Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-09-28 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of Reading 16 Lowell Street TOWN CLERK Reading, MA 01867-2683 READING, MASS. Phone: 781-942-6612 Fax: 781-942-9071a3 ° A C Q b Email: jdelios@ci.readmg.ma.us 2010 J G Community Planning and Development Commission CPDC MINUTES Meeting Dated: Se Mmber 28, 2009 s Location: Selectmen's Meeting Room, T©wn Mali Time 7:30 PM Members Present: Nichols Safina (NS), Chairman, JOhn,`Westo~n Q W). Secretary, Joseph Patterson (JP), and David Tuttle (D t) Members Absent: Clair Paradiso (CP), Also Present: Jean Delios (JD), Town Planner; Abigail McCabe (AM), Staff Planner; George Zambouras, Town Engineer; and Michael Schloth (MS), Recording Secretary. Bill Bogaert., 91 Pleasant St. Tina Brzezenski, Main Street Reading, LLC, owner of 580 Main Street, Attorney Steven Cicatelli, Cicatelli & Cicatelli , 266 Main St., Stoneham, MA Jamie Lynch, Lynch Construction, 90 Main St., North Reading, MA Peter Marino, representing owner (father) of 75 Pleasant St. Ms. Gwendolyn Noyes, Architect, partner of Oaktree Development \ David O'Sullivan, 18 Thorndike St Selectman Ben Tafoya, 40 Oak Street For Perfectos Caffe: Mr. Max Gabriello, Owner of Perfectos Caffe Chris Huntress (sp?) David Petkewich, PE, Senior Proj. Mgr.; R.J. O'Connell & Assoc., 80 Montale Ave., Stoneham, MA Attorney Christine Sheehy, Johnson & Borenstein, LLC; 12 Chestnut Ave., Andover, MA William Turville, Scultor/Architect, 1165R Mass. Ave., Arlington, MA There being a quorum the Chair called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM. The Board welcomed Ms. Jean Delios, Reading's new Town Planner and Community Services Director. Public Comments None. Approval Not Required (ANR): 17 King Street The applicant is combining two lots in the S-15 Residential zoning district. The Town Engineer had no issues with the ANR. DT moved the Board endorse the plans for 17 King Street as presented. JP seconded and the motion was carried 4:0:0. The Board signed the plans. Page 1 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 9/28/2009 - ' Site Plan Review (Continued) 285 Main Street, Perfectos Caffe Appearing for Perfectos Caffe were Owner Mr. Max Gabriello, Attorney Christine Sheehy, Engineer and Project Manager Mr. David Petkewich; Architect Mr. Bill Turvile, and Chris Huntress (sp?). Attorney Sheehy updated the Board as to the items addressed since last the applicant was before the Board (9/14/2009). A structural engineer had been hired to review the foundation and should start work later this week. The south-side parking configuration was re-evaluated to see if parking nose-in to the building would be a better design but they discovered doing so would make two parking spaces unusable so they have returned to the original design. The parking space nearest the south curb-cut has been removed to make room for a larger landscape island there. Signage, lighting, landscaping, color-scheme, and roof details have been submitted for review. The dumpster enclosure has been revised to better match the color and style of the building. Architect Bill Turville said the building's design is now more traditional with a light-colored brick material (Quick Brick) on the ground-level fagade and a clapboard-like upper fagade. The roof will be a hip-roof with an empty center to conceal mechanicals. Lights under the overhanging portion of the upper story will be recessed. Lights will be of low wattage and most will be directed onto the walkway around the building. The business closes at 6:00 pm so lights will be needed only in winter. Mr. Chris Huntress expanded on the lighting. The lights were worked into the architecture to hide the source and would illuminate down along the walls. There are three telephone poles with lights nearby so no additional light poles were though necessary. The Board noted as per bylaw section 6.2.3.2.1 the internal illumination of the freestanding sign could shine through the logo and letters only. The background must be opaque. The applicant said they would come back with a signage plan to fit the bylaw. The Town Engineer said the applicant had addressed all of his concerns with regards to the roof runoff and drainage. Also, he noted the parking angles of the north-side parking spaces had been adjusted so that customers would not have to back out onto Main Street. The Chair asked if the applicant had addressed the questions the Conservation Administrator had put to the applicant in her memo. Attorney Sheehy said they had only recently had received the Conservation Commission's questions of 9/25/2009 and did not yet have a full reply but would address the questions with the Conservation Commission when they next appeared before it. JW asked if there would be problems with flow (e.g. surcharge or backwash) through the drainage system given the roof-runoff would be as great as the parking-lot runoff. Mr. Petkewich said this would not be a problem for the system. Next, Mr. Huntress described the proposed landscaping. The new landscape island at the south curb cut would contain low shrubbery and a River Birch enclosed by a low fence. The same shrubbery would be added along the north boundary of the site and in to the center landscape island (located between the two - curb-cuts). Half of the width of the center island extends into Mass Highway's right-of-way and the plantings there will be what Mass Highway typically allows: grass and some perennials. The Page 2 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 9/28/2009 conservation buffer zone along the stream would be raked, sticks and other debris would be removed, and the area planted with an erosion-control mix of plants. No trees would be cut down. JW suggested adding more substantial tree. The applicant said it would have to have a small canopy. The Board advised the applicant to work with the town's Tree Warden to select a suitable tree. The consensus of the Board was to continue the site plan review until the meeting of 10/19/2009 at 7:30 PM. The Board advised the applicant that the two main concerns of the Board are the state of the foundation and any issues the Conservation Commission may have with the site. The Board reminded the applicant that approval is based on the re-use of the existing foundation and if it is determined the foundation cannot be re-used as-is, then the project will have to go back before all necessary Boards and Commission again beginning with the ZBA. Discussion with Oaktree Development Update on Proposal for 30 Haven Street Ms. Gwen Noyes represented Oaktree Development. Also present was Selectman Ben Tafoya and the Town Manager, Peter Hechenbleikner. Ms. Noyes and the Town Manager asked the Board to consider making changes to the Mixed-Use zoning which would allow Oaktree to proceed with its proposal using the Mixed-Use zoning in case the Downtown 40R (SmartGrowth) Bylaw: A) does not pass or B) passes and Oaktree is unable to obtain a subsidy from the DHCD to build the required affordable housing. Ms. Noyes explained the issue regarding the subsidy is that the DHCD requires the zoning to be in place first and depending on when and if the Downtown 40R zoning is approved by the town Oaktree may not be able to obtain a subsidy in the in time. She noted Oaktree's big issue is density or Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.): the Mixed-Use bylaw as written does not allow the F.A.R. Oaktree needs. Selectman Tafoya noted the town did all it could to try to get Oaktree a speedy response from the State. There are other ways to get to the same place - using a 40B or a LIP - but they have there own issues. The current Mixed-Use bylaw also may not offer as much control to the town but with revisions it could be more restrictive to developers. The Town Manager said if the Board thinks Oaktree's project is the right development for the site and for the downtown, then it does not matter what zoning mechanism is used to build it. In the ensuing discussion, it was noted that National Development had a hand in creation of the Gateway 40R zoning (at the former site of Addison Wesley). Mr. David O'Sullivan, 18 Thorndike Street, noted the Gateway 40R (at the former site of Addison Wesley) seemed to have been driven by the developer but it was for one property. He agreed the Mixed- Use zoning is unworkable in its current state and he believed Town Meeting could be made to see the reason for making changes to it, but he expressed concern that those changes should not be seen as driven by a particular developer. The Board had many issues with this request. Page 3 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 9/28/2009 • Changes to the Mixed-Use lead to more and more problems, which is one reason the Board decided to try 40R zoning. • Presenting two separate zoning options for the Downtown to Town Meeting could result in an either/or situation. • Town Meeting might see this as a referendum on one site rather than two zoning options. • The Mixed-Use zoning covers much more area than Oaktree's site. It covers much more area than the proposed Downtown 40R. Changes would have to be examined in that light. The Floor Area Ratio (F.A.R.) Oaktree is looking for should not apply to the entire Mixed-Use district. • It would be unlikely the Board could properly implement the changes (review what needed changes and how the changes would impact the downtown) in time for Town Meeting. Regarding the last point, Ms. Noyes asked if that was a request for help. She noted Oaktree had provided help writing zoning bylaws for other communities. The Board said it was a statement for the Town Manager to take as he will whether for staff or consultant help. The Town Manager said National Development had reimbursed the town for the help of consultants on the Gateway 40R. The consensus of the Board was it would consider Oaktree's request. No action was taken by the Board. Request for Waiver from Site Plan Review 580 Main Street Ms Tina Brzezenski, owner of 580 Main Street, was present. A site plan review was triggered because alterations are proposed to over 1000sgft of interior space. A new tenant - O'Sullivan Architects wants to occupy over 1800sgft of the second floor. There are no exterior changes and the use is the same (office). The site is exempt from parking requirements because it is within 300ft of a municipal lot. Conditions of all previous waivers for the site have been met. Ms. Brzezenski has committed to the Fire Department to make necessary changes to meet the fire code (e.g. sprinklers); and to the Building Inspector to make necessary changes to meet the Architectural Access Board's codes (e.g. 2-stop lift and unisex restroom) DT moved the Board grant the applicant's request for a waiver from Site Plan Review. JW seconded and the motion was carried 4:0:0. Discussion with Owner of 75 Pleasant Street Current applicability of 2007 ZBA Decision and Land-swap The owner's son, Mr. Peter Marino, was present. Also present was the Town Manager, Peter Hechenbleikner, and abutter Mr. Bill Bogaert. This same property was the subject of a possible land-swap between the Town of Reading and the Reading Housing Authority. That transaction was not completed and the Housing Authority has since sold the property to Mr. Marino. Mr. Marino wants to go forward with the land-swap and construct four Page 4 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 9/28/2009 residential units under a LIP (Local Initiative Program). Mr. Marino's son was before the Board to ask if his father could pick up where the Housing Authority left off. The Town Planner did not think there were any issues with the town making the land-swap with a private party. The Town Manager asked the Board if it though the project the Housing Authority began but dropped was still worthwhile to complete with Mr. Marino. If the Board agrees it is worthwhile, then Mr. Marino would go back to the Board of Selectmen to have a warrant article placed before Town Meeting to do the land-swap again. If the Board does not agree it is worthwhile, Mr. Marino will build a two-family home. The consensus of the Board was it had no issues with the land-swap. No action was taken by the Board. Request for Extension of Site Plan Review Decision 18-20 Woburn Street Attorney Stephen Cicatelli represented the owner, Mr. Jamie Lynch, who was also present. Mr. Cicatelli cited the state of the economy as the reason his client has not broken ground on construction. It has been difficult to find tenants. Mr. Lynch is looking for a 2(two)-year extension of the Board's December, 2007 Site Plan Review Decision on 18-20 Woburn St. The Board asked if there were any outstanding issues with the site, safety issues in particular. The Town Planner said her office window looks out on the site and she can verify the site has been properly secured. The Board asked Mr. Lynch if he would agree to place a vinyl fence around the lot instead of the current chain-link fence - especially along Woburn St. Mr. Lynch agreed. NS moved the Board grant the applicant a 2(two)-year extension of the Board's 2007 Site Plan Review Decision for 18-20 Woburn Street with the condition that the owner screen the site on the Woburn Street side with a vinyl fence. DT seconded. The motion was carried 4:0:0. Other Business DHCD edits to Downtown Smart Growth District By-Law The Board noted most of the edits were to remove subjective language. It noted no changes were made to the signage language of the bylaw. It noted the DHCD had changed the Board's definition of "multifamily residential" from a residential structure with 3 units to one with 4 units. The DHCD did not provide comments on its edits. The Staff Planner said more details should arrive in a month or so. The Town Planner reported that the town's consultants, Housing Partners, Inc., saw no issues with the DHCD's edits. The Chair asked if the change in the definition of "multifamily" would have an effect on small parcels. He noted the building code only looks at one or two family structures; everything else is considered multifamily. DT noted it exempts triple-deckers. e Page 5 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 9/28/2009 The consensus of the Board was to wait for the DHCD's more complete report and ask the DHCD what was its concern with multifamily units. No action was taken Section 6.3.17 of the Zoning By-Laws (Reconstruction after Demolition) The Town Planner reported that because the amendment came from a citizen's group, the language should go on the warrant as it was submitted. The consensus of the Board was it agreed with the intent of the citizen's group but it was not sure the amendment as written would fix the problem the citizen's group sees, namely that the ZBA is not taking into account the context of the reconstruction within a neighborhood. The Town Planner advised the Board recommend the amendment be passed. It could be improved upon later. The Board suggested amending subsection B to read: "any reconstruction within a residential district" noting that a distinction should be made between residential and commercial districts. Example: reconstruction on a Main Street property which abuts a residential property should be appropriate to Main Street. DT suggested making an amendment from the floor of Town Meeting. The Town planner noted that would require a public hearing. The Chair directed a public hearing be scheduled at which the Board would present its own amendment. The Town Planner said a two-week notice for the hearing was needed and she would schedule it for the next meeting. Benjamin Lane Bond Release DT moved the Board approve the release of $5,500.00 of the remaining bond pending the written recommendation of the Town Planner. The Chair seconded and the notion was carried 4:0:0. The Chair moved to adjourn. DT seconded and the motion was carried 4:0:0. The meeting adjourned at 10:15 PM. Amendment to general By-Laws: Earth Removal By-Law In the ensuing discussion, the following points were raised. The meeting adjourned at 10:40 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. S 1 John/Weston, Secretary D Page 6 of 6