Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-11-06 Community Planning and Development Commission Minutes - Executive SessionRECEIVED By Town CNA GV of 12:91 pm, Feb 11, 2015 Town of Reading i Meeting Minutes Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Community Planning and Development Commission Date: 2023-11-6 Time: 7:30 PM Building: Town Hall Location: Hybrid Meeting - Zoom and Select Board Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Executive Session Purpose: Hybrid Meeting Version: Final Attendees: Members In person: lohn Weston, Chair; Tony D'Arezzo, Vice Chair; Hillary Mateev; Tom Armstrong; Mark Wetzel; Heather Clish Others Present in person: Community Development Director Andrew MacNichol; Senior Planner Mary Benedetto Remote Participants: Town Counsel Ethan Dively 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 7:31 PM. Executive Session With respect to GC Fodera Contractina. Inc. v. CPDC (459 Main St litioationl Mr. Wetzel made a motion to enter Executive Session under Purpose Three, to discuss strategy relative to the litigation involving 459 Main Street, because an Open Session may have a detrimental impact on the litigating position of the public body, and to invite Community Development Director Andrew MacNichol, Senior Planner Mary Benedetto, and Town Counsel Ethan Dively to attend the executive session, and, once finished, to return to Open Session and continue on with the meeting at the conclusion of the Executive Session. Mr. D'Arezzo seconded the motion and it was approved 5-0-0. The CPDC entered Executive Session at 7:44 PM. The CPDC returned to Open Session at 9:02 PM. Mr. MacNichol gave an overview of the history of the project for the new members who were not on the board for the original public hearing or series of executive sessions related to the appeal. Town Counsel Mr. Ethan Dively spoke from Zoom and clarified that they have entered into a settlement agreement based upon the discussion and terms from the CPDC members back in spring. Mr. Dively came to answer any final questions the members may have with that agreement. The agreement was finalized last Friday and the court issues a remand order this morning. Counsel has agreed to the set of plans with the intention that CPDC will review the plans within 60 days in a public hearing with full public notice. Page 6 of the Settlement agreement was reviewed In detail between Town Counsel and the members. Mr. Dively reiterated that in May CPDC agreed that they would support a project that meets the above criteria and that within 60 days CPDC will need to issue a vote. He stated that if the members do not feel that they want to approve the project, it would put them back in the situation they were in a year ago, defending the project in court. 1 0Town of Reading �„ Meeting Minutes ,:,Mox.^vr Mr. MacNichol reviewed the plan set and changes with the members. Mr. Wetzel asked how far the building is proposed to be set back from the bullding to the North and it was discussed it was aft from the line and that the neighboring building is also set back a few feet, so there is an alley -like space between the two. Mr. Wetzel asked if there was a landscape plan and Mr. Dively conflrrned that there isn't any meaningful landscape plan but the proposal for the planters and potential plants are Included. Mr. MacNichol indicated that there is a street tree in front of the site and CPDC members asked if they could condition its maintaining or replacement as part of the decision. It was confirmed that condition would be viable. Mr. Armstrong indicated his concerns were for as much landscaping as possible in this part of Main St. He also asked what the $35k set aside would be used for and if it was possible to use It for a traffic study. Mr. MacNichol asked Mr. Dively if there were any conditions on that $35k, such as if there was a time to expend it by, or conditions if it has to be used for hard improvements or could be used for a study. Mr. Dively stated it was indicated it would be sent over pre -occupancy, but he could discuss timing with the applicant's legal team. He stated that the $35k would likely end up in general funds and staff would have to ask for it back via Town Meeting, but there arent any constraints on the time or what It can be spent on. Mr. Dively discussed the traffic study that was part of the original application, and reiterated that one of the issues with the original decision was that CPDC members disagreed with the traffic report and with their own third -party traffic study and that the intention then with the funds was it to be for pedestrian Improvements. Mr. Weston agreed that another traffic study wouldn't get them anywhere. Mr. Armstrong stated that his broader concern was the overall changes on Main St with this project and Chase Bank and McDonald's combined. Ms. Clish indicated that some of the orlglnal discussion was to make this intersection more appealing to pedestrians and make It better suited to pedestrians, given that the applicant had proposed using parking spaces that were diagonally across the intersection, but that they were not improving the Intersection for pedestrians. Mr. Weston recommended that as part of the Declslon that the money should be directed to actual pedestrian Improvements In the built environment at that intersection. Mr. Armstrong asked if the money could be used for street trees or landscaping to Improve the pedestrian feeling and Mr. Dively confirmed that once the developer pays the fees they won't restrict its use. Mr. Wetzel commented that there are a lot of pedestrians in that area and improvements to their experience would be appreciated. Ms. Clish asked about the West elevation of the design on Main St. on page 10 of the plans and asked If It is possible to have something other than a long brick wall against the Rise475 Street, suggesting that perhaps they could add a window or an Inset with a planter. Ms. Mateev asked about the building being 3 R away from the lot line and asked if the Fire Dept had reviewed it and signed off with the windows on the North side in the bedrooms being a second means of egress. Members wanted sign -off from all departments again before the public hearing, including from public safety and engineering. Ms. Mateev asked to confirm that the planters would be filled with live plants, not plastic ones. Mr. Dively stated that could be listed as a condition—to be filled with live plants off the native species list. Ms. Clish asked who would take care of the plants. Mr. MacNichol listed that conditions usually list plants maintained in perpetuity by the owners/managers. Ms. Clish inquired about the west wall facing Main St, wanting clarification on where the future retailer could put a sign, being uncertain if there was room over the doorway or over the windows for signage. The members agreed there currently isn't an obvious or easy place for business or residential signage. The request from the members was to consider a Master 000 Town of Reading Meeting Minutes Signage Plan now to make sure that the signage works for future tenants. Mr. D'Arezzo asked about if they could just say "no signage approved" but the members discussed that they wanted to see locations, if not details, for both the residential address as well as any future retail tenant. Mr. MacNichol discussed that there will likely need to be a minor redesign of the stormwater system based on the changes to the site layout to meet standards. Mr. Weston brought up the construction management and traffic management plan condition about no lane closures during peak commuting hours. Mr. Weston said he would want to review any construction management plan. Mr. Wetzel asked how much of the construction management plan would typically be handled at the staff level vs. CPDC. Mr. Wetzel Indicated he thought their parking plan was very limited in their prior construction management proposal. The members discussed the challenges with the site and that there are no parking spaces in the area and that some of the challenges of the building and construction will be from the site. Members asked if there could be a condition about a constmctlon management plan and Mr. Dively indicated that could be included still with the intention of it being handled by staff prior to permitting. He stated that it was fair to ask them to update the plans for the public hearing. Ms. Mateev double-checked that the roof is non -habitable. Mr. D'Arezzo commented that the building is all electric. Mr. MacNlchol asked If there were any opinions about the use of the parking and if they wanted to restrict the parking at all. The members discussed that they might want to condition that but that it would depend on the retail tenant. Mr. Wetzel asked if they could condition anything else in the public hearing and it was confirmed that while they could, they didn't want to surprise the applicant with anything new in the meeting. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if anyone had checked with RMLD about the location of the transformer. Mr. MacNichol indicated that those are Items that would be reviewed and approved with staff prior to a building permit. Mr. Dively indicated that it would be noticed as a major modification, whether we use the text of the original agreement and amend it, vs. an actual modification. So, he would lean towards using a redline agreement. Something as a Decision after remand that incorporates all the changes. Mr. Weston reiterated that there should be no new comments ahead of the public hearing. The members indicated they had no Issues with voting on it in one meeting. Mr. Weston asked a clarifying question about if the decision wasn't approved, would the judge then look at the reasons for denying this updated approval and Mr. Dively stated no, that this is all considered negotiation. Mr. MacNichol asked Mr. Dively to clarify that no Mullin rule forms would be required because it Is a new public hearing and that was confirmed. Mr. D'Arezzo made a motion to return to the regular session and Mr. Weston seconded and it was approved 5-0-0.