HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-09-13 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown o Reading PF"ElvFD
16 Lowell Street T 0~ N! C L E R K
R ~ r'~GI~S. M 55.
Reading, MA 01867-2683
Phone: 781-942-6612
Fax: 781-942-9071 201 t
JUN 2 1 P 12: 5 2
Email: jdelios@ci.reading.ma.us
Community Planning and Development Commission
CPDC MINUTES
Meeting Dated: September 13, 2010
Location: Selectmen's Meeting Room
Time: 7:30 PM
Members Present: John Weston (JW), Chairman; Joseph Patterson (JP), Secretary; David Tuttle (DT),
Nicholas Safina (NS) and Paul Bolger (PB).
Also Present: Abigail McCabe (AM), Staff Planner; and Michael Schloth (MS), Recording Secretary.
Mr. Prakash Badola, 670 Main Street
Mr. Bill Bergeron, Hayes Engineering, Wakefield, MA.
Mr. & Mrs. Ralph Blunt, 22 Linden Street
Marie & Joe Calareso, 28C Carnation Circle
Ms. Sheila Clarke Economic Development Committee (EDC)
Mr. Anthony D'Arezzo, 130 John Street
Mr. Joe DiMambo, 5 Mile Post Road
Ms. Lori Doughty, 348 South Street
Ms. Susan Gravallese, 5 Mile Post Road
Attorney Brad Latham of Latham Law Offices, LLC, 643 Main Street
Attorney Chris Latham of Latham Law Offices, LLC, 643 Main Street
Mr. Phil Terzis, Oaktree Development
Mr. Neal Roberts, 102 Main Street
Ms. Michelle Williams Economic Development Committee (EDC)
Mr. Imad A. Zrein, P.E., Devellis Zrein Inc., Foxborough, MA
There being a quorum the Chair called the meeting to order at 7:36 PM.
The Board welcomed new member Paul Bolger.
Public Hearing: Site Plan Review and Special Permit (continued)
80-100 Main Street, Calareso's Farm Stand
The owner, Mr. Joseph Calareso, was present with his attorney, Mr. Brad Latham, and his engineer, Mr.
Bill Bergeron.
JW noted there were two main issues: 1) Drainage - Need assurance pipe is of sufficient size to handle a
25-year storm without surcharge. 2) Driveway layout - number of access lanes (2 or 3) and sloped vs
vertical granite curbing.
Drainage: JW noted that Cons Comm suggested a re-design of the drainage. Hayes Eng. proceeded to
explain why this is not necessary. The discussion got technical but the gist appeared to be that the
drainage plan would meet all requirements although GZ wanted an as-built of the site prior to occupancy
Page 1 of 5
CPDC Minutes of 9/13/2010
(see below). NS expressed surprise that given the applicant's business it had not been proposed to
collect the roof water for irrigation.
Two vs. three access lanes: The Board was unanimous in its opinion that the third lane (a dedicated left
turn exit) was not necessary. The applicant had proposed submitting two sets of plans: one with two
lanes and one with three. The Board requested the applicant withdraw the three-lane option and that all
mention of the optional plan should be struck from the decision.
Other issues:
Contribution to traffic improvements: There was much discussion on this point. The Board agreed the
decision of the 2007 Board to go with the two-lane access was correct. It also agreed with that Board's
decision to add a condition that the developer should contribute to possible future traffic improvements
if the traffic in the area worsens (particularly traffic at the intersection of Hopkins and Main). The
applicant and EDC members presented arguments against this condition:
• In 2007 during a better economy the amount was $12,500.00. Today, in a worse economy, the Board
is asking for $20,000.00.
• The applicant is moving away from Hopkins Street therefore the traffic there should improve.
• Calareso's is a long-established business which has contributed much to the community.
• . The traffic generated by Calareso's would be less than that generated by the use proposed in 2007
(multi-tenant retail with a restaurant).
• The Board's decision on Sam's Bistro does not contain such a condition even though that business is.
located closer to Hopkins Street.
• The language states the contribution is mandatory.
In reply, the Board noted the condition was mis-worded: it should not state the payment is mandatory.
The Board also emphasized that in the 2007 decision, which the applicant makes much use of, this
condition was "piggy-backed" on the approval of the two-lane access. If it was equitable in 2007, it is
equitable today. Also, the increase to $20,000 accounts for inflation. Also, not having to construct the
third access lane (left-turn exit) would save the applicant a good deal of money. There was some
discussion that $20,000 may be too much but in general the Board was in agreement that the condition
should remain. DT disagreed noting that the original condition was conceived at the same time National
Development was working on developing the Addison-Wesley property and the concerns of increased
traffic in the area had as much if not more to do with that development which, he reminded the Board,
was never built. In the end, the Board struck the condition altogether.
Lighting: The Board recommended 18' high, properly shielded light poles in the parking lot.
As-Built & Bond: The Town Engineer requested the applicant post a $5,000.00 bond to secure an as-
built plan of the site prior to occupancy. The Board agreed.
Granite Curbing: The Board agreed 60 degree sloped curbing could be used at all places except at the
entrance/exit and along the traffic-stack.
Planters as bollards: The applicant agreed something must be put along the edge of the parking lot
along the walkway next to the building, but felt low bollards or curb would lead to tripping. Instead, the
applicant suggested four foot tall planters along the walkway. The Board agreed.
Page 2 of 5
The Board noted that a further vote would be required on the final plans.
CPDC Minutes of 9/13/2010
DT moved the Board close the Public Hearing for the request for a Special Permit for the work
proposed ay80-100 Main and 370 South Streets.
NS seconded. Motion carried 4:0:1 with new member Paul Bolger abstaining.
DT moved the Board close the Public Hearing for the preliminary PUD-B Special Permit request and
Site Plan Review for work proposed at 80-100 Main and 370 South Streets.
NS seconded. Motion carried 4:0:1 with new member Paul Bolger abstaining.
The following reference the plans submitted dated 7120 and revised 8131.
DT moved the Board approve the request that the statutory requirement of six loading spaces be
waived to allow only four loading spaces.
JP seconded. Motion carried 4:0:1 with new member Paul Bolger abstaining.
NS moved the Board approve the request for a Special Permit to allow Open Storage at 80-100 Main
and 370 South Streets as shown on submitted plans dated 712012010 and revised 813112010. DT
seconded. Motion carried 4:0:1 with new member Paul Bolger abstaining.
NS moved the Board approve the Preliminary PUD-B plan as shown on submitted plans dated
712,012010 and revised 813112010 and amended tonight.
DT seconded. Motion carried 4:0:1 with new member Paul Bolger abstaining.
Request for Signage Certificate of Appropriateness: 580 Main Street, Kumon
Learning Center
The applicant requests a change to the Board's decision of 8/30/2010 that the letters of the wall sign
must be black.
The applicant, Mr. Prakash Badola owner of Kumon Learning Center, was present. He requested the
letters of the wall sign be blue rather than black as shown in the submitted plan. He wants the same blue
as on the Bank of America's sign.
DT moved the Board approve the request for a Signage Certificate of Appropriateness for Kumon
Learning Center's wall sign at 580 Main Street.
JP seconded and the motion was carried 5:0:0.
The Chair stamped and signed the plan
Public Hearing: Site Plan Review (continued)
30 Haven Street, Oaktree Development
Appearing for Oaktree was. Mr. Phil Terms and Mr. Imad Zrein
A draft decision had been prepared and presented to the applicant.
Page 3 of 5
CPDC Minutes of 9/13/2010
Oaktree presented the latest revisions to the plans which consisted primarily of changes to the parking
lot: Except in one area, the parking lot would have 24 foot driving aisles and it would be rebuilt to
include catch basins and a Stormceptor (or equivalent) water treatment device.
The Town Engineer, who was present, had issued a memo on the development earlier today. His biggest
issues concern the level of the ground water on the site and the location of a drainpipe that runs
through/under the building. He noted the applicant would bear the cost of rerouting the drainpipe and
cautioned the applicant that the risk they run is that the rerouting may be extensive and costly. He
cautioned the Board that if it approves the site plan it must add a condition or make it clear in the
decision's language that the rerouting of the drainpipe must be the applicant's responsibility. He
suggested the Board also condition that the work must meet his approval.
The Staff Planner said she references the Town Engineer's memo in the draft decision.
The Board expressed concern that the parking lot be accessible during construction. The Town Engineer
noted that access during construction and other issues concerning the parking lot falls under the
jurisdiction of the Board of Selectmen.
DT moved the Board close the Public Hearing of 30 Haven Street.
NS seconded and the motion was carried 4:0:1 with new member Paul Bolger abstaining.
DT moved the Board approve the request for a waiver from "4.12.8.2: Off-Street Loading &
Delivery'
JP seconded and the motion was carried 4:0:1 with member Paul Bolger abstaining.
DT moved the Board approve the Site Plan Decision of 30 Haven Street as amended tonight.
NS seconded and the motion was carried 4:0:1 with member Paul Bolger abstaining.
Correspondence: Request for Extension of a Completion Deadline
175 Franklin Street, Sailor Tom's Way
Attorney Chris Latham represented the owner of the Sailor Tom's Way project requesting the extension.
He noted that the request includes a.list of completed.and to-be-completed items and that they were
asking for an extension to July 1. 2011.
The Town Engineer told the board the list was accurate to the best of his knowledge. His concern was
the site has been inactive for some time. He was looking for a timetable of completion. The Town
Engineer suggested extending the deadline further to October 1, 2011. The Board agreed.
NS moved the Board approve the request for an extension of the Completion Deadline for work at 175
Franklin Street (Sailor Tom's Way) to October], 2011. DT seconded and the motion was carried
5:0:0.
Zoning Work Session: Voting on Recommendation of Zoning Amendments for
Inclusion on the Warrant of the Subsequent Town Meeting 2010
Page 4 of 5
CPDC Minutes of 9/13/2010
After much discussion of the language of the articles, the Board voted as follows. The language of the
articles follows these minutes in a separate document (Note: at the time, the designating numbers of the
individual articles was not known).
Non-Conforming Section of Zoning By-laws (ZBL)
DT moved the Board approve the language of Draft Article "X" [describing the change to 6.3.3.1 of
the ZBL] for inclusion in the warrant of Fall 2010 Town Meeting. JP seconded. Motion carried 5:0:0.
Side Setback.
DT moved the Board recommend including the Draft Article "X" as amended tonight in the warrant
of the Subsequent Town Meeting, Fall 2010.
NS seconded. Motion carried 5:0:0.
Flag Ground Clearance and Edits removing: 1) the requirement of addresses on free-standing signs, and
2) the typo in 6.2.6.4.
NS moved the Board recommend including the Draft Article "X" as amended tonight in the warrant
of the Subsequent Town Meeting, Fall 2010.
JP seconded. Motion carried 5:0:0.
Multiple Signs for Businesses on Single Tenant Lots in Bus. A.
JP moved the Board recommend including the Draft Article "X" as amended tonight in warrant of
the Subsequent Town Meeting, Fall 2010.
i
DT seconded. Motion carried 3:2:0.
The Chair asked if Non-Conforming Signs had to be addressed. AM replied they may not have to be
addressed at all because if the signs are still non-conforming after applying article changes, then it is
truly non-conforming. The Chair agreed.
NS moved to adjourn. NS seconded and the motion was carried 4:0:0.
The meeting adjourned at midnight.
These minutes were prepared by Michael Schloth and submitted to the CPDC on October 18, 2010;
these minutes were approved as amended by the CPDC on October 18, 2010.
Signed
atterson, Secretary
Da
Page 5 of 5
Memo
To: Jean Delios, Community Services Director/Town Planner
Abby McCabe, Staff Planner
From: George J. Zambouras, Town Engineer
CC: CPDC Members
Date: September 13, 2010
Re: 80-100 Main Street
Documents Reviewed:
• Site Development Plans entitled - Calareso's Farmstand & Garden Center, 80=100 Main
Street - dated July 26, 2010 with revisions to August 31, 2010 prepared by Hayes
Engineering, Inc. sheets 1-12, SL-1,L-1,SK-1 and SK-2.
• Mitigative Drainage Analysis - dated August 20, 2010 prepared by Hayes Engineering, Inc.
• Supplemental Traffic- Memorandum -dated August 31, 2010 prepared by Hayes Engineering,
Inc.
Below please find the Engineering Divisions comments on the Site Plan submittal for Calareso's
-Farmstand located at 80-100 Main Street.
Site Plans General
• Number of handicap spaces should be increased to a total of six (6) to account for seasonal
parking.
• All curbing shall be vertical granite curb in accordance with CPDC regulations.
• The radii at the site's entrance\exit should be redesigned to accommodate the required turning radii
of vehicles servicing facility and emergency vehicles to enter and exit the site without crossing
lanes of traffic.
• The perimeter of all paved areas shall be furnished with vertical granite curb. (no curbing is
identified at islands or at the rear of the building)
• Provide design and typical section of rain gardens for review and approval.
• What is finish ground treatment within rear display area?
• Details indicated sloped granite curbing is this in error? Detail sheets contain duplication of details
and details not being proposed under this project. The sheets should be revised to reflect details
that pertain to this project.
• Engineering designs shall be submitted for all retaining walls.
• Lighting spill at property lines should be reduced. Pole heights should be reduced and all fixtures
shall be furnished with full cut off luminaries to reduce glare to abutting residential properties.
0 Page 1 13_~
• Question applicability of note on lighting sheet indicating that "lighting levels of parking area are
increased over those in the access driveway'. Majority of parking lot is adjacent to residential
areas and light levels and pole heights should be reduced to reduce adverse affects on abutting
residential areas.
• Parking lights should be turned off %2 hour after closing.
Utilities
• It is unclear exactly what is being proposed or discontinued for water and sewer services. The
applicant shall provide supplemental information to the Engineering Division on proposed water .
and sewer services for review and approval.
• All abandoned water and sewer services shall be discontinued at the main.
• All water services and connections shall be in accordance with Town of Reading Water
Department.
• Where is the proposed grease trap located or is this detail in error?
• Drain line from northerly loading are trench drain shall be relocated to connect to main drain in
direction of normal flow.
• All catch basins shall discharge to drain manholes. Catch basin to catch basin connections shall be
eliminated (front of building).
• All utilities, structures, frames and covers shall be of Town o Reading standards. Additional
notations shall be added to the plans and details.
General
• Engineering Division shall be notified 72 hours in advance to mark out Town utilities.
• All site work shall be inspected by the Engineering Division. The Applicant\Owner's contractor shall
submit a construction schedule of proposed work. All inspections shall be scheduled 24 hours in
advance.
• Copies of all MassDOT permit applications and approvals shall. be submitted to the Engineering
Division.
• No building permit shall be issued until MassDOT permits have been approved.
An approved site as-built shall. be submitted to the. Engineering Division within 60 days of certificate
of occupancy. The as-built shall be submitted in mylar and, electronic ACAD format.
Prior to the.granting of a certificate of occupancy the Applicant\Owner shall furnish a.$5000 bond
which shall be returned upon receipt of an approved site as-built.
Drainage Analysis
• Specifications for the clay to be utilized within the detention basin shall be provided. All clay
delivered to the site shall be tested and certified to meet the intended design specifications.
• A detail of the outlet control structure shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for review and
approval.
• The detentions basin shall be redesigned to prevent overtopping during storms equal to and in
excess of the 25 year event.
• Drainage shall be re-designed to handle the 25 year event without surcharging.
• Documentation shall be provided to document proposed stormceptor unit is suitable for the area
and flow tributary to it.
• Volume to be infiltrated should be based on total impervious area not the increase in pre and post .
conditions. Calculations shall be resubmitted for review and approval by the Engineering Division.
• A stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the
Engineering Division prior to the start of construction. The Plan shall be developed for construction
and post construction procedures.
• The project may require and EPA SWPPP, if one is required a copy of the completed plan shall be
submitted to the Engineering Division.
0 Page 2 0
I
Y ~
I
I
I
Memo'
To: Jean Delios, Community Services Director/Town Planner
Abby McCabe, Staff Planner
From: George J. Zambouras, Town Engineer
CC: CPDC Members
Date: September 13, 2010
Re: Oaktree Development - 30 Haven Street
Documents Reviewed:
• Site Development Plans - 30 Haven Street - dated April 12, 2010 revised Aug. 11, 2010 prepared
for Oaktree Development by DeVellis Zrein Inc. and JM Associates, sheets existing conditions, C-1
to C-6, and A-1 to A-25. With updated existing conditions, CA to C-7 dated Sept. 3, 2010
• Stormwater Management and Operation and. Maintenance. Plan - dated March 26, 2010 revision
date of Aug. 5, 2010. prepared by DeVellis Zrein Inc.
Traffic Analysis - dated Aug. 10, 2010 prepared by TEC
I have indicated below the status of comments'to date. In my opinion, while the applicant has provided some
additional information several items that are outstanding could alter the plan and building configuration that is
presently before us.
Status of Previous Comments: The following is a listing of my original comments with a report on their
status in italics.
• The existing conditions plan should indicate existing grades.
o In progress -Additional information regarding existing drainage system pending.
■No further information furnished
• Plans depicting proposed improvements lack sufficient, detail and dimensions to adequately review the
proposed work. The plans should be revised to include sufficient detail indicating widths/dimensions of
roadways, sidewalks, planting areas, parking space identification, proposed grading and/or spot
elevations where appropriate, proposed utilities and structure improvements, curve radii and all other
pertinent information to enable a proper review of the improvements being proposed.
o Partially addressed -Plans are 50% to 70% complete and still require proposed grading
and spot elevations, completion of dimensioning, utility and structure improvements and
sufficient detail to depict all improvements and modifications proposed.
95 % satisfied- minor details remain
• Details of all site improvements shall be provided
o Partially addressed - The plans shall be revised to provide sufficient detail to identify and
describe all modifications and or improvements proposed.
9 Pagel 6_ ; 5 .
■ 95 % satisfied - minor details remain
• The location of. trees along the walkway depicted on Landscape plan C-2 & C-4 should be altered to
provide a minimum sidewalk clearance of 5 feet.
o Partially addressed -Trees have been relocated, however signage have been added
which reduces sidewalk clearances to less than 5 feet. Either alternate location for signage
shall be provided or the sidewalk shall be altered to provide a minimum clearance of 5 feet.
■ Comment satisfied
• Photogrammetric illumination plan should be provided for all site and exterior building lighting. Lighting
specification sheet A-19 should indicate all fixture components and indicate wattage planned.
o Partially addressed- Photometric plan has been provided, plan only identifies building
lighting and should include all adjacent roadway, sidewalk and parking lot lighting. Plan
shall also be reproduced at a readable scale.
■ Not addressed
• The Stormwater Report provided is incomplete. A comprehensive stormwater management report shall
be provided complete with all necessary hydraulic calculations and supporting computations depicting
the projects compliance with DEP Stormwater Standards. The report shall also include design
calculation for all temporary and permanent Stormwater management, erosion and sediment control
devices and complete construction and post construction Operation and Maintenance plan. The existing
drainage shall also be analyzed to insure that existing drainage is of sufficient capacity to accept altered
flow patterns volumes when appropriate,
o Not addressed - While additional information has been provided the developer shall
provide detailed documentation indicating the applicable standards of the DEP Stormwater
Standards have been met or have been met to the maximum extent practicable as required
by DEP.
■ Partially addressed
o Stormwater O & M Plan - The plan as presented is severely deficient and only generalizes
intended BMP's, inspection procedures and maintenance. The plan shall be.modified to
address all construction 'BMP's and their maintenance that will be required or intended to
be utilized on site and off site to control erosion, sedimentation, dust, debris and other
measures that will be required during demolition and construction of the facility and site.
■ Additional information provided is incomplete, comment not satisfied
o The Plan shall adequately define post-construction maintenance procedures and practices
that will be required for the site.
■ Additional information provided is incomplete, comment not satisfied
o The Plan shall also include the requirement for annual notification of problems, inspection
and maintenance reporting to the Engineering Division.
■ Additional information provided is incomplete, comment not satisfied
o Hydraulic analysis does not address if altered flow patterns have affected system capacity
where applicable.
■ Have been informed verbally, backup documentation is needed
• Base on the preliminary information furnished, it is possible that the existing drain line traversing the
property will be at an elevation that conflicts with the proposed underground parking area. The status of
the potential grade conflict shall be reviewed. Should the conflict be unavoidable a relief drain of equal
capacity will be required to be re-routed around the building to the discharge point of the existing drain
so the Town will not loose any drainage carrying capacity of the current drainage system.
o NotAddressed
■ No additional information was provided, comment not satisfied
• A plan showing the proposed revisions to the Town's parking lot should be provided. The plan shall
indicate grading revisions, traffic patterns, tree and landscape improvements, traffic marking plan and
signage complete with dimensions. The plan shall also indicate adequacy of the turning movements to
accommodate vehicles servicing the complex; and to abutting properties.
0 Page 2 o~ 7
o Partially Addressed - Plan and traffic analysis addresses the majority of the requested
information. Plan does not address proposed grading, additional signage and lacks
sufficient detail of proposed pervious pavements and landscape features. In addition the
information provided resulted in additional comments, please refer to the following section
indentifying new comments
■ 95 % satisfied- parking lot ahs been realigned to provide adequate lane and
space widths. Constructability of spaces up to property line deeds to be
investigated and minor details remain to be furnished (Island-surface
treatment and pervious paver information)
■ A traffic study and impact assessment shall be furnished indicating pre and post average daily and peak
hour traffic volumes, trip generation, LOS of affected intersections, suitability of existing roadway
geometry to accept the proposed revisions to traffic patterns and any improvements proposed which
would be necessary to mitigate the impacts of the development. The report shall also provide a parking
assessment impact and analyze the impacts to safety and affects on traffic patterns of the proposed
traffic island (bump out) on Haven Street..
o Comment Satisfied
A Geotechnical Report and Ground water Report shall be furnished to address the following. Based on
information known from adjacent buildings it is likely that the underground parking area may require
prolonged or permanent dewatering. The reports shall address the impacts associated with pumping
issues if pumping is determined to be required by subsurface investigations. Soil explorations shall be
performed to evaluate the suitability of installing underground infiltration. chambers for stormwater
management. The Engineering Division shall.be notified 72 hours in advance of any soil explorations.
o Not Addressed
■ Report is pending
■ A curb reveal analysis shall be provided for the area abutting the site if the existing curb is to be adjusted
along Haven Street.
o Partially addressed - Additional existing grades have been provided however no proposed
grades have been provided to determine an analysis of the curb reveal to be provided and
its effect on Haven Street grades.
■ Typical section provided - needs further discussion with applicants
engineer
• The plans should be corrected to reflect that the Town of Reading does not own the right of way leading
to the parking area. The town only has acquired an easement for the right of passage and access.
o Comment Satisfied.
Additional comments based on the revised information submitted:
Public Parking Lot
1. Proposed Modifications
• Proposed parking lot modification sheet C-1 incorrectly identifies number of parking spaces
provided. The correct number should be 89 and 4 HP spaces.
■ Comment Satisfied.
Traffic analysis indentifies that one space within the public parking lot should be eliminated to
accommodate WB-50 turning movements. This should be identified on the plan. The
combination of this recommendation and the error identified above reduces the number of
space to 88 and 4 HP spaces.
■ Comment Satisfied.
■ Proposed angle parking dimensions are sub-standard (insufficient stall length and depth) and
do not meet standard Town, MassDOT and transportation engineering design criteria.
■ Comment Satisfied.
■ Proposed parking lot aisle widths are sub-standard and do not meet standard Town, MassDOT
and transportation engineering design criteria.
• Page 3 J
■ Comment Satisfied.* Needs verification of constructability of angled spaces
up to property line)
• Based in the above comments the modifications to the Public Parking Area are unacceptable
and should be corrected to meet design standards.
2.. Parking Lot Drainage
• The proposed improvements eliminate %2 of the catch basins presently servicing the lot. This
severely reduces the effective available inlet capacity and, needs to be corrected..
■ Comment Satisfied inlet capacity restored
• All connections shall be to manholes. No tee connections or catch basin to catch basin
connections are permitted.
■ Comment Satisfied.
• Oil and grease hoods shall be installed on all existing catch basins to meet Stormwater
requirements.
■ Comment Satisfied- additional notes needed for all basins
• Developer shall investigate additional sedimentation controls and TSS removal devices for all
effected drainage to meet Stormwater requirements.
■ Not satisfied" no information furnished
• The roof drain material type, size and elevations shall be noted on the plans.
■ Partially satisfied
3. General
• Additional information shall be furnished to review proposed parking lot permeable surface
■ Not satisfied
• Final grading shall be provided throughout.
■ Comment Satisfied.
Provide spot gutter grades for all bump out areas to verify proper drainage.
•
■ Comment Satisfied.
• No staging area has been identified for the project. Is the parking lot proposed to be the projects
staging area? If so additional information on limits of required staging area and site. restoration
shall be submitted for review.
Traffic Analysis
The following modifications identified in the report shall be included on the proposed site plans:
• The elimination of one. parking space, within the public lot, to accommodate WB-50 turning
movements
■ Comment Satisfied.
• The addition of the bump out on Haven Street along the easterly side of the ROW access to the
parking lot and associated markings and signage to address safety and ite distance issues
identified.
* Not satisfied
Haven Street
• All connections shall be to manholes. No catch basin to catch basin connections are permitted.
■ Comment Satisfied.
• Provide spot gutter grades for all bump out areas to verify proper drainage.
■ Comment Satisfied.
• The plans shall reflect that the installation of the HP ramp (southerly side of Haven Street) to.
accommodate the relocated crosswalk is to be installed as part of the project.
■ Not satisfied
Page 4
• The plans shall also include the elimination of the handicap ramp and restoration of curbing at the
location of the HP ramp proposed to be eliminated.
■ Not satisfied
• Typical roadway cross sections shall be developed to enable. review of curb reveal issues.
■ Partially satisfied needs further discussion
Landscaping
• Indicate all landscaping on planting plan - locations of shrubs and ground cover has not been
provided.
• What additional ground treatment is proposed for parking lot islands?
Not satisfied
General
• All pavements, sidewalks, crosswalks and brick banding shall be in accordance with Town
specifications. I will provide the necessary details to be included in the drawings,
• Developer to provide additional information on specified concrete mix design specified for review
and approval.
Not satisfied
• All frames, covers and grates shall be in accordance with Town specifications. I will provide the
necessary details to be included in the drawings.
• Site and lighting plan shall identify which existing roadway and parking fixtures that are to remain,
be modified or relocated.
■ Not satisfied
• Final site, walkway and parking lot grades, including spot grades were necessary, shall be provided.
1 Finish floor building grades shall be provided.
■ Comment Satisfied
• Size, type and elevation of all proposed utilities shall be provided.
■ Comment Satisfied.
Respectfully,
George J. Zambouras, P.E.
Town Engineer
0 Pages U~
l-
vv)
EATHAM LAW OFFICES EEC
643 MAIN STREET
READING, MA 01867
0. BRADLEY LATHAM'
CHRISTOPHER M. O. LATITAM
SOSHUA E. LATHAM
September 13, 2010
TEL: (781) 944-0505
FAX: (781) 944-7079
. ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN
MASSACHUSETTS AND NEW $AMPSIURE
Community Planning and Development Commission
Town Hall
16 Lowell Street
Reading, MA 01867
RE: REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF COMPLETION DEADLINE FOR 175 FRANKLIN STREET (SAILOR TOM'S
WAY)
Community Planning and Development Commission:
This correspondence is on behalf of Richard P. Merrill, trustee of the Richard P. Merrill Trust, the
owner of 175 Franklin Street (Sailor Tom's Way) ("Project") in response to the written legal opinion of
Town counsel dated September 8, 2010 and the correspondence of the assistant town planner dated
the September 9, 2010.
Mr. Merrill hereby formally requests an extension of Sailor Tom's Way's subdivision completion
deadline consistent with the opinion of Town counsel. As justification for this request Mr. Merrill points
to the reasons and intent stated by the legislature and Governor in passing the Commonwealth's
Economic Development Reorganization Act of 2010 and the Permit Extension Act of 2010 and personally
notes that as with many real estate developers, Mr. Merrill was negatively affected by the downturn in
the economy, specifically in the real estate and credit markets, which had the combined, synergistic,
concurrent and spiraling effects of reducing real estate values, lender's willingness to fund real estate
development, lender's willingness to assume risk and issue mortgages, decreased demand for new
home construction and unemployment.
Mr. Merrill is now ready, willing and able to complete the Project since new opportunities have
presented themselves. Mr. Merrill thus requests an extension of the Project's subdivision completion
deadline such that the subdivision's infrastructure can be completed by July 1, 2011. Mr. Merrill intends
to seek lot releases from the Commission by such time.
With the above said, please note that we believe the Permit Extension Act of 2010 applies to the
Project and reserve Mr. Merrill's rights in those regards. Mr. Merrill, however, is hopeful that a mutually
acceptable resolution with the Commission is possible via an extension of Sailor Tom Way's subdivision
completion deadline and requests, any waivers from 9.4.1 and or.9:4.2 of the Rules and Regulations
Governing Subdivision of Land in Reading that the Commission may deem necessary.
Thank you in advance for the Commission's time and cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
LATHAM LAW OFFICES, LLC
Chris Latham
JM ASSOCIATES
Civil Engineers-Land Surveyors-GPS
325 Main St.
North Reading, Ma. 01864
Tel. 978-664-6668 Fax 978-664-8155
www.imassociateseng.com
~G~ q ~ a
Sept. 13, 2010
Sailor Tom's Way
Reading, Ma.
Site work completed to date
1. Site clearing, grubbing & grading
2. Excavation of detention pond
3. Installation of drainage pipe and structures
4. Installation of sewer main, sewer structures and services.
5. Installation of water main, hydrant and services.
6. Construction of roadway gravel base and asphalt binder.
Remaining Work to be completed by July 1, 2011.
1. Construct retaining wall along westerly sideline Sailor Tom's Way.
2. Install electric, telephone, and cable television utilities.
3. Finish grading of detention pond and slope easements. Rip Rap pipe ends.
4. Install granite curbing
5.. Construction of handicap ramps.
6. Loam and seed detention pond, slope easements, exposed sidewalk areas.
7. Place leveling and finish pavement courses. Pave sidewalk. .
8. Plant landscape vegetation.
9. Install granite monuments.
10. Clean catch basins and sweep pavement.
C~AGAA
7oL,Yi et _~S DO I 0
Board of Selectmen
ARTICLE 16 To see if the Town will vote -pursuant to Massachusetts General '
Laws Chapter 30Bj • Section, 12 .to -authorize the General. Manager of the Reading
Municipal Light Department (RMLD) -to enter into a five-year contract including all,
extensions renewals and options, in order to, save $12,187 as compared to signing a
one-year contract, for malntenance of the Supervisory Control ahd Data Acquisition
program for electric. distribution system monitoring, upon such .terms and conditions
determined by the Reading 'Municipal. Light Department General Manager, or take any
other action with respect thereto by the Reading Municipal Light Board, or take any-other . .
action with respect thereto.
Reading Municipal Light Board '
,A . TtG.E17°' To see if the Town will vote to amend Section 6.2 of the Reading
s.~z..
onrZ ng Laws, by adding an after 20 in row # 11 Free-Standing Signs under Side
Setback in Table 6•.2:3 for Business-A,,Business-C and Industrial Zoning Districts. And
add (1) to the Notes in Table 6.2.3. and add a new Section 6.2.9• "Signs by Special
..Permit" as follows: (Words in bold italics denotes new language.
Table 6.2.3: Signs Permilitt6d.Acc6rding to Zoning District
Business-A, Business-C and Industrial Zoning Districts:
Max.
Max..
Type
Permit
Sign
Sign
Front
Side
Mauimum
'
Required
Area
Height
Setback
Setback
Number
(s q. ft
ff.
(ft.)
(ft)
'1• I . Free-
Standing
Y.
60(b)
20
0
20(1)
1•/lot
Note (1): A Special Permit -maybe granted by the' CPDC. See Section' 6.2.9. for
Special Permit Criteria.
Add New-Section 6.2.9. so that it reads as follows:
Section 6.2.9: Signs bt! Special Permit:
The CPDC may grant a Special Permit for a free-standing sign within the,
side setbacks identified -in Table 623 or Section 6,2,6.3, if it-rinds that the sign
complies with the purposes of this by-law, abutting properties are not
unreasonably. impacted by sign placement, and the sign conforms in all other
respects with Section 6.2, 'w th specific attention to Section 6.2.5.a,' regarding
impact on traffic and pedestrian safety.
Or take any other action with respect thereto.
Community Planning and Development Commission'
ARTICLE 18 To see if the Town will vote to amend Section 6.2. of the Town of
Reading. Zoning By-Laws by amending Taljle 623 and the 'corresponding Sections in
6.2. as follows: (t aRg age t6 h /words 'In bold
italics denotes new language:}
7 Li
In Table 6.2.3 Signs Permitted According to-Zoning District .
Business,B Zoning Dlsti•icts:
Amend Line #14 under Business-B Zoning Districtd,as shown in the chartand add'a new
Line #17 under to read as follows:
. '
Max.
Permit
. Sign
Max.
Front
Side
Maximum
Type
Required.
Area
Sign
Setback
Setback
Number'.
.
sq. ft.)
Height
(ft.)
{ft.)
14. Free-
Y
35 &Q(D)
29-94
0
20
1/lot
Standing
(Service
Stations
only)
97. Free:.
SPP W
35
90.5
0.
20
•i/lot
Standin
Add (J) under the Notes in Table 6.2.3 so that it reads as follows:
Note -(J); Free-standing signs shall be permitted only where the principal business
entrance is.located more than 4a feet from 'the centerline of the 'street in front of
-the lot See.Section 6.2.9.a. -for Special Permit Criteria:
Add "or by special.perrimit" at the end of Section 6.2.5.f. under "Prohibited Signs" so that
it reads:
f. Free-standing signs in a Business-B. Zoning District (except as permitted at
service' stations or by special permit):
In-Section 626.4. "Signs In Business-B Zonlhg Districts" under Prohibited add.the words
or by Special Permit" at the end of the first bullet so that ifi, reads: .
Free-standing (except as permitted at service stations or by special permit).
In the second to last sentence of the first paragraph of Sectlbri 6.2.6.4. "Signs in .
Business.-B Zoning District" delete "free-standing;" -and add "or by special permit from
the CPDC'•ta the end of the last sentence so that1t reads:. .
No free tag, internally illuminated, or Reader Board signs shall be permitted
anywhere in a Business-B Zoning.District.• Free-standing signs will be allowed.only for
service stations or by special permit from the CPDC.
In Section 6.2.6.8. "Signs in Residential Districts" add "except as allowed by a special
permit" to the end of the'-second bullet under Prohibited, so that it reads:
• Free-standing signs (except as allowed by a special permlt):
Add New Section 6.2.9.x. so that it reads as follows:
section 6.2,9.ar
The CPD,.'C may grant a Special, Permit. for a tree-standing sign in the
Business-B or Residential Zoning Districts if it finds that the sign complies with
the purposes of this by-law, abutting properties are not unreasonably impacted by
sign placement and -there is no negative impact on traffic and pedestrian safety, .
The CPDC may consider the following itet7s When. reviewing the Special Permit
request,- considerations for the character of the-, surrounding neighborhood, the
principal.use of the properly or business, the location'of the parking, landscaping
in the front yard setback and other signs on the property-
Or take any other action with respect thereto,
Community Planning and DeveloprPient Commission
-ARTICLE 19" To see if the Town will vote to amend.the Town of Reading Zoning
By-Laws Section 6.2.4.o.. "Exempt Signs" and Section 6.2.6.3 "Signs in Business-A
Zoning Districts" and Section 6:2.6.4. "Signs in' Bussihess-B Zoning Districts" -as follows:
(6e-te-be-te+te3reIwords in bold italics denotes
new language.)
Add the following language to Section 6.2.4.o. "Exempt Signs":
a. Any establishment located in a Business of Industrial"Zoning' District may
display: . .
An `-Open" Flag -with dimensional requirements not to-exceed, four (4)
feet by six (6) feet and may contain decorative graphics.
• A 'National.or State Flag - with" emblems of religious;' educational,
governmental organization or any" other- 'federally tax-exempt
organization, except when displayed•,•in conn'sction with commercial
promotions or advertising: Dimensions shall not exceed four. (4) fret
by six (6) feet.
A minimum ground clearance of eight (8) *feet shall'be provided
for flags' that hang over walkways, sidewalks and entrances of
businesses." Ground clearance shaA be defined as. the distance
between. the lowest hanging.portion or bottom of the•flag and the
grade directly below.
Delete the last sentence in the, second paragraph of Section 6,2.6'.3:."Signs,in Busindss-
A Zoning Districts" so that it reads:
A lot which contains not' more than one establishment shall be allowed one free-standing
sign or one wall. sign or one projecting sign only, The er,-of the
PeFty shall be pi:umiii~fitly displayed on sueh-slg ",d the silvn shall in all, respeGts
Delete Section 6,2.6.3.d
d. E;ithei: the allowed free standing sign 9F, if no fte dint., "'g 1 then'
aaWeast one wall
r!Um138r of the prn r y
Delete the second paragraph of Section 6.2.6.4: "Signs in Business-8 Zoning Districts:"
bleb Sr*. illw a ftern and rvraphi-gs,-
- ,
• be tu e d 9# at the ell of business.,
Or take any other action with respect thereto.
Community Planning and,Development Commission
ARTICLE.20 To see if the Town will vote to amend the Town of Reading-Zoning
By-Laws Section 6.2.6.3 "Signs in Business-A Zoningbistricts" ad follows: (Lan, tim -t-e
be remove is °hrith sfreGcthrnn~jwords in bold italics denotes new language.)
To remove the second bullet under prohibited Signs in -Section 6.2.5.3. so that it reads:
Prohibited Signs:
Banners as permanent signs
and .~all BIOS
Amend the first sentence in the second paragraph in Seei:ion 6:2.6:3: "Signs in Business-
A Zoning Districts"-5o that It reads as follows-'
A lot which contains not more than one establishment shall oe allowed one free-standing
sign or one wall sign or one projecting sign . A second sign of a,diferent sign
type shall be allowed not to exceed a maximum of eight (8) square feet. The total'
square footage. of the two signs shall not exceed the maximum allowed as
specified in. Table 6,2.3:
Or take any other action with respect thereto.
Community, Planning and Development- Commission
ARTICLE 21 To see if -the Town will vote to amend- Section of the
Zoning. 8y-Laws by adding the word "not" In the second lime between the words "does"
and "or" so that Section 6:3:3.1 reads in its entirety as follows (words in bold italics
denotes new language.):
6.3.3A The Building Inspector may issue a Building Permit for-an interior renovation,
interior. alternation or.interior reconstruction of a pre-existing, rionconforming*
structure that does not or will not extend the non-conformity or create a new
non-conformity;
Or take any other action with respect thereto.
Community Planning and Development Commission