HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-12-08 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of
16 Lowell Street
Reading
Reading, MA 01867-2683
Phone: 781-942-9012
Fax: 781-942-9071
Email: creilly@6reading.ma.us
Community Planning and Development Commission
CPDC MINUTES
Meeting Dated: December 8, 2003
Members Present: Chair, Susan DeMatteo (SD), Secretary Neil Sullivan (NS),
Jonathan Barnes (JB), Richard Howard (RH)
Also Present: Chris Reilly (CR), Town Planner
The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:42 PM.
RH moved to approve the following minutes with amendments /additions:
11.24.03
NS seconded.
Voted 4-0-0, all in favor.
Public Comment:
JB is unhappy about the Depot Century 21 signage noncompliance and wants
enforcement; RH suggested CPDC should do a site walk of signage in the
downtown area.
CR will look into scheduling a January site walk for signage.
Public Hearing:
Johnson Woods Realty, Inc., Preliminary PUD-R Permit Application.
SD opened the public hearing and NS read the legal notice.
Attorney Brad Latham, Architect Jim Velleco, and Engineer Bill Bergeron are
present for the Applicant.
Jim Velleco went over the site design submitted with the application.
The first 600' at the entrance is a meadow, the rest of the site is woods.
The first step was designing the road pattern, a loop system.
Spurs go off of main loop; the loop is in the interior.
Kelch and Enos emergency access would be gated.
The conceptual plan contains 5 internal parks: at the entrance the first park will
have distinctive features with a gazebo and landscaping/ aesthetic features; other
-parks will be heavily treed; parks will differ for natural reasons:
CAMy Documents\CPDC\Agenda-Minutes\Minutes\Minutes 12.08.03.doc
A recreation trail through the site will connect Town-owned open space; it will
be open during daytime for all pedestrians /residents.
A normal, residential streetscape is planned throughout.
Building elevations will consist of: townhouses;1 single-family home; New
England character architecture with gables; single car garages; porches; raised
entries, and split entry to follow topography.
Two, 3-story, 12-unit condo flats in the rear will contain 24 units, including the 16
units of affordable housing required; they will have dormers to minimize the
building mass.
Bill Bergeron gave a presentation and went over the proposed utility plan.
The existing watermain is 6" with dead ends; the proposed looped system has
12" main with 8" feeders.
Fire flows should be improved; the Applicant will work with Fire Chief on
hydrant locations.
They will put in stubs for future development on the back 10-acre parcel.
For sewer 70% of sanitary would go to Enos Circle, with pump-stations for the
townhouses; 30% would go to Kelch and Longwood Rd. pump station.
The site drainage has 3 main drainage areas: the Longwood drainage area has
wetland resource areas that will be avoided; Woburn wetlands have been
delineated-most are in Woburn; Enos drainage goes northerly.
Stormwater management will meet DEP standards.
Flats will have recharge through infiltration.
The roadway system has been designed; the main roadway system is 24 with 20
wide spurs.
Turfstone is proposed for emergency links on Kelch and Enos.
The traffic study from comprehensive permit application was submitted.
NS wants to see dimensions on setbacks, building heights, etc. and is concerned
about the lack of guest parking and street and parking dimensions on the
submitted plans.
RH wants a sequencing plan, if the development is phased.
Zoning By-Laws Sections 4.9.4 and 4.9.5 have environmental and design
guidelines; CPDC needs to review the application according to all of these
regulations.
The Applicant will grant an extension as appropriate.
RH wants to see a peer-review of the fiscal impact analysis submitted with the
application.
There are questions about the assumption of children per 3- bedroom units.
SD wants the affordable housing to be integrated and dispersed.
JB is concerned about the accuracy of the fiscal analysis relative to the size of
units and number of 3 bedroom units; the assumed traffic impact is questionable.
NS feels the site is very dense and setbacks are minimal.
Jim Velleco says side yards aren't preferred in this sort of development.
George Katsoufis from the Master Plan Advisory Committee is there to speak
CAMy Documents\CPDC\Agenda-Minutes\Mlnutes\Mnutes 12.08.03.doc
He asked about Longwood and Enos access and what the intent is on the back 10
acres.
He doesn't like single entry developments.
Ralph Colorusso, 31 Enos Circle doesn't like the drainage proposal; he is
concerned about invasive species; doesn't want to see access through Enos;
thinks there should be a financial analysis and feels the drainage from the PUD
will impact the Enos basin where there is already frequent standing water. He
also claimed he didn't get a notice for the hearing.
SD moved to continue to 9:15 PM on 12.22.03.
RH seconded.
Voted 4-0-0, all in favor.
RH wants a financial analysis and has drafted a scope for peer review.
CR will prepare for review by CPDC and the developer.
Administrative Review:
Chili's Building Elevations
Ed Shaw from Dickinson Development Inc. represented Chili's.
They cleaned up the design in the rear, as conditioned by the prior approval.
The rear elevation has been changed to masonry and the dumpster area now has
a canopy.
The masonry is a whitish color and the enclosure is about 19' by 25.'
RH moved to approve the plans with building elevations, dated November 17,
2003, that show a masonry dumpster enclosure with painted metal gates, a
painted metal canopy and a side metal access door.
JB seconded.
Voted 4-0-0, all in favor.
Zoning Workshop:
Atlantic Tambone Developers, Inc., 80-100 Main Street.
George Katsoufis talked about pedestrian friendly uses and whether we wanted
to encourage them.
The current PUD by-law was reviewed to incorporate certain environmental and
design guidelines.
There are sections prior to 4.9.5 that have the language CPDC wants to include.
RH wanted to review the purpose contained in 4.9.1 and whether it works with
the proposed PUD-B. He assumed CPDC would revise the current PUD by-laws.
There would be a separate section containing the PUD-B language; possibly 4.7
on use and dimensional requirements for the PUD-B.
The PUD by-law seems disjointed and there was discussion about organization
and whether sections should be re-numbered.
tion was viewed as problematic with Town
Mr. Tambone had no concerns about including the environmental and design
guidelines in most of Section 4.9.5.
C_\My Documents\CPDC\Agenda-Minutes\Minutes\Minutes 12.08.03.doc
JB wants to make sure CPDC integrates residential in the language; promoting
economic development but not to the detriment of residential uses.
RH felt that 4.9.5 may have the proper language and Atty. Latham agreed.
Sections were reviewed and removed where redundant.
RH suggested that CR draft the changes agreed upon and circulate between
CPDC, Town Counsel and the Applicant outside of the workshop.
CR will try to do so in advance of the January 12 meeting.
RH moved to adjourn.
NS seconded.
Voted 4-0-0, all in favor.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:47 PM
These minutes were prepared by Chris Reilly, Town Planner and submitted to the
Community Planning and Development Commission on December 22, 2003.
The minutes were approved as amended by the CPDC on December 22, 2003.
Signed as approved,
Neil Sullivan Date
CAMy Documents\CPDC\Agenda-Minutes\Minutes\Minutes 12.08.03.doc