Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-09 Community Planning and Development Commission Minutes Town of Reading RE C IE ILVl TOWN� 0 Meeting Minutes L 'RK Ar i ii. s . Board : Committee - Commission - Council: 2010 MAY -3 AM 7. 31 Community Planning and Development Commission Date: 2018-04-09 Time: 7:30 P.M Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: -Open Session Purpose: General Business Version: Attendees: Members - Present: Chairman Nick Safina, John Weston, Dave Tuttle, Rachel Hitch Associate Tony D'Arezzo Members - Not Present: Karenr Goncalves-Dolan Others Present; Assistant Town Manager Jean Delios, Community Development Director Julie Mercier,Planning Assistant Andrew MacNichol, Teale Bernstein, Scott Cameron, David Orvosh, Michael Radner, Virginia Adams, Jonathan Barnes, Sarah Brukilacchio, Jack Sullivan, Alison Hammer Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Andrew MacNichol' Topics of Discussion: Chairman Nick Safina called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m. Public Hearing, Site Plan Review 95 Walkers Brook Drive, Perico Implants North Inc. Scott Cameron, Teale Bernstein, and Michael Radner were present on behalf of the Application. . Mr. Weston read the public hearing notice into the record. Mr. Scott Cameron, P.E. of Morin-Cameron Group, Inc. introduced Ms. Teale Bernstein and Michael Radner. He gave a brief overview of how the presentation would proceed: there will be an introduction of the company and then a review of the proposed plans. Ms. Teale Bernstein, Organizational Development Manager of Perico Implants North, provided•a history of the the company: the business provides periodontics and adult orthodontics. She said the intention is.to close the current practice in Wakefield and. move to Reading. Mr. Cameron explained that the Applicant is requesting Site.Plan, approval for improvements to the parking area. He informed the Commission;the interior renovation has been permitted and work has commenced. Mr. Cameron presented-the existing.conditions: • The town of Wakefield is to the east of the Site, and there is Town-owned land to the south; Page 1 • Access to the site is through an easement around the existing gas station business at 87 Walkers Brook Drive; • The pavement is in need of repair; • The existing building is 6,000 square feet; • 80% of the property is covered with asphalt and building; • There are no landscaped islands; • The existing business is an office use; • There are 70 parking spaces existing on site; • There are existing outdated light poles in the back corners of the site, which will be removed; • There are wetlands on all sides of the property, and the Applicant has filed with the Conservation Commission; • Utilities all come into the front of the building; and • Runoff flows inward towards the site and into the existing catch basins in the parking lot. Mr. Cameron then presented the proposed site improvements: • Approximately 8,700 square feet/25% of pavement will be removed; Proposed modifications will improve handicap access at the front, sides and rear; The parking and entrance will be at the rear of the building, but the building entrance will be enhanced so it feels like the front; • A side door,and sidewalk will be added to allow patient pickup after surgery and access for emergency personnel; • The proposed handicap parking spaces will meet requirements; • The grade will be flattened by 2% in some areas and landscape islands added; • Signage and pavement markings will help direct traffic into the site; • A 5'wide landscaped island will be added between the Shell station and Perico; • A chain link fence will be installed to help with plowing and drainage in the snow storage area; • The majority of the site is in the floodplain. Cut and fill will be balanced by matching grades throughout the site, which will result in more compensatory flood storage; . • A 6" deep snow storage area allows for snow melt into two sumps that will filter out sand and grit; 6"vertical granite curb is proposed in front of the building, and will transition into concrete to match the existing concrete; cape cod berm is proposed around the islands; • No curbing is proposed at the back edge of the parking lot, but the runoff flows into the site; and • The existing Town easement will remain accessible. Mr. Michael Radner from Radner Design Associates presented the landscape plan, which was just submitted today: • There are existing foundation plantings along the front with trees. One tree-came down during a recent storm; • A large flowering tree that is close to the building will be removed which will open up the front of the building, but a second flowering tree will remain; • The foundation plantings along the front of the building will be replaced, and there will be new plantings in the rear; • Landscape islands with shade trees, shrubs, and arborvitae will be added to provide screening to the gas station and to help with site facilitation; • Parking lot, bollards and building mounted lights will be added to the site; The existing light pole at the gas station provides light to the egress; and • The fixtures will be LED and dark sky compliant which is standard for site lighting. Mr. Cameron mentioned the following: • The lighting will be on a timer and will shut off when the business closes between 6-8 PM; The parking spaces will be reduced to which will meet zoning requirements; • The proposed use will generate a reduction in peak hour trips; Page 1 2 The lot coverage is decreasing significantly; • The sumps were measured and provide storm water management on the property; and • The site is really low and there is not much cover over the pipes; rather than bringing the whole site up they focused on reducing pavement and adding landscape. Assistant Planner Andrew MacNichol asked for clarification on the total number of parking spaces. Community Development Director Julie Mercier asked if the 44 parking spaces is a result of the changes that were submitted today. She informed the Commission that the Applicant revised the plans based on comments in the draft Decision. The Applicant will be presentin'g'the revised plans to the Conservation Commission. Mr. Cameron said that Engineering and Conservation requested parking spaces to be moved to allow for more green space at the site entrance. The spaces will be located near the Town's access to the sewer easement; the total parking spaces increased by one with this change. He added that the two light poles in the rear will be removed; one will be replaced with new fixtures. Mr. Radner said the photometric did not change, only the type of lightbulbs. Ms. Mercier, commented that Conservation has concerns with the light spillover into the habitat area. Mr. Cameron said the timer on the lights will help with this concern. Mr. Safina recommended shielding the fixtures. Mr. Radner said he will address the concern with'the Conservation Commission. Mr. Tuttle.said he thought the Shell Station is a 24-hour business, but after a brief discussion it was confirmed the owners of the gas station requested a modification to their license and it is no longer a 24-hour business. He added,that the site has interesting challenges because of the shared access and easements.'He asked,about the angled parking that may impede the drive aisle entrance. Ms. Bernstein explained that the drive aisle won't change and will go straight into the site. Mr. Safina commented that the existing traffic movement is a concern, but the proposal is an improvement. He expressed concern with the delivery trucks that could block the easement. Ms. Bernstein explained the parking and striping in the area. Mr. Weston commented that the Shell Station will have to manage their parking so the easement is not blocked. Mr. Safina asked if the turn radius still works for the Shell Station delivery trucks going around the back of the building. Mr. Weston said it may be an issue for Dunkin Donuts, and questioned if they will-now utilize through the Perico site access. Mr. Cameron said typically there is one 18-wheeler delivery per week and daily box truck deliveries. Mr. Safina expressed concern that delivery trucks will cut through and erode the landscaping" 'islands and pavement. Mr. Cameron pointed out that the 28'wide drive aisle is adequate- for dequatefor turning movements so damage to the islands is unlikely. Ms. Bernstein said her priority is patient safety and that she will discourage the trucks entering onto the property. Mr. Tuttle said his concern is that the back is now blocked off, and the vehicular access to the Shell Station will be compressed with this application. Mr. Cameron noted that the Shell Station has to manage vehicle turns on their own site. Mr. Weston commented that the gas station owners demonstrated.to the Town that they could do all their loading at the front of the property before they were.permitted. He reiterated that it is the gas station's issue to manage their deliveries and parking. Mr. Cameron said Perico is a low intensity use and is not expecting conflicts at peak use times for either business. Mr. Weston pointed out two areas where he recommends instructional or directional signage. One sign would be required at-the merge point near the exit where the island ends and another sign at the site exit to clearly direct patients,to enter around the Shell Station. Ms. Bernstein explained the company will address this concern a few ways: adding `enter ft left' on the site sign; a pictur6of the entrance on the referral pads; and info on the website. She added that subject to a sign permit application, Perico would like to add a dedicated sign at the actual entrance over the existing easement from 87 Walkers Brook Drive. Page 1 3 Mr. Safina noted that the Town Engineer did not address the capacity of the drainage system, asked if it is sufficient. Mr. Cameron responded that an Operation and Maintenance Plan will be provided, and that the Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission will address the drainage system. Mr. D'Arezzo asked how tall the current light poles are. Mr. Radner replied that he believes they are 20'-25'. Mr. D'Arezzo commented that a shorter light pole is preferred. Mr. Radner agreed but explained that to get the light to reach the perimeter and not spill-over they will need to be taller. He explained that the current light fixtures are not dark sky compliant, but the new ones will comply. Mr. Safina opened the meeting to public comment; there was none. Mr. Safina suggested reviewing the draft Decision. Ms. Mercier suggested that the Decision be drafted based on the plans received today, with any changes added as conditions. Mr. Cameron reviewed the proposed changes. Ms. Mercier asked if the relocated parking spaces will be dedicated as employee only. Mr. Cameron said the employee area will be striped with no signage. This will allow the Town to access to the sewer easement without disturbing the patient parking areas. Mr. Weston pointed out that the proposed site entrance sign in the easement over 87 Walkers Brook Drive could be considered an off-premise sign and might require that the owners of the Shell Station submit the sign permit application for Town approval. Ms. Bernstein opined that a sign would be a benefit for both businesses. She said a discussion was started with the Shell Station owners about this. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to close the public hearing for Perico Implants North, Inc. at 95 Walkers Brook Drive. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hitch and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Ms. Mercier said she will add specific information to the Decision on the signage and lighting as discussed. Mr. Tuttle asked if the Site Plan Decision should acknowledge impacts to the Shell Station circulation. Mr. Weston replied that the Shell Station does not have the right to utilize the 95 Walkers Brook Drive property. Mr. Tuttle asked about the existing easement that allowed the former Aristonics business to use the back of the Shell property. Ms. Bernstein replied that Perico has no need for the easement and it will be abandoned. She said removing the easement will improve the vehicle flow for the customers at the Shell Station. Mr. Weston recommended adding a statement that the easement will no longer be utilized. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the Site Plan Review for Perico Implants North, Inc. at 95 Walkers Brook Drive as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Mr. Safina announced that the 40R Design Guidelines discussion might not happen tonight due to the full agenda. Ms. Mercier said the discussion will be on the May 9, 2018 agenda under"Other Topics". Concept Plan Review, 2-Lot Subdivision 40 Grove Street, David Orvosh Josh Latham, Jack Sullivan, and David-Orvosh were present on behalf of the Application. Attorney Josh Latham introduced property owner David Orvosh and Project Engineer Jack Sullivan. Mr. Latham said the Applicant requested time with the Commission to informally discuss a concept plan that proves compliance with the Subdivision Regulations to yield a 2- lot subdivision and another concept plan, with waivers, which results in a lower impact 2-lot development. He then gave a brief description and history of the site: Page 14 • The property is approximately 57,700 square feet area, and is located in the 5-15, and Aquifer Protection Overlay districts; and • The existing dwelling on the Historic Inventory and according to Town maps was built in approximately 1850. Mr. Latham explained.that the proposal is to build a 2-lot subdivision on the property and the intent is to maintain the existing historical structure as part of the process. The first , plan shows that all subdivision regulations can be met, however the Applicant does not feel that the regulations are appropriate for just two lots and would prefer to go forward with a lower impact design. He said the Town's Subdivision Regulations were crafted for more traditional subdivisions and that the Town does not have provisions for a shared driveway or a mechanism for a low-impact development, so waivers will be required. Mr. Latham discussed a second plan: • Showing a 40' right-of-way with a 14' travelled way/common driveway Mr. Latham explained the many benefits of this design: • Much less land will be disturbed; • Much less impervious area; • The existing dwelling will be maintained; and • The 50" Beech tree will be preserved He added that the Applicant met with Ryan Percival,.Town Engineer, and Ms. Mercier for an initial meeting, and then attended a DRT which led to the revised plans. The feedback received from staff was positive. Mr. Latham reiterated that the meeting tonight is to receive feedback on the proposed Concept Plan from the Commission before going forward with fully engineered subdivision plans. Mr. Jack Sullivan of Sullivan Engineering noted that one critical aspect of this design is feedback from the Fire Department. At the DRT,.the Fire Department requested that the new dwelling be sprinklered and that a 14'wide paved access road be provided. The access should be widened at the dwelling. Mr. Sullivan noted other Towns that allow similar alternatives to standard subdivisions. He listed some benefits of the project: • The Historic home will be maintained; • More trees will be preserved; • The impervious pavement will be reduced in the AQP District; and . • The existing non-conforming home will become conforming r Mr. Sullivan said he will provide a count of mature trees that will be preserved with the low impact design compared to the trees that would have to be removed if a full subdivision is required. Mr. Safina asked if there would be any benefit to providing a "T"turn-around for Fire so they do not have to back out onto Grove Street. Mr. Sullivan replied that he could provide a "Y" or"T"turn-around, but the Fire Department did not require it. Mr. Weston commented that the driveway is 300' long so it may be good to have a turn-around for emergency and commercial trucks that may have to access the dwelling. Mr. Safina asked if Town staff had any issues with the waivers.Ms. Mercier said she did not believe so, but that she has not seen the full list. Mr. Latham opined he did not think there would be any issues. Mr. Tuttle said the plan shows a 14' curb cut on Grove Street, and asked if it should be wider. Mr. Sullivan agreed to widen the curb cut to 20'-22' to allow for two-way traffic, then to narrow it down. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if parking will be prohibited on the sides of the driveway. He questioned where people will park if there is a party. Mr. Latham said that there could be an agreement Page 1 5 between the owners to limit parking. Mr. Sullivan said a 2' gravel shoulder can be added to allow vehicles to pass or park on the edge if necessary without increasing impervious area. Mr. D'Arezzo commented that the existing garage is being demolished, and asked where a new garage could be built. Mr. Sullivan replied that a garage would have to meet zoning requirements. Mr. Safina said the Commission should not speculate whether the owner will want a garage in the future. Mr. Safina opined that he has no objection to the low impact design; the concept plan is a positive all around. Mr. Latham noted that the development is not setting a precedent because the Applicant can show conformity with the Subdivision Regulations as part of the process. Mr. D'Arezzo asked the Commission if they would oppose a certain driveway length. Ms. Mercier replied there are driveway regulations but she is not aware of a maximum length. Mr. Safina said an owner has the right to access their property. Mr. Sullivan said that there is no a maximum length. Mr. Safina commented that a benefit to this development is that specimen trees will be preserved. Ms. Virginia Adams, a member of the Reading Historical Commission, said that the RHC is pleased with and supportive of the proposed development. Mr. Safina agreed the proposed plan does not impose on the historic structure, and allows the existing home to stand by itself. Maior Modification to an Approved Site Plan 306 Main Street, Tower Home Loans Alison Hammer, Jean Machado, Jack Sullivan, Bernardo Jose, and Victor Andrade were present on behalf of the Application. Ms. Mercier said a courtesy notice was sent to the abutters, but it was not required. Ms. Alison Hammer of Hammer Design and Development LLC introduced the team: owner of Tower Home Loans Jean Machado; Project Engineer Jack Sullivan; Architectural Designer Bernardo Jose; and contractor Victor Andrade. Ms. Hammer provided a history of the permit that was issued by the Commission for Pizza World; and said the Applicant is requesting a change of use from restaurant to office. To accommodate the new business there are minor changes to the structure and site. Mr. Jack Sullivan of Sullivan Engineering presented the site plan changes: • The previous approval for Pizza World was for a 40' x 55' building, this application is for the same building and location; • The site circulation and number of parking spaces is still the same. There will be sixteen (16) conventional and one (1) handicap parking space. He pointed out a typo on the plan; • The dumpster location is the same; • The HVAC units are now proposed on the roof with screening and bollards will not be required; • The proposed concrete walkway in the rear will not impact the travel way; • The outdoor seating and patio will be eliminated, but instead a pedestrian walkway for access from the sidewalk to the building will be provided; • A dedicated water service and a fire suppression system are proposed; • MassDOT permits obtained for Pizza World curb cuts ran with the owner and have expired. The Applicant will reapply to MassDOT but doesn't envision a problem; • The traffic signage was previously approved by MassDot; and • The Applicant will be before the Conservation Commission on April 11, 2018. Mr. Bernardo Jose, Architectural Designer, presented the changes to the architecture: Page 1 6 f • The same footprint and same foundation are proposed, but the building layout will change; • The proposed use will have less of.a traffic impact than the previous business; • The parking spaces will remain the same.; • The HVAC units will be on the roof and will be screened; • . The bar shown on the 1St floor plan is an employee refreshment area; • The Applicant is proposing a free-standing sign and a wall sign. The wall sign is dedicated to the main use of the building. The Applicant would like to keep the option to lease the second floor and have a free-standing sign. Ms. Mercier said the Applicant will be allowed one sign if the building is a single-tenant building and will need to apply to.the Zoning Board of Appeals for a Variance for additional signs. Mr. Safina agreed if the building is constructed as a single-tenant building they will need to apply to the ZBA for a Variance. They cannot decide after-the-fact they would like a multi-tenant building. Mr. D'Arezzo said a second tenant may require a separate entrance. Ms. Hammer said the building was designed in case the owner wanted to lease the second floor. There are entrances at either end of the building. Mr. Jose showed potential entrances and exits. Mr. Jose said the plans today reflect a single-tenant building. Mr. Safina expressed concerns that the Applicant would seek-a Variance for conditions they created themselves. Mr. Tuttle agreed that the building should be designed as multi-tenant. Mr. Jose confirmed the building will be built as multi-tenant. Ms. Mercier said the Building Inspector will require the building meet Building Code for a multi-tenant space. Ms. Mercier noted that the second tenant might require approval from the Commission if additional parking spaces are required. Mr. Machado explained that the mortgage business is uncertain; it might not continue to grow. If it does continue to grow, the building will stay as single-tenant but he agreed to proceed as a multi-tenant building. Mr. Safina said if a sign is required for a second tenant, then a sign application will be required and nota Variance. Ms. Mercier commented that there are no guarantees a Variance will be granted. Mr. Jose said the business will not require a loading space. Ms. Mercier said the loading space requirement was waived for Pizza World. Mr. Jose said the business will be open 9AM -5PM; there will be only safety lights at night. Mr. Jose confirmed that the building height is the same as approved for Pizza World. -Mr. Safina commented that he did not,like the proposed dormer on the front, and noted that the center window is offset. He recommended removing the dormer if it is not needed. Ms. Hammer said the purpose of the dormer is to allow for paperwork storage. She said the dormer increases utility of the area, but is not habitable space under the Building Code. Mr. - Safina said the plan shows a kitchenette in that area. Ms. Hammer replied it is a utility sink. Mr. Safina commented there is a coffee maker on the plan. Ms. Hammer said the employees will.use the area to eat.- Mr. Machado said his business is required to.keep paperwork for five years and there will be file cabinets stored up there. Mr. Safina asked if the insurance company requires the paperwork to be kept.off,-site. He questioned if the storage area is calculated in the parking. Mr. Jose said 30.0 square feet was added in the attic. Mr: Safina disagreed with the square footage. Ms. Hammer estimated the space to be 1000 square feet. Ms. Mercier questioned if a kitchenette can technically be called non-habitable space. Ms. Hammer explained the State Building Code states building height under 7' is considered non-habitable space. Mr. Safina.questioned whether the third floor requires a means of egress. Mr. Jose said,the building is going to be sprinklered so the egress will not be required. Mr. Safina said that required egress and sprinklering are separate issues. Ms. Hammer said the Applicant will do what is required to meet Building Code. Mr: Safina said the Applicant needs to research the State Building Code to make sure this area complies, and the dormer needs to be revised. Ms. Hammer asked for clarification on the dormer. Page 17 Mr..Safina replied that he does not like the shed dormer appearance; and requested the sign to be integrated into the fagade better. The Assistant Town Manger Jean Delios said there appears to be an extreme amount of pole lights-for site primarily used in the day. Mr. Sullivan replied it is just a rendering, and the lighting is not on the site plan. Ms. Delios asked for the proposed number of light poles. Mr. Jose replied there are twelve (12) LED light poles that are 12'tall but will shut off at night. Ms. Mercier and Ms. Delios expressed concern with that amount of light poles. Mr. Safina said the unshielded light poles will create light spillover. Ms. Delios said the previous lighting.plan showed gooseneck lighting.. Mr. Sullivan agreed to look at the lighting and reduce the amount. Ms. Delios said there is a residential neighborhood behind the site. Mr. Weston opined that the proposed building has no architectural details at all and appears to be a big, flat facade. He suggested adding awnings.to break up the fagade. Mr. Safina recommended vertical trim to break up the fagade and agreed with the suggestion to add awnings. Mr. Weston commented that on South MainStreet the front of the building should not look like the back. Mr. Jose said he agreed and will update the plans. Mr. Sullivan asked if awnings are exempt from the setback requirement. Ms. Mercier confirmed that they are and added the Town allows awnings to overhang sidewalks. Mr. Tuttle asked about the proposed tandem parking in back of the building. Mr. Sullivan replied that Pizza World also had tandem parking which will be labeled for employee parking. Mr. Safina said he appreciates the Applicant wanting to develop the site and the Commission will help them get through the process. Mr. Machado asked if the Commission could make recommendations that can be incorporated in the plans and.approved administratively, so as to not require another meeting. Mr. Safina said there are issues with the third floor and the fagade. Mr. Sullivan said the Applicant is meeting with_the.Conservation Commission on Wednesday and it would be helpful to continue this meeting in case the Conservation Commission requests changes. He said he has not submitted any materials to MassDOT, but it is just a process since the State has already approved the same permits for the site. Ms. Hammer noted that the Site Plan Approval expires in May. Ms. Mercier said an extension was already granted and the bylaw does not have a provision to extend a second time.• She said the Applicant can start site work to exercise the permitIfthe Conservation Commission agrees. Mr. Sullivan said there is an active Order of Conditions, and agreed the site work can commence. Mr. Weston made a motion to continue the Major Modification to an Approve Site Plan for 306 Main Street to May 7, 2018 time to be determined.. The motion was seconded by Mr. Tuttle and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Planning Updates and Other Updates Charles Street Pump Station Design Ms: Mercier presented the Charles'Street pump station design proposed by the Engineering Division and designed by CDM Smith. She said the design does not trigger a Site Plan Review, but if the Commission has any.concerns she will forward them to Town Engineer Ryan Percival. Mr. Safina said the pump station is one of the critical pump stations in Town. Ms. Mercier said the Town decided not to have a building that enclosed the pump station at this location but are proposing a fence instead. Ms. Mercier commented the proposed fence is similar to the existing fence on the property. Mr. Safina asked about the trees that were recently planted that could be impacted by this design. Mr. D'Arezzo asked the height of the door. Mr. MacNichol replied the door is 4' high with a 7' high stockade fence. Mr. Safina asked if it is a diesel or gas generator. Mr. D'Arezzo asked about the pavement. Ms. Mercier replied that 200' of pavement is proposed. Ms. Hitch said the triangle itself could use an update. Page 1 8 Mr. Weston asked why the existing second cut-through is necessary. Mr. D'Arezzo said it could be utilized to park the maintenance vehicles. Mr. Safina said there should be a place for a vehicle to park that is not grass..After discussion, the Commission agreed they had no major concerns with the proposed.design. Ms. Mercier agreed to ask the Town Engineer about the few items pointed out. Discussion.of Town Meeting Presentation Ms. Mercier said she has not had a chance to create the Town Meeting PowerPoint Presentation yet, but that.Mr. D'Arezzo had drafted a Translation Guide providing the current and, proposed Zoning Bylaw. She said she will work onthe presentation with Mr. D'Arezzo and forward to the Commission for approval. Mr. D'Arezzo explained how he set up the Translation Guide. Mr. Safina said he.scrolled through and it.read correctly, but he did not review if the information is correct. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if an Applicants shadow study is incorrect, what recourse the Town will have. Mr. Safina said the software is not wrong unless the data is wrong. If the Commission asks for the studies they should be reviewed thoroughly. He said the Commission can request the study be"stamped and sealed". Ms. Mercier said this Town Meeting cannot address any clean up items pointed out by Mr. D'Arezzo. Mr. Safina recommended the cells to be highlighted to make it transparent to the Town.Meeting members. Ms. Mercier suggested a bold & cross-out version. She said she was not going to use the Translation Guide in the PowerPoint Presentation, just as a handout. Mr. Safina asked if the Translation Guide can be distributed before Town Meeting. Ms. Delios recommended the Town Clerk email the Town Meeting_ members in advance and to have the handout available at the first night of Town Meeting. Ms. Hitch said the Translation Guide is.clear. Ms. Mercier said she has concerns about the Table. Ms. Delios suggested having the Table as a separate'sheet with bold &cross-out. Ms.-Hitch recommended pointing out'the three major changes: detail to setbacks; footnotes in Table; and transition areas (adjacencies). Mr. Weston commented the last Town Meeting PowerPoint Presentation approach worked well. The Commission thanked Mr. D'Arezzo for his time creating the Translation Guide. Discussion of 40R Desian Guidelines The 40R Design Guidelines discussion was tabled to the next meeting due to the full agenda. CPDC Minutes 2/26/18 Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the February 26, 2018 minutes. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hitch and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. CPDC Minutes 3/12/18 Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the.March 12, 2018 minutes. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hitch and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. CPDC Minutes 3/26/18 The March 26, 2018 minutes were not ready for approval. Ms. Mercier said she.will soon be submitting the Housing Choice Designation application to the State, which gives the Town priority standing for capital grants. Mr. D'Arezzo said the 40B at Lakeview/Eaton meeting is scheduled for May 2, 2018. Ms. Mercier_commented it will be at the Town library. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9;57 PM. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hitch and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Page 9 o Documents reviewed at the meetin4: CPDC Agenda 2/26/18 Design Guidelines - Initial Thoughts 364 Lowell Street Mylars & Form H Johnson Woods - Continuance Request for White Oaks Lane Foundation discussion 59High Street- Sign Permit Application a) Sign Permit Application b) Photos & Elevations c) Layout d). Draft Certificate of Appropriateness - 2/26/18 364 Lowell Street -Modification to an Approved Definitive Subdivision Plan a) Courtesy Meeting Notice b) Form B - Modification c) Memo from Project Attorney d) Memo from Project Engineer e) Revised Plans - Sheets 1-5 / Sheets 6-11 f) Memo from Town Engineer - 12/20/17 g) Draft Decision - 2/26/18 Johnson Woods - Minor Amendment, PUD Special Permit a) Draft Decision - Parking - 2/26/18 b) Draft Decision - Foundation - 2/26/18 c) Resident Feedback d) New Information - Packet of landscape documents for next meeting 50 Haven Street - Modification to 40R Plan Approval a) Narrative / Letter of Request b) Owner Authorization c) Floor Layout d) Draft Decision - 2/26/18 Page i 10