1996-10-15Chairman William Delaney
James A. Manzi ~ , ~~ Joanne Dunn
Ellen K. Flannery
Vice Chairman Salvatnre Modugno
Richard Dinkin D. Stephen Papa
Planning Director Barry Sullivan
Tina P. Cassidy John Thomson
Minutes
Beverly Planning Board
October 15, 1996 Meeting
Members present: Chairman James Manzi, Vice-Chairman Richard
Dinkin, Salvatore Modugno, Joanne Dunn, Bill Delaney, John Thomson,
Barry Sullivan, Ellen Flannery; also present: Commissioner of
Public Works George Zambouras, Planning Director Tina Cassidy and
Susan Akerman, Secretary to the Board
Chairman Manzi calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Dinkin: motion to recess for public hearings, seconded by
Sullivan. All in favor, Motion carries.
m Public Hearing: Special Permit Request #93-96 / 22 Paine
Avenue ("Old Fort" estate) / Paul Quinn, First City
Development Corp.
Cassidy reads legal notice. Manzi asks if Counsel would like to
make presentation.
Mark Glovsky, attorney representing Paul Quinn, introduces himself
to the Board and explains that his client is also present tonight.
Glovsky briefly describes the legal basis for the application and
the history of the property and explains that the property is
located in an R90 Zoning District. Glovsky explains that the
property is proposed to be divided into two lots shown as Lots 4A
& 7A, and that Lot 4A has 105,181 sq. ft. and contains the existing
structure which is a single family dwelling; Lot 7A has 90,019 sq.
ft. of land.
(Flannery joins the meeting at 7:50 p.m.)
Paul Quinn addresses the Board and explains that he was approached
by the Chairman of the Historic District Commission to see if they
could turn the tide and pessible save the building. Quinn
describes the elements of the proposal for the new building.
Ci~ Hall 191 CabotStreet Bever~ Massachusetts01915 (50~ 921-6000 Fax(508) 922-0285
Cassidy reads the following letters to the Members:
- Letter dated 9/3/96 from the Beverly Police Department.
(On File)
- Letter from the Beverly Fire Department. (On File)
- Letter dated 9/16/96 from the Beverly Board of Health.
(On File)
Manzi opens meeting up to members of the public.
John Serafini, 26 Paine Avenue introduces himself to the Board and
explains that he is here tonight representing the abutters and that
his associate is also present. Serafini passes out information
regarding research of the property and indicates why they think the
Board should deny the present application before them. Serafini
reviews the history of the property and states that the reason for
the initial request to rezone to an R90, was because the street
know as Paine Avenue was originally designed for only a few homes,
and explains the roadway is very narrow, the conditions of the
roadway are not constructed for normal use. Serafini adds that
members should bear in mind how fragile the 225 foot frontage is.
Serafini states that the issue tonig'ht is that the developer can't
make a commitment whether he is going to live there and not knowing
what is going to happen to the two lots is a great concern.
Serafini explains that there is no turn-around on top of the Old
Fort, that it is inappropriate to use this section of ordinance to
create a pork chop lot. Serafini states to restore the Old Fort is
fine but to add an extra lot will be a burden or imposition to the
other people who would not like to see the zoning be broken.
Serafini states that there is sufficient information for denial of
this application.
Attorney Ellen Winkler, Serafini's Assistant, addresses the Board
and shows photos of the condition of the driveway and states that
it is important for the Board to understand that the entire matter
of dividing this land into more than one lot has been before the
Board several times. Winkler points out that there are 10
preconditions that still stand today before a special permit can be
granted; that no cars can pass, no turnaround; that the driveway is
to serve as a street; and that there will be a negative impact on
property value.
Thomson asks how many houses currently use Old Fort Avenue for
their primary access. Winkler explains that two houses have
primary access and there is one more house which has frontage on
Paine Avenue.
Jo~l Krol, of Beverly states that the dwelling is an extremely
historic structure and adds that Mr. Quinn has worked diligently
with the Planning Board and the Historic Commission and con~ents
that Mr. Quinn has a reasonable plan for keeping the structures
history.
Dan Urban, a resident of Paine Avenue, states he feels that the
issues of this buildings historic value is in some way being used
to extort change in the zoning ordinance and that the neighbors
feel it is very important to protect this property. Urban explains
that the streets are narrow, there are no sidewalks, police don't
police area because private way, believes more traffic will be more
dangerous, and believes since there is already problems with the
septic system that there will be added problems. Urban states the
residents are looking at replacing the water main. Urban states he
would like to see the Board deny this special permit for a pork
chop lot and protect the integrity of the area.
Anna Haley, 75 Paine Avenue, states she feels the integrity of the
area depends on the R90 Zoning and feels that the granting of the
special permit would change the nature of the area.
Eemon Tennessee, 11 Paine Avenue, feels that the restoration of the
house is fine but does not want to see the R90 Zoning be broken.
Ron Jackson, 35 Paine Avenue, states if they want to save the Fort
fine, but he does not want it subdivided because there is no
assurance that the Fort will be saved and restored. Jackson states
it is not in the best interest of the residents.
Ian Gardiner a resident of Paine Avenue states that the police do
come back but don't police speed limits and states that all the
residents fought very hard for the R90 Zoning and would not like to
see it be broken.
Marshall Moriety, Quinn's neighbor, owns house that would be
considered the Old Fort Barn and states he has access on that lane
and explains that the lane is just that a lane not a street, it is
narrow and has a steep shoulder and would not like to see traffic
increased. Moriety would like to see the historic preservation
without dividing up the land.
Elizabeth Garcia, 23 Paine Avenue is a direct abutter and states
she is opposed to cutting up the land any further and wants to
continue to protect the R90 Zoning.
Dan Lohmes, President of the Historic Commission, reads a letter
from the Historic Society which states if they restore the building
then they would compromise and agree to have the lot divided.
Lohmes states that the main concern is the preservation of the
house.
Bill Finch, Chairman of the Beverly Historic Commission, states he
reviewed the proposal and explains that the Historic Commission
voted to support Quinn's request. Finch also states that the
3
building was voted by the Massachusetts Historic Agency to be
listed on the ten most endangered building list and states that the
Historic Commission believes that the granting of this special
permit will bring about restoration of this building.
City Counselor John Murray, 42 Paine Avenue, states that from a
historic preservation stand point this building is probably the
last and best opportunity the Planning Board will have to save what
is unquestionable one of the most historical significant owned
homes in Beverly. Murray recommends a site visit and suggests that
the Board pay particular attention to 42 Paine Avenue and explains
that it was subdivided into three house lots, that no approval was
necessary and it is not a pork chop lot. Murray explains that the
driveway runs through three houses.
· Discussion/Decision: Special Permit Request #93-96 / 22 Paine
Avenue ("Old Fort" estate)
Delaney suggests since there are issues that will prevent the Board
from taking action tonight that the Board should; (1) look at the
site; (2) have the City Solicitor take a look at the legal
memorandum that has been provided by Serafini; and (3) give
Glovsky a chance to respond to that memorandum end submit something
on his own behalf.
Dinkin states prior to leaving this hearing we need to ascertain
that those members of the public who came here to testify who may
not be able to appear at a subsequent hearing are given adequate
opportunity to address their issues.
A resident of Paine Avenue who opposed the demolition of the
building back in January, states he has studied historic issues for
40 years, and states that the historic relevancy is still very much
there.
Delaney: Motion to continue public hearing pending a site visit,
and subject to a submittal from Glovsky with respect to
the legal status of the way and that the City Solicitor
review and analyze the two memorandums, seconded by
Sullivan. All in favor, Motion carries.
Sullivan: Motion to recess for two minutes, seconded by Delaney.
All in favor, Motion carries.
· Public Hearing: Woodland Road definitive subdivision plan
S & J Development Corp. / Joseph Schelzi.
Cassidy reads legal notice. Chairman Manzi asks if Counsel is
present to make presentation.
Thomas Alexander, attorney representing the developers, addressed
the Board and reviews the history and states they are seeking to
4
get approval for a 10 lot subdivision. Alexander explains that it
is not going to be a dead end, that they are suggesting to loop the
existing roadway. Alexander notes that there were some questions
with the preliminary plan in regards to the grade and explains that
they have had meetings with the Fire Chief and Commissioner of
Public Works and that they agreed that the existing grade will be
maintained as it is. Alexander states some advantages of looping
the roadway: (1) the roadway would allow for better water pressure;
(2) it allows for better sewer circulation; and (3) provides for
better public safety. Alexander introduces Peter Ogren, President
of Hayes Engineering who will discuss the technical aspects of the
plan.
Peter Ogren introduces himself to the Board and explains that the
proposal calls for the construction of approximately 1,000 feet of
roadway from Colon Street going in a north-northeasterly direction
up to the existing paved way, and the construction of about 230
feet of roadway for Anna Lane, which will allow for the necessary
frontage. Ogren explains that from a utility standpoint they are
proposing to connect the water from Colon Street through to the
water that exists on Woodland Road with an 8" main and to connect
the sewer into the existing sewer which will come down Anna Lane to
an existing sewer on Colon Street. Ogren states that a drainage
report has been submitted to the City of Beverly's Engineering
Department and explains that there are some flow characteristic
problems that deal with silting. Ogren adds that the land owner
has agreed to clean out the siltation build-up. Ogren explains
that the existing paved area of Woodland Road grade will remain as
is. Ogren states that Hayes Engineering submitted a definitive
plan and reviews the submitted letter requesting the waiver. (On
File).
Cassidy reads the following letters to the Members:
- Letter dated 10/10/96 from the Captain of Fire Prevention.
(On File)
- Letter dated 10/7/97 from the Police Department. (On File)
- Letter dated 10/10/96 from the Beverly Board of Health.
(On File)
- Letter dated 10/15/96 from the Department of Public Works.
(On File)
Chairman Manzi opens meeting up to the public.
Jackie Bariselli, 12 Woodland Road, asks how they plan on
connecting the sewer line from the bottom of Woodland Road to the
top of Woodland Road and questions the connection of the water
line. Ogren states the sewer doesn't connect at all, and explains
that it will connect to an existing sewer. Ogren also explains
5
that there is an existing water line to their knowledge on the
layout of the road that will be connected.
Bob Bariselli, 12 Woodland Road asks the developers where thet are
going to hook up the water and if it will be coming from the
existing Woodland Road area. Ogren responds affirmatively and
explains that they did have an opportunity to look at some plans
that indicated that there was a water line at the existing Woodland
Road.
Bob Bariselli asks if the water line is on an existing house lot
right know. Ogren responds not to his knowledge.
Bob Bariselli states that there is an existing water line behind
his house and states he thought it ended there. Ogren states he
will look into it further.
Bob Bariselli asks if they intend to bring the Woodland Road that
is off Colon Street to the New Woodland Road and asks if the
developers knew that the current Woodland Road is only 20 feet wide
and asks how they plan to flow traffic. Ogren states that Woodland
Road is laid out all the way through and they only proposes to
construct it to the suggested width of 24 feet.
Cheryl Mcneill, who is a direct abutter, mentions that her title
overlaps onto other lots that are being proposed. Ogren states
that that is true and that there are two little areas of overlap of
title and mentions that their applicant has a deed that shows the
true line. Mcneill states she too has a deed that states this is
the true measure and states she would like to see this boundary
line taken care of once and for all. Ogren suggests they get
together and review the titles.
Mcneill asks about the drainage easement on Lot #1 and asks if they
would be blasting. Ogren responds yes and explains that it will be
controlled by the Fire Department.
Paula McCarthy, 14 Woodland Road reopened the fact that the water
line ends on her property and states that there is not an easement
to allow this work to be done and explains that there is solid
ledge and states that she is concerned with the blasting. She is
opposed to the subdivision for these reasons.
Councilor Virginia McGlynn states that the most complaints that she
receives from this area are regarding water and drainage and states
that this work will have to be done carefully.
Thomson states that the plan shows a proposed 25 foot slope
easement and asks what is the purpose. Ogren states the purpose is
once they get by Mrs. Mcneill's house they need to slope onto the
adjourning property. Ogren states there was not an easement laid
out back when the roadway was laid out.
6
Thomson asks if they have the slope easement. Alexander responds
yes.
Thomson asks why aren't sidewalks going to be installed. Ogren
states because there will be no houses on that side.
Thomson asks if there is an intended pedestrian access to these
properties. Ogren states no.
Thomson states he has a concern with the intersection of this road
and asks if there is any possibility that there could be a turning
radius there. Ogren states he believes it might be possible to
negotiate a small turning radius with the abutter.
Thomson states that they should also talk to the next abutter too.
A resident of 8 Woodland Road is concerned with the width of the
road from the cul-de-sac and beyond heading down toward Montserrat
Road, and explains that there are no sidewalks, and traffic is
limited and believes that if the road is opened, there would be a
problem with cars and pedestrians.
Michael Mi!som, 141 Rear Colon Street states that the hill is one
solid rock with clay pockets in the middle and mentions the last
time houses where built the City promised the residents that
underground drainage would be installed and it never happened.
Milsom states he would like to see the City in some way guarantee
them that if they incur any problems the City will be responsible.
Glen Campbell, 10 Woodland Road states he opposes the project
because he has concerns with the young children and believes it
will be a disaster if they opened the roadway; a fatality waiting
to happen.
Rose McDaid, 126 Rear Colon Street, states she would like to
request that the drainage issue be taken very seriously.
Manzi asks if any other members of the public wish to be heard by
the Board. Hearing no response Manzi closes the public hearing.
· Concurrent Public Hearings: Special Permit Request #94-96 and
Site Plan Review #27-96: 21-unit addition to the Mayflower
Motel at 325 Cabot Street / Robert and Cheryl Brilliant
Cassidy reads legal notice. Chairman Manzi asks if counsel would
like to make presentation.
Thomas Alexander, attorney representing Robert & Cheryl Brilliant,
addresses the Board and reviews the history of the motel and the
property, he reviews the troubled history and states the
Brilliants' have done a good job cleaning up the area, and that
there has been little or no police calls to that area since the
7
Brilliants took over. Alexander explains that the motel presently
has 22 units and that they are seeking a special permit to add 21
rooms to the existing facility and that the structure will go up an
additional two stories. Alexander explains that the property is
located in a CC Zone, and it is partially bisected by the RMD Zone
and R6 Zone, however, under Beverly's Zoning Ordinances there is a
provision that if a lot is bisected by the lot line and the lot
owner wanted to extend that lot line for 50 feet in either
direction then the whole lot could be considered a CC lot.
Alexander states they are good neighbors and good for the value of
the area, that the property value is not adversely affected by the
rooming house, that improvements would improve the value of the
area. Alexander adds that the traffic and parking are appropriate
for this area and dumpsters will be screened. Alexander states
that there is adequate municipal services, and that there is
adequate maintenance. Alexander introduces David Jakeworth.
David Jakeworth introduces himself to the Board and states that
they are proposing a two story building of about 16 feet in height,
10 units on the bottom floor, 11 units on the top floor. Jakeworth
states landscaping will be maintained in some areas and that some
areas will be additional, that all present units will be upgraded,
and that safety standards have been discussed with the Fire
Department.
Cassidy reads letters to the Members:
- Letter dated 10/10/96 from the Fire Department. (On File)
- Letter from the Beverly Board of Health. (On File)
- Letter dated 10/1/96 from the Police Department. (On File)
- Letter dated 10/15/96 from the Parking & Traffic Commission
(On File).
- Memo Cassidy wrote to Building Inspector dated 10/15/96.
(On File)
- Letter in response to Cassidy's memo dated 10/15/96.
(On File)
- Letter from Bruce Nardela, 194 Dodge Street. (On File)
- Letter dated 10/15/96 from Scott Houseman. (On File)
- Letter dated 10/9/96 from Mr. & Mrs. Barrett. (On File)
- Letter dated 10/9/96 from Mr. & Mrs. Stover, 20 Pierce
Avenue. (On File)
- Letter dated 10/10/96 from Mr. & Mrs. Parisella. (On File)
8
- Letter from George Zambouras. (On File)
Chairman Manzi opens meeting to public.
Robert Schlein, 70 Dane Street states he has never incurred a
problem with the Mayflower Motel or its residents, that the
property is well maintained, it is not a flop house and people of
good quality live there.
Bill Copier states he is in opposition and votes against granting
of the special permit.
David Jakeworth states he is for the granting of the special permit
but wants to rebut issues brought forward from the Building
Inspector and states they met with the Building Inspector
extensively on all issues to do with the building and at that time
there were no issues or all issues where adjusted with the Building
Inspector. Jakeworth explains the parking in front of the lot and
explains that those lots exist at the present time and no space
will be closer than 5 feet from the line. Jakeworth responds to
comments brought up in Zambouras' letter regarding the width of the
aisle way and explains that the zoning ordinance states that one
way traffic provides for an 18 foot aisle way.
Alexander asks if he could set the record straight about a couple
of issues: (1) this is not a variance this is a use by special
permit; (2) lighting on lot will remain the same; and (3) height of
the building proposing is the same height of the building to the
left of the Mayflower Motel.
A resident of Beverly states he had no problem with tenants of the
Mayflower and no adverse affect on the value of the sale of his
house.
Scott Houseman, 27 Appleton Avenue addresses the Board and states
he is in opposition. Houseman passes out handouts disclosing his
involvement and points out several concerns: (1) the visual impact
being appropriate for its use; (2) the cliental of a boarding house
and what kind of neighbors they make; (3) property value; (4) image
of boarding house; (5) lighting; (6) privacy issues; (7) traffic
issues, that doubling the amount of traffic will have a detrimental
impact on area; (8) plan does not specify if lines on there are
suitable for lot line determination; and (9) no safety walk coming
from building when people are entering or exiting. Houseman
explains he has a letter that he would like to read into the record
and presents a petition of 121 residents that are in opposition.
Houseman passes out zoning ordinance and states it is a non
conforming use that the proposed addition would dramatically,
increase the amount of the non conforming use by means of its bulk.
9
Jill Stover, 20 Pierce Avenue addresses the Board and states that
the Mayflower Motel sits 12" from her house and touches their fence
with the roof, never had a problem, that she likes Pierce Avenue,
that there are lots of kids in the neighborhood and that it is a
close neighborhood, it is private, safe and secure~ but any
addition to this lot would drastically affect their lives, and
character of house and quite neighborhood. Stover states that she
is also concerned with the property value and explains that Elaine
Sawyer, of Hunneman and Hunneman, looked at their property and did
an assessment of what she thought would happen if they sold the
property. Jill reads one small paragraph that Elaine Sawyer wrote
advising the Stovers regarding their property value. "In the event
that the Mayflower Motel is approved for the two story addition, I
feel that the negative impact on your property value will be
somewhere between 20-30%. Your home being a large four bedroom
colonial it would be most appealing to families with children, your
property abutting a three story rooming house so close to your rear
lot line would certainly deter most families from moving into your
neighborhood." Stover states she has great concerns and believes
it is wrong for Beverly, wrong for the location, wrong for Pierce
Avenue, and wrong for her family.
Steven Barrett, 25 Pierce Avenue addresses the Board and states
that he is concerned about the safety and well being of the
neighborhood. Barrett reviews police calls/reports and nature of
these police calls from the past four years and states he is
concerned with the number of cars that these calls needed. Barrett
states he does not want to subject the children to this.
Paul Guanci of Prospect Hill and owner of Supersub, addresses the
Board and states it is hard to oppose the rooming house because the
Brilliants are good to them, never had a problem, but the increase
of the size of population of the motel could increase the police
activity which could cause people to shy away from coming down
town; not enough people come downtown, they think it is unsafe.
Guanci states the motel is great as is, but opposes the increase of
size.
Houseman asks if they could get a count of people here tonight
because some are leaving. The count concluded that 53 people
oppose the addition and that 4 approve of the addition.
Karl Hering, 18 Pierce Avenue states he is in opposition and that
he is concerned with the exterior changes in structure and would
like to see this be denied.
John Parisella, 16 Pierce Avenue states he is in opposition and
doesn't see any good for the City of Beverly but see lots of
minus'
Robert Caraveny, 24 Auburn Circle states he is not opposing the
addition but is concerned because of the past number of problems
10
with the motel and states there have been no problem since the
Brilliant's took over.
Alexander states since the issue of property value has come up he
would like to introduce Neiland Douglas who did a study on property
values and the impact of similar use in the City.
Alexander states he wants to set the record straight. First, keep
in mind that the abutting properties in the rear have a difference
in elevation of approximately 8-10 feet, and second, the special
permit granted last May was to allow the motel to become a rooming
house.
Neiland Douglas, appraiser, addresses the Board and states that he
was engaged by Mr. Brilliant to review project impact of abutting
property values. Douglas reviews the existing use, possible uses,
history of sales, and analysis of like projects in City. Douglas
explains the report and states there are no factual evidence that
are found in property value in the district which would cause
serious adverse impact, that projects can adversely affect assessed
values.
Sally Parisella, 16 Pierce Avenue states that the Harborlight
average age is 90 and asks the Board to please review this because
she feels it is very important.
Ron McNeil, 329 Cabot Street states that a 40' structure will block
all sunlight for his house for entire day. McNeil states he has no
problem with the operation, but that is not the issue.
Linda Hering 18 Pierce asks what happens when leaves fall - there
will be no light in corridors to their rooms and states there is no
room for shrubbery.
Joyce Golin, Councilor of Ward 3, discusses constituent issues;
that there are not a lot of direct abutters but issues such as,
fighting, congested lot, lights, trash and liquor bottles,
dumpsters, disturbances because of lack of office supervision, not
attractive project for downtown Beverly and it is not in keeping
with the vision have been raised.
John Watts, 31 Pierce Avenue opposes a bigger addition and states
that he would like to have a guarantee from the City that they are
not going to lose any money regarding property value.
A resident at 21 Myrtle Street questions why the City of Beverly is
looking to build and expand boarding houses.
A resident on Summer Street states that an increase of 43 people in
a downtown neighborhood changes life styles.
11
Virginia McGlynn, Ward 4 Councilor states she is disturbed by the
aesthetics of the project. McGlynn adds that it is not right to
have this building at the gateway to the City.
Arthur Powell, 17 Walnut Avenue mentions art renaissance project
not in keeping with the image of Beverly.
Sid Gold, 15 Pierce Avenue states he is opposed to the project
because of traffic and the aesthetic would be a detriment to the
City.
Houseman states the issue isn't size, that a one story proposal
would be just as detrimental as a two story proposal.
Manzi asks if any other members of the public wish to be heard by
the Board. Hearing no response, Manzi closes the public hearing.
Dinkin: motion to recess for two minutes, seconded by Sullivan.
All in favor, motion carries.
m Special Permit Request #95-96: Construction of airplane hangar
at airport in Watershed Protection Overlay District / G.T.E.
Corporation
Cassidy reads legal notice. Chairman Manzi asks if someone is here
tonight from G.T.E. to make a presentation.
Roger Galloghy from G.T.E. addresses the Board and explains that
they are seeking a special permit within the Watershed Protection
Overlay District to add a 7,600 square foot hangar. Galloghy
reviews history of the hangar.
Rich Holworth from Rackemann, Sawyer & Brewster addresses the Board
and explains the site plan and specifics of the hangar, roof run-
off to wetlands, and storm water management practices with
deterioration areas. Holworth states the sewer connection will be
deferred until a later date.
Leo White, 299 Essex Street, Vice Chairman of the BAC addresses the
Board and states that he has approved of this application.
Cassidy reads letters to the Members:
- Letter from the Beverly Fire Department. (On File)
- Letter dated 10/15/96 from the Department of Public Works.
(On File)
- Draft Letter from the Salem/Beverly Water Supply Board.
(On File)
12
Joe Bitka, 35 Old Burley Street in Danvers states he is an abutter
to the airport and he would like the special permit denied until
G.T.E. addresses the water issue. Bitka states that water has been
running off the airport and winding up in their back yard for the
last 5-7 years and that the ground water is a mess. Bitka asks
what type of aircraft does G.T.E. plan on running in and how much
more noise will there be.
Galloghystates they are not increasing the number of aircraft that
G.T.E. is going to a larger aircraft.
Bitka states his main concern is how can G.T.E. come before the
Planning Board without a detailed plan regarding the drainage
system.
Margaret Vernon, 56 Trask Street states that the quality of life is
decreasing and states it is critical that the facts be known and
asks what type of plane will be stored in the hangar.
Linda Berg, 54 Trask Street is an abutter of the airport and states
she is against the proposal and is concerned that the larger size
airplanes will increase the noise level and fumes.
Maryarme Nicols, Old Burley Street, states that the water problem
is a big issue and that the noise level has increased tremendously.
Nicols states that hush kits need to be considered.
Manzi asks if any other members of the public wish to be heard by
the Board. Hearing no response, Manzi closes the public hearing.
1. Discussion/Decision: Special Permit Request #93-96 / 22 Paine
Avenue ("Old Fort" estate) Paul Quinn, First City Development
Corp.
Dinkin: motion to set a site visit for Paine Avenue on Saturday,
November 2, 1996 at 10:00 a.m., seconded by Sullivan.
All in favor, motion carries.
2. Discussion/Decision: Woodland Road definitive subdivision
plan S & J Development Corp. / Joseph Schelzi
Delaney: motion to table to the November 19, 1996 meeting,
seconded by Dinkin. All in favor, motion carries.
Dinkin suggests that the Board get clarification regarding the
Title of Lot #1. All members agreed.
13
3. Special Permit Request #94-96and Site PlanReview #27-96: 21-
unit addition to the Mayflower Motel at 325 Cabot Street /
Robert and Cheryl Brilliant
Dinkin states he is interested in hearing if applicant has any
comments at this time.
Mr. Brilliant addresses the Board and states that only the negative
problems where heard and nothing positive. Brilliant invites the
Board to do a site visit and get their own opinion in regards to
noise level, appearance, etc. Brilliant states there are two sides
to the police calls
Dinkin: motion to continue discussion to the October 28, 1996
special meeting, seconded by Delaney. All in favor,
motion carries.
Sullivan states that anything the applicant can do to clear up
questions will be helpful.
Thomson asks if the regulations require a registered engineer.
Alexander responds no.
Delaney states that for the record it is very hard for us tonight
to digest in this time frame and articulate an intelligent
decision.
4. Discussion/Decision: Special Permit Request #95-96:
Construction of hangar at Beverly Airport in Watershed
Protection Overlay District / G.T.E. Corporation
Dinkin states he would like to see real drainage calculations or a
plan on drainage addressed.
Dinkin: motion to table to the October 28, 1996 special meeting,
seconded by Sullivan. All in favor, motion carries.
· Public Hearing: 9 Thaxton Road definitive plan and waiver from
frontage requirements of zoning ordinance / Mitchell Carrier
Cassidy updates the Board.
Zambouras updates the Board and states the existing problems in the
neighborhood are not related to Carrier. DPW may be able to help,
but will need to review. Zambouras states that the run-off from 9
Thaxton should be caught by a roadway system on Cumnock Street and
states the issue won't help or aggravate the situation.
Thomson: motion to grant waivers, seconded by Flannery. All in
favor, motion carries 6-0.
14
Thomson: motion to approve plan under Subdivision Control Law on
the condition that DPW Director review and possibly
requ~[e catch basins in the driveway on Thaxton Road if
necessary and grant waivers, seconded by Sullivan. All
in favor, motion carries 6-0.
Manzi opens meeting up to members of the public.
A resident on Thaxton Street states he is concerned that his
property is going to be washed away, and asks how much blasting
will be going on and what type of driveway will be installed.
Carrier explains driveway to Thaxton will be a 15 foot wide paved
driveway and that not much blasting will be done.
Manzi asks if any other members of the public wish to be heard by
the Board. Hearing no response, Manzi closes the public hearing
and returns to the Board to regular session.
Dinkin: motion to table remainder of agenda to the October 28,
1996 special meeting, seconded by Sullivan. All in
favor, motion carries.
Meeting is adjourned at 12:30 p.m.
15