Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-09-05 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes Cly rnFgO Town of Reading -r, .. � Meeting Minutes Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Zoning Board of Appeals NOY -8 AM i0: 50 Date: 2018-09-05 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Reading Public Library Location: Community Room Address: 64 Middlesex Avenue Session: Purpose: Public Hearing Version: Attendees: Members - Present: John Jarema Robert Redfern Cy Caouette Nick Pernice Erik Hagstrom Kyle Tornow Members - Not Present: Others Present: Maria Dinjian, Ed Chisholm, Norma Chisolm, Jeff Brenner, Shane Ferris, P. Pelusi, P. Lastrutz, Nick Nunes, Edward Raupp, Diana Lavaucher, Tony D'Arezzo, Jeanne Intonti Ferris, Lucy Intonti, Jeanne Snodgrass, Doug Neary, Guy Fodera, Guy Mangniello, Maria Cervone, Erin Calvo-Bacci, David Cannon, Charley Parker, Paula Rocheleau, Joe Appleyard, Patrick Smallwood, Maryan Kbhorsar, Gina Dulong, Josh Dulong, Jim Foley, Marilyn Foley, AI Jerrett, Johanna Gatta, Paul Cysto, Carol Gallagher, Boriana Milenova, Shirley Slack, Marilyn Powers, Kathleen Buckner, Deb Farnham, Jon Freeman, Michael Perry, Chris Corkin, Joyce Gould, Susan Viegas, Kevin Cignetti, Glenn Paradis, Debbie Paradis, Matt Holmen, Cheryl Powers Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Kristen Grover Topics of Discussion: Case#18-01 Eaton Lakeview 40B The Zoning Board of Appeals will hold a continuance of a Public Hearing in the Community Rooms at the Reading Public Library,64 Middlesex Avenue in Reading Massachusetts on Wednesday September 5,2018 at 7:00 PM on the petition of Eaton Lakeview Development,LLC,who seeks a Comprehensive Permit to develop 86 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),0 Eaton Street(Map 17,Lot 274),0 Eaton Street(Map 17,Lot 275),and 128 Eaton Street(Map 17,Lot 276)in Reading,.Massachusetts. Mr.Jarema called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM. Mr. Jarema asked Mr. MacNichol and Ms. Delios for the update since the last meeting in July. Page I r Ms. Delios stated since the last meeting on 7/18,where there was review on the Green International peer review, a revised proposal, updated plans and some public comment came a memo of 7/26 forth the Fire Chief, a meeting of 8/14 at Mr. Regnante's office,deeper review into traffic studies which both traffic engineers commented on. She noted receipt of a list of proposed waivers, an exchange of the scope of work and where the Applicant redlined and made comments. Mr. Jarema suggested as the 1s'order of business to discuss new information relative to the traffic discussed in August. He asked the 2 engineers to address their reports and the information discussed on 8/14. Mr. Hazavartian stated there were a number of technical points that Green International commented on and they responded to. He said they were in agreement with several of the items and noted 2 things that needed to be discussed as being the fence at the apartment complex next door and improvements to bring the streets up to Town standards. Mr.Wong offered that the new fence was discussed extensively and the developer will work with the neighbor to remove part of it and fix it. He said the consensus from the neighborhood was that conducting a more in depth study will result in a better product in the end. Mr. Hazavartian said it was his understanding that the Applicant will be contributing to that study. Mr.Wong said that was correct. Mr. Shumer added that the issue of the fence is a sight distance problem, and the concern is that it is not their fence so they can't just take it down but they will work with the neighbor. He also said architects and traffic engineers at the 10/3 meeting to narrow down issues. Mr. Jarema asked Ms. Delios to provide an overview of the workshop. Ms. Delios mentioned they discussed traffic, additional vehicle trips and the best approach to that, suggestions to signalize some intersections, neighborhood opposition, and needs of the Town. She explained that none of the suggestions were popular and they decided to look at the situation in a more holistic way and planning a wider net, not just focusing on the one intersection at Lakeview. They talked about the Town applying for grants,and stated this study would be a long term approach to this plan. She stated there will be key Town staff from many departments working together,that comments from the Town Engineers were helpful and he will play a very strong role in crafting a solution. She said with lots of people working together they will figure out the best approach to this issue. Mr. Jarema stated he was also at the meeting and noted a difference in models used by the engineers to do the traffic study. He expressed his concem that the complete solution to that intersection and others may not be completed by the deadline and suggested that a partial decision may need to be made on that issue. Mr. Jarema opened the meeting to questions from the Board. Mr. Caouette offered his observation. He stated he appreciated the effort that has gone on since July but is a little disappointed that not as much progress has been made. He said traffic is an ongoing problem and no solution will make everyone happy and he may be disappointed himself. He mentioned that in talking about a long term solution there may be a vote required but they should commence talking about solutions more than talking about or defining the problem. He said February is right around the corner and they have to start focusing the conversations on conclusions and that he would like to see it move along more rapidly. Mr. Shumer and Mr.Wong commented on how temporary measures and different options were discussed at the meeting and agreed that changes that need to be made are extensive. Mr. Jarema asked Ms. Milenova to open discussion on behalf of the community. Ms. Milenova thanked everyone that was involved in the discussions and said they are open to the wait and see approach, that everyone seems on board for improvements to the General Way intersection,and that it will be a great improvement for the neighborhood. Mr. Jarema reiterated the developer has proposed to offer help and solutions to a longer range study beyond the time frame of this project. Matt Holmen, Beech Street thanked everyone involved in working on this project. He informed the Board a "right turn only'sign was put up at the endo of Green Street and nobody pays attention to it. He noted nobody pays attention to the signs on General Way. He commented on the suggestions for the fence line, Lakeview/Walkers Brook and Salem Five explaining that you have to pull out further than one would safely like to in order to see if cars were coming. He commented that a"no left tum"sign will back up John Street. Kathy Bucker, Elliot Street asked her question pertaining to a study on Washington Street. She said if they stop people from turning left onto Walker Brook, it will send traffic into a neighborhood with homes and kids. She said she was not sure why this was a good option and would like an explanation as to why it would even be considered an option. Page 1 2 Mr. Hazavartian referenced the computer modeling for these studies. He conceded that saying the project will add only minor traffic does sound insane but the 2 scientist have data supporting that. He states the area of Washington Street was not included in the study. He explained how the study works and how it fans out to farther away from where the project is. He stated the traffic impact study for this project was over and beyond what they had to do, and the long term study would be the best way to look at the problem. Mr. Jarema said he wanted to reiterate a solution is not going to be decided on tonight,that the issue of traffic will come up again and again. Kevin Signetti, Smith Ave;commented that he has seen a lot increase in traffic. He said his 10 question was in asking where the data was taken from and if they looked at additional traffic and crashes. Mr. Hazavartian informed Mr. Signetti and the public the data came from the MA DOT database online and they use calculations to predict the increase. Mr. Signetti asked if they used and escalating increase per year or an average of the 5 years. Mr. Hazavartian answered that use existing numbers based on history. Mr. Signetti asked if anyone physically stood there morning, night, summer,fall, during little league, etc.to conduct the study. Mr. Hazavartian said they used video at peak times and use an average per month, not peak month. Jeannette Keller, John Street, commented that it seems like a cheaper alternative is to put a sign there. She asked if it was possible to put a light there so that people have a choice, so people can't complain that all the traffic is going to one neighborhood. She said that if figuring something else out to make it better takes more work,then please do the more work. Mr. Hazavartian said that none of the options form Mr.Wong or himself are more than options or possibilities. He noted putting a light in at Lakeview is very complicated and needs to be limed with other signals. He suggested looking at a holistic approach. Mr. Jarema commented that these are only a few options and both engineers have agreed to continue the study. He reminded the public the whole process is not just for the Eaton/Lakeview corridor but for the Town of Reading. Patrick Smallwood, John Street, asked for clarification on who is working for the Town and who is working for the developer. He said he wanted to ask them a personal question,that being;would they want this in their backyard? Mr.Jarema told Mr. Smallwood he is not going to ask that question. He reminded Mr. Smallwood and the public that this is a 40B project, explained the options and that this is in the control of the State. He discussed working toward SafeHarbor and accepting this. Made Dingion, Pleasant Street, mentioned putting in a 2 way light and traffic is hard to get out and around. David Cannon, Beech Street,said he had a question about the loading zone taking away from the green space. Mr. Jarema asked him to hold off with that question until further down the mad when that issue is addressed. Mr. Jarema staled they won't be discussing the engineering or architectural review or the landscaping, but only the overall project and traffic. He noted the Board already made a statement about loading zones and the neighborhood is working hard to increase the green space. He said the developer graciously agreed to create a park but because of the loading zone the idea may need to be revisited. He reminded everyone the ideas are on the table,that all of it is on the table. He informed everyone the subjects are being talked about, almost daily;these meetings are to figure out what is the best solution to get out of a 40B project,and the schedule needs to be adhered to. Nick Nunes, Green Street, said he knows there was talk of a rotary but didn't hear it mentioned in the 3 solutions discussed. He commented that the other rotary handles 5 roads as well. He said he thinks there would be less congestion and asked that that be considered. He asked if anyone reached out to Google or Waze for them to suggest alternate routes if roads will be closed off during the project. Mr.Wong commented that as far as a rotary,there would be significant property,impacts, and that would be something that would have to be looked at. Resident of Smith Ave, stated she feels the traffic issue will get solved in its time. She said she wanted to talk about the trees and the green,that it hasn't been addressed yet. She commented on 0ood history and drainage if trees are removed. She asked if they can calculate for that impact, and managing wildlife and wetlands. She commented on State funding for rotaries. She thanked the Applicant for changing the plan and making it more palatable for the Town. Mr.Jarema asked Mr. Sporages to comment on why Conservation is not being addressed just yet. Mr. Sporages said there will be more meeting before fling with the Conservation Commission. He stated they are required to file,comply with DEP storm water regulations, and that all issues Diane brought up are part of the Act they have to adhere to. He noted that will be a separate public hearing. Page 1 3 Mr. Shumer stated he'd like to add to the issue of trees, saying they are committed to preserving and adding as many as they can. Maria Sarbone, John Street,thanked everyone and said she would like to speak to the holistic approach the Board is talking about. She stated the vibrations from the existing traffic, specifically trucks, have caused cracks in her ceiling. She said she read the entire report and thought the statement saying there was only 1 truck on the road was inaccurate-that it was only looking at one moment in time and they need to look at more and do more. Mike Barry,Village Street, said he tends to agree. He suggested talking about how congested traffic will be on weekends. He commented that a rotary would be optimal and a light secondary. Doug Barry,Village Street, asked if anyone looked at the traffic study done before, commented that it was ignored and a light was put in against regulation. Debbie Farnham,John Street, said she was another person that can't get out of their driveway and asked if they extend Lakeview into John,would they close it off? Where John hits Village. Joyce Gould, John Street, stated that it has already been mentioned that traffic controls in the neighborhood are not adhered to and would like to hear from the Chief on how to control more traffic if the existing isn't adhered to. Ms. Delios informed her and the public that every month they go over details of traffic problems in a similar round table and is not aware of the problem. She said in her 9 years she doesn't remember this issue being fled with the Police Department and encouraged calling in these concerns so the Town can follow up. Jenna Dulong, Eaton Street,said she filed a complaint on See/Click/Fix regarding the speed limit and never got a response. She stated 30mph in a neighborhood is too fast and inquired about lowering the speed limit and speed bumps. John Pearson,Woburn Street, said he agrees with the project, likes to see 40B's, but feels that it's just this site that has problems. He stated public safety of the project with traffic concerns it's not going to happen. Alex Root, Pleasant Street, suggested taking a piece of property by eminent domain. Ms. Delios said there had been a lot of discussion about that. She said the Town needs to be mindful about going too far and asking for things that are uneconomical, noting at that point the Town loses all its leverage. The Board and Ms. Delios discussed going over the redlined list of waivers and hiring Niche Engineering for a peer review. Mr. Sparages discussed the draft scope of services for peer review in civil engineering. He commented on dealing with storm and sewer water, complying with storm water management,and a review by the Conservation Commission. He discussed the items struck, local regulations,wetland resources, DEP storm water management,and the MA storm water handbook and what applies and does not apply to this project. He discussed low impact development techniques and being limited with the amount of land they are working with. He discussed to no disturb and no build zones and how they were incorporated into the project. Mr. Jarema, Mr. Heep,and Ms. Delios discussed the reclining of the scope, how under 40B an Applicant doesn't need to comply with all bylaws, but if the Applicant requests a waiver of Town bylaw, it is important to discuss if there will be impacts if that waiver is granted that will cause problems if the waiver is granted. They noted they certainly don't want peer review to redesign the project, but if they see something to address,add or improve the project it is not uncommon for them to make suggestions. Mr. Jarema asked the Board their thoughts on having Town Counsel and staff review the scope. Mr. Redfern stated meeting every month doesn't hurry the project along, and they depend on Town staff to work with the Applicant. He commented on receiving new plans and questioning the readiness for peer review. Mr. Sparages stated every plan submitted was a complete plan ready to build, including revised plans, and ready for peer review. Mr. Caouette agreed with comments from Town Counsel and said he thinks the impacts of the waiver requests should be reviewed as part of the assessment. He stated the thinks the Town Engineer should also give his stamp of approval. Mr. Hagstrom stated he fully supported Ms. Delios and Town counsel, and finds the peer reviews incredibly helpful, noting the benefit of a separate and neutral second look. Page 1 4 Mr. Pernice said he appreciated them going through the redlines and he concurred with the other Board members that daytime government work with the Applicant. Mr. Jarema said he concurred also, that they depend totally on staff and would accept a motion at this point to permit staff along with Town Counsel to review the scope and finalize it as soon as possible. Mr. Heep suggested having the Board instruct him and Ms. Delios to work with the Applicant over the next couple days to come with an agreed scope to work on and fund the 53G account to be ready to review at the next meeting. On a motion made by Mr.Redfern,seconded by Mr. Caouette, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to instruct Town Staff and Town Counsel to work with the Applicant to comprise an agreed upon scope and fund the 53G Account for Case#18-01. Vote was 5-0-0(Jarema, Redfgm, Caoueffe,Hagstrom,Pernice) Mr. Jarema discussed other issues including an upcoming meeting date and folding the architectural and landscaping reviews into the civil engineering review. He discussed a list of issues that needs to be addressed at the next meeting. Mr. Heep stated the Board requires as a condition the Town require a Building Code review before the building permit is issued. Mr. Jarema asked Mr. Heep what his recommendation would be. Mr. Heep stated it was imperative to get the civil review going and that Niche Engineering can also look at lighting and such that Ms. Delios suggested. He suggested expanding the civil aspect to include lighting and landscaping and in such,will allow sufficient progress. Mr. Heep advised doing the reviews now versus later allows time for comments and possible revisions. He noted at this stage the construction level drawing is needed for review, and the review needs to be before issuing a building pemrit. The Board and staff discussed possible dates for the next meeting and decided on 10/17/18. The Board asked the scope and reports are ready for that day to speed up the process. Mr.Jarema said it will be the intention of the Board to vote on it that night also. On a motion made by Mr.Redfern,seconded by Mr.Pernice, the.Zoning Board of Appeals moved to amend the previous motion to Include items such as lighting, landscaping and other issues daytime government sees fit for the scope for Case 018.01. Vote was 5-0-0(Jarema;Redfem, Caouette,Hagstrom, Pernice) Mr.Jarema noted a conflict on 10/17 as being the Economic Development Summit meeting and suggested moving to 10/24118. On a motion made by Mr.Redfem,seconded by Mr.Caouette, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to continue Case#18.01 to 10/24(18. Vote was 5.0.0(Jarema,Redfem, Caouette,Hagstrom, Pernice) Other Business Adlournment On a motion made Mr. Caouette,seconded by Mr.Hagstrom, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:22p.m. Vote was 5-0-0(Jarema, Redfern, Caouette,Hagstrom,Pernice). Page 1 5