Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-03-11 Community Planning and Development Commission Minutes °re o Town of Reading RECEIVED a� o Meeting Minutes RTO WN CLERK'=rxoo•>pPr Board - Committee - Commission - Council: 2019 JUN 10 AM 9' 37 Community Planning and Development Commission Date:2019-03-11 Time: 7:30 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Selectmen Meeting Room Address: 18 Lowell Street Session: Open Session Purpose: General Business Version: Attendees: Members - Present: Nick Safina, Dave Tuttle, John Weston, Rachel Hitch, Pamela Adrian,Associate Tony D'Arezzo Members - Not Present: Others Present: Community Development Director Julie Mercier, Staff Planner Andrew MacNichol, Virginia Adams,Bob Biggio, Glen Hartzler, Andrew Randolph, Jean Cignetti, Dan Ryan,- Joshua yan;Joshua Latham, Andrew Heaney, Patrick Clancy, Everett Blodgett, Dave Dodge, Amelia Freedman, Carlo Bacci, Pete Douoet, Janet Barry, Ginny Giulotti, Pino D'Orazio, Donna Morin, Patricia Stewart, Ron Petrin, Jonathan Barnes, Steven Fleming, Sarah Brukilacchio, Ilene Bornstein Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Topics of Discussion: Chairman Nick Safina called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. Public Hearing. Definitive Subdivision Plan 116 West Street. Robert and Michelle Biagio Josh Latham, Robert Bigglo and Steve Fleming were present on behalf of the Application Mr. Weston read the legal notice into the record. Mr. Everett Blodgett, the Chairman of the Historic District Commission (HDC), called the HDC to order. Attorney Joshua Latham provided the project overview: • Applicant is proposing a two-lot subdivision of the existing property; • The existing property is 44,451sf, in the S-15 District and the West Street Historic District; • The existing home is built circa 1898, on the Historical Inventory for the Town and known as the Alden S. Johnson House; • The existing property is non-conforming in regards to the frontage, side and rear setback; • The proposal is to subdivide the existing lot to create two lots; • The existing home will be preserved and a new house lot will be created; • The property can conform to all Town Subdivision Regulations but Applicant does not want to conform to the regulations; • The Town Subdivision Regulations are not appropriate for the neighborhood or to yield one additional lot; 1 orx a Town of Reading 0 e = Meeting Minutes • The proposal is an alternative design and is similar to the recently approved subdivision at 40 Grove Street; • The proposed right-of-way will create a non-conforming front-yard setback on the existing house; • The proposal was presented to the HDC in January to discuss conceptually relocating the existing house to correct the non-conforming front-yard setback; • The HDC submitted a letter to the Commission for"proof"they agree of the concept of relocating the house but supports the waivers to allow a limited subdivision; • The proposal is to create a private paper street; • The paper street size will have a reduced 50' right-of-way rather than the 60' that is required under the subdivision regulations; • In the right-of-way, there will be two driveways stemming from West Street; • The driveways will be maintained and paid by a Homeowners Association and there will be no town involvement with regards to plowing snow or maintaining the drainage; and • There will be no sidewalks just an opening to the driveway Mr. Latham gave his opinion the limited subdivision is more appropriate for the Historic District and to the neighborhood. Mr. Steve Fleming from Vineyard Engineering Environmental Services presented the proposal: • The lot was redesigned to conform with all zoning bylaws; • Removing two patios but the impervious area will Increase by 912sf; • The driveway will be permeable pavement and will drain to the south side of the driveway into a Swale; • The swale will be used for run off when the permeable pavement is frozen or maintenance is laxed during the fall months; and • The increase in Impervious area requires 3 cultech recharges to be installed around the new house Mr. Safina asked how the run off will be controlled to prevent water from going onto adjacent properties. Mr. Fleming explained the contours are designed to shed water to the southwest side of the property. There is so much vegetation on the property the water is probably not ponding. He added most of the existing contours will be used and the neighboring properties are a bit higher in elevation. Mr. Safina said It appears the house is at the lowest point. He asked about the floor elevations. Mr. Fleming discussed the elevations around the property. Mr. Safina asked if there any special precautions when putting permeable pavements over utilities? Mr. Fleming responded he is not aware of any special conditions. Ms. Mercier, the Community Development Director, said the Fire and Engineering Department have not yet approved the proposal and the Applicant still needs to submit outstanding information. Mr. Tuttle asked for clarification on the proposed curb cut/driveway width. Mr. Latham pointed out on the plan the driveway that will be dedicated to the Homeowners Association. Mr. Weston said there is an existing curb cut and asked if West Street is controlled by MassDOT? It was confirmed West Street is controlled by the Town. Ms. Mercier requested the driveway be shown more clearly on the plan. 2 e ra a Town of Reading c iso Meeting Minutes Mr. D'Arezzo asked the proposed curb cut width? Mr. Fleming replied the curb cut width is 24-feet. Ms. Mercier clarified the layout is larger, but the curb cut and paved area is smaller. She said a curb cut larger than 24' would need approval by the Select Board. Mr. Latham clarified what is on the plan and said the 37' is the distance from the right-of-way. Ms. Mercier agreed the 37' is in an awkward area on the plan. Mr. Tuttle asked if the responsibility to maintain the drainage swale would be shared between the two homeowners? Mr. Latham replied the responsibility is similar to a Condominium Association. The operations and maintenance of the drainage and maintenance of the driveways will be an obligation by both property owners financially and to act to assure it remains open. He added the HOA document will be filed with the deeds. Mr. Safina asked if the Fire Department has commented on the turnaround. Mr. Latham replied the Fire Department expressed two alternatives. One is to require a 14' driveway to support the ladder truck or a reduced driveway with a sprinklered house. He said the proposal is to increase the driveway to the required 14' but the curb cut will remain the same. Mr. Safina asked if the impervious driveway can support a fire truck. Mr. Fleming replied the asphalt material and will be able to support the fire truck. Mr. Safina asked if the Fire Department requested room to turnaround at the top of the property. Mr. Latham replied the,Fire Department wanted the"T"to stabilize the truck but is still waiting for the formal comments. Mr. Safina commented the turnaround is close to the house and suggested pulling it back. Ms. Mercier agreed the Fire Department would not park so close to a burning house. Mr. Tuttle suggested moving it down to the "bulb"to provide Fire access to both houses. Mr. Safina requested waiting for the formal comments from the Fire Department. Mr. D'Arezzo asked for clarification on the elevation on the south side, the elevation is 276' but the elevation of the hydrant two lots over is 275-feet. Mr. Fleming clarified the elevation is 272-feet. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if this slope would cause the water to flow to the adjacent property. Mr. Fleming explained the water Flow and said it will be managed on the new lot. Ms. Mercier said the Applicant has submitted two different sets of plans and cautioned the Applicant to be careful in the future. Mr. Fleming said they are the same plans but when scanned the defined lines are not as apparent. Mr. Safina reviewed the requested waivers: • Topography - this waiver is usually requested; • ID of trees - Mr. Fleming agreed to locate the trees that will be removed; • Street for Town acceptance - Ms. Mercier said there is usually a note on the plan stating the road to remain private; • Profile for the roadway - suggested spot elevations with drainage detail; • Test pits - required for the Engineering Department; • Location of the fire hydrant - questioned why a waiver to locate one hydrant; • Location of the utilities - the location is required; • Environmental Impact Report - Mr. Latham said there Is no Conservation; • Test borings - Prove to Engineering the impervious pavement will not collapse; • Street lighting - not a public way; • 30' minimum paved way - after a discussion it was noted this will be changed; and • Granite curbing - may be needed at West Street but waived along driveway edge to allow drainage to work naturally 3 Town of Reading C i Meeting Minutes Mr. Safina requested the Applicant to show snow piles on the plans. Ms. Hitch left the meeting. Mr. Dan Ryan from 17 Wentworth Road commented water is a hot topic and said he has photographs showing the standing water. The Fire Department has helped pump his basement, required drywells to mitigate the issues with the water. He expressed concern the proposal will push water back toward his property and wanted clarification on the recharge systems. Mr. Fleming responded the depth to the groundwater is 6' but will be verified with test pits. The Increase in impervious is increased only 900' and there will be 9 cultech units that will capture water evenly. He said all the surface runoff will be contained on this property but will not affect nor help solve other people's property. The design will manage the increased impervious with percolation for a 100-year storm. Mr. Ryan reiterated the water is the biggest concern and questioned if the Items he put in place will need to need to be changed, for example: upgrading sump pumps, upgrading generator, or adding Flood insurance. Mr. Safina explained how a recharge system works. Mr. Ryan gave his opinion the Applicant has not proved the proposal will not cause significant impact of water to his or surrounding properties. Mr. D'Arezzo agreed with this statement. Mr. Safina said the Town Engineer will review and provide feedback. Ms. Jean Cignetti from 100 West Street said there is a spring underneath 116 West Street and when it rains it pools. She never had a problem until 12 years ago and had to install two sump pumps to handle the water in her basement. Ms. Cignetti added she already lived through the West Street construction and does not want to go through a construction of a subdivision Ms. Mercier asked why the test pits have not been done to confirm the groundwater. Mr. Fleming said test pits could have been done ahead of time. The plans changed, the original proposal was for a three-lot subdivision. He said the water is still being managed on site and the neighboring properties will not be impacted. Mr. Safina said the Engineering Department Is going to require the test pits. Ms. Mercier commented she has never seen a project proceed this far without having test pits. Mr. Paul Dodge from 27 Wentworth Road pointed out on the plan the area that is affected with all the water and said it is not only 100-year storm it is every spring. The ground is sloped to a little creek and looks like an abandoned channel. He gave his opinion it could be considered a wetland and should be evaluated. Mr. Dodge expressed concern with the waivers requested by the Applicant. Mr. Safina and Mr. Weston explained why the proposed low-Impact design is an Improvement over a regular subdivision. Mr. Safina added nothing has been approved and the Town Engineer needs to provide feedback. Mr. Dodge asked who would prove there is wetlands - the Town or Applicant. Ms. Mercier replied she will follow up with Chuck Tirone, the Conservation Agent. Mr. Pete Doucette from 23 Wentworth Road said he is concerned with the recharge systems, and said they will not work if the area is saturated. He said the vegetation is wet and dying. Mr. Doucette added if the vegetation is removed and a house is built It will change his view. 4 .� rR o� Town of Reading c ' . �r Meeting Minutes Mr. Fleming said perk and test pits will be done by a professional before the final drainage design. He said the Applicant will be adding new trees for privacy. Mr. Safina said the trees should be distributed to cover the entire area. Ms. Janet Barry from 32 Lewis Street said for the record she supports the Biggio Family but would like a study on the wetlands. Her yard was just graded because of the 4' of water and mentioned the ducks that visit regularly. She asked to see on paper what is proposed for trees. Mr. Safina said the Town will look into the Conservation issue. Ms. Cignetti said she was impacted with the West Street project and will be directly with this project and asked how the dirt and dust will be controlled. Mr. Safina replied the Decision will address the construction control and the contractor will meet with the Town. Ms. Mercier explained the Town pre-construction process. Ms. Cignetti asked about potential rodents. Mr. Safina suggested she call the Town to Inform the staff with concerns. Ms. Adrian asked if the Applicant will be required to submit a landscape plan that can also address the down trees? Ms. Mercier replied a landscape plan is not a requirement but could request additional information on screening/plantings. Mr. Latham responded he would like to continue the hearing to allow time toreceive comments from the Fire and Engineering Department and at that time submit a plan for screening and plantings. Ms. Mercier said the next meeting will be April 8, 2019 at 7:45 PM. Mr. Weston requested delaying the meeting until the test pits are done. Mr. Fleming said the test pits can be done weather pending. Mr. Blodgett explained why the HDC prefers the small-scale project versus the full cul-de- sac and said it is historically better. He said there was a stream that went through that area. Ms. Adams from the HDC encouraged the Commission to approve the low-Impact design subdivision as they did at 40 Grove Street. Ms. Mercier reminded the audience they will not be notified again about a meeting and urged them to check the Town website or call the Town Hall. Mr. Andrew MacNichol the Staff Planner said he will update the Town website with new plans and documents Mr. Tuttle made a motion to continue the Definitive Subdivision for 116 West Street to April 8, 2019 at 7:45 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Mr. Blodgett adjourned the HDC at 8:40 PM. 24 Gould Street. 40R Dave Traggorth, Andrew Consigli and Jeff Olinger were present on behalf of the Application Ms. Adrian recused herself and left the dais. Mr. Traggorth gave an update on what has transpired since the Decision was approved: 5 ore r Town of Reading e I: �e Meeting Minutes • Advancing the plans; • Obtaining State Funding for the Affordable Housing component; • Selecting the contractor - Delphi Construction; • Working on the Construction Management Plan; • Submitted for a building permit and the review is ongoing; • In December a community meeting was held with the direct neighbors to discuss construction logistics; and • Talked with immediate Green Street residents to get feedback on material selections on the back wall; Mr. Traggorth said the reason for this meeting is to: • Review/discussion of proposed plan change; • Review of facade materials/sample boards; and • Review of Arborist's finalized planting plan for the street trees along Gould Street Mr. Traggorth said the building is the same as approved: the 55-residentlal units, the parking, presentation along the street, height and setback will all remain the same. Mr. Traggorth distributed the updated plans. Mr. Traggorth summarized the plan changes: • On Level 1 - the transformer is notched out due to feedback received from Reading Municipal Light Department; • On Level 3 - articulation over garage at northeast, a 1% increase In GSF which improves the layout of the bedrooms over the garage entry; • The garage entry is taller to make sure truck clearance would work; and • Level 1 - the retail space is reduced by 100sf to allow for a more generous mailroom, larger lobby and historic exhibit space Mr. Tuttle asked if Level 1 still allows for bike storage. Mr. Traggorth replied the space is still there but reconfigured. Mr. Traggorth Informed the Commission the mix in the 55-residential units will be changed to 31 one bedroom, 22 two bedroom and 2 three bedroom units. He said the change was due to egress conditions that needed to be incorporated and "empty nesters" wanting a 1- bedroom unit. Mr. Jeff Olinger presented the facade materials and elevations: • Two-toned iridescence brick and mixed gray/beige tone brick; • Arriscraft masonry material at the residential; • Siding at the front and base at the rear; • Synthetic slate for ground level roof; • Broad range of colors, blend will look calm and natural; and • Materials are better from a constructability standpoint not to switch systems Mr. Safina said the windows are smaller and less vertical; and said he favored the prior plan first Floor stone base. Mr. Consigli explained there was difficulty locating the product and said bringing the brick down will help with the vertical appearance. Mr. Olinger confirmed all the window trim will be done with masonry precast. Mr. Safina said he preferred the prior design especially over the garage. Mr. Olinger said the challenge was with the two-bedroom units having three windows in front. He added the windowsills are higher to allow the resident to have choices in the unit for example: a couch in front of the window. 6 N�rRFq� Town of Reading a Meeting Minutes Mr. Consigli explained removing the balconies and railings will help control the facade. The residents won't be able to store items on their balcony and have it seen from the street. Mr. Traggorth said management would need to police the balconies and the focus should be on the store front. Mr. Weston said he preferred the prior design because it visually broke up the commercial from residential. Mr. Safina asked if the masonry is Arriscraft or if it is cast stone. Mr. Olinger replied the Arriscraft color is pink and clashed with the brick. Mr. Traggorth agreed to look into Arriscraft. Mr. Safina said he is not favoring Arriscraft and agreed with Mr. Weston statement. Mr. Traggorth asked the building permit process not be held up, and suggested coming back to the Commission for approval once the material is finalized. Mr. Safina said the rear of the building shows less mullions and asked if they are black framed. Mr. Olinger said they are white framed at the rear. Mr. Tuttle said the right side of the building appears more vertical. Mr. Olinger said the rendering doesn't accurately represent the property line and the building still has a jog. He said the prior plan showed a portico because of an exit door. Mr. Safina pointed out an inconsistency in the plans with the materials shown. Ms. Mercier asked why the garage appears so much larger. Mr. Olinger explained it is larger to allow for a truck to pull in off the street. Mr. Tuttle asked about the angled-corridor on the second, third and fourth floor. Mr. Olinger replied after further analysis the angled-corridor is no longer proposed, there is a requirement for a third stair which caused an internal configuration. Mr. Safina opened the meeting to the public. Mr. Johnathan Barnes from the Historical Commission said when the Commission signed off on the project there was a lot of discussion on the design. The proposed changes have not been reviewed by the Historical. He said the changes are not a major modification, but are still changes. Mr. Barnes went through the stated why he preferred the original proposal. Mr. Olinger said the canopies are not shown on this plan but are not eliminated. Mr. Consigli said the retailer can specify their own canopy. A resident asked If the building was being moved. Mr. Traggorth confirmed the building is not being moved. Ms. Sarah Brukilachio from 48 Maple Ridge Road said her contractor recommended reflection coating on glass so the glare doesn't melt her new vinyl siding or create a rippling effect. Mr. Traggorth said he has never heard of a neighbor's window causing vinyl siding melting. Ms. Brukilachio pointed out in Salem and Peabody where the houses are built close together. Mr. Traggorth thanked Ms. Brukilachio for bringing this concern forward and agreed to address it. Mr. Traggorth explained he recommended to Mr. Olinger the rear be made simpler for the rear abutters, simple double hung windows and muted clapboard. He added he will do whatever the neighbors choose for the rear of the building. Mr. Consigli said the appearance In the rear became too busy and said the grids can be put back in the windows. 7 °rR Town of Reading �e e Meeting Minutes Mr. Traggorth said the courtyard will have planters and trees but agreed it looks a little barren. Mr. Safina approved the windows as proposed. Mr. Safina said the plan changes are required to be approved before a building permit can be issued. He added he has no issues with the materials. Ms. Adams and Mr. Barnes said the colors and materials are acceptable. Mr. Weston said the approved set of plans showed some sort of detail shown in the rear. Mr. Consigli said it was originally proposed but there was a concern the material will move. It was decided to keep the rear simple and clean. Mr. Weston gave his opinion removing the material makes the building appear flat. Mr. Barnes said the front of the building design looks great and is missing in the rear. Mr. Traggorth said there is a lot of articulation at the back because of the step-backs. Mr. Consigli said a white board is proposed at the bottom of the courtyard. Mr. Consigli described the aluminum coping at back with traditional trim board. Ms. Brukilachio suggested the end by the houses have darker window sashes to match the abutting homes. Mr. Consigli said adding the darker window sashes will create mixed colored windows. Mr. Safina replied the whole building will not be viewed at the same time. Mr. Traggorth agreed to change those windows. Ms. Mercier requested one updated rendering for the file. Mr. Safina agreed the Applicant will have to provide a revised rendering showing the front material. Mr. Traggorth made a suggestion to the language so the Decision can be submitted for the building permit. The Commission discussed the revised rendering: • Building base along the front of the buildings red brick should be stone to match approved drawing; • Brick material behind transformer; • Awnings not shown for clarity of dotted in; • Rear elevation with dark charcoal windows; and • Add false shadowing to garage image Ms. Mercier asked about the three-bedroom units and Inter-agency agreement. Mr. Traggorth said the proposal complies with the DHCD. Mr. Weston said the number units are staying the same but the number of beds is reduced. The Commission reviewed the changes to the plan and draft Decision. Mr. Safina reiterated an updated rendering will be required. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to determine that the proposed plan changes for the 40R at 20-24 Gould Street are minor plan changes. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the proposed minor plan change for the 40R at 20-24 Gould Street. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to approve the material changes for the 40R at 20-24 Gould Street. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. Mr. Traggorth provided a presentation on the removal of the trees that were recommended by an arborist. He pointed out the little trees at the back-property line and one that is bigger that Is wrapped around the building. B 6.� °r"�a Town of Reading c !; q- Meeting Minutes `J JJyI� �C Mr. Traggorth said he informed the neighbors about the trees and will use atree company. He added he was hoping to save the trees but they may become unstable and unsafe. Mr. Traggorth provided the planting plan along Gould Street. Ms. Mercier said the Tree Warden will need to approve. Mr. Traggorth confirmed the tree company has already spoken with the Tree Warden. Mr. Safina asked if the island is projecting out to protect the parking space and questioned if a tree could survive at this location; Mr. Traggorth said it is a large spot for a tree. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if there will be trees planted in the rear? Mr. Traggorth replied there is no proposal to plant trees, the rear abutters will be able to use the space between their yards and the building. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to accept and approve the arborist's opinion and tree plan for the 40R at 20-24 Gould Street. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 4-0-0 vote. - Ms. Adrian returned to the dais. Continued Public Hearina. Definitive Subdivision Plan 135. 139 & 149R Howard Street Infrastructure Holdings LLCC There was no one present on behalf of the Application Mr. Safina read the Applicant has requested the hearing to be continued to April 8, 2019. Mr. Safina made a motion to continue the Definitive Subdivision for 135, 139 & 149R Howard, Infrastructure Holdings LLC to April 8, 2019 at 8:00 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Continued Public Hearing, Site Plan Review 258-262 Main Street, Reading CRE Ventures LLC There was no one present on behalf of the Application Mr. Safina read the Applicant has requested the hearing to be continued to April 8, 2019. Mr. Safina made a motion to continue the Site Plan Review for 258-262 Main Street, Reading CRE Ventures LLC to April 8, 2019 at 8:15 PM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Planning Uodates and Other Updates - Potential Zoning Bylaw Amendments for November Town Meeting 2019 This discussion was held at the end of the meeting. - Approval of CPDC Minutes of 01/14/2019 and 2/11/2019 Ms. Mercier suggested tabling the approval of minutes to the next meeting. - Discussion of 40R Design Guidelines Ms. Mercier said she incorporated all comments received and compared the changes to the original 40R Design Guidelines document and made one colored document. She added she 9 x Town of Reading e " Meeting Minutes made a list of outstanding discussion points from the last time the guidelines were discussed in September. Ms. Mercier pointed out the two big areas that was changed on the document. Mr. Weston suggested discussing transitional areas and district edits where projects would abut residential uses and neighborhoods. Mr. D'Arezzo asked about section 10.4.1 - building height. Ms. Mercier clarified her intent for the change. Mr. Saflna said just the wording and suggested "no more than 30% greater nor 30% less than". Mr. Johnathan Barnes said he has several comments on the new version and asked how the Commission would like to proceed to Incorporate the comments. He said his concern is the areas that were eliminated. The Commission reviewed the following outstanding discussion points: • The language that allows how tall a proposed building that abuts residential homes can be built; • How to define a residential neighborhood - to protect single, two and three-family units; • Residential development adjacent to a residential neighborhood vs. non-residential development adjacent to a residential neighborhood; • Abutting residential use vs. adjacent residential use - limiting factor has to be relevant; • The Design Guidelines vs. Zoning Bylaw - they don't have to be tied together; • Is the Commission getting hung up on definitions - the Guidelines can be loose; • The purpose of the 40R Design Guidelines is for potential developers to know the guidelines to adhere too and gives the Commission the ability to deny a development; • To figure out the term of an abutter - legally define it based on the Certified Abutters List; • Transitional areas are really about the direct or across the street abutters; • Parking plan should be required - separate plan for residential component and commercial component; • The employee parking study is being reviewed; and • Should development areas be required to have underneath/covered parking spaces The 40R Design Guidelines discussion is continued to a future meeting. • Ms. Mercier informed the Commission Town Counsel has determined there is a definition for CBD Oil and Hemp in the Zoning Bylaw and have prepared a draft of two different bylaws that will be presented at Town Meeting. She said the plan is not to enforce the stores until It is determined at Town Meeting if the Town wants to prohibit. • Ms. Mercier discussed the proposed changes to Footnote 1: requiring Special Permit by the Zoning Board of Appeals; what additional square footage is reasonable to allow on an existing house; and a specific date limit. Mr. D'Arezzo volunteered to take the lead with this discussion. • Mr. Weston said he will take the lead for Lots in two districts, extending the zone boundary. • Mr. Saflna said he will take the discussion on mixed-use and Intensity Regulations. • Ms. Mercier presented the proposed changes to mixed-use. She forwarded feedback from Attorney Joshua Latham, who reached out to developers, on how to make 10 o °rR o� Town of Reading c 1 = Meeting Minutes affordable units work in a project. The Commission discussed what percentage of affordable units per development should be required; and rather than payment in lieu allowing the idea of alternative affordable units. • Ms. Mercier discussed the proposed changes to the Intensity Regulations. Mr. Tuttle pointed out his concern with section 5.6.8.3. Ms. Mercier asked the Commission if they would like to add additional meetings to allow time to continue the proposed zoning amendments. After a discussion, the Commission agreed to add a meeting on April 1`t to discuss zoning only. Ms. Mercier suggested the public hearing be June loth and then continued if necessary. She added Town Counsel should be invited to the public hearing to discuss the CBD Oil/Hemp warrant. Mr. Safina made a recommendation to nominate John Weston for Chairman. The motion was seconded by Mr. Tuttle and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Mr. Safina made a recommendation to nominate Rachel Hitch for Secretary. The motion was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Ms. Mercier reminded the Commission this Is her last meeting and will be leaving the Town. She read a personal note to the Commission. Mr. D'Arezzo reminded the members their term could be expiring in June. Mr. Tuttle made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 12:00 AM. The motion was seconded by Mr. Safina and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. otm 11