Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-06-11 Community Planning and Development Commission MinutesTown of Reading 16 Lowell Street Reading; MA 01867-2683 Phone: 781-942-6612 Fax: 781-942-9071 Email: creilly@ci,reading.ma.us Community Planning and Development Commission CPDC MINUTES Meeting Dated: June 11, 2007 Location: Selectmen's Meeting Room, Town Hall Time: 7:30 PM Members Present: John Sasso (JS), Chairman; Brant Ballantyne, (BB), Secretary; Richard Howard (RH), Jonathan Barnes (JB), and David Tuttle (DT). Associate Members Present: George Katsoufis (GK), Nicholas Safina (Nick S.) Associate Members Absent: Israel Maykut (IM) Also Present: Carol Kowalski (CK), Town Planner; George Zambouras (GZ), Town Engineer; and Michael Schloth. Attorney Chris Latham of Latham, Latham & Lamond, P.C., 643 Main Street Attorney Andrea Butler Mr. Jerry Fiore, 11 Gateway Circle Mr. Dave Dewing, 7 Gateway Circle Ms. Virginia Adams, 59 Azalea Circle Ms. Kathy Greenfield, Chair of Historical Commission, 192 Woburn Street Mr. Jason Benagh, c/o Quannapowitt Players, 55 Hopkins Street There being a quorum, and the Chair not yet here, the Secretary called the meeting to order at 7:30 PM. Public Comments Selectman Chair Ben Tafoya introduced Carol Kowalski, Reading's new Town Planner, to the Board. Subdivision Approval Not Required 29-33 Shackford Road No one appeared for the applicant. GZ said this ANR had not been presented to the Board at the previous meeting because, through a miscommunication on his part to Town Counsel, this ANR was not presented to Page 1 of 8 the Board at the previous meeting. He assured the Board that Town Counsel has no issues with this ANR. RH moved to have the Board endorse the ANR plans for 29-33 Shackford Road dated 4/17/07 based on a memo from the Town Engineer dated 5/30/07. BB seconded. Voted Approved: 4:0:0. The Board Members signed the plans. Determination of Minor Modification 30 Newcrossing Road, Hallmark Health The applicant requests a change to the lighting plan. Attorney Chris Latham appeared for the applicant. The applicant requests a change to condition #7 "Site Lighting" of the Board's Site Plan Review Decision for 30 Newcrossing Road [recorded with the Town Clerk on 10/17/2006]. The applicant would rather the two decorative lights not replace the existing lights as stated in the decision as decorative lights would not be of adequate wattage. They propose locating the decorative lights elsewhere as shown in a drawing of the site submitted to the Board tonight. The Town Engineer agreed with the modification. He said he did not believe the intention of the condition was to replace parking lot lights with low-wattage decorative lights. The Board asked if a Lighting Consultant had reviewed the site's lighting plan. The Town Engineer said none had. The consensus of the Board was the modification was minor and they approved of it. RH began to make a motion of approval when Mr. Latham interrupted to say he had composed language for a motion already and distributed copies of same to the Board. Mr. Latham's motion read: Move that the following modifications to the October 17, 2006, Site Plan Review Decision of this Commission as to the Hallmark Health Medical Center at 30 New Crossing Road, as requested by HH 55 Walkers Brook LLC, is hereby found to be a minor modification and is hereby approved: The second sentence in Condition numbered 7, Site Lighting, which is to be completed prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, is modified to be as follows: Two (2), twelve foot(12 ) decorative light poles of a design consistent with Reading's downtown streetscape lighting specifications shall be installed at the locations marked "Suggested Locations for Decorative `streetscape " Lamps " on the sketch submitted by the applicant and dated June 11, 2007, and shall have no greater than 175 wattage per fixture. Page 2of8 It was the consensus of the Board to use this language with the following changes. 1. Add a sentence stating the existing parking lot lights will remain as shown in the plans. 2. Change the wattage from 175 to 100. RH so moved. DT seconded. Voted Approved: 4:0:0. BB stamped the drawing approved, and signed and dated the stamp. JS arrived and took his seat as Chair of the Board. Other Business Open Space Liaison The Town Planner said the Conservation Administrator is looking for a liaison from the Board for the Open Space Committee. The current Open Space plan is out of date. It needs to be updated every five years for the Town to be eligible for associated grants. JS said the Board has used associate members as liaisons in the past and he would speak to the associates to see if anyone was interested. Public Hearing: Site Plan Review 55 Hopkins Street, Quannapowitt Players, Inc. The applicant proposes to add an addition to the existing building and make general site improvements. Action date: June 25, 2007 JS opened the Site Plan Review and noted a draft decision had been written. JS gave an overview of the procedure - applicant would speak, then town staff, then the Board, and the public would be allowed to comment. The draft decision will then be reviewed and the public hearing will be left open during this review to allow for any further public comment. Mr. Dale Gienapp provided a summary of the project. There are three outstanding issues: 1. Rear retaining wall. At last meeting, the applicant agreed to do something to maintain a masonry wall of the same height as the one that exists today. They will try to keep as much of the existing wall standing as possible but doubt much will survive the excavation. What they do not save they will rebuild. Smaller retaining walls will be built to support the rebuilt wall and the grade. 2. Conservation Commission. The applicant meets with the Cons Comm on Wednesday [6/13/07] and expects all issues to be resolved and a draft order of Conditions to be ready. 3. Setback of addition from the Hopkins Street side of the original structure. The applicant met with the Historical Commission and both parties agreed to move the Hopkins St. side of the addition back 3 feet nine inches (3'9") from the Hopkins Street side of the original structure. Page 3 of 8 Mr. Gienapp said a chain-link safety fence would be placed on top of the retaining wall and vegetation [arbor vitae] added behind it [the Hopkins St. side]. Mr. Gienapp said they had not heard from the Fire Department on the question of access to the parking lot. The Town Engineer said all open issues with respect to drainage have been addressed satisfactorily. RH asked if runoff would worsen the abutters' problems with the brook that flows through his yard. The Town Engineer said the site's runoff should not increase and in fact the proposed changes should result in some reduction of runoff. The Board noted that they had not'received revised plans or elevations reflecting any changes since March 2007. The Town Planner said she had received last Friday by email files in pdf-format. She forwarded them to the Board Members but had some trouble doing so due to the size of the files. The Board emphasized the most recent plans must be referenced in the decision. Ms. Kathy Greenfield, Chair of the Historical Commission, said the Historical Commission was very pleased with the Quannapowitt Players' cooperation and thanked them for agreeing to move the addition 3'9" back from the original Hopkins St side of the building. She asked that the window that will have to be removed to make room for the addition be preserved, appropriately labeled, and stored preferably on site. JS did not believe the Board had the authority to make this request a condition of the decision. Mr. Jason Benagh said the Quannapowitt Players intend to use the gallery created by the addition as a place to keep historical artifacts of the building. JS asked if there were any comments from the public. There were none. He reminded all present that the hearing will remain open for public comments during the review of the draft decision. Highlights of the Review of the Draft Decision. Added to Materials section: • Board of Appeals decision case # 06-25 • Historical Commission's letter of May 10, 2007 Additional memo from the Conservation Administrator to ConsComm: May 8, 07 Findings • The Board decides to delete reference to decision to waive the requirement of a loading space. Conditions: Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit #3: Final Landscaping Plan. The consensus of the Board was to delete the table specifying the location and contents of a 5 foot wide landscape bed. Page 4 of 8 #7: Fire Suppression: The Board changed the language to include "any" fire suppression system "and/or" alarm design shall be subject to the Fire Chief's approval. #8: Fire Lane: The Town Engineer said the Fire Chief would not make a determination on the question of a fire lane until after he sees the final site plans. The Board added this condition to specify it would be acceptable to continue the practice of stacked parking and to state the typical parking layout as shown in sheet PS-7 may be modified by the Fire Chief to include a fire lane or access. #9: Meeting with Building Inspector and Town Planner. Mr. Gienapp requested the time requirement of 30 days be reduced. The Board denied the request saying they want ample time to handle the review of any changes. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.) Mr. Gienapp said he had wanted to distinguish between permanent and temporary Certificates of Occupancy because he anticipated requesting. a temporary C.O. for the entranceway alone. It was the consensus of the Board not to include language distinguishing permanent and temporary C.O.s but rather to leave it to the Building Inspector to make such determinations. #1: Rear Retaining Wall; The Town Engineer noted that the Board was originally looking for a decorative fence in the rear with planting placed outside the fence [on the retaining wall side]. The applicant has changed the fence to a chain-link fence and placed the plantings on the inside of the fence. Mr. Gienapp said it was his understanding the abutters did not want a privacy fence. BB suggested keeping the chain-link fence but place the planting outside the fence. Mr. Benagh said placing the plantings outside the fence - on the retaining wall side - would make them difficult to maintain safely. Mr. Dave Dewing of 7 Gateway Circle said he was fine making the fence a chain-link fence. The consensus of the Board was to change the wording of this condition to the following. Per Zoning By-Laws Section 4.3.3.6.f. & i, a landscape or other suitable masonry wall shall be provided along the westerly property line. The existing wall will be retained, repaired or replaced to elevation approximately grade 268 as shown on the plans. After Occupancy #l: Landscaping. The Board agreed to delete the word "professional" from the phrase "with professional landscaping and maintenance services". #4: Seating Capacity. There was some disagreement as to what was the true seating capacity of the building. The Town Engineer was not sure if it was 155 or 165. He noted the parking is substandard. Mr. Benagh said they have the ability to fit 165 and their Page 5 of 8 current Certificate of Occupancy specifies 165 seats. The applicant's attorney, Ms. Andrea Butler, said the ZBA variance references a capacity of 175 seats. It was the consensus of the Board to use the figure of 165 as the maximum seating capacity. JS noted the use of offsite parking is referenced [memo from Wally Arsenault of Harrows Restaurant]. #5: Rear, Basement Door. The original draft language specified the use of the basement door to emergency access and egress. The applicant preferred the language state they would ensure the basement door not be used by the public except in emergencies. The Town Engineer said it was his understanding from the previous meeting that the Board had a concern with this area being used as a place for people to congregate (smoke, drink, etc...). Mr. Jerry Fiore of 11 Gateway Circle reminded the Board the new rear addition would be nine feet closer to his property and said he would prefer the original language. Mr. Benagh said the original language restricts them from using certain parts of the building and the new rear addition would only be about three feet closer to the rear abutters. RH said he understood the Board's concern to be with members of the public congregating there. The consensus of the Board was to keep the new wording: The Applicant shall ensure that the westerly basement level doorways are not used by the public except for emergency egress. It was the consensus of the Board to add a condition #6 to the section "During Construction" in regards to the preservation of the window to be removed to make room for the addition. This condition is to read: If removed, the window on the south east corner shall be identified, tagged, and stored, preferably on site, for possible future use in the building, as requested by the Historical Commission. BB moved to close the public hearing. JB seconded. Voted Approved: 3:0:2. Members John Sasso and Richard Howard abstained. BB moved to approve the Site Plan Review of 55 Hopkins Street as amended tonight. JB seconded. Voted Approved: 3:0:2. Members John Sasso and Richard Howard abstained. RH said both he and JS abstained because they did not attend the last public hearing for this Site Plan Review [during the meeting of 5/14/2007]. Determination of Minor Modification Johnson Woods The applicant requests an existing access/service road be made a named right-of-way. The Town Engineer said he is still waiting for the applicant to submit a general site plan showing the location and name of the road. As no one appeared for the applicant, and Page 6 of 8 nothing had been submitted to the Board for their consideration, the Board decided not to address this item. Zoning Workshop Before continuing the discussion of accessory structures, lot coverage, etc... JS listed the other workshop action items still before the Board: • Downtown Parking Task Force: The task force meets with the Selectmen on 6/26/07 and the CPDC has agreed to follow-up with the results of that meeting. • CPA: The Town Planner has not yet heard back from IM. • Canopy Illumination • 40R Design Standards: The Board decided to schedule tentatively a Planning Subcommittee meeting on Monday June 18, 2007 from 7:30 PM to 9:30 PM. This meeting would be devoted exclusively to the discussion of 40R design standards in the downtown district. During the discussion that followed, the Board relied on the draft language provided by BB in an email of 5/15/2007 on additional zoning bylaw definitions and text revisions to existing bylaws. Accessory Buildings JS said the intention not to set size requirements but to state if the accessory is within 10 feet of the principal building it should be considered an addition to the principal building. JS suggested removing the words "attached to or" since if it is attached to the principal building it is subject to the setbacks of the principal building. Accessory Garage RH asked about bedrooms over garages. JS said only attached garages can have bedrooms built above them. JS said the words "attached to or" should be removed from this definition too. BB suggested deleting the word "registered" from "registered passenger vehicles". The Board agreed. Lot Coverage The Board decided to add Carriage Houses to the parenthetical list of accessory structures that should be considered when calculating lot coverage. Open Space The Board decided to add the word "buildings" to the list of what a lot area must be devoid of to be considered open space. BB said he would reword the reference to basketball courts to include all kinds of similar courts (i.e. basketball, tennis, etc...). JS noted the definition may need to be adjusted for areas within the Aquifer District. For Future Discussion 1. Look at forgiveness for different zones. Page 7of8