the wheelbase is smaller, so they'll be forced to contact one or the other.

So they can't use that gap either?

Right. Maybe one tire, potentially. Either way, you're going to have to slow down. That's the idea.

Thank you for doing this. I love traffic comics, so this sounds great. I would add traffic logic. Shih Tzu gave us, make a horrible flyer. This thing is all over the place with data, and I was going over it, and they're everywhere. A few questions. are you doing tabletop extension or just the it's just a module of one piece ramp up and down right or stop

How is this? So they're... Up and down? Up and down. Because it's a... If you think of like... Quilt, and like a one square. That's kind of how they're shaped. It's like a convex mound.

Okay, I see that on this sheet on the awful flyer. They have a sideways view. It's not necessarily a table, which I think you're talking about, whether it be a speed table where you have a longer.

because that potentially would have more impact on emergency vehicles than anything going over because the front axle would be up on it while the rear axle isn't, etc. But those applications... potentially we could use elsewhere depending, but yes, I know what you're talking about.

They can also be if you're driving from a turn, and you're driving over them they're not directionally designed so they're still going to have that effect even if you're turning into it rather than just approaching it head-on.

There is a gap in some scenarios, 36 to 32 inches between them, right? So in Arlington, Virginia, they use this same thing. It's not these, but they use speed bumps with cuts. and has the unhelpful result that A1 just swerves around into the gap to avoid going over them. So it looks like A1's DWI. which the Board of Health would be pissed about. But I think that creates another unhelpful effect. So if you put these in, I don't know if maybe how you space them. But I think you get people swerving around them. In Arlington, Virginia, they create an illegality that if the police see you doing it, they'll ticket you.

that's another okay yeah so that's up to you no I know yeah the thing about that Kevin is that they're that's why they're custom made for that layout right okay because so they ask in advance how wide is the road okay so that they space them in such a way where even if you go to that gutter line you're still gonna have one tire okay contacting that because of how the width of it has created enough space in the gutter for water to go through. But if you go to the right and you try to avoid it, your left tire is still going to be on that.

and then on the photo you did, I know it's fun with Photoshop type thing, but the Harris and Pinewood, someone taking a right turn on Pinewood, right? Or from the Pollard parking lot, rather. I'm sorry. Yes. Taking a right going east, Harris, right? Yes. Okay. Are they going to hit those things obliquely, like sideways? How do you make it? And it may not be this scale in the photo.

Yeah, so as I mentioned, there's no solid face on any one side. So your tire can, like, you can corner on top of them, and you'll still, you know, as long as you don't gun it immediately and you're... You know, you wouldn't do that anyway, but as long as you're taking it slowly a controlled turn, there should be no problem. Okay.

We shouldn't be gunning out of the Pollard parking lot. Yeah. So whatever damage that they inflict on their vehicle, then... Okay.

All right then, let's try the pilot.

Heidi, did you? have a question? Yeah, thank you, Cathy. I just wanted to ask, I think this is a really interesting idea. I'm curious, clearly, I understand that the intent is to protect pedestrians in the crosswalk. This is a pretty long street though, and the speeds do get pretty high. especially during the morning commute. So I'm wondering if there's any thought about how to control speeds on the rest of the street or when we eventually get to that point, is there a plan to restripe or anything?

Yeah, so we Harris Avenue is due for resurfacing, and we actually have plans to do a surface treatment next summer. So that will be the opportunity for the addition of any pavement markings. We do have a draft plan for markings that will have a traffic calming effect, but it hasn't been fully designed. It's tricky because you don't want to With a roadway that's not exactly wide enough for two cars to be... There's a parking lane, but it's not delineated. So...

You have to balance the needs of the parking and all that that goes on with the traffic calming effect. But we are actively working on a restriping plan.

Thank you.

Josh, you had another question? Thanks. I just wanted to confirm that you've consulted with police and fire to make sure that they're comfortable with having to weave through

Yeah, so I did submit all the same information that I submitted to the board to them probably about a month ago or more, and I received no comment back. but I did inform them. They said they had no issue with it when I talked to them in person.

OK. So they responded.

yeah i mean they they have the information that i included the information about the um you know it won't affect their emergency vehicles um because i just want to make sure i hear that from them yeah um they I invited them to become part of the conversation.

So if it's being taken up in the winter, what do you wait for first snow or is there a schedule or what's the plan?

So we'll plan to put them in the spring because if we put them in now, we'll take them out in about a month. You're an optimist. The plan is to put them in in the spring. It will take a little bit of time the first time we're putting it together, but it can be done over a weekend. we've also the school has been part of this conversation as well in that same thread with you know public safety and they expressed that they were that they think it's a good idea they're from the principal and School Transportation. They're on board.

obviously we'll reevaluate depending upon you know whatever decision is made for Pollard etc you know and any sort of future you know thing on Harris whether we do more permanent solutions etc

And will you be measuring the speed just before? Or are you measuring it now so you have a comparison?

So we can do that. We can place the... devices in that area right on the other side. It is a localized treatment, so it's meant for

like just that one crosswalk area you know you're not expecting that they're just understood but i think it would be interesting just to see you know what what impact it has hardware to be able to measure to assess before and after yeah for a measure of success

of Failure.

Yeah. I'd be interested to see that.

Great. We already have funding for this appropriated?

Yes, this was funded through the TSC's dedicated budget.

Anything else, Heidi? nope okay any other discussion well thank you thank you so much very interesting and looking forward to seeing how that goes okay and regulations We are now doing signed notices of traffic regulation with Tom Ryder and Karis Lustig.

Right.

So we have nine traffic regulation stop signs. should want me to go through them all one shot or individually, but five of them are off of Harris neighborhood streets. We have a stop at the intersection of Harris. All the other streets are already stopped, but these five are not. And then we have two on that are neighborhood streets that are going to be stopped at Great Plain Avenue. And there's two others that are going to become always stops. Honeywell at Hillside, and Hoyden at Parrish. So if you want to go through them.

No.

Oh, and Meadowbrook, yeah. Parrish and Meadowbrook. Okay.

Okay.

Hillside and Honeywell is a good one. Thank you.

I have a question about the Hillside and Honeywell one. So when you're coming over the train bridge, there's really not much visibility. Is that How do you manage that? How will a stop sign allow people to... I want to make sure cars don't crash.

Absolutely. That's the reason why the all-way is because of the geometric issues over there. So there's going to be a stop ahead. and then there'll be a stop sign. And the same thing with Nehoyden and at Parrish, there'll be stop-aheads. And then the other streets that we identified are T-intersections, so they don't need the stop-ahead.

The idea being that the car that you're looking for will be much closer to you when you're looking over your shoulder than they will be coming down the hill uninterrupted. There'll be a stop by right there so that you can look to your right knowing that they'll have to stop at that stop sign.

Yes, I see that. And then the pre-stop, like stop ahead, will make sure that cars don't crash into a stopped car in front of them.

They will alert the driver. I'm too optimistic, I guess. Okay.

Yeah, likely we'll probably do some pre-warnings of a change coming up in that area. Okay.

Like the new tabs or something like that.

Yeah, similar to Hillside West.

Yep.

Mayor?

Kevin?

Yeah. Yes, these are great. Thank you. Love the Hillside and Honeywell one. I am always surprised that we needed to stop sign at a T intersection, but I, okay. And what's your best guess on Hillside Ave, the length of that crosswalk? It crosses. It is huge.

70?

We just had this chat earlier today.

well we didn't go over length we just went over like wow configuration so we do have proposals for geometric changes that would make the crossing shorter okay um this is an interim no no i absolutely appreciate it

This is great.

And the stop signs currently at Hillside and Honeywell are flashing. Would the other ones be flashing as well?

We could. We could. We can, yeah. It seemed to mirroring the West Street location.

The flashing sign component is not regulatory, so we have discretion as to whether or not you have flashing or non-flashing signs based on the regulation.

Heidi, anything, any questions? Nope. I have a question.

No, I just want to say I appreciate this. We haven't really talked about Harris, but I think that's a huge improvement as well to slow traffic as people are turning onto Harris from those side streets that will really help. and I appreciate the thought being put into the hillside intersection because that is terrifying. Thanks.

I had a question, which is sort of a broad question. How do you identify places for stop signs?

So a whole host of approaches. So some come up that we notice within the community. So just I think generally speaking, we don't just decide like this is the type of sign or control measure that you put in each intersection. They're sort of very clearly dictated. by the MUTCD and whether or not the intersection meets warrants that are set up for those intersections. So sometimes roads change, uses change, and before it might not have met a warrant. And now because of how that area is being used, it might meet a warrant. So we have areas frequently where the way the control measures are set up don't actually match the current use. So it either comes up from our own observations and our staff drives Needham every single day and they drive pretty much every road over a short period of time. but they also come up through a petition process through the Transportation Safety Committee. And so there's sort of two avenues.

Sometimes there's stuff that's fairly obvious that we would say yes or no to, and then sometimes there's stuff that is a little bit more nuanced.

Any further discussion?

I appreciate that you're making all of my favorite crosses that are unsafe. Safe. So, you know, Tower Hill, this one here where I come up from cricket to pass the calf. If I no longer have to take my life in my hands through that one, that's another plus. So thank you.

And there are a couple more that I've noticed. There are a few more, yeah.

You're working your way through my life-endangering intersections, yes.

There's a few more that have been identified that just we haven't really evaluated fully yet, but we will. Yep.

thank you well yes i appreciate kind of the surveillance and constantly looking at these and things change too you know so it's good that you guys are looking at that i guess

Madam Chair, how do you want a motion? Do you want nine individuals or are you going to do a combined one?

A combined would be great.

All right. I'll make a motion for the Board vote to approve and sign the Notice of Traffic Regulation Permit Number SS25 10, 14, placing a stop sign on 1, Colton Park at Harris Avenue, 2, Wilshire Park at Harris Avenue. 3, Stevens Road at Harris Avenue 4, Prince Street at Harris Avenue 5, Pinewood Road at Harris Avenue 6, Green Street at Great Plain Avenue 7, Maple Street at Great Plain Avenue 8 Nehoyden Street at Meadowbrook Road and 9 Honeywell Street at Hillside Avenue.

Second.

Well done. Any further discussion before we come to a vote?

Kevin, for future, as presented at the meeting, works. Let's go.

yeah i guess so i suppose i like to be thorough okay there we go okay let's vote then heidi yeah so before i vote i just want to say we talked earlier about um how DPW is a first responder. And I just want to say, I think that part of what DPW in particular does so well is preventative safety. So this is exactly the kind of thing, whether it's shortening a crosswalk or looking at the size of a crosswalk or looking at the speeds. These are the kinds of things that prevent tragedies. So I just really want to say that I appreciate it and vote yes. Thanks. Thank you, Heidi.

Marianne? Aye. Josh? Yes. Kevin? Aye. And the chair votes yes. Well, thank you all. That is great.

So there are only separate ones to sign on.

yes yes we have i have signed all nine yes you will get all nine Thank you. Okay. Up next, we have the Stephen Palmer update with Katie King, our town manager.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So in your packet is a memo from me summarizing a lot of the information that I will share verbally in this update, along with an agreement between the town of Needham and Stephen Palmer Associates. So I will start at the beginning just for anyone who isn't familiar with the building, the project, just to give a good foundation. First, Stephen Palmer is a former elementary school at the corner of Pickering and May Streets. It was constructed in 1914 and it was closed in the 1970s. And at that time, town meeting voted to lease the land for 50 years. And in May of 1977, the town entered into a 50 year grant lease with Stephen Palmer Associates, also known as Crown and Shield.

And the town sold the building to Stephen Palmer Associates also at that time. They then converted it from an elementary school to 28 rental units that still exist today. And Stephen Palmer Associates have been the landlord and the property manager on site ever since. As you've heard tonight, the ground lease between the town and Stephen Palmer Associates expires on May 3rd of 2027, at which time the building and the land revert back to the town. and so all of our discussion tonight has been kind of the town's planning efforts for that eventuality and, you know, I think for context, we heard from another number of the residents here tonight. There are 28 units in the building. They're fully occupied. There's 21 bedroom units and eight two bedroom units.

The town meeting originally voted that those units should be preference for individuals who are 55 years or older, although there were allowances over the years if there was somebody If they weren't able to find a tenant over 55, it could be rented to someone younger than that age. There are no income requirements for tenants to be eligible for a unit and thus the units are not included in the town's subsidized housing inventory. But we certainly know that this has become naturally occurring affordable housing in the sense that it is not on any subsidized state program. But the rents range from $830 to $400. 1430 per month, which is certainly under market rate in Needham. So the context for this agreement is really, as I said, trying to be planful for when the ground lease expires.

and trying to work in coordination between the town and Stephen Palmer Associates for how we could kind of responsibly wind down the residential use of the building before it reverts back to the town. and I thought it would be helpful to provide a little bit of context, I think, in the thinking that kind of shaped our conversations with Stephen Palmer Associates. The first, as has been mentioned, is that the town does not yet know the future use of the building. The select board, you have established a committee to run a community engagement process to figure out what will be the future use of that site, of the building. And that work is just kicking off. Actually, the first meeting of the committee is tomorrow. May of 2027 is 18 months away. And in town time, I think that's really like a blink of an eye. in the sense that it takes a while to do community engagement planning.

And so I think that in thinking about this agreement the town may or may not know in May of 27 what the determined future use of the site will be and if we wait until that reuse planning is complete before we make decisions that give direction to the current tenants. There would be no time to support a thoughtful transition if we waited for the planning process to conclude. the other reality is even if we know what we want to do as a town with the building in the site actually having that whatever that vision ends up being come to fruition is many many years away depending on what the chosen future uses. I think that's my sense of the reality of community planning processes, but also property redevelopment, budget cycles, etc.

So That's one piece of kind of the context for our thinking for the lease expiration. The other context really is that organizationally, the town is not set up to be a residential landlord. I think none of us were at the table in the 70s, but I think it's reflected. This reality was recognized in the original 50-year lease. The town did not maintain ownership of the building, did not play a role in any of the tenant landlord decision making. and didn't retain the building and hire a management company. Instead, the town kind of wholly removed itself from being a landlord and turned over the building and the operations completely, basically for 50 years.

So with that context, I think understanding both the timing and what the town is functionally set up to do or not do as an organization, that really shaped the discussions that we had in leading up to this agreement. And I think fundamentally led to the approach of de-linking the decision about what the future use of the property will be with what guidance and decisions we have to make today to give direction to the current tenants. And So with that, it really led to the agreement that's before you today and that is on your agenda. I'll just walk through kind of the basic tenets of the agreement. And again, this is the goal of trying to be coordinated between Stephen Palmer Associates in the town and to be able to provide some clear direction.

starting as soon as possible, which is leading it to October special town meeting. The key tenants are that Stephen Palmer Associates will notify all current tenants that leases will expire on October 31st, 2026. This would serve as the final move out date for current residents. And anyone who chooses to leave early has the option to do that without penalty. and anyone whose current lease expires before that date, their leases will be converted to month to month so that everyone has up until October 31st, 2026. Steven Palmer Associates has agreed to not enter into any new leases or allow any new occupancy once a unit becomes vacant.

and the town in this agreement agrees to pay Stephen Palmer Associates for the rent for the vacant units until the conclusion of the ground lease. upon proof of vacancy. The town will also pay any utilities that are individually metered to the vacant units. and then the agreement also includes aspects for if the building becomes fully vacant, before the May 2027 lease end date. The town would take the building back early once we had notification that the building was fully vacant. and finally one component of the agreement deals with a situation if Stephen Palmer Associates loses their insurance coverage because of reduced occupancy in the building over time.

and if they do in that circumstance lose insurance which is a current requirement of them in under their lease agreement with the town that the town would accept the building back at some point between March 15th and May 3rd if that kind of eventuality comes to be. those are the core kind of tenants of the agreement and all of this is subject both to the board's approval of this agreement and then also appropriation to fund the estimated cost of the agreement at October special town meeting. The estimate, which will be advance to special town meeting is $385,000. You know, we won't know the final total cost until the end based on all of the moving pieces of this, but were comfortable with that estimate for an appropriation.

And I guess that's in terms of the cost estimate. What is not reflected in the document itself, but what has been a core part of our planning and our discussions around this process has been the tenant relocation assistance program. As we heard tonight, we met with the tenants on Thursday night and it was a meeting that was not as much notice as we normally would like to give, but it was the last possible day that we could meet with everyone before this information became public. And so we did share the outlines of this agreement, but also the fight around a tenant benefit assistance program that the board is advancing in partnership with this agreement with Stephen Palmer Associates. So this is going to be a challenging transition.

I think we recognize that. and so the tenant benefit assistance is really in two parts. The first is Again, subject to appropriation that the town would provide up to $10,000 per unit for reimbursement of eligible costs. We have articulated those eligible costs to be in four categories. So the difference between a tenant's new rent and their current rent for up to four months. Security Deposit Costs, Moving Costs, and Application Fees. So any of those eligible costs incurred by a tenant for relocation upon providing receipts will be reimbursed up to that $10,000 per unit cap. The second part of the tenant assistance program is housing to home. So this is the consultant that the town,

procured with funds from the October 2024 appropriation. Housing to Home has been advising the town on relocation requirements, obligations, things to consider. and they specialize in supporting residents in finding new homes that meet their needs and so housing a home as part of this would, if the agreements and the tenant benefits funding is approved, housing to home would be available starting November 1st to work one-on-one with each resident at Stephen Palmer to understand their housing needs and help them find a place to relocate to. and you know in our conversations with housing at home I know timing is important to residents and while The end date in this agreement is for October 31st, 2026.

That does give all residents a full 12 months of notice and 12 months of support from housing to home so that we can work closely. with everyone. from a financing perspective the select board would seek a reserve fund transfer for supporting the funds needed for the tenant benefit program that would allow us to make those requests over time as the costs become incurred over the next year. So that really is the overview of the agreement of the planning we've been doing and some of the thought behind what shaped this approach. This is, you know, I think a very challenging situation and I think this is the clearest articulation that we can provide to the tenants to town meeting members to the community of kind of

why we're delinking current tenants from the future visioning and how best we can support everyone through the next year. So with that, I would recommend approval of the agreement with Stephen Palmer Associates.

Thank you, Katie. Marianne, did you have a comment?

So we met last Thursday, as Katie said, with the residents, a number of whom are here this evening. and recognizing that this is a really difficult situation. I guess I make the observation now as having sat on the Select Board for 14 years and having served the town for however many years it is now, I don't know, 25, something like that, that Stephen Palmer has come up many times over that period. and each time the town has looked and evaluated the use of Stephen Palmer, we've always chosen on an interim basis to walk away from that because in fact it would be too difficult we thought to to have people leave their homes right but we knew when we got to the end that we are going to need to ask people to leave their homes. And we are at this difficult point now. So it was very important, I think, to me, to others on the select board that we find a way

to communicate as clearly as possible with as much time as possible with certainty and a level of support what the town could do in this situation. And that gets us to where we are today. I appreciate all the time that Katie has put into working with Stephen Palmer Associates and Crown and Shield to try to and other staff members too but to try to get to a point where we could create some certainty because otherwise the situation that our tenants would have been facing what it could have been 30 days notice right and they would have been out or that they reached the end without support and then it was out so trying to be sure that we could put all the pieces together to try to be as clear as possible to make something happen for that. It's never easy and

I hope that should the town ever do ground leases again that there are things that we can take from this learning. I mean, I don't know how many times we've all looked at each other over the last 13, 14 years and at least as far as I've been involved and said how come nobody wrote into that that the building needed to be vacant when it came back to the town which is something we come back to every time so

Yeah. I prepared some comments. So on May 3, 1977, the Needham Board of Selectmen entered into a 50-year agreement to transfer ownership of the former Stephen Palmer Elementary School and its grounds to a private entity, Stephen Palmer Associates, for development into 28 apartments. That agreement will terminate in approximately 18 months, at which point the property will return to the town's ownership under the jurisdiction of the school committee, and any leases current at that time will be assigned to the town of Needham. This last provision of the town assuming residential leases would be difficult for the town to implement, and I share the town manager's concern that the town of Needham is not in a position to be a landlord.

however I do not support the current proposal though this may be repetitive for my colleagues I want to reiterate an alternate approach intended both to prevent the town from becoming a landlord and to prevent Stephen Palmer residents from having to leave their homes before the termination of the current agreement I'll also outline my concerns with the current proposal. As this alternate approach, I urge the select board, with the permission of the school committee, to issue a request for proposals seeking parties interested in providing management services or entering into a new ground lease for the Stephen Palmer Apartments and to whom residential leases would be assigned at the conclusion of the current agreement. Such an arrangement would be short-term in nature, less than five years beyond the conclusion of the current agreement, It would clearly define an end date for all the residential leases so that residents have more time to plan and more time in their homes while the town figures out what we want to do with the property. I'm confident that there are organizations, perhaps even nonprofits with property management experience or housing authorities who would be interested in such an arrangement.

not only because it aligns with the mission of many of these organizations to preserve housing at below market rents, but also because the Stephen Palmer structure is sound according to the town's consultant and because the fully rented building generates over $30,000 per month in rent. Instead, the current proposal seeks to wind down the residential leases by insisting that residents leave their homes by October 31, 2026, over six months before the ground lease terminates. If not for this proposal, residents would continue to enjoy the reasonable expectation of being able to stay in their homes at least through the end of the ground lease. I'm not comfortable insisting that residents leave their homes any sooner. Needham has spent the past several years studying, debating, and legislating housing policies. As important as these conversations have been, they've all been about prospective housing and prospective residents. The current situation is far more concrete. At Stephen Palmer, we're talking about existing housing with existing residents, our neighbors.

I will not tell Needham residents that they must leave their homes before the ground lease expires, and I encourage the Select Board to pursue an alternate agreement that both satisfies the town's needs and allows residents to stay in their homes for longer.

Kevin?

I support this agreement. I think it's a fair one. I think for 50 years we've known we've had to deal with this. I like that we're giving assistance to help tenants move out. And I think we have to really, this is a nut we have to crack. And I think this is gonna be really hard, but this is the way we have to do it. and I hope it passes town meeting. I hope town meeting supports that.

Heidi, would you like to add anything?

Yeah, I guess I'd just like to say that I really think that with this agreement, the town has worked very hard to provide tenants with predictability and flexibility and support in both with both relocation assistance and Financial Assistance. Well, I appreciate Josh's comments and the idea of the extension. I think that in discussions of this very idea, even Josh agreed that such a move would only, extending the ground lease, would only increase both the costs and the risks to the town and extend the uncertainty for the tenants. who we hope very much to help. And I think that the terms of this agreement are quite fair. So I do support the agreement. I agree that this is

not a situation that anyone wants to find themselves in it's not great for the tenants it's not great for the town but we are doing our best to muddle through a difficult situation and I think that to do otherwise is to stick our head in the sand really. I think that this is a good agreement and I support it.

Thank you, Heidi. I also support the agreement and I know it's difficult but I do support the agreement I thank Katie for working this out and I think it is It is a moment that we had to come to at some point and this provides clarity and notice and support for a difficult transition and so I do support the agreement.

I just have two questions.

Katie, the question.

Excuse me.

I'm sorry, but it's not a public hearing. It's not a public hearing.

There were two questions that I thought was interesting.

What's being discussed here is not what we're asking right now. just give us the six months. That's all we're asking. We're not asking for an extension, although thank you, Josh. You don't have to be a landlord after May 3, 2027.

I'm sorry I have to call for order here we're having a we're having a select board discussion we're not having an open meeting we're not having public comments we're not having public comment okay please continue

Okay, there's a question if residents in Stephen Palmer can maintain Needham residency so that when future properties come online, they would have an advantage in getting back into Needham. Is that an option?

I don't know the answer to that, but I absolutely will check with our advisors to see if that's a possibility.

Okay. Now we have it as October 26, October 31st, 26, six months early. what's the advantage for the town to do that?

I guess I'd answer it in two parts. One, we were trying to think about what were the existing leases in place. And Stephen Palmer Associates articulated to us that October 31 of 2026 was the latest state that current tenants had a lease extended to. And so we wanted to honor that and then line everybody else up so that some people weren't asked to move sooner than others. and so that was part of the reasoning for that date and it also allows for time for the transition and that the town's going to have to make once it's fully vacant to prepare for taking the building back.

Okay, thank you.

Further discussion? If not, I'd welcome a motion.

Madam Chair, I move that the Board approve and sign the Memorandum of Agreement with the Stephen Palmer Associates Limited Partnership.

Second.

okay further discussion okay well we'll come to a vote um heidi yes marianne yes josh no kevin yes and the chair votes yes

Would it be appropriate to offer a motion to release the executive session minutes pertaining to the Stephen Palmer discussions?

I wouldn't be comfortable doing that without council guidance first would be my recommendation to the board.

Okay.

I want to make sure that town meeting members have the benefits of the full discussion that we had in those meetings. Given that it's Monday, if it doesn't happen tonight, I guess they won't have that benefit.

under the select board's policy for executive session minutes you let me just pull it up because I have it for my next agenda item I do not believe that you vote on the release that is under my review. So I would want to read the policy more closely. I hear the request, but I again, I'm not comfortable without consulting with town council because there's attorney client privilege items in there.

Yeah, I agree with that.

Next, we have positions on warrant articles. And I believe there are two.

Yes, the two articles that the board needs to take positions on is Article 5, Appropriate for Stephen Palmer Lease Expiration, and then Article 6, Amend the FY26 Operating Budget. and as a reminder Article 6 includes funding for Article 5 along with a separate request for the town clerk unrelated.

Okay.

Discussion?

I move the Board vote to support Article 5 in the October 20, 2025 Special Town Meeting Warrant.

Second.

Any further discussion before we vote? Okay. Heidi? Yes. Mary Ann? Aye. Josh?

No.

Kevin?

Aye.

And the chair votes yes. Okay, so we also have Article 6.

I move that the Board vote to support Article 6 in the October 20th, 2025 Special Town Meeting Warrant.

Second.

Any discussion?

MR. I'm just going to mention I'm supporting this because if Article 5 does pass, then I think it's better to be funded through the reserve fund than increasing taxes even more. If Article 5 doesn't pass, I assume we'll revisit Article 6 at some point, but we can have that discussion later.

all right um so let's come to a vote heidi yes marianne yes josh yes kevin yes and the chair votes yes Okay, up next is the town manager's report.

Thank you. Just one other item. As I mentioned earlier, the Select Board has a policy. It's SB-Admin-002 about periodic review and release of executive session minutes. I have completed a periodic release and wanted to note that we will be releasing executive session minutes for the dates of April 9th April 14th, April 18th, April 25th, and May 13th of 2025, as well as a release of a partial release of Executive Session Minutes stated February 25th, March 11th, and July 22nd, 2025.

Anything else on the town manager's report? Okay. We have committee reports.

Do you have a committee report?

I guess envision Needham, but I think that's on the agenda.

On the agenda.

Okay, so let's hear it from them.

Heidi? The tree committee met last week and has been working diligently on the tree bylaw. They were also at the Harvest Fair. And kudos to Erica Bond, who coordinated that activity. It was a very successful event. and we have a public forum coming up so we can share with the public and get their feedback on the work that has been done thus far. That will be November 19th in Powers Hall. Thank you Heidi. Josh?

Stormwater has not met.

I was trying to figure out when did large house meet last?

You guys are done. We're done? I would say that while you're looking at that, Marianne, I'll just mention the Harvest Fair, which is not a committee, but it was a great town event. I was just bowled over by the number of exhibitors and people and the great mix of local businesses and community groups and the engagement was wonderful and the weather was perfect unlike this past sunday so it was well well-timed I couldn't find it I think we're safe okay okay so uh are we we're early for Envision it was supposed to be at eight is my clock wrong no no okay but are we are we good to go okay

on up okay so we have tim bulger envision um working group chair and caris lustig director of public works so tell us what is going on thank you for having us

We are working on the reset of this project a little bit right now. hearing your direction that's coming from the select board we've reset over the summer kind of trying to set the pieces back together there are three plans that you asked for they're getting close to that to share but not yet and part of that motion was to kind of evaluate different features of it and so we've come up with a matrix that's also Underdevelopment to be vetted by the committee before we present it to you. There was a timeline presented, you know, December for your decision making. I think we're kind of flexible on that. it may go out a little bit further than that, I think, based on feedback from the committee and changing some of the timeline around a little bit.

A decision will need to be made at some point soon, but we're flexible, pushing that out a little bit. Our next big public engagement is leaning towards a Q&A style with breakout sessions it was I guess it was in the large house committee did a similar thing there seems to be some desire from the committee to have that type of engagement and so that is looking like that will happen sometime between now and December. And that's kind of where we're

but then following that there would be a select board hearing of this.

I would also add we are looking at and have developed most of the questions for a survey as well to try to have multiple opportunities for engagement. So it's not just all in person or all public. And people have the ability to express themselves in a whole host of different ways.

That survey will have a QR code that's going to be mailed to, I think, every resident. Amy Halston is working on that.

Yeah. Right. And so the, we had put ourselves, there was a thought of a deadline to get questions for select board. That may be. your patience may be required as we all right so it's not I don't know the time but I think you know we're working towards it it's

generally speaking, in the conversations of the committee. I think over the summer, again, the reset was very helpful. I think we do have three very different designs than what were looked at last year. I think we are still struggling, I think, internally, externally on how to really make it clear that there's a reset. I think there's a lot of preconceived notions about the project that was looked at in May, about what we're presenting today. And I think generally about the iterative process of doing something like this design work in a really public Space. So those are, I think, some of the things that the committee in general is struggling with is how to get something in a way that residents can kind of understand nuanced complexities in a really quick way to be able to provide feedback. and then also I think even just consistency amongst the committee on the charge of the committee, the expectations and how to

sort of best present the least biased information to try to collect public feedback.

I think the engagement really we're trying to get, which I think we haven't really got a lot of, is good information to help kind of guide the design. We're not necessarily, you know, all of the engagement opportunity that things that we've done in the past, it's been a year now. So try to like get information so that the final design kind of have those features of the local kind of knowledge to it. And not necessarily getting consensus for the project, but getting people to know about it and getting information so that we can shape certain things that we have the ability to change versus things that we don't necessarily know their engineering standards and stuff like that.

And my understanding is that of the three plans, we're going to advance one, but the first decision is if it's four lanes, hybrid, or two lanes. Amenities will be decided on later.

so I'll give an example of like one of the struggles that I think the committee is having a lot of the public feedback that we keep on getting is like we don't want to get rid of parking we don't like parking so you should keep four lanes of traffic in this particular process we're going through those are two independent decisions. And in fact, the one that has the most parking has the least lanes of traffic, which sort of makes sense if you think about how you're developing out space that if you have less turn lanes, therefore you have more space to put parked cars. So it's really hard to even digest the feedback that we are getting because it feels like the feedback we're getting isn't for any of the options that we're looking at now. I also think it is really hard for people to look at what is like a concept plan and make a decision on it knowing that a concept is a concept and it's not final design. It's just an uneasy place, I feel like, for people to comment on because, you know, they might be commenting that they like one specific feature of that plan, but that particular feature could get designed out, right?

Like, oh, I like that one bump out and that bump out could look different as it moves forward through the process. So I think those are the things that are, making it challenging, I think, trying to get consensus about even moving forward with getting public input.

And the engagement we've done so far there's been a lot of good information that's come from it. I sat here one day about nine months ago or so and talked to people all day long in here. and there was a lot of good information and it's you know you get that and we've gotten it so far um and you know i think that we've presented on that to the committee as we've gone along of all of you know kind of what happens in here and what's happened in some of the other events. The Harvest Fair, it's kind of like it started a year ago. I was at the Harvest Fair before the committee was formed, talking to the consultants. And then here we are again, we've kind of reset doing the Harvest Fair sort of again as like a back into the community for outreach. And there's good information that departs from every one of those things, including the hearing that we held. you know there's good information there as well but also trying to like get information to get details to get kind of finite

Finite details that we need from constituents to be able to kind of forward that plan the best way.

Okay. Mayor Haynes. Can I ask a couple questions? The website seems to be still showing the May plan and not the current plans. So I think that's part of what contributes to people being very confused about what the plans are and how they might understand what they are. I don't even know. So I understand why people are confused. I'm wondering what is driving this December date that I keep certainly I hear angst. You know, we heard it earlier tonight about you're making a decision in December. People seem to believe that we're making a decision in December. I don't know of anything from the select board that drives a decision in December. Is there something else that we're not aware of that's driving a December decision? I do understand.

that we can't pay a consultant forever, right? So there's some bounds here, but I just don't understand what really the timeline is and what the drivers are on that so that we can figure out what the plan might be.

So I think the initial goal of trying to get, and it wasn't a decision of the whole project in December, it was simply trying to get a decision of the number of lane arrangements that we were looking at. So the intent was, Once we can firm up where the travel lanes are going to be, then we can look at the other amenities that can be provided. Parking, bike lanes, outdoor dining, additional pedestrian spaces, and parklets and other green spaces. So the first step we looked at when we had the revised charge was to look at that corridor and figure out, all right, what is the intent of the corridor? What are the goals of the project? because we're sort of designing a project backwards. We're sort of designing a project without goals, trying to get perspective as opposed to having specific goals that we're designing to. And so the hope had been to sort of get some decision making process in place.

So within the next 12 months, we would have an idea of how this project would be moving forward. And so the goal initially was to start public engagement through the Harvest Fair, utilize that to try to get more public outreach so we could, you know, that's one few event that we do have where we do touch a lot of people to get engagement with a survey, get engagement with our drawings, get engagement with you know a public forum of that type over the fall. I think one of the struggles that we have is that there's no good time to do anything so it's like you know you can't do things over the summer because the town is too quiet you don't want to do things over the holidays because the town you know people have other obligations so trying to find the right time to do engagement we felt like October and November would be an ideal time

of Time, and then completing the work of our committee to then hand the public engagement information, the content, over to the select board to make a decision. Ultimately, again, it's just trying to figure out how to gain forward momentum. So December was not like a hard deadline as far as set specifically. for when a decision needed to be made. But when we built out like a 12 month timeline, it seemed like a reasonable time to try to make the first of many decisions on the project, but certainly not a firm one and not one that we think we're going to be able to make it this time.

So, I'm sure other people will have comments, but I just have a couple of observations. What I think we've heard from the merchants in town is that parking spaces are extremely critical to them. to say that we're going to choose lanes but then parking remains a variable i understand i'm going to say that i understand why they feel very hesitant about making that call to me it feels like lanes and parking need to be clear, okay? And I think there was a sense that the lane set the curb, and because the curb was set, you knew what the parking was, so they were clear, but that seems... Even right now from you I'm hearing that parking is still a variable after the lanes are set. I feel like we need to set people some certainty because that is an area that the merchants are so worried about. All right.

And as you know, I keep thinking about I keep thinking about a planning board discussion that I listen to that I've talked about, but I but I think it was valuable. where they talked about the town's parking requirements being too great and recognizing that they never meet them. and everybody negotiates and we figure out how to make it work. But that still means that the parking that we have is gold to them and that's how the merchants feel about it. so I feel like making that a non-negotiable you know or something that says these these are two sort of stakes in the ground that that would maybe give us the ability to move forward that it's a big issue The other thing is I'm feeling like we are our own worst enemy in terms of making information available. The last minutes that are available from this committee on the website are from May. Finding the Envision videos is a challenge still.

The information that's here has the May plan, but not the current plans. We're making it so hard. for people in town to participate and to understand what's going on, that I hear why people are frustrated. That's just my observation.

one of the questions that you have that I just think is helpful. And again, I think the more clarity and the more direction we get from this, the more helpful it will be when we talk to the committee members. So I think one of the challenges we have with parking being a fixed entity is that there are other needs that the town may choose to one in its downtown. And if we do go with a four lane solution, it is very limited as to what we can accomplish. So I'll give a good example like outdoor dining. If we don't widen the sidewalks, there is no space for outdoor dining. Outdoor dining has to occupy something else because we're choosing to maintain the same number of lanes the only place i can go is parking i think one of the things we have talked about is in

you know kind of the questioning it's like in this plan if you were to lose five parking spaces is that okay right like you know trying to figure out what a reasonable parklet outdoor dining solution might look like um because i think that's one of the one of the struggles we're having is trying to get people to understand very real trade-offs that there are in every alternative. Not every alternative provides all the things. And I think some people are hoping that they can get all the things out of one of those alternatives.

So so I think that's a great point. And I think we should be clear. If you go with the four lane solution and you have parking, you don't get outdoor dining.

Yes.

unless somebody decides you're taking away parking spaces in the streets at a future time and other restaurants that may be future restaurants that come into a space or that currently do not have the outdoor dining are not going to be able to have access. So I think being clear about that and just say, if you do this, you don't have that. I think that is a good thing to do. I think we don't want to make it wishy-washy you want to say with this scenario this is what you get and you don't get outdoor dining I will also say

setting the parking necessarily in stone there's a decision point that comes up you know now which is the lane setting and once that once you've chosen chosen your your alternative there's another decision point that comes down the line that's not necessarily going to be on the committee and maybe on you as well that's you know hey here are your you've chosen this here are the parking like here's another decision point where we may be in front of you you may say well we don't we've heard from the merchants that we they don't want to lose any parking and so that is how you know we're going to vote on this you know at this point in the process um leave all the parking there and at that point you'll have the trade-off right like here is here are the places you could have outdoor dining here are the places you could have Trees or whatever. And here's where you could have parking. And that becomes another decision point down the line after we've chosen lanes. That makes sense.

I think that does make sense, but I think to the greatest degree that we can be clear, two lanes, you can have this as an option, Three lanes you can have this, four lanes you get this, and you don't get whatever you don't get in those. I think that gives people the ability to make some choice, because you are right. People are wishing in each scenario.

I also would say in many of the scenarios, we actually add parking to the downtown. And I think that's also a question, right? Like is the goal to add parking? Do we want to keep parking the same? And if we want to keep parking the same, what do you do with that extra space you've now created? And there's a whole host of opportunities there as well.

Marion, I'd like to also say that consultant did the three options all have set parking so that the issue is where does the curb where we choose your lane um all have maximum parking shortest crosswalks, and no bike lanes. So those are the three constants in all of them. I think once I think once we choose which option, I think, as you said, you're out of parking. You're not getting less parking. You're not getting more. It's what the plan is. and I personally don't think we're going back to parklets. So I don't think you get the four lane option with a parklet when you need. I think if you do four lanes, you don't have outdoor dining in Needham. and I think if you do a hybrid...

Unless you happen to have a big enough sidewalk that you already owned.

But actually, honestly, that doesn't happen in the four lane. According to the drawings, that's not an option. even at Sweet Basil. It's not. Unless you have a parklet, there is no option.

I will clarify. I think there's a little bit of an outdoor dining component, but not the same size as a full parking space that they currently have.

because they are gaining more. Even in the four lane plans, there are places where the sidewalk is is let's get bigger. So there's options, but it's smaller. And I think the four lane plan also has The slip lane that's over on the corner by Littleston. That becomes outdoor space in all of the three plans here. There is some chatter just out there about A plan that doesn't do anything, you know, so that that there are some people asking for that as well.

Can I just add to that for just a second? So I've heard the same thing. So the four lane option that we have and I appreciate Mary and I did not realize that Apex had not updated their documentation. So we will talk to them about that on the town's website. We have posted all of our slide decks from all the meetings. And if you look at the plans that are shown there, it compares a two lane, a two with turn lane and a four lane solution with what we currently have in existing conditions. I think I've sort of seen or we've heard this question like, well, can't you just fix the problems that we have and not do something like the four lane solution suggests in the plan. The four lane solution really is the limited touch approach to how to modify the downtown. There is more appropriately stacking traffic so that way people aren't merging and unmerging on top of intersections.

You don't have people in an uncontrolled environment crossing four lanes of traffic. And you are making little tiny sidewalk enhancements where you have the ability to add sidewalk as well. the you know, if we didn't do anything, I think there's this question like, can you just leave things the way they are? We will have to do some drainage improvement. I think for those who live near Bennington or on Bennington have seen how much disruption you have to cause in order to do a drainage project as as far as just the right of way and then you have to put things back and you can either put things back exactly as they are now but there's a cost to doing that or you can put them back a little bit differently and the cost is relatively the same to do either. So once you get into the infrastructure needs of the area,

There isn't a lot of wiggle room as far as just leaving things the way they are as far as pedestrian safety and other issues. So there will have to be some change in order to try to accommodate those issues. We did in that scenario choose to not touch the interior core of work that was already done. And that was done intentionally, one to maintain the same the way it looks today. And the second is also there is a slight cost savings if you're not disrupting existing signalization and existing infrastructure that was already improved. There is not a need. I think I've heard also a question like, do we need to tear? Tear that particular component of road up for drainage. And even in the original project that we did in 2017, a lot of the resources that went to that project went to drainage improvements that were already made within that corridor drainage

was already on our minds even back then when we did that project so we would just be it would be a matter of connecting into it as opposed to having to redo that area that area does need to get redone though if you do want to alter the other roadways because everything is sort of, we had a question like, well, could you do this one solution in this corridor and this other solution in this other corridor? They have to align. So that's really where some of the challenges are.

on the topic of input and feedback. Some inputs are going to be positive, some inputs are going to be negative. And I think comments have to be considered the same way, whether they're positive or negative. and so I watched the August 13th meeting of the committee and I didn't feel like that was happening so at that meeting there were suggestions or requests that businesses take down their not our vision signs, that's protected speech by businesses under the First Amendment. I don't think it's acceptable to be asking businesses to take down their signs. And I think By doing that, maybe that's a symptom, but I think you're losing people's trust in this project. And I think that's why it's become so divisive. And so in your public outreach, I think the main goal has to be earning people's trust or else this project is going to continue being divisive. And then on cost,

So this is just the design portion. I remember about a year ago, Karis, you mentioned just an estimate that to rip up the roads, do the drainage improvements, whatever design we implement would be at least $10 million. And that was a ballpark. But it sounds like it would be a lot of money. Our capital plan right now is super saturated. I don't know how that would fit in. So even in the best scenario where we come to a consensus about the design, When does it get built? What is the end goal? I want to make sure that we understand what can be built and what is realistic.

I think this is where some of the struggles are, It's a cart before the horse kind of conversation. So not having a plan about where you go makes it difficult to figure out what the resources are as far as a project. Because if it's a project that meets different state expectations, there may be state or federal funding available. or if it doesn't meet those expectations, then it's on the town to fund the project itself. So that's where it gets a little bit challenging, notwithstanding any of the other variables that are happening at the state or the federal level at this particular time. The initial plan that we had for funding the project was exclusively through Chapter 90. The Phase 2 of the project that was presented in 2021 cost about $4.5 million. We also extended the length of the project a little bit. Originally, it was supposed to end at the back end of Warren and Pickering and Maple.

And we've extended it to Lyndon and Warren because there's some logic about not going in and ripping up a road twice and disrupting the businesses more in that regard. So we are looking at our Chapter 90 allocations and figuring out what could be held for this particular project. We do have quite a significant bank of Chapter 90 funds that are still available, even though we have been utilizing them a little bit more frequently for projects like Mark Tree Road. So figuring that out and then trying to determine where the delta is and if that's pursued through grant funding, town funding. One of the things we have talked about as a committee is pursuing town meeting funding at some level just to make sure that there is a town meeting vote on the project so that way there's clarity that that's the direction for moving the project forward and you'll see last year and this year there'll be a future form in the capital plan for the downtown project

Thank you. And I would say I think there should be a town meeting vote, even if the source is Chapter 91s.

MS. Heidi? I guess I just want to thank the committee. It's clear that these are really difficult and uncomfortable conversations. People feel like they have a lot riding on everything in the project and not just in the project um public trust and having your input listened to so i guess I know that it's hard and I know that people have really mixed feelings about not only the project but the process. What I see is people persevering and trying really hard to speak to each other and express their concerns about their situations and to do it hopefully constructively to work through a difficult project. Even though it's hard, and at times contentious.

I just want to say thank you for doing it. I don't think that there's an easy way through some of these hard conversations. So I appreciate your efforts. and you know there's a lot still to be resolved obviously all of the points that have been made tonight are good ones and but still the work needs to be done so thank you for doing it

Thank you, Heidi. I had a couple sort of questions, observations. I agree with Marianne that the parking is a source of great anxiety and tension. and so if we can sort of provide some certainty it may mean departing a little bit from the decision tree that you have you know of first Elaine's and then because I think that it's understandable, right? It's parking. It's also traffic flow, right? And there's a couple of concerns there for commuters getting through. As we heard from Stu Carpenter, if we force traffic away, does that hurt businesses? People in the neighboring streets have expressed concern that traffic will be diverted onto their streets, right? So there's also the traffic flow. So I think, I don't know, have you guys got that yet? some estimates of how the traffic would move not yet so we have a we're we have a

An analysis of traffic that shows if there's no diversion, right? So if everybody kept going through the funnel that is the downtown existing conditions, four lane, two lane turn, and two lane, what that would look like. It's a kind of hypothetical scenario that won't actually ever happen. We did have a vote at the last meeting to ask the consultant to provide also a diversion analysis as part of the modeling on these new three alternatives. They had one on the original project, but obviously obviously that is being changed in every, it's not the same as even the two lane alternative that we're talking about. So we will have that in the next, before the select board secures this as information. One of the challenges we have, and maybe Joshi talked on this a little bit, is the issue of trust. And I think one of the concerns I have is that We can provide information. And I think the goal is to try to provide it with as least amount of bias as possible. But there is presumed bias in the communications that we have.

And so, you know, for me at least for the professionals that we hire the you know these are people who have engineering degrees they're working with modeling it's it's not i think we hear like that's your opinion or that's your thought process and we are dealing with a hypothetical science. So there's no like, you know, it doesn't get proven out until it gets built, but there is a science to it. And I just think trying to navigate that has also been a challenge.

Yeah, and I want to say that I would echo Heidi's comments that I really appreciate what this committee is doing and the professionalism of all of our staff who's been involved with this. and I regret if people's either motivations or competence has been questioned. I think that is not appropriate behavior and that hurts everyone. but I think for people to really be able to, well, it's ultimately going to be our decision, right? So that's another thing I just wanna sort of state, like that you guys don't have to come to a consensus, right, on your committee. and if you have kind of if there are areas where there's disagreement in the committee about a certain aspect i think it's fine if you just bring that whole ugly mess to us and we'll sort through that and sort of to your point the different views right because some people like this some people don't we don't agree that's fine well then we can

we can sort of sort through that but I think that ultimately the trade-offs if it's possible to get this down it's like okay in this scenario this is your parking this is your traffic flow and these are your amenities I know it's kind of hard to do, but so that there's like a trade-off. Because I think that was great, the idea, well, here you get the four lanes. That's some sort of proxy for traffic flow, but you don't get. the amenities the outdoor dining or here you get the outdoor dining and maybe your you know your traffic flow I'm assuming is a little bit better the more lanes there are you know and just so people can see and maybe there's trade-offs people are willing to make trade-offs they're not willing to make but i think that would i know this is a lot on the survey but

like just sort of forcing people to choose between these things like here are your options and no you can't have you know there's a b and c you can't have d you can't have e you can't have all these imaginary things where everything's perfect you can have these Which do you want? What is your preference if you have to trade off? Because we have to trade off. There's only so many feet. and yeah nobody likes trade-offs but you know I think and you know people won't agree people have different values but it would be interesting I mean I'm interested to see the feedback but I know there's concern about parking I know there's concern about congestion and diversion and and that part I think we need to understand as well as you know sketch out what the amenities would be you know what I mean what what do you get you know with more sidewalk you know so that so that in fairness so that we can all look and try to make a, I know it's, I'm oversimplifying.

It's a challenge, I think. Anytime we show a picture, it's like, well, this is what you're building. and it's not what we're trying to show we're not trying we're trying to show examples we're not trying to show foregone conclusions and I think again it goes back to that trust comment that you think I think you made which is really observant is that because there isn't that trust, every time they see something, they panic. But I think to your point, we certainly could ask questions about the value of parking, We certainly could look at the designs and maybe set some minimum thresholds for parking in each one of the designs just to try to provide some assurances, I think is really what people are looking for. that what they're seeing isn't going to be wildly modified when we move forward.

Yeah, and I think that's important because I think otherwise, how can you express a preference when the thing you most care about isn't definite?

or if it's not shown like if the thing you most care about isn't in one of the options there has to be a way to express that too if it's you know just a free comment field

but yeah parking and congestion I think are two things that if there were the two things that people were most worried about back

in May, you know, but yeah, Marianne. And I think, Karis, while you're here, maybe you could also generally update people on what's going on with the traffic signals. I think the last time we had a discussion of that, we were saying, well, it didn't happen in the summer, but it's happening in September. And I think now it's out longer because of equipment lead times. So if you could maybe talk about that, that would also be a useful update for the town.

So I guess there's a saying like you get what you pay for. So the program that the town is doing in the downtown is a bottleneck reduction program that is run by the state. So the state did all the design work for us, which was great. And they put the project out to bid. And so we are working with the bidder through that project. At the time that we had worked on the project, we had assumed that we would be implementing not just video detection signals, which is sort of the new industry standard for how to manage traffic, but adaptive signals. and basically what adaptive signals are is they use AI technology to be able to modify traffic patterns and learn and adjust. So typically when you do a Old style traffic signal, you say this phase is this long, this phase is that long, because we assume this many cars are moving through these patterns. these signals know exactly how many cars are moving through. They see the patterns and they make adjustments based on those patterns. They also talk to each other, right? So you have three signals in a corridor right now that are on...

effectively timers and they talk to each other basically when the train comes and then they sort of don't talk to each other. These ones would actually coordinate between all three signals, obviously the train preempting the rest of the phase. So we had thought we were getting adaptive signals. And then when we started the project, it turns out the state had been just regular video detection. So we put a timeout on the project and we said, no, we really want video detection. Turns out there's two companies that are big in the market. The vendor had a preference for one. We have a preference for another. We are winning out, but it just took a little bit longer than we had initially anticipated. So that's why the project has been delayed. We want to make sure that what we put down is going to be effective.

Good. Thank you for doing that. I'd rather have something better than something fast.

Yes, I was going to say as somebody who hasn't driven from west to east in the town without stopping at three lights in over a year, I'm a huge fan of doing something that might make that flow smoother.

Yeah, I thought I'd have to change my voting address to Proud Mary because I was waiting at that light.

So it would be a plus to have that. But now at least people. So it's not even clear to me that it's coming in December. You didn't actually give us a new timeline. I'm hedging my bet and not giving you a timeline. We finally have agreed on a vendor, so this is a plus. When do you think you might come back to us with a timeline? Let me ask that question. I can come back in November with a timeline. Okay, thank you, Karis.

and do you expect, I know there's a traffic study or count that's involved. Right.

So the bottleneck, the technology that they're putting down for the project for the bottleneck reduction. Sorry, for Envision. I'm jumping back and forth. Sorry. So they did a count on September 9th. I'll say one of the challenges we have is that, again, this is my concern. you know there was some pushback as to whether or not that was an appropriate date to do a traffic count because it's the beginning of school and some of the businesses felt like they were less busy. I will say typically the first two weeks of school are actually one of the worst traffic times because people haven't figured out their routines yet. So you tend to see more congestion during that time frame than less. We don't have an intent of redoing that traffic count, but they did that traffic count throughout the entire day.

maybe I'm complicating things I think that traffic count once you redo the traffic signals it's no longer relevant is it it's the number of vehicles that go through the intersection not the speed at which they go through the intersection So will you be able to answer people's questions? Because people have questions about how will a two-lane configuration affect my speed through an intersection. Will you be able to answer that question?

it won't be speed because we want everyone to go the speed limit it's the amount of like the time that it takes to get to the intersection yes yes because that's all built with models now right all three of the configurations will change a little bit the way you process through the signals and so the the modeling takes. This is how many vehicles are here at this time. This is how many vehicles are here at that time. And then it runs scenarios through the intersection corridor and makes predictions for how long it will take. So the information from the count perspective will be good in either scenario.

But the modeling is, I presume, going to have to be redone once the traffic signals are aligned.

The modeling assumed adaptive signals regardless. So in all three scenarios, we assumed adaptive signals.

OK, so the same thing we're intending to implement? Yes. Yep.

Other comments, questions? I was just going to make one more. I mean, Josh talked about the Not My Vision signs as being a First Amendment protected speech. I really prefer to talk about it as being a sign that's there that says we want to believe and when we're comfortable that we're being heard. right then we're comfortable taking those signs down i think that's what i've heard from the merchants that i've talked to and so really the question for them is they just want to feel that they are heard and that they are participating. And I think all these questions that we've talked about, about being able to create some certainty for them around parking, are really key to their being able to, they also want this to be successful and frankly having a successful downtown is key to their success. I mean people do understand that.

and despite everything that says about you know what if nothing changes the answer is we didn't get to this point also because everything's perfect there right there are other things that can improve So I just think it's a balance of all of that, but we need to be able to take those in and they are a huge stakeholder and we need to create some certainty around that for them.

I will say that that conversation for me anyways when it happened, that information that they gave us there was that, you know, We don't feel comfortable because we don't have enough information. That was the information that I got from that question that was asked of them. I didn't really hear take down your sign I heard like you know what is the plan with it and how does it work into this thing and that is the information we got from there so it's helpful for me anyways to understand you know where their standpoint was with that and we have those members on the committee that are in the business neighborhood not necessarily their own but you know talking for people that they know so that is the information from that specific conversation that that we got that I felt was valuable. And there and I didn't hear necessarily, but I was sitting there at the time and I haven't really listened to it. People asking other people to do certain things. I think it was more of a question of, you know, like, what is

I think that's fair.

The question was phrased about how you could have a survey with a sign in a window, which is also a reasonable question. So the real question is how do our merchants get to the point where they feel like they're heard so there's trust in the conversation and that can move forward. And I think that only benefits all of us to get to that level.

One of the things we did talk about was providing businesses with flyers so they could have them in their businesses. One of the things in the very early stages of this process we found out is that more than half of the customers that go to the businesses are likely from out of Needham. So there is a constituency that they have that really does, you know, they're not Needham residents, so they wouldn't normally have a seat at the table in these conversations. So we thought it would be useful to provide them access to that survey and then we're also looking at sort of dividing it out into three different components we want to look at the business community we want to look at the residential community and we want to look at the out-of-town customer community because those all three may have very different perceptions and needs

Thank you. That's helpful.

Other discussion? I guess I would just make one last comment about sort of the feelings of the business owners. which is I don't think of them as a separate constituency in the fact that the reason why the downtown is vibrant is because of the merchants. it's sort of for all of us the downtown minus merchants minus restaurants is nothing there's no reason to come i mean we have a nice common but you know basically there's no reason to come so it I don't I would hope we don't think of them as just a constituency like others because they create the vibrancy that makes it a place to go to so

yeah i would say the i think the pillars of this are Public Safety and Economic Fatality. And I think if you can mash the two together and make a word, because sometimes I think those are the same thing. If it's safer, you'll increase economic fatality. You'll get more people down there. It'll be a sense of place. And so I think that would help all the business community and Needham residents and consumers. So it's a win-win. Yes. All right.

Yes. Just so long as we aren't telling the business community what it is that they need, you know, that we are listening to them. Yeah, or residents too. Or anyone. But yeah, we listen to what their stated needs are rather than telling them what they are. Any other comment? I believe this is our last agenda item and we do not have a vote.

I could be a contrarian for a moment that says We all should go into this recognizing that usually when you ask people what they want that they are not able to actually tell you what they want. Data says it doesn't actually work that way, but it does involve really careful listening to people about what their values are. And from there, then you're trying to discern what's the way forward. So fair.

And I also want to thank Tim.

Tim has been a stalwart.

You've been very good. You do a good job, so thank you.

Can't feel like I'm coming to the principal's office.

The chairs don't help, right?

The lineup, the chairs. I like it. So I guess I would say to the whole committee, I know that this work has already taken longer than anybody planned. and I am certain that it will come to a conclusion and for the town's sake I really want it to be a successful conclusion. So I'm invested in your success and I hope everybody else is too. Yes, thank you.

Thank you so much.

We've reached the end of the agenda. I think Kevin wants to make a motion. I'm sure Kevin wants to make a motion.

I don't see the rush, but okay. Actually, Josh, you made a motion?

Yeah.

I'll second it.

Heidi? Yes. Marianne? Yes. Josh? Yes. Kevin?

Yes.

And the chair votes yes. We are adjourned.

Thank you.