1996-03-12 ~airman
James A, Manzi
Vice Chairman
Richard Dinkin
Planning Director
Tina P. Cassidy
William Delaney
Joanne Dunn
Ellen K. Flannery
Salvatore Modugno
D, Stephen Papa
Barry Sullivan
John Thomson
MINUTES
Beverly Planning Board
Special Meeting
March 12, 1996
Members present: Chairman James Manzi, Vice-Chairman Richard Dinkin, Bill Delaney, Sal
Modugno, Steve Papa, Barry Sullivan, Joanne Dunn, John Thomson and Ellen Flannel. Also
present: Planning Director Tina Cassidy, Commissioner of Public Works George Zambouras and
Assistant Planning Director Debbie Hurlbun.
Manzi calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Dinkin:
Motion to recess for public hearing, seconded by Sullivan. All members in favor,
motion carries.
Concurrent Public Hearings: Definitive Subdivision Plan and Watershed Protection
Overlay District Special Permit/Fonzo Realty Trust, The Flaticy Co. and the City of
Beverly
Cassidy reads legal notice for this Definitive Subdivision Plan and Special Permit Request for
construction of a roadway and associated work within a Watershed Protection Overlay District.
Attorney Thomas Alexander introduces himself to the Board and states that he is representing
Aero Manufacturing who is one of the applicants. The other applicants am the Flatley Company
and the City of Beverly. Alexander states that Aero Manufacturing is a high quality
manufacturer of metal products who have been in business for over 30 years manufacturing
military and air products. Alexander states that Aero employs over 60 employees in Danvers and
hopes to come to Beverly which will help create jobs and produce a new tax base.
Alexander states that this proposal was previously before the Board as a Preliminary Subdivision
Plan. In addition, this proposal has been filed with the Department of Environmental Protection
under the MEPA process. Alexander states that this proposal also requires that the applicant file
with the FAA for an Environmental Assessment which is similar to the MEPA process. The
proposal will also be filed with the Conservation Commission soon.
City Hall 191 Cabot Street Beverly, Massachusetts 01915 (508) 927-6000 Fax (508) b22-0285
Minutes of the Planning Board
March 12, 1996
page two
Alexander states that this project encompasses 89 acres of which 60-65 belongs to the Fonzo's
with the balance belonging to the City of Beverly and the FlatIcy Company. Alexander adds that
this proposed road will go from one industrial road at Cheny Hill Drive to another industrial
road, L.P. Henderson.
Alexander states that the City has applied for three grants, $25,000 from the Land Bank which
will be matched by Aero Manufacturing, $1 million from a PWED grant for the construction of
the roadway based on the economic impact of this project, and there is preliminary indications
that the City will receive $750,000 from a Community Development Action Grant (CDAG)
which has been earmarked for this site.
Alexander states that Phase I of this project will be the installation of the roadway and Phase II
will be to pay back some of the governmental grant funds initially utilized to install sewerage
systems to the airport and homes along Cabot and Trask Street.
Alexander adds that the Beverly Airport is under an Order from {he Department of Environmental
Protection to clean up a portion of the area because the septiie system has failed, and this project
would allow this to come into compliance due to the installation of a sewer system. Alexander
continues that this project allows for much needed tax revenue while the service cost is very
small based on the fact that this is not a residential development and there will be no children
and the businesses provide for their own collection of trash. Alexander states that a comparison
of the tax base in various communities shows that in Danvers the tax revenues generated from
residences are 61%, in Peabody 61%, in Salem 48%, and in Beverly 78%. Alexander then
introduces Bill Bergeron from Hayes Engineering.
Bergeron states that this installation of this roadway will provide for a looped roadway system
and that the roadway is 4,490 feet in length. Bergeron states that from the Preliminary stage of
the subdivision to the Definitive stage he has been able to reduce the roadway by 125' in length
due to some changes in the roads placement.
Bergeron states that this project will be soon flied with the Conservation Commission and will
be filed as a Limited Project filing. Berg~ron states that part of the project will be to connect
the industrial roads to each other but also to get additional traffic off Cabot Street. Bergeron
goes on to state that there was an initial traffic study filed but there will be a more extensive
traffic study done with the new filing. Bergeron adds that this project also requires that the
applicants look at air quality and its impact.
Bergeron states that the proponent will bring in a 12" water main and bring it up into the site,
and that an extension of the sewer will be brought to a pumping station near Trask Road which
will be an improvement for the residents in the neighborhood.
Minutes of the Planning Board
March 12, 1996
page three
Bergeron adds that a hydrologic analysis will be conducted for the Conservation Commission but
that the applicant is required to get the Planning Board approvals prior to filing with the
Conservation Commission meeting.
Bergeron states that the applicant is seeking two waivers, one for the grade of the roadway and
the other is for sidewalks on one side only. Bergeron adds that there will be a 50' layout but
one sidewalk will allow for less wetlands filling, and there will be vertical retaining walls with
no side sloping within the three crossings. Bergeron adds that there will be erosion sedimentation
barriers installed adjacent to all the wetlands, and that the hydrological analysis in post-
development will not be more than in pre-development according the Best Management Practices
(BMP).
Bergeron states that preliminary traffic estimates indicate that the traffic generated in the a.m.
will be 445 vehicles in and 37 exiting the site for a total of 482, and in the p.m. 210 vehicles in
with 241 out for a total of 451 vehicles.
Cassidy reads letters from Board of Health, Police, Department of Public Works and Fire
Departments and from George Batcheider. She states that the Board is waiting for a letter from
the Beverly/Salem Water Supply Board.
Chairman Manzi asks if there is anyone who would like to speak on this proposal.
Dinkin asks Cassidy if she could provide the Board with the letter from the Department of Public
Works and from Batcheider. Cassidy responds that she will.
Dinkin asks what is the sum total of public financial participation for this roadway. Alexander
responds that the balance is privately funded. Dinkin asks what the date of the final disposition
of funds. Alexander responds imminent. Dinkin asks what is the sewerage funding methodology
and if the total sewerage is being funded. Alexander responds that the roadway and the utilities
will cost approximately between 2.4 and 2.7 million dollars and that the City is participating by
using only grant monies. Dinkin reiterates his understanding of the funding stating that the City
will provide all of the 1.75 million dollar grant as a loan to the developer for the developers
share of the sewerage costs and attended improvements, and that the loan is to be repaid on the
sale of the buildable lot then used for funds for off-site improvements. Alexander states that was
correct.
Manzi asks if anyone would like to speak on this proposal.
Minutes of the Planning Board
March 12, 1996
page four
Naomi Cohen of 31 Colgate Road states that both presentation represents that approximately
1,200 jobs are anticipated and questions whether that would include all the 65 acres. Alexander
states that the estimate is based on zoning for the entire 65 acres. Cohen discussed the gridlock
that would occur on Routes 128 and 97, and that she believes that there are always more cars
than what is anticipated. Cohen goes on to state that she believes eventually there will have to
be an interchange here, and it will impact Danvers and Wenham.
Cohen also states that this project cannot go forward if the sewerage is not in place, and that the
City is responsible for sewer, and asks how much will the City be paying for debt sendee.
Cohen directs a comment to Council President Brace Nardella asking for a public hearing for
what the debt service will be for this project. Cohen also asks if the new developer will be
getting new sewer rates or will they have to pay what the residents have to pay.
Carolyn Costsin of 21 Wellesley Road asks if there will be further testing of the groundwater.
Alexander responds that there will not be. Costsin asks what t?pographic maps are being used.
Bergeron states that 1991 air photogrammetry.
Glen Terry of 13 Macarthur Road asks where the sewer connection will be made. Bergeron
states in Cherry Hill Drive. Terry asks if the sewer can handle this new development. Bergeron
states that pan of the study to be conducted wilt review this.
Bill Bums a former Salem City Councillor and Salem resident states that Beverly is the custodian
of the Salem/Beverly Water supply and that he urges the Board to keep that in mind. He also
states that to eliminate the risks to any of the two Cities that the Board should stop this therefore
not impacting the water supply.
Dave Booeggman of 56 West Street states that the Bass River emanates from this area, and when
them is a lot of rain there is overflow to the pipes which effect the downstream residents.
Booeggman states that the Board should make sure the areas downstream are not affected. Manzi
responds that the applicant will have to show the drainage system plan.
Bob Perron of 8 Bass River Road states that in October there was a flood that flooded his back
yard and the City had three men working to keep the Bass River open. Perton states that he saw
the legal notice in the newspaper in December of 1995 and he wrote a letter to the Secretary of
Environmental Affairs indicating his concerns (see file). Perron states that we will see more
asphalt but wonders where will all the water is going to go. He states that the water will try to
go under 128 but cannot, and downstream will then have real flooding.
Meeting of the Planning Board
March 12, 1996
page five
Tom Vasile Jr. of 38 Trask Street states that he is concerned with the water run-off, and
specifically the water that comes off the hill creates more flooding in area. Bergeron states that
the project will use BMP to encourage water to be held and actually cleaned. Vasile states that
there is a brook in the vicinity and wonders if there are any plans which impact the brook.
Bergeron states that there will be a detail crossing here and there are plans to create a control
structure to control the water going out. Visale asks on what side of the street will the sidewalks
be located. Bergeron states that the sidewalks will be toward Trask Street.
Wayne Smith of 678 Cabot Street states that he is concerned with m-off but if the developer
does the project properly it would be a good project, and that he is in favor of the project.
Renee Mary of 274 Hale Street asks that if blasting is necessary, how much blasting would
occur, and what effects would this have on the surrounding area. Mary questions that during and
after the blasting will the IVBVSS test well and L.P. Henderson Road and Route 128 be tested on
a weekly basis to see if there is any effect and then the records made public. Mary asks if there
will be additional costs from the clean up of fly ash. Mary asks how much fill would be brought
in and how would this change the contours of the topography.~
Councillor At Large Peter Gilmore of 10 Parsons Road asks what is being subdivided. Cassidy
explains that the establishment of new lots and new roadways trigger this subdivision as well as
a Special Permit because it is within the Watershed Overlay Protection District. Gilmore asks
how may lots are being created. Cassidy responds five. Gilmore asks if there will be further
subdivision. Bergeron states that generally one tailors the land to meet the needs of the
development but basically this subdivision is to create a roadway. Gilmore asks what would be
the result of connecting a 12" pipe to an 8" pipe for the water main. Bergeron states that it will
increase the pressure. Gilmore states that he has heard the number of $1 million dollars to $2
million dollars in tax generated revenues and wondered what the actual amount would be.
Alexander states that it depends on the ultimate buildout. Gilmore asks how much area is needed
for parking for 60,000 s.f. of developed area. Alexander states that the lot coverage cannot be
greater than 60% including parking and buildings. Gilmore asks how much of the 89 acres is
buildable. Alexander states that approximately 75% is buildable area and approximately 25%
is wetland. Gilmore states that perhaps the area left can be denoted as a no-build, no-develop
zone, no matter what the zoning allows to give a buffer zone forever.
Nathan Zoll of 4 Orchard Street states that the citizens are concerned with the wetlands, wildlife
and the fly ash.
Ward Five City Councillor Bill Coughlin states that he would like to know who is going to
respond to the following issues; the Bass River flow, the hydrological disturbance, the houses on
Trask Street where the water comes in the basement and if there is a disturbance who will be
responsible, the cost analysis of breakdown of all three entities, when can the residents see the
sewerage installed, and the contaminated sites.
Meeting of the Planning Board
March 12, 1996
page six
Ward One City Councillor Maureen Troubetaris states that the City needs to address the drainage
problems and that we cannot afford more drainage problems. Troubetaris adds that the developer
should spend the money to take care of the problems and if they can't then the project shouldn't
be done at all.
Vincent Cotreau of 71 Enon Street asks what review these plan will have in terms of noise
pollution and air pollution. Cassidy responds that this size development would trigger Site Plan
Review, Cotreau states that he believes that this road is substandard.
Steve Bates of 26 Parramatta Road states that this development is critical to the City and without
this we will all be paying higher taxes.
Dinkin:
Motion to recess the public hearing to 7:30 p.m. on April 30th, seconded by
Thomson. All members in favor, motion catTies.
1. Discussion: Workshort for P!anninl Board
Cassidy states that due to the late hour the Board may want to postpone the Board's workshop
that was contemplated for this evening. Dinkin states that he would like to see this postponed
to another date when the Board doesn't have three meetings in that month.
Dinkin:
Motion to hold the next workshop on May 7, 1996 at 7:30 p.m., seconded by
Flannery. All members in favor, motion carries.
2. Adiournment
Dinkin: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Sullivan. All members in favor, motion carries.
Meeting is adjourned at 9:40 p.m. --