1997-02-25 Minutes
Beverly Planning Board
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Members present: Chairman James Manzi, Richard Dinkin, Joanne
Dunn, Bill Delaney, John Thomson, Barry Sullivan, Ellen Flannery,
Stephen Papa and Salvatore Modugno; also present: Planning Director
Tina Cassidy, Assistant Planning Director Debbie Hurlburt 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
Thomson. All in favor, motion carries.
· Public Hearing: Lakeshore Crossing Definitive Subdivision
Plan / A1 Symes, Developer
Chairman Manzi recused himself from discussion of this matter,
Vice-Chairman Dinkin chairs the meeting.
Cassidy reads legal notice. Dinkin asks if Counsel would like to
make presentation.
Attorney Thomas Alexander addresses the Board and states that there
have been questions raised regarding whether there are owners of
property outside the limits of this subdivision who have deeded
rights to the old road layouts. Attorney Alexander explains that
there is documentation and that the issue is being held in abeyance
until the Planning Board and the City Solicitor can review them.
Attorney Alexander explains that this proposal is a 47 lot
subdivision off Bonad Road and Lakeshore Avenue, and that the lots
will be located in the R10 and R22 Zone. Attorney Alexander
explains that there were a number of issues raised during the
Preliminary Plan process, that there have been many meetings with
the City Solicitor and City Planner responding to the comments of
the Preliminary Plan, and that there are waivers that need to be
granted and unless these waivers are granted they may not be able
to proceed.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Two
Attorney Alexander asks if he could request that the Board give
some sense, by way of vote, if the key waivers requested would be
granted. The waivers requested are (1) a waiver from the maximum
roadway grade requirement of 6%, the proposal seeks a grade of
9.9%; (2) a waiver from the minimum reverse curve tangent
requirement of 150' in length to a reverse curve tangent of zero;
(3) a waiver from the use of sloped faced granite curbing vs.
straight faced granite curbing; (4) a waiver from the minimum
centerline radius requirement of 300' to 225' and (5) a waiver from
all trees 6" in caliper or greater be shown on the plan.
Cassidy reads the following letters:
- Letter dated 2/24/97 from the Beverly Fire Department.
(On File).
- Letter dated 1/17/97 from the Beverly Police Department.
(On File).
- Letter dated 1/16/97 from the Beverly Board of Health.
(On File).
- Letter dated 2/25/97 from the City Solicitor. (On File).
- Letter dated 2/21/97 from the DPW. (On File).
Joanne Dunn joins the meeting at this time.
Delaney states that the Board has heard Attorney Alexander's
issues, but that there are a number of major areas of concern with
this project. Delaney states that he would like to ask a few
questions on those particular waiver issues, let the public be
heard on the waivers, and then vote on the four or five major
waiver requests as Counsel for the applicants has requested.
Thomson questions whether the Board should vote on the waivers
prior to the close of the public hearing. Delaney responded no,
that he believes the Board can vote on the waivers earlier.
Thomson states that he is not comfortable having an official vote
without public comments. Delaney states that it is his sense that
we are having a public hearing and that we cannot preclude anyone
from speaking.
Dinkin states that this Board, in the past, has voted on waiver
issues in absence of any public hearing based on the amount of
information received and that it is his view that the Board may
make any vote, in substance, in the course of a public hearing on
the waivers.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Three
Dinkin states that the Board is voting only on specific waiver
issues.
Attorney Alexander stated that it was his intention to speed up the
process as much as possible by voting whether or not to grant the
waivers, seeking to limit the length of the process.
Thomson states that the action the Board should take is a straw
vote.
Delaney asks from a procedural point of view, if the Board took a
straw vote, and should the indication be negative, could the Board
move forward to the public hearing and resolve this issue.
Attorney Alexander stated that if the Board resolves the waiver
issues tonight then the Board could proceed as long as necessary,
but if the waivers were denied then the applicant would like to
continue the public hearing to the next meeting.
Dinkin recesses the Board for 10 minutes to resolve the procedural
issues of the public hearing.
Dinkin asks for a show of hands of who is prepared to vote on the
specific matters of waivers after testimony is taken from the
public. The vote was 8-1 with Thomson opposed.
Cassidy reads the list of waivers:
- use of sloped faced granite curbing vs. straight faced
granite curbing;
- grading outside;
- waiver of maximum roadway grade requirement of 6% to 9.9%
for design standard;
- minimum reverse curve tangent requirement of 150' in length
to a reverse curve tangent of zero;
-minimum centerline radius requirement of 300~ to 225';
- all trees 6" in caliber or greater be shown on the plan;
- certified list of waivers.
Ken Anastasi of 114 Colon Street asked for a clarification of the
requested waivers. Cassidy explains the 6% grading, straight faced
curbing, and tree issues.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Four
George Zambouras explains the minimum reverse curve tangent of 150'
and the centerline radius requirements issues.
Priscilla Johnson of 2 Jewett Road questions the issue of the 6"
trees and asks if the trees would be identified on the plan.
Cassidy explains that all trees over 6" need to be identified by
the regulations, however the applicant is seeking a waiver from
this requirement.
A resident of Beverly asked what will be the consequences of
granting these waivers. Cassidy explains that they are largely a
matter of public safety and economics.
Renee Mary of 274 Hale Street asks if the abutters have been
notified. Cassidy responds abutters have to be notified.
Mr. Torgler of 27 Lakeshore Avenue asks what power does the Board
have to act on these waivers. Dinkin explains that waivers are a
request from the developer not to be held to strict regulations and
that it is the Board's authority to approve or disapprove a
definitive plan for a subdivision of land.
A resident of Parramatta Road states that the waivers seem
incidental, that residents are interested in the subdivision as a
whole. Dinkin states that some waivers could be incidental, but
some address very specific design issues of the roadway.
Dick Biegger of 3 Greenleaf Dr. asks if the waiver for the caliper
of trees is granted, what would protect someone's yard with respect
to drainage issues. George Zambouras explains that the waiver is
for the location of trees to be shown, not to tear down trees.
Bill Walker of i Bonad Rd. states that the City has rules and
regulations which state specific issues; and asks why does the City
have waivers or allow waivers. Mr. Walker also states that terms
being used tonight like "economically feasible" and "expedient
time", are disturbing to him.
Dedee Kartstein of 18 Lakeshore Avenue asked to have the tree
waiver explained again. Cassidy explains that this waiver pertains
to trees that directly relate to drainage.
Mr. Woitunski of 114 Rear Colon Street asked if the waivers go hand
in hand with other waivers, and states that the whole picture
should be looked at, and that the City should build proper drainage
systems throughout the City.
A resident of Pearl Street Extension states that the 9.9% grading
is hazardous, that a major accident could occur because cars can't
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Five
stop especially when iced over and that it would be a disaster to
put the project in as indicated on the plan.
Ellen Hutchinson, Attorney representing Mr. & Mrs. Hutchinson of 2
Jewett Road asks for a clarification regarding the minimum reverse
curve tangent of 150' in length waiver. George Zambouras explains
this waiver issue, explaining that there is currently no tangent
distance in between.
Virginia McGlynn, Ward 4 Councillor gives an example of how steep
a 9.9% grade would be, stating that the angle of the Beverly bridge
is at a 6% grade, so the proposed grading of this street will be
steeper.
Fred Hutchinson of 2 Jewett Road states that if the waivers are
approved then there will be problems with respect to health and
safety issues for the entire community.
Bruce Philbrick of 87 Lakeshore Avenue states that he is against
putting through any of the waivers and that he is against the
project.
Attorney Ellen Hutchinson asks who are we to second guess the Fire
Department or the City Officials.
A resident of Pearl Street Extension asks what will be the bottom
line/final outcome. Dinkin explains that an individual or
corporation in this situation can seek a judicial review.
A resident of Stanley Street asks if the Board denies the waivers,
can the developer go back and change the plan and come back for
another consideration of the same final subdivision plan. Dinkin
explains that if the public hearing is not closed and the waivers
are denied, then the developer may come back to a subsequent
meeting with a new plan. Dinkin further explains that the
developer must show on the new plan conformance in the areas where
waivers have been denied.
A1 Symes, proponent of the plan addresses the Board and states that
he came before the Board with a preliminary plan and had an
indication of the departments comments, but that he came here
tonight to see what changes would need to be made to the plan.
Barry Sullivan joins the meeting at this time.
Terry Russo of Beverly asks how many times can the developer make
changes and come back with a new plan. Dinkin explains that a
property owner or person who owns property can continue to present
plans for development of property until he hits upon a plan that is
acceptable.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Six
Mary Walker of I Bonad Road states that the Fire Department has a
hard time getting into this area as it is.
Richard Hutchinson questions that in regards to flooding, is the
Board going to let the people drown.
Mr. Lee Yaffa asks if the procedure is to take a vote on these
waivers, what follows that vote, will you entertain other public
comments.
A resident of 31 Lakeshore Avenue states that all four of these
issues are all public safety issues.
Andy Herman of 4 Foster's Drive asks if these waivers are
exceptional, and states that they are public safety issues.
Donald Brown of 49 Cross Street states with respect to the grade,
drainage in this area is not sufficient, that the grade is to steep
to handle the water issue and that it would be detrimental to the
houses.
Delaney states that it is clear to him that the waivers are
inappropriate and feels that the Board has enough information to
vote upon them.
Thomson states that he is opposed to granting these waivers for
public safety reasons.
Delaney: motion to deny applicant's request for sloped faced
granite curbing on Lakeshore Crossing Definitive
Subdivision Plan, seconded by Flannery. Motion carries
with a 6-1-1 vote. (Dinkin, Modugno, Papa, Delaney,
Flannery, Dunn in favor, Thomson opposed, Sullivan in
abstention.)
Delaney: motion to deny applicantts request to allow a waiver from
the Board's requirement of roadway grade of 6%, seconded
by Modugno. Motion carries with a 6-1-1 vote. (Dinkin,
Modugno, Papa, Delaney, Flannery, Dunn in favor, Thomson
opposed, Sullivan in abstention.)
Delaney: motion to deny applicant's request to allow a waiver from
the Board's requirement of minimum reverse curve tangent
requirement of 150', seconded by Modugno. Motion carries
with a 6-1-1 vote. (Dinkin, Modugno, Papa, Delaney,
Flannery, Dunn in favor, Thomson opposed, Sullivan in
abstention.)
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Seven
Delaney: motion to deny applicant's request to allow a waiver on
centerline radius requirement of 300', seconded by
Flannery. Motion carries with a 6-1-1 vote. (Dinkin,
Modugno, Papa, Delaney, Flannery, Dunn in favor, Thomson
opposed, Sullivan in abstention.)
Dinkin explains to Attorney Alexander that the developer needs to
redraw the plan, and asks Attorney Alexander if he wishes to
proceed. Attorney Alexander states that he would like to request
that the public hearing be recessed for two months untilApril 15,
1997, and he would also like to request an Extension of Time until
April 30, 1997.
Delaney: motion to recess the Public Hearing to the Board's
regular April meeting on April 15, 1997, seconded by
Modugno. All in favor motion carries 8-0.
Delaney explains that this is contingent upon obtaining the request
for an Extension of Time from the applicant.
Delaney: motion to grant the Extension of Time until April 30,
1997, seconded by Dunn. All in favor, motion carries
8-0.
Delaney: motion to recess for 5 minutes, seconded by Dunn. All in
favor, motion carries.
Manzi resumes the Chair at this time.
m Public Hearing: Access Road Definitive Subdivision Plan /
David Camevale
Cassidy reads legal notice.
Cassidy reads the following letters:
- Letter dated 1/27/97 from the Beverly Fire Department.
(On File).
- Letter dated 1/17/97 from the Beverly Police Department.
(On File).
- Letter dated 1/23/97 from the Board of Health. (On File).
- Letter dated February 21, 1997 from the DPW. (On File).
Attorney Alexander addresses the Board on behalf of developer David
Carnevale and explains that they are seeking to construct 2 lots
within this subdivision that are in the R10 Zone with lot #3 being
in excess of 10,000 square feet. Attorney Alexander explains that
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Eight
the original layout of the road was 640 liner feet but only paved
to 460' and was originally done by the Commonwealth, and that they
are seeking to extend the pavement to 640' and add a turn around
for emergency access vehicles. Attorney Alexander states that the
applicant came before the Board previously on a portion of this
subdivision for a special permit for a pork chop lot which was
granted.
Attorney Alexander states that they are seeking a waiver for no
sidewalks or curbs on the street, a waiver for a hammerhead
turnaround, a waiver for a dead-end street beyond 500' and a waiver
for no street trees. Attorney Alexander explains that the existing
way has no sidewalks or curbs and that they are looking to keep
that continuity. Attorney Alexander states that the Fire
Department and the DPW are in favor of these waivers and of this
development.
Attorney Alexander further explains that with this subdivision they
are looking to install sewerage to go all the way to the end of
Access Road and resurface the whole street, improving the whole
area.
Joan Murphy of 36 Longmeadow Road asks if the 4" water line
shouldn't be an 8" water line. George Zambouras explains that a 4"
water line is more than adequate to service the neighborhood.
Joan Murphy states that the existing septic system will be located
15' from the lot line and another 15' from the foundation of Lot #3
and that the septic system runs out the back towards the
development and asks if there would be any health hazards. George
Zambouras explains that the subdivision is going to be hooked up to
city sewerage, then, the existing system will be dismantled and
filled in.
Attorney Alexander states that they will comply with all Board of
Health requirements.
Joan Murphy states that she would not recommend that the Board
waiver the tree issue explaining that the fourth lot is in a red
maple swamp and if the developer puts in a detention pond then
there will be increased flooding for the rest of the neighborhood.
Don Brings, drainage consultant for the project, explains that the
pond designed is not in the wetlands, it is above the wetlands and
that they will not be adding any more flow, and that the water
balance will remain the same.
Manzi declares the public hearing closed.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Nine
Discussion: access Road Definitive Subdivision Plan /
David Carnevale
Thomson asks for clarification with respect to the layout of the
road and the sidewalks. George Zambouras explains that sidewalks
could physically fit, but the neighbors don't want them and states
that they will create water problems in the residents yards.
Sullivan asks why the developer is seeking a waiver for no street
trees, couldn't they move the street over. Mr. Vernon LeBlanc
states that trees could be planted outside the layout, that they
could push the paved part of the road to the right.
Delaney asks if there are any trees at the beginning of the street.
Mr. LeBlanc responds no. Attorney Alexander states that they would
be happy to add more trees if it was the consent of the Board.
Sullivan asks if they would go through the drainage design layout.
Mr. Brings explains the layout, stating that whatever drains off
the hill will follow along the roadway then shed down to a catch
basin, like sheet flow.
Sullivan asks how big the detention pond would be. Mr. Brings
states 1,000 square feet explaining that it is designed to allow
the same flow and balance as it exists today.
Sullivan asks how long it will hold 2' of standing water. Mr.
Brings states 24 hours, then it will drain itself through.
Delaney: motion to waive the Board's requirement that all 6"
caliber trees be shown on the plan, seconded by Sullivan.
A1J~=~s-~a%~pr, motion carries 7-1.
Delaney: motion to waive the Board's requirement for installation
of sidewalks, seconded by Sullivan. Ell in fzver, motion
carries 5-3.
Discussion:
Thomson states only if the City Engineer determines that it is not
feasible to install.
Dinkin comments that he generally prefers the installation of
sidewalks rather than not, but believes in this case the developer
controls the property to Dodge Street and if we require the
developer to install sidewalks throughout all the property he owns
it would only be 2/3rds of the way on Dodge Street. Dinkin states
that he agrees with George Zambouras.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Ten
Delaney asks if it is feasible to install sidewalks. George
Zambouras states that it is possible to do this.
Delaney: motion to allow a hammerhead turnaround rather than a
cul-de-sac, seconded by Sullivan. All in favor, motion
carries 8-0.
Delaney: motion to deny applicant's request from the Board's
requirement to allow no street trees, seconded by Dinkin.
All in favor, motion carries 8-0.
Delaney: motion to grant the requested waiver to allow a dead-end
street beyond 500 feet, seconded by Sullivan. All in
favor, motion carries 8-0.
Dinkin: with the amendment that a sprinkler system be installed,
seconded by Flannery.
Dinkin: withdraws his amendment.
Delaney: motion to waive the requirement that all trees six inches
(6") in callper or greater be shown on the plan, seconded
by Flannery. Motion carries 7-1 with (Sullivan, Delaney,
Papa, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomson, Dinkin
opposed).
Delaney: motion to waive the requirement that sidewalks be
installed on both sides of the roadway, sconded by
Dinkin. Motion carries 5-3 with (Dinkin, Delaney,
Sullivan, Papa and Modugno in favor, Flannery, Dunn &
Thomson opposed).
Delaney: withdraws his motion.
Dinkin: motion to waive the Board's requirement to allow Access
Road to extend beyond 500' provided that all new homes
constructed within the subdivision be installed with a
residential sprinkler system and that the developer
submit a plan for street trees on the entire length of
Access Road, two trees per lot for new and existing lots,
seconded by Sullivan. All in favor, motion carries 9-0.
Delaney: motion to approve Access Road Definitive Subdivision
Plan, conditioned upon the installation of residential
sprinklers for the two new dwellings and upon
installation of street trees and that it is incorporated
into the Subdivision Plan, seconded by Sullivan. All in
favor, motion carries 9-0.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Eleven
Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans (SANR's)
a. Bennett Street
Cassidy explains that the developer is shy of frontage for this ANR
project and that they request to withdraw.
Chairman Manzi asks if it meets all the rules and regulations.
Cassidy explains that there are three issues that are unresolved.
Attorney Alexander withdraws applicant's request for an ANR.
Delaney: motion to accept applicant's withdrawal of application,
seconded by Flannery. All in favor, motion carries
unanimously.
Sunday Drive Subdivision: Request to grant waiver of curbing
requirement, notification of violation of buffer zone / Gary
Palardy and David Carnevale
Attorney Alexander address the Board and states that the Applicant
would like to request a waiver to a sloped faced granite curbing
verses a straight faced granite curbing explaining that the rest of
the neighborhood has sloped.
Dinkin asks if it is a major or minor modification and states that
he objects, in principal, in a modification being submitted outside
of the public hearing process.
Dinkin: motion that the Board find the Request for Sunday Drive
Subdivision to be a minor modification, seconded by
Thomson. All in favor, motion carries unanimously.
Dinkin: motion to deny the applicant's request for granting a
waiver for straight faced granite curbing to sloped faced
granite curbing, seconded by Thomson. All in favor,
motion carries unanimously.
Cassidy updates the Board regarding the notification of the
violation of the buffer zone with respect to tree and brush
clearing. Cassidy states that the Conservation Commission is
asking the developer to replant the trees and that the number of
plantings required is up to the Conservation Commission. Cassidy
further explains that the Board is requiring the developer that a
notification is required in every deed regarding a 20' no cut zone.
Attorney Alexander discusses a bond issue for the remaining lots
explaining that he has negotiated a figure with George Zambouras
and is requesting that a bond be set.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Twelve
George Zambouras states that the current amount to finish the
project is $104,075.00.
Dinkin: motion to set a bond or surety amount for Sunday Drive
Subdivision in the amount of $104.075.00 exactly,
seconded by Thomson. All in favor, motion carries
unanimously.
Dinkin: motion to accept as surety for Sunday Drive Subdivision
a passbook in the amount of $104,075 exactly, acceptance
to become effective on the delivery of the passbook to
the Chairman of the Board, seconded by Delaney. All in
favor, motion carries unanimously.
Dinkin: motion to release the lots in Sunday Drive Subdivision
for building and sale purposes pending release to become
effective upon receipt and verification of appropriate
surety to the Chairman of the Board, seconded by
Sullivan. All in favor, motion carries unanimously.
Montserrat Estates Definitive Subdivision Plan: set date for
public hearing / Sullivan and Dailey
Cassidy updates the Board explaining that the proposed subdivision
is at the preliminary stage, that the definitive plan submitted is
nearly identical to the last submittal and that the applicant would
like a public hearing date be set.
Sullivan states that he did not look upon this subdivision
favorable before.
Thomson: motion that a public hearing be scheduled for the next
regular meeting provided that the developer provide a
legal opinion and supporting documentation relative to
the issue of possible overburdening of the easements with
the right to use Brookhead Avenue area for access by
March 11, 1997, seconded by Papa. All in favor, motion
carries unanimously.
Virginia Avenue Definitive Subdivision Plan: set date for public
hearing / Curtis Jones
Cassidy update the Board explaining that this is a 5 lot
subdivision plan and that the applicant is asking for a public
hearing.
Delaney: motion to set a public hearing for Virginia Avenue
Definitive Subdivision Plan for the Board's next regular
meeting scheduled for March 18, 1997, seconded by
Thomson. All in favor, motion carries unanimously.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Thirteen
46-48-50 Bartlett Street: set date for public hearing on request
for waiver of frontage requirements in accordance with M.G.L.
Chapter 41, Section 81-R / Martinez & Metta
Cassidy updates the Board explaining that the applicant is looking
to set a public hearing and is also looking for a frontage waiver.
Delaney: motion to set a public hearing for 46-48-50 Bartlett
Street for the Board's next regular meeting scheduled for
March 18, 1997, seconded by Modugno. All in favor,
motion carries unanimously.
City Council Order #61: Recommendation to City Council on Joint
Public Hearing on Order to fezone several lots from R-10 to "CN"
near Shortmeadow Road / Arthur Booras
Cassidy updates the Board explaining that the applicant is looking
to rezone the undeveloped lots #15, 16 & 17 from an R-10 to a CN.
Cassidy states that a petition in favor of this change has been
submitted on behalf of many neighbors.
Delaney: motion to recommend to the City Council that a joint
public hearing be scheduled, seconded by Papa. All in
favor, motion carries unanimously.
Approval of Minutes: December 17, 1996 regular meeting, January 6,
1997 special meeting and January 21, 1997 regular meeting.
Delaney: motion to adopt and approve the minutes of the Board's
December 17, 1996 regular meeting, the January 6, 1997
special meeting and the January 21, 1997 regular meeting
as drafted, seconded by Papa. All in favor motion
carries.
New or Other Business
a. Receipt of Waterways License application
Cassidy states that a license application for a Waterways license
application is on file with the Planning Board as required, and
that it is available for members to review.
b. Request from David Gardiner to address Board on open space
issues
Cassidy states that the Board could decide the best time for Mr.
Gardiner to address the Board at the April meeting. Cassidy will
contact Mr. Gardiner to coordinate.
Planning Board Minutes
February 25, 1997 Meeting
Page Fourteen
c. Other
Attorney Thomas Alexander addresses the Board with respect to
Woodland Road and explains that he received the redrafted plans
today and that he would like to submit them under the existing
submittal to avoid paying a new filing fee of $900.00 and to
request that this matter be placed on the agenda for the next
public hearing.
Thomson: motion to waive the fee and to set a public hearing date
for the Board's next meeting scheduled of March 18, 1997,
seconded by Dunn. All in favor, motion carries
unanimously.
Sullivan: motion to adjourn meeting, seconded by Dinkin. All in
favor motion carries unanimously.
Meeting is adjourned at 11:20 p.m.