Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-05-12 Community Planning and Development Commission Minutesor9r� Town of Reading Meeting Minutes RECEIVED I. ,. =�� �Tr" BY rowmduc (M9 of 10:29 am, Auo 1Z 2020 o �° Board - Committee - Commission - Council: Community Planning and Development Commission Date: 2025-05-12 Time: 7:00 PM Building: Town Hall Location: Hybrid Meeting - Zoom and Select Board Meeting Room Address: 16 Lowell Street Session: Open Session Purpose: Hybrid Meeting Version: Approved Attendees: Members In person: Heather Clish, Chair; Hillary Mateev, Secretary; John Weston; John Arena; Guy Manganiello; Tom Armstrong Members Not Present: N/A Others Present in person: Andrew MacNichol, Community Development Director; Olivia Knightly, Senior Planner; Tony D'Arezzo; Maggie Coult; Matt Kurkowskl; Brian McGrail; Dom LaCava; Use Mayes; Thomas J. McCord; Peter C. Marrione; Mary Marfione; Christine Curtin; Andrew Curtin; Christina Dicostanco; Stephen K Mayves; Stephen L Mayes; Alan Kushinsky; Dennis and Deirdre Walsh; Joy Apostolou; George Kapodlstrias; Leslie and Peter Gent. Present on Zoom: Ryan Percival, Town Engineer; Karen Rose Gillis; Angela Mayes; Steve Crisafulli, Activitas; Karen Rose Gillis; Chris York; David Swyter; Steven DeFuria; S21; Chris; Meghan O'Leary; Victoria Epstein; Kevin L; Michael Salamone; Michelle Jones; Katie Hefferon; Ethan Dively, Town Counsel; Katelyn; Annie Donohue; Beau's Thone; Harry Athia; Lindsay; Harry Athia; Michelle Sousa Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Olivia Knightly Topics of Discussion: Birch Meadow Park Phase 2; 885 Main Street, The Primrose School; 346-348 Main Street Site Plan Review; Grandview Road Extension; Master Plan Discussion MEETING HELD IN THE SELECT BOARD ROOM AND REMOTELY VIA ZOOM Ms. Mateev called the meeting to order at 7:00 PM and Mr. MacNichol provided an overview of the hybrid meeting procedures. Continued Public Hearing. Definitive Subdivision Application 0 Harold Ave (a.k.a 0 Van Norden Rd), Zero Harold Avenue, LLC Park Realty Trust Mr. MacNichol stated the reasoning for the continuance request, citing rights of access, and stated that he will seek an update from the applicant. Ms. Clish made a motion to continue the application of O Harold Ave at the request of the applicant to June 9, 2025. It was seconded by Ms. Mateev, and it was approved 4-0-1. (Weston, Clish, Mateev, Arena). Mr. Manganiello abstained. orxp� Town of Reading Meeting Minutes �� 3r Pslblic Hearing. Minor Site Plan Review. Birch Meadow Park Phase 2. Town of Reading Mr. Percival presented the plan updates, stating that they incorporated comments from CPDC. He said that they adjusted the crosswalk to go across the opposite side of the street, to the north of the Hartshorn Intersection. Removed parking at Bancroft and added accessible parking, moving parking away from the neighborhood area and maintaining trees on the Bancroft side. Mr. Weston asked if the portable classrooms relate to the playground areas. Mr. Percival said that the Rise playground and modular classrooms that will sit on the southern side of the parking lot area are not part of the Birch Meadow facility. He stated that the rise playground resurfacing has been incorporated into the scope of Birch Meadow for cost efficiencies. Mr. Weston asked if the rise playground equipment will remain and Mr. Percival said that it would be coming out. Mr. Weston expressed his concern with communication between the school department and Activitas, and that there should be flow between all these components on site and that Activitas should talk with the school committee to ensure that the site is laid out properly. Ms. Clish asked If the Rise playground is going away, and if so, what playground the school will use. Mr. Percival said that the playground equipment will be removed but the play surface will be improved. Mr. Percival said that new equipment will be going in at the Birch Meadow playground. Mr. Weston said that it worries him that there may not be coordination with the school, and Mr. Percival said that there has been communication regarding the Rise playground and Klllam modular classrooms. Mr. Percival said that they coordinated a Notice of Intent for the classrooms to help the schools and that there is accessible connectivity. Mr. Crisafulli said that a few pieces of playground equipment will remain as Rise. Mr. Weston stated that he wants the flow and functionality between the project areas to make sense. Ms. Clish asked about the connectivity pathways on site and Mr. Crisafulli said that the path is accessible. Mr. Percival said that the modular classrooms are being brought in to make room for the Killam School project and that this was decided In the last few months. Mr. Weston said that the School Committee has not come before CPDC so there Is uncertainty about their intention to use other facilities on site. Ms. Mateev asked about the impact to parking on site, Mr. Percival said that two spaces are impacted, transforming one into an ADA space and the other into a van aisle. Mr. Arena asked if there is a tie in between the portables and electrification or drainage for the projects and Mr. Percival said that they are independent utilities. Ms. Clish opened for public comment David Swyter, 98 Hartshorn Street, asked if the town has spoken with the residents of 103 and 104 Hartshorn Street have been notified about the plan change. Mr. Percival said that they received public notice and would be engaged should the permit be approved. Mr. Swyter stated that there Is 45-degree existing curbing and that the neighbors would like to have the curbing modified to vertical curbing. Mr. Percival said that the curbing would be Improved. Mr. Swyter said that the proposed walkway that terminates on Longwood Ave is private property and Mr. Percival said that it was a request from the Conservation Commission. Mr. Swyter expressed concern for students accessing the school from Hartshorn Street during construction and Mr. Percival said that the town can review the proposed fencing. �F Or RF i0 Town of Reading Meeting Minutes Mr. Weston made a motion to approve the Minor Site Plan Decision for O Birch Meadow Drive. It was seconded by Mr. Manganiello, and it was approved 5-0-0 (Manganiello, Arena, Mateev, Clish, Weston). Continued Public Hearing, Special Permit and Site Plan Review for Mixed Use. 346• 348 Main Street, Park Realty Trust Brian McGrail, legal representative of the applicant, stated that at the prior meeting the board expressed satisfaction with the commercial percentage of the project, and requested turning radius details on the compact parking space which have been submitted, and that the board expressed concerns about the residential unit density of 15 units. Mr. MCGrail presented the revised site plan and stated that they reduced the residential density from 15 units to 13 units. Ms. Clish asked how many parking spaces there are per unit. Mr. MCGrail said that there are 20 parking spaces and there are about 1.54 spaces per unit. Mr. Arena suggested that the parking spaces could be tied to each unit so that there is no excess created. Mr. McGrall stated that they have a parking agreement that would manage the parking area. Mr. Manganiello asked if the proposed residential units are for sale or rental, and Mr. MCGrail said that it could work either way. - Mr. Armstrong asked if the parking spaces will be assigned and Mr. MCGrall said that they would be numbered. Mr. MacNichol asked how they would regulate Park Ave parking spaces and Mr. MCGrail said that they would only regulate on -site parking spaces. Mr. Weston said that the proposal has increased the number of bedrooms, from 21 bedrooms to 23 bedrooms. Mr. Manganiello asked if the density had increased at all and the applicants confirmed that they had not. Mr. McGrail said that the bylaw does not differentiate the parking requirements based on number of bedrooms. Mr. Arena stated that 13 spaces will be occupied by residential tenants and the remaining 7 spaces will be used for commercial and visitor parking. Ms. Clish said that a waiver is required for the parking because they are providing one space per unit when 1.25 is required. Mr. McGrail stated that there will be 3 visitor spaces and four flex spaces including an ADA space. Mr. Manganiello said that if the units are for ownership, then an HOA body would be able to regulate the rules more. The board continued to discuss the proposed parking layout. Mr. Weston stated that the change in unit count does not change the density of the use on site and that an update would be appreciated at this time. Ms. Clish said that she appreciated the reduction in unit count but is still uneasy about having one parking space per unit. She said that she Is worried about the three on street spaces and the limited street parking on Main Street and that they should accommodate a few more spaces. Mr. Manganiello said that he is comfortable with the plan if it is an HOA structure but anticipates issues if it is for rent. Mr. Armstrong said that they need a waiver for commercial parking. Mr. Weston reminded the board that the application is a special permit and that there is a different standard for review. Ms. Mateev noted that the ADA space is not counted in the total parking equation so there are only 19 spaces and Mr. Manganiello said that it would have to be assigned to the commercial space. Town of Reading ,.�„ Meeting Minutes P'IN[OP� Mr. Armstrong stated that the applicant has not addressed the 14% commercial waiver from 25%. Mr. Arena asked how the commercial percentage is calculated and Mr. MacNichol said that it is 25% of the gross Floor area. Mr. Weston said that the intention of this commercial requirement is to maintain the commercial district. Mr. Arena asked if the board can condition the special permit to require the units to be for sale, and the board stated that the applicant would have to propose that. Ms. Clish questioned whether the commercial space would work for future tenants. Mr. Joly stated that the need for commercial space has decreased and that he is hoping to maintain his business there. Mr. McGrail stated that the commercial storefront is 795 square feet and when combined with the basement storage area they meet the 25% requirement. Ms. Clash said that it is dramatically less usable space than should be In a commercial district. Mr. Weston said that the combination of reduced commercial and the squeeze of the residential to fit on site is not producing the 25% commercial requirement, which does not meet the intent of the zoning bylaw. The board continued to discuss the proposed commercial storefront space. Mr. Manganiello proposed the applicant reduce the overall unit count If they cannot increase the commercial space. Tony D'Arezzo, 130 John Street, stated that the applicant may need a waiver for the corner parking space and that there Is a temporary construction easement proposed that appears to go onto the abutting property. Mr. York said that there Is a proposed temporary construction easement on the adjacent property to remove the existing stockade fencing. Mr. D'Arezzo asked if they have the easement and Mr. MCGrail said that it Is a private property matter and the board requested more information on this matter. Ms. Mateev made a motion to continue the public hearing to June 9, 2025. It was seconded by Mr. Weston and approved 5-0-0 (Arena, Manganiello, Weston, Clish, Mateev). Continued Public Hearina. Site Plan Review. 885 Main Street. The Primrose School Josh Kline, project engineer, stated that they met with the police and fire department and also attended a Development Review Team meeting. He stated that they are hoping to get the traffic peer review approved from the board to continue with the application process. He said that they will prepare to resubmit the Traffic Impact Study, Site Plans, and reports. Ms. Clish asked if they plan to present the updated site plans and Mr. Kline said that they were planning to wait until all reviews were complete and then return with an updated package and plan set. Mr. MacNlchol said that town staff reached out to Green International Associates to complete the traffic peer review. He summarized the peer review scope. Mr. Weston stated that a concern for past peer reviews has been the process of review and supplemental Information because the board may not agree with the peer reviewer. He stated that the biggest issue is the sight distance evaluation for the turning movements. He said that the peer reviewer will need to have a more detailed analysis taken into consideration. Ms. Clash said that there needs to be opportunity to hear wncems from CPDC and the community and update the peer review as needed. Mr. Kline said that a site distance evaluation from the field is a MassDOT requirement as well. The board continued to review the peer review scope and provide revisions. Mr. Weston said that the board will not have the benefit of a MassDOT review prior to issuing a decision, because their review comes after local approval. Mr. Kline said that they 0 A ,, Town of Reading Meeting Minutes will review it, but they will not Issue an access permit until local approval is issued. He added that they have not filed yet because they have been waiting for comments from public safety. Mr. Kline said that their review can take from six months to one year and is similar to the peer review, which Includes the traffic impact study, sight distances, turning movements, and off -site Impacts to the roadway network. Mr. Kline presented the updated site plan and stated that it addressed the comments received from public safety but will return with a full package of updated plans. Mr. Arena asked about the proposed fire hydrant and Mr. Kline said that they are proposing a new fire hydrant on the property. Mr. Armstrong asked where the rescue area is on site and Mr. Kline said that they would work with public safety on this. Mr. Armstrong said that the site is crowded and the area where people can go during an evacuation Is limited. Mr. Kline said that they would continue to work with the fire chief, but a gathering area has not been discussed. Mr. Arena expressed that the site In over constrained and that these questions should be considered. He asked what the turning radius of the Reading Fire Truck is, and Mr. Kline said it is 25.247 feet. Mr. Arena stated that the full turning radius is required and that there is no wiggle room. Mr. Kline said that the truck movements were reviewed by the Fire Chief. Mr. Arena asked what the turn radius off Main Street, and Mr. Kline said that it had been designed to safely accommodate the fire truck. Mr. Arena asked If they could signalize the intersection and Mr. Kline said that they would defer to DOT on this but based on the traffic impact study the project does not warrant a signal. Mr. Armstrong asked if a raised berm splits the Main Street entrance and it was confirmed that there is only paint. Mr. Armstrong asked about the site grading and Mr. Kline said that they have submitted a grading plan and that it is to be updated. Ms. Clish opened for public comment Tom McCord, 44 Francis Drive, asked about the traffic peer review and if historical elements could be considered, particularly for the 5-year accidents report which Include 2020 and 2021 which may be underreported. Mr. McCord requested to expand the years of data collection because accident rates may be underreported, and he would appreciate the police department to review the data. He added that this part of Route 28 is accident prone and was restrlped and this should be considered by the peer reviewer. He said that the Charles Street and Main Street intersections have been restricted due to accidents and that they should look Into possible restrictions for turns coming into and out of the Primrose School to address traffic concerns. The board discussed that the restriping was completed prior to the dates being evaluated in the traffic study and that the applicant could consider expanding the dates of the study to a pre-covid year. Mr. Weston said that a right turn out of private property is not enforceable by the police department. Lori McKenna, 34 Duck Road, stated that the new design poses a greater safety risk with rows of parking on each side of the driveway in an area with reduced frontage. She stated that cars will que on Main Street. She stated her lack of support for the project and safety concerns and requested a full parking maneuverability assessment and development of this size. She stated that the scope is too large for this parcel of land. Paul Sutherland, 10 Duck Road, asked about the traffic peer review and stated that there was lack of consensus on daycare pick up and drop off times. He asked if this will be covered in the traffic impact study, specifically for special events on site. Mr. MacNichol said 5 6�N nrq a �' Town of Reading a' ,. c� Meeting Minutes that the peer review can look into how many vehicles are pulling in and out of the site at a given time. Mr. Weston said the peer reviewed will look at the Institute of Traffic Engineers traffic generation rates and evaluate the proposal based on this data. Ms. Clish said that parking turnover on site was provided as justification for the reduction in the number of parking spaces on the current iteration of the plan. Mr. Sutherland said that the applicant previously stated that they do not do sitewide events, but other locations of the franchise do, and he wants this to be captured. Mr. Sutherland asked if people will be crossing the parking lot by the entrance and Ms. Clish said this should be considered by the engineers. He asked if the retaining wall is still proposed along Francis Drive and asked about the retaining wall and the elevations. Steve Mayes, 59 Francis Drive, asked if the site is required to have EV parking spaces. Mr. MacNichol stated he would find out more information. Mr. Mayes said that the traffic study should review more days In their traffic analysis. Lastly, he asked if the playground area is Flammable and whether this is safe for children to gather during a fire. Janice Berner, 874 Main Street, said that traffic patterns on Main Street are busy and asked whether an independent study of traffic can be done, not just a peer review. She asked for more clarity on the school capacity and enrollment. She expressed concern for the roadways downhill grade and site congestion safety concerns. Matt Krokowski, 911 Main Street, asked if the traffic peer review study can model snowbanks or winter weather and the impact on visibility. Mr. MacNichol said that the board can condition snow storage cannot impede sight lines or sight distance. Mr. Weston said that this is not typically reviewed through a traffic study. Valerie Ross, 29 Lawrence Road, stated that children will be walking from Hampshire and Lawrence Road to school and that it is a dangerous intersection. She added that during winter kids will be walking to school in the street because of snow pile ups and that there are no sidewalks on Lawrence Road. She stated that this is a safety concern. Ms. Clish asked if this is considered in a traffic impact study and Mr. Ross said that they did look at Lawrence Road and Hampshire and noted that the sidewalks are spotty. Jane McCord, 44 Francis Drive, asked if the traffic study captured data on one day in March and if they can expand that to include more days of observation. Mr. Weston said that typically a traffic study is limited based on seasons and that they have other data to utilize which reports on what traffic is typically like in the region. Kevin L, asked a question via zoom; inquiring if the board can choose a neutral third party to conduct the peer review and questioned if the number of traffic stops within a 100-yard distance of the site are accounted for in the peer review. Mr. MacNichol stated that the peer review is independent and has no relation to the applicant. Ms. Clish said that they have worked into the peer review process with an opportunity for the board to question the review. Christine Curtie, 55 Francis Drive, said that there are many young and inexperienced drivers on Main Street. Resident of 56 Lawrence Road said that many kids bike to school and asked if the traffic analysis takes the traffic signal into consideration the frequency of the signal. Mr. Arena asked what it costs if the board did an additional traffic study, and Mr. Weston said that it would not result in any new information. Mr. Arena asked if the vehicle velocity is included in the TIS and Mr. Kline said that traffic does not include velocity. Mr. Arena said aTown of Reading Meeting Minutes that this portion of the street is posted at 40 but many regularly go faster. He made the comparison to Charles Street, stating that it was converted to a right turn only because of accidents associated with left hand turns. Mr. Kline said that this would be covered under the site evaluation and the peer reviewer will look at existing conditions and observe speeds. Mr. MacNichol said that they can work with RPD to see If they can get a sign board and speed board on a pole near the site. Janice Berner, 874 Main Street, asked if accident history is going to be considered in the traffic study and how this Information will be used. Ms. Clish said there should be Information in the study about where the data comes from. Mr. MacNichol presented the revised scope. Christine Curtin, 55 Francis Drive, asked If they could put a traffic camera by the site. Ms. Clish said that there Is a lot of data already and it would be challenging to process the data. Paul Sutherland, 10 Duck Road, suggested that an enforcement camera could be introduced to the area to create more safe traffic conditions. Arthus Sandovis, 14 Duck Road, said that the peer review is not considering winter conditions. Mr. Weston said that accident reports will include winter accident data and that they can continue to have conversations about the traffic Impact study and peer review data and other concerns that come up. Mr. Manganiello asked If Primrose Schools operate when other schools dose. Mr. Kline said that they will collect all comments and report to the Primrose School representative. Mr. Arena suggested that the peer review identify the peak speeds for the roadway alongside the average speeds. Mr. Armstrong said that data for peak times Is needed. Lori McKenna asked if the CPDC has visited the site. Mr. MacNichol said they would have to receive approval from the current property owner, but that abutters have invited board members to walk the neighboring sites. Ms. Mateev made a motion to authorize the peer review scope of work as amended and it was seconded by Mr. Weston. It was approved 5-0-0 (Manganiello, Mateev, Clish, Arena, Weston). Ms. Mateev made a motion to continue the public hearing for the site plan review of 885 Main Street to Monday July 14, 2025. It was seconded by Mr. Arena, and it was approved 5-0-0 (Manganiello, Mateev, Clish, Arena, Weston). The board took a 5-minute recess at 10:10 pm. Other Plannina Business Grandview Road Extension Form H Covenant Agreement Endorsement and Form L Lot Release General construction schedule for right of way and proposed dwelling lots, which intends to complete in 2026. He added that the remaining question is whether the developer needs to obtain a slope easement and said that town counsel is comfortable with CPDC endorsing the covenant. The applicant is requesting the board to endorse the covenant at this time. 6rq "a� I, qu Town of Reading .�1 Meeting Minutes J9�IF[ �4C Mr. Weston said that he has a problem with the guidance from town counsel which states that a written license agreement should be obtained to prevent unexpected future variables. Ms. Clish asked whether the town needs a temporary or a slope easement. Mr. Weston said that they are using town land to support their roadway and is something happens then the town Is liable. Mr. Manganiello asked if the board can condition that the developer maintain the slope in perpetuity. Mr. Weston said that this would be enforced through a license agreement. Mr. MacNichol said the long-term maintenance of the slope is under question now, and Ms. Clish asked if the town is responsible for maintaining the slope that supports the road. Mr. MacNichol said that they can condition and require an executed license agreement or full easement. Ms. Clish asked if the HOA maintains the road and Mr. Weston said yes. Mr. Manganiello asked if they have a performance bond, and Mr. MacNichol said that they have a bond of $145,000. The board tabled the discussion of endorsing the covenant agreement until later In the meeting. The board returned to their discussion of the covenant agreement at 10:58 pm. Mr. Clish summarized the board's discussion to Michael Salamone, the developer. Mr. Arena asked if the covenant agreement covers more than just the slope, and Mr. MacNichol said that it does. The board further discussed the slope easement with Mr. Salamone. Mr. Manganiello stated that the bond is to do the work, and the license agreement is to maintain the work in perpetuity. Tony D'Arezzo, 130 John Street, said that they need more clarification from town counsel. He added that easements are harder to get because they are in perpetuity and it Is easier to keep track of. Ms. Mateev made a motion to endorse the Form H covenant agreement in relation to Grandview LLC and Grandview Road Subdivision, conditioned that prior to release of said covenant a license agreement must be executed. It was seconded by Mr. Weston, and it was approved 5-0-0 (Mateev, Clish, Weston, Arena, Armstrong) Mr. Manganiello abstained. Master Plan Discussion and N Ms. Clish state that the Select Board is interested in pursuing a Master Plan. The CPDC initially discussed taking an update to town meeting In November to discuss the cost of a Master Plan update. Council confirmed that several components of the Master Plan required by state law are under jurisdiction of the CPDC as the Planning Board. She added that the select board has an interested in a broader style of master plan. She said that the CPDC and Select Board will collaborate to determine a consensus on the composition of a Master Plan Steering Committee. She said that the planning department has pursued some grants in the interim to fund the update, or a budget request could be brought to town meeting. Ms. Clish said that in previous efforts all members of CPDC were on the master planning advisory committee. Ms. Clish said that the CPDC will need to determine the scope of master planning committee charge, the makeup of the committee, and what other groups are important to have on the committee. She added that CPDC ultimately must vote to approve a Master Plan. Ms. Clish said that in 2023 town meeting made an instructlonal motion that CPDC pursue a Master 00 "� ° Town of Reading ,. � • Meeting Minutes Plan Update and Mr. Weston added that in 2019 the CPDC recognized a need for a new Master Plan, but that there was a lot of change happening downtown at the time. Ms. Clish said that Reading already has a lot of plans to inform a Master Plan, and they can fill the gaps as needed. The board further discussed working group and steering committee potential and what the process could look like. Mr. Arena suggested reviewing the 2005 Master Plan to determine what the town has accomplished since and what needs remain. Mr. MacNichol said that the finer details of Master Plan contents and process can be worked out during the RFP drafting. Mr. Manganlello asked what this would cost, and Mr. MacNichol said it can range from $125,00 to $200,000. Mr. Weston emphasized that it should be a community -led process. Adiournment Ms. Mateev made a motion to adjourn at 11:20 PM and It was seconded 6y Mr. Weston. It was approved 5-0-0 (Arena, Weston, Mateev, Clish Manganiello). Documents Reviewed at the Meeting: 885 Main Street - The Primrose School Site Plan, dated 5-6-25 Stonefield, Police & Fire Response Letter, dated 5-6-25 Truck Turning Movements, dated 5-6-25 DRAFT Decision, dated 5-12-25 Birch Meadow Park Phase II Birch Meadow Civil Plans, dated 3-17-25 Birch Meadow Phase II Presentation, dated 5-12-25 Rendering, dated 5-2-25 DRAFT Decision, dated 5-12-25 346-348 Main Street Revised Plan Set, dated 5-5-25 DRAFT Decision, dated 4-14-25 Other Business Grandview Rd Ext Bond Estimate, dated 1-7-2025 Grandview Rd Ext. - Form H Covenant Agreement, dated 3-18-25