2014-09-16Beverly Planning Board
September 16, 2014
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Board: Planning Board Meeting
Date: September 16, 2014
Location: Beverly Public Library
Members Present Chair John Thomson, Vice Chair Ellen Hutchinson, Ellen Flannery
(arrived at 7:30), John Mullady, Catherine Barrett, and Wayne
Miller, James Matz, David Mack and Ned Barrett
Members Absent: None
Others Present: Assistant City Planner Leah Zambernardi
Recorder: This meeting was recorded and transcribed from tape by Eileen
Sacco
Thomson calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m
Request to Set Public Hearing Date — Site Plan Review Application #112 -14 and Special
Permit Application #138 -14 — 50(52) Dunham Road — Anderson Clarke, LLP
N. Barrett: motion to set the public hearing date for the Board's regular meeting of October 21,
2014. Mack seconded the motion and it carries (8 -0).
Request to Set Public Hearing Date — Site Plan Review Application #113 -14 and Special
Permit Application #139 -14 — North Shore Crossing — Brimbal Avenue — CEA Beverly
LLC
Matz: motion to set the public hearing date for the Board's regular meeting of October 21, 2014.
Mack seconded the motion and it carries (8 -0).
Mack: motion to require peer reviews of the applicant's traffic and storm water reports.
Mullady seconds the motion and it carries (8 -0).
Bass River Estates Definitive Subdivision (a.k.a. Folger Avenue Extension) — Request for
One -Year Extension of Constuction Completion Date (December 31, 2014) — Joseph J.
Phelan III, Bass River Beverly LLC
Zambernardi reads a letter of request into the record from Mr. Phelan.
Hutchinson: motion to extend the construction completion deadline to June 30, 2015. Mack
seconds the motion and it carries (7 -1) with N. Barrett in opposition.
Request for Minor Modifications to Special Permit #128 -11 and Site Plan Review #103 -11 — 30
LP Henderson Road — Cicoria Tree and Crane Service, Inc.
Pagel of 8
Beverly Planning Board
September 16, 2014
John Morin and Mark Cicoria are present and describe the proposed changes to the plan.
Thomson informs the Board that the task of the Board this evening is to determine if the
proposed modification is minor in nature and if so they can approve or deny it. He also noted
that if the modification is found to be major then a public hearing date must be set.
Hutchinson: motion that the Planning Board find that the proposed modifications are minor in
nature and that the Board approves the Minor Modification subject to the
conditions and specifications of the City Engineer. Mack seconds the motion.
The motion carries (8 -0).
Flannery arrives at 7:30 p.m.
Subdivision Approval Not Require Plans
40 Neptune Street — Thomas and Linda Wilburn
Zambernardi reported that Thomas and Linda Wilburn have submitted an SANR plan to divide
their parcel at 40 Neptune Street into two buildable lots. She noted that members may be aware
that the historic residence on the property was removed and relocated to 46 Pickman Road in
2013.
Zambernardi explains that the parcel is currently vacant with the exception of a small shed on the
right side. She further explains that 40 Neptune Street is currently 29, 305 s.f and if the plan is
endorsed, Lot 1 will have 25,974 s.f of area where 10,000 s.f is required and 101.20 feet of
frontage where 100 feet is required. She explains that Lot 2 will have 17,809 s.f of area where
10,000 s.f is required and 175.96 feet of frontage where 100 is required. She noted that the plan
meets the Board's requirements for SANR's and the staff recommends approval.
Zambernardi also notes that a frontage analysis was done on both lots and they conform to the
R10 Zoning district.
Thomson asks if there are any questions or comments from the Board.
Thomson asks if there are any other homes on the site. Zambernardi explains that there are a
number of easements on the property for views and access to the water via stairs down to it. She
noted that certain easements cannot be included in area requirements. She reviewed the areas on
the plans.
Thomson notes that the there are no access issues with this plan and everything looks to be in
order. Zambernardi agreed noting that she visited the site.
There being no questions or comments regarding this matter:
Page 2 of 8
Beverly Planning Board
September 16, 2014
Hutchinson: motion to endorse the SANR as submitted. Motion seconded by Flannery. The
chair votes in favor. The motion carries (9 -0)
Update on Inclusionary Housing "Submission Requirements, Procedures and
Supplemental Regulations" — Fee in Lieu of Affordable Housing Units Fiscal Year 2015
Zambernardi explains that Beverly adopted the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in July of 2007
and the ordinance requires that 12% of housing in a new development of 10 homes or more be
reserved for persons of low or moderate income. She noted that one of the options for
developers in providing the affordable units is to request a Special Permit to pay a fee to the City
of Beverly in lieu of providing the affordable units.
Zambernardi explained that the formula for the fee is provided in the Planning Board's
Submission Requirements, Procedures and Supplemental Regulations for Inclusionary Housing.
She noted that the fee is 35% of the average of the lowest 50% of residential sale prices in the
Beverly neighborhood in which the applicant is developing the units, for the three fiscal years
immediately prior to the current fiscal year.
Zambernardi explained that the Planning Board is responsible for updating the fee schedule
annually without a public hearing, shortly after the start of the fiscal year.
Zambernardi reviewed the formula and noted that fee schedule for fiscal year 2015 is included in
appendix C of the Planning Board packet. She noted that she was assisted in compiling this
schedule by Margaret O'Brien of the Community Development Office.
Zambernardi reviews the fee schedule noting that the Board is not changing the formula, they are
updating the fee structure. Members review the changes in fees during the recent recession.
Hutchinson: motion to approve the fee schedule for the Fee in Lieu of Affordable Housing
Units for fiscal year 2015 as submitted. Mack seconds the motion. The motion
carries (9 -0).
Recess for Public Hearing
Hutchinson: motion to recess for public hearings. Flannery seconds the motion. The motion
carries (9 -0).
Continued Concurrent Public Hearing - Open Space Residential Design Site Plan,
Definitive Subdivision Plan, Inclusionary Housing Application and Special Permit — 232
Essex Street — DUC Residential LLC
Attorney Brian McGrail addresses the Planning Board and explains that since the last meeting
they have been before the Design Review Board on August 7, 2014. He noted that the DRB
voted unanimously to support the project. He also noted that they met with the Parking and
Traffic Commission who also recommended support of the project and the Open Space and
Recreation Committee has issued a letter of recommendation.
Page 3 of 8
Beverly Planning Board
September 16, 2014
Thomson reviews the action that the Board has taken on the project noting that the preferred plan
and the Yield Plan have both been reviewed by the Board and have been approved. He asked
Atty. McGrail if they are seeking any more waivers from the Board and has anything changed
with the plans. Atty. McGrail reported that there have been no changes to the plan.
Thomson asks Zambernardi to review the comment letter the Planning Board received from other
city Boards and Commissions.
Zambernardi reports that the City Engineer has issued draft comments and the applicant has
responded to them last week and the applicant and the City Engineer are still in the process of
working on that.
Zambernardi reviews a letter from the Open Space and Recreation Committee with
recommendations.
Matz notes that the lower portion of the open space would go to the Homeowners Association
and the upper portion would go to the City of Beverly. Ogren reviews the plan and notes the
locations on the plan.
Thomson asks if the proposed trail connection would be new. Ogren states that it does not
currently exist. Ogren notes the areas on the plan that would be restored.
Hutchinson asks what would be the restoration area around the pond and who would be
responsible for it financially going forward. Atty. McGrail explains that initially Mr. DiBiase
will do some clearing of the area and then the city would be responsible.
Zambernardi explains that the OSRD Ordinance allows for the Planning Board to seek an
endowment for the property. She also notes that the Planning Board could require a cash bond
from the Homeowners Association for the upkeep of their portion of the open space.
Zambernardi explains that an internal recommendation is that the City would accept the open
space to the care and custody of the Parks and Recreation Department.
Thomson states that it makes sense for the Park and Recreation Department to be charged with
the care and custody of the land noting that they have property adjacent to it.
Matz agrees noting that the Conservation Commission does not have the finances to maintain the
open space and it would be best for the city to take it on.
Hutchinson asks if the Open Space Committee considered the cost to the city in accepting the
open space. Matz states that there was a discussion and it was noted that it would be a benefit for
the city. Hutchinson asks what the cost of maintaining it would be for the city.
Zambernardi reviews the comment letter from the Fire Department. She notes that the Fire
Department gave a waiver to the applicant to use a break away chain explaining that they are
Page 4 of 8
Beverly Planning Board
September 16, 2014
made of a plastic material and will keep others out but they are easy for the fire department to get
through.
Thomson noted that if the emergency access road is going to be private the city will need an
easement. McGrail explained that the Homeowners Association will be responsible to keep the
emergency access clear, noting snow removal etc.
Miller asks if any thought has been given to the amount of the endowment for the open space.
McGrail explains that the Conservation Commission has requested that they do some work to
maintain the pond and that would have to be taken into consideration. He states that they would
be having another meeting with them to determine the work to be done noting that it would
involve some clearing etc. He states that there will be further discussions about the endowment.
Matz states that Parcel B trail maintenance should be low tech and low cost and noted that there
are a lot of volunteer groups such as the Boy Scouts Eagle Scout candidates who regularly
participate in projects such as maintenance of trails throughout the city.
Thomson notes that maintenance of the pond will include dredging and clearing of vegetation on
the trail. He notes that the trail has been there for a long time.
Ogren reports that Parcel A is currently in disarray and will require removal of brush etc., and
restoration and loaming and seeding to restore it.
Thomson states that he wants to reassure the public that the pond and the trails will remain park
land for the benefit of the community. He notes that the transfer to the Parks and Recreation
Department will see to that and they are interested in doing so.
Zambernardi continues reviewing the Fire Department comments and notes that they have
concerns that lots 12 and 13 have excessively long driveways that are not constructed to handle
heavy fire apparatus, and therefore will delay fire department fire and life rescue situations. She
notes that the developer has worked with the fire department to improve the driveway access.
Hutchinson asks if the emergency access would be a means for secondary access and is there a
distinction between them. Zambernardi explains that the secondary access is for emergency
response only.
Zambernardi reviews the Parking and Traffic Commission letter and notes that they have no
comments.
Zambernardi reviews the letter from the Board of Health and notes that they have issued their
standard conditions.
Zambernardi reviews the letter from the Design Review Board and notes that they have no
comments.
Page 5 of 8
Beverly Planning Board
September 16, 2014
Thomson notes that the applicant has requested a special permit to pay a fee in lieu of affordable
housing.
Atty. McGrail explains that the ordinance contemplates this option because of the cost involved
in constructing single family homes. He explains that special circumstances are in order because
they presented a yield plan for 19 lots and the developer through negotiations with the neighbors
has agreed to build on 16 lots, noting that they have made a concession. He also notes that the
inclusionary housing contemplates two family dwellings to comply with the ordinance. He
further notes that they are giving up three units with this plan.
Atty. McGrail refers to the ordinance language regarding a density bonus and reviews the
section. He notes that Mr. DiBiase cannot and will not do that because of the 16 unit limitation.
Thomson asks for comments from the Board at this time.
Zambernardi explains that the city has not received a fee in lieu of affordable units to date and
notes that fees of this nature could be collected and distributed to various non - profit groups to
assist them in funding their affordable housing projects. She also notes that the city has access to
studies showing a need for affordable housing for the elderly and empty nesters and first time
home buyers who are looking for more affordable housing. She also noted that an Affordable
Housing Trust could be established. She notes that the money would be used to fund affordable
housing units. Thomson states that the idea for affordable housing is to get as many affordable
units in Beverly and spreading it throughout the city. He notes that there are 100 units of
affordable housing across the street owned by the Beverly Housing Authority. The absence of
affordable housing in this neighborhood is therefore not an issue.
C. Barrett asks if this has ever been done.
Thomson notes that Windover Construction was allowed to provide affordable housing on
another site that they owned.
Zambernardi also notes that the Ventron project, which has not been built yet, has a provision for
a payment of $80,000, noting that it was approved before the Inclusionary Housing ordinance
was adopted.
Zambernardi estimates that the cost of an affordable single family home based on the 2013
calculations would be $222,500. She explained that the maximum income for a family of 5 is
$70,000 and a mortgage would be $1,600 plus the cost of power and maintenance and questioned
if that would be affordable in reality, noting that it is very different from the rents at the Beverly
Housing Authority.
Hutchinson states that she would like to see the affordable housing spread out throughout the city
and she would not want to set a precedent for upscale housing projects. She also notes that the
ordinance requires affordable housing to be equivalent to what is built.
Page 6 of 8
Beverly Planning Board
September 16, 2014
Thomson states that his justification for approving this request would be the location of the
affordable housing across the street.
Atty. McGrail states that this is a unique situation because the yield plan is for 19 units and the
developer has agreed to commit to building only 16 of the units he could build. He states that he
would suggest that it would not be precedent setting because of the yield plan.
Matz states that he would be a lot more concerned if there were zero or very few affordable units
in the area. He notes that having volunteered for Beverly Bootstraps he knows that there are a
significant number of affordable units in the area and he agrees that it would not be setting a
precedent. He also notes that the Board takes each project on a case by case basis and considers
the circumstances of each one.
Mullady states that this is a chance to get quality housing and that is something that needs to be
considered rather than the number of affordable units in the area.
N. Barrett states that the Beverly Housing Authority has hundreds of units that are spread across
the city that are in need of maintenance. He suggests that these funds may be used to help
upgrade those properties for the Beverly Housing Authority and other agencies.
Mullady states that he wants to be sure that the money is used for affordable housing.
Zambernardi explains that the city would most likely eventually set up an affordable housing
trust. She also notes that they are in the process of researching the process for the distribution of
the funds.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
N. Barrett: Motion to approve the request for a special permit to allow a payment in of a fee
in lieu of two affordable housing units, subject to the Fiscal Year 2014 fee
schedule. Flannery seconds the motion. The motion carries (7 -2) with
Hutchinson and Mullady opposed.
Thomson notes that a requirement of the OSRD is that the Planning Board hold a site visit at the
property and suggests that the Board schedule it before the next meeting in October.
The Planning Board will hold a site visit on Saturday, October 18, 2014 at 9:00 a.m.
Hutchinson: motion to continue the public hearing to Tuesday, October 21, 2014. Flannery
seconds the motion. The motion carries (9 -0).
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening a motion was
made by Flannery to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Hutchinson. The motion carried (9 -0)
Page 7 of 8
Beverly Planning Board
September 16, 2014
The meeting adjourns at 9:00 p.m.
Page 8 of 8