Marlborough Economic Development Master Plan (Marlborough, Massachusetts)

MARLBOROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MASTER PLAN: BUILDING THE NEW MARLBOROUGH ECONOMY

Marlborough Residential Land Use Map

. 3,000 0 3,0001,500 Feet

LegendLand Use RESIDENTIAL USE TYPES

SINGLE FAMILY HOMES

ACCESSORY LAND AND MULTIPLE PROPERTIES

TWO FAMILY HOMES

THREE FAMILY HOMES

APARTMENTS

CONDOMUNIUMS

GROUP HOUSING (NON-TRANSIENT)

MOBILE HOMES

CHILD CARE

VACANT RESIDENTIAL LAND

NON-RESIDENTIAL

Prepared for

Marlborough Economic Development Corporation Prepared by

FXM Associates with The Cecil Group, AECOM and EDR Group

September 2011

Prepared for the Marlborough Economic Development Corp.

Prepared by FXM Associates with The Cecil Group, Inc., AECOM, and EDR Group

Images in this report have been provided by Ajita Perera of the Marlborough Economic Development Corporation.

September 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTSINTRODUCTION�� 1

1.1 EconomicDevelopmentMasterPlanPurposeandObjectives..................................2

1.2.PlanningProcessandPublicOutreach......................................................................2

1.3.ReportOrganization....................................................................................................3

1.4.DataLimitations...........................................................................................................3

1.5 PotentiallyRelevantReportsandDataDevelopedbyOthers.....................................4

CITY�OF�MARLBOROUGH�SOCIOECONOMIC��PROFILE,�REAL�ESTATE�MARKET�AND�FISCAL�OVERVIEW�� 5

2.1 GreaterMarlboroughRegion.....................................................................................6

2.2 DemographicCharacteristics......................................................................................6

2.3 BusinessEstablishmentsJobsandSales..................................................................7

2.4MAPCPopulationProjections...................................................................................10

2.5MAPCEmploymentProjectionsandSpaceDemand...............................................12

2.6RealEstateMarketOverview.....................................................................................14

2.7.FiscalOverview..........................................................................................................20

PUBLIC�OUTREACH�AND�PARTICIPATION�� 233.1 SummaryofFocusGroupDiscussions.....................................................................24

3.2 PublicWorkshopHighlights......................................................................................26

3.3 VisualPreferenceSurvey...........................................................................................28

3.4 OverviewofInterviews...............................................................................................32

3.5 EconomicDevelopmentIssuesandOpportunities..................................................36

INDUSTRIAL�SECTOR�OVERVIEW�� 394.1 RoleinMarlboroughEconomy..................................................................................40

4.2IndustrialRealEstateMarketAnalysis......................................................................54

4.3 Build-outAnalysis......................................................................................................57

4.4 IndustrialSectorEconomicDevelopmentGoalsandActionItems.........................................77

i

COMMERCIAL�SECTOR�OVERVIEW�� 815.1 RoleinMarlboroughEconomy..................................................................................82

5.2 RealEstateMarketAnalysis......................................................................................98

5.3 CommercialBuild-outAnalysis...............................................................................102

5.4 CommercialSectorEconomicDevelopmentGoalandActionItems.....................118

RETAIL�SECTOR�OVERVIEW�� 1236.1 RoleinMarlboroughEconomy................................................................................124

6.2 RetailRealEstateMarketAnalysis..........................................................................132

6.3 Build-outAnalysis....................................................................................................140

6.4 RetailSectorEconomicDevelopmentGoals..........................................................150

RESIDENTIAL�SECTOR�OVERVIEW�� 1537.1 RoleinMarlboroughEconomy................................................................................154

7.2 RealEstateMarketAnalysis....................................................................................158

7.3.DemandforMarketRateResidentialRentalsandCondos...................................166

7.4ResidentialEconomicDevelopmentGoalsandActionItems................................171

CITY,�REGIONAL�AND�STATE�LABOR�MARKETS�� 1738.1 OverviewofSectorsandClusters...........................................................................176

8.2 OverviewofOccupationalStructures......................................................................177

8.3 OverviewofHighDemandOccupations.................................................................181

8.4MarlboroughCompetitiveEnvironment..................................................................182

8.5 LaborMarketEconomicDevelopmentGoalsandActionItems.............................186

ECONOMIC�DEVELOPMENT�SUPPORT�SYSTEMS�� 1899.1 OverviewofServices,CapacityandDeficiencies..................................................190

9.2 LEAPAnalysisSummary.........................................................................................196

9.3 SupportSystemsEconomicDevelopmentGoalsandActionItems.......................203

MARLBOROUGH�QUALITY�OF�LIFE��20510.1QualityofLifeComparativeMetrics......................................................................206

10.2QualityofLifeGoals&ObjectivesStatement.......................................................215

ii

MARLBOROUGH�ECONOMIC�DEVELOPMENT��CAPACITY�&�RESOURCES�� 217

11.1WhyshouldMarlboroughundertakeaLocalEconomicDevelopmentPlan?.....218

11.2Marlborough’sCurrentEconomicDevelopmentCapacity-TheLocalEntities...219

11.3OtherStateEconomicDevelopmentResources..................................................239

11.4ResourcesNeededtoImplementtheMarlboroughEconomicDevelopmentStrategy&ActionPlan��240

ECONOMIC�DEVELOPMENT�STRATEGY�ACTION�PLAN��24512.1EconomicDevelopmentIssues,AssetsandOpportunities.................................246

12.2IndustrialSectorEconomicDevelopmentGoals&ActionItems..........................250

12.3CommercialSectorEconomicDevelopmentGoalsandActionItems.................252

12.4RetailSectorEconomicDevelopmentGoalsandActionItems............................254

12.5ResidentialEconomicDevelopmentGoalsandActionItems.............................256

12.6LaborMarketEconomicDevelopmentGoals&ActionItems..............................256

12.7SupportSystemsEconomicDevelopmentGoals&ActionItems........................258

12.8QualityofLifeGoals&ObjectivesStatement.......................................................260

12.9EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourceGoalsandActionItems..............261

APPENDIX�A:��Marlborough Economic Development Competitiveness Analysis DRAFT

APPENDIX�B:��Brownfields 2011 Cleanup Grant Fact Sheet

APPENDIX�C:��Focus Group Notes

APPENDIX�D:� Public Workshop Notes

APPENDIX�E:��Visual Preference Survey Results

APPENDIX�F:�� Consultant Team Contacts & Interviews

APPENDIX�G:� Socioeconomic Profiles

iii

INTRODUCTION1Economic Development Master Plan Purpose and Objectives

Planning Process and Public Outreach

Report Organization

Data Limitations

Potentially Relevant Reports and Data Developed by Others

2

M A R L B O R O U G HE c o n o m i c D e v e l o p m e n t P l a n

1Introduction

1.1ECONOMICDEVELOPMENTMASTERPLANPURPOSEANDOBJECTIVES

Public policy has a strong effect on economic development as represented in the develop-ment history of Marlborough. While it was settled as a typical New England agricultural com-munity and later grew as a manufacturing center, the City of Marlborough decided on Octo-ber 1, 1956 to promote growth by applying industrial zoning to the whole southwest quadrant of the City and establishing an Industrial Finance Commission.1 With the concurrent opening of I-495, these actions provided positive results as historical documents illustrate. The city-wide Master Plan of 1985 projected 5 million square feet of new office and light industrial development by 2010. Since 1985, the City has actually seen more than 8 million square feet of new commercial and industrial development.2

This Economic Development Master Plan is not a city-wide master plan. While the 1985 Master Plan offers historical perspective, that Plan does not provide a meaningful context or framework for evaluating priorities for future community growth. During the past 25 years, Marlborough has experienced many physical, demographic and economic changes in re-sponse to local and regional conditions. Preparation of this report revealed an urgent need for the City to update its City-wide Master Plan and thereby address critical issues that are beyond the scope of this study.

As presented in the Marlborough Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) request for consultant proposals (RFP), the overall objectives of this Economic Development Master Plan are to: improve economic opportunities for Marlborough residents; stabilize the Marl-borough residential property tax rate; and promote local business retention, expansion and attraction. The MEDC commissioned this planning effort to answer the five following general questions based on available City data and background information, secondary source re-search, and public input solicited during preparation of this study.

• What is the composition of the City’s economy?

• What are characteristics of the City’s key economic sectors?

• What do these sectors contribute to the local economy?

• What kind and amount of economic growth can the City expect?

• How can the City improve its economic development prospects and process?

1.2PLANNINGPROCESSANDPUBLICOUTREACH

The public participation component of the Marlborough Economic Development Plan was undertaken to increase civic understanding of the City’s growth opportunities, limitations and trade-offs required to achieve desired results. The MEDC supported the consultant team’s effort by convening focus groups, forums and other interactive means of communicating with residents, business and property owners, and other community stakeholders. In addi-tion, the consultants conducted interviews with representatives of local industries, real estate brokers, property owners and developers, local organizations, and others knowledgeable about Marlborough’s economic conditions.

1 Master Plan, City of Marlborough April 19852 As determined by current City Assessors records


3

1.3REPORTORGANIZATION

The MEDC established the format for this Economic Development Master Plan and decided to organize the report contents according to its definition of “sectors.” The MEDC is ex-pected to issue a separate Executive Summary, which will synthesize and summarize find-ings described in this report, identify key opportunities and challenges influencing economic growth and job creation in Marlborough, and recommend priority implementation actions.

The “sector” definitions used by the MEDC are: Industrial, Commercial, Retail and Residen-tial. In the report, “Industrial Sector” refers to manufacturing industries and real estate space classified as industrial by conventional real estate market terms. The “Commercial Sector” section refers to industries that are not manufacturing or retail and the corresponding real es-tate market analyses address office space. The “Retail Sector” refers to industries classified as retail in conventional economic reporting terms as well as real estate classified as retail space in conventional market terms. The “Residential Sector” section of the report provides an overview of residential market trends and focuses on target households that could sup-port the MEDC goal of improving net fiscal revenues.

1.4DATALIMITATIONS

Throughout the report, there are quantitative estimates of number of businesses, jobs, and business sales in the City of Marlborough and the six surrounding communities of Greater Marlborough. Unfortunately, the varied data sources used to obtain these numbers for spe-cific analyses lack consistent definitions of jobs and business sales. None of these data can be used exclusively to provide the best available estimates of current conditions, trends or forecasts. Specific data definitions and limitations are referenced in the body of the report, as warranted. The following list describes major secondary source data used in this report and related definitions and limitations.

• The US Regional Economic Information System (REIS) is a comprehensive database of population, households, income and jobs maintained by the US Department of Com-merce, Bureau of Economic Analysis. REIS is considered by academic researchers and practitioners as the most reliable source of these data -- principally because it is the only data source with access to IRS records. Unfortunately, REIS data is available only at the County level and reports generalized industry categories lacking the specificity of the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) or North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes.

• Claritas SiteReports provides the most recent available data (2010 or 2011) on detailed demographic, employment and business characteristics at the community level. Clari-tas is a proprietary data service that purports to use the most recent US Economic Cen-sus and “other” government and private data sources, including proprietary algorithms to disaggregate the REIS data to the community level. Claritas does not provide trend data beyond their current or most recent year estimates.

• The Massachusetts Department of Labor & Workforce Training (MassDOL) provides job and wage estimates for a generalized list of industries at the community level. The job estimates provided by MassDOL (called ES 202 data series) are only for those jobs covered by unemployment insurance. This data does not include self-employed or part-time workers who are not covered by unemployment insurance. MassDOL job estimates are substantially below the estimates provided by REIS or Claritas, as many industries are comprised of small firms or individuals not covered by unemployment

4


1Introduction

insurance (especially professional and technical services, retail and financial services). However, MassDOL does provide 10-year historical data at the community level that is not available from any other source.

• The consultant team used CoStar Property Information Services (commercial markets) and The Warren Group (residential markets) for the analyses of real estate market con-ditions and trends. Each source is a proprietary, subscription database, and while con-sidered the most comprehensive reference data by most professional real estate ana-lysts, neither can be considered to have 100% coverage of all relevant market data nor do they necessarily correspond with other publicly and privately available data.

Therefore, readers are cautioned that what may appear to be discrepancies in number of jobs shown in tables or text actually are reflections of these differing definitions.

1.5POTENTIALLYRELEVANTREPORTSANDDATADEVELOPEDBYOTHERS

Every reasonable effort was made by the MEDC on behalf of the consultant team to obtain all potentially relevant reports and other data from City officials. The consultant team also made every reasonable effort to obtain available, potentially relevant reports and data devel-oped by government agencies and private organizations. However, neither the MEDC nor the consultant team warrants that the sources used in this report include all such potentially relevant information.

While every reasonable effort was made to verify and compare information sources and to avoid reliance on any single source exclusively, neither the MEDC nor the consultant as-sumes responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the data or other information de-veloped by others and used in this report.

CITY OF MARLBOROUGH SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE, REAL ESTATE MARKET AND FISCAL OVERVIEW

2Greater Marlborough Region

Demographic Characteristics

Business Establishments, Jobs and Sales

MAPC Baseline Population Projections

MAPC Employment Projections and Space Demand

Real Estate Market Overview

6


2City of Marlborough Socioeconomic Profile, Real Estate Market and Fiscal Overview

2.1GREATERMARLBOROUGHREGION

The City of Marlborough is one of the 35 suburban communities in the MetroWest area of Boston that is situated within the I-495 corridor of high technology commerce. This plan-ning analysis uses a generally accepted definition of the Greater Marlborough local region that includes the City and the six surrounding towns of Berlin, Hudson, Northborough, Southborough, Sudbury and Westborough.1

The following highlights provide an overview of Marlborough demographic characteristics and business activity, which includes comparisons to the Greater Marlborough region, based on standard secondary sources and research industry databases.2 More detailed socioeconomic data, tables and figures are contained in the Appendices to this document.

2.2DEMOGRAPHICCHARACTERISTICS

Population and Households

• The estimated 38,450 City residents represented about 32% of the Greater Marlbor-ough population (118,620), and the City’s 15,436 households comprised approxi-mately 35% of all households in the local region.

• From 2000 to 2010, the City’s population and households grew an estimated 6%, while the population and households in Greater Marlborough overall increased 9%.

• The average City household size was 2.46 residents, which is slightly smaller than the Greater Marlborough average of 2.76.

• Approximately 7,750 Marlborough residents (22%) aged five years and older spoke a language other than English at home. Of those residents, 4,270 (12%) spoke an IndoEuropean language and 2,240 (6.2%) spoke Spanish.

• By 2015, the City’s population and households are projected to increase 2% to 39,260 residents in 15,780 households. Greater Marlborough is projected to grow about 3% to approximately 121,384 residents in 45,740 households during the same period.

Income and Poverty Status

• Marlborough households had an estimated average income of $88,500, median in-come of $71,100, and per capita income of $35,710; Greater Marlborough house-holds had an average income of $133,800, median income of $106,785, and per capita income of $47,400.

• In 2010, an estimated 2,340 City households (15%) had annual incomes of less than $25,000. This accounts for 53% of all Greater Marlborough households at the same income level.

• The 9,845 family households comprised 64% of the estimated 15,436 Marlborough households, and the 545 Marlborough family households with poverty level incomes represented 51% of the region’s 1,050 family households with poverty level incomes.

1 Source: MEDC. The MetroWest Economic Research Center (MERC) defines the Greater Marlborough region to in-clude the four communities of Hudson, Marlborough, Northborough and Westborough Greater Marlborough Region webpage at www.merc-online.com

2 Nielsen Claritas 2010 SiteReports, a proprietary subscription database service.


7

Employment and Occupations

• About 91% of Marlborough residents aged 25 and older were high school graduates, and 41% had college degrees. In Greater Marloborough, 95 % of residents were high school graduates, and 51% had college degrees.

• Of the estimated 38,450 Marlborough residents in the labor force, 71% were civilian employees (21,625), 26% were not in the workforce (7,770), and 3.5% were unem-ployed (1,030). City residents accounted for 35% of the Greater Marlborough labor force.

• Occupations of employed Marlborough residents included: Office/Administrative Sup-port (13.2%), Management (11.3%), Sales Related (10.4%), Computer/Mathematical (6.6%), and Building/Ground Maintenance (6.4%).

Housing and Occupancy

• The majority of Marlborough residents (65%) lived in owner-occupied housing com-pared with 75% in the Greater Marlborough region, and the estimated median value of owner-occupied housing in the City was $272,375 compared with $409,000 in Greater Marlborough.

• Marlborough had 5,130 multifamily units (3+units), which comprised 32% of the City’s housing stock and 50% of all multifamily housing in Greater Marlborough.

2.3BUSINESSESTABLISHMENTS,JOBSANDSALES

Greater Marlborough Region Business Activity

• Approximately 6,450 business establishments in Greater Marlborough communities provided almost 87,000 jobs and generated more than $10 billion in 2010 sales.

• Service sector businesses (2,650) represented about 41% of the region’s economy with an estimated 30,500 jobs and almost $3.1 billion sales, or 34% of all jobs and 31% of all sales.

• Retail Trade was the second largest industry sector with 1,260 establishments (20%) providing 17,135 workers and generating $2.4 billion in annual sales.

• Finance, Insurance, Real Estate (FIRE) businesses accounted for 10% of the region’s economy (610), provided 11% of all jobs (9,534), and generated 17% of all sales ($1.8 billion).

• An estimated 366 Manufacturing establishments in Greater Marlborough accounted for 6% of all businesses, provided 15% of the region’s jobs (12,640) and generated 10% of all region sales ($986 million).

8



City of Marlborough Business Activity

• Approximately 2,070 business establishments in Marlborough provided 31,540 jobs and generated annual sales estimated at $3.6 billion in 2010.

• Service business establishments accounted for 40% of the Marlborough economy, provided 31% of all jobs (9,800), and generated 26% of business sales (almost $921 million).

• Retail Trade had 460 businesses or 22% of all City establishments, provided 6,170 jobs or 20% of all local jobs, and had sales estimated at $766 million or 21% of all business sales.

• An estimated 176 Fire Insurance Real Estate (FIRE) businesses accounted for about 9% of Marlborough economy, provided 12% of local jobs (3,860), and generated 19% of 2010 business sales ($682 million).

• The 127 Manufacturing businesses represented about 6% of all borough establish-ments, provided 18% of all jobs and generated sales estimated at $429 million that accounted for 12% of all local business sales in 2010.

• The 84 Transportation Communication Public Utilities (TCPU) businesses were 4% of the City’s establishments, provided 2,640 jobs and had annual sales of $288 million representing about 8% of all local sales.

Source: Nielson Claritas Site Reports 2010 and FXM Associates

Categories of Businesses

Number of

Businesses% of

RegionNumber of

Jobs% of

RegionSales

(million)% of

Region

All Industries 6,405 87,081 $10,149.3

All Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 366 5.7% 12,643 14.5% $985.9 9.7%

All Retailing (SIC 52-59) 1,257 19.6% 17,135 19.7% $2,421.1 23.9%

Public Administration (SIC 90-97) 185 2.9% 1,770 2.0% 0 0

Agriculture (SIC 1-7) 159 2.5% 881 1.0% $37.6 0.4%

Construction (SIC 13-17) 483 7.5% 2,735 3.1% $496.4 4.9%

Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 366 5.7% 12,643 14.5% $985.9 9.7%

Transportation, Communication,

Public Utilities (SIC 41-49)217 3.4% 4,441 5.1% $491.2 4.8%

Wholesale Trade (50-51) 302 4.7% 4,993 5.7% $851.8 8.4%

Retail Trade (SIC 52-59) 1,257 19.6% 17,135 19.7% $2,421.1 23.9%

Finance, Insurance, Real Estate

(SIC60-67)610 9.5% 9,934 11.4% $1,763.2 17.4%

Services (SIC 70-89) 2,653 41.4% 30,505 35.0% $3,094.5 30.5%

Government (SIC 91-99) 351 5.5% 3,698 4.2% 0 0

Table 2.3.1 GreaterMarlboroughRegionSummaryIndustries, Jobs, and Business Sales


9

Comparison of Local and Regional Business Activity

• The estimated 2,070 Marlborough business establishments were 32% of all businesses, had 36% of all jobs, and generated 35% of all sales in the Greater Marlborough region.

• Transportation Communication Public Utilities (TCPU) businesses in Marlborough were 34% of all Greater Marlborough establishments in this sector and accounted for about 60% of the jobs and annual sales.

• The City’s 460 Retail Trade establishments represented 37% of all Greater Marlborough retail businesses and accounted for 36% and 32% of all sector jobs and sales, respectively.

• The 129 Manufacturing businesses in Marlborough constituted about 35% of the Greater Marlborough region’s manufacturing establishments and 44% of the jobs and annual sales.

• The City’s 176 Fire Insurance Real Estate (FIRE) businesses accounted for 29% of FIRE establishments in Greater Marlborough and 39% of the jobs and annual sales.



Number of

Businesses% of

RegionNumber of

Jobs% of

RegionSales

(million)% of

Region

All Industries 2,069 31,537 $3,547.0


All Retailing (SIC 52-59) 462 22.3% 6,177 19.6% $776.0 21.9%

Public Administration (SIC 90-97) 46 2.2% 436 1.4% 0 0

Agriculture (SIC 1-7) 38 1.8% 204 0.6% $8.3 .23%

Construction (SIC 13-17) 142 6.9% 838 2.7% $140.6 3.96%




Wholesale Trade (50-51) 100 4.8% 1,714 5.4% $301.8 8.51%

Retail Trade (SIC 52-59) 462 22.3% 6,177 19.6% $776.0 21.88%


(SIC60-67)176 8.5% 3,860 12.2% $682.4 19.24%

Services (SIC 70-89) 836 40.4% 9,827 31.2% $920.7 25.96%

Government (SIC 91-99) 101 4.9% 719 2.3% 0 0

Table 2.3.2 CityofMarlboroughIndustries, Jobs, and Business Sales Summary

10



2.4MAPCPOPULATIONPROJECTIONS

The 2010 US Census population count for Marlborough was 38,500 persons. This was a 5.1% increase over the 2000 Census count. Estimates and projections through 2035 were obtained from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) from the Metro Future series.3 The MetroFuture March 2011 release was prepared to support the development of “Paths to a Sustainable Region,” the Boston Metropolitan Planning Organization’s long-range transportation plan.

Figure 2.4.A illustrates historical population growth and projections up to 2035 for Marlbor-ough and the overall seven-community Market Area. As this figure shows, population in both the Market Area and the City of Marlborough experienced more rapid growth between 1990 and 2010 than is expected for the 2010 to 2035 period.

Table 2.4.1 shows estimated and projected population by five-year increments from 1990 to 2035. The Greater Marlborough Market Area grew at an annual rate of 0.76% per year from 1990 to 2010; this is projected to drop to 0.55% per year through 2035. The annual growth rates for Marlborough are 0.65% and 0.33% per year, respectively. Table 2.4.2 shows population estimates and projections for these areas for 1990, 2010 and 2035, as well as the Compound Annual Growth Rates (CAGRs) for the respective time periods.

Figure 2.4.B presents a graph of a population growth index from 1990 to 2035. Year 2010 was chosen as the base year for the index to demonstrate relative growth from now through 2035. Actual index values by five-year increments are presented in Table 2.4.3.

3 MetroFuture Projections 2035 Update, MAPC Data Services Department, March 2011.



Number of

Businesses% of

RegionNumber of

Jobs% of

RegionSales

(million)% of

Region

All Industries 2,069 32.3% 31,537 36.2% $3,547.0 34.9%


All Retailing (SIC 52-59) 462 36.8% 6,177 36.0% $776.0 32.1%

Public Administration (SIC 90-97) 46 24.9% 436 24.6% 0 0

Agriculture (SIC 1-7) 38 23.9% 204 23.2% $8.3 22.1%





Wholesale Trade (50-51) 100 33.1% 1,714 34.3% $301.8 35.4%

Retail Trade (SIC 52-59) 462 36.8% 6,177 36.0% $776.0 32.1%


(SIC60-67)176 28.9% 3,860 38.9% $682.4 38.7%

Services (SIC 70-89) 836 31.5% 9,827 32.2% $920.7 29.8%

Government (SIC 91-99) 101 28.8% 719 19.4% 0 0

Table 2.3.3 CityofMarlboroughandGreaterMarlboroughRegionSummaryIndustries, Jobs, and Business Sales Summary


11

Figure 2.4.A PopulationEstimatesandProjections,MarlboroughandMarketArea,1990-2035

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Ann

ual P

opul

atio

n Es

timat

e

Market Area Marlborough

Source: MAPC Metro Futures Update 3-11-11 and FXM Associates

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Market Area 98,500 101,700 115,000 118,900 120,300 124,400 127,500 130,400 133,400 136,500

Marlborough 31,800 32,700 36,600 37,400 38,500 38,600 38,700 39,300 39,900 40,600

Table 2.4.1 PopulationEstimatesandProjections,MarlboroughandMarketArea,2010 to 2035


Table 2.4.2 CompoundAnnualGrowthRatesforPopulationandHouseholds,2010 to 2035


AreaPopulation

2010 2035 CAGRHouseholds

2010 2035 CAGR

Market Area 118,900 136,500 0.554% 47,700 55,900 0.637%

Marlborough 37400 40,600 0.329% 16,100 17,700 0.380%

1990 2010 CAGR 1990 2010 CAGR

Market Area 98,475 118,900 0.757% 40,400 47,700 0.667%

Marlborough 31,830 37,400 0.647% 12,200 16,100 1.116%

12



1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Market Area 0.82 0.85 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.03 1.06 1.08 1.11 1.13

Marlborough 0.83 0.85 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.04 1.05

Table 2.4.3 PopulationGrowthIndex,1990 to 2035, 2010 = 1.00


2.5MAPCEMPLOYMENTPROJECTIONSANDSPACEDEMAND

Table 2.5.2 shows estimated square footage (SF) demand for additional space (newly con-structed or filling vacancies) by type of space for Marlborough and the seven-community Marlborough Region by 2030. FXM converted the employment projections shown in Table 2.5.1 into space demand based on norms for SF per employee by industry and then further consolidated the different industry projections into the real estate categories shown in Table 2.5.2.

Marlborough’s current share of employment is about 35% of the seven-community total, and MAPC projected that same capture rate to apply in 2030, which is reflected in the space demand projections. The 40% and 45% capture rates for potential space demand shown for Marlborough assume an effective economic development strategy by the City that would lead to a relatively higher share of projected regional growth.

Data in Table 2.5.2 shows no projected additional demand for Industrial space in Marl-borough or within the seven-community Greater Marlborough Region since MAPC has forecasted an absolute decline in manufacturing jobs, as shown in Table 2.5.1. In the subsequent Real Estate Market Overview subsection, the reader will note that Co Star Prop-erty Information Systems forecasts a significant increase in demand for and absorption of

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

1.15

1.20

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Popu

latio

n In

dex

2010

= 1

.00

Market Area MarlboroughSource: MAPC Metro Futures Update 3-11-11 and FXM Associates

Figure 2.4.B PopulationGrowthIndex,MarlboroughandMarketAreas,1990-2035, 2010 = 1.00



13

Marlborough 2000 2010 2020 2030

% Change from

2010-2030Delta

2010-2030

Natural Resource, Mining, Construction

533 617 681 734 19.0% 117

Manufacturing 7,466 7,124 6,855 6614 -7.2% -510

Trade, Transportation and Utilities 5,716 6,197 6,574 6,884 11.1% 687

Information 2,412 2,692 2,909 3,087 14.7% 395

Financial Activities 1,024 1,136 1,223 1,295 14.0% 159

Professional and Business Services 4,330 4,989 5,509 5,942 19.1% 953

Education and Health Services 2,482 2,763 2,992 3,185 15.3% 422

Leisure and Hospitality 2,160 2,419 2,626 2,800 115.8% 381

Other Services 988 1,118 1,222 1,308 17.0% 190

Government 270 288 302 313 8.7% 25

Total 27,381 29,343 30,893, 32,162 9.6% 2,819

35.0% 34.9% 34.8%

Table 2.5.1 MAPCEmploymentProjections

Source: Metropolitan Area Planning Council, 2006

Market Area 2000 2010 2020 2030

% Change from

2010-2030Delta

2010-2030

Natural Resource, Mining, Construction

2,420 2,816 3,116 3,361 38.9% 545

Manufacturing 18,695 18,590 18,003 17,515 -6.3% -1,075

Trade, Transportation and Utilities 17,129 18,703 19,901 20,885 21.9% 2,182

Information 4,571 5,009 5,349 5,630 23.2% 621

Financial Activities 2,917 3,219 3,451 3,644 24.9% 425

Professional and Business Services 12,259 13,850 15,123 16,194 32.1% 2,344

Education and Health Services 9,252, 10,499 11,467 12,277 32.7% 1,778

Leisure and Hospitality 5,443 6,188 6,764 7,247 33.1% 1,059

Other Services 2,444 2,736 2,966 3,158 29.2% 422

Government 1,973 2,164 2,306 2,420 22.7% 256

Total 77,103 83,774 88,446 92,331 19.8% 8,557

RegionMarlborough at

35% CaptureMarlborough at

40% CaptureMarlborough at

45% Capture

Office 1,436,675 502,836 574,670 646,504

Retail 1,292,079 452,228 516,832 581,436

Education and Health 1,071,778 375,122 428,711 482,300

Leisure and Health 1,654,158 578,955 661,663 744,371

All Other Commercial 375,770 131,519 150,308 169,096

Total 5,830,460 2,040,661 2,332,184 2,623,707

Table 2.5.2 AdditionalSpaceDemandby2030based on MAPC Employment Projections

14



Industrial space in Marlborough, in sharp contrast to MAPC’s employment projections.

2.6REALESTATEMARKETOVERVIEW

Commercial real estate market conditions and trends are assessed in the subsequent graphs for All Commercial Space, Office Space, Industrial Space, Flex Space, and Retail Space. A Summary Table is provided below. The analysis is based on proprietary data obtained from Co Star Property Information Services (June 2011). Co Star existing condi-tions estimates are for the 2nd quarter of 2011 and their forecast period is through the 2nd quarter of 2013.

2.6.1 All Commercial Space

Figure 2.6.1.A shows the historical and forecast inventory of all commercially classified space in Marlborough, from the 3rd quarter of 2006 through the 3rd quarter of 2013. As shown in the graph, no increase in the built inventory (RBA or rentable building area) of commercial space overall is projected by Co Star through the 2nd quarter of 2013, while the

amount of vacant space is projected to decline but still remain in excess of 1.5 million SF.

Data in Figure 2.6.1.B show historical and forecast net absorption and vacancy rates for all commercial space in Marlborough, with an average annual net absorption of more than 100,000 SF forecast and a declining vacancy rate through the 2nd quarter of 2013.

Space Type

2011 Inventory

(SF)

2011 Vacancies

(SF)

2011 Vacancy

Rate

Average Annual

Forecast Net Absorption

5-year Extrapolated

Net Absorption

All Commercial 15,504,789 1,757,668 11.3% 109,612 548,060

Office 6,176,971 986,620 16.0% 27,048 135,240

Industrial 2,462,501 178,673 7.3% 55,216 276,080

Flex 3,758,196 593,721 15.8% 17,304 86,520

Retail 3,252,121 143,654 4.4% 10,048 50,240

Table 2.6.1 CommercialRealEstateMarketSummary

Source: Co Star Property Information Services and FXM Associates


15

Figure 2.6.1.A HistoricalandForecastInventoryandVacancies:All Commercial Space in Marlborough

Historical and Forecast Inventory and Vacancies: ALL Commercial Space in Marlborough

15,100,000

15,150,000

15,200,000

15,250,000

15,300,000

15,350,000

15,400,000

15,450,000

15,500,000

15,550,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

3Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Tota

l Inv

ento

ry (S

F)

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

Vaca

ncie

s (S

F)

Total Inventory

Vacant

Historical and Forecast Net Absorption & Vacancy Rate: ALL Commerical Space in Marlborough

(200,000)

(150,000)

(100,000)

(50,000)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

3Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Net

Abs

orpt

ion

in S

F

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

Vac

ancy

Rat

e

Net Absorption

Vacancy Rate

Figure 2.6.1.B HistoricalandForecastNetAbsorptionandVacancyRate:All Commercial Space in Marlborough

16



2.6.2 Office Space

Figure 2.6.2.A shows the historical and forecast inventory of Office space in Marlborough from the 3rd quarter of 2006 through the 2nd quarter of 2013. As shown in the graph, no increase in the built inventory (RBA or rentable building area) of Office space is projected by Co Star through the 2nd quarter of 2013, while the amount of vacant space is projected to decline but still remain in excess of 900,000 SF.

Data in Figure 2.6.2.B show historical and forecast net absorption and vacancy rates for Office space in Marlborough, with an average annual net absorption of 27,000 SF forecast and a declining vacancy rate through the 2nd quarter of 2013.

Historical and Forecast Inventory and Vacancies: OFFICE Space in Marlborough

5,950,000

6,000,000

6,050,000

6,100,000

6,150,000

6,200,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Tota

l Offi

ce S

pace

(SF)

750,000

800,000

850,000

900,000

950,000

1,000,000

1,050,000

Vaca

nt O

ffice

Spa

ce (S

F)

Total Inventory

Vacant

Figure 2.6.2.A HistoricalandForecastInventoryandVacancies:Office Space in Marlborough

Historical and Forecast Net Absorption & Vacancy Rate: OFFICE Space in Marlborough

(150,000)

(100,000)

(50,000)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Net

Abs

orpt

ion

(SF)

12.5%

13.0%

13.5%

14.0%

14.5%

15.0%

15.5%

16.0%

16.5%

17.0%

Vaca

ncy

Rat

e

Net Absorption

Vacancy Rate

Figure 2.6.2.B HistoricalandForecastNetAbsorptionandVacancyRate:Office Space in Marlborough


17

2.6.3 Industrial Space

Figure 2.6.3.A shows the historical and forecast inventory of Industrial space in Marlbor-ough from the 3rd quarter of 2006 through the 2nd quarter of 2013. As shown in the graph, no increase in the built inventory (RBA or rentable building area) of Industrial space is pro-jected by Co Star through the 2nd quarter of 2013, while the amount of vacant space is pro-jected to decline significantly to well below 100,000 SF. As previously noted, this projected absorption of industrial space sharply contrasts with MAPC employment projections and projected space demand in the industrial sector based on those employment projections.

Historical and Forecast Inventory and Vacancies: INDUSTRIAL Space in Marlborough

2,415,000

2,420,000

2,425,000

2,430,000

2,435,000

2,440,000

2,445,000

2,450,000

2,455,000

2,460,000

2,465,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Tota

l Inv

ento

ry (S

F)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

Vaca

ncie

s (S

F)

Total InventoryVacant

Figure 2.6.3.A HistoricalandForecastInventoryandVacancies:Industrial Space in Marlborough

Figure 2.6.3.B HistoricalandForecastNetAbsorptionandVacancyRate:Industrial Space in Marlborough

Historical and Forecast Net Absorption & Vacancy Rate: INDUSTRIAL Space in Marlborough

(150,000)

(100,000)

(50,000)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2QNet

Abs

orpt

ion

(SF)

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

Vaca

ncy

Rat

e

Net Absorption

Vacancy Rate

18



The data in Figure 2.6.3 B show historical and forecast net absorption and vacancy rates for Industrial space in Marlborough, with an average annual net absorption of 27,000 SF forecast and a declining vacancy rate through the 2nd quarter of 2013. The projected vacancy rate – below 3% -- is extremely low and would be considered inadequate to ab-sorb additional demand specific to the City of Marlborough unless new industrial space is added to the inventory.

2.6.4 Flex Space

Figure 2.6.4.A shows the historical and forecast inventory of Flex space in Marlborough from the 3rd quarter of 2006 through the 2nd quarter of 2013. As shown in the graph, no increase in the built inventory (RBA or rentable building area) of Flex space is projected by Co Star through the 2nd quarter of 2013, while the amount of vacant space is projected to decline but still remain in excess of 500,000 SF.

Figure 2.6.4.A HistoricalandForecastInventoryandVacancies:Flex Space in MarlboroughHistorical and Forecast Inventory & Vacancies: FLEX Space in Marlborough

3,400,000

3,450,000

3,500,000

3,550,000

3,600,000

3,650,000

3,700,000

3,750,000

3,800,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Tota

l Inv

ento

ry (S

F)

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

Vaca

ncie

s (S

F)

Total Inventory

Vacant

Data in Figure 2.6.4.B shows historical and forecast net absorption and vacancy rates for Flex space in Marlborough, with an average annual net absorption of 17,000 SF forecast and a declining vacancy rate through the 2nd quarter of 2013, though the rate is still rela-tively high at 15%.


19

2.6.5 Retail Space

Figure 2.6.5.A shows the historical and forecast inventory of Retail space in Marlborough from the 3rd quarter of 2006 through the 2nd quarter of 2013. As shown in the graph, no increase in the built inventory (RBA or rentable building area) of Retail space is projected by Co Star through the 2nd quarter of 2013, while the amount of vacant space is projected to decline to about 120,000 SF.

Figure 2.6.4.B HistoricalandForecastNetAbsorptionandVacancyRate:Flex Space in MarlboroughHistorical and Forecast Net Absorption & Vacancy Rate: FLEX Space in Marlborough

(100,000)

(50,000)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Net

Abs

orpt

ion

(SF)

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

Vaca

ncy

Rat

e

Net Absorption

Vacancy Rate

Figure 2.6.5.A HistoricalandForecastInventoryandVacancies:Retail Space in MarlboroughHistorical and Forecast Inventory & Vacancies: RETAIL Space in Marlborough

3,225,000

3,230,000

3,235,000

3,240,000

3,245,000

3,250,000

3,255,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Inve

ntor

y of

Ret

ail S

pace

(SF)

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

Vaca

nt R

etai

l Spa

ce (S

F)

Total Inventory

Vacant

20



Data in Figure 2.6.5.B shows historical and forecast net absorption and vacancy rates for Retail space in Marlborough, with an average annual net absorption of 10,000 SF forecast and a declining vacancy rate through the 2nd quarter of 2013. The projected vacancy rate—below 4%—is extremely low and would be considered inadequate to absorb additional de-mand specific to the City of Marlborough unless new retail space is added to the inventory.

Figure 2.6.5.B HistoricalandForecastNetAbsorptionandVacancyRate:Retail Space in MarlboroughHistorical and Forecast Net Absorption & Vacancy Rate: RETAIL Space in Marlborough

(60,000)

(40,000)

(20,000)

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

Net

Abs

orpt

ion

(SF)

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

Vaca

ncy

Rat

e

Net AbsorptionVacancy Rate

2.7.FISCALOVERVIEW

For each major land use category, data in Table 2.7.1 show the following: land and building areas, assessed values, average assessed values per square foot, and FY 2011 estimated property tax revenues (based on a commercial tax rate of $27.55 per $1,000 valuation and a residential tax rate of $13.94 per $1,000 valuation). Table 2.7.1 also shows the percent (%) each land use category represents of the total for all land uses in Marlborough. These data are drawn from records of the Marlborough Assessor and GIS.

As shown by the data in Table 2.7.1, the total assessed value of all land and buildings in Marlborough is approximately $4.3 billion, of which 72% is in residential uses and 28% in commercial uses. The total assessed value of all commercial uses (land and buildings) is thus $1.2 billion, of which $805 million is the assessed value of all commercial buildings (67% of total commercial assessed value).

The MEDC has publicly stated that a goal for the City’s economic development initiatives is to increase the assessed value of commercial uses by $1.4 billion. As will be discussed in the detailed sector sections of this report, virtually all of this increase would have to come from additional commercial buildings in Marlborough. Data in Table 2.7.2 shows the increases that would be required over the current commercial buildings inventory and assessed values to achieve this objective.


21

Table 2.7.2 IncreasesoverCurrentCommercialUsesRequiredtoAchieveMEDCTargeted$1.4BillionIncreaseinAssessedValueofCommercialPropertiesBasedontheCurrentDistributionofLandUsesandCurrentCommercialTaxRate

All Commercial Land Uses Industrial

Non-Retail Commercial Retail

Additional Building SF Required

28,274,192 11,231,961 12,209,861 4,832,370

% Increase in SF Over Current Uses

174% 174% 174% 174%

Implied Property Tax Revenue Increase

$35,589,166 $11,891,760 $16,397,094 $7,300,312

% Increase in Commercial Property Tax Revenues 117% 109% 126% 111%

Source: City of Marlborough Assessor and GIS, MEDC



Additional Buildings SF 3,600,000 1,819,708 1,451,825 328,467

% Increase in SF Over Current Uses 7% 28% 21% 12%

Increase in Assessed Value $172,011,547 $75,790,839 $76,699,905 $19,520,803

Increase in Commercial Property Tax Revenues $4,372,534 $1,926,603 $1,949,712 $496,219


Table 2.7.3 IncreasesoverCurrentCommercialSF,AssessedValues,andPropertyTaxRevenuesBasedonPermittedandPlannedCommercialDevelopmentProjectsinMarlborough

Source: Marlborough Building Department and Assessor

All Land Uses Industrial

% Industrial

Commercial (non-retail)

% Commercial Retail

% Retail Residential

% Residential

Number of parcels 12,306 270 2% 308 3% 255 2% 11,473 93%

Land area SF 361,916,260 68,688,758 19% 35,039,179 10% 13,348,917 4% 244,839,406 68%

Building area SF 51,050,197 6,457,523 13% 7,019,741 14% 2,778,245 5% 34,794,688 68%

Land assessed values $1,476,943,103 $159,229,200 11% $142,752,925 10% $94,072,100 6% $1,080,888,878 73%

Buildings assessed values $2,814,564,704 $268,950,896 10% $370,820,173 13% $165,122,400 6% $2,009,671,235 71%

Land and buildings assessed values $4,291,507,807 $428,180,096 10% $513,573,098 12% $259,194,500 6% $3,090,560,113 72%

Assessed land value per SF $4.08 $2.32 57% $4.07 100% $7.05 173% $4.41 108%

Assessed building value per SF $55.13 $41.65 76% $52.83 96% $59.43 108% $57.76 105%

Table 2.7.1 CityofMarlboroughLandUseandFiscalCharacteristics,2011

Source: City of Marlborough Assessor and GIS

22



As discussed in subsequent sections of the report, a foreseeable 10-year buildout scenar-io for commercial uses in Marlborough has been derived based on permitted and planned commercial development projects in Marlborough and the forecasts of absorption by land use type discussed in the previous section 2.6. Data in Table 2.7.3 show that scenario and its implied increases over current buildings SF, assessed values and property taxes.

Data in Table 2.7.4 shows for the same categories displayed in Table 2.7.3 for the five-year forecast absorption of commercial space reported in the Commercial Real Estate Market Overview, Section 2.6.



Additional Buildings SF 548,000 277,000 221,000 50,000

% Increase in SF Over Current Uses

3% 4% 3% 2%

Increase in Assessed Value $26,183,980 $11,537,050 $11,675,430 $2,971,500

Increase in Commercial Property Tax Revenues $665,597 $293,272 $296,789 $75,536


Table 2.7.4 IncreasesoverCurrentCommercialSF,AssessedValues,andPropertyTaxRevenuesBasedonFive-yearForecastMarketAbsorption

Source: Marlborough Assessor and Co Star Property Information System

Figure 2.7.A MEDCTargetIncreaseinAssessedValueComparedtoPermittedBuildOutandProjectedFive-yearMarketAbsorption

MEDC Target Increase in Assessed Value Compared to Permitted Buildout and Projected 5-year Market Absorption

$1,400,000,000

$172,011,547

$26,183,980$-

$200,000,000

$400,000,000

$600,000,000

$800,000,000

$1,000,000,000

$1,200,000,000

$1,400,000,000

$1,600,000,000

MEDC Target Permitted Projects Buildout Projected 5-year Market Absorption

Assessed Value Increase

PUBLIC OUTREACH AND PARTICIPATION 3Summary of Focus Group Discussions

Public Workshop Highlights

Visual Preference Online Survey Results

Overall Themes from Interviews

Economic Development Issues and Opportunities

24


3Public Outreach and Participation

The public outreach and participation task of the Marlborough Economic Development Plan was comprised of four main components: focus group sessions, a public workshop, an online visual preference survey and stakeholder interviews. These components were purposefully designed to engage with different stakeholders, interest groups and the gen-eral public using methods to best optimize the outreach efforts and to solicit participation that would provide critical insight and understanding of local needs and opportunities that could be incorporated into the Marlborough Economic Development Plan.

Following are summary descriptions of each component of the public outreach process.

3.1SUMMARYOFFOCUSGROUPDISCUSSIONS

The Focus Group sessions were a series of meetings held over a two-day period on April 13 and April 14, 2011. The purpose of the Focus Group sessions was to engage busi-nesses, interest groups, constituencies and stakeholders sector by sector and to ascer-tain specific industry insight regarding the factors that could encourage and discourage economic development within the City of Marlborough. The Marlborough Economic De-velopment Corporation (MEDC) invited over 160 people and organized 13 different Focus Groups, comprised of appropriate stakeholders for each sector. The 13 Focus Groups that participated in the discussion sessions were:

• Banking, Finance, Legal, Real Estate;

• Sports, Tourism, Hotels, Restaurants;

• Educators, Youth Services, Social Services;

• Medical Institutions;

• Chamber of Commerce;

• Housing Developers, Owners and CDA;

• Urban Core;

• High Tech and Life Sciences;

• Commercial Property Owners, Landlords and Managers;

• Industrial Business Owners and Managers;

• East Side (Business, Property Owners and Residents);

• City Officials (City Department Representatives); and

• Elected Officials.

The following is a sample of the discussion comments and input that the Focus Group sessions produced regarding how conditions for economic development within the City of Marlborough could be improved. The complete Focus Group Session Notes are in the Appendix to this study.

• Split tax rates create a competitive disadvantage and disincentive for commercial tax base improvements.

• Increasing taxes on non-residential uses will contribute to companies relocating out of Marlborough.


25

• The City has excellent infrastructure: highway access to a central New England loca-tion and supporting utilities.

• The City is well located with access to trained employees in five states, access to de-livery systems, and connections to clients, who are mostly outside the region.

• There is a perception that the quality of the public school system is a detriment for locating new businesses.

• More is needed to build or strengthen government relationships with the business community.

• Sports, tourism and event industries are strong and nationally recognized and should be nurtured.

• A consistent marketing campaign for visitors would be very helpful.

• Potential budget changes for federal entitlement programs will impact the local health care industry, and the City should be prepared for the possible changes.

• The number of uninsured patients presents a challenge to the Hospital and a barrier to attracting new primary and specialty physicians.

• The business community has a positive relationship with City Hall with the exception of certain permitting and enforcement.

• City signage code enforcement is perceived as overzealous and inconsistent.

• A single point of contact for business recruitment and retention should be provided by the City.

• Across housing types, the trend is for couples to move out of Marlborough once they have children – or enroll their children in schools outside the City.

• Luxury apartments have been very successful.

• Downtown is a missed opportunity for a unique, attractive place.

• Downtown parking is available and needs to be identified with way-finding signs.

• Certain buildings; e.g. the Walker Building, would provide good mixed use opportuni-ties.

• There is a Great mix of uses in downtown but a lack of cohesiveness and “urban” identity.

• Incubator and mid-scale incubator growth space, with labs, would attract new and growing businesses.

• Hotel and conference space is important for business development.

• Quality of building space in Marlborough exceeds regional quality and makes it competitive.

• There is a need for food, services, and ‘concierge’ services to make vacant office spaces more attractive.

• Reduction in commercial taxes would pull more tenants from Worcester as rents would be more competitive.

• City government and other developed conditions (housing, downtown) have not been reasons for high/bio tech businesses to site in Marlborough.

• Industrial businesses would improve with the siting of raw material suppliers closer to the facilities.

26



• There is a perception that the East Side is neglected by City overall.

• Qualities in the rest of the City should be extended to the East Side.

• Waste management facilities on the East Side are a detriment to character and need improvement.

• An East Side village should be developed as a mixed commercial center to attract regional business.

• There is a perception problem about quality of City services.

• There is a need for a consistent stream of news on the positive activity occurring in the City.

• Elected officials need to hold discussions on long-range priorities.

• The City must make it easier to fill existing, vacant commercial spaces.

• There is a need to build city-corporate relationships.

• There is a need to market Marlborough as a small, affordable and livable city.

3.2PUBLICWORKSHOPHIGHLIGHTS

A public workshop was held for the Marlborough Economic Development Plan on June 8, 2011 at the Massachusetts International Academy at 280 Locke Drive in Marlborough. The public workshop agenda contained two primary sections: a presentation and small working group activities. The presentation reviewed the scope and purpose of the Marlbor-ough Economic Development Plan and initial demographic, infrastructure, regulation and market condition assessments. The small working groups used participant engagement activities, including mapping exercises, identifying and voting on economic development priorities for the City and envisioning the outcome of the economic development plan process. These exercises were designed to solicit input from community members and engage in the economic development plan process. Descriptions of the small working group activities and their purposes are listed below.

• Mapping the Future – This series of mapping exercises included three specific com-ponents:

o Identifying areas within Marlborough where change would be acceptable, possible and not possible. The purpose of this activity was to identify the community’s per-spective on development locations within the City.

o Matching specific types of development with specific areas of the City. The purpose of this activity was to understand the scale and nature of development that is ac-ceptable to the community. Participants used development prototype game pieces and a large-scale map of the City to “locate” specific types of development in spe-cific areas of the City.

The prototype game pieces used for this exercise were specific buildings existing in or near Marlborough.

o Calculating the tax base. This activity applied tax revenue implications to the map-ping of new development within the City of Marlborough. The purpose of this activity was to connect the participants’ desired level of development with the tax revenue goals required for the City to stabilize the residential tax rate.


27

• Priorities - This exercise involved each participant contributing economic develop-ment priorities for the City, and then it allowed the group to vote in support of the stated priorities. The purpose of this activity was to identify the participants’ economic development priorities and provide an egalitarian weighting of the participant group’s priorities.

• Headlines - Each participant in this exercise wrote a news headline or tagline for a news article about the City of Marlborough that will take place 10 years in the future. The purpose of this exercise was to identify the participants’ goals for the Marlbor-ough Economic Development Plan process.

The following are highlights and summaries of the input received in the small working group sessions. The complete Public Workshop Meeting Notes and the small working group results are contained in the Appendix to this study.

• A sample of the areas of Marlborough consistently viewed as unchangeable by the small working groups was:

o All existing residential areas

o Residential areas west of Route 495

o Marlborough Country Club

o Callahan State Park

• A sample of the areas of Marlborough consistently viewed as changeable by the small working groups was:

o The Route 495 Corridor




o Downtown Marlborough

• A sample of the most frequent type of development used in the mapping exercises conducted by the small working groups were the building and use types listed below:

o Office buildings under 100,000 square feet

o Research laboratories

o Mixed use – commercial and residential uses

o Mixed use – different types of commercial uses

• When the small working groups completed their development mapping exercise, as-sessed values were added and calculated to the proposed development to determine the new assessed value that would contribute to the tax base for the City. The larg-est amount of new assessed value that any individual working group achieved was $521.8 million. This is below the $1.4 billion in new development that was presented as the goal of what will be needed for Marlborough to stabilize future residential tax rates.

• The highest ranked priorities for economic development by the small working groups are listed below. The number of votes that each priority received from the individual working group participants is located in parenthesis following the stated priority.

o Clarity of roles for the marketing of business and the permitting process of business

28



development (15)

o Closing Main Street to traffic; esp. Sundays; arts, food, music; attract residents from employees (8)

o Lincoln-Mechanic Street Area – improve; mixed housing, historic walking tour, cul-tural district (7)

o Consider increasing density in some areas (HP site along 495, 219, 20; need den-sity downtown) (6)

o Attract large businesses – the next Genzyme (6)

o Add incubator space with partnerships (5)

o Increase walkability throughout the City (5)

o Pursue Route 290 Corridor large development opportunities (5)

• A sample of the topics and ideas of note that were generated through the small work-ing group activities is:

o Industrial development should not be restricted to four stories of height;

o Infrastructure and traffic improvements are needed on the Route 85 Corridor;

o Walking trails throughout the City would be a positive community asset; and

o The amount of elderly housing in the City should be increased.

• A sample of the headlines generated at the public meeting is:

o Crossroads of Culture – It’s a Shoe-in!

o Business Week: Marlborough Best Place to Start a Business in America;

o Marlborough Named Best Place to Live in MA;

o Another Marlboro Life Science Startup Goes Public;

o Former Shoe Town Reinvents Itself as Center of Modern Business;

o Marlborough Declared All American City; and

o Marlborough: #1 Place to Work and Raise Families in America.

3.3VISUALPREFERENCESURVEY

An online visual preference survey was conducted as part of the public outreach for the Marlborough Economic Development Plan to solicit public input on the types of building style and character that community members would prefer for their City. The purpose of the visual preference survey was to collect input from community participants regarding their aesthetic preferences in response to images that typify the ranges of development possible. The online visual preference surveys conducted for Marlborough asked partici-pants to review images and provide their opinion on whether or not that building would be preferred, acceptable, or unacceptable in the community. The images were grouped into categories, with varying style and character traits for the buildings and spaces. The full results of the Marlborough Online Visual Preference Survey are contained in Appendix E: Online Visual Preference Survey Results.

The structure of the Marlborough Online Visual Preference Survey was:

• The Survey contained 122 images organized into seven categories


29

• The seven categories were City Gateways, Residential, Office, Retail, Mixed Use, Parking, and Neighborhood Character

• The images were to be ranked on a scale of -3 to +3, with -3 as the least preferable and +3 as the most preferable

• A section at the end was available for written comments.

The details and key results of the Marlborough Online Visual Preference Survey were:

• The Online Visual Preference Survey was available through the MEDC website, www.marlboroughedc.com

• The Online Visual Preference Survey was available for 50 days from May 20, 2011 to July 8, 2011;

• The Online Visual Preference Survey had 120 participants;

• The most preferred and least preferred images are determined by the highest and lowest average score of images within each category; and

• The full results of the Online Visual Preference Survey are contained in Appendix E: Online Visual Preference Survey Results.

The most and least preferred images from each of the Online Visual Preference Survey’s seven categories are identified below.

Rank: 1Average: 1.64Responses: 120

Rank: 12Average: -1.04Responses: 119

Category 1: Gateway

Category 2: Residential



30



Category 3: Office



Category 4: Retail



Category 5: Mixed Use




31

Category 6: Parking Structures



Category 7: Urban Form



32



3.4OVERVIEWOFINTERVIEWS

In addition to conducting more than a dozen focus groups and a public workshop, the consultants contacted more than 35 individuals to obtain additional information and insight regarding the Marlborough economy, including current and anticipated business and la-bor issues and activity as well as real estate market conditions and trends. Confidential interviews were conducted with representatives of key Marlborough industries, commercial and residential brokerages, property managers and developers, community organizations, business associations, and government agencies. These interviews provided a range of perspectives and actual experiences that helped qualify secondary source data, and they augmented stakeholder involvement in this assessment of the City’s economy. The List of Contacts and Interviews in the Appendix to this report identifies people suggested by the MEDC as well as others identified during this study. The interviews provided the following comments, organized by subject matter.

3.4.1 Marlborough Assets, Attributes, Competitiveness

• Marlborough is centrally located with very good access to entire Boston MetroWest region. The City has a better supply of marketable properties than surrounding com-munities, and especially properties near 495, as a result of the past 20 years of de-velopment.

• Companies do not come looking for a particular city/town unless they are already in the state and expanding; usually, inquiries are looking to locate in Massachusetts, MetroWest, or locations near 495 and Mass Pike.

• Proximity to the Mass Pike sets pricing. Marlborough is one exit removed from I-90, so rents are lower. The level of building finishes in Marlborough is typically higher than what one would find in Westborough, but Westborough rents are higher because it is closer to the Pike exit.

• Marlborough has cultural and natural features that attract people to live, work, locate businesses in the City. The City has a diversity of housing choices, which is lacking in nearby communities. Downtown area has limited appeal due to access issues.

• Marlborough government is responsive to business. The Mayor gets personally in-volved, and the Assessor is cooperative. The City’s chief competitor is Westborough due to its location and aggressive economic development policies.

• Marlborough has a crossroad location that is important to companies with regional markets. The City offers easy access to Boston and Providence, is less expensive than Boston and has desirable quality of life. Many company owners live in surround-ing communities but want their business to be located in the city rather than a town environment.

• Marlborough is in a better position than most communities because of the MEDC, which should be a benefit. A dedicated economic development entity gives the City ‘a leg up.’

3.4.2 Commercial Real Estate Activity

• The 495 corridor is the toughest area in the state for new companies and business expansion; some firms are renegotiating leases at lower rents to remain, while others are moving closer to Boston as rents there have decreased.


33

• The amount of vacant space in Marlborough is not unique in the MetroWest region or state; other communities are also trying to attract new users for vacant ‘corporate cam-pus’ sites. Over the past year, more companies are “kicking tires,” but leasing is still slow.

• The market says you want to be leasing 5,000-15,000 sq. ft. spaces; therefore, you have to demise walls without a lot of construction to get marketable space. There is definitely been an ‘up-tick’ in tenant interest over past few months with more shoppers looking for 10,000 sq. ft. spaces. Interest is mostly from MetroWest and Maynard.

• Smaller deals have to be done more quickly, but the good news is that when Marlbor-ough gets a critical mass of mid-sized tenants, Those tenants will stay because relo-cation disrupts business and is costly. The difficulty is providing nearby conveniences these office workers expect.

• Prospective tenants are in engineering, professional and business services, and th science fields; most inquiries are from similar types of companies. Employees are professionals in various technical fields, who are used to working in manufacturing environments and do not mind being in Marlborough instead of Boston or Cambridge. Hipper would be better, but the City is okay just as it is.

• Office-based workers do not see malls and commercial strips as viable or suitable options for convenience retail goods and services. The lack of on-site or nearby retail shops, specialty foods, and personal services makes some (vacant) office buildings in the City less competitive in the Greater Marlborough office market.

3.4.3 Residential Real Estate Activity

• Residential sales have picked up in the northeast region, tremendously; increased activity is occurring because it is a good time for first-time homebuyers to purchase. Interest rates have dropped, there are much lower property prices now, and there is a large inventory of homes (foreclosures)

• Typical buyers have been very young professionals (23-35 years old) with good-pay-ing jobs, who work in Boston Metro area, are unable to afford to buy in Boston, and need easy access for commuting. Marlborough’s proximity to I-290 is ideal.

• Home-buyers are concerned with investment value and operating costs, and they will pay more for quality conditions but want affordability. Affordability is $225,000 to $250,000; property at those prices stays on the marker for less than a week.

• The local condo market is slow due to the number of distressed/foreclosed single-family properties available at lower costs; buyers are price-sensitive and have a lot of options.

• The residential rental market is very busy. Most renters are potential buyers who are leery of employment security and need to maintain mobility. The overall housing mar-ket will come back within the next two years, primarily driven by attrition/turnover and employee relocation. Relocation housing demand is higher than ever and continues to escalate.

3.4.4 Business Development in Marlborough

• Business and real estate development that has happened and continues to happen in Marlborough is in spite of the City’s efforts, not because of any conscious, collective goal or orchestrated plan.

34



• The permitting process is handled fairly well compared to other suburban towns. The Site Plan Review process is effective, professional, and received a MAPC award, but the City Council Special Permit review process is ad hoc, often petty, and sometimes driven by personality.

• During past 20 years, there were times when the City was proactive, prepared a strat-egy/plan and went about implementing it, but over the past several years, the City has responded to development on a case-by-case basis using the City Council Special Permit review.

• There are many Clean Energy/Green Tech companies in Marlborough that did not exist 15 years ago, and Massachusetts is a national leader in this field. It is an obvi-ous existing, emerging ‘cluster,’ and savvy communities are working to attract more of these firms.

• The biggest issue affecting development in Marlborough, generally, is whether the City will provide flexibility to property and building owners who want or need to up-grade their assets.

• The City’s commercial tax rate is a factor but does not drive business location deci-sion. The tax rate was not a big issue in the past but is a factor when times are tough, and it can affect the bottom line by $10 - $50,000 on annual basis, especially for vacant buildings. Putting the tax burden on commercial property owners is easier because companies do not vote.

3.4.5 Marlborough Issues and Suggested Improvements

• The 495/290 Interchange is one of two primary access routes to Marlborough and is critical to the City’s economic viability and future development; it is the major con-straint for access to key development sites. Most employees use this interchange to reach their workplace, and the City incurs significant cost responding to hundreds of 495/290 related traffic accidents.

• The City’s western commercial corridor is served by the Western Wastewater Treat-ment facility, which has capacity and upgrade issues, only some of which are planned to be addressed. This infrastructure limitation diminishes the City’s attractiveness as a location with expansion option, especially for biotech research and development, bio-manufacturing, and some types of precision fabrication.

• Commercial property owners should have the option for shared parking to accom-modate new retail uses with existing office building lots, which would help preserve streetscape, minimize amount of paved areas, and reduce tree and vegetation removal.

• There are two Marlboroughs, the Route 20 area and Main Street; the separation is more than physical, and it would be good to find ways to link these sections of the City. Those who work in Marlborough office parks do not go into the City. Many take Route 20 in to work and go out to the highways when the work day ends. The City and businesses need to invite and service the thousands of workers commuting into Marlborough every day.

• The City needs an organization and ways to accommodate small businesses that cannot afford to join the Chamber but need local information, informal networking, and basics like where to go for lunch or after work. The City needs to help firms and workers become part of this community.


35

• City code enforcement officers need resources to require property owners to maintain premises and clean up conditions on Broad and Lincoln Streets (trash, derelict cars in yard, broken stairs); newcomers would acclimate to Marlborough neighborhood values if the City issued citations for open rubbish and loud parties at night. Part-time City Ani-mal Control Officer also needs adequate resources to perform his or her job effectively.

• There is a need to address the mediocre status of Marlborough High School. The school system is fine at the elementary and middle schools, but the High School is the “weak link” with high dropout rates, low state test scores, bullying issues and pregnancies. Despite some recent improvements, there seems to be a reluctance to address challenges affecting the urbanized, multi-cultural student body.

• The City must take the initiative to identify and deal with foreclosed property that is not secured, has utilities that are not turned off, and is accessible to homeless people and stray animals. Banks and mortgage companies simply allow property to deteriorate and should be held responsible for the upkeep of yards, snow removal and other responsibilities.

• Zoning controls and review criteria should protect existing (residential) property val-ues and not allow new uses to diminish adjacent, nearby property values. City zoning should allow for greater density, such as townhouses and zero-lot houses.

• City Councilors do not appear to have confidence in department staff and instead micro-manage the Special Permit process rather than rely on professional expertise and recommendations of staff. The biggest impediment to managing and realizing economic growth in Marlborough is a lack of harmony between the Mayor and the City Council, and the Council and municipal departments.

• Essential development planning functions are shared among four to five City depart-ment personnel as secondary responsibilities; there is a lack of resources to deal with business development effectively and an inability to use available resources that could provide assistance. A city the size and complexity of Marlborough needs a City Planner.

3.4.6 Marlborough Economic Development Strategy

• Collaboration is key to improving economic development effectiveness. It is important to bring all stakeholders together, discuss success stories, learn about progress in other communities, and understand ‘best practices’ that can be applied in Marlborough.

• There is definitely a lot of potential in Marlborough; the first step is to get in the economic development ‘loop’ and maintain involvement. As important as a strategic plan is, it can-not fill vacant space in the short-term. The best approach is to knock on doors of exist-ing businesses who may be considering expansion and engage local realtors to feature vacant property.

• Marlborough is now a designated Green Community. Restaurants could offer healthy, organic, locally grown food that would attract workers, visitors and residents; hotels/hospi-tality services could offer “Green Packages” for guests and events that would attract New England, Massachusetts and regional events.

• The availability of water and wastewater treatment is critical for most biotech companies, and if Marlborough has adequate services, it should be advertised widely because other MetroW-est towns have major constraints meeting capacity needs of bio-processing facilities.

36



• The state’s 2010 economic development initiative should be to make Marlborough a more attractive option for businesses looking to locate in the MetroWest region. New regional economic development organizations are being created to serve smaller regions, and the City needs to aggressively participate in this process which will market the region.1

• Marlborough should hire a full-time City Planner, coordinate local volunteer efforts, and provide municipal resources that encourage and facilitate business growth in Marlbor-ough. Economic development is more than slick marketing brochures, and local leader-ship is far more important to successful outcomes.

3.5ECONOMICDEVELOPMENTISSUESANDOPPORTUNITIES

Through the public outreach and participation process, the following items were identi-fied as issues that impede development and the opportunities for economic development within the City of Marlborough:

Economic Development Issues

• The split commercial/residential tax rate is a burden on the commercial property own-ers and makes it more difficult to remain competitive in the regional market.

• Building height and mixed use limitations make it difficult to maximize development potential and be competitive in the real estate market place.

• The entitlements process, specifically the Special Permit process, is difficult particu-larly because of scheduling issues with the City Council, which acts as the permit-granting authority for many Special Permits.

• The amount of vacant office space resulting from the most recent economic downturn has created a perceived problem that must be turned around by filling those spaces.

Economic Development Opportunities and Assets

• Marlborough has a great location, central to the New England region.

• The City has great accessibility with interstate highways that provide regional access and access to airports and major metropolitan areas of Hartford, Providence and Boston.

• A local sports industry supported with high quality commercial facilities that attract national events.

• A business-friendly environment that could be improved with City Hall outreach and certain changes to the permitting and enforcement process.

• The areas for major redevelopment and new development are:

o The I-290 corridor for new retail and commercial development.

o The I-495 corridor and the Southwest corner of the City for new commercial devel-opment mixed with retail and residential uses.

o The northern and southern sections of Route 85, particularly for reuse and redevel-opment of existing properties.

1 The Massachusetts Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development (EOHED) is implementing the com-prehensive reorganization of the state’s economic development administration, programs, services, and financing priorities in accordance with provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 240 of the Acts of 2010.


37

o The Route 20 corridor in the East Side of town where a mixed-use/commercial vil-lage center is desired.

o Downtown Marlborough with infill development that makes a more vibrant place to visit, shop, work, live and eat.

INDUSTRIAL SECTOR OVERVIEW4Role in Marlborough Economy

Industrial Real Estate Market Analysis

Build-Out Analysis

Industrial Sector Economic Development Goals and Action Items

40


4Industrial Sector Overview

4.1ROLEINMARLBOROUGHECONOMY

4.1.1 Industrial Land Use Profile and Zoning

City of Marlborough Assessors’ Department data was used to identify the following land use characteristics of industrial properties within the City of Marlborough. The Massachusetts Department of Revenue Property Type Classification Codes, as assigned by the Marlbor-ough Assessors’ Department, were used to determine which parcels were included in the Industrial Sector Overview. The following list contains key characteristics of Marlborough’s industrial sector, and Figure 4.1.1.A illustrates the location of all industrial use parcels in the City of Marlborough.

Industrial Parcel Size

• There are 270 parcels of land within the City of Marlborough that are identified as con-taining industrial uses.

• The City’s 270 parcels containing industrial uses constitute 1,576 acres of land.

• The 1,576 acres of land represents 12.74% of the total land within the City of Marlborough.

• The average size of industrial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 5.84 acres.

• The median size of buildable industrial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 1.71 acres.

• The smallest buildable industrial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 0.12 acres.

• The largest buildable industrial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 152.50 acres.

Industrial Parcel Value

• The City of Marlborough’s 270 industrial parcels of land possess an aggregate as-sessed total value of $428,180,096.00.

• The $428,180,096.00 aggregate assessed total value Marlborough’s industrial parcels represents 9.09% of all assessed property within the City of Marlborough.

• The average assessed total value for industrial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is $1,585,852.21.

• The median assessed total value for industrial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is $220,100.00.

• The smallest assessed total value for an industrial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is $5,000.00.

• The largest assessed total value for an industrial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is $48,024,700.00.

Industrial Buildings

• The City of Marlborough’s 270 industrial parcels of land possess a total of 112 buildings.

• The 112 buildings on industrial parcels of land represent 1% of all buildings within the City of Marlborough.

• The average year buildings on industrial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough were built is 1972.


41-42


1 0 10.5 Miles

¯

Figure 4.1.1 Industrial Land Use

LegendIndustrial Land Use

Zoning DistrictsBusiness

Commercial and Automotive

Industrial

Limited Industrial

Retirement Community Overlay

Retirement Community Residence

Residence A-1

Residence A-2

ResidenceA-3

Residence B

Residence C

Rural Residence

Parcel Boundaries

RoadsLegend

Figure 4.1.1.A Industrial Land Use


43

• The median year buildings on industrial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough were built is 1982.

• The oldest building on an industrial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough was built in 1890.

• The newest building on an industrial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough was built in 2009.

• The City of Marlborough’s 112 buildings on industrial parcels of land possess a total 6,457,523 gross square feet.

• The average size of buildings on industrial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 57,656 gross square feet.

• The median size of buildings on industrial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 26,189 gross square feet.

• The smallest building on an industrial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 240 gross square feet.

• The largest building on an industrial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 659,530 gross square feet.

Industrial Parcel Zoning

• The City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in 10 different zoning districts.

• 41% of the City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in the Limited Industrial Zoning District.

• 35% of the City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in the Industrial Zoning District.

• 7% of the City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in the Residence A1 Zoning District.


• 3% of the City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in the Residence C Zoning District.

• 3% of the City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in the Commercial and Automotive Zoning District.

• 3% of the City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in the Business Zoning District.

• 1% of the City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in the Rural Resi-dence Zoning District.

• 1% of the City of Marlborough’s industrial parcels of land are located in the Residence B Zoning District.


44



4.1.2 Business Activity

Table 4.1.2.1 shows the number of manufacturing (industrial) businesses, jobs and business sales in Marlborough and compares these numbers to the overall seven-community Greater Marlborough Market Area. As data in Table 4.1.2.1 shows, the largest industrial sector indus-try in Marlborough is Measuring & Analyzing Instruments with more than 2,800 jobs and $187 million in sales in 2010. The City holds 87% of the Market Area jobs and 82% of the Market Area sales within this industry. Electrical & Electronic Equipment is the second largest manu-facturing industry in Marlborough, with 741 jobs and $67.5 million in sales in 2010. The City holds 53% of the Market Area jobs and 59% of the Market Area sales within this industry.

.

Business Categories Businesses

% Market Area

Businesses Jobs

% Market

Area JobsSales ($mil)

% Market Area Sales

Food and Kindred Products 2 22% 44 15% $3.9 13%

Textile Mill Products 1 20% 50 45% $2.8 41%

Apparel & Other Fabric Products 2 50% 126 93% $13.8 95%

Lumber & Wood Products 2 25% 21 14% $1.6 15%

Furniture & Fixtures 0 0% 0 0% $0.0 0%

Paper and Allied Products 6 67% 131 61% $8.0 39%

Printing, Publishing & AlliedIndustries 26 39% 183 21% $17.2 25%

Chemicals and Allied Products 5 50% 505 18% $50.8 24%

Petroleum Refining and Related Industries 1 50% 4 44% $0.4 50%

Rubber and Plastic Products 1 8% 10 3% $0.7 4%

Leather and Leather Products 0 0% 0 0% $0.0 0%

Stone, Clay, Glass & Concrete Products 3 30% 54 47% $1.7 23%

Primary Metals Industries 2 29% 48 29% $3.0 29%

Fabricated Metals Products 13 33% 454 47% $38.8 50%

Industry, Commercial Machinery & Computers 16 26% 218 16% $19.4 16%

Electrical, Electronic Equipment (Ex. Computers) 21 44% 741 53% $67.5 59%

Transportation Equipment 2 67% 29 53% $2.8 44%

Measuring & Analyzing Instruments 17 44% 2,817 87% $187.3 82%

Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries 9 33% 112 37% $8.8 37%

ALL INDUSTRIAL 129 35% 5,547 44% $428.5 43%

Table 4.1.2.1 IndustrialBusinesses,Jobs,andSalesinMarlboroughandComparedtoMarketAreaTotals

Source: Claritas Site Reports, 2010, and FXM Associates

According to data obtained from Claritas Site Reports (2010 data), manufacturers in Marlbor-ough accounted for 6% of all City business establishments, 18% of City-wide jobs, and 12% of all sales made by businesses in Marlborough in 2010. Manufacturing jobs in Marlborough have declined over the past 10 years, as shown by the data in Figure 4.1.2.A. Note that the job totals shown in Figure 4.1.2.A do not match those shown in the prior table. The reason for this difference is that Claritas Site Reports – the source of the data in the table – counts all jobs whereas the Massachusetts Department of Labor and Workforce Development (Mass-DOL)—the source of the data in Figure 4.1.2.A -- counts only those jobs covered by unem-ployment insurance. MassDOL is the only source of local historical trend data but signifi-cantly undercounts jobs in many industry categories, which include self-employed persons.


45

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Ave

rage

Mon

thly

Em

ploy

men

t

23 - Construction

31-33 - Manufacturing

42 - Wholesale Trade

44-45 - Retail Trade

48-49 - Transportation and Warehousing

51 - Information

52 - Finance and Insurance

53 - Real Estate and Rental and Leasing

54 - Professional and Technical Services

55 - Management of Companies andEnterprises 56 - Administrative and Waste Services

61 - Educational Services

62 - Health Care and Social Assistance

71 - Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation

72 - Accommodation and Food Services

81 - Other Services, Ex. Public Admin

NAICS Category

Notes: Compiled from Monthly ES-202 data. No data recorded for Manufacturing, Management, and Educational Services. For 2010, individual categories total 5,308 employees vs. reported total of 6.896 employees; missing classification of 23% of total.Source: Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce

Development (MassLabor), Monthly Employment and Wages Data, 2000-2010; and FXM Associates

Figure 4.1.2.A MarlboroughAverageMonthlyEmployment,2001-2010,byNAICSCategory

4.1.3 Industrial Sector Fiscal Impacts

As shown by the data in Table 4.1.3.1, industrial businesses in Marlborough contributed $10.8 million in property tax revenues in FY’11, accounting for 15% of all property tax revenues and 36% of property taxes paid by commercial uses. Industrial uses comprise 19% of the City’s taxable land area. Assessed values per square foot for Industrial uses are 57% of the aver-age SF assessed land value City-wide and 76% of the assessed building values per square foot. Average assessed vales per SF of Industrial land are 52% of the average for all com-mercial property, and 81% of the average assessed values per SF of all commercial buildings.

Industrial % of All Land Uses% of Commercial

Land Uses

Number of Parcels 270 2% 32%

Land Area SF 68,688,758 19% 59%

Building Area SF 6,457,523 13% 40%

Land Assessed Values $159,229,200 11% 40%

Buildings Assessed Values $268,950,896 10% 33%

Land and Building Assessed Values $428,180,096 10% 36%

Assessed Land Value per SF $2.32 57% 52%

Assessed Building Value per SF $41.65 76% 81%

Property Tax Revenues in FY'11 $10,884,338 15% 36%

Table 4.1.3.1 MarlboroughIndustrialSectorFiscalEffects

Source: City of Marlborough Assessor

46



4.1.4 Greater Marlborough Comparative Analysis, Target Industries, Projected Employment

This section presents Marlborough’s competitive position for job growth in the industrial sector. For purposes of this analysis, “industrial sector” is defined as industries and sub-industries that tend to utilize industrial space. Complete details regarding methodology are in the Appendix to this report. This analysis begins with an overview of industry composition and growth trends, which provides important context for subsequent discussion of industry opportunities. This analysis is primarily based on industry data for 2009 (the most recent year for which complete data is available) at the zip code level.1 The analysis was carried out primarily using the LEAP model (Local Economic Assessment Package) developed by Economic Development Research Group for economic analysis.2

This section provides a current industrial profile of Marlborough, examining industry size measured by total jobs, industry mix, and employment and output growth by industry to provide context for the baseline job growth projections in section 4.1.4.2 and target industry identification in sections 4.1.4.3 and 4.1.4.4.

4.1.4.1 City of Marlborough Economic Base – Industrial Sectors

In 2009, the Marlborough economy supported nearly 32,800 jobs. Approximately 30% of these jobs were in industrial sectors, shown below in Table 4.1.4.1.1. With the exception of utilities, construction, mail, package delivery and warehousing, all of the industries in Table 4.1.4.1 are industries that export products outside of Marlborough, bringing new income into the community. The mail, package delivery and warehousing industry is a mix of local-serving and economic base. Most of these industries account for small shares of Marlbor-ough’s overall employment. With nearly 2,000 jobs representing about 5% of Marlborough’s employment base, computer and electronic products manufacturing is a notable exception.

An important measure of industry presence and performance is relative industry size, shown in Table 4.1.4.1 as “Mix Ratio3”. The mix ratio is the percent of the City’s employment in a given industry relative to the percent of employment in that industry in New England.4 A mix ratio of 1.0 indicates equal shares of industry employment in the City as in the New England economy, while a mix ratio of 2.0 indicates proportionally twice the share of employment in the City rela-tive to New England. Miscellaneous manufacturing (5.68), computer and electronic products (4.61), and wholesale trade (3.91) are particularly strong sectors in the Marlborough economy.

Despite net positive job growth in the overall Marlborough economy between 2004 and 2009, industrial sectors lost more than 1,000 jobs. While the overall economy grew at an average rate of 0.3% during the period, industrial sectors lost jobs at a rate of 1.8% per year. The utili-ties, chemical manufacturing and plastics and rubber manufacturing industries posted small gains during the period. All other industrial sector industries shed jobs.

1 The data was provided by IMPLAN of Stillwater, MN. IMPLAN re-packages and adds value to annual Federal eco-nomic data compiled through U.S. Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis), and the U.S. Census (Bureau of Labor Statistics).

2 For background information on this software product see the Appendix at the end of this document.3 The technical term for “mix ratio” is “location quotient”, abbreviated as LQ).4 For this section, which presents a basic overview of Marlborough’s economy, the mix ratio is shown relative to New

England as a whole. In the subsequent section, the mix ratios are calculated relative to each of the two


47

NAICS Industry 2004 20092009 % of

Total2004-09 CAGR1

‘09 Mix Ratio/ LQ2

221 Utilities 287 323 0.90% 2.40% 3.07

230 Construction 1,615 1,445 3.80% -2.20% 0.68

311 Food Products 406 387 1.00% -1.00% 1.95

313 Textile Mills 4 2 0.00% -14.30% 0.05

314 Textile Product Mills 8 8 0.00% -1.70% 0.37

321 Wood Products 2 1 0.00% -12.10% 0.02

322 Paper Manufacturing 350 231 0.60% -8.00% 2.22

323 Printing & Related Support Activities 108 99 0.30% -1.80% 0.82

324 Petroleum & Coal Products 13 10 0.00% -4.40% 1.32

325 Chemical Manufacturing 148 166 0.40% 2.40% 1.04

326 Plastics & Rubber Products 38 45 0.10% 3.20% 0.36

327 Nonmetallic Mineral Products 6 5 0.00% -5.10% 0.09

331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 46 36 0.10% -4.90% 0.74

332 Fabricated Metal Products 264 229 0.60% -2.90% 0.64

333 Machinery Manufacturing 98 65 0.20% -7.80% 0.32

334 Computer & Electronic Products 2,284 1,969 5.20% -2.90% 4.61

335 Electric Equipment, Appliances, etc. 16 11 0.00% -7.10% 0.1

336 Transportation Equipment 298 142 0.40% -13.80% 0.48

337 Furniture & Related Products 13 11 0.00% -2.70% 0.19

339 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 1,272 1,235 3.30% -0.60% 5.68

420 Wholesale Trade 4,864 4,685 12.50% -0.80% 3.91

491-493 Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing 227 207 0.60% -1.90% 0.77

Subtotal - Industrial Sectors 12,367 11,312 30.10% -1.80%

TOTAL - All Sectors 37,033 37,546 100.00% 0.30%

Table 4.1.4.1.1 MarlboroughEmploymentinIndustrialSectors

Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, aggregated by MIG Inc. (IMPLAN data).

1 Compound annual growth rate.2 Ratio of the percent Marlborough’s total employment in an industry with the percent of employment in that industry in New England as a whole (location quotient, LQ, is the technical term for this concept).

Manufacturing industries are losing jobs nationally due to global economic forces such as competition from lower cost locations overseas and changes in technology that has resulted in overall declines in demand for some products. These forces are outside the influence of local economic development policies and programs, creating a challenge for slowing or reversing job losses in these industries.

Nonetheless, declining employment is not necessarily an indicator that an industry is in de-cline. For some industries, automation and other investments that increase worker productiv-ity have allowed greater output with fewer workers. Although these industries are no longer the direct job engines for Marlborough they once were, they remain important because they purchase goods and services from local suppliers and pay wages to their workforce, wages which are often higher to reflect increased productivity. Table 4.1.4.1.2 shows Marlborough industries that lost jobs while increasing output between 2004 and 2009. Except for admin-

48



istrative and support services, these are all manufacturing industries. This suggests a shift in manufacturing’s role in economic development. Instead of pursuing manufacturing employ-ers as primary sources of jobs, they should be understood more broadly as supporters of secondary economic activity, both as consumers of/and suppliers to other local industries and through employee spending of wages.

NAICS Industry 2004 2009 CAGR1 CAGR1 2004 2009 CAGR1 CAGR1

331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 46 36 -4.90% -4.70% $16 $16 0.60% 0.00%

334 Computer & Electronic Products 2,284 1,969 -2.90% -3.30% $1,337 $1,398 0.90% 2.60%

323 Printing & Related Support 108 99 -1.80% -4.40% $12 $18 8.50% 2.90%

311 Food Products 406 387 -1.00% -1.30% $181 $190 0.90% 2.20%

Marlborough USJOBS

Marlborough USOUTPUT (millions 2005 $)

Table 4.1.4.1.2 IndustriesDeclininginJobswhileGaininginOutput

Source: Data from US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, provide by MIG, Inc.(IMPLAN). Sectors organized by using LEAP Conclusions

1 Compound annual growth rate

4.1.4.2 Industrial Sector Job Growth Projections

Local job growth over the 2004-2009 period as well as national industry 10-year growth projections were used to estimate future job growth for industrial sectors for Marlborough between 2009 and 2019. Industries projected to grow are shown below in Table 4.1.4.2.1. This represents the growth that is likely to occur under current economic development poli-cies and conditions, and it assumes that Marlborough maintains its competitive position relative to other areas in terms of business costs, transportation access, and labor market

cost, quality and availability.

NAICS Sector 10-Year Baseline Growth Range - Jobs

221 Utilities 0-86

230 Construction 0-167

311 Food Products 0-16

325 Chemical Manufacturing 0-44

326 Plastics & Rubber Products 0-16

420 Wholesale Trade 0-389

481-487 Transportation 25-34

491-493 Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing 0-24

562 Waste Management & Remediation 0-41

Table 4.1.4.2.1 10-YearBaselineJobGrowthProjectionsforMarlborough(2009-2019)Industrial Sector Industries

Source: EDR Group with data from Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Relative competitiveness is a constantly shifting process that depends on Marlborough’s invest-ments and policies as well as those of its competitors (Section 9.2: LEAP Analysis Summary). Section 4.1.4.3 identifies industries with job growth opportunities over and above these baseline growth projections that could be attainable through focused economic development targeting.


49

4.1.4.3 Industrial Sector Comparative Analysis

This comparative analysis identifies potential target industries among industrial sector indus-tries based on the dual dimensions of industry growth and relative concentration. For the first dimension, industries are classified according to seven categories: 5

• Industry growing faster locally than nationally;

• Industry declining locally while growing nationally;

• Industry growing locally while declining nationally;

• Industry growing locally slower than nationally;

• Industry declining locally slower than nationally;

• Industry declining locally faster than nationally; and

• Industry growing or declining locally at a rate similar to national trend.

A sector expanding nationally and growing even faster in Marlborough indicates a local strength. The local market share is increasing within a strong national market. If a national growth trend is positive, while the industry in Marlborough has a growth rate that is either less than or equal to that national rate, or possibly declining, then market share is being lost or threatened. Local stakeholders should consider economic development strategies tailored to that particular industry to ensure that Marlborough captures its share of that industry (i.e. arrest/reverse decline in the local market share).

Industry-specific decline in employment at the national level may be due to (1) decreasing demand or shrinking U.S market shares against worldwide competition, (2) shifting produc-tion off-shore, (3) or automation, which reduces the labor-to-capital ratio and slows employ-ment growth even if the industry’s output is growing. A sector that sheds employment on a national basis and gains employment locally (or contracts at a slower pace) may indicate consolidation for that activity as a result of local competitive advantages. These advantages could include infrastructure, low business costs, superior market access, or recent capital investments in industrial facilities. These sectors may not be sustainable in the long term, but citizens and leaders will need to decide if economic development investments to support such industries are warranted in the short term. Industries that are most vulnerable are those that are losing employment at a faster rate in Marlborough than in the nation as a whole. In these cases, competitive advantages elsewhere (and possibly disadvantages locally) are causing disinvestment in Marlborough.

Industries also are classified based on a second dimension, relative concentration, which is measured against each of the comparison areas (See Section 9.2.1 Comparative Communi-ties for comparison area selection methodology).

Table 4.1.4.3.1 provides a key for interpreting Tables 4.1.4.3.2 and 4.1.4.3.3, which sum-marize Marlborough’s industrial sector industries into the categories described above. Note that for both tables, industry growth is measured relative to the nation while industry concen-tration is measured relative to each of the Comparison Areas (Andover and Burlington, as identified in Section 9.2: Comparative Communities). As a result, industries will appear in the same column in both tables, but in different rows depending on the concentration of jobs relative to each of the comparison areas.

5 “Faster” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% greater than the national trend. “Slower” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% less than the national trend. “Similar rate” denotes trends that are less than 20% different.

50



Industries in the four left-most columns represent strengths and opportunities for various business activities in Marlborough. For example, utilities, which is growing faster than the nation and is more highly concentrated in Marlborough than either comparison area, rep-resents a strong industry. In contrast, mail, package delivery and warehousing is declining in Marlborough while growing in the nation, and its lower concentration than Burlington in-dicates that it may have room to grow. Prescriptive economic development actions may be used to support an underperforming local firm in an industry that is vibrant at the nation level.

Industries that appear in the four right-most columns represent weak or threatened busi-ness activities in Marlborough. Within these columns, those industries that have higher job concentrations in Marlborough relative to the competitor locations may be at risk for job loss, and preemptive economic development outreach to firms may be warranted. The analysis reinforces the findings of section 4.1.4.1 regarding decline in industrial sector industries, at least as measured at the 3-digit NAICS level. Section 4.1.4.3 below takes a closer look at Marlborough industries to identify sub-industries that may be performing well.

Str

eng

ths/

Op

po

rtu

niti

es

Wea

knes

ses/

Thre

aten

ed

Table 4.1.4.3.1 InterpretingConcentration/TrendAnalysisResults

Industry Trend Category Greater than 1.2 0.8 - 1.2 Less than 0.8

1Industry Growing Faster Locally than Nationally*

Strong, stable local industry

Strong, consider supporting

Emerging local industry, consider

supporting

2Industry Declining Locally while Growing Nationally

Strong, but needs attention

Medium strength, growth potential

Weak local industry, potential

opportunity

5Industry Growing Locally Slower than Nationally*




opportunity

8Industry Growing at a Rate Similar to National Trend*




supporting

3Industry Growing Locally while Declining Nationally

Industry in national

decline, seek diversification

Unstable, consider diversification

Possible consolidation,

monitor

4Industry Declining Locally Slower than Nationally*




Weak local industry

6Industry Declining Locally Faster than Nationally*




Weak local industry

7Industry Declining Locally at a rate Similar to National Trend




Weak local industry

Concentration


51



• Utilities


• Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing



• Transportation

• Construction


• Chemical Manufacturing


• Miscellaneous Manufacturing

• Food Products


• Paper Manufacturing

• Wholesale Trade

• Transportation Equipment


• Fabricated Metal Products

• Computer & Electronic Products

Str

eng

ths/

Op

po

rtu

niti

es

Wea

knes

ses/

Thre

aten

ed

Table 4.1.4.3.2 IndustrialSectorConcentration/TrendAnalysis–Marlboroughvs.AndoverComparisonArea1,2

Source: Data from US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, provide by MIG, Inc. (IMPLAN). Sectors organized using LEAP.

1 For industrial sector industries representing at least 100 jobs.2 Trend (growth/decline) is measured relative to the U.S., employment concentration is measured against the Comparison Area.

*Note: Faster denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% greater than the national trend. Slower denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% less than the national trend. Similar rate denotes trends that are less than 20% different.

Concentration

52





• Utilities


• Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing



• Transportation


• Chemical Manufacturing


• Miscellaneous Manufacturing

• Food Products


• Paper Manufacturing

• Wholesale Trade


• Computer & Electronic Products

• Fabricated Metal Products

Str

engt

hs/O

ppo

rtun

ities

W

eakn

esse

s/Th

reat

ened

Table 4.1.4.3.3 IndustrialSectorConcentration/TrendAnalysis–Marlboroughvs.Burlington,MAComparisonArea1,2




Concentration

4.1.4.4 Opportunities in Industrial Sub-Sectors

When viewed at the 2- and 3-digit NAICS level, industrial sectors as a whole are in decline na-tionally, and those patterns are mirrored in both Massachusetts and Marlborough. However, some individual industries within these broad industry categories are performing well and are important to Marlborough’s economy. This analysis examines industries based on IM-PLAN’s highest level of resolution for employment, which reports employment in 440 industry categories. Industries analyzed had at least 100 employees in Marlborough. Table 4.1.4.4.1 presents employment concentration in these industries relative to the nation as a whole. For all industries, Marlborough has many times the national level of employment in these sectors, indicating that they each have an important presence in Marlborough.

In determining whether these industries are suitable for future targeting in Marlborough, it is important to consider future growth prospects. Table 4.1.4.4.2 presents a shift-share analysis of these industries, which is a measure of each industry’s growth in Marlborough relative to its growth in the nation as a whole. The most promising future growth industries are those that are growing both nationally and in Marlborough. Three industries fall into this category: seasonings and dressing manufacturing (likely led by Ken’s Foods), guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing (likely led by Raytheon), and surgical and medical instrument

manufacturing (such as Navilyst and Hologic).


53

Jobs % U.S. %Mix Ratio

(LQ)2

Total – All Sectors 37,546 100.0% 100.0% --

Scientific research and development services1 509 1.4% 0.5% 2.47

Surgical and medical instrument, laboratory and medical instrument manufacturing

1,145 3.0% 0.1% 38.81

Watch, clock, and other measuring and controlling device manufacturing

417 1.1% 0.0% 59.93

Seasoning and dressing manufacturing 381 1.0% 0.0% 53.24

Paperboard container manufacturing 224 0.6% 0.1% 7

Computer terminals and other computer peripheral equipment manufacturing

198 0.5% 0.0% 19.2

Guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing 142 0.4% 0.0% 11.89

All other chemical product and preparation manufacturing

132 0.4% 0.0% 8.04

Table 4.1.4.4.1 EmploymentConcentrationinIndustrialSub-Sectors,2009(LocationQuotient)

Source: Bureau of Economic Analysis (packaged by Minnesota IMPLAN Group).

1 This industry is somewhat of a hybrid between industrial and commercial, as it often requires manufacturing or wet lab space in close proximity to office-oriented space (often within the same building)

2 Location quotient, LQ, is the technical term for mix ratio.

Marlborough

Table 4.1.4.4.2 RelativeEmploymentGrowthinIndustrialSub-Sectors,2004-2009

2004 2009 Marlborough U.S.Shift-Share

Ratio

Total – All Sectors 36,501 37,546 2.9% 1.60% --

Scientific research and development services1 1,397 509 -63.6% 5.30% -12.01

Surgical and medical instrument, laboratory and medical instrument manufacturing

573 1,145 99.6% 16.90% 5.9

Watch, clock, and other measuring and controlling device manufacturing

511 417 -18.4% -9.30% -1.98

Seasoning and dressing manufacturing

263 381 44.8% 14.40% 3.11

Paperboard container manufacturing 103 224 116.8% -18.90% -6.18

Computer terminals and other computer peripheral equipment manufacturing

269 198 -26.7% -25.20% -1.06

Guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing

107 142 31.8% 9.00% 3.52


433 132 -69.4% -19.40% -3.59

MarlboroughTotal Growth Rate

2004-2009

Source: BEA (packaged by Minnesota IMPLAN Group).

54



4.2INDUSTRIALREALESTATEMARKETANALYSIS

4.2.1 Greater Marlborough Industrial Market Trends

In the following graphs, historical and projected trends in the industrial space inventory, va-cancies, vacancy rates, and net absorption are shown for the City of Marlborough compared to the seven-community Greater Marlborough Market Area (Region). The analyses in the section are derived from proprietary data obtained from Co Star Property Information Servic-es, the generally accepted real estate data source used by most brokers, analysts, develop-ers, and property owners. Notwithstanding Co Star’s standing in the professional real estate community, the consultant team notes that no data source is 100% reliable, and therefore the analyses derived from these data should be regarded as indicative of general trends rather than a definitive indicator of the actual numbers in any data category.

Figure 4.2.1.A shows the historical and forecast inventory of industrial space in Marlborough and the Greater Marlborough Market Area. Both the City of Marlborough’s and the Market Area’s inventory of industrial space has changed little since 2006, and new additions to the supply are not forecast through the 2nd quarter of 2013. Marlborough’s inventory of iIndus-trial space totaled 2.5 million SF in the 2nd quarter of 2011, 20% of the Market Area’s 12.1 million SF of industrial space.

Total Inventory of Industrial Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Squa

re F

eet

Inventory-Region Inventory-Marlborough

Figure 4.2.1.A TotalInventoryofIndustrialSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegion

Figure 4.2.1.B shows historical and forecast vacant Industrial space in Marlborough com-pared to the region. Marlborough’s share of vacant industrial space is projected to decline from 179,000 SF currently to 68,000 SF by the 2nd quarter of 2013, or from 12% to 5% of the Market Area vacant industrial space.


55

Figure 4.2.1.B VacantIndustrialSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegionVacant Industrial Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Sqau

re F

eet

Vacant-Region Vacant-Marlborough

Figure 4.2.1.C HistoricalandProjectedVacancyRatesforIndustrialSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegion

Historical and Projected Vacancy Rates for Industrial Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Vaca

ncy

Rat

e

Vacancy Rate-Region Vacancy Rate-Marlborough

Data in Figure 4.2.1.C shows the corresponding relative decline in Marlborough’s industrial space vacancy rate compared to the region overall, which has historically been below the regional vacancy rate and will become substantially lower as projected. The projected 3% industrial vacancy rate by 2013 for Marlborough is considered too low to absorb additional industrial uses after that time without net new additions to the industrial space inventory. Partly for this reason, little net absorption of retail space is forecast for Marlborough. Over the next two years the City of Marlborough is projected to capture 88% of the net absorption of industrial space in the Market Area, as shown in Figure 4.2.1.D.

56



Figure 4.2.1.D HistoricalForecastNetAbsorptionofIndustrialSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegion

Historical and Forecast Net Absorption of Industrial Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

(400,000)

(300,000)

(200,000)

(100,000)

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Squa

re F

eet

Net Absorption-Region Net Absorption-Marlborough

Lease Rates

As shown in the graph below, lease rates (per square foot) for industrial space in Marlbor-ough historically tracked slightly higher than the regional average until 2010. They have been comparable or slightly less since.

Region and Marlborough Average Rental Rates Per SF for Industrial Space

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

1998 1Q 1999 1Q 2000 1Q 2001 1Q 2002 1Q 2003 1Q 2004 1Q 2005 1Q 2006 1Q 2007 1Q 2008 1Q 2009 1Q 2010 1Q 2011 1Q

Ann

ual R

ent p

er S

F (n

nn)

Marlborough RegionSource: COSTAR and FXM Associates

Figure 4.2.1.E RegionandMarlboroughAverageRentalRatesPerSFforIndustrialSpaces

Source: COSTAR and FXM Associates.


57

4.3BUILD-OUTANALYSIS

4.3.1 Zoning Comparative Analysis

The Marlborough Zoning Regulations are typical of those in many Massachusetts commu-nity land use regulations because local regulations must conform to the same state enabling legislation. However, there are some important distinctions between Marlborough’s Zoning regulations and typical land use regulations of many Massachusetts communities.

Special Redevelopment Districts – There are no zoning districts specifically geared towards promoting redevelopment in the industrial districts. This was previously noted from a study by the MAPC in a memo dated October 2007. Communities will often include special districts to attract and encourage redevelopment. However, districts specifically drafted for certain developments, such as in Wayland (Town Center overlay district) and Westwood (Westwood Station overlay district) were negotiated and written with the developer. This has typically been the case with c.40R Smart Growth Incentive districts throughout the state as well.

Parking – Marlborough requires one parking space per three industrial use employees. In a comparison with 12 other Massachusetts communities—Lexington, Arlington, Win-chester, Woburn, Burlington, Bedford, Waltham, Belmont, Newton, Weston, Wellesley, and Needham—the parking requirements for industrial uses ranged from one space per 1,000 SF (Newton) to 3.3 spaces per 1,000 SF (Needham), and one space per 1.5 employees (Belmont) to one space per four employees (Newton).

4.3.2 Industrial Build-out Analysis

Build-out analyses were completed to determine the amount of new industrial space that could be added to the City’s supply as allowed under current zoning regulations and the differential amount of new space that could be added with modifications to the Marlborough Zoning Regulations.

The City has over 12,000 parcels identified in the public records. Using City Assessors data, Zoning Regulations and GIS data, the build-out analysis sorted the information and identified:

• Land zoned and used for industrial uses by acreage and square feet of building space.

• Amount of vacant and under-utilized land currently zoned for industrial use.

• The maximum potential build-out for every industrial parcel that met the basic criteria of vacant or underutilized and met certain additional criteria within the commercial and industrial zoning districts (B, CA, LI, and I).

• Current assessed values of industrial land and buildings.

• The value of that maximum potential build-out according to current tax rates and aver-age assessed values.

Database Assessment

The Assessors’ database, linked to the City’s GIS database, was used in this build-out calcu-lation. The Assessors’ records were sorted in an Excel file to list the following criteria:

• GIS and Assessors’ parcel ID;

• Parcel Area and Value;

58



• Building Area and Value;

• Zoning;

• Land Use [According to Property Type Classification Codes]; and

• Wetlands Area.

The Property Type Classification Codes, prepared by the Massachusetts Department of Rev-enue [revised as of June 2009, are used in the Commonwealth to identify, as consistently as possible, land use within the local assessors’ records. The codes were sorted for the Build-out Scenario as shown in the following Table:

Property Type Classification Code* Land Use [Sector]

1000-2100 Residential

2600-2800 Agricultural and Park Land

3000 Commercial

3100 Industrial: Warehouse and Distribution

3200-3300 Retail

3400 Commercial

3600-3800Commercial: Entertainment and Recreational

Facilities

3900 Commercial: Vacant

4000-4100, 4400 Industrial

4200-4300, 4500 Utilities

Table 4.3.2.1 PropertyCodesandLandUses

*Note: The Massachusetts Land Use code uses three digits. The Marlborough Assessors’ database uses four digit codes.

Only those parcels identified in the appropriate sectors were used in each sector build-out analysis. The parcels were further sorted to remove parcels:

• Where the underlying zoning district did not conform to the use designation;

• Where listed, with an area of wetland greater than 50% of the parcel; and

• Where the total parcel area was less than the minimum lot size for the specified zoning district.

GIS Review

A review of the GIS database and aerial imagery was performed to further refine the parcel list generated by the Assessors’ database and sort out parcels that were clearly used for specific purposes, not zoned for the use, and restricted by the mapped wetlands and water resources.

Build-out Calculations: Floor Area Ratio [FAR]

A Floor Area Ratio, or FAR, was calculated for each zoning district. The formula for the

calculation of FAR was:

Maximum Building Area/ Lot Size = FAR for district


59

The definition of Lot Coverage in the zoning regulations is: “The area of a lot covered by all structures, areas used by vehicular traffic and parking, including driveways, loading bays and maneuvering aisles, whether paved, unpaved or graveled, and of all impermeable areas such as paved walkways or outdoor storage areas, but not including gravel walkways or pedestrian areas not adjacent to parking lots or buildings. Areas not included in “lot cover-age” shall be landscaped areas…” [sec 650-5] Consequently, the Maximum Building Area is calculated from the total coverage allowed by zoning, subtracting the surface area parking requirements while considering the allowances for building height in stories on a one acre lot.

For Industrial zones, the FAR was calculated as 1.5 in the Light Industrial [LI] District and 1.8 in the Industrial [I] District.

Build-out Scenarios: Vacant Land

Vacant land parcels are those indicated on the Assessors’ records as having no buildings on the land. Certain parcels are used for specific purposes even though listed as vacant. For example, a ‘vacant’ parcel might be used as part of a drainage system or storage area. As noted, a scan of the GIS aerial imagery was performed to remove from the sorted database for build-out those parcels committed to other uses.

Build-out Scenarios: 25-Percent and 50-Percent Developed

The maximum potential build-out conforms with zoning height limitations and lot coverage restrictions and includes the parking and circulation needs as determined by the size of each building and Urban Land Institute parking demand ratios.

The underutilized land was identified under two different specifications: land that was 25% developed and land that was 50% developed. These conditions were identified according to a comparison of the allowable development under the zoning dimensional standards, specif-ically maximum lot coverage and the resulting FAR, which was then combined with the park-ing requirements and area for construction of surface parking to meet those requirements. This total area was compared with the Assessors’ information for current development on the parcel, and all parcels meeting the threshold were listed accordingly as less than 25% or less than 50% developed. As noted, a scan of the GIS aerial imagery was performed to remove from the sorted database for build-out those parcels committed to other uses.

The formula for determining underutilized land is:

A. Total building FAR/ Number of Stories = Building coverage in sf+ 2 spaces X 1,000 SF of building X 350 SF per parking space = Total parking area= Total parcel development opportunity

B. Existing total parcel development*/ Maximum parcel development opportunity [X 100]

= Percent developed* from Assessors’ database

C. Percent developed compared to the threshold of <25% and <50% of the allowed development

60



Build-out Scenarios: Values

Certain land use codes, such as vacant land or uses that do not pay local property taxes, had no assessed building value. In these cases, either the assessed value per square foot of the building remained at zero, or the value was changed to that of the most relevant land use code. For example, “39: Vacant Land: Commercial” uses the same average value per square foot as the State Land Use Code “34: Office Building.” These numbers were calculated as square foot unit values for comparative purposes.

Fit Studies

A further refinement was to review the GIS database and aerial imagery and determine how additional development could fit according to zoning and other restrictions on specific sites.

Qualifications

Some qualifications should be noted regarding the results obtained from the analysis of this data.

1. This summary is based on data provided by the Assessors’ Office and the City’s Geo-graphic Information System, as the best available information.

2. Certain discrepancies were found between the Assessors’ database and the GIS aerial photo imagery. This may be due to the time of the photography or other considerations by the property assessors.

3. The wetland and water resource delineations are approximate, and actual on the ground surveys may provide lesser or greater areas on the individual properties.

4. Parking and building configurations used to estimate build-out are based on industry standards and testing of sites, but may vary for the actual site design.

5. Easements and other encumbrances on the properties were not researched as part of this analysis.

Results of Industrial Build-out Calculations

The following table summarizes the results of the Industrial Sector Build-out Analysis.

Number of Parcels

Potential DevelopmentSquare Footage

Assessed Value of Potential Development

Vacant Parcels 56 10,577,348 $588,462,059

Parcels that are less

than 25% developed98 7,201,688 $299,751,480

Parcels that are less

than 50% developed98 10,806,052 $449,773,721

Table 4.3.2.2 IndustrialBuild-OutAnalysis


61

4.3.2.1 Current Marlborough Zoning Regulations

Current Marlborough Zoning Regulations include the following sections relevant to Industrial sector uses:

• The Definitions [§ 650-5] include listings for ‘Light Manufacturing,’ ‘Manufacturing’

and ‘Warehouse.’

• Two Industrial Districts are identified [§ 650-7].

1. Limited Industrial Districts; LI2. Industrial Districts; I

○ Certain industrial uses are also allowed in the B and CA districts.

• The Table of Uses [§ 650-17] includes a list of what uses are classified as Industrial Uses and how they are treated in the respective industrial districts as indicated in Table 4.3.2.1.1.

• The Table of Dimensional Standards for Industrial Districts [§ 650-41] is shown in Table 4.3.2.1.2.

Table 4.3.2.1.1 IndustrialDistrictUses

List of Industrial Uses in Industrial Districts and status for building permits Limited Industrial Industrial

Industrial Uses

Airports and heliports Y Y

Newspaper printing and publishing, job printing

Y Y

Manufacturing where the majority of items are sold on premises to the consumer

N N

Transportation terminal and freight depots

SP SP

Food processing plants N Y

Research, experimental labs Y Y

Bakery (non-retail) N Y

Light non-nuisance manufacturing Y Y

Light manufacturing, using portable electric machinery

N N

Light manufacturing incidental to research

Y Y

Associated/accessory research uses SP SP

Manufacturing and/or warehousing Y Y

Manufacturing or warehouse N Y

Retail sales accessory to manufacturing

N Y

Recreation center, indoor and outdoor

SP SP

Power laundries and dry cleaning N Y

Dye works N Y

Packaging or bottling plants N Y

Electric power substation for changing bulk power to distribution voltage

SP SP

Accessory uses and service buildings Y Y

Large tract development N Y


433 132

Abbreviations: Y= allowed, N= not allowed, SP= Special Permit

Industrial Zoning Districts

62



District

Minimum Lot Area(acres)

Minimum Lot

Frontage (feet)

Minimum Side Yard

(feet)

Minimum Front Yard

(feet)

Minimum Rear Yard

(feet)

Maximum Lot

Coverage

Distance from

Residential Zone (feet)

Height (feet)

Limited Industrial LI

2 200 50 50 50 60 0 to 150: 30

151 to 250: 36

251 to 400: 40

401 to 500: 52

Industrial I 1 50 25 40 40 6010 –– 11

Height

10 Maximum lot coverage for a Large Tract Development Lot shall be 50%.11 Buildings on a Large Tract Development Lot, which are more than 1,200 feet from a Residential

Zone, may be built to a maximum height of 85 feet.

Table 4.3.2.1.2 IndustrialDistrictDimensionalStandards[Excerpt]

Brownfields

The City of Marlborough reportedly has numerous properties categorized as hazardous waste sites or brownfields, which are zoned for industrial and commercial use. Many of these sites have completed C. 21E assessments to determine types and amounts of toxic-ity, remediation required, and future ‘activity and use’ restrictions. Some of these sites have been cleaned-up and reused/redeveloped, and others may be vacant or underutilized build-ings and land.6 The status of the City’s vacant and underutilized brownfield sites could not be ascertained from information available to the consultant team during the course of this study. The City recently received a $200,000 EPA Brownfields grant award to clean-up petroleum con-tamination at the (former) Jenney Service Station (25 East Main Street). The “Brownfields 2011 Cleanup Grant Fact Sheet – Marlborough, MA” is in the Appendix to this report.

4.3.2.2 Higher Density Zoning Modifications

Because of the maximum development potential calculated here as Industrial sector build-out under existing zoning, amendments to the City Zoning Regulations for higher density development are not considered necessary. However, a number of changes to the Zoning Regulations would facilitate new industrial development. Those changes are:

• Allowing manufacturing with on-site consumer sales to be allowed by Special Permit in the LI and I districts;

• Reducing dimensional standards for parcel size for “Large Tract Development” to pro-vide additional opportunities to use the option for greater building height;

• Specifying mixed-use options for projects in industrial zoning districts, particularly retail/office, retail/industrial and live-work options;

• Adding a definition of ‘Light non-nuisance manufacturing’ to specify the intent of “non-nuisance;”

6 The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) website identifies 239 hazardous waste sites in the City of Marlborough at www.db.state.ma.us/dep/cleanup/sites, and as referenced on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “Brownfields and Land Revitalization” program website at www.epa.gov/brownfields.


63

• Allowing Recreation centers to be As-of-right uses [Y in Table sec. 650-17] in the I district at the same time as including a definition for the use; and

• Adding definitions for ‘Cleantech/Alternative energy’ and ‘Flexible incubator space’ or similar terms to identify desired uses.

Overall recodification of the Zoning Regulations is recommended as a means to address

current inconsistencies and confusing text that apply to all sections.

4.3.3 Infrastructure Opportunities and Constraints

Transportation

The connection between projected future development and the transportation network serv-ing the City of Marlborough has its basis in the amount of traffic expected to be generated by that development and the ability of the transportation network to accommodate the projected traffic volumes. In addition, the anticipated directional distribution of this traffic will dictate what portions of the network are most likely to attract additional volumes and whether there is sufficient roadway capacity available to accommodate these increases.

The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publishes the industry standard Trip Genera-tion, which contains daily and peak hour rates and equations used to calculate the amount of traffic expected to be generated by hundreds of different land uses. Table 4.3.3.1 sum-marizes the average trip generation rates that will be used to estimate traffic associated with the various sector buildout analyses identified in this report.

Table 4.3.3.1 MarlboroughEDCTripGeneration

Land Use ITE CodeAverage Weekday AM peak hr PM peak hr

Manufacturing 140 3.82 0.73 0.73

Industrial Park 130 6.96 0.84 0.86

Light Industrial 110 6.97 0.92 0.97

Warehouse 150 3.56 0.3 0.32

Office 710 11.01 1.55 1.49

R&D 760 8.11 1.22 1.07

Retail (shopping center) 820 42.94 1 3.73

Restaurant 932 127.15 11.52 11.15

Hotel (per room) 310 8.17 0.56 0.59

Notes: Average rate provided in table.

Rates represent number of trips per 1,000 square feet unless otherwise noted.

Peak hour rates are for peak of adjacent street traffic, not peak hour of generator.Source: ITE Trip Generation, 8th edition, 2008

In the case of this industrial sector analysis, the rates for light industrial and research and development will be used if specified in the development description; otherwise, the indus-trial park category will be applied. This latter category accounts for a variety of land uses (manufacturing, warehouse, light industrial) in a mixed-use industrial setting.

64



Trip generation rates are typically applied to specific development plans or overall develop-ment forecasts. In this case, a list of designated Priority Development Sites (PDS) in the City of Marlborough as well as planned and/or approved developments, will be used as the basis for trip generation calculations. Table 4.3.3.2 summarizes the PDS and planned/approved developments.

Industrial sector-related development locations in Table 4.3.3.2 include 362 Elm Street, 413 South Street, 200 Forest Street and 289 Elm Street. The results of trip generation calculations for these proposed developments are summarized in Table 4.3.3.3.

Table 4.3.3.2 MarlboroughPriority&Planned/ApprovedDevelopmentSites

Chapter 43D Priority Development Sites

• 100 Crowley Drive 120,000 SF built 2009; Class A Office; 100,000 sf. ft. (vacant)

• 362 Elm Street 55,000 SF flex/R&D-manufacturing; 47,000 sq. ft. available

• 413-417 South Street 145,000 SF (J) flex industrial (planned)

50,000 SF (I) office space (proposed)

• Devonshire@495 Center 600,000 SF 47 acres; office/flex, R&D space (planned)

Other Permitted, Planned and Proposed Projects6

• Cedar Hill Street/Simarano Drive 600,000 SF office & hotel (preliminary proposal)

• 100 Campus Drive 650,000 SF office ^ 2,528 parking spaces (proposed)

• 800 Nickerson Road 125,000 SF office on 12 acre site (proposed)

• 900 Nickerson Road 125,000 SF office (proposed)


• 84 Waterford Drive 60,000 SF office (proposed 3rd of 3-building complex)

In addition, the Marlborough Assessor’s Office identified two (2) other sites in a sample list of vacant and underutilized industrial properties located in Marlborough.7

• 200 Forest Street 825,000 SF LI (former Hewlett Packard site)

• 289 Elm Street 71,236 SF LI (built in 1982; 100% vacant)

6“Development Spreadsheet” from Stephen F. Reid, Building Commissioner, City of Marlborough (June 21, 2011)7“Sample of Vacant and Underutilized Properties,” Green Communities Application – Criteria #1 As-of-right Siting, Office of

the Assessors (November 15, 2010)

Proposed DevelopmentDevelopment Program (SF) ITE Code

Average Weekday

Traffic (veh./day)

AM Peak Hour Traffic

(veh./hr.)

PM Peak Hour Traffic

(veh./hr.)

362 Elm Street 47,000 760 381 57 50

413 South Street 145,000 760 1,176 177 155

200 Forest Street 825,000 110 5,750 759 800

289 Elm Street 71,236 110 495 65 69

Subtotal 1,088,236 7,802 1,058 1,074

Table 4.3.3.3 IndustrialSectorTripGeneration


65

The combined square footage of proposed industrial space identified in Table 4.3.3.3 is approximately 1.1 million square feet, compared to a forecasted absorption rate of approxi-mately 276,000 square feet in the next five years (see Section 2.6 Real Estate Market Over-view). If developed and occupied, approximately 7,800 vehicle trips per day would be added to the local and regional transportation network, with approximately 1,100 vehicle trips from that total occurring during both AM and PM peak hours.

Distribution of these trips over the local and regional transportation network has been calcu-

lated using U.S. Census Journey to Work data from the 2000 Census.

The residence locations of those working in Marlborough were identified in order to deter-mine travel patterns across the local and regional transportation network. Figure 4.3.3.A illustrates the 10 highest residence communities of those working in Marlborough.

Figure 4.3.3.A ResidenceLocationsofMarlboroughWorkers(HighestTenLocations)

Fully 30% of those who work in Marlborough live in Marlborough and likely use local roads and Route 20 (and to a lesser extent, Route 85) to reach their work destinations. Given Marlborough’s superior interstate highway accessibility, it is no surprise that the majority of worker-related trips (52%) are interstate-oriented: 20% to/from the south on I-495, 18% to/from the north on I-495, and 14% to/from the west on I-290. The balance of trips entering and exiting Marlborough (18%) are split among Route 20, Route 85 and local roads. These vari-ous distribution percentages will be applied to the trip generation calculations summarized in Table 4.3.3.3 to determine the potential impact of proposed industrial sector development on local and regional transportation infrastructure. It should be noted that the peak hour volumes will be used for this exercise since it is typically peak hour operations that define the quality of the transportation network.

The final task required to complete the trip distribution assignment is to geographically locate the proposed development sites and their proximity to likely routes to and from Marlborough. Figure 4.3.3.B on the following page illustrates the locations of all PDS and planned/ap-proved developments provided in Table 4.3.3.2.

Given the location of the proposed industrial developments, the majority of the 1,100 peak hour trips will likely utilize the I-495/Simarano Drive interchange, followed by the I-495/Route 20 interchange. On the local network, Route 20, Williams Street and Forest Street will likely attract the greatest number of proposed traffic.


66-67


1 0 10.5 Miles

¯MEDC Development Study Locations

LegendMEDC Development Study Location

Building Footprints

Parcels

Roads Legend

Figure 4.3.3.B Location of PDS and Planned/Approved Developments

1 0 10.5 Miles

¯MEDC Development Study Locations

LegendMEDC Development Study Location

Building Footprints

Parcels

Roads

68



As part of the I-495 Study: I-290 to I-90 (Final Report, 2009, CMRPC and MAPC), ramp ca-pacity analyses were performed for each of the three I-495 interchanges in Marlborough for existing (2007) conditions. Table 4.3.3.4 summarizes the results of those analyses.

Table 4.3.3.4 I-495InterchangeCapacityAnalysisSummary

Source: CMRPC/MAPC

AM peak PM peak

I-495/I-290

I-495 NB to I-290/85 EB 0.335 0.34

I-495 NB to I-290 WB 0.495 0.6

I-495 SB to I-290 WB 0.609 1.35

I-495 SB to I-290/85 EB 0.01 0.01

I-290 EB to I-495 NB 0.455 1.25

I-290 EB to I-495 SB 0.428 0.69

I-290 WB to I-495 NB 0.475 1.32

I-290 WB to I-495 SB 0.328 0.26

I-495/Route 20

I-495 NB to Route 20 EB 0.76 0.8

I-495 NB to Route 20 WB 0.83 0.51

I-495 SB to Route 20 WB 0.42 0.42

I-495 SB to Route 20 EB 0.38 0.49

Route 20 EB to I-495 NB 0.138 0.3

Route 20 EB to I-495 SB 0.4 0.74

Route 20 WB to I-495 NB 0.56 0.58

Route 20 WB to I-495 SB 0.53 0.71

I-495/Simarano Drive

I-495 NB to Simarano Drive WB 0.69 0.42

I-495 SB to Simarano Drive WB 0.19 0.15

Simarano Drive EB to I-495 NB 0.09 0.19

Simarano Drive EB to I-495 SB 0.24 0.67

Table 4.3.3.5 adds the projected industrial sector trip generation to the previous table in order to assess the potential for each interchange component to accommodate the anticipated peak hour traffic volume increases.

The results summarized in Table 4.3.3.5 indicate that the regional transportation network serving Marlborough has sufficient capacity at the highway interchanges to accommodate the potential increase in peak hour traffic anticipated from the planned and proposed industrial developments noted in Table 4.3.3.2. The one exception noted in the table, at the I-290 WB to I-495 NB on-ramp, is a negligible volume (6 vph) that is within the margin of daily traffic variation on the local trans-portation network. However, the acknowledgement of an existing deficiency at this ramp location indicates the need for future roadway improvements at this location. Indeed, the I-495 Study: I-290 to I-90 report includes recommendations and conceptual diagrams intended to address this and other deficiencies in order to address future growth and safety needs.


69

Table 4.3.3.5 I-495InterchangeCapacityAnalysisvs.TrafficVolumeIncrease

Source: CMRPC/MAPC

AM peak PM peak

Peak Hour Volume Increase

Available Capacity? (yes/no)

I-495/I-290

I-495 NB to I-290/85 EB 0.335 0.34 12 Yes

I-495 NB to I-290 WB 0.495 0.6 50 Yes

I-495 SB to I-290 WB 0.609 1.35 0 NA

I-495 SB to I-290/85 EB 0.01 0.01 6 Yes

I-290 EB to I-495 NB 0.455 1.25 0 NA

I-290 EB to I-495 SB 0.428 0.69 50 Yes

I-290 WB to I-495 NB 0.475 1.32 6 No

I-290 WB to I-495 SB 0.328 0.26 12 Yes

I-495/Route 20

I-495 NB to Route 20 EB 0.76 0.8 62 Yes

I-495 NB to Route 20 WB 0.83 0.51 0 NA

I-495 SB to Route 20 WB 0.42 0.42 47 Yes

I-495 SB to Route 20 EB 0.38 0.49 20 Yes

Route 20 EB to I-495 NB 0.138 0.3 63 Yes

Route 20 EB to I-495 SB 0.4 0.74 0 NA

Route 20 WB to I-495 NB 0.56 0.58 20 Yes

Route 20 WB to I-495 SB 0.53 0.71 27 Yes


I-495 NB to Simarano Drive WB 0.69 0.42 102 Yes

I-495 SB to Simarano Drive WB 0.19 0.15 108 Yes

Simarano Drive EB to I-495 NB 0.09 0.19 108 Yes

Simarano Drive EB to I-495 SB 0.24 0.67 102 Yes

Given the substantial percentage (30%) of trips expected to be associated with workers residing in Marlborough, local roadways such as Route 20, Route 85, South Street, Williams Street and Forest Street are likely to exhibit noticeable increases in traffic. However, these increases will be tempered by the observation that local residents would be using many of these roadways in any case as part of their travel route to work whether or not that employment was based in Marlborough.

Alternative Land Use Scenarios

Three alternative land use scenarios were reviewed for comparison with the square footage totals associated with the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marl-borough:

• Same square footage as the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Develop-ments in Marlborough, but at current City of Marlborough land use distribution percentages;

70



• Same square footage as the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Devel-opments in Marlborough, but at Current Market Absorption analysis land use distribu-tion percentages;

• Square footage and land use distribution as projected by the five-year Current Market Absorption analysis.

Table 4.3.3.6 provides the industrial sector summary comparison of each alternative scenario.

Table 4.3.3.6 IndustrialSectorTripGenerationComparison:AlternativeLandUseScenarios

Land Use Scenarios Development Program (SF)

Average Weekday

Traffic (veh./day)

AM Peak Hr Traffic (veh./

day)

AM Peak Hr Traffic (veh./

day)

Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough

1,088,236 7,802 1,058 1,074

Current Marlborough Land Use Distribution Percentage

1,202,921 8,384 1,107 1,167

Current Market Absorption Land Use Distribution Percentage

1,819,708 12,683 1,674 1,765

Five-Year Market Absorption Land Use Distribution Percentage

277,000 1,931 255 269



Peak hour rates are for peak of adjacent street traffic, not peak hour of generator.

Source: ITE Trip Generation, 8th edition, 2008

These alternative scenarios indicate that similar levels of development at either the current Marlborough land use distribution or the market absorption land use distribution will gener-ate more industrial-related traffic (and therefore consume more of the available remaining roadway capacity) than the land use distribution represented by the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments. The modest level of industrial development reported for the Five-Year Market Absorption can be easily accommodated by the existing roadway network.

Based upon the information and findings provided above, the following summary statements are offered for consideration:

• Industrial developments account for approximately 1.1 million square feet of the 3.5 mil-lion square feet of planned and approved development in Marlborough;

• Industrial development will generate approximately 7,800 vehicle trips per day, of which approximately 1,100 vehicle trips will occur during the AM peak hour and approximately 1,100 vehicle trips will occur during the PM peak hour;

• 30% of those employed in Marlborough live in Marlborough and will use local roads to access new development sites;

• With limited exceptions, the regional transportation network (interstate and interchang-es) can accommodate the increases in peak hour traffic attributable to proposed indus-trial development;

• The majority of industrial development is proposed in the area of Marlborough served by the I-495/Simarano Drive interchange. This is beneficial given the substantial available capacity provided by the interchange.


71


Southwest Zone: 29,000 VPD

Northwest Zone: 700 VPD Northeast Zone: 2,000 VPD

Southeast Zone: 1,700 VPD

= 1,000 Vehicles Per Day (VPD)

Projected Trip Distribution 495INTERSTATE

290INTERSTATE

20

20

85

85

Note: Based on U.S. Census 2000 Journey to Work Data

Legend

Figure 4.3.3.C Projected Trip Generation by Zone

Southwest Zone: 29,000 VPD

Northwest Zone: 700 VPD Northeast Zone: 2,000 VPD

Southeast Zone: 1,700 VPD


Projected Trip Distribution 495INTERSTATE

290INTERSTATE

20

20

85

85




72

800 VPD

495INTERSTATE

20

20

6,000 VPD

4,500 VPD

1,500 VPD

800 VPD

7,000 VPD

800 VPD

2,000 VPD

85

85

495INTERSTATE

10,000 VPD

23,400 Vehicles Per Day (VPD) External to Marlborough

Projected Trip Distribution


10,000 Vehicles Per Day (VPD) Internal to Marlborough

290INTERSTATE


Legend

Figure 4.3.3.D Projected Trip Distribution

800 VPD

495INTERSTATE

20

20

6,000 VPD

4,500 VPD

1,500 VPD

800 VPD

7,000 VPD

800 VPD

2,000 VPD

85

85

495INTERSTATE

10,000 VPD

23,400 Vehicles Per Day (VPD) External to Marlborough

Projected Trip Distribution


10,000 Vehicles Per Day (VPD) Internal to Marlborough

290INTERSTATE



73

Water and Wastewater

Wastewater calculations are based on rates provided in CMR 310 15.203 (Department of Environmental Protection, “System Sewage Flow Design Criteria”). Water use was calcu-lated by adding a 10% factor to the wastewater calculations, as is standard industry practice. These calculations do not account for process-specific water and wastewater requirements, which must be addressed at the specific project level.

In the case of this industrial sector analysis, the rate for “Factory, Industrial Plant, Warehouse or Dry Storage Space with Cafeteria” will be used. The rate is 20 gallons per person: a con-version factor of 2 employees per 1,000 square feet of industrial space has been used in the following calculations.

The following descriptions of the two wastewater treatment plants operating in the City of Marl-borough were taken from the City of Marlborough website.

The City of Marlborough has two wastewater treatment plants: the Easterly Wastewater Treat-ment Plant and the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant. It should be noted that sewer con-nections to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant are subject to the Interim Sewer Con-nection Policy. Since Marlborough is at its capacity to the Westerly Plant, this policy has been instituted to assist in creating usable capacity by removing inflow and infiltration, or identifying a flow diversion project that would transfer flow from the Westerly Plant to the Easterly Plant.

The Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plant is an advanced wastewater treatment facility de-signed to handle a daily average flow of 5.50 million gallons per day. The facility treats sewage from the easterly portion of Marlborough (east of Route 495). This facility operates under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by an EPA and Massachusetts DEP. The facility’s current permit has been issued by the regulators and contains stringent phosphorus discharge limits of 0.1 mg/l during the growing season, since phosphorus is an element that acts as a fertilizer and promotes weed growth. As a result of the new permit, it will be necessary to upgrade the facility. In accordance with our NPDES permit, the proposed upgrades to the plant will take place after the upgrades to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant are completed. At this time, it is anticipated that the upgrades could run as high as $40 million. The impact of the construction and higher operating costs will result in a significant increase to the City’s sewer user fees.

The Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant is an advanced wastewater treatment facility de-signed to handle a daily average flow of 2.89 million gallons per day. The facility treats sewage from the westerly portion of Marlborough (west of Route 495) and the Town of North-borough under an inter-municipal agreement. The facility operates under a National Pollu-tion Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the EPA and Massachusetts DEP. The new NPDES permit for this facility has been issued. The primary change in this new permit is the requirement to treat phosphorus to a level of 0.1 mg/l. This is an extremely low level and will require a significant upgrade to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant. The cost for this upgrade is expected to be about $40 million. Marlborough’s flow to the Westerly Plant is currently at its available capacity and will require an increase in the design flow of the facility in order to accommodate expected growth in the area contributory to this facility. The new permit does not contain language allowing additional flow discharge from the facil-ity. Regulations exist, however, that allow the performance of an anti-degradation study to prove increasing flows to the receiving water, the Assabet River, does not negatively impact the river. This study is ongoing. When completed, the City is optimistic that the permit may be modified to allow increased flow to the river.7

7 Source: City of Marlobourgh website http://www.marlborough-ma.gov/gen/index.

74



Water and wastewater generation calculations for the industrial projects identified in the list of Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough is sum-marized in Table 4.3.3.7.

Proposed DevelopmentDevelopment Program

(SF)

Anticipated Wastewater Flow

(gallons/day)

Anticipated Water Usage

(gallons/day)

362 Elm Street 47,000 1,880 2,068

413 South Street 145,000 5,800 6,380

200 Forest Street 825,000 33,000 36,300

289 Elm Street 71,236 2,850 3,135

Subtotal 1,088,236 43,530 47,883

Table 4.3.3.7 IndustrialSectorWaterandWastewaterGeneration

Water and wastewater calculations were also provided for the alternative land use scenarios. Those calculations are summarized in Table 4.3.3.8.

The majority of the wastewater generated under the industrial development scenario will be treated at the Westerly WWTP, and should be accommodated based upon the similarity of projects anticipated in the design projections for improvements to the Westerly WWTP. Water usage is likewise within the volumes provided by the combined City of Marlborough / MWRA allowances.


(SF)


(gallons/day)


(gallons/day)


1,088,236 43,530 45,821


1,202,921 48,117 50,650


1,819,708 72,788 76,619


277,000 11,080 11,663

Table 4.3.3.8 IndustrialSectorWaterandWastewaterGenerationComparison:AlternativeLandUseScenarios

Other than the modest Five-Year Market Absorption, the full-development alternatives direct more wastewater to the Westerly WWTP in one case 65% higher than the Priority Develop-ment Sites and Planned / Approved Development. Given the limits at the Westerly WWTP, significant Inflow and Infiltration improvements and water conservation efforts would be re-quired to accommodate the higher levels of development identified in the alternative sce-narios.


75

Summary comments include the following:

• Industrial developments account for approximately 1.1 million square feet of the 3.5 mil-lion square feet of planned and approved development in Marlborough;

• Industrial development will generate approximately 43,530 gallons per day of wastewa-ter, and 45,821 gallons per day of water usage;

• With only one exception, the projects identified in the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough were also identified in the CWMP when calculating future WWTP design flow requirements.

Energy and Telecommunications

National Grid provides electricity to the City of Marlborough as part of its Bay State South region. NStar provides natural gas to the City of Marlborough. Both energy providers have business and economic development incentives designed to provide competitive and ef-ficient services to current and future businesses in Marlborough.

Phone, cable and internet services are available from multiple providers, including Comcast, Verizon (including FIOS), and other national and regional providers.

Inquiries were placed with the Massachusetts Broadband Institute to determine if there were any potential technology limitations that would deter businesses from locating in Marlborough.

The following is a summary of those discussions:

• The Massachusetts Broadband Institute (MBI) does not have detailed information on privately owned, operated and maintained infrastructure.

• The MBI has an online interactive map showing the available services to Marlborough at http://mapping.massbroadband.org. Provider information and services are noted as follows:

1. AT&T Mobility LLC

• Service Type: Terrestrial Mobile Wireless

• Maximum Advertised Speed:

○ Download: 1.5 – 3 Mbps

○ Upload: 768 kbps – 1.5 Mbps

2. Cellco Partnership and its Affiliated Entities (Verizon Wireless)



○ Download: 3 – 6 Mbps

○ Upload: 1.5 – 3 Mbps

3. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (Comcast)

• Service Type: Cable Modem–DOCSIS 3.0


○ Download: Unknown speed

○ Upload: Unknown speed

76



4. Covad Communications Company

• Service Type: Symmetric xDSL



○ Upload: 3 – 6 Mbps

5. Sprint Nextel Corporation (Sprint)





6. T-Mobile USA, Inc. (T-Mobile)





7. Verizon New England, Inc. (Verizon)

• Service Type: Asymmetric xDSL Optical Carrier/Fiber to the End User



• The vast majority of Marlborough is very well served by private communications compa-nies. Nearly the entire City is served by Cable, DSL and Fiber Optic lines. There are very small portions of Marlborough that are served only by DSL or only by cable.

• The vast majority of Marlborough has access to internet speeds 25 Mbps or greater. Throughout most of the City, speeds of 100 Mbps are available via Fiber Optic lines. These speeds are more than sufficient to meet the needs of any technology company.

• The entire City is served by wireless speeds of 10 Mbps or greater.

The MBI is not aware of any current plans to upgrade communications infrastructure.


• Reliable provision of common utility services (electric, gas) is available throughout the City of Marlborough;

• According to the Massachusetts Broadband Institute, full telecommunications services of industrial-level quality are available throughout the City of Marlborough; and

• For proprietary reasons, private utility and telecommunications providers are reluctant to share specific information and future plans regarding business services.


77

4.4INDUSTRIALSECTORECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALSANDACTIONITEMS

Transportation

• Goal: Interstate interchange Improvements identified in the (I-495 Study: I-290 to I-90) report should be supported and implemented to eliminate constraints to future growth in Marlborough.

○ Action Item: City officials should actively participate in the 495 MetroWest Corridor Partnership and actively lobby their State senators and representatives to provide funding for the design and construction of these improvements;

• Goal: Require project proponents to identify trip reduction and travel demand man-agement measures that will result in greater preservation and efficient use of available remaining roadway capacity on both the local and regional roadway network.

○ Action item: City officials should work with the Marlborough Regional and MetroWest Chambers of Commerce to include existing and potential Marlborough employers in the MetroWest/495 Transportation Management Association (TMA).


• Goal: Ensure that sufficient capacity exists at both the Westerly and Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) to accommodate future development.

○ Action Item: City officials should actively work with project proponents to understand their water and wastewater requirements early in the permitting process in order to assist proponents in meeting those requirements;

• Goal: Ensure efficiency in allowing connections to both WWTPs.

○ Action item: City officials should actively work with project proponents to identify con-servation measures that will reduce water and wastewater volumes; and

• Goal: Maximize capacity at both WWTPs.

○ Action item: City officials should work with project proponents to identify Inflow and In-filtration (I/I) deficiencies in infrastructure elements leading from proposed projects to the subject WWTP and to also require I/I improvements as project-related mitigation.


• Goal: Understand if there are clear benefits or deficiencies with utility and telecommu-nications resources that would affect businesses considering locating in Marlborough.

○ Action Item: City officials should establish a Working Group comprised of service providers that can advise the EDC about how best to market existing strengths and how to address service deficiencies without compromising proprietary information.

• Goal: Understand data limitations and specific service coverage and capacity informa-tion in Marlborough.

○ Action Item: Establish appropriate dialogue/outreach with the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) and Attorney General’s Office (AGO) to obtain reasonable level of de-tail regarding services available to Marlborough.

78



• Goal: Understand the benefits and detriments of alternative treatment systems.

○ Action item: City officials should work with project proponents to determine if and when alternative treatment systems, such as on-site package treatment plants, would be more practical from a systemwide and project-specific basis than connection to the City WWTPs.

• Goal: Industrial development should be encouraged in the Industrial zoning districts [LI and I], the majority of which are in the Southwestern section of the city, and along the I-495 and I-290 corridors. The principal types of uses are high tech, clean tech, and bio tech.

• Goal: Incubator space in the small and mid-size ranges, or with flexible layouts, and with high quality lab spaces should be encouraged through the City programs.

• Goal: Mixed-use development, including retail, residential and flex space, should be permitted around industrial areas to provide uses supportive of the principal industrial uses.

• Goal: Industrial manufacturing businesses could improve with the siting of raw material suppliers closer to the facilities. Close proximity to raw material suppliers is critical for the management supply dependability and shipping costs. If the materials are high value and can be transported and stored safely, the City should provide opportunities for sites.

• Goal: The City of Marlborough should maintain or reduce the taxes for industrial compa-nies. Increasing taxes on non-residential uses may motivate some industrial companies to relocate their operations to communities other than Marlborough. Regional industrial companies are faced with strong national and international competition; Marlborough should provide financial incentives to increase the retention of its industrial uses.

• Goal: The City and MEDC should establish and maintain a database of available indus-trial and commercial buildings, space and land in Marlborough as a webpage on the City and MEDC websites, including name and contact information to reach directly the appropriate municipal and MEDC officials.

○ Action Item: Seek advice from other municipalities, local commercial real estate bro-kers, MOBD, MassEcon and others providing and using similar online services; de-termine most effective approach to inventory and update available property informa-tion, track usage and feedback and provide staff support for inquiries; create system, monitor and evaluate projected operating cost, and add potential revenue as fixed item in MEDC annual budget.

• Goal: The MEDC should actively promote vacant and under-utilized Marlborough prop-erty through public and other economic development online property listing services.

○ Action Item: Renew MEDC membership in Massachusetts Economic Development Alliance (MAED); update MassEcon online municipal contact information, and pro-vide active links to MEDC and City website links; submit current profiles of local prop-erty listings directly to MassEcon, and establish a system to coordinate listing up-dates in coordination with area real estate brokers; select sites, suited for the Mass Top 100 listing, and prepare annual application (October 2011); consider participat-ing as an exhibitor at an MassEcon sponsored trade-show/presentation targeting leasing agents, tenants and investors.

○ Action Item: Renew MEDC organizational relationship with MassBio, the state’s bio-technology industry trade association; update MassBio on-line real estate listings in


79

Marlborough, provide current municipal contact information with links to MEDC and City websites; submit profiles of current local property listings and establish a system to coordinate listing updates in coordination with area real estate brokers; prepare and submit online survey to elevate City’s BioReady Community ranking from the Silver to Gold level.8

○ Action Item: Evaluate ways to expedite City permitting for building improvements to accommodate the shorter timeframe of lease transactions typical of smaller compa-nies. Solicit input from the MEDC Commercial Property Owners/Managers Commit-tee members to suggest ways to expedite the City’s permitting process and provide examples of more efficient municipal procedures from other communities.

• Goal: The City and MEDC should collaborate with the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center and Life Sciences Center to identify and provide support for emerging tech-nology-based industry subsections, including Clean Tech, Green Tech, Green Bio and Renewable Energy industries.

○ Action Item: Explore opportunities to leverage the City’s designation as a Green Com-munity that increases funding options and technical assistance resources for existing Marlborough businesses and entrepreneurs in Clean Tech/Renewable Energy indus-try R&D, commercial production and full-line manufacturing.

○ Action Item: Investigate feasibility of establishing a business incubator in Marlborough to serve Clean Tech/Green Tech and other emerging biotech industries; determine facility requirements and identify suitable building space; prepare a business and op-erating plan, with anticipated expenses and potential revenues; pursue discussions with WPI Venture Center and MassBio Incubator regarding possible satellite business incubator in Marlborough.

○ Action Item: The City should participate in regional high technology industry forums—particularly those that bring together academic-entrepreneurs and funders —to help spread the word that start-ups in the physical and life sciences are thriving in Marlborough. These firms have specialized needs, and the success of similar busi-nesses tells other entrepreneurs that Marlborough can meet these specialized needs.

• Goal: Interstate interchange Improvements identified in the I-495 Study: I-290 to I-90 report should be supported and implemented in order to eliminate constraints to future growth in Marlborough.

○ Action Item: City officials should actively participate in the 495 MetroWest Corridor Partnership, and actively lobby their State senators and representatives to provide funding for the design and construction of these improvements.

8 “BioReady Communities,” The MassBio BioReady Communities Campaign, in conjunction with MassEcon and re-gional organizations throughout Massachusetts, has developed ratings for municipalities based on zoning practices and infrastructure capacity to help biotechnology companies find an optimum location. Municipalities at the Gold level meet the Silver level criteria plus have sites or buildings pre-permitted for biotechnology libratory or manufactur-ing use, or have existing buildings in which biotech laboratory or manufacturing activities take place. www.massbio.org/economic_development

COMMERCIAL SECTOR OVERVIEW5Role in Marlborough Economy

Real Estate Market Analysis

Commercial Build-Out Analysis

Commercial Sector Economic Development Goals and Action Items

82


5Commercial Sector Overview


5.1.1 Commercial Land Use Profile and Zoning

City of Marlborough Assessors’ Department data was used to identify the following land use characteristics of commercial sector properties within the City of Marlborough. The Mas-sachusetts Department of Revenue Property Type Classification Codes, as assigned by the Marlborough Assessors Department, were used to determine which parcels were included in the Commercial Sector Overview. The Commercial Sector Overview does not include retail uses, which are addressed separately in the Retail Sector Overview. The following list contains key characteristics of the Marlborough commercial sector, and Figure 5.1.1A illus-trates the location of all commercial use parcels in the City of Marlborough.

Commercial Parcel Size

• There are 308 parcels of land within the City of Marlborough that are identified as con-taining commercial uses.

• The City of Marlborough’s 308 parcels containing commercial uses constitute 804.39 acres of land.

• The 804.39 acres of commercial land represents 6.50% of the total land within the City of Marlborough.

• The average size of commercial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 2.61 acres.

• The median size of buildable commercial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 0.24 acres.

• The smallest buildable commercial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 0.03 acres.

• The largest buildable commercial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 64.15 acres

Commercial Parcel Value

• The City of Marlborough’s 308 commercial parcels of land possess an aggregate as-sessed total value of $513,573,098.00.

• The $513,573,098.00 aggregate assessed total value Marlborough’s commercial par-cels represents 10.90% of all assessed property within the City of Marlborough.

• The average assessed total value for commercial parcels of land within the City of Marl-borough is $1,667,445.12.

• The median assessed total value for commercial parcels of land within the City of Marl-borough is $256,100.00.

• The smallest assessed total value for a commercial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is $2,000.00.

• The largest assessed total value for a commercial parcel of land within the City of Marl-borough is $29,590,900.00.


83-84


1 0 10.5 Miles

¯

Figure 5.1.1 Commercial Land UseLegend

Commercial Land Use

Zoning Districts

Business


Industrial

Limited Industrial



Residence A-1

Residence A-2

Residence A-3

Residence B

Residence C

Rural Residence

Parcel Boundaries

RoadsLegend

Figure 5.1.1.A Commercial Land Use


85

Commercial Parcel Buildings

• The City of Marlborough’s 308 commercial parcels of land possess a total 216 buildings.

• The 308 buildings on commercial parcels of land represent 2.76% of all buildings within the City of Marlborough.

• The average year buildings on commercial parcels of land within the City of Marlbor-ough were built is 1973.

• The median year buildings on commercial parcels of land within the City of Marlborough were built is 1985.

• The oldest building on a commercial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough was built in 1851.

• The newest building on a commercial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough was built in 2009.

• The City of Marlborough’s 216 buildings on commercial parcels of land possess a total 7,019,741 gross square feet.

• The average size of buildings on commercial parcels of land within the City of Marlbor-ough is 32,499 gross square feet.

• The median size of buildings on commercial parcels of land within the City of Marlbor-ough is 4,435 gross square feet.

• The smallest building on a commercial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 235 gross square feet.

• The largest building on a commercial parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 355,929 gross square feet.

Commercial Parcel Zoning

• The City of Marlborough’s commercial parcels of land are located in 9 different zoning districts.

• 57% of the City of Marlborough’s commercial parcels of land are located in the Business Zoning District.

• 18% of the City of Marlborough’s commercial parcels of land are located in the Limited Industrial Zoning District.

• 7% of the City of Marlborough’s commercial parcels of land are located in the Commer-cial and Automotive Zoning District.

• 5% of the City of Marlborough’s commercial parcels of land are located in the Industrial Zoning District.

• 4% of the City of Marlborough’s commercial parcels of land are located in the Resi-dence A2 Zoning District.


• 2% of the City of Marlborough’s commercial parcels of land are located in the Resi-dence B District.

• 2% of the City of Marlborough’s commercial parcels of land are located in the Resi-dence B Zoning District.


86



5.1.2 Business Activity

Table 5.1.2.1 shows the number of non-manufacturing and non-retail commercial business-es, jobs, and business sales in Marlborough and compares these numbers to the overall seven-community Greater Marlborough Market Area. As data in Table 5.1.2.1 shows, the City of Marlborough holds 31% of Market Area business establishments and 35% of Market Area jobs and business sales within the non-manufacturing and non-retail industries overall. The largest non-manufacturing and non-retail industry in Marlborough (in terms of jobs) is Security & Commodity Brokers & Services with 2,029 jobs and $313 million in sales in 2010. The City holds 42% of the Market Area jobs and business in this industry. The other major employers in Marlborough are the Communications industry (2,005 jobs), Health Services (1,994 jobs), Education Services (1,561 jobs), and Business Services (1,450 jobs). Marl-borough holds more than 50% of Market Area jobs in Communications (87%), Depository Institutions (60%), and Hotels & Other Lodging Places (59%).

According to data obtained from Claritas Site Reports (2010 data), the non-manufacturing and non-retail industries in Marlborough accounted for 71% of all City business establish-ments, 63% of City-wide jobs, and 66% of all sales made by businesses in Marlborough in 2010. Over the past 10 years, the job prospects within these in Marlborough have been mixed, as shown by the data in Figure 5.1.2.A. Most notable has been the steady gains in employment within Professional & Technical Services, which is consistent with state and national performance, and the declines in Information services, which is contrary to state and national trends. Note that the business categories shown in Figure 4.1.2.A do not strictly match those shown in the prior table. The reason for this difference is that Claritas Site Re-ports – the source of the data in the table – uses SIC categories to report most recent year jobs and sales by industry. Claritas is the only source of detailed industry data at the com-munity level. Also, Claritas counts all jobs whereas the Massachusetts Department of Labor and Workforce Development (MassDOL)—the source of the data in Figure 4.1.2.A— counts only those jobs covered by unemployment insurance. MassDOL is the only source of local historical trend data but significantly undercounts jobs in many industry categories, which include self-employed persons.


87


% Market Area

Businesses Jobs

% Market


% Market Area Sales

Agricultural Production - Crops 1 8% 1 2% $0.1 3%Agticultural Production - Livestock 0 0% 0 0% $0.0 0%

Agricultural Services 37 25% 203 24% $8.2 24%

Oil and Gas Extraction 0 0% 0 0% $0.0 0%

Mining 0 0% 0 0% $0.0 0%Building Construction & General Contractors

37 26% 128 19% $36.5 20%

Heavy Construction (Except SIC 15) 5 20% 112 34% $14.1 34%

Construction-Special Trade Contractors 100 32% 598 35% $90.0 33%Local, Suburban & Interurban Transportation

13 30% 317 47% $13.8 43%

Motor Freight Transportation & Warehouse 19 37% 114 17% $10.6 18%

U.S. Postal Service 2 22% 64 31% $0.4 27%

Water Transportation 0 0% 0 0% $0.0 0%

Transportation by Air 1 17% 1 5% $0.1 5%

Transportation Services 11 41% 38 22% $10.0 25%

Communication 31 52% 2,005 87% $239.8 88%

Electric, Gas & Sanitary Services 7 37% 104 28% $13.2 16%

Wholesale Trade-Durable Goods 80 34% 1,007 28% $174.0 29%

Wholesale Trade-NonDurable Goods 20 31% 707 49% $127.8 52%

Depository Institutions 32 33% 1,010 60% $219.6 54%

NonDepository Credit Institutions 13 30% 77 19% $23.4 19%

Security & Commodity Brokers and Service 22 23% 2,079 42% $312.8 42%

Insurance Carriers 0 0% 0 0% $0.0 0%

Insurance Agents, Brokers & Service 24 26% 280 33% $65.3 33%

Real Estate 83 30% 410 21% $60.6 23%

Holding & Other Investment Offices 2 33% 4 5% $0.7 5%

Hotels & Other Lodging Places 11 39% 598 59% $24.7 61%

Personal Services 117 36% 452 41% $18.7 37%

Business Services 140 31% 1,450 31% $201.2 32%

Automobile Repair, Services & Parking 68 40% 247 35% $20.8 33%

Miscellaneous Repair Services 31 53% 222 55% $22.0 63%

Motion Pictures 6 33% 44 28% $4.0 16%Amusement &Recreational Service (Ex. Movies)

43 30% 573 40% $41.8 42%

Health Services 133 32% 1,994 35% $177.3 37%

Legal Services 42 25% 127 23% $23.7 24%

Educational Services 35 26% 1,561 28% $155.6 26%

Social Services 58 29% 1,236 36% $82.1 39%

Museums, Art Galleries, Zoos, Etc. 1 20% 1 1% $0.1 3%

Membership Organizations 49 33% 192 16% $11.9 11%Eng, Acct, Research & Mgmt Related Services

98 26% 1,114 26% $136.0 21%

Miscellaneous Services 4 36% 16 52% $0.8 44%

Exec., Leg. & General Govt. (Except Finance) 27 30% 151 31% NA NA

Justice, Public Order & Safety 7 16% 217 23% NA NA

Public Finance, Taxation & Monetary Policy 3 18% 10 15% NA NAAdministration of Human Resource Programs

4 29% 25 30% NA NA

Admin. of Environ. Quality & Housing Programs

1 11% 14 16% NA NA

Administration of Economic Programs 2 33% 8 23% NA NA

National Security & International Affairs 2 40% 11 13% NA NA

NonClassifiable Establishments 55 33% 283 14% NA NA

TOTAL OTHER COMMERCIAL 1,477 31% 19,805 35% $2,341.7 35%

Table 5.1.2.1 Non-manufacturingandNon-retailBusinesses,Jobs,andSalesinMarlboroughandComparedtoMarketAreaTotals


88



0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Ave

rage

Mon

thly

Em

ploy

men

t

23 - Construction





51 - Information










NAICS Category




5.1.3 Commercial Sector Fiscal Impacts

As shown by the data in Table 5.1.3.1, non-manufacturing and non-retail businesses in Marl-borough contributed $13.1 million in property tax revenues in FY’11, accounting for 18% of all property tax revenues and 43% of property taxes paid by commercial uses. These com-mercial uses comprise 10% of the City’s taxable land area. Assessed values per square foot for these commercial uses are equivalent to the average SF assessed land value City-wide and 96% of the assessed building values per square foot. Average assessed values per SF of these commercial uses are 91% of the average for all commercial land and 103% of the average assessed values per SF of all commercial buildings.

Non-manufacturing & Non-retail Commercial % of All Land Uses% of Commercial

Land Uses

Number of Parcels 308 3% 37%

Land Area SF 35,039,179 10% 30%

Building Area SF 7,019,741 14% 43%

Land Assessed Values $142,752,925 10% 36%

Buildings Assessed Values $370,820,173 13% 94%

Land and Building Assessed Values $513,573,098 12% 43%

Assessed Land Value per SF $4.07 100% 91%

Assessed Building Value per SF $52.83 96% 103%

Property Tax Revenues in FY'11 $13,055,028 18% 43%

Table 5.1.3.1 MarlboroughIndustrialSectorFiscalEffects



89

5.1.4 Greater Marlborough Comparative Analysis, Target Industries, Projected Employment

This section presents Marlborough’s competitive position for job growth in commercial sec-tor industries, defined as sectors that typically utilize commercial/office type real estate. Complete details regarding the LEAP analysis methodology is contained in the Appendix to this report. This analysis begins with an overview of industry composition and growth trends, which provides important context for subsequent discussion of industry opportunities. This analysis is primarily based on industry data for 2009 (the most recent year for which com-plete data is available) at the zip code level.1 The analysis was carried out primarily using the LEAP model (Local Economic Assessment Package).2

This section provides a current profile of Marlborough’s commercial sector industries. It examines industry size measured by total jobs, industry mix, and employment and output growth by industry to provide context for the baseline job growth projections in section 5.1.4.2 and target industry identification in Sections 5.1.4.3 and 5.1.4.4.

5.1.4.1 Marlborough’s Economic Base – Commercial Sectors

Commercial sector industries represent more than half of Marlborough’s employment, as shown in Table 5.1.4.1.1. One important note is that unlike the industrial sector presented earlier, many commercial industries are not export-oriented industries. Instead, they are sec-ondary industries supported by the economic activity brought into Marlborough by primary industries. The industries marked with an asterisk represent primary/export industries, while those marked with two asterisks represent those that are partially primary/export industries, though mostly local-serving. Primary/export industries are particularly important to Marlbor-ough’s economic future, as they have the ability to bring dollars into the economy from other cities and regions. This table highlights the importance of the professional scientific and technical services industry, which accounts for nearly 6,500 jobs, which is more than 17% of Marlborough’s job base. Other important industries based on employment are government (3,009 jobs), health care (2,601 jobs), and monetary, financial and credit activity (1,950 jobs).

An important measure of industry presence and performance is relative industry size, dis-played in Table 5.1.4.1 as “Mix Ratio” (defined in Section 4.1.4). This measure underscores the prominence of the professional scientific and technical services industry, which is nearly twice as large in Marlborough as in New England. Though smaller in terms of total employ-ees, the internet and data processing services industry is more than six times as prevalent in Marlborough as in the rest of New England. Though monetary, financial and credit activity reflects relatively high concentration based on 2009 employment data, the loss of Fidelity, a major employer in that sector, at the beginning of 2011 will result in significant job loss in this sector (analyzed further in Section 5.1.4.3). It should be noted, however, that the loss of one major employer does not necessarily indicate the likelihood of further losses in this industry.

1 The data was provided by IMPLAN of Stillwater, MN. IMPLAN re-packages and adds value to annual Federal eco-nomic data compiled through U.S. Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis), and the U.S. Census (Bureau of Labor Statistics).

2 For background information on this software produce, wee the Appendix at the end of this document.

90



NAICS Industry 2004 20092009 % of

Total CAGR1 Ratio2

115 Support for Agriculture & Forestry* 96 67 0.2% -7.1% 1.35

511 Publishing Industries (except Internet)* 22 22 0.1% 0.7% 0.07

512 Motion Picture & Sound Recording* 92 122 0.3% 5.7% 1.93

514 Internet & Data Process Services* 1,218 1,374 3.7% 2.4% 6.69

521-523 Monetary, Financial, & Credit Activity* 1,611 1,950 5.2% 3.9% 1.46

524 Insurance Carriers & Related Activities* 166 176 0.5% 1.2% 0.22

525 Funds, Trusts, & Other Financial Vehicles* 30 39 0.1% 5.7% 0.43

531 Real Estate 522 753 2.0% 7.6% 0.5

532 Rental & Leasing Services 39 24 0.1% -9.4% 0.19

541-551 Professional Scientific, Technical, Services* 5,967 6,477 17.3% 1.7% 1.81

561 Administrative & Support Services 1,108 1,047 2.8% -1.1% 0.6

562 Waste Management & Remediation 180 155 0.4% -3.0% 1.59

611 Educational Services** 242 271 0.7% 2.3% 0.19

621-624 Health Care & Social Services** 2,312 2,601 6.9% 2.4% 0.52

811-812 Repair, Maintenance, & Personal Services 1,062 814 2.2% -5.2% 0.87

813 Religious, Civic, Professional Organizations 315 341 0.9% 1.6% 0.58

920 Government & non-NAICs 2,801 3,009 8.0% 1.5% 0.66

Subtotal - Commercial Sectors 18,086 19,489 51.9% 1.5% --

TOTAL – All Sectors 37,033 37,546 100.0% 0.3% --

Table 5.1.4.1 MarlboroughEmploymentinCommercialSectors

Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, aggregated by MIG Inc. (IMPLAN data).

1 Compound annual growth rate.2 Ratio of the percent Marlborough’s total employment in an industry with the percent of employment in that industry in New England as a whole.

*Primary/export industry as defined in Appendix A.

**Partially primary/export, partially local-serving.

Marlborough’s commercial sector gained more than 1,400 jobs between 2004 and 2009, more than offsetting losses in the industrial sector. While the overall economy grew at an av-erage rate of 0.3% during the period, the commercial sector expanded at a rate of 1.5% per year. This growth was led by gains in professional, scientific and technical services, internet and data processing services, and monetary, financial and credit activity (the latter of which may be viewed with caution in light of Fidelity’s departure.)

5.1.4.2 Industrial Sector Job Growth Outlook

Local job growth over the 2004-2009 period as well as national industry 10-year growth pro-jections were used to estimate future job growth by industry for Marlborough between 2009 and 2019. Industries projected to grow are shown below in Table 5.1.4.2.1. This represents the growth that is likely to occur under current economic development policies and condi-tions, and it assumes that Marlborough maintains its competitive position relative to other areas in terms of business costs, transportation access, and labor market cost, quality and availability. Marlborough may have the opportunity to gain additional jobs in these and other commercial sectors through successful economic development activities.


91

NAICS Sector 10-Year Baseline Growth Range

512 Motion Picture & Sound Recording 20-90

514 Internet & Data Process Services 0-375

521-523 Monetary, Financial, & Credit Activity 147-908

524 Insurance Carriers & Related Activities 17-22

525 Funds, Trusts, & Other Financial Vehicles 4-29

531 Real Estate 138-753

541-551 Professional Scientific, Technical, Services 1,153-1,599

561 Administrative & Support Services 0-333

611 Educational Services 68-90

621-624 Health Care & Social Services 691-794

Table 5.1.4.2.1 10-YearBaselineJobGrowthProjectionsforMarlborough(2009-2019)Commercial Sectors

Source: EDR Group with data from BLS.

5.1.4.3 Impacts of Recent Layoff Announcements

As noted above, this analysis is based on data covering economic activity between 2004 and 2009, the most recent period for which complete data is available. Unfortunately, a few Marlborough firms have recently made layoff announcements that do not show up in the data. These include the closure of Fidelity’s Marlborough operation with a loss of 1,100 jobs as well as undisclosed losses at Evergreen Solar’s headquarters (related to that firm’s plant closure in Devens).

In addition to the direct losses at these firms, they imply additional losses at other Marlbor-ough firms that have supplier relationships and/or depend on employee spending of wages. The magnitude of losses at Evergreen, which employs about 130 at its Marlborough head-quarters3, has not yet been announced, so it is premature to speculate on the extent of those secondary impacts. For Fidelity, an IMPLAN economic impact model was run to determine the extent of spinoff (secondary) impacts4 and what industries in Marlborough will be most affected (additional impacts may accrue beyond Marlborough’s economy but were not mod-eled here). This analysis indicates that the 1,100 direct job losses at Fidelity could result in an additional loss of 1,760 indirect/induced jobs that were supported by Fidelity employee spending. The loss of personal income and business sales (output) are indicated below in Table 5.1.4.3.2.

3 Zapdata (Dun & Bradstreet) company report accessed 6/3/2011.4 Spinoff impacts include two technical concepts, indirect impacts and induced impacts. Indirect impacts are changes

in business to business sales and induced impacts are changes in consumer purchases supported by the additional workers income (or in this case, reduction of income) that come from direct impacts to the economy.

92



JobsPersonal Income

(million $s)Total Output(million $s)

Direct Impact -1,100 -237.7 -790.7

Indirect/Induced Impact -1,760 -87.4 -201.2

Total Impact -2,860 -325.1 -991.9

Table 5.1.4.3.1 EconomicImpactsoftheLossofFidelity

Source: Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.Note: Numbers are rounded to avoid false precision.

Industry Description JobsPersonal Income

(million $s)Total Output (million $s)

Securities, commodity contracts, investments, and related activities -860 -37.1 -53.5

Funds, trusts, and other financial vehicles -650 -140.8 -468.3Monetary authorities and depository credit intermediation activities -100 -7.2 -28.3

Food services and drinking places -100 -2.8 -7

Real estate establishments -60 -1.2 -12

Private hospitals -40 -2.9 -6.2Insurance agencies, brokerages, and related activities -30 -2.9 -5.7

Management, scientific, and technical consulting services -30 -3.2 -5.4

Retail Stores - General merchandise -30 -9 -1.6Offices of physicians, dentists, and other health practitioners -30 -2.4 -4.2

Table 5.1.4.3.2 Top10IndustriesAffectedbyLossofFidelity

Source: Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.Note: Numbers are rounded to avoid false precision.

5.1.4.4 Commercial Sector Comparative Analysis

This comparative analysis identifies potential target industries among commercial sectors based on the dual dimensions of industry growth and relative concentration. For the first dimension, industries are classified according to seven categories:5

• Industry growing faster locally than nationally;

• Industry declining locally while growing nationally;

• Industry growing locally while declining nationally;

• Industry growing locally slower than nationally;

• Industry declining locally slower than nationally;

• Industry declining locally faster than nationally; and

• Industry growing or declining locally at a rate similar to national trend.

Table 5.1.4.4.1 provides a key for interpreting Table 5.1.4.4.2 and Table 5.1.4.4.3, which sum-marize Marlborough’s commercial sector industries into the categories described above. Note that for both tables, industry growth is measured relative to the nation, while industry concentration is measured relative to each of the Comparison Areas (Andover and Burling-5 “Faster” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% greater than the national trend. “Slower” de-

notes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% less than the national trend. “Similar rate” denotes trends that are less than 20% different.


93

ton, as identified in Section 9.2). As a result, industries will appear in the same column in both tables but in different rows depending on the concentration of jobs relative to each of the comparison areas.

Industries in the four left-most columns point to strengths and opportunities for various busi-ness activities in Marlborough. For example, professional scientific and technical services, which is growing at the same rate as in the nation as a whole, is underrepresented in Marl-borough compared to Burlington, indicating that it may have room to grow. Internet and data processing services and educational services are growing more slowly than the nation as a whole, and they comprise smaller shares of employment than they do in Andover and Burl-ington, suggesting opportunities for additional employment growth.

Industries that appear in the four right-most columns represent weak or threatened business activities in Marlborough. Within these columns, those activities that occur in higher job con-centrations for Marlborough relative to the competitor location represent more significant risk for job loss, and preemptive economic development outreach to firms may be warranted. Fortunately, among commercial sectors, only insurance carriers and related activities falls into this category, and they are not of significant size to be of great concern.

Str

eng

ths/

Op

po

rtu

niti

es

Wea

knes

ses/

Thre

aten

ed

Table 5.1.4.4.1 InterpretingConcentration/TrendAnalysisResults






supporting





opportunity





opportunity





supporting





Possible consolidation,

monitor





Weak local industry





Weak local industry





Weak local industry

Concentration

94





• Monetary, Financial, and Credit Activity



• Internet & Data Process Services

• Educational Services


• Real Estate

• Health Care & Social Services

• Professional Scientific, Technical, Services


• Insurance Carriers & Related Activities




Str

eng

ths/

Op

po

rtu

niti

es

Wea

knes

ses/

Thre

aten

ed

Table 5.1.4.4.2 NationalCommercialSectorConcentration/TrendAnalysis




Concentration


95



• Monetary, financial, & Credit Activity



• Internet & Data Process Services



• Professional Scientific, Technical, Services


• Real Estate


• Insurance Carriers & Related Activities




Str

eng

ths/

Op

po

rtun

ities

W

eakn

esse

s/Th

reat

ened

Table 5.1.4.3.3 CommercialSectorConcentration/TrendAnalysis–Marlboroughvs.Burlington,MAComparisonArea1,2




Concentration

5.1.4.5 Opportunities in Commercial Sub-Sectors

Overall, the commercial sector is performing fairly well in Marlborough, and some sub-indus-tries within the commercial show strong growth potential. This section examines industries based on the IMPLAN highest level of resolution for employment. Table 5.1.4.5.1 presents employment concentration in these industries relative to the nation as a whole. Employment in a number of these industries is many times more concentrated in Marlborough than in the national economy, particularly software publishers (9.65), computer systems design services (4.25), telecommunications (2.65) and scientific research services (2.47).

In determining whether these industries are suitable for future targeting in Marlborough, it is im-portant to consider future growth prospects. Table 5.1.4.5.2 presents a shift-share analysis of these industries. Management of companies and enterprises shows the strongest growth at more than five times the national average (shift share ratio 5.71). Other industries growing in both the nation and in Marlborough are securities, computer systems design, software publishers, data processing and other private educational services. The fact that these industries are grow-ing more slowly than in the nation as a whole—as evidenced by positive shift share ratios less than 1.0,—indicates that perhaps Marlborough could capture additional growth in these sectors.

96



Jobs % U.S. %Mix Ratio

(LQ)2

Total – All Sectors 37,546 100.00% 100.00% --

Securities, commodity contracts, investments, and related activities

943 2.50% 1.50% 1.69

Computer systems design services 929 2.50% 0.60% 4.25

Telecommunications 633 1.70% 0.60% 2.65

Software publishers 601 1.60% 0.20% 9.65

Custom computer programming services 506 1.30% 0.80% 1.67

Management of companies and enterprises 281 0.70% 1.10% 0.69

Management, scientific, and technical consulting services

234 0.60% 0.70% 0.9

Data processing, hosting, ISP, web search portals and related services

141 0.40% 0.20% 2.23

Motion picture and video industries 122 0.30% 0.20% 1.36

Other private educational services 115 0.30% 0.60% 0.53

Non-depository credit intermediation and related activities

104 0.30% 0.50% 0.53

Scientific research and development services1 509 1.40% 0.50% 2.47

Table 5.1.4.5.1 EmploymentConcentrationinCommercialSub-Sectors,2009(LocationQuotient)



2 Location quotient, LQ, is the technical term for mix ratio.

Marlborough


97

Table 5.1.4.5.2 RelativeEmploymentGrowthinCommercialSub-Sectors,2004-2009

2004 2009 Marlborough U.S.Shift-Share

Ratio

Total Employment – All Sectors 36,501 37,546 2.90% 1.60% --

Scientific research and development services1 1,397 509 -63.60% 5.30% -12.01


757 943 24.50% 37.90% 0.65

Computer systems design services 556 929 67.00% 70.00% 0.96

Telecommunications 332 633 90.60% -13.00% -6.98

Software publishers 573 601 4.90% 13.90% 0.35

Custom computer programming services

1,037 506 -51.20% -17.00% -3

Management of companies and enterprises

599 281 -53.10% 9.30% 5.71


286 234 -18.20% 17.70% -1.03

Data processing, hosting, ISP, web search portals and related services

110 141 27.90% 55.10% 0.51

Motion picture and video industries 90 122 34.50% -0.20% -183.61

Other private educational services 106 115 8.90% 27.80% 0.32

Non-depository credit intermediation and related activities

163 104 -36.10% -12.40% -2.9

Scientific research and development services

1,397 509 -63.60% 5.30% -12.01

MarlboroughTotal Growth Rate

2004-2009



98



5.2REALESTATEMARKETANALYSIS

5.2.1 Greater Marlborough Office Market Trends

There are a number of commercial real-estate submarkets serving the industries described in the Business Activity and Fiscal Impacts sections of this section of the report. The Sec-tion 2 profile and overview presents the overall commercial real estate market as defined by real estate brokers and analysts (including industrial and retail uses) as well as each major commercial submarket in the City of Marlborough. The largest real estate submarket in Marl-borough is office space, which serves the majority of the industries covered in this section and is the space category with the largest amount of vacant square feet and therefore is of principal concern to MEDC.

In the following graphs, historical and projected trends in the office space inventory, vacan-cies, vacancy rates, and net absorption are shown for the City of Marlborough compared to the seven-community Greater Marlborough Market Area (Region). The analyses in the sec-tion are derived from proprietary data obtained from Co Star Property Information Services, the generally accepted real estate data source used by most brokers, analysts, developers, and property owners. Notwithstanding Co Star’s standing in the professional real estate community, the consultant team notes that no data source is 100% reliable, and therefore the analyses derived from these data should be regarded as indicative of general trends rather than a definitive indicator of the actual numbers in any data category.

Figure 5.2.1.A shows the historical and forecast inventory of office space in Marlborough and the Greater Marlborough Market Area. Both the City of Marlborough’s and the Market Area’s inventory of office space has changed little since 2006, and new additions to the supply are not forecast through the 2nd quarter of 2013. Marlborough’s inventory of office space totaled 6.2 million SF in the 2nd quarter of 2011, 45% of the Market Area’s 14 million SF of office space.

Office Space Inventory: Marlborough Compared to Region

0

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

16,000,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Squa

re F

eet


Figure 5.2.1.A TotalInventoryofOfficeSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegion


99

Figure 5.2.1.B shows historical and forecast vacant office space in Marlborough compared to the region. Marlborough’s share of vacant office space is projected to decline marginally from 987,000 SF currently to 933,000 SF by the 2nd quarter of 2013, but rise from 55% to 58% of the Market Area’s vacant office space.

Figure 5.2.1.B VacantOfficeSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegionVacant Office Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Squa

re F

eet


Data in Figure 5.2.1.C shows a projected marginal decline in Marlborough’s office space vacancy rate from 16% in 2011 to 15% by the 2nd quarter of 2013. The vacancy rate for office space in the overall Market Area is also projected to decline marginally from 13% in the 2nd quarter of 2011 to 12% by the 2nd quarter of 2013.

Over the next two years, the Market Area is forecast by Co Star to show a 200,000 SF net absorption of office space, with net absorption in the City of Marlborough forecast at 54,000 SF (27% of the Market Area total) over this period, as shown in Figure 5.2.1.D. In Co Star’s forecast scenario, the City of Marlborough is thus projected to perform worse than the Market Area overall in filling currently vacant office space over the next two years.

100



Figure 5.2.1.C HistoricandProjectedVacancyRatesforOfficeSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegionHistorical and Projected Vacancy Rates for Office Space:

Marlborough Compared to Region

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2Q

Vaca

ncy

Rat

e


Figure 5.2.1.D HistoricalForecastNetAbsorptionofOfficeSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegion

Historical and Forecast Net Absorption of Office Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

(250,000)

(200,000)

(150,000)

(100,000)

(50,000)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

2006

3Q

2006

4Q

2007

1Q

2007

2Q

2007

3Q

2007

4Q

2008

1Q

2008

2Q

2008

3Q

2008

4Q

2009

1Q

2009

2Q

2009

3Q

2009

4Q

2010

1Q

2010

2Q

2010

3Q

2010

4Q

2011

1Q

Curren

t Qtr

2011

3Q

2011

4Q

2012

1Q

2012

2Q

2012

3Q

2012

4Q

2013

1Q

2013

2QSqua

re F

eet



101

Lease Rates

As shown in Figure 5.2.1.E, lease rates (per square foot) for office space in Marlborough have historically tracked with those of the region overall.

Region and Marlborough Average Rental Rates Per SF for Office Space

$0.00

$5.00

$10.00

$15.00

$20.00

$25.00

$30.00

1998 1Q 1999 1Q 2000 1Q 2001 1Q 2002 1Q 2003 1Q 2004 1Q 2005 1Q 2006 1Q 2007 1Q 2008 1Q 2009 1Q 2010 1Q 2011 1Q

Ann

ual R

ent p

er S

F

Marborough Average Rental Rate Regional Average Rental Rate

Figure 5.2.1.E RegionandMarlboroughAverageRentalRatesPerSFforOfficeSpace

102



5.3COMMERCIALBUILD-OUTANALYSIS

5.3.1 Zoning Comparative Analysis


Number of Commercial Districts – Marlborough has two Commercial zoning districts. Of-ten communities have more than two commercial districts to distinguish different areas of the community, such as neighborhood centers, downtown, shopping centers, and highway commercial areas. As an example, Lexington has six commercial zoning districts, with two for office, one for retail centers and the other three for different types of mixed-use commu-nity centers. The Marlborough Industrial districts [LI and I] zoning districts also allow Com-mercial office and certain other business uses.

Special Redevelopment Districts – There are no zoning districts specifically geared toward pro-moting redevelopment in the commercial districts. This was previously noted from a study by the MAPC in a memo dated October 2007. Communities will often include special districts to attract and encourage redevelopment. However, districts specifically for certain developments, such as in Wayland (Town Center overlay district) and Westwood (Westwood Station overlay district) were negotiated and written with the developer. This has typically been the case with c.40R Smart Growth Incentive districts throughout the state as well. Consequently, providing an option for a “floating district” in which standards and design criteria are negotiated to some extent with the redeveloper could provide an advantage to the City in comparison with other communities with previously set standards that may require amendment.

Parking Requirements – Marlborough requires 3 parking spaces per 1,000 SF of commer-cial office space. In a comparison with 12 other Massachusetts communities—Lexington, Arlington, Winchester, Woburn, Burlington, Bedford, Waltham, Belmont, Newton, Weston, Wellesley, and Needham—the parking requirements for commercial office uses ranged from 2 spaces per 1,000 SF (Arlington) to 4 spaces per 1,000 SF (Burlington). While fitting the range, the number should change depending on the project location. For redevelopment projects on Route 85 and in the downtown, relief from certain standards, including parking, should be expected.

5.3.2 Build-out Analysis

Build-out analyses were completed to determine the amount of new commercial space that could be added to the City’s supply as allowed under current zoning regulations and the differential amount of new space that could be added with modifications to the Marlborough Zoning Regulations.

Commercial space was defined as all uses coded by the City Assessor as commercial—ex-cept for those uses coded as Retail — to distinguish the sectors for this build-out analysis.

The City has over 12,000 parcels identified in the public records. Using City Assessor data, Zoning Regulations and GIS data, the build-out analysis sorted the information and identified:

• Land zoned and used for commercial uses by acreage and square feet of building space;

• Amount of vacant and underutilized land currently zoned for commercial use;


103

• The maximum potential build-out for every commercial parcel that met the basic criteria of vacant or underutilized and met certain additional criteria within the commercial and industrial zoning districts (B, CA, LI, and I);

• Current assessed values of commercial land and buildings; and


Database Assessment


• GIS and Assessor parcel ID;



• Zoning;


• Wetlands Area.

The Property Type Classification Codes, prepared by the Department of Revenue [revised as of June 2009, are used in Massachusetts as consistently as possible, when identifying land use within the local assessors records. The codes were sorted for the Build-out Scenario as follows in Table 5.3.2.1:



2600-2800 Agricultural and Park Land

3000 Commercial

3100 Industrial: Warehouse and Distribution

3200-3300 Retail

3400 Commercial

3600-3800Commercial: Entertainment and Recreational

Facilities

3900 Commercial: Vacant

4000-4100, 4400 Industrial

4200-4300, 4500 Utilities


NOTE: The Massachusetts Land Use code uses three digits. The Marlborough Assessors’ database uses four digit codes.

104





• Where listed, with an area of wetland greater than 50% of the parcel;

• Where the total parcel area was less than the minimum lot size for the specified zoning district.

GIS Review

A review of the GIS database and aerial imagery was performed to further refine the parcel list generated by the Assessors’ database and sort out parcels that were clearly used for specific purposes, not zoned for the use, and restricted by the mapped wetlands and water resources.


A Floor Area Ratio, or FAR, was calculated for each zoning district. The formula for the cal-culation of FAR was:

A. Maximum Building Area

/ Lot Size

=FAR for district

The definition of Lot Coverage in the zoning regulations is, “The area of a lot covered by all structures, areas used by vehicular traffic and parking, including driveways, loading bays and maneuvering aisles, whether paved, unpaved or graveled, and of all impermeable areas such as paved walkways or outdoor storage areas, but not including gravel walkways or pedestrian areas not adjacent to parking lots or buildings. Areas not included in “lot cover-age” shall be landscaped areas…” [sec 650-5] Consequently, the Maximum Building Area is calculated from the total coverage allowed by zoning, subtracting the surface area parking requirements while considering the zoning allowances for building height [in stories] on a one acre lot.

For Commercial zoning districts, the FAR was calculated as 3.2 in the Business [B] District and 1.6 in the Commercial Automotive [CA] District.



Build-out Scenarios: 25% and 50% Developed

The maximum potential build-out conforms to zoning height limitations and lot coverage restrictions and includes the parking and circulation needs as determined by the size of each building and Urban Land Institute parking demand ratios.


105

The underutilized land was identified under two different specifications: land that was 25% developed and land that was 50% developed. These conditions were identified according to a comparison of the allowable development under the zoning dimensional standards, specif-ically maximum lot coverage and the resulting FAR, which was then combined with the park-ing requirements and area for construction of surface parking to meet those requirements. This total area was compared with the Assessors’ information for current development on the parcel, and all parcels meeting the threshold were listed accordingly as less than 25% or less than 50% developed. As noted, a scan of the GIS aerial imagery was performed to remove from the sorted database for build-out those parcels committed to other uses.


A. Total building FAR/ Number of Stories, or Building coverage in sf+ 2 spaces X 1,000 SF of building X 350 SF per parking space = Total parking area= Total parcel development opportunity


= Percent developed* from Assessors’ database

C. Percent developed compared to the threshold of <25% and <50% of the al-

lowed development

* From Assessors’ database



Fit Studies


Qualifications

Some qualifications should be noted with respect to the results obtained from the analysis of this data.

• This summary is based on data provided by the Assessors’ Office and the City’s Geo-graphic Information System, as the best available information.

• Certain discrepancies were found between the Assessors’ database and the GIS aerial photo imagery. This may be due to the time of the photography or other considerations by the property assessors.

106



• The wetland and water resource delineations are approximate, and actual on the ground surveys may provide lesser or greater areas on the individual properties.

• Parking and building configurations used to estimate build-out are based on industry standards and testing of sites, but may vary for the actual site design.

• Easements and other encumbrances on the properties were not researched as part of this analysis.

Results of Build-out Analysis

The following table presents the summary results of the Commercial Sector Build-out Analysis:

Number of Parcels

Potential DevelopmentSquare Footage


Vacant Parcels 37 1,590,416 $88,474,832

Parcels that are less than 25% developed 138 1,506,283 $80,152,637

Parcels that are less than 50% developed 138 6,557,426 $343,700,968

Table 5.3.2.2 CommercialBuild-OutAnalysis

5.2.3.1 Current Marlborough Zoning Regulations

The Marlborough Zoning Regulations include the following sections related to the Commer-cial Sector uses:

• Definitions [Sec 650-5]

○ “OFFICES AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICES A building or portion thereof wherein services performed are predominantly administrative, professional or clerical opera-tions…”

○ “MIXED USE A mix of residential and commercial uses within one structure…”

• The Marlborough Zoning Regulations include the following Districts [Sec 650-7] related to Commercial Sector uses:

○ Business Districts [B]

○ Commercial and Automotive Districts [CA]

The B districts are for general commercial and are predominantly located along the Route 20 corridor and parts of the southern Route 85 corridor, while the CA districts have been used for northern and southern sections of the Route 85 corridor. Certain business uses are also permitted in the LI and I districts.

The Table of Uses [§ 650-17] includes uses classified as Business Uses in the B and CA zoning districts as listed in Table 5.3.2.1.1.

The City Zoning Regulations also specify dimensional standards for these districts in Table 5.3.2.1.2.


107

Table 5.3.2.1.1 BusinessDistrictUses

List of Business Uses in CommercialDistricts and status for building permits Businesses Commercial & Auto

Business Uses

Convert buildings to office, bank, insurance use [SP in RC district] N N

Commercial kennels and animal hospitals [SP in RR district] N N

Veterinary hospital N Y

Commercial kennels Y Y

Riding academy SP SP

Retail sales and services <75,000 square feet gross floor area Y Y

Retail sales and services >75,000 square feet gross floor area SP SP

Offices, banks, insurance and financial institutions Y YSchools, for business, trade, music, dance, and television\or radio broadcasting studios (but not including towers)

Y Y

Commercial radio and television towers and wireless communications facilities

SP SP

Hotels and motels SP SP

Hotels with conference facilities and commercial uses SP SP

Residential conference and training center with food and recreation services N N

Recreation center N N

Private clubs, nonprofit SP SP

Clubs Y Y

Self-service laundry Y Y

Medical and dental clinic [SP in RR, A1, A2, A3, and RB; Y in RC and RCR] N N

Consumer service establishments Y Y

Salesroom N Y

Wholesale office or showroom N Y

Wholesale sale and warehousing N Y

Commercial greenhouse Y Y

Place of repair for cars, boats, trucks and farm equipment (25) N Y

Places of assembly SP SP

Outdoor recreation uses SP SP

Outdoor storage Y Y

Car parking lots, garages SP SP

Gasoline filling stations SP SP

Auto service facilities for minor repairs, changing tires and lubrication SP SP

Auto sales and service N Y

Car wash SP SP

Open air markets SP SP

Shopping malls N N

Soil removal [regulated under Chapter 534] Y Y

Accessory uses Y Y

Funeral homes, parlors and mortuaries N YPublic, private or commercial recreation establishments, recreation grounds or places of amusement

SP SP

Restaurant, cafe Y Y

Restaurant with drive-in or drive-thru facilities SP SP

Restaurants serving food outdoors Y Y

Restaurants for employee use N N

Drive-in facilities SP SP

Adult bookstore N N

Adult video store N N

Adult paraphernalia store N N

Adult movie theatre N N

Adult live entertainment establishment N N

Tattoo and body piercing parlors and shops N N

Abbreviations: Y= allowed, N= not allowed, SP= Special Permit

Commercial Zoning Districts

108



District

Minimum Lot Area

(SF)

Minimum Lot

Frontage (feet)

Minimum Side Yard

(feet)

Minimum Front Yard

(feet)

Minimum Rear Yard

(feet)Height (feet)

Maximum Lot

Coverage

Business B 5,000 50 25 50 None 52

30% for residential; 80% for all other uses

Commercial and Automotive CA

5,000 50 25 40 40

2 Stories (no limit

where use is exclusively

for industry)*

80%

Notes: Industrial uses allowed in the CA districts are:

Table 5.3.2.1.2 BusinessDistrictDimensionalStandards[Excerpt]

• Newspaper printing and publishing

• Manufacturing where the majority of items sold on premises to consumer

• Light manufacturing using portable electric machinery

• Recreation center

Brownfields

The City of Marlborough reportedly has numerous properties categorized as hazardous waste sites or brownfields, which are zoned for industrial and commercial use. Many of these sites have completed C. 21E assessments to determine types and amounts of tox-icity, remediation required, and future ‘activity and use’ restrictions. Some of these sites have been cleaned-up and reused/redeveloped, and others may be vacant or underutilized buildings and land.6 The status of the City’s vacant and underutilized brownfield sites could not be ascertained from information available to the consultant team during the course of this study. The City recently received a $200,000 EPA Brownfields grant award to clean-up petroleum contamination at the (former) Jenney Service Station (25 East Main Street). The “Brownfields 2011 Cleanup Grant Fact Sheet – Marlborough, MA” is in the Appendix to this report.

5.3.2.2 Higher Density Zoning Modifications

The zoning allowances were tested on actual properties from the list of underdeveloped parcels. The analysis indicates that zoning dimensional standards do not restrict expected development. Because of this analysis and the high maximum development potential cal-culated here as Commercial sector build-out under existing zoning, amendments to the City Zoning Regulations for higher density development are not considered necessary in the near term. However, a number of changes to the Zoning Regulations would facilitate new com-mercial development. Those changes are:

• Mixed Use – Specifying mixed-use options for office and retail as well as residential proj-ects in commercial zoning districts, particularly live-work options for smaller ventures;

• Downtown Parking Requirements – The number of required spaces should be reduced in the downtown area in recognition of the amount of existing public parking available and shared parking opportunities;

6 The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) website identifies 239 hazardous waste sites in the City of Marlborough at www.db.state.ma.us/dep/cleanup/sites, and as referenced on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “Brownfields and Land Revitalization” program website at www.epa.gov/brownfields


109

• Downtown Zoning – Create a business subdistrict or overlay district for the downtown, which includes at least the following:

○ Increase Allowable Coverage – Allow up to 100% coverage to maximize use of parcels.

○ Setbacks – Add a zero lot line setback or a ‘build to back of sidewalk’ requirement.

○ Mixed use - Add allowance for residential and office space on the upper floors and limit first floors to retail uses.

Overall recodification of the Zoning Regulations is recommended as a means to address current inconsistencies and confusing text that apply to all sections.

5.3.3 Infrastructure Opportunities and Constraints

Transportation

The connection between projected future development and the transportation network serv-ing the City of Marlborough has its basis in the amount of traffic expected to be generated by that development and the ability of the transportation network to accommodate the projected traffic volumes. In addition, the anticipated directional distribution of this traffic will dictate what portions of the network are most likely to attract additional volumes and whether there is sufficient roadway capacity available to accommodate these increases.

The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publishes the industry standard Trip Genera-tion, which contains daily and peak hour rates and equations used to calculate the amount of traffic expected to be generated by hundreds of different land uses. Table 5.3.3.1 sum-marizes the average trip generation rates that will be used to estimate traffic associated with the various sector buildout analyses identified in this report.

In the case of this commercial sector analysis, the rates for office and research and develop-ment will be used as specified in the development description.

Trip generation rates are typically applied to specific development plans or overall development forecasts. In this case, the list of designated Priority Development Sites (PDS) in the City of Marl-borough as well as planned and/or approved developments previously provided in Table 4.3.3.2 (and repeated below as Table 5.3.3.2) will be used as the basis for trip generation calculations.

110






Industrial Park 130 6.96 0.84 0.86

Light Industrial 110 6.97 0.92 0.97

Warehouse 150 3.56 0.3 0.32

Office 710 11.01 1.55 1.49

R&D 760 8.11 1.22 1.07

Retail (shopping center) 820 42.94 1 3.73

Restaurant 932 127.15 11.52 11.15

Hotel (per room) 310 8.17 0.56 0.59




Table 5.3.3.2 MarlboroughPriority&Planned/ApprovedDevelopmentSites

Chapter 43D Priority Development Sites

• 100 Crowley Drive 120,000 SF built 2009; Class A Office; 100,000 sf. ft. (vacant)

• 362 Elm Street 55,000 SF flex/R&D-manufacturing; 47,000 sq. ft. available

• 413-417 South Street 145,000 SF (J) flex industrial (planned)

50,000 SF (I) office space (proposed)

• Devonshire@495 Center 600,000 SF 47 acres; office/flex, R&D space (planned)

Other Permitted, Planned and Proposed Projects6

• Cedar Hill Street/Simarano Drive 600,000 SF office & hotel (preliminary proposal)

• 100 Campus Drive 650,000 SF office ^ 2,528 parking spaces (proposed)

• 800 Nickerson Road 125,000 SF office on 12 acre site (proposed)



• 84 Waterford Drive 60,000 SF office (proposed 3rd of 3-building complex)

In addition, the Marlborough Assessor’s Office identified two (2) other sites in a sample list of vacant and underutilized industrial properties located in Marlborough.7

• 200 Forest Street 825,000 SF LI (former Hewlett Packard site)

• 289 Elm Street 71,236 SF LI (built in 1982; 100% vacant)

6“Development Spreadsheet” from Stephen F. Reid, Building Commissioner, City of Marlborough (June 21, 2011)7“Sample of Vacant and Underutilized Properties,” Green Communities Application – Criteria #1 As-of-right Siting, Office of

the Assessors (November 15, 2010)


111

Commercial sector-related development locations in Table 5.3.3.2 include 100 Crowley Drive, 417 South Street, Devonshire @495 Center, Cedar Hill/Simarano Drive, 100 Campus Drive, 800 Nickerson Road, 900 Nickerson Road, 1000 Nickerson Road, and 84 Waterford Drive. The results of the trip generation calculations for these proposed developments are sum-marized in Table 5.3.3.3.

Proposed DevelopmentDevelopment Program (SF)

ITE Code

Average Weekday

Traffic (veh./day)


(veh./hr.)


(veh./hr.)

100 Crowley Drive 100,000 710 1,101 155 149

417 South Street 50,000 710 551 78 75

Devonshire @495 Center 600,000 760 4,866 732 642

Cedar Hill/Simarano Drive 500,000 710 5,505 775 745

100 Campus Drive 650,000 710 7,157 1,008 969

800 Nickerson Road 125,000 710 1,376 194 186

900 Nickerson Road 125,000 710 1,376 194 186

1000 Nickerson Road 125,000 710 1,376 194 186

84 Waterford Drive 60,000 710 661 93 89

Subtotal 2,335,000 710 23,969 3,423 3,227

Table 5.3.3.3 CommercialSectorTripGeneration

The combined square footage of proposed commercial space identified in Table 5.3.3.3 is approximately 2.3 million square feet, compared to a forecasted absorption rate of 221,000 square feet over the next five years. If developed and occupied, approximately 24,000 ve-hicle trips per day would be added to the local and regional transportation network, with 3,200-3,400 vehicle trips from that total occurring during both AM and PM peak hours. Dis-tribution of these trips over the local and regional transportation network has been calculated using U.S. Census Journey to Work data from the 2000 Census, as noted previously in Sec-tion 4.3.3.3.

Again, fully 30% of those who work in Marlborough live in Marlborough and likely use lo-cal roads and Route 20 (and to a lesser extent, Route 85) to reach their work destinations. Previously noted distribution percentages (52% interstate-oriented: 20% to/from the south on I-495, 18% to/from the north on I-495, and 14% to/from the west on I-290, with the bal-ance of trips entering and exiting Marlborough (18%) split among Route 20, Route 85 and local roads) were applied to the peak hour trip generation calculations summarized in Table 5.3.3.3 to determine the potential impact of proposed commercial sector development on local and regional transportation infrastructure.

The final task required to complete the trip distribution assignment is to geographically lo-cate the proposed development sites and their proximity to likely routes to and from Marlbor-ough. Once again, Figure 4.3.3.2 was referenced for the locations of all PDS and planned/approved developments.

Given the location of the proposed commercial developments, the majority of the 1,100 peak hour trips will likely utilize the I-495/Simarano Drive interchange, followed by the I-495/Route 20 interchange (smaller amounts will access the Waterford Drive project via the I-290/Solo-mon Pond interchange). On the local network, Route 20, Williams Street and Forest Street will likely attract the greatest number of proposed traffic, along with Route 85, Glen Street,

112



Hayes Memorial Drive and Boundary Street.

Table 5.3.3.4 adds the projected commercial sector trip generation to the interchange ca-pacity table provided in section 4.3.3.3 (Table 4.3.3.4) in order to assess the potential for each interchange component to accommodate the anticipated peak hour traffic volume in-creases.

Table 5.3.3.4 I-495InterchangeCapacityAnalysisvs.TrafficVolumeIncrease

Source: CMRPC/MAPC

AM peak PM peak

Peak Hour Volume Increase

Available Capacity? (yes/no)

I-495/I-290

I-495 NB to I-290/85 EB 0.335 0.34 12 Yes

I-495 NB to I-290 WB 0.495 0.6 50 Yes

I-495 SB to I-290 WB 0.609 1.35 0 NA

I-495 SB to I-290/85 EB 0.01 0.01 6 Yes

I-290 EB to I-495 NB 0.455 1.25 0 NA

I-290 EB to I-495 SB 0.428 0.69 50 Yes

I-290 WB to I-495 NB 0.475 1.32 6 No

I-290 WB to I-495 SB 0.328 0.26 12 Yes

I-495/Route 20

I-495 NB to Route 20 EB 0.76 0.8 62 Yes

I-495 NB to Route 20 WB 0.83 0.51 0 NA

I-495 SB to Route 20 WB 0.42 0.42 47 Yes

I-495 SB to Route 20 EB 0.38 0.49 20 Yes

Route 20 EB to I-495 NB 0.138 0.3 63 Yes

Route 20 EB to I-495 SB 0.4 0.74 0 NA

Route 20 WB to I-495 NB 0.56 0.58 20 Yes

Route 20 WB to I-495 SB 0.53 0.71 27 Yes


I-495 NB to Simarano Drive WB 0.69 0.42 102 Yes

I-495 SB to Simarano Drive WB 0.19 0.15 108 Yes

Simarano Drive EB to I-495 NB 0.09 0.19 108 Yes

Simarano Drive EB to I-495 SB 0.24 0.67 102 Yes


113

The results summarized in Table 5.3.3.4 indicate that the regional transportation network serving Marlborough has sufficient capacity at the highway interchanges to accommodate the potential increase in peak hour traffic anticipated from the planned and proposed in-dustrial developments noted previously in Table 4.3.3.4. The exceptions noted in the table, at three of the I-290 / I-495 ramps, add negligible volumes (8 to 19 vph) that are within the margin of daily traffic variation on the local transportation network. Once again, however, the acknowledgement of existing deficiencies at these ramp locations indicates the need for future roadway improvements at this location. Indeed, the I-495 Study: I-290 to I-90 report includes recommendations and conceptual diagrams intended to address this and other deficiencies in order to address future growth and safety needs.

Given the substantial percentage (30%) of trips expected to be associated with workers residing in Marlborough, local roadways such as Route 20, Route 85, South Street, Wil-liams Street and Forest Street are likely to exhibit noticeable increases in traffic, along with Glen Street, Hayes Memorial Drive and Boundary Street. However, these increases will be tempered by the observation that local residents would be using many of these roadways in any case as part of their travel route to work whether or not that employment was based in

Marlborough.


Three alternative land use scenarios were reviewed for comparison with the square footage totals associated with the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough:

• Same square footage as the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved De-velopments in Marlborough, but at current City of Marlborough land use distribution percentages;

• Same square footage as the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Devel-opments in Marlborough, but at Current Market Absorption analysis land use distribu-tion percentages; and


Table 5.3.3.6 provides the commercial sector summary comparison of each alternative scenario.

These alternative scenarios indicate that similar levels of development at either the current Marlborough land use distribution or the market absorption land use distribution will gener-ate less commercial-related traffic (and therefore consume less of the available remaining roadway capacity) than the land use distribution represented by the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments. The modest level of commercial development reported for the Five-Year Market Absorption can be easily accommodated by the existing roadway network.

114



Table 5.3.3.6 CommercialSectorTripGenerationComparison:AlternativeLandUseScenarios

Land Use Scenarios ITE CodeAverage Weekday AM peak hr PM peak hr


2,335,000 23,969 3,423 3,227


1,658,546 18,261 2,571 2,471


1,451,825 15,985 2,250 2,163


221,000 2,433 343 329




Based upon the information and findings provided above, the following summary state-

ments, recommendations and action items are offered for consideration:

• Commercial developments account for approximately 2.3 million square feet of the 3.5 million square feet of planned and approved development in Marlborough;

• Commercial development will generate approximately 24,000 vehicle trips per day, of which approximately 3,400 vehicle trips will occur during the AM peak hour and approxi-mately 3,200 vehicle trips will occur during the PM peak hour;

• 30% of those employed in Marlborough live in Marlborough and will use local roads to access new development sites;

• With limited exceptions, the regional transportation network (interstate and interchang-es) can accommodate the increases in peak hour traffic attributable to proposed com-mercial development;

• The majority of commercial development is proposed in the area of Marlborough served by the I-495/Simarano Drive interchange. This is beneficial given the substantial avail-able capacity provided by the interchange.


Wastewater calculations are based on rates provided in CMR 310 15.203 (Department of Environmental Protection, “System Sewage Flow Design Criteria”). Water use was calcu-lated by adding a 10% factor to the wastewater calculations, as is standard industry practice. These calculations do not account for process-specific water and wastewater requirements, which must be addressed at the specific project level.

In the case of this commercial sector analysis, the rate for “Office Building” will be used. The rate is 75 gallons per 1,000 square feet.

The following descriptions of the two wastewater treatment plants operating in the City of Marlborough were taken from the city of Marlborough website.

The City of Marlborough has two wastewater treatment plants: the Easterly Wastewater Treat-ment Plant and the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant. It should be noted that sewer con-nections to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant are subject to the Interim Sewer Con-


115

nection Policy. Since Marlborough is at its capacity to the Westerly Plant, this policy has been instituted to assist in creating usable capacity by removing inflow and infiltration, or identifying a flow diversion project that would transfer flow from the Westerly Plant to the Easterly Plant.

The Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plant is an advanced wastewater treatment facility de-signed to handle a daily average flow of 5.50 million gallons per day. The facility treats sewage from the easterly portion of Marlborough (east of Route 495). This facility operates under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by an EPA and Massachusetts DEP. The facility’s current permit has been issued by the regulators and contains stringent phosphorus discharge limits of 0.1 mg/l during the growing season, since phosphorus is an element that acts as a fertilizer and promotes weed growth. As a result of the new permit, it will be necessary to upgrade the facility. In accordance with our NPDES permit, the proposed upgrades to the plant will take place after the upgrades to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant are completed. At this time, it is anticipated that the upgrades could run as high as $40 million. The impact of the construction and higher operating costs will result in a significant increase to the City’s sewer user fees.

The Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant is an advanced wastewater treatment facility de-signed to handle a daily average flow of 2.89 million gallons per day. The facility treats sewage from the westerly portion of Marlborough (west of Route 495) and the Town of North-borough under an inter-municipal agreement. The facility operates under a National Pollu-tion Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the EPA and Massachusetts DEP. The new NPDES permit for this facility has been issued. The primary change in this new permit is the requirement to treat phosphorus to a level of 0.1 mg/l. This is an extremely low level and will require a significant upgrade to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant. The cost for this upgrade is expected to be about $40 million. Marlborough’s flow to the Westerly Plant is currently at its available capacity and will require an increase in the design flow of the facility in order to accommodate expected growth in the area contributory to this facility. The new permit does not contain language allowing additional flow discharge from the facil-ity. Regulations exist, however, that allow the performance of an anti-degradation study to prove increasing flows to the receiving water, the Assaber River, does not negatively impact the river. This study is ongoing. When completed, the City is optimistic that the permit may be modified to allow increased flow to the river.

Water and wastewater generation calculations for the commercial projects identified in the list of Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough is summarized in Table 5.3.3.7.

116




(SF)


(gallons/day)


(gallons/day)

100 Crowley Drive 100,000 7,500 8,250

417 South Street 50,000 3,750 4,125

Devonshire @495 Center 600,000 45,000 49,500

Cedar Hill/Simarano Drive 500,000 37,500 41,250

100 Campus Drive 650,000 48,750 53,625

800 Nickerson Road 125,000 9,375 10,313

900 Nickerson Road 125,000 9,375 10,313

1000 Nickerson Road 125,000 9,375 10,313

84 Waterford Drive 60,000 4,500 4,950

Subtotal 2,335,000 175,125 192,639

Table 5.3.3.7 CommercialSectorWaterandWastewaterGeneration

Water and wastewater calculations were also provided for the alternative land use scenarios. Those calculations are summarized in Table 5.3.3.8.


(SF)


(gallons/day)


(gallons/day)


2,335,000 175,125 192,639

Current Marlborough Land Use Distribution Percentage 1,658,546 124,391 136,830


1,451,825 108,887 119,776


221,000 16,575 18,233

Table 5.3.3.8 CommercialSectorWaterandWastewaterGenerationComparison:AlternativeLandUseScenarios


National Grid provides electricity to the City of Marlborough as part of its Bay State South region. NStar provides natural gas to the City of Marlborough. Both energy providers have business and economic development incentives designed to provide competitive and efficient services to current and future businesses in Marlborough.


Inquiries were placed with the Massachusetts Broadband Institute to determine if there were any potential technology limitations that would deter businesses from locating in Marlborough7.


7 Telephone conversation with Cynthia Gaines, Mass Broadband Institute


117


• The MBI has an online interactive map showing the available services to Marlborough at http://mapping.massbroadband.org/. Provider information and ser-vices are noted as follows:



































118



• The vast majority of Marlborough is very well served by private communications com-panies. Nearly the entire City is served by Cable, DSL and Fiber Optic lines. There are very small portions of Marlborough that are served only by DSL or only by cable.






• According to the Massachusetts Broadband Institute, full telecommunications services of industrial-level quality are available throughout the City of Marlborough; and

• For proprietary reasons, private utility and telecommunications providers are reluctant to share specific information and future plans regarding business services.

5.4COMMERCIALSECTORECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALSANDACTIONITEMS

Transportation

• Goal: Interstate interchange Improvements identified in the I-495 Study: I-290 to I-90 report should be supported and implemented to eliminate constraints to future growth in Marlborough.

○ Action Item: City officials should actively participate in the 495 MetroWest Corridor Partnership and actively lobby their State senators and representatives to provide funding for the design and construction of these improvements;

• Goal: In addition to site-specific mitigation requirements on local roads, City officials should require project proponets to provide traffic studies that assess direct project im-pact to interstate interchanges and also to provide funding to assist the City in studying future large-scale needs beyond the scale of individual developers.

○ Action item: Identify means to collect and hold mitigation funds that will be directed toward addressing future transportation network analysis and design.

• Goal: Require project proponents to identify trip reduction and travel demand man-agement measures that will result in greater preservation and efficient use of available remaining roadway capacity on both the local and regional roadway network.

○ Action item: City officials should work with the Marlborough Regional and MetroWest Chambers of Commerce to include existing and potential Marlborough employers in the MetroWest/495 Transportation Management Association (TMA);

• Goal: Monitor conditions throughout the Route 20 corridor at major intersections and at the I-495 interchange, primarily to address potential traffic issues associated with trips by local residents to their Marlborough workplace locations but also to address regional traffic exiting I-495. It should be noted that due to STOP control conditions on the off-


119

ramp from I-495 SB to Route 20 WB, existing AM peak hour traffic queues extend back onto the I-495 mainline.

○ Action item: City staff should establish a current baseline of traffic counts at selected intersections throughout the Route 20 corridor for comparison with previous and future studies.


• Goal: Ensure that sufficient capacity exists at both the Westerly and Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) to accommodate future development.

○ Action Item: City officials should actively work with project proponents to understand their water and wastewater requirements early in the permitting process in order to assist proponents in meeting those requirements;

• Goal: Ensure efficiency in allowing connections to both WWTPs.

○ Action item: City officials should actively work with project proponents to identify con-servation measures that will reduce water and wastewater volumes;

• Goal: Maximize capacity at both WWTPs.

○ Action item: City officials should work with project proponents to identify Inflow and In-filtration (I/I) deficiencies in infrastructure elements leading from proposed projects to the subject WWTP and to also require I/I improvements as project-related mitigation;

• Goal: Understand the benefits and detriments of alternative treatment systems.

○ Action item: City officials should work with project proponents to determine if and when alternative treatment systems, such as on-site package treatment plants, would be more practical from a system-wide and project-specific basis than connection to the City WWTPs.


• Goal: Understand if there are clear benefits or deficiencies with utility and telecommu-nications resources that would affect businesses considering locating in Marlborough.

○ Action Item: City officials should establish a Working Group comprised of service providers that can advise the EDC about how best to market existing strengths and how to address service deficiencies without compromising proprietary information.

• Goal: Understand data limitations and specific service coverage and capacity informa-tion in Marlborough.

○ Action Item: Establish appropriate dialogue/outreach with the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) and Attorney General’s Office (AGO) to obtain reasonable level of de-tail regarding services available to Marlborough.

• Goal: A village shopping and business district should be established on the Route 20 corridor in east Marlborough. Establishing a village business district on the east side of Marlborough will support existing businesses and attract small to medium size compa-nies to the area.

• Goal: The City of Marlborough should reduce taxes for commercial properties in the City. Competitive commercial tax rates will enhance Marlborough’s standing as a com-munity that wants to attract and retain business and encourage reinvestment in com-mercial properties.

120



• Goal: The City of Marlborough should work to increase its incubator and mid-scale growth properties with labs. Increasing this type of property will attract small and mid-sized growing companies to Marlborough. Attracting growing companies to Marlbor-ough is a long-term strategy to capture large-scale businesses.

• Goal: The City of Marlborough should establish clearly defined and coordinated roles for all municipal entities involved with business recruitment and retention on behalf of the City. City Hall and all Marlborough businesses should have an established point of contact to establish and maintain positive relationships.

• Goal: The City and MEDC should establish and maintain a database of available in-dustrial, flex and commercial buildings, facility space and land in Marlborough as a webpage on the City and MEDC websites, including name and contact information to reach directly the appropriate municipal and MEDC officials. Marlborough properties suitable for specialized facility needs should also have a separate/additional link with profile and contacts for other business, trade, funding and real estate development networks promoting physical and life sciences, generally, and Clean Tech, Green Tech, Green Bio, and Advanced Manufacturing industries in particular.

○ Action Item: Seek advice from other municipalities, local commercial real estate bro-kers, MOBD, MassEcon and others providing and using similar online services; de-termine most effective approach to inventory and update available property informa-tion, track usage and feedback and provide staff support for inquiries; create system, monitor and evaluate projected operating cost, and add potential revenue as fixed item in MEDC annual budget.

5.4.1 Target Sites Suitable for Commercial Use

The City of Marlborough has over 250 parcels that are zoned for commercial use and contain enough developable land that they could accommodate at least 30,000 square feet of new commercial space. Of these 250 parcels, 12 were also identified by the City of Marlborough as sites that have either already been permitted for development or have been designated as Chapter 43D Priority Development Sites by the community. The amount of potential developable space for each of these properties was determined through the Commercial Build-out Analysis [Section 5.3]. The table below contains these 12 properties’ addresses, zoning districts, potential building square footage, current building square footage and cur-rent land use codes and descriptions. These property locations are also illustrated in Table 5.4.1.1 Marlborough Preferred Commercial Use Sites.


121

Address Zone

Building Potential

(SF)

Current Building

(SF)Current Use Code and Description

100 Campus Dr I 2,796,761.22 0 995 – Open Space

200 Forest St LI 2,087,134.06 659,530 4040 – Research and Development

Cedar Hill St I 1,222,720.62 0 4400 – Developable Land

Forest St I 508,293.06 0 4400 – Developable Land

Forest St I 466,606.14 0 4400 – Developable Land

Hayes Memorial Dr LI 308,362.75 0 4400 – Developable Land

413-417 South St I 238,207.16 145,600 4020 – Manufacturing Office

158 Waterford Dr LI 229,471.17 191,656 4040 – Research and Development

900 Nickerson Rd LI 203,233.54 0 4400 – Developable Land

800 Nickerson Rd LI 128,212.99 0 4400 – Developable Land

289 Elm St LI 87,470.50 71,604 4000 – Manufacturing Operations

362 Elm St LI 76,219.35 45,721 4010 – Warehouse

Table 5.4.1.1 PreferredCommercialUseSites

Source: Marlborough Assessors’ Department

RETAIL SECTOR OVERVIEW6Role in Marlborough Economy

Retail Real Estate Market Analysis

Build-Out Analysis

Retail Sector Economic Development Goals

124


6Retail Sector Overview


6.1.1 RetailLandUseProfileandZoning

City of Marlborough Assessors’ Department data was used to identify the land use charac-teristics of retail sector properties within the City of Marlborough. The Massachusetts De-partment of Revenue Property Type Classification Codes, as assigned by the Marlborough Assessors’ Department, were used to determine which parcels were included in the Retail Sector Overview. The following summarizes characteristics of Marlborough’s retail sector properties, and Figure 6.1.1.A illustrates the location of all retail use parcels in the City of Marlborough.

Retail Parcel Size

• There are 255 parcels of land within the City of Marlborough that are identified as con-taining retail uses.

• The City of Marlborough’s 255 parcels containing retail use constitute 306.45 acres of land.

• The 306.45 acres of retail land represents 2.48% of the total land within the City of Marlborough.

• The average size of retail parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 1.20 acres.

• The median size of buildable retail parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 0.44 acres.

• The smallest buildable retail parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 0.04 acres.

• The largest buildable retail parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 16.50 acres.

Retail Parcel Values

• The City of Marlborough’s 255 retail parcels of land possess an aggregate assessed total value of $259,194,500.00.

• The $259,194,500.00 aggregate assessed total value Marlborough’s retail parcels rep-resents 5.50% of all assessed property within the City of Marlborough.

• The average assessed total value for retail parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is $1,016,449.02.

• The median assessed total value for retail parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is $389,000.00.

• The smallest assessed total value for a retail parcel of land within the City of Marlbor-ough is $5,500.00.

• The largest assessed total value for a retail parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is $36,416,400.00.


125-126


1 0 10.5 Miles¯

Figure 6.1.1 Retail Land Use

LegendRetail Land Use

Zoning Districts

Business


Industrial

Limited Industrial



Residence A-1

Residence A-2

Residence A-3

Residence B

Residence C

Rural Residence

Parcel Boundaries

Roads Legend

Figure 6.1.1.A Retail Land Use


127

Retail Parcel Buildings

• The City of Marlborough’s 255 retail parcels of land possess a total 169 buildings.

• The 169 buildings retail parcels of land represent 1.52% of all buildings within the City of Marlborough.

• The average year buildings on retail parcels of land within the City of Marlborough were built is 1965.

• The median year buildings on retail parcels of land within the City of Marlborough were built is 1974.

• The oldest building on a retail parcel of land within the City of Marlborough was built in 1790.

• The newest building on a retail parcel of land within the City of Marlborough was built in 2010.

• The City of Marlborough’s 196 buildings on retail parcels of land possess a total 2,778,245 gross square feet.

• The average size of buildings on retail parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 14,174.72 gross square feet.

• The median size of buildings on retail parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 5,250 gross square feet.

• The smallest building on a retail parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 256 gross square feet.

• The largest building on a retail parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 300,337gross square feet.

Retail Parcel Zoning

• The City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in eight different zoning districts.

• 66% of the City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in the Business Zon-ing District.

• 15% of the City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in the Commercial and Automotive Zoning District.

• 5% of the City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in the Limited Industrial Zoning District.

• 5% of the City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in the Industrial Zoning District.

• 4% of the City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in the Residence B Zoning District.

• 2% of the City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in the Residence C Zoning District.

• 1% of the City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in the Residence A3 District.

• 1% of the City of Marlborough’s retail parcels of land are located in the Residence A1 Zoning District.

128



6.1.2BusinessActivity

Table 6.1.2.1 shows the number of retail businesses, jobs and business sales in Marlbor-ough and compares these numbers to the overall seven-community Greater Marlborough Market Area. As data in Table 6.1.2.1 shows, Marlborough has a larger share (%) of business establishments and smaller share of jobs and sales in Food Stores– in other words, a greater number of smaller businesses than in the Market Area overall. Marlborough has significantly higher jobs and sales per establishment in Apparel & Accessory Stores, indicating a rela-tively greater number of larger businesses in this store type.


% Market Area

Businesses Jobs

% Market


% Market Area Sales

BuildingMaterials,GardenSupply&MobileHomes 23 29% 292 25% $41.4 24%

GeneralMerchandiseStores 10 36% 681 40% $74.5 40%

FoodStores 43 41% 274 19% $38.9 17%

AutomobileDealers&GasServiceStations 41 32% 477 28% $146.7 27%

Apparel&AccessoryStores 50 56% 572 80% $35.9 78%

HomeFurniture,Furnishings&Equipment 83 40% 1,141 36% $266.1 34%

Eating&DrinkingPlaces 111 37% 1,838 37% $86.2 38%

MiscellaneousRetail 101 32% 902 40% $86.3 37%

ALL RETAIL 462 37% 6,177 36% $776.0 32%

Table 6.1.2.1 RetailBusinesses,Jobs,andSalesinMarlboroughandComparedtoMarketAreaTotals


According to data obtained from Claritas Site Reports, retail business in Marlborough ac-counted for 22% of all City business establishments, 20% of City-wide jobs, and 22% of all sales made by businesses in Marlborough in 2010. Retail jobs in Marlborough have been relatively flat over the past 10 years, as shown by the data in Figure 6.1.2.A. Note that the job totals shown in Figure 6.1.2.A do not match those shown in the prior table. The reason for this difference is that Claritas Site Reports – the source of the data in the table – counts all jobs whereas the Massachusetts Department of Labor and Workforce Development (Mass-DOL) counts only those jobs covered by unemployment insurance. MassDOL is the only source of local historical trend data but significantly undercounts jobs in many industry cat-egories, which include self-employed persons.


129

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Ave

rage

Mon

thly

Em

ploy

men

t

23 - Construction





51 - Information










NAICS Category




6.1.3RetailSectorFiscalImpacts

As shown by the data in Table 6.1.3.1, retail businesses in Marlborough contributed $6.6 million in property tax revenues in FY’11, accounting for 9% of all property tax revenues and 22% of property taxes paid by commercial uses. Retail uses comprise 4% of the City’s tax-able land area. Assessed values per square foot are relatively high for retail uses, at 173% of the average SF assessed land value City-wide and 108% of the assessed building values per square foot. Average assessed values per SF of retail land and buildings are also higher

than the averages for all commercial properties, as shown by the data in Table 6.2.3.1.

Retail % of All Land Uses% of Commercial

Land Uses

NumberofParcels 255 2% 31%

LandAreaSF 13,348,917 4% 11%

BuildingAreaSF 2,778,245 5% 17%

LandAssessedValues $94,072,100 6% 24%

BuildingsAssessedValues $165,122,400 6% 21%

LandandBuildingAssessedValues $259,194,500 6% 22%

AssessedLandValueperSF $7.05 173% 157%

AssessedBuildingValueperSF $59.43 108% 116%

PropertyTaxRevenuesinFY'11 $6,588,724 9% 22%

Table 6.1.3.1 MarlboroughRetailSectorFiscalEffects


130



6.1.4 GreaterMarlboroughComparativeAnalysis

For purposes of this study, the retail sector includes industries that primarily utilize retail space, including Retail, Amusement & Recreation, Accommodations and Eating & Drinking.

In most economies, Marlborough included, retail is not an economic base industry.1 It exists to serve the local population and is primarily supported by the spending of household income. As a result, the amount of retail employment is driven by local population and disposable income lev-els, and growth and contraction is closely tied to changes in population, employment and wages.

In contrast, Amusement & Recreation, and Accommodations and Eating & Drinking are both local-serving and export-oriented industries (i.e., capturing income from outside the City.) This means that Marlborough can gain economic activity in these industries by encourag-ing tourism and visitor expenditures, including from business travelers. Though the eating and drinking industry primarily serves the local population, restaurants can sometimes be regional attractions. In Marlborough’s case, they also serve the significant inflow of workers who commute to the City from other locations and choose to eat meals near work. Though the amusement and recreation industry is not technically a major user of retail space, it is in-cluded here because it is important to Marlborough’s economy and defies analysis as either an industrial or commercial sector.

Though predominantly local-serving, a healthy retail sector is important for economic de-velopment. The availability of shopping, dining and personal services is an important com-ponent of quality of life for residents and employees, and some level of retail is necessary to support business activity in export-oriented industries. Furthermore, the retail sector is an important source of jobs for entry-level and unskilled workers.

Table 6.1.4.1 shows that the share of retail sector employment in Marlborough is comparable to the national share. This is to be expected because it primarily serves local populations. Amusement and recreation accounts for a fairly small number of employees (330) in Marl-borough, or 0.9% of jobs, which represents slightly less than half the percentage of jobs the industry comprises at the national level. This suggests that Marlborough may be able to cap-ture additional growth in this industry. Between 2004 and 2009, its rate of growth essentially matched the national rate, but faster growth might be possible to close the gap between employment share in Marlborough and in the rest of the nation. Finally, accommodations, eating and drinking represents a slightly smaller share of employment in Marlborough com-pared with the country as a whole. Unlike the nation, which lost jobs in this sector, however, Marlborough made slight gains between 2004 and 2009.

NAICS Industry 2004 2009

% of 2009 Jobs CAGR1

% of 2009 Employment CAGR1

441-454 RetailTrade 3,739 3,797 10.1% 0.3% 10.3% 0.8%

711-713 Amusement&Recreation 313 329 0.9% 1.0% 2.1% 1.1%

721-722 Accommodations,Eating&Drinking 2,222 2,299 6.1% 0.7% 6.8% -0.6%

Marlborough

Table 6.1.4.1TotalEmployment,ConcentrationandGrowthinRetailSectors

Source: Data from US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, provide by MIG, Inc.(IMPLAN). Sectors organized by using LEAP Conclusions


U.S.

1 Notable exceptions include places like Burlington and Natick which have regional malls that draw significant expenditures from outside populations.


131

The retail trade industry (NAICS 441-454) is comprised of a number of types of retailers, as shown below in Table 6.1.4.2. The largest retail sub-sectors in Marlborough are general merchandise, clothing and accessories, and food and beverage. Miscellaneous retailers comprises an additional 20% of retail employment. Though a number of these sub-sectors declined between 2004 and 2009, general merchandise, non-store direct and electronic sales, sporting goods, and food and beverage made important gains. Furniture also grew but still accounts for only a small share of retail employment in Marlborough. The national recession that began in 2008 is likely responsible for many of these losses.



2004 2009

2009 % of Retail Sectors CAGR1

Motorvehicleandparts 228 200 5.7% -2.60%

Furnitureandhomefurnishings 70 82 2.3% 3.00%

Electronicsandappliances 256 185 5.3% -6.30%

Buildingmaterialsandgardensupply 242 178 5.1% -5.90%

Foodandbeverage 419 476 13.6% 2.60%

Healthandpersonalcare 261 240 6.9% -1.60%

Gasolinestations 41 35 1.0% -3.10%

Clothingandclothingaccessories 739 651 18.6% -2.50%

Sportinggoods,hobby,bookandmusic 175 208 5.9% 3.50%

Generalmerchandise 63 756 21.6% 64.60%

Miscellaneous 1,243 785 22.4% -8.80%

Non-stores,directandelectronicsales 128 290 8.3% 17.80%

Total Retail Sectors 2,946 3,506 100.0% 3.50%

Table 6.1.4.2 RetailSub-SectorsEmployment

6.1.4.1RetailSectorJobGrowthOutlook

Local job growth over the 2004-2009 period as well as national industry 10-year growth projec-tions were used to estimate future job growth by industry for Marlborough between 2009 and 2019. Retail sector industries projected to grow are shown in Table 6.1.4.1.1. This table repre-sents the growth that is likely to occur under current economic development policies and condi-tions, and it assumes that Marlborough maintains its competitive position relative to other areas in terms of business costs, transportation access, and labor market cost, quality and availability.

NAICS Industry10-Year Baseline

Growth Range - Jobs

441-454 RetailTrade 117-397

711-713 Amusement&Recreation 34-84

721-722 Accommodations,Eating&Drinking 162-369

Table 6.1.4.1.110-YearBaselineJobGrowthProjectionsforMarlborough(2009-2019)

Source: Marlborough Assessors’ Department

132



6.2RETAILREALESTATEMARKETANALYSIS

6.2.1 GreaterMarlboroughRetailMarketTrends

In the following graphs, historical and projected trends in the retail space inventory, vacan-cies, vacancy rates, and net absorption are shown for the City of Marlborough compared to the seven-community Greater Marlborough Market Area (Region). The analyses in the sec-tion are derived from proprietary data obtained from Co Star Property Information Services, the generally accepted real estate data source used by most brokers, analysts, developers, and property owners. Notwithstanding Co Star’s standing in the professional real estate community, the consultant team notes that no data source is 100% reliable, and therefore the analyses derived from these data should be regarded as indicative of general trends rather than a definitive indicator of the actual numbers in any data category.

Figure 6.2.1.A shows the historical and forecast inventory of retail space in Marlborough and the Region. Marlborough’s inventory of retail space has changed little since 2006, and new additions to the supply are not forecast through the 3rd quarter of 2013. An additional 600,000 SF of retail space is projected for the region during the same period. Marlborough’s share of the regional retail space inventory is projected to decline from 46% in the 2nd quar-ter of 2011 to 42% by the 2nd quarter of 2013.

Historical and Forecast Inventory of Retail Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

9,000,000

2006 3Q

2006 4Q

2007 1Q

2007 2Q

2007 3Q

2007 4Q

2008 1Q

2008 2Q

2008 3Q

2008 4Q

2009 1Q

2009 2Q

2009 3Q

2009 4Q

2010 1Q

2010 2Q

2010 3Q

2010 4Q

2011 1Q

Current Qtr

2011 3Q

2011 4Q

2012 1Q

2012 2Q

2012 3Q

2012 4Q

2013 1Q

2013 2Q

Squa

re F

eet


Figure 6.2.1.A HistoricalandForecastInventoryofRetailSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegion

Figure 6.2.1.B shows historical and forecast vacant retail space in Marlborough compared to the region. Marlborough’s share of vacant retail space is projected to decline from 27% of the region total in the 2nd quarter of 2011 to 12% of the region total by the 2nd quarter of 2013. This is due not only to the projected increase in retail space outside the City but also a projected absolute decline in vacant retail space in Marlborough, from 144,000 SF in 2011

to 124,000 SF by 2013.


133

Data in Figure 6.2.1.C shows the corresponding relative decline in Marlborough’s retail va-cancy rate compared to the region overall, which has historically been below the region total and will become substantially lower as projected. The projected 4% retail vacancy rate for Marlborough is considered essentially too low to absorb additional retail uses without net new additions to the retail space inventory. Partly for this reason, little net absorption of retail space is forecast for Marlborough over the next two years, as shown in Figure 6.2.1.D.

Figure 6.2.1.B VacantRetailSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegionVacant Retail Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

2006 3Q

2006 4Q

2007 1Q

2007 2Q

2007 3Q

2007 4Q

2008 1Q

2008 2Q

2008 3Q

2008 4Q

2009 1Q

2009 2Q

2009 3Q

2009 4Q

2010 1Q

2010 2Q

2010 3Q

2010 4Q

2011 1Q

Current Qtr

2011 3Q

2011 4Q

2012 1Q

2012 2Q

2012 3Q

2012 4Q

2013 1Q

2013 2Q

Squa

re F

eet


Figure 6.2.1.C HistoricalandForcastVacancyRateinRetailSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegion

Historical and Forecast Vacancy Rate in Retail Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

2006 3Q

2006 4Q

2007 1Q

2007 2Q

2007 3Q

2007 4Q

2008 1Q

2008 2Q

2008 3Q

2008 4Q

2009 1Q

2009 2Q

2009 3Q

2009 4Q

2010 1Q

2010 2Q

2010 3Q

2010 4Q

2011 1Q

Current Qtr

2011 3Q

2011 4Q

2012 1Q

2012 2Q

2012 3Q

2012 4Q

2013 1Q

2013 2Q

Vaca

ncy

Rat

e


134



Figure 6.2.1.D HistoricalandForecastNetAbsorptionofRetailSpace:MarlboroughComparedtoRegion

Historical and Forecast Net Absorption of Retail Space: Marlborough Compared to Region

(100,000)

(50,000)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

2006 3Q

2006 4Q

2007 1Q

2007 2Q

2007 3Q

2007 4Q

2008 1Q

2008 2Q

2008 3Q

2008 4Q

2009 1Q

2009 2Q

2009 3Q

2009 4Q

2010 1Q

2010 2Q

2010 3Q

2010 4Q

2011 1Q

Current Qtr

2011 3Q

2011 4Q

2012 1Q

2012 2Q

2012 3Q

2012 4Q

2013 1Q

2013 2Q

Squa

re F

eet


Lease Rates

As shown by the data in Figure 6.2.1.E, lease rates (per square foot) for retail space in Marl-brough are currently slightly higher than the regional average.

Marlborough and Region and Marlborough Rental Rates for Retail Space

$0.00

$5.00

$10.00

$15.00

$20.00

$25.00

2006 1Q 2007 1Q 2008 1Q 2009 1Q 2010 1Q 2011 1Q

Trip

le N

et L

ease

Rat

e pe

r SF

(nnn

)

Marlborough Region

Figure 6.2.1.E MarlboroughandRegionandMarlboroughRentalRatesforRetailSpace

6.2.2 MarlboroughRetailOpportunity/GapAnalysis

A retail opportunity or gap analysis shows the potential demand for various types of retail development within a defined market area by comparing estimated household expenditures in a range of retail store categories with actual sales by stores in those categories. Where expenditures by households in the market area exceed sales, a gap or opportunity exists for stores within the market area to “capture” more of those household expenditures. Con-versely, where market area household expenditures are less than actual sales in particular retail categories, stores in the market area already attract consumer dollars from outside the market area, and opportunities for additional retail development would be more limited. The retail gap analysis is a snapshot of current opportunities for retailers to newly locate or


135

expand facilities based on a well-established empirical fact that people will purchase goods within the shortest available walking or drive time from where they live.

Retailers typically define market areas in terms of drive times, with a 15-minute drive time considered the maximum outside market area definition for all but the largest stores and store types. Market support within a 5-minute drive time is preferred to a 10- or 15-minute drive time, with 5 minutes considered the outside drive-time reach of smaller retailers.

The following tables show the retail opportunity/gap and what that opportunity/gap may mean in terms of potentially supportable square footage of retail development within three

potential areas of Marlborough – Downtown, East Side and West Side.

Downtown

Data in Table 6.2.2.1 shows the retail opportunity for selected store types based on the aver-age annual expenditures of residents living within a 5-minute drive time of Downtown. The opportunity/gap drops off substantially beyond a 5-minute drive time of Downtown based on competition from existing retailers located outside the 5-minute drive-time area. Figure 6.2.2.A is a map of the 5-minute drive time from Downtown.

Table 6.2.2.1 RetailDevelopmentOpportunitiesbasedontheCurrentSupplyGapwithina5-minuteDriveTimeofDowntownMarlborough

Store Type with NAICS CodesSales Volume Opportunity

Median Sales per

SF ($)Supportable Sq. Footage

Median Store Size

(SF)

Potential Number of

Stores

Supermarkets,Grocery(ExConv)Stores-44511

$41,103,696 360 114,177 51,000 2

Women’sClothingStores-44812 $3,956,026 170 23,271 26,000 1

OfficeSuppliesandStationaryStores-45321

$1,922,590 140 13,733 10,500 1

OtherMiscellaneousStoreRetailers-45321

$2,194,326 200 10,972 16,000 1

Limited-ServiceEatingPlaces-7222 $4,130,348 280 14,751 2,000 7

SpecialFoodServices-7223 $3,751,384 280 13,398 2,000 7

TOTALS $57,058,370 190,301 19

Source: Claritas Site Reports, 2010 data, and FXM Associates.

As shown by the data in Table 6.2.2.1, based on capturing purchases now made outside the 5-minute drive time area by residents living within that same area, Downtown could hypo-thetically support an additional 190,000 square feet of retailing.

136



Figure 6.2.2.A 5-MinuteDriveTimeofDowntown

East Side

Data in Table 6.2.2.2 shows the retail opportunity for selected store types based on the aver-age annual expenditures of residents living within a 5-minute drive time of a central point on the East Side (Boston Post Rd. E at Farm Road). The opportunity/gap drops off substantially beyond a 5-minute drive time of the East Side central point used in this analysis, based on competition from existing retailers located outside the 5-minute drive-time area. Figure 6.2.2.B is a map of the East Side 5-minute drive time.


137

Table 6.2.2.2 RetailDevelopmentOpportunitiesbasedontheCurrentSupplyGapwithina5-minuteDriveTimeofEastSide


Median Sales per


Median Store Size

(SF)

Potential Number of

Stores

FurnitureStores-4421 $4,096,790 225 18,208 5,000 4

Radio,Television,ElectronicsStores-443112

$4,252,879 225 18,902 5,500 3


$36,131,178 360 100,364 51,000 2

Women’sClothingStores-44812 $3,137,660 170 18,457 26,000 1

FamilyClothingStore-44814 $6,644,274 240 27,684 8,000 3

ShoeStore-4482 $2,532,906 175 14,474 4,000 4

JewelryStores-44831 $1,546,142 450 3,436 1,500 2

SportingGoodsStores-45111 $2,305,967 190 12,137 8,500 1


$2,108,208 140 15,059 10,500 1

Limited-ServiceEatingPlaces-7222 $3,869,665 280 13,820 2,000 7

SpecialFoodService-7223 $3,113,654 280 11,120 2,000 6

TOTALS $69,739,395 253,661 34


Figure 6.2.2.B 5-MinuteDriveTimeofEastSide

As shown by the data in Table 6.2.2.2, based on capturing sales now made outside the 5-minute drive time area by residents living within that same area, the East Side could hypo-

thetically support an additional 254,000 square feet of retailing.

138



West Side

Unlike the findings for both Downtown and the East Side, the retail gap analysis revealed few opportunities for additional retailing in West Side based on consumer expenditures and actual store sales within a five-minute drive time of the selected West Side central point (I-495 N at Lakeside Avenue). However, when the potential market area is extended to a 15-minute drive time, the gap analysis shows substantial opportunities. It must be noted that at the 15-minute drive time market area retail opportunities previously reported for both Downtown and east Side are also counted, so the three areas’ development potential can-not be summed. Data in Table 6.2.2.3 shows the retail opportunity for selected store types based on the average annual expenditures of residents living within a 15-minute drive time of a central point on the West Side (Boston Post Rd. E at Farm Road). Figure 6.2.2.C is a map of the 15-minute West Side drive time area.

Table 6.2.2.3 RetailDevelopmentOpportunitiesBasedontheCurrentSupplyGapwithina15-minuteDriveTimeofWestSide


Median Sales per


Median Store Size

(SF)

Potential Number of

Stores

FurnitureStores-4421 $23,187,244 225 103,054 5,000 21

HomeFurnishingStores-4422 $14,311,229 200 71,556 4100 17

HardwareStores-44413 $13,290,168 110 120,820 13200 9


$163,863,908 360 455,178 5500 8

OpticalGoodsStores-44613 $2,803,946 335 8,370 2000 4

Men’sClothingStores-44811 $3,271,454 185 17,684 3500 5

Women’sClothingStores-44812 $20,492,166 170 120,542 4400 27

FamilyClothingStore-44814 $12,073,395 240 50,306 8000 6

ShoeStore-4482 $13,339,045 175 76,223 4000 19

JewelryStores-44831 $15,227,132 445 34,218 2500 14


$4,454,687 140 31,819 4000 8

Gift,NoveltyandSouvenireStores-45322

$6,896,868 137 50,342 4200 12

OtherMiscellaneousStoreRetailers-4539

$18,204,057 200 91,020 2300 40

Limited-ServiceEatingPlaces-7222 $24,451,662 280 87,327 1750 50

TOTALS $335,866,961 1,318,460 241


As shown by the data in Table 6.2.2.3, based on capturing sales now made outside the 15-minute drive time area by residents living within the 15-minute drive time area, West Side could hypothetically support an additional 1.3 million square feet of retailing.


139

Figure 6.2.2.C 15-MinuteDriveTimeofWestSide

Applications of a Retail Gap Analysis

The retail gap analysis is a useful tool for identifying potential development opportunities within a discrete geographic area – for example, a Downtown – and can be used to help recruit retailers who might not otherwise consider a Downtown location. Opportunities within a 5-minute drive time area are especially important to convenience and smaller retailers who are not candidates for location in a regional mall. However, at the scale of a 15-minute drive time market area and for central points not distinguished by special or unique features (such as Downtown postal offices, municipal and legal services, cultural services, unique or historic architectural and urban design features, and long-standing tradition as a central gathering place), the retail gap analysis must be viewed with greater caution. The retail gap analysis for the West Side, for example, has not considered competitors that might be lo-cated outside the 15-minute drive time area and that are drawing consumers from inside that defined 15-minute drive time area. Significant additional analysis would be required to fine tune actual development opportunities and developer interest, especially on the West Side where few gaps exist inside the 5- and 10-minute drive time areas.

140



6.3BUILD-OUTANALYSIS

6.3.1 ZoningComparativeAnalysis


Number of Commercial Districts – Marlborough permits retail uses as of right in two com-mercial districts. A Special Permit is required if the retail use is greater than 75,000 SF. Often communities have more than two commercial districts that allow retail uses to distinguish different areas of the community and types and scales of retail uses, such as neighborhood business districts, downtowns, shopping centers, and highway commercial areas. As an example, Framingham allows retail uses in eight commercial zoning districts by right and in one by Special Permit. Framingham’s zoning district that allows retail use by Special Permit is the Technology Park District where retail uses must be accessory uses and occupy less than 2,500 SF. Additionally Framingham employs the Highway Overlay District to encour-age greater density in its commercial districts, abutting major arterial highways. This allows a greater density of retail uses in return for providing public benefit amenities such as traffic improvements and the creation of open space.

6.3.2 RetailBuild-outAnalysis

Build-out analyses were completed to determine the amount of new retail space that could be added to the City’s supply as allowed under current zoning regulations, and the differen-tial amount of new space that could be added with modifications to the Marlborough Zoning Regulations. Retail space was defined as those uses coded by the City Assessor as retail.

The City has over 12,000 parcels identified in the public records. Using City Assessor data, Zoning Regulations and GIS data, the build-out analysis sorted the information and identified:

• Land zoned and used for retail uses by acreage and square feet of building space.

• Amount of vacant and under-utilized land currently zoned for commercial use.

• The maximum potential build-out for every commercial parcel that met the basic criteria of vacant or underutilized and met certain additional criteria within the commercial and industrial zoning districts (B, CA, LI, and I).

• Current assessed values of retail land and buildings.



141

Database Assessment


• GIS and Assessor parcel ID;



• Zoning;


• Wetlands Area.

The Property Type Classification Codes, prepared by the Department of Revenue [revised as of June 2009], are used in Massachusetts to as consistently as possible identify land use within the local assessors records. The codes were sorted for the Build-out Scenario as fol-lows in the Table 6.3.2.1:



2600-2800 AgriculturalandParkLand

3000 Commercial

3200-3300 Retail

3400 Commercial

3600-3800Commercial:EntertainmentandRecreational

Facilities

3900 Commercial:Vacant

4000-4100,4400 Industrial

4200-4300,4500 Utilities


* The state code uses use three digits. The Marlborough Assessors’ database uses four digit codes.



• Where listed, with an area of wetland greater than 50% of the parcel; and

• Where the total parcel area is less than the minimum lot size for the specified zoning district.

GIS Review

A review of the GIS data base and aerial imagery was performed to further refine the parcel list generated by the Assessors’ database and sort out parcels that were clearly used for specific purposes, not zoned for the use, and restricted by the mapped wetlands and water resources.

142




A Floor Area Ratio, or FAR, was calculated for each zoning district. The formula for the cal-culation of FAR was:

A. Maximum Building Area

/ Lot Size

=FAR for district

The definition of Lot Coverage in the zoning regulations is: “The area of a lot covered by all structures, areas used by vehicular traffic and parking, including driveways, loading bays and maneuvering aisles, whether paved, unpaved or graveled, and of all impermeable areas such as paved walkways or outdoor storage areas, but not including gravel walkways or pedestrian areas not adjacent to parking lots or buildings. Areas not included in “lot cover-age” shall be landscaped areas…” [sec 650-5] Consequently, the Maximum Building Area is calculated from the total coverage allowed by zoning, subtracting the surface area parking requirements while considering the zoning allowances for building height [in stories] on a one-acre lot.

For retail zoning districts, the FAR was calculated as 3.2 in the Business [B] District, 1.6 in the Commercial Automotive [CA] District, 1.5 in the Limited Industrial [LI] District and 1.8 in the Industrial [I] District.



Build-out Scenarios: 25-Percent and 50-Percent Developed

The maximum potential build-out conforms with zoning height limitations and lot coverage restrictions and includes the parking and circulation needs as determined by the size of each building and parking requirements [4.4 spaces per 1,000 SF retail].

The underutilized land was identified under two different specifications: land that was 25% developed and land that was 50% developed. These conditions were identified according to a comparison of the allowable development under the zoning dimensional standards, specifically maximum lot coverage and the resulting FAR, which was then combined with the parking requirements and area for construction of surface parking to meet those require-ments. This total area was compared with the Assessors’ information for current develop-ment on the parcel, and all parcels meeting the threshold were listed accordingly as less than 25% or less than 50% developed. As noted, a scan of the GIS aerial imagery was performed to remove from the sorted database for build-out those parcels committed to other uses.


143


A. Total building FAR/ Number of Stories, or Building coverage in sf+ 2 spaces X 1,000 SF of building X 350 SF per parking space = Total parking area= Total parcel development opportunity


= Percent developed* From Assessors’ database

C. Percent developed compared to the threshold of <25% and <50% of the al-

lowed development

* From Assessors’ database



Fit Studies


Qualifications

Some qualifications should be noted with respect to the results obtained from the analysis of this data.

• This summary is based on data provided by the Assessors’ Office and the City’s Geo-graphic Information System, as the best available information.

• Certain discrepancies were found between the Assessors’ database and the GIS aerial photo imagery. This may be due to the time of the photography or other considerations by the property assessors.

• The wetland and water resource delineations are approximate, and actual on-the-ground surveys may provide lesser or greater areas on the individual properties.

• Parking and building configurations used to estimate build-out are based on industry standards and testing of sites, but may vary for the actual site design.

• Easements and other encumbrances on the properties were not researched as part of this analysis.

144



Results of Build-out Analysis

The following table presents the summary results of the Retail Sector Build-out Analysis:

Number of Parcels

Potential Development Square Footage


Parcelsthatarelessthan25%developed

247 2,146,227 $111,676,063

Parcelsthatarelessthan50%developed

247 3,618,603 $194,852,456

Table 6.3.2.2 RetailBuild-outAnalysis

6.3.2.1 CurrentMarlboroughZoningRegulations

The Marlborough Zoning Regulations include the following sections related to the Retail Sector uses:

• Definitions [Sec 650-5]

○ RETAIL LOT A parcel of land comprising a single lot or contiguous lots not separated by a public way, which parcel is adjacent to a development lot on which a shopping mall is located. All of such parcel shall be within 3,000 feet of the development lot on which such shopping mall is located.

○ RETAIL SALES AND SERVICE The sale of goods and services to end consumers, including personal service and consumer service products such as hairdressing, barbers, insurance offices, optometry shops, drugstores and similar services but not restaurants.

○ SHOPPING MALL A concentration of retail stores and service establishments, includ-ing, without limitation, one or more restaurants, movie theaters, and such other uses customarily found in a regional shopping mall, within an enclosed structure (which may consist of several buildings) containing not less than 250,000 square feet of gross floor area and located on a development lot of no less than 20 acres, with a unified approach to ingress and egress, parking, truck loading, vehicular entrances and exits, drainage and utilities. Utility buildings and structures serving the shopping mall may be located outside of the enclosed structure.

○ WHOLESALE SALE The sale of goods in large quantities.

• The Marlborough Zoning Regulations include the following Districts [Sec 650-7] sup-porting Retail Sector uses:

○ Business Districts [B]

○ Commercial and Automotive Districts [CA]

○ Limited Industrial [LI]

○ Industrial [I]

• The Table of Uses [§ 650-17] includes the following distinction:

○ Retail uses <75,000 SF are permitted in the B and CA districts. In all other districts and all other project sizes >75,000 SF, Special Permits are required.

○ Shopping malls are permitted in LI and I districts only with Special Permits.

• The City Zoning Regulations also specify dimensional standards for these districts:


145

District

Minimum Lot Area

(SF)

Minimum Lot

Frontage (feet)

Minimum Side Yard

(feet)

Minimum Front Yard

(feet)

Minimum Rear Yard

(feet)Height (feet)

Maximum Lot

Coverage

BusinessB 5,000 50 25 50 None 52

30%forresidential;80%forallotheruses

CommercialandAutomotiveCA

5,000 50 25 40 40 2Stories 80%

Table 6.3.2.1.1 BusinessDistrictDimensionalStandards[Excerpt]

6.3.2.2 HigherDensityZoningModifications

The zoning allowances were tested on actual properties from the list of underdeveloped parcels. The analysis indicates that zoning dimensional standards do not restrict expected development. Because of this analysis and the high maximum development potential calcu-lated here as retail sector build-out under existing zoning, amendments to the City Zoning Regulations for higher density development are not considered necessary in the near term. However, a number of changes to the Zoning Regulations would facilitate new commercial development. Those changes are:

• Mixed Use – Specifying mixed-use options for office and retail as well as residential proj-ects in commercial zoning districts, particularly live-work options for smaller ventures;

• Definitions – Change definition of Shopping Mall to reflect current trends for lifestyle centers or specify the definition by size and mix of uses, and match sizes in the Use Table, Retail listings;

• Downtown Restaurants – As restaurants are often associated with retail uses and par-ticularly the downtown, relax the standards specified in Note 31 in § 650-18, Conditions for restaurants in the downtown;

• Downtown Zoning – Create a business subdistrict or overlay district for the downtown, which includes at least the following:

○ Parking Requirements – The number of required spaces should be reduced in the downtown area in recognition of the amount of existing public parking available and shared parking opportunities.

○ Coverage – Allow up to 100% coverage to maximize use of parcels.

○ Setbacks – Add a zero lot line setback or a ‘build to back of sidewalk’ requirement.

○ Mixed use - Add allowance for residential and office space on the upper floors and limit first floors to retail uses.

○ Downtown Restaurants – As restaurants are often associated with retail uses and particularly the downtown, relax the standards specified in Note 31 in § 650-18, Con-

ditions for restaurants in the downtown.

Overall recodification of the Zoning Regulations is recommended as a means to address

current inconsistencies and confusing text that apply to all sections.

146



6.3.3 InfrastructureOpportunitiesandConstraints

Transportation

The connection between projected future development and the transportation network serv-ing the City of Marlborough has its basis in the amount of traffic expected to be generated by that development and the ability of the transportation network to accommodate the pro-jected traffic volumes. In addition, the anticipated directional distribution of this traffic will dictate what portions of the network are most likely to attract additional volumes and whether there is sufficient roadway capacity available to accommodate these increases.

The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publishes the industry standard Trip Genera-tion, which contains daily and peak hour rates and equations used to calculate the amount of traffic expected to be generated by hundreds of different land uses. Table 5.3.3.3.1 sum-marizes the average trip generation rates that will be used to estimate traffic associated with the various sector buildout analyses identified in this report.




IndustrialPark 130 6.96 0.84 0.86

LightIndustrial 110 6.97 0.92 0.97

Warehouse 150 3.56 0.3 0.32

Office 710 11.01 1.55 1.49

R&D 760 8.11 1.22 1.07

Retail(shoppingcenter) 820 42.94 1 3.73

Restaurant 932 127.15 11.52 11.15

Hotel(perroom) 310 8.17 0.56 0.59




In the case of this retail sector analysis, the rates for shopping center will be used. The list of Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough does not include any retail projects. As a result, the primary trip generation and distribution analysis did not address retail uses.


Three alternative land use scenarios were reviewed for comparison with the square footage totals associated with the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough:

• Same square footage as the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved De-velopments in Marlborough, but at current City of Marlborough land use distribution percentages;


147

• Same square footage as the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Devel-opments in Marlborough, but at Current Market Absorption analysis land use distribu-tion percentages;


Table 6.3.3.2 provides the retail sector summary comparison of each alternative scenario.

Table 6.3.3.2 RetailSectorTripGenerationComparison:AlternativeLandUseScenarios

Proposed DevelopmentDevelopment Program (SF)

Average Weekday

Traffic (veh./day)


(veh./hr.)


(veh./hr.)

PriorityDevelopmentSitesandPlanned/ApprovedDevelopmentsinMarlborough

0 0 0 0

CurrentMarlboroughLandUseDistributionPercentage 738,533 31,713 739 2,755

CurrentMarketAbsorptionLandUseDistributionPercentage 328,467 14,104 328 1,225

Five-YearMarketAbsorptionLandUseDistributionPercentage 50,000 2,147 50 187

The following observations are offered based on the information provided in Table 6.3.3.2:

• Retail uses have the highest trip generation rates of the three major sectors. While simi-lar in magnitude to industrial and commercial during the AM peak hour, the PM peak hour and average daily traffic volumes generated by retail uses are noticeably higher and will have a greater impact on transportation infrastructure, even after factoring re-ductions for pass-by traffic;

• Despite site-specific information, it is safe to assume that the modest level of develop-ment identified in the five-year market absorption analysis can be accommodated by the local and regional transportation network;

• Retail development levels based on the same square footage as the Priority Devel-opment Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough (the 738,533 SF under current Marlborough land use distribution percentages and the 328,467 SF under current market absorption land use distribution percentages) will likely require mitigation or transportation infrastructure improvements to provide sufficient local transportation network capacity, and may create or exacerbate deficiencies on the regional transporta-tion network, depending upon geographic location within Marlborough.


As noted in previous sections, wastewater calculations are based on rates provided in CMR 310 15.203 (Department of Environmental Protection, “System Sewage Flow Design Crite-ria”). Water use was calculated by adding a 10% factor to the wastewater calculations, as is standard industry practice. These calculations do not account for process-specific water and wastewater requirements, which must be addressed at the specific project level.

In the case of this retail sector analysis, the rate for retail store will be used. Again, the list of Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough does not

148



include any retail projects. As a result, the primary water and wastewater calculations did not address retail uses.

Water and wastewater calculations were provided for the alternative land use scenarios. Those calculations are summarized in Table 6.3.3.3.


(SF)


(gallons/day)


(gallons/day)

PriorityDevelopmentSitesandPlanned/ApprovedDevelopmentsinMarlborough

0 0 0

CurrentMarlboroughLandUseDistributionPercentage 738,533 36,927 40,619

CurrentMarketAbsorptionLandUseDistributionPercentage

328,467 16,423 18,066

Five-YearMarketAbsorptionLandUseDistributionPercentage

50,000 2,500 2,750

Table 6.3.3.3 RetailSectorWaterandWastewaterGenerationComparison:AlternativeLandUseScenarios




Inquiries were placed with the Massachusetts Broadband Institute, in order to determine if there were any potential technology limitations that would deter businesses from locating in Marlborough2.



• The MBI has an online interactive map showing the available services to Marlborough at http://mapping.massbroadband.org/. Provider information and ser-vices are noted as follows:






2 Telephone conversation with Cynthia Gaines, Mass Broadband Institute


149





























○ Download: 50 – 100 Mbps • The vast majority of Marlborough is very well served by private communications compa-

nies. Nearly the entire City is served by Cable, DSL and Fiber Optic lines. There are very small portions of Marlborough that are served only by DSL or only by cable.






150



• According to the Massachusetts Broadband Institute, full telecommunications services of industrial-level quality are available throughout the City of Marlborough;

• For proprietary reasons, private utility and telecommunications providers are reluctant to share specific information and future plans regarding business services

6.4RETAILSECTORECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALS

• Goal: Downtown Marlborough’s unique assets and existing attractions should be capi-talized on and cultivated to create a regional destination to shop, dine, work and live.

� Downtown Marlborough should be a pedestrian safe and friendly environment with a mix of retail, restaurant, commercial and residential uses.

� Infill development over surface parking lots and mixed used for residential, retail and commercial should be promoted.

� Parking standards for all uses should be significantly reduced in the Downtown area because of existing public parking.

○ Action Item: The City of Marlborough should develop a marketing campaign to at-tract tourists to Marlborough and to highlight the City’s restaurants, shops and at-tractions. This campaign should seek to capitalize on travelers who may already visit Marlborough because of the active hotel and sporting event industries.

○ Action Item: The City and MEDC should establish and maintain a database of available commercial buildings, space and land zoned or suitable for retail use in Marlborough as a webpage on the City and MEDC websites, including name and contact information to reach directly the appropriate municipal and MEDC officials. Downtown Marlborough properties should also have a separate/additional link to appropriate business, trade, and real estate networks that promote ‘Sustainable Community’ ‘Green Communities,’ and other ‘Smart Growth’ land use and economic development.

○ Action Item: The MEDC should seek advice/assistance from regional and state plan-ning and economic development agencies to prepare a Downtown Area Revitaliza-tion Plan that provides an assessment of market-driven opportunities and specific public and private sector actions required to facilitate continued property reuse/rede-velopment and business expansion.3

○ Action Item: The MEDC should actively collaborate with other Downtown Area inter-ests groups, elected officials and organizations to establish or enhance Downtown Marlborough as a destination for specialty retail merchants, services, restaurants, cultural and entertainment activities serving the Greater Marlborough market area.

○ Action Item: The retail gap analysis conducted for Downtown and target areas on the East Side and West Side indicated substantial opportunities to expand existing retail businesses and attract new ones. The MEDC and area merchants and brokers should use this information to facilitate business expansion and recruitment. One of the most effective strategies for downtowns has been for public officials and private business interests to identify successful small retailers elsewhere in the market area and con-nect them to the owners of vacant or underutilized space and offer initial rental prices at below market rates as an inducement to open an additional store in Marlborough.

3 The report prepared by FXM Associates, Downtown New Bedford Revitalization Part II: “Measuring Success” is an example of an effectively implemented economic development strategy, and submitted an electronic copy with our proposal submission to the MEDC.

RESIDENTIAL SECTOR OVERVIEW7Role in Marlborough Economy

Real Estate Market Analysis

Demand for Market Rate Residential Rentals and Condos

Residential Economic Development Goals and Action Items

154


7Residential Sector Overview


7.1.1 ResidentialLandUseProfileandZoning

City of Marlborough Assessors’ Department data was used to identify the following land use characteristics of residential sector properties within the City of Marlborough. The Mas-sachusetts Department of Revenue, Property Type Classification Codes, as assigned by the Marlborough Assessors’ Department, were used to determine which parcels were included in the Residential Sector Overview. The following list contains key characteristics of Marl-borough’s residential sector, and Figure 7.1.1.A illustrates the location of all residential use parcels in the City of Marlborough.

Residential Parcel Size

• There are 11,473 parcels of land within the City of Marlborough that are identified as containing residential uses.

• The City of Marlborough’s 11,473 parcels containing residential use constitute 5,620.74 acres of land.

• The 5,620.74 acres of residential land represents 45.41% of the total land within the City of Marlborough.

• The average size of residential parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 0.49 acres.

• The median size of buildable residential parcels of land within the City of Marlborough is 0.32 acres.

• The smallest buildable residential parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 0.02 acres.

• The largest buildable residential parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 97.28 acres.

Residential Parcel Value

• The City of Marlborough’s 11,473 residential parcels of land possess an aggregate as-sessed total value of $3,090,560,113.

• The $3,090,560,113 aggregate assessed total value Marlborough’s residential parcels represents 65.58% of all assessed property within the City of Marlborough.

• The average assessed total value for residential parcels of land within the City of Marl-borough is $269,376.

• The median assessed total value for residential parcels of land within the City of Marl-borough is $241,300.

• The smallest assessed total value for a residential parcel of land within the City of Marl-borough is $600.

• The largest assessed total value for a residential parcel of land within the City of Marl-borough is $37,116,600.00.


155-156


1 0 10.5 Miles

¯

Figure 7.1.1 Residential Land UseLegend

Residential Land Use

Zoning Districts

Business


Industrial

Limited Industrial



Residence A-1

Residence A-2

Residence A-3

Residence B

Residence C

Rural Residence

Parcel Boundaries

Roads Legend

Figure 7.1.1.A Residential Land Use


157

Residential Parcels and Buildings Sizes

• The City of Marlborough’s 11,473 residential parcels of land possess a total of 10,505 buildings.

• The 10,505 buildings on residential parcels of land represent 94.22% of all buildings within the City of Marlborough.

• The average year buildings on residential parcels of land within the City of Marlborough were built is 1958.

• The median year buildings on residential parcels of land within the City of Marlborough were built is 1961.

• The oldest building on a residential parcel of land within the City of Marlborough was built in 1650.

• The newest building on a residential parcel of land within the City of Marlborough was built in 2010.

• The City of Marlborough’s 10,505 buildings on residential parcels of land possess a total 34,794,688 gross square feet.

• The average size of buildings on residential parcels of land within the City of Marlbor-ough is 3,312.20 gross square feet.

• The median size of buildings on residential parcels of land within the City of Marlbor-ough is 2,972 gross square feet.

• The smallest building on a residential parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 150 gross square feet.

• The largest building on a residential parcel of land within the City of Marlborough is 181,395 gross square feet.

Residential Parcel Zoning

• The City of Marlborough’s residential parcels of land are located in 8 different zoning districts.

• 34% of the City of Marlborough’s residential parcels of land are located in the Residence A3 Zoning District.



• 13% of the City of Marlborough’s residential parcels of land are located in the Residence B Zoning District.

• 10% of the City of Marlborough’s residential parcels of land are located in the Rural Residence Zoning District.

• 6% of the City of Marlborough’s residential parcels of land are located in the Residence C Zoning District.

• 5% of the City of Marlborough’s residential parcels of land are located in the Business District.

• 1% of the City of Marlborough’s residential parcels of land are located in the Limited Industrial Zoning District.

158



7.1.2 ResidentialSectorFiscalImpacts

FXM applied its proprietary Municipal Fiscal Impact Model to estimate the net fiscal impact of residential properties in Marlborough. The FXM model takes into account the average value of residential units in Marlborough, all revenues attributable to households (property taxes, licenses, fees, etc.), state aid (which is deducted from school costs, for example), general government expenses per household, public school enrollment and per pupil costs, and the average number of school-aged children per household in Marlborough. Residential developments targeted to households under age 35 and over 55 would typically have fewer school-aged children than the City-wide average, so the net fiscal impact of an average value residential unit in Marlborough without school-aged children is also assessed. As shown in Figure 7.1.2.A, the typical residential unit costs the City of Marlborough more than $3,800 per year, when municipal government and education costs are subtracted from property tax and other revenues attributable to households. For an average value residential unit without school-aged children, the net effect on municipal revenues is currently plus $2,400 per year.

Net Fiscal Impact Annually of Residential Units in Marlborough

$2,379

-$3,852

-$5,000

-$4,000

-$3,000

-$2,000

-$1,000

$0

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

No School Aged Children Citywide Average School AgedChildren per Household

Figure 7.1.2.A NetFiscalImpactAnnuallyofResidentialUnitsinMarlborough

7.2REALESTATEMARKETANALYSIS

This section of the report presents conditions and trends in housing, population and house-holds in Marlborough and the towns in the surrounding Market Area. A principal objective of the residential market assessment is to identify potential demand for market-driven resi-dential development consistent with an overarching goal of the MEDC, which is to increase net fiscal income to the City. Section 7.3 presents the analysis of potential demand for rental and condo units that might be part of an overall mixed residential-commercial or stand-alone development project that could enhance fiscal revenues.


159

7.2.1 ResidentialRealEstateMarketConditionsandTrends

Population

The 2010 US Census population count for Marlborough was 38,500 persons. This was a 5.1% increase over the 2000 Census count. Estimates and projections through 2035 were obtained from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) from the Metro Future series.1 The MetroFuture March 2011 release was prepared to support the development of “Paths to a Sustainable Region 2035,” the Boston MPO’s long-range transportation plan.

Figure 7.2.1.A illustrates historical population growth and projections to 2035 for Marlborough and the overall seven-community Market Area. As this figure shows, population growth for both the Market Area and the town of Marlborough experienced more rapid growth between

1990 and 2010 than is expected for the period from 2010 to 2035.

Table 7.2.1.1 shows estimated and projected population by 5-year increments from 1990 to 2035. The Greater Marlborough Market Area grew at an annual rate of 0.76% per year from 1990 to 2010; this is projected to drop to 0.55% per year through 2035. The annual growth rates for Marlborough are 0.65% and 0.33% per year, respectively. Table 7.2.1.2 shows popu-lation estimates and projections for these areas for 1990, 2010 and 2035 and the Compound Annual Growth Rates (CAGRs) for the respective time periods.

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Ann

ual P

opul

atio

n Es

timat

e

Market Area Marlborough

Figure 7.2.1.A PopulationEstimatesandProjections,MarlboroughandMarketArea,1990-2035

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

MarketArea 98,500 101,700 115,000 118,900 120,300 124,400 127,500 130,400 133,400 136,500

Marlborough 31,800 32,700 36,600 37,400 38,500 38,600 38,700 39,300 39,900 40,600

Table 7.2.1.1 PopulationEstimatesandProjections,MarlboroughandMarketArea,2010 to 2035


1 MetroFuture Projections 2035 Update, MAPC Data Services Department, March 2011.

160



Table 7.2.1.2 CompoundAnnualGrowthRatesforPopulationandHouseholds,2010 to 2035


AreaPopulation

2010 2035 CAGRHouseholds

2010 2035 CAGR

MarketArea 118,900 136,500 0.554% 47,700 55,900 0.637%

Marlborough 37400 40,600 0.329% 16,100 17,700 0.380%

1990 2010 CAGR 1990 2010 CAGR

MarketArea 98,475 118,900 0.757% 40,400 47,700 0.667%

Marlborough 31,830 37,400 0.647% 12,200 16,100 1.116%

Figure 7.2.1.B presents a graph of a population growth index from 1990 to 2035. Year 2010 was chosen as the base year for the index to demonstrate relative growth from now through 2035. Actual index values by 5-year increments are presented in Table 7.2.13.

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

1.15

1.20

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Popu

latio

n In

dex

2010

= 1

.00


Figure 7.2.1.B PopulationGrowthIndex,MarlboroughandMarketArea,1990–2035,2010=1.00

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

MarketArea 0.82 0.85 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.03 1.06 1.08 1.11 1.13

Marlborough 0.83 0.85 0.95 0.97 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.04 1.05

Table 7.2.1.3 PopulationGrowthIndex,1990 to 2035, 2010 = 1.00



161

Households

Similar to population data, estimates and projections of ouseholds were obtained from MAPC’s MetroFuture data series for 1990 to 2035. Figure 7.2.1.C illustrates historical house-hold growth and projections to 2035 for Marlborough and the surrounding Market Area. There appears to be an anomaly in the Market Area household data for 1995; it is highly unlikely for the number of households to jump by almost 10,000 from 1990 to 1995, and then drop by 8,000 in the next 5-year period.

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Ann

ual H

ouse

hold

Est

imat

es


Figure 7.2.1.C HouseholdProjections,MarlboroughandMarketArea,1990-2035

Table 7.2.1.4 lists the number of Greater Marlborough households by 5-year increment for 1990 through 2035. Figure 7.2.1.D shows the relative growth index for market area house-holds from 1990 through 2035. Actual index values by 5-year period are presented in Table 7.2.1.5.

As was shown earlier in Table 7.2.1.1, the future growth rate of Market Area households is expected to be about the same as the 1990-2010 period (0.67% per year); for the City of Marlborough the annual growth rate is projected to drop from 1.12% annually to 0.38% per year to the 2010-2035 period.

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

MarketArea 40,400 49,300 42,300 44,900 47,700 49,300 51,000 52,700 54,500 55,900

Marlborough 12,200 13,300 14,500 15,300 16,100 16,300 16,600 17,00 17,500 17,700

Table 7.2.1.4 HouseholdEstimatesandProjections,MarlboroughandMarketArea,1990 to 2035


162



1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

MarketArea 0.82 0.85 0.96 0.99 1.00 1.03 1.06 1.08 1.11 1.13

Marlborough 0.83 085 0.95 0.9 1.00 1.00 1.01 1.02 1.04 1.05

Table 7.2.1.5 HouseholdGrowthIndex,1990-2035,2010=1.00


0.70

0.75

0.80

0.85

0.90

0.95

1.00

1.05

1.10

1.15

1.20

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

Hou

seho

ld In

dex

2010

= 1

.00


Figure 7.2.1.D HouseholdGrowthIndex,1990to2035

Home Sales

The housing market in Marlborough has followed the national trends in recent years. As illustrated in Figure 7.2.1.E, home sales in Marlborough and the surrounding communities peaked in 1999 and again in 2004 before going into decline in 2005 through 2007-8 and reaching a plateau over the past two or three years. Current sales trends are flat at a little less than 500 units per year sold in Marlborough and about 1,500 units per year sold in the Market Area as a whole.

Figure 7.2.1.F shows the 10-year trend in housing sales in Marlborough by type of unit sold. The trends in single-family (1-family) homes and condos are roughly parallel. Sales of other types of housing units (duplex, multifamily housing) have declined steadily since 2000 and leveled off from 2008 until now. Total housing sales have been 400 to 500 units sold per year since 2007.


163

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Ann

ual U

nits

Sol

d

Market Area MarlboroughSource: The Warren Group and FXM Associates

Figure 7.2.1.E AnnualHomeSales:MarlboroughandMarketArea,1987to2010

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Uni

ts S

old

1-Fam Condo AllSource: The Warren Group and FXM Associates

Figure 7.2.1.E 10-yearTrendinMarlboroughHomeSalesbyType

164



Housing Prices

Housing prices have also declined since their peak in 2005. In Marlborough, the median price of a single-family home has dropped by 25% from $360,000 in 2005 to $270,000 in 2010. Median housing price by type (1-family, condo and all housing types combined) for 2000 to 2010 are illustrated in Figure 7.2.1.G.

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

1-Fam Condo AllSource: The Warren Group and FXM Associates

Figure 7.2.1.G MarlboroughMedianHomePrice,2000to2011

Figure 7.2.1.H shows the housing price trends for all types of housing combined from 2000 to 2011 for the City of Marlborough and the towns in the surrounding Market Area. These trends are roughly parallel, although prices in Marlborough have continued to decline since 2008, while prices in the other nearby towns have leveled off at $325,000 to $350,000.

There is considerable variation in home sales prices in the seven towns that make up the Market Area: Berlin, Hudson, Marlborough, Northborough, Southborough, Sudbury and Westborough. As shown in Figure 7.2.1.I for the first half of 2011, single-family home prices range from a low of $246,500 in Marlborough to $593,500 in Sudbury.


165

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Market Area MarlboroughSource: The Warren Group and FXM Associates

Figure 7.2.1.H MedianSalesPrices,MarlboroughandMarketArea,2000to2011

$0

$100,000

$200,000

$300,000

$400,000

$500,000

$600,000

Berlin Hudson Marlborough Northborough Southborough Sudbury Westborough

Median Sales PriceSource: The Warren Group and FXM Associates

Figure 7.2.1.I MedianSalesPricebyTown,2011

166



7.3.DEMANDFORMARKET-RATERESIDENTIALRENTALSANDCONDOS

A principal objective of the Residential Sector Assessment is to identify potential demand for market-driven residential development consistent with an overarching goal of the Marlbor-ough Economic Development Plan which is to increase net fiscal income to the City. This subsection presents the analysis of potential demand for rental and condo units that might be part of an overall mixed residential-commercial or stand-alone development project that could enhance fiscal revenues.

The target market segment is comprised of households aged under 35 and over 55 with sufficient qualifying incomes to afford newly constructed rental or condo units. These house-holds are less likely to have school age children and, therefore, residential developments targeted to these market segments are more likely to produce net fiscal revenues to the City.

Method

For the purposes of this analysis the market area is defined as the Greater Marlborough sev-en-community area,2 consistent with the generally accepted view of the primary geographic area where communities offer similar economic development attributes, and constitute the competitive region for attracting jobs and households. For this geographic area, FXM ob-tained proprietary data from Claritas Site Reports estimating the number of households by age of householder and income ranges in 2011 and projected to 2016.

Next, FXM applied its proprietary Housing Demand Model which incorporates data on mo-bility rates by age of householder, propensities to own or rent by age of householder, local market data on current and historical rental and sales prices, current and projected number of households by age and income, and the qualifying income standards of commercial lend-ers (which are based on estimated interest rates, local property taxes, and down payment requirements).

Potential Demand

Figure 7.3.A shows estimated average annual demand for rentals and sales in various price categories for the prime targeted household types.

As shown by data in Figure 7.3.A, over the next five years, demand for rentals is projected to sub-stantially exceed average annual condo demand, especially for householders under age 35 who comprise between 73-77% of potential demand for rentals within the price categories shown and 51-53% of projected average annual condo demand within the price categories shown.

Figure 7.3.B shows average annual demand between 2011 and 2016 for rentals and condos for all households with qualifying incomes regardless of householder age. As with the target under-35 and over-55 householder types, demand for rentals overall is projected to substan-tially exceed condo demand over the next five years.

2 Berlin, Hudson, Marlborough, Northborough, Southborough, Sudbury, and Westborough.


167

Average Annual Demand for Rentals and Condos: 2011-2016 Householders under Age 35 and Ages 55 to 74

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Rentals @$1500/month



Condos @$190,000

Condos @$240,000

Condos @$300,000

Age 55-74

Under Age 35

Figure 7.3.A AverageAnnualDemandforRentalsandCondos:2011-2016 Households under Age 35 and Ages 55 to 74

Average Annual Demand for Rentals and Condos All Household Types with Qualifying Incomes: 2011-2016

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200




Condos @$190,000

Condos @$240,000

Condos @$300,000

Num

ber o

f Uni

ts

Figure 7.3.B AverageAnnualDemandforRentalsandCondos:2011-2016 All Household Types with Qualifying Incomes

168



Marlborough’s ability to capture a significant share of this demand will depend on a number of factors particular to specific development opportunities in Marlborough compared with potentially competitive projects elsewhere in the market area. For example, suitability of lo-cation, site features, unit amenities, competitive pricing, accessibility to jobs, permitting and approval requirements will determine the success of individual projects.

The subsequent graphs are self-explanatory and document some of the analyses inherent to the FXM Housing Demand Model. Of particular note is the final graph that shows an ab-solute decline in the number of householders age 35 to 54 between 2011 and 2016 and a substantial increase in the number of householders between age 55 and 74 over that same period. This largely reflects the maturing age of the “boomer” generation and the relatively lower number of younger households maturing into the former “boomer” age groups.

Average Annual Demand For Rentals, Single Family and Condo Sales for Income Qualifying Households: 2011-2016

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200




Sales @$225,000

Sales @$275,000

Sales @$350,000

Num

ber o

f Uni

ts

Figure 7.3.C AverageAnnualDemandforRentals,SingleFamilyandCondoSales:2011-2016 All Income Qualifying Households

Estimated Annual Demand for Rental Units by Price and Age of Householder for Income Qualified Households: 2011-2016

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Under 35 Age 35-44 Age 45-54 Age 55-64 Age 65-74 75 and Over

Num

ber o

f Uni

ts p

er Y

ear

Rentals @ $1500/month Rentals @ $1900/month Rentals @ $2400/month

Figure 7.3.D EstimatedAnnualDemandforRentalUnitsbyPriceandAgeofHouseholderforIncomeQualifiedHouseholds:2011-2016


169

Estimated Annual Demand for All Sales Units by Age of Householder for Income Qualified Households: 2011-2016

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Under 35 Age 35-44 Age 45-54 Age 55-64 Age 65-74 75 and Over

Num

ber o

f Uni

ts p

er Y

ear

Sales @ $225,000 Sales @ $275,000 Sales @ $350,000

Figure 7.3.E EstimatedAnnualDemandforAllSalesUnitsbyAgeofHouseholderforIncomeQualifiedHouseholds:2011-2016

2011 Income by Age of Householder

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

Age 15 - 24 Age 25 - 34 Age 35 - 44 Age 45 - 54 Age 55 - 64 Age 65 - 74 Age 75 - 84 Age 85+

Num

ber o

f Hou

seho

lds

Total over $60,000 Total over $75,000 Total over $85,000 Total over $95,000 Total over $105,000

Figure 7.3.F 2011IncomebyAgeofHouseholder

170



2016 Income by Age of Householder

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000


Num

ber o

f Hou

seho

lds

Total over $60,000 Total over $75,000 Total over $85,000 Total over $95,000 Total over $105,000

Figure 7.3.G 2016IncomebyAgeofHouseholder

Change in Number of Households by Age and Income Cohorts: 2011-2016

-1,500

-1,000

-500

0

500

1,000

1,500


Num

ber o

f Hou

seho

lds

Total over $60,000Total over $75,000Total over $85,000Total over $95,000Total over $105,000

Figure 7.3.H ChangeinNumberofHouseholdsbyAgeandIncomeCohorts:2011-2016


171

7.4RESIDENTIALECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALSANDACTIONITEMS

A comprehensive analysis of housing in Marlborough was beyond the scope of this report, which covered an overview of market trends and focused on potential demand for market-rate rental and condo units that could support the MEDC goal of enhancing net fiscal rev-enues to the City.

Affordable housing, and particularly affordable housing for Marlborough’s workforce, should be addressed in the context of a City-wide Comprehensive Plan that takes into consideration all items relevant to housing policy, including: open space, playgrounds, school capacities and student enrollment projections, police and fire protection capacities, as well as transpor-tation, water, sewer and other infrastructure capacities.

Within the limited context in which housing has been assessed as part of an economic de-velopment strategy to enhance fiscal revenues in Marlborough, there are significant potential market opportunities within the region for Marlborough to capture young professionals and empty nesters who do not have school-aged children and whose housing units would likely contribute net fiscal revenues to the City.

CITY, REGIONAL AND STATE LABOR MARKETS8Overview of Sectors and Clusters

Overview of Occupational Structures

Overview of High Demand Occupations

Marlborough Competitive Environment

174


8City, Regional and State Labor Markets

The labor market in Marlborough can be looked at from two perspectives: 1) ability of Marl-borough residents to compete for jobs at Marlborough firms, and 2) ability of Marlborough firms to recruit qualified candidates both from Marlborough and from the surrounding labor shed. This labor market analysis examines labor availability and occupational skill character-istics of Marlborough’s labor market, focusing on the occupational needs of Marlborough’s growth industries identified in Sections 4.1.4 and 5.1.4.

Discussions with Marlborough business leaders indicate that their businesses rely heavily on labor market access and that labor market access was among the top reasons their business chose to locate in Marlborough. Marlborough’s position on the I-495 corridor near the junctions with the Massachusetts Turnpike (I-90) and I-290 provides access to workers from all directions, and Marlborough firms interviewed for this project (including participants in focus groups) report drawing employees from as far as Cape Cod, Rhode Island, New Hampshire and throughout New England.

Marlborough is a net importer of workers, as illustrated in Figure 8.A, which shows the com-muter-shed of the I-495 corridor. Marlborough has one of the highest influxes of workers in the corridor. Data from the US Census Bureau reporting where Marlborough residents work and where Marlborough employees live (“Journey to Work”) supports this observation as shown in Table 8.1.1 Slightly more than 33,200 people work in Marlborough (including some of whom live in Marlborough), while only 19,800 employed people live in Marlborough (including some who also work there).

Source: Commuter-shed Analysis for Our Transportation Future, MAPC (2010).

Figure 8.A Commuter-ShedfortheI-495Corridor

Interestingly, work patterns for both those who work in Marlborough and for employed Marl-borough residents show that there is no dominant residential origin for Marlborough workers nor workplace destination for Marlborough residents. Looking at the right-hand columns in Table 8.1 which show where Marlborough residents work, some 30% of employed Marlbor-ough residents work in Marlborough, 9% work in Framingham, 5% work in Boston and an

1 This data is from the 2000 Census, the most recent year for which Journey to Work data has been collected and published. While dated, it nonetheless provides a point of reference for understanding commuting patterns for Marl-borough residents and workers at Marlborough firms. Updated data for Massachusetts communities are expected soon through the US Census Bureau’s Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics project.


175

City/Town MA County Count % of Total Count % of Total

Total 33,246 -- 19,839 --

Marlborough Middlesex 6,224 19% 6,224 31%

Worcester Worcester 1,967 6% 610 3%

Hudson Middlesex 1,591 5% 771 4%

Shrewsbury Worcester 1,048 3% 180 1%

Framingham Middlesex 1,003 3% 1,770 9%

Boston Suffolk 777 2% 927 5%

Northborough Worcester 688 2% 244 1%

Westborough Worcester 617 2% 623 3%

Lowell Middlesex 498 1% 154 1%

Waltham Middlesex 372 1% 646 3%

Sudbury Middlesex 363 1% 805 4%

Hopkinton Middlesex 336 1% 190 1%

Newton Middlesex 323 1% 328 2%

Grafton Worcester 303 1% 0 0%

Southborough Worcester 283 1% 314 2%

Holden Worcester 278 1% 0 0%

Acton Middlesex 277 1% 212 1%

Cambridge Middlesex 267 1% 406 2%

Ashland Middlesex 243 1% 121 1%

Maynard Middlesex 237 1% 159 1%

Natick Middlesex 235 1% 669 3%

Lancaster Worcester 231 1% 0 0%

OtherBristolCo. 514 2% 0 0%

OtherEssexCo. 992 3% 132 1%

OtherMiddlesexCo. 3,921 12% 1,188 6%

OtherNorfolkCo. 1,850 6% 426 2%

OtherPlymouthCo. 269 1% n/a n/a

OtherWorcesterCo. 5,467 16% 632 3%

OtherMA 362 1% 123 1%

OtherNewEngland 1,509 5% 64 0%

OtherUS/Intl 201 1% 110 1%

Subtotal Bristol Co. 514 2% 0

Subtotal Essex Co. 992 3% 260 1%

Subtotal Middlesex Co. 15,890 48% 15,078 76%

Subtotal Norfolk Co. 1,850 6% 674 3%

Subtotal Plymouth Co. 269 1% 0 0%

Subtotal Suffolk Co. 777 2% 927 5%

Subtotal Worcester Co. 10,882 33% 2,603 13%

Table 8.1 SummaryofJourney-to-Work(2000)

Source: US Census Bureau 2000 Census (with EDR Group calculations).

Marlborough Workers by Place of Residence

Marlborough Workers by Place of Work

176



additional 6% commute to other locations within Middlesex County. Other-wise, Marlborough residents commute to a wide range of locations primarily in Middlesex County and to a lesser extent within Worcester County.

Looking at the left-hand columns in Table 8.1 which show where persons employed by busi-nesses in Marlborough live, approximately 19% also live in Marlborough, 6% live in Worces-ter and 5% live in Hudson. Approximately 9% commute to Marlborough from other loca-tions in Middlesex County and an additional 9% commute from other locations in Worcester County. These patterns illustrate that Marlborough is a central location both for residents to commute to workplaces throughout the region and for residents of other locations to reach workplaces in Marlborough.

8.1OVERVIEWOFSECTORSANDCLUSTERS

The sector analyses in Sections 4.1.4 and 5.1.4 identified the following industries with pro-jected job growth as a result of existing business attraction factors and conditions, as well as industiries that could be enhanced through targeted economic development activities (shown below in bold):

• Utilities

• Construction

• Manufacturing: Food Products, Chemical Manufacturing, and Plastics & Rubber Products

• Wholesale Trade

• Retail Trade

• Transportation/Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing

• Internet and Data Processing Services

• Finance, Insurance and Real Estate: Monetary, Financial & Credit Activity, Insur-ance Carriers & Related Activities, Funds, Trusts, & Other Financial Vehicles, Real Estate

• Professional Scientific, Technical Services

• Administrative & Support Services/Waste Management and Remediation



• Amusement and Recreation

• Accommodations, Eating & Drinking

Sections 4.1.4.5 and 5.1.4.5 identified a number of sub-industries that are also candidates for future growth in Marlborough through targeted economic development efforts. Industrial sub-sectors with additional growth potential include:

• Seasonings and dressing manufacturing

• Guided missile and space vehicle manufacturing

• Surgical and medical instrument manufacturing

Commercial sub-sectors with additional growth potential include:

• Management of companies and enterprises

• Securities, commodity contracts, investments and related activities


177

• Computer systems design

• Software publishers

• Data processing, hosting, ISP, web search portals and related activities

• Other private educational services

Each of the industries identified above has a different profile of occupational needs, requiring employees with different skill sets, education levels and training. For economic growth, it is important that the educational attainment and occupational skill level of workers in the labor market match the needs of growing industries. Sections 8.2, 8.3 and 8.4 examine this match.

8.2OVERVIEWOFOCCUPATIONALSTRUCTURES

The LEAP analysis presented in Section 9.2 measures two dimensions of the labor market: 1) Access, as measured by the population within a 40-minute commute time and, 2) Skill level, as approximated by the percent of the workforce (population age 25 and over) with a bach-elor’s degree or higher. This section takes a more complete look at the match between Marl-borough’s labor market and occupational demands of Marlborough’s future growth indus-tries. Specifically, it examines the occupational structure of Marlborough’s growth industries (identified above) and compares these industries’ occupational needs with the educational attainment and skill set present in the labor market.

Occupations represent the type of work employees perform as opposed to industry classifi-cations, which represent the types of product or services companies provide. For example, management occupations exist in every industry, and building and grounds cleaning and maintenance workers can be found in many service and manufacturing sectors. The Bureau of Labor Statistics tracks the occupational composition (number of employees in each oc-cupation within each industry) for broad industry categories.

For purposes of this study, occupational skill level is divided into three general categories2:

• Low-skill - Service and agricultural occupations.3

• Middle-skill - Clerical, sales, construction, installation/repair, production, transportation/material moving occupations and skilled trades.

• High-skill - Professional/technical and managerial occupations.

These skill categories reflect average skill demands within major occupational categories; however, skill level can vary significantly for occupations within these broad categories. For example, some occupations within the technical and managerial categories require less than a bachelor’s degree, some in the middle categories might require only high school, and some in the service category require more than high school. Similarly, while the majority of jobs in the agricultural industry are unskilled, the industry also includes some specialized trade and management positions that fit into the high- or middle-skill categories. Nonethe-less, these categories provide a general view of skill demands appropriate for the present analysis.

Figure 8.2.A presents the national composition of skill level for occupations within the broad

2 BLS identifies 11 education or training categories that describe the most significant education or training pathway to employment for each occupation: 1) First professional degree; 2) Doctoral degree; 3) Master’s degree; 4) Bachelor’s or higher degree, plus work experience; 5) Bachelor’s degree; 6) Associate degree; 7) Postsecondary vocational award; 8) Work experience in a related occupation; 9) Long-term on-the-job training; 10) Moderate-term on-the-job training; 11) Short-term on-the-job training. For this study, categories 1-5 were considered “high skill”, 6-10 were

considered medium skill, and 11 was considered low skill.3 Note that BLS does not track the number of jobs nor occupational skill requirements for the Farm sector.

178



industry categories expected to have future growth within Marlborough. The national distri-bution shows the following:

• Educational Services; Professional, Scientific & Technical Services; and Internet & Data Processing Services tend to demand occupations with high skill level;

• Monetary, Financial & Credit Activity/Insurance favor both high- and middle-skilled oc-cupations;

• Health Care & Social Services, Manufacturing, Construction and Utilities have above average proportions of workers in middle-skill occupations;

• Accommodations, Eating & Drinking; Amusement & Recreation; Administrative & Sup-port Services & Waste Management; and Transportation/Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing favor employees in low-skill occupations; and

• Wholesale Trade favors both low- and middle-skill occupations.

Some of these industries are small in Marlborough, and some are large. The actual demand for workers at a given occupational skill level will depend on the size of these industries in Marlborough.

Figure 8.2.A National%ofEmploymentinHigh,MiddleandLowSkillOccupationsforSelectedBroadIndustryCategories

Source: BLS.


179

8.2.1OccupationsandSkillLevelNeedsofMarlboroughGrowthIndustries

Based on the national composition of occupational skill level shown above in Figure 8.2.A, Marlborough would require higher proportions of high- and middle-skilled employees than the national average, as illustrated in Table 8.2.1.1. This is the result of Marlborough’s con-centration of employment in industries that favor higher levels of education and training, particularly professional, scientific and technical services, internet and data processing, and monetary, financial and credit activity. Conversely, Marlborough has low levels of employ-ment in industries that favor low-skilled workers.

Even within broad industry categories, the firms that exist and are growing in Marlborough are oriented toward more specialized and higher technology products and processes than the national average. For example, at the national level, the manufacturing industry includes all types of manufacturing at all levels of technology, and on average, it favors middle-skill workers. In contrast, the types of manufacturing concentrated in Marlborough are oriented toward developing and commercializing new and emerging products and technologies, which favors high-skill workers. As a result, it is likely that the skill level requirements of Marl-borough growth industries do not reflect national patterns and are instead more heavily ori-ented toward high-skill occupations. Future job growth can be expected to continue existing patterns or even further favor high- and middle-skill jobs.

High Skill Middle Skill Low Skill

Marlborough,2009 23% 43% 36%

Marlborough10-YearBaselineGrowth1 29% 42% 30%

US 21% 43% 36%

Table 8.2.1.1 ApproximateOccupationalSkillLevelofMarlboroughGrowthIndustriesbasedonNationalOccupationalSkillDistribution

% of Employment byOccupational Skill Category

Source: BEA (from Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.) and BLS with EDR Group calculations.

1 Estimates shown in Appendix G.

8.2.2EducationalAttainmentandOccupationalSkillsintheLaborMarket

The previous section underscored Marlborough industry demands for a highly skilled, high-ly educated workforce. This section looks at educational attainment and occupational mix in Marlborough and the broader labor market that serves Marlborough firms to determine whether characteristics in the supply of labor match industry needs. Table 8.2.2.1 presents the current educational attainment for the working-age population (age 25 and over) in Marl-borough and within a 40-minute commute from Marlborough. The distribution in Massachu-setts as a whole is presented as a point of reference.

The proportion of Marlborough’s working-age population with a bachelor’s degree or higher is slightly below the statewide rate and also below that found in the wider 40-minute com-mute area. The slightly lower rate of bachelor’s degree holders than the 40-minute commuter catchment area indicates that Marlborough may have to compete with other high-skill em-ployment centers within the same catchment area, such as Burlington and Andover.

180



The percent of Marlborough’s population with only a high school education is higher than that found in the 40-minute drive time area; the same goes for the percent of population with less than a high school diploma (including equivalency). Together, these populations repre-sent 43.1% of Marlborough’s workforce, compared to only 34.5% of the workforce popula-tion in the 40-minute drive time area. This is the core population to fill low-skilled positions, which are not prevalent in Marlborough. In fact, regional workforce specialists interviewed for this project noted that there are few jobs, even at the lowest skill-level requirements, that do not require at least a high school education. More and more jobs require a level of critical thinking and problem solving that is not typically gained through a high school education and on-the-job training alone. Recruiting this population into vocational training and associates degree programs will make them better able to fulfill the workforce needs of Marlborough employers.

Table 8.2.2.1 EducationalAttainment

Marlborough40-Min Drive Time from Marlborough Massachusetts

# % # % # %

Population25yearsandover 27,436 -- 2,072,146 -- 4,416,135 --

Lessthanhighschoolgraduate 3,571 13.00% 215,503 10.40% 514,382 11.60%

Highschoolgraduate(incl.equivalency)

8,267 30.10% 499,387 24.10% 1,200,061 27.20%

Somecollege,nodegree 3,878 14.10% 279,740 13.50% 698,933 15.80%

Associate'sdegree 1,520 5.50% 134,689 6.50% 334,486 7.60%

Bachelor'sdegree 6,324 23.10% 503,531 24.30% 957,797 21.70%

Graduateorprofessionaldegree 3,876 14.10% 437,223 21.10% 710,476 16.10%

Percenthighschoolgraduateorhigher

-- 87.00% -- 89.50% -- 88.40%

Percentbachelor'sdegreeorhigher

-- 37.20% -- 45.40% -- 37.80%

*Includes equivalency.Source: ESRI Business Analyst (2010).

Table 8.2.2.2. presents employment by occupational skill level for residents of Marlborough, residents within a 40-minute commute from Marlborough and residents of Massachusetts (the latter presented as a point of reference.) This represents jobs held by residents, regard-less of where the employee’s place of work is located. Note that Marlborough’s resident population working in high-skill positions is slightly higher than the state but somewhat lower than within Marlborough’s 40-minute commute area. Marlborough has a higher percentage of population in middle-skill positions compared with the state and in particular, compared with the 40-minute drive time population.


181

Marlborough 40-Minute Drive Time Massachusetts

High1 43% 50% 40%

Middle2 35% 25% 32%

Low3 23% 26% 28%

Table 8.2.2.2 EmploymentbyOccupationSkillLevelCategory(%)(Residentemployment)

1 Includes Management/Business/Finance and professional occupations.2 Includes construction/extraction, installation/maintenance, production, and services occupations.3 Includes administrative support, farming/forestry/fishing, sales, and services occupations.Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2005-2009 American Community Survey; ESRI Business Analyst (2010); BEA; Calculations by EDR Group.

8.3OVERVIEWOFHIGHDEMANDOCCUPATIONS

Labor market specialists familiar with the Marlborough labor market reported that employ-ers have some difficulty filling jobs at very high and very low skill positions.4 At the highest skill levels, specialized education and knowledge is required, e.g., civil engineers, energy efficiency engineers and experienced specialized nurses. Many of the lowest skill occupa-tions, such as cleaning and maintenance, require night shift work, which sometimes pres-ents transportation and child care issues for low-wage workers.

The Massachusetts Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development (EOLWD) has identified 53 “high-demand, high-wage, high-skill occupations” in the Commonwealth.5 These industries meet the following criteria:

• A projected 2006-2016 growth above the average employment growth rate for all oc-cupations and having at least 1,000 net total job openings.

• Average wages at least 25% more than the $39,700 median salary reported for Mas-sachusetts in 2008 (i.e. $49,625 or above).

• Minimum education or training requirements of long-term on-the-job training lasting one or more years (includes positions with higher requirements including work experience in a related occupation; post-secondary vocational training; associate’s degree; bachelor’s degree; master’s degree; doctoral degree; first professional degree (e.g., M.D. J.D) ).

Table 8.3.1. shows the selection of these occupations relevant to Marlborough growth indus-tries as well as state-level projections for growth between 2006 and 2016. These projections anticipate rapid growth in computer and mathematical science, life and physical science, and health care occupations. Rapid growth in the larger occupations such as health care and business and financial operations will add many new jobs to the state economy. Con-tinued access to a regional, highly-educated workforce will help ensure that Marlborough captures a share of growth in these desirable, high-wage occupations.

4 EDR Group interviews with Sylvia Beville, Executive Director, Metro South/West Regional Employment Board (June 16, 2011) and Kathleen Manning, Director of Business Development, Quinsigamond Community College (June 24,

2011).5 Includes only those occupations that employed 100 or more workers in the Commonwealth as of 2006.

182



Jobs % of Jobs Jobs % of Jobs CAGR1

Management 36,382 7.2% 40,589 6.8% 1.1%

Businessandfinancialoperations 110,796 21.8% 128,158 21.5% 1.5%

Computerandmathematicalscience 66,293 13.1% 86,363 14.5% 2.7%

Architectureandengineering 20,141 4.0% 23,112 3.9% 1.4%

Life,physical,andsocialscience 20,568 4.1% 24,908 4.2% 1.9%

Communityandsocialservices 12,611 2.5% 13,995 2.3% 1.0%

Education,training,andlibrary 80,102 15.8% 90,018 15.1% 1.2%

Arts,design,entertain.,sports,media

14,059 2.8% 16,034 2.7% 1.3%

Healthcarepractitionersandtechnical

115,805 22.8% 138,029 23.1% 1.8%

Salesandrelated 31,010 6.1% 35,780 6.0% 1.4%

Total-AllHighDemand/High-Wage/High-Skilled

507,767 100.0% 596,986 100.0% 1.6%

2006 2016 Projected

Table 8.3.1 High-Demand,High-Wage,High-SkillOccupations-ProjectedGrowthinMA,2000-2006

Source: Commonwealth’s Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development (EOLWD).

1 Compound annual growth rate.

8.4MARLBOROUGHCOMPETITIVEENVIRONMENT

8.4.1 GreaterMarlboroughRegion

Marlborough sits at the center of a seven-community region that includes Marlborough, Berlin, Hudson, Northborough, Southborough, Sudbury and Westborough. Though dated, Journey to Work patterns from the 2000 Census do not demonstrate a strong commuting relationship between Marlborough and these neighboring communities. Despite this weak relationship, more recent data from the 2005-09 American Community Survey shows that the seven-community region contains a labor pool of more than 66,000, including 22,400 within Marlborough itself (See Table 8.4.1.1). While Marlborough has about 1,000 unemployed workers actively in the labor force, the region has an additional 2,000. Depending on their skill level and occupational competencies, Marlborough may be able to tap some of these unemployed labor market participants to meet future job growth.

Tables 8.4.1.3 and 8.4.1.4 provide educational attainment and occupation information for the employed population in the seven-community region. (This information is not available for the unemployed population.) Marlborough has a higher percentage of population with only a high school diploma or less, 33.1% versus 26.8% in the seven-community region. Conversely, Marlborough has a notably lower percentage of population with a bachelor’s degree or higher.


183

Table 8.4.1.1 JourneytoWorkPatternsfor7CommunityRegion(2000)

Source: US Census Bureau 2000 Census.

Residence City/Town % of Total

Total 33,246 --

Marlborough 6,224 19%

Berlin 114 0%

Hudson 1,591 5%

Northborough 688 2%

Southborough 283 1%

Sudbury 363 1%

Westborough 617 2%

%Within7Communities 30%

%Within7Comm.(excl.Marlborough) 11%

Marlborough Workers

Workplace City/Town % of Total

Total 19,839 --

Marlborough 6,224 31%

Berlin 37 0%

Hudson 771 4%

Northborough 244 1%

Southborough 314 2%

Sudbury 805 4%

Westborough 623 3%

45%

14%

Marlborough Residents

Marlborough7-Community

Region Massachusetts % US %

Population16years+ 31,033 93,836 -- --

Inlaborforce 22,400 66,078 -- --

%inLaborForce 72% 70% 67% 65%

Civilianlaborforce 22,369 66,022 3,528,738 --

Table 8.4.1.2 LaborMarketParticipationCharacteristics–GreaterMarlboroughRegion

NOTE: Greater Marlborough Region defined to include the City of Marlborough and Towns of Berlin, Hudson, Northborough, Southborough, Sudbury, and Westborough.

Source: US Census Bureau 2005-09 American Community Survey.

184



Table 8.4.1.3 EducationalAttainment-GreaterMarlboroughRegionMarlborough Seven -Community Region

# % # %

Population25yearsandover 27,436 -- 78,986 --

Lessthanhighschoolgraduate 3,571 13.00% 4,897 6.00%

Highschoolgraduate(incl.equivalency)

8,267 30.10% 16,429 20.80%

Somecollege,nodegree 3,878 14.10% 10,663 13.50%

Associate'sdegree 1,520 5.50% 5,529 7.00%

Bachelor'sdegree 6,324 23.10% 23,301 29.50%

Graduateorprofessionaldegree 3,876 14.10% 18,167 23.00%

Percenthighschoolgraduateorhigher

-- 87.00% -- 93.80%

Percentbachelor'sdegreeorhigher

-- 37.20% -- 52.50%

NOTE: Greater Marlborough Region defined to include the City of Marlborough and Towns of Berlin, Hudson, Northborough, Southborough, Sudbury, and Westborough.

Source: US Census Bureau 2005-09 American Community Survey.

8.4.2 MassachusettsandNewEnglandLaborMarkets

Though the Journey to Work data presented in Section 8.1 is dated (year 2000), it illus-trates something fundamental about the labor pool that Marlborough draws upon that is unlikely to have shifted dramatically over the last 11 years. Marlborough draws workers from more than 220 cities and towns across the state. This is likely the result of two main factors: Marlborough’s location at the intersection of several major regional interstate highways and Marlborough’s high proportion of medium- and high-skilled jobs. This latter factor is impor-tant because these types of jobs, even in the middle-skill range, often require specialized industry skills and experience. Extensive research on the economic implications of conges-tion indicate that the more specialized the worker, the wider the labor pool necessary to find those workers.6 Because there are so few people with each specific skill and so few firms with each specific skill need, the odds of them being proximally located are much lower than for less specialized occupations. Firms with specialized needs do tend to cluster, as do their workers, but the dynamics of job changes and other industry needs are such that access to the widest labor market possible remains a key factor in the success of such businesses and therefore a key factor in their location decisions. Even though most of the labor needs of Marlborough businesses are filled from within the 40-minute commute time (which includes the Greater Marlborough area), for highly specialized occupations, Marlborough industries rely on a statewide labor market and even beyond.

8.4.3 WorkforceTrainingResources

There are a number of workforce training resources available to Marlborough firms and resi-dents, ranging from accredited degree programs to specialized corporate training tailored to meet the needs of individual employers. This section highlights the programs that are actively in use as well as some emerging opportunities.

6 See Weisbrod, Vary and Treyz, “National Cooperative Highway Program Report 463: Economic Implications of Congestion, Transportation Research Board/National Research Council” (2001).


185

Metro South/West Regional Employment Board

The Metro South/West Regional Employment Board (MSWREB) covers the 43 communities in the Metro South/West Workforce Investment Area (WIA), which are primarily located within the I-95/ I-495 corridor. MSWREB serves as a labor market information clearinghouse, provides labor market analysis to identify regional workforce issues and barriers, brings together public institutions and businesses to find and implement solutions to labor market problems, advocates for policy change and funding for workforce solutions, and conducts other activities to ensure that there is a skilled workforce available to businesses and to increase individual worker earning capacity.

The MSWREB operates a One-Stop Career Center in Marlborough, one of 32 such career cen-ters statewide. The center offers programs for employers such as applicant pre-screening, job posting service, job fairs and information about training grants and tax credits and employees/job seekers. Services for job seekers include job search assistance, career counseling, access to online job listings, and access to computers for job search and resume building. The center offers regular workshops, and training programs are oriented toward improving the skills of entry level workers, such as basic computer skills (Windows, Office) and job search skills.

Quinsigamond Community College

Quinsigamond Community College (QCC) offers approximately 70 associates degree and technical certificate programs to some 13,000 students at its main campus in Worcester and offer satellite programs at Blackstone Valley Regional Technical High School in Upton (Auto-motive Technology) and Southbridge High School/ Southbridge (evening classes offerings). In the fall 2011, QCC is initiating several new training programs for Marlborough. The largest new offering is an HVAC certificate program. Other new programs include a series of non-credit classes such as entry-level photovoltaics, sterile surgical procedures, and medical interpreting. These programs were designed based on QCC market research, which found employer demand for these skills. In designing the programs, QCC analyzed industry data and met with the employers to identify workforce skill deficiencies.

In general, QCC training and degree programs focus on entry-level through middle-skill workers. The school provides a lot of continuing education for incumbent workers looking to enhance skills (management and technical writing) and also has a robust corporate train-ing unit (QCC Training and Education Center). For example, QCC designed an English as a Second Language course for Ken’s Foods, focusing on vocabulary workers encounter on the job. QCC has also offered specialized project management training to Marlborough employers. These programs are created in close consultation with the employer requesting the training. QCC conducts a needs assessment and then designs a specialized, employer-driven curricula. QCC also partners with employers to help them access state level workforce training grant funds, which are supported by unemployment contributions.

Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) is a 4-year public institution of higher education located in Worcester that offers bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degrees in a range of science, engineering and technical fields as well as the humanities. The University’s Department of Corporate and Professional Education provides workforce training at a number of satellite locations in the area, including at the Marriot Courtyard in Marlborough. The department of-fers programs in project management, process improvement, geometric dimensioning and tolerance, lean enterprise, and leadership and management development. The school plans

186



to launch a part-time MBA program in Marlborough and is also developing a certified project manager program. WIP also provides customized programs for employers and helps em-ployers access state workforce training funds.

8.5LABORMARKETECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALS&ACTIONITEMS

� The industrial sector analysis in Section 4.1.4 and commercial sector analysis in Section 5.1.4 show that Marlborough growth industries primarily depend on me-dium- and high-skilled workers. The retail sector analysis in Section 6.1.4 showed more limited opportunities for low-skilled and entry-level workers. Section 8.4 found that Marlborough draws on a broad regional labor market and Marlborough’s resi-dent workforce is relatively lower skilled than the regional labor market. This implies the following goals for future economic development:

• Goal: Ensure continued access to the regional labor market. This does not simply mean preserving the status quo. Economic development competitiveness is measured relative to other business locations, so Marlborough must ensure that its own success is not overshadowed by investments and improvements in competing locations.

○ Action Item: Work with regional planning and transportation agencies to ensure relative free flow of traffic on state and interstate highways;

○ Action Item: Prioritize actions on state and interstate highways that increase ac-cess to Marlborough and reduces the distance from on/off ramps to employment centers; and

○ Action Item: Work with the planning department to ensure that local transporta-tion plans allow ease of access for commuters and minimize congestion between residential, employment and services/retail areas during peak travel times.

• Goal: Improve the skill level of Marlborough’s resident workforce. This goal will help employers to recruit locally (benefitting employers and employees by reducing com-muting costs and commute-related work delays/interruptions) and will help increase the earning power of local residents.

○ Action Item: Support and encourage local workforce training institutions to pro-vide programs in Marlborough that meet the needs of employers looking to fill specific skill gaps;

○ Action Item: Support and encourage local workforce training institutions to provide programs in Marlborough that meet the needs of middle-skill employees looking to upgrade their workforce skills (project management and emerging technical skills/techniques);

○ Action Item: Support and encourage local workforce training institutions to pro-vide occupational skills training to entry-level and unskilled workers, particularly those that increase high school graduation rates, and provide vocational certifi-cate and associates degree programs that allow high school graduates to transi-tion to middle-skill positions education; and

○ Action Item: Keep and attract retail sector jobs that allow unskilled workers to participate in the workforce and gain work experience.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUPPORT SYSTEMS

9Overview of Services, Capacity, and Deficiencies

LEAP Analysis Summary

Support Systems Economic Development Goals and Action Items

190


9Economic Development Support Systems

9.1OVERVIEWOFSERVICES,CAPACITY,ANDDEFICIENCIES

9.1.1 WastewaterInfrastructure

The following descriptions of the two wastewater treatment plants operating in the City of Marlborough were taken from the City of Marlborough website.

“The City of Marlborough has two wastewater treatment plants: the Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant. It should be noted that sewer connections to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant are subject to the Interim Sewer Connection Policy. Since Marlborough is at its capacity to the Westerly Plant, this policy has been instituted to assist in creating usable capacity by removing inflow and infiltration, or identifying a flow diversion project that would transfer flow from the Westerly Plant to the Easterly Plant.

The Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plant is an advanced wastewater treatment facility de-signed to handle a daily average flow of 5.50 million gallons per day. The facility treats sewage from the easterly portion of Marlborough (east of Route 495). This facility operates under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by a EPA and Massachusetts DEP. The facility’s current permit has been issued by the regulators and contains stringent phosphorus discharge limits of 0.1 mg/l during the growing season, since phosphorus is an element that acts as a fertilizer and promotes weed growth. As a result of the new permit, it will be necessary to upgrade the facility. In accordance with our NPDES permit, the proposed upgrades to the plant will take place after the upgrades to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant are completed. At this time, it is anticipated that the upgrades could run as high as $40 million. The impact of the construction and higher operating costs will result in a significant increase to the City’s sewer user fees.

The Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant is an advanced wastewater treatment facility de-signed to handle a daily average flow of 2.89 million gallons per day. The facility treats sewage from the westerly portion of Marlborough (west of Route 495) and the Town of North-borough under an inter-municipal agreement. The facility operates under a National Pollu-tion Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued by the EPA and Massachusetts DEP. The new NPDES permit for this facility has been issued. The primary change in this new permit is the requirement to treat phosphorus to a level of 0.1 mg/l. This is an extremely low level and will require a significant upgrade to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant. The cost for this upgrade is expected to be about $40 million. Marlborough’s flow to the Westerly Plant is currently at its available capacity and will require an increase in the design flow of the facility in order to accommodate expected growth in the area contributory to this facility. The new permit does not contain language allowing additional flow discharge from the facil-ity. Regulations exist, however, that allow the performance of an anti-degradation study to prove increasing flows to the receiving water, the Assabet River, does not negatively impact the river. This study is ongoing. When completed, the City is optimistic that the permit may be modified to allow increased flow to the river.”

The City has submitted a Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan (CWMP)/Environmen-tal Impact Report that included the Phase III/IV – Evaluation of the Most Feasible Options and Recommended Plan (CDM, 2007). The Preferred Alternative for improvements to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Plant will allow for the treatment of 2.9 million gallons per day (mgd) from the City of Marlborough. Construction of these improvements is currently (2011) underway.


191

The composition of that 2.9 mgd was adjusted to account for an increase in future com-mercial/industrial development and a decrease in documented residential water consump-tion from 80 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) to 70.8 gpcd. Further reductions could be achieved as the City works toward meeting the Massachusetts DEP Water Conservation Policy standard of 65 gpcd.

The projected composition of flows to both the Easterly and the Westerly Wastewater Treat-ment Plants, as identified in the CWMP Phase III/IV report, are listed in Table 9.1.1.1 below.

Easterly WWTP Westerly WWTP

Marlborough

• Residential 2.25mgd 0.40mgd

• Commercial 0.48mgd 1.18mgd

• Municipal 0.03mgd 0.06mgd

• Industrial 0.12mgd 0.73mgd

Subtotal 2.88 mgd 2.37 mgd

• Infiltration/Inflow 1.30mgd 0.53mgd

Marlborough Total 4.18 mgd 2.9 mgd

Table 9.1.1.1ProjectedWastewaterTreatmentPlantFlows

In projecting the future composition of flows, the CWMP identified specific planned and/or approved projects totaling 3.2 million square feet of office/research and development projects and 1.2 million square feet of office/commercial projects. With the exception of the Cedar Hill / Simarano Drive project (600,000 SF office and hotel), all of the projects listed in the previously identified Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough were accounted for in the future wastewater flow planning. (The vacant sites at 200 Forest Street and 289 Elm Street were assumed to be occupied at the time of the CWMP.) Furthermore, the CWMP noted that more than 90% of the projected commercial and industrial development (and its associated wastewater needs) would occur in the Westerly WWTP service area, echoing the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Devel-opments in Marlborough list.

Given the similarity between the land use projections utilized in the planning for improve-ments to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Facility and the Priority Development Sites and Planned/Approved Developments in Marlborough being used for purposes of this report, it appears that the current construction of improvements to the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Facility will be sufficient to accommodate the forecasted future industrial and commercial development in the City of Marlborough.

The CWMP contains residential and population projections indicating that 85% of residen-tial sewer flows in Marlborough will be treated at the Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plant, based on the geographic service area, with the balance treated at the Westerly Wastewater Treatment Facility. As with the commercial, industrial and municipal flows noted earlier, it is expected that these future flows will be accommodated within the design parameters of both the Easterly and Westerly Wastewater Treatment facilities.

192



9.1.2 WaterInfrastructure1

Potable water supply for the City of Marlborough comes from three major sources. The City owns and operates the Millham Reservoir and Lake Williams. These two surface water sourc-es supply on average 36% of the water used by the City. The remainder of the water supply is provided by the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA). Both Lake Williams and the Millham Reservoir are located within the service area of the Westerly Wastewater Treat-ment Facility and within the Assabet River watershed. Lake Williams is a 200 million gallon (MG) water body with a 225-acre watershed. Water from Lake Williams flows by gravity to the 300MG Millham Reservoir. The surrounding watershed for the Millham Reservoir mea-sures 3.78 square miles. Water withdrawal from the reservoir is treated at the Millham Water Treatment Facility and discharged to the City water distribution system. The water treatment facility capacity is 3.6 mgd.

Water from the MWRA originates in the Quabbin and Wachusett Reservoirs and reaches Marlborough via the Cosgrove Tunnel from Wachusett Reservoir. The Cosgrove Tunnel ends in Marlborough, and the Hultman Aqueduct, which delivers water to communities east of Marlborough, begins. Water is withdrawn from the MWRA Hultman Aqueduct at the Cedar Hill Pumping Station located in the southwestern portion of Marlborough. Also located in this area of Marlborough is the MWRA water treatment facility at Walnut Hill.

In 2010, the City of Marlborough Department of Public Works provided 1.7 billion gallons of water to its customers. This figure is consistent with results reported in the CWMP, which noted 1.749 billion gallons of water withdrawal by the City. Increased water conservation efforts can be attributed to the decrease. The balance of water provision is delivered by the MWRA, which by agreement will provide over 2 billion gallons per year to the City. The MWRA will also provide for any shortfall in water demand in excess of the volumes noted above.

On a daily basis, the City is capable of treating and providing up to 3.2 mgd, but has aver-aged approximately 1.84 mgd. The balance provided by the MWRA has been approximately 3.3 mgd, although under its agreement, the MWRA can provide up to 9.0 mgd to cover shortfalls.

Finally, the CWMP provided a table of “Adjusted Water Use by Component,” which is repli-cated in Table 9.1.2.1.

ComponentAnnual Water Use

(million gallons/day)Annual Water Use

(million gallons/year)

• Residential 2.69 982

• Commercial 1.08 394

• Municipal 0.09 32

• Industrial 0.69 253

Metered subtotal 4.55 1,661

• UnaccountedforWater 0.59 214

Total Water Withdrawal 5.14 mgd 1,875 MG

Table 9.1.2.1AdjustedWaterUsebyComponent

1 The section is an excerpt from the Marlborough CWMP prepared in 2007 by CDM


193

As presented in the Marlborough CWMP, the City obtains approximately 64% of its water from the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) and the remainder from its lo-cal surface water source within the Assabet River watershed. The CWMP notes that as water demands increase in the community, the City will be more reliant on the MWRA source, thus not significantly changing the water withdrawal from the Assabet River Basin.

9.1.3 EnergySystems


9.1.4 TransportationSystem

The City of Marlborough transportation system is dominated by Interstate 495, with inter-changes at Interstate 290 (itself an important regional facility), Route 20 (the main east/west route connecting the entire City) and Simarano Drive (the newest interchange, serving large existing and future development sites). The accessibility provided by these interchanges has provided the catalyst for development outside of the urban core of Marlborough, particularly office, research and development, industrial and retail uses that benefit from the employ-ment base, goods movement and market population provided by the regional transportation network.

Interstate 495 carries an annual average daily traffic volume of nearly 100,000 vehicles per day, with the months of June through September exhibiting volumes in excess of 110,000 vehicles per day. MassDOT traffic volumes for Marlborough roadways are summarized in Table 9.1.4.1: Marlborough Traffic Voumes.

Roadway YearAverage Annual Daily

Traffic

I-495,southofI-290 2009 90,030vehiclesperday

I-495,northofI-290 2007 97,978vehiclesperday

I-495,southofRoute20 2009 88,401vehiclesperday

I-290,westofI-495 2009 72,627vehiclesperday

Route20,westofI-495 2009 25,700vehiclesperday

Route20,eastofI-495 2006 24,800vehiclesperday

Route20,westofCookLane 2006 26,600vehiclesperday

Route85,northofFortuneBlvd. 2006 25,200vehiclesperday

Table 9.1.4.1MarlboroughTrafficVoumes

The I-495 Study – I-290 to I-90, Final Report was published jointly by the Central Massachu-setts Regional Planning Commission (CMRPC) and the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) (September 2009). The report reviewed traffic operations and provided recommen-dations at five interchanges in the I-495 corridor, including I-495/I-290, I-495/Route 20 and I-495/Simarano Drive. Among the observations and recommendations for these Marlbor-ough interchanges included in the report were the following:

194



• Traffic projections indicate that average daily traffic on I-495 will increase to over 120,000 ve-hicles per day in 2030 on segments in Marlborough, representing an increase of over 20%;

• The I-495 mainline through Marlborough will be over capacity by 2030 if improvements are not implemented;

• Recommended improvements to the I-495/I-290 interchange include a new two-lane ramp from I-495 southbound to I-290 westbound,and a two-lane flyover ramp from I-290 eastbound to I-495 northbound;

• Recommended improvements to the I-495/Route 20 interchange include a flyover ramp from Route 20 eastbound to I-495 northbound and a flyover ramp from Route 20 west-bound to I-495 southbound. An alternative recommendation is to reconstruct the inter-change to a single-point urban interchange with the I-495 mainline flowing underneath an elevated structure;

• Recommended improvements to the I-495 mainline through the provision of a collector/distributor roadway separating through traffic from traffic using the interchange ramp systems; and

• No recommended improvements at the I-495/Simarano Drive interchange were deemed necessary, as it is expected that the interchange capacity can accommodate expected growth at that location.

It should be noted that the I-495/I-290 improvements were included as an “Illustrative Project” in the MAPC “Journey to 2030” Regional Transportation Plan. Illustrative plans are defined as “projects that meet the MPO’s criteria for selection but which are not included in the recom-mended list of projects because there is not sufficient revenue to fund them.” This critical regional project is in a preliminary design phase and targeting the submittal of an Interchange Justification / Interchange Modification Report to the Federal Highway Administration.

Route 20 is the major arterial connecting the entire city of Marlborough and has historically been the subject of several corridor and location-specific studies. Ongoing monitoring of conditions at critical Route 20 intersections is vital to preserving local transportation connec-tions. While not to the extent of Route 20, Route 85 serves as an important local north-south option. CTPS recently (October 2008) identified improvements at the Route 85 / Union Street intersection as part of its “Safety and Operational Improvements at Selected Intersections (SOISI) Study.”

The MassDOT Freight Plan (September 2010) identified I-495 and I-290 as critical truck freight routes and the I-495/I290 interchange as a “highway freight bottleneck” that “seriously impede freight flows on a regular basis.” Truck traffic represents more than 15% of all traffic on I-495 through Marlborough. While limited freight rail service is provided in Marlborough, planned construction for a major freight terminal by CSX in nearby Westborough is ongoing.

Marlborough is not directly served by commuter rail. The nearest MBTA commuter rail sta-tions are located in Southborough and Westborough as part of the Framingham/Worcester line. The closest stations on the Fitchburg line are located in Acton, Concord and Lincoln.

The MetroWest Regional Transit Authority serves Marlborough with a single fixed route (Route 7) that allows intra-city and intercity service connecting 14 MetroWest communities.

The Assabet River Rail Trail (ARRT) is a multi-community bicycle/pedestrian trail that will eventually connect Marlborough with the MBTA commuter rail station in South Acton. The Marlborough component of the trail is complete; funding issues have delayed completion of the ARRT from Sudbury to Acton.


195

The City of Marlborough Mayor’s Transportation Task Force has acknowledged many of these same elements and issues. Among their stated concerns are the following:

• Regional solutions to transportation system needs;

• Exploration of direct commuter rail links via existing freight lines that pass through Marlborough;

• Exploration of indirect commuter rail links through shuttle van services between major employers and existing commuter rail stations in Southborough and Westborough;

• Exploration of increased number of commuter rail trains serving the reverse commute from Boston to the Marlborough area;

• RTA service linking employment locations and residential / downtown areas in Marlborough;

• Consideration of a downtown intermodal facility; and

• Expanded intercity service to and from Marlborough.

9.1.5 CommunicationsSystem


Inquiries were placed with the Massachusetts Broadband Institute to determine if there were any potential technology limitations that would deter businesses from locating in Marlbor-ough. The following is a summary of those discussions:


• The MBI has an online interactive map showing the available services to Marlborough at http://mapping.massbroadband.org.

• The vast majority of Marlborough is very well served by private communications compa-nies. Nearly the entire City is served by Cable, DSL and Fiber Optic lines. There are very small portions of Marlborough that are served only by DSL or only by cable.




Local commercial property owners and managers have conveyed concerns expressed by prospective tenant about the “availability, capacity and consistency” of adequate power supplies, based on the frequency and duration of power outages. In addition, the cost of electricity has become a competitive factor in business location decisions as more extensive technology-based operations have increased energy consumption.

196



9.2LEAPANALYSISSUMMARY

Competitiveness for business attraction is both absolute and relative. Businesses require certain baseline (absolute) conditions in order to start in a new location or to expand. Howev-er, once a business has determined the list of locations that meets these baseline conditions, they typically compare certain cost and market access factors in each potential location when making location and expansion decisions. As such, the first step in using LEAP is to identify a comparison area against which differences in relative strengths, weaknesses and performance can be measured. Inputs to LEAP include a broad range of information about economic conditions including:

• Patterns and trends in employment, income, value added and business output, by industry;

• Size of the population, labor market and truck delivery market within given drive times;

• Population, workforce participation and level of educational attainment;

• Accessibility (drive times) to airports, intermodal rail terminals and marine ports;

• Costs of labor, electricity, taxes and housing;

• Availability of broadband telecommunications services; and

• Extent of orientation towards tourism-based or international export-based activities.

9.2.1 ComparativeCommunities:AndoverandBurlington,Massachusetts

LEAP was used to assess relationships between economic performance and attributes of facilities, as well as services and costs, between Marlborough and comparison areas. As discussed in greater detail below, these comparisons include the relative cost and quality of a Marlborough’s workforce and infrastructure facilities, and costs of doing business relative to appropriate comparison areas. Ideally, a Comparison Area would be identical to the City with the exception of one factor of interest, such as workforce skill level or transportation access. Such ideal Comparison Areas are rarely available. Instead, areas with similar key characteristics are analyzed to identify the most relevant Comparison Area. Key character-istics include:

• Similar population size and density/distribution;

• Adjacent Study Areas and Comparison Areas are desirable but not always possible; at the very least, they should be located in the same region of the country;

• Similar climate;

• Absence or presence of unique natural resources such as mining or fishing or geo-graphical features such as an ocean or mountains; and

• Absence or presence of unique dominant economic entities such as a military base, major research university or tourist attraction.

In selecting a comparison area for Marlborough, economic development professionals in Marlborough and broader New England region were consulted to identify cities that might be suitable based on general impressions.2 The initial list included the following:

• Andover, Massachusetts;

• Burlington, Massachusetts;

2 Members of the Northeast Economic Developers Association (NEDA) were among those queried for suggestions of appropriate comparison areas. The NEDA region stretches from Maine to Maryland and Pennsylvania. Responses came from New England members.


197

• Keene, New Hampshire;

• Nashua, New Hampshire; and

• Peabody, Massachusetts.

Basic economic data was collected for each city including the following:

• Population;

• Total employment;

• Employment by industry;

• Sales by industry;

• Number of firms by industry; and

• Number of firms with 20 or more employees, by industry.

Table 9.2.1.1 presents population and employment data for the initial cities considered in comparison with Marlborough.

Comparison AreaCommunities

Population (2009 Estimate)

Employment (2010 Estimate)

Marlborough,MA 38,465 33,394

Andover,MA 33,694 28,481

Burlington,MA 25,749 38,564

Keene,NH 22,395 22,613

Nashua,NH 87,555 57,283

PeabodyMA 51,718 27,020

Table 9.2.1.2ComparisonAreaCandidates

Source: US Census Bureau and Claritas.

None of the comparison areas considered was most similar to Marlborough by all measures. However, Andover and Burlington were similar by the greatest number of measures, and both were selected as comparison areas. The location of the two comparison areas relative to Marlborough is shown in Figure 9.2.1.A.

198



Source: ESRI.

Figure 9.2.1.A MarlboroughandComparisonAreas

Marlborough

Burlington

Andover

9.2.2RelativeCostandMarketAccessFactors

Business costs and market access factors are among the most critical considerations for firm location and expansion decisions. From an economic development perspective, these cost and market access factors are the cities’ economic development support systems. This diagnostic test compares key cost and market access factors in Marlborough to those in Andover and Burlington.

9.2.2.1CostFactors

When all other quality factors are equal across possible locations, businesses tend to locate where they can minimize costs. For this analysis, the following indicators are used to evaluate dif-ferences in non-transportation costs between Marlborough and each of the Comparison Areas:

• Average Labor Cost (annual Retail wages);

• Average Electricity Cost ($/kWh);

• Commercial property tax rate ($ per thousand of assessed value);

• Average Business Property Tax Burden (commercial property tax per employee per year);

• Average Housing Cost ($ for a single family home); and

• Average Rental Cost ($ per month).


199

Note that relative differences in labor cost are measured using the retail sector as retail occu-pations are comparable across different geographical areas without encountering business ‘mix’ biases (high vs. low value-added worksites) as can be the case within the manufac-turing sector. Differences in business taxes are measured by property taxes since all three areas are in Massachusetts and face the same state tax regime.

This analysis includes two separate measures of commercial property tax. The first, com-mercial property tax rate, is the most straight forward. It is the amount levied per $1,000 in assessed values. However, assessed values can be difficult to compare because it is deter-mined by each jurisdiction’s assessor’s office. Though it is often intended to reflect market value, it is not always a consistent measure across jurisdictions. To ensure a more equal comparison, we use an additional measure intended to reflect the amount that businesses actually pay: Commercial property tax per employee (calculated by dividing total tax collec-tions reported by each jurisdiction’s tax assessor by the number of jobs in the jurisdiction).

The figures below show each cost in Marlborough relative to each of the Comparison Areas. A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that costs are equal in both areas. A value above 1.0 indicates higher costs in Marlborough (a relative disadvantage), while a value below 1.0 indicates lower costs in Marlborough (a relative advantage). Against both compari-son areas, Marlborough has a distinct advantage in terms of ownership housing. Electricity rates are basically comparable. Labor rates present a bit of a mixed picture, with rates ap-proximately 10% higher than Marlborough in Andover and 10 percent lower in Burlington. Nonetheless, the difference is relatively small and not likely to present a serious barrier (or advantage).

Figure 9.2.2.1.A RelativeCostFactors–Marlboroughv.Andover

Notes: (1) Labor = Average Labor Cost, $ per year in retail; (2) Electricity = Average Electricity Cost, $/kWh;(3) Commercial property tax rate (FY2011) (4) Taxes = Average Commercial Property Tax per Job, $ per year; (5) Housing-Buy = Average Housing Cost, $ for a single family home; (6) Housing-Rent = Average Rental Cost, $ per month (residential).

Source: Massachusetts Department of Labor; NSTAR; National Grid; Property tax assessors of Marlborough, Andover and Burlington; Warren Group; US Census Bureau.

200



Figure 9.2.2.1.B RelativeCostFactors–Marlboroughv.Burlington

Notes: (1) Labor = Average Labor Cost, $ per year in retail; (2) Electricity = Average Electricity Cost, $/kWh;(3) Commercial property tax rate (FY2011) (4) Taxes = Average Commercial Property Tax per Job, $ per year; (5) Housing-Buy = Average Housing Cost, $ for a single family home; (6) Housing-Rent = Average Rental Cost, $ per month (residential).

Source: Massachusetts Department of Labor; NSTAR; National Grid; Property tax assessors of Marlborough, Andover and Burlington; Warren Group; US Census Bureau.

9.2.2.2Transportation&MarketAccessFactors

Business efficiency, productivity and operation costs are highly dependent on access to workers, customers and suppliers. For this analysis, transportation and market access is measured by:

• Labor market area – Population within 40-minute drive time;

• Access to skilled workers – Percent of the population age 25 and over with a bachelor’s degree or higher within the labor market area;

• 1-day truck delivery market area – Employment within 180-minute drive time;

• Access to commercial airport – Drive time (minutes) to nearest commercial airport;

• Access to freight marine port – Drive time (minutes) to nearest freight marine port;

• Access to rail intermodal terminal - Drive time (minutes) to nearest freight rail intermodal terminal.

The following figures portray Marlborough relative to each of the Comparison Areas for each of these metrics. A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. For market access factors (Figures 9.2.2.2.A and 9.2.2.2.B), a value above 1.0 indicates a relative advantage for Marlborough, while a value below 1.0 indicates a rela-tive disadvantage. Marlborough has a clear edge in terms of 1-day truck delivery market. It also enjoys an interesting position relative to workforce. While it has a smaller overall labor market than the two comparison areas, the population within its labor market is slightly more educated. Labor market issues are covered in more detail in Section 8.


201

Figure 9.2.2.2.A RelativeMarketAccessFactors–Marlboroughv.Andover1,2

1 A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. Values above 1.0 indicate a relative advantage for Marlborough while values below 1.0 indicate relative disadvantages.

2 (1) Skilled Workers = % of workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher in the Labor Market Area; (2) Labor Market Area = Population within 40-minute drive of population centroid; (3) 1-Day Truck Delivery Market = Employment within 180-minute drive time.

Source: ESRI.

Figure 9.2.2.2.B RelativeMarketAccessFactors–Marlboroughv.Burlington1,2

1 A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. Values above 1.0 indicate a relative advantage for Marlborough while values below 1.0 indicate relative disadvantages.

2 (1) Skilled Workers = % of workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher in the Labor Market Area; (2) Labor Market Area = Population within 40-minute drive of population centroid; (3) 1-Day Truck Delivery Market = Employment within 180-minute drive time.

Source: ESRI.

For transportation access factors (Figure 9.2.2.2.C and Figure 9.2.2.2.D), values above 1.0 indicate longer travel times from Marlborough, a relative disadvantage, while values below 1.0 indicate shorter travel times from Marlborough, a relative advantage. As the figures indi-cate, Marlborough appears to be comparable in terms of workforce skill level, though it has a somewhat smaller labor market area. It has a clear advantage in terms of 1-day truck delivery market relative to both comparison areas. Marlborough’s transportation access appears to be somewhat disadvantageous, particularly for travel to a commercial airport and freight ma-

202



rine port. Table 9.2.2.2.C lists the nearest commercial airport, marine port, freight rail intermodal terminal and international border crossing for Marlborough, Andover and Burlington.

Figure 9.2.2.2.C RelativeTransportationAccessFactors–Marlboroughv.Andover1,2

1 A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. Values above 1.0 indicate longer travel times for Marlborough (a disadvantage) while values below 1.0 indicate shorter travel times (an advantage).

2 (1) Skilled Workers = % of workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher in the Labor Market Area; (2) Labor Market Area = Population within 40-minute drive of population centroid; (3) 1-Day Truck Delivery Market = Employment within 180-minute drive time; (4) Drive time

Source: ESRI.

Figure 9.2.2.2.D RelativeTransportationAccessFactors–Marlboroughv.Burlington1,2

1 A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. Values above 1.0 indicate longer travel times for Marlborough (a disadvantage) while values below 1.0 indicate shorter travel times (an advantage).

2 (1) Skilled Workers = % of workers with a bachelor’s degree or higher in the Labor Market Area; (2) Labor Market Area = Population within 40-minute drive of population centroid; (3) 1-Day Truck Delivery Market = Employment within 180-minute drive time; (4) Drive time

Source: ESRI.


203

Table 9.2.2.2.1 NearestTransportationFacilities&InternationalBorderCrossing

Commercial Airport Freight Marine Port

Rail Intermodal Facility1

International Border Crossing

MarlboroughBoston-Logan

InternationalAirportPortofBoston

CrBostonBeaconParkVdTofc/Cofc

HighgateSprings-Alburg,Vt

AndoverBoston-Logan


ColdwaterTerm&WholesaleEverett


BurlingtonBoston-Logan


CrBostonBeaconParkVdTofc/Cofc


1 Tofc = “trailer on flat car”, Cofc = “container on flat car”.Source: ESRI.

9.3SUPPORTSYSTEMSECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALS&ACTIONITEMS

• Goal: Support upgrade of utility and telecommunications systems.

○ Action Item: Collaborate with National Grid to address concerns of prospective commercial property owners and tenants about the availability of consistent elec-tric power supplies, as articulated in discussion with the MEDC and interviews conducted for this study.3

○ Action Item: Address perceptions of commercial property owners, managers and tenants that Marlborough may be underserved by utilities and that capacity issues may exist.

○ Action Item: Examine feasibility of establishing “wireless” zones in “high profile” activity centers such as Downtown and Sports Centers (funds for this may be avail-

able from DHCD MA Downtown Initiative grant awards).

3 “Summary Report – MEDC Commercial Property Owners Meeting” (November 30, 2010, and interviews conducted by consultants preparing the Marlborough Economic Development Strategy-Action Plan (July 2011).

MARLBOROUGH QUALITY OF LIFE

10Quality of Life Comparative Metrics

Quality of Life Goals and Objectives Statement

206


10Marlborough Quality of Life

10.1 QUALITYOFLIFECOMPARATIVEMETRICS

Just as businesses make location decisions based on the cost, quality and access factors most relevant to the type of business they conduct, residents choose where they make their homes based on their own needs, values and priorities. Common considerations include:

• Cost of living

• Proximity to jobs

• Housing availability

• Crime

• Quality of schools

• Recreation amenities (golf courses, walking trails)

• Proximity to retail, grocery stores, restaurants, and personal services

• Transportation (roadways, parking, transit options)

Individuals evaluate the overall value of the bundle of factors available in a given location, relative to the bundles available in other locations. Within bundles, they weigh factors dif-ferently depending on personal preference, which is driven by factors such as stage of life, personal preference and special needs. Decisions are typically made with a high degree of subjectivity, as individuals have imperfect information regarding the true values, weights and interplay between factors. Even factors that can be demonstrated with hard data, such as crime rates and school scores, are weighed and balanced with a high degree of personal subjectivity influenced by prior conceptions and stereotypes.

Quality of life contributes to business location and expansion decisions as well, particularly for businesses that rely on the ability to recruit qualified workers as Marlborough’s busi-nesses do. These workers must be able to find a home and community that satisfies their needs and priorities within commuting distance of their workplace. From the perspective of the employer, however, it is not critical that Marlborough meet the different needs and prefer-ences of its workers, as long there are surrounding communities within commuting distance that do meet these needs. From the employer’s perspective, they simply need Marlborough to provide access to some level of retail and shopping near their workplace for meals during the workday and quick errands before and after work and on breaks, and provide transporta-tion access to the broader labor market.

All this is to say that quality of life is complicated and highly subjective, and no jurisdiction can meet all the needs of all potential residents. However, Marlborough can tailor its quality of life offerings to 1) Meet the needs of current residents working in Marlborough, 2) Meet the needs of growing local businesses, and 3) Attract new resident populations that support economic development goals while minimizing demands on City resources.1 On average, this population tends to have the following quality of life preferences:

• A suburban living environment (versus a dense/transit-oriented, urban environment);

• Ease of driving/parking, cycling and walking, less concerned with availability of transit;

• Low maintenance homes (e.g. not a lot of yard/landscaping);

• High quality, varied restaurants;

• Evening entertainment social/networking options;

1 These economic development objectives should be interpreted as in addition to meeting the needs and expecta-tions of current residents.


207

• Recreation amenities such as running trails and after work sports leagues;

• Specialty retail such as grocery stores (Trader Joe’s, Whole Foods), dry cleaners and quick oil change shops; and

• Quality K-12 schools.

The indicators presented below are meant to provide a point of reference for where Marl-borough stands on each of these quality of life topics. Table 10.1.1 shows selected retail, food and personal service establishments per 1,000 population in Marlborough as well as selected towns in the region, including neighboring towns for which data was available.2

Marlborough is above average in the number of barbershops and full service restaurants, and it is average in terms of stores in the other categories.

Po

pul

atio

n (2

009)

Bea

uty

Sal

ons

& B

arb

er S

ho

ps1

Full-

Ser

vice

Res

taur

ants

Sup

erm

arke

t/ G

roce

ry S

tore

s

Dry

Cle

anin

g/

Laun

dry

Ser

vice

2

Ph

arm

acie

s an

d D

rug

Sto

res

Flo

rist

s

Marlborough 37,963 1.6 2.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2

Andover 33,201 1.3 0.8 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2

Burlington 24,983 1.8 2.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.2

Framingham 66,411 1.3 1.7 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1

Hudson 19,551 1.3 1.7 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2

Northborough 14,732 1.5 1.6 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.3

Southborough 9,681 0.4 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1

Sudbury 17,244 1.2 0.9 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.1

Westborough 18,427 1.5 2.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2

Average - All Selected Towns

274,114 1.3 1.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1

Table 10.1.1 RetailandServicesEstablishmentsper1,000Population

Source: US Census Bureau 2005-09 American Community Survey; Claritas BusinessPoint.

Establishments per 1,000 Population

1 Includes nail salons.2 Excludes coin-op.

Though most people choosing to live in a suburban community such as Marlborough are willing and able to drive, many people also enjoy the ability to walk to stores and restaurants and even to work. Figure 10.1.A illustrates the area of Marlborough that is within walking distance of Downtown. This area will be attractive to residents who value the ability to travel on foot and/or access downtown retail and services with short car trips.

2 The number of businesses in each category was obtained from Claritas BusinessPoint, a proprietary data source. It is not comprehensive and additional establishments may exist. However, it provides a representative sample of the number of establishments that can be compared across jurisdictions.

210


208


Legend

Figure 11.1.A Downtown Marlborough Walking Radius

nm

nmnm

nmnm nmnm

nmnm

nmnm

nm

nmnm

Richer

The 4-7 School

Francis J Kane

Marlborough High

Assabet Valley Voc HS

Immaculate Conception

Charles Jaworek School

Early Childhood Center

Wayside Academy School

New Covenant Christian

Glenhaven Academy - JRI

Advanced Math and Science Academy Charter School

Assabet Valley Collaborative - Intensive Elem KaneAssabet Valley Collaborative - ALTERNATIVE HIGH SCHOOL

1 0 10.5 Miles

¯Marlborough Schools

LegendMarlborough Schools

nm Wayside Academy School, SPE

nm The 4-7 School, PUB

nm Richer, PUB

nm New Covenant Christian, PRI

nm Marlborough High, PUB

nm Immaculate Conception, PRI

nm Glenhaven Academy - JRI, SPE

nm Francis J Kane, PUB

nm Early Childhood Center, PUB

nm Charles Jaworek School, PUB

nm Assabet Valley Voc HS, PUB

nm Assabet Valley Collaborative - Intensive Elem Kane, COP

nm Assabet Valley Collaborative - ALTERNATIVE HIGH SCHOOL, COP

nm Advanced Math and Science Academy Charter School, CHA

0.5 Mile Walking Distance


Sidewalks

Roads

Parcels


Figure 10.1.A

208


209-210


Figure 10.1.B Marlborough Open Space

"

MARLBOROUGH

HUDSON

BERLIN

SUDBURY

NORTHBOROUGH

FRAMINGHAM

SOUTHBOROUGH

WESTBOROUGH

STOW

Locator Map

OPEN SPACE IN THE CITY OF MARLBOROUGH AND THEPROTECTED LANDS IN SURROUNDING TOWNS

0 1 2 30.5Miles

Open Space Mapping compiled by the Marlborough Department of Conservation and the

Department of Public Works.

Nancy E. Stevens, MayorPriscilla Ryder, Conservation OfficerNathaniel Bowen, GIS Administrator

MAP 1

CedarSwamp

DCRCallahan State Park

DCRSudbury Reservoir

Assabet RiverNational Wildlife Refuge

Protected Open Space in Marlborough

Protected Open Space in Adjacent Communities


211

Many people value access to open space, which includes active recreation lands (golf cours-es, sports fields) as well as land preserved for environmental reasons (wetlands, forests and agricultural lands). Figure 10.1.B: Marlborough Open Space in the Open Space and Sur-rounding Map from the City of Marlborough’s Open Space and Recreation Plan 2010-2015.

Crime is another important quality of life factor. Though no one wants to be the victim of any type of crime, people generally weigh the incidence of personal crime (rape, murder, robbery and assault) more heavily than property crimes (burglary, larceny and traffic crimes). Table 10.1.2 presents crime rates per 1,000 of population for Marlborough and selected surround-ing communities. The year 2006 is the most recent year for which data is available. It is pos-sible that crime rates in these communities have declined since 2006 in line with the national trend of declining crime rates. As the table shows, in terms of personal crime, Marlborough (0.6 crimes per 1,000 population) was well below the statewide average (4.9) and below the two urban communities presented, Worcester (8.4) and Framingham (2.5). In terms of property crime, Marlborough (16.7) was below the statewide average and Framingham (both 23.7) and well below Worcester (31.9) and Burlington (28.1).

Table 10.1.2 Crimeper1,000Population

2006 Personal Crime Property Crime

Marlborough 0.6 16.7

Andover 0.7 11.9

Burlington 1.2 28.1

Framingham 2.5 23.7

Hudson 0.2 9.3

Northborough 0.1 9

Southborough 0.1 5.3

Sudbury 0.2 5.2

Westborough 1.5 14.9

Worcester 8.4 31.9

State-wide Average 4.9 23.7

Per 1,000 Population

Source: Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (2006 Crime Report); US Census Bureau 2005-09 American Community Survey.

212



Many people value quality public K-12 schools because they either have or plan to have children or they are homeowners who recognize that school quality is an important factor in residential property resale values. One measure of school quality that many people consider when buying a home (or renting a home, if they have school-age children) is school stan-dardized test scores. In Massachusetts, students must pass the Massachusetts Compre-hensive Assessment System (MCAS) exam in order to graduate. The MCAS is a diagnostic tool meant to help the state and school districts improve student achievement of basic skills. Scores are not intended to be used as a proxy for school quality, but they are popularly used as such by real estate agents and homebuyers. Figure 10.1.C shows the percent of high school seniors who have passed the MCAS exam in Marlborough Public Schools, Assa-bet Vocational High and selected surrounding districts. As the figure shows, Marlborough

schools’ pass rates are below neighboring districts, particularly Assabet Vocational High.

Figure 10.1.C PercentEarningCompetencyDetermination(English/LanguageArts&MathProficientorAbove&ScienceTechnology/EngineeringNeedsImprovementorAbove)

Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

Some residents with children like to live near their children’s school for convenience, for prox-imity to their children’s school friends and for an added sense of community. Figure 10.1.D shows the areas of Marlborough within walking distance of public schools.


213-214


Legend Figure 10.1.D Walking Distance to Marlborough Public Schools

nm

nmnm

nmnm nmnm

nmnm

nmnm

nm

nmnm

Richer

The 4-7 School

Francis J Kane

Marlborough High










1 0 10.5 Miles





nm Richer, PUB














Sidewalks

Roads

Parcels

nm

nmnm

nmnm nmnm

nmnm

nmnm

nm

nmnm

Richer

The 4-7 School

Francis J Kane

Marlborough High










1 0 10.5 Miles





nm Richer, PUB














Sidewalks

Roads

Parcels


215

10.2 QUALITYOFLIFEGOALSANDOBJECTIVESSTATEMENT

The quality of life in Marlborough is tied to the opportunities for living, recreation, learning and creating wealth. Through the public outreach processes, people stated the key elements in the local quality of life are:

• Encouraging new commercial and industrial development that supports the community tax base and helps fund and maintain public services. The recommended locations of this development [see sector goals] will ensure that the infrastructure can support this growth.

• Revitalizing the Downtown with infill development, particularly the surface parking lots and one-story buildings on Main Street; the reuse of buildings, particularly the Walker Building; and additional accessibility, pedestrian-friendly streets, better signage and overall clean-up.

• Recognizing the quality of education in the local public schools and the opportunities they hold for continuing education through partnerships with local technology busi-nesses.

• Improving the environmental quality of the East Side by controlling the externalities as-sociated with the solid waste and wastewater facilities.

• Filling in vacant commercial and industrial spaces to maintain the feel of a vital and active business community. This would be applicable to the large corporate buildings along the major corridors and the smaller commercial buildings fronting the regional highways.

MARLBOROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY & RESOURCES

11Why should Marlborough undertake a Local Economic Development Plan?*

Marlborough’s Current Economic Development Capacity—The Local Entities*

Other State Economic Development Resources*

Resources Needed to Implement the Marlborough Economic Development Strategy & Action Plan**

* Prepared by MEDC** Prepared in collaboration with the MEDC and the Consultant Team

218


11Marlborough Economic Development Capacity & Resource

This section of the Economic Development Master Plan was prepared in collaboration with the MEDC Executive Director. It includes background information, descriptions of current capacity and resources to carry out local economic development initiatives provided to the consultant team by MEDC and is sourced to MEDC. The consultant team was not tasked with developing background information nor provided information on MEDC’s current capacity and resources for independent review and analysis. Therefore, it is appropriate that this section include verbatim input from MEDC. Sections 11.2 and 11.3 are the verbatim input of the MEDC Executive Director, which draws upon the consultant team’s draft report Capacity and Resources section as well as additional information that MEDC believes relevant to a full un-derstanding of their mission and the relevant local and state resources that might be used to implement the Economic Development Strategy and Action Plan (see Section 12). MEDC has also requested that a section be included to represent their understanding of the rationale for this Economic Development Master Plan and this is also included verbatim as Section 11.1.

Section 11.4, Resources Needed to Implement the Economic Development Strategy and Action Plan has been edited by the consultant team and represents the collaborative find-ings of MEDC and the consultant team.

11.1 WHY SHOULD MARLBOROUGH UNDERTAKE A LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN? [PREPARED BY MEDC]

Why should Marlborough undertake a Local Economic Development Plan (LED)? Thomas S. Lyons and Roger E. Hamlin answered this question in the Introduction to their book, Creating an Economic Development Action Plan, published in 2001 by Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT. The following is an excerpt from their book.

“In a market economy, a set of forces translates the desires of individuals into an allocation of productive resources. Because market forces are so complex, intervention in the market by government can be risky, and often produces results that are the opposite of those intended. Some will argue that in the context of a national market economy, a local economy will func-tion on its own and should receive a minimal amount of local government intervention. They may further argue that if a particular community’s economy does poorly, it is because natural market forces are drawing people and businesses to other regions of the nation, and that this shift is good for the national economy.

However, the notion that the private economy should be left alone assumes that markets be-have according to the economist’s model of perfect competition. This model is based upon some improbable postulates. The perfect market economy model assumes perfect com-munication between market participants, no externalities, a very large number of standardized items or units for sale, and a large enough number of buyers and sellers such that no partici-pant can distort the market. In reality, private markets are full of imperfections that distort their automatic functioning for the good of all. The existence of these market imperfections does not necessarily argue against a market economy. One argument for local economic develop-ment planning may be, however, that the local government should take action to perfect the markets and make them work more efficiently.

Another argument for economic development planning is that local governments are already deeply involved in local business activity as suppliers of infrastructure, as tax collectors, as regulators of land, building and activities. Therefore, any local government should, at the least, understand what effect its behavior has on the local economy.

C h a p t e r P r e p a r e d b y M E D C


219

A third argument for local economic development planning is that communities are in compe-tition with one another. Although some dislocation may result from excessive intercommunity competition, this “mercantilism” also creates some benefits. The fact remains that our local government structure puts local economies head to head in a battle for economic survival. Those cities, metropolitan areas, rural regions, and states that do not plan effectively will lose.

At a minimum, therefore, local economic development planning continues to be important because it offers a strategy for improving the necessary interaction between business and government, for perfecting the markets through better communication, and for effectively competing for economic resources in a highly competitive environment.

So Marlborough is involved in LED planning because its leaders knew that markets are not perfect and action is necessary to make them work more efficiently; they knew that their lo-cal government is already involved in the local business community through the provision of public infrastructure and public safety services, the assessment and taxation of business property and the regulation of certain aspects of business operations; they knew that indeed they are in a competition with other communities for new investment and new revenues; and they knew that if they did not take action, the City would become a victim of “this highly competitive environment”.

In Marlborough, the LED planning process was given impetus by the MEDC’s often stated objective of a $1.4 billion increase in the City’s non-residential tax base over the next ten years (which is an estimate of the increase required to keep up with the expected increases in the cost of providing local public services while stabilizing the residential property taxes). While it has been shown in this document’s earlier sections (the Industrial, Commercial, Retail Sections and their real estate market analysis and the expert’s opinions) that this ob-jective would be difficult to achieve; it did lead to the realization that a significant portion of that growth could be achieved through a concentrated local economic development effort. It also lead to the other areas of analysis in this Plan and the identification of other economic development opportunities in other sectors; like housing specifically aimed at the under 35 year old (young professionals with no children) and over 55 year old (empty nester) markets, that are net revenue generators.

Finally, the Economic Development Strategy and Economic Development Action Plan that are presented as economic development opportunities, goals and action items in Section 12 of this Plan, serve as a blueprint for the economic development initiatives, projects and programs that will need to be developed and implemented if Marlborough is to realize the growth and development that it wants and needs for a healthy and prosperous future.

11.2 MARLBOROUGH’S CURRENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY - THE LOCAL ENTITIES [PREPARED BY MEDC]

The purpose of local economic development (LED) is to build up the economic capacity of a local area to improve its economic future and the quality of life for all. It is a process by which public, business and nongovernmental sector partners work collectively to create better conditions for economic growth and employment generation. Local economic development (LED) offers local government, the private and not-for-profit sectors, and local communities the opportunity to work together to improve the local economy. It focuses on enhancing com-petitiveness, increasing sustainable growth and ensuring that growth is inclusive. Successful LED depends on the collective efforts of the public, private and community sectors.

(Source: worldbank.org/local economic development)


220



In the City of Marlborough benefits from a number of entities that are involved in different as-pects of the local Economic Development process. Some of these entities are local, some of them are regional and still others are state-wide. Also, some of these entities are public, some of them are private and still others are quasi-public. The intent of this subsection is to identify those major entities that are or can contribute to the local efforts and thus have a significant impact on the overall local economic development of the City of Marlborough. Specifically, these entities include: the City of Marlborough (its Elected Officials, Depart-ments, Boards and Commissions); the Marlborough Economic Development Corporation; the Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce (with its Committees, Councils & Task Forces and Initiatives; the Marlborough Downtown Village Association; The Small Business Development Center (SBDC) of Clark University; the MetroWest / 495 Partnership with the 495 / MetroWest Development Compact; the MetroWest Regional Transit Authority; and the MetroWest / 495 Transportation Management Association (TMA). These entities and their current roles will be described primarily in their own words and in more detail in the following subsections 11.2.1 through 10.2.8.

11.2.1 City of Marlborough – Elected Officials, Departments, Boards and Commissions [Prepared by MEDC]

The Mayor – The Mayor is the Chief Executive Officer of the City. Elected every two years, the Mayor is responsible for overseeing all city departments as well as serving as a member and Chair of the Marlborough School Committee. A Primary duty of the Mayor’s office is the setting the city’s annual budget and tax rate, as approved by City Council. In the area of economic development the Mayor is an initial point of contact for out-of-town businesses in-terested in locating in or relocating to Marlborough. Also, developers interested in proposing major commercial, residential or mixed use projects for Marlborough sites, usually contact the Mayor’s office for an introduction and preliminary presentation and/or discussion. The Mayor is often the point of contact for local businesses with questions, issues or problems with local ordinances, permits, services or enforcement. The Mayor is also often the initia-tor of local policies and proposals, or programs whose focus is the promotion of economic development in the community; e.g. the 2006 proposal to create Marlborough 2010, Inc. the predecessor of the Marlborough Economic Development Corporation.

The City Council – The Marlborough City Council is comprised of 11 councilors, four who are Councilors-at-large elected city-wide and seven of whom are Ward Councilors. Each Ward Councilor is elected by the voters in his or her particular Ward. City Councilors serve a two-year term of office, co-terminus with the Mayor who is the Chief Executive Officer of the City. Under Marlborough’s Plan B Charter, the City Council serves as the Legislative branch. It is responsible for enacting laws, reviewing the annual operating budget, confirm-ing mayoral appointments, and providing the necessary balance to the actions of the Execu-tive branch of government. The City Council may not increase any amount in or the total of the annual budget nor add thereto any amount for a purpose not included therein except on recommendation of the Mayor. As the City of Marlborough prepares to enter a new legisla-tive year, the City Council remains committed to providing a system of municipal government that recognizes the careful expenditure of tax dollars, the responsible enactment of reason-able laws, and the shared interests of fair and equitable levels of public services.

The City Departments that are involved in the development process include those on the following list (with a brief description of their function):



221

City Assessors Department – The assessor is obliged to revalue all properties in the resi-dential and commercial condominium classes. In addition to certification duties, the Board finalizes the taxable list and prepares the tax bills; updates records relating to property trans-fers; inspects new construction, additions and alterations of sites; processes motor vehicle excise tax bills by year’s end; and administers special assessments and statutory exemptions.

Note: Under the Municipal Assessment Process, the Commercial and Industrial properties are valued based upon a combination of their income potential and market/cost analysis. These two classes of real property as well as personal property are taxed at the commercial rate that is higher than the residential rate; Residential properties, including apartment buildings, are taxed at the residential rate. One to three family homes are typically valued based on sales of comparable properties while apartment buildings of four and more units are valued on their income potential as well as a cost/market analysis; The market value of any such property will ordinarily be reflected in the sale price as long as it is an arm’s length (market) sale.

Community Development Authority – The Marlborough Community Development Authority is a special purpose government agency established in 1979 to manage the city’s commu-nity development programs, housing authority and redevelopment efforts. The agency owns and operates over 200 units of public housing, administers voucher programs, and funds housing rehabilitation projects, downtown revitalization, neighborhood stabilization efforts and infrastructure projects. CDA is responsible for securing and administering Community Devel-opment Block Grant funds and overseeing the use of those funds to support home improve-ments, neighborhood improvements and a variety of programs for youth, elderly and families.

Conservation Commission – The Commission’s Mission is to work to protect the natural resources of Marlborough, both its wetlands and open space, thus improving the quality of life for all City residents; including conservation land, rivers lakes and streams and the en-forcement of the State Wetlands Protection Act to protect all wetlands and water bodies from pollution. The Commission administers the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, and undertakes land acquisition and the management of conservation land, as well as provid-ing the public with education and public participation on environmental issues. This seven member board of dedicated volunteers is appointed by the Mayor.

Inspectional Services – The Office of Inspectional Services provides assistance to indi-viduals and contractors wishing to do construction in the City of Marlborough. The office also serves to enforce regulations of the city’s zoning ordinance, sign ordinance, fence ordinance and the Commonwealth of Mass. state building code. Also, Building permits are managed by the Department of Inspectional Services. While the City of Marlborough does not have any regulations in excess of CMR 780, the State Building Code; there are, however, dimen-sional issues such as setbacks that are governed by City’s Zoning Ordinance.

Planning Department - The Mission of the Planning Department is to conduct long range planning and to generally guide the physical development of the City of Marlborough. The Planning Director chairs the City’s Site Plan Review Committee, which accepts “Applications for Site Plan Approval,” for Non-residential and Major Residential Projects (a special form) and reviews each application and attached plans for conformance with the requirements of Chapter 272-2 of the Marlborough City Code. A complete application includes a completed cover form, the required plans and other information identified in the Code. All applicants are required to consult with the Planner at a “pre-application” review, prior to the submission of a formal application.


222



Note: An Overview of the Chapter 43D Expedited Permitting Process shows that in May 2007, the City of Marlborough adopted MGL Chapter 43D also known as “expedited permit-ting”. The City designated several sites as Priority Development Sites (PDS) including Hayes Memorial Drive; 417 South Street; 362 Elm Street; and 100 Crowley Drive. MGL Chapter 43D requires local permitting decisions on Priority Development Sites within 180 days of the filing of a completed application. The permitting affected by 43D includes special permits issued by the City Council; Zoning Board of Appeals and/ or Planning Board; variances by the ZBA; Orders of conditions and wetland decisions issued by the Conservation Commission; Flam-mable Materials License issued by the Fire Chief; Historic District commission decisions; and Title V and septic decisions issued by the Board of Health.

Local approvals not governed by the Expedited Permitting process include: building permits issued by the Inspectional Services Department, ANR Plans and Subdivision Approvals un-der the subdivision control law. The City of Marlborough has developed procedures for the expedited permitting process and city representatives would be happy to assist prospective applicants with this process.

The Planning Board – The Planning Board of the City of Marlborough is a seven-member Board comprised of individuals appointed by the Mayor and the City Council. In the City of Marlborough, the Planning Board is primarily concerned with any subdivision of land. It is the Planning Board’s responsibility to insure that every subdivision of land either meets or exceeds the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 41, Section 81 Subdivi-sion Rules and Regulations. The Board is also the special permit granting authority for any “Open Space” subdivision granted under the authority of the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Marlborough (Chapter 200).

Additionally, the Board also reviews any requests for relief or variance from the City’s Sign Ordinance as well as the special permit granting authority for work on any of the City’s Scenic Roads.

Note: Most subdivisions involve multiple lots on a larger parcel of land with the construction of a roadway. In some cases, single lots can be carved out of a larger lot or there can be a land swap between neighbors that does not require a full subdivision plan because the lots will meet all of the dimensional requirements of the current zoning as it applied to frontage requirements. In that case the term “approval not required” actually means “approval not required under the Subdivision Control Law.” In that instance the Planning Board reviews the plan to insure that the plan meets three standards: (1) The lots shown on the plan must front on one of three types of ways as specified in Chapter 41, Section 81L, MGL; (2) The lots shown on the plan must meet the minimum frontage requirements as specified in Chapter 41, Section 81L, MGL; or (3) The Planning Board’s determination that the vital access to the lots as contemplated by Chapter 41, Section 81L, MGL., otherwise exist.

Public Works Department – The Department of Public Works is tasked with providing multiple services to the residents of the City of Marlborough including the operation, care and maintenance of the city’s drinking water treatment and distribution systems, sewage col-lection and treatment systems, public roadways, roadway and off-road drainage systems, cemeteries, parks and recreation facilities, city-owned trees, solid waste and recyclables collection and disposal, snow and ice program, and the Geographic Information System (GIS). The Department is also responsible through its Engineering Office for capital project and subdivision design and construction oversight, administering the Department’s road opening permit program and providing technical support to all municipal officials, boards and commissions.



223

Note: On the City of Marlborough’s GIS System – A GIS (Geographic Information System) is a computer system capable of assembling, storing, manipulating, and displaying geographi-cally referenced information, i.e. data identified according to their locations. Simply put, a GIS combines layers of information about a place to give you a better understanding of that place. The layers of information you combine depends on your purpose. Some common examples would include: finding the best location for a new store, analyzing environmental damage, viewing similar crimes in a city to detect a pattern, and so on. The Public Works Department provides various geographic analysis and mapping services to support the City of Marlborough’s various departments. Some current uses of GIS within the city include in-frastructure management, public works, growth planning, street improvements, and Internet mapping. The City of Marlborough’s GIS is dedicated to providing customers with access to geographic information through expert implementation of the principles of geography, cartography and geo-spatial analysis.

Zoning Board of Appeals – The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) is comprised of five Board members as appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. The City’s Building inspector serves as the ZBA’s “Zoning Enforcement officer.” The function of the ZBA is to hear testimony regarding why an appeal is being request. An appeal to the permit grant-ing authority as the zoning ordinance or by-law may provide, may be taken by any person aggrieved by reason of his inability to obtain a permit or enforcement action from any ad-ministrative officer under the provisions of Chapter 40A, by the regional planning agency in whose area the city or town is situated, or by any person including an officer or board of the city of town, or of an abutting city or town aggrieved by an order or decision of the inspector of buildings who is also the Zoning Enforcement Officer, or other administrative official, in violation of any provision of this chapter or any ordinance or by-law adopted thereunder. To hear requests for Special Permits the Zoning bylaw must designate the Board as the Special Permit Granting Authority. The ZBA is also the permit granting authority for Comprehensive Permits (MGL, c.40B Sections 21-23).

Note: According to Mass General Laws Chapter 40A, Section 10: “In order for the Zoning Board of Appeals to legally grant a variance, all three findings must be made, i.e. the Board must find: (1) A substantial hardship, financial or otherwise; (2) No substantial detriment to the public good; and (3) No substantial derogation from the intent and purpose of the ordi-nance and that owing to the soil conditions, shape or topography of the land or structures, but not affecting generally the zoning district in which it is located, a literal enforcement of the ordinance would bring about item (1) above.” Also, “Regarding the definition of “Hard-ship” once the above factors are considered, “financial” hardship can be used for grounds of relief. However, the “financial hardship” must inure to all owners of the land in question as a result of its unique condition, not merely to the present owner owning to his or her peculiar or particular financial status.”

11.2.2 The Marlborough Economic Development Corporation [Prepared by MEDC]

In 2006, a group of local leaders (political and private sector people) had the vision to call for the creation of a new type of organization to pursue economic development in Marlborough. Based on similar organizations that had been created in other communities the concept of a non-profit economic development organization was that would involve political leaders (the Mayor and President of the City Council) but not be a part of the city government. It was initially named the Marlborough 2010 Corporation and its operation was funded primar-


224



ily from private sector donations with a small commitment from the city. Then, in May of 2007, Governor Patrick signed legislation to transform Marlborough 2010, Inc. from a local economic development corporation, into a quasi-public authority. Under the new legislation Marlborough 2010, which from its inception in 2006, had been operating as a nonprofit, was allowed to accept and use city funds, as well as make tax-free loans. Under Chapter 40 of the Acts of 2007: An Act establishing the Marlborough 2010 Corporation, as enacted by the Massachusetts Senate and House of Representatives in General Court and Approved by the Governor, it was stated that: There shall be a body politic and corporate to be known as the Marlborough 2010 Corporation. The corporation shall be a public instrumentality separate from the city, and shall not be considered an authority, board or committee of the city. The corporation is empowered to carry out the provisions of this act, and the exercise by the cor-poration of the powers conferred by this act shall be considered the performance of essential public and governmental functions.

The Legislature and Governor acknowledged the following facts that warranted the creation of the corporation: In the City of Marlborough unused, underused, substandard, undevel-oped or underdeveloped areas exist and that these areas constitute a menace, injurious and inimical threat to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the city; and that these areas constitute an economic liability substantially impairing or arresting the sound growth of the city and retarding the economic well-being of the commonwealth. It is further stated that redevelopment of these areas in accordance with locally-approved community and economic development, capital improvement or other plans, including the city’s master plan, for the elimination of these conditions and prevention of their recurrence is necessary to retain existing enterprises, attract new commercial, industrial or residential development and to promote sound and orderly growth of the city. It continues by noting that the exis-tence of these areas identified above have created a situation where persons are unwilling or unable to do business in the city and this menace is beyond remedy and control of the normal local regulatory powers; and to prevent a recurrence of these conditions the exercise of the powers of the corporation and any city or state assistance given to the corporation are deemed public uses and purposes for which public funds may be expended; and the acquisition, planning, clearance, development, rehabilitation or rebuilding of these above identified areas for commercial, industrial, residential, institutional and public facility pur-poses are public benefits for which public funds may be expended for the welfare of the city and the commonwealth.

In addition to identifying the specific purposes for the creation of the corporation, the legis-lature noted that in addition to the powers conferred on the corporation under the provisions of the act, the corporation shall, subject to the restrictions and limitations provided in the act, have a set of specific powers as delineated and listed under section 3(b) of the act. That list contains a total of thirty-one (31) specific powers, of which some of the key development related powers are identified here:

To make and enter into all contracts and agreements necessary or incidental to the perfor-mance of its duties; to receive and accept from any federal agency, the commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof any grants, loans or advances for or in aid of a development project or projects and to receive and accept contributions from any source of either money, property, labor or other things of value, to be held, used and applied for the purposes for which these grants, loans, advances and contributions may be made; to own and manage real property; to prepare or cause to be prepared plans, designs, drawings, specifications and estimates of cost for construction, reconstruction, development, redevelopment, reha-bilitation, remodeling, alteration or repair of development projects and, from time to time,



225

modify these plans, designs, drawings, specifications and estimates; to designate property for development and preservation projects, except that when the property is owned by the city, the designation and use shall have the concurrence of the city council; to arrange or contract with the city for the planning, re-planning, opening or closing of streets, roads, alleys or other places or for the furnishing of facilities or for the acquisition by the city of property or property rights or for the furnishing of property or services in connection with a development project or projects; to act with respect to one or more development projects as a corpora-tion organized under chapter 121A of the General laws; to sell, convey, mortgage, lease, transfer, exchange, or otherwise dispose of any property, both real and personal, that the objectives and purposes of the corporation may require, subject to any limitations as may be prescribed by law; to acquire improved and unimproved real estate for the purposes of developing, demolishing, constructing or reconstructing commercial, industrial, residential, institutional, or other establishments thereon, or for developing, redeveloping or constructing public facilities, or for the purpose of disposing of such real estate to others for the develop-ment, redevelopment, demolition, construction, operation or management of commercial, industrial, residential, institutional or other establishments, or for public facilities, as the ob-jects and purposes of the corporation may require, but nothing contained in this act shall be construed to grant the corporation the power of eminent domain; to acquire, demolish, construct, reconstruct, alter, maintain, sell, convey, transfer, mortgage, pledge or otherwise dispose of commercial, industrial, residential or business establishments or other property as the objects and purposes of the corporation may require; to promote the city as a retail, commercial, industrial, professional and financial center.

11.2.3 Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce [Prepared by MEDC]

The Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce (which has been serving the community since 1924), works with public officials, business people and citizens to make the region a better place to live, work and play. It is accredited by the U. S. Chamber of Commerce, which only about 15% of all Chambers nationally are. The Chamber’s espoused mission is to promote and advocate for its members’ business and civic interests and to collaborate with the communities for the overall economic benefit of the region. The Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce is a voluntary partnership of business and professional people work-ing together to build a healthy economy and to improve the quality of life in the communities. It serves it members (over 700 of the area’s small and large businesses) by: promoting a strong regional economy; providing opportunities to build relationships; delivering programs to help businesses grow; representing and advocating on behalf of business; and, enhanc-ing commerce through community stewardship.

The Chamber members (businesses, organizations and individuals) are concerned with the socio-economic climate of the region. They have joined together because they know they stand a better chance of getting things done when they speak as one voice. As it works to improve the economy and quality of life of the communities that make up the Marlborough Region, the Chamber keeps a set of broad objectives in mind: to help business prosper and grow; to increase job opportunities; to encourage an orderly expansion and development of all segments of the community; to contribute to the overall economic stability of the com-munity; and, to encourage and promote the nation’s private enterprise system of competitive marketing. It is a not-for-profit, private organization that provides: a forum and resources for business people to experience individual and collective growth; education through Semi-nars, Breakfasts and the Small Business Development Center from Clark University; and


226



legislative advocacy and Economic Development that ultimately result in cohesive regional success through the 495/MetroWest Corridor Partnership.

11.2.3.1 Chamber Committees, Councils & Task Forces [Prepared by MEDC]

The Chamber’s many committees and task forces work diligently to address city and state legislative (needs) and issues. Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce provides leadership and acts as a salesperson for ideas, working in concert with other organizations and government to make the community a better place to work and live. The Chamber has been an active participant in recent public discussions about issues such as highway and rail transportation, car pool incentives, the regional shopping mall, and commercial and personal property tax rate. The Chamber’s successes are due to the involvement of its mem-bers and each year, a reorganization of its committees is key to bringing (new) excitement and enthusiasm to a variety of initiatives that the Chamber is tackling. A listing of the Cham-ber’s Committees and their goals would include the following examples: Governmental Af-fairs – Both brings forth (new legislative ideas) and educates members on legislation that affects (their) businesses. It also continues to develop relationships with elected officials by providing the membership with access to them; School/Business Committee – School and Business Partnerships, intern and extern programs, Education Showcase, School to Career Partnerships and student scholarships; Tax Rate Review Task Force – Annual research and lobbying for a fair and equitable tax rate for business; 495/MetroWest Corridor Partnership Committees – Infrastructure planning and projects; Economic Development Committees – Regional and Local Economic Development Issues, Economic Development Projects and Activities, Workforce Development and University Development; and Regional Positioning Committees – Legislative & Regulatory Action, Regional Marketing/Branding, and Communi-cations Institute for Local Officials. Other Committees include: Ambassadors; Heritage Fes-tival Committee; Marketing/ Communications; Professional Development Training Program; Strategic Planning; Special Events and Women’s Business Council Business Connections.

Note: The Chamber has a number of Initiatives with which it is involved, but perhaps one which is noteworthy is the Marlborough Regional Community Foundation – The Chamber (in 1998) using its Section 501(c)(3) non-profit status, created the Foundation, which is legally empowered to collect tax-exempt contributions and disburse the funds in support of non-profit community activities. It has become a community resource for business and civic organizations in the areas of fundraising, education, and business and economic develop-ment.

11.2.4 Marlborough Downtown Village Association [Prepared by MEDC]

The Marlborough Downtown Village Association (MDVA), is described as, “A community of business owners, residents, professionals, employees, and Landlords, working together for the common good of Marlborough’s Main Street District.” Its’ mission is to create an association of people with an interest in downtown Marlborough for the purpose of creat-ing an environment that attracts visitors, shoppers and tenants and to develop a commu-nication network to keep downtown stakeholders abreast of issues and events that would affect everyone.

The intent of the MDVA is to unite the greater Main Street community (everyone that has a stake in the downtown); create an exciting vision for the downtown (using vibrant downtown



227

villages developed elsewhere as models; and then, step-by-step work to make that vision a reality. Already there has been significant progress made over the past several years with renovations that have been completed, new construction that is in progress, and the holding of major events that have attracted visitor’s downtown. The MDV is organizing for a sus-tained effort to improve the downtown by building on the recent successes. It has recently identified an initial set of objectives for the organization, as follows:

• Identify downtown district stakeholders and invite all to join;

• Gain consensus on the 2-4 most important issues impeding a vibrant downtown;

• Gain support of City Hall to address key issues identified by the MDV;

• Breakdown cultural barriers and engage all members of MDV;

• Work with landlords to attract tenants; and

• Generate activities within the downtown to increase visitors and shoppers to Main Street.

Finally, the MDV has also identified a list of “current tasks” that it will be undertaking as it is addressing the above stated objectives and an expansion of its membership. Those tasks include the following:

• Improve the parking situation to make it more convenient for visitors to the downtown;

• Improve signage that better identifies the downtown and clearly directs visitors to the “free” parking areas;

• Improve the pathways from the parking garages to Main Street, making them more inviting to visitors;

• Make the necessary improvements to the parking garages to make them more inviting to visitors; and

• Consider a “Public Art” program.

11.2.5 The Small Business Development Center (SBDC) of Clark Uni-versity [Prepared by MEDC]

The Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce has partnered with the SBDC of Clark University for a number of years to offer professional advice and assistance to small busi-nesses in Marlborough and throughout the Greater Marlborough area. As Chamber Presi-dent, Susanne Morreale-Leeber notes in a recent article: “Job creation in an uncertain econ-omy is on everyone’s mind today. Small to mid-size businesses are creating the vast majority of new jobs, according to The Small Business Administration (SBA).”

“One of the major hurdles to small businesses growing and creating jobs is their inability to secure financing. They need lines of credit, equipment loans, real estate loans and working capital. It is difficult for the small business owner to prepare the essential business plan and loan proposal necessary to obtain these funds.” said Paula Camara, Senior Business Advi-sor (Clark University SBDC).

The Clark University Small Business Development Center (SBDC) has helped many people navigate this process and assisted the client in developing a roadmap, as well as, gathering the necessary information to present a solid financial proposal to the funding source, be it bank loans, private financing, equity or alternative lending. The Clark University SBDC is one of the top centers in the country for helping clients in gaining access to capital over the past ten years. Their loan packaging process is well known and respected by the regional banks and SBA.


228



Companies that survived in 2008-2009 are now growing and expanding. Small manufactur-ers are buying property and equipment, investing in tooling and bringing back some jobs from China due to quality concerns. Merger and acquisition activity is up as well. Compa-nies or individuals are now looking to buy a company, benefit from Mass Small Business De-velopment Center (MSBDC) services as they assist with valuation, due diligence and access to capital. All companies, no matter what stage they are in, need marketing, sales, cash flow management and advice from someone who understands the demands of business owner-ship. Many of the SBDC clients are working on strategic marketing plans that incorporate social media and changing technologies.

The MSBDC services help business owners better manage their companies, allowing them to grow faster. In 2010 the Clark SBDC provided business advisory services to 837 clients (more than half of them existing businesses) resulting in $16.9 million capital infusion, 41 new business launches, 210 jobs created and 213 jobs saved.

During the 29 years at Clark University, the Massachusetts Small Business Development Center Network Program has assisted over 21,000 entrepreneurs and small business own-ers. They helped clients raise $227 million in capital and created 3,500 new jobs in Central Massachusetts. Free one-to-one confidential appointments are held at the Marlborough Re-gional Chamber of Commerce offices located at 11 Florence Street, Marlborough, MA or at Clark University, Worcester, MA. If a business is at a point where a review with Senior SBDC Advisor would be of value, an appointment with Paula Camara can be arranged through the Chamber.

11.2.6 MetroWest / 495 Partnership [Prepared by MEDC]

For years, the 495/MetroWest region (which consists of some 37 communities along the 495 corridor) has been an area primed for economic growth and development. However, despite the tantalizing opportunities presented by this area, it was frequently overlooked by policy-makers throughout its history. As a result of the unease caused by this limited representation, a group of visionary regional leaders worked together to create the 495/MetroWest Partner-ship in 2003. As a dedicated public-private association, the Partnership is able to address all the sectors of need in the region, and act as an advocacy organization focused on economic development, transportation, and water supply issues that proliferate the 495/MetroWest Corridor. Since the creation of the organization, the Partnership has enjoyed a great variety of successes, and has become recognized by legislators as the true voice for a region crucial to the economy of the Commonwealth. The Partnership is governed by a board of directors that combines influential, dynamic individuals from both public and private sectors in the 495/MetroWest region. Control of the board is shared equally between co-chairmen, one each from the private and public spheres. The vice-chairs below them are apportioned in the same way. The board convenes quarterly to discuss any issues pertaining to the activities of the Partnership, as well as to discuss strategies for upcoming efforts. State legislators have an important role as members of an exclusive advisory council, which helps provide the board with an indispensible auxiliary layer of counsel and support.

The 495/MetroWest Partnership has a clearly defined mission, incorporating numerous relat-ed objectives. The Partnership, through a unique, public-private collaboration with business-es, municipalities, and other stakeholders, is the regional leader for creating an environment that prepares for and cultivates sustainable growth. This is accomplished by coordinating, educating, and advocating for solutions to regional constraints and limited natural resourc-es. The key priorities that the Partnership addresses within the 495/MetroWest region are



229

separate and unique, but operate as part of an interrelated network of regional needs. All areas of concern are important, and each one must be addressed in order to achieve the goals envisioned by the Partnership.

The key priorities and their related goals are as follows: Economic Development – Retain, grow, and attract employers to the region; Workforce Housing – Advocate for diversified housing stock in all communities for a range of incomes; Natural Resources – Develop best practices on sustainable water, energy, and natural resources; Skilled Workforce – Retain and attract a skilled workforce to grow existing and new businesses; Transportation – Ease the flow of goods and persons within, to, and from the region; and, Organizational Sustain-ability – Increase recognition, financial support, awareness, and credibility of the Partnership.

495 / MetroWest Development Compact

There is a special initiative that the 495 / MetroWest Partnership and all of its communities are involved in at this time and that initiative is referred to as the “495 / MetroWest Compact”. The following is a detailed description of the initiative as provided by the Partnership. For the last twenty years, the communities in the 495/MetroWest region of Massachusetts have undergone significant growth in employment and population. Looking forward, the region’s public and private sector leaders recognize the need for collaborative approaches to infra-structure and land use to ensure the vitality of the region’s economy and quality of life. The 495/MetroWest Development Compact is creating a shared framework for state, regional, and local strategies for priority development and land preservation as well as transportation and other infrastructure investments in the 37 municipalities in the region.

The Patrick-Murray Administration through the Executive Office of Housing & Economic De-velopment is partnering with the Central Massachusetts Regional Planning Commission, the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, the MetroWest Regional Collaborative, the 495/Me-troWest Partnership, and Mass Audubon Society to engage the region in the preparation of a comprehensive land use and development plan for the 495/MetroWest region, modeled on the award-winning South Coast Rail Corridor Plan. A key component of this plan will be identifying priority development and preservation areas and significant transportation and infrastructure investments for the region (see below). Like the South Coast Plan, the 495/MetroWest plan will be prepared in collaboration with regional and local participants and engage both public and private sectors to form the framework for public decision-making in land use regulation and infrastructure investment within the region over the next twenty years.

The Compact is guided by six fundamental principles:

The following are the six fundamentals that guide the Compact process: Continued new growth will likely require major transportation and other infrastructure upgrades, beyond what is needed to keep existing systems in good repair; New commercial and residential growth must occur in a manner that is respectful of open space resources, transportation networks, and water resources in the region; Land use and transportation decisions must take into account the principles established by the Global Warming Solutions Act, the trans-portation reorganization statute and the objectives of the Clean Energy and Climate Plan, and the GreenDOT initiative; Workforce housing must continue to be produced and pre-served within the region at a scale that allows the number of workers living in the region to keep pace with the number of new jobs created in the region; Sustainable new growth will involve the creation and maintenance of an effective public transit system that will coordinate with existing transit; and, Coordinated planning and implementation efforts between jurisdic-


230



tions are necessary. The project is slated to be completed by December 31, 2011 and will specifically address these four major areas.

Priority Development Areas (PDA)

Locations potentially capable of supporting additional development or redevelopment, but that may first require additional investments in infrastructure. May be a single use or mixed-use: a combination of retail, commercial, office, or housing. Can range in size from a single lot to many acres. May include adaptive reuse of existing buildings to preserve sense of place. Generally characterized by good access, available infrastructure (primarily water and sewer), and an absence of environmental constraints. Areas have undergone extensive area-wide or neighborhood planning processes and may have detailed recommendations for future actions. Areas designated under state programs such as Chapter 43D (expedited permitting), Chapter 40R (smart growth zones) or Economic Opportunity Areas can be ex-amples of PDAs.

Priority Preservation Areas (PPA)

Deserve special protection due to significant environmental factors and/or natural features, such as endangered species habitats, large blocks of high quality intact habitat (BioMap2), areas critical to water supply, scenic vistas, areas important to a cultural landscape, or areas of historical significance. Are not currently permanently protected (e.g., via conservation restriction, municipal or state conservation land, land trust ownership, etc.). In general, exist-ing parks or new park facilities would not fall within this category. May be critical to linking open space and also trails within a community across municipal boundaries that are part of a larger, regional network.

Significant Transportation Investments (STIs)

Transportation projects, that have the potential to increase efficiency and enhance inter-connectivity for facilities, which serve regional transportation needs. May be a project in a town or within a town’s sub-region. In most cases, these potential projects address major roadways as well as transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities that either individually or collec-tively serves regional travel needs. May include improvements for commercial airports and intermodal freight facilities, that are key to the regional economy. Locally identified projects, along with projects from other statewide and regional planning documents, will be evaluated to develop an initial set of Regionally Significant Transportation Investments (RSTIs).

Significant Infrastructure Investments (SIIs)

Are infrastructure projects that have the potential to increase efficiency and capacity and enhance development potential for facilities/sites which serve regional needs.

May be a project in a town or within a town’s sub-region. In most cases, these potential projects address water, sewer/wastewater, storm water, and may include new infrastructure upgrades/increase in capacity to existing infrastructure that either individually or collectively serve regional needs. Locally identified projects, along with projects from other statewide and regional planning documents, will be evaluated to develop an initial set of Regionally Significant Infrastructure Investments (RSIIs).



231

11.2.7 MetroWest Regional Transit Authority [Prepared by MEDC]

The MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA) is a regional public transit authority pro-viding the City of Marlborough and ten other area communities (Ashland, Framingham, Hol-liston, Hopkinton, Natick, Sherborn, Southborough, Sudbury, Wayland, and Weston) with bus and paratransit services. The MWRTA was formed in 2006 and began service on July 1, 2007 with the purpose of filling the void in public transportation services in the Metrow-est region. Through a commitment to deliver expanded public transportation service to the business and commercial hubs across the MetroWest region, the goals and purpose of the MWRTA are embodied in its mission statement: “Build a public transportation system to de-liver convenient and dependable service that enhances mobility, environmental quality and economic vitality in the region.”

The MWRTA is headquartered in Framingham, MA and operates a fleet of twenty Ford E-Series cutaway-based 18 passenger buses. All buses contain lift systems capable of car-rying up to 800 pounds for physically disabled passengers. The daily ridership (February 2008) was estimated at 645 with a monthly average of over 18,700. Funding for the MWRTA comes partially from the state and local governments of the communities it operates within. The eleven member communities of the MWRTA receive varying levels of service: Ashland, Framingham, Holliston, Hopkinton, Marlborough, Natick, and Southborough receive fixed-route bus spread over ten routes and paratransit service, while Sherborn, Sudbury, Wayland, and Weston receive only paratransit service.

Note: Paratransit service is a flexible passenger transportation service which does not fol-low fixed routes or schedules. According to ADA requirements, the MWRTA must provide paratransit service as a curb-to-curb service to eligible residents having a physical, cogni-tive, or mental disability within a 3/4 mile radius of a fixed route regular bus service. In addi-tion, MWRTA paratransit service is also provided to eligible residents within any of its eleven member communities. All MWRTA buses are equipped with lift systems to accommodate the physically handicapped along their regular fixed routes. The MWRTA also provides para-transit service to MWRTA service area border towns at an increased fare. The paratransit service is provided in the form of a call-ahead multi-passenger shuttle allowing disabled residents of MWRTA communities to be picked up at their houses and shuttled to any other location within or bordering the MWRTA service region, such as other residences, grocery stores, hospitals, or job sites. Prior to the creation of the MWRTA, the Massachusetts Bay transportation Authority (MBTA) provided part of its paratransit service, called The Ride to the two communities of Framingham and Natick within the current MWRTA service area. The MBTA continued to provide The RIDE to Framingham and Natick until 2009 under contrac-tual obligations. On July 1, 2009, administration of paratransit service to Framingham and Natick switched from the MBTA to MWRTA in alignment with the change in assessments paid to the MWRTA by those communities rather than to the MBTA.

11.2.8 MetroWest /495 Transportation Management Association (TMA) [Prepared by MEDC]

The TMA is a member-based organization. TMA services are only available to employees of the more than 30 member companies in Framingham, Hopkinton, Marlborough, Natick Southborough, Sudbury and Westborough. The TMA strives to reduce congestion and im-prove air quality by promoting carpooling, vanpooling, taking public transit, biking and walk-ing to work to nearly 40,000 employees of more than 30 member companies in MetroWest. The TMA’s five key efforts are as follows:


232



• Promote a free, secure ride matching database for employees of member companies.

• Offer a free Guaranteed Ride Home to people who leave their cars at home at least two days a week.

• Reach out to employees in member companies at regular onsite events, to educate them on the supporting programs and benefits of giving their cars a break.

• Promote public transit in the region by sharing schedules, routes and maps of public transit in the region.

• Advocate, lobby and join coalitions locally, state-wide and nationally to change Ameri-can’s habit of driving a car alone to work.

Two chambers of commerce host the TMA’s office – the MetroWest Chamber of Commerce and the Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce. Companies that join the TMA also join one of the Chambers of Commerce. The two Chambers of Commerce merged their TMA organizations in 2000 to gain economies of scale and better serve the region.

11.2.9 Summary of the Entities and their Roles [Prepared by MEDC]

From the information provided in the subsections above 11.2.1 through 11.2.8, a summary of the specific roles that each entity is playing in the local economic development process is presented below.

The City (Its Elected Officials, Departments and Boards and Commissions):

The Mayor:

• Point of contact for out-of-town businesses interested in Marlborough as a new location;

• Point of contact for developers interested in proposing major commercial, residential or mixed use projects for Marlborough sites;

• Point of contact for local businesses with questions, issues or problems with local ordi-nances, permits, services or enforcement;

• Initiator of local policies, projects, and programs addressing specific economic devel-opment issues;

• Proposer of the annual city budget and tax rate and the setting of local investment priorities

The City Council:

• The approving authority for city budget and tax rate and investments

• The approving authority of Special Permits required for development projects

• Review and approval of Mayoral appointments as prescribed

• Review and approve all TIF (Tax Increment Financing) Agreements with local business-es and their submission to the State Economic Assistance Coordinating Council for final approval



233

The City Departments:

City Assessors Department:

• Obligated revalue of all residential and commercial condominium properties;

• Finalizes the taxable list and prepares tax bills;

• Updates property transfer records;

• Inspects new construction, additions and alterations of sites;

• Processes motor vehicle excise tax bills;

• Administers special assessments and statutory exemptions;

Community Development Authority:

• Manages city’s community development programs;

• Manages city’s housing authority and redevelopment efforts;

• Owns and operates over 200 units of public housing;

• Administers housing voucher programs;

• Funds housing rehabilitation projects;

• Funds downtown revitalization projects;

• Funds neighborhood stabilization efforts;

• Funds infrastructure projects;

• Secures and administers CDBG funds and their use;

Conservation Commission:

• Works to protect city’s natural resources (wetlands and open space);

• Works to improve quality of life for city residents;

• Administration and enforcement of the State’s Wetlands Protection Act;

• Land acquisition and management of conservation land;

• Provides public with education/participation on environmental issues;

Inspectional Services:

• Provides assistance to individuals/contractors wishing to construct in the city;

• Enforce regulations of the city’s zoning ordinance, sign ordinance, fence ordinance and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts state building code;

• The issuance and management of all building permits;

• Oversee compliance with dimensional requirements of city zoning ordinance;


234



Planning Department:

• Conduct long range planning and generally guide the physical development of the City;

• Planning Director chairs the city’s Site Plan Review Committee;

• Planning Director meets with all applicants for site plan review at a pre-application re-view;

• The Site Plan Review Committee accepts applications and reviews each application and attached plans for conformance with Chapter 272-2 of the Marlborough City Code;

• The city does not have a Planning Director at this time, the city’s Commissioner of In-spectional Services is serving as an interim Planning Director;

Planning Board:

• Primarily concerned with the subdivision of land;

• Responsible for insuring that every subdivision of land either meets or exceeds the requirements of MGL c41s81, Subdivision Rules and Regulations;

• Special permit granting authority for any “Open Space” subdivision granted under city’s zoning ordinance (chapter 200);

• Reviews any requests for relief or variance from the city’s sign ordinance;

• Special permit granting authority for work on any of the city’s Scenic roads;

Public Works Department:

• Responsible for the operation, care and maintenance of the city’s:

○ Drinking water treatment and distribution systems

○ Sewage collection and treatment systems

○ Public roadways

○ Roadway and off-road drainage systems

○ Cemeteries, parks and recreational facilities

○ City-owned tress

○ Solid waste and recyclables collection and disposal

○ Snow and ice program

○ GIS (geographical information system)

○ It is also responsible (through its Engineering Office) for capital project and subdivi-sion design and construction oversight

○ Administering the Department’s road opening permit program;

○ For providing technical support to all municipal officials, boards and commissions

Zoning Board of Appeals:

• Main function is to hear testimony regarding why an appeal is being requested;

• Hear appeals to the permit granting authority as the zoning ordinance or by-law may provide;



235

• Appeals may be made by any person aggrieved by reason of his/her inability to obtain a permit or enforcement action from any administrative officer under the provisions of Chapter 40A; or

○ By the regional planning agency in whose area the city is located; or

○ By any person including an officer or board of the city; or

○ Of an abutting city or town aggrieved by an order or decision of the inspector of build-ings who is also Zoning Enforcement Officer; or

○ Other administrative official, in violation of any provision of this chapter or any ordi-nance or by-law adopter thereunder;

• To hear requests for Special Permits the Zoning bylaw must designate the ZBA as the Special Permit Granting Authority

• The ZBA is also the permit granting authority for Comprehensive Permits under MGL Ch.40B Sections 21-23;

Marlborough Economic Development Corporation (MEDC):

The following list is abridged because Chapter 40 of the Acts of 2007, as enacted by the Massachusetts Legislature (House and Senate) and approved by the Governor, lists over 40 specific powers given to the MEDC, some of which are not directly development powers. A complete listing of the MEDC’s powers can be found in the copy of Chapter 40 of the Acts of 2007 contained in the Appendices to this Plan.

• To make and enter into all contracts and agreements necessary or incidental to the performance of its duties;

• To receive and accept from any federal agency, the commonwealth or any political sub-division thereof any grants, loans or advances for or in aid of a development project or projects and to receive and accept contributions from any source of either money, property, labor or other things of value, to be held, used and applied for the purposes for which these grants, loans, advances and contributions may be made;

• To own and manage real property;

• To prepare or cause to be prepared plans, designs, drawings, specifications and esti-mates of cost for construction, reconstruction, development, redevelopment, rehabilita-tion, remodeling, alteration or repair of development projects and, from time to time, modify these plans, designs, drawings, specifications and estimates;

• To designate property for development and preservation projects, except that when the property is owned by the city, the designation and use shall have the concurrence of the city council;

• To arrange or contract with the city for the planning, re-planning, opening or closing of streets, roads, alleys or other places or for the furnishing of facilities or for the acquisition by the city of property or property rights or for the furnishing of property or services in connection with a development project or projects;

• To act with respect to one or more development projects as a corporation organized under chapter 121A of the General laws;

• To sell, convey, mortgage, lease, transfer, exchange, or otherwise dispose of any prop-erty, both real and personal, that the objectives and purposes of the corporation may


236



require, subject to any limitations as may be prescribed by law;

• To acquire improved and unimproved real estate for the purposes of developing, demol-ishing, constructing or reconstructing commercial, industrial, residential, institutional, or other establishments thereon, or for developing, redeveloping or constructing public facilities, or for the purpose of disposing of such real estate to others for the develop-ment, redevelopment, demolition, construction, operation or management of commer-cial, industrial, residential, institutional or other establishments, or for public facilities, as the objects and purposes of the corporation may require, but nothing contained in this act shall be construed to grant the corporation the power of eminent domain;

• To acquire, demolish, construct, reconstruct, alter, maintain, sell, convey, transfer, mort-gage, pledge or otherwise dispose of commercial, industrial, residential or business es-tablishments or other property as the objects and purposes of the corporation may require; to promote the city as a retail, commercial, industrial, professional and financial center.

The Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce:

• To promote advocate for its members’ business and civic interests

• To collaborate with communities for the overall economic benefit of the region

• To collaboratively build a healthy economy and to improve the quality of life in the com-munities in which it operates by adhering to a broad set of objectives;

○ To help businesses prosper and grow

○ To increase job opportunities

○ To encourage an orderly expansion and development of all segments of the community

○ To contribute to the overall economic stability of the community

○ To encourage and promote the nation’s private enterprise system of competitive marketing

• It serves its over 700 members (small and large businesses) by;

○ Promoting a strong regional economy

○ Providing opportunities to build relationships

○ Delivering programs to help businesses grow

○ Representing and advocating on behalf of businesses

○ Enhancing commerce through community stewardship

• Through its various committees, councils and task forces the Chamber provides these other services;

○ Brings forward new ideas for legislation

○ Provides education on proposed and newly enacted legislation

○ Provides members with access to political leaders

○ Encourages opportunities for business/school partnerships for educational and work experience purposes

○ Promote local events and activities

○ Serve as a fundraising, education and business resource for other community non-profit organizations



237

The Marlborough Downtown Village Association:

• Create an association of people with an interest in downtown Marlborough;

• Create an environment that attracts visitors, shoppers and tenants to the downtown

• To develop a communications network to keep downtown stakeholders abreast of is-sues and events;

• Create an exciting vision for the downtown

• Work to make that vision a realty

• Gain support of city hall to address key issues

• Work with individual landlords to attract tenants

• Generate downtown activities to attract visitors and shoppers

• Recently identified immediate tasks to work on;

○ Improve and make downtown parking more convenient

○ Improve signage identifying shops, venues and parking locations

○ Improve pathways between garages and Main Street to make them more inviting;

○ Improve the parking garages themselves to make them more inviting

○ Consider a public art program for the downtown;

The Small Business Development Center (SBDC) of Clark University:

• Offer professional advice and assistance to small businesses

• Assist small businesses to grow an increase job opportunities by

• Addresses the small businesses’ inability to secure financing for credit lines, equipment loans’ real estate loans, and working capital loans

• Assist small businesses with the preparation of solid financing proposals

• Assist with the valuation, due diligence and access to capital for companies and/or individuals interested in buying a small business;

• Assist with the preparation of marketing plans that incorporate social media and chang-ing technologies;

• Assist small business owners to better manage their companies, allowing them to grow faster;

MetroWest/495 Partnership:

• A public/private association that addresses all the sectors of need in the region (which consists of 37 communities along the 495 corridor);

• Acts as an advocacy organization focused on regional economic development, trans-portation, and water supply issues;

• Develops strategies for addressing regional issues;

• Serves as the regional leader for creating an environment that prepares for and culti-vates sustainable growth;


238



• Key priorities and goals are;

• Retain, grow and attract employers to the region;

• Advocate for diversified housing stock in all communities for a range of incomes;

• Develop best practices on sustainable water, energy, and natural resources;

• Retain and attract a skilled workforce to grow existing and new businesses;

• Ease the flow of goods and persons within, to and from the region;

• Increase recognition, financial support, awareness, and credibility of the Partnership;

495/MetroWest Development Compact:

• It is a regional (the Partnership’s 37 communities along the 495 corridor) initiative in-volving both public and private sectors in the creation of a shared framework for state, regional and local strategies for;

○ Priority development areas

○ Priority preservation areas

○ Significant transportation investments

○ Significant infrastructure investments

MetroWest Regional Transit Authority:

• It is a regional public transit authority providing (Marlborough and ten other area com-munities) with fixed route bus and paratransit services;

• a public transportation system that delivers convenient and dependable service that enhances;

○ mobility of the region

○ environmental quality of the region

○ economic vitality of the region

• Committed to deliver transportation services to the business and commercial hubs across the Metrowest region;

MetroWest/495 Transportation Management Association (TMA):

• It is a member-based organization, whose services are only available to employees of member companies;

• Currently about 30 member companies with 40,000 employees, located in Marlbor-ough, Framingham, Natick, Hopkinton, Southborough, Sudbury and Westborough;

• Objective is to reduce congestion and air pollution by promoting the use of;

○ Carpooling and vanpooling;

○ Public transit;

○ Biking and walking to work;

• Promotes use of ride matching data base

• Provides educational programs at employment sites



239

• Provides schedules and info on use of public transit

• Advocates and lobbies to change America’s habit of single commuter car use

11.3 OTHER STATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES [PREPARED BY MEDC]

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has an array of state agencies, quasi-public entities and affiliated organizations performing economic development functions to assist munici-palities, including administration of related federal funds. Recent legislation, Chapter 240, reorganized the roles, relationships, responsibilities, investment criteria, financing priorities, and funding of statewide economic development agencies and quasi-public entities, and created the new Office of Performance Management & Oversight. The Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development (EOHED) is implementing Ch. 240 policy and regu-lations, including establishing Regional Economic Development Organizations (REDOs) which will serve as the framework for future statewide economic development investments.

11.3.1 State Agencies and Quasi-Public Entities

State economic development resources fall into three categories: financing, technical assis-tance, and support programs, and are available to City officials, businesses and residents from the following:

• Massachusetts Cultural Council;

• Massachusetts Marketing Partnership;

• Massachusetts Growth Capital Corporation;

• Mass Development;

• Mass Life Science Center;

• Mass Clean Energy Technology Center;

• Mass Technology Development Corporation;

• Community Development Assistance Corporation;

• Mass Technology Collaborative;

• Mass Technology Transfer Center; and

• Mass Commonwealth Corporation.

11.3.2. Other Economic Development Agencies and Organizations

There are many regional, national and even international agencies and organizations that provide differing levels of detailed information, reports, and case studies related to a variety of economic development issues and topics. Communities can take advantage of publica-tions and sometimes free consulting services to assist with the creation of a local, develop-ment of a project proposal or the drafting of a program to address a specific need. The following is a sample list of some these agencies and organizations that communities can join or call on for assistance with an economic development activity:

• MAPC/MetroWest Growth Management Committee;


240



• Massachusetts Economic Development Council;

• Northeast Economic Development Association;

• The Urban land Institute;

• National Congress for Community Economic Development;

• National Business Incubation Association:

• New England Venture Capital Association -Consortium of VC firms in the region;

• American Planning Association;

• International Economic Development Council:

• National Venture capital Association;

• National Community Development Association;

• National Association of Industrial and Office Parks (NAIOP);

11.4 RESOURCES NEEDED TO IMPLEMENT THE MARLBOROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY & ACTION PLAN [PREPARED COLLABORATIVELY BY MEDC AND THE CONSULTANT TEAM]

The planning and implemention of a successful local economic development program will require coordination and cooperation among the several local entities involved in economic development in Marlborough identified in Section 11.2, as well as full cooperation and par-ticipation of local elected officials and City departments. In other communities, entities such as the Marlborough Economic Development Corporation have been called upon by local elected officials to be a central clearinghouse for economic development initiatives and to take a lead role in communicating the efforts of other local agencies and city departments to each other and to spearhead outreach and follow-up efforts needed to attract and retain businesses to the community.

The Marlborough Economic Development Corporation is a state-chartered, non-profit eco-nomic development corporation, with its principal place of business now located at 91 Main Street, Suite 204 in downtown Marlborough. The stated purposes of the corporation (in the Act) are as follows:(1) to serve as a catalyst for stimulating projects that improve the quality of life and help achieve Marlborough’s vision for its future; (2) to be a catalyst for positive change and an advocate of solutions and opportunities for the city’s businesses and eco-nomic development through programs; (3) to create a suitable living environment and to strengthen partnerships between all levels of government, as well as non-profit and for-profit organizations; (4) to enhance the position, image and perception of the city as a desirable place to live, work, visit and invest; (5) to aid the city, other public agencies, private enterpris-es and non-profit organizations in the speedy and orderly development or redevelopment of the areas identified above; and (6) to aid the city, other public agencies, private enterprises and non-profit organizations in the development, operation and management of facilities and infrastructure necessary to support the economic vitality of the city.

The MEDC is managed by a 25-member Board of Directors and in particular a 7-member Executive Committee of the Board of Directors. The MEDC Board is largely comprised of private business and non-profit institution and representative organization leaders in Marl-borough. Their input to public sector decision-making is crucial to the effectiveness of City



241

actions to stimulate economic development, as it is the private and other non-government sectors that will create the preponderance of new jobs and it is the private sector (businesses and households) that pay all property and other tax revenues. In every community in which new business development and retention of existing businesses has been advanced beyond the status quo ante, the private and non-profit sectors of that community have had a leading role and a handful of key business, institution, and representative organization leaders have emerged to champion those efforts. The close coordination between elected officials, public agencies, and private businesses called for in this Economic Development Strategy and Ac-tion Plan is a principal reason for considering MEDC having a leading role in implementing the plan. This is not to say that MEDC can singularly carry out the objectives and action items identified in this report – primary responsibilities for development review, permitting, budget-ing, and day-to-day operations that are critical to successful local economic development initiatives are and will remain the purview of local elected officials and City departments.

The MEDC currently has three full-time employees as follows: an Executive Director who oversees and manages the day-to-day operations of the organization, and who has experi-ence working with other types of organizations and groups to achieve projects and operate programs that have mutual benefit; a Marketing Director who manages the MEDC website, publishes the MEDC newsletter, writes short articles on local businesses and events, plans, organizes and publicizes MEDC events, and promotes local businesses, venues and activi-ties and maintains contact with local businesses and organizations; and an Administrative Assistant who serves as the organization’s, receptionist, secretary and office manager, sup-porting and maintaining the day-to-day operation of the staff and the office. The current operating budget for the MEDC is about $200,000.00 annually, including staffing, office and ordinary maintenance expenses.

At the present time (September 2011) the MEDC staff is involved in the following:

• Overseeing the preparation of the Marlborough Economic Development Master Plan;

• Development and implementation of a Business Outreach Program that seeks to visit local businesses and engage them in a discussion of their business operations, their experiences operating a business in Marlborough, their immediate and long-range plans, and the identification of any needs, issues or problems that MEDC can help with;;

• Planning and organizing “Special Events,” specifically including: an event to thank those individuals that have supported and assisted the MEDC through its first five years of existence; the MEDC’s 2nd Annual Innovation Summit event which will seek to bring together many of the city’s high-tech and life sciences companies for a networking, educational and informational experience;

• Preparation of new Marketing Materials (folders and insert sheets) that will highlight the local government, the local economy, the local schools, local recreation and sporting opportunities, the local housing market, etc.; and

• Participating in the activities of a number of formal and ad hoc committees and groups involved in the planning and/or promotion for downtown organizing, downtown im-provements, commercial properties, the hospitality industry and sports events, and in-creasing educational opportunities in Marlborough.

In summary, the MEDC current economic development efforts include: long-range plan-ning; local business outreach; event planning and implementation; business networking and educational programming; marketing the community; and participating in local and regional groups and organizations focused on economic development policy, projects and activities.


242



Additional Resources Needed by MEDC

The consultant team notes in Section 12 (Action Plan) that the present three-person staff will not be sufficient to carry out the initiatives that have emerged from both the public process and research and analyses undertaken for this report, and specifically to carry out those responsibilities identified as appropriate for MEDC. Two additional staff positions at MEDC – a real estate development specialist redspecialist and a business recruitment/retention specialist would significantly add to MEDC’s capacity to carry out crucial roles for advancing the goals and action items identified in this plan for a non-profit entity.

The real estate development specialist – which MEDC suggests be called the Director of Real Estate Development – would work on a range of projects, from small downtown in-fill sites to the rehabilitation of vacant or underutilized industrial and commercial buildings and land. This individual would work with prospective owners, tenants and developers. He or she would advise/assist on project financing (loan applications, state and/or federal grant applications for development assistance, applications for TIFs/DIFs, developing and/or reviewing pro forma financial statements for project development and project operation, etc.) and assist businesses and prospective developers in working with City departments responsible for project permitting (preparations for site plan review, environmental permits or clearances, sewer connections, utility connections, etc.). This individual could also assist property owners and brokers in marketing available commercial space in existing buildings as well as land targeted by the City for commercial development.

The business retention and attraction specialist – which MEDC would call the Director of Business Development -- would work on the development and implementation of a Business Retention Program (including help in obtaining private financing and public loans, grants, and tax incentives) and a Business Attraction Program which would include marketing Marl-borough as a business location (identifying target groups, working with individual commer-cial property owners, attending trade shows, and preparing technical and/or financial infor-mation for marketing pieces) and working with businesses that express interest in locating in or relocating to Marlborough. A Business Expansion Program would be a joint effort of the real estate and business development specialists because it would include identifying local businesses that are either interested in expanding in their current location or considering moving to a larger or smaller (if consolidating or downsizing) facility/space in Marlborough.

The additional staffing salary and benefits and ordinary maintenance budget support is es-timated by MEDC at about $190,000.00 annually, and this amount would be consistent with the consultant team’s experience in other communities that have such capabilities. When added to the current staffing and operating expenses of about $200,000.00, the MEDC annual budget would be about $390,000.00 to implement the full Economic Development Strategy and Action Plan for Marlborough.

Source of Funding

Currently the principal source of funding for the MEDC budget is donations from local private businesses supplemented with a modest contribution from the City. While the MEDC has some very generous donors that have provided financial support over the first five years of its existence, the recent economic climate has made annual fund raising more difficult and the number of private donors and the levels of contributors has declined, according to the MEDC Executive Director. The MEDC Executive Director also reports that it would be a dif-ficult task for the MEDC to attempt to raise sufficient private contributions to fund its 2012 operating budget, at its current staffing level; and that it would be “near impossible” for the



243

MEDC to raise sufficient private funds to support the additional staff needed to implement the Master Plan recommendations.

If the MEDC is to add the new staff and expertise necessary to implement the Economic Development Master Plan goals and action items identified as appropriate for MEDC, the MEDC needs to identify a new principal source of funding. In November 2010, the City of Marlborough enacted a 2% increase in the hotel rooms tax, with the additional revenues generated identified as a source for funding new local economic development initiatives and activities. According to MEDC officials, the 2% increase in the hotel rooms tax is anticipated to generate about $500-600,000 annually. Such amounts would be sufficient to cover the current and anticipated MEDC operating budget, subject to negotiation with the Mayor and City Council.


ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY & ACTION PLAN

12Economic Development Issues, Assets and Opportunities

Industrial Sector Economic Development Goals & Action Items

Commercial Sector Economic Development Goals and Action Items

Retail Sector Economic Development Goals and Action Items

Residential Economic Development Goals and Action Items

Labor Market Economic Development Goals & Action Items

Support Systems Economic Development Goals & Action Items

Quality of Life Goals & Objectives Statement

Economic Development Capacity & Resource Goals and Action Items

246


12Economic Development Strategy & Action Plan

This final section of the Marlborough Economic Development Master Plan presents goals and action items, most of which are identified in prior sections of the report. These goals and action items reflect the public participation process, including Focus Groups and a public workshop; input from MEDC staff and the MEDC Board and Executive Committee; as well as the interviews, research and analyses conducted by the consultant team. Because eco-nomic development at the municipal level is a complex process requiring shared goals and objectives and the integration of all public and quasi-public agencies and elected officials as well as private sector concerns, both MEDC and the consultant team recommend that the next step is for MEDC and city officials to jointly establish priorities for implementing the action items identified in this report.

The foundation of all successful economic development strategies is an understanding of the existing constraints and opportunities particular to the community. These include “perceived” strengths and weaknesses, as well as those that can be objectively measured. Perceptions can govern actions, and where warranted steps can be taken to strengthen positive views of a community as well as to overcome negative perceptions as well as objectively measured strengths and weaknesses. In the following Section 12.1, perceived and objectively measured Issues, Assets, and Opportunities for enhancing Marlborough’s competitive position for cap-turing additional jobs and commercial tax base are summarized. Sections 12.2 through 12.9 summarize goals and action items enumerated by sector in previous report sections.

12.1 ECONOMICDEVELOPMENTISSUES,ASSETSANDOPPORTUNITIES

Through the public outreach and participation process as well as the consultant team’s research the following items were identified as either Issues that are impeding business development or Assets and Opportunities that are supporting and/or promoting business development in the City of Marlborough.

Economic Development Issues

• Marlborough’s Master Plan is out of date and needs to be updated to reflect the new directions in community development, capitalize on market opportunities through se-lective zoning updates (particularly for mixed-use residential/commercial development), and to improve the quality of life for residents of Marlborough. Marlborough needs a full-time City Planner to assist the Planning and Zoning Boards with development proposals as well as assure the City is capitalizing on federal and state grant and related funding opportunities.

• Marlborough’s commercial tax rate is higher than in some surrounding communities which creates a challenge for the City to remain competitive in the regional market.

• Building height and mixed use restrictions in the zoning regulations make it difficult to maximize development potential and be competitive in the real estate market place.

• The Special Permit process is difficult particularly because of scheduling issues with the City Council which acts as the permit-granting authority for many Special Permits. In most communities, the development approval process is handled by the Planning and Zoning Boards with assistance of a full-time City Planner. In the most successful communities, a formal development approval process is adopted and includes initial input from all department heads, clear criteria for their review (with these criteria made up front and explicit to potential developers and businesses requesting permits), and


247

the entire review and approval/denial process is accomplished in a maximum of 90 to 120 days.

• Overall, the land use and zoning regulations for the City need recodification to improve consistency and clarity.

• Industrial process discharge limitations for businesses discharging non-domestic wastewater to the WWTP are an obstacle to industrial growth.

• The amount of vacant office space resulting from the most recent economic downturn has caused a perceived problem that must be turned around by filling those spaces.

• There are undeserved, negative perceptions of Marlborough regarding the public school system and quality of housing that don’t reflect the reality.

• Potential budget changes in federal entitlement programs will impact the local health care industry.

• The area provides access to trained workers, but not enough for growth in all sectors, particularly health care.

Economic Development Assets

• Asset:Marlborough’s location is central to the whole New England region.

• Asset:Complimenting its location, Marlborough is supported by interstate highways that provide regional access to airports and major metropolitan areas, including Worcester, Hartford, Providence and Boston. The roadway assets allow the City to offer highly competitive travel times to labor and business markets and suppliers. (Of the many attributes Marlborough offers for economic development, accessibility to a large regional labor market of highly skilled workers has been and remains paramount. As documented in the report, improvements to the I-290/Route 495 intersection as well as improved access to key development areas from the current I-495 intersections are a high priority for assuring the continued accessibility advantage.)

• Asset:Marlborough hosts a solid corporate and diversified industry base currently ex-ists in Marlborough.

• Asset:The City’s hotels and conference spaces are a regional asset. The central loca-tion and highways helps keep rates affordable for business travelers and tourists.

• Asset:Sports, tourism and event industry is strong in Marlborough and the City is rec-ognized nationally as a destination for youth sporting competitions.

• Asset: An inventory of desirable office space with high quality finishes is available in Marlborough.

• Asset:The commercial retail sector is active and aggressive in pursuing sale and lease opportunities for currently vacant space.

• Asset: Marlborough has achieved its affordable housing requirement to satisfy Chapter 40B regulations (10% of all housing units are subsidized affordable units).

Economic Development Opportunities

• Opportunity:Make Marlborough a more attractive location for living, working and shop-ping, dining and recreation. As the largest community in the local region, Marlborough has a number of opportunities to become a “special place” featuring cultural, recreation-al, dining and shopping opportunities that can attract new residents and businesses.

248



• Opportunity: Reduce the current commercial tax rate to help attract new development and retain existing businesses. (As discussed in the real estate market analysis sections of this report, lease rates for currently available industrial and commercial properties in Marlborough are competitive within the seven-community Greater Marlborough Region. Over time, with increased occupancies and valuations of existing properties as well as potential development opportunities, a relatively higher commercial tax rate in Marlbor-ough will become an objective as well as “perceived” competitive disadvantage.)

• Opportunity:Change the Mayoral term from two years to four years to increase political stability and continuity for economic development policies.

• Opportunity: Support a local sports industry with high quality comprehensive marketing programs to garner greater notice and attract more national events.

• Opportunity:Take advantage of Marlborough Hospital, Marlborough’s Life Sciences cluster, proximity to Worcester and Boston and their hospitals and medical schools to attract more medical researchers.

• Opportunity:Increase medical resources and support that would allow a private prac-tice medical group to develop in Marlborough.

• Opportunity: Improve the business-friendly environment with City Hall outreach, and certain changes to the permitting and enforcement process.

• Opportunity:Acknowledge and recognize local community and business leadership.

• Opportunity: The City should encourage young people to live here. The City should survey what happens when young people finish local schooling – what attracts them to stay, their perceptions of the activities and assets, their sense of community. This information can be woven into the City’s broader economic development strategy. (As noted in the Residential sector real estate market analysis, demand for rental units tar-geted to young professionals (households under 35) and empty nesters (households over age 55) is strong in the overall market region. Such households have few if any school aged children and therefore can be significant net positive contributors to city tax revenues. These market segments are also attracted to mixed residential-commercial projects that combine housing with retail/restaurant and office space, and many typi-cally find active downtowns and well designed units in older buildings attractive places to live.)

• Opportunity:Past restaurant, hotel and activity brochures for visitors have been very beneficial. A new and consistent marketing campaign for visitors to Marlborough is needed.

• Opportunity:The City and private businesses should jointly pursue events, conventions and tourism business, as opposed to relying upon a regional agency.

• Opportunity:The City could use another attraction, such as a water park or some other activity, to help the hotels and restaurants compensate for the corporate vacancies.

• Opportunity: The City should promote and assist in the marketing of the areas of the City identified in this Plan for major redevelopment and new development.

• Opportunity: The City should make the Downtown a “Unique Life Style Place” for living, dining, socializing, entertainment, education and recreation that will be attractive to new residents, local residents and visitors.

• Opportunity:The City should look at creating an Eastside “Village Center” along Route 20 that would also be a “Unique Life Style Place” for living, dining, socializing, entertain-


249

ment, education and recreation that will be attractive to new residents, local residents and visitors.

• Opportunity: The City should explore the redevelopment and reuse of the Armory build-ing as a cultural center.

• Opportunity:The City should investigate improving the overall quality of life with greater walk-ability, connecting trails with the neighborhoods and Downtown, more arts, culture and green space.

• Opportunity:Many residents believe the Marlborough school system has great teach-ers and a successful program that is not recognized as such. (Quality of schools is an important consideration for employees of local and regional businesses – objective measures of the local public schools capabilities should be documented and marketed to prospective residents and to attract businesses.)

• Opportunity: Corporate partnerships with the public and local schools should be formed to educate the students and the teachers as to what the most necessary skills are for 21st century employment.

• Opportunity: The business-friendly environment could be improved with changes to the economic development outreach and permitting and processes:

○ A single point of contact for economic development in Marlborough is needed. Where communities have done this – via an entity like MEDC, a business develop-ment ombusdsman with clear authority from the City CEO to coordinate all depart-ments involved in the development/redevelopment and business expansion permit-ting process, a downtown development coordinator, and/or similar initiatives – they have been more successful in retaining existing businesses and attracting new ones. Marlborough currently engages in an informal inter-departmental review of develop-ment applications, headed by the building inspector, and this effort should be con-tinued and enhanced. A single designated individual or entity for these purposes as well as outreach to prospective new business would also clarify and simplify required interactions between businesses and City Hall.

○ Create a support structure for small business – become “the place for small business.”

• Opportunity: Areas for major redevelopment and new development include:

○ The I-290 corridor for new retail and commercial development.

○ The I-495 corridor and the Southwest corner of the City for new commercial develop-ment mixed with retail and residential uses.

○ The northern and southern sections of Route 85, particularly for reuse and redevelop-ment of existing properties.

○ The Route 20 corridor in the East Side of town where a mixed-use/commercial village center is desired.

○ Downtown Marlborough with infill development that makes a more vibrant place to visit, shop, work, live and eat.

○ Increasing the allowed height of commercial and mixed residential/commercial uses to greater than four stories or otherwise increasing density within existing parcels such as the HP site, along Interstates 495 and 290, and Route 20.

• Opportunity: The types of new development and redevelopment to attract include:

○ Incubator space including facilities created in partnership with institutions

250



○ Large businesses – the next ‘Genzyme’

○ Mixed use projects promoted for the Southwest quadrant with residential, office and retail space

○ Sports facilities

○ Higher quality retail along Route 20

○ Small infill businesses along Route 85

○ Institutions

• Opportunity: Improve the Downtown (resident participants in the study use this term):

○ Bring more entertainment into the downtown.

○ Improve the Lincoln/Mechanic Street area with mixed housing and commercial uses, historic walking tour, and cultural district.

○ Create Downtown anchors; such as museum, performance center/movie theater, educational institution, cultural center, and so forth.

12.2 INDUSTRIALSECTORECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALS&ACTIONITEMS

The consultant team notes that distinctions between traditionally defined “industrial”, “com-mercial,” and “flex” space and their respective business users are increasingly blurred. Many types of innovative and other small and/or light manufacturing, R&D, and distributive busi-nesses can be accommodated in “office” space originally built for administrative, financial, and professional/technical services businesses, for which there are substantial vacancies as documented in the real estate market analyses presented in prior report sections. Therefore, many of the goals and action items noted in this Industrial Sector section and the subse-quent Commercial Sector section apply equally to each sector.

IndustrialSectorGoal1:Industrial development and redevelopment should be encouraged in the Industrial zoning districts (LI and I), the majority of which are in the Southwestern sec-tion of the City, and along the I-495 and I-290 corridors. Virtually all communities are seeking so-called “high tech,” “clean tech,” and “bio tech” industries, but many types of innovative and traditional light manufacturing/distributive industries may be suitable and not all require a highly skilled labor force. Many of Marlborough’s current residents and labor force partici-pants lack such skills and could therefore use these jobs or additional training.

IndustrialSectorGoal2:Incubator space in the small and mid-size ranges, or with flexible layouts, and with high quality lab spaces should be encouraged through the City programs.

IndustrialSectorGoal3:Mixed use development including retail, residential and flex space should be permitted around industrial areas to provide uses supportive of the principal in-dustrial uses.

IndustrialSectorGoal4: Industrial manufacturing businesses could improve with the siting of raw material suppliers closer to the facilities. Close proximity to raw material suppliers is critical for managing supply dependability and shipping costs. If the materials are high value and can be transported and stored safely, the City should provide opportunities for sites.

IndustrialSectorGoal5:The City of Marlborough should maintain or reduce the property tax rate for industrial and commercial uses. The current industrial/commercial property tax rate is higher than in many competitive communities, and while this has not significantly af-


251

fected current lease rates compared to surrounding communities, over time it will become a competitive disadvantage. Marlborough may also need to provide financial incentives to help retain existing businesses and attract new development (for example, Tax Increment Financing (TIF) that allows graduated property taxes and coupled with state corporate tax benefits is a popular mechanism used by many competitive communities.)

IndustrialSectorGoal6:The City and MEDC should establish and maintain a database of available industrial and commercial buildings, space and land in Marlborough as part of the City and MEDC websites, including name and contact information to reach directly the ap-propriate municipal and MEDC officials and brokers.

IndustrialSectorAction Item6.1:Seek advice from other municipalities, local com-mercial real estate brokers, MOBD, MassEcon and others providing and using similar on-line services; determine most effective approach to inventory and update available industrial property information, track usage and feedback, provide staff support for in-quiries; create system, monitor and evaluate projected operating cost, potential revenue as fixed item in MEDC annual budget.

IndustrialSectorGoal7:The MEDC should actively promote vacant and under-utilized Marl-borough property through public, and other economic development on-line property listing services.

IndustrialSectorActionItem7.1: Renew MEDC membership in Massachusetts Eco-nomic Development Alliance (MAED); update MassEcon on-line municipal contact information, and provide active links to MEDC and City website links; submit current profiles of local property listings directly to MassEcon, and establish a system to coor-dinate listing updates in coordination with area real estate brokers; select sites, suitable for the Mass Top 100 listing, and prepare annual application (October 2011); consider participating as an exhibitor at a MassEcon sponsored trade-show/presentation target-ing leasing agents, tenants and investors.

IndustrialSectorActionItem7.2:Renew MEDC organizational relationship with Mass-Bio, the state’s biotechnology industry trade association; update MassBio on-line real estate listings in Marlborough, provide current municipal contact information with links to MEDC and City websites; submit profiles of current local property listings and estab-lish a system to coordinate listing updates in coordination with area real estate brokers; prepare and submit on-line survey to elevate City’s BioReady™ Community ranking from the Silver to Gold level.

IndustrialSectorActionItem7.3: Evaluate ways to expedite City permitting for building improvements to accommodate the shorter timeframe of lease transactions typical of smaller companies. Solicit input from the MEDC Commercial Property Owners/Manag-ers Committee members to suggest ways to expedite the City’s permitting process and provide examples of more efficient municipal procedures from other communities.

IndustrialSectorGoal8:The City and MEDC should collaborate with the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center and Life Sciences Center to identify and provide support for emerging technology-based industry subsections, including Clean Tech, Green Tech, Green Bio and Renewable Energy industries.

IndustrialSectorActionItem8.1:Explore opportunities to leverage the City’s designa-tion as a Green Community that increases funding options and technical assistance

252



resources for existing Marlborough businesses and entrepreneurs in Clean Tech/Re-newable Energy industry R&D, commercial production and full-line manufacturing.

IndustrialSectorActionItem8.2:Investigate feasibility of establishing a business incu-bator in Marlborough to serve Clean Tech/Green Tech and other emerging biotech in-dustries; determine facility requirements and identify suitable building space; prepare a business and operating plan, with anticipated expenses and potential revenues; pursue discussions with WPI Venture Center and MassBio Incubator regarding possible satellite business incubator in Marlborough.

IndustrialSectorGoal9: City should participate in regional high technology industry forums, particularly those that bring together academic-entrepreneurs and funders, to publicize that start-ups in the physical and life sciences are thriving in Marlborough. These firms have specialized facility, support, and labor market needs and the success of similar businesses tells other entrepreneurs that Marlborough can meet these specialized needs

12.3COMMERCIALSECTORECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALSANDACTIONITEMS

CommercialSectorGoal1:A village shopping and business district should be established on the Route 20 corridor in east Marlborough. Establishing a village business district on the east side of Marlborough will support existing businesses and attract small to medium size companies to the area.

CommercialSectorGoal2: The City of Marlborough should maintain or reduce the property tax rate for industrial and commercial uses. The current industrial/commercial property tax rate is higher than in many competitive communities, and while this has not significantly af-fected current lease rates compared to surrounding communities, over time it will become a competitive disadvantage. Marlborough may also need to provide financial incentives to help retain existing businesses and attract new development (for example, Tax Increment Financing (TIF) that allows graduated property taxes and coupled with state corporate tax benefits is a popular mechanism used by many competitive communities.) Same as Indus-trial Sector Goal 5.

CommercialSectorGoal3:City of Marlborough should work to increase its incubator and mid-scale growth properties with labs. Increasing these types of properties will attract other small and mid-sized growing companies to Marlborough. Attracting growing companies to Marlborough is a long-term strategy to capture large-scale businesses.

CommercialSectorGoal4:The City of Marlborough should establish clearly defined and coordinated roles for all municipal entities involved with business recruitment and retention on behalf of the City. City Hall and all Marlborough businesses should have an established point of contact to establish and maintain positive relationships.

CommercialSectorGoal5:The City and MEDC should establish and maintain a database of available flex and commercial buildings, facility space and land in Marlborough as a web-page on the City and MEDC websites, including name and contact information to reach directly the appropriate municipal and MEDC officials. Marlborough properties suitable for specialized facility needs should also have a separate/additional link with profile and con-tacts for other business, trade, funding and real estate development networks promoting physical and life sciences, generally, and Clean Tech, Green Tech, Green Bio, and Advanced Manufacturing industries in particular.


253

CommercialSectorActionItem5.1: Seek advice from other municipalities, local com-mercial real estate brokers, MOBD, MassEcon and others providing and using similar on-line services; determine most effective approach to inventory and update available flex and commercial property information, track usage and feedback, provide staff sup-port for inquiries; create system, monitor and evaluate projected operating cost, poten-tial revenue as fixed item in MEDC annual budget.

CommercialSectorGoal6: Ensure that sufficient capacity exists at both the Westerly and Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) to accommodate future development.

CommercialSectorActionItem6.1: City officials should actively work with project pro-ponents to understand their water and wastewater requirements early in the permitting process in order to assist proponents in meeting those requirements.

CommercialSectorGoal7:Ensure efficiency in allowing connections to both WWTPs.

Commercial Sector Action Item 7.1:City officials should actively work with project proponents to identify conservation measures that will reduce water and wastewater volumes.

CommercialSectorGoal8: Maximize capacity at both WWTPs.

CommercialSectorActionItem8.1:City officials should work with project proponents to identify Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) deficiencies in infrastructure elements leading from proposed projects to the subject WWTP, and to require I/I improvements as project-related mitigation.

CommercialSectorGoal9: The City of Marlborough reportedly has numerous properties categorized as hazardous waste sites or brownfields which are zoned for industrial and com-mercial use. Many of these sites have completed C. 21E assessments to determine types and amounts of toxicity, remediation required, and future ‘activity and use’ restrictions. Some of these sites have been cleaned-up, reused/redeveloped, and others may be vacant or underutilized buildings and land. The status of the City vacant and underutilized brownfield sites could not be ascertained from information available to the consultant team during the course of this study. The City recently received a $200,000 EPA brownfields grant award to clean-up petroleum contamination at the former Jenney Service Station (25 East Main Street). “Marlborough MA Brownfields 2011 Cleanup Grant Fact Sheet” is in Appendix B to this report.

CommercialSectorGoal10:The MEDC should document the characteristics and econom-ic impact, market area and economic potential associated with existing operations/services, as well as near-term plans or opportunities for expansion and diversification.

CommercialSectorGoal11:The MEDC should assume a leadership role to assist local sports, tourism and hospitality business owners/managers, the Marlborough Region Cham-ber of Commerce and Downtown Village Association in on-going efforts to strengthen this tra-ditional and growing ‘niche’ market which reinforces Marlborough as a regional destination.

254



12.4RETAILSECTORECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALSANDACTIONITEMS

An aggressive municipal economic development strategy is the most effective way to en-hance Marlborough’s retail sector. One step in this direction is to acknowledge that Down-town is a significant asset that is now underperforming.

A strong Downtown helps define a community’s image and is an important asset affecting both household and business location decisions – if viewed by the community and outsiders as a liability it will detract from the larger economic development goals for the community overall. If viewed as an asset, it will strengthen the City’s ability to attract and retain residents and businesses citywide., As noted in the Retail Sector section of the report, there are po-tentially significant opportunities to expand existing retail offerings and attract new ones to the Downtown based on sales leakages from the current resident market within a 5-minute drive time of Downtown.

Retail Sector Goal 1: Downtown Marlborough’s unique assets and existing attractions should be capitalized on and cultivated to create a regional destination to shop, dine, work and live.

RetailSectorActionItem1.1:The MEDC should actively collaborate with other Down-town Area interests groups, elected officials and organizations to establish/enhance Downtown Marlborough as a destination for specialty retail merchants, services, restau-rants, cultural and entertainment activities serving the Greater Marlborough market area.

RetailSectorAction Item1.2:The City of Marlborough should develop a marketing campaign to attract both local and regional residents as well as business and other visitors to Downtown Marlborough and to highlight the City’s Downtown and other res-taurants, shops and attractions. This campaign should seek to capitalize on travelers who may already visit Marlborough because of the active business traveler and sporting event hotel business.

RetailSectorAction Item1.3: The City and MEDC should establish and maintain a database of available commercial buildings, space and land zoned or suitable for retail use in Marlborough as a webpage on the City and MEDC websites, including name and contact information to reach directly the appropriate municipal and MEDC officials.

RetailSectorActionItem1.4: Downtown Marlborough properties should also have a separate/additional link to appropriate business, trade, and real estate networks that promote ‘Sustainable Community,’ ‘Green Communities,’ and other ‘Smart Growth’ land use and economic development.

RetailSectorActionItem1.5:The MEDC should seek advice/assistance from regional and state planning and economic development agencies to prepare a Downtown Area Revitalization Plan that provides an assessment of market-driven opportunities, and specific public and private sector actions required to facilitate continued property reuse/redevelopment and business expansion.

RetailSectorGoal2: Downtown Marlborough should be a pedestrian safe and friendly envi-ronment with a mix of retail, restaurant, commercial and residential uses.

RetailSectorGoal3:Infill development over surface parking lots and mixed used for resi-dential, retail and commercial should be promoted.


255

RetailSectorGoal4:A village shopping and business district should be established on the Route 20 corridor in east Marlborough. Establishing a village business district on the east side of Marlborough will support existing businesses and attract small to medium size com-panies to the area. As noted in the Retail Sector analyses in previous report sections, there are currently opportunities to attract additional retail uses based on current sales leakages within the existing resident market.

RetailSectorGoal5: Parking standards for all uses should be significantly reduced in the Downtown area because of existing public parking.

RetailSectorActionItem5.1:Undertake a parking demand study to understand peak and off-peak parking supply, demand, and shared parking opportunities within Down-town.

RetailSectorActionItem5.2:Amend Business zoning in the Downtown area or create an overlay zone to enable several recommendations that would improve the Downtown area. Those recommendations include:

RetailSectorActionItem5.2a:Reduce Parking Requirements – The number of required spaces should be reduced in the downtown area in recognition of the amount of existing public parking available and shared parking opportunities;

RetailSectorActionItem5.2b:Increase Allowable Coverage – Allow up to 100% coverage to maximize use of parcels;

RetailSectorActionItem5.2c:Setbacks – Add a zero lot line setback or a ‘build to back of sidewalk’ requirement;

RetailSectorActionItem5.2d:Mixed use – Add allowance for residential and of-fice space on the upper floors and limit first floors to retail uses;

RetailSectorAction Item5.2e:Downtown Restaurants – As restaurants are of-ten associated with retail uses and particularly the downtown, relax the standards specified in Note 31 in § 650-18, Conditions for restaurants in the downtown.

RetailSectorActionItem5.3:Overall re-codification of the Zoning Regulations is rec-ommended as a means to address current inconsistencies and confusing text that ap-ply to all sections.

RetailSectorGoal6:Enhance the quality of life for Marlborough residents by aggressively pursuing local retail development opportunities. The retail gap analysis conducted for Down-town and target areas on the East Side and West Side indicated substantial opportunities to expand existing retail businesses and attract new ones. The MEDC and area merchants and brokers should use this information to facilitate business expansion and recruitment. One of the most effective strategies for Downtowns has been for public officials and private busi-ness interest to identify successful small retailers elsewhere in the market area and connect them to the owners of vacant or underutilized space and offer initial rental prices at below market rates as an inducement to open an additional store in Marlborough.

256



12.5RESIDENTIALECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALSANDACTIONITEMS

In the Residential Sector section of the report the consultant team noted that a comprehen-sive analysis of housing in Marlborough was beyond the scope of this report, which covered an overview of market trends and focused on potential demand for market rate rental and condo units that could support the MEDC goal of enhancing net fiscal revenues to the City. Affordable housing, and particularly affordable housing for Marlborough’s workforce, should be addressed in the context of a City-wide Comprehensive Plan that takes into consideration all items relevant to housing policy, including: open space, playgrounds, school capacities and student enrollment projections, police and fire protection capacities; as well as trans-portation, water, sewer and other infrastructure capacities. Within the limited context in which housing has been assessed as part of an economic development strategy to enhance fis-cal revenues in Marlborough, there are significant potential market opportunities within the region for Marlborough to capture young professionals and empty nesters who do not have school aged children and whose housing units would likely contribute net fiscal revenues to the City.

ResidentialSectorGoal1: City should amend Business zoning in the Downtown area or cre-ate an overlay zone to enable several recommendations that would improve the Downtown area.

ResidentialSectorAction Item1.1: Those recommendations should include adding mixed use with an allowance for residential and office space on the upper floors and first floors limited to retail uses.

ResidentialSectorGoal2:Take advantage of Marlborough’s great central location and high-way accessibility to attract residential developers interested in developing housing aimed at the under 35 and over 55 year old market segments.

ResidentialSectorGoal3: Promote Marlborough’s “inner-City” neighborhoods as places of diversity, charm, affordable housing prices, as great locations for families, with proximity to schools, the downtown and recreation.

ResidentialSectorGoal4:Promote the City as a community that accommodates many dif-ferent residential life styles from urban to country to suburban, with all of the amenities; good schools, good health care, good shopping, entertainment and dining as well as great sports and recreational opportunities.

12.6LABORMARKETECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALS&ACTIONITEMS

Commitment to a strong workforce will improve the attractiveness of Marlborough to busi-nesses as well as enhance the prosperity of its residents. Workforce development affects all sectors of the City’s economy and economic development prospects. The industrial sector analysis in Section 4.1.4 and commercial sector analysis in Section 5.1.4 show that Marlborough growth industries primarily depend on medium and high skilled workers. The retail sector analysis in Section 6.1.4 showed more limited opportunities for low skilled and entry level workers. Section 8.4 found that Marlborough draws upon a broad regional labor market, and that Marlborough’s resident workforce is relatively lower skilled than the regional labor market. However, given its superior accessibility, businesses in the City can easily


257

draw from a high skilled and educated regional workforce. This implies the following goals for future economic development.

LaborMarketGoal1: Ensure continued access to the regional labor market. This does not simply mean preserving the status quo. Economic development competitiveness is mea-sured relative to other business locations, so Marlborough must ensure that its own success isn’t overshadowed by investments and improvements in competing locations.

LaborMarketActionItem1.1:Work with regional planning and transportation agencies to ensure relative free flow of traffic on state and interstate highways.

LaborMarketActionItem1.2: Prioritize actions on state and interstate highways that increase access to Marlborough and reduce the distance from on/off ramps to employ-ment centers.

LaborMarketActionItem1.3Coordinate planning and investment decisions among City departments and state agencies to ensure that local transportation plans allow ease of access for commuters and minimize congestion between residential, employ-ment, and services/retail areas during peak travel times.

LaborMarketGoal2: Improve the skill level of Marlborough’s resident workforce. This goal will help employers to recruit locally (benefitting employers and employees by reducing com-muting costs and commute-related work delays/interruptions), and will help increase the earning power of local residents.

LaborMarketActionItem2.1:Support and encourage local workforce training institu-tions to provide programs in Marlborough that meet the needs of employers looking to fill specific skill gaps. Work with Quinsigamond Community College, Worcester Poly-tech and other institutions (such as Framingham State College) and local employers to develop on-demand training to meet immediate and specific needs. Such programs will support existing workforce needs and be attractive to firms considering locating in Marlborough.

LaborMarketActionItem2.2: Engage actively with the one-stop career center in Marl-borough. Work proactively with City and state legislative delegations to maintain and enhance the center in Marlborough to diminish any threat of closure/program consolida-tions. Support and encourage local workforce training institutions to provide programs in Marlborough that meet the needs of middle-skill employees looking to upgrade their workforce skills (project management, emerging technical skills/ techniques).

LaborMarketActionItem2.3Support and encourage local workforce training institu-tions to provide occupational skills training to entry level and unskilled workers, particu-larly those that increase high school graduation rates, and vocational certificate and associates degree programs that allow high school graduates to transition to middle skill position education.

LaborMarketActionItem2.4: Keep and attract retail sector jobs that allow unskilled workers to participate in the workforce and gain work experience and possibly progress into store management.

258



12.7SUPPORTSYSTEMSECONOMICDEVELOPMENTGOALS&ACTIONITEMS

Transportation

SupportSystems/TransportationGoal1: The City should seek funding to help prepare a Local Transportation Plan which evaluates current conditions, near-term system and ser-vice improvements/priority needs, and identifies longer-range topics to be addressed during preparation of an updated Marlborough Master Plan or other comprehensive, community-wide planning.

SupportSystems/TransportationGoal2: Interstate interchange Improvements identified in the “I-495 Study: I-290 to I-90” report should be supported and implemented in order to eliminate constraints to future growth in Marlborough.

SupportSystems/TransportationActionItem2.1:City officials should actively partici-pate in the 495 MetroWest Corridor Partnership, and actively lobby their State senators and representatives to provide funding for the design and construction of these im-provements.

Support Systems/Transportation Goal 3: Require project proponents to identify trip reduc-tion and travel demand management measures that will result in greater preservation and efficient use of available remaining roadway capacity on both the local and regional roadway network.

SupportSystems/TransportationAction Item3.1:City officials should work with the Marlborough Regional and MetroWest Chambers of Commerce to include existing and potential Marlborough employers in the MetroWest/495 Transportation Management Association (TMA).

Support Systems/Transportation Goal 4: Monitor conditions throughout the Route 20 cor-ridor at major intersections and at the I-495 interchange, primarily to address potential traffic issues associated with trips by local residents to their Marlborough workplace locations but also to address regional traffic exiting I-495. It should be noted that due to STOP control con-ditions on the off ramp from I-495 SB to Route 20 WB, existing AM peak hour traffic queues extend back onto the I-495 mainline.

SupportSystems/TransportationActionItem4.1:City staff should establish a current baseline of traffic counts at selected intersections throughout the Route 20 corridor for comparison with previous and future studies.

Support Systems/Transportation Action Item 4.2: Given the important relationship between Marlborough economic development potential and the City’s transportation “hard and soft” infrastructure, the MEDC should obtain and review recent municipal and regional transportation plans designating priority projects for federal and state invest-ments. The MEDC should assume a leadership role, in concert with City departments, elected officials and community organizations, to advance funding for reconstruction of the I-495 – I-290 Interchange and associated roadways serving nearby industrial and commercial activity, as well as proposed Route 20 roadway and streetscape improve-ments.


259


SupportSystems/WaterandWastewaterGoal1:Ensure that sufficient capacity exists at both the Westerly and Easterly Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) to accommodate fu-ture development.

SupportSystems/WaterandWastewaterActionItem1.1: City officials should actively work with project proponents to understand their water and wastewater requirements early in the permitting process in order to assist proponents in meeting those require-ments.

SupportSystems/WaterandWastewaterGoal2: Ensure efficiency in allowing connections to both WWTPs.

SupportSystems/WaterandWastewaterActionItem2.1:City officials should actively work with project proponents to identify conservation measures that will reduce water and wastewater volumes.

SupportSystems/WaterandWastewaterGoal3:Maximize capacity at both WWTPs.

SupportSystems/WaterandWastewaterAction Item3.1:City officials should work with project proponents to identify Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) deficiencies in infrastructure elements leading from proposed projects to the subject WWTP, and to require I/I im-provements as project-related mitigation.

SupportSystems/WaterandWastewaterGoal4: Understand the benefits and detriments of alternative treatment systems.

SupportSystems/WaterandWastewaterActionItem4.1:City officials should work with project proponents to determine if and when alternative treatment systems, such as on-site package treatment plants, would be more practical from a system-wide and project-specific basis than connection to the City WWTPs.


SupportSystems/EnergyandTelecommunicationsGoal1:Understand if there are clear benefits or deficiencies with utility and telecommunications resources that would affect busi-nesses considering locating in Marlborough.

Support Systems/Energy and Telecommunications Action Item 1.1: City officials should establish a Working Group comprised of service providers that can advise the City about how best to market existing strengths and how to address service deficien-cies without compromising proprietary information.

Support Systems/Energy and TelecommunicationsGoal 2:Understand data limitations and specific service coverage and capacity information in Marlborough.

Support Systems/Energy and Telecommunications Action Item 2.1: Establish ap-propriate dialogue/outreach with the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) and Attorney General’s Office (AGO) to obtain reasonable level of detail regarding services available to Marlborough.

260



SupportSystems/EnergyandTelecommunicationsGoal3:Support upgrade of utility and telecommunications systems.

SupportSystems/EnergyandTelecommunicationsActionItem3.1:Collaborate with National Grid to address concerns of prospective commercial property owners and ten-ants about the availability of consistent electric power supplies, as articulated in discus-sion with the MEDC and interviews conducted for this study.

SupportSystems/EnergyandTelecommunicationsActionItem3.2:Address percep-tions of commercial property owners, managers and tenants that Marlborough may be underserved by utilities and that capacity issues may exist.

SupportSystems/EnergyandTelecommunicationsActionItem3.3:Examine feasibil-ity of establishing “wireless” zones in “high profile” activity centers, such as Downtown and Sports-Centers (funds may be available from the DHCD MA Downtown Initiative grant awards).

SupportSystems/EnergyandTelecommunicationsGoal4: Ensure continued reliable provi-sion of common utility services (electric, gas) is available throughout the City of Marlborough.

SupportSystems/EnergyandTelecommunicationsGoal5: According to the Massachu-setts Broadband Institute, full telecommunications services of industrial-level quality are available throughout the City of Marlborough. Ensure continued reliable provision of service. Note that for proprietary reasons, private utility and telecommunications providers are reluc-tant to share specific information and future plans regarding business services.

12.8QUALITYOFLIFEGOALS&OBJECTIVESSTATEMENT

The Quality of Life in Marlborough is tied to the opportunities for housing, recreation, learning and creating wealth. Through their participation in Focus Groups and the public workshop, as well as in selective individual interviews, Marlborough residents stated the key elements in the local quality of life are:

• Encouraging new commercial and industrial development that supports the community tax base and helps fund and maintain public services. The recommended locations of this development (see Industrial and Commercial sector goals and action items) will ensure that the infrastructure can support this growth.

• Revitalizing the Downtown with infill development; particularly the surface parking lots and one-story buildings on Main Street, and reuse of buildings; particularly the Walker Building, and with additional accessibility, pedestrian-friendly streets, better signage and overall clean-up.

• Recognizing the quality of education in the local public schools and the opportunities they hold for continuing education through partnerships with local technology business-es. Ensuring that the schools receive recognition not only at the local level, but at the wider regional level, improving Marlborough’s image throughout the region.

• Improving the environmental quality of the East Side by controlling the externalities as-sociated with the solid waste and wastewater facilities.

• Filling in vacant commercial and industrial spaces to maintain the feel of a vital and active business community. This would be applicable to the large corporate buildings along the major corridors and the smaller commercial buildings fronting the regional highways.


261

12.9ECONOMICDEVELOPMENTCAPACITY&RESOURCEGOALSANDACTIONITEMS

Economic Development Capacity & ResourcesGoal 1: The City should designate the MEDC (the local state-chartered, non-profit Chapter 501(c)6 economic development corpo-ration) as the organization responsible for implementing the Economic Development Strat-egy and Action Plan identified in this Economic Development Master Plan document.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesGoal2:The City should provide the MEDC through either a grant or contract, with the financial support to maintain and expand its op-erations as necessary to implement the Economic Development Strategy and Action Plan identified in this Economic Development Master Plan document.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesAction Item2.1:The MEDC, using the new, increased level of financial support from the City, should expand its current three-person staff (consisting of an Executive Director, a Marketing Director, and an Ad-ministrative Assistant) by adding two new positions as follows: a Director of Real Estate Development and a Director of Business Development.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesActionItem2.2:The job description for the new MEDC position of Director of Real Estate Development, should include at least the following background, duties, and responsibilities: be knowledgeable of and experienced in the field of real estate development and finance; be responsible for work-ing with any local developers, owners, and/or tenants on the fit-up of existing vacant and/or underutilized industrial/commercial/retail properties; be capable of analyzing and preparing financial proformas in support of new real estate development projects; be experienced in assisting with the preparation of loan, loan guarantee, TIF and/or grant documents in support of new real estate development projects; be knowledgeable of and experienced in the operation of a “Business Expansion” program; and, be experi-enced with site plan review procedures and permitting requirements for new real estate development projects.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesActionItem2.3:The job description for the new MEDC position of Business Development Director should include at least the following background, duties, and responsibilities: be knowledgeable of and expe-rienced in the provision of “Business Ombudsman” services; be knowledgeable of and experienced in the operation of a “Business Retention” program; be knowledgeable of and experienced in the operation of a “Business Attraction” program; and be knowl-edgeable of and experienced in the operation of a “Business Expansion” program.

Economic Development Capacity & ResourcesGoal 3: The City should designate the MEDC as the single point of contact for individuals, businesses, developers, organizations and agencies interested in discussing and/or pursuing economic development policies, plans, projects, investments or programs in the City of Marlborough.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesActionItem3.1:The City should re-quest that MEDC, under its grant agreement or contract with the city, take on the respon-sibility of coordinating its local economic development activities with the other local and regional entities identified in Section 11 of the Plan: i.e. the Mayor, the City Council, the appropriate City Departments, the Chamber of Commerce, the Marlborough Downtown Village Association, The Small Business Development Center (SBDC) of Clark Univer-sity, the MetroWest/495 Partnership, the MetroWest Development Compact, the Me-

262



troWest Regional Transit Authority, and the MetroWest/495 Transportation Management Association and others as appropriate.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesGoal4: The City should re-establish a Marlborough Planning Office and the position of City Planner. This is a position that should be required to oversee and implement the long overdue update to the Marlborough Com-prehensive Plan. (The function of a City Planner is not the same as the real estate specialist and business development specialist suggested for MEDC. The City Planner duties include site plan and project review that are integral to the functions of a Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals.)

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity & Resources Action Item 4.1: Following the re-establishment of the Marlborough Planning Office and the position of City Planner, the Planner should initiate the preparation of a new, city-wide Comprehensive Master Plan for the City of Marlborough.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesGoal5:The MEDC should actively partici-pate in all relevant regional and state organizations and initiatives, promotion and advertis-ing, and so forth, particularly those that bring together academic-entrepreneurs and funders, to help spread the word that start-ups in the physical and life sciences are thriving in Marlbor-ough. These firms have specialized needs and the success of similar businesses tells other entrepreneurs that Marlborough can meet these specialized needs.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesActionItem5.1:The MEDC should also participate in regional and statewide high technology industry forums as a means of promoting Marlborough as a new home for such businesses.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesGoal6:The MEDC should continue cur-rent practices and initiate additional outreach following this planning process to City-wide and neighborhood interest groups and stakeholders to solicit their input and update prog-ress on the Economic Development Strategy & Action Plan.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesGoal7: The MEDC should establish and maintain a database of available industrial, flex and commercial buildings, facility space and land in Marlborough as a webpage on the MEDC websites (including names and contact information for each property owner or broker). It should also identify those Marlborough properties suitable for specialized facility needs (e.g. laboratory space, etc.).

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesActionItem7.1: The database should also have a separate/additional link with profile and contacts for other professional, busi-ness, trade, funding and real estate development networks promoting physical and life sciences, generally, and Clean Tech, Green Tech, Green Bio, and Advanced Manufactur-ing industries in particular. MEDC staff should ensure that all properties in the MEDC da-tabase are also kept current in the state-level site finder database,www.massecon.com.

EconomicDevelopmentCapacity&ResourcesActionItem7.2: The MEDC should also seek advice from other municipalities, local commercial real estate brokers, MOBD, MassEcon and other agencies and organizations that are providing and using similar on-line services; determine the most effective approach to inventory and update avail-able property information, track usage and feedback, provide staff support for inquiries; create a system, for monitoring and evaluating projected operating cost, potential rev-enue as fixed items in MEDC annual budget.

MARLBOROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMPETITIVENESS ANALYSIS DRAFT A

AAPPENDIX A

Marlborough Economic Development Competitiveness

Analysis DRAFT

Prepared for:

Marlborough Economic Development Corporation

Prepared by:

Economic Development Research Group, Inc.

2 Oliver Street, 9th Floor, Boston, MA 02109

August 10, 2011

Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Marlborough’s Economic Base ..................................................................................................................... 4

Industry Classification for Economic Development Analysis .................................................................... 4

Marlborough Employment Trends ............................................................................................................ 5

Job Growth Outlook .................................................................................................................................. 7

The Impacts of Recent Layoff Announcements ........................................................................................ 8

Marlborough’s Economic Development Outlook & Competitiveness ........................................................ 10

Identifying Competitors for Comparison ................................................................................................ 10

Industry Mix & Trends Assessment ......................................................................................................... 12

Relative Cost and Market Access Factors ............................................................................................... 17

Increased Worker Productivity ............................................................................................................... 22

Appendix I: About the LEAP Model ........................................................................................................... 25

3

Introduction The purpose of this analysis is two‐fold: 1) To identify industries with the greatest potential for future growth in Marlborough, and 2) To evaluate Marlborough’s competitiveness for business growth and attraction based on economic development support systems (business competitiveness factors including key costs and market access).

This analysis begins with an overview of industry composition and growth trends, which provides important context for subsequent diagnostic screens. Next, diagnostic screens are applied. The first screen uses location quotient (relative industry mix) and shift‐share (relative industry growth) techniques to identify industries that are performing well in Marlborough, as well as those that may be struggling.

Then we identify strengths and weaknesses in Marlborough’s economic development support systems to determine industries to target for future growth based on existing strengths/competitive factors.

This analysis is primarily based on zip code‐level and industry‐level data for 2009 (the most recent year for which complete data is available), sourced through IMPLAN of Stillwater, MN. IMPLAN re‐packages and adds value to annual Federal economic data compiled through U.S. Department of Commerce (Bureau of Economic Analysis), and the U.S. Census (Bureau of Labor Statistics). The analysis was carried out using the LEAP model (Local Economic Assessment Package). For background information on this software product see the Appendix at the end of this document.

4

Marlborough’s Economic Base

This section presents a current industrial profile of Marlborough, examining industry size by total jobs, industry mix, and growth. The next section will build on this profile, analyzing the county’s economic situation relative to key regional competitors (Andover and Burlington) in terms of industry composition (mix) and growth as well as economic development support systems (general business competitiveness factors), including business costs, transportation access, and labor market access factors.

Industry Classification for Economic Development Analysis

For this analysis, industries are considered in four broad categories. The performance of industries in each category has different implications for Marlborough’s current economic health as well as identifying opportunities for the future. The categories are as follows:

1. Export Industries ‐ Export industries are critical to economic health because businesses in these industries sell goods and services outside the local economy (or to visitors arriving from other locations/student families from outside a region) and these sales generate income for resident working age households that supports additional local services. These ‘export base’ industries typically are goods producing such as manufacturing, agriculture and mining.1

2. Local Serving Industries ‐ These industries sell goods and services to residents and to local businesses. As such, these industries do not expand local wealth, but they provide important components to the local job base. Major employers in this category include retail trade, construction, household services and repair, maintenance, and personal services.

3. Both Export and Local Serving ‐ Several sectors are both export oriented and local serving. Tourism industries, such as hotels and restaurants, serve tourists as well as residents. 2 Business services, technical services, other professional services and education services also fall into this category. Healthcare and social services are typically filling local demand, however medical facilities that do research with Federal grants and those that serve patients from outside Marlborough can be considered partially export driven.

4. Logistics – Logistics sectors contribute to the movement of people and goods. These, of course, can be local serving, but are critical for connecting workers and jobs (and employers with labor markets), intermediate inputs to supply Marlborough’s industries, transportation of Marlborough’s exports to markets, goods for retail sales and visitor travel. Industries in this sector include wholesale trade, mail, package delivery and warehousing, and transportation services.

1 Note that the term “export” is not limited to international exports, it includes all goods that leave Marlborough, bringing money into the City in exchange.

2 Tourism is considered an export industry because visitors bring money into Marlborough’s economy from outside its boundaries. The sectors usually affected by visitor spending are accommodations, eating and drinking establishments, transportation services, retail and amusements‐recreation. Accommodations and eating and drinking establishments (hotels and restaurants) are noted because they are generally the two sectors most heavily affected by tourist spending.

5

This analysis will focus on identifying growth opportunities in export industries, the export portion of export/local serving industries and logistics sectors, as these have the greatest economic impact on income growth and hence, supporting job growth in local‐serving industries.

Marlborough Employment Trends

In 2009, Marlborough’s economy encompassed nearly 32,800 jobs. Table 1 presents the top industries in terms of total employment at the 3‐digit NAICS level. The prevalence of export industries among top employers such as professional scientific, technical services, computer and electronic products, and internet and data processing services, indicates a strong economic base. Furthermore, when aggregated to the 2‐digit level, the broad manufacturing sector employ some 4,600 workers or 12 percent of Marlborough’s total employment. The income these export industries bring into Marlborough support local‐serving employment such as in retail, construction, and eating and drinking establishments.

Table 1. Top 10 Industries in Marlborough by Total Employment, 2009

Employment % of Total

Employment Industry Category

541‐551 Professional Scientific, Technical Services 6,477 17.3% Export 420 Wholesale Trade 4,685 12.5% Export/Local 441‐454 Retail Trade 3,797 10.1% Local 920 Government 3,009 8.0% Local 621‐624 Health Care & Social Services 2,601 6.9% Export/Local 721‐722 Accommodations, Eating & Drinking 2,299 6.1% Export/Local 334 Computer & Electronic Products 1,969 5.2% Export 521‐523 Monetary, Financial, & Credit Activity 1,950 5.2% Export/Local 230 Construction 1,445 3.8% Local 514 Internet & Data Process Services 1,374 3.7% Export

Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, aggregated by MIG Inc. (IMPLAN data) .

Government, Retail Trade and the broad Services sectors are typically among the top employers in most economies since these activities are population driven. A more informative measure of industry presence and performance is relative industry size.

Table 2 presents the top industries in Marlborough by concentration (mix ratio) relative to New England as a whole. The mix ratio is the percent of the city’s employment in a given industry relative to the percent of employment in that industry in New England.3 A mix ratio of 1.0 indicates equal shares of industry employment in the city as in the New England economy, while a mix ratio of 2.0 indicates proportionally twice the share of employment in the city relative to New England. The table includes all industries with a mix ratio of 1.2 or greater. This list is heavily oriented towards export industries, which further underscores the strength of Marlborough’s economic base. It also highlights the concentration of high tech industries such as internet and data processing services, computer and electronics products and professional scientific and technical services.

3 For this section, which presents a basic overview of Marlborough’s economy, the mix ratio is shown relative to New England as a whole. In the subsequent section, the mix ratios are calculated relative to each of the two economic competitors treated in that section.

6

Table 2. Marlborough’s Top Industries by Relative Size, 20091 Marlborough New

England % of Total

NAICS Industry Jobs % of Total

Mix Ratio

Industry Category

514 Internet & Data Process Svcs 1,374 3.7% 0.5% 6.69 Export

339 Miscellaneous Manufacturing 1,235 3.3% 0.6% 5.68 Export

334 Computer & Electronic Products 1,969 5.2% 1.1% 4.61 Export

420 Wholesale Trade 4,685 12.5% 3.2% 3.91 Export/Local

221 Utilities 323 0.9% 0.3% 3.07 Local

322 Paper Manufacturing 231 0.6% 0.3% 2.22 Export

311 Food Products 387 1.0% 0.5% 1.95 Export

512 Motion Picture & Sound Recording 122 0.3% 0.2% 1.93 Export

541‐551 Professional Scientific, Technical, Services 6,477 17.3% 9.5% 1.81 Export

562 Waste Management & Remediation 155 0.4% 0.3% 1.59 Local

521‐523 Monetary, Financial, & Credit Activity 1,950 5.2% 3.5% 1.46 Export/Local

115 Support for Ag. & Forestry 67 0.2% 0.1% 1.35 Export

324 Petroleum & Coal Products 10 0.0% 0.0% 1.32 Export 1 Percent of employment in a given industry in Marlborough relative to the employment share in New England. Source: US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, aggregated by MIG Inc. (IMPLAN data)

Table 3 presents Marlborough industries with the greatest job gains between 2004 and 2009. Between 2004 and 2009, Marlborough gained more than 500 jobs, rising to 37,550, an increase of about 1.4 percent. Gains were led by the professional scientific and technical services (gain of 510 jobs); monetary, financial, and credit activity (gain of 339 jobs), health care and social services (gain of 289 jobs); and internet and data processing services (gain of 156 jobs).

Table 3. Marlborough’s Top 10 Industries by Employment Growth, 2004‐2009

2004 2009 Jobs

Gained Av. Annual

Growth

541‐551 Professional Scientific, Technical, Services 5,967 6,477 510 1.7%

521‐523 Monetary, Financial, & Credit Activity 1,611 1,950 339 3.9%

621‐624 Health Care & Social Services 2,312 2,601 289 2.4%

531 Real Estate 522 753 231 7.6%

920 Government 2,801 3,009 208 1.5%

514 Internet & Data Process Svcs 1,218 1,374 156 2.4%

721‐722 Accommodations, Eating & Drinking 2,222 2,299 77 0.7%

441‐454 Retail Trade 3,739 3,797 58 0.3%

221 Utilities 287 323 36 2.4%

512 Motion Picture & Sound Recording 92 122 30 5.7% US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, aggregated by MIG Inc. (IMPLAN data)

Unfortunately, a few key industries sustained losses during the period, including more than 300 jobs in computer and electronic products manufacturing, nearly 180 jobs in wholesale trade, and more than 150 jobs in transportation manufacturing. During this time, construction also lost about 170 jobs, primarily due to the national financial crisis and collapse of the housing market.

7

Mirroring national trends, Marlborough lost approximately 725 manufacturing jobs between 2005 and 2009, dropping from 5,375 to 4,650 (an average decline of 2.8 percent per year). At the 3‐digit NAICS level, which includes 21 manufacturing industries, all but two Manufacturing industries in Marlborough lost jobs during the period. The two industries to gain jobs were chemical manufacturing, which added 18 jobs (for a total of 166) and plastics and rubber products, which added 7 jobs (for a total of 45). However, as the diagnostic screens in the next section show, job creation is not the only indicator of economic health, and other measures of economic activity indicate some bright spots in manufacturing for Marlborough.

Job Growth Outlook

We used local job growth over the 2005‐2009 period as well as national industry 10‐year growth projections to estimate future job growth by industry for Marlborough between 2009 and 2019. Industries projected to grow are shown below in Table 4. This represents the growth that is likely to occur under current economic development policies and conditions, and assumes that Marlborough maintains its competitive position relative to other areas in terms of business costs, transportation access, and labor market cost, quality and availability.

Table 4. 10‐Year Baseline Job Growth Projections for Marlborough (2009‐2019)

NAICS Sector 10‐Year Baseline

Growth Range ‐ Jobs 221 Utilities 0‐86230 Construction 0‐167 311 Food Products 0‐16325 Chemical Manufacturing 0‐44326 Plastics & Rubber Products 0‐16 420 Wholesale Trade 0‐389 441‐454 Retail Trade 117‐397 481‐487 Transportation 25‐34 491‐493 Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing 0‐24512 Motion Picture & Sound Recording 20‐90514 Internet & Data Process Services 0‐375 521‐523 Monetary, Financial, & Credit Activity 147‐908 524 Insurance Carriers & Related Activities 17‐22 525 Funds, Trusts, & Other Financial Vehicles 4‐29 531 Real Estate 138‐753541‐551 Professional Scientific, Technical, Services 1,153‐1,599561 Administrative & Support Services 0‐333 562 Waste Management & Remediation 0‐41 611 Educational Services 68‐90 621‐624 Health Care & Social Services 691‐794 711‐713 Amusement & Recreation 34‐84721‐722 Accommodations, Eating & Drinking 162‐369811‐812 Repair, Maintenance, & Personal Services 0‐126

Source: EDR Group with data from BLS.

In reality, relative competitiveness is a constantly shifting process that depends on Marlborough’s investments and policies as well as those of its competitors. The economic development diagnostic tools discussed in the next section focus on improving Marlborough’s competitive position, as well as job growth opportunities over and above these baseline growth projections.

8

The Impacts of Recent Layoff Announcements

As noted above, this analysis is based on data covering economic activity between 2005 and 2009, the most recent period for which complete data is available. Unfortunately, a few Marlborough firms have recently made layoff announcements that do not show up in the data. These include the closure of Fidelity’s Marlborough operation, for a loss of 1,100 jobs, as well as undisclosed losses at Evergreen Solar’s headquarters (related to that firm’s plant closure in Devens).

In addition to the direct losses at the firms themselves, they imply additional losses at other Marlborough firms that have supplier relationships and/or depend on re‐spending of employee wages. The magnitude of losses at Evergreen, which employs about 130 at its Marlborough headquarters4, has not yet been announced so it is premature to speculate on the extent of those secondary impacts. For Fidelity, which has announced the number of jobs that will be cut, we have run an IMPLAN economic impact model to determine the extent of spinoff impacts (indirect/induced) and what industries in Marlborough will be most affected. This analysis indicates that the 1,100 direct job loss at Fidelity could result in an additional loss of 580 indirect/induced jobs that were supported by Fidelity employee spending. Personal income and business sales (output), as well as industries most affected are shown below in Table 5. Table 6 presents the top 10 industries affected, which are primarily other financial sector industries but include losses to food service, retail and health care.

Table 5. Economic Impacts of the Loss of Fidelity

Jobs Personal Income

(million $s) Business Sales

(million $s) Direct Impact ‐1,100 ‐$237.700 ‐$790.7Indirect/Induced Impact ‐580 ‐$28.8 ‐$66.4 Total Impact 1,680 ‐$266.5 ‐$857.0

Source: Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.

Table 6. Top Ten Industries Affected by Loss of Fidelity

Industry Description Jobs

Personal Income

(million $s) Total Output (million $s)

Funds, trusts, and other financial vehicles ‐1,100 ‐$237.6 ‐$790.6


‐280 ‐12.2 ‐13.7

Monetary authorities and depository creditintermediation activities

‐30 ‐2.4 ‐5.0

Food services and drinking places ‐30 ‐9.0 ‐1.3 Real estate establishments ‐20 ‐4.0 ‐2.9 Private hospitals ‐10 ‐1.0 ‐1.0 Insurance agencies, brokerages, and related

activities ‐10 ‐1.0 ‐1.4

4 Zapdata (Dun & Bradstreet) company report accessed 6/3/2011.

9


‐10 ‐1.1 ‐1.2

Retail Stores ‐ General merchandise ‐10 ‐3 ‐5 Offices of physicians, dentists, and other health

practitioners ‐10 ‐8 ‐9

Note: Numbers are rounded to avoid false precision. Source: Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.

10

Marlborough’s Economic Development Outlook & Competitiveness

This analysis is comprised of three diagnostic screens that identify Marlborough’s outlook and competitiveness for job growth and attraction. All three screens were run using LEAP, an economic development analysis tool developed by EDR Group, described in greater detail in the appendix.

The first diagnostic screen seeks to identify potential target industries through a combination of location quotient (relative industry mix) and shift‐share (relative growth). The second screen looks at Marlborough’s economic development support systems, that is, the business cost and market access factors that influence job growth and attraction. The final screen uses output as a measure of economic activity in order to identify industries that, due to productivity gains, remain important local economic engines despite job losses.

Identifying Competitors for Comparison

Competitiveness for business attraction is both absolute and relative. Businesses require certain baseline (absolute) conditions in order to start in a new location or to expand. However, once a business has determined the list of locations that meet these baseline conditions, they typically compare certain cost and market access factors in each potential location when making location and expansion decisions. As such, the first step in using LEAP is to identify a comparison area against which differences in relative strengths, weaknesses and performance can be measured. As inputs to LEAP, we assembled a broad range of information about economic conditions including:

• Patterns and trends in employment, income, value added and business output, by industry • Size of the population, labor market and truck delivery market within given drive times • Population, workforce participation and level of educational attainment • Accessibility (drive times) to airports, intermodal rail terminals and marine ports • Costs of labor, electricity, taxes and housing • Availability of broadband telecommunications services • Extent of orientation towards tourism‐based or international export‐based activities.

We used LEAP to assess relationships between economic performance and attributes of facilities, as well as services and costs, between Marlborough and comparison areas. As discussed in greater detail below, these comparisons include the relative cost and quality of a Marlborough’s workforce, infrastructure facilities and costs of doing business relative to appropriate comparison areas. Ideally, a Comparison Area would be identical to the City with the exception of one factor of interest, such as workforce skill level or transportation access. Such ideal Comparison Areas are rarely available however. Instead, we looked for areas with similar key characteristics to identify the most relevant Comparison Area. Key characteristics include:

• Similar population size and density/distribution; • Adjacent Study Areas and Comparison Areas are desirable but not always possible, at the very

least they should be located in the same region of the country; • Similar climate;

11

• Absence or presence of unique natural resources such as mining or fishing or geographical features such as an ocean or mountains;

• Absence or presence of unique dominant economic entities such as a military base, major research university or tourist attraction.

In selecting a comparison area for Marlborough, we conferred with economic development staff within Marlborough and in the wider New England region to compile a list of cities that might be suitable based on general impressions.5 The initial list included the following:

• Andover, MA • Burlington MA • Keene NH • Nashua NH • Peabody MA

Basic economic data was collected for each city including the following:

• Population • Total employment • Employment by industry • Sales by industry • Number of firms by industry • Number of firms with 20 or more employees, by industry

Table 7 presents population and employment data for the initial cities considered in comparison with Marlborough.

Table 7. Comparison Area Candidates: Population & Employment

Comparison Area Population (2009

Estimate) Employment (2010

Estimate) Marlborough, MA 38,465 33,394

Andover, MA 33,694 28,481Burlington, MA 25,749 38,564Keene, NH 22,395 22,613Nashua, NH 87,555 57,283Peabody MA 51,718 27,020 Source: US Census Bureau and Claritas.

None of the comparison areas considered were most similar to Marlborough by all measures, however Andover and Burlington were each found to be similar by the greatest number of measures and both

5 Members of the Northeast Economic Developers Association (NEDA) were among those queried for suggestions of appropriate comparison areas. The NEDA region stretches from Maine to Maryland and Pennsylvania. Responses came from New England members.

12

were selected as comparison areas. The location of the two comparison areas relative to Marlborough is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Marlborough & Comparison Areas

Source: ESRI.

Industry Mix & Trends Assessment

This section identifies potential target industries based on the dual dimensions of industry growth and relative concentration. For the first dimension, industries are classified according to seven categories: 6

• Industry growing “faster” locally than nationally • Industry declining locally while growing nationally • Industry growing locally while declining nationally • Industry growing locally “slower” than nationally

6 “Faster” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% greater than the national trend. “Slower” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% less than the national trend. “Similar rate” denotes trends that are less than 20% different.

Andover

Burlington

Marlborough

13

• Industry declining locally “slower” than nationally • Industry declining locally “faster” than nationally • Industry growing or declining locally at a rate “similar” to national trend

A sector expanding nationally and growing even faster in Marlborough indicates a local strength. The local market share is increasing within a strong national market. If a national growth trend is positive, while the industry in Marlborough has a growth rate that is either less than or equal to that national rate, or possibly declining, then market share is being lost or threatened. Local stakeholders should consider economic development strategies tailored to that particular industry to ensure that Marlborough captures its share of that industry (i.e. arrest/reverse decline in the local market share).

National industry‐specific trends that are declining may be due to (1) decreasing demand or shrinking U.S market shares against worldwide competition, (2) shifting production off‐shore, (3) or automation which reduces the labor‐to‐capital ratio and slowing employment growth even if the industry (on dollars of output) is growing. A sector that sheds employment on a national basis and gains employment locally (or contracts at a slower pace) may indicate consolidation for that activity as a result of local competitive advantages. These advantages could include infrastructure, low, business costs, superior market access, or recent capital investments in industrial facilities. These sectors may not be sustainable in the long term, but, citizens and leaders will need to decide if economic development investments to support such industries are warranted in short term. Local consolidation for a specific industry may be temporary however if a time lag has afforded the local buffer before economic conditions change locally (a ‘last hold‐out effect’). Industries that are most vulnerable are those that are losing employment at a faster rate in Marlborough than in the nation as a whole. In these cases, competitive advantages elsewhere (and possibly disadvantages locally) are driving disinvestment from Marlborough.

Industries are also classified based on a second dimension, relative concentration, which is measured against each of the comparison areas.

This analysis includes industries that account for at least 100 jobs in Marlborough. Because our focus is economic base (primary) industries, the following local‐oriented sectors are excluded: government; retail trade; construction; administrative and support services; repair, maintenance and personal services; private household services; waste management; and religious, civic, professional organizations.

Table 8 provides a key for interpreting Table 9 and Table 10, which summarize Marlborough’s industries into the categories described above. Note that for both tables, industry growth is measured relative to the nation while industry concentration is measured relative to each of the Comparison Areas. As a result, industries will appear in the same column in both tables, but in different rows depending on the concentration of jobs relative to each of the comparison areas.

Industries that appear in the four rightmost columns represent weak or threatened business activities in Marlborough. Within these columns, those activities that occur in higher job concentrations for Marlborough relative to the competitor location present a larger job risk, and preemptive economic development outreach to firms may be warranted. The four left‐most columns point to strengths and opportunities for various business activities in Marlborough. However, prescriptive economic development actions may be used to shore up an underperforming local firm in an industry that is vibrant at the nation level.

14

Table 8. Interpreting Concentration/Trend Analysis Results Industry Trend Category

Industry growing

“faster” locally than

nationally*

Industry declining

locally while growing nationally

Industry growing locally

“slower” than nationally *

growing at a rate “similar” to national trend*

Industry growing

locally while declining nationally

Industry declining locally

“slower” than nationally*


“faster” than nationally*

Industry declining locally at a

rate “similar” to national

trend

Concen

tration

Greater than 1.2


Strong but needs attention

Strong but needs attention


Industry in national decline, seek diversification




0.8‐1.2









Less than 0.8

Emerging local industry, consider supporting

Weak local industry, potential opportunity

Weak local industry, potential opportunity

Emerging local industry, consider supporting

Possible consolidation, monitor

Weak local industry

Weak local industry

Weak local industry

Strengths/Opportunities Weaknesses/Threatened

15

Table 9. Concentration/Trend Analysis – Marlborough vs. Andover Comparison Area1,2

Industry Trend Category

Industry growing “faster”

locally than nationally*

(1)

Industry declining

locally while growing

nationally (2)

Industry growing locally “slower” than

nationally * (5)

growing at a rate “similar” to national trend*

(8)

Industry growing locally while declining

nationally (3)

Industry declining locally “slower” than nationally* (4)

Industry declining locally “faster” than nationally* (6)


rate “similar” to national trend (7)

Concen

tration

Greater than 1.2

Utilities Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing

Transportation Accommodations, Eating & Drinking

Miscellaneous Manufacturing

Paper Manufacturing

Fabricated Metal Products

Food Products Wholesale Trade

0.8‐1.2

Monetary, Financial, & Credit Activity

Real Estate

Health Care & Social Services

Less than 0.8

Internet & Data Process Services

Professional Scientific, Technical, Services

Insurance Carriers & Related Activities

Transportation Equipment

Computer & Electronic Products

Educational Services

Amusement & Recreation

Chemical Manufacturing

Strengths/Opportunities Weaknesses/Threatened1For industries representing at least 100 jobs (excluding government; retail trade; construction; administrative and support services; repair, maintenance and personal services; private household services; waste management; and religious, civic, professional organizations). 2 Trend (growth/decline) is measured relative to the U.S., employment concentration is measured against the Comparison Area. * Note: “Faster” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% greater than the national trend. “Slower” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% less than the national trend. “Similar rate” denotes trends that are less than 20% different.

Source: Data from US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, provide by MIG, Inc.(IMPLAN). Sectors organized by using LEAP.

16

Table 10. Concentration/Trend Analysis – Marlborough vs. Burlington, MA Comparison Area1,2

Industry Trend Category

Industry growing “faster”

locally than nationally*

(1)

Industry declining

locally while growing

nationally (2)

Industry growing locally “slower” than

nationally * (5)

growing at a rate “similar” to national trend* (8)

Industry growing locally while declining

nationally (3)


“slower” than nationally* (4)


“faster” than nationally* (6)


rate “similar” to national trend (7)

Concen

tration

Greater than 1.2

Monetary, Financial, & Credit Activity

Amusement & Recreation

Chemical Manufacturing

Miscellaneous Manufacturing

Paper Mfg Transportation Equipment

Computer & Electronic Products

Utilities Food Products Wholesale Trade

Fabricated Metal Prod.

0.8‐1.2

Less than 0.8

Mail, Package Delivery & Warehousing

Internet & Data Process Svcs

Professional Scientific, Technical, Services

Insurance Carriers & Related Activities

Educational Services

Health Care & Social Services

Accommodations, Eating & Drinking

Real Estate Transportation

Strengths/Opportunities Weaknesses/Threatened 1For industries representing at least 0.5% of Marlborough’s total employment (excluding government; retail trade; construction; administrative and support services; repair, maintenance and personal services; private household services; waste management; and religious, civic, professional organizations). 2 Trend (growth/decline) is measured relative to the U.S., employment concentration is measured against the Comparison Area. * Note: “Faster” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% greater than the national trend. “Slower” denotes local growth or decline trend that is more than 20% less than the national trend. “Similar rate” denotes trends that are less than 20% different. Source: Data from US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, provide by MIG, Inc.(IMPLAN). Sectors organized by using LEAP

17

This concentration/trend analysis diagnostic screen reveals a number of strong industries with positive outlooks as well as smaller industries with potential for growth. Two industries, monetary, financial and credit activity and utilities, are relatively highly concentrated in Marlborough, and outpacing national growth. Marlborough might leverage this strong growth by targeting industries that are backwards and forwards linked in the supply chain. The internet and data processing services; educational services; and professional, scientific and technical services industries are each growing similarly or more slowly than in the nation as a whole, and they capture a smaller share of Marlborough’s economy than they do in competitor economies, indicating that Marlborough may be able to capture additional job growth through economic development efforts focusing on these industries.

The analysis also suggests that the following industries are threatened in Marlborough:

• Computer and electronic products • Fabricated metal products • Paper manufacturing • Wholesale trade

• Food products • Transportation equipment • Chemical manufacturing • Miscellaneous manufacturing

The industries are in decline nationally due to global economic forces such as competition from lower cost locations overseas and/or as the result of an overall decline in demand for their product. These forces are outside the influence of local economic development policies and programs, so it may be difficult or impossible to slow or reverse job losses in these industries. Particularly for industries such as paper manufacturing and fabricated metal products, which are relatively highly concentrated, economic diversification strategies may be warranted to offset losses in these industries. Though this screen paints a rather discouraging picture for manufacturing, the third screen based on value added captures some bright spots for manufacturing in Marlborough.

Relative Cost and Market Access Factors

Business costs and market access factors are among the most critical considerations for firm location and expansion decisions. From an economic development perspective, these cost and market access factors are the cities’ economic development support systems. This diagnostic test compares key cost and market access factors in Marlborough to those in Andover and Burlington.

Cost Factors

When all other quality factors are equal across possible locations, businesses tend to locate where they can minimize costs. For this analysis, the following indicators are used to evaluate differences in non‐transportation costs between Marlborough and each of the Comparison Areas:

• Average Labor Cost (annual Retail wages) • Average Electricity Cost ($/kWh) • Commercial property tax rate ($ per thousand of assessed value) • Average Business Property Tax Burden (commercial property tax per employee per year) • Average Housing Cost ($ for a single family home) • Average Rental Cost ($ per month)

18

Note that relative differences in labor cost are measured using the Retail sector as retail occupations are comparable across different geographical areas without encountering business ‘mix’ biases (high vs. low value‐added worksites) as can be the case within the manufacturing sector. Difference is business taxes are measured by property taxes, since all three areas are in Massachusetts and face the same state tax regime.

This analysis includes two separate measures of commercial property tax. The first, commercial property tax rate, is the most straight forward. It is the amount levied per $1,000 in assessed values. However, assessed value can be a bit of a gray area because it is determined by each jurisdiction’s assessor’s office. Though it is often intended to reflect market value, it is not always a consistent measure across jurisdictions. To ensure an apples‐to‐apples comparison, we use an additional measure intended to reflect the amount that businesses actually pay: Commercial property tax per employee (calculated by dividing total tax collections reported by each jurisdiction’s tax assessor, divided by the number of jobs in the jurisdiction).

The figures below show each cost in Marlborough relative to each of the comparison areas. A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that costs are equal in both areas, a value above 1.0 indicates higher costs in Marlborough (a relative disadvantage), while a value below 1.0 indicates lower costs in the county (a relative advantage). Against both comparison areas, Marlborough has a distinct advantage in terms of ownership housing. Electricity rates are basically comparable. Labor rates present a bit of a mixed picture, with rates approximately 10 percent higher than Marlborough in Andover, and 10 percent lower in Burlington. Nonetheless, the difference is relatively small and not likely to present a serious barrier (or advantage).

Figure 2. Relative Cost Factors – Marlborough v. Andover

Notes: (1) Labor = Average Labor Cost, $ per year in retail; (2) Electricity = Average Electricity Cost, $/kWh; (3) Commercial property tax rate (FY2011) (4) Taxes = Average Commercial Property Tax per Job, $ per year; (5) Housing‐Buy = Average Housing Cost, $ for a single family home; (6) Housing‐Rent = Average Rental Cost, $ per month (residential). Source: Massachusetts Department of Labor; NSTAR; National Grid; Property tax assessors of Marlborough, Andover and Burlington; Warren Group; US Census Bureau.

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

19

Figure 3. Relative Cost Factors – Marlborough v. Burlington, MA

Notes: (1) Labor = Average Labor Cost, $ per year in retail; (2) Electricity = Average Electricity Cost, $/kWh; (3) Commercial property tax rate (FY2011) (4) Taxes = Average Commercial Property Tax per Job, $ per year; (5) Housing‐Buy = Average Housing Cost, $ for a single family home; (6) Housing‐Rent = Average Rental Cost, $ per month (residential). Source: Massachusetts Department of Labor; NSTAR; National Grid; Property tax assessors of Marlborough, Andover and Burlington; Warren Group; US Census Bureau.

Transportation & Market Access Factors

Business efficiency, productivity and operation costs are highly dependent on access to workers, customers and suppliers. For this analysis, transportation and market access is measured by:

• Labor market area ‐ Population within 40 minute drive time; • Access to skilled workers – Percent of the population age 25 and over with a bachelor’s

degree or higher within the labor market area; • 1‐day truck delivery market area – Employment within 180 minute drive time; • Access to commercial airport – Drive time (minutes) to nearest commercial airport; • Access to freight marine port – Drive time (minutes) to nearest freight marine port; • Access to rail intermodal terminal ‐ Drive time (minutes) to nearest freight rail intermodal

terminal.

The figures below portray Marlborough relative to each of the comparison areas for each of these metrics. A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. For market access factors (Figure 4 and Figure 5) a value above 1.0 indicates a relative advantage for Marlborough, while a value below 1.0 indicates a relative disadvantage. Marlborough has a clear edge in terms of 1‐day truck delivery market. It also enjoys an interesting position relative to workforce. While it has a smaller overall labor market than the two comparison areas, the population within its labor market is slightly more educated.

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

20

Figure 4. Relative Market Access Factors – Marlborough v. Andover1, 2

1A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. Values above 1.0 indicate a relative advantage for Marlborough while values below 1.0 indicate relative disadvantages. 2 (1) Skilled Workers = % of workers with a bachelor's degree or higher in the Labor Market Area; (2) Labor Market Area = Population within 40‐minute drive of population centroid; (3) 1‐Day Truck Delivery Market = Employment within 180‐minute drive time. Source: ESRI.

Figure 5. Relative Access Market Factors – Marlborough v. Burlington, MA1, 2

1A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. Values above 1.0 indicate a relative advantage for Marlborough while values below 1.0 indicate relative disadvantages. 2 (1) Skilled Workers = % of workers with a bachelor's degree or higher in the Labor Market Area; (2) Labor Market Area = Population within 40‐minute drive of population centroid; (3) 1‐Day Truck Delivery Market = Employment within 180‐minute drive time. Source: ESRI.

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

Skilled Workers Labor Market Area 1‐Day Truck Delivery Market

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

Skilled Workers Labor Market Area 1‐Day Truck Delivery Market

21

For transportation access factors (Figure 6 and Figure 7), values above 1.0 indicate longer travel times from Marlborough, a relative disadvantage, while values below 1.0 indicate shorter travel times from Marlborough, a relative advantage. As the figures indicate, Marlborough appears to be comparable in terms of workforce skill level, though it has a somewhat smaller labor market area. It has a clear advantage in terms of 1‐day truck delivery market relative to both comparison areas. Marlborough’s transportation access appears to be somewhat disadvantageous, particularly for travel to a commercial airport and freight marine port. Table 11 lists the nearest commercial airport, marine port, freight rail intermodal terminal and international border crossing for Marlborough, Andover and Burlington.

Figure 6. Relative Transportation Access Factors – Marlborough v. Andover1, 2

1A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. Values above 1.0 indicate longer travel times for Marlborough (a disadvantage) while values below 1.0 indicate shorter travel times (an advantage). 2 (1) Skilled Workers = % of workers with a bachelor's degree or higher in the Labor Market Area; (2) Labor Market Area = Population within 40‐minute drive of population centroid; (3) 1‐Day Truck Delivery Market = Employment within 180‐minute drive time; (4) Drive time. Source: ESRI.

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

Commercial Airport Freight Marine Port Rail Intermodal Facility International Border Crossing

22

Figure 7. Relative Transportation Access Factors – Marlborough v. Burlington, MA1, 2

1A value of 1.0 (marked by the red line) indicates that the factors are equal in both areas. Values above 1.0 indicate longer travel times for Marlborough (a disadvantage) while values below 1.0 indicate shorter travel times (an advantage). 2 (1) Skilled Workers = % of workers with a bachelor's degree or higher in the Labor Market Area; (2) Labor Market Area = Population within 40‐minute drive of population centroid; (3) 1‐Day Truck Delivery Market = Employment within 180‐minute drive time; (4) Drive time. Source: ESRI.

Table 11. Nearest Transportation Facilities & International Border Crossing Commercial

Airport Freight

Marine Port Rail Intermodal

Facility International

Border Crossing Marlborough Boston‐Logan

International Airport Port of Boston Cr Boston Beacon

Park Vd Tofc/Cofc Highgate Springs‐

Alburg, Vt Andover Boston‐Logan

International Airport Port of Boston Coldwater Term &

Wholesale Everett Highgate Springs‐

Alburg, Vt Burlington Boston‐Logan

International Airport Port of Boston Cr Boston Beacon

Park Vd Tofc/Cofc Highgate Springs‐

Alburg, Vt Source: ESRI.

Increased Worker Productivity

Declining employment is not necessarily an indicator that an industry is in decline. For some industries, automation and other investments that increase worker productivity (output per worker) have allowed greater output with fewer workers. Though these industries are no longer the direct job engines for Marlborough that they were in the past, they are still important to the extent that they purchase goods and services from local suppliers and pay wages to remaining employees, wages which are often higher to reflect increased productivity. Table 12 shows Marlborough industries that lost jobs while increasing output between 2005 and 2009. Note that with the exception of administrative and support services, these are all manufacturing industries. This suggests a shift in manufacturing’s role in economic development. Instead of pursuing manufacturing employers as primary sources of jobs, they should be understood more broadly as supporters of secondary economic activity, both as consumers of/suppliers to other local industries and through employee re‐spending of wages.

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

Commercial Airport Freight Marine Port Rail Intermodal Facility International Border Crossing

23

Table 12. Industries Declining in Jobs while Gaining in Output

Jobs Output

(millions 2005 $)

Marlborough Natl CAGR

Marlborough Natl CAGR NAICS Industry 2004 2009 CAGR1 2004 2009 CAGR1

331 Primary Metal Manufacturing 46 36 ‐4.9% ‐4.7% $16 $16 0.6% 0.0%

334 Computer & Electronic Products 2,284 1,969 ‐2.9% ‐3.3% $1,337 $1,398 0.9% 2.6%

323 Printing & Related Support 108 99 ‐1.8% ‐4.4% $12 $18 8.5% 2.9%

561 Administrative & Support Svcs 1,108 1,047 ‐1.1% ‐0.5% $71 $74 0.9% 0.7%

311 Food Products 406 387 ‐1.0% ‐1.3% $181 $190 0.9% 2.2% 1Compound annual growth rate. Source: Data from US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, provide by MIG, Inc.(IMPLAN). Sectors organized by using LEAP Conclusions

The mix and trend diagnostic suggests that the following industries present opportunities for future job growth in Marlborough:

• Monetary, financial and credit activity • Utilities • Internet and data processing services • Educational services • Professional scientific and technical services

The first two industries are relatively highly concentrated in Marlborough, and outpacing national growth. Marlborough might leverage this strong growth by targeting industries that are backwards and forwards linked in the supply chain. The others are are growing similarly or more slowly than in the nation as a whole, and capture a smaller share of Marlborough’s economy than they do in competitor economies. Marlborough may be able to capture additional job growth through economic development efforts focusing on these industries.

The economic development support system analysis suggests that Marlborough should focus on job growth and attraction among industries that need skilled workers and access to a large 1‐day truck market, factors that present strengths for Marlborough. Unfortunately, the factors that are disadvantages for Marlborough, transportation access, are largely beyond the influence of local economic development policies. Nonetheless, Marlborough may consider participating in regional efforts that improve travel times on MassPike and I‐495.

The increased worker productivity screen indicated that a number of industries in Marlborough remain healthy, despite job losses, including:

• Primary metal manufacturing • Computer and electronic products • Printing and related support • Administrative and support services • Food products

24

Strategies to leverage these industries should focus on 1) ensuring that Marlborough is able to meet these industries’ labor needs (so that wages are more likely to be re‐spent within Marlborough, and 2) Encouraging local supplier relationships which will support jobs in up and down stream industries.

Appe

LEAP is analysisopportunof transpdevelopm

LEAP is version econom

Asseenabstrenretai

Benclocalagain

Diagto ideattraaddr

Straeconassechan

LEAP ha

LE

CoResein S

ndix I:

the award-s. It is desinities and dportation syment factor

the interacthat addresic developm

essment – It ble economic ngths and weaning and expa

chmarking – performancenst neighborin

gnosis – It proentify target oction and crit

ressed to mak

tegy – It givenomic developesses the impnges on those

as gained n

EA

ouncil for Commearch, Nationa

Support for Bus

About

-winning syigned to diadesign stratystems, utilrs.

ctive, web-bsses issuesment planne

generates redevelopers toaknesses for anding busine

– It displays coe & strengths/ng and compe

ovides a uniqopportunities fical factors thke them poss

es the basis fopment targetsacts of altern

e target priorit

ational awa

P Lo

munity & Econoal Award: Excelsiness Developm

Econom

the LEA

ystem for regagnose locategies to adlities, buildi

based s faced by ers:

ports that o assess locaattracting, ess activity.

omparison of /weaknesses eting areas.

ue capability for business

hat need to beible.

or prioritizing s, and ative policy ties.

ards and rec

ocal Ec

omic llence ment

Intl.C

Excell

mic Development

AP Mod

gional and

al competitiddress weakings, workfo

al

e

cognition fo

conomi

USES O

• Plannleadindriver

• CompStratetrendsbarrie

• Agensectorperfor

• Barriegaps, skills, taxes

• Policyprioritdevelo

• Alternassestechno

Economic DeCouncil: Recognlence for Rese

t Research Grou

del

local econoive positionknesses in force and ot

or its uniqu

c Asse

OF LEAP

ning & Commng sectors, rers of growth prehensive Eegy (CEDS) Rs and gaps, iders to growth, cy Progressrs & growth srmance relativer/Gap Analybarriers and market accesand infrastruy Developmeties, target dirop industry clnatives Analyss impacts of ology and wo

velopment nition for arch Studies

p, 2 Oliver St., B

omic develon, identify ta

cost, qualitther econom

ue capabiliti

essmen

munications gional compa

Economic DeReports – shdentify struggdefine target Reports - shuccesses, beve to other arysis - identifyneeds for impss, broadbancture conditioent – define brect growth opluster & suppysis – use “winvestment in

orkforce qualit

Middle GDevelo

#1 in Review

Boston, MA 0210

opment arget ty or availabmic

ies:

t Packa

- show profilearisons, key

evelopment ow area patteling industriesing strategy how improvingenchmark reas y performanceproving workfd, utilities, co

ons business attrapportunities, aly chain strate

what if” analysn infrastructurty.

Georgia Regionopment Center:w of Economic

09 USA 1.617.33

bility

age

es,

erns, s,

g

e force

osts,

action and egies sis to re,

nal : Tools

38.6775

LEAP – p

• S• N• C• C• P• F• S• M• A• N• C

LEAP ismodules

Economibenchmaperformancomparisoidentify leand local

Targetingstrengthscost (utilitquality (btraining) ahighwaysbarriers cattractionattraction

Policy Scchanges the size abusiness prioritize f

proven app

Southern TieNorthern AlaColorado SpCoosa VallePortland MeFort Drum RSW Florida RMiddle GeorAppalachianNorthern TruCity of LaPo

s designed as:

ic Base Assrk profiles ofnce trends bon to surrou

eading & lagggrowth pote

g Diagnosis & weaknesties, housingroadband, inand access (s, railroads). constraining , and potent targets.

cenarios – ain local cond

and nature oattraction, hfuture plans

KL

plication and

er East Regiabama Counprings Econoy Regional Dtro (Council

Regional LiaiRegional Plargia Developn Regional Cust (British Corte, Indiana

around thre

sessment –f business m

by industry, wunding areasging industri

ential.

s – competitses in termsg, labor, taxendustrial par(to airports, It identifies business grotial business

assess how ditions can af potential fu

helping you t.

EY ELocal Ec

Econom

D&A

DRCA

d use for:

ional Planninncil of Local omic DeveloDevelopmenof Governmson Organizanning Counpment CenteCommission Columbia)

(IN)

ee

mix and with s to ies,

ive s of es), rks,

owth & s

affect uture to

LEMEonomic

ic Development

Define Study & Comparison Areas

Define Alternative Scenarios

Define Local Ratings: Cost, Availability, Access, Quality

ng DevelopmGovernmenpment Corp

nt Center (GAments) (OR)zation (NY)ncil (FL) er (GA) (TN)

ENTSAssess

Research Group

ED

Change inOpportunitie

Economic Per

Primary OppDevelop

Secondary OppBusi

Economic Base

Diagnosis: Locworkforce, mainfrastructure,transport term

Factors Holding

Scenarios: Ch

ment Board ts (AL) . (CO) A)

S OF Lsment Pa

p, 2 Oliver St., Bo

DR-LEAP LocaAssessment

n Primary & Secoes for Business A

rformance Gap Sc

portunities for Bupment & Attractio

portunities for Suiness Attraction

e: Patterns & Tr

al Adequacy aterials, industry faci, technologies, int. tr

minals, reliability Back Business G

hange in Local R

(NY)

LEAPackage

oston, MA 0210

al Economic Package

ondary Attraction

creener

usiness on

R

s

upporting

rends

ilities, rade,

Growth

Ratings

P

09 USA 1.617.33

Industry Trends

Industry Requirements

Industry Forecasts

Inter-Industry Relationships

suppliers, cluster, dispersion

38.6775

BROWNFIELDS 2011 CLEANUP GRANT FACT SHEETA

BAPPENDIX B

EPA Brownfields Program

EPA's Brownfields Program empowers states,communities, and other stakeholders to work together toprevent, assess, safely clean up, and sustainably reusebrownfields. A brownfield site is real property, theexpansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may becomplicated by the presence or potential presence of ahazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant. In2002, the Small Business Liability Relief andBrownfields Revitalization Act was passed to helpstates and communities around the country cleanup andrevitalize brownfields sites. Under this law, EPAprovides financial assistance to eligible applicantsthrough four competitive grant programs: assessmentgrants, revolving loan fund grants, cleanup grants, andjob training grants. Additionally, funding support isprovided to state and tribal response programs througha separate mechanism.

Community Description

The City of Marlborough was selected to receive abrownfields cleanup grant. Located in centralMassachusetts, Marlborough (population 38,469) is alow-to-moderate-income community with a significantimmigrant population. The state lists more than 230cleanup sites in Marlborough. Many of thesebrownfields, including the targeted Jenney GasolineService Station, are concentrated in the downtown areanear residential neighborhoods. The target site islocated on a visible corner of a busy thoroughfare andhas been vacant and deteriorating for more than 10years. The economic decline in the community has ledto an increase in unemployment. After the target site iscleaned up, the city plans to reuse the property as asocial gathering site or pocket park.

Cleanup Grant

$200,000 for petroleum

EPA has selected the City of Marlborough for abrownfields cleanup grant. Petroleum grant fundswill be used to clean up the Jenney Gasoline ServiceStation at 25 East Main Street, which was used as agasoline station, automotive repair facility, towingoperation, and automotive sales facility from the late1920s through the 1970s. The site is contaminatedwith petroleum and polycyclic aromatichydrocarbons. Grant funds also will be used forcommunity outreach activities.

Contacts

For further information, including specific grantcontacts, additional grant information, brownfieldsnews and events, and publications and links, visitthe EPA Brownfields Web site(http://www.epa.gov/brownfields).

EPA Region 1 Brownfields Team(617) 918-1424 EPA Region 1 Brownfields Web site(http://www.epa.gov/region1/brownfields)

Grant Recipient: City of Marlborough,MA508-460-3521

The information presented in this fact sheet comesfrom the grant proposal; EPA cannot attest to theaccuracy of this information. The cooperativeagreement for the grant has not yet been negotiated.Therefore, activities described in this fact sheet aresubject to change.

Brownfields 2011 Cleanup Grant Fact SheetMarlborough, MA

United States Environmental Protection AgencyWashington, DC 20450

Solid Waste and Emergency Response (5105T)

EPA 560-F-128-005May 11

FOCUS GROUP NOTES

C APPENDIX C

APPENDIX C: FOCUS GROUP NOTES


A series of thirteen meetings over a two day period was completed at the Massachusetts International Academy to solicit comments, discussion and ideas from groups of people with similar areas of interest that may have an impact on future economic development in Marlborough.

The attendees, key discussion points, introductions and notes are provided below in the sequence that the meetings occurred. All meetings were facilitated by and notes were recorded by The Cecil Group.

Banking, Finance, Legal, Real Estate Focus Group Meeting

April 13, 2011 - 8am

Focus Group Attendees

Name Title Company

1 Jim Hickey Vice President Marlborough Savings Bank

2 Ernie Houde Owner Ernie Houde Associates

3 Anthony Battista VP Marketing St. Mary's Credit Union

4 David P Gadbois Attorney

5 Lisa Trainor Branch Manager People' s United Bank

6 Bob Gustafson President & Wealth Management Advisor

RKG Financial

Banking, Finance, Legal, Real Estate Focus Group Meeting Key Discussion Points:

1. Split tax rates creates a competitive disadvantage for commercial property owners and a disincentive to make improvements to their properties

2. Marlborough has excellent infrastructure: highway access, central location and utilities

3. The perception is that the Marlborough public school system is below average and that can be a detriment for companies to locate in Marlborough.

4. More efforts should be made by the City to build or strengthen relationships with the business community and address their economic development needs.


Introductions

• Jim Hickey - Marlborough Savings Bank

• Ernie Houde - Ernie Houde Associates – realtors and real estate services

• Anthony Battista – St. Mary’s Credit Union

• David Gadbois – local attorney

• Lisa Trainor – People’s united Bank

• Bob Gustafson – RKG Financial

Discussion

• Municipal approach and culture towards development effect economic development. How welcoming the City is towards new development (permitting process)

• Commonwealth’s role in incentivizing companies to come to Marlborough and stay in the State as opposed to NH and RI

• Banking sector businesses are currently struggling on a regular basis

Economic Opportunities in Marlborough

• The City has an excellent foundation for businesses due to its infrastructure

• Obstacles for economic development include permitting and tax rates (when compared with neighboring communities)

• A solid corporate base currently exists in Marlborough

• City Contacts – The City needs a dedicated professional to guide prospective developers through the economic development process. That role is currently being assumed by the MEDC as opposed to a City staff point person. At one time the City had a dedicated position to facilitate economic development (finding opportunities and preventing opportunities from being sidetracked). This role should be a LOCAL position to represent Marlborough and not a regional or State representative

• Permitting – There exists a perception of over regulation

• Infrastructure – City is currently rebuilding the treatment plants. Existing highway access and rail access are excellent

• Regional Perspective – Positives: geographic location is excellent, being centrally located in MA and NE. Negatives: reputation of educational system – companies are attracted to communities with excellent school system reputations as a benefit for employees (school budget cuts and diverse population contribute to challenges, but the school system has been improving in recent years). The split tax rate developed by the City in years past, is now becoming a disincentive for businesses to


locate in Marlborough and businesses to stay in Marlborough. Perception versus reality that Marlborough is an expensive community to live in

• Job creation – The commercial retail sector is active. Marlborough’s infrastructure provides a significant incentive to locate in Marlborough. No specific retail sector to target, be flexible and responsive to all industries

• Marlborough’s brand SHOULD BE – Marlborough is an affordable and welcoming place for businesses to locate and grow. (The State must help keep companies in Mass and not RI and NH). The former brand was “A country kind of City” with commercial density and ‘country’ hospitality. To achieve this State level incentives are needed. The tax system is a major hindrance. Comparison to Andover (businesses in Wilmington) – HS level education is critical, (examples are cited where residents are sending kids to Hudson for HS)

• Businesses/residents relationships - is it important for people to live and work in Marlborough? It is important for people who work in Marlborough to live in Marlborough

• High School problems –The school system has mediocre State rankings. Facilities are not appropriate; the 8th grade is included with HS. City has not provided facilities to handle larger classes

• New Branding – City should decide who they want to attract and define the brand to target those companies

• Vacancy rate is currently at more than 28% for commercial/office space, which results in a lack of tax revenue. The deterioration of vacant facilities compounds problems

• The tax rates are a competitive disadvantage – Marlborough’s tax rate is higher than Northborough and other adjacent communities. Mass is higher than RI, ME and NH. When the overall economy is performing poorly it compounds the tax system disparities

• Why not target medical research? - Marlborough is located between Worcester and Boston

• Zoning and permitting process should be reevaluated to make development easier and more welcoming

• Residential multifamily development has some demand, but its value is not as high as commercial properties


Sports, Tourism, Hotels, Restaurants Focus Group Meeting

April 13, 2011 – 9:30am


Name Title Company

1 Kathleen Patterson Owner Crossroads Fencing Center

2 Joe Flynn Vice President Marlborough Sports Partnership

3 Mary Simone General Manager Courtyard Marriott

4 Tom Teager President Fore Kicks

5 Richard Tomanek General Manager Embassy Suites

6 Wes Tuttle General Manager New England Sports Center

7 Intern Intern New England Sports Center

8 Helene Loiselle Director of Sales Hampton Inn

9 Robert Johnson President Special Olympics MA

10 Bob Kays Owner Marlboro Restaurant Association

11 Laura Palmer Owner Allora Ristorante

12 Joe Ferro Owner Allora Ristorante

13 Linda Tatten Owner Travel by Tatten

14 Bob Kane Exec Director Olde Marlborough

15 Don Landers City Council City of Marlborough

Sports, Tourism, Hotels, Restaurants Focus Group Meeting Key Discussion Points:

1. Sports, tourism and event industry is strong in Marlborough and Marlborough is recognized nationally as a destination for youth sporting competitions


2. Past restaurant, hotel and activity brochures for visitors have been very beneficial, but have been inconsistent. A consistent marketing campaign to visitors to Marlborough would be very helpful

3. Improved signage and wayfinding would be helpful for visitors navigating their way through the City

4. The City and private businesses should jointly pursue event and convention business on its own as opposed to relying upon a regional agency

5. Split tax rate is an obstacle in bringing businesses to Marlborough

Introductions

• Bob Kane - Historic Society, former community development director – City has lost a number of historic buildings and reducing tourism potential. Believes there is a link between sports industry and tourism industry

• Bob Kays - Restaurant Association , restaurant industry shares a strong relationship with the sports and tourism industry in Marlborough

• Richard Tomanek – Embassy Suites hotel, tourism industry – Current room tax is $6.25

• Mary Simone – Courtyard Marriot. Tourism industry

• Linda Tatten – Travel by Tatten – tourism industry, Marlborough competes with Boston and Cape Cod. City’s strongest asset is the hotel opportunities

• Helene Loiselle - Hampton Inn – hotel industry is concerned about the corporate vacancy rates

• Kathy Patterson – Crossroads Fencing Center– national competitions for fencing are not local. When traveling for sports competitions, hotels that cater to athletes (meal times and meal choices) are attractive as are alternate local activities

• Bob Johnson – Special Olympics Massachusetts – recently relocated to Marlborough for its central location. Built (2009) and operates a training center in Marlborough. Attracts people from all over NE

• Don Landers – City Council – former school department – present as an observer

• Joe Flynn – Marlborough Sports Partnership (a 501C3) – bringing sports events and competition to Marlborough – Marlborough as a sports competition center is a BRAND

• Laura Palmer and Joe Ferro– Allora Restaurant – hotels and sports centers directly influence the restaurant business

• Wes Tuttle – New England Sports Center chose Marlborough for hotels and central location. Supportive community is an asset for the sports and hospitality industry. Competes nationally to host events.


The Marlborough hospitality community has come together to support those efforts

• Tom Teager – Fore Kicks – Events are tied to local hospitality industry, central location is a significant asset – Fore Kicks is looking to attract more tournaments

Discussions

• Hotel Room Tax recently had a 2% increase

• The City could use another attraction, such as a water park or some other activity, to help the hotels and restaurants compensate for the corporate vacancies

• Split Tax Rate – significant roadblock to bringing business to the City

• Office Parks – corporate sector should expand – bring more people to Marlborough (people who will use the restaurants, gyms and generate hotel reservations)

• Marlborough Recreation Facilities - The City’s recreation resources are excellent but are not centralized and focus on outdoor facilities. School system facility resources are limited

• Hotel Industry –Central location helps keep rates affordable and provides access throughout Mass and NE for business travelers and tourism

• Local hotels are better than Boston hotels for sporting events because there is less travel time to events, they are more appropriate for kids, and more affordable

• Youth sporting events are generating repeat business

• Central Location is/should be a key selling point

• Marlborough Youth Sports Industry – The City has strong private and public facilities and is recognized at a national level within the youth sports community as a sports competition destination

• Is there a municipal portal/website for recreational services to increase awareness and increase use? – MEDC had developed a brochure listing business, restaurants and stores (It was funded through a Mass Turnpike Authority grant and coordinated with the City planner) – it hasn’t been published in a couple of years. This brochure generated business for the local restaurants and hotels

• Marlborough public transit would help move tourists around the City for activities

• Marlborough acts as stop over destination for leisure travel. On Friday nights and Saturdays cross state travelers coming from NYC, Albany, Ohio going to Cape Cod and VT stop in Marlborough. It is located at a critical intersection along the pike. Signage is key to drive people to Marlborough hospitality resources


• Brochure/ map of Marlborough should be developed and maintained by the City to help identify restaurants, resources, etc

• MEDC – MEDC made dining guide for sports events to be handed out at events – simple map location of activities (sports centers, restaurants, hotels). It was very successful

• 2014 Special Olympics Bid for Boston – result: lost to Princeton NJ. Princeton won because it was not Boston. Marlborough is not Boston, which is good. It is easier to navigate, more affordable, etc

• Are there needs for additional development? – Hotels have capacity on an annual basis, but coordination with sport centers schedules of events would help spread business throughout the seasons and keep rates lower. There is a market for additional sports center development. Existing Centers are currently considering potential expansion of facilities

• Existing Marlborough tag line – “Crossroads of New England” (495 and Mass pike)

• Worcester/Boston/Marlborough – joint perspective/logo/tagline

• How is Marlborough’s access better or different from other “access points” such as Metro West? Marlborough is a specific location and more central for the State – attractive to inside and outside 495 (unlike Metro West – Framingham/128)

• What should the City be doing to encourage the tourism, sporting and events sector? A convention bureau could be established to pursue events as a joint effort between business segments. A regional Convention Authority exists is Worcester, but local organizations should register to become members. Marlborough could still pursue events on its own. City/MEDC contact person should be designated to facilitate the pursuit of and marketing for conventions and tourism events. MEDC’s role? George Ciccone as “Mr. Marlborough”

• A central contact for all economic development in Marlborough would be very helpful. Local businesses support each other now without City encouragement and support. There is an opportunity for a greater impact if the City were to become involved and market and sell the City and the City’s assets


Educators, Youth Services, Social Services Focus Group Meeting

April 13, 2011 – 11am


Name Title Company

1 Brenda Finn Principal MIA

2 Cindy Zomar Guidance Assabet Valley Reg'l H S

3 Mark Snyder Math Assabet Valley Reg'l H S

4 Sylvia Beville Executive Director Metro South West Regional Employment Board

5 Jim G. Employment Options

6 Veronica Gaudet HR Director Marlborough High School

7 Rick Lacina Asst Principal Whitcomb School

8 Kalliope Pantazopoulos Kindergarten teacher Jaworek School

9 Brendan St George ELA Teacher, MHS/MEA President

Marlborough High School

10 Kathie Manning Director of Business Dev

Quinsigamond Community College

11 Francis Hurley President Boys & Girls Club

12 Joan Simoneau VP Board of Directors Addictions Referral Center Inc

13 Tina Betley EEC Director Marlborough Early Childhood Center

14 Kathy Whitney Owner/Director Meadowbrook Child Garden Preschool & Kindergarten

15 Don Landers City Council City of Marlborough


Educators, Youth Services, Social Services Focus Group Meeting Key Discussion Points:

1. A perception problem exists for the school system. The schools are much better than they are perceived by Marlborough residents and other communities

2. Vertical integration between the school levels (middle school to high school, high school to community college, etc) is needed to improve transitions and increase achievement

3. Corporate partnerships with the schools should be formed to educate the students and the teachers as to what skills are most necessary for 21st century employment

Introductions

• Joan Simoneau – Addictions Referral Center – provide services for school systems and corporations to address drug and health related issues

• Kathie Manning – Quinisigamond Community College – College mission involves educating the workforce

• Sylvia Beville – Metro South West Regional Employment Board – surveys the business market and identifies needs – provides education programs to teachers to provide real workforce training as well as advanced education opportunities for teachers. Works with the healthcare industry to expand and advance healthcare employees’ training. Runs one-stop career centers – connecting job seekers with job openings

• Brenda Finn – Massachusetts International Academy (MIA) – established facility and curriculum. Serves Chinese HS graduates, capacity for 220 Students as a residential school – has connections to UMASS. MIA is a private company and employer and is looking for opportunities for students to experience “American Life”

• Cindy Zomar – Assabet Valley Regional HS – Interested in finding more job opportunities for HS students and college involvement with Quinsigamond and UMASS and identifying more productive alternate leisure activities for HS students

• Mark Snyder – Assabet Valley Regional HS –Current Math teacher who as a student participated in “Volunteer Math” with Digital– Digital employees act as substitute teachers

• Fran Hurley – Boys & Girls Club – provides afterschool programs and job exposure. Having more companies in Marlborough is important for continued support to the Club

• Jim G – Employment Options – provides clubhouse services for individuals with mental illness, including job development, training and placement. Would like to work with companies to make more placement opportunities available. Employment Options’ new


program – Furniture Options – provides furniture for low income individuals

• Tina Betley – Marlborough Early Childhood Center – MECC’s childhood services can serve as incentives to families to locate to Marlborough and starts students on the right track

• Brendan St. George – MHS – MHS has developed relationships with Quinsigamond CC and Framingham State with the goal of preparing students to fill the positions needed for the 21 Century

• Kalliope Panazopoulos – Public School Kindergarten Teacher at the Jaworek School – business partnerships are helpful, but companies are no longer engaged

• Rick Lacina – Assistant Principal at Whitcomb Middle School – he has been approached by parents seeking jobs for help in locating employment – this is an important issue that relates to academic achievement - can the schools be a channel for job search information?

• Veronica Gaudet – Human Resources Director at Marlborough High School – Her job is to attract qualified and enthusiastic teachers to the school system and keep them in the community. Additional activities for students, such as a community center, with pool and expanded facilities – family center not just kids and drop-off – would be a significant asset. Centralized location for services (ESL) and employment services as well as activities for kids

• Kathy Whitney – Meadowbrook Child Garden Preschool and Kindergarten –She needs employed parents for daycare and early childhood services to be most effective and open coordination with local schools. Providing parenting services and training is important. Would like to continue partnerships with local community schools

• Don Landers – City Council – former school department – present as an observer

Discussions

• The perception of the Marlborough school system mirrors what the parents perceive as their children’s experiences and life stage (elementary is great, junior high school is horrible and high school is passable)

• Preschool is critical because it establishes a learning foundation, and supports the needs of the parents’ ability to work. Preschools often provide parenting tips and training to new parents

• The High School level perception is very positive, once people and parents have the opportunity to visit first hand. Not all parents are familiar with the school and how things work, which creates a negative impression

• Reorganization with the school system will help provide appropriate services


• Assabet Valley Regional Technical High School – perception is good for those who are involved in the school, members of the community that are not involved in the school have a lesser opinion (out of ignorance)

• Marlborough School System does not promote itself enough

• EEC – oversees preschool and daycare, promote collaboration among programs, this collaboration is lost at higher levels of the school system

• Marlborough High School offers many services, programs, and excellent teachers, but the school needs to tell people about it. The community must be educated

• School programs and accomplishments are publicized in the local paper

• Vertical integration at all levels is needed. There is little to no ongoing dialogue between Assabet and Marlborough middle school. There should be a connection between faculty and programs between the schools. Same need for collaboration exists between the High Schools and Community College for transition. Quinsigamond tries to coordinate with local high schools to prep students for the next step and transition

• Kids are not working, only 1 out of every 4 kids is working in the region, in part because there are fewer job opportunities for kids. The end result is that there exists very little employment foundation before kids begin workforce training. Developing job opportunities for youth should be a priority

• What should the City being doing for institutional development? – Community Colleges rely upon corporate training programs for financial independence therefore more local corporations should help these efforts. MIA ‘s experience is that the City has been very responsive to its needs. The Boys and Girls Club has a very positive partnership with the City (the Club acts as a polling location, coordinates with school bussing, etc). Employment Options has a great relationship with the City, but would like additional funding to provide additional services. Metro South West Regional Employment Board would like to improve the relationship with the City, specifically for economic development

• The Marlborough school system has great teachers and teachers make the system great not $200M facilities. The human capital within the school system should be marketed and advertized for prospective residents

• Social Services – Good communication exists between the City’s Department of Social Services and the school system. The role of the teachers is critical for services and support for children and parents

• More cross support between City resources and services and the school system would be helpful

• Diverse populations create challenges and demands for services. The number of students eligible for free school lunches between 2000 and


2010 has doubled. The reality of the services that are provided and the demand for those services is not communicated to the community

• Improvements to the Marlborough Website should be made to advertise the City’s resources

• Youth Commission reorganization and revitalization is needed to strengthen that tool. It has been very useful in the past

• Private sector companies should develop partnerships with the schools. This occurs in other communities. How does it happen in Marlborough? Companies with strong social commitments/missions should be targeted and in addition to asking for fire trucks and police stations private companies should be asked to provide volunteer hours in the schools (Boston Partners in Education had a program SHIPS (Special Helpers in Public Schools). Industry must teach the teachers what skills the students need once they graduate. Programs that send business leaders to the schools to teach the staff and students would be very helpful

• Find a tax rate that increases funding for local services and reduces corporate vacancy rate

• Mass Business Alliance Education – Assabet involved with program several years ago. State cut the program and it lost momentum. Would love to get that program back


Medical Institutions Focus Group Meeting

April 13, 2011 – 1:15pm


Name Title Company

1 Annette Casco Director for Rehab Services and MedWorks

Marlborough Hospital

2 Dave Walton Treasurer/ Co-Owner Patriot Ambulance

3 Robert O'Connor Director New Horizons @Marlborough

4 Julie Dalbec Acupuncture Therapist Marlborough Wellness Center

5 Debbie Gitner Licensed Certified Social Worker

ElderCare Resource Services

6 Judi Mulry General Manager Christopher Heights

7 Rose Veith Practical Nursing Coordinator

Assabet Valley Technical HS

Medical Institutions Focus Group Meeting Key Discussion Points:

1. Marlborough’s medical trained workforce is good for the senior care facilities, alright for the ambulance companies, but lacking for Marlborough Hospital

2. Uninsured patients present a challenge to the Hospital and a barrier to primary and specialty physicians locating in Marlborough

3. The medical community has positive experiences working with the City of Marlborough, except that sign permitting takes too long

4. Potential budget changes for federal entitlement programs will impact the local health care industry

Introductions

• Julie Dalbec – Marlborough Wellness Center, an independent out-patient pediatric clinic – looking to create a medical network within Marlborough and surrounding communities

• Annette Casco – Marlborough Hospital, provides access to care, injury management and employee health services to the Marlborough area


• Dave Walton – Patriot Ambulance - Marlborough Chamber of Commerce, Chair – Patriot is well located within the City and is the dedicated ambulance service for Marlborough

• Bob O’Connor – New Horizons@Marlborough – elder care facility

• Judy Mulry – Christopher Heights Marlborough Hills – develops public affordable housing

• Debbie Gitner - Elder Care Resource Services - Collaborative at Marlborough Hospital, senior care – community outreach to centralize services associated with continued care services - assists coordination and location of services

• Rose Veith - Assabet Valley Technical HS - Teaches LPN program at Assabet. Patriot sponsored education program. Have partnership with Marlborough Hospital to run different programs, education and training programs for Assabet Valley Technical HS

Discussions

• The area provides some trained workers, but not enough. Patriot Ambulance is looking for Quinsigamond and Assabet partnerships to continue High School training programs. The needs include pediatric PT OT speech therapists for Wellness Center. Marlborough Hospital needs nurses (79 beds – small hospital). The hospital is trending to agency staff to fill its nursing needs, but leads to different work staff. Agency staff lacks longevity. Horizons has enough applicants and employs local High School students

• City Relations – Hospital works directly with City’s emergency preparedness and has a very close relationship. The Hospital recently announced the expansion for a Cancer Pavilion. Patriot Ambulance has a good relationship with City and Hospital. New Horizons came to the City in 1994 and have had three special permit processes, but have maintained a positive relationship with City

• Marlborough Hospital partnered with UMASS medical for the development of the new health center in Southborough and has partnered with UMASS medical for expansion for certain departments and expanded services

• Marlborough Hospital believes that more primary care physicians in Marlborough would be beneficial. Also there is a need for infant and pediatric services in Marlborough. Specialty services are a challenge because the demand that is needed. How does Marlborough make it attractive for primary care physicians to be located in Marlborough? There is also a need for geriatric physicians in Marlborough – right now patients must go to Worcester for care

• The perception is that UMASS Medical Center in Worcester is very far from Marlborough for medical care (especially for the elderly)

• Marlborough Hospital serves a large portion of the uninsured population and immigration populations. These groups tend to use the emergency room for primary care


• Immigration populations tend to care for elderly within the family structure

• Christopher Heights located in Fry Boot factory is perceived as a facility for the poor by Marlborough residents. Christopher Heights and New Horizon are populated by non-Marlborough based populations – in general children will relocate parents to the communities they now live in. Lawrence Hospital recently opened a Spanish speaking assisted living and Alzheimer unit. The Chamber of Commerce has conducted outreach programs to the Portuguese speaking community and have been unsuccessful

• Does perception of facilities prevent native community from taking advantage of local medical resources? No

• From a National Level, what will the medical world be like once Federal funding is cut or capped? Special committee formed two years ago to look at the restructuring of medical services within State of Massachusetts and the results were it will be a network based structure. One fee to be split between multiple service providers (ambulance, hospital, nursing home, etc) regardless of time spent and dependant on outcome

• Can the existing Marlborough medical community continue to serve the Marlborough community? New facilities must be accompanied by cultural outreach and services to accommodate the immigrant population in Marlborough

• A PILOT (Payment In Lieu of Taxes) program, where tax exempt organizations agree to make some payments to the municipality in return for City services, would be difficult for Marlborough medical community

• MEDC interested in replicating some of the UMASS initiatives that exist in Worcester – biotech park and business incubator with Marlborough Hospital

• Permitting of signs is a prolonged process. It should be easier

• Southborough Medical Group exists – why not Marlborough Medical Group? Reduces some overhead but not facilities. More medical resources than currently exist in Marlborough are needed for it to be successful. Uninsured individuals prevent primary care private practices from being financially viable


Chamber of Commerce Focus Group Meeting

April 13, 2011 – 2:45pm


Name Title Company

1 Karen Callahan Owner Adventures Online

2 Susanne Leeber President Chamber of Commerce

3 Jan Patterson Exec Director Arts Alliance

4 Christine Alessandro Director Baypath Elder Services Inc

5 Ann Scott Owner City Greetings

6 Phil White Owner The Lakeside Oil Company Inc

7 Arthur Bergeron Chairman MEDC

8 Dave Walton Treasurer/ Co-Owner Patriot Ambulance

Chamber of Commerce Focus Group Meeting Key Discussion Points:

1. The high commercial tax rate and restrictive zoning are competitive disadvantages that other communities use to recruit businesses away from Marlborough

2. The Downtown is a missed opportunity to make Marlborough a unique place to attract business, residents and employees

3. City signage code enforcement is perceived as overzealous and inconsistent

4. A single point of contact for business recruitment and retention should be provided by the City

Introductions

• Christine Alessandro – ByPath Elder Services Inc

• Jan Patterson – Arts Alliance – provides programs for The City of Marlborough

• Phil White– Lakeside Oil Company Inc


• Dave Walton – Patriot Ambulance

• Art Bergeron – Chair, Marlborough Economic Development Corporation

• Karen Callahan – Adventures Online

• Susanne Leeber Chamber of Commerce, President – Camber provides contacts and connections for prospective and existing businesses

• Ann Scott – City Greetings – On behalf of the Chamber of Commerce she welcomes new businesses and residents to Marlborough, providing Chamber produced maps, guides, and information

Discussions

• How does Marlborough fit into the regional perspective? The central location is the strongest attribute, access provides value to businesses. Marlborough’s distinction is that it is convenient to highways and shopping Previous brands include “Where All New England Connects” “Free Parking”. These were used by the tourism committee

• A reliable public transit service would be beneficial. Quinsigamond CC wants a bus a line close to any prospective new buildings. Marlborough’s lack of existing densities to support transit lines would require a subsidy

• The tax rate is too high, and the zoning regulations are too restrictive. Other cities and states court Marlborough companies to relocate to other communities when they are outgrowing their Marlborough facilities

• Surveys should be conducted of companies that choose to leave Marlborough on why they left

• Massachusetts is expensive and the dual rate is not inviting

• The general cost of living (housing costs, taxes, insurance) is a shock to residents who relocate from out of state

• The utilities are not mentioned as a problem

• The Downtown lacks space for community arts activities. There are no cultural/municipal spaces

• The Chamber of Commerce supports and coordinates existing Main Street events, such as car shows, heritage festivals, and the “Taste of Marlborough”

• The perception of the Downtown is that it is service oriented with some restaurants. There has never been a consistent effort to locate businesses and restaurants in the Downtown

• Tech employers have stated that Marlborough is not urban enough for employees to live in. There is nothing to do, nothing to walk to, nothing open late. Tech employers are comparing Marlborough with Boston and Cambridge


• A positive about Marlborough is that all levels of housing are available

• The City is in a transition period and there is no brand currently. Brands for Marlborough could be “Best place to Live (raise a family) and Work”. To achieve this the City needs aggressive marketing and lower tax rates. The culture at City Hall needs to change to be more welcoming to businesses. That change will require political will and must have resident support

• There are sign problems. The code enforcement officer is too aggressive with fines and codes are not communicated in advance in fines

• City needs an advocate and point of contact for existing and prospective businesses

• Four sites have been designated as part of the 43D state permitting program. To date it has not been successful, but designation occurred during the down market

• City culture is averse to new family oriented development, to avoid expanding the school department services

• Baypath moved from Framingham to Marlborough through Jones Lang LeSalle realtor. Baypath chose Marlborough because it fit the criteria (accessibility and price). The staff has been happy with access. They received no incentives to relocate

• Is it possible to fill Marlborough’s existing vacant space? Or should it be taken down and land-banked?

• When Digital left the City was able to diversify the economic make-up. This needs to happen again

• Can the City afford to provide financial incentives to attract other businesses? TIFs can be successful, but come with significant qualifications

• If Marlborough is just another place with an office building then it is a race to the lowest price. The challenge is to make Marlborough a “Special Place” so that people and businesses want to be here or close to here. If the goal is to remake Marlborough as a western Cambridge, then the City must engage WPI (tax exempt and potential expansion). Cultural activities are needed to be a part of the “Special Place”

• Could the vacant buildings be filled with branch offices/classes with support services, such as restaurants, daycare, etc. Create a college annex for a many State colleges

• Marlborough Post Office is in a horrible location and lacks parking

• The City should provide complete service to businesses for retention of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses. This should not include incentives, but coordinated services between the Chamber of Commerce and City Hall


• Currently it seems that company life spans are too short to recoup benefits following municipal incentives


Housing Developers, Owners and CDA Focus Group Meeting

April 13, 2011 – 4:15pm


Name Title Company

1 Mitch Gorka Realtor Re/MAX

2 Lynn Gorka Realtor Re/MAX

3 Branch Yules Managing Partner Hudson Highlands, LLC, Owner Frye bldg

4 Deborah Fairbanks Owner/Architect/Developer Fairbanks Development LLC

5 Eric Asman President French Hill Neighborhood Assoc (FHNA)

6 Rebecca Porter Secretary French Hill Neighborhood Assoc (FHNA)

7 Wendy Butler Owner/Realtor Distinctive Realty

8 Rieko Hayashi Program Manager Community Development

9 Shawn Pike Community Manager Jefferson at Wheeler Apartment Homes

10 Stas Burdan Developer St.Mary's of French Hill Redevelopment LLC

11 Gary White Owner White Real Estate

12 Arthur Bergeron Chairman MEDC

Housing Developers, Owners and CDA Focus Group Meeting Key Discussion Points:

1. Developers have very positive relationship with the City for the development process and code enforcement


2. Across housing types, the trend is for couples to move out of Marlborough once they have children – or enroll their children to the Hudson School System

3. The City should promote itself the way other communities, specifically the other boroughs promote themselves

4. Luxury apartments have been very successful, in staying occupied and raising rents, while condo sales are struggling

Introductions

• Shawn Pike – Jefferson at Wheeler Apartment Homes - JPI original developer in 2002

• Gary White – White Real Estate owner, French Hill Area property manager and real estate broker

• Eric Asman – President of The French Hill Neighborhood Association (FHNA)

• Rieko Hayashi– Marlborough Community Development Agency (MCDA), manages public housing and housing rehab program. MCDA is a semi – public entity

• Rebecca Porter –Secretary of The French Hill Neighborhood Association (FHNA)

• Deborah Fairbanks – Owner of Fairbanks Development - residential developer converted mill building into mixed use redevelopment

• Branch Yules – Managing Partner of Hudson Highland LLC - realtor and property manager. Owner of the Frye Building

• Mitch Gorka –ReMax realtor and member of the urban core initiative and ZBA alternate

• Lynn Gorka – ReMax realtor in Marlborough and Northborough of commercial and residential properties

• Stas Burdan – St. Mary’s French Hill Redevelopment LLC - developer

• Wendy Butler –Owner of Distinctive Realty and realtor of residential properties. Also a Marlborough resident

• Art Bergeron – Chair, Marlborough Economic Development Corporation

Discussion

• Does Marlborough have an opportunity to grow the housing sector and where? School system and crime rate are common questions from prospective buyers

• Luxury apartments have a 95% occupancy rate, experience regular rent increases and have 25% affordable housing component. People are moving in from out of state capitalizing on central location, particularly when compared with communities toward the east where rents are


higher. Market rate rentals are not typically families. Once individuals have kids they relocate out of Marlborough

• Unit sales are occupied by single families or couples without kids. Once individuals have kids they relocate out of Marlborough

• Code enforcement issues, landlords not keeping up the properties and devalues the neighborhood

• Perception is that people who work in Marlborough do not live in Marlborough

• Luxury apartment dwellers are not engaged with the community. They do not frequent local businesses or restaurants

• Illegal apartments do exist. The code enforcement officers are very responsive to violations. City Hall is a partner to cooperative developers. Developers have had positive experiences with code enforcement officer and mayor’s office. This should be advertised, because it is not the perception

• Marlborough has achieved its affordable housing requirement to satisfy Chapter 40B regulations

• Housing Industry assessment: there are many people interested in buying, but not many are buying. There is demand for lower price range properties. $100-$250K Marlborough caters toward first time homebuyers. Current economic climate and job uncertainty contributes to this trend

• Last year’s condo sales most active price point was – $50-$99K

• At the $220 – $230K range, there is 8 months of inventory

• People buying lofts in downtown are primarily from out of the State

• Can Marlborough capitalize on the existing immigrant population and embrace the diversity to fill vacancy and enliven the downtown area? Can Marlborough be marketed to educated Brazilian populations in Brazil to relocate

• Westborough, Southborough, Northborough have full time PR staff that promote the towns’ assets

• Financing for new development is difficult to find

• Marlborough has experienced problems with foreclosure, where properties are being abandoned without shutting off utilities or providing homes for animals

• French Hill Neighborhood Associations has tried to engage the local immigrant populations and has been unsuccessful to a large degree

• A street by street (Lincoln Street) plan to revitalize neighborhood and save historic buildings. One very small historic district – potential for expansion


• CDA - Marlborough foreclosed properties are nicer than the rest of the State. CDA purchased foreclosed properties rehabbed and resold properties

• FHNA would like to create a hip area with coffee shops and theaters and a place for the arts

• Marlborough has made great strides in the last 10 years and is building momentum in the right direction. Advertising and marketing is the key

• Marlborough residents sending kids to Hudson school system

• The Newsweek article underscores the need to market externally and internally

• The City should create a brochure that lists activities, business, restaurants - its assets for tourists

• The City should target people who work here, to live here – to better align the industry in the City with the human capital in the City

• The City should promote increased density


Urban Core

April 13, 20

Focus Grou

Name

1 Mary

2 Andre

3 Janet

4 Jim A

5 Grego

6 Rick

7 Keith

8 Mark

9 Mich

10 Rick

11 Georg

12 Neil L

13 Bob K

14 Arthu

Urban Core

e Focus Grou

011 – 6:30pm

up Attendees

e

y Scott

ea Bibi

Licht

Ash

ory Minott

Bennett

h Fuller

k Evangelous

hael Murphy

Lombardi

ge Voyiatzis

Licht

Kane

ur Bergeron

e Focus Group

1. Parking

2. Certain opportu

3. Great m

up Meeting

m

Tit

Ow

Ow

Pre

Pub

Fou

Pre

Par

Sale

V P

Ow

Ow

Ch

Exe

Ch

p Meeting Key

is available an

buildings; eunities

mix of uses but

tle

wner

wner

esident

blisher

unding Princi

esident

rtner

es Manager

President

wner

wner

hief Advisor

ec Director

hairman

y Discussion P

nd needs to be

e.g. Walker,

t lack of cohes

Co

M

BB

MSo

M

pal Dr

MBa

NeCo

Ge

MAg

Th

Th

HeCh

Ol

M

Points:

e identified wi

would prov

iveness and “u

ompany

ain Street Caf

B Realty Corp

arlborough ociety

ain Street Jou

ream Collabor

arlborough ank

ext Gommunication

emini Signs

urphy gency

he Vin Bin

he Fish

ereWeAre -hange Group

lde Marlborou

EDC

ith wayfinding

vide good m

urban” identit

fé

p

Historical

urnal

rative

Savings

Generation ns

Insurance

Managing

ugh

g signs

mixed use

ty


4. Need to provide people access to downtown through shuttle bus and trails

Introductions

• Jim Ash – Publisher of Main Street Journal – interested in improving downtown with an increased business mix. Perception from other business owners is that it is not easy to do business in Marlborough due to the City’s permitting and approvals process

• Rick Lombardi – Owner of The Vin Bin – has had positive experiences working with the City of Marlborough

• Neil Licht –“Here We Are” Managing Change Consultancy practice, and property owner. Downtown should pursue new identity – no new clothing stores – it should be an entertainment destination. Change Management is providing services to business owners that assist them to adapt to changing landscapes

• Janet Licht – Marlborough Historical Society – would like to increase awareness of the Downtown’s and the whole City’s historical resources

• Bob Kane – Exc. Director of Olde Marlborough and former community development director. Would like to see the Downtown add a job center (like a courthouse), increased residential density (high rise), increase or create tourism. Believes that Public Art projects could play a major role in revitalization and tourism efforts – murals could be the center piece

• Gregory Minott– Founder of Dream Collaborative an architecture and planning firm located in Downtown Marlborough – Marlborough has many great individual pieces, but they do not connect. Families do not have high quality outdoor PASSIVE space in the downtown area. Passive outdoor space could also act as function space

• George Voyiatzis – Owner of The Fish (restaurant with a 160 seat dining room) and a commercial property owner in the Downtown

• Andrea Bibi – BB Realty (investment portfolio) – owns a downtown mixed use building and is losing a tenant due to economic downturn

• Keith Fuller–Partner with Next Generation Communications (a telecom company). He is happy with the City and Chamber of Commerce. Believes more parking is needed in the Downtown and would like an eclectic mix of businesses. Possibly creating a pedestrian only street would provide a unique nature that would attract businesses and patrons. Current store mix does not generate street activity. Believes that Philadelphia and Salem can be used as positive examples and case studies of reinvented Downtowns

• Mary Scott – Owner of Main Street Café and founder of Marlborough Downtown Village Association, which functions like a main street association, but is not a formal Main Street Association. Would like to keep existing businesses and attract new, appropriate businesses to the Downtown


• Michael Murphy – Vice President of Murphy Insurance – maintain diverse businesses mix and operate throughout the day

• Rick Bennett – President of Marlborough Savings Bank and Chair of Urban Core committee, which is looking at a number properties and redevelopment and reuse opportunities in the Downtown. Marlborough Savings Bank recently built a new building in downtown

• Mark Evangelous –Sales Manager of Gemini Signs – Sign designer located in Downtown. Business shifts to selling more signs over the web than through walk-ins. Believes the City’s permitting process is backlogged. For example, Framingham has a dedicated sign permitting officer and Marlborough does not and the approval process can be backed up for months

• Arthur Bergeron – Chair, Marlborough Economic Development Corporation

Discussions

• What local initiatives are needed to expand existing businesses – City Hall not behind programs like the mural Art Programs, redevelop historic buildings to attract higher income residents in downtown – add attractions to downtown

• Increase residential densities in downtown – businesses see increase activity due to “Design Pack” building

• Urbanization is a trend – Downtown should capitalize on this – “accessible urban”

• Cultural tourism attracts people from within 20 mile radius. Case studies most on the West coast – Haverhill MA. Installation art - lobsters in Boston, apples in Leominster, Mr. Potato Head in Providence

• Mixed use downtown – businesses serve residents. Satellite campus for Universities – anywhere in Marlborough would be good, downtown would be great. If residential uses increase then the amenities will be needed for the additional population

• Main Street not cohesive – lack of cohesion due to ethnicity, communication, etc – unify Main Street through municipal facilities and reuse the walker building for university or revitalized apartments. Dinner theaters - South Hadley

• Increasing daytime and evening population is key for business success

• Parking inventory – there is capacity, but perception is that it is insufficient

• Increase residential population – redevelop and improve existing residential space before developing new residential

• Promote historic sites in the downtown - cemetery

• Strong business growth is expected/hoped for in the next three years


• How is the downtown positioned within the region – Downtown is an anchor, communities that invest in the downtowns change the perception of a community

• Geographic challenges – Granger Boulevard has diverted traffic from Main Street, no back yard on one side of the street (cliff), lack of natural feature in the downtown

• Marlborough has had a series of streetscape investments over the last 20 years

• Improve connections in downtown – Assabet trail stops right before downtown Lincoln Street – connect to the downtown area. Make connections between Main Street and Granger – businesses should not turn back on Route 20

• Wayfinding is needed to direct residents, tourist, etc to community assets

• Sign Ordinance is an issue – window lettering, coverage – hindrance to promote businesses, sign size is determined by building setbacks, Downtown Sign Review Board defunct

• Marlborough does not market its assets for tourism – at New England Sports Center

• Buy locally

• New England Sports Center – generates tourism – is a shuttle possible to bring people from sports center to other parts of Marlborough? Does a trolley or tram work in Marlborough?

• Downtown Village Association – create a collective voice


High Tech

April 14, 20

Focus Grou

Nam

1 Jen B

2 Bonn

3 John

4 Marti

5 Lucill

6 Susan

7 Dr. E

8 Wend

9 Ken A

10 Ted M

High Tech

Introductio

and Life Scie

011 – 8am

up Attendees

e

Boudrie

nie Adams

Romeo

in J. Levins

le Servidio

n Hager

Elizabeth Higg

dy Farrell

Amidon

Marple

and Life Scien

1. City is w5 states are most

2. Incubatosimilar b

3. Hotel an

4. City govhave not

ns

• Ken Amto Marl

ences Focus G

Titl

Fou

Pres

HR

Ma

Vic

VP

gins Fou

PrinPlan

Ma

ChiDev

nces Focus Gr

well located foand access totly outside the

or and mid-sbusinesses

nd conference

vernment andt been reasons

midon – Marklborough fro

Group Meeting

le

under

ss

R

naging Direct

e President

under

ncipal Tnner

rketing

ief velopment Of

roup Meeting

or business groo delivery systee region

cale growth s

e space import

d other develops to site in Ma

keting positionm Worcester

g

C

G

C

BoC

tor G

CEn

Q

G

Technical Ra

Bl

Business fficer

Xc

Key Discussio

owth. Access ems and conn

space, with la

tant for busine

ped conditionarlborough

n for Blue Cor in 2005 be

ompany

Green Marlboro

ommunity Ad

oston orporation

Global Access P

apaccio Envirngineering

Qteros

GlycoSolutions

aytheon Com

lue Cod

cellerex

on Points:

to trained emnections to cli

ab space, wou

ess developme

ns (housing, d

od Technologiecause of loc

ough

dvocate

Scientific

Partners

ronmental

s

mpany

mployees in ients, who

uld attract

ent

owntown)

ies – came cation for


employee base. Blue Cod Technologies provides technology services for the insurance industry

• Wendy Farrell – Principal Technical Planner with Raytheon

• Jen Boudrie – Founder of Green Marlborough, director of Green Workforce Training

• Martin Levins – Managing Director with Global Access Partners. Interested in leveraging City resources and local business

• John Romeo – Human Resources position with Boston Scientific. Boston Scientific consolidated offices from Watertown and Natick to Marlborough in part due to an analysis conducted of employee residential and access factors. Boston Scientific refurbished a building and located 2 major divisions in Marlborough. Of the Boston Scientific employees working in Marlborough 54 live in Marlborough and 120 live within the region served by Marlborough Chamber of Commerce

• Lucille Servidio –Vice President of Capaccio Environmental Engineering. Capaccio Environmental moved to Marlborough in 2003 from Sudbury because of central location for employee access. Currently Capaccio Environmental has 30 employees in Marlborough

• Bonnie Adams – Reporter with The Community Advocate

• Sue Hager – Vice President of Qteros. Qteros has 55 employees located in Marlborough. The company originated in western MA. Central location for access to employees was a critical factor in the company’s relocation to Marlborough

• Dr. Elizabeth Higgins – Founder of GlycoSolutions - Moved the company and 7 employees from Worcester for access to employees and lower rent than Worcester. Company originated in Worcester incubator space

• Ted Maple – Chief Business Development Office of Xcellerex a biomanufacturing company. The company located in Marlborough for access to skilled workforce and affordable land

Discussions

• Skilled workers are available in the Marlborough due to regional access, some employees commute from out of state

• Infrastructure services – industrial process discharge limitations have been an issue for industrial companies growth

• Access to four airports is an asset

• Packaging companies and call centers are not located regionally. This is a barrier to locating manufacturing in Marlborough and Mass and NE

• Hotel and conference space is an important regional asset

• Office must open all the time energy and access – to function as virtual offices for other regions of the company


• Free Parking

• Better rents and opportunities to expand than Worcester

• “Clusters” are less important than rent rates

• Started in Worcester in incubator space

• Local initiative for Marlborough – incubator space - life science incubator space subsidized by state - post incubation space – small space and lower rents. Incubator types – high tech, clean energy, life sciences. Office of Economic Development heading the incubator spaces – new incubator in Fall River, and existing and recent incubator spaces

• Will R&D follow manufacturing to other countries (EverGreen)? Marlborough provides access to employees in more affordable areas – attracts workers

• Employee living options IN Marlborough not a key right now (additional high quality residences) – due to the City’s accessibility. Increased gas prices may affect this

• Cluster (adjacent businesses) not important, but access to life sciences industry in MA is important (access to employees, services, equipment, etc)

• Downtown – likes – no parking meters. People do not use the downtown for business entertainment, and dining options (Southborough, Northborough, Westborough, Sudbury, Boston, Hudson). Worcester dining is great. Boston Scientific supported ‘Taste of Marlborough’ the last several years – sells discount tickets to employees. Marlborough has good restaurants, but how to connect to businesses?

• MassBio – has Biotech ready community standards for what assets communities should have to attract biotech companies

• Corporate Responsibilities - Conferences in Marlborough – support of local hotels – send employees in for speaking opportunities and judging science fairs at Marlborough Public Schools

• What can the City provide to improve/expand your businesses? Zoning changes to allow employee amenities and services (dry cleaner, convenience store, coffee, Post Office, etc). Employees leaving work reduces productivity and many errands are to services outside of Marlborough. Gym in building is a great asset. – smart growth principals will allow increased mixed use development and opportunities. Location is not enough to keep companies here – brings them initially, but not live work and grow the company. Tax rate is an important factor – better rates and more equitable than Worcester (Assessors’ office too aggressive, lack of communication)

• Route 20 is a barrier – employees avoid Route 20 and therefore local businesses in Marlborough


• Are there regional initiative to improve/expand your businesses? Metro West Incubator instead of Marlborough Incubator. Expand transportation services for companies

• Are you optimistic about life sciences and high tech industry growth? Limited State benefits seen by local companies

• Marlborough political culture – Chamber supporting a four year term as opposed to a two year

• Raytheon – experience on the East Side of Marlborough. Campus has store, gym, dry cleaner. Lunch destinations in Sudbury. Daycare options in Sudbury. 1400 employees – not at building capacity. Looking to move employees to Marlborough to reduce real estate costs elsewhere

• Question - What type of businesses have been locating to Marlborough in the last 5 to 10 years – how have they been growing? Are clean energy businesses a part of these recent companies moving to Marlborough?


Commercia

April 14, 20

Focus Grou

Nam

1 Allen

2 Sheila

3 Peter

4 Diann

5 Andr

6 Robe

7 Scott

8 Robe

9 Kevin

10 Chris

11 David

12 Tom

13 Bonn

CommerciaDiscussion

al Property O

011 – 9:30am

up Attendees

e

Smith

a Hennessy

Flynn

ne Dellmeyer

ew Spaulding

rt Depietri

J Weiss

rt Turcotte

n Malloy

s Hannon

d Ferris

Wellen

nie Adams

al Property OwPoints:

1. Quality

2. Access is

wners, Landlo

m

Tit

Gen

Dir

Vic

Pre

MaComDev

IT

Vic

Sen

V P

Co

Pre

wners, Landlo

of space in M

s a key benefit

ords and Man

tle

neral Manage

rector Marketi

ce President

esident

anaging Dirmmercial velopment

Executive

ce President

nior Property

President

nsultant

ess

ords and Mana

Marlborough ex

t to the area

nagers Focus G

C

r So

ing So

R

HIn

NP

RC

rector of G

D

LC

Manager C

FG

C

agers Focus G

xceeds regiona

Group Meetin

Company

olomon Pond

olomon Pond

RK Associates

Haynes Manc

Normandy Reartners

Rosewood DevCorp

Guttierez

Data Translatio

incoln Company

CBRE

erris DevGroup

Community Ad

roup Meeting

al quality

ng

d Mall

d Mall

anagement

eal Estate

velopment

on

Property

velopment

dvocate

g Key


3. Permitting can be very difficult with City Council issuing Special Permits. Also, 2-year political cycle makes it difficult to define relationships with City

4. Need food, services, and ‘concierge’ services to make office spaces more attractive

5. Change in commercial taxes would pull more tenants from Worcester as rents would be more competitive

Introductions

• Chris Hannon – Senior Property Manager with CBRE

• Allen Smith – General Manager of Solomon Pond Mall with Simon Property Group

• Sheila Hennessy – Director of Marketing for Solomon Pond Mall with Simon Property Group. Believes that Marlborough could achieve a synergy between the Mall and the Corporate Office space that is similar to what occurs in the area of the Burlington Mall

• Kevin Malloy – Vice President with Lincoln Property Company

• Rob Turcotte – Executive with Data Translation, which provides data translation services. The company has recently shrunk and looking to sublease space

• Tom Wellen– Former Marlborough City Treasurer, ran St. Mary’s Credit Union, and was the interim director for MEDC

• Dianne Dellmeyer - Haynes Management Inc, provides property management

• Scott Weiss – Managing Director of Commercial Development with Guttierrez Normandy – 550 Acres of development potential

• Rob DePietri – President of Rosewood Development Corporation. Rosewood Development built and owns five buildings in Marlborough

• David Ferris – Vice President of Ferris Development Owns a distressed property in Marlborough

• Andy Spaulding – Vice President of Normandy Real Estate Partners, Marlborough property owners

• Bonnie Adams – Reporter with The Community Advocate

Discussions

• Are there issues with how the City is handling Commercial property (land use regulations, taxes, etc) – Broader market perspective than Marlborough. Awareness by the City that the 3Com property development was result of City incentives (changed over the last several years) Important to keep businesses in Marlborough

• City Hall approach has come full circle – In the 80s City was very development friendly, in mid 90s development times were extended


that discouraged development, now City is beginning to be more pro business and proactive

• Utility infrastructure - Sewer fees and capacity issues on western side of the City. Limiting factor to development. Broadband service (Verizon is only network provider) Forest Street service is not run in the street and not easy to work with – affects tenants. North Attleboro took control of broadband service, but abandoned it due to management problems

• City Hall Staff is positive, but infrastructure and processes is alright (middle of road compared with other Mass communities – not the worst, not the best)

• City Permitting issues – Special permit requires City Council – which slows down approvals, increases costs, opens up other areas of examination. Too many issues require special permit approval. City Council does not have technical expertise to review development plans. Drive thru Special Permit – several instances cited. 9 month review and approval process. City Council questions and second guesses City Staff

• Politicized permitting process is a deterrent to development

• Food and services to support commercial tenants are needed, but difficult to obtain services though the City processes. If the services exist to support the commercial space, then commercial properties would be more attractive and have fewer vacancies

• Create/allow Neighborhood villages for services to exist that support the commercial properties – and service the New England Sports Center

• Proximity to amenities is a key factor for employers looking to lease space

• What is the competitive advantage of Marlborough? Price #1 in this environment. Larger blocks of space

• Positive experience (smooth and expedited) for tenant fit-out for key tenant (EMC backed company) with seasoned EMC construction evaluators. – Building inspector provided a level of confidence for the tenant to close the deal

• Price sensitive – Difference in Marlborough and Westborough office parks can be $3-$4

• Regional highway access key asset for prospective tenants

• Marlborough buildings with high quality fit and finish – that will not be constructed anywhere unless rents double in the future – is an advantage over neighboring communities

• What size or types of business will be likely to come to Marlborough – life science, tech, etc – vacant buildings are corporate HQ. Conversion of space will most likely be required to match existing tenants to vacant space. HP space is obsolete. Fidelity buildings will take 2-3 years to fill


in a Good market – longer now. I-495 will be an option for more tenants once other areas (128) are filled and rents rise

• The State will need to provide incentives to fill and break up the buildings

• Can the Fidelity buildings (3 buildings 750,000 sf) be delayed to coming to market – Fidelity can sell cheap, which will reduce the landlords pricing abilities

• Tenant trends – moving closer to Boston while rents are low (public transportation is a reason given)

• Large user (like Fidelity) brings other support businesses to Marlborough – can the City and State find another large user

• Can Marlborough work with Fidelity to lease buildings to west coast high tech companies (Facebook and Twitter)

• High tech companies – do employees (younger) want to work in Marlborough. Younger companies are not looking for “Corporate Campus” more “village concept” Marlborough office space was developed as “Corporate Campus” space

• Westborough National Grid Building – case study for building reuse. Less attractive building and location than Fidelity buildings – City of Westborough drove that solution

• Changes in Marlborough must come from the top all the way down. MEDC must be stabilizing force and provide consistency strategy and push the Mayor’s office – especially with 2 year terms for mayor

• Zoning and processes are important to keep development out of political process – especially with 2 year political cycle

• If the commercial tax rates are equal Marlborough could pull tenants from Westborough. Incentivize vacant buildings. Competitive disadvantage for Marlborough – realtors showing Westborough properties highlight higher Marlborough taxes

• Future accounting changes may move current tenants to property owners – split tax rate will be more of a factor

• Reduces property value of commercial properties – rents are low now only because distressed properties are purchased at a drastically reduced rate


Industrial B

April 14, 20

Focus Grou

Name

1 Brian

2 Don R

3 Karl N

4 Frank

Industrial B

Introductio

Discussions

Business Own

011 – 11am

up Attendees

e

Murphy

Robinson

Nye

k Niejadlik

Business Owne

1. Relation

2. Power inprice wi

3. TIF’s an

4. Businessto the fa

ns

• Frank Nmanufac

• Karl NyFoundry

• Don RoGrid is t

• Brain Mconsulti

s

• Growth expand campus Marlborcompeti

ners and Mana

Titl

Pres

Acc

VP

DirMfg

ers and Manag

nships are good

nfrastructure th the Southw

nd DIF’s could

s would improacilities

Niejadlik – ctures chemica

ye – Vice Prey, which prod

obinson – Acthe electrical u

Murphy – Presng services to

potential fo(leasing spacecafeteria and

rough Foundition. 12 peop

agers Focus G

le

sident

count Exec

Manufacturin

rector, Facilitieg. Support

gers Focus Gr

d with the Cit

is providing gwest

d be used to m

ove with the s

Facilities direals for technol

esident of Mauces aluminum

ccount Execuutility provide

sident of Colocorporations

or industrial , possible expad gym. Regdry is not gple. Central l

Group Meetin

C

CIn

N

ng M

es and RE(D

roup Meeting

ty

good service b

mitigate tax rat

siting of raw m

ector with Dlogy industry

anufacturing m castings

tive with Naer that serves M

onial Power Gand municipa

users? Dowansion) 600 c

gional employgrowing, comlocation is imp

ng

Company

Colonial Powernc

National Grid

Marlborough F

Rohm & Haas Electronic MatDow)

Key Discussio

but cannot co

te

material suppl

Dow Chemic

with the Ma

ational Grid. Marlborough

Group – providalities

w Chemical locurrent employyee base, fewmpeting withportant. Nati

r Group

Foundry

terials

on Points:

ompete on

liers closer

cal, which

arlborough

National

des energy

ooking to yees. On-

w in City. h overseas ional Grid


has received interest of potential customers to locate to Marlborough. National Grid offers rebates to customers for energy efficiency

• Good relationships with the City

• Dow owns 113 acres, like regional work force, positive relationships with the City. Looking to expand existing buildings (good relationships with building inspector and assessor)

• Competitive advantages to Marlborough? Electrical infrastructure is good in Marlborough. Green industry development potential is real for Marlborough – but not the resources for green power generation – Marlborough group purchase electricity achieves lower rates for municipalities and smaller office uses

• Local power plant could provide Marlborough the opportunity to sign a long term power usage agreement and secure lower rates. New England does not have the demand for electric power

• Energy efficiency business cluster

• Marlborough Foundry is established and has operations functioning with limited help or need from the City

• Dow Chemical – do not increase taxes to draw attention from national headquarters. Tier 1 site as evaluated by Down Chemical. Intellectual property is key asset for this location. 1992 land was purchased

• Marlborough’s accessibility is key asset

• Could the City solicit raw material supplier to the Marlborough for materials that multiple Marlborough industrial companies utilize – to reduce shipping costs

• Mass Technology Collaborative in Westborough

• Municipal waste treatment capacity was an issue that the City has been addressing

• Electricity capacity for Marlborough is significant. Fidelity buildings and Hewlet Packard were data centers – which had immense energy densities. That capacity is now available for other customers

• Back up energy service can be provided by National Grid to ensure uninterrupted service

• Marlborough cannot compete for heavy industrial companies with southwest due to power demands and capacity

• Assabet Valley Technical School can provide technical employees

• Marlborough manufacturers tend to be smaller and difficult to attract during the day – incentives to smaller companies – smaller companies are the foundation of the business community

• TIFs and DIFs could be more effective with existing tax rates


East Side (B

April 14, 20

Focus Grou

Nam

1 Jim M

2 Jeff B

3 Korin

4 Bill B

5 Jim K

6 Rand

7 Robe

8 Darre

9 Josep

10 Peter

11 Paul C

East Side (BDiscussion

Introductio

Business, Prop

011 – 1:15pm

up Attendees

e

McGrath

Batta

na Peltak

Brewin

Kambosos

di Isaacson

rt Stetson

en McLaughli

h F. Delano, J

Flynn

Crocetti

Business, PropPoints:

1. Perceptishould b

2. Waste mimprove

3. Would lto attrac

ns

• Jim Kamsmall renational

perty Owners

m

Tit

En

GM

Ow

Att

Ow

Ow

Ow

in Ge

Jr. Co

Pre

perty Owners a

ion that East Sbe extended to

management ement

like to developct broader regi

mbosos –Ownetail businessl franchises tha

s and Residen

tle

ngineering Fell

M

wner

torney

wner

wner

wner

eneral Manage

ouncilor

ess

and Residents

Side is negleco the East Side

facilities are

p the village cional business

ner of Capitas owner therat have recent

nts) Focus Gro

C

low R

M

L

B

CC

P

M

er WSw

C

R

M

s) Focus Grou

ted by City. Qe

a detriment

center as more

al Liquors andre is significtly opened in E

oup Meeting

Company

Raytheon Corp

Marlborough N

Ledle, Inc. (Re

Brewin Law

Capital LiquCapital Farms

ost Road Art

Marlboro Airpo

Wayside Racwim Club

City of Marlbo

RK Associates

Metrowest Dai

up Meeting Ke

Qualities in re

to character

e of a commer

d Capital Farcant competitEast Marlboro

poration

Nissan

al Estate)

uors &

Center

ort

cquet &

orough

ily

ey

est of City

and need

rcial center

rms. As a tion with ough


• Jeff Batta – General Manager with Marlborough Nissan. Marlborough Nissan has 52 employees. The existing zoning prevents an expansion for his dealership. He had a very negative and humiliating experience with the City in attempts to amend zoning to allow the expansion. His experiences in the City Marlborough are in striking contrast with the Town of Milford, where he had a very positive experience opening a dealership

• Korina Peltak –Owner of Ledle Inc - Commercial and residential property owner and property management. There has been an increase of vacant space on Route 20 in the last 10 years. Most of the current vacancies were locally owned stores

• Peter Flynn – RK Associates – Understands that the Home Depot, Target and Walgreens are all struggling with sales

• Bill Brewin – Resident – Would like to see increased density in East Marlborough to support the existing businesses. Would like to see the City put more effort into developing the East Marlborough neighborhoods

• Darren McLaughlin – General Manager of Wayside Racket and Swim Club. The club draws members from Hudson, Marlborough, Sudbury, Framingham. The State park in the area is used for jogging by club members, but it is not connected to the residential community. This could be developed into a recreational destination

• Bob Stetson – Owner of the Marlboro Airport . Marlborough Airport is one of 36 general public use airports in MA, and one of only 12 privately owned public use airports in MA

• Jim McGrath – Engineering Fellow with Raytheon and Marlborough resident. Marlborough should target large businesses, by providing low taxes, easy access. Raytheon attracts employees from all over NE and Mass to Marlborough

• Randi Isaacson – Post Road Art Center. Overall business is declining, believes that people avoid the intersection where the Post Road Art Center is located because it is so bad. Additionally the business has poor access from the street

• Paul Crocetti – Reporter with the MetroWest Daily News

• Joseph Delano – Marlborough City Councilor representing East Marlborough

Discussions

• East side has Home Depot, Target and Walgreens – not fully active. Home Depot is a tweener store to take over flow. Too disconnected from Sudbury to capitalize on the existing demographics. Target opened one month, 50% off normal expectations – two Targets in Marlborough (only city in the nation with two Targets)

• Staples Plaza – empty 20,000 SF of 67,000 SF


• Nissan, Target, Home Depot – destination shopping

• Sudbury residents do not come to Marlborough for shopping – so East Marlborough neighborhoods should be further developed

• Waste treatment plant, transfer station, junk yard – not inviting for residents and neighborhood businesses

• Transfer station garbage from Framingham – Marlborough garbage is treated/managed separately

• Heavily trafficked area – but commuter road – pass through traffic

• Target taking business away from small local businesses – Local convenience store was off 40% in the first month after Walgreens opened

• Sign ordinance – inconsistent and over-zealous enforcement

• Residential properties are smaller starter homes

• Municipal airports are heavily subsidized by Federal and State authorities – private airports are prevented by law to receive grant

• Sudbury residents shop at the carpet store

• Nissan’s main customers from the west more than the east

• Marlborough airport – handles 1.5 private arrivals per week for area businesses (Raytheon, Fore Kicks, Staples, Computer Associates, movie production, etc). Airport could be more heavily utilized by the City and companies within the City. 40 airplanes typically housed at Marlborough. Middle ranked airport within the State. Mass sales tax exception for airplane parts - possible repeal. Airport can handle single engine airplanes

• Waste to energy solution for waste treatment facility

• What works well with Marlborough? Lower cost per sf per property, with high visibility, good traffic flow, green space and road improvements, Design Pack building conversion, downtown aesthetic improvements are nice – can they be extended to East Marlborough?

• What doesn’t work with Marlborough? Sign ordinance inconsistence, political process for zoning amendments – broader commercial code, commercial tax rates too high, political process for development approvals, too much politics in economic development

• Cornell University study – most communities in the country are stream lining permitting process as a form of incentive programs – because there is little to no financial costs

• Perception of east side as second class citizens within the City

• Parking off Lincoln Street for the bike path


City Officials (City Department Representatives) Focus Group Meeting

April 14, 2011 – 2:45pm


Name Title Company

1 Nancy M. Stevens Mayor City of Marlborough

2 Rosalind Baker Director Human Services Dept

3 Jennifer Claro Executive Director Council on Aging

4 Robert Landry Sanitarian/Administrator Board of Health

5 Margaret Cardello Library Director Marlborough Library

6 Priscilla Ryder Conservation Officer Conservation Commission

7 Ronald M. LaFreniere Commissioner of Public Works

DPW

8 Walter Bonin Chairman Licensing Board

9 Krista I. Holmi Executive Aide to Mayor Mayor's Office

10 Steve Reid Commissioner Building Department

11 Anthony Trodella Principal Assessor Assessor's Dept

12 Thomas E. Cullen City Engineer DPW

13 David T. Grasso Recreation Director Recreation Dept

14 Mark Leonard Chief of Police Police Dept

15 Ricky A. Plummer Fire Chief Fire Dept

16 Nathaniel W. Bowen GIS Administrator DPW

17 Colleen Hughes Planning Board Member Planning Board

18 John Ghiloni Director Public Facilities Department


City Officials (City Department Representatives) Focus Group Meeting Key Discussion Points:

1. Disconnect between community businesses and City Hall – for activities – no cohesive acknowledgement and announcement of positive news

2. There is a perception problem – Marlborough has good infrastructure, good communication, good quality of life (school system), and good relationships with business communities

3. Need consistent news stream of the positive activity occurring in the City

Introductions

• Walter Bonin - Chairman of the Licensing Board (restaurants, liquor, used cars )– interested in transportation elements within the City of Marlborough, connecting industrial and office parks to City businesses. Marlborough has not been involved in regional transportation decisions, which are occurring at a State level and should be

• Mark Leonard – Police Chief. Marlborough Police Department employs a community policing philosophy. Current emphasis is on Downtown and French Hill areas, code enforcement issues and traffic and pedestrian problems – mostly quality of life issues

• Margaret Cardello – Library Director – Library acts as an attraction for downtown. There is demand for books and newer services and large demand for meeting rooms, but the parking is inadequate

• Jennifer Claro– Executive Director for Council on Aging . Council on Aging provides enrichment opportunities and medical care for senior population. Senior Center supports residential and business relocation to Marlborough

• Mayor Nancy Stevens – The Mayor’s Office acts as a clearing house for all business needs - supplying infrastructure needs, schools, quality of life, new senior center in the Downtown area, etc. All will have a domino effect in the Downtown towards revitalization. Currently a new wastewater treatment facility is being built and there are 8 active TIFs (4 or 5 in the last 6 years)

• Steven Reid – The Building Department Commissioner. The Building Department coordinates all new construction activity within the City and code enforcement, and works with regulations on how things are developed (such as high quality developments factors – parking/green space ratio)

• Rick Plummer – Marlborough Fire Chief – Fire Department provides fire protection and EMS for residents and businesses. The Department provides proactive fire prevention and not just responses. Furthest response time is 10 minutes to Industrial park. French Hill Station is the busiest station in the City. Most EMS responses are to the hotels. Fire equipment is appropriate for the City building stock. Believes that the ISO rating of 3, could be used as a marketing feature for the City


• Bob Landry – Administrator with the Board of Health. The Board of Health has 13 divisions - sporting facilities and activities are a significant portion of time, also involved in code enforcement. The largest recent addition to the Board of Health responsibilities has been Emergency Preparedness services

• John Ghiloni – Director of Marlborough Public Facilities Department. The City manages 1.4 million square feet of municipally owned properties and there is a need for additional space for seniors and library

• Colleen Hughes – Member of the Planning Board. Focuses on subdivisions, and open space, finding the balance between developers needs and City needs. Current focus is on creating passive recreation spaces

• Priscilla Ryder – Conservation Officer with the Conservation Commission. The City just completed open space plan, looking to expand protected open spaces. Marlborough has received a “green community” designation

• Tom Cullen – City Engineer with the Department of Public Works(DPW). The DPW provides technical support to boards for new development, as well as design and construct infrastructure projects

• Ron LaFreniere– Commissioner of the DPW – Current focus related to economic development is improvements to parking and streetscapes

• Nat Bowen – GIS Administrator with the DPW – The City has developed considerable GIS resources for mapping and electronic databases which could be used to assist and aid further economic development opportunities within the City

• Dave Grasso –Director of the Recreation Department. The Recreation Department manages wading pools, athletic fields and special events. The Recreation Department recently upgraded all twenty-two playgrounds in the city

• Ross Baker – Director of the Human Services Department. Human Services Department addresses quality of life issues, such as unemployment and underemployment, foreclosures, job training, senior housing and youth commission

• Anthony Trodella – Principal Assessor with the Assessors Department

• Krista Holmi – Executive Aid to the Mayor

Discussions

• Traffic and pedestrian high accident areas – mostly in downtown area where density is the highest

• Vacancy rate of office buildings a major concern

• 2M SF of site planned approved development on the shelf that have not been constructed due to financial landscape – mostly west of 495 in the limited industrial zone


• Professional site plan approval process efficient and effective

• Good transformation for most redevelopment properties

• Route 20 poorly used parcels exist – represent opportunities for assembly and redevelopment

• Foreclosure challenges in Marlborough – starting to turn around

• Zoning does need to address Downtown specifically to allow a mixed use, vertical development and different parking and open space requirements

• Fire Department and Health Department contributes to the code enforcement

• Walker Building 35,000 SF municipally owned potential reuse – important for the Downtown

• Municipal facilities have been upgraded to meet energy efficient goals

• Rail trials network looking at being expanded and connected throughout the City, create a trail network throughout the industrial park – 26 mile interconnected trial throughout the City proposed in the open space master plan – and investigating possibility of community gardens on conservation lands

• Water, sewer, lighting and sidewalk improvements are ongoing trough the engineering department

• Lack of an irrigation system in the downtown limits the streetscape abilities

• 500 parking spaces – perception that parking structures were unsafe – improved lighting and security cameras have helped change the perception

• Signage would help mitigate the reduced traffic as a result of the bypass – improved activity and facilities would also help

• Downtown – develop a theme or character for the future of the downtown and engage the property owners. What activities are appropriate for the downtown? Can the City incentivize certain uses? Create visual for downtown (like the south coast rail) to show what the downtown could be

• Business directory maps to show opportunities and existing assets

• Open space plans involve the recreation department in the planning

• “Best Place to Raise Your Kids” – news article

• How to leverage the athletic fields and sports complexes

• Train system to help residents access job opportunities without private vehicles

• Grant has allowed for a bus for transportation to east side of Marlborough


• Disconnect between community businesses and City Hall – for activities – no cohesive acknowledgement and announcement of positive news

• Does building stock match the need? Incorporate campus verses start up smaller space

• Perception Problem – Marlborough has good infrastructure, good communication, good quality of life (school system), good relationships with business communities

• Need consistent news stream of the positive activity occurring in the City


Elected Officials Focus Group Meeting

April 14, 2011 – 6:30pm


Name Title Company

1 Robert M. Seymour Councilor City of Marlborough

2 Donald R. Landers Councilor City of Marlborough

3 Kathleen D Robey School Committee Member

Marlborough Public Schools

4 Joseph Valarioti Marlborough Seat and Secretary

Assabet Valley Regional High School

5 Patricia Pope Councilor City of Marlborough

7 Joseph F. Delano, Jr. Councilor City of Marlborough

8 Paul Ferro Councilor City of Marlborough

11 Michelle Bodin-Hettinger School Committee Member


12 Sen. Jamie Eldridge State Senator

13 Mark Hediger School Committee Member


14 Jennifer Hardy School Committee Member


Elected Officials Focus Group Meeting Key Discussion Points:

1. Elected officials need discussion of long-range priorities

2. Must make it easier to fill existing commercial spaces

3. Need to focus on business mix in the downtown

4. Need to build city-corporate relationships

5. Marlborough is a small, affordable and livable city – need to market that brand

6. Perception of school system is lower than actual quality


Introductions

• Joe Valariori – Assabet Valley Regional School Committee (Marlborough Seat)

• Senator Jamie Eldridge – State Senator

• Trish Pope – Marlborough City Councilor

• Paul Ferro – Marlborough City Councilor

• Joe Delano – Marlborough City Councilor

• Michelle Bodin-Hettinger –School Committee Member (Marlborough Public Schools)

• Jennifer Hardy – School Committee Member (Marlborough Public Schools)

• Mark Hediger - School Committee Member (Marlborough Public Schools)

• Kathleen Robey - School Committee Member (Marlborough Public Schools)

• Don Landers – Marlborough City Council

Discussions

• Assabet School System – very positive school environment

• School System perception is poor – MCAS test scores are not great, school leadership has been inconsistent and constant change– Hudson has a new school and attracting Marlborough students – new leadership is promising and a strategic plan roll out for the school system in July 2011

• Marlborough as a city is a selling point – surrounded by towns – small city

• What is the link between the school and economic development? Schools are a factor in business relocation decision making process

• Assets – natural open space and trail system – smaller urban communities pursuing smart growth zoning policies to provide walkable neighborhoods

• Marlborough is affordable and livable community

• Downtown – can a community with a major regional mall coexist with a vibrant downtown? Shops are boutique and different stores than malls. How do you incentivize certain types of businesses? Promote to certain businesses, provide liquor licenses, etc. How is it maintained?

• Who is the point person for economic development initiatives and to handle responses? MEDC will be the leader


• Special Permit Process – City Council must balance development needs and resident needs – clear roadmap of expectations for city council and developers and residents. Possible too many uses require special permits

• West end – Arcade Plaza is perceived to be the best development in the City – how to get office workers to go downtown – not everyone (too much congestion) , but some percentage

• RK Plaza benefits from office space – how to get people downtown to make it successful like RK Plaza

• Building height restricted by building code and zoning regulations – visualization studies

• Industrial companies – make it easier to fill the empty space, not easier to build new

• How to make existing companies stay in Marlborough – City council to reach out

• State level – mixed use tax credits for downtown redevelopment – zoning transfer fees and open space are available

• Enterprise Zones – can they be set up – for the east side? Brownfield site redevelopment and grants are available

• Who from the city is contacting the businesses in the city? City could recognize city businesses – “Best Corporate Citizenship” award from the City Council or Mayors office. How to marry corporate missions with civic needs – how to build those relationships – who’s responsible for this? City Council wants to build relationships with businesses – but needs vehicle to do this – councilors don’t have the capacity to do this – need someone to do this

• Corporate missions vary from business to business. Some want to be a part of the community and do not want to be involved

• Inventory of infrastructure needs – community center, library, civic activities, post service, senior center, resources kids

• What have businesses done for the schools - interns, career programs, math and engineering programs – businesses do, but the school system hasn’t had the leadership to capitalize on these opportunities

• Tax rate - $25 for businesses, $14 for residential – how is this reconciled?

• Elected leaders need to have annual opportunity to discuss these longer range topics

• May 21st announcement – reverse 911, tracker at bottom of City Council Meetings, direct mailings

PUBLIC WORKSHOP NOTES

D APPENDIX D

APPENDIX D: PUBLIC WORKSHOP NOTES


MEDC conducted a public workshop for the Marlborough Economic Development Plan on June 8, 2011 at the Massachusetts International Academy at 280 Locke Drive in Marlborough. The public workshop agenda contained two primary sections: a presentation and small working group activities. The presentation reviewed the scope and purpose of the Marlborough Economic Development Plan and initial demographic, infrastructure, regulation and market condition assessments. The small working groups focused on participant engagement activities including mapping exercises, identifying and voting on economic development priorities for the City and envisioning the outcome of the economic development plan process.

Questions Asked Following the Presentation

1. Is a map of the Greater Marlborough Region, which was used for demographic analysis, available?

2. What is the source of data that provided analysis such as absorption rates?

3. Can a map comparison (of all reference maps) be made available through video or mapping transparencies?

4. Will the issue of “moving people” or “linking areas” through a transit system or service be incorporated into this study?

5. Have educational uses been examined as a method of increasing the tax revenue within the City of Marlborough (not just commercial properties). Can municipal tools be used to increase the positive economic impact of educational uses (location, zoning)?

6. Marlborough should target young people to live here – They pay rent, eat out etc. The City should look at what happens when young people finish school; what attracts them to stay; vitality of activities, sense of community. Has the City examined this?

7. Is there a relationship between the absorption rates and the demand of public services? And will absorption rates grown in a linear manner or in steps? Can the existing infrastructure system handle the expected demand?

8. Has the telecommunication systems within the City been examined as part of the infrastructure analysis?


Small Group Working Session Notes: Group 1

Mapping the Future

Areas that should not be redeveloped

• Marlborough Country Club and State Forest

• Current residential areas, especially west of Route 495

Areas that should be redeveloped and the appropriate types of development

• The Route 495 Corridor

o Southwest area of the Route 495 Corridor

Rail station

Research facilities or R&D

Hotels

Retail

Manufacturing

o Mid Route 495 Corridor (Eastside)

Hotels

o Mid Route 495 Corridor (Westside)

Lifestyle center

Mixed use commercial

• Walking paths to connect hotels to retail should be included

o Northwest area of the Route 495 Corridor

More indoor recreation (New England Sports Center) – like the development already there - would like to see more

Hotel

• Develop the Northwest area all the way to Stop & Shop


o The Route 20 Corridor (East of Downtown)

Retail

Apartments

Mixed use commercial/residential

Mixed use commercial


o The Route 85 Corridor (South of Downtown)


Manufacturing

Low density office/residential

Low density office

o The Route 85 Corridor (North of Downtown)

Research/laboratories

Apartments

• Downtown

o Revitalize Whole Downtown – increase density of uses, activities, attractions

New Anchors Uses

• New Downtown anchors uses could include a museum, performance center/movie theater, tourist information kiosk, educational institution, open space (common) and pedestrian friendly shopping behind city hall

Apartments

Office

Mixed use commercial/residential

Other Notes

• Protected green space allowing walking from one side of town to the other

• Leave most residential areas alone (except Downtown)

• Consider elderly housing (such as what exists in Hudson)

• Industrial development should be allowed to be greater than 4 stories

• The transfer of development rights should be used to encourage development within the City

• Downtown Character Notes:

o Smart growth and walkability

o Downtown should encourage people to meander, hang out, use park benches

o Should the Post Office be relocated?

o The cliff on Main Street is unique but problematic

New Assessed Value

Property Type Assessed Property Quantity Total Assessed


Value Value

Retail Under 75,000 SF $855K 0 0

Retail Over 75,000 SF $8.5M 2 $17.0M

Office Building Under 100,000 SF

$2.7M 18 $48.6M

Office building over 100,000 SF $11.0M 2 $22.0M

Mixed Use Commercial/Residential

$855K 20 $17.1M

Mixed Use Commercial $855K 50 $42.8M

Research Laboratories $7.7M 5 $38.5M

Indoor Recreation Center $6.0M 2 $12.0M

Manufacturing $1.6M 3 $4.8M

Hotel with Conference Centers $4.0M 4 $16.0M

Apartment Community $101M 3 $303.0M

Blank Unknown 4 0

TOTAL NEW ASSESSED VALUE

$521.8M

Priorities

• Create Downtown Anchors (museum, performance center/movie theater, tourist information kiosk, educational institution, open space, etc ) (4)

• Create additional Elderly Housing (0)

• Create 4 multipurpose fields within a mile of hotels (encourages and is eligible for more tournaments) (5)

• Increase the allowed height of all industrial uses to greater than 4 stories (5)

• Create a cross-town trail (1)

• Increase parking and add an attraction to the bike trail at Lincoln (1)

• Redevelop/Reuse the armory building for cultural/arts (3)


• Consider increasing density in some areas (HP site along 495, 290, 20; need density downtown) (6)

• Route 20 is NOT Route 9 (2) (No strip retail that is set back from the street and surrounded by parking)

• Improve quality of life (arts, green space) (4)

• Downtown: mixed-use; entertainment – weekends; where else in city? (5)

• Closing Main Street to traffic; esp. Sundays; arts, food, music; attract residents from employees (8)

• Lincoln-Mechanic Street Area – improve; mixed housing, historic walking tour, cultural district (7)


Small Group Working Session Notes: Group 2

Mapping the Future

Areas that should not be redeveloped

• Existing residential areas

Areas that should be redeveloped and the appropriate types of development


o Route 20 Corridor (East of Downtown)

Research laboratories

Destination retail

Office

o Route 20 Corridor (West of Downtown)

Mixed-use (upgrade and revitalization of existing uses)

Apartments


o The Route 85 Corridor (South of Downtown) - revitalize this entire corridor

Commercial

Office

Retail

Mixed Use

Auto related uses

Medical Center

• There were concerns regarding the capacity of this section of Route 85 to accommodate the traffic demands related to increased development

• The Route 85 Corridor (North of Downtown) – Improve the character of the area

Auto-oriented uses

Commercial uses

• Create design standards for this area

Medical center east of hospital

Community center (youth/senior)

• Impact issues related to Fort Meadow Reservoir


• Walking trails along Fort Meadow Reservoir would be a community asset


o Southwest area of the Route 495 Corridor

Auto-oriented uses

Apartments

Office

Limited Mixed use – residential and retail

Limited Residential

Limited Retail

Industrial

o Mid Route 495 Corridor (Eastside)

Mixed uses

Apartments

o Mid Route 495 Corridor (Westside)

Retail center

o Northwest area of the Route 495 Corridor

Institutional Uses

Indoor Recreation

Hotels

Manufacturing

Medical Center

Incubator space

Industrial district


o The Route 290 Corridor (East of Route 495) (same as Northwest area of the Route 495 Corridor)

Institutional Uses

Indoor Recreation

Hotels

Manufacturing

Medical Center

Incubator space

Industrial district


o The Route 290 Corridor (West of Route 495)

Restaurants

Retail

• Downtown

o Revitalize existing uses

Increase Restaurants

Increase shops

Other Notes

• The walking trails planned/proposed around Fort Meadow Reservior would be a positive community benefit

• Is Route 20 capable of additional capacity – is access a detriment to successful development there?

• Infrastructure and traffic improvements to the Route 85 Corridor are needed; in particular, South of the Downtown

• Capitalize on the City-owned property located along Route 85 Corridor north of Downtown near the Fort Meadow Reservoir

• The tax structure for institutions should be examined to increase the benefits to the City

New Assessed Value

Property Type Assessed Property Value

Quantity Total Assessed Value

Retail Under 75,000 SF $855K 1 $855K

Retail Over 75,000 SF $8.5M 2 $17.0M

Office Building Under 100,000 SF

$2.7M 1 $2.7M

Office building over 100,000 SF $11.0M 1 $11.0M

Mixed Use Commercial/Residential

$855K 0 0

Mixed Use Commercial $855K 0 0

Research Laboratories $7.7M 2 $15.0M

Indoor Recreation Center $6.0M 1 $6.0M


Manufacturing $1.6M 0 0

Hotel with Conference Centers $4.0M 1 $4.0M

Apartment Community $101M 1 $101M

Blank $3.0M 5 $15.0M

TOTAL NEW ASSESSED VALUE

$172.5M

Priorities

• Create a downtown pedestrian mall (4)

• Increase walkability throughout city (5)

• City sponsored weekly (weekend) events

• Add incubator space w/ partnerships (5)

• Attract large business – the next Genzyme (6)

• Add institutions (1)

• Keep housing affordable (3)

• Improve quality of schools and marketing of schools (4)

• Clarity of roles for the marketing of business and the permitting process of business development (15)

• Simplicity for businesses (2)

• No casino (2)

• Higher quality retail on Route 20 in East Marlborough (2)

• Be Small business friendly on Route 85 (2)

• Increase mixed-use, office, and commercial uses; Southwest – limited residential and retail uses; Northwest – open to development (1)

• Pursue Route 290 Corridor large development opportunities (5)

• Change tax structure (2)

• Small business attraction – relocate to vacant buildings – support local small business

• Create a support structure for small business – “the place for small business” social infrastructure (1)


Headlines

• City Planners’ Dreams Become Reality

• Crossroads of Culture – It’s a Shoe-in!

• Main Street to Close –New Art Center and Activity Center

• Business Week: Marlborough Best Place to Start a Business in America

• Marlborough Named Best Place to Live in MA

• A City Transformed: Shoes to

• Another Marlboro with Life Science Startup Goes Public

• Marlborough Home of the Stanley Cup at the Bruins New Home, the N.E. Sports Center

• Former Shoe Town Reinvents Itself as Center of Modern Business

• Mayor and City Council Support the Business Community

• Marlborough Biotech Announces Cure for Cancer

• MIT Satellite Campus and Genzyme Create New …

• Marlborough Declared All American City

• Marlborough: #1 Place to Work and Raise Families in America

VISUAL PREFERENCE SURVEY RESULTS

E APPENDIX E


EVisual Preference Survey Results

Category 1: Gateway














Category 2: Residential














Visual Preference Survey Results

E


Category 3: Office

.



























E


Category 4: Retail


























E


Category 5: Mixed Use



















E


Category 6: Parking Structures










E


Category 7: Urban Form

























E

CONSULTANT TEAM CONTACTS & INTERVIEWS

F APPENDIX F

Appendix F:

Consultant Team Contacts & Interviews

• Dale H. Allen, Vice President Community Engagement, Quinsigamond Community College

• Richard K. Bennett, President/CEO, Marlborough Savings Bank

• Sylvia Beville, Executive Director, Metro South/West Regional Employment Board

• Walter T. Bonin, Chair, Mayor's Transportation Task Force

• Jennifer Boudrie, Founder, Green Marlborough

• Nathaniel W. Bowen, GIS Administrator, City of Marlborough

• Wendy Butler, Real Estate Broker, ERA Distinctive Properties

• John R. Caulfield, President/CEO, St. Mary's Credit Union

• Tom Clay, CEO, Xtalic

• Deborah Fairbanks, Architect/Developer, Fairbanks Development LLC

▪ Dave Ferris, Vice President, Ferris Development Group

▪ Lyn Gorka, Realtor, ReMAX

▪ Mitch Gorka, Realtor, ReMAX

▪ Jack Gracey, President, Marlborough Community Development Corporation

▪ Richard Grady, Supply Chain Director, Raytheon Company

▪ Susan Hager, Vice President Corporate Communications and Government, Qteros

▪ Christopher Hannon, Senior Property Manager, CBR Ellis

▪ Elizabeth Higgins, Founder/CEO, GlycoSolutions

▪ Douglas Kehlhem, Director of Corporate Site Location, MassEcon/MAED

▪ Bruce Leish, Director, MetroWest Regional Collaborative. MAPC

▪ Kevin Malloy, Vice President, Lincoln Property Company

▪ Kathleen Manning, Director of Business Development, Quinsigamond Community College

▪ Paul Matthew, Executive Director, 495 MetroWest Partnership

• Susanne Morreale Leeber, President, Marlborough Regional Chamber of Commerce

• Carla Normandin, Manager, Employment & Training Resources Career Center

• Julie Pappazisis, Interim Director, Marlborough Community Development Office

• John Parsons, President/CEO, Parsons Commercial Group

• Sarahbeth Persiani, Senior Business Development Manager, Worcester Polytechnic Institute

• Stephen F. Reid, Commissioner Inspectional Services, City of Marlborough

• Arthur Robert, Regional Director, Massachusetts Office of Business Development

• Priscilla Ryder, Conservation Officer, City of Marlborough

• Steven W. Sagon, CEO, CarrdioFocus, Inc.

• James Sutherby, CFO/Treasurer, Ken's Foods, Inc

• Scott J. Weiss, Managing Director Commercial Development, Gutierrez Company

SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILES

GAPPENDIX G

Greater Marlborough Region SummaryIndustries, Jobs, and Business Sales

Categories of BusinessesNumber of

Businesses% of

RegionNumber of

Jobs% of

RegionSales

(milllion)% of

Region

All Industries 6,405 87,081 $10,149.3All Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 366 5.7% 12,643 14.5% $985.9 9.7%All Retailing (SIC 52-59) 1,257 19.6% 17,135 19.7% $2,421.1 23.9%Public Administration (SIC 90-97) 185 2.9% 1,770 2.0% 0 0

Agriculture (SIC 1-7) 159 2.5% 881 1.0% $37.6 0.4%

Construction (SIC 13-17) 483 7.5% 2,735 3.1% $496.4 4.9%

Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 366 5.7% 12,643 14.5% $985.9 9.7%Transportation, Communication, Public Utilities (SIC 41-49) 217 3.4% 4,441 5.1% $491.2 4.8%

Wholesale Trade (50-51) 302 4.7% 4,993 5.7% $851.8 8.4%

Retail Trade (SIC 52-59) 1,257 19.6% 17,135 19.7% $2,421.1 23.9%

Finance, Insurance, Real Estate (SIC60-67) 610 9.5% 9,934 11.4% $1,763.2 17.4%

Services (SIC 70-89) 2,653 41.4% 30,505 35.0% $3,094.5 30.5%

Government (SIC 91-99) 351 5.5% 3,698 4.2% 0 0

Source: Nielson Claritas SiteReports 2010 and FXM Associates

City of Marlborough & Greater Marlborough Region SummaryIndustries, Jobs, and Business Sales


Number of City

Businesses

City Share of

Region

Number of City Jobs

City Share of

Region

Annual Sales

(milllion)

City Share of

Region

All Industries 2,069 32.3% 31,537 36.2% $3,547.0 34.9%All Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 129 35.2% 5,547 43.9% $428.5 43.5%All Retailing (SIC 52-59) 462 36.8% 6,177 36.0% $776.0 32.1%Public Administration (SIC 90-97) 46 24.9% 436 24.6% 0 0

Agriculture (SIC 1-7) 38 23.9% 204 23.2% $8.3 22.1%



Wholesale Trade (50-51) 100 33.1% 1,714 34.3% $301.8 35.4%

Retail Trade (SIC 52-59) 462 36.8% 6,177 36.0% $776.0 32.1%

Finance, Insurance, Real Estate (SIC60-67) 176 28.9% 3,860 38.9% $682.4 38.7%

Services (SIC 70-89) 836 31.5% 9,827 32.2% $920.7 29.8%

Government (SIC 91-99) 101 28.8% 719 19.4% 0 0


City of Marlborough Industries, Jobs and Business Sales Summary


Businesses % of CityNumber of

Jobs % of CitySales

(millions) % of City

All Industries 2,069 31,537 $3,547.0All Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 129 6.2% 5,547 17.6% $428.5 12.1%All Retailing (SIC 52-59) 462 22.3% 6,177 19.6% $776.0 21.9%Public Administration (SIC 90-97) 46 2.2% 436 1.4% $0.0 0.0%

Agriculture (SIC 1-7) 38 1.8% 204 0.6% $8.3 0.23%



Wholesale Trade (50-51) 100 4.8% 1,714 5.4% $301.8 8.51%

Retail Trade (SIC 52-59) 462 22.3% 6,177 19.6% $776.0 21.88%

Finance, Insurance, Real Estate (SIC60-67) 176 8.5% 3,860 12.2% $682.4 19.24%

Services (SIC 70-89) 836 40.4% 9,827 31.2% $920.7 25.96%

Government (SIC 91-99) 101 4.9% 719 2.3% 0 0


City of Marlborough

Population & Households

Marlborough % of City Region% of

RegionCity % of Region

Population 2015 Projection 39,266 121,384 32.3% 2010 Estimate 38,438 118,623 32.4% 2000 Census 36,259 111,624 32.5% 1990 Census 31,820 95,779 33.2%

Projected Growth 2010-2015 2.2% 3.1%Estimated Growth 2000-2010 6.0% 8.9% Growth 1990 - 2000 14.0% 16.9%

Households 2015 Projection 15,788 45,741 34.5% 2010 Estimate 15,436 44,789 34.5% 2000 Census 14,501 42,117 34.4% 1990 Census 12,153 35,692 34.0%

Projected Growth 2010-2015 2.3% 2.7%Estimated Growth 2000-2010 6.4% 8.6% Growth 1990 - 2000 19.3% 18.0%

2010 Average Household Size 2.46 2.76

2010 Estimated Households Income 15,436 44,789 Income Less than $15,000 1,225 7.9% 2,638 5.9% 46.4% Income $15,000 - $24,999 1,116 7.2% 2,316 5.2% 48.2% Income $25,000 - $34,999 1,042 6.8% 2,526 5.6% 41.3% Income $35,000 - $49,999 1,881 12.2% 4,053 9.0% 46.4% Income $50,000 - $74,999 2,907 18.8% 6,998 15.6% 41.5% Income $75,000 - $99,999 2,365 15.3% 6,089 13.6% 38.8% Income $100,000 - $124,999 1,807 11.7% 5,162 11.5% 35.0% Income $125,000 - $149,999 1,109 7.2% 3,789 8.5% 29.3% Income $150,000 - $199,999 1,131 7.3% 4,838 10.8% 23.4% Income $200,000 - $499,999 743 4.8% 5,042 11.3% 14.7% Income $500,000 and more 110 0.7% 1,338 3.0% 8.2%

Household Income Less than $25,000 2,341 15.2% 4,413 9.9% 53.0%Household income more than $150,000 1,984 12.9% 11,218 25.0% 17.7%

2010 Est. Average Household Income $88,505 $133,806 66.1%

2010 Est. Median Household Income $71,104 $106,785 66.6%

2010 Est. Per Capita Income $35,710 $47,404 75.3%

Family Households 2015 Projection 10,066 63.8% 32,825 71.8% 30.7% 2010 Estimate 9,845 63.8% 32,128 71.7% 30.6% 2000 Census 9,287 64.0% 30,254 71.8% 30.7% 1990 Census 8,049 66.2% 25,964 72.7% 31.0%

2010 Est. Family Household by Poverty Status Families Below Poverty Level 545 3.5% 1,050 2.3% 51.9% Families w/Children Below Poverty Level 375 2.4% 728 1.6% 51.5%


City of MarlboroughEducation & Occupations



2010 Est. Pop. Age 25+ by Educational Attainment 26,647 80,079 33.3% Less than 9th grade 967 3.6% 2,233 2.8% 43.3% Some High School, no diploma 1,455 5.5% 3,124 3.9% 46.6% High School Graduate (or GED) 6,814 25.6% 16,812 21.0% 40.5% Some College, no degree 4,690 17.6% 11,260 14.1% 41.7% Associate Degree 1,889 7.1% 5,540 6.9% 34.1% Bachelor's Degree 6,641 24.9% 23,222 29.0% 28.6% Master's Degree 3,357 12.6% 13,276 16.6% 25.3% Professional School Degree 427 1.6% 2,393 3.0% 17.8% Doctorate Degree 407 1.5% 2,219 2.8% 18.3%

High School or above 24,225 90.9% 74,722 93.3% 32.4% Bachelor's or above 10,832 40.6% 41,110 51.3% 26.3%

2010 Est. Population 16+ by Employment Status 30,489 93,889 32.5% In Armed Forces 11 0.0% 84 0.1% 13.1% Civilian - Employed 21,626 70.9% 65,776 70.1% 32.9% Civilian - Unemployed 1,080 3.5% 2,572 2.7% 42.0% Not in Labor Force 7,772 25.5% 25,457 27.1% 30.5%

2010 Est. Civ. Employed Pop. 16+ by Class 21,686 65,263 33.2% For-prfot Private Workers 16,805 77.5% 49,416 75.7% 34.0% Non-Profit Private Workers 1,445 6.7% 5,194 8.0% 27.8% Local Government Workers 1,175 5.4% 3,900 6.0% 30.1% State Government Workers 370 1.7% 1,336 2.0% 27.7% Federal Government Workers 383 1.8% 799 1.2% 47.9% Self-Employed Workers 1,490 6.9% 4,564 7.0% 32.6% Unpaid Family Wortkers 18 0.1% 54 0.1% 33.3%

2010 Est. Civ Employed Pop 16+ by Occupation 21,686 65,263 33.2% Architect/Engineer 1,014 4.7% 3,040 4.7% 33.4% Arts/Entertain/Sports 387 1.8% 1,436 2.2% 26.9% Building Grounds Maint 1,396 6.4% 2,327 3.6% 60.0% Business/Financial Ops 1,051 4.8% 3,929 6.0% 26.7% Community/Soc Svcs 224 1.0% 702 1.1% 31.9% Computer/Mathematical 1,425 6.6% 4,651 7.1% 30.6% Construction/Extraction 814 3.8% 2,255 3.5% 36.1% Edu/Training/Library 1,158 5.3% 3,914 6.0% 29.6% Farm/Fish/Forestry 48 0.2% 103 0.2% 46.6% Food Prep/Serving 1,268 5.8% 2,803 4.3% 45.2% Health Practitioner/Tec 1,021 4.7% 3,767 5.8% 27.1% Healthcare Support 373 1.7% 751 1.2% 49.7% Maintenance Repair 572 2.6% 1,441 2.2% 39.7% Legal 221 1.0% 951 1.5% 23.8% Life/Phys/Soc Science 346 1.6% 1,451 2.2% 23.8% Management 2,450 11.3% 10,081 15.4% 24.3% Office/Admin Support 2,871 13.2% 7,517 11.5% 38.2% Production 1,107 5.1% 2,722 4.2% 40.7% Protective Svcs 308 1.4% 866 1.3% 35.6% Sales/Related 2,265 10.4% 7,020 10.8% 32.3% Personal Care/Svc 657 3.0% 1,712 2.6% 38.4% Transportation/Moving 710 3.3% 1,824 2.8% 38.9%

2010 Est. Pop 16+ by Occupation Classification 21,686 65,263 33.2% Blue Collar 3,203 15% 8,242 12.6% 38.9% White Collar 14,433 67% 48,459 74.3% 29.8% Service and Farm 4,050 19% 8,562 13.1% 47.3%

2010 AverageTravel Time to Work (Minutes) 29 29


City of MarlboroughHousing & Occupancy



2010 Estimated Total Housing Units 16,045 46,296 34.7%

2010 Estimated Owner-Occupied Housing Values 10,019

62.4% 33,672 72.7% 29.8% Value Less than $20,000 0 0.0% 4 0.0% 0.0% Value $20,000 - $39,999 12 0.1% 57 0.2% 21.1% Value $40,000 - $59,999 82 0.8% 127 0.4% 64.6% Value $60,000 - $79,999 141 1.4% 204 0.6% 69.1% Value $80,000 - $99,999 245 2.4% 301 0.9% 81.4% Value $100,000 - $149,999 581 5.8% 1,086 3.2% 53.5% Value $150,000 - $199,999 978 9.8% 2,048 6.1% 47.8% Value $200,000 - $299,999 4,104 41.0% 9,073 26.9% 45.2% Value $300,000 - $399,999 2,041 20.4% 6,952 20.6% 29.4% Value $400,000 - $499,999 892 8.9% 4,445 13.2% 20.1% Value $500,000 - $749,999 862 8.6% 6,132 18.2% 14.1% Value $750,000 - $999,999 68 0.7% 2,110 6.3% 3.2% Value $1,000,000 or more 13 0.1% 1,133 3.4% 1.1% Estimated Median Value of All Owner-Occupied Housing $272,375 $409,880 66.5%

Estimated Housing Units by Units in Structure 16,045 46,296 1 Unit Attached 815 5.1% 2,097 4.5% 38.9% 1 Unit Detached 7,987 49.8% 30,325 65.5% 26.3% 2 Units 1,634 10.2% 2,901 6.3% 56.3% 3 or 4 Units 833 5.2% 1,994 4.3% 41.8% 5 to 19 Units 2,389 14.9% 4,659 10.1% 51.3% 20 to 49 Units 759 4.7% 1,397 3.0% 54.3% 50 or More Units 1,155 7.2% 2,215 4.8% 52.1% Mobile Home or Trailer 470 2.9% 703 1.5% 66.9% Boat, RV, Van, etc. 3 0.0% 5 0.0% 60.0%

Estimated Tenure of Occupied Housing Units 15,436 44,789 Owner Occupied 10,019 64.9% 33,672 75.2% 29.8% Renter Occupied 5,417 35.1% 11,117 24.8% 48.7% Estimated Owner Occupied Avg. Length of Residence 16 18 88.9%

Estimated Renter Occupied Avg. Length of Residence 8 7

Estimated Housing Units by Year Structure Built 16,045 46,296 34.7% Housing Unit Built 2000 or later 1,432 8.9% 4,119 8.9% 34.8% Housing Unit Built 1990 to 1999 1,611 10.0% 5,645 12.2% 28.5% Housing Unit Built 1980 to 1989 1,911 11.9% 6,273 13.5% 30.5% Housing Unit Built 1970 to 1979 2,734 17.0% 7,538 16.3% 36.3% Housing Unit Built 1960 to 1969 2,514 15.7% 7,347 15.9% 34.2% Housing Unit Built 1950 to 1959 1,478 9.2% 5,158 11.1% 28.7% Housing Unit Built 1940 to 1949 597 3.7% 1,570 3.4% 38.0% Housing Unit Built 1939 or Earlier 3,768 23.5% 8,646 18.7% 43.6%


City of MarlboroughIndustries, Jobs, and Business Sales



Jobs % of CitySales


All Industries 2,069 31,537 $3,547.0All Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 129 6.2% 5,547 17.6% $428.5 12.1%All Retailing (SIC 52-59) 462 22.3% 6,177 19.6% $776.0 21.9%Public Administration (SIC 90-97) 46 2.2% 436 1.4% $0.0 0.0%

2 Digit SIC1 Agricultural Production - Crops 1 0.0% 1 0.0% $0.1 0.0%2 Agticultural Production - Livestock 0 0.0% 0 0.0% $0.0 0.0%7 Agricultural Services 37 1.8% 203 0.6% $8.2 0.2%

13 Oil & Gas Extraction 0 0.0% 0 0.0% $0.0 0.0%14 Mining NonMetalics, Except Fuels 0 0.0% 0 0.0% $0.0 0.0%15 Building Construction & General Contractors 37 1.8% 128 0.4% $36.5 1.0%16 Heavy Construction (Except SIC 15) 5 0.2% 112 0.4% $14.1 0.4%17 Construction-Special Trade Contractors 100 4.8% 598 1.9% $90.0 2.5%

20 Food and Kindred Products 2 0.1% 44 0.8% $3.9 0.1%22 Textile Mill Products 1 0.0% 50 0.2% $2.8 0.1%23 Apparel & Other Fabric Products 2 0.1% 126 0.4% $13.8 0.4%24 Lumber & Wood Products 2 0.1% 21 0.1% $1.6 0.0%25 Furniture & Fixtures 0 0.0% 0 0.0% $0.0 0.0%26 Paper and Allied Products 6 0.3% 131 0.4% $8.0 0.2%27 Printing, Publishing & Allied Industries 26 1.3% 183 0.6% $17.2 0.5%28 Chemials and Allied Products 5 0.2% 505 1.6% $50.8 1.4%29 Petroleum Refining and Related Industries 1 0.0% 4 0.0% $0.4 0.0%30 Rubber and Plastic Products 1 0.0% 10 0.0% $0.7 0.0%31 Leather and Leather Products 0 0.0% 0 0.0% $0.0 0.0%32 Stone, Clay, Glass & Concrete Products 3 0.1% 54 0.2% $1.7 0.0%33 Primary Metal Industries 2 0.1% 48 0.2% $3.0 0.1%34 Fabricated Metal Products 13 0.6% 454 1.4% $38.8 1.1%35 Industry, Commercial Machinery & Computers 16 0.8% 218 0.7% $19.4 0.5%36 Electrical, Electronic Equipment (Ex. Computers) 21 1.0% 741 2.3% $67.5 1.9%37 Transportation Equipment 2 0.1% 29 0.1% $2.8 0.1%38 Measuring & Analyzing Instruments 17 0.8% 2,817 8.9% $187.3 5.3%39 Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries 9 0.4% 112 0.4% $8.8 0.2%

41 Local, Suburban & Interurban Transportation 13 0.6% 317 1.0% $13.8 0.4%42 Motor Freight Transportation & Warehouse 19 0.9% 114 0.4% $10.6 0.3%43 U.S. Postal Service 2 0.1% 64 0.2% $0.4 0.0%44 Water Transportation 0 0.0% 0 0.0% $0.0 0.0%45 Transportation by Air 1 0.0% 1 0.0% $0.1 0.0%47 Transportation Services 11 0.5% 38 0.1% $10.0 0.3%48 Communication 31 1.5% 2,005 6.4% $239.8 6.8%49 Electric, Gas & Sanitary Services 7 0.3% 104 0.3% $13.2 0.4%

50 Wholesale Trade-Durable Goods 80 3.9% 1,007 3.2% $174.0 4.9%51 Wholesale Trade-NonDurable Goods 20 1.0% 707 2.2% $127.8 3.6%

City of Marlborough -- continued



Jobs % of CitySales


52 Building Materials, Garden Supply & Mobile Home 23 1.1% 292 0.9% $41.4 1.2%53 General Merchandise Stores 10 0.5% 681 2.2% $74.5 2.1%54 Food Stores 43 2.1% 274 0.9% $38.9 1.1%55 Automobile Dealers & Gas Service Stations 41 2.0% 477 1.5% $146.7 4.1%56 Apparel & Accessory Stores 50 2.4% 572 1.8% $35.9 1.0%57 Home Furniture,Furnishings & Equipment 83 4.0% 1,141 3.6% $266.1 7.5%58 Eating & Drinking Places 111 5.4% 1,838 5.8% $86.2 2.4%59 Miscellaneous Retail 101 4.9% 902 2.9% $86.3 2.4%

60 Depository Institutions 32 1.5% 1,010 3.2% $219.6 6.2%61 NonDepository Credit Institutions 13 0.6% 77 0.2% $23.4 0.7%62 Security & Commodity Brokers and Service 22 1.1% 2,079 6.6% $312.8 8.8%63 Insurance Carriers 0 0.0% 0 0.0% $0.0 0.0%64 Insurance Agents, Brokers & Service 24 1.2% 280 0.9% $65.3 1.8%65 Real Estate 83 4.0% 410 1.3% $60.6 1.7%67 Holding & Other Investment Offices 2 0.1% 4 0.0% $0.7 0.0%

70 Hotels & Other Lodging Places 11 0.5% 598 1.9% $24.7 0.7%72 Personal Services 117 5.7% 452 1.4% $18.7 0.5%73 Business Services 140 6.8% 1,450 4.6% $201.2 5.7%75 Automobile Repair, Services & Parking 68 3.3% 247 0.8% $20.8 0.6%76 Miscellaneous Repair Services 31 1.5% 222 0.7% $22.0 0.6%78 Motion Pictures 6 0.3% 44 0.1% $4.0 0.1%79 Amusement &Recreational Service (Ex. Movies) 43 2.1% 573 1.8% $41.8 1.2%80 Health Services 133 6.4% 1,994 6.3% $177.3 5.0%81 Legal Services 42 2.0% 127 0.4% $23.7 0.7%82 Educational Services 35 1.7% 1,561 4.9% $155.6 4.4%83 Social Services 58 2.8% 1,236 3.9% $82.1 2.3%84 Museums, Art Galleries, Zoos, Etc. 1 0.0% 1 0.0% $0.1 0.0%86 Membership Organizations 49 2.4% 192 0.6% $11.9 0.3%87 Eng, Acct, Research & Mgmt Related Services 98 4.7% 1,114 3.5% $136.0 3.8%89 Miscellaneous Services 4 0.2% 16 0.1% $0.8 0.0%

91 Exec., Leg. & General Govt. (Except Finance) 27 1.3% 151 0.5% 0 092 Justice, Public Order & Safety 7 0.3% 217 0.7% 0 093 Public Finance, Taxation & Monetary Policy 3 0.1% 10 0.0% 0 094 Administration of Human Resource Programs 4 0.2% 25 0.1% 0 095 Admin. of Environ. Quality & Housing Programs 1 0.0% 14 0.0% 0 096 Administration of Economic Programs 2 0.1% 8 0.0% 0 097 National Security & International Affairs 2 0.1% 11 0.0% 0 099 NonClassifiable Establishments 55 2.7% 283 0.9% 0 0


Greater Marlborough RegionPopulation & Households

Berlin Hudson Marlborough Northborough Southborough Sudbury WestboroughRegion Total %

Population 2015 Projection 3,092 20,161 39,266 14,642 9,942 17,966 19,407 121,384 2010 Estimate 2,892 19,581 38,438 14,526 9,492 17,624 18,962 118,623 2000 Census 2,370 18,100 36,259 13,996 8,442 16,858 17,969 111,624 1990 Census 2,282 17,218 31,820 11,898 6,341 14,377 14,125 95,779

Projected Growth 2010-2015 6.9% 3.0% 2.2% 0.8% 4.7% 1.9% 2.3% 3.1%Estimated Growth 2000-2010 22.0% 8.2% 6.0% 3.8% 12.4% 4.5% 5.5% 8.9% Growth 1990 - 2000 3.9% 5.1% 14.0% 17.6% 33.1% 17.3% 27.2% 16.9% Households 2015 Projection 1,154 7,945 15,788 5,202 3,194 5,767 6,691 45,741 2010 Estimate 1,074 7,665 15,436 5,141 3,099 5,701 6,673 44,789 2000 Census 868 6,986 14,501 4,900 2,827 5,512 6,523 42,117 1990 Census 795 6,358 12,153 4,049 2,178 4,771 5,388 35,692

Projected Growth 2010-2015 7.4% 3.7% 2.3% 1.2% 3.1% 1.2% 0.3% 2.7%Estimated Growth 2000-2010 23.7% 9.7% 6.4% 4.9% 9.6% 3.4% 2.3% 8.6% Growth 1990 - 2000 9.2% 9.9% 19.3% 21.0% 29.8% 15.5% 21.1% 18.0% 2010 Average Household Size 2.69 2.54 2.46 2.80 3.05 3.06 2.71 2.76 2010 Estimated Households Income 1,074 7,665 15,436 5,141 3,099 5,701 6,673 44,789 Income Less than $15,000 36 541 1,225 188 116 198 334 2,638 Income $15,000 - $24,999 92 451 1,116 191 62 141 263 2,316 Income $25,000 - $34,999 79 608 1,042 202 101 176 318 2,526 Income $35,000 - $49,999 86 793 1,881 396 154 218 525 4,053 Income $50,000 - $74,999 124 1,509 2,907 759 300 475 924 6,998 Income $75,000 - $99,999 155 1,170 2,365 727 285 463 924 6,089 Income $100,000 - $124,999 159 1,056 1,807 616 302 518 704 5,162 Income $125,000 - $149,999 126 573 1,109 528 292 525 636 3,789 Income $150,000 - $199,999 125 524 1,131 805 465 912 876 4,838 Income $200,000 - $499,999 76 381 743 617 762 1,503 960 5,042 Income $500,000 and more 16 59 110 112 260 572 209 1,338

Household Income Less than $25,000 128 451 2,341 379 178 339 597 4,413Household income more than $150,000 217 964 1,984 1,534 1,487 2,987 2,045 11,218

2010 Est. Average Household Income $109,493 $90,878 $88,505 $129,409 $185,762 $198,348 $134,248 $133,806 2010 Est. Median Household Income $94,311 $73,841 $71,104 $104,376 $144,625 $157,503 $101,738 $106,785 2010 Est. Per Capita Income $41,125 $35,777 $35,710 $46,127 $60,690 $64,664 $47,735 $47,404

Family Households 2015 Projection 877 5,487 10,066 4,074 2,626 4,972 4,723 32,825 2010 Estimate 815 5,298 9,845 4,030 2,548 4,915 4,677 32,128 2000 Census 663 4,841 9,287 3,861 2,333 4,756 4,513 30,254 1990 Census 636 4,634 8,049 3,246 1,770 4,051 3,578 25,964

2010 Est, Family Household by Poverty Status Families Below Poverty Level 20 182 545 58 9 131 105 1,050 Families w/Children Below Poverty Level 20 102 375 40 8 112 71 728

Source: Nielson Clarita's SiteReports 2010 and FXM Associates

Greater Marlborough RegionEducation & Occupations

Berlin Hudson Marlborough NorthboroughSouthborough Sudbury WestboroughRegion Total

2010 Est. Pop. Age 25+ by Educational Attainment 1,964 13,610 26,647 9,353 5,691 10,568 12,246 80,079 Less than 9th grade 15 894 967 130 11 50 166 2,233 Some High School, no diploma 130 711 1,455 249 101 169 309 3,124 High School Graduate (or GED) 542 4,232 6,814 1,737 745 828 1,914 16,812 Some College, no degree 308 2,190 4,690 1,117 542 850 1,563 11,260 Associate Degree 108 1,040 1,889 726 378 540 859 5,540 Bachelor's Degree 613 2,738 6,641 3,255 2,301 3,655 4,019 23,222 Master's Degree 213 1,421 3,357 1,580 1,113 3,053 2,539 13,276 Professional School Degree 29 257 427 231 319 700 430 2,393 Doctorate Degree 6 127 407 328 181 723 447 2,219

High School or above 1,819 12,005 24,225 8,974 5,579 10,349 11,771 74,722 Bachelor's or above 861 4,543 10,832 5,394 3,914 8,131 7,435 41,110

2010 Est. Population 16+ by Employment Status 2,272 15,699 30,489 11,155 6,845 12,842 14,587 93,889 In Armed Forces 1 65 11 0 0 7 0 84 Civilian - Employed 1,598 11,032 21,626 8,312 4,818 8,680 9,710 65,776 Civilian - Unemployed 25 446 1,080 217 126 234 444 2,572 Not in Labor Force 648 4,156 7,772 2,626 1,901 3,921 4,433 25,457

2010 Est. Civ. Employed Pop. 16+ by Class 1,542 11,077 21,686 8,149 4,748 8,674 9,387 65,263 For-prfot Private Workers 1,140 8,756 16,805 6,218 3,548 6,052 6,897 49,416 Non-Profit Private Workers 65 791 1,445 631 446 1,048 768 5,194 Local Government Workers 147 658 1,175 494 241 519 666 3,900 State Government Workers 43 199 370 201 103 110 310 1,336 Federal Government Workers 16 93 383 28 61 101 117 799 Self-Employed Workers 128 580 1,490 563 345 833 625 4,564 Unpaid Family Wortkers 3 0 18 14 4 11 4 54

2010 Est. Civ Employed Pop 16+ by Occupation 1,542 11,077 21,686 8,149 4,748 8,674 9,387 65,263 Architect/Engineer 91 469 1,014 392 193 417 464 3,040 Arts/Entertain/Sports 61 211 387 214 83 256 224 1,436 Building Grounds Maint 29 367 1,396 213 101 78 143 2,327 Business/Financial Ops 47 532 1,051 359 466 934 540 3,929 Community/Soc Svcs 10 124 224 97 41 73 133 702 Computer/Mathematical 122 647 1,425 726 190 572 969 4,651 Construction/Extraction 143 499 814 221 198 135 245 2,255 Edu/Training/Library 95 659 1,158 469 262 693 578 3,914 Farm/Fish/Forestry 17 8 48 21 1 6 2 103 Food Prep/Serving 25 570 1,268 320 109 127 384 2,803 Health Practitioner/Tec 60 422 1,021 637 325 619 683 3,767 Healthcare Support 5 146 373 78 21 50 78 751 Maintenance Repair 60 413 572 134 61 92 109 1,441 Legal 20 83 221 66 155 303 103 951 Life/Phys/Soc Science 36 194 346 243 153 284 195 1,451 Management 178 1,272 2,450 1,422 1,079 1,971 1,709 10,081 Office/Admin Support 220 1,566 2,871 799 438 591 1,032 7,517 Production 72 964 1,107 201 90 109 179 2,722 Protective Svcs 25 167 308 73 48 95 150 866 Sales/Related 119 1,083 2,265 1,051 582 937 983 7,020 Personal Care/Svc 31 302 657 226 65 223 208 1,712 Transportation/Moving 76 379 710 187 87 109 276 1,824

2010 Est. Pop 16+ by Occupation Classification 1,542 11,077 21,686 8,149 4,748 8,674 9,387 65,263 Blue Collar 351 2,255 3,203 743 436 445 809 8,242 White Collar 1,059 7,262 14,433 6,475 3,967 7,650 7,613 48,459 Service and Farm 132 1,560 4,050 931 345 579 965 8,562

2010 AverageTravel Time to Work (Minutes) 24 27 29 28 31 34 30 29

Source: Nielson Clarita's SiteReports 2010 and FXM Associates

Greater Marlborough RegionHousing & Occupancy

Berlin Hudson Marlborough Northborough Southborough Sudbury WestboroughRegion Total

2010 Estimated Total Housing Units 1,103 7,947 16,045 5,260 3,155 5,829 6,957 46,296

Estimated Owner-Occupied Housing Values 901 5,616 10,019 4,427 2,794 5,311 4,604 33,672 Value Less than $20,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 Value $20,000 - $39,999 0 4 12 1 0 0 40 57 Value $40,000 - $59,999 0 7 82 0 10 0 28 127 Value $60,000 - $79,999 0 37 141 0 0 0 26 204 Value $80,000 - $99,999 0 24 245 6 0 0 26 301 Value $100,000 - $149,999 4 235 581 76 22 3 165 1,086 Value $150,000 - $199,999 64 585 978 222 26 26 147 2,048 Value $200,000 - $299,999 202 2,432 4,104 1,028 363 179 765 9,073 Value $300,000 - $399,999 209 1,306 2,041 1,342 431 606 1,017 6,952 Value $400,000 - $499,999 198 536 892 753 456 762 848 4,445 Value $500,000 - $749,999 165 398 862 780 805 2,100 1,022 6,132 Value $750,000 - $999,999 48 8 68 178 428 1,000 380 2,110 Value $1,000,000 or more 11 44 13 41 253 635 136 1,133

Estimated Median Value of All Owner-Occupied Housing $386,190 $278,771 $272,375 $365,599 $527,761 $628,510 $409,953

$409,880

Estimated Housing Units by Units in Structure 1,103 7,947 16,045 5,260 3,155 5,829 6,957 46,296 1 Unit Attached 21 390 815 359 139 22 351 2,097 1 Unit Detached 964 4,829 7,987 4,190 2,840 5,531 3,984 30,325 2 Units 49 604 1,634 265 41 36 272 2,901 3 or 4 Units 32 571 833 200 73 53 232 1,994 5 to 19 Units 36 1,022 2,389 148 48 15 1,001 4,659 20 to 49 Units 0 210 759 83 1 137 207 1,397 50 or More Units 0 144 1,155 8 13 35 860 2,215 Mobile Home or Trailer 0 177 470 7 0 0 49 703 Boat, RV, Van, etc. 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 5

Estimated Tenure of Occupied Housing Units 1,074 7,665 15,436 5,141 3,099 5,701 6,673

44,789 Owner Occupied 901 5,616 10,019 4,427 2,794 5,311 4,604 33,672 Renter Occupied 173 2,049 5,417 714 305 390 2,069 11,117 Estimated Owner Occupied Avg. Length of Residence 16 19 16 18 17 21 16 18

Estimated Renter Occupied Avg. Length of Residence 8 8 8 7 7 7 8 7

Estimated Housing Units by Year Structure Built 1,103 7,947 16,045 5,260 3,155 5,829 6,957 46,296 Housing Unit Built 2000 or later 229 883 1,432 379 346 321 529 4,119 Housing Unit Built 1990 to 1999 125 671 1,611 793 670 721 1,054 5,645 Housing Unit Built 1980 to 1989 92 1,282 1,911 885 431 738 934 6,273 Housing Unit Built 1970 to 1979 119 906 2,734 823 403 951 1,602 7,538 Housing Unit Built 1960 to 1969 79 1,437 2,514 541 383 1,435 958 7,347 Housing Unit Built 1950 to 1959 100 657 1,478 907 370 1,014 632 5,158 Housing Unit Built 1940 to 1949 41 263 597 216 90 165 198 1,570 Housing Unit Built 1939 or Earlier 318 1,848 3,768 716 462 484 1,050 8,646


Greater Marlborough RegionIndustries, Employment, and Business Sales


Business Categories Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs SalesAll Industries 140 633 $75.2 844 8,311 $917.7 2,069 31,537 $3,547.0 770 7,295 $840.8 497 5,962 $858.80 798 7,514 $843.6 1,287 25,829 $3,066.2All Manufacturing (SIC 20-39) 3 18 $2.5 90 1,861 $135.5 129 5,547 $428.5 31 705 $63.5 19 383 $30.90 23 360 $33.0 71 3,769 $292.0All Retailing (SIC 52-59) 26 152 $23.0 160 2,171 $268.3 462 6,177 $776.0 153 1,488 $160.4 80 1,432 $289.90 133 1,527 $230.4 243 4,188 $673.1Public Administration (SIC 90-97) 10 65 $0.0 29 305 $0.0 46 436 $0.0 22 156 $0.0 13 137 $0.00 33 326 $0.0 32 345 $0.0

2 Digit SIC 2 Digit 1 Agricultural Production - Crops 4 8 $0.6 2 11 $0.9 1 1 $0.1 1 3 $0.2 0 0 $0.00 3 16 $1.2 2 6 $0.4 12 Agticultural Production - Livestock 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 27 Agricultural Services 10 34 $1.5 20 116 $4.9 37 203 $8.2 21 137 $5.6 11 48 $2.00 31 163 $6.5 16 135 $5.5 7

13 Oil & Gas Extraction 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 1314 Mining NonMetalics, Except Fuels 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 2 12 $0.9 0 0 $0.00 1 15 $1.1 1 6 $0.4 1415 Building Construction & General Contractors 5 11 $3.7 22 88 $22.0 37 128 $36.5 24 87 $24.8 14 96 $26.60 23 111 $30.4 18 151 $41.1 1516 Heavy Construction (Except SIC 15) 3 16 $2.0 2 52 $6.5 5 112 $14.1 5 32 $4.0 0 0 $0.00 4 41 $5.2 6 78 $9.2 1617 Construction-Special Trade Contractors 11 36 $6.3 83 509 $78.9 100 598 $90.0 32 144 $21.3 14 79 $12.80 33 101 $15.5 42 265 $45.5 17

20 Food and Kindred Products 0 0 $0.0 1 4 $0.6 2 44 $3.9 1 4 $0.6 2 13 $0.90 1 3 $0.4 2 220 $24.2 2022 Textile Mill Products 0 0 $0.0 3 57 $3.9 1 50 $2.8 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 1 4 $0.2 2223 Apparel & Other Fabric Products 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 2 126 $13.8 1 4 $0.3 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 1 6 $0.4 2324 Lumber & Wood Products 0 0 $0.0 2 12 $1.2 2 21 $1.6 2 13 $0.9 0 0 $0.00 1 8 $0.5 1 95 $6.7 2425 Furniture & Fixtures 0 0 $0.0 2 105 $7.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.00 1 3 $0.5 1 40 $7.2 2526 Paper and Allied Products 0 0 $0.0 1 10 $0.7 6 131 $8.0 1 70 $11.8 0 0 $0.00 1 4 $0.2 0 0 $0.0 2627 Printing, Publishing & Allied Industries 0 0 $0.0 7 46 $2.9 26 183 $17.2 2 202 $14.7 5 16 $1.00 9 225 $17.4 18 220 $15.4 2728 Chemials and Allied Products 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 5 505 $50.8 0 0 $0.0 1 100 $6.30 0 0 $0.0 4 2,217 $154.3 2829 Petroleum Refining and Related Industries 0 0 $0.0 1 5 $0.4 1 4 $0.4 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.030 Rubber and Plastic Products 0 0 $0.0 6 171 $11.0 1 10 $0.7 1 15 $1.0 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 4 92 $7.2 3031 Leather and Leather Products 0 0 $0.0 1 4 $0.2 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.032 Stone, Clay, Glass & Concrete Products 1 6 $1.0 3 36 $1.6 3 54 $1.7 2 18 $2.8 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 1 2 $0.4 3233 Primary Metal Industries 0 0 $0.0 2 106 $6.7 2 48 $3.0 1 2 $0.1 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 2 7 $0.434 Fabricated Metal Products 0 0 $0.0 15 389 $27.5 13 454 $38.8 2 39 $2.7 2 20 $1.30 2 7 $0.6 5 62 $6.1 3435 Industry, Commercial Machinery & Computers 1 4 $0.3 19 463 $37.0 16 218 $19.4 5 218 $17.2 3 29 $2.10 4 45 $3.7 14 367 $38.1 3536 Electrical, Electronic Equipment (Ex. Computers) 0 0 $0.0 10 250 $19.0 21 741 $67.5 3 15 $1.3 4 136 $9.50 1 1 $0.1 9 259 $17.5 3637 Transportation Equipment 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 2 29 $2.8 1 20 $3.6 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 3738 Measuring & Analyzing Instruments 1 8 $1.2 9 117 $9.1 17 2,817 $187.3 1 30 $2.0 2 69 $9.80 3 64 $9.6 6 131 $10.3 3839 Miscellaneous Manufacturing Industries 0 0 $0.0 8 86 $6.7 9 112 $8.8 8 55 $4.5 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 2 47 $3.6 39

41 Local, Suburban & Interurban Transportation 0 0 $0.0 13 121 $5.4 13 317 $13.8 3 61 $3.2 1 6 $0.30 5 55 $3.1 8 120 $6.0 4142 Motor Freight Transportation & Warehouse 4 9 $1.1 4 8 $0.9 19 114 $10.6 12 115 $11.2 4 62 $6.00 1 100 $7.6 7 282 $23.0 4243 U.S. Postal Service 1 7 $0.1 1 4 $0.1 2 64 $0.4 1 30 $0.2 1 4 $0.10 2 54 $0.4 1 45 $0.2 4344 Water Transportation 0 0 $0.0 1 1 $0.2 0 0 $0.0 1 4 $0.4 0 0 $0.00 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 4445 Transportation by Air 1 4 $0.4 0 0 $0.0 1 1 $0.1 0 0 $0.0 3 12 $1.20 1 4 $0.4 0 0 $0.0 4547 Transportation Services 0 0 $0.0 2 15 $4.8 11 38 $10.0 0 0 $0.0 1 60 $10.40 4 9 $2.9 9 47 $11.9 4748 Communication 0 0 $0.0 5 24 $2.2 31 2,005 $239.8 6 13 $1.3 6 88 $10.00 4 6 $0.6 8 158 $19.1 4849 Electric, Gas & Sanitary Services 1 1 $0.1 1 5 $0.4 7 104 $13.2 2 21 $1.7 2 7 $0.60 2 16 $1.3 4 220 $64.5 49 50 Wholesale Trade-Durable Goods 7 27 $4.6 42 354 $59.6 80 1,007 $174.0 20 711 $120.8 13 54 $9.60 21 174 $29.9 54 1,232 $209.1 5051 Wholesale Trade-NonDurable Goods 3 15 $2.6 5 43 $10.9 20 707 $127.8 10 72 $14.9 2 11 $2.40 15 436 $57.7 10 150 $27.9 51 Greater Marlborough Region -- continued


Business Categories Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales Business Jobs Sales52 Building Materials, Garden Supply & Mobile Home 6 55 $8.8 10 253 $34.3 23 292 $41.4 14 219 $36.1 5 37 $6.00 7 50 $7.4 14 274 $38.353 General Merchandise Stores 1 2 $0.2 4 344 $37.5 10 681 $74.5 2 227 $25.2 0 0 $0.00 2 52 $5.8 9 415 $45.154 Food Stores 4 15 $2.2 17 348 $53.5 43 274 $38.9 14 92 $15.1 9 191 $33.30 5 429 $76.2 14 57 $8.955 Automobile Dealers & Gas Service Stations 2 14 $2.9 22 229 $64.3 41 477 $146.7 20 74 $15.3 10 257 $73.50 6 101 $37.6 26 576 $199.056 Apparel & Accessory Stores 1 1 $0.1 6 22 $2.0 50 572 $35.9 5 8 $0.5 3 9 $0.50 12 61 $4.2 12 44 $2.857 Home Furniture,Furnishings & Equipment 5 39 $7.2 12 78 $16.1 83 1,141 $266.1 12 48 $10.0 16 562 $154.40 31 292 $61.8 51 1,030 $269.958 Eating & Drinking Places 3 18 $0.9 45 593 $28.1 111 1,838 $86.2 36 558 $26.6 22 260 $12.30 23 274 $12.2 63 1,415 $62.759 Miscellaneous Retail 4 8 $0.7 44 304 $32.5 101 902 $86.3 50 262 $31.6 15 116 $9.90 47 268 $25.2 54 377 $46.4 60 Depository Institutions 1 7 $2.0 11 192 $53.9 32 1,010 $219.6 10 50 $13.9 6 22 $5.50 13 71 $20.0 23 327 $90.661 NonDepository Credit Institutions 0 0 $0.0 2 16 $4.6 13 77 $23.4 3 25 $7.7 3 107 $33.50 7 65 $19.5 15 126 $37.062 Security & Commodity Brokers and Service 0 0 $0.0 4 20 $3.2 22 2,079 $312.8 16 53 $8.6 12 63 $10.30 15 47 $7.6 25 2,708 $408.663 Insurance Carriers 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 0 0 $0.0 1 1 $0.1 1 30 $3.40 1 2 $0.2 0 0 $0.064 Insurance Agents, Brokers & Service 1 3 $0.7 10 109 $25.4 24 280 $65.3 6 46 $10.7 13 90 $21.10 12 60 $14.0 26 253 $59.065 Real Estate 4 20 $2.8 36 161 $21.4 83 410 $60.6 39 451 $59.8 30 173 $24.30 26 225 $30.6 58 477 $67.667 Holding & Other Investment Offices 0 0 $0.0 1 64 $11.7 2 4 $0.7 1 4 $0.6 0 0 $0.00 1 5 $0.8 1 1 $0.1 70 Hotels & Other Lodging Places 0 0 $0.0 2 13 $0.6 11 598 $24.7 1 6 $0.2 0 0 $0.00 5 95 $2.3 9 302 $12.472 Personal Services 2 3 $0.2 45 132 $6.0 117 452 $18.7 46 129 $7.0 22 63 $3.60 36 117 $4.8 53 218 $10.473 Business Services 8 24 $3.8 49 291 $39.6 140 1,450 $201.2 56 454 $69.1 39 370 $61.00 57 471 $51.1 101 1,579 $211.975 Automobile Repair, Services & Parking 4 9 $0.5 34 109 $7.1 68 247 $20.8 14 41 $2.4 14 114 $15.00 12 45 $2.3 26 150 $14.076 Miscellaneous Repair Services 1 2 $0.3 10 93 $6.5 31 222 $22.0 7 19 $1.7 2 4 $0.20 2 8 $0.5 6 57 $3.578 Motion Pictures 0 0 $0.0 3 9 $2.1 6 44 $4.0 1 1 $0.2 2 51 $12.20 3 23 $5.5 3 32 $1.179 Amusement &Recreational Service (Ex. Movies) 6 22 $1.6 14 94 $5.9 43 573 $41.8 21 270 $17.8 9 48 $3.70 19 202 $13.9 31 234 $15.380 Health Services 5 21 $1.9 26 138 $11.9 133 1,994 $177.3 57 552 $43.2 27 328 $35.10 55 510 $39.0 112 2,235 $169.881 Legal Services 0 0 $0.0 12 39 $7.1 42 127 $23.7 22 51 $9.6 17 65 $11.80 32 93 $17.0 40 174 $31.582 Educational Services 2 57 $7.6 16 550 $61.2 35 1,561 $155.6 16 599 $66.8 19 1,172 $120.90 27 950 $104.6 22 705 $75.783 Social Services 2 10 $1.0 17 171 $9.4 58 1,236 $82.1 26 162 $7.4 15 136 $5.70 33 421 $13.5 49 1,258 $93.184 Museums, Art Galleries, Zoos, Etc. 1 4 $0.1 0 0 $0.0 1 1 $0.1 1 4 $0.1 0 0 $0.00 2 121 $3.3 0 0 $0.086 Membership Organizations 4 21 $1.1 21 135 $9.2 49 192 $11.9 17 87 $5.1 9 59 $6.90 22 124 $6.3 27 558 $69.687 Eng, Acct, Research & Mgmt Related Services 7 20 $2.9 29 234 $29.1 98 1,114 $136.0 46 451 $74.3 48 513 $81.40 68 324 $59.5 84 1,707 $261.889 Miscellaneous Services 0 0 $0.0 3 4 $0.3 4 16 $0.8 1 1 $0.1 1 7 $0.40 1 1 $0.1 1 2 $0.1

91 Exec., Leg. & General Govt. (Except Finance) 6 13 0 14 85 0 27 151 0 10 43 0 5 41 0 16 104 0 12 43 092 Justice, Public Order & Safety 2 46 0 6 123 0 7 217 0 5 85 0 4 80 0 6 174 0 14 211 093 Public Finance, Taxation & Monetary Policy 1 1 0 2 7 0 3 10 0 3 13 0 2 9 0 4 18 0 2 8 094 Administration of Human Resource Programs 1 5 0 3 14 0 4 25 0 1 2 0 1 6 0 2 12 0 2 18 095 Admin. of Environ. Quality & Housing Programs 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 5 18 0 1 50 096 Administration of Economic Programs 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 8 0 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 15 097 National Security & International Affairs 0 0 0 3 75 0 2 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 099 NonClassifiable Establishments 2 5 0 17 49 0 55 283 0 16 47 0 24 68 0 10 20 0 42 1,507 0


Marlborough Economic Development Master Plan (Marlborough, Massachusetts)

Documents

cecil group

edr group images

feet accessory land

fxm associates

multiple properties

ajita perera

table of contentsintroduction