10.03.23 BPB Minutes Final (1) City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 1 of 12
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: City of Beverly Planning Board
DATE: October 3, 2023
LOCATION: Beverly City Hall, 191 Cabot Street, 3rd Floor Council
Chambers
MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice Chair Derek Beckwith, Ellen Flannery,Nathaniel
Lewis, Wayne Miller, Sarah Bartley, George Gomes,
Rodney Sinclair(late)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Chair Ellen Hutchinson
OTHERS PRESENT: Assistant Director of Planning Ken Clawson
RECORDER: Naomi Moca
Call to Order
Vice Chair Beckwith calls the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.
Gomes: Motion to recess for public hearings. Flannery seconds. Motion
carries (5-0).
Recess for Public Hearings
1. Continued Public Hearing: Council Order#184—Proposed Amendments to the City of
Beverly Zoning Ordinance: Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance; definitions regarding
transient lodging,bed and breakfasts, and other minor clarifications. (Continued from
joint public hearing with Beverly City Council held on September 5,2023.)
City Solicitor Stephanie Williams is present. City Director of Planning and Development
Darlene Wynne is present and states the matter is a continuation from the September 5, 2023
meeting.
7:05 p.m.: Sinclair arrives.
Assistant Director Clawson reads the Certification of Evidence Review for Ellen Flannery into
the record.
Materials added to the record:
• Certification of Evidence Review for Ellen Flannery for the September 5, 2023 meeting
Wynne summarizes the matter thus far,which is a continuation of the public hearing. Wynne
states that there are some administrative clarifications, and changes in two categories: 1)the
elimination of the requirement for tandem parking and 2) a proposed option, in collaboration
with the Solicitor's Office and Engineering Department, for nonconforming uses to go before the
1
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 2 of 12
Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) for a Special Permit or Variance for that use. The object of this
proposed amendment is to allow owners of nonconforming properties to request Accessory
Dwelling Unit(ADU)use, although there is no guarantee of it being granted.
Materials added to the record:
• Chapter 300. Zoning Article XIII_ Board of Appeals §300. Article VII District
Regulations.
Solicitor Williams states that currently, the zoning states that an applicant may not seek relief
from zoning dimensional requirements in order to create an ADU. As a result of the public
hearing, the Solicitor's Office, the Planning Department, and the Engineering Department
collaborated to propose an alternative to relieve this situation, which is the option to request a
Variance or a Special Permit. Williams reads the Special Permit uses into the record.
Materials added to the record:
• Chapter 300. Zoning Article XIII. Board of Appeals §300-91. Special Permit uses.
Williams explains that as a general matter, a Special Permit for an ADU may be considered with
additional scrutiny,with the option of not approving it and/or applying conditions. By contrast, a
Variance has a stricter standard, requiring proof of practical difficulty and hardship. Williams
reads the Variance uses into the record.
Materials added to the record:
• Chapter 300. Zoning Article XIII. Board of Appeals §300-92. Variances.
Williams clarifies that currently, the language stops after Section 300-55. This proposal is to add
an amendment stating that in certain districts, an ADU may be created as long as the property
does not involve a nonconforming situation or require a Variance. If the property does involve
one of those two situations, which have subsets,the owner needs to obtain a Special Permit
before engaging in that use. Additionally, the owner may need relief from dimensional standards.
Williams emphasizes that the ZBA is in charge of this process and these scenarios are fact-
dependent.
Gomes summarizes that prior to this proposal, there was no ADU option for nonconforming
properties, and now there are two possible paths forward. The amendment came about due to the
concerns expressed at the public hearing for homeowners who do not have access to zoning
relief. Given the age of the City, many properties are nonconforming or need a Variance. This
allows an alternative to go before the ZBA instead of the use being automatically unavailable.
Miller asks if this kind of access to relief is typical for cities. Wynne answers that in researching
other cities nearby, it was found that there are a significant number that require Variances.
Flannery asks if there are residential zonings that are exceptions to this amendment. Wynne
answers that these changes will affect R districts and RMD districts.
2
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 3 of 12
Wynne states in the case of non-habitable spaces, the space would have to be upgraded to
become habitable in order to comply; for example, a garage that is being converted to housing.
The dwelling must remain owner-occupied and cannot be split into separate deeds. Sinclair
observes that renters in Beverly may find it difficult to purchase homes in Beverly, so the income
generated by the sale of a unit may help the homeowner and may give a renting family the
chance to buy a home. Wynne states that while this proposal is not attempting to solve that issue,
it may have that result. Creating ownership units is a subdivision process that already is in place.
Beckwith adds that the first house he was able to afford to buy was because it had a rentable
space and allowed him to qualify for a mortgage based on anticipated rental income. Sinclair
discusses that the proposal creates an opportunity and avenue to create more affordable housing.
The ADU number per year is under 10 in other cities, so the amendment is not offering a lot of
housing relief.
Wynne states that the zoning as it exists now is already in place such as subdivisions or condos.
Wynne states that it is difficult to compare the City to different communities as there are
different parameters; for example, Salem has an affordability limitation. Wynne states that this
amendment may allow the creation of more ADUs by removing parking limitations and
changing the rules around usage.
Diantha Phothisan of 99 Corning Street states that in the 42 Massachusetts communities with
ADUs, an average of four units are built per year, which does not address the entire housing
issue. Phothisan gives the hypothetical example of an aging homeowner living cooperatively
with a resident they elect to share their property with and states that housing is a basic human
right. Phothisan states that the Essex County Community Organization (ECCO) consists of
members of various community organizations. Phothisan encourages the Board to allow
residents the right to at least request an ADU, where previously residents could not even ask if it
were on a nonconforming property. Phothisan states that of the 42 communities with ADUs,
none of them deny Variances or Special Permits. Phothisan states that these communities leave it
to the owner to determine the best way to set up off-street parking for their property.
Mina Techwani of 215 Rantoul Street states that she came to the US from India 40 years ago as a
single woman after a divorce.Now she is a part-time student and is disabled. She previously
owned an Indian restaurant. Techwani states that she believes that the ADU amendment is a
great gift to live a better life. Techwani states that as a resident of the Beverly Housing Authority
(BHA), her concerns are traffic and not being allowed to take more classes. Techwani expresses
gratitude that the Disability Resource Center(DRC)holds monthly meetings to assist with
classes or help with applications. Techwani attends First Baptist Church, where City Council
President Julie Flowers also attends.
Paul Drake of 8 Bartlett Street states that the church he attends supports various community
organizations. Drake states that his personal rental situation being unique is the only reason he
can continue living in Beverly, and an ADU would probably not even be in his price range.
Clawson reads the email from Stefano J Basso of SV Design into the record.
3
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 4 of 12
Materials added to the record:
• email from Stefano J Basso to Director Wynne dated September 29, 2023
Wynne clarifies that an ADU would have to make its entrance accessible and must comply with
ADA requirements and that the second front door would have to appear to be secondary. Wynne
explains that in the previous language, tandem parking is not allowed, and this amendment
changes that so that tandem parking is permitted, as long as the property owner supplies one off-
street parking space per unit. Wynne explains that the height of 35 feet was chosen because it is
the existing height for all the applicable districts, and the ADU has to be smaller in height than
the primary dwelling anyway.
Bartley discusses the difference between the ADU amendment and other housing options, such
as creating a condominium. Wynne emphasizes the importance of communicating to the public
the different paths available to them so people have as many tools within the home as possible.
Wynne reads the language that does not allow for a condo creation, emphasizing that it is a very
distinct path from an ADU.
Sinclair raises the question of what else the City can do to address the housing issue and what the
City will do to make this ADU amendment successful. Wynne states that the ADU amendment is
now an additional tool in the City's proverbial toolbox, and the City is strategizing ways to
market it, educate the community on how to access this tool, and make clear the steps needed. If
passed, the City will track the amendment, observe hurdles that people may encounter, and
perhaps adjust the zoning ordinance accordingly.
Wynne summarizes that this matter is continued from the September 5, 2023 meeting, the City
Council closed the public hearing two weeks ago, and the Board has until Friday, October 6,
2023, to make the recommendation to the Council incorporating the changes the City has
proposed.
Flannery: Motion to close the hearing. Gomes seconds. Motion carries (6-0).
Gomes: Motion to recommend that the City Council approve the ADU proposal as
drafted with the amendments as discussed. Flannery seconds. Motion carries
(6-0).
The members discuss that this proposal is a starting step toward addressing the housing issue and
may make a difference for families. Gomes expresses gratitude to the Planning Department.
Bartley expresses gratitude to the community members present for highlighting basic dignity,
accessibility, and aging in place, as this conversation would have been different if they had not
been present.
Flannery: Motion to reconvene regular meeting. Gomes seconds. Motion carries
(6-0).
4
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 5 of 12
2. City discussion with Planning Board regarding unaccepted streets
Mayor Michael Cahill is present and expresses gratitude to the Board. Cahill states that while the
City has approximately 650 roads, about 200 of them are not fully accepted public ways due to
the unconventional ways they were developed over the City's long history. Cahill states that the
Planning Department, the Solicitor's Office, and the Engineering Department have been
collaborating on addressing this issue for one year because in order to be able to spend tax
dollars on upgrades and repairs, the streets need to be public ways. Cahill states that his intent
today is to notify the Board that in the coming months, City streets and neighborhoods will be
presented to the Board to be deemed ready for repairs and rebuilding. The City Council will need
to vote to approve them as accepted streets. Cahill expresses the hope that the City will be able to
accomplish this process with a couple of neighborhoods per year.
Williams explains that the City Council will vote to lay out a way as public and refer the layout
plan to the Board, which then has 45 days to provide an advisory report. Cahill expresses hope
that the process will happen efficiently, as streets can be grouped together; for example, one
subdivision may encompass nine streets.
Flannery: Motion to recess for public hearings. Miller seconds. Motion carries
(6-0).
3. Public Hearing: Definitive Subdivision Plan—63 Sturtevant Street—Symes Permitting
and Development LLC
a. Application shows an approximate 174-foot extension of Sturtevant Street with a
hammerhead turnaround creating three new residential building lots in the R-10
zoning district.
Clawson reads the legal notice. Jeffrey Rhuda of Symes Associates and Bob Griffin of Griffin
Engineering are present. Griffin summarizes that the preliminary plan was discussed in July
2023. The parcel is in the R10 zoning district, so 100 feet of frontage is required. Griffin presents
the aerial photo of the area showing that it is currently mostly wooded. A common driveway runs
through the property and there is a preschool in the area. It is a 1.1-acre parcel. Griffin presents
the site plan with the elevations, the existing water and sewer lines, and the existing drainage
flowing toward Beverly School for the Deaf. The project will extend Sturtevant Street by 100
feet, creating three R10 lots. The project is proposing a hammerhead layout at the end of
Sturtevant Street, allowing emergency and delivery vehicle turnaround. The site plan shows the
extension of the street and proposed pavement of the subdivision. The project also proposes to
widen and re-pave the existing 20-foot section of Sturtevant Street. Griffin describes the
stormwater runoff plan.
Griffin describes the proposed utility extensions. There will be forced pump connections tying
into the common existing sewer line on Sturtevant Street. The plan proposes to extend the water
line to install a new hydrant that will serve the lot and adjacent properties. There will be one
additional street light, a separate location for trash collection on the side of the road, and an
5
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 6 of 12
additional sidewalk. There is an existing common drive coming from the south, and Griffin
proposes to add signs cautioning drivers to slow down in the area of the preschool and to add no
parking signs on the hammerhead. Miller clarifies with Griffin that there will be a single
sidewalk on one side of the street and the streetlight will be located opposite Lot 1.
Griffin details the waiver requests:
1) Due to the small project size, the plans are drawn at 1"=20' instead of 1"=40'.
2)No separate drawing with an index. Due to the small project size, a separate index sheet
showing the entire subdivision at 1"=100' scale is not provided.
3) Reduce the pavement and right-of-way width to 20 feet from 32 feet, and to 40 feet from 50
feet.
4) Eliminate the requirement to map trees greater than six inches in diameter at breast height due
to the need to remove all trees to allow for the construction in the site's compact area.
Miller asks if, from the perspective of the developer, there are any trees worth saving. Griffin
states that he believes there are no trees worth saving on the site.
5) The length of the dead-end road will now be 975 feet from 800 feet.
6) Hammerhead driveway instead of cul de sac due to limited available space.
7) Reduce the drainage easement width to 15 feet wide from 20 feet.
8) Reduce the size of the water main on Sturtevant Street to the hydrant to a six-inch water line
from an eight-inch line.
9) Eliminate the seeded grass strip at the sidewalk as there is not enough room because the
sidewalk is adjacent to the curb.
10) Sidewalk on one side only instead of two due to space limitations.
11) Eliminate a street-mounted fire alarm system,which has become antiquated with the use of
cell phones, and may cause future maintenance issues for the Fire Department.
Miller points out that Section 375-14E of the ordinance limits dead-end streets to 500 feet, while
the proposal is nearly double that length at 975 feet. Griffin explains that the street is already 800
feet with no turnaround opportunity, and this project proposes to extend it by 175 feet and add a
turnaround point. Griffin states that the plan proposes planting eight street trees 20 to 30 feet
apart, with the species to be determined based on the tree warden's recommendation. Griffin
states that he is of the opinion that that is a reasonable number of trees.
Sinclair discusses the proposed caution sign in the area where speeding vehicles come from the
common driveway. Griffin states that the applicant plans to repair any potholes and pave the
street. Sinclair asks if the applicant has explored alternatives for surfaces that could decrease
vehicle speed or speed bumps. Beckwith states that when the preliminary plan was discussed, the
Board asked that the applicant explore ways to address the speed factor in both directions, from
the road to the driveway and vice versa. Griffin states that the applicant is amenable to
considering structural things to slow vehicle speed in addition to the signs. Lewis comments that
while signs may not dissuade drivers from speeding, structural formations are effective in
slowing vehicles down.
6
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 7 of 12
Gomes asks about the drainage plan details and the total loss of pervious surface. Griffin states
that the applicant provided a drainage report to the City, which entails capturing roof runoff into
two catch basins and routing it to the infiltration basin, allowing the water to re-absorb into the
ground. Griffin states that the subdivision's homeowners' association (HOA)will be responsible
for complying with the annual inspection required by the City. Griffin states that if a sprinkler
system is required by the Fire Department, it will be added to the subdivision. Griffin states that
at this time there is no plan to construct a roof runoff irrigation system, but there is space to do
that if the homeowners decide to.
Flannery discusses that the Engineering Department report indicates that the sewer line cannot be
installed as shown. Griffin states that the plan is to extend the sewer line another 60 feet, and the
developer is amenable to discussing that at the time of construction. If it is not possible, the
applicant will ask for permission to tie into the private sewer line. Griffin also states that a fire
hydrant flow test will be performed and that a Homeowners' Association will be formed.
Materials added to the record:
• Letter from Jodi and Patrick Connolly of 60 Matthies Street
Jodi Connolly of 60 Matthies Street is present and states that Griffin's statement that certain trees
are not worth saving is why she and her husband Patrick Connolly are present at today's
meeting. Connolly states that their property is adjacent to Lot 223F, with a fence that abuts Lot 2
of the proposed subdivision. The fence is in place well within their property line because the soil
at the property boundary is not stable enough to support the fence. Connolly expresses concern
about the integrity of the land with the proposed clearing of all the trees because the wooded area
has a stabilizing effect on the downward slope of the property. Connolly states that the trees have
been in place for longer than the 10 years they have lived there. Since purchasing the property,
Connolly and her husband have installed a pool and deck and fears that clearing of the land will
affect the integrity of the structures. Connolly states that at the time of purchasing their property,
they were told that the site of the proposed subdivision was "unbuildable." Connolly states that
the greenery has provided a beautiful natural barrier and habitat for deer, foxes, and coyotes, and
its removal is a travesty. Connolly states that a retaining wall will not be constructed and the
trees will not be replenished. Connolly points out that the neighborhood is somewhat small and it
is unreasonable to squeeze three houses into the space. Connolly states that there are families
with small children living in the neighborhood and the residents did not know about the project
until Ward I City Councilor Todd Rotondo alerted them.
Clawson clarifies that the plot was considered unbuildable in terms of zoning due to having
insufficient frontage to satisfy the zoning requirements. With the extension of the frontage with
the project, the site is now considered buildable.
Griffin states that the chain link fence at the Connolly property is encroaching on the site
property. Connolly states that the fence is within their property line. Griffin states that that is
what the surveyor said, and the developer is happy to work with Connolly's surveyor. Griffin
7
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 8 of 12
states that maintaining that degree of slope can be accomplished with lawn, additional
reinforcement, and adding fill to stabilize it. Griffin points out that it is not in anyone's interest
for the ground to fall. Sinclair addresses the manner in which Griffin is speaking. Beckwith
emphasizes thoughtful, civil conversation.
Rhuda states that Symes Development has built 400 homes in the City and always works with
residents. Rhuda states that Symes recognizes that it is working near people's homes, and is
committed to coordinating and cooperating with residents. Rhuda highlights that from a safety
point of view, as it exists, Sturtevant Street is unsafe and it is being improved with the
turnaround. Rhuda states that he disagrees with Griffin's statement that there are no trees worth
saving, and while it is impossible to do construction without removing some trees, the developer
is committed to doing some replanting.
Dan Mascola of 62 Matthies is present and states he shares Connolly's concerns. Mascola states
he is concerned that blasting and chipping may be necessary if the construction hits ledge. From
a stability standpoint, Mascola is concerned about his pool, retaining wall, and shed. From a
noise standpoint, Mascola is concerned about the nuisance especially since at least 12 children
reside nearby; thus, Mascola is requesting that blasting be prohibited. Mascola states he bought
his property in 2021 and was told by a real estate agent that the subdivision's site was
unbuildable. Mascola states he feels that he was lied to and he is requesting compensation.
Philip Lavoie of 62 Sturtevant Street is present and states that he built his house in 1982 and
installed water and sewer with the proper permits. Lavoie states that he is concerned that the
subdivision will tie into his water and sewer line that he paid for and pulled the permits for.
Lavoie points out that three more homes may create wear and tear and maintenance issues going
forward.
Griffin states that there are examples of projects with five or six houses on a two-inch line,
proving that it is possible, but if requested,the developer is happy to run the line 60 more feet
and avoid Lavoie's line. Griffin states that Lavoie may even want to tie into the subdivision's
line as it may provide improved pressure. Griffin states that with regard to blasting,while it is
not possible to guarantee no blasting, a hydraulic hammer may be used. Griffin points out that a
no-blasting restriction will likely extend the duration of the noise.
Lavoie asks if all the adjacent homes will be surveyed, and Griffin answers that a pre-blast
survey of the neighboring houses will be conducted. Griffin states the developer will try to do the
project without any blasting if possible, but cautions that he cannot rule it out.
Lavoie states that when he built his house he hit ledge at 3.5 to 4 feet and Griffin agrees that the
test pits dug on the site support that data. Rhuda states that Symes plans to meet with the abutters
individually.
8
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 9 of 12
Patrick Connolly of 60 Matthies Street points out that Sturtevant Street would not need to be
extended if the three houses were not being built. The developer is extending the street to comply
with the frontage zoning requirement so that the project can be built.
Martha Mari of 55 Sturtevant Street states she has lived there her whole life. Mari proposes
conducting an environmental study and cites the example of the recent flooding and failed
retaining wall in North Andover. Mari asks for clarification on the sign that states Dead End.
Mari states that she has observed vehicles speeding and has even called the police with her
concerns. Clawson explains that the dead end has a driveway at the end.
Mari asks why the daycare does not use the Route 62 entrance. Mari states that removing
vegetation that supports the properties is a concern. Mari states that it was not brought to the
neighbors' attention that there would be an HOA for those three homes. Clawson explains that a
HOA is a City requirement for this type of subdivision. Clawson elaborates that because the
extension is a private way, an HOA must be established. Beckwith and Clawson explains that a
stormwater study, not an environmental study, is a City requirement for this type of subdivision.
Karen Kiley of 61 Sturtevant Street is present and states that she has lived there all her life. Kiley
expresses concern since her father, who works in construction, encountered ledge when he was
installing her pool. Kiley asks whether the site will remain a right-of-way since it is not a
recognized road. Kiley asks who will be responsible for maintaining it after the initial
construction if it is not a recognized road.
Griffin explains that the HOA will be responsible for maintenance. Griffin explains the
difference between the extension of a street versus a private driveway. It is a 20-foot driveway
easement being used as a de facto throughway. Kiley asks what the rules of the right-of-way are
and who has access to it. Clawson states that it is an unusual situation and that driveways are
usually to access private property.
Kiley expresses concern because she had her pump that ties into the sewer line repaired last year,
costing her over$5,000. Kiley is concerned that it will back up her pump and necessitate another
costly repair. Beckwith answers that the project's engineer will meet with the City Engineer for
that exact concern. If an agreement cannot be reached, the line will be extended an additional 60
feet approximately at 56 Sturtevant Street. Kiley expresses that it is a quiet neighborhood.
Bartley asks if there are multiple solutions, and which City departments should residents address
their concerns with. Clawson clarifies that the Parking and Traffic Commission (P&TC)does not
review subdivision plans unless this Board requests it. Clawson clarifies that the three houses do
not change that existing condition and the HOA is responsible for the connections to the utilities.
Betty Spak of 39 Sturtevant Street states that while there may be on average two additional cars
per new house, the improvement of the street may encourage drivers to make use of it even
more. Rhuda observes that drivers tend to speed on Sturtevant Street in the mornings to avoid the
traffic lights and suggests some type of speed table at the 400-foot marker.
9
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 10 of 12
Sinclair observes that the owner of that property may help resolve the issue. Rhuda suggests
converting it into a one-way with a"do not enter" sign. Clawson states that the City does not
have the right to do that as it is a private way. Rhuda suggests constructing a speed table at about
the midway point of Sturtevant Street.
The members discuss keeping the hearing open so that they may conduct individual site visits in
the interim. Miller states that he has visited and observes that it is a challenging site. Flannery
suggests that site visits be done individually so there is no violation of open meeting law.
Griffin and Rhuda agree that the applicant will conduct the water flow test before the hearing
closes.
Flannery: Motion to continue the Public Hearing to the October 24, 2023 meeting. Miller
seconds. Motion carries (6-0).
Flannery: Motion to reconvene the regular meeting. Gomes seconds. Motion carries (6-0).
Reconvene Meeting
4. Minor Modification request: Site Plan Review #156-22—6 Rantoul Street(formerly
known as 26,28,28R Cabot Street and 4-6, 8 Rantoul Street)—Procopio Companies
Tyler Palermo and David Roach of Procopio Companies and Miranda Siemasko of Glovsky and
Glovsky are present. Roach summarizes the minor modifications being proposed:
1) The water service room needs to be moved to the Goat Hill Lane side of the building
because, during the cutting and capping of the utilities for demolition,the main was
found to be on the opposite side of the intersection. A new fire hydrant will be installed
on Goat Hill Lane.
2) The dumpster needs to be moved and a corral will be created in the parking lot by
creating a border, made out of chain link fence with black slats, around compact parking
spaces.
3) The transformer needs to be moved due to National Grid setback requirements and will
be placed in the area where the trash room was located originally.
4) The concave wall where the transformer was located originally, along the Cabot Street
sidewalk,will be straightened and thus increase the walkable sidewalk area
5) The curb will be pulled back as the traffic signal creates a pinch point where pedestrians
cannot circulate comfortably along the sidewalk. Beckwith asks for the location of the
entrance and egress and Roach explains that the garage is the egress while the main
access to the building is unchanged.
6) The roof deck configuration needs to be moved to the front corner of the building as the
original plan made the 100-foot walk to access it unrealistic.
7) Six-inch fresh air vents need to be installed. Roach states that the plan does not show the
finalized design for the roof mechanicals and that condensers are not desirable above
apartments due to the noise.
10
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3,2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 11 of 12
Roach explains that instead of increasing the commercial space with the repositioning of the
transformer, he opted to increase the fitness center space by approximately 500 square feet.
Beckwith opens up the discussion to determine whether the application is minor. Siemasko
clarifies that while the modifications are packaged together, it is possible to vote on each one
individually. Clawson explains to the Board that if the modification is deemed to be not minor, it
will re-open the whole process. Miller points out that the mechanicals on the rooftop would be
decreased if it used a geothermal system,but the amount of power generated would not offset the
amount of energy used for this project. Roach states that he is nonetheless still likely to convert
to solar in the future as it will decrease common utilities.
Flannery: Motion to deem the modification request for Site Plan Review 9156-22 - 6
Rantoul Street as minor. Gomes seconds. Motion carries (6-0).
Flannery: Motion to grant the minor modification request for Site Plan Review 9156-22 -
6 Rantoul Street as presented. Gomes seconds. Motion carries (6-0).
5. Adopt Fiscal Year 2024 Fee in lieu of Affordable Housing Units —update of Table 1 per
Chapter 315 Inclusionary Housing Regulations
Clawson summarizes that the update will go into the zoning ordinance to update Chapter 315,
Table 1 based on sales from fiscal year 2023 of the various neighborhoods in the City. Clawson
presents the updated table, chapter 315 attachment 5 appendix E.
Flannery: Motion to adopt the fee in lieu of Affordable Housing units as presented for
2024. Gomes seconds. Motion carries (6-0).
6. Approval of minutes (as available):
a. November 15,2022
b. December 13,2022
c. January 18,2023
d. March 7,2023
e. March 29,2023
L April 24,2023
g. June 21,2023
h. July 18,2023
Flannery: Motion to continue to the October 24, 2023 meeting. Gomes seconds. Motion
carries (6-0).
7. Adjournment
Lewis: Motion to adjourn. Sinclair seconds. Motion carries unopposed.
11
City of Beverly Planning Board
October 3, 2023
Meeting Minutes
Page 12 of 12
Meeting adjourns at 10:05 p.m.
The next regular meeting of the Planning Board is scheduled for Tuesday, October 24,
2023.
12