Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-05-13 Community Planning and Development Commission Minutes cd"'� Town of Reading RECEIVED Meeting Minutes TOWN CLEREADING, MA Board - Committee - Commission - Council: 4113 AUG 14 AM 10-- 37 Community Planning and Development Commission Date:2019-05-13 Time: 7:30 PM Building: Reading Town Hall Location: Select Board Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Open Session Purpose: General Business Version: Attendees: Members - Present: John Weston, Nick Safina, Rachel Hitch, Pamela Adrian,Associate Tony D'Am=o Members - Not Present: Dave Tuttle Others Present: Staff Planner Andrew MacNichol, Praveen Limbachiya Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Andrew Machlichol Topics of Discussion: Chairman John Weston called the meeting to order at 7:36 PM. Andrew MacNichol, Staff Planner, suggested taking two agenda items out of order and addressing the public hearings that will be continued at the request of the Applicants to the next meeting. Master Signage Plan Application/Amendment 606 Main Street. MF Charles Building Ann DiCicco was present on behalf of the Application. Ms. Ann DiCicco from DiCicco Sign said the landlord of the MF Charles Building is requesting an amendment to the Master Signage Plan. Mr. MacNichol explained the Applicant is requesting approval for signage on the facade facing Main Street for the 2nd and 3rd floor tenants. Ms. DICicco clarified the Northern Bank currently uses the second floor, the amendment will allow signage for existing tenants on the 3rd floor and any potential future tenants on the 21d floor. Mr. MacNichol said the proposal is for one sign block that displays the businesses along Main Street and a directory sign in the rear of the property. Mr. Safina asked if there was a Northern Bank sign in the rear of the building. Ms. DiCicco replied there is a sign for the bank in the rear of the building. Mr. Safina asked if the request is only for the Main Street fagade and does not include the Haven Street fagade. Ms. DICICco replied the Haven Street businesses have their own signage above their awning. She said the 2nd and 3rd floor tenant entrance is on Main Street. Mr. Safina questioned if the addresses for the MF Charles Building are 600-622 Main Street and asked if the proposal is for three signs in one sign block. Ms. DiCicco replied on the 3rd floor there are three tenants and the 2nd floor is used by the bank. She said the bank does not intend to move, but the proposal is for potential future 2nd floor tenants. Mr. Safina said Page 11 orxea Town of Reading e Meeting Minutes he does not want the bank to request an additional sign. Ms. DiCicco responded the bank already has two signs which is the maximum allowed. Mr. Safina requested the wording in the Decision be changed to make sure it clarifies the signage is for potential future 2nd floor tenants. Mr. Safina pointed out an old document in the packet and requested it be replaced with the correct rendering. Ms. DICicco said she will forward the correct rendering if needed. Ms. Hitch said she had difficulty finding Subway on Haven Street and asked if the business had a sign above the awning. Ms. DiClcco said that Subway has a sign above the awning, and reiterated the proposed amendment does not Include the businesses on Haven Street. Ms. Hitch said all businesses are allowed one awning and one sign. Mr. Safina said signs are not allowed to be installed above the lowest eaves of the second floor windows. Mr. Weston said the Master Signage Plan does not address the number of signs per business. Ms. Hitch said there are locations on the building that could be used for signs to help advertise the businesses. She suggested every one business is allowed one sign, and not put three businesses in one block. Mr. Safina clarified the entrance to the V floor tenants Is located through the existing door on Main Street. Ms. Hitch said she understands the logic, but the proposal creates an area on building that looks empty. She suggested one awning topper per tenant. Mr. Weston disagreed with the suggestion, and said a business is allowed one size sign based on the frontage. Mr. Safina restated signage is not allowed to be placed above the bottom eave of the second floor windows. Ms. Hitch gave her opinion spreading out the signage would allow the quiet unpopulated corner to have vibrancy. Mr. Safina explained the location of the proposed directory sign. Mr. Weston said directory signs are typically allowed. Mr. MacNichol said a 6-square foot directory sign is allowed. Mr. Weston asked if that size is the maximum allowed for the entire building. Mr. Saflna asked if the directory is illuminated. Mr. MacNichol read the sign-bylaw and corrected his previous statement that the maximum size of the sign allowed by-right Is 4-square feet. Mr. Weston said there was a legal decision that revealed the Town cannot call signs"directory signs". Mr. MacNichol said there is not a definition of a directory sign in the bylaw. The Commission discussed the history behind removing directory signs from the bylaw. Mr. Safina believed the language allowing 4-square feet per sign was carried over from interior directories. Mr. Weston believed the language was for the exit and entrance signs on a driveway. Mr. Safina gave his opinion he is not offended by the sign and suggested a location for the proposed sign. He said the Commission cannot exceed 4-square feet per sign and asked if Ms. DiCicco would like to reconsider the proposal. Mr. MacNichol asked if the Master Signage Plan allows the Commission some leeway. Ms. DiCicco asked for clarification on the maximum 8-feet in height language. Mr. Safina said 8-feet in height would be to the top of the sign. Mr. Weston said a Master Signage Plan does not provide leeway on the size of the signor amount of signs, only on the style and placement. Mr. Safina said the sign does not need to be read until someone approaches the sign. Ms. DiCicoo asked if the proposal is redesigned to conform to requirements can town personnel approve or would the Commission need to review a new application. Mr. Weston replied the amendment to the Master Signage Plan would allow the directional sign in that location. Ms. DiCicco asked if the tenant would be allowed a sign in the rear of the building. Mr. Saflna said he believes the zoning bylaw does not allow tenants two signs off the first floor. Mr. MacNichol read the Master Signage Plan and said the zoning bylaw allows one wall sign per business. Ms. DiCicco said if the tenant chose not to use the front of the building, could they choose to put a sign in the rear of the building? Mr. Safina said the bylaw is written by district and by use and the Commission took time to review the bylaw. Page 12 Ory Or RF,� Town of Reading i Meeting Minutes Ms. DiCicco confirmed the sign will be magnetic to allow it to be changed If needed. Ms. DICicco said the three tenants proposed the directional sign for the building and on account of the limit on size of the sign the tenant could choose to do a sign for themselves. Mr. Safina replied only one directional sign per building is allowed. Ms. DiCicco commented there are no address numbers in the rear of the building and said the numbers will be above the door on Main Street. Mr. Safina said address numbers are exempt. He said he likes the sign design but it needs to be smaller in size and added if the zoning changes to allow the sign to be increased in size the magnets can be changed without abandoning the sign. Ms. DICicco said the sign was designed so every business in the building could be displayed. Mr. MacNichol suggested changes to the Findings. Mr. Safina requested the directional sign language be changed. Mr. Weston requested the specific square feet not be called out in the Finding so if the zoning requirement does change the Master Signage Plan would still apply. Mr. MacNichol reviewed what would be changed in the draft certificate. Ms. DiCicco said the tenants proposed the sign design but she will have to discuss with the landlord how they would like to proceed. Mr. Weston opened the meeting to public comment and closed with none. Ms. Hitch made a motion to approve the Master Signage Plan Amendment for the MF Charles Building at 600-622 Main Street as amended. The motion was seconded by Ms. Adrian and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Sian Permit Application 5 Hamden Street, Dollar Tree Mike Cohen was present on behalf of the Application Mr. MacNichol provided an email from Mark Dupell, Building Commissioner, that the proposed sign location is allowed as it is not on the second floor of the building. Mr. Safina said this is the first occasion he has heard of the Dollar Tree opening a store at 5 Hamden Street. The artwork that was displayed in the windows have been removed and he asked what the proposal for the windows is. Mr. MacNichol replied he did not attend the pre-construction meeting but he was told there has been nothing proposed for the windows. Mr. Safina asked If the existing panels will be removed to open up the windows. Mr. MacNichol replied the proposal is the panels to remain and he added a condition to the Decision that requires the Staff Planner to approve any changes to the windows or awnings. Mr. Safina said the artwork was part of the approved site plan for the building and questioned if the intent is to add mannequins in the windows. Mr. MacNichol asked the location of the windows that is a concern. Mr. Safina replied Walgreens was required to display artwork in the windows on the first floor that face the street to cover the"cookie cutter" displays. He asked if the intent of the Dollar Tree is to replace the artwork with something to cover the displays from inside. Mr. Weston suggested reviewing the Decision of the original use and if any changes it will need to be addressed by the Commission. Mr. Safina asked if the proposal shows LED lighting without LED lights. Mr. Cohen, the sign representative, said there is no LED lighting proposed, the existing lights on the building will help with illumination. Ms. Hitch asked for clarification on who would need to approve any changes to the awnings. Mr. MacNichol replied awnings are allowed by-right, but he added language to the Decision Page 13 a orx Town of Reading c e Meeting Minutes to assure any window or awning changes would need to be approved. Mr. Safina prefers lettering only on one awning. Mr. MacNichol explained the Applicant previously proposed window and illuminated signs and reiterated he added language to make sure the Town would have to approve any changes. Ms. Hitch said the existing awnings are a nice architectural feature and wants to make sure the awnings are not changed to cloth awnings. Mr. Cohen replied he was unsure if the awnings are proposed to be changed. Ms. Hitch requested strong language be added to the Decision to make sure the awnings are not changed without Town approval. Mr. Safina requested the Town meeting minutes. Mr. MacNichol explained a DRT meeting was not required and the pre-construction meeting minutes were not drafted for this meeting. He said he did not attend the meeting, but understands the Town has concerns with a Dollar Tree at this location. Mr. Weston wanted to be certain the memo from the Building Commissioner said the window located by the roof of the building is not considered a window; therefore the proposed sign would comply because it is below the eave. Mr. Safina said the original developer promised a much nicer background which was not done. Ms. Hitch said that is her concern, promises won't be kept and she said there should be language with consequences. Mr. Safina said the application is for a sign permit that will be issued by the Building Inspector. Ms. Hitch asked if there is another location for a sign. Mr. MacNichol said the original proposal was for a sign in the rear of the building but the Applicant did not want to seek approval for an additional sign. Mr. Weston asked if the tenant is allowed two signs per business. Mr. MacNichol replied the building is a single tenant building and the Town allows only one wall sign or a free-standing sign. Mr. Safina said Burger King is in the process of seeking a Variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow wall signs and keep the existing free-standing non-conforming sign. Mr. Weston presented his interpretation of the sign bylaw. He said he is not advocating for additional signs, but the building should have one sign in the front and one that faces the town parking lot in the rear of the lot. Ms. Hitch asked if there is a rendering of the Walgreens signs. Mr. MacNichol replied he does not have a rendering, he was made aware by the Building Inspector that the Dollar Tree sign Is in the same location as Walgreens. Mr. Weston brought forward a previous discussion on allowing wall mounted signs rather than a free-standing sign. He said he does not have any issues with the proposed sign. Ms. Hitch said there are a lot of residents that have a concern that the Dollar Tree is proposed at this location. Mr. Safina replied the residents are not in attendance. Ms. Hitch said she would like to make sure that it is in the record the Town should look into something to understand why the placement of stores similar to the Dollar Store should not be located at the crossroads of the Town. Mr. Weston pointed out the surrounding towns have similar types of stores. Ms. Hitch responded the surrounding Towns did not allow them be located at the crossroads of the Town. Mr. Weston said the Town is not in control of the location of businesses, the Town is in control of the types of businesses. He said at one time the Town approved retail at this location and if the residents want higher end stores then they would need to shop local. Ms. Hitch pointed out Nantucket prohibits national chains and certain types of stores and said the Town should be able to take a location and say it is not the right use for this site. She agreed residents are not spending locally, but expressed her opinion that the Dollar Tree and Your CBD Store do not represent the character of the Town that we want to live in. Mr. Safina agreed with this statement. Ms. Hitch continued and said It Is a tragedy for the Town that the Walgreens location that was vacant for five years is Page 14 r" Town of Reading ? �a Meeting Minutes ��a now proposing this type of business. She said she is glad that there will be "feet on the street" based on the current construction projects that may bring restaurants and retail but the Town should watch and look Into tools. Ms. Adrian said 30 Haven Street is now medical and not restaurants and asked if the town can legislate what type of businesses can go into a location. Ms. Hitch said there is a luxury if you have enough demand, but there is not enough demand. Mr. Weston said zoning will be discussed later in the meeting and requested the discussion be limited to the proposed sign. He asked if there were particular issues on the sign. Ms. Hitch wanted to make sure LED lighting is not proposed. Mr. MacNichol replied the sign permit will state LED lighting Is not allowed. Mr. Safina said there was no power to the original sign. Ms. Adrian said she has no concern with the sign. Mr. MacNichol asked about the artwork language. Mr. Safina said staff should make sure there are no changes to the window. Mr. Weston said the Applicant is required to comply with the same conditions as Walgreens. Ms. Hitch requested no green painting allowed. Ms. Hitch made a motion to approve the sign permit application for the Dollar Tree, 5 Hamden Street as amended. The motion was seconded by Ms. Adrian and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Continued Public Hearing, Definitive Subdivision Plan 114 West Street, Robert Biagio Robert Biggio, Josh Latham, Patrick Cloney and Steve Fleming were present for the Application. Attorney Josh Latham representing Robert and Michelle Biggio provided an update since the last meeting: • Plan revisions based on feedback from the Commission and residents; • Test pits for the drainage designs; • Investigated wetland concerns brought forward by the abutters; and • Engineering and Fire Department feedback Mr. Latham said a wetland scientist visited the site on March 25, 2019 and again with Chuck Tirane, the Conservation Administrator, on April 1, 2019 and at that time a whole site evaluation was done. The wetland scientist forwarded the results to the Conservation Commission and it was concluded there is no wetland resources on site. Mr. Latham said Ryan Percival, the Town Engineer, has submitted a memo agreeing with the waivers requested and approving the drainage design. Mr. Latham said the Fire Department has no jurisdiction for a single-family dwelling but at the DRT meeting it was suggested a 14' roadway be provided and which Is being proposed. Mr. Steve Fleming from Vineyard Engineering said the revisions to the plans were made based on the feedback received at the last meeting. The feedback mainly focused on the drainage Issues, but changes were made based on the information received from the test pits and percolation test. He said the geo-technical engineer conducted three test pits on the driveway to make sure the subsurface could support a fire truck. The report was forwarded to the Town Engineer for his review, and it indicated the subsurface condition Is acceptable and permeable pavers will be installed. This information is added to the detail plan. Page 15 c °r" Town of Reading i Meeting Minutes Mr. Fleming said the elevation was raised to allow the foundation of the dwelling and garage to be higher to assist with the high ground water table in the rear part of the property that was pointed out by the wetland scientist. Mr. Fleming said the contours are essentially the same, and everything flows to the southwest side of the property. He said based on the test pits, the drainage infiltration will be moved to the front and he presented the percolation test results. Mr. Fleming said instead of designing for the increased impermeable area, the drainage is designed for 100% of the proposed house. He added the Applicant has agreed to add infiltration to the existing dwelling. The test pits could not be done in the rear of the carriage house due to the constraint but similar soils were assumed. Mr. Fleming said a snow storage area was added and the size of the swale was increased. He added everything is pitched towards the swale. Mr. Fleming summarized drainage was the biggest concern and everything was done that possibly can be done. The original home binds up the property and didn't want to disturb stonewalls that are on the south and west side of the property. He said the dimensions were added to the plans and the turn-around was moved away from the house. Mr. Fleming explained the site plan and the planting plan. Mr. Latham said the presentation has concluded and pointed out there is an updated waiver list. Mr. Safina requested a copy of the Town Engineer memo. Mr. Weston asked the location of the 2' ground water that was brought forward by the wetland scientist site visit. Mr. Fleming pointed out the location the wetland scientist did his test pits. He said the wetland scientist did 12-14 test holes and found organic soils. He added the Applicant did 5 test pits. Mr. Safina asked if it was below 9-feet. Mr. Fleming provided the test pits log and the Commission discussed. Mr. Safina said the Applicant should have planned more than what is required. Mr. Latham said there was a discussion with the Town Engineer, which is the part of the reason the existing house is included. Mr. Fleming said the permeable pavement will have stone underneath to hold more water. The swale is in an area that will perk 2 minutes per inch and the proposal will manage a greater amount of water than existing. He said patios will be removed; the net increase is less than 1000 sf. Mr. Safina pointed out an area on the site plan and asked If the water will be addressed in the area. Mr. Fleming explained one CULTEC recharger will be installed and said the direction of the ground water flow will not change. Mr. Saflna said each waiver granted requires a contribution from the Applicant and recommended increasing the number of CULTEC drainage systems to help with the water problems in the area. He added if the water was reduced by the carriage house it would mitigate water problems. Mr. Fleming explained the grade would have to be raised in that area which would lose the storage value; and said the proposal will not exacerbate site conditions outside of the property. Mr. Safina said he appreciates the proposal will not make it worse, but wanted to see If it could be improved. He said he understands the CULTEC will not function properly in that area. Mr. Weston said the concerns from the neighborhood regarding the water in that area now makes sense. Mr. Fleming said the soils are not as porous in that area. The swale is over designed for the roadway and the driveway is an infiltration on its own. He explained the existing home has patios and walls and digging for infiltration could destroy the character of the home. Page 16 0 1�s° °r Town of Reading � : Meeting Minutes Mr. Robert Biggio said he suggested adding the CULTEC In the rear of the carriage house to help capture the water in that area. Mr. Fleming said the owner is not opposed to putting more CULTEC charges around the house, but at some point, it becomes impractical to bring water to the front of the house. Mr. Weston said the proposal Improves the drainage and there is not much else that can be done to improve the situation except allowing the abutters property to drain into this property. Mr. Fleming said the proposal is a robust approach to handle the drainage. The drainage swale was increased and the permeable paved driveway Is a huge infiltration system. Mr. Safina asked if the snow storage will impact the swale in the winter. Mr. Fleming replied the snow will take some capacity of the swale and explained the process. He said if there is a massive melt there will be water problems. The swale is over designed and will eventually handle the water. It could take a little time and could freeze over before it perks. Mr. Fleming said the Town Engineer requested the Applicant prepare for a massive melt and a failure to the Operation and Maintenance. Ms. Hitch asked if the landscaping includes the front of the house on West Street. Mr. Biggio replied a full landscaping plan has not been completed. Mr. Fleming said the landscaping plan was designed primary for the screening around the property. Mr. Biggio said the Historic District Commission will need to approve the exterior features of the house and landscaping. Mr. MacNichol explained everything that Is clouded on the plan is proposed to be removed. Ms. Adrian asked if there is any ledge on the property and if blasting will be necessary. Mr. Fleming said there is no ledge, only really good soils. Mr. Weston said the waivers that are requested were Identified at the last meeting but not specifically discussed. He said a lot of the requested waivers relate to the plan set. A resident asked if the public could ask questions. Mr. Weston opened the meeting to public comment. Mr. Dan Ryan from 17 Wentworth Road said he is glad test pits were done, but said he is curious why test pits were not conducted by the wetland scientist on the west side of the property. He said the water table is around 2-feet in that area. The east and north side is taking care of, but what is happening to improve the west side. Ms. Lauren Ryan from 17 Wentworth Road said she has come to terms with the structure, but expressed concern there is standing water on her property that causes moss where grass should grow. The driveway and test pits are nowhere near her property line and said she wants to make sure her basement does not Flood. Ms. Ryan continued and said Mr. Fleming's words aren't reassuring that the water problem will not negatively Impact her property. Ms. Ashley Heaney from 13 Wentworth Road said to help mitigate water on her property a sump pump and a French drain was installed and questioned what other precautions can be done to protect her property. She said she moved to the property four years ago and has seen the damage the water has done and is really afraid what could come. Page 17 o�H orxc� Town of Reading c Meeting Minutes Y(OP Andrew Heaney from 13 Wentworth Road said he appreciates the effort to makes things better but what he understands there is nothing that can be done in that area except perhaps stop the location of the new home. He said the back of the property has lost the most permeable land. Mr. Weston gave his perspective on the current drainage and the proposed drainage. He pointed out Mr. Safina explored earlier in the meeting if the drainage could be improved on the neighboring properties. Mr. Ryan said he understands in theory the water is limited in the area, and asked what would be his next step if this water problem intensities on his property. Mr. Fleming said there is water problems in the area, but the proposal won't add to the water problems. His client Is making a significant investment to his property, and does not want his property to flood. Ms. Ryan replied she does not want the Applicant to fix the water problem on her property but she doesn't want it to get worse. She said she can provide pictures showing water within a few inches of her home. Mr. Safina explained the current flow of water and what is being proposed. Mr. Fleming gave his opinion if a CULTEC was added to that area It would flood immediately. Mr. Biggio said a CULTEC behind the carriage house will Improve the drainage. Mr. Safina asked If a traditional house is proposed and nothing modern. He requested a French drain around the perimeter. Mr. Fleming said there is a concrete pad. Ms. Hitch said the new house should have a French drain. Mr. Safina said the house will not drain in the direction of the abutters. Mr. Heaney asked if there was anything In place to prevent a future owner from constructing an addition or changing the mitigation of water. Ms. Hitch replied the owner would have to seek approval from the Commission. Mr. Safina questioned if this statement was true,.and asked if an owner can do an addition by-right. Mr. Latham replied a homeowner can construct an addition on their home by-right as long as setbacks and lot coverage are met. Mr. Safina said an addition would require an Increase to the drainage system. Mr. Fleming said the setbacks are basically at the limit bemuse of the location of the CULTEC recharges and pond. After reviewing the plan, Mr. Safina said the footprint of the house is probably the biggest it can be based on the site. Mr. Weston said he understands there is water in the area, and said the proposal will not make the water worse and It could make it better. Mr. Ryan said he understands his water won't improve but reiterated he does not want it to become worse and asked if it does who would he contact? Mr. Safina suggested talking to the neighbor, and he explained an Operation and Maintenance Plan is required for the system. He added if there are significant problems follow up with the Town to make sure the maintenance was done. The Commission confirmed, the O&M Plan is required to be sent annually to the Town. Mr. Latham said the property is part of a Homeowners Association and it is an obligation of both owners for the operations and maintenance of the systems. The Town has enforcement to assure the owners will maintain the systems. Mr. Weston said a lot of the waivers have to do with the plan set and asked if the Town - Engineer has approved the waivers. Mr. MacNichol said the Town Engineer approved the prior list of waivers before some were removed and added the revised plan was sent to the Town Engineer and he did not have any comments or concerns. Mr. MacNichol confirmed the draft Decision has the current waiver request list. The Commission went through the list of waiver requests and discussed as needed. Mr. MacNichol said information was provided that the roadway will remain private. Mr. Safina made a motion to close the public hearing for the Definitive Subdivision Plan for 116 West Street. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hitch and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Page 18 Town of Reading Meeting Minutes Mr. Weston asked if Applicant would need to seek approval from the Historic District Commission. Mr. Latham explained the process and said the Historic District Commission will be required to approve the new home and any changes to the exterior of the existing home before a building permit will be issued. The Commission reviewed the draft Decision and changes were made. Ms. Hitch made a motion to approve the waivers as proposed and amended for the Definitive Subdivision Plan for 116 West Street. The motion was seconded by Mr. Safina and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Ms. Hitch made a motion to approve the Definitive Subdivision Plan for 116 West Street as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Safina and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Continued Public Hearing. Definitive Subdivision Plan 135, 139 & 149R Howard Street, Infrastructure Holdings LLC There was no one was present for the Application Mr. Weston read the Applicant has requested the public hearing to be continued to June 10, 2019. Mr. Safina made a motion to continue the public hearing for 135, 139 & 149R Howard Street to lune 10, 2019 at 7:30 PM. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hitch and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Continued Public Hearing, Site Plan Review 2SS-262 Main Street. Reading CRE Ventures LLC Praveen Limbachiya was present for the Application Mr. Weston read the Applicant has requested the public hearing to be continued to June 10, 2019. Mr. Safina made a motion to continue the public hearing for 258-262 Main Street Reading CRE Ventures LLC to lune 10, 2019 at 8:00 PM. The motion was seconded by Ms. Hitch and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Plannino Uodates and Other Topics Mr. MacNichol asked the Commission if they would discuss the Lot Release's for Lyle Estates, 364 Lowell Street. He explained the Lot Release request was received too late to add to the agenda. Mr. Safina said the Commission is required to vote on a Lot Release. After a discussion, the Commission agreed the construction for Lyle Estates is not far enough along to be able to vote. Potential Zoning Bylaw Amendments for November Town Meeting 2019 Mr. MacNichol suggested a quick review of the potential zoning bylaw amendments and if the language is approved he will post the public hearing for the meeting in early June. Mr. MacNichol presented the following: • Town Counsel provided CBD language referring to MGL, but he would like clarity before presenting; Page 19 o+ r" Town of Reading c Meeting Minutes re°js„�_ ��� • Lots In Two Districts has been eliminated as a potential zoning amendment; • Footnote 1 has been vetted; and • Mixed-Use Projects - changes made to the language The Commission reevaluated the proposed language to mixed-use projects. Mr. Weston asked the member of the audience if she had any questions or comments. The audience member gave her opinion the Commission is overregulating commercial developments and said the Commission Is trying to make decisions on how the Town will be In 25 years. Mr. Weston replied essentially Planning Is trying to make decisions for the future. The member asked how the Town will attract the right businesses so developers can get to the 25% commercial requirement. She believes Wakefield lost businesses because there was no parking. Mr. Safina said if the commercial requirement is less than 25% It would not be mixed-use and said the Town does not need more residential. Mr. Weston said the intent is to make sure the commercial area is maintained on the first Floor and allowing more Flexibility to build additional Floors for residential. Mr. Safina remarked the 25% requirement is not the only mechanism. The member said she finds it difficult to cross Main Street and does not go Into the business if she has to cross the street. Mr. Weston said a big structural problem the Town has is the commercial area is too narrow that causes parking issues. Mr. MacNichol said he will prepare the potential zoning amendments in black and bold version. The audience member asked how the potential zoning amendments will be made available for the public. Mr. MacNichol said the agenda for June 10th is quite full and suggested posting the public hearing for that night and also posting for a second public hearing In June if necessary. The Commission discussed and agreed to open the public hearing on June 10th and if needed continue to June 17th. • Approval of CPDC Minutes of 01/14/2019, 02/11/2019, 04/01/2019 8t 04/08/2019 Mr. Weston requested the minutes be tabled to a future meeting. • Discussion of 40R Design Guidelines There was no discussion on 40R Design Guidelines Ms. Hitch made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:45 PM. The motion was seconded by Ms. Adrian and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Page 110