Loading...
11.15.22 BPB Minutes Final DRAFT CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES COMMISSION: Planning Board DATE: November 15, 2022 LOCATION: Beverly Middle School Library 502 Cabot Street, Beverly, MA 01915 Web Platform: BevCam (live stream on YouTube): https://bevcam.org/video/live-stream/ MEMBERS PRESENT: Ellen Hutchinson (Chair), Derek Beckwith (Vice-Chair) Ellen Flannery, Rodney Sinclair, Andrea Toulouse, George Gomes, Sarah Bartley, Wayne Miller MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Darlene Wynne, Director of Planning and Community Developmen OTHERS PRESENT: RECORDER: Sharlyne Woodbury Call to Order Chair Hutchinson calls the meeting to order at 7:01 pm. 1. Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans a. 121 Livingstone Avenue—TAM Properties, LLC Bob Griffin, Griffin Engineering Group, presented on behalf of the applicant.They are dividing a 300 ft long parcel into three 100 ft long parcels. Planning Director Darlene Wynne explained what the ANR criteria are for the Board to consider. Hutchinson reads the criteria for an ANR from the staff report. There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Flannery: Motion to endorse the SANR for 121 Livingstone Avenue as presented. Miller seconds. Motion carries 8-0. b. 26, 28 and 28R Cabot Street and 4-6,8, 10 Rantoul Street—Goldberg Brothers Real Estate LLC and William Goldberg,Trustee of the Rear 28 Cabot Street Trust Miranda Siemasko, Glovsky Counselors at Law, presents on behalf of the applicant. She notes this is the site of the proposed Southwest Rantoul Gateway project, a joint venture of Beverly Crossing and the Goldberg Brothers. Lot B will remain with the Goldberg Properties and Lot A is the joint venture between Beverly Crossing and Goldberg Properties. Lot C to remain a separate house lot, with a parking and access easement for Lot B. Lot B remains with Goldberg Properties because they have other tenants who rely on the shared use lot from other neighboring properties. The frontage for Lot C is 23.50 feet on Rantoul Street. This meets zoning requirement because in a CC zoning district there is a zero foot requirement for frontage on certain parcels that predate zoning. There will be vital access to Lot B when the parking lot drive is constructed and the ANR plan shows the building blocking the vital access to be razed. Once razed there is no barrier from the lot to Goat Hill Lane. There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 13 Flannery: Motion to approve the SANR for 26, 28 and 28R Cabot Street and 4-6, 8, 10 Rantoul Street—Goldberg Brothers Real Estate LLC and William Goldberg, Trustee of the Rear 28 Cabot Street Trust as presented. Miller seconds. Motion carries 8-0. Beckwith: Motion to recess for public hearing. Gomes seconds. Motion carries 8-0. 2. Continued Public Hearin a. Site Plan Review#154-22 and Inclusionary Housing#20-22—218-224 Cabot Street and 18 Federal Street—Leggat McCall Properties LLC i. Construct a mixed-use building containing 113 residential units; 5,000 sq. ft. ground floor commercial; 153 parking spaces Gomes is not eligible to participate in the review of Site Plan Review#154-22 because he was not seated on the Board when the first public hearing was held. Addy Grady(Leggat McCall), Rebecca Brown (GPI), Charlie Wear (Hancock Associates), Stefano Basso (SV Design) are introduced as representing the applicant. Miranda Siemasko, Glovsky Counselors at Law, presents to the Board. The applicant received a favorable recommendation from the Parking &Traffic Commission (PTC) after a detailed peer review. The applicant agreed to all the conditions presented by the PTC. The peer review conditions include an extensive set of offsite pedestrian and traffic improvements estimated at costing over$250K. They own the responsibility of a safety audit along the Cabot Street intersections. The site plan changed from 113 to 112 residential units with 8%at 60%AMI. They changed from 4 to 6 artist studios on the second floor. There are two retail spaces of 5,000 sq. ft. and 153 residential parking spaces, 124 in garage, and 29 on the adjacent Federal Street lot. The project complies with the Beverly Zoning Ordinance, preserves the existing fagade on 218 Cabot Street known as the Rogers Building. The project also has a letter of recommendation from the Design Review Board (DRB). The proposal is to provide 8%of the units as affordable units restricted to those earning no more than 60%AMI. That equates to 9 units of permanent reserved for households of less than 60%AMI. A revised configuration of floor plan units is presented to address the Board's comments. The 9 affordable units are 4 one-bedroom units; 2 one-bedroom units with den; 2 two-bedroom units; and one 2-bedroom unit with a den.The units are dispersed throughout floors 2-5. M. Siemasko informs the members Chris Lovasco at the YMCA, Cabot Street is working with Leggatt to provide as many as 10 units for artists at the 245 Cabot Street building. Leggat is working with the community to provide as much artist space as possible. Other plan changes include landscaping modifications,tweaks to the garage layout from PTC where certain spaces were recommended to be designated as compact spaces. Miller asks who will qualify for the artist space i.e., musical, visual, sculpture, etc. Wynne explains that the artist genre is hard to define and notes that there is broad language in the zoning ordinance, where the City defined Artist Live-Work (which does not apply here, but can be guidance).The City did not want to pigeonhole someone who declares themselves from a particular genre. She notes that there are vetting measures by the landlord to assist with that artist qualifications. Miller is looking to minimize noise and odor challenges for the spaces. Beckwith was hoping for more artist spaces; he appreciates they are designed together with their own facilities. Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 13 Beckwith questions the parking and traffic. How the resolution of the multiple turning points identified in the peer review, comment#S-8.The suggestion made would be to relocate the compact space or eliminate it. Was the compact car adjustment made without reducing the number of parking spaces? Brown replies there were not any adjustments made.They are proposing that those parking spaces be restricted so that large SUVs and pickup trucks are unable to park there. Parking spaces will be assigned, and those spaces will not be assigned to large vehicles. Beckwith asks about the space discrepancy from 124 to 123. Basso explains it was made for additional loading space. Beckwith asks if the artist studios need parking. M. Siemasko explains those spaces are not considered residential and they can be mitigated to park within 500 feet of the building. Beckwith asks about the snow ban parking. Supposedly there are 101 spaces available within 500 feet, and Beckwith is concerned about the congestion in the area. Brown explains the 101 spaces represents when there is an event occurring at both the Larcom and Cabot theatres. Brown notes the likelihood of a snowstorm occurring with 2 events at both theatres is highly unlikely. Beckwith asks about the impact on the neighborhood and what happens with a snow emergency. Wynne discusses the snow bans ongoing discussions to downtown residents in those weather conditions. Snow emergencies would not apply to on street parking. Wynne notes this lot is not considered a snow emergency lot for this area. Wynne points out the parking study relates to downtown. Beckwith specifically wants to know where the neighbors will park during a snowstorm. Miller follows with the parking demand generated by the site. With the exception of a dual event day during a snowstorm,the parking availability is worse now than after the proposal. Beckwith there is no available spots for the residents who do not live in the building. The surrounding neighbors have no space to park. M. Siemasko,the applicant recognizes the public has used the private lot for parking. The applicant is trying to partner with the city to provide creative solutions. Those are ongoing conversations. M. Siemasko does not agree it is on the applicant to fix the snow emergency parking issues downtown. Miller notes to Beckwith's point, it also cannot exacerbate the problem. M. Siemasko maintains there is a supply that meets the demand and neighboring residents will have to search for a parking spot during snow emergencies. Hutchinson asks what a road safety audit is. Brown explains multiple types of analyses performed and the crash reports within a 5-year period are utilized. They analyze for any crash patterns and prepare collision diagrams. Next steps meet with department of public works (DPW),fire department, police department, and planning to meet and review the collision patterns plus walk the area. Then create a report that will present cost analysis and time frame for implementing improvements. Hutchinson falls on the low-cost short-term improvements. Why are they only short term? Brown answers,they can typically be completed in a short term period, things like striping and signage, add a wheelchair ramp, etc. Those are not elaborate changes to the curb line, the width of the road, or road alignment. M. Siemasko,the applicant, is funding the audit and will fund up to $15,000 of suggested improvements. Brown details the improvements and the areas represented by the road safety audit. The applicant will reconstruct sidewalks from Bow Street, Chapman Street, along Federal and Cabot Streets down to the Lux properties, and wheelchair ramp ADA improvements at the intersections. Hutchinson confirms with M. Siemasko there are no spaces designated for guests of the residents. Brown reviews the loading zone space located along Federal Street and the changes. Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 13 Hutchinson asks about the construction mitigation for the St. Mary's School and the noise. Can the construction company minimize the level of noise during school hours? M. Siemasko confirms the PTC will require a construction management plan be submitted and that these types of outreach measures should be included in that. Bartley asks if there are any tenants identified for the retail space. M. Siemasko notes no applicants at this point in time. M. Siemasko iterates for the board Leggatt is interested in having local businesses that serve the communities, not national chains occupying the space. A local grocer or market is highly favorable. M. Siemasko responds to Beckwith's comment about parking spaces and parking lots for patrons and visitors. M. Siemasko notes that typically real estate management companies see that most city/town ordinances require more parking than there is a demand for. M. Siemasko comments that the PTC conditions include no employee parking on Cabot and the residents do not qualify for the resident parking sticker program. Beckwith discusses the project rendering and height. Basso notes the building will be largely obscured when heading north from Salem. The height is set back from Cabot Street 55 ft. Beckwith does not see how the height will not take away from Cabot Street and obstruct church steeple views. The building will look like more of a security fortress. Basso discusses the DRB suggestions changing the elevation from a chain link fence to a softer look on Federal Street and Chapman Street. Beckwith asked if they could supply or project the market value rents. M. Siemasko does not have those numbers. They supplied some market rates from other projects, like Sedna. There will be an assessment of what the other units are supplying, and rates will be based off that. They cannot project market rates 3 years from now. Toulouse rebuts that the purview of the Board is not to comment on the affordability of these units. The Board's statutory abilities stop at whether or not a building is by right. Beckwith respectfully declines that the affordability should be reflected in a neighborhood where the median income household cannot afford the rent. Miller points out if the applicant were to express concern with economic feasibility the financial transparency would be questioned. Currently the Board does not have that scope.This is something to be considered for the future. Hutchinson opens comments to the public: Estelle Rand, 3 Agate Street, Ward 2 Councilor Appreciates the commitment to infrastructure improvements, equitable disbursement of affordable housing, and the increased artist units. Would like to hear more about the pedestrian improvements and ADA infrastructure updates. How the project will make the neighborhood feel like a neighborhood despite this huge building. Really concerned about the impact of the neighborhood between Rantoul and Cabot Street. Asks for more details on the impact to the skyline. Echoes Beckwith's concern for affordable housing for median income. The system is broken with so little units provided for each of these projects. They cannot keep people in their community. These types of projects are not providing the need for affordability. Basso responds recognizing that Cabot Street core around the churches is a special area and preservation of the church corridor is important. The project's intent is to clean up the storefront; revitalize the streetscape and fagade; preserve the detail and articulation of the historic fagade. Basso addresses the scale of the building and it's mass. They believe there is a good precedent for brick second tier and transitional zone where the building mass fully transitions to the residential mass. Basso Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 13 addresses other design improvements for the security gate, the alley, loading zone, and building corners from Federal, Bow and Chapman Streets. Rand would like more collaboration to encourage walking in the downtown area and to encourage the continuity of the neighborhood between the monolithic building and its block and the existing multifamily homes in the neighborhood. Vivian Hudgins, 394 Rantoul Street Part of the artist community. What kind of artist would be able to rent these spaces? It would be hard to determine the type of artist or who is an artist, asks that there is an open mind and fairness between the different art mediums. Suggests it might be leaning toward more digital artists where the ventilation is not an issue for other artists requiring machines, dust, etc. Jason Silva, 6 Crosby Ave Understands the Planning Board role and limited authority. Expresses some concern about the size and scale of the project. It is massive. It is not in keeping with the surrounding area and neighborhood. Loss of parking for businesses and residents. Think about the parking lot and its future use. Sad to see that this did not happen before the project advanced at this stage. It will be detrimental to future business. Miller asks if there are any other detriments. Silva, specifically referring to parking and the patrons for the businesses. Wynne reviews the letters with conditions to the board drafted in anticipation of a vote tonight. There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Motion: Beckwith moves to close the public hearing. Flannery seconds. Motion carries 7-0-1. Gomes abstains. Determinations on the merits of the project: Approve site plan review. Wynne for the records some of the site plans should note amended through November 7 and 15, 2022. Motion: Flannery moves to grant approval of the Site Plan Review application#154-22 subject to the following conditions: 1. The project shall be constructed in accordance with the site development plan set entitled "Legatt McCall Properties LLC Renovation Expansion at 218-224 Cabot Street and 4 Federal Street", 38 sheets, scale varies, prepared for Legatt McCall Properties, building owner, prepared by SV Design at 126 Dodge Street, Beverly, MA 01915, and Hancock Associates at 185 Center St, Danvers, MA 01923, dated 11/7/22 and 11/15/22, said pans were attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference 2. Subject to compliance with the conditions contained in the comment letters submitted by the various department heads, boards, and commissions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference: a. Letter dated June 29, 2022 from Bill Burke with the Health Department b. Letter dated July 26, 2022 from Victoria Healey on behalf of the Design Review Board Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 13 c. Letter draft dated November 15, 2022 from Richard Benevento, Chair of the Parking and Traffic Commission d. Letter dated June 29, 2022 from former Captain Ryan Larisy on behalf of the Fire Prevention Office e. Comments in the Central Square Permitting System from the Assistant City Engineer, Lisa Chandler, dated June 30, 2022 3. To the extent permissible and approved under fair housing and the Department of Housing and Community Development,the applicant will honor any local preference requested by the City of Beverly residents up to the DHCD maximum of 70 percent. The DHCD will require that this request be made in collaboration between the applicant and the City. 4. Any changes made in any plans, proposals, and supporting documents approved and endorsed by the Planning Board without the written approval of the Planning Board shall require submission of a modification request to the Planning Board for review and approval and shall include a description of the proposed modifications, reasons the modifications are necessary, and supporting documentation. The Planning Department will determine the course of review. 5. Prior to the commencement of the authorized site activity, the applicant shall provide to the Planning Board office the name, address, email, and business phone number of the individual who shall be responsible for all construction activities on site. 6. The terms, conditions, restrictions, and/or requirements of this decision shall be binding on the owner and its successors and/or assigns. In the event of the transfer of the site as a whole, within five days of such transfer, the owner shall notify the Board in writing of the new owner's name and address. 7. Refuse removal, ground maintenance, and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the applicant. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off-site. 8. As-built plans stamped by the registered professional Engineer shall be submitted to the Beverly Planning Department and City Engineer prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. The as-built plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer in an electronic file format suitable for the City's use and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. 9. To the extent that construction work has been completed sufficient for a Certificate of Occupancy to be issued for the portion of the project or the project in its entirety, but as the as- built plans have not yet been fully completed for the said portion of the project or the project in its entirety, the applicant may provide a performance bond or a surety in the amount and form subject to approval of the Planning Department to ensure that the as-built plans are completed within a reasonable time frame. 10. The applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of the stormwater management system. In the event that the applicant, its successors, or agent fails to maintain the stormwater management system in accordance with the operation and maintenance plan and stormwater system inspection and maintenance schedule as shown on the above referenced plan, the City may conduct such emergency maintenance or repairs and the applicant shall permit entry onto the property to implement the measures set forth in such guidelines. In the event the City conducts such maintenance or repairs the applicant shall promptly reimburse the City for all reasonable expenses associated therewith. If the applicant fails to reimburse the City,the City may place a lien on the property to secure such payment. 11. The violations of any conditions shall result in revocation of this permit by the Planning Board unless the violation of such condition is waived by a majority vote of the Planning Board. Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 13 Miller seconds. Discussion on the motion: Miller asks for clarification on condition#3 where the applicant honors any local preference request with DHCD honoring 70%. Wynne provides clarifying points. The Board does not require local preference. The applicant is encouraged to go after local preference which will seek ultimate approval from the housing facility. Beckwith, we as a Board want to extend affordability for the people who already live here. Beckwith strongly encourages the local preference by the Board to the applicant. This is good for the recommendations. Miller notes that any one project cannot be responsible to improve the quality of life for any resident. Beckwith speaks to the impact on the local neighbors, it's a massive wall. This does follow the established zoning guidelines.The applicant is maximizing what the zoning allows. Motion carries 7-0-1. Gomes abstains. Motion: Flannery moves to grant the Inclusionary Housing permit number 20-22 at 218-224 Cabot Street and 18 Federal Street, the applicant Miranda Siemasko, Glovsky Counselor at law for Legatt McCall Properties LLC as presented. Miller seconds. Motion carries 7-0-1. Gomes abstains. Sinclair leaves the meeting at 9 p.m. Hutchinson asks for motion for a 5-minute recess. Motion made by Flannery, seconded by Miller. Motion carries 7-0. Hutchinson ends the recess. Motion carries 7-0. 3. Continued Public Hearin a. Site Plan Review 156-22 and Inclusionary Housing#21-22—26,28, 28R Cabot Street:4- 6,8 Rantoul Street and portion of 10 Rantoul Street(Map 1, Lots 79, 80; Map 4, Lots 160, 161, 162, 163)—Southwest Rantoul Gateway, LLC M. Siemasko presents to the board.The traffic peer review is still underway by the traffic consultant. Brown discusses the left lane turning point off of Rantoul Street into the site. Consideration was made to convert the Goat Hill Lane access to two-way in order to prevent potential back-ups on Route 1A. They were able to widen the driveway off of Goat Hill Lane to provide access up to the garage. Anyone who wants to access the surface lot can take the right hand turn down Cabot Street, looping around back to Rantoul Street via School Street. The driveway itself is right hand turn in only off of Rantoul Streetm circulating one way around the back of the building down to Goat Hill Lane. Still waiting for more updates from the peer review. Basso addresses the request for more renderings from the previous meeting. Basso demonstrates the sequence coming over the bridge from the Salem north bound approach. Chris Koeplin recaps the Ward 2 Civic Association meeting on November 9, 2022. Miller asks what the width of the two-way drive is, the team replies 20 foot width. Basso provides material samples for the clapboard, a medium gray and rich navy blue. Miller asks if the darker gray is going on the south side building, Basso affirms and Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 13 confirms the navy blue is going on the west side of the building by the bump outs. Basso notes these shades are similar to the 2 Hardy Street building. Beckwith discusses the lack of greenery onsite and noting the height is level with the tree line. The building is starkly different with the current neighborhood. Bartley notes the Sedna Apartments are the largest thing you see first. Members review the color scheme with Basso pointing out the DRB requested richer colors. M. Siemasko notes the rendering for the roof is not present. Basso discusses the light edge screening with shrubberies on the lower roof. Basso assures the board the roof will be landscaped and have pea gravel. Beckwith asks if potted plants or shrubbery is on the lower roof. Koeplin informs the Board that potted plants cannot be added to the roof due to the lack of green structure. Residents are permitted to have potted plants on their balconies but not beyond the railings. Miller asks if they have looked at a living roof or a roof that grows food. Koeplin,the residents will not have easy access to the lower roof, it would have to be through a unit. Miller discusses sustainability aspects and strongly encourages it. M. Siemasko discusses the request for relocating one of the inclusionary units.The relocation for one unit will face south on a corner unit toward the water. Miller asks why they moved the unit, Koeplin said they were asked and reiterates Sinclair did not instruct the team which unit to pick. M. Siemasko informs the board the team prepared a market analysis as a snap shot in time for today. Koeplin notes these rents prices are subject to changing times of supply and demand. Beckwith applauds the transparency of the numbers provided. M. Siemasko acknowledges the request for more street trees. DRB noted another tree would be appreciative, however there is a lot of electrical infrastructure underground that will be a hindrance to the survival of a street tree. Beckwith asks the team if there will be any further community outreach with the Ward 2 Civic Association. Koeplin responds that further engagement was one of the outcomes of the previous meeting. Hutchinson opens comments to the public. Jason Silva, 6 Crosby Ave Approves of the project noting the area has been looking for improvement for a while. Feels this project is in keeping with the neighborhood. Hutchinson asks how he defines the neighborhood and how it is keeping with it. He feels this is in line with Rantoul Street. It is the gateway to the city. Rachel Hand, 21 Mulberry Street Reads her written comment. Through her work she is intimately familiar with the housing crisis. This is a supply and demand issue.There is simply not enough rental units for every household that needs one. Affordable housing would not be necessary if housing supply was not an issue.Advocates for building more high-density housing and briefly discusses Family Promise, a homeless services agency. Miller asks exactly what the agency does. Hutchinson asks her opinion on building more housing compared with affordability. Hutchinson asks Hand if she has any sense about how much housing should be built in order to drive down the cost. Hand informs the members MA is so behind on building more housing. The restrictive town ordinances prevent the needed housing quantity from keeping in line with population increase. Miller confirms her opinion is building more high-density transit orientated housing. She advocates more high-density high rises and looking like Boston; because this would provide the housing so desperately needed. Estelle Rand, 3 Agate Street, Ward 2 Councilor Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 13 Discusses the gateway asking how the brick buildings on the other side of Rantoul Street tie into the project. Rand asks if there will be plans to mirror investment on that side. Rand is in favor of removing those billboards and creating a cohesive welcoming vibe in the area. M. Siemasko responds that the observation is noted, however;that is a different venture and is unrelated to the current project.The team can return with answers at the next hearing. Hutchinson concludes the public comments. Wynne states for the record, Miller and Bartley missed the last meeting but listened to the meeting via audio recording. Therefore, they are permitted to vote on the continued public hearing for Site Plan Review#156-22, Southwest Rantoul Gateway, LLC. Hutchinson asked when the peer review expects completion. M. Siemasko responds December 2022. There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Motion: Flannery moves to continue the hearing to the December 13, 2022 meeting. Beckwith seconds. Motion carries 7-0. 4. Continued Public Hearin a. Site Plan Review#158-22 and Inclusionary Housing#22-22 119—Rantoul Street— Wilso Ventures LLC&Tiny Ventures LLC i. New mixed-use building with 56 residential units, 1650 sq. ft. commercial space and 57 parking spaces Tom Alexander represents the owner, Chris Crowley. Introduces the team, Rebecca Brown, Bob Griffin, and Thad Siemasko. Alexander provides updates. They received a letter of recommendation from PTC and DRB. Alexander notes the landscaping suggestions were considered and mostly incorporated into the plan. There are 7 affordable units at the 80%AMI. Alexander considered treatment of Pleasant Street, building mass, rental rate break down, sun and light loss, setback from the street. Alexander confirms these units will be at fair market value and notes the appreciation of rental units and housing for fair market value. Rental rates dropped in 2007-2010 time frame. Alexander reminds the members this project could have gone to six stories, but the applicant kept the building to 5 stories instead of 6. Thad Siemasko addresses the DRB comments how the building hits the street in terms of landscape and the ability to be maintained. They did not extend out front. No changes to the plan other than the outdoor terrace north of the building. T. Siemasko discusses the inclusionary units. T. Siemasko passes out color samples and discusses the appearance of the building in sunlight. It is estimated there will not be any significant loss of sunlight. DRB requested a decorative metal grill design around the windows, T. Siemasko incorporated those suggestions. Reviews the sun rotation around the building and compares the shade from surrounding buildings as well. Gives credit to Jon Ouellette on the DRB, he's a Landscape Architect and provided excellent suggestions for the project team to incorporate.Alexander, in full disclosure one of the recommendations by PTC is to seek connection from the parking garage to Ahearn Park, if feasible. Alexander said they cannot make the grade work for ADA requirements for access to Goldthway Playground. There is a Hardy Street extension where the ADA ramp is accessible. Flannery agrees the grading is not feasible. Asks if the applicant can work with the City to improve the rotted railings and the playground. Alexander would not like to make an open-ended commitment for playground improvements. Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 13 Alexander confirms this is not a condominium, this is a rental unit therefore a homeowner's association is not required to issue certificate of occupancy. Hutchinson confirms this is going to remain a rental property. Miller would like to point out the playground work is feasible, but not economically feasible for the applicant. Miller asks if there is any soil contamination and soil testing because of the car repairs. Crowley discusses the testing done from 2003 upon purchase and the survey after. Those numbers came back within limits. An updated phase 1 was done within the last 6-9 months. There would not be any soil removal. Toulouse asks if the executive summary in phase 1 recommended a phase 2 or if it recommended an action to perform something like an AUL to make the first floor commercial and not have residential units start after any particular elevation. Crowley does not recall any situation recommending any of those situations. Miller confirms with Flannery that all DRB concerns were addressed and that there are no additional recommendations. Miller discusses the setback or lack thereof. This building seems more of a block. Miller points out the lack of going full 6 stories still does not mitigate the block feel to the building mass. T. Siemasko discusses building scale and following the ordinance by right. T. Siemasko addresses the vegetation on the building per Miller's question. There are trellis and planters to give it a more organic feel. Miller and T. Siemasko briefly discuss the electrical and heat sourcing components. Bartley approves of the organic feel and green color palette. Beckwith asks about inclusionary housing application and if the sample agreement is one that is reflective of rental units. Beckwith points out the application submitted is one used for condominiums. Alexander noted the document language was standard. Alexander confirms the final agreement that goes before the board will be in full language compliance. Alexander clarifies his statement that it is probably going to be a rental, but not fully determined. Beckwith would like clarification between "nice" apartments versus "luxury high end apartments".T. Siemasko said this is "nice" apartments, due to solar amenities, proximity to train station, and competitive with the surrounding buildings. Crowley provides comments regarding competitive rates. Beckwith would like greater transparency on the rents in order to understand what type of buildings are developed and continue to be developed in the city. Hutchinson opens the floor for public comment. Estelle Rand, 3 Agate Street, Ward 2 Councilor This is another Ward 2 grievance by the residents. They express their fatigue at the amount of development in their Ward, but states that it infills an urban area rather than undeveloped land. Rand still pushes for a connection to the park. Would like to further discuss the park details with the project team and the feasibility of connecting to the park. Curious if they considered reaching out to the Ward 2 Civic Association as that provides an opportunity and a close setting for an intimate conversation with the neighborhood. Basso submitted a presentation to the October meeting. It was a brief presentation. T. Siemasko emailed Rand and did not receive a response. Rand replies to the comment. She was present at the October meeting. The Civic Association did not consider that a formal presentation, more of a head's up. Hutchinson asks both Rand and the applicant to discuss connecting the park and looking into a solution during the discussion with Ward 2 Civic Association next meeting. Alexander pushes the feasibility of the park connection as part of the condition. Hutchinson asks what prevents the connection from being feasible. Alexander states that the connection between the city street and city park is across private land. Crowley replies that residents on Pleasant Street own the land. Hutchinson suggests placing the connection to the public park as a condition to meet with Ward 2 Councilor Estelle Rand and determine if repairs to the park and connectivity are a feasible condition. The Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 13 language would be similar to PTC's condition describing feasibility and best efforts. Hutchinson suggests closing the public hearing with the condition. Miller asks how residents will get to the park T. Siemasko answers through Hardy or Pleasant Street. Miller said this park seems like an amenity for the residents and that some remediation of the park might be appropriate. Wynne asks if the applicant amendable for local preference. Alexander answers affirmative. There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Motion: Flannery moves to close the public hearing. Miller seconds. Motion passes 7-0. Motion: Beckwith moves to approve Site Plan Review#158-22, 119 Rantoul Street Wilso Ventures LLC &Tiny Ventures LLC subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance to the conditions in the comment letters submitted by the various department heads, Boards, and Commissions which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference including: a. Letter dated October 6, 2022 from Bill Burke of the City of Beverly Heath Department b. Letter dated November 7, 2022 from Dylan Lukich on behalf of the Design Review Board c. Letter dated November 10, from Richard Benevento, chair of the Parking and Traffic Commission d. Letter dated October 5, 2022 from Captain Jake Kreyling on behalf of the Fire Prevention Office e. Comments in the Central Square Permitting System from assistant City Engineer Lisa Chandler dated October 6, 2022 2. To the extent permissible and approved under Fair Housing and the Department of Housing and Community Development, the applicant will honor any local preference requested by the City of Beverly for residents up to the DHCD maximum of 70 percent. DHCD will require that this request be made in collaboration between the City and the applicant. 3. The applicant shall adhere to the standard conditions as delineated in the document distributed by the Planning Director, numbers 4 through 11 and incorporated herein and by reference. 4. The project shall be constructed in accordance with the Site Development Plan filed by the applicant. 5. The applicant agrees to meet with Ward 2 Councilor Estelle Rand and the Ward 2 Civic Association for discussions including the possibility of assisting in the development of access to the public park abutting and/or in close proximity to the project in a commercially reasonable and feasible manner as well as other points of interest between the two parties. Flannery seconds Discussion on the motion: Miller suggests contacting Sustainability Director Erina Keefe, and/or the Clean Energy Advisory Committee, and/or Green Beverly as either will have additional information on domestic water heat systems that use air source heat source pump systems and procurement of renewable energy. Motion carries 7-0. Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 13 Motion: Beckwith moves to approve Inclusionary Housing application #22-22 119 Rantoul Street. Flannery seconds. Motion carries 7-0. Motion: Toulouse moves to reconvene meeting. Beckwith seconds. Motion carries 7-0. S. Minor Modification Request a. Hickory Hill Way OSRD Site Plan—Lot 5, Griffin Engineering Group, LLC Bob Griffin presents on behalf of the applicant.The actual house that will be constructed is approximately 500 s.f. larger than was anticipated. As a result, a second drywell has been added. Engineering calculations show that there is a reduction in storm water runoff from the lot. Miller asks what the percentage of increase is. Griffin responds that it is plus or minus 20%. Beckwith asks if the additional drywells are contiguous. Griffin responds that they are right next to each other. Motion: Beckwith moves the Board find the modification request for Hickory Hill Way OSRD Site Plan—Lot 5 be deemed minor in nature. Flannery seconds. Motion carries 7-0. Motion: Flannery moves to approve the minor modification request for Hickory Hill Way OSRD Site Plan—Lot 5 as presented. Beckwith seconds. Motion carries 7-0. 6. No public hearings 7. Approval of minutes a. July 19, 2022 Motion: Flannery moves to accept and approve the minutes as amended. Beckwith seconds. Motion carries 7-0. b. August 16, 2022—to be reviewed at the next meeting c. September 13, 2022—to be reviewed as the next meeting 8. New/Other Business a. Accept and place into the record i. Letter from Warrenstreet Architects, Inc., dated November 4, 2022 1. Related to Building Energy Review for 350-354 Rantoul Street (Reverie 73), as requested by the Planning Board Motion: Beckwith moves to accept and place into record the letter from Warrenstreet Architects, Inc. dated November 4, 2022 into the record. Flannery seconds. Motion carries 7-0. b. Zoning amendments proposed by Planning Dept i. Recommend joint public hearing with City Council at council meeting December 5, 2022 at 8:30 p.m. Members discussed whether to have a Special Meeting on December 5. Wynne informs members that these changes are lowering the height of buildings along Cabot Street and that the change only applies to the West side of Cabot Street as the maximum height on the East side is currently 35 feet in most Planning Board November 15, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 13 locations. Wynne informs members the Mayor is committed and has publicly stated so. Gomes affirms the Mayor's level of commitment. These changes are a result of the master plan discussion. Eliminating the tall buildings overlay district, reducing the maximum height of buildings on Cabot Street and in the RHD district, and changing the parameters of the affordability requirements including lowering the threshold of applicable projects from 6 to 4 units and changing the affordability standard to 12%the units at 60%AMI. Wynne discusses the zoning changes. After deliberation, Hutchinson suggests canceling the November 22, 2022 meeting with a suggestion to meet about design standards and that the Public Hearing on the 5t"will be continued to the next Planning Board meeting. 9. Adjournment Motion: Gomes moves to adjourn. Flannery seconds. The motion carries 7-0. Meeting adjourned 11:19 pm. Next meeting scheduled 12/13/22. Google meet: Estelle Rand Adelaide Grady Nate Lewis Vivian Hudgins Rebecca Brown Tiffany Collins Danielle Spang Rodney Sinclair Charlie Wear