Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-02-23 Board of Selectmen Minutes o� orR�O f, Town of Reading r) Meeting Minutes RECEIVED & o„poa' TOWN CLERK Board - Committee - Commission - Council: I%EAOING, MASS. Board of Selectmen 2m An I I A 0 43 Date: 2016-02-23 Time: 7:00 PM Building: School - Parker Location: Multi-Purpose Room Address: 45 Temple Street Session: Open Session Purpose: General Business Version: Attendees: Members - Present: Chairman Daniel Ensminger, Secretary Kevin Sexton, Vice Chairman John Halsey, Barry Berman Member: - Not Present: John Arena Others Present: Town Manager Bob LeLacheur, Assistant Town Manager Jean Cellos, Community Development Director Julie Mercier, Administrative Assistant Caitlin Saunders, CPDC members Jeff Hansen, David Tuttle, John Weston and Nick Safina, Everette and Virginia Blodgett, Kevin Brown, Christine ' Hansen, Damase Caouette, Phil Pacino, Robert Redfem, Robert Mooney, Marianne Downing, Matthew Noman, Gregg Jones, Jackie Carson, Pamela Congdon, Gary Hylan, Christine Hylan, Mary Ellen O'Neill, Al Sylvia, David Traniello, Gina Snyder, Bo Garrison, Nancy Docktor, George Katsoufis, Megan Fidler-Carey, Nicole Barletta, Nichola Aiello, Lynn O'Brien, Denis Gagnon, Joan Cotter, Joe Gesmundo, Karen Stromm, Julie Aylward, Geoffrey Coran, Eric Burkhart, Kate Grant, Amy Hussey, Holly Gallant, Ashley Quinn, Amy Cole, Julie Joyce, Stephen Crook, Nick Pernice, Carolyn Whiting, Robert Ferrari, Ann Cruickshank, Dennis and Lorraine Lee, len Hillery, Robyn - Ferraz ani, Colleen DeRosa, Jeff Barton, Amy Scicchitani, Jeanne Thomases, Vonda Gauthier, Denise Ewald, Dan McCarthy, Michele Sanphy. Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Topics of Discussion: Reports and Comments Selectmen's Liaison Reports and Comments Mr. Berman said he attended the Library Building Committee meeting and It looks like the project will use all of its contingency but is on schedule. Mr. Halsey noted he attended the Birch Meadow Committee. They are working on bringing a report to the Recreation Committee to then bring to Town Meeting to give them an update. The RFP for the lighting is due to go out in a couple weeks. Mr. Ensminger wanted to make it known there are a lot of open Town Meeting seats available. Mary Ellen O'Neill wanted to encourage the women of Reading to get involved with Town Meeting. Page 1 1 Board of Selectmen Minutes - February 23 2016 - pace 2 Mr. LeLacheur noted the Town expects a very large turnout for this election and to remember that there will be two ballots, one for the primary and one for the local election. , Proclamations/ Certificates of Appreciation Gas Leak Resolutions Mr. LeLacheur noted there are two bills that came to the legislative that have not been acted upon. The Climate Advisory Committee is asking the Board to support it and voice an opinion to the legislation. Mr. Sexton moved that the Board support: (House Bill 2870 "An Act relative to Protecting Consumers of Gas and Electricity from Paving for Leaked and Unaccounted for Gas") (House Bill 2871 "An Act Relative to Gas Leak Repairs During Road Proiects") And that the Board through Its designee notify the elected Reading delegation in the House and Senate second by Mr. Berman and approved with a 4-0-0 vot Mr. Halsey noted at first he did not think this was a good idea to poke our noses into this but Reading has a lot of leaks that affect Reading residents and we should be here to help them. Mr. Ensminger agreed and Mr. Berman agreed as well saying we need to do something to push them along. Discussion/Action Items ' Acknowledoe Withdrawal of Liquor License Transf r Mr. LeLacheur noted Ristorante Pavarotti's sale is falling through but the application is still In the ABCC so the Board needs to formally withdraw the application. Mr. Sexton moved and Mr. Berman seconded that the Board of Selectmen acknowledge the withdrawal of the Iinuor license transf r from Ristorante Pavarotti Inc, d/b/a Ristorante Pavarotti- 501 Main Street to Rocco's Enterprises LLC, and approved with a 4-0-0 vote Community Compact Mr. LeLacheur said this vote will make the chair the signatory on an application to be a compact community and to approve the list of best practices submitted as a part of the application. Mr. Sexton moved and Mr. Berman seconded that the Board of Selectmen approve the list of Best Practices submitted as part of the aoDlic tion Package for the Community Compact and further that the Chair is designated as the Compact Sianatory for such apWication and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Personnel &A000intments Mr. Sexton noted they had six appointments total last week. He expressed how Impressed he was with the applicants and encouraged more volunteers as we have many spots available. Mr. Halsey explained how volunteerism Is very important and they had a great round of ' Interviews. Mr. LeLacheur said he has been Involved with volunteers for the past 20 years and most recently he has seen a lot of new residents to Reading starting to volunteer and It is a great thing to see happening. Page 1 2 Board of Selectmen Minutes - February 23 2016 - pace 3 Mr. Sexton moved and Mr. Berman seconded that the Board of Selectmen accent the recommendation of the Volunteer Appointment Subcommittee as follows: • Harry Curtis for a term on the Conservation Commission ending June 30 201 • Amy Scicchitani for a term on the Conservation Commission ending June 30. 22018 • Nick Pernice for an Associate position on the Zoning Board of Appeals through lune 30, 2017; • Robert Beckman for an Associate position on the Fall Street Faire through lune 30. 2017: • Jeff Everson for an Associate position on the Climate Advisory Committee through June 30. 2016; • Jack Williams for a term on the Historical Commission through lune 30. 2016. The vote was approved 4-0-0. Joint Meetino with CPDC; Reading Village 40B Proiect CPDC called to order at 7:25 PM. Mr. Ensminger explained what a 408 project is and outlined the process a 40B applicant must go through. The applicant, Matthew Zuker, from MKM Reading, LLC was present on behalf of the project proposed at 39-41 Lincoln Street and 2-12 Prescott Street. He noted that the next public ' hearing with the ZBA is March 17'^. He explained that the proposal is for 77 units, 70% of which will have just one bedroom. The goal is to build a transit-oriented project that encourages people to live, work and shop In the downtown. He mentioned that the development team is starting to organize meetings with neighbors to hear their comments and concerns. Mr. Zuker's business partner Ken Chase was also present. He commented that they are in the beginning stages of the project and the ZBA process. He explained that the biggest recurring question regards the height of the building and Its proximity to buildings around It. He noted that the existing building, home to Certainly Wood, is currently on the property line. The buildings that are proposed will meet applicable building and fire codes. He explained that the Fire Code only requires that a fire truck be able to get within 150 feet of each side of the building, which is feasible under the proposal. Architect Peter Bartash explained that vehicle access to the site is via a two-way ingress/egress off of Prescott Street with and a one-way exit out onto Lincoln Street. The garage Is technically considered `S2' Storage by code due to.its design. There are 170 feet of frontage along Prescott Street and 90 feet along Lincoln Street. The building will have stairs at each end with a corridor down the middle. An elevated courtyard with landscaping Is proposed as a common area for the residents. There will be an internal trash chute in the middle of Building A. The roof plan shows a roof with a low slope to help lower the perceived height of the building. There will be deep overhanging awnings for pedestrians. Mr. Bartash explained the results of the shadow studies at different times of day throughout the year. ' Mr. Ensminger asked Mr. Bartash about the memo from the Fire Chief- regarding the sprinkler system and the open garage. Page 1 3 Board of Selectmen Minutes - February 23 2016 - page 4 Mr. Bartash explained that according to code - based on the construction classification - the garage and the residential areas are considered separate structures. This means that the ' overall height of the residential building is measured from the top of the parking podium and is allowed to be much higher than what is proposed. The materials of the building are non-combustible and have a one-hour fire rating. The parking podium, as well as the stairways, trash chute and elevator that penetrate it, are required to have two-hour fire ratings. Mr. David Tuttle, CPDC member, asked if the applicant plans to have a management company oversee the building once it is constructed. Mr. Zuker noted that details like this will be worked out further into the process, but that it will be professionally managed. Mr. Nick Safina, CPDC member, commented that this building is not right for the area and does not address residential property lines on all sides. He pointed out that the front of the building is at a 0 lot line, which could create problems with snow and Ice failing off the roof onto pedestrian areas. He asked whether anything could be done to address the pedestrian views into the parking garage. He opined that the building will isolate the whole block from the neighborhood, as it is too tall on most facades. He stated that the massing should address the context of the neighborhood. He asked what section of the fire code allows the building height to be measured from the top of the podium, and what the fire rating will be between the garage and the building. Mr. Bartash replied that depending on the building materials used it will be two-hour or three-hour rated. Mr. Berman mentioned that a big concern with the project is the lack of parking. The site does not propose enough parking to handle all the residents and their guests. He opined ., that the depot is already overwhelmed with commuters. He noted that if people start finding it hard to park downtown, then they will shop elsewhere. This is not something the town wants. He asked the applicant to look Into ways to address this issue. Mr. Ensminger asked Ms. Delios if the applicant has to justify all the waiver requests. Ms. Delios deferred to Town Counsel. Town Counsel replied in the affirmative, that the ZBA will look at each waiver request and examine supporting information from the applicant. The ZBA will have the benefit of peer reviewers, who are outside experts, who will look at the application as well. The ZBA has to consider whether denial of a waiver will render the project unbulidable and whether granting of a waiver will violate the public health, safety and welfare in such a way that trumps the Town's need for affordable housing. Mr. John Weston, CPDC member, opined that the applicant's use of the term `transit- oriented development' is only somewhat correct in this scenario. The applicant is taking credit for the proximity of the train to reduce parking ratios, yet has done nothing to aid In transit mode options for residents. It would be hard to live in Reading without a car and there is no grocery store downtown. The development is near the train but that is not enough. Mr. Halsey asked the applicant who determines which residents are income eligible for the affordable units. ' Mr. Zuker responded that the affordable housing component would be handled by a company certified in 40B lotteries. He noted that local preference is an option that can be explored, but it would still have to be managed in accordance with the requirements of the subsidizing agency as well as Fair Housing laws. Mr. Bartash added that Mass Housing has to review and approve the distribution by type and location of the affordable units. Page 14 Board of Selectmen Minutes - February 23 2016 - oaoe 5 Mr. Sexton asked if these plans could change or if they are final. Mr. Zuker expressed that the development team wants to make the project work for tenants and that neighborhood reality and buyer needs have to be balanced. There is some fluidity in the plans. Creative options for parking will be explored. Mr. Sexton asked why the applicant is proposing 77 units and Inquired whether the purchase of Brown's Autobody could mitigate the height and footprint of the building. Mr. Zuker noted that they have not designed the project to include that parcel. Mr. Tuttle opined that the traffic analysis needs to be reviewed before any decisions can be made. Mr. Ensminger suggested that the parking analysis should include traffic flow in the morning for all the commuters that come Into that area. The Board opened the hearing up to public comment. Jackie Carson, Sanborn Place, expressed her opinion that the Town should manage the affordable units instead of doing a lottery. Marianne Downing of 13 Heather Drive noted concerns about the density. She believes that 93 units per acre Is proposed by the applicant as a starting point for negotiation. She spoke about other projects in the greater Boston area that the development team is involved with. Christine Hansen of 30 Haven Street said that the already significant population of seniors will increase over the years. She asked what accessible features the project has. Mr. Bartash explained that the project is required to meet ADA and MAAB regulations, which require that 5% of units be fully compliant while all the others have to be adaptable. The elevator will be handicap accessible and there will be accessible pathways on-site. Nancy Docktor of 371 Pearl Street asked If a recyclable chute will be provided with.the trash chute. She asked whether the one bedroom units are truly one bedroom. Mr. Bartash answered that there will be a recycling chute next to the trash chute. He also noted that the one bedroom units are traditional with a closet. Gregg Jones of 26 Avon Street asked what the actual number of parking spaces is. Mr. Bartash answered 82. Mr. Jones expressed his concern that the project does not fit the neighborhood and agrees that Reading is not quite a commuter community. Uber in Reading is not realistic. Mary Ellen O'Neill of 125 Summer Avenue asked what will happen to the trees behind Doucette's. She opined that the project provides no green space for the neighborhood. Mr. Chase indicated that the trees are not on their property. ' Nick Aiello of 92-94 Washington Street stated that his backyard abuts the property. He is not opposed to redevelopment of the site, but he thinks the proposed project is too large to be so close to his property line. He noted that the neighborhood already has a drainage problem and asked whether this project will impact it. Page 15 Board of Selectmen Minutes - February 23 2016 -page Mr. Chase replied that the DEP mandates that post-construction runoff be no worse than ' pre-construction runoff. He explained that roof leaders and drainage chambers will help recharge stormwater to the ground. Mr. Bartash added that the rate of recharge is regulated as well, such that rainwater must be captured, retained and released. Cadence Thomases of 21 Arlington Street asked the applicant to show the shadows at S in the morning so she can see how it affects her home. She said she hopes for visitor parking. Jeanne Thomases of 21 Arlington Street noted that Arlington Street has not been mentioned at all in these plans but that the garage exits across from Arlington Street. She asked what the sounds associated with the garage doors will be like and what the landscaping plans are. Mr. Bartash responded that they will work with neighbors on sounds and landscaping but need to be mindful of safety concerns as well. Virginia Blodgett of 99 Prescott Street asked if the existing sewer system can handle all the new units. She opined that it would be nice to see what the building will look like from the perspective of surrounding streets. Gina Snyder of 11 Jaden Terrace mentioned that the Town was considering different options for the site before the applicant came forward. Ms. Delios explained that the ZBA will continue their public hearing on March 17`h and ' encouraged everyone to come and speak up to help shape the project within its neighborhood. She explained that 40B is a challenging process driven by state laws, but that the Town is hiring peer review consultants to help the ZBA examine the site. Joint Meeting with CPDC: 40R districts Ms. Delios explained unlike 40B, 40R allows the community to adopt an overlay district that allows the Town to have options and a say in shaping developments. It gives the Town a measure of control and expertise which hopefully leads to projects suitable for Reading. For example, 30 Haven has been a successful project that has helped revitalize the downtown. Tonight the discussion will be focused on expanding the existing Downtown Smart Growth District (DSGD). The Economic Development Plan suggests expanding the 40R district and MAPC suggests a close look at PDA 1A and 113 (the site of the proposed 40B) as expansion areas. The Town is currently in talks with a developer fof the post office. Mr. Jeff Hansen, CPDC member, noted that the CPDC is putting together a subcommittee for the 40R expansion and that the Board of Selectmen's opinion on this is paramount. The CPDC wants to get this on the warrant for November Town Meeting. Mr. Weston explained that there has been a lot of discussion of how to expand without affecting too many homes. He reminded the Board that the current DSGD is the smallest area the State would allow and Includes all commercial buildings. He opined that the CPDC really needs to figure out what it is trying to accomplish for this area. Mr. Berman commented that often zoning chases a project, but that projects should chase ' zoning. He agreed that 30 Haven has been a great addition to the downtown, but that it needs to be expanded to allow people to live downtown without a car. History shows that when the Town is proactive it gets better results. Expanding the district will also show the community the Board Is serious about economic development. Page 1 6 Board of Selectmen Minutes - February 23 2016 - pace 7 Mr. Sexton commented that expanding the district is a great idea. The EDSAT identified that the Town's demographic in twenty years will be mostly seniors and young professionals who will be looking for housing and retail options in the same area. Mr. Tuttle noted that the initial proposal for smart growth expansion was to include all of Business B, which is a much larger area. He opined that there has been a lot of change in what was possible then versus now. He pointed out that the 4011 is only an overlay that gives an owner or developer more choices of how to redevelop the land; it does not mean it has to or will be done. Mr. Halsey agreed that people are afraid when they see their home included in an area for proposed rezoning, but that expanding the 4011 only creates options and opportunities for the Town in the future. He also reminded the room that PDA 1B was proposed and then denied as a smart growth area, and now there is a pending 40B (Reading Village) for the site. He commented that the Town needs to create its own destiny. Mr. Halsey believes the Town should expand 40R even more to allow further opportunities. Mr. LeLacheur noted that last night the CPDC put out priorities for November Town Meeting and 40R was one of them. There is a lot of work to be done in that time frame. The Board opened up the discussion for public comment. Mary Ellen O'Neill noted that she was at the CPDC meeting last night and is concerned for the people with homes within the area considered for 40R expansion. She opined that the Town should start talking to these people sooner rather than later. Jeanne Thomases asked if Reading Village would be stopped if the smart growth district were expanded to include PDA 1B. Mr. Tuttle responded in the negative. Although the 40B is not a done deal per say yet, a 40R at this point would not affect them. Furthermore, the presence of a 4011 overlay district does not preclude development of a 40B. Mr. Safina noted that the downtown smart growth district can have sub-districts for which the CPDC can craft design guidelines and rules for different streets and sections. The CPDC adjourned at 9:37 PM. Financial Overview Mr. Letacheur noted they will look at and discuss the timeline for an override, if current funds are managed correctly, are these temporary or permanent funds that we need, communication rules for government workers/volunteers, how much we need and what we are trying to solve. - In the next 12 months we have three chances to get an override question on a ballot. September 8 - October 25 window would be the best time frame. We need to present a budget explaining position cuts to show the community but not lay out which specific positions would be cut. The Board would have to decide whether to call a Special Town Meeting or not; they don't have to but it has always been good politics. We would need to start planning neighborhood meetings right away. The Town Manager and Superintendent of Schools both agree a fall vote would be best from a morale standpoint. Mr. Ensminger wanted to make It clear that this override would be for FY18. FY17 is already basically in the books and there will be cuts and it will hurt a little. Page 1 7 Board of Selectmen Minutes - February 23 2016 - pace 8 Mr. LeLacheur noted we have to remember that there are plenty of people in town who cannot afford an override and we have to protect them somehow. ' Mr. Berman said he thinks it is better to pick the later fall date. It would give us more time to figure out exactly what we're going to be asking and really get good community feedback. Mr. Ensminger agreed the October option seems better. He also noted the Board of Selectmen appreciate all the emalls/comments/phone calls they have been getting and they urge you to contact the School Committee to get them to communicate their opinions more. Mr. Sexton also agreed saying October would be best and not to show specific position cuts. Mr. Halsey wanted to clear some miscommunications that may be coming from all the emails. Encouragement from the community to put this on a ballot is great but the ultimate decision is the Board of Selectmen's and they will be making that decision soon. The Board of Selectmen has to be careful not to take sides; they must be respectful to everyone. Their job is to assemble Information and present it so people understand the current state, the current state with an override and the current state without an override with ramifications, without being a cheerleader for one side. Once and if the vote happens we have to go forward with the results and deal with managing new taxes or figuring out how to continue without more money. Eric Burkhart of 161 Belmont Street wanted to make sure he was clear on the way an override gets on a ballot. The Board ultimately makes the decision but public input helps them make that decision. Mr. Burkhart asked the Board to elaborate on that decision making process. ' Mr. Ensminger stated the Board has made It clear they value public opinion. They then have a large decision with themselves and with Mr. LeLacheur's expertise. A resident asked if there was flexibility with the timing of the neighborhood meetings and the Board answered yes. Jeff Barton of 23 Thomas Drive asked if an override does go on a ballot and it is successful, what Is the process for deciding where the money goes. Mr. LeLacheur noted that Is one of the key things we need to answer when we ask for this override. He also noted the town has predetermined ways to allocate money. Once those things are subtracted, there is a formula to use on the leftover money to split between the departments. This will be a large discussion between boards and staff about our priorities. There is a budget process in place that is not taken lightly. Mr. LeLacheur also mentioned he looks at budgets as far out as 2030 to see where we may need money In the future to help make these decisions as well. Jackie Carson asked if the neighborhood meetings can be at different times and the Board stated they could be. A resident commented he didn't like that Mr. Halsey said the Board shouldn't be a cheerleader for one side. He thinks If the Board feels one way, the town deserves to know that and know If there was an overwhelming amount of public comment towards one way or ' not. Mr. Ensminger explained the Board needs to be mindful of all residents. Legally the board cannot take sides; personally, they each can have their own opinion. Page 1 8 Board of Selectmen Minutes - February 23 2016 - Daae 9 Mr. Halsey stated they can Inform the community on what the majority of the public ' comment has been. He said to look at it this way, if the Selectmen chose to put an override on a ballot that is the Board telling the residents they seriously need to consider this. The Board will guide you but they have to be on everyone's side. The Board cannot tell you what to think or what to do; they have to let the facts speak for themselves. Michelle Sanphy of 75 Glenmere Circle asked if she was sensing the Board is thinking of putting an override on the ballot with respect to people who can't afford it and small businesses. Mr. Sexton answered yes, it is a big balancing act and we have to take everything into consideration. Mr. Tuttle commented the budget is approved by Town Meeting which is a different set of individuals. - Mr. Ensminger noted it has been an honor and a privilege to chair this board and he thanks you for giving him the opportunity. The Board of Selectmen will be reorganizing at their next meeting. Approval of Minutes Mr. Sexton moved and Mr. Halsey seconded that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of January 12 2016 and approved with a 4-0-0 vote Mr. Sexton moved and Mr. Berman seconded that the Board of Selectmen approve the minutes of January 20, 2016 and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Mr. Sexton moved and Mr. Berman seconded that the Board of Selectmen approve the Executive Session minutes of January 26, 2016 as written, the vote was as follows: Ensminner - Yes Halsey - Yes Sexton - Yes Berman - Yes The motion carries with a 4-0-0 vote. Mr. Sexton second by Mr. Berman move that the Board of Selectmen adiourn the meeting at 10:26 PM, approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Respectfully submitted, Secre ry C Page 1 9