1672 Worcester RoadAnd the Rugg Gates House

What are the plans for this property?

June 20 2006 EDIC minutes

“Tim Hanna would like the Town to take back this site from the Massachusetts Turnpike authority so that he can redevelop the site, most likely into a restaurant.”

“If it requires legal action, Weisbrod’s opinion is that the EDIC should not be out front leading the charge as it would be a conflict of interest.”

July 18, 2006 EDIC minutes

“Rogers recommended meeting with Hanna to understand their legal opinion that the Town may use eminent domain against the Turnpike Authority.”

“Taberner contacted the Turnpike Authority, which stated that they would not deal with Timothy Hanna.”

“Taberner added that we would have to release an RFP for the property, if we were to take and then re-use it for other than government/public use. Mr. Hanna could bid on the property, but we cannot favor Hanna or provide an exclusive opportunity without an RFP process. Taberner added that this could be an opportunity to improve the Park and Ride and other properties on the site, while leaving Boston Properties’ access intact for its proposed project.”

December 12, 2006 EDIC minutes

“Mulvey reported that he and Rogers had a meeting with the Board of Selectmen in Executive Session Regarding this property and explained that Town Counsel Chris Petrini ruled that the sensitivity of the topic met the criteria for a closed session.”

“The Turnpike Authority is frustrated with the Town’s difficult permitting process. Further, this property has been offered to the Town twice previously.”

“The bidder is proposing to pay $80,000 to the Turnpike Authority for the site. The Town is obligated to give $87,500 from the Turnpike Authority general fund. Mulvey and Rogers feel the site is worth more. A Framingham resident is a Turnpike Authority board member, and will not take a position on the issue.”

“Mulvey is aware that we do not have an internal supporter of this project at the Turnpike Authority.”

Planting Plan for Interchange 12

Boston Properties predicted view

Route 9 traffic this morning, May 15

(The following information is drawn from an April 29 article in the Boston Globe)

Here’s what local planners are saying about traffic on Route 9:

"Completely oversubscribed" -Southborough Town Planner Vera Kolias

"Overdemanded and undercapacited“ - Patrick Reffett , Natick's community development director

"We're nearing a crisis" - state Senator Karen Spilka

If communities continue on a path of aggressive building, according to the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission:

A trip from Newton to Framingham that now takes 30 minutes will take an hour, or longer.

Trips from Southborough could run three times longer than now.

Westborough could see the evening commute time increase a mind-boggling fivefold. It is common for motorists in rush-hour traffic to endure four or more light cycles to get past...Edgell Road in Framingham.

Other Route 9 developments affecting traffic:

Traffic on Route 9 has been fairly stable over the past decade, at 50,000 cars daily.

The Natick Collection (Natick Mall) is expected to add 9,000 cars a day to the interchange at Speen Street and Route 9, where 90,000 cars already converge.

There are plans for a new complex near the Atrium mall that could add 11,000 car trips each weekday.

A proposed Home Depot store and an office building near Lyman Street in Westborough could add 4,000 car trips daily.

A 2.2 million-square-foot expansion by EMC, a project straddling the Southborough-Westborough line, could generate 15,000 car trips daily.

Interchange 12 traffic prediction

Route 9 is in danger of becoming gridlocked by development and commuters.

"We can't fix Route 9 by building our way out or widening the road or reducing the curb cuts. We have a saying in my business: 'It's the land

use, stupid.'"

- Marc Draisen,Executive Director of the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission.

Our neighborhood supports economic development in Framingham, and we would like to see the town receive tax revenue for 1672 Worcester Road. However, the proposed land taking, as described in Article 4 of the May 15 Special Town Meeting Warrant, lacks transparency to say the least.

It also appears to be part of the much larger development at Interchange 12, which we feel is inappropriate to the site. We, the neighbors, would like to see development continue on the north side of the Pike, but it does not belong in our residential neighborhood. At the very least, more mitigation is needed.

Although the Board of Selectmen may not wish to go forward with the land taking at this time, we expect the issue to arise again, so we ask Town Meeting to keep our concerns in mind while developing this property.

Forecast: cloudy with a chance of litigation

We believe that the Special Permit for the Interchange 12 development was granted inappropriately, and without adequate protection of the neighborhood.

We hope that Town Meeting will vote to refer Article 4 of the Special Town Meeting Warrant back to the sponsor.

And we ask the Planning Board to vote not to renew the Special Permit for Interchange 12 at the May 24 Public Hearing.

For more information, or to contact us, visit the website

http://StopExit12.info

Thank you.