HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005-08-22 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of Reading
16 Lowell Street = i L t
_D
Reading, MA 01867-2683 r 1,- E R
Phone: 781-942-6612 } ASS.
Fax: 781-942-9071
Email: creilly cr ci.reading.ma.us
Community Planning and Development ~%i niskion
CPDC MINUTES
Meeting Dated: August 22, 2005
Location: Selectmen's Hearing Room, Reading Town Hall
Members Present: John Sasso, Chair (JS), Jonathan Barnes (JB) (arrived late), Neil
Sullivan (NS), and Susan DeMatteo (SD).
Members Absent: Richard Howard
Also Present:
Chris Reilly, Town Planner (CR); Michael Schloth
Joe Delaney, Town Engineer (JD)
Ms. Virginia Adams, Madam Chair of the Historical Commission
Mr. Fred Alexander, 172 Wakefield Street, Reading, MA
Mr. Doug Crowley, 24 Baker Road, Reading, MA
Mr. Tony DeCastro, Architect
Ms. Noreen DeLai, 18 Baker Road, Reading, MA
Attorney Mark Favaloro, Favaloro & Associates, 348 Park Place,
North Reading, MA 01864
Mr. Barry Greenwood, 142 Wakefield Street, Reading, MA
Mr. Bryan Irwin, 302 Woburn Street
Mr. George Katsoufis, 9 Berkeley Avenue, Reading, MA
Attorney Brad Latham of Latham, Latham & Lamond, P.C., 643 Main Street
Ms. Diane Meyers, 159 Wakefield Street, Reading, MA
Mr. John Ogren, Project Coordinator, Hayes Engineering, 603 Salem Street,
Wakefield, MA 01880
Ms. Jessica Pratt 245 Woburn Street, Reading, MA
Ms. Barbara Rawding, 11 Prospect Street, Reading, MA
Mr. David Rawding, 11 Prospect Street, Reading, MA
Mr. Tom Wheaton, nephew of Mr. Paul Bassett of 150 Wakefield Street, Reading, MA
There being a quorum, the Chair called the meeting to order at 7:30PM.
Public Hearing (continued): Definitive. Subdivision
Richard Merrill Trustees, 175 Franklin Street
(Action date: August-22, 2005)
. Attorney Brad Latham said now that the ZBA had approved his client's request for an
Aquifer District Waiver they will need time to conform to the waiver's conditions.
Page 1 of 8
NS moved to continue the Public Hearing of the 175 Franklin Street Definitive Subdivision
to September 26, 2005 at 7:30PM.
SD seconded.
Voted Approved 3:0:0.
Public Comment/Minutes
JB arrived and took his seat with the Board.
Scheduling a Subdivision Regulations Review & Update.
Town Engineer Joe Delaney agreed with the Board that such a review would be a good
idea and said that he has asked his staff to read through the regulations to see if anything
pops out that may warrant looking into. He noted that the last time the regulations were
reviewed was back in 1997.
He then touched on a few examples of possible changes to regulations that had recently
been brought to his attention:
• Accepting plans and as-builts in electronic format as suggested by GIS technician Kim
Honetschlager (minutes of 2/15/05). Everyone agreed this was a good idea.
• Increasing the radius of cul-de-sacs from 40' to 44'. The Fire Chief had told him that
the fire trucks need the larger radius.
• Keeping road grades to 6 degrees or less. The Fire Chief had told him that the ladder
truck needs a grade of 6 degrees or less. Joe Delaney said that we might not want to
- make this particular change because too shallow a grade would increase the size of
retaining walls.
The Board also expressed their interest in adding more specificity to the definitions of
words and phrases found in the regulations. For example: dust, noise, lighting, "heavy
equipment", and "hours of operation".
The Board also had concerns over the size of garages and, noting a recent incident that had
upset an entire street, suggested looking into adding dimensional controls to garages. CR
said such controls were already in place. A garage cannot be larger than three cars and
there are height restrictions too. He was aware of the incident the Board referred to and said
there was more to it than just the structure's size. There was also a matter of use, which is a
zoning issue, and aesthetics, which is always dangerous ground.
CR did note that the Building Inspector feels that more restrictive language should be
added to the definition of accessory buildings, but it has been hard trying to get such
language passed at Town Meeting. Joe Delaney said that the coverage requirements come
into play with accessory buildings but they still allow for tall buildings.
No date was set for the review of the Subdivision Regulations.
Spence Farm Setback.
The Board noted that the buildings in the Archstone development seem a little close to
West Street. Joe Delaney said that as it is a 40B project the setbacks don't have to meet
regulations but in fact this project does meet the regulations. He added that it was his
Page 2of8
recollection the ZBA wanted those buildings placed close to the street to block the view to
the larger buildings behind them. He reminded the Board that landscaping has not yet been
added to the site and it should look better when it had.
Customer Service Survey.
It was the consensus of the Board that the questionnaire should be made available to the
public at every meeting of the CPDC starting with the next meeting and that mention
should be made of them before the start of every Public Hearing. The Town Planner said
that he would leave a stack of theirs next to the stack of agendas before each meeting. He
also offered to provide a box in which to collect the surveys. No motion was needed to
implement the survey.
7/11/05 Minutes.
JB moved to approve the minutes of July 11, 2005 as amended.
NS seconded.
Voted Approved: 4:0:0.
Public Hearing (continued): Definitive Subdivision
Deer Run Developers, Inc., 150-166 Wakefield Street
Proposed definitive subdivision for 8 lots in the 5-20 zoning district.
(Action date: August 22, 2005)
This was a new application for the same location. There was no draft decision prepared.
JS opened the public hearing and explained the procedure. After the Legal Notice is read
the applicant will present their proposal. Next, the Town's experts will present their
findings and the Board will ask them any questions they might have. Next, the public will
be invited to comment. Finally, the Public Hearing will be closed and the Board will
discuss the application among themselves and either come to a decision or continue until a
later meeting.
After NS read the Legal Notice, Attorney Brad Latham introduced the new proposal saying
that this revised plan is for eight lots and a cul-de-sac on roughly 9.5 acres. He noted that
Lot #8 could be freestanding and may be spun off as an ANR lot.
Next, Mr. John Ogren of Hayes Engineering, Wakefield went into the details of the plan.
• The existing lot at 150 Wakefield St. has been added to the plan.
• There are now eight lots. Three existing (150, 160, and 166 Wakefield St.) and five to
be created.
• The cul-de-sac is slightly longer than the one in the previously submitted plan 430'-
and now hooks toward Baker Rd.
• Water is looped from Wakefield St. to Baker Rd. and the Sewer connection to Baker
Rd. passes between lots #5 and #6.
• Drainage has been revised. Runoff is caught by catch basins then piped to a Storm
Water management system by lots #2 and #3 and eventually flows to the Wetlands
beyond.
Page 3 of 8
Next, Mr. Ogren said this plan also addresses issues raised at the Public Hearing of the
original plan.
• The addition of the new acreage has softened the grade of the 4-bay Storm Water
Management system.
• Sidewalks now wrap onto Wakefield Street.
• The cul-de-sac as planned has a radius of 40'. The Fire Chief wants a radius of 44'. The
applicant would entertain a waiver request to reduce the Tree Lawn to 6' from the
regulation 10' to accommodate the increased radius.
Next, the Town Planner read from the minutes from the DRT meeting of 8/15/05 and the
Town Engineer read from his memo on the project. Highlights: the applicant still owes the
Planning Dept, money. The issues the DPW had with the project's utilities have been
addressed, but the DPW is still waiting for site calculations. The Conservation Dept. is still
waiting for the wetlands to be delineated and asks if it is appropriate for the CPDC to
review this project before the Conservation Committee?
JS and JB asked if Lot #l, 150 Wakefield St., and the house on it would remain as is? Mr.
Ogren said it would and added that the owner had sold the rest of the land to the developers
and was retaining 150 Wakefield St. for his own use. Brad Latham said that, subject to
easements, the lot would not be reconfigured, and, like Lot #8, it could also be
freestanding.
The Board then discussed the matter of the cul-de-sac's radius. There was concern that
trees may not be able to survive on a narrower Tree Lawn. Joe Delaney said that he thought
they would be fine but suggested planting them behind the Tree Lawn if there was a
concern for their survival. Brad Latham said the applicant had no problem with planting the
trees on the lots behind the Tree Lawn. Mr. Ogren said that the Fire Chief had suggested
the possibility of placing an island in the middle of the cul-de-sac as compensation for the
narrower Tree Lawn. The consensus of the Board was that an island would not be a good
idea. Problems with snow removal and maintenance were given as reasons against adding
an island.
Next, JS opened the hearing to comments from the public.
Mr. Fred Alexander, 172 Wakefield St.
Regarding the sewerage easement, does the Town or the developer have a right to work on
it from my property? Joe Delaney: No.
There is a stone wall there. If the developer needs to take it down will they have to put it
back up? Joe Delaney: We could require that they do.
Can hay bails be set up to protect from runoff? CR: Yes. That is something you should
speak to the Fran Fink, our Conservation Administrator, about.
Mr. Doug Crowley, 24 Baker Rd.
Will the Baker Rd. sewer pipe be able to handle the extra load from this project?
Joe Delaney: Yes.
Ms. Noreen DeLai, 18 Baker Rd.
Has the Conservation Commission scheduled a meeting to discuss this project?
Page 4of8
Mr. Ogren said that they would be filing with Cons Comm but that they haven't yet. Joe
Delaney assured Ms. DeLai that when the Cons Comm schedules their meeting to discuss
this project they will notify the abutters.
Mr. Barry Greenwood, 142 Wakefield St.
Mr. Greenwood's property abuts the retention basin and he is concerned with runoff and
standing water if the retention basin is not properly maintained. He asked if a better
solution might not be to encase the basin in a concrete vault? Mr. Ogren said that the
topography should assure that runoff will flow away from Mr. Greenwood's property and
towards the wetlands. Mr. Ogren added that a concrete vault would only hide any problems
and make the basin harder to maintain. Joe Delaney noted that ultimately the maintenance
of the retention basin falls to the Town.
Mr. Bob Brown, 37 Susan Drive.
Mr. Brown asked, in light of the Town's water restrictions, are there any restrictions on the
developer to use less water-intensive flora when landscaping? The Town Planer said that
that is the homeowners' responsibility. Brad Latham added that the restrictions are a town-
wide ban and as such should affect all residents equally.
Ms. Diane Meyers, 159 Wakefield St.
Ms. Meyers expressed concern over the lack of maintenance of the Wakefield St. lots. She
said that a large tree had fallen in one these lots and no one did anything about it for a long
time. CR said that the applicant was asked to secure the buildings. If they become a hazard
steps will have to be taken to rectify the situation.
Mr. Tom Wheaton, nephew of Mr. Bassett of 150 Wakefield St.
Mr. Wheaton asked how long this permitting process might take? CR said that the next
CPDC meeting might close the CPDC portion of the process. CR reminded Mr. Wheaton
that this project still has to go before the Conservation Commission and their review may
take a couple of months. CR thought that the project might be ready to break ground next
spring.
Ms. Virginia Adams, 59 Azalea Circle.
Ms. Adams asked that as many stonewalls be kept intact as possible. Many along
Wakefield St. are quite old.
It was the understanding of the Board that there was a need for a Landscaping and Tree
Preservation Plan and that such a plan would require much grading. JB asked if the
Subdivision Regulations provided for tree preservation? CR said, yes, all trees of 6" caliper
measurement or greater should be preserved where possible.
Mr. Ogren said that the developer agrees that trees should be preserved where possible but
both the existing topography and the regulations necessitate much grading so there is not a
lot of room to preserve trees. He noted that they might be able to soften the grading along
the__edges of the project. CR_said that both this Board and-the Conservation Commission
will be looking for the developer's best efforts in this regard. JB appreciated the
developer's candor and predicament but emphasized that it is their burden.
Page 5 of 8
Ms. Diane Meyers, 159 Wakefield St..
Ms. Meyers asked if a plan showing the saved trees would be made available to the public?
CR said he and the Tree Warden will be inventorying the trees together and the completed
inventory will be made available to the public.
CR suggested continuing the public hearing to 9/12/05 at 7:30PM.
Regarding the cul-de-sac radius issue, the consensus of the Board was that they supported
the applicant's waiver request and the Fire Chief's recommendation of a 44' radius.
JB moved to continue the Public Hearing of the Definitive Subdivision of Deer Run
Developers, Inc., 150-166 Wakefield Street, to 9/12/05 at 7:30PM.
NS seconded.
Voted Approved, 4:0:0.
Public Hearing: Site Plan Review
Unitarian Universalist Church, 239 Woburn Street
Addition and renovation to allow for meeting space
(Action date: September 26, 2005)
JS opened the public hearing and explained how it would proceed.
NS read the Legal Notice.
Attorney Mark Favaloro explained that his client wants to enlarge the Church and remove
Sawyer House. He then introduced Mr. Tony DeCastro, the architect; Mr. Bryan Irwin, a
member of Church's Building Committee; and Reverend Tim Kutzmark.
Mr. Irwin said Church membership has grown and the use of the buildings' space is no
longer efficient. The Building Committee has investigated options over the past year and a
half. He emphasized that the proposed changes are for the better accommodation of
existing programs.
Mr. DeCastro, the architect, explained that his goal is to make the changes match the style
of the existing church as much as possible. Architectural details of the original Church will
be duplicated in the addition. Some features, the front entrance for instance, will not be
changed.
Among the specific changes mentioned were:
• Moving their Community Room from the current basement to a new first floor location.
• Increasing the size of existing classrooms.
• Improving parking by adding more on-site spaces.
• Increasing the Church's seating from 220 to approx. 250 people.
• Dropping the choir loft to the first floor.
The Town Planner read the minutes of the August 15, 2005 DRT meeting on the project.
The Town Engineer read his memo on the project. Concerns: Planning is looking for more
Page 6of8
landscaping as well as both landscaping and lighting plans. The DPW noted that on-street
parking on Woburn St. is an issue. The Health Dept. has a concern with lead paint in
Sawyer House and wants a proper enclosure around the dumpster.
CR said he has been questioned about the proposed rear parking lot and some have asked
him if the parking spaces there could be placed elsewhere? Mr. DeCastro said that an
earlier plan had placed more of the parking spaces in the front but there were objections to
having Loring House look out over a large parking lot. Mr. DeCastro added that the rear lot
will be made of pea-stone not asphalt and will be shielded from the neighbors with dense,
8' high plantings.
JS invited comments from the public.
All of the public comments concerned the proposed rear parking lot and were made by
three of the abutters to the proposed lot. The abutters are Ms. Jessica Pratt of 245 Woburn
Street, and David and Barbara Rawding of I I Prospect Street.
Ms. Pratt noted that in spite of what Mr. Irwin said at the start of the hearing about
accommodating only existing programs, the increase in parking spaces implies that the
Church expects to expand their operations.
Mr. Favaloro said that his client anticipates that the improvements will attract more people
to the existing programs. That's why the number of parking spaces was doubled from 20 to
40. Mr. Irwin added that it was also their intention to decrease the on-street parking by
providing more on-site parking spaces.
Mr. Favaloro noted that the parking regulations are less strict for religious institutions.
Ms. Pratt noted that the grounds are also used for non-religious purposes (e.g. day-care
center) and asked if the religious exemptions still apply? Mr. Favaloro said that ancillary
uses are allowed.
Both Ms. Pratt and the Rawdings expressed their concerns that the rear lot will be used
more and more often leading to more noise, exhaust fumes, and headlights shining into
their windows. They feel that they have a legitimate concern that construction of the rear
lot will depreciate the value of their properties. They wondered why they must bear the
brunt of the increased parking and asked why some spaces can't be moved to the other side
of the church?
Virginia Adams said that the Historical Commission had asked the building committee to
reconfigure their parking spaces so that there was not a large parking lot in front of Loring
House. Mr. Irwin added that parking has been a major preoccupation of the project. On the
one hand they want to add as much off-street parking as possible, on the other hand the
Summer Avenue side is the main public view and a historical setting.
The abutters were not moved by this argument. They felt that what they saw as a clear loss
of value to their property and quality of life should not be trumped by appeals to aesthetics
and historical value.
Page 7of8
It was the consensus of the Board that this Site Plan Review deserves further discussion.
The applicant was told that the Board wants to see their Lighting Plan. They were also told
that the abutters' request for a reduction in the number of parking spaces was both
reasonable and a priority.
JB moved to continue the Site Plan Review of the Unitarian Universalist Church, 239
Woburn Street, until Monday, 9/12/05, at 8:15 PM.
NS seconded.
Voted Approved 4:0:0.
Zoning Workshop: Downtown Mixed-Use Rezoning
The Board reviewed recent changes and discussed further changes to the proposed Mixed-
Use Bylaw. Among the topics discussed were nonconforming properties, existing
properties and uses, and dimensional requirements.
Using data supplied by GIS Administrator Kim Honetschlager, members of the Board, the
Town Planner, and Mr. George Katsoufis have met over the past two Saturdays to develop
scenarios to test the proposed bylaw especially its effect on parking. JS said that they feel a
responsibility to make the parking no worse.
JS thanked everyone for their efforts to get the bylaw ready for Town Meeting.
CR said that the efforts of the Board have been above and beyond the call of duty.
CR said that he would update the draft with the latest changes.
Ms. Virginia Adams asked to be kept up-to-date with any developments.
SD moved to adjourn.
JB seconded.
Voted Approved. 4:0:0.
The meeting adjourned at 11:OOPM.
These minutes were prepared by Michael Schloth and submitted to the CPDC on
November 1, 2005; the minutes were approved as amended by the CPDC on November 1,
2005.
Signed as approved,
,.Ricard D. Howard, Secretary
Date
Page 8 of 8