HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-03-07 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes o�N OFI?
;. , hyc' Town of Reading
Meeting Minutes tr 0` °��; '�'
9%1NCOR40.
Board - Committee - Commission - Council: 2018 AP`R 19 AM 9: 34
Zoning Board of Appeals
Date: 2018-03-07 Time: 7:00 PM
.Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room
Address: 16 Lowell Street
Purpose: Public Hearing Session:
Attendees: Members - Present:
David Traniello, Chairman
John Jarema
Robert Redfern
Cy Caouette
Nick Pernice
Members - Not Present:
Erik Hagstrom
Others Present:
Jean Delios - Assistant Town Manager, Julie Mercier - Community
Development Director, Chris Heep - Town Counsel, Andrew MacNichol -
Planning Assistant, Kristen Grover - Administrative Specialist
Jana Gabano, Chris Helsel, Matt Holmen, Chris Corkum, Boriana Milenova,
Brad Rhodes, Richard Keatle, Stephen Croor, Dave and Cheryl Cannon,
Diana LaVancher, Jeanne Snodgrass, Edward Chisolm, Norma Chisolm, Jim
and Candade Quigley, Jeff Brenner, Melissa Brenner, Joe Fodero, Guy
Fodero, Paula and Larry Rocklaw, Nick Marrangen, Elizabeth Cunniff, Anna
Bruce; John Green, Gina Green, Penny Lashuk, Paula Pelusi, Gail Toomajian,
Ken Toomajian, Steve and Jan Kowanis, Stephen MacNeil, Joshua Dulong,
Gina Dulong, Gretchen Dulong, Barbara and Ben Parish, Peter Dulong,
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Kristen Grover
Topics of Discussion:
Chairman Traniello called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM
Case# 18-02—32 Whitehall
The Zoning Board of Appeals held a continuance of a Public Hearing in the Selectmen's Meeting Room at Town Hall, 16
Lowell Street,Reading,Massachusetts on Wednesday March 7,2018 at 7:00 PM on the application of Attorney Joshua
Latham on behalf of Vincent and Kimberly Shanley,pursuant to M.G.L.Ch.40A§9 for a Special Permit under Reading
Zoning Bylaw Sections 5.3.2 and 5.4.7 to construct an addition to the existing single family dwelling and to create an
attached accessory apartment on the property located at 32 Whitehall Lane in Reading,Massachusetts.
Mr.Traniello read the case. Mr. Latham requested a further continuance to the April 4,2018 hearing for time to
reconcile the drawings.
Page 1 1
On a motion made by Mr.Jarema,seconded by Mr. Redfern, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to
grant a continuance to April 4, 2018 for Case#18-02.
Vote was 5-0-0(Traniello,Jarema, Redfern, Caouette, Pernice).
Mr. Traniello then turned the meeting over to Mr. Jarema after recusing himself from the next case.
Case#18-01—Eaton Lakeview
The Zoning Board of Appeals will hold a Public Hearing in the Selectmen's Room at Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street in
Reading,Massachusetts on Wednesday,March 7,2018 at 7:00 PM
on the petition of Eaton Lakeview Development,LLC,who seeks a Comprehensive Permit to develop 120 units of rental
housing on 4.33 acres of land that is partially in a residential zone and partially in an industrial zone under Massachusetts
General Laws Chapter 40B Sections 20-23,with waivers from zoning requirements,on the property comprising six tax
parcels known as:0 Lakeview Avenue(Map 17,Lot 131),0 Lakeview Avenue(Map 18,Lot 2),23-25 Lakeview
Avenue(Map 18,Lot 1),O'Eaton Street(Map 17,Lot 274),0 Eaton Street(Map 1.7,Lot 275),and 128 Eaton Street
(Map 17,Lot 276)in Reading,Massachusetts.
Ted Regnante-Attorney,Jesse Shomer—Project Attorney, Chris Sparages—Engineer, David Debenedetto—
Architect, Kim Hazavartian—Traffic Engineer, Ed Marchant—Chapter 40B Advisor,were present on behalf of the
Application.
Mr. Jarema opened the hearing by explaining the process for 40A and 40B hearings. Mr. Jarema read the case into
the record. He then informed the public that the room was at capacity and those standing outside the Selectmen's
room that couldn't fit in the room were welcome to sit in the room next door and watch the meeting from there.
Mr.Jarema advised the audience that the meeting will follow procedure and remain orderly. He informed everyone
that they will have the opportunity to speak, need to raise their hand and give their name and address, and wait to be
called on. He asked that to minimize redundancy for those that speak to be clear and succinct. He also informed
everyone that it will take more than one or two meetings to hear everyone. Members of the Board were introduced.
He then invited Chris Heep—Town Counsel to speak.
Mr. Heep explained the 40B process and reviewed the timetable with the Board and the Public.
He further explained that 40B at its most general state is a law that governs a certain type of development,for which.
25% of units are designated for affordable housing. He also stated that the one Comprehensive Permit covers all
local Boards and permits with the exception of permits pursuant to State Regulations, such as the Wetlands Act. He
noted that Chapter 40B is a State program not a local one. He advised that the ZBA is able to assume authority for
Town matters. The rules and regulations including those pertaining to normal density, height, setback, etc. can be
waived by the ZBA.
He explained how the process normally works, in particular that although the first step begins with the ZBA, it is not
the first step for the Applicant. He informed the audience that the Applicant must first get a letter of'project eligibility
from MA Housing which clears the way for the Applicant to apply to the ZBA; once the ZBA application is filed
timelines are immediately triggered. He then explained the timeline process.
He also explained that the Applicant agreed to extend thel80 day timeline to February 2019;that this is the beginning
of a very long hearing process, but with more time than typically available. He then talked about safe harbors that
exist to permanently or temporarily insulate a town from a Comprehensive Permit wherein if the town reaches 10%of
affordable housing, or produces enough housing in a given year,the ZBA can safely deny a 40B Application.
Mr. Heep stated that if the Board believes they have the right to invoke Safe Harbor they must notify the Applicant
and DHCD within 15 days of opening the hearing and that the Town finds itself in that position tonight. He explained
that the Town is in compliance with its Housing Production Plan. He also explained that the Board does not have to
deny the Application but does have to notify the Applicant in writing that it believes it has the right to deny the
Application under Safe Harbor.
He then discussed how the 40B process governs these applications and the main legal question is whether a denial
would be consistent with local needs. He mentioned there needs to be a balance between a need for affordable
housing and local concerns. He also explained that an Applicant can appeal to the Housing Appeals Committee
(HAC) and that the HAC focuses heavily on the need for affordable housing,which most often outweighs local
concern. He stated that the HAC typically leans in favor of the need for affordable housing.
Mr. Heep explained that the Board will be asked to rule on waivers on issues such as the number of units, maximum
height, etc;they will solicit comments from all other Boards, Commissions, and Staff, and all comments will be
entered into the record. He then explained the timeframe of the Decision and Appeal process,and what is meant if
the Applicant claims that the conditions render the project uneconomic. He further explained that abutters have a
right to appeal also, but not to the Housing Appeals Committee.
Page 1 2
Mr. Jarema asked the Board if they had any questions pertaining to Mr. Heep's presentation.
Mr., Jarema then asked Julie Mercier, Community Development Director and Jean Delios,Assistant Town Manager
where the Town stands as far as affordable housing units. Ms. Mercier explained that the Town is within Safe Harbor
and by being proactive can be ahead of the game for 2019.
Mr.Jarema then addressed the Applicant and Abutters and asked them to each hold their presentations to 45
minutes; he invited Mr. Regnante to begin his presentation on behalf of the Applicant.
Mr. Regnante—Attorney with Regnante, Sterio and Osborne LLP discussed his concentration in 40B projects and
familiarity with the DHCD&State regulatory process. He introduced the development team and mentioned they are
a limited dividend organization. He stated he agrees with Town Counsel's analysis of the 40B process and
acknowledges the Town has reached Safe Harbor and is able to invoke that right. He mentioned they have agreed in
writing to extend the time for the ZBA to utilize and invoke Safe Harbor to February 2019. He further stated that they
want to work with the Town and the Public to create a 40B that makes sense for the Town and the Neighborhood.
Mr. Regnante then discussed the proposed project, stating the site is 4.33 acres and one building is proposed for lot
A, and two buildings for lot B;there will be a total of 120 units, 40 in each building, and 1.5 parking spaces per unit He
also discussed the improvements to Lakeview Ave for emergency access;it will be at the developer's expense to
bring Lakeview Ave up to Town standards so it may be adopted as a public way. He described the project amenities
and that they will gladly work with Conservation to create a park and adhere to the Wetlands Protection Act. He
discussed how the existing utilities appear to be adequate and that they have seen the summary of comments and
concerns from abutters.
Mr. Regnante stated that they want to make a commitment to the Board and neighbors that they want this project to
work,they want make adjustments to the project while keeping it economic. He suggested holding workshops with
staff from different departments,Town Counsel, and neighbors, and is hoping.they can all sit at a table and work
through the issues. He then turned the presentation over to Chris Sparages, Engineer.
Mr. Sparages—Project Engineer of Williams and Sparages, began by informing the audience that he has been
working on this project for more than a year and a half. He presented an overview of the project. He discussed the
100-year storm event and identified the site in relation to FEMA flood insurance maps. He discussed how the road
will be ground up and rebuilt with curbing, and reiterated that they will ask the Town to accept it as a public way after
improvements are made. He informed the audience that the original plan called for 160 units and after talking with
staff and public safety officials, and going through a number of revisions he believes the plan has been drilled down
to something that really works and fits with the neighborhood. Mr. Sparages discussed test holes, quality of soil,the
high water table, storm water and elevation of buildings for flooding, as well as soil surveys, utilities,town water
distribution and hydrant flow testing. He further discussed how the storm water management system meets DEP
standards and the lighting and landscape plan. He mentioned that the plan eliminates plantings to allow for snow
storage on part of the site. He then turned the presentation over to David Debenedetto-Architect.
Mr. Debenedetto—of Curtis DiBenedetto&Associates, Inc discussed the project, described the exterior,explaining
the colors and materials proposed and noted that the buildings won't have flat fagades. He explained that changes
were made to soften the mass of the structure and break up the height of the building,the pitch of the roof helps
screen the rooftop mechanical units. He then turned the presentation over to Kim Hazavartain—Traffic Engineer.
Kim Hazavartian of TEPP LLC introduced himself and gave his credentials as a Traffic Engineer. He discussed the
traffic and impact study, explaining it the standard used to generate such studies. He discussed the growth rate,
number of cars, speed of cars,AM and PM peak hours, Saturday traffic and crash history, as well as calculations for
anticipated traffic volume changes compared to a no build scenario. He summarized that the overall impact is not
anticipated to be significant, and that much of the current industrial traffic will go away once the site becomes
residential.
Mr. Ed Marchant of EHM—40B Consultant stated he had nothing to add.
Mr. Jarema asked the Board for comments or questions for the Applicant.
Mr. Redfern said one thing that strikes him is the height and density of the building. He added that he was looking for
the green space and thinks the residents will need more amenities like walking paths, picnic areas, etc, and he feels
the way to accomplish that.might be to reduce the density of the project. He mentioned he did not like the
appearance or the size of the buildings. He further stated that modernizing the traffic signals may be beneficial. He
noted that provisions for package deliveries should be taken into consideration and that the Town Engineer and Fire
Chief should comment on wastewater and building access. He inquired about the advantages and disadvantages of
the Safe Harbor. `
Mr. Pernice said he would like to save most of his questions and comments for later but stated that given it was an
industrial site,were there any questions regarding the subsurface conditions or was anything revealed that should be
Page 1 3
submitted to the Board. He mentioned the proximity to the flood plain, anticipated flooding in the underground parking
areas, and the parking ratio,and asked if the parking was going to be assigned.
Mr. Caouette expressed that tonight's meeting is essentially a kick off meeting where the.Board and Public are able
to hear and digest the proposal. He mentioned he feels this development has potential to be a really nice
development and improvement to the area. He mentioned the roads and intersections are a disaster and need more
thought for improvement and he wants Conservation and Environmental laws to be well addressed. He stated he
felt the size of the development comes across as big like that of Reading Village. He mentioned he is not sure how
.many units will make this economic, but a three story building in this area would appear pristine. He noted the
neighbors response was well done and he has no qualms that the issues raised will be addressed, adding that he is
looking forward to working with the Applicant and neighbors:
Mr.Jarema mentioned there was a lot of information in the Project Eligibility Letter from Mass Housing, and issues
that the DHC felt needed to be addressed. He stated that staff input is still needed. Staff pointed out that notes from
the Development Review Team meetings were in the letter from Mass Housing, on the website and in the Application
package from the Applicant. The Board has had staff input since January. He also mentioned that in moving
forward,there needs to be five Board members present, explained the Mullen Rule for absenteeism, and explained
that Mr.Traniello recused himself from the meeting.
Mr.Jarema then read a letter submitted by the Mr. Regnante regarding the Safe Harbor into the record.
Mr.Jarema then notified the audience that the weather conditions were rapidly getting worse and asked Mr. Heep to
,explain the letter in plain English so everyone could understand.
Mr. Heep explained that under state regulations the Board has the ability to deny or impose conditions on the project
and that there is a Safe Harbor in effect because the Town recently produced enough affordable units in one calendar
year per the Housing Production Plan. He explained that in order to use the Safe Harbor there must be a vote to
provide notice to the Applicant; it can later be used for a basis for denial or conditional approval. The Board should
vote on this tonight.
Mr. Jarema asked Jean Delios to comment before coming back to the Board for a vote.
Ms. Delios stated that she wanted to preface her comment by alerting the room that she was made aware by two
other Boards that are having meetings tonight that the weather conditions are becoming treacherous. She then
stated that on a more positive note,we are planners, and proactively plan for things like affordable housing. She
informed everyone that the goal is to do what is right for the Town of Reading and also satisfy the mandate by the
State. She gave credit to Staff who works not only on the planning but who also follow up on the myriad of
regulations. She explained that by having a Housing Plan and producing the units,the State essentially deemed
Reading as one of a handful of communities that qualify for a two year Safe Harbor period, and as such there is more
time to collaborate with the developer and make this project the best for Reading.
Mr. Redfern made a motion that the ZBA instruct Town Counsel to prepare and submit a written notice pursuant to
760 CMR 56.05(3)and CMR 56.03(8)(a)to the Applicant and DHCD,which will effectively invoke the Town of
Reading's Safe Harbor under 760 CMR 56.03(1). The motion was seconded by Mr. Caouette.4-0-0
Mr. Redfern asked whether the plan for the meeting on March 21,2018 would be to start with the residents'
presentation. The Board agreed. Ms. Mercier mentioned the meeting will be scheduled to continue to the
Selectmen's Meeting Room but that staff would try to find a better location to accommodate the neighborhood. She
said she would notify the neighbors and to check the website for updates.
On a motion made by Mr. Redfern,seconded by Mr. Caouette, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to
continue the meeting to.March 21, 2018 at 7pm in the Selectmen's Meeting Room.
Vote was 4-0-0(Jarema, Redfern, Caouette, Pernice).
Adiournment
On a motion made by Mr.Redfern,seconded by Mr. Caouette, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to
adjourn the meeting at 9:14p.m.
Vote was 4-0-0(Jarema, Redfern, Caouette,Pernice).
Page 1 4