No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-05-13 Zoning Board of Appeals MinutesTown of Reading ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes of May 13, 2004 Members present: John Jarema Susan Miller Robert Redfern Paul Dustin Mark Gillis 8: 3 A meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held in the Selectmen's Meeting Room of the Town Hall, 16 Lowell Street, Reading, Massachusetts at 7:00 P.M. Also present was Chris Reilly, Town Planner; Joan Langsam, Town Counsel; Greg Burns, Fire Chief, Joe Delaney, Town Engineer. Minutes On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Susan Miller, the minutes of February 19, 2004 were approved with changes. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Robert Redfern, the minutes of March 11, 2004 were approved with changes. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. On a motion by John Jarema, seconded by Susan Miller, the minutes of March 18, 2004 were approved. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. Case #04-09 Continuance of a Public Hearing on the petition of Maplewood Village Development LLC who seek a Comprehensive Permit under MGL Chapter 40B of the Zoning By-Laws in order to construct 36 age-restricted condominium units on the property located at 201-275 Salem Street. C/ 1 The Chairman explained the initial presentation by the Petitioners was on April 1, 2004. Since this hearing a DRT meeting was held with the Petitioners and town staff and some suggestions were made. The Petitioners submitted additional and the Town Engineer submitted a memo to the Board. The Town Planner said the DRT was really a mini DRT because the plans had been so extensively developed. The Petitioners were proactive and talked extensively to Town staff. The limited DRT was just to address the drainage design. Peter Gamia said they did some additional soils tests that confirmed some of the previous tests as well as the dry well locations. The ground water and perk rates were what they expected so there was little change in the proposed system in that location. In an area on the right side of the development they have eliminated three dry wells that were proposed and now have the run-off flow into the filtration system. If these systems did not perform the water would run along two swales and not go into the street. Stone trenches will prevent water from going into the parking lot but instead it will go into the pipes. These are all good safety nets for the infiltration system. The only change is the addition of the Maplewood Village sign. The Fire Chief said he has reviewed the designs and he is happy with the access to the site. They increased the roadway from 22' to 24' in the area that was requested. There is a hydrant within the site. He said he did not see the drawings for each individual building yet but they will do their code research as they receive these plans. They are satisfied with what has been presented. There is no access to the back of these buildings but it is not a code requirement. They have the side access that is required and they do have access to the corners so it does meet the code. The Chairman asked the Fire Chief to put his comments in writing for the Board. The Town Engineer said essentially most of the big issues have been addressed. For building E the four parking spaces in front of the garages do not meet the 18' depth for zoning. The wheel chair ramps on the right of way have to comply with the Massachusetts Highway Department standards. The crosswalks need to be painted across the entrance. The proposed median is shown as cobblestone and there is some concern whether it complies with the ADA. There should be adequate site distance and the fence should be pulled back about 10' from the sidewalk. The berms and the tree plantings should be kept back to increase sight distance. The 10' easement across the front will allow the Town the right to go in and trim the plantings if necessary. The revised drainage plans appear to meet what is required. If they are within the 100' buffer zone they have to file with the Conservation Commission. The Town Engineer did not know exactly where the Conservation Commission was regarding this matter at the moment but work within the 100' buffer is almost always allowed. This is no different from any of the other projects that have been approved. They would have to go before the Conservation Commission after the Zoning Board's approval and if there were changes they would have to come back before the Zoning Board. This design is a lot further along which makes the Town Engineer's job a lot easier. This project is much closer at this point than any other that has been done in the town. The Chairman expressed some concern about the unit in front that has the rear part facing the street. David O'Sullivan explained they put more detail in the back and made the back doors look more like front doors to a house so that will make for a more interesting streetscape. Greenhouse 2 Acres is similar in that their fronts are actually their backs. There will be restrictions that these back areas will have to be kept neat and tidy. The Chairman wanted a landscaping plan because that is a very busy roadway and something had to be there for screening such as plantings or low fencing. The Chairman said he was having a difficult time visualizing how the entire project would look if he was standing across the street and looking over. David O'Sullivan said the depth is very similar to a single family and there will be low shrubs to give it a very finished look. He offered to do a drawing that would flatten out the space if that would be helpful. The Chairman said he was wondering about the front building in relation to the other buildings because this is a unique area that borders on wetlands, other residences, and a very busy commercial area in the town. He wanted to be able to see how it relates to the other buildings in the area. Richard Stuart said they felt they arrived at a good transition from the residential to the commercial area. David O'Sullivan said they had paid extra attention to all four sides of these buildings because they were very visible buildings. The Town Engineer said any landscaping would be subject to approval of the Town Planner. Site distance will not bean issue as long as plantings are 10' back and well maintained. The Town Planner said the Petitioners have done this project the right way and he did not think it necessary to continue the public hearing beyond this hearing. The Petitioners were very aggressive in getting input from him and other Town staff members. There have been several DRT meetings and most of the concerns have been addressed. He stated there are always issues down the road but with a good productive relationship with the town they can be resolved. The Chairman mentioned that there had only been one abutter present at the first meeting. At this meeting there was also only one abutter attending but he did not wish to make any comments. The only input the Board did not have was from the Police department but they were part of the DRT meetings and did not have any issues with the project. The Chairman requested that the Police Chief put his comments in writing for the Board. Joe Smolak said they we would rather not submit the purchase and sales agreement. Town Counsel said that in the past when there was a need for privacy the Petitioners gave her the purchase and sales agreement for her to look over and at the very least she got an affidavit. She did not have a problem with the Petitioners doing this. She just wants to make sure it is a valid purchase and sales agreement and tie it into a proforma. The Zoning Board still has to issue the permit even though the LIP has already been approved by the Board of Selectmen. The Board has the plans, applications and comments submitted by Town staff. The Petitioners still have to go before the Conservation Commission. Town Counsel wondered if there was any more required of the Zoning Board members if they are comfortable with what had been presented. There does not seem to be any serious traffic issues so she did not see any reason for a peer review. If the Board felt they needed more time to digest the information it would be appropriate to continue the public hearing. If the Board does not need time it would be appropriate to close the public hearing. The Chairman said he would like clarification on the site control and something from Town Counsel regarding the purchase and sales agreement. Other Board members indicated they would like more time also. Town Counsel suggested she and the Town Planner work out a draft decision and continue the public hearing to another evening. The Town Planner said they would work on the draft of the conditions so it can be posted on the Town website. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, Zoning Board of Appeals voted to continue the hearing to June 10, 2004. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. On a motion by Robert Redfern, seconded by Susan Miller, the Zoning Board of Appeals voted to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved by a vote of 3-0-0. Respectfully submi ed, Maureen M. Knetary, Recording Secr