2011-06-21CITY OF BEVERLY MASSACHUSETTS
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
BOARD OR COMMISSION: Planning Board
SUBCOMMITTEE: -
DATE: Tuesday, June 21, 2011
LOCATION: Beverly City Hall, Council Chamber, 3 rd Floor
PLANNING BOARD
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard Dinkin, Vice Chairman John Thomson,
Charles Harris, Ellen Flannery, David Mack, James Matz
MEMBERS ABSENT: Ellen Hutchinson, Michael O'Brien
OTHERS PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director, Leah Zambernardi
RECORDER: Diana Ribreau
Dinkin called the Regular Meeting of Beverly Planning Board to order at 7:30 p.m.
Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans (SANR's)
a. Corner of L.P. Henderson Road and Sam Fonzo Drive — City of Beverly and Cicoria Tree
Service/Mark Cicoria
Zambernardi informed the Planning Board that the applicant did not submit a SANR in time for
this meeting, therefore it will not be heard tonight.
b. 11 Whitehall Circle (a.k.a. Boyles Street) and 44 Boyles Street — Manor Homes
Development and Kavanaugh.
Bob Griffin from Griffin Engineering reviewed the plan for the Board and presented a map of the
previously approved subdivision plan highlighting in yellow the old lot line. He stated that the
land south of the yellow line is owned by Manor Homes Development. The subdivision plans
filed did not completely describe the perimeter of parcels A, B, C, and D and various distances
on the intermediate lot line had been left off the plan. Griffin said that no new lots are being
created nor is there new frontage. The plans are the result of two lots (Lot 27 and Lot 32) with
the same boundaries as on the approved subdivision plan. The subject is the process of the
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 2 of 17
conveyance of the land from Manor Homes to Mr. Kavanaugh. Griffin added that 11 Whitehall
Circle is an unimproved lot that was approved as part of the 2008 Subdivision Plan.
Thomson made a motion to endorse the plan as presented. Motion seconded by Harris.
Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.
C. 93 and 103 Hart Street MacQuarrie and Cabot
Zambernardi described the property. She stated that Parcel C and D as shown on the plan are
owned by MacQuarrie. The proposal is to cut off parcel C from MacQuarrie's land and convey
it to the Cabot's. Zambernardi stated that Parcel D is MacQuarrie's lot, which is not a new
building lot in the R15 Zoning and will continue to comply with the R15 zoning law. Parcel C
will not be a building lot on its own.
Matz asked a clarifying question. Zambernardi responded.
Thomson made a motion to endorse the SANR plan. Motion seconded by Flannery.
Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.
Pending Application for Modification of Wellington Heights Definitive Subdivision (a.k.a.
Oak Hill Estates Subdivision) — Request for Waiver of Owner Signature on Form C
Application — Glenn Wood on behalf of Roundy Estates, LLC
Zambernardi read a letter submitted by Wood on behalf of his client to the Planning Board dated
June 20, 2011 requesting a continuance.
Harris made a motion to accept the request for an extension to the July 19, 2011 Public
Meeting. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.
Dinkin called the meeting to recess until 7:45 p.m. at which time the Planning Board will
reconvene for the scheduled Public Hearing.
Public Hearing: Special permit Application #127 — Convert existing property to 32 studio
apartments for supportive veterans housing with additional studio unit for live -in
responder — CC Zone — 60 Pleasant Street (a /k/a 62 Pleasant Street) — Pleasant Street
Apartments — Windover Properties, LLC
Zambernardi read the public notice for the record.
Attorney Miranda Gooding, Glovsky and Glovsky, presented the proposed plans on behalf of the
applicant, Windover Development. Gooding informed those present that she is accompanied by
several representatives that will be available for questions. Present are: Lee Dellicker,
Windover Development, Betsy Collins and Doreen Bushashia from Peabody Properties.
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 3 of 17
Gooding reviewed the special permit request under Section 29 -17.0 of the Zoning Ordinance,
which requires authorization of a multi - family dwelling use in the CC District where more than
75% of the floor area of the building will be used for residential use. The property consists of a
7,000 s.f parcel of property of which there is 50 feet of frontage at 60 Pleasant Street and the
private way on Court Street. Gooding went into the building's history stating that the building
has been used as a nonconforming warehouse for at least 10 years. Since purchased by Windover
Development in 2006, the building has been leased for operation as a self - storage facility. The
request will create a conforming use by special permit to authorize the conversion of the property
to 32 studio apartments for use as permanent, supportive veterans housing, together with one
additional studio unit for a live -in responder. In addition to the residential use, the first floor will
be used for veterans counseling and vocational training as well as offices for administrative
purposes. There are exterior renovations proposed but no exterior expansion of the building
footprint. The units will range from 350 -375 s.f and will include an efficiency kitchen and
private bathroom. There will be a common area laundry and vocational services and additional
space available for recreation.
Gooding informed the Board that there is one correction on the application. The Local Veterans
Affairs Agent that was originally planned to have an office on -site has potentially agreed to
move to another location. Commercial space will be available for lease if in fact the space
indicated is not used for the Local Veterans Affair Agent. The floor plans have been revised to
show the designation of commercial space to avoid any confusion. Gooding continued to say
that the newly restored building will be compliant to all ADA requirements, also noted on the
floor plans. There are two units that are handicap accessible and the remainder of the units will
be adaptable to handicap accessibility. The common areas will be compliant with ADA as well.
The renovation will be done by Windover Development. Windover Development has requested
historic tax credits to assist in funding the project. The project will be compliant with National
Park Service Standards. The property will be professionally managed by Peabody Properties.
Gooding gave a brief overview on the background of the company.
Gooding stated that on May 23, 2011, Windover Development conducted a neighborhood
meeting to all residential abutters that had questions or concerns about the project so that they
could hear those concerns and comments and answer questions to the best of their ability before
this meeting. Gooding added that Windover Development has had considerable support from
state and local governments and feels that Windover Development has already made a marked
difference in the property since it was purchased and the project will greatly enhance the
neighborhood.
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 4 of 17
Lee Dellicker, President of Windover Development, gave a brief overview of Windover's vision
at Depot Square and the surrounding areas. Dellicker presented different views of the original
building and what the building looks like now in addition to plans for the exterior.
Dellicker reiterated that Windover has applied for historic tax credits and has already been
granted $400,000 so far and in total will be eligible for $1.1 million. There are a series of steps
to get that money but the funding will make the building an outstanding one. Dellicker presented
drawings of Depot Square and the surrounding areas to help viewers understand what their vision
has been. They have worked closely with the MBTA and explained a variety of schemes of how
they have not been able to complete everything they had envisioned but they are doing their best
with what the market is at the time. He added that the location of the building in question has
always been a challenge in their overall development plan. There were plans to have a
public /private partnership with the "T" and combine the residential /commercial needs with the
commuter parking needs. However, the "T" ended up going in a different direction. The "T"
decided to go with an RFP and with that, took several sites that Windover owned by eminent
domain. Dellicker pointed out on graphics presented what Windover owns today and projects
they are currently working on. Dellicker told the Board that Windover Development is and has
been heavily invested in the neighborhood and feels that they are making the best use of the
property.
Thomson asked Dellicker if he knows where the parking garage is projected to be. Dellicker
showed the Board what he believes are the MBTA's latest plans.
Dellicker went on to say that he was introduced to an outfit called Caritas Communites that
works with North Shore Veterans who have purchased the property previously known as the
"Press Box ". He was educated on the need for veteran housing from what Caritas Communities
has been doing to help. In the process, he was also introduced to DHCD (Department of Housing
and Community Development) and found even more reasons for the need to assist veterans with
housing. Windover started looking for a partner who understands the complexities of funding
and understands veterans housing and operating and managing this type of service. After their
research, they found that Peabody Properties was the best fit for the project. Dellicker feels that
Peabody Properties has similar values and culture as Windover. Peabody Properties has been
involved with veteran housing and experience with funding for many years. He noted that
Peabody Properties also manages the Millery across the street. In closing, Dellicker reviewed
phase one and two of their plans between Depot Square and the Weaver Site and added that they
have been consistent with high quality projects and would not be proposing a use for the
proposed building site if he thought it would jeopardize the value of the 63 unit market building
next to it (Depot Square).
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 5 of 17
Doreen Bushashia, Director of Resident Properties - Peabody Properties, introduced herself and
gave an overview of Peabody Properties mission statement and their approach to management.
Currently, they manage 10,000 units in Massachusetts with affordable housing and supportive
services. Peabody Properties is an experienced long -term management company but is also
experienced with the population in need. Bushashia submitted for viewing a portfolio showing a
number of awards and recognition from the State. Peabody Properties has a full complement of
professionals and experts in all different areas including a grant writer. They are also licensed by
the State for a foster care program. In addition, they have personal care and homemaking
services, which shows they are very committed to the affordable housing model. Peabody
Properties has a good track record with many awards that prove that they are a good fit for this
particular property in serving special populations. Bushashia described the model of staffing that
will be available for the building. She added that the building is not open to the general public.
Bushashia closed by saying that Peabody Properties has a long track record for managing
affordable permanent housing and they welcome the opportunity to work on this project.
Betsy Collins, Director of Development - Peabody Properties, reviewed their plans for the
project. Sufficient funding has been secured for the proposed project. Peabody Properties has
been successful in getting long -term commitments from HUD for rental subsidies. Plans to hire
a Case Manager are in place that will be funded fully by HUD. The project is dependent on state
and municipal resources under Chapter 115. The resident portion is 30% of the individual
income and the subsidy received by HUD pays the remainder of the housing fee. There are
requirements for the residents that receive the subsidy. Because it is a certified Historic
Building, tax credits have been available for funding. In addition there is private equity money
coming in. They have accumulated resources to begin the project as a permanent resource. In
closing, Collins said that they have met with the Mayor and Congressman Tierney whom have
been very supportive and have helped in getting the rental subsidies.
Dinkin said that in comments he heard there was only one stream of income stated that would be
taken care of by HUD. He asked where funding is coming from to support the remainder of the
staff Collins responded that other staff members are funded by rental income from the building
and that the project is fully funded and within the budget.
Dinkin asked about the extent of a long -term commitment. Collins responded that it is a 15 -year
commitment that is subject to renewal at that time. At the end of the initial commitment the
option to choose a 10 or 20 year renewal is available.
Matz asked for an explanation for the plans that show the case manager office and vocational
classroom on the first floor, which seems to be replaced by commercial space on the new plan.
Gooding responded that those services will still be there however they defined everything that
was commercial as opposed to residential for clarification purposes on the plan.
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 6 of 17
Matz asked about available parking spaces. Gooding responded that there is space on -site for 3
cars and the property is within 500 feet of public parking.
Matz asked if there is a project that has been done that is similar to the proposed project and if
so, where the nearest location is located. Boushashia distributed a package of all the properties
that Peabody Properties currently manages. Boushashia noted that not all of the sites they
manage house veterans.
Matz asked if the facility is for men only. Boushashia responded no, however the property is not
suitable for children.
Matz asked how Peabody Properties plans to manage other homeless people outside the building
and if it is an issue at other facilities they manage. Boushashia responded that they have a very
proactive process in place and explained the incident follow -up process. Collins added
comments relating to the processes in place.
Dinkin asked how many units that house veterans are on the North Shore and how many police
incident reports they have on record. Boushashia responded that Peabody Properties has close to
1,000 units but they do not have exact numbers for incident reports available however that there
have been very few. Boushashia stated that they work very closely and collaboratively with
local police departments and the local neighborhood watch. In addition, they have onsite
satellite to police stations and security onsite between staff and the building itself. They continue
to work on the front end and be preventative by giving education up front to avoid as many
incidents as possible. She also stated they have data which can be made available if the Planning
Board wishes to review it.
Dinkin requested to see the data pertaining to incident reports from projects that house veterans
that are managed by Peabody Properties. Collins agreed to gather information to satisfy Dinkin's
request.
Gooding added that this was brought up at the neighborhood meeting. There had been frequent
complaints of vandalism when the building had been used as a warehouse. By bringing a good
active use with onsite management 24 hours a day with this project she believes the situation
would be actively improved for the neighborhood and it would hopefully eliminate the number
of incidents.
Mack asked if they anticipate the commercial rental income is necessary to fund any portion of
the project. Collins responded no.
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 7 of 17
Thomson asked if the project is subject to an affordable housing restriction recorded with the
registry of deeds. Gooding responded that it is financed in part by tax credits. The Ordinance
for Affordable Housing is almost identical to the DHCD for other affordable housing restrictions.
Thomson asked if there is an affordability requirement. Collins responded that it is 60% of the
area median. Thomson followed by asking if the project is designed for one or two occupants.
Gooding responded that it is intended for one occupant per unit. Thomson then asked what
happens if a person gets married. Gooding responded that the space is restricted by size of the
unit by the State and if a situation arises where there would be a need for more than one occupant
together, they would work with that resident to find suitable space for them.
Thomson asked if Peabody Properties could provide a general idea of the number of homeless
veteran's there are in Beverly. Collins responded that the latest data she has from 2009, there are
1,890 veterans in the State of Massachusetts and that 12% of the actual homeless population is
veterans in the State.
Thomson asked what happens if there comes a time where the need for veterans housing is no
longer needed. Gooding responded that it is not likely to happen but in the event that were to
happen she feels there is ample need for affordable housing for the general population. Collins
added an example of a building they manage with AIDS patients and the use for that type of
housing is still for affordable housing units.
Mack asked if the tenants are required to sign a lease. Gooding responded yes, a 12 -month lease
is required.
Dinkin asked that Zambernardi read the comment letters submitted for the record.
June 20, 2011 — Sergeant William Page, Beverly Police Department
June 16, 2011 — William T. Burke, Director of Public Health
June 14, 2011 — Amy Maxner, Environmental Planner; Conservation Commission
June 13, 2011 — William Fiore, Beverly Fire Department
June 07, 2011 — Email; Eric Barber, City Engineer
June 06, 2011 — Arthur Daignault, ADA Coordinator, City of Beverly
May 20, 2011 — Email; Michelle Gordon — Resident of Gateway
June 20, 2011 — Lynn Pellino, Executive Director, North Shore Veterans Counseling Services,
Inc.
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 8of17
No date - Rocco L. Pensiaro, Veteran — 116 Rantoul Street
Gooding presented closing remarks. Gooding corrected for the record that Windover has always
represented that the project is for individual veterans and it has never been intended for veteran's
families. Gooding added that the project satisfies the requirements for a special permit because
more than 75% of the total floor area of the building will be used for residences in the CC
Zoning District. Under Section 29 -28.0 the Planning Board is required to evaluate the project
against criteria that was read aloud for the record and also included in the staff report. Gooding
commented how Windover Development meets each of the criteria. Windover Development
finds that this proposed project is appropriate use for the property.
Mack asked about the type of security that is planned for the site and what type of insurance is
mandated. Collins responded that they have comprehensive insurance for all the properties they
manage. In reference to security, the staffing plan is used to have a security presence. Security
cameras and flex hours are in the budget for additional security presence during certain times.
The building is also a locked building.
Harris stated that he is a 7 -year veteran and he applauds what the project's purpose is. He said
that it seems to be a concern with what type of individual will be housed in this building and he
asked for an explanation on the screening requirements for the veteran's that apply. Collins
responded that they must be a veteran and provide documentation of homelessness. Boushashia
added that it is mandated in the tenant selection plan by the State to meet all standard
qualifications such as references, ability to pay rent, criminal records, etc.
Harris asked for confirmation on plans for the MBTA parking lot adjacent to this site. Gooding
responded that the plan is for a multi -level garage with approximately 500 parking spaces and it
will also have commercial space for lease as well.
Thomson asked what the time frame is to construct the MBTA garage. Gooding responded that
the estimates known to her is the project is to begin January 2012 and will be finished in 2013.
Gooding added that for the proposed plans before them this evening Windover Development
foresees the site to be construction ready by the end of this calendar year.
Thomson said for clarification to the public, Windover is before the Planning Board tonight
because their plans propose using more than 75% of the building for veteran's housing which
requires a special permit. If the plans presented were less than 75% they would not require a
special permit or be before the Planning Board for a vote. Gooding responded yes.
Thomson requested clarification on the meaning of a veteran and asked if it is anyone who
served in the military not just those that served inaction. Gooding responded yes.
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 9 of 17
Dinkin opened the meeting up to clarifying questions from the public
Victor Capozzi, 138 Bridge Street, Beverly, stated that he is on the Board of Directors for the
North Shore Veterans Counseling Services, Inc. and also a Vietnam veteran. Capozzi stated that
the parking garage is vague and poses much concern. There is no garage yet therefore there is no
guaranteed staff parking available beyond the three spaces mentioned in addition to those that
will be coming and going from the site.
Gooding responded that the population being served will be homeless and not likely to have a
vehicle but agreed that in the future there may be cars owned by residents with the help of the
services provided onsite to get the veterans back on their feet. Gooding added that the site is in
walking distance to transit bus and train lines and it is likely that residents will live without a
vehicle. In the event residents do own a vehicle, there are mechanisms in place. Parking passes
will be provided and subsidies will offset the cost of the passes. Gooding said that the location
of the facility is a perfect offset not to have a car and for those that do, arrangements will be
available to those residents. Gooding added that the site complies with parking by the City
Zoning Ordinance prospective.
Robert Desjardins 21 Swan Street, stated he is a 33 year veteran of US Army and that he
supports homeless veteran's 100 %. He asked how many homeless veterans there are in Beverly
and what the projections of homeless veterans are in 1, 3, and 5 years from now in the City.
Scott Houseman, Appleton Avenue, Beverly, stated that in the past year the River House has
provided at least temporary housing for approximately six or less homeless veterans. Gooding
responded that it is not foreseen that the proposed facility will house only veterans from the City
of Beverly and the figure on the number of veterans that are homeless in the State of
Massachusetts is currently 1,700.
Lauren Kelly, resident at Depot Square, 116 Rantoul Street, Beverly, said she is not opposed to
veteran's assistance but is opposed to the location. Kelly asked what type of security will be
provided to the Depot Square residents.
Susan Fielding, resident at Depot Square in Beverly asked about the square footage for
residential space and commercial space in the building. Gooding responded.
Michelle Gordon, 60 Rantoul Street, Gateway, Beverly, stated that she attended the last meeting
on Zoning Ordinance changes to the parking requirements and she said that Planning Director
Cassidy spoke about the garage and said it was a private commercial garage. She added that no
provision has been made for parking other than the provision from the MBTA. Gordon asked for
clarification on what municipal parking really means and if a commercial MBTA lot meets those
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 10 of 17
criteria. Dellicker responded that it is his understanding that they will lease out commercial
space in addition to having the parking in the garage.
Bob Gilbert, 115 Water Street, Beverly, stated that he is Commander of the Vietnam Veterans
Association and a 22 year veteran of the US Army. Gilbert wanted clarification that you cannot
specify that the project would only house Beverly veterans. Dinkin responded it would be
against the law. Gilbert asked if the criteria defined as a veteran means an honorably discharged
veteran. Collins responded yes.
Gerry Giulebbe, 26 Pine Street, and Veterans Agent for Beverly described his responsibility for
the wellbeing and care for Veterans that move into the City of Beverly. Giulebbe stated that the
proposed project will add another 20 -30 hours to his job and he feels it would be an additional
burden on him and for the City of Beverly. Giulebbe stated that an additional 10 to 15 veterans
alone adds another $60,000 + a year coming out of the City which he feels is over taxed and
burdened now. VASH vouchers can't be awarded indefinitely and he stated his concerns over
stipends. He added that he is retiring next year and that it will not be his problem but is
concerned nonetheless.
Collins responded and supports some of the concerns Mr. Giulebbe raised. Collins said that
most of the job Giulebbe does will be in -house at the facility. There is a 2 year commitment that
the State and City makes with funding a veteran. It allows them to move into the facility even if
they are no longer dependent on the stipend under Chapter 115. Dinkin added that eligibility for
SSI will likely be available. Collins concurred.
Collins stated that there is a special award for VASH vouchers (tenant based subsidy for veterans
from HUD and the VA), which is given to the unit rather than the individual, which is held by
the Case Manager. If a veteran moves on, this award would go to the next veteran. Collins added
that it is a federal VA not the State.
Maureen Troubetaris, 28 Davis Road, Beverly, stated that she is not opposed to veterans housing
and has family members that served. Troubetaris stated her concern that several pending
projects all point to the MBTA garage for parking and are dependent on this garage. She doesn't
feel there will be enough space for the commuters to park especially with yet another proposed
project that will have tenants, staff, and visitors parking in the MBTA garage.
In addition, Troubetaris said that Collins referenced using community resources. She feels that
the City is maxed out on local references and resources. Collins responded that the facility is not
trying to tie into existing services. There is an active outreach program with vocational efforts as
well as North Shore Veteran's Association offers some programs that are a good fit to the
residents. Educational schools are active in the community college network on training. Their
hope is to try not to burden other existing programs.
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 11 of 17
Boushashia added that there is the GED program in the community and opportunities for
referrals there as well. She added that Peabody Properties has a full -time person dedicated for
funding. Referrals are made when appropriate.
Rosemary Maglio, 32 Pleasant Street, Beverly, asked if the project has a variance yet and how it
plans to get through the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Maglio said that under the Zoning
Ordinance, this lot is 7,000 s.f in a CC Zone which requires 1,000 s.f per unit and the proposed
plans include 32, 1- bedroom apartments. Gooding responded that under Section 29- 17.D.5 the
building is a combined residential/commercial use so a variance is not required. Gooding said
that the proposed plan complies with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Also, 100% of units
are affordable which far exceeds what the City Ordinance requires. In addition to a special
permit application they have filed an application for review with the Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance to ensure that the project complies with other regulatory requirements.
Dinkin stated that the section Maglio refers to does not require the Public Hearing part of the
discussion or part of the decision process for this proposal. Because it does not require a Public
Hearing it is not in order.
Maglio asked if Windover Development plans to restore the sidewalk on Pleasant Street.
Dellicker responded that no, a sidewalk is not required on both sides of the street.
Maglio doesn't feel that the MBTA garage can be counted on for parking for the facility and
asked where staff will park. Collins responded that there are 3 spaces available on -site and staff
will be on a rotating basis and that not everyone will be using a vehicle.
Lauren Kelly, 116 Rantoul Street, Depot Square, asked again what type of security will there be
for Depot Square residents. Dellicker responded that they installed a security system at Depot
Square and plan to install a security system at the proposed building.
Jim Ladder, 145 Park Street, Beverly, stated the he would never want to discourage veteran's
coming to Beverly. He asked that the Planning Board keep in mind that the facility is being used
for a special population. There are other properties around the area that also house a challenging
population and he feels that needs to be taken into consideration.
Victor Capozzi, 138 Bridge Street, Beverly, is a member of North Shore Veterans. Capozzi
stated that he resents that Windover Development is assuming that the occupants will not have
cars. His facility took in transit veterans and 70% of them have cars. Capozzi wanted to make it
clear that residents of the facility will not all be honorably discharged veterans. Capozzi went
over the different types of veterans that qualify. He explained his opinion that the veterans that
will be housed at the proposed facility will be like the veterans that are at his facility. He agreed
that there are some veterans that are truly deserving and are in need but that 90% of the veterans
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 12 of 17
that qualify for the facility will have problems with mental and /or substance abuse. Capozzi
gave some examples of the personalities of the veterans that he houses in Beverly adding that
they are homeless because they have issues. He does not allow VASH vouchers in his building
and explained the VASH voucher process within the system. He added that having a VASH
voucher doesn't allow you to check a veteran's military background history. Capozzi feels that
the proposed facility will bring environmental and social problems to the Beverly community, as
the City will have approximately 100 people within one City block that will be very high risk.
Chuck Clark, 65 Juniper Street, Beverly, board member of the North Shore Veterans Service,
stated that he is the owner of a towing business on Park Street in Beverly. Parking continues to
be an issue in the downtown area and he described projects with multi -unit buildings that have
been created over the years and with each one, parking becomes more of an issue. He feels there
simply is not enough room to keep adding projects that do not house sufficient parking on -site.
Clark described his experience with towing in the downtown area of Beverly. Clark agrees with
Victor Capozzi's comments.
Robert Desjardins, 21 Swan Street, Beverly, read statistics from Veteran's Inc. that serves
veterans across the street. He added that he is in support of North Shore Veterans.
Dinkin asked for a motion to recess the Public Hearing until another time certain.
Thomson made a motion that the Public Hearing be recessed until July 19, 2011 at 8:00
p.m. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.
City Council Legal Affairs Committee Request for Planning Board Comments - Proposed
Amendments to Watershed Protection Overlay District Ordinance and Map — Planning
Board Discussion/Recommendation
Dinkin asked if the Planning Board has had an opportunity to read Planning Director Cassidy's
comments and if the Board would like to add or delete anything at this time.
Thomson said he would like input from Cassidy. Thomson stated that he had trouble comparing
the new proposal to the existing proposal. He added that the Chief Planner has done a nice job
summarizing and raising issues. With extensive comments and conflicts that are not resolved
Thomson doesn't feel the Board could make comments on the matter. Thomson recommends
that City Council not act favorably on the current proposal but if the City Council is to pursue the
matter a study committee of some kind be created to try and resolve those differences and
produce an ordinance that will meet those concerns.
Pam Kampersal, 241 Dodge Street, Beverly, stated that the City Council Legal Affairs
Committee has decided to have a subcommittee meeting in the fall to look at the Watershed
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 13 of 17
Protection Overlay District Ordinance and have a new ordinance written if deemed it is
important. Kampersal informed the Board that she has a copy showing side by side the current
Ordinance created in 1987 on one side and the proposed Safe Drinking Water Ordinance on the
other side which makes it much easier to read and eliminates most all of Cassidy's concerns.
Kampersal offered to send this to the Board via email. Dinkin requested that she send it to Leah
Zambernardi. Kampersal agreed. She continued by stating that the only thing that is different in
the proposed ordinance is updating it to meet the Federal Clean Water Act and the Mass DEP
Requirements as well as the US EPA Requirements. Kampersal doesn't feel the concerns are a
big issue and offered to answer Cassidy's concerns now to the Planning Board if desired.
Kampersal reminded the Board that a draft of the Safe Drinking Water Act proposal was
provided to all boards and commissions and if things need to be changed it needs to get done.
She added that the existing Ordinance is 24 years old and Beverly needs to step up and get it
accomplished. Kampersal asked that the Planning Board write a letter to the City Council of
Legal Affairs stating the Board's view that it is a good idea and that Council should sit down
with those members appropriate and get it done to make the best revisions possible to protect the
City of Beverly's drinking water supply.
Thomson stated that he is supportive of the Ordinance however he feels that there are two
different bodies looking at the same Ordinance and if there are things that need to be changed it
is another process itself. Thomson said it doesn't make sense to discuss the matter any further.
Ward 2 Councilor Wes Slate said that a request went out to Legal Affairs and to all relevant
boards and commissions to revise the Ordinance. When the proposal came in it was lengthy and
complicated. Speaking as a member of Council, Legal Affairs and the rest of Council felt that
they didn't have the expertise to judge it and that is why it went out to the Planning Board and
other Commissions for review and comments. Those involved have given their best advice on
what the current ordinance did or did not do and it did not get a unanimous response from City
Council. It seemed necessary that a subcommittee needs to be created that has the relevant
experts to evaluate the proposals. It was a general agreement that that the current ordinance
needs work and it should be made relevant to look at the boundaries for the subcommittee to
comment on.
Thomson asked if subcommittee exists. Slate responded not yet but it will be created. It will be
a subcommittee of City Council members and added that Ward 5 Councilor Don Martin is a
member of Legal Affairs and the representative in the ward where much of the watershed lies
and he will surely be part of the subcommittee.
Thomson made a recommendation and motion for the Planning Board to write a letter to
City Council that a subcommittee be created with Cassidy included in some way. The
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 14 of 17
Planning Board will rely on Cassidy's input. Matz concurred and seconded the motion.
Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.
Continued Discussion/Decision — OSRD Site Plan Application #02 -10 — 875 and 875 V2 Hale
Street — Montrose School Park, LLC.
Matz recused himself from the room at this time.
Zambernardi stated for the record, David Mack has signed a certification of evidence review —
pursuant to General Law Chapter 39 Section 23D that he missed no more than a single session of
the Hearing and that he has examined all evidence of that session including an audio of the
session and is eligible to vote.
Zambernardi updated the Planning Board on the matter stating that the last meeting on May 10,
2011, members took 2 votes. One carried and one did not. The plan is still on the table for the
Board to look at and comment. Zambernardi made note that the last plan dated May 5 th was
circulated around to the various commenting bodies and the Planning Board has received
comments back. Zambernardi said that the Open Space Committee and Conservation
Commission have made comments on the open space management plan submitted. In addition,
letters from various bodies have been received. The Board has received email correspondence
from Kevin Barry, 265 Hale Street; RJ Lyman, 852 Hale Street; and Tom Grant of Hale Street.
Jeff Rhuda responded to those emails today.
Thomson stated he would like to hear what the municipal agencies had to say. Mack agreed and
asked for Zambernardi to paraphrase the letters to the Planning Board: Zambernardi paraphrased
certain sections within the following letters:
Letter dated June 20, 2011 - Conservation Commission
Letter dated June 20, 2011 - Open Space Committee
Letter from the Fire Department
Letter dated June 7, 2011 - Engineering Department (included in staff report)
Letter dated June 7, 2011 — Parking and Traffic Commission (included in staff report)
Thomson said he is concerned about the date that the Planning Board is bound by in the
Ordinance. Thomson submitted the following motion in writing:
"To approve the proposed OSRD site plan as last submitted, including the granting of all waivers
necessary in order to accomplish same, upon the following conditions in addition to any non -
waived requirements of the OSRD ordinance:
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 15 of 17
1 - The recommendations set forth in the comment letters received to date from the following
boards, committees and departments of the city are incorporated by reference in this decision to
the extent not already depicted in the site plan:
City Engineer - dated June 7, 2011
Parking & Traffic - dated June 7, 2011
Design Review Board - dated June 7, 2011
2 - The Standard Open Space Conditions submitted by the Planning staff at the May 10 meeting
(attached) are incorporated by reference.
3 - No portions of the Open Space shown on the site plan may dedicated to exclusive use
easements or other rights for specific lots or homeowners - the entire Open Space is to remain
available for use by all owners of homes within the site plan tract. There shall be no landscaping
to set off or demark yard areas outside the house lots.
4 - No fences or other above - ground structures, whether temporary or permanent, may be erected
or places within the Open Space - this would include (but not be limited to) swing sets or similar
play structures, tennis courts, paved walkways, but would not include moveable: lawn furniture,
picnic tables and chairs /benches etc. suitable for passive recreation.
5 - The way providing access to new the lots shown on the site plan shall remain private and the
city shall at no time have any obligations with respect to its maintenance, snow - plowing or
utilities therein.
6 - The Open Space shall not be disturbed during construction except for the planting of trees as
depicted on the landscape plan, and the installation and maintenance of underground utilities and
drainage structures; and all disturbed areas shall be promptly restored upon completion of the
applicable portion of such work. No building material, fill, or debris shall be stockpiled within
the Open Space, even temporarily.
7 - Construction activity shall be limited to the hours of 8 AM to 6 PM, on weekdays only.
8 - The site plan must clearly depict the "areas not to be disturbed" (to be reviewed by Planning
staff for consistency with representations made to the Planning Board by the applicant).
9 - The form of deed of the Open Space must be approved by this Board prior to recording.
10 - The Open Space Management Plan, the Operation and Maintenance Plan for Long -term
Pollution Prevention, the Homeowners Association Trust, the Restrictive Covenant, Easement
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 16 of 17
and Agreement - Open Space, shall each be subject to final approval by this Planning Board after
first having been reviewed by the city solicitor. Initial changes required include:
Open Space Management Plan - no structures except per this decision; only organic weed, pest
and disease control (as well as organic fertilizers)
Operation and Maintenance Plan - delete references to parking lot
Homeowners Trust - reference on page 1 to city acting "by and through its Planning Board"
needs review; assignments under 9(k) to other entities to be subject to prior Planning Board
approval and only if new entity assumes all obligations; cost shares (1/5 vs 1/6 need to be
rectified and coordinated with Restrictive Covenant)
Restrictive Covenant - must refer to and incorporate conditions of this decision; amount of bond
must be increased to $5,000; right of enforcement to be extended to abutting lot owners on same
side of Hale Street."
Harris suggested that item #7 read Monday- Friday, excluding Holidays.
Mack made a motion to accept Thomson's motion as read with the suggested change by
Harris. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with Matz abstaining.
Continued Discussion/Decision: 875 Hale Street Definitive Subdivision Plan — create 6 new lots
in R10 Zone — Montrose School Park, LLC
Attorney Brad Latham respectfully requests a continuance on the discussion on the matter until
the end of July.
Thomson said it is his understanding that in that period of time the subdivision plan is going to
be revised to be consistent with the decision. Latham said that the Board gave instructions
tonight that if a revision is required the engineer would make revisions consistent with the
OSRD.
Thomson made a motion to extend the discussion and decision until the end of July.
Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with Matz abstaining.
Matz joined the meeting at this time.
Request for Minor Modification to Site Plan #37 -98: 950 Cummings Center: Beverly
Commerce Park, LLP — New solar support structure over 3 -level parking garage at corner
of Elliott and McKay Streets:
Regular Meeting
Beverly Planning Board
June 21, 2011
Page 17 of 17
Steve Drohosky, 43 Hickory Lane, Boxford, General Manager of the Cummings Center in
Beverly discussed the request for a minor modification to an existing site plan at the Cummings
Center. He described a similar request that was approved a couple years ago and that they are
hoping to do the same thing on the west garage which is on the corner of Route 62 and McKay
Street. The plans are for the installation of a solar support structure on the west garage, which is
the only garage that doesn't have plans for a solar structure on it. Zambernardi asked Drohosky
if he could explain the ZBA Application for a variance request. Drohosky explained that they
were asked to come to the Planning Board for site plan review before going to the ZBA by the
Building Department. The ZBA Hearing is scheduled for July 26, 2011. The height requires the
variance on part of the garage, which sits in two zones. The IR Zone has a 60 ft. height
limitation and the IG Zone has a 35 ft. height limitation. Drohosky stated that the variance
would allow the structure to go to 49 ft. over the required 35 ft. and it would be 33 -36 ft. high on
McKay Street.
Mack requested the actual height of the solar structure panels. Drohosky presented a rendition of
the plans. He stated that the structure will not be visible on McKay Street.
Thomson stated his opinion that the request is a minor modification request not a major
modification.
Dinkin added that it goes along with renewable energy and the previous approval for a minor
modification to the other solar panel structures at the Cummings Center.
Mack made a motion determining that the request is for a minor modification. Motion
seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.
Mack made a motion to approve the modification request. Motion seconded by Flannery.
Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.
Approval of Minutes: March 29, April 26 and May 10 meetings.
Dinkin said that the approval of the minutes listed on the agenda can be made at the next
meeting.
Mack made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:50 p.m. Motion seconded by Matz.
Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.