HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-07-13 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of Reading ;c,vo
16 Lowell Street T Q' 4 CLERK
r tnI G, MASS
Reading, MA 01867-2683
Phone: 781-942-6612 O b
Fax: 781-942-9071 9 A 2 1 A LJ 4J
Email: ckowalski@ci.reading.ma.us
Community Planning and Development Commission
CPDC MINUTES
Meeting Dated: July 1 , 2009
Location: Selectmen's Meeting Room Town-Hall Time: 7 30 PM
Members Present: David Tutt e (DT),,_Chairrnau,-Nicholas Salina (NS), .Secretary; J hn Weston
(JW), and Joseph Patterson (J)
Members Absent: Clair Paradiso (CP)
Associate Members Present: George Katsoufis (GK)
Also Present:
Board of Selectmen: Ben Tafoya, Chairman; James Bonazoli, Vice Chairman; Secretary; Camille
Anthony; Richard Schubert; Stephen Goldy.
Town Staff. Peter Hechenbleikner, Town Manager; Carol Kowalski (CK), Town Planner; Abigail
McCabe (AM), Staff Planner; Michael Schloth, Recording Secretary.
Housing Partners, Inc.: Eleanor White; Charles Eisenberg.
Virginia Adams, 59Azalea Circle
Lynn Arena, 26 Francis Drive
Barbara Argonish, 895 Main Street
Curtis Barnes, 1 i Bancroft Avenue
Donnan Barnes, 11 Bancroft Avenue
Ralph & Adele Blunt, 22 Linden Street
Mark Boucher, 109 Washington Street.
The Cooks, 94 Salem Street
Nancy Cullen, 58 Francis Drive
Peter Doucette, 108 Washington Street
Ed & Pat Driscoll, 105 Washington Street.
Russ Graham, Economic Development
Committee, 68 Maple Ridge Road
Michael Harris, Office of Rep. Brad Jones
Kim Honetschlager, 51 Mill Street
Kim Hubbard, 43 Washington Street
Rob Hubbard, 43 Washington Street
Naomi Kaufman, 64 Woburn Street
Tom MacDonald, 25 Prescott Street
David McDonald, 11 Arlington Street
Joseph McDonald 11 Arlington Street
David O'Sullivan, 18 Thorndike Street
Jim Queeny, 28 Mt. Vernon Street
Laurie Reilly, 109 Washington Street
Jack Russell, 91 Spruce Road
Peg Russell, 91 Spruce Road
Karen Sanborn, 54 Mt. Vernon Street
Rick Schaffer, 67 Woburn Street
Mary Sewall, 17 Highland Street
David. Talbot, 75 Linden Street
Jeanne Thomases, 21 Arlington Street
Christopher Vaccaro, 57 Woburn Street
Ann Ward, 14 Bancroft Avenue
There being a quorum of the Board of Selectmen, Chairman Ben Tafoya called the meeting to order
at 7:30 PM.
There being a quorum of the CPDC, Chairman Nick Safina called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM.
Public Comments
There were no comments from the public.
Page 1 of 5
CPDC Minutes of 7/13/2009
Public Hearing: Downtown Smart Growth (40R) Overlay District By-law
This was a joint meeting with the Board of Selectmen because the Board of Selectmen must approve
the submission of the Smart Growth (40R) application including the by-law language to the
Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). The DHCD accepts
40R applications at the end of each month only. The CPDC expects to submit the 40R application at
the end of July 2009.
DT read the public notice.
The Town Manager provided a brief introduction and noted the proposed 40R by-law contains design
guidelines which would give the Town more control over developers' projects than would be allowed
under a 40B application.
CK made a brief presentation on the 40R bylaw and the district which included a summary of the
reasons for and benefits of establishing the district. She noted the CPDC was still working on the
Design Guidelines.
Selectman Schubert asked if there are agencies or procedures in place to provide financial oversight
of projects coming in under the 40R. Ms. White, a consultant with Housing Partners, Inc., replied
40Rs fall strictly under zoning law not housing finance law but projects would most likely require
housing subsidies from the DHCD in which case the DHCD would provide oversight.
Selectman Tafoya asked if densities lower than the proposed 20 units per acre had been considered.
CK said the others had been discussed. but the CPDC decided a lower density would not work for the
downtown as it would not provide the vibrancy surveys had shown Reading residents were looking
for in the downtown. Ms. White noted the by-law must allow 20 units per acre but a developer is not
required to build to that density.
Selectman Schubert asked if there would be an issue with the fact the design guidelines were not yet
completed. CK said the CPDC expected to have the draft guidelines reviewed and made final in time
to be submitted to the DHCD along with the rest of the by-law by the July 31 a deadline. She noted it
is usually not a problem if the guidelines are submitted or if corrections to the guidelines are made
shortly after the deadline.
Public Comments.
Although there was broad support for what was hoped to be achieved by the overlay district, there
was also concern over its possible effects. Most comments fell into three not necessarily mutually
exclusive categories:
1. Parking and traffic impacts.
2. Questions about the two proposed projects awaiting passage of the by-law: Oaktree
Development's redevelopment of the Atlantic Supermarket; and the redevelopment of the
M.P.Charles Building.
3. Concern the 40R would have a detrimental impact on the character of Reading (e.g. too tall
buldings, too great a density, etc...). In particular, residents of the portion of the proposed
district located west of the railroad tracks (roughly between Arlington and Fulton Streets)
expressed concern over the 40R's impact on their neighborhood and questioned why their
Page 2 of 5
CPDC Minutes of 7/13/2009
it is
being included in the district at all since, in their view, not an area
neighborhood was downtown.
typically associated with Reading's ressing opposition
each submitted staten1ents to t of he the Boards Town Beading.
Ms. Pat Driscoll and Mr. Jim Queeny t of step with the character
to all or parts of the by-law as being ou
and osiers
Ms. Lynn Arena, Ms. Kim Hubbard, M.s. Jeanne Thomases, railroad
b
Mr. Dave McDonald,
commented on the adverse effect the district would have on t1 neighborhood west of the
tracks. the design guidelines
i Kaufman cautioned against voting on the by-law without reviewing
Ms. Naom requested more information on the design guidelines.
in detail: Mr- Schaffer also req er said the
Concern was expressed over the impact of snoreschool pdxen. rabably ThenTo ~t~
expectation is the type act many families with
of residential units Proposed specifically mitigate through cash offsets any
children but noted the state's 40S program is meant to sp
adverse effects a OR would have on a participating town's services.
toviding units for families with children. The
Mr. Talbot asked why the town should be against p be urchased by first-time buyers
Town Manager ree that was not the case: developers could use t b he district to create rentals or
condominiums for f ed families but the expectation is most units would p
or empty-nesters.
has gone after towns that have refitsed to allow the construction
Mr. Talbot asked how often the state
of a 40B. Both Boards and the consultants answered as one: always was required for the
a traffic study for this 40R was not required when one
Mr. Talbot asked why the Addison-Wesley site which includesa ~ R dis d 'n expect
to osed redevelopment of act study
recent p p altered a MEPA (environment
the Add al rmeed a traffic study for individual
Addison-Wesley project Cri~;~
er a similarregturerT~nosed O ktree (Atlantic Supermarket) or
the downtown OR itself to trigg
developments within the district.- c sr example le he Pro ed.
Mawn (MY, Charles Bldg.) P" Je
g xem tion for businesses within 300 ft on the downtown ipal lot is tif a large
place Mr. and Schaffer noted expressed the Parking concern n it e could p lead to much worse pasking Problem
rdistrict. Almost all properties within the district could
business was to establishits elf in the proposed
take advantage of the exemption-
Development Committee, ex
member of the Economic ressed support for the
establishing a 40R rather than waiting for a 40B is that the
M~-. Russell 40R district. He Graham, noted the advantage of a
town has a greater say in what can be built within a 40R district. on abutting residential
ible shadow impact pact
Mr. Christopher Vaccaro expressed concern over the poss
guideline's height and setback rear setback neighborhoods could be built just as tall and with no g buildings built in
of buildings built take advantage of the design sal allowances. The CPDC noted b~-tdinidel~rs es would improve this situation by quirin
current zoning, and the design b page 3 of 5
be set back at least 15 feet- from the rear boundary.
the 40R district
CPDC Minutes of 7/13/2009
Mr. Cook asked how the M.F.Charles building could be redeveloped if it is on the historical register.
CK explained historical properties could be rehabilitated i.e. redevelop the interior only while
keeping the building's envelope and important historical features unchanged. Its height would not
change. The Town Manager noted that the redevelopment plans for the building call for the
demolition of a portion of the parking-lot side of the adjacent one-story buildings to provide
additional parking spaces.
For the Board of Selectmen, Selectman Bonazoli moved to close the public hearing. The motion was
seconded and carried: 5:0:0.
For the CPDC, DT moved to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded and carried: 4:0:0.
The public hearing was closed.
The consensus of the Board of Selectmen was they had no issues with language of the by-law but
thought it best to remove from the district that portion to the west of the railroad tracks.
Selectman Anthony moved the Board of Selectmen approve the submission of the Downtown Smart
Growth 40R application as amended by redrawing the district's boundary to be coterminous with the
Business-B zoning district's boundary along Lincoln Street.
The motion was seconded and carried: 5:0:0.
Selectmen Bonazoli moved the Board of Selectmen adjourn. The motion was seconded and carried;
5:0:0. The Board of Selectmen adjourned at 10: 55PM.
After the Board of Selectmen and most of the public left, the CPDC continued its agenda.
Smart Growth (40R) Overlay District: Design Guidelines Work Session
The Board learned the Floor Area Ratio of Oaktree's proposed redevelopment of the Atlantic
Supermarket site would be greater than the design guideline's maximum of 2.0. After discussion with
the consultants of Housing Partners, Inc, the Board determined the proposed Floor Area Ratio
(F.A.R) of 2.0 to be too low to attract desired developments and suggested increasing the guideline's
F.A.R to 3.4.
DT moved the Board meet July 20, 2009 (next Monday) to continue the Design Guidelines Work
Session. JP seconded. The motion was carried 4:0:0.
CK said she would investigate if Oaktree's project could meet a F.A.R of 3.4 and report her findings
to the Board at the 7/20/2009 meeting.
Other Business
Bond Reduction Request: Benjamin Lane
JW moved the Board follow the recommendation of the Engineering Department and release
$59,,500.00 of the Benjamin Lane bond leaving a bond amount of $5,500.00.
DT seconded. The motion was carried 4:0:0.
Page 4 of 5
CPDC Minutes of 7/13/2009
JW moved to adjourn. The motion was seconded and carried 4:0:0.
The meeting adjourned at 11:20 PM.
These minutes were prepared by Michael Schloth and submitted to the CPDC on July 27, 2009; these
minutes as presented were approved by the CPDC on July 27, 2009.
Signed as approved,
Jo4A Weston, Secretary
(0/0
Page 5 of 5