Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-02-12 Community Planning and Development Commission Minutes N�Fq � Town of Reading Meeting Minutes. W, { co • i v i...'8 d� Board - Committee - Commission-- Council: Community Planning and Development Commission MAR AM 1/: • 28 Date: 2018-02-12 Time: 7:30 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Open Session Purpose: General Business Version: Attendees: Members - Present: Chair Nick Safina, John Weston, Dave Tuttle, Karen Goncalves-Dolan Tony D'Arezzo, Associate Members - Not Present: Rachel Hitch Others Present: Assistant Town Manager Jean Delios, Community Development Director Julie Mercier, Planning Assistant Andrew MacNichol, David Cannon, Brad Latham, William Bergeron, Bob Del Savio, Leonard & Lynn Polonski, Walter.Michard, Will Finch; Laura Neumeyer, Mary & Herbert Gravlin, Ann Gray, Sara Dembroski, Hany Hanna, Jill Mayberry, Michele Urann, Susan True Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Topics of Discussion: Chairman Nick Safina called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. Continued Public Hearing, Zoning Bylaw Amendments for Awil 2018 Town Meeting Section 6.0: Intensity Regulations Mr. Safina asked if Town Counsel recommended any substantial changes after reviewing the proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments. Community Development Director Julie Mercier went over some of Town Counsel's suggested changes with the Commission. The Commission had a lengthy discussion regarding the requirements for front and side yard setbacks on a corner lot. They also discussed requiring,.shadow studies during Site Plan Review, and how to handle calculating average setback when the adjacent lot is vacant. Ms. Mercier suggested that the regulation should defer to the rule not the.exception. Mr. Safina suggested that a graphic would help explain the step back to height ratio line. Mr. Safina opened the hearing to public comment. There was none. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to close the public hearing for the proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments for April 2018 Town Meeting. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Page i 1 Mr. Tuttle made a motion to recommend the,proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments for the April 2018 Town Meeting Warrant as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Continued Public Hearing, 40R Plan Review 467 Main Street (former Sunoco station), Boghos Properties LLC Ray Boghos, Brian McGrail and Rob Del Savio were present on behalf of the Application. Attorney Brian McGrail summarized the status of the Application. At the meeting in January the Commission requested time to review last minute changes that were made to the plans. No additional changes have been made since that meeting. The Applicant has reviewed the draft Decision and forwarded comments to Community Development Director, Ms. Mercier. Ms. Mercier noted that she incorporated some of the suggested changes, but that some she left for discussion by the Commission. Mr. Rob Del Savio of EMBARC Studio informed the Commission of minor.changes to the facades, including modifications to the brick piers, articulation of the cornice lines, and continuity of the building materials and details from the front to the sides and rear of the building. Mr. Del Savio noted that the masonry details for the ground floor retail level are still being worked out. Mr. Safina asked if the garage entrance was widened as previously discussed with the Commission. Mr. Del Savio replied that the entrance was reviewed, but the transformer and column locations prohibit the garage entrance from being any wider. Ms. Mercier asked if the Applicant has received approval from RMLD for the transformer location. Mr. Boghos replied that the plan was submitted to RMLD in November and that no objections have been raised, but that he will follow up with RMLD. Assistant Town Manager Jean Delios said RMLD typically requires bollards to protect the transformer. Ms. Delios asked about lighting on the Main Street fagade. Mr. Del Savio stated that light will shine through the commercial glass windows, and that there will be downlights along the fagade. Mr. Boghos added that the residential balconies on upper floors will have their own personal lighting. Ms. Delios questioned if the proposed lighting would be enough for the commercial businesses, and she asked whether goosenecks would be installed above the signboards. Mr. Del Savio replied that the purpose of the lighting is to provide ambient light for the sidewalks, and he opined that goosenecks can be problematic because they create hot spots. Mr. Safina commented that there are street lights. Mr. Del Savio said that all lighting will be dark sky friendly and will be pointed down. Mr. Safina said that the lighting can go up and down the fagade but not out. Ms. Delios asked about the location of the signboard. Mr. Del Savio replied that the Applicant will work with the retail businesses, but that it will tentatively be installed on the awnings, which will be fabric. Mr. Safina commented that the Commission is not approving the signage tonight, and that a Master Signage Plan will be required for the building. Mr. Safina commented that the memo from the Town Engineer was brief. Ms. Mercier noted that the Applicant is still working on outstanding items for Engineering which are specified in the Draft Decision. She said that the outstanding items will need to be addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit. Mr. Tuttle complimented the proposed project. Mr. D'Arezzo asked for clarification on the PTT-TF memo received regarding a right-turn only off of Green Street onto Main Street. Ms. Mercier replied that the memo is for a future discussion of the Board of Selectmen. She noted that the police believe this change will improve the intersection, which is already problematic. Mr. Weston cautioned that having the sign effective 100% of the time will just create a traffic problem somewhere else. Ms. Mercier noted that the proposed on-street parking, and to some extent the proposed outdoor dining, will impede the sight lines for vehicles turning left onto Main Street. The Page 1 2 Commission discussed the potential impact of the proposed right-hand turn onto Main Street. Ms. Mercier clarified that it has not yet been approved. Mr. D'Arezzo asked about the width of Green Street. Mr. Tuttle replied the road width is 24- feet. Mr. Weston said when Chute Street was changed to a one-way it created bigger traffic issues on Middlesex, Linden and.Lowell streets. Ms. Mercier said that restricting the traffic flow off from Green Street onto Main Street may cause drivers to take alternate routes with signalized intersections. Ms. Goncalves-Dolan asked if the garage ceiling height would allow a trash hauler to enter. Mr. Boghos explained that the management company will be responsible for bringing barrels out to the sidewalk on pick up days. Ms. Goncalves-Dolan expressed concern that traffic will be impacted for 20-30 minutes while the trash is emptied. Mr. Boghos suggested that the trash pickup frequency and/or barrel size could be increased if necessary. Mr. Safina suggested a side-lift truck pick up the trash on Green Street beyond the garage doors. Mr. Boghos noted that the Decision states that the proposed trash pickup time will be between 11:00 AM and 3:00 PM. Mr. Safina noted that if there is an issue it will be addressed. Ms. Delios agreed that the Town will be notified if it becomes a concern. The Commission reviewed the draft Decision. Mr. Safina commented that the height waiver needs to be specific. Mr. Del Savio pointed out that the 50' height includes the parapet walls; the roof membrane is at 48-feet. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if the maximum height is really 50' and noted that it looks like more on the plans. Mr. Del Savio explained that the elevator penthouse is taller but is not included in the calculation. Mr. Safina said the roof deck will unlikely be seen from Main Street or the rear of the building, but will potentially be visible from Ash Street or further up Main Street. He added that there are structures on top of the MF Charles Building that are not visible from the street. i Mr. Boghos confirmed that the overall residential unit count will not change. He clarified that the tree analysis and landscape plan should be included in the list.of approved plans. Mr. Safina requested that the roof deck setback be a minimum of 10'from the roof edge. Mr. Weston suggested adding that the roof deck may be furnished with tables and chairs. Ms. Mercier pointed out that findings in the Decision are not binding like conditions. Mr. Safina asked where the utility meters will be located. Mr. Del Savio replied that the electric meters will be on the second and fourth floors, and that the gas meters will be in the basement. Ms. Mercier asked about the building lighting. Mr. Safina suggested adding a condition that the Applicant will be required to submit the lighting fixtures for approval. The Commission reviewed the list of requested waivers. Ms. Mercier noted that.the Decision clearly states that loading for non-residential functions is not allowed on Main Street. Ms. Mercier clarified that if the project triggers another waiver, the Applicant would be required.to come back to the Commission for approval. Mr. Boghos said the Fire Department is requesting that any proposed gas grills on the roof be hard piped. Ms. Mercier will edit the Decision to reflect the Applicant's request to.allow this amenity subject to_Fire Department approval. Mr. McGrail asked for clarification on the condition related to construction of the affordable units. Mr. Safina responded that construction should be of the same quality as market rate units, but that the finishes and options can be different. Mr. Boghos confirmed there will be eight affordable rental units. Page 1 3 Mr. Safina opened the hearing to public comment. There was none. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to close the public hearing for the 40R Plan Review for 467 Main Street. The motion was seconded by Ms. Goncalves-Dolan and approved with a 5-0-0.vote. Voting on this project were: Mr. Safina, Mr. Weston, and Mr. D'Arezzo. Mr. Tuttle and Ms. Goncalves-Dolan were not eligible to vote due to missed sessions of the hearing. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the density waiver. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 3-0-0 vote. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to, approve the height waiver. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 3-0-0 vote. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the loading waiver. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 3-0-0 vote. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the tree waiver. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 3-0-0 vote. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the 40R Plan Review for 467 Main Street, inclusive of the above waivers, and as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 3-0-0 vote. Minor Amendment, PUD Special Permit. Johnson Woods, O. Bradley Latham on behalf of Ted Moore Brad Latham, William Bergeron, and Bob Gargano were present on behalf of the Application. Mr. D'Arezzo recused himself and left the room. Community Development Director Julie Mercier summarized the three main issues that require discussion: the parking at the multi-family buildings; the foundation location at 6-8 White Oaks Lane; and an unfilled promise of a garage at 162 Johnson Woods Drive. The Applicant has requested a continuance on the discussion of the foundation of 6-8 White Oaks Lane to allow more time for a resolution to be worked out off-line. Ms. Mercier recommended that the other two items be discussed tonight. Attorney Brad Latham apologized that the owner of Johnson Woods, Ted Moore, was not able to attend the meeting. He introduced project engineer William Bergeron of Hayes Engineering. Mr. Latham stated there are two items that are before the Commission: discussion of the foundation at 6-8 White Oaks Lane, which they would like continued to another meeting date; and the surface parking spaces at the three multi-family buildings. Mr. Latham indicated that he had no prior knowledge of the garage for 162 Johnson Woods Drive, and that it was not part of the application. Mr. Latham explained that the Applicant intends to restripe the parking spaces in the spring. so that they are all 9' in width. Mr. Bergeron showed the as-built conditions for the parking spaces, and noted that he provided--a two-page memo outlining all_the parking space locations. He described all of the current parking spaces at the three multi-family buildings and reviewed the proposed changes which will bring them into compliance with the original approval. Mr. Bergeron confirmed that the third multi-family building, which is currently under construction, will have 9' x 18' parking spaces. Mr. Latham asked the Commission to approve the changes to the parking as discussed in the memo. Mr. Tuttlecommented that he has no concerns with the proposed parking modifications, but questioned if the residents who live at Johnson Woods would agree, as it will result in a loss of parking spaces overall. r Page 14 Mr. Safina asked if'the Applicant is asking the Commission to break up the Decision into two parts so that the parking solution can be approved tonight. ,He noted that the Commission would like to keep all the issues on the site together. Mr. Latham responded that the building permit for 16 Taylor Drive is being delayed until the parking issues are resolved. Mr. Safina pointed out that the misplaced foundation at 6-8 White Oaks Lane has not been resolved, and asked what leverage the Commission will have if the solution involves moving the foundation. Mr. Robert Gargano of Little Harbor Construction replied that the foundation will be moved if required. Mr. Latham explained that the foundation for 16 Taylor Drive is in the right location and expressed concern that the building permit for one building is being held up because of a foundation at another location. Ms. Mercier pointed out that certificates of occupancy have already been issued for 30 and 39 Taylor Drive, and asked what leverage the Town will have to ensure that the Applicant restripes the parking spaces in the spring. Mr. Latham suggested that the Applicant could post a $5,000 bond until the parking spaces are restriped. Ms. Goncalves-Dolan requested the bond be larger, closer to $10,000. Mr. Bergeron agreed and added that the work be done by June 1, 2018. Ms. Delios requested a signed contract from the contractor showing the scope of work, plan and when the work will commence. Ms. Mercier said that approval of the parking space solution does not let the Applicant off the hook for the minor amendment for the foundation on White Oaks Lane. Mr. Latham agreed that the foundation issue needs to be resolved, and noted that it will not go away as long as it is being scrutinized by the abutter. Mr. Tuttle opined that the proposed parking plan is an improvement to the situation, but asked if it would solve the residents' concerns. Mr. Safina opened the meeting for public comment. Ms. Laura Neumeyer of 30 Taylor Drive commented that there are wetlands and a river by 30 Taylor Drive. She asked if any trees will be removed to install the pervious pavers for the added spaces on the access road. Mr. Bergeron replied that no trees will be removed and that the existing grass will be replaced by pervious pavers. Ms. Sarah McClusky of 39 Taylor Drive asked how many spaces will be lost when they are widened from 8' to 9'. She noted that residents with spaces in the front could be bumped to the new spaces further away, which are really inconvenient and not well-lit. She noted that it would be better if people could use the visitor spaces or rent a space in the garage, but that the rental fee of $450/month is cost prohibitive. She opined that in general there is not enough parking on the site. Ms. Mercier noted that the proposed parking solution is more or less what was originally approved. She asked what spin off problems this may create for residents who have been deeded spaces. Mr. Latham clarified that the parking spaces are not deeded; they are assigned by the condominium association, and that the owner has the ability to reassign spaces as tenants move in and have different needs. Mr. Safina said that if the parking space widths are the correct size and there is the right number of parking spaces, everyone should be able to park safely. A resident might be inconvenienced, but that is not under the Commission's purview. Mr. Safina opined that there is no better solution than to go back to what was originally approved. The Commission does not get involved how the parking spaces are allocated; but maybe it will get easier once the owner is not involved with the Condominium Association. He said he drove around the property and noted that people do park on the street even Page 1 5 though they are not supposed to, but it does not inhibit traffic too much. If the Fire • Department has access issues, the Association will-be notified. Mr. Safina asked about the promised single-car garage at 162 Johnson Woods Drive. Mr. Latham responded that the garage is not part of the minor modification application. Mr. Safina commented that Mr. Moore represented that the building could be built at the last meeting. Mr. Latham said that a building permit has not been sought and the building has not been built, and that the Commission will be involved at a later date if necessary. Mr. Bergeron stated that the property owner has not authorized him to design the garage. Ms. Mercier said that all structures need to be approved by the Commission. Mr: Latham said that the Applicant has not started the process for the garage yet. Mr. Weston stated that the Applicant has the process set up wrong, and that the Commission needs to review and approve the footprint and location before the owner authorizes the design and applies for a building permit. Mr. Bergeron commented that the only information he has seen about the garage is a ball-point sketch on a plan that was drawn by someone he does not know. Ms. Mercier noted that the entire Commission witnessed Ted Moore drawing this sketch of the garage at the last meeting. . Ms. Maribeth Canning of 162 Johnson Woods confirmed that Mr. Moore approached the dais at the last meeting and drew the garage on the site plan. She showed the Commission plans . and documents contradicting Mr. Bergeron's statement that the design and process for the garage has not been authorized. She noted that two different locations have been discussed for the garage, one of which is directly in front of her unit. She provided photographs of the staked out.location and an architectural plan of the garage. Mr. Bergeron stated that the concern with that location is that it has not been engineered; the garage would interfere with utilities. Ms. Canning reiterated that she bought the property six years ago and that the P&S states that Mr. Moore will construct a single-car garage. She opined that there has been plenty of time for the garage to be engineered properly. Mr. Safina asked if the Landscaping Plan is current. He noted that the proposed location for the garage would create a similar condition for abutters as the foundation at 6-8 White Oaks Lane. M,r. Bergeron said the Landscaping Plan is for when the whole project is completed. Ms. Delios said that she requested a current Landscaping Plan. Mr. Weston pointed out that the developer continues to make changes to the site without thinking through all the ripple .effects and without-getting approval, and opined that overall plans of the site are useless to the Commission because of this. He added that the Commission cannot be expected to make decisions in such a piecemeal fashion, and he reminded the engineer that the project is a Planned Unit Development. Mr. Bergeron responded that the development is large and has been underway for 14 years. He agreed that Mr. Moore has taken more liberties than he probably should have, but that he is just responding to shifts in the market, and that'he has always tried to maintain trees and fit the buildings on the property. Mr. Weston said that the Commission wants to review all the changes at one time. Mr. Tuttle commented that Reading Woods has built 400+ units without issues like this. Ms. Canning commented that for six years she has been trying unsuccessfully to negotiate in good faith and be flexible. She never agreed for the garage to be in her front lawn. At the last meeting Mr. Moore pointed out a location on the plan that she agreed to, and since then architectural drawings have been prepared. She asked how much longer it will take for her garage to be constructed. Mr. Safina commented that neither proposed garage location is appropriate - one is directly in front of her unit; the other will conflict with slopes and trees. Ms. Canning pointed out a third location, across the street from her unit. Mr. Safina noted that this location will likely create issues for future owners of the units proposed on that side of the street. Mr. Latham asked if Ms. Canning had a discussion with Mr. Moore about this location. Mr. Safina stated that Mr. Moore needs approval to move or construct buildings. Page 1 6 Mr. Weston clarified that since the Commission did not receive an application for the garage, they do not have the authority to approve a specific location for it. He noted that they can only tell her Where the garage cannot be located. Mr. Weston said that the garage issue is between Mr. Moore and Ms. Canning. Ms. Canning asked the Commission for some type of leverage. Mr. .Latham said that he only recently learned about the garage issue, and even though he does not represent Mr. Moore on such he will have a conversation with Mr. Moore about it. Ms. Mercier asked if the Commission could compel Mr. Moore to submit an application for the garage as a condition of approval for the minor modification that is before them now. She asked if a condition be added to the Decision requiring this. Mr..Safina noted that any proposed garage location will have to be reviewed and-approved, and will need to take into consideration the site grading and trees. Mr. Weston stated that the Applicant needs to put all proposed and envisioned changes on one plan and submit a comprehensive application for the Commission's approval, or risk having future piecemeal changes denied. Mr. Tuttle suggested that all building permits for the project be withheld until the issues on White Oaks Lane and Johnson Woods Drive are resolved. Mr. Bergeron complained that the foundation for 16 Taylor Drive has been stalled for three months; the Applicant would like to continue with the building. Mr. Safina commented that Ms. Canning has been waiting six years for her garage. Ms. Mercier explained that the Decision intertwines the different aspects of the application, and that certain pieces provide leverage to have other issues rectified. Mr. Tuttle suggested separating the parking issue from the foundation and garage issues. Ms. Mercier replied that she has no certainty the Applicant will reconfigure and restripe the parking lots, or deal with the foundation and garage issues in a timely manner. Mr. Latham asked that the parking issue be separated and proposed the following solution: the Applicant would provide a $10,000 cash bond, and a signed contract with a deadline of 06/01/2018 to finish the restriping work. He suggested that the Commission add conditions to future permits regarding the submission of a comprehensive plan of changes, resolution of the foundation issue, and the submission of an application for the garage. Mr. Latham opined that this will send a loud and clear message to the Applicant. Ms. Mercier brought forward a complaint from the Building Inspector regarding an accessory structure that was to be demolished as part of the approval but instead was renovated by the Applicant and still exists on the site. Mr. Bergeron said the accessory structure is part of the original farm. Ms. Goncalves-Dolan asked about the trash removal for the property. Mr. Safina explained that there have been complaints about trash piling up near the trash compactor. Ms. Delios suggested increasing the frequency of trash removal. Mr. Safina summarized.that the issues will be separated into two Decisions, with carefully crafted conditions that impose certain sanctions and requirements on Mr. Moore for future changes. The Commission will need to review the Decisions carefully at the next meeting before taking a vote. After discussion, Mr. Bergeron agreed to continue the meeting until February 26, 2018, with the understanding that the building permit for 16 Taylor Drive will not be issued yet: Mr. Tuttle made a motion to continue the Minor Amendment to the PUD Special Permit for Johnson Woods to February 26, 2018 at 8:30 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Page 1 7 Continued Public Hearing, 40R Plan Review 14 Chapin Avenue, Leonard Polonski Leonard Polonski, Donnie Garrity and Brad Latham were present on behalf of the Application. Mr. Garrity of O'Sullivan Architects reviewed the changes to the proposed plans: • Moved the building back on the site to allow room for a private front entry porch and functional front door for the first unit along Chapin Avenue; • Made roof pitch shallower to comply withheight requirement; • Modified front fagade to enhance view from the street; • Redistributed the windows; and • Trash will be on Town pick-up schedule per Assistant DPW Director.Ms. Jane Kinsella. Mr. Tuttle said the changes to the proposal are an improvement and complimented the fagade on Chapin Avenue. Mr. Weston acknowledged that the Applicant incorporated all of the Commission's suggestions. Mr. Safina opened the hearing to public comment. Ms. Jill Mayberry of 16 Chapin Avenue noted that some issues the abutters previously mentioned have been resolved, but that the neighbors still wish the building were lower in height. She acknowledged that the O&M plan language regarding maintenance of the pervious driveway will be in the homeowner documents, and she asked if language would be needed to ensure that snow does not pile too high on the grassed area. Mr. Safina asked what her specific concern with the snow is. Ms. Mayberry replied that the snow melt and runoff might be a problem, and that the abutters might not like super high snow mounds. Mr. Safina said if the snow were to impact the parking or building, then the Applicant would haul it off-site. He added that the Commission will not impose a specific restriction regarding snow removal. Ms. Mayberry asked for a construction timeframe. Mr., Garrity said that the construction will depend on a number of.things including the pre-construction process.Attorney Brad Latham said there is a 20-day appeal period for the 40R Decision, and that construction drawings are still in process, but that his client would like to start in the spring. Mr. Safina'noted that a pre-construction meeting with the Town is required per the Decision. Community Development Director Julie Mercier reminded the Commission that the abutters requested the construction hours be modified on Saturdays. Mr. Safina said he is okay with this request. Assistant Town Manager Jean Delios commented that based on discussions at other pre-construction meetings, many contractors work limited hours or not at all on Saturdays. Ms. Mayberry requested a survey of the existing conditions of her home prior to the commencement of construction and at the end of the project. Mr. Latham replied that there will be no blasting, so a pre-blast survey is not needed, but he offered to take pictures of her house. He noted that the project consists of routine demolition, foundation and building permit processes. Mr. Safina agreed that the construction should not be heavy, but pointed out that the Applicant will protect himself by taking the photographs of abutting structures. Ms. Mayberry requested an 8' solid.wood fence along her property line. Mr. Weston asked if there was a,difference in zoning for a 6' fence compared to an 8' fence. Ms. Saunders confirmed that a building permit is required for a fence over 7'. Mr. Latham added that any fence over 6' is considered a "spite" fence unless the neighbor agrees to it. Ms. Mercier said that currently there is an 8' fence, and that there is a condition in the Decision requiring the developer to work out the fence style, height and material with each abutter. Ms. Mayberry Page 1 8 asked if the Applicant was able to contact the new owners of the property at the rear. Mr. Safina stated that not all neighbors will necessarily want a fence. Ms. Susan True of 22 Chapin Avenue asked if the bonus rooms on the top floor could be . removed to help the building fit better into the two-story neighborhood. Mr. Safina stated that the property is zoned Business B and Downtown Smart Growth, and the surrounding . neighborhood is zoned A-40. Mr. Latham added that the proposed 32' high structure is lower than what is allowed for a single-family dwelling throughout most of Town. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to close the public hearing for the 40R Plan Review for 14 Chapin Avenue. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Voting on this project were: Mr. Safina, Mr. Weston, Mr. Tuttle, and Mr. D'Arezzo. Ms. Goncalves-Dolan was not eligible to vote due to missed sessions of the hearing. Mr. Safina suggested adding a condition that the Applicant have the building height survey- verified and accepted by the Building Inspector. Ms. Delios and Mr. Safina explained that the project will be controlled construction. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the density waiver. The motion was seconded by.Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the State-approved waiver to allow a 3-unit multi- family development under Chapter 40R. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the 40R Plan Review for 14 Chapin Avenue, inclusive of the above waivers, and as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Planning Updates and Other Tonics Housing Production Plan Ms. Mercier requested that the Commission review and vote on the Housing Production Plan. She said the Plan will be filed with the State on Wednesday or Thursday. Mr. Tuttle and Mr. Weston confirmed that they read the Plan. Mr. Safina questioned the student enrollment numbers, which show a progressive decline in enrollment at all the schools. He asked about the accuracy of the data and how three of the elementary schools were able to prove their need_ for modular trailers just a few years ago. Ms. Delios responded that the data presented at Town Meeting reflected the need at that time for additional space for kindergarten. Mr. D'Arezzo commented that the shift to offering full-day kindergarten increased the space requirement. Mr. Weston added that the modular schools were also needed to improve space planning. Mr. Safina commented that the downtown is almost at capacity, and so future development projects in the Downtown Smart Growth District should be scrutinized more thoroughly. Applicants will be required to present a traffic study with multiple intersections, financial information and municipal impacts. Mr. Tuttle asked about the Zoning Board's ability to use the safe harbor regarding the Eaton Lakeview 40B project. Ms. Delios explained that Town Counsel is currently reviewing the interpretation of safe harbor. Ms. Mercier commented that there are only 7 or 8 towns that have a safe harbor, and of those only a couple that have it for two years. Given this, and the current proposed 40B i.n Town, DHCD is in somewhat uncharted territory. Ms. Delios noted a minor language change regarding Housing Authority units lost from the Subsidized Housing. Inventory. Ms. Mercier explained that the new Executive Director of the Housing Authority requested the change on behalf of the Housing Authority Board. Staff Page 1 9 agree with the change and are interested in forging a more collaborative relationship with ` the Housing Authority going forward. Ms. Goncalves-Dolan asked how the Town will ensure that no additional units will be lost: Ms. Mercier explained how the Town's Regional Housing Coordinator monitors the units. Ms. Delios noted that the Housing Coordinator position is shared with three other towns, and that the Coordinator works closely with a housing consultant when unusual circumstances arise. Mr. Safina opened the discussion to public comment. There was none. The Commission discussed if the Housing Production Plan would need to be updated since 467 Main Street was just approved. Ms. Delios said the Housing Production Plan is dated before the approval of 467 Main Street. Ms. Mercier suggested the Town defer to the housing consultant on this. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to adopt the updated Housing Production Plan. The motion was seconded by Mr. D'Arezzo and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Ms. Delios gave a brief update on Reading Village. She said the Applicant has started the remediation of the asbestos. Mr. Kevin Sexton, a member of'the Board of Health, went to the property to make sure there were_no other health.issues. Ms. Mercier stated that a pre- demolition meeting is scheduled on Wednesday. Ms. Delios explained that the former Certainly Wood building will be demolished first due to fire safety concerns. Ms. Delios-informed the Commission that the Zoning Bylaw Amendment article is scheduled for the first Thursday of Town Meeting, which is April 26tH Ms. Goncalves-Dolan asked if the Town is addressing the proliferation of illegal signs that are cropping up around Town. Ms. Mercier explained that Planning Assistant Andrew MacNichol is currently creating a list and that enforcement will commence soon. Mr. Safina asked if Perfecto's Cafe at 285 Main Street and Greater Boston Real Estate at 68-70 Main Street will be contacted. Ms. Mercier replied that the Building Inspector has been in contact with Perfecto's. Mr. Safina opined that the electrician should be penalized for installing the illegal sign at 68-70 Main Street without a proper permit. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10;56 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Documents reviewed at the meetina CPDC Agenda 2/12/18 Housing Production Plan - 2018 Renewal Potential ZBL Amendments for April 2018: Section 6.0 - Intensity.Regulations w/Town Counsel edits 467 Main Street 40R Development: a) ' Further Revised Plans - 1/29/18 b) Revised Waiver List c) Revised Autoturn Movements d) Memo from Town Engineer e) Memo from PTTTF to BOS f) Draft Decision - 2/12/18 Johnson Woods Minor Amendment: a) Landscape Plan - 1/18/18 b) Parking &Site Grading Plans- 1/29/18 c) Summary of Modifications - 1/29/18 d) Letter from Applicant's Attorney- 2/5/18 e) Resident Feedback f) Draft Decision - 2/12/18 14 Chapin Avenue 40R Development: a) Summary of Changes b) Revised Plans-2/5/18 c) Email from Town Engineer- 2/6/18 d) Letter from Residents - 2/6/18 e) Draft Decision- 2/12/18 Page 110 \