Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-09-14 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of Reading RECEIVED TOWN CLERK 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867-2683 RD'01NG. ASS. Phone: 781-942-6612 2010 JA 21 A c~ O b Fax: 781-942-9071 Email: jdelios(alci.reading.ma.us Community Planning and Development Commission CPDC MINUTES Meeting Dated: S Location: Selectmen's Members Present: Nicholas (JP), and. David Tuttle (DT) ,er 14, 2009 Room, Town Hall Time: 7. la (NIS), Chairman: John Weston (JW), Secretary, J Members Absent: Clair Paradiso (CP), Associate Members Present: George Katsoufis (GK) 0PM Patterson Also Present: Jean Delios (JD), Town Planner; Abigail McCabe (AM), Staff Planner; and Michael Schloth (MS), Recording Secretary. Attorney Christine Sheehy, Johnson & Borenstein, LLC; 12 Chestnut Ave., Andover, MA Mr. Max Gabriello, Owner of Perfectos Caffe David Petkewich, PE, Senior Proj. Mgr.; R.J. O'Connell & Assoc., 80 Montale Ave., Stoneham, MA There being a quorum the Chair called. the meeting to order at 7:33 PM. The Board welcomed Ms. Jean Delios as Reading's new Town Planner and Community Services Director. Public Comments None. Public Hearing for Site Plan Review: 285 Main Street, Perfectos Cafe The Chair opened the public hearing. JW read the public notice. Appearing for Perfectos Caffe were Owner Mr. Max Gabriello, Attorney Christine Sheehy, and Engineer and Project Manager Mr. David Petkewich. Ms. Sheehy made a brief presentation. The applicant proposes to construct a bakery/caf6 on the site of a Tuxedo Shop which was destroyed by fire in 2006. They received a special permit from the ZBA in March 2009 to build on the existing foundation. The site has undergone hazardous waste remediation (oil and gasoline) and a final report from the site owner's Environmental Consultant should be on file in early October 2009. Page 1 of 4 CPDC Minutes of 9/14/2009 The Board questioned if the applicant wanted to go forward given the outstanding conservation issues (noted by the Conservation Administrator in a letter to the Board) and the concern expressed by town staff over the structural integrity of the foundation. Ms. Sheehy said they had received the Conservation Administrator's comments and they would meet with her soon. Also, a Notice of Intent would be filed. by the end of the week. Regarding the foundation, Ms. Sheehy said a structural engineer had reviewed the foundation and said the foundation could be re-used but a more detailed analysis would have to be made before applying for a building permit. She did not have the engineer's report but said it would be ready soon. The Chair informed the applicant that if the foundation proved inadequate they would have to resubmit their application to all necessary Boards and Commissions. The Board took issue with the design of the parking lot. The two spaces on the North side nearest to Main Street would require patrons to back into Main Street. The parking spaces on the South side may provide better access and flow for both customers and deliveries if the spaces were nose-in against the building rather than nose-in against the lot line. A physical demarcation should be considered. for the southern curb cut instead of the proposed painted triangle. The Board suggested a fence or a curbed or benned landscape island with a bicycle rack. Regarding the Northern spaces, Mr. Petkewich said the spaces were oversized so anyone backing-up there would not have to beck onto Main "Street. He would review the feasibility of the Board's suggestions for the South side spaces and curb cut. As for the building, the Board asked the applicant to consider a different design for the second. floor. The roofline is too flat and the windows do not fit with the design of the lower floor. The Board also asked the applicant to consider a different design for the exterior light fixtures. The Town Planner asked if the landscape island against Main Street could be expanding into one or both of the two adjacent parallel parking lots. Ms. Sheehy said they would consider it but the loss of the spaces could cause overflow. The consensus of the Board was to continue the site plan review to the next meeting, 9/28/2009. The applicant agreed to the continuance. For that meeting, the Board asked the applicant to submit: • A color scheme for the building including a color sample of the building's panels. • Details on proposed signage.` • A roof plan keeping in mind the adjacent Avon Apartments are taller. • More details on lighting. The Board is particularly concerned that light sources not be visible. • The 21E report for the site. • The Structural Engineer's report on the foundation. DT moved the Board continue the Site Plan Review of 285 Main Street, Perfectos Caffe, to Monday, September 28, 2009 at 7:30 PM. JP seconded and the motion was carried 4:0:0. Preparation for Town Meeting Downtown Smart Growth District Page 2 of 4 CPDC Minutes of 9/14/2009 The Town Planner reported the initial review of the Downtown 40R Smart Growth District by the DHCD has been completed and was favorable. The more detailed review is underway and she expects it to take at least 60 days. The Board agreed the presentation to Town Meeting should emphasize why the 40R district is being proposed. It should. tie into the goals of the Master Plan and desires expressed by residents at the World Cafe. Mixed-Use Overlay By-Law revisions The Town planner said Oaktree Development is requesting the Board consider recommending to Town Meeting a motion consisting of changes to the existing Mixed-Use Overlay by-law that would allow Oaktree to proceed with their redevelopment of the Atlantic Supermarket site without the 40R overlay. Oaktree is requesting this back-up plan because even if the DHCD approves the 40R language in time for Town Meeting to vote on it, and even if Town Meeting approves it, there is a chance Oaktree may not receive the affordable housing subsidy they would need to proceed. under the 40R overlay. The Downtown 40R and the Mixed-Use changes would be presented together at Town Meeting but as separate motions. In the ensuing discussion, the following points were raised. • It was not the Board's jab to make zoning fit what a developer wants. • The perception would be this would be for Oaktree's benefit only. It would be better if the Mixed-Use changes were spearheaded by a citizen petition similar to how the 40R at Addison-Wesley was proposed (Gateway Smart Growth District). • There is not enough time before Town Meeting to review what changes to the Mixed-Use by- law would be required, to craft the language, and to hold the public hearing. • The changes would be specific to Oaktree but would apply to the entire Mixed-Use district. • The Downtown 40R district has already been reduced. in size due to public.outcry. Would the public support a 40R-like change to the much larger Mixed-Use district? The consensus of the Board was to recommend against making changes to the Mixed-Use by-law. DT moved the Board recommend no changes be made to the Mixed-Use Overlay at this time. The Chair seconded and the motion carried 4:0:0. Amendment to general By-Laws: Earth Removal By-Law The Town Planner said this was an amendment to the General By-Laws. It will be on the Town Meeting Warrant. In the ensuing discussion, the following points were raised. • The intent is for large excavations but no exception is made for homeowners re-grading their lawns. An exception for smaller projects should be added or it will not pass Town Meeting. • There should be language addressing adding soil and re-grading. As written, it applies to cases where soil is removed only. The consensus of the Board was the language needed further review. It took no action. Page 3 of 4 CPDC Minutes of 9/14/2009 Charitable Drop Boxes The Town Planner said she had hoped to advance some zoning concerning such boxes after complaints were received from abutters to Home Goods where an attended drop-off trailer is located. She was unable to find. model language in other communities' by-laws. The main issue is safety: e.g. clear access to the drop-off box; propane heater for the attendant in winter. Town Counsel had told her this is not covered under the by-laws. The Board was not able to think of any suggestions to offer. The Board took no action. Section 6.3.17 of the Zoning By-Laws (Reconstruction after Demolition) New language proposed by Town Counsel had been distributed to the Board for its review. In the ensuing discussion, the following points were raised. • A distinction should be made between residential and commercial zoning districts especially where the two meet. Residential should. not make abutting commercial conform to residential massing and vice versa, but commercial should have a greater variety of massing than residential. 0 Strike "or by the proposed voluntary action of the owner" and the 6.3.17 makes more sense. Add language addressing the voluntary destruction of structures on a non-conforming as Section 6.3.17.1. • What is to be considered "damage" and who decides if it is "damage"? The consensus of the Board was the language needed further review. It took no action. ZBA Case Review 130 Franklin Street The Aquifer Protection District covers a corner of the lot and the owner is seeing a variance to go over the allowed impervious cover but no plans have been submitted. The ZBA has requested more details. The consensus of the Board was it could. not comment without reviewing plans. Other Business Minutes The Board voted 5:0:0 to approve the minutes of July 27, 2009 as amended. The meeting adjourned at 10:40 PM. These minutes were prepared by Michael Schloth and submitted to the CPDC on October 19, 2009; these minutes were approved by the CPDC on October 19, 2009. 6," Jo► Weston, Secretary to/v"- r) ate Page 4 of 4