Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-06-23 Zoning Board of Appeals Minuteso�N OF REa4i Town of Reading J Meeting Minutes 5J9.avcox4°µr Board - Committee - Commission - Council Zoning Board of Appeals Date: 2016-06-23 Building: Pleasant Street Senior Center Address: 49 Pleasant Street Purpose: General Business Attendees: Members - Present: Robert Redfern, Chair Damase Caouette John Jarema Erik Hagstrom David Traniello Kathleen Hackett Nick Pernice F?C IVE'D TO`1'1 CLERK RE,�DING. Mr°iSS, 1011 APR I9 P 4: 281 Time: 7:00 PM Location: Great Room Members - Not Present: None Others Present: Town Representatives: Jean Delios, Assistant Town Manager Julie Mercier, Community Development Director Chris Heep, Town Counsel Reading Village 40B Development Team: Matt Zuker, MKM Reading Ken Chase, MKM Reading Geoff Engler, SEB LLC Peter Bartash, Cube 3 Studio Public: Margaret E. Paquette, 49 Lincoln Street Lee Mona, Riverside Drive Jeanne Thomases, 21 Arlington Street Joseph Gesmundo, 34 Sunnyside Avenue Christine Moore, 75 Green Street Lois Bell, 35 Washington Street Nick Gagnon, 76 Washington Street Christine Hansen, 30 Haven Street Lianne Stoddard, 96 Washington Street Everett & Virginia Blodgett, 99 Prescott Street Matt Julie Aylward, 25 Prescott Street Joe Josh Lemaitre, 83 Prescott Street Nicholas Aiello, 44 Vine Street - owner of 92-94 Washington Street Kathy Rovnak, 86 Sunnyside Avenue Kevin M Sexton, 20 Emerson Street Page 1 1 Q� OFR O� Town of Reading b Meeting Minutes f s�gxconQ°pP� Karen Stroman, 46 Washington Street Joe Barletta, 1-3 Fulton Street Eileen Barrett, 90 Sunnyside Avenue Jonathan Barnes, 41 Pratt Street John Yurweicz, 10 Fairview Avenue Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Kim Saunders, Recording Secretary Topics of Discussion: ZBA Case # 16-02 The Zoning Board of Appeals continued the public hearing in the Great Room at the Pleasant Street Center, 49 Pleasant Street in Reading, Massachusetts on the petition of MKM Reading, LLC who seeks a Comprehensive Permit to develop 77 units of rental housing on a 36,604 square foot residentially -zoned tract of land under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B Sections 20-23, with waivers from zoning requirements, on the property located at 39-41 Lincoln Street and 2-12 Prescott Street in Reading, Massachusetts. Mr. Redfern opened the continued public hearing at 7:04 p.m. Mr. Redfern summarized the previous meeting. He said the Board, Town staff and the peer consultants have not had a chance to review the revised plans that were received electronically on Tuesday. He said the applicant will be presenting the new revised plans tonight and a brief discussion will follow. Matt Zuker from MKM Reading apologized and explained why the plans were not submitted when promised. He provided a PowerPoint presentation which gave an overview of the site and program changes. He commented the side and rear setbacks are greater than what was originally proposed. He stated the units will be decreased to 72, and the majority units are 1 bedroom. Each unit will have 1 parking space. He added the visitor parking is still being worked on. Peter Bartash the Architect from Cube 3 Studio stated the revised plans address the concerns received from the Town and the peer reviews. He added the circulation of the site has improved. He said the first level will be parking and the residential units will be 3 floors above. He showed an overlay of the new proposed plan over the previous plan. He described how the building layout will be and what it would look like. He added the building height is similar to the building that is currently there. He provided a plan showing the shadows cast during different seasons and time of the day. After the presentation, Mr. Zuker added the landscape plan will be available at the next meeting. Mr. Redfern asked the Board if they had any questions or concerns. Mr. Traniello stated the development is moving in the right direction, but he has not had enough time to review the revised plans. He would like to wait for the peer reviews before commenting. Mr. Jarema questioned the square footage in the residential area compared to the original plans. Page 1 2 Mr. Bartash answered many of the 2 bedroom units are now 1 bedroom units. He added they eliminated inefficiency as a whole. There will be sixty (60) 1 bedroom, three (3) 2 bedroom and nine (9) 3 bedroom. The 3 bedroom are required by the State. Mr. Zuker agreed to provide the revised waiver request. Mr. Caouette said the project is moving in the right direction, but there is a still a ways to go. He would like the peer reviews input. Ms. Hackett commented there has been positive improvements, but has no comments. Mr. Hagstrom said he had no comments. Mr. Perniece complimented the reduced height, dormers, the opportunity for landscaping and the number of 1 bedroom units. He asked for clarification on the 3 bedroom State requirements. Mr. Redfern said he will refrain from commenting until he can review the revised plans. He read an email from the Traffic Engineer Peer Reviewer. He questioned if the Town has received all fees from the developer for the peer review. He reiterated his concern with receiving the plans later than what was agreed upon. Mr. Jarema questioned when the next public hearing would be scheduled, and if the November 1 S` deadline could be met. Ms. Mercier clarified the only peer review fee that is outstanding is for the architectural. The next public hearing would be held on July 21 S`. She suggested, and Mr. Heep agreed, to continue the public hearing for a month and then ask for another extension if needed. Ms. Delios stated she had concern about the Architectural Peer Reviewer fee still being outstanding. Mr. Zuker said he only received estimate from the Architectural Peer Reviewer. He understands the revised plans will need more technical information. Mr. Engler said the concerns the Traffic Engineer Peer Reviewer stated in his email can be handled in a couple of days. He stated he is not happy with the fee the Architectural Peer Reviewer has charged. Mr. Caouette reiterated the revised plans are a step in the right directions. It should not be complicated for the peer reviews. Mr. Redfern opened the public hearing to the public. Public Comment Ms. Lianne Stoddard of 96 Washington Street questioned when the revised plans would be available on line. She said she would like to see fencing and trees. Mr. Nick Gagnon of 76 Washington Street questioned if there were balconies. He agreed adding the fencing would help with privacy for the abutters. He questioned how the new design addressed the fire safety concern and fire truck access. Page 1 3 Mr. Nick Aiello of 92-94 Washington Street questioned the number of balconies and the location. Mr. Zuker answered there is 1 stack of 3 balconies. The balconies allow a natural break in the building. Mr. John Yurweicz of 10 Fairview Avenue said he had privacy issues, a balcony or window imposes on the abutters. He suggested having tall trees to help with the privacy concerns. Ms. Christine Moore of 75 Green Street questioned the 1 parking space per unit. She stated the number of cars will impact the area. Ms. Lois Bell of 35 Washington Street echoed the parking concerns. She added a couple could have jobs in two different towns and would need their own car. Ms. Jean Thomases of 21 Arlington Street questioned if the changes impacted the price range of a unit. She questioned what are in the spaces with the big windows? Mr. Bartash answered they are residential units. Ms. Delios stated parking is only allowed at the MBTA lot during the day. Ms. Virginia Blodgett from 99 Prescott Street questioned if the back of the property would have a driveway? Mr. Bartash answered there will be a driveway; the rendering shown is a view from the abutter's property. There will be plantings added. Mr. Josh Lemaitre of 83 Prescott Street asked about the construction time. He asked how many units are counted by the State. Mr. Engler answered 25% of the units will be affordable, but all units are counted by the State. Mr. Jonathan Barnes of 41 Pratt Street echoed the concern of the lack of providing a waiver request. He stated the bulk size massing of the building is entirely inappropriate. Mr. Jonathan Barnes of 41 Pratt Street expressed concern with the shadow effect on the two Historic structures in the area. Ms. Eileen Manning of 78 Riverside Drive asked if the applicant could show the proposed plan overlaying the existing building to see the difference. She expressed frustration that this is the second meeting with very little information. Ms. Jean Thomases of 21 Arlington Street questioned the toxic soils that could possibly be on the site. She commented on the density of the project. Ms. Eileen Barrett of 90 Sunnyside Avenue asked if the Doucette building would have asbestos shingles. Mr. Redfern closed the public comment. Mr. Redfern commented the plans that were submitted originally had a lot more information. Mr. Zuker said the revised architectural plans are the same package that was originally submitted. He agreed they would need to prepare additional civil plans once they receive feedback about the architectural changes from the peer review. Page 1 4 Mr. Redfern said showing elevation of the back of the building would help the neighbors and the ZBA. Mr. Jarema stated he can hear the frustration from the residents. He explained a 40B allows waivers to be granted by the ZBA. He added this type of project would need give and take to be successful. Mr. Caouette stated the State requirements need to be satisfied, which can conflict with the Town Zoning Bylaws. Ms. Mercier said the presentation was not submitted in time, the new information will be on the Town website on Monday. Ms. Delios suggested everyone work together. She asked everything be submitted a week in advance before the next pubic hearing. This will allow time for everyone to review. Mr. Zuker said what was submitted is what is being proposed. He agreed July 21St is sufficient time. On a motion by Mr. Traniello, seconded by Mr. Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to continue the public hearing until July 21, 2016. Vote was 5-0-0 (Redfern, Jarema, Caouette, Traniello, Hackett). Minutes: The minutes were not approved. Adjournment On a motion by Mr. Traniello, seconded by Mr. Jarema, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. Vote was 7-0-0 (Redfern, Jarema, Caouette, Traniello, Hackett, Hagstrom, Pernice). Documents reviewed at the meeting: ZBA Agenda 6/22/16 Page 1 5