Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-12-14 Community Planning and Development Commission Minutes -RE' IVED Town of Reading TOWN CLERK 3 Y Meeting Minutes 0�a''"Mw, "(Ju , ."N 1 .i tiM �� la Board - Committee - Commissions- Council: Community Planning and Development Commission Date: 2020-12-14 Time: 730 PM Building: Location: Remote Meeting - Zoom Address: Session: Purpose: Meeting Version: Attendees: Members: John Weston, Chair; Nick Safina, Pamela Adrian Heather Clish, Tony D'Arezzo-Associate Members - Not Present: Rachel Hitch Others Present: Community Development Director Julie Mercier, Staff Planner Andrew MacNichol, Giovanni Fodera, Michael Salamone, Brian McGrail, Brad Latham, Ugo DiBiase, Kelsey Beard, Jack Sullivan,Adam Goncalves, Reed Hayes, Made Kantorosinski, John Bobrek, Shawn Stetson, Melanie Stetson, Susan Coram, Emily Pelletier, Bill Jacob,Avery Fernandez, Beth Joyce, Penny Jean,Anastasia DaSilva, Frank Lanzillo, Bob Cusolito Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Andrew MacNichol Topics of Discussion: MEETING HELD REMOTELY VIA ZOOM Chairman John Weston called the meeting to order at 7:33 PM. Community Development Director Julie Mercier explained the protocols for tonight's meeting that is being held virtually as all hearings throughout the pandemic have been. She presented the Zoom Meeting information to the public for those wishing to join. She explained the features of the Zoom program and how to provide comments for any given application. She added that RCN is broadcasting and recording the meeting. Continued Public Hearing, Site Plan Review 1310-1312 Main Street, Readina Animal Clinic Mr. Weston announced that the Applicant has requested a continuance of the hearing to the January 2V, 2021 CPDC meeting date. Public Hearing, Special Permit for Free-Standina Sian 136 Haven Street The Postmark Mr. Brad Latham was present on behalf of the application team. He shared the proposed signage on the screen. Mr. Latham continued that the sign was reduced to 16sf in order to comply with the Downtown Smart Growth District Design Guidelines. He added that it will be constructed of aluminum material, stainless steel lettering and be illuminated through halo lighting. The sign will not be visible from any residential districts and will distinguish the residential entryway from the commercial areas of the site. Mr. Latham reviewed the General Special Permit Criteria. He showed and explained the desired sign location on screen. The sign is to be located on top of the brick wall within the residential pocket park on the site. He added that a street tree will be planted within the sidewalk. 1 Town of Reading Meeting Minutes Mr. D'Arezzo read the legal notice into the record before any ensuing discussion. Mr. Safina questioned the halo lettering. He stated it appears that the light would also shine through the sides of the lettering and not just the edges. Ms. Adrian asked if a Master Signage Plan is to be expected. She also asked if the site address will be shown. Mr. Latham responded that a Master Signage Plan is not being applied for at this time because tenants have not been identified. He continued that the site has two addresses, the residential entryway is addressed as 8 Sanborn Street and the address will be shown above the doorway. Mr. Safina noted that one of the sign specifications faintly shows what appears to be rows of LED lights, and asked what they are. Mr. Ugo Di Biase of the application team stated they may have been shown this way to show the locations of the LED lights within the cabinet. Mr. Safina agreed and expressed concern that the specs show a backlit internally illuminated sign. Mr. Latham stated the rendering shows illumination through the lettering only, and that the application is for halo lighting. Mr. Safina agreed that there seems to be a discrepancy and that he just wants to clarify what is being approved. Mr. Reed Hayes, a professional sign mechanic present on behalf of the Ace Flats sign application, offered his expertise that the specs are drawn this way to show lighting locations within the enclosed cabinet but that light would only appear through the acrylic lettering. The frosted siding is to ensure no light passes through. Mr. Safina asked for clarification on the proposed 8900 lumens for the sign and how bright that really is. Mr. Reed replied that it is the total light inside the cabinet and is not a huge amount. Ms. Clish asked if the sign is defined as internally illuminated. Mr. Latham responded that the sign was designed to conform to the bylaws. Ms. Clish asked how the sign will hold up in winter weather. Mr. Latham stated the sign will be managed by the condo association which would want to ensure the sign looks good at all times. He opined that the stainless-steel material would hold up well. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if the frosted sides would reduce in quality over time. He also asked if the condo association will have language within the condo documents on the sign location. Mr. Latham replied that if needed, the condo association would have the ability to reapply and move the signage if desired. Mr. Weston asked if there are any concerns with the sign configuration. Ms. Clish asked if the sign was reduced in size. Mr. Latham replied in the affirmative. Ms. Clish opined that the sign be moved closer to the door so it is not directly behind the street tree. Mr. Latham stated they were looking for symmetry within the pocket park. Mr. Safina stated that symmetry is not applicable given that the entrance and pocket park design are not symmetrical. He opined that off-setting the sign a bit might make more sense given the asymmetry of the pocket park. Mr. Safina asked for clarification on the definition of what is allowed. Mr. MacNichol stated that internally illuminated signs are not allowed within the Business-B Zoning District so it must conform to the Halo Signage definition. Mr. Safina opined that the lighting could illuminate the background causing more illumination than desired. 2 Town of Reading Y Meeting Minutes Mr. DiBiase stated that the sign could be shifted toward the stairs but only such that it aligns neatly with the stone on top of the wall. Mr. Safina asked for the definition of an internally illuminated sign. Mr. MacNichol shared the definition of internally illuminated signs in the chat. Mr. Safina stated this sign conforms with the internally illuminated sign definition more so than the Halo Lighting definition. Mr. Weston agreed relocating the sign would result in a better application. He also agreed that due to the signage definitions he is not sure the application can be voted on tonight. Mr. DiBiase stated he was under the impression that this was a halo sign but would revise the application to better reflect such. Ms. Mercier asked if this could be conditionally approved. She stated if the changes cannot be made they could return to CPDC. Mr. Weston opined that the applicants come back to the Board due to the Special Permit requirement of the application. He continued that this would give the Applicants flexibility in design and location as well. Mr. Weston opened the hearing to public comment. Seeing none Mr. Weston asked if the Board had any more comments. Mr. Safina stated that the presentation was well put together and appreciated the work that went into it. Ms. Clish agreed. Mr. MacNichol screen shared the draft decision for the application. After discussion the Board agreed to condition the requested changes for approval, so that the Applicant does not need to return to the Commission. Mr. Safina made a motion to close the public hearing portion of the application. Mr. D'Areuo seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-1. Mr. Safina made a motion to approve the Special Permit for a free-standing sign at 136 Haven Street as amended. Ms. Clish seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-1. Continued Public Hearing, 4011 Plan Review 531 Main Street, Reading Chronicle Mr. Safina made a motion to continue the 40R application for 531 Main Street to January 1V at 8.30PM. Mr. D'Areuo seconded the motion and it was approved 5- 0-0. Approval Not Required (ANR) Plan Endorsement 0 Grove Street. Meadowbrook Golf Club Mr. Jack Sullivan, project engineer, and Mr. Brian McGrail, project attorney, were present on behalf of the application. Ms. Mercier shared the plan on screen. Ms. Clish disclosed that she is a member of Meadowbrook Golf Club but does not need to recuse herself from the application. Mr. McGrail summarized the application that will result in a net of five new conforming lots. He stated that Grove Street is a public way that has been in existence prior to the adoption 3 Town of Reading x Meeting Minutes of the subdivision rules and regulations. He continued that the land and newly formed lots have no impact on the golf course use. Mr. Weston asked if this is the wooded area on site. Mr. McGrail replied in the affirmative and shared an aerial view of the site. He stated a significant buffer will remain between the lots and driving range. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if the golf club operated under a Special Permit. Mr. McGrail stated it is a legal pre-existing non-conforming use that does not require a Special Permit. Mr. Safina made a motion to endorse the Approval Not Required Plan at 0 Grove Street. Ms. Clish seconded the motion and it was approved 5-0-0. Sian Permit Application 45 Hiah Street. KSH & Co Beauty Ms. Kelsey Beard, KSH &Co. Beauty business owner, was present for the application. Ms. Beard stated that the existing lettering for Mark Tango Plumbing would be replaced and the wall sign would remain. Mr. Safina asked if the background would be repainted. Ms. Beard replied that she will confirm this with the sign manufacturer if desired. Ms. Weston stated this should be ensured so that the existing lettering is not seen at all. Mr. Weston asked if there are any changes to the sign lighting. Ms. Beard replied in the negative. There were no other comments from Commission members or the public. Mr. Safina made a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for KSH & Co Beauty at 45 Nigh Street. Ms. Adrian seconded the motion and It was approved 5-0-0. Sian Permit Application 24 Gould Street. Ace Flats Mr. Reed Hayes of Archetype Sign Works was present for the application. He stated that the developer would like a blade sign directly adjacent to the residential entry way of the 40R development at 24 Gould Street. The sign is to be aluminum construction and the lettering will also be dimensional. Mr. Safina stated that it was a creative design that reflected the history of the site well. He asked if the sign would be illuminated. Mr, Hayes replied it would not be illuminated. Mr. Weston asked how high the sign would be located. Mr. Hayes replied it would be 8'-2" above the sidewalk. Mr. D'Arezzo commented that the designer clearly followed the sign bylaw and asked if the sign bylaw was easy to interpret. Mr. Hayes stated though cumbersome, the table made it clear what was allowed and that he was familiar with the bylaw due to prior sign applications. Ms. Clish asked if the adjacent areas will include commercial signage. Mr. Hayes replied in the affirmative. Mr. Safina made a motion to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for 24 Gould Street, Ace Flats. Ms. Clish seconded the motion and it was approved 5-0-0. 4 Town of Reading p Meeting Minutes Public Hearing. Site Plan Review 323 Main Street. aaael World Ms. Adrian read the legal notice for the application into the record. Ms. Mercier started by informing the Commission that a staff meeting was held with the Applicant team and a traffic study is still expected. She continued that the applicant team wished to start the discussion with the Commission to receive comments prior to finalizing the traffic study. Mr. Bill Jacob, project architect, started by stating the building is going to receive a 'facelift' by replacing siding and roofing. He continued that during the staff meeting it was clear a traffic analysis would be beneficial. He stated that site circulation, entrances and exits have been discussed. Mr. Jacobs stated there is a desire from staff to restore some of the back paved area to natural grass and landscaping, which will provide a buffer at the rear of the building and parking lot and may help screen residential abutters. He continued that it is their desire to discuss the site circulation and traffic issues and that they are happy to listen to and do what is best for the Town. Mr. Jon Bobrek, project engineer, shared the site plan on screen. He stated that the site is being revamped to add a second drive-through lane to mitigate existing traffic patterns and spillover onto Main Street. He stated that the business owners have done on-site analysis over the years and have tried the two-lane approach in real time which has worked well. He continued that though parking is being reduced from 43 spaces to 28, the site will still conform to the zoning requirement of 17 spaces. He stated that the southern curb cut will be used for entrance only and allow customers to use either of the drive through lanes or access the parking areas. Mr. Bobrek stated that drivers could enter the site via both the northern and southern curb cuts, but the southern curb cut would only allow entry to drivers making a left-hand turn from Main Street. There would be no right turn into allowed into the southern entrance. He stated that a passing lane will also be provided around the drive-through for those who wish to get out of line, access other parking areas, or exit the site. The northern curb cut would be used as an entrance as well as an exit. Mr. Bobrek noted that additional landscaping has been added to the plan and that a catch basin will be installed to eliminate a puddling effect in the lot. Two ADA compliant spaces are being relocated to the front entry way to minimize the travel distance for handicapped customers. Ms. Mercier asked to clarify if the plan being shared on screen is different from the original submission, which was provided to the Commission. Mr. Bobrek replied in the affirmative stating that this plan depicts additional landscaping. Mr. Jacobs added that'Do Not Enter' signage has been added to the front parking area so that customers know that a left hand turn into the area is not allowed. Mr. Amos Fernandez of Amos Engineering stated he has been brought on to review the traffic patterns on the site. He stated the existing single drive-through lane has been found to be at capacity multiple times during the peak morning period which causes the queue to back up onto Main Street. Intersection analyses have been done at both driveways and both operate at decent standards. He continued that a dual-lane approach would most certainly reduce traffic congestion at the site. 5 Town of Reading Y Meeting Minutes '•„x Mr. Weston stated that weekend mornings must be studied in the traffic report, in addition to the weekday morning data that has been gathered. In addition to the typical weekend back-ups, the on-going pandemic is causing issues for Main Street during the week as well. He stated that he has been at the site when they were 'practicing'the dual drive-through approach, and it did seem to work well. He stated that the addition of another order screen should make this plan work even better. Mr. Weston stated that the solution of having the front parking lot be a one-way entry is a good one, but signage must be located correctly in order for this to work as desired. He continued that a reduction of parking does present concerns of employees and customers parking in adjacent residential areas or at other abutting businesses. Mr. Bobrek agreed that the site is constrained by size and they are looking to maximize the traffic capacity due to the fact that the drive-through dominates the business sales. Mr. Safina asked if the southern driveway would be used for the drive-through only. Mr. Bobrek replied in the affirmative - drive-through or passing lane, with no left turn into the parking area at the front of the site. Mr. Safina opined that this will surely be broken a few times in the beginning. Mr. Safina stated that a parking space in the south eastern corner may block the passing lane and should be looked at further. He asked if the parallel spaces at the north of the site provide enough room to back up and exit the spot. Mr. Bobrek replied in the affirmative and that they will be 21' in length. Mr. Safina stated that the plan does not reduce traffic it just simply holds more traffic on- site. He stated a 'motion study' should also be performed in order to account for all movement and operations. He pointed out the dual drive-through approach does narrow to a single lane at the pick-up window. He asked if internal operations are being studied and accounted for in terms of impact to the traffic. Mr. Jacobs stated an architectural study is being done in order to see if the site can maintain a second prep station which would increase the speed of getting orders out. He stated a number of inside operations are being reviewed, including Point of Sale (POS) operations and practices, in order to decrease the queue and wait time for customers. Mr. Weston found the operation changes appropriate as they should allow other customers to Flow if a large order is placed at one of the ordering points. He questioned the turning radii where the lanes merge near the ordering screens and asked if they would work in real time. He opined that extending the curb to the north might make the movement easier. Mr. Bobrek replied that an analysis was done that showed a box truck could make the movement. Ms. Clish asked if the passing lane can ft a car if the lot and drive-through are full. Mr. Bobrek replied that it is 12'wide which is greater than most cars require. Mr. Jacobs stated that Bagel World currently has practices in place to limit the menu and large, complicated orders at the drive through during peak hours. Mr. Weston stated that with both driveways proposed as entrances there will be more conflict points for cars travelling north, especially if the turning lane is congested. Mr. Fernandez stated that could certainly result in some safety deficiencies and is worth further study and discussion. Ms. Pelletier of Bagel World stated that Saturday from 8-9AM should be studied further. Mr. Fernandez agreed. Ms. Clish asked how many parking spaces are needed for staff. Mr. Jacobs stated about seven spaces are required for employees. Mr. Weston opined that employees should park in the rear spaces provided. 6 Town of Reading Meeting Minutes Ms. Clish expressed concerns about pedestrians entering the heavily trafficked site. She asked if anything could be done to improve pedestrian safety. Mr. Fernandez replied the best pedestrian access route can be studied further. Ms. Pelletier stated that a crosswalk is located a bit down the street from the site (at Minot Street) and that she would not want to encourage people to cross Main Street directly at the site. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if a loading zone is to be provided on-site. Mr. Bobrek stated loading would be done informally at the northeast corner of the lot. Ms. Pelletier added that deliveries are not done at peak hours or during weekends. Mr. D'Arezzo asked that a truck be shown on the plan so it is clear that it works. Mr. Bobrek agreed. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if the largest shift of employees was used to calculate the required parking. Mr. Jacobs and Ms. Pelletier replied in the affirmative and that the number was actually 11. Ms. Pelletier stated that when indoor dining can commence again the business will redo the dining room and is expecting to provide less seating in order to make the room more comfortable. Mr. D'Arezzo asked for clarification on the drive-through length, One dimension showed 120 linear feet and another 198 linear feet. Mr. Bobrek stated he will provide clearer dimensions on the plan. Ms. Pelletier stated the additional 78' in length is from the order system to the pick-up window. Mr. Weston asked what screening will be provided to the residential abutters to the east. Mr. Bobrek stated an island encircled with vertical granite curbing will be provided in the rear of the site which will include a number of shrubs and bushes. Mr. Jacobs stated there is an existing tree line in the area as well. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if the residential abutters are at a higher elevation than the site. Mr. Jacobs replied they are only slightly higher. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if a planting plan will be submitted. Mr. Bobrek replied that plantings are minimal and that only hardy, low maintenance plants will be provided. Mr. Weston recalled when the abutting residential area was developed they did include some screening to prevent noise from the Bagel World site. Mr. Jacobs agreed that some buffering does exist. Mr. Weston asked if lighting is being added. Mr. Jacobs replied in the negative due to the business being closed before dark. The existing lighting will remain as is. Mr. Weston requested that the microphone and speaker volumes be reviewed to ensure they do not impact abutters. Mr. Weston opened the hearing to public comment. He cautioned that the plan presented is preliminary. Mr. Safina acknowledged the email provided from an abutter asking for fencing. He stated that fencing will not stop sound from travelling and an acoustic analysis should be performed. He agreed with Mr. Weston that the microphones at the ordering stations should be studied. Mr. Jacobs agreed that controlling the source is the best way to minimize sound impacts. Mr. Jacobs asked if the Town has a standard for decimal at the property line so that they may work towards that. Mr. D'Arezzo stated that the General Bylaw Section 8.7.7 states sound should not be heard off-site. Mr. Shawn Stetson, abutter, stated the speaker can be heard from his home. He also had concern that the number of idling cars will double due to the additional drive-through. He 7 r Town of Reading Meeting Minutes noted that the elevation between Bagel World and the neighborhood to the east is pretty level which does not help mitigate sound impacts. Ms. Mercier stated that a second email was provided from a resident who commented that animals forage through the trash on-site and carry it to abutting areas. Mr. Weston stated the condition of the trash enclosure should be reviewed. Mr. Jacobs acknowledged it is a concern. Mr. Bobrek stated that a rodent control plan can be developed. Ms. Pelletier stated it is Bagel World's intent to upgrade the enclosure. She continued that most unsold bagels are brought off-site and donated to a local farm. Mr. Safina opined that bait traps should not be used as they could unintentionally be brought off-site as well. Mr. MacNichol stated that an abutter also requested that employee parking be kept on-site and not allowed along Avon Street. Mr. Weston agreed. Mr. Bobrek stated employee parking practices will be explored further. Mr. D'Arezzo noted that the proposed paintings along the building fagade would actually be defined as wall signs and would not be allowed along with the existing free-standing sign. He stated a variance would be needed in order to have both the existing free-standing sign and the proposed wall signage. Mr. Jacobs stated that the applicants are looking to enhance branding and the signs would be removed or a variance will be sought. Mr. Jacobs asked to review the list of expected deliverables for the next hearing date. Mr. Weston stated the site plan could be updated and revised, a weekend traffic analysis is needed, and some detail on noise impacts should be presented. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if Mass DOT approval should be sought before any CPDC approvals. Mr. Bobrek replied they are typically sought afterwards. Mr. Weston agreed, but noted that in some cases Mass DOT approval is sought beforehand. Due to the fact that the site driveways are existing, it should be okay to receive Mass DOT approval after the fact. Mr. Safina made a motion to continue the Site Pian Review for 323 Main Street to Monday January 25'^at 8:00PM. Ms. Adrian seconded the motion and it was approved 5-0-0. Public Nearing. 4-Lot Definitive Subdivision 4Cold Spring Road, Michael Salamone Ms. Adrian read the legal notice for the application into the record. Mr. Adam Goncalves, project counsel, was present along with engineer Giovanni Fodera and project developer Michael Salamone. Mr. Goncalves stated that the land to be developed is known as 4 Cold Spring Road and currently contains one single-family dwelling. This dwelling would be maintained and an additional 3 lots would be created. He continued that the road is an existing private paper street that has been partially developed and would be further developed to provide frontage and access to the proposed lots. Mr. Weston asked if the 'proof plan' has been revised to conform to the subdivision rules and regulations. Ms. Mercier stated a new plan was submitted but the Town Engineer has not had a chance to review it yet. Mr. Fodera shared the revised proof plan on screen. He stated that the plan was revised to show a 25' radius at the road apron with the intersection, and that the road alignment was adjusted to meet the centerline requirement. Though not yet reviewed by the Town 8 Town of Reading Meeting Minutes Engineer, Mr. Fodera felt the plan now conformed. Mr. Weston asked if the plan showed a cul-de-sac with a 60' radius. Mr. Fodera replied in the affirmative. Mr. Fodera stated the proposal includes a waiver request to allow for a 25' paved roadway width where 30' is required. He stated it could be increased to 30' but it would result in the removal of the 5'vegetated strip along the roadway. He continued that instead of providing a retaining wall along the western boundary the Applicant is looking to grade into the abutting Town-owned property to the west. He stated this requires review and approval from the Town, and that the Tree Warden will need to determine species for the replacement trees. Mr. Fodera stated that the site grades upwards and that in order to evade removing and blasting ledge Lot 4 would be accessed through an easement granted by Lot 3. He stated it has been proved that the stormwater system meets all requirements. Mr. Safina asked for the frontage length on Lot 2. He opined if frontage is given from Lot 2 to others they may be able to avoid the access easement required for Lot 4. Mr. Fodera stated that is worth exploring but may be constrained due to lot sizes. Mr. Weston opined that a reduction in right-of-way width is not typically waived and that a 60' right-of-way may be preferred. Mr. Goncalves stated that the way is pre-existing at 40' wide and they would be continuing at such width. Mr. Fodera added that a 60' right-of-way would result in the existing home at 4 Cold Spring Road having a non-conforming side yard setback. Mr. Goncalves opined the addition of street lighting, sidewalks and vegetation would result in a better project than the 60' right-of-way. Mr. D'Arezzo opined that if the pavement is increased the sidewalk should be removed instead of the vegetation. Mr. Fodera stated that a public school is located nearby and that a sidewalk may be beneficial to any family with young children. Mr. Weston stated the goal is not to increase pavement just the right-of-way layout. Mr. Goncalves responded the way exists on paper. Mr. Weston opined it is a lot of development for the site due to constraints and the surrounding neighborhood. Ms. Clish asked for clarification on the proposed sloping easement versus the installation of a retaining wall. Mr. Fodera explained that fill is required in the area due to it being a low spot and to meet the road requirements. He stated a retaining wall could be provided but after discussions with Town staff it was found that grading the land would be a preferred option. Ms. Clish agreed this would be a better result. Ms. Clish asked if there was concern of snow plow excess being pushed onto the Town land. Mr. Fodera replied it should not be a concern and that the management plan shows the capture of sands, salts and other excess material. Mr. Safina asked if the stormwater management infrastructure would be the responsibility of the three new lots or all four. Mr. Fodera stated he will get an answer to such. The Board questioned if the development would be enhanced if the cul-de-sac was not provided. Mr. Goncalves stated the cul-de-sac is provided to allow for emergency access and turnaround and removing such may present concerns. Mr. Weston opened the hearing to public comment. 9 Town of Reading Y Meeting Minutes Ms. Susan Coram of 31 Ridge Road asked if the existing home at 4 Cold Spring Road would remain. She also asked if the center of the cul-de-sac aligned with the centerline of the roadway. Lastly, she asked that if drainage is being brought mostly to the east, would it impact the direct abutters to such. Mr. Weston stated the Town Engineer has always worked to ensure stormwater is captured on-site even with grading and drainage changes. Mr. Fodera added that the standard is that the proposed runoff rate must be lower than the pre- existing runoff rate. He stated there is an overflow structure which would only be used during the 100-year storm event. Mr. Fodera explained that the proof plan does encroach on the existing home but it is not intended for construction, only to show a subdivision can be met by-right. He also explained the centerline can change with curvature up to 100'due to the cul-de-sac. Mr. Weston agreed and reiterated the idea and goal of the proof plan. Mr. Keong Yu of Main Street stated that he lives to the east of the proposed development. He stated his dwelling does not conform to the required setbacks. He asked if the plans are going to be revised based on the revised proof plan. Mr. Fodera stated that an increase of intensity to the stormwater infrastructure is expected due to comments made by the Town Engineer but this would not change any house locations. He added that each house meets the required setbacks in zoning. Mr. Weston asked if the building footprints shown are intended to be built out. Mr. Fodera replied in the affirmative. Ms. Joanne Cusolito of 23 Grandview Road asked if the road is intended to end at the cul- de-sac and not go further south into the abutting lot. Mr. Fodera stated the regulations state that an abutting developable lot can be shown, however, due to the grade change of the two sites they would not meet the regulations by-right. Ms. Cusolito asked if a 40B is to developed at the adjacent site. Ms. Mercier replied that it is the Town's opinion that the 40B permit has lapsed and due to the fact that the Town meets the 10% affordable housing requirement a 40B development is not eminent. Mr. Bob Cusolito asked what happens if construction vehicles damage the existing private roadways. He also asked if cut-through paths would be developed to the school. Mr. Safina opined that the Town would need to look into developing official paths on the adjacent land. Mr. Fodera stated an erosion control plan will be developed if and when construction ensues in order to prevent tracking on the roads. He stated they will not be responsible for the existing right-of-ways and any damage that may occur to them. Mr. Weston stated the Town Engineer will need to opine on such. Ms. Mercier asked if the sidewalk is a preferred option by the Board. She asked the same of street lighting. Mr. Weston thought that the sidewalk was a nice addition and is desired. Mr. Safina agreed and that providing an accessible route from the street is preferred. Mr. D'Arezzo opined that it is not needed but it would not hold anything up either. Ms. Clish added that adding sidewalks should be a preferred practice. Ms. Adrian asked for more detail of the rear setback for the proposed dwelling at Lot 2. Mr. Fodera stated it looks to be around 50', exceeding requirements. Ms. Adrian opined that this should give the abutter a bit more comfort. Mr. Weston stated street lighting at the end of the cul-de-sac is preferred. Mr. Fodera stated a number of lighting fixtures have been proposed along the roadway in order to illuminate the sidewalks, cul-de-sac and intersection. 10 Town of Reading Meeting Minutes Mr. Fodera stated a number of comments made by the Town Engineer have been addressed already and they would like to continue to the meeting of January 11, 2021. Mr. Safina made a motion to continue the public hearing for a 4-lot Definitive Subdivision for land located at 4 Cold Spring Road to Jan. 11, 2021 at 9:30PM. Ms. Adrian seconded the motion and it was approved 5-0-0. Adjournment Mr. Saffna made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:07 PM. The motion was seconded by Ms. Clish and approved with a 5-0-0 vote. Documents Reviewed at the Meeting: CPDC Agenda 1211420 CPDC Minutes of 11220 and 112320 136 Haven Street,Special Permit: o Sign Permit Application o Application Summary o Sign Details and Renderings o Landscape Wall Detail o Draft Decision,dated 12/1420 , 45 High Street, Sign Permit Application o Sign Permit Application o Sign Rendering o Sign Details o Existing Signage at 45 High Street o Draft Certificate of Appropriateness,dated 12/1420 , 24 Gould Street,Sign Permit Application o Sign Permit Application o Sign Rendering and Details o Draft Certificate of Appropriateness,dated 12/1420 , 323 Main Street,Site Plan Review o Site Plan Review Application o Site Plan Permit Set o Existing Conditions Plan o Locus Map o Memo from Town Engineer o Draft Decision,dated 12/1420 o Email from Abutter , 4 Cold Spring Road, Definitive Subdivision Application o Application Form 8,Waiver Requests and Supporting Information o Definitive Subdivision Plan Set • Storowater Report o Memo from Town Engineer o Draft Decision,dated 12/1420 , 0 Grove Street,Approval Not Required Plan o ANR Plan o Memo from Town Engineer and Community Development Director o ANR Certificate 11