Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-10-15 ad Hoc - Zoning Advisory Committee MinutesTown of Reading Meeting Minutes Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Zoning Advisory Committee Date: 2014 -10 -15 Building: Pleasant Street Senior Center Address: 49 Pleasant Street Purpose: General Business Attendees: Members - Present: David Tuttle Jeff Hansen Marsie West George Katsoufis David Traniello Eric Bergstrom Erin Calvo -Bacci Members - Not Present: Others Present: Time: 7:30 PM kECEIVED [OWN CLERK "IliNG. MASS. 1015 FEB 19 A 11= 08 Location: Great Room Session: Jean Delios - Assistant Town Manager, Community Services Jessie Wilson - Community Development Administrator John O'Neil - 125 Summer Avenue David Greenfield - 192 Woburn Street Bob LeLacheur - Town Manager Jeff Struble - 4 Tower Road Nancy Twomey - 23 California Road Angela Binda - Town Meeting Member Susan A. Churchill - Town Meeting Member Tony D'Arezzo - 130 John Street Robery Ferrari - 20 Crosby Road Dan Ensminger - 6 Oakland Road Virginia Adams - 59 Azela Circle Johnathan Barnes - 41 Pleasant Street Nancy Docktor - 371 Pearl Street Jack and Peg Russell - 212 Gazebo Circle Anne Landry - 15 Center Avenue Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Jessie Wilson, Community Development Administrator Topics of Discussion: There being a quorum Ms. West called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM. Presentation for Article 8, Zoning Update for Town Meetina Page 1 1 Town of Reading - Meeting Minutes Ms. West presented to the audience. She provided a background on zoning, noting Reading first adopted Zoning in 1928. She pointed out that Reading's zoning has been updated on piecemeal basis overtime and it is in need of a comprehensive update. The goals of the project are so simplify, modernize and clarify. Another goal is to improve the permitting process, eliminate internal inconsistencies, add new language where needed and make sure the zoning reflects our land use goals. Ms. West discussed the remaining project timeline pointing out the upcoming public hearing on October 20"' with the CPDC. She also added that Staff is having office hours Tuesday nights from 5 -7PM. As for the key changes, Ms. West said that the entire document will be re- codified. In addition, the ZAC has been working to make the permitting process easier through zoning. The ZAC has also proposed changes for Accessory Apartments, including some by -right and special permit options. Ms. West also pointed out there have been some changes to the Aquifer Protection District which will make it more consistent with the state regulations and what other communities have for regulations. Another key change is updating the regulations pertaining to Nonconforming Uses and Structures to allow for more day time government review. As for moving forward with Town Meeting approval, there will be some sections of the bylaw that are not moving forward until a later Town Meeting. The sections that will be moving forward include Definitions, Administration, Use Regulations, Intensity Regulations, Nonconforming Uses and Structures, and Applicability and Severability. The remaining Sections will be taken up at Town Meeting in April. Ms. West went through the changes in more detail and also discussed the changes to the Accessory Apartment regulations. Mr. David Greenfield asked whether a detailed summary of the changes will be provided to Town Meeting Members. Ms. West replied that staff is working on a detailed document to call out all the changes. Mr. Traniello presented the remainder of the changes to the audience noting that the bylaw will be reorganized and several tables and graphics will be added to help convey the information. In addition, the Site Plan Review regulations have been updated as well as the nonconforming uses and structures section both to make it easier to understand and reduce unnecessary review. Mr. Traniello summarized the following: Definitions - many of the terms were updated and graphics were included. This will help convey the meaning of the term. Accessory Apartment - there is an aging population in Reading and to address the needs of that population we are proposing to be more flexible with the accessory apartment regulations. These regulations will also provide for more low impact development by working with the existing structure and neighborhood. He described the proposed permitting process in more detail. Nonconforming Uses and Structures - Mr. Traniello said that many of the homes in town (80 %) are nonconforming and that many of the proposed alterations or renovations to these structures require a special permit. The ZAC would like to update this to allow certain alterations to be approved by daytime government. Applicability and Severability - We've included a new severability clause that is updated to ensure the bylaw is not invalidated if a single section would be deemed to be invalid. The ZAC opened up to comments and questions. Page 1 2 Town of Reading - Meeting Minutes Mr. Dan Ensminger asked what new construction constituted. Mr. Traniello replied that it is new at the time of permitting. Mr. Jeff Struble asked about the difference between invalidity and severability. Mr. Traniello said that the Attorney General would be the body to determine a section to be invalid and severability protects the rest of the document should a section become invalid. Mr. Struble asked about the Medical Marijuana bylaw and the fact there is no severability clause. Mr. LeLacheur replied that Counsel added that section to the medical marijuana bylaw to protect the bylaw as it went forward by itself. Ms. Nancy Twomey said that the new definition of Nonconforming Lot seems to make several nonconforming lots now buildable. Mr. Traniello replied that our definition follows a state said that statute that already protects certain lots. Mr. LeLacheur added that he will follow up with Town Counsel on this to make sure it applied to the lots we want /need it to apply. Ms. Twomey asked why the CPDC now the special permit authority and then Board of Appeals issuance the variance. Mr. Tuttle said that they will be streamlined since many projects require Site Plan Review with the CPDC regardless. Mr. Katsoufis expressed concern over accessory apartments. Mr. Traniello replied that there are many people who are looking for accessory apartments or in -law apartments. The ZAC is trying to plan for the future for the aging population. He added that there are performance controls written into the language to limit the design and help control the concerns about impacts to the neighborhood. This also allows more flexibility to home owners and helps legitimize these applications. Many accessory apartments are constructed without permit and we hope this will help encourage applications to do it right. Mr. Katsoufis said that accessory apartments should be further evaluated to understand the impact to the community, especially the density. Ms. LeLacheur said that the Town wants to encourage construction of these units in accordance with building code. Mr. Johnathan Barnes said he thinks it is important to remind Town Meeting members and to inform them that it has to be rented to a family member. Mr. Traniello clarified that it does not need to be rented to family members. Mr. Barnes said that he is not in favor of that and would like to encourage it to family members. Mr. Traniello said that the ZAC did hear many different positions and they tried to balance the needs of the community with the role of government. Mr. LeLacheur also replied that Town Counsel said that we cannot limit the renting to just family members and that would not hold up in court. There was concern over changing single family homes into two - family homes. It was clarified that it is not changing the single family home. Ms. West said that we molded our bylaw after Lexington's bylaw. Ms. Twomey said that many other towns in the communities do this and Reading does not. However, there are ways to get around it, and she knows that people are doing that. Ms. Angela Binda said there is concern about getting a driveway approved without the addition and have an addition without a driveway. She also pointed out the graphics are confusing and should be eliminated. She added that the ZAC should tell people that the cap of 10% is now being eliminated from the language. She was also concerned about the relief given for those individuals who are handicapped and how that would be determined. Ms. Wilson clarified that relief may be granted, but it is not just assumed. Ms. Twomey feels that it is not an issue and she feels that most architects would not choose to put an additional door on the front as they would want to maintain the look of the single family house. Page 1 3 Town of Reading - Meeting Minutes Mr. John O'Neil expressed concern that the discussion will get out of hand at Town Meeting. Mr. Struble said that the presentation should be clarified, noting that the by -right option still means that a permit is required from the Building Inspector. He said it would also be helpful to obtain some data from Lexington in terms of how many accessory apartments they have seen. Mr. Barnes agreed and said that the data from other Towns will be helpful and a comfort Town Meeting Members that there won't be a huge impact in the density of the neighborhoods. Ms. Twomey expressed concern over the height restriction of accessory buildings and structures. She said that the height restrictions may cause concern for poorly designed detached structures. She felt that 20 -feet may be reasonable. Mr. Tuttle said that depending on the distance from the principal structure it may be part of the principal structure and not a detached structure. Some felt that if the height was increased that could also be an impact. Mr. Barnes pointed out the issue with the rear yard graphic and that the term did not match up with the graphic. It was agreed that the graphic will need be adjusted. Mr. D'Arezzo questioned the regulations for truck trailers and storage containers. Ms. Wilson clarified it is discretionary with the CPDC so if they felt a more stable structure could be presented, they may consider that. Mr. Barnes asked about the Site Plan Review and Minor Site Plan Review and how that relates to review for change of use requiring less than 15 parking spaces. Would that be reviewed by the Town Planner? Ms. Wilson clarified that yes, through established regulations that would then permit the Town Planner for approval. Mr. D'Arezzo pointed out the timeframe for completeness for Site Plan Review Application is much shorter now to 5 days from 30 days. Ms. Wilson pointed out that if an application was not complete, it could be picked up during the public hearing proceedings. However others felt that 10 days may be more appropriate and it was recommended changing it. No additional comments were received. Mr. Tuttle moved to adjourn Mr. Hansen seconded and carried 6 -0 -0. 10:OPM Page 1 4