HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-10-26 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of Reading , 'REC'EIVED
16 Lowell Street TOWN C L A R K
Reading, MA 01867-2683 READING, MASS.
Phone: 781-942-6612
Fax: 781-942-9071 010 JAN 21 c1 Ob ,
Email: jdelios@ci.reading.ma.us G U k1fV 8°'1
Community Planning and Development Commission
CPDC MINUTES
Meeting Dated: October 26, 2009
Location: Selectme 's Meeting Room, Town Hall Time: 7:30 PM
Members Present: cholasafina (NS), Chai an; JQh Weston (JW), Secretary, Clair Paradiso
(CP), David Tuttle (DT), and Joseph'attrson.,(1
Associate Members resent-George I atsoufis (`K-)
Also Present: Jean Delios (JD), Town Planner; Abigail McCabe (AM), Staff Planner; and Michael
Schloth (MS), Recording Secretary.
Mr. Russell Graham, 68 Maple Ridge Road
There being a quorum the Chair called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM.
Public Comments
None.
The Board briefly discussed the matter of what kind of dumpster enclosure had been required for
1349 Main Street.
Request for Minor Modification to Site Plan Review Decision:
10 Torre Street, The Goddard School
The Town Planner informed the Board the applicant had withdrawn the request.
No action was taken by the Board.
Work Session:
Prepare for Town Meeting & Public Hearing for Downtown Smart Growth
District (DSGD)
The Board reviewed the Powerpoint presentation scheduled for the 11/2/2009 public hearing.
• The Board noted it is important to emphasize by-right feature of the 40R will be accompanied
by high-quality planning review and design guidelines.
• Should explain "non-conforming" and "under-utilized properties"
• Note the challenge of trying to meet the Master Plan/World Cafe Goals of increasing housing,
increasing retail and restaurants, while supporting public spaces and maintaining Reading's
character and identity.
• Clarify what can and cannot be done under Business-B, Mixed-Use, and the DSGD.
Page 1 of 3
CPDC Minutes of 10/26/2009
• Compare Mixed-Use and Business-B in a separate slide.
Parking:
• Emphasize how all businesses within the DSGD are within 300 feet of a municipal parking lot
and therefore are exempt from parking regulations as per Section 6.1.1.1 of the Zoning
Bylaws.
• Must be prepared to explain why slide shows no parking spaces are required within the DSGD
• Recognizes reality of 300ft exemption
• Developers would still probably have to provide parking spaces above zoning minimums to
sell units
• Parking Study reports the downtown has many unutilized parking spaces: shared parking.
Issue: Mr. Graham noted the town may not be ready to believe we have the parking spaces
already. The Board agreed but noted the reality must be presented. GK emphasized that the
parking issue is not something that would kill the DSGD and advised the Board not give the
impression otherwise.
• GK noted it is not the Board's battle to fight the parking space issue. Instead, it should
emphasize whether the town goes with a parking garage or a parking management plan, the
DSGD can work. Mr. Graham agreed but noted Town Meeting would probably want to know
if the town has plans for either or both.
Dimensions
• Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.): the Board agreed this concept must be made clear to Town
Meeting.
• GK noted the most important numbers to the public will be Minimum Lot Area and
Maximum Height.
• Need graphics to show how tall Reading's buildings are now.
• Setbacks: another concept to explain to Town Meeting. Graphics maybe best way to do so.
Other
• Do not make the depot the center of the DSGD. It is no longer tied to a transportation hub.
• Explain "Median Household Income" and note if it is with regards to Reading or Metro
Boston or...?
• The Board considered whether it should include a slide showing who endorses the DSGD.
The consensus was not to.
• Various editorial corrections.
Discussion of Oaktree's suggested changes to Mixed-Use Zoning
• The Board discussed reducing the requirement to 10% from 20%. GK recalled a drop to 15%
in a better market, but could not recall a drop to 10% at all. The Chair expressed concern the
by dropping the percentage too far the town will fall too far behind the threshold. GK noted
another concern: affordable units may not be affordable in perpetuity therefore could be
market-rate sometime in the future putting the town further behind the threshold.
• Why change F.A.R. to 3.4 if Oaktree only needs approx 2.7?
• Underground Parking: why restrict it to lots of 30,000 sq. ft - if developers want to add
underground parking they should be encouraged.
Page 2 of 3
CPDC Minutes of 10/26/2009
The consensus of the Board was the changes need further review.
DT moved the Board adjourn. CP seconded.
The meeting adjourned at 9:40 PM.
These minutes were prepared by Michael Schloth and submitted to the CPDC on December 14, 2009;
these minutes were approved by the CPDC on December 14, 2009.
Signed as approved,
Jojii Weston, Secretary
0
Page 3 of 3