Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-02-11 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading, MA 01867-2683 Phone: 781-942-6612 Fax: 781-942-9071 Email: ekowalski@ci.reading.ma.us Community Planning and Development Commission CPDC MINUTES Meeting Dated: February 11, 2008 Location: Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Hall Time: 7:30 PM Members Present: Brant Ballantyne, (BB), Chairman; David Tuttle (DT), Secretary; John Sasso (JS), Nicholas Safina (NS), and John Weston (JW). Also Present: Carol Kowalski, Town Planner; George Zambouras, Town Engineer; and Michael Schloth. Attorney Christopher Coleman Mr. Anthony Cavallo, owner of Venetian Moon, 680 Main Street There being a quorum the Chair called the meeting to order at 7:35 PM. Public Comments There was no comment from the public. Approval Not Required (ANR) (continued) 4 Summit Drive Attorney Christopher Coleman represented the applicant. At the previous meeting (1/14/2008) the Board had asked Mr. Coleman: 1. To show Lot C complies with Section 5.2.1 of the Zoning Bylaws (Lot Shape) 2. To investigate if any restrictions from any prior decisions etc. on the site existed. Mr. Coleman provided the Board with calculations prepared by Andrew. C. Bramhall of Benchmark Survey showing Lot C does meet the Lot Shape requirements of Zoning Bylaw 5.2.1. Mr. Coleman said he found nothing in the Registry of Deeds, the Town Clerk's files, or the Planning Department's files that would prohibit the subdivision of the site as shown in the ANR. The Town Planner said she and the Building Inspector reviewed the ANR and agree there is no problem with it. DT moved the Board endorse the ANR plan. NS seconded. Voted Approved: 3:0:0. The Board Members signed two mylar copies of the ANR. Page 1 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 2/11/08 JW arrived and took his seat with the Board. Minutes NS moved the Board accept and approve the minutes of 1/28/2008 as amended. DTseconded. Voted Approved: 4:0:0. JS arrived and took his seat with the Board. Zoning Workshop Downtown 40R: HPI Zoning & Design Standards The Town Planner informed the Board the firm Housing Partners Inc. (HPI) had been hired by the town to prepare the bylaw for a 40R overlay for the Downtown much as Concord Square Development had done with the 40R overlay for the Business C zone (the Addison-Wesley site). She has met with HPI a few times already and HPI is currently busy reviewing the land uses of the Downtown as well as GIS [Geographic Information Systems] data with an eye towards adding new construction with accompanying parking. It is understood density cannot be increased without additional parking. She said HPI has suggested increasing the height of buildings noting Reading's buildings were taller in the past. Their architects are very interested in the book "At Wood End". BB asked if the boundary of the 40R district is set. The Town Planner said it was not and it may be useful to consider including the entire depot and beyond to the "Certainly Wood" warehouse and the large building behind it. The Town Planner said HPI had not yet begun to review design standards for the Downtown 40R. It is possible various standards from the Gateway 40R [Addison Wesley site] may be incorporated into the Downtown 40R. e.g parking ratios. NS suggested the design standards not be written into the Downtown 40R bylaw (as they were for the Gateway 40R) but instead be standalone to avoid having to go to Town Meeting for approval of every change to the standards. The Board agreed: BB expressed his preference for being able more easily to tweak the standards as necessary. DT noted the standards should apply to all three possible zoning uses in the downtown: Business B, Mixed-Use, and 40R. The Town Planner said she would inform HPI of the Board's preference for standalone design standards. BB suggested they schedule time at the next meeting (2/25/2008) to review the next chapter of design standards. NS said he would circulate them to the Board Members and asked they each review them and email each other their opinions as to which standards to attack next. He said he did not include Street Types Page 2 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 2/11/08 among the standards because he doubted any new streets would be cut in the Downtown. Altogether there are eight design standard chapters not including Sustainability. BB pointed out the Downtown 40R's design standards will have illustrative examples rather than verbiage only as with the Gateway 40R. The consensus of the Board was to complete the review of the design standards and put them into a draft format for HPI to review and put into proper zoning language. Request for Determination of Minor Modification 680 Main Street, Venetian Moon Mr. Anthony Cavallo, the owner, was present. JS recused himself and left the room. The Town Planner said the Board had received copies of Mr. Cavallo's letter to her dated 2/8/2008 requesting the Venetian Moon be allowed to receive deliveries through the building's Woburn Street door between the hours of 8 a.m. and 1 p.m. Mr. Cavallo addressed the Board: • Deliveries would be for perishable products only (fish, produce, poultry, veal, desserts) and would not take more than ten minutes to complete. • The delivery schedule is approx.: ➢ Fish, poultry: every two days or so; 4 or 5 stacks. ➢ Produce: daily; 5 to 7 packages. ➢ Desserts: once a week • The delivery trucks would be roughly the size of UPS trucks- no trailers, all straight trucks or vans. The trucks would stop in the right-turn only lane but would not impede traffic because they would not be there long and they would be approx. 75 feet from the intersection. • Using the rear parking lot can be a problem: it is difficult for a delivery truck to find enough space to park safely during business hours and often they must block parked cars. This upsets customers and other store owners and increases the delivery times due to having to move the trucks to unblock customers who want to leave. . BB said the Police Chief has asked the requested Woburn Street delivery times be changed to between the hours of 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. to move the deliveries outside of the morning commute. Mr. Cavallo agreed to this change. DT suggested the Board add a condition restricting deliveries to no longer than 15 minutes. The Board agreed. The Town Planner requested the Board add a condition the delivery trucks must not park on the sidewalk. The Board agreed. NS moved the Board find the request to allow deliveries to Venetian Moon at 680 Main Street through its Woburn Street door a Minor Modification to the Board's 3/13/2006 Site Plan Review waiver decision. Page 3 of 6 DT seconded. Voted approved: 4:0:0. The Board determined the request to be a Minor Modification CPDC Minutes of 2/11/08 NS moved the Board approve the Minor Modification to allow deliveries to the Woburn Street entrance of Venetian Moon with the following conditions. 1. Delivers will be made between the hours of 9:00 a.m and 1:00 p.m. 2. Delivery vehicles will not park on the sidewalk. 3. Deliveries will be limited to 15 minutes. 4. Only single-unit trucks will make deliveries. DT seconded. Voted approved: 4:0:0. JS returned and took his seat on the Board. Signage Certificate of Appropriateness 545 Main Street, Metropolitan Bath No one appeared for the applicant. The Town Planner asked the Board to review the application for the awning sign submitted by the applicant. If the Board has questions of the applicant the plans cannot answer the Board could continue this item to a future meeting. The Board agreed to review the application. The plans call for three separate awnings of a black material to be mounted over the left and right windows and the center doorway. The middle awning would have centered on it a gable- or dormer- like feature creating a triangular surface flush with the awning's street-edge. The peak of the gable would be at the same height as where the top of the awnings attached to the wall. The triangular surface would be white with a black diamond-shaped logo and the words "Metropolitan Bath" in black letters. The Town Planner presented the Board with a sample of the black material. The recording secretary in his capacity of Permits Coordinator summarized the history of the application. The applicant had originally wanted an awning that stretched the length of the storefront but the Building Inspector said the sign area of any non-retractable awning with letters or logos is equal to awning's length times its height-on-the-wall. Since the bylaw allows only 2 sq. ft. of sign area per linear foot of frontage, and the awning has a height on the wall of 4 ft., the awning as proposed had approx. twice the sign area allowed and therefore was non-conforming and the Building Inspect said he would deny the sign application. The applicant then suggested the current plan: three awnings with all lettering and logos on the center awning - the awning over the entrance - only. The Building Inspector said he would accept this if: 1. The awnings met all other dimensional requirements. 2. It was obvious the three awnings were separate awnings. In other words, the three awnings could not abut each other directly or too closely. The applicant suggested separating the awnings a distance of 2 inches. The Building Inspector agreed that would be sufficient. Page 4 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 2/11/08 JS noted the submitted photoshopped picture of the awning in place made it look as if the awning was longer at its far edge above the sidewalk than it was against the building and suggested the Board stipulate the ends be perpendicular to the face of the building. He also suggested the Board specify the triangular surface be of a white canvas material. The Board agreed. JW moved the Board grant a Certificate of Appropriateness for the awning at 545 Main Street as shown in plans dated 2/4/2008 with the following conditions. 1. All of the ends of the awnings will be perpendicular to the building. 2. The gable-end of the center awning will be made of a white, canvas material. 3. The awnings will not be illuminated. DT seconded. Voted Approved: 5:0:0. CPDC Peer Reviewers Selection Process The Board had already developed a draft procedure for traffic peer reviewer selection. BB said his concern was peer reviews could become a problem red tape, conflicts of interest, etc. - especially with the big, upcoming National Development project if the Board does not have a selection procedure in place ahead of time. BB said the selection procedure would be as much for National Development's protection as for the town's. Traffic Peer Review JS noted the Board of Selectmen had expressed concern over the quality of prior peer reviews and of not having a choice of peer reviewers. The CPDC had decided it would be best to have a selection procedure in place to provide a rationale for their selections and to provide feedback on peer reviewers' performance. BB suggested the town have contracts in place with two or three firms to provide peer reviewers rather than wait until a peer reviewer is needed and then go looking for one. The work could be divided among the contracted firms. The Town Engineer suggested it may be better to contract with one firm only as it would promote a strong working relationship between the firm and the town. He added it should be made a requirement of the contract that the firm hired not be allowed to do other business in Reading for the term of the contract. The consensus of the Board was they appreciated the Town Engineer's point about promoting a good working relationship but felt the work ban would put too large a burden on the firm hired. JS suggested hiring two firms and making one the primary firm and the second the backup. This met with general agreement. BB said he would prefer the Town Engineer review possible firms and advise the Board on those firms' qualifications. The Board and Town Engineer agreed. The Town Engineer noted it may be a requirement of certain projects (e.g. 40Bs) that the firm hired was listed in the State's Central Registry. He said he would research this. JS said he would send the Town Engineer a copy of the draft procedure for him to edit. Page 5 of 6 CPDC Minutes of 2/11/08 Lighting Peer Review BB asked the Town Engineer if the selection procedure would be similar for lighting peer reviews. The Town Engineer said he was not sure what the bylaws said with regards to the cost threshold for requiring the solicitation of bids for peer reviews but he noted lighting reviews tend to cost less than traffic reviews. JS said the lighting peer review selection procedure need not be as stringent as the traffic peer review procedure. The important point is to have a procedure in place. BB agreed, adding a written procedure would provide documentation if the Board is ever put in the position of having to defend the hiring or not hiring of a particular peer reviewer. Other Peer Reviews The question was raised whether or not a procedure for the peer review of landscape plans should be developed too. The consensus of the Board was procedures for traffic and lighting peer reviewer selection would be enough for now. The Town Engineer said town staff's expertise could be relied upon in matters of landscaping. Other Items The Town Planner updated the Board on various matters: • The Board they will receive the agendas of all future Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) and Economic Development Committee (EDC) meetings and vice versa. • Mr. Scott Weiss has left the employ of National Development. JS said he was still working on the update to the outstanding master Plan items. DT reminded the Board of the upcoming World Cafe on Wednesday, 2/27/08 and suggested everyone attend. JS moved to adjourn. DT seconded. Voted Approved: 5:0:0. The meeting adjourned at 8:50 PM. These minutes were prepared by Michael Schloth and submitted to the CPDC on February 25, 2008; the minutes were approved as amended by the CPDC on February 25, 2008. Signed as approved, David Tuttle, Secretary Date Page 6 of 6