2005-05-02
City of Beverly, Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
BOARD: Planning Board
TOPIC: Joint Public Hearing with the City Council
DATE: May 2, 2005
PLACE: Council Chambers, Beverly City Hall
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Richard Dinkin; John Thomson,
Joanne Dunn, Eve Geller-Duffy, Jason Silva,
Charlie Harris, Ellen Flannery
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Donald Walter
OTHERS PRESENT: Leah Zambernardi, Assistant Planning
Director; Tina Cassidy, Planning Director:
RECORDER: Robin Levesque
Council President Paul Guanci calls the meeting to order at 6:30 pm
City Council Order #105: Proposed Zoning Amendment - Open Space Residential
Design Ordinance (OSRD)
Tina Cassidy, Planning Director provides an overview of the proposed zoning
amendment. She states this Ordinance was submitted earlier this year but that the time
restraints for review of the original ran out before the Council was done commenting. She
states that is the reason for the Ordinance being in front of the Board once again.
She introduces Scott Houseman, Chairman of the ZBA and co-drafter of the Ordinance.
Houseman states there are two major changes being submitted:
1. Changes suggested by the Planning Board
2. Changes by the Legal Affairs and Accounts Committee
Guanci asks the members of the Council if they have any questions.
Maureen Troubetaris, Ward 1 Councilor, asks the pro's and con's of excluding the R10
zoning district from the Ordinance.
John Burke, Ward 3 Councilor, asks a question about the wetlands being counted towards
the open space requirement and states his concerns.
1
Ronald Costa, Ward 2 Councilor, asks about whether the abutting tidelands have been
considered. He asks how the developer considers the low water mark or the high water
mark.
Houseman states that question hasn’t come up before and is a good one. He states the
Ordinance calls for buffers to be included in open space.
Costa states you could have 100ft set back off the water and at those certain set backs you
can not build. Costa states the low water mark is essential in channel conservation.
Pat Grimes makes comments.
Guanci asks the Members of the Planning Board if they have any questions. There being
none at this time, Guanci asks the residents if they have any questions
Guanci asks the Residents if they have any questions.
Joan Murphy, 36 Longmeadow Rd. states there are allot of nonconforming lots in the R6
zones. She asks how the R10 is any different. Murphy states the lots are all kinds of
shapes and sizes, that there are lots of 6000 sq. feet and 10,000 sq. ft. She asks how the
nonconforming lots are affected. She states there is less room for maneuvering without
doing harm. Murphy states that wetlands are a gift to the developer and that if they didn’t
include the wetlands there would have less development.
Renee Mary, 274 Hale St. shares her comments:
??
Page 1: add a new entry: I.1.g. to read "to protect the regional water supply from
contamination to ensure its adequacy to serve the population requirements for the
future".
??
Page 2: regarding what is a covered project: it should be written in language that
ordinary people can understand.
??
add R-10 & R-15 after R-6 as exclusions and we need to hear from the ZBA
members on this.
??
Regarding III.1.a, end of paragraph, she asks why it is a stated goal to help the
developer? She also asks why the developer is encouraged, but not required to
meet with the neighbors. Page 2: reduce the cost; do not remember seeing this in
the planning board or conservation, price reference should be deleted.
??
She asks why a landscape architect is used. She states a wetland expert is needed
instead.
??
She states that other issues not settled by the Planning Board were the mandatory
versus optional, and why, if using the mandatory approach, would we use density
bonuses.
Guanci states there is another meeting scheduled and recesses the Council's public
hearing until June 6, 2005 @ 7:00 p.m.
Dinkin recesses the Planning Board's Public Hearing until the same time.
2
City Council Order #103: Proposed Zoning Amendment - Brimbal Avenue/Sohier
Road Rezoning from IR to CG
Guanci states that Attorney Thomas Alexander is here to represent the petitioners
Attorney Thomas Alexander, 1 School St. Beverly, MA, hands out information to the
Planning Board and Councilors. He states this is a request to rezone parcels at Assessors’
Map #55, Lot #29 and Map #55, Lot #30. Alexander states the property is zoned IR and
that it has been vacant since 1962, and prior to 1962 it was used as a landfill. Alexander
states the property went on the market last year to pay off debt owed by the Catholic
Church. Alexander states the Developer is proposing a one-story building, less than 65
feet in height. Alexander states the IR zone allows for light manufacturing and office
use, and it doesn’t make sense to develop like the Cummings Center. Alexander states
the traffic with the CG will be less intensive than an IR zone. He states the peak traffic
with an IR use could be very intense. Alexander states the CG zone traffic course would
be the entire day. Alexander states this would allow taxes to come into the City.
Alexander at this time introduces Steve Cohen, President of CEA Group.
Steve Cohen, President CEA Group states that the 6 ½ acres at Rt. 128 and Brimbal Ave
was a former landfill, and hasn’t been touched for over 50 years. CEA Group is under an
agreement with the Archdiocese, which is selling the property at $2.5 million to pay off
debts. Cohen states a retail development is the best use for this site. Cohen states that the
booklet handed out tonight relates to its surroundings and has a site plan. It shows the
scale and design. He states that in order to build retail on the site, we have to re-zone. He
states that instead of asking for 5 stories, we’re asking for one. Cohen states there will be
additional reviews by the City and that the State Highway Department is also involved.
Cohen states re-zoning is the first step. Cohen states that the impact on traffic, in the
morning and afternoon (rush hour) will increase traffic in the morning by 1% and in the
afternoon by 5%. He states that we found that office development would cause more
traffic at peak hours and that retail spreads traffic throughout the day. Cohen states that
the traffic would be diverted away from the Music Theatre and traffic would be reduced
by 30 to 40 percent with the Brimbal Ave. interchange project. Cohen states that the
DEP will be closely supervising this operation. He states they will be spending $1.5
million in environmental and geotechnical costs. He states the untreated landfill must be
certified by DEP. Cohen states they will put together the top designers to clean up the
former landfill.
Larry Grossman, architect, states he’s designed many retail projects. Grossman states the
building is designed on all sides or with "360 degree architecture". He states the main
access would be Brimbal Avenue. There would be a right turn in there and a right turn
out on Sohier Road. He states it would be a mix of very small shops, of 800 s.f. or more,
and the retail will have different areas. He states this would be a down zoning from IR to
CG. Grossman states that rezoning will reduce traffic on this site and, due to the
interchange project, traffic in general will decrease to 40 percent.
3
Rich Moore with the development team states that the site has been inactive for 50+
years. He states they will be compacting. There will be a gravel cover with pavement on
top. He states that landscaping and parking will be added. He states they are using
acceptable approaches to cap a landfill and they will get approval from DEP. He states
that a 21E report has been completed and closed out. He states that there are no more
hazardous wastes. He states that an evaluation of gas generation on the site is also
evaluated and they have had lengthy discussions with the DEP. He states there is a
venting system under a concrete slab, which will vent the buildings. He states there is not
much gas because the landfill has been inactive for 50 years. They will have monitoring
in enclosed spaces.
Alexander states the City has another example, but a larger site. He states that the North
Beverly Plaza was built on a former landfill and they underwent a similar procedure for
treatment. He stated this site even had wetland resources although there are no wetland
resources identified on their site.
Dinkin asks for the zoning of surrounding parcels. Alexander states the surrounding
parcels are zoned IR. He states that Northridge is a residential development allowed by
M.G.L. Chapter 40B. Dinkin asks if the sale is contingent on a zoning change.
Alexander states that it is not.
Guanci and Dinkin recess their respective public hearings to June 20, 2005 @ 7:00 pm
Planning Board Special Meeting Immediately Following the Joint Public Hearing
Dinkin opens the special meeting and notes there will be no discussion on OSRD or the
Brimbal Avenue parcel rezoning because the public hearings have not been closed.
Zambernardi states that one ANR plan was received since the last meeting for members
to review.
SANR
a. Cailin Rd. - off Rt. 97, Cabot St.
Zambernardi states this ANR plan is a reconfiguration of the lot lines. She states that
these lots were created by a Planning Board constructive approval in the late 80’s. She
states the Planning Board had then tried to rescind the plan but the developer appealed
and won. So the subdivision was constructively approved.
Dinkin asks who the owner is.
Flannery states Jack Kelleher still has some part in it. Zambernardi states that Stanley
Bialek also has ownership. She states there is a plan for a subsidized elderly
development in this area floating out there. She states they could do it if they received a
special permit from the Zoning Board.
4
Dinkin asks if there are any additional questions or comments
Thomson asks if there is a bond. Zambernardi states she doubts there is still a bond in
effect since the subdivision occurred so long ago, but that she will have to look into that.
Thomson states his concern. Zambernardi states the lots are already created and this is a
shifting of lot lines. She states no new lots are being created.
Thomson asks if there are any building permits. Zambernardi states she doesn't believe
there are. Dinkin states they could get building permit on front parcel.
Thomson: motion to endorse the plan as one not requiring approval under the
subdivision control law. Seconded by Flannery. All members in favor. Motion carries.
5