Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-08-14 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of Reading Meeting Minutes TOVyNEI'VFD CLERK REAO!Mi Mfb, Board - Committee - Commission - Council: NPI SEP 12 AH 9: 3E Community Planning and Development Commission Date: 2023-08-14 Time: 7:30 PM Building: Town Hall Location: Hybrid Meeting - Zoom and Select Board Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Open Session Purpose: Hybrid Meeting Version: Final Attendees: Members: John Weston, Chair; Tony D'Arezzo, Vice Chair; Hillary Mateev; Tom Armstrong Members - Not Present: Mark Wetzel; Heather Clish Others Present in person: Community Development Director Andrew MacNichol, Senior Planner Mary Benedetto, Michael Salamone, Brandy Previti, Frank Lanzillo, Angelo Salamone Remote Participants: Giovanni Fodera, Adam Goncalves, Larry Hayes, Susan Coram, Joyce, Mark Delaney, Phil Christiansen, Daki Koutiuvides Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Mary Benedetto Topics of Discussion: MEETING HELD IN THE SELECT BOARD ROOM AND REMOTELY VIA ZOOM Mr. Weston called the meeting to order at 7:34 PM. Mr. MacNichol gave an overview of the hybrid meeting set up and procedures. Continued Public Hearing, 4011 Plan Review 25 Haven Street. 25 Haven Street LLC Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to accept the withdrawal without prejudice. Mr. Armstrong seconded the motion. Mr. MacNichol briefly summarized the 40R application and reminded everyone that the new site plan review application that was approved for the mosque for this site is still moving forward. The motion was approved 4-0-0. Public Hearina. Site Plan Review & Special Permit Process 1312 Main St. AIIV Mann Mr. D'Arezzo read the public notice into the record. Mr. MacNichol summarized what the application was and that the applicant requested to withdraw it. Mr. Weston opened it up for public comment and there was none. rgrao ' Town of Reading Meeting Minutes r` Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to close the public hearing, Mr. Armstrong seconded and it was approved 4-0-0. Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to accept the withdrawal without prejudice. Mr. Armstrong seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-0. Continued Public Hearing. Maior Modification of Subdivision Application & special Permit. Grandview Road Extension. Michael Salamone Mr. Giovanni Fodera presented on Zoom as the project engineer on behalf of the applicant. He reviewed the changes since the last meeting: they set the lot lines back to the original plan as it had been decided that they will move the shed that had been the reason to require the easement and move the lot lines. They also added a second catch basin and added the requested retaining wall. Mr. D'Arezzo asked Mr. Fodera to confirm that the rip -rap had been moved from the edge of the property line and Mr. Fodera confirmed that it is now at least 10 it away from the property line. Mr. Armstrong noted that the detention pond has a 10ft depth and asked what level of water would be sitting in it and Mr. Fodera indicated that at the 100 -year storm level it would be at elevation 107, which would be 4 R of water. Mr. Armstrong asked about the utilities being low -flow and noted that he didn't see a stub going to Lot 2. Mr. Fodera indicated it should be shown on sheet C-5. Mr. Michael Salamone, the applicant, was present in person and Mr. Adam Goncalves, his legal representation, was on Zoom and the two stated that there is an existing agreement that the owner of Lot 1, Penny Jean, will get ownership eventually. Mr. Salamone confirmed that Penny did not want to build on Lot 2 so they were not planning on putting in a stub. Mr. Frank Lanzillo, a partner on the project, stated in person that they could stub it up to the property line so they wouldn't have to cut up the asphalt afterward and Mr. Armstrong agreed that it would appropriate to do that. All parties agreed it was appropriate to stub the utilities up to the property line of Lot 2. Mr. Armstrong asked staff if they usually get copy of the HOA agreements and Mr. MacNichol confirmed that is a condition of the original agreement. Staff and the Commission members then reviewed the decision. Mr. MacNichol reminded members that the stormwater permit is included because the original subdivision approval predates the new stormwater regulations. Mr. Weston indicated that in the Plan Revisions section of the decision that they wanted to ask the applicant to stub the utility lines up to the property line for Lot 2. Mr. D'Arezzo requested that prior to building permits they will want to see that the shed has been moved on Lot 1 in order to properly convey Lot 2 and a condition was added. Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to close the public hearing for the Grandview Road Extension subdivision at 4 Cold Spring Road. The motion was seconded by Ms. Mateev and it was approved 4-0-0. Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to approve the Major Modification to the Subdivision Application decision and the Stormwater Permit for the Grandview Road Extension at 4 Cold Spring Rd, as amended. Ms. Mateev seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-0. Town of Reading z Meeting Minutes y, Continued Public Hearing, Preliminary Subdivision Application 45 Beacon Street, Angelo Salamone Mr. Phil Christiansen presented on Zoom on behalf of the applicant. The proposal is a 3 -lot subdivision of 2 new lots and the one existing lot. He reviewed the concept plan showing a 60 -ft width roadway and that the existing roadway is 45 ft. They are proposing a 24 -ft wide paved road to a 45 -ft cul-de-sac surrounded by a wall due to the grade of the site. They propose the cul-de-sac at a 5% grade, though 3% is required. They propose two catch basins and an infiltration system for it and additional catch basins on the lots, rather than having drainage Flow onto the road. Since it is a preliminary plan they haven't done the level of detail required to confirm if their proposed drainage plan will work, but that is their hope. They are proposing a bituminous curb around the cul-de-sac as part of the drainage system to make sure it would go into the catch basins at the end. Mr. MacNichol clarified for the Commission members and public that it is a Preliminary Plan so there isn't a full grading or drainage plan yet, the Preliminary Plan is mainly about the concept of the roadway and lots and proving it meets our regulations. Mr. D'Arezzo asked about the limits imposed by the original subdivision and Mr. MacNichol indicated that staff had not found any limits for this site. Mr. D'Arezzo asked to confirm that the "right of way" access from Main St is not being used and Mr. Christiansen said yes, they will not be using it as a roadway, but the existing lot will keep access to it as it will be on their property. Mr. D'Arezzo asked about the height of the walls being proposed around the cul-de-sac. Mr. Christiansen stated it would be ranging from 2 ft up to about 6 ft in height. As it varies around the cul-de-sac they may need to put guard rails or fencing around the walls depending on the final design. Mr. D'Arezzo and Mr. Armstrong asked about the grading and slope being proposed. Mr. Christiansen clarified that a cul-de-sac is supposed to be no more than 3% grade but they are proposing a 5% grade. The grade on the road is being proposed at 10%, as required by the regulations. Mr. Christiansen discussed the difference between the Flow on the roadway vs. across the cul-de-sac. Mr. Weston asked what staff had reviewed the plan and Staff indicated that the full Development Review Team had been provided the plans. Engineering had no comments thus far and the Fire Department had approved the plans conceptually as meeting their minimum roadway widths. Mr. Weston asked about the difference between the concept plan and the approved plan and Mr. Christiansen confirmed that it was a 60ft radius around the entire circle of the cul-de- sac. Mr. Weston questioned if this was a legitimate proof plan because he believed the edge of the cul-de-sac circle went over the lot line. He pointed out that there was an almost 90 - degree angle on the western edge of where the cul-de-sac connects to the roadway. Mr. Weston asked Mr. MacNichol to have Engineering sign off on that corner of the concept plan. Mr. Weston asked if the proof was legitimate because the lot with the existing house becomes untenable if you did expand the right of way to 60 ft. Mr. Christiansen stated that the lot still meets all the requirements of the zoning. Mr. Weston asked whether this meets the letter of the law. Mr. MacNichol indicated that prior subdivisions that were utilizing a paper road the Town actually did not require a concept plan and that the applicant therefore doesn't need to prove the roadway width using a concept plan because they are utilizing and improving an existing right of way. Mr. Weston asked if there is a requirement for the Town of Reading 40 Meeting Minutes bulb to be centered on the cul-de-sac and Mr. MacNichol Indicated that there is. The Commission members reviewed the design. Mr. Armstrong asked If this would be another low-pressure utility system and the applicant confirmed yes. They discussed that the discharge point for the drainage would be to the top of the hill. Mr. Armstrong asked and Mr. Christiansen confirmed there is a fire hydrant proposed for the end of the cul-de-sac. Mr. Armstrong noted that this would be a private road and that Beacon St is not in as good a condition due to its nature as a private road. Mr. D'Arezzo asked how long Beacon St is in total. Mr. MacNichol indicated it's more than 500 ft In total to the nearest intersection. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if that means the applicant doesn't need a waiver if it presently and already exceeds 500ft. Mr. Christiansen asked for clarification of the line of questioning and then stated that actually they are not extending one roadway, they are extending off an intersection as a new street and therefore their total extension is less than 200 ft. Mr. Weston moved the discussion over to the list of waivers and started with building within the existing roadway width and only providing a 24ft paved width. Mr. D'Arezzo indicated that the narrow width could become an access issue for the Fire Dept. Mr. Christiansen pointed out that some parts of Beacon right now are only 20 ft paved. Mr. MacNichol Indicated the PTTTF could discuss having no parking signs on some parts of Beacon St and reiterated that the Fire Department had signed off on the plans. Mr. Weston moved on to the bituminous curb and stated that the CPDC doesn't usually approve bituminous curbs when the curb is part of the drainage system, granite only. The Commission discussed the request for no sidewalks as a waiver they could go either way on. Mr. D'Arezzo pointed out that there are only two houses leading Into a neighborhood where there are no sidewalks so it doesn't seem like a useful ask and Ms. Mateev noted that increasing impervious surface also doesn't make a lot of sense. Mr. MacNichol indicated that they could ask Engineering about the grade waiver request. Mr. Weston and Mr. D'Arezzo asked about waivers being requested now vs. later and the scope of the Preliminary Plan and Staff confirmed that waivers can be requested now in advance of creating the Definitive Plan and/or can be requested as part of that plan. Mr. Weston Indicated he would like to have the proof plan clarified by Mr. Christiansen and staff and if it needs to be shifted farther north then what that does to the lots, the wail, etc. before he would feel comfortable signing off. The Commission opened it up for public comment and Mr. Mark Delaney spoke from Zoom and he asked about the fence of the existing lot directly across Beacon St from the existing house lot. Mr. Christiansen indicated that the fence is actually on the paper street of Beacon St and if the roadway goes there then their fence will be directly next to the road. Mr. MacNichol agreed that the wall the applicant is proposed next to the roadway will be directly up against their property. Mr. Weston asked to continue the discussion to another meeting and for staff to sign off on the western corner of the conceptual plan. Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to continue the public hearing for the Preliminary Subdivision Application for 45 Beacon St to September 11, 2023. Ms. Mateev seconded the motion and /t was approved 4-0-0. Town of Reading i Meeting Minutes tther Business 18 Woburn St - external materials review - Mr. MacNichol gave an overview of the prior application for this item and went over the rendering with the updated notes on materials. He pointed out that the color of the top section of the building will be much lighter than originally proposed. Mr. Weston and Ms. Mateev stated that the gray/green and the gossamer veil are very close to each other in color and they might prefer to have the third floor be darker in color than the original proposed but after discussing agreed the proposed colors were fine. Mr. Armstrong indicated he thought it was more important to blend with everything else going on in the area than stand out so he thought the lighter green color was preferable. Commission members had no concern with the aluminum siding switching to hardie board. Ms. Mateev indicated she would send over an email with her comments which included clarifying the hardie board material and if they would be installed with exposed hardware. Mr. MacNichol brought up the idea of a separate design review group outside of site plan review and stated that many cities and towns have their own design review teams. Mr. Weston indicated that he felt that it would only be appropriate for processes that are larger, that have the ability to work with the Town and set it up, for example that he wouldn't want to set it up for site reviews like the Chase Bank that has a pre-set materials list. MBTA Communities Update - Ms. Benedetto and Mr. MacNichol provided an update on how their process is moving forward. Mr. D'Arezzo stated that he felt it would be extremely important to only use real world examples in Reading when discussing multi -family housing. Mr. Weston asked if staff had any inclination yet as to whether they would be using a smaller acreage or a larger acreage than required to get to the density and staff indicated that will depend on what style of multi -family is proposed. Mr. D'Arezzo stated he felt it would be near to impossible to get it taken to Town Meeting In April and Mr. MacNichol indicated that staff intends for the zoning changes to be as simple and straightforward as possible. There was a discussion around parking. SHI - Mr. MacNichol informed the Commission that Reading is back below the 10% requirement of the SHI. The culprit is the Eaton -Lakeview 40B that was split into two phases. The 12 homeownership units were built but the 74 rental units have not been started and because they didn't get a building permit those 74 units lapsed off the SHI until they receive a building permit. The Eaton Lakeview developers recently came to the ZBA and ZBA found their permit was active but the state does not agree. Dollar Tree - 5 Hamden St - Mr. MacNichol updated the Commission that staff had received a building permit application for the interior renovation of the old Walgreens into a Dollar Tree, but it doesn't trigger a site plan review. Staff will be working through issues with access and use with the applicant. Net Zero Action Plan Kick-off - Staff discussed the kick-off to this year long planning process and the end goals. Lenetta Lane - Mr. MacNichol indicated that the CPDC will take it to November town meeting and have it accepted as a public roadway but that it hasn't been done in over a decade so staff is reviewing what the process will look like and will let the Commission know if he needs anything else from them. Walkers Brook Drive - Mr. MacNichol announced the kick-off of this project being run by the Economic Development Director. Starting with public engagement effort around a Town of Reading • Meeting Minutes redesign and an interactive survey which is ongoing. Mr. D'Arezzo asked about the prior design involving a rotary. PARC efforts — A general update was provided that paid parking kiosks will be live in lots this fall. Hazard Mitigation Plan — Draft plan is currently out for comment, staff are taking it to CAC next week. Tom Armstrong asked for updates on 25 Haven and 246 Walnut and staff updated him that there was nothing additional to add yet from the applicants at this time. Meeting Minutes The Commission reviewed the minutes for lune 12, 2023, and made changes. Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to approve the minutes of 6/12/23 as amended. Mr. Armstrong seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-0. The Commission reviewed the minutes for July 10, 2023, and made changes. Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to approve the minutes of 7/10/23 as amended. Mr. Armstrong seconded the motion and it was approved 4-0-0. Adiournment Ms. Mateev made a motion to adjourn at 10:03 PM. Mr. D'Arezzo seconded and it was approved 4-0-0. Documents Reviewed at the Meeting: • Major Modification of Subdivision Application, Grandview Rd o Plans, dated 7/27/23 o Email of revisions, dated 8/9/23 o Draft Decision • Preliminary Subdivision Application, 45 Beacon o Plans, dated 8/3/23 o Email of Waivers Requested, dated 8/3/23 o Draft Decision • META Communities Update Slides • Draft Minutes: 6/12/23, 7/10/23 REGEIVEu TOWN CLERK READING, MA. Town of Reading Community Planning & Development CNAWidd AM 9: 45 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO G. L. c. 39, SECTION 23D OF PARTICIPATION IN A SESSION OF AN ADJUDICATORY HEARING WHERE THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBER MISSED A SINGLE HEARING SESSION [Note: Can only be used for missing one single hearing session; cannot be used for missing more than one hearing session. Inquiries concerning this form and your ability to participate in a matter where you missed a single hearing session should be addressed to Town Counsel.] Heather Clish (name), hereby certify under the pains and penalties perjury as follows: 1. 1 am a member of said board. 2. 1 missed a hearing session on the matter of - the property located at 45 Beawn St. held on August 14, 2023 which was 3. 1 reviewed all the evidence introduced at the hearing session I missed, which included a review of (initial which one(s) applicable): a. audio recording of the missed hearing session; or b. x video recording of the missed hearing session; or C. a transcript of the missed hearing session. This certification shall become a part of the record of the proceedings in the above matter. Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury this tom day of September, 2022n'' 3 . Y' C� Name Received as. part of the record of the above matter: Date: 1r /f 3 Pos ion:1.,,- KEC I VEL; TOWN �CLERK RE.ADiMG, AAA Town of Reading ?"' SEP I I Ah 9: 5? Community Planning &Development Commission CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO G. L. c. 39, SECTION 23D OF PARTICIPATION IN A SESSION OF AN ADJUDICATORY HEARING WHERE THE UNDERSIGNED MEMBER MISSED A SINGLE HEARING SESSION [Note: Can only be used for missing one single hearing session; cannot be used for missing more than one hearing session. Inquiries concerning this form and your ability to participate in a matter where you missed a single hearing session should be addressed to Town Counsel.] I, Mark L Wetzel (name), hereby certify under the pains and penalties of perjury as follows: 1. 1 am a member of said board. 2. 1 missed a hearing session on the matter of - which was 3. 1 reviewed all the evidence introduced at the hearing session I missed, which included a review of (initial which one(s) applicable): a. audio recording of the missed hearing session; or b. x video recording of the missed hearing session; or C. a transcript of the missed hearing session. This certification shall become a part of the record of the proceedings in the above matter. Signed under the pains and penalties of perjury this 17th day of August Name t Received as part of the record of the above matter: Date: f�••�zz By: / Position: ,�,�.s� r� �...��m.ffir..��.,e,�Pa Mw,�w.P..mm•