Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-12-12 Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes r p c Town of Reading a Meeting Minutes RECEIVED TOWN CLERK READING, MA.Y °'usoarpP� Board - committee - commission - council: 2019 MAR 14 AM 8: 57 zoning Board of Appeals Date: 2018-12-12 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Pleasant Street Senior Center Location: Great Room Address: 49 Pleasant Street Session: Purpose: General Meeting Version: Attendees: Members - Present: John Jarema, Cy Caouette, Robert Redfern, Erik Hagstrom, Nick Pernice Members - Not Present: Kyle Tornow Others Present: Staff Planner Andrew MacNichol, Assistant Town Manager Jean Delios, Chris Heep, Chris Sparages, Ted Regnante, Jesse Schomer, Guy Mandnlello, Steven Gribbin, Matt Brassard of Nitsch Engineering, David Cannon, Borianna Milenova, Brad Rodes, Paula Rocheleau, Matt Holmen, Tony D'Arezzo, Cecelia Russo, Susan Viegas, Chris Synott, Wei Lam, David Tuttle Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Andrew MacNichol Topics of Discussion: Case#18-01 Eaton Lakeview 40B The Zoning Board of Appeals held 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 7:04PM. Mr. Jarema read the continuance notice into the record and then asked the available Town Staff for an update since the pervious 40B hearing. Mr. MacNichol recapped the previous October 24n' meeting and provided an update on new Information submitted since. New information included revised plans, memos from various staff departments and the scope of work for the Walkers Brook Drive Corridor Study. Mr. Jarema asked Mr. Regnante how he would like to proceed. Mr. Regnante called for Project Engineer Chris Sparages to review the revised plans based off the Nitsch Peer Review comments. Mr. Sparages commented that he would review the comments made by Nitsch Engineering one by one and review how they were addressed in the new plans. He commented that if there were any questions he had he would ask Matt Brassard of Nitsch Engineering directly in order to streamline the process and keep topics in order. Mr. Sparages also mentioned Page I 1 they had filed the Notice of Intent with the Conservation Commission on 11/14/18, with the Public Hearing scheduled for 12/19/18. Mr. Sparages reviewed the Nitsch Engineering comment letter. Review Included the topics of zoning compliance parking and access, grading design, utility services, stormwater management, wetlands and Floodplain and landscape and lighting. He reviewed each topic in order: Parking and access: • A waiver was submitted for the required parking numbers. 101 spaces have been proposed on Lot A where 111 are required. • Off street loading o Two 12 x 35 spaces were added to the plans closest to Walkers Brook, in front of each dumpster. o A Parking and Loading Regulations Plan was also submitted to provide details of the management of parking and loading. o The loading zones to encroach on the 24' drive aisle width when occupied. o Mr. Brassard commented that cars could navigate the use but that the Reading Fire Department required continuous 24' aisle width throughout the project so the applicants offer an alternative plan or verify the Fire Department would authorize use of the loading zone spaces. o Mr. Sparages commented that Chief Gregory Burns of Reading Fire Department did not approve the proposed loading zones due to safety concerns in the 12/11/18 memo provided. The applicants will look for another alternative Including relocating the dumpsters to fit one loading space while maintaining the 24'drive aisle width. o Mr. Redfern mentioned he reviewed the regulations plan and asked if the applicants had thought about reserving certain parking spaces to use as loading zones during specific times approved by the management. Mr. Guy Mandniello reviewed alternative loading plans that could Include such a recommendation. A`Floating' loading space would be on the opposite side of the dedicated space to maintain access. Mr. Brassard also provided comments on the alternative plans. • Mr. Jarema asked about the total parking spaces and if handicap spaces were to be included in the amount and if the total of the two lots reaches the 1.5 spaces per unit requirement. Mr. Sparages reviewed the parking calculations table and mentioned Lot A exceeded the 18 required spaces and that Lot B would reach the requirement If the future banked parking was Included. The total spaces is 135, divided by the 86 units is 1.56 spaces per unit. Mr. Brassard added that handicap spaces are included in the total parking count. • Ms. Boriana Milenova of 92 Eaton Street spoke on and presented data from similar and neighboring developments and their parking utilization rates. The presentation showed why the pocket park/future banked parking Is a good Idea and creates a more modern development for the Town and neighborhood. • Mr. Jarema commented he was okay with starting with a lower number of spaces with the potential to be increased based on need. He did raise concern of no electric vehicle parking spaces or compact car spaces which could help preserve space. Mr. Brassard agreed these would be good progressive inclusions but that is up to the Applicants - these requirements could be added to the Town Zoning Bylaw for future projects. • Mr. Redfern acknowledged he liked the progressive thoughts and discussion and that the neighborhood data gave greater comfort in the reduced parking numbers. • Mr. Sparages added that the Fire Chief asked for no on street parking and for signs to be placed on the street indicating so. This limited the guest parking availability so the Applicants would not like to go lower than the 101 proposed spaces. Mr. Regnante asked for the Decision to Include the ability to come back to the Town to increase the parking If needed. • Accessible parking signs and their locations were added to the plans. Page 1 2 Grading Design: • Additional details for spot grades were added in various locations. • Grading was adjusted in the courtyard to produce positive pitch. • The future banked parking area was revised to show vegetated land instead of parking. Utility Services: • Water services and connections were shown. Mr. Sparages stated both the Town Engineer and DPW approved the utility locations and compliance. • Mr. Sparages stated they would replace the existing hydrant per the Town Engineer request. They would also add a second hydrant per the Fire Chief's request in the South of Lot B. The location will be approved by the Fire Chief. • The sewer pump station on Lot A was given more detail for review. • Existing conditions plan will be revised to match existing pipes and connections. • Transformer pads for electrical service were proposed, one on each lot. Stormwater Management: • Roof drains were adjusted as requested. • Design was adjusted to lift the drainage system to provide additional discharge. Mr. Brassard reviewed the original comment and stormwater practices. He added that the revised change will help prevent sediment build up and more. Mr. Jarema asked if that increasing sea level rise or climate change would affect this design or if it is adequate for the expected increase in weather variety. Mr. Brassard replied that stormwater design addresses what happens if the system is to fail and that 25 year storms are accounted for. • Watershed maps were included. • LID techniques were added by Including two raingardens in the courtyard of Lot B. Further detail on plantings will be provided. Wetlands and Floodplain: • Calculations were submitted for Floodplain storage areas. Conservation Commission will also be reviewing. Landscape and Lighting: • 4'-5'Arborvitae plantings are being used to screen the Eaton Street residential abutter. The existing tree on the plot line is to remain and the proposed retaining wall is for the down sloping land. The plantings will be on the downhill side which may result in the retaining wall being visible and it would take several years for the plantings to grow to a 'full blown screen'. Mr. Sparages commented they have not gotten to review this comment as a team but could potentially use taller tree plantings. More information on the growth of the proposed plants can be provided. • Mr. Jarema asked about electric service and Its emergency capability. Mr. Sparages replied they would reach out to Reading Municipal Light Department (RMLD) to confirm locations and that Mr. Brassard could review to ensure transformer locations do not interfere with other functions. Ms. Delios added that the transformers would also need screening while still providing access to the unit. • It was found that the proposed Arborvitae plantings can grow up to 10" per year and up to 20' tall. Ms. Delios asked if the retaining wall design could be reimagined instead of higher trees. Mr. Sparages replied that would affect green space and the ability to preserve the existing tree in the area. It may be possible to ask the abutter which scenario they would prefer. • Mr. Sparages reviewed snow storage and the Snow and Ice Removal Pian submitted. Revisions will be made based on Nitsch comments and the Fire Department memo to address drainage and site lines. • Small lights and parking lights will be left on for late night arrivals and as such the detail stating security lighting details to be determined will be struck from the plans. Page 1 3 Mr. Sparages commented that bike racks are proposed outside and Mr. Steven Gibbons confirmed. These will be added to the site plans. No electric vehicle spots are proposed. Mr. Brassard acknowledged comments were addressed and satisfactory. Mr. Jarema asked if a second elevator was added to the 50 unit building on Lot B. Mr. Gibbons answered that there are now two proposed elevators and that fire suppression rooms with knox-boxes have been shown. Mr. Pernice asked if the Fire Suppression Rooms are heated. Mr. Gibbons replied yes they will be. Mr. MacNichol asked if the Police Department Memo was reviewed and if the requested stop signs could be added. Mr. Sparages replied both requested stop signs at the exits of the site will be added. Mr. MacNichol then asked if a management office would be Included on site or off site. Mr. Mandniello replied that the office is off site but located close by down the street. Ms. Delios asked for more detail on the retaining walls. Mr. Sparages replied details have not been confirmed but they would be either concrete block system or stone and mortar. He also added walls over 4' in height will require their own building permit. Mr. MacNichol asked if a concept design plan was created for the Lakeview Ave street improvements. Mr. Sparages replied he included a detail on the site plan set for how the road would be constructed. He mentioned the width varies from 44' wide to 35'. The proposal provides 26' of pavement across and includes vertical granite curbing on each side, which does not exist today. A 5' sidewalk would be added to the side of the development with a 2' grass strip on either side. Grass areas would be wider where the right of way also widens. Mr. Sparages reviewed the memo from the Reading Fire Department. Mr. Sparages commented that he did already include the details requested just on a different page but that he would edit the plans to include road widths, turning radius' and more details to the requested pages for the Chief. Mr. Jarema opened the hearing to public comment. Ms. Milenova asked what was being proposed In the courtyard of Lot B. Mr. Sparages replied they were contour lines to show grading symmetry. Mr. David Cannon of 30 Beech Street suggested that the no parking signs state "no parking either side" as this is already an issue and this would address that. Mr. Tony D'Arezzo of 130 John Street questioned the number of parking spaces on Lot A and that the site plans and architectural plans differ. Mr. Sparages commented he will revise the parking table to match what is being proposed. Mr. Brad Rhodes of 94 Eaton Street raised concern of the current status of Eaton Street. He stated the road in in disrepair and that when construction begins it will only make it worse. He asked that construction vehicles only travel along Lakeview Ave since it will be redone at the end of the project. Mr. MacNichol answered that there will be a pre-construction meeting in the future and this point will be raised. Mr. Jarema then started the discussion on traffic mitigation and the Walkers Brook Drive Corridor Study. He mentioned the Scope of Work was drafted for such study and that input from the Board and Applicants were welcome. He added this was a long range Town project and that the Applicant would help contribute to. Page 14 Mr. Regnante stated they would hold their comments until their traffic engineer Kim Hazarvardian could answer and provide comments. He added once an estimate was provided the Applicants and Town can work out a fair contribution. Mr. Chris Heep of Town Counsel added that a back and forth dialogue is not necessary and that comments by Mr. Hazarvardian can be provided in writing. Mr. Regnante agreed. Mr. Jarema asked the Board if they had any comments. Mr. Caouette asked how long such a study would take as the deadline for the project is approaching. Mr. Jarema replied this Is a project for the Town and would take time so It is not expected to be completed before the project gets approved. He mentioned Immediate traffic mitigation would be addressed at the next meeting date when determined. Mr. Jarema and Mr. Heep both advised that a Draft Decision should be circulated shortly to be reviewed at the following hearings. Mr. Redfern commented that he felt It appropriate to leave the Scope of Work for the corridor study to Town Staff. On a motion made by Mr. Redfern,and seconded by Mr. Hagstrom,the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to release the scope to receive an estimate and proceed. Vote was 5-0-0(Jarema,Redfern,Caouette, Hagstrom, Pernice) Mr. Jarema started the discussion of scheduling the next meeting date. He stated the Board has committed to being available every week for any necessary hearings. Mr. Regnante mentioned they would be available for multiple meetings as well. It was decided that multiple hearings will be held in January on the dates of Thursday January 10`h, Thursday January 20, and Wednesday January 30`h. On a motion made by Mr. Redfern,and seconded by Mr. Caouette, the Zoning Board of Appeals moved to continue Case#18-01 to 1110119. Vote was 5-0-0(Jarema,Redfern, Caoueffe,Hagstrom, Pernice) Other Business Adjournment 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