No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-05-21 ad Hoc - Zoning Advisory Committee MinutesTown of Reading �.� Meeting Minutes �J9, r tv Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Zoning Advisory Committee Date: 2014 -05 -21 Building: Reading Town Hall Address: 16 Lowell Street Purpose: General Business Attendees: Members - Present: Marsie West David Tuttle George Katsoufis Eric Bergstom Jeff Hansen David Traniello Members - Not Present: Erin Calvo -Bacci Others Present: Time: 7:30 PM CE1VED AN CLERK _ riuii'(l.l, t irt�J. L I 1 - 3 - 3 P 4: 1 1 Location: Conference Room Session: Jean Delios - Assistant Town Manager, Community Services Jessie Wilson - Community Development Administrator Virginia Adams - Resident Ralph Willmer, Consultant, VHB Jesse Wilson - North Reading Resident Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Jessie Wilson, Community Development Administrator Topics of Discussion: There being a quorum the Chair called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM. Discuss Feedback Reception at Reading Co -Op The ZAC discussed the evening reception at the Reading Co- Operative Bank from Tuesday night. It was agreed it went well and many comments were received. It was agreed that having a more relaxed forum engaged people to talk more about these issues with zoning. Planned Residential Development (PRD) Ms. Wilson told the ZAC she included some model language from the State Smart Growth Toolkit for Open Space Design, which is the more modern term for this type of zoning. She said that she believed the ZAC would want to maintain the PRD language, and not delete it, and instead make it easier to use. She noted that under the current bylaw, Town Meeting approval is required to get the map zoned for a PRD overlay. She mentioned that currently there is a family that is hoping to use this bylaw for their project. They presented the preliminary concept to the CPDC and their Project Engineer mentioned Lexington has a good model. Page 1 1 Town of Reading - Meeting Minutes Mr. Traniello said he resides in a PRD and the design of the project is intended to limit the infrastructure impacts and maximize the amount of open space. With his neighborhood, there is an open space restriction. He did note that it seems the developer did have to go through a number processes to get the project approved and would agree the process needs to be simpler. Mr. Willmer said that the language provided by Ms. Wilson is a more current version of cluster zoning. The model language would allow this type of development by right where as the current language requires town meeting approval of the map change prior to moving forward. Ms. Delios depicted a current subdivision plan and how much land the roadway requires. In the open space design language, the open space is maximized and the goal is for limited impact from infrastructure. Mr. Willmer said he did want to understand how the ZAC felt for this type of development and so he can draft appropriate language for this type use. Mr. Tuttle suggested the first step would be to establish the constraints and the controls for this type of bylaw. For example outlining what the requirement is for land size and then determine what district(s) it should be located. Mr. Jesse Wilson, proponent for the current PRD in progress said that his main concern is the length of time it would take to get the project approved. He would love to see the process go smoother and quicker. Mr. Willmer said the ZAC would need to decide what zoning district the PRD should be allowed in. Some towns to require 10 or more acres but he suggested go with something much smaller. He said theoretically the ZAC could allow this in all single family districts. Mr. Tuttle said it is important to maintain the neighborhood character and one way to do that would be to follow the underlying dimensional regulations. Mr. Willmer agreed. Ms. Adams asked if a developer could demolish a home and then take advantage of this bylaw. Mr. Tuttle said yes. She was concerned that it could increase the number of teardowns. Mr. Willmer said that he feels it would not encourage more demolition than would occur otherwise without the existing zoning. There would be no additional incentive. It was agreed that Mr. Willmer would take a look at the language based on this conversation. Planned Unit Develoument - PUD Mr. Willmer asked how often this district would be used. He noted that the revised language was cleaned up and that he tried to clarify the preliminary plan submission requirements. It was confirmed that the plan submission requirements was same language proposed for Site Plan Review. Mr. Hansen suggested referencing the Site Plan Review section rather than listing it out again. Mr. Willmer said that is a possibility. Mr. Tuttle clarified that Planned Unit Development and the Applicant may combine several parcels to meet the size requirements. For example Calareso's Farm Stand. It was a Site Plan /Special Permit type of development and /or redevelopment. Mr. Tuttle also expressed concern with the proposed language about where this district can be located. He also summarized the Johnson Woods project, which was a former poultry farm that was converted to 293 housing units. He said that he feels that the PUD - "R" should not necessarily be development in a residential underlying district and that he would not have an issue with it being a PUD -R located in an industrial underlying district or a different type of underlying district. Page 1 2 Town of Reading - Meeting Minutes Mr. Willmer said it allows for a single or mix of uses at a large scale size of development by assembling a large parcel or a number of parcels. It does not necessarily have to correlate with an underlying district. Mr. Tuttle suggested calling them all PUD and eliminate the "I ", "B" and "R ". Ms. Wilson reminded everyone of the previously adopted PUD -R -C overlay adjacent to the Johnson Woods development. This would need to be addressed should those terms be modified. Ms. Delios pointed out that the parking regulations are different for each PUD type as well as the dimensional controls. She suggested putting the dimensional controls in a table in each subsection to make it easier to read. Mr. Tuttle added that it may be more appropriate to have it be in the dimensional control section of the bylaw. Mr. Willmer also suggested pulling out language like the Biotech Uses and having it be more general for all Biotech Uses. Ms. Delios said a few years ago it was discovered that the PUD -I has a requirement for residential uses to be within 200 -feet of another residential zone. She felt it was odd to have a requirement for it to be "within" and not a "distance from ". Ms. West suggested getting rid of all the double negatives in the language, specifically related to the dimensional controls. Ms. West also is not in favor of allowing residential uses in the industrial district. Mr. Tuttle added that there should be only one procedural section in the PUD and then move the dimensional controls to the table of dimensional controls in Section 5 of the bylaw. Mr. Willmer did agree that it would make sense, but that sometimes it is so curtailed to that specific section it is located within the section. It was agreed to eliminate residential uses within the Industrial District. Beqin Review of Pr000sed bviaw for Medical Mariivana Ms. West said there was a lot of good comment from the public at the last public forum in regards to the location of the medical marijuana facilities. Many of them wanted it right downtown so that it was in the open and in the eye of the public. Mr. Traniello expressed concern with allowing that as Reading could be known as the Town with the "pot shop" downtown. He also felt that many of the businesses would not like to have that use there. Mr. Hansen asked if this would be separate from the entire zoning update. It was agreed this needs to be a separate article and will need to go in November even if the rest of the zoning update is not ready. Mr. Willmer said that the language he provided was based on some models in the state and tried to pick the best from those models and incorporate it into this draft. The ZAC agreed that there needs to be some buffers such s distances from schools, etc. identified more clearly in this language. It was clarified that the boundary line are based on the lot line. Mr. Traniello pointed out that it is an all cash business and there may be challenges related to the IRS and Feds. Other Business Ms. Delios said that she would like to give the ZAC binders that they can keep here of all the revised sections. The ZAC agreed that would be helpful. Ms. Delios said it would also be helpful to give the Board of Selectmen the draft bylaw in a binder outlined in section tabs as well as a summary of the changes. Page 1 3 Town of Reading - Meeting Minutes The ZAC also liked the idea of the Dirty Doodle hosting an event similarly to the Reading Co -op. Approval of Minutes Mr. Traniello moved the ZAC to approve the minutes of April 30, 2014 as amended. Mr. Hansen seconded and motion carried 4 -0 -1. Ms. Delios pointed out that there was a change on the floor of Town Meeting in regards to the Aquifer Protection District. That is why there is a grandfathering provision because it was approved at the floor of Town Meeting. She also suggested having a fact sheet that details what the changes to the Aquifer Protection District will be and where we currently stand. Ms. West said that we do need to look into what other Town's are doing for Aquifer Protection Districts. In addition, we do need to confirm whether the district is still needed even though Reading is now on MWRA. Mr. Tuttle moved the ZAC to approve the minutes of May 7, 2014 as amended. Mr. Traniello seconded and the motion carried 4 -0 -1. Adiournment On a motion by Mr. Hansen, seconded by Mr. Bergstrom, the ZAC voted to adjourn at 10:00PM PM by a vote of 5 -0 -0. Page 1 4