2015-06-16 (2)Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Board:
Date:
Location:
Members Present
Members Absent
Others Present:
Recorder:
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Planning Board Meeting
June 16, 2015
Beverly City Hall, City Council Chambers
Chair John Thomson, Ellen Hutchinson, Ellen Flannery, Catherine
Barrett, James Matz, David Mack, Ned Barrett
Wayne Miller
City Planner Aaron Clausen
Eileen Sacco
Thomson calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans
112 & 114 Hull Street — Edward Winslow/William Peterman & Lindsey Roy
Clausen explains that Edward Winslow has submitted an application for endorsement of an
SANR plan to relocate the rear property line of the subject property in order to transfer 2,120
square feet of land (identified as Lot 2A on the SANR plan) from the property located at 114
Hull Street to the property located at 112 Hull Street.
Clausen states that the land transfer will not alter the frontage of either of the subject properties,
both of which are on Hull Street. He notes that 112 Hull Street has 100 feet of frontage and 114
Hull Street has just over 125 feet of frontage. He further notes that the 114 Hull Street property
will retain 15,730 s.f of land following the land transfer and therefore complies with zoning
requirements and 112 Hull Street is an existing non - conforming lot with less than 15,000 s.f of
land and less than 125 feet of frontage. The land transfer will make not make 112 Hull Street
any less conforming and in fact will bring it closer to conformity relative to lot area requirements
with a combined lot area of 14,218 square feet.
Clausen states that Planning Staff has reviewed the plan for conformance with the Board's
requirements for a SANR plan and recommends it be endorsed as such.
Thomson asks for clarification that Lot A is not a buildable lot. Clausen explains that the land is
being combined.
Hutchinson: Motion to endorse the SANR as submitted for 112 — 114 Hull Street. Mack
seconds the motion. The motion carries (7 -0).
Page 1 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
11 & 19 Frankwood Avenue — Jonathan and Cecile Tagliani & Thomas M. Roberts Trustee
Clausen addresses the Board and explains that Jonathan and Cecile Tagliani have submitted an
application for endorsement of an SANR plan to relocate the side lot line of the subject property.
He explains that the plan proposes 2,062 square feet of land (identified as Parcel A on the SANR
plan) from the property located at 19 Frankwood Avenue to the property located at 11
Frankwood Avenue. He notes that the property at 11 Frankwood Avenue is currently an existing
non - conforming lot with less than 10,000 s.f of land and 59 feet of frontage. Following the
proposed land transfer, 11 Frankwood Avenue will remain non - conforming both in lot area and
frontage, however will become more conforming consisting of 77 feet of frontage and 8,860 s.f
of land. He further notes that the property at 19 Frankwood Avenue will remain in conformity
with 100 feet of frontage and 11,792 s.f of land.
Clausen states that planning staff has reviewed the plan for conformance with the Board's
requirements for a SANR and recommends it be endorsed as such.
Hutchinson: Motion to approve the SANR Plan for 11 -19 Frankwood Avenue as submitted.
Mack seconds the motion. The motion carries (7 -0).
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the February 10, 2015 March 17, 2015, and April 14, 2015 Planning Board
meetings were presented for approval.
Mack: Motion to approve the minutes of the February 10, 2015, March 17, 2015 as
presented. Hutchinson seconded the motion. The motion carried (7 -0).
Mack: Motion to approve the minutes of the April 14, 2015 minutes as amended.
Hutchinson seconds the motion. The motion carries (7 -0).
Hutchinson moves to recess for public hearings at this time. C. Barrett seconds the motion. The
motion carries (7 -0).
Continued Public Hearing — Special Permit #143 -15 — Site Plan Review #116 -15 and
Inclusionary Housing #8 -15 — 131 Rantoul Street — Depot Square Phase III LLC
Thomson recuses himself from discussion of this matter and Ms. Hutchinson assumes the Chair.
Mack moves to waive the reading of the legal notice. Hutchinson seconds the motion. The
motion carries (6 -0).
Atty. Miranda Gooding from the Law Offices of Glovsky and Glovsky addresses the Board and
explains that at the last meeting they made a presentation on the project site and reviewed the site
plan layout for the project at 131 Rantoul Street for 72 residential units and 72 parking spaces
with commercial /retail space on the ground floor. She explains that there will be a mix of one
and two bedroom units with a common area and amenities. She explains that there are 72 parking
Page 2 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
spaces proposed on site with 62 spaces in an underground parking garage at the rear with a roof
deck for 10 spaces.
Atty. Gooding reported that all non - residential parking will be at the MBTA garage which is
allowed by zoning. She explains that the commercial parking requirements are for 29 spaces (1
per 129 s.f of retail space). She also notes that there will be 7 on street parking spaces along
Rantoul Street at the front of the building.
Atty. Gooding reported that they have been working with the Parking and Traffic Commission
and the Design Review Board and they have both concluded their reviews and issued letters of
recommendation to the Board. She noted that the Parking and Traffic Commission requested a
traffic impact and access study which they have provided.
Atty. Gooding explains that they are seeking a Special Permit for Inclusionary Housing on the
site as well and explains that they proposing 9 affordable units and have submitted a draft
marketing plan. She explains that there will be 3 one bedroom units, 3 two bedroom units and 3
one bedroom units with a den.
Atty. Gooding reported that this evening they will be presenting the traffic impact and access
study and introduced Rebecca Brown of TEC to make a presentation on the traffic study.
Ms. Brown addresses the Board and states that she is from TEC Engineering in Lawrence and
they were hired by the applicant to perform a traffic impact and access study for the project.
Ms. Brown reviews the traffic study as follows:
Brown reviews the summary and recommendations as follows:
TEC has examined the potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed 131 Rantoul Street
Redevelopment on the study area roadways.
The following is a summary of the results and conclusions of this effort.
The project consists of razing the existing buildings on site and constructing a transit -
oriented, mixed -use development with 72 residential apartment units, a 4,732 SF
restaurant, and 2,306 SF of specialty retail.
Public transportation is provided in the vicinity of the site, including MBTA Commuter
Rail Service, MBTA bus service, and Cape Ann Transportation Operating Center bus
service. Access to public transportation services are within 500 feet of the site.
The proposed 131 Rantoul Street Redevelopment is anticipated to result in a reduction
in vehicles trips during the weekday morning peak hour as compared to the existing land
uses. The project is expected to generate an increase of approximately 15 new vehicle
trips during the weekday evening peak hour, and 36 new vehicle trips during the
Saturday midday peak hour as compared to the existing land uses.
Page 3 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
All intersections within the study area experienced fewer than three (3) crashes per year
over the three -year study period and crash rates less than the statewide and district -wide
averages.
MassDOT is currently in the final design stages of the Route I (Rantoul Street and
Cabot Street) Reconstruction Project (MassDOT Project #600220). Within the
development study area, travel lanes along Rantoul Street (Route IA) will be restriped
with 11 -foot travel lanes and 5 -foot bicycle lanes in both the northbound and
southbound directions. Additional improvements include reconstructed sidewalks with
curb bump -outs to define on- street parking limits, new granite curbing, and
reconstructed accessible wheelchair ramps. The project proposes to construct a new
fully- actuated traffic signal at the intersection of Rantoul Street (Route IA) / Railroad
Avenue.
To improve access to the proposed parking structure, the Proponent proposes to convert
Pleasant Street from one -way westbound flow to two -way flow between Rantoul Street
(RoutelA) and Hardy Street. To allow adequate egress for Pleasant Street eastbound
trips, Hardy Street will be converted from one -way southbound to one -way northbound
flow. The Proponent will install appropriate "DO NOT ENTER" signs, "ONE WAY"
signs, "STOP" signs, and pavement markings on these roadways to accommodate the
changes in traffic flow.
In addition to physical improvements, the Proponent is committed to implementing
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to reduce vehicle trips to /from
the site, including providing transit schedules and maps to residents, and providing
bicycle racks onsite.
With minor signal timing adjustments, all approaches at the intersectionofRantoul Street
(Route IA) / Railroad Avenue are anticipated to operate at acceptable levels of service
(LOS D or better) during 2022 Build with Mitigation.
Conditions. Under 2022 Build and 2022 Build with Mitigation Conditions, the
intersection of Rantoul Street (Route I A)/Railroad Avenue is anticipated to operate at
overall LOS B or better during all analysis periods. In addition, the volume -to- capacity
(v /c) ratios on each movement are expected to be well belowl.00, indicating there will
be adequate capacity to accommodate the anticipated traffic. Queues on each
intersection approach are not expected to increase by more than one (1) vehicle as a
result of the project.
All movements at the Rantoul Street (Route IA) / Pleasant Street intersection are
anticipated to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better) under all analysis
conditions. In addition, the volume -to- capacity (v /c) ratio will be well below 1.00,
Page 4 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
indicating there will be adequate capacity to accommodate the anticipated traffic
volumes, and queues are not expected to exceed two vehicles.
All movements at all other study intersections are expected to operate atacceptable
levels of service (LOS B or better) and queues not exceeding two vehicles under all
analysis scenarios.
A parking structure with 72 parking spaces will be constructed on site to accommodate
one parking space per residential unit in accordance with City of Beverly zoning
regulations.
Restaurant and retail parking will be accommodated within nearby on- street parking
spaces and within the nearby MBTA parking garage. The existing on- street parking
spaces within one block of the site are approximately 67% occupied during the weekday
peak hour. Therefore, ample parking exists on- street within close proximity of the site to
accommodate restaurant and retail parking.
In conclusion, the traffic generated by the proposed 131 Rantoul Street Redevelopment can be
safely and efficiently accommodated along the existing street system with implementation of
the recommended improvements. The minor increases in delay at the study area intersections
resulting from the development do not warrant any additional project - specific mitigation.
Hutchinson opens the hearing up for comments from the Planning Board members at this time.
C. Barrett asked if there are any intersections within 500 feet of the proposed project that is a
Level of Service F. Brown explains that the location of the traffic signal at Railroad and
Rantoul is a LOS F. She explains that it is based on existing traffic volumes and notes that the
level of service would improve with the suggested improvements.
C. Barrett asked what the time of day the peak hours are estimated at. Brown explains that
peak hours for the a.m. are 7 -9 a.m. and peak hours for the p.m. are 4 -6 p.m. She also explains
that the peak hours for the weekends are mid day from 12 -2 p.m.
C. Barrett asks if they are counting on the uses of the MBTA garage for both the residential and
the retail uses. Brown explains that they are proposing onsite parking for the residential units
and they would be using the MBTA garage for the commercial spaces.
C. Barrett notes that they have proposed 7 parking spaces on the street and asks if those will be
reserved for the building. Brown explains that they will be along Route I and could be used
by the retail customers or the general public.
N. Barrett asks Brown notes that the plan to make Pleasant Street a one way street appears to
be losing 8 parking spaces that service the neighborhood. Brown explain that they are all
being adequately replaced.
Mack expressed concern about the timing of this project in light of the Rantoul Street
reconstruction project that will be underway this summer.
Page 5 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Flannery clarified that the light that has been mentioned at Railroad Avenue and Rantoul Street
is not part of this project and is part of the Rantoul Street reconstruction project.
Hutchinson questions if the 8 spaces that will be lost as a result of the traffic reconfiguration
currently being used by the neighborhood. Brown states that they do not know what spaces are
used but noted that they have looked at the parking spaces at various times of day and there are
a lot of spaces available. She explains that there are multifamily units along the stretch of
Pleasant Street and notes that a good amount of them have driveway parking.
Hutchinson asks if they met with the neighbors to discuss the propose changes and the project
in general. Atty. Gooding explained that they held a very well attended meeting with the
neighbors at the Beverly Depot. She also noted that they have not received any special
concerns raised by the neighbors.
N. Barrett asks if the neighbors were specifically made aware of the loss of the parking spaces.
Atty. Gooding stated that they are proposing to change the direction of the traffic to assist with
the flow of traffic in the neighborhood and it makes sense.
N. Barrett asks if there is any part of the design that would encourage the use of bicycles and
the bike path. Siemasko states that there is space for 20 bikes in the garage.
Hutchinson opens the hearing up for questions only at this time regarding the parking and
traffic study.
Barry Weldon of 46 Pleasant Street addresses the Board and notes that the city installed signs
on the south side of Pleasant Street to limit parking from 12 a.m. to 6 a.m. and questions why
they are taking all of those parking spaces and not proposing any others to replace them.
Atty. Gooding stated that they have to go before the City Council for approval of the changes
and notes that there does not appear to be a lack of parking during peak hours in the
neighborhood.
Claire Lunberg of Moulton Court addresses the Board and asks if the traffic light at Railroad
and Rantoul Streets is a done deal. She states that she is worried about getting out of her street
with the traffic.
Brown explains that they met with the Parking and Traffic Commission and they have asked
for monitoring study and to work with the Massachusetts Department of Transportation on
adjustments to timing to make the traffic flow better.
Ms. Lunberg also stated that she is concerned about parking in front of her home and notes that
she does not feel that she should be forced to find parking elsewhere in the neighborhood. She
asked if they have considered valet parking if there is a restaurant. She also suggested that
resident parking stickers should be issued to residents.
Page 6 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Atty. Gooding stated that the application is neutral with respect to residential parking and notes
that residential parking stickers is something that has come up over the years and bears being
looked at. She also notes that the traffic signal at Railroad and Rantoul is not part of this
project.
Rick Marciano of 141 McKay Street addresses the Board and questions if the residents have
seen the proposed traffic plans. He also asked if they have looked at the use of the parking
spaces at 4:00 a.m.
Siemasko states that their sense is that parking on the street is commuters and the spaces are
empty by 8:00 p.m.
City Planner Aaron Clausen reports that the Parking and Traffic Commission reviewed the
parking counts from 3:30 -6:30 and found that of 102 parking spaces, 68 are used and notes that
is a fair amount and the PTC found that there was adequate parking for the retail use and there
are about 3 0-3 5 spaces available within a block of the site.
Rose Maglio of 30 Pleasant Street addresses the Board and expresses her concerns about the
project. She asks if the residents have had any input into the conceptual plans for this project.
She also questions why they are proposing to make Pleasant Street a one way street.
Sandra Dickenson of Highland Avenue addresses the Board and states that Highland Avenue is
one block away from the proposed development and she is concerned about parking and
traffic. She stated that the parking all around the area is limited to 1 -2 hours and notes that the
lot in front of Casa DeLuca has two hour parking. She stated that she feels that people will be
looking for free parking rather than pay for parking in the MBTA garage. She also states that
she does not see that the proposed parking spaces on Rantoul Street will help in the long run,
noting that they are losing 8 spaces on Pleasant Street.
Ms. Dickenson presented a letter signed by 10 residents of Highland Avenue who are opposed
to the project.
Clausen states that the new spaces on Rantoul Street will be metered parking. He also notes
that the current spaces on Pleasant Street are restricted to discourage commuter parking.
Mack asks if they have done a study on the available parking in the area and did they factor in
the uses of the Press Box and the Casa DeLuca site. Atty. Gooding stated that they factored in
traffic.
Jonathan Melvin of 59 Pleasant Street addresses the Board and states that he is concerned
about the location of the parking lot entrance and stated that he concerned that people will start
using the street as a cut through during peak hours of traffic. Brown reviews the traffic
information that they reported on site generated trips assignment and their findings.
Hutchinson asks for public comment in favor of the project.
Page 7 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Dana Staples of 36 Pleasant Street addresses the Board and states that he has attended every
meeting regarding this project and notes that he has never seen a design that has been more
responsive. He states that this is a much better use of the site than what is there now.
Former State Representative Mary Grant addresses the Board and states that she supports the
project. She stated that transit oriented developments are being encouraged across the state to
add vitality to the cities and towns. She notes that the site is close to the train station.
Mrs. Grant explained that she is also co- president of Beverly Main Streets and their mission is
to create a vibrant downtown with economic development. She states that this project is a big
boost for this area and the City cannot afford not to move forward.
Chris Connelly of 119 Rantoul Street addresses the Board and states that there have been many
changes in the neighborhood noting Depot Square and the new MBTA station. He states that
the all of the concerns that have been raised regarding traffic have never proven true and states
that he applauds Windover for sticking with the plan. He further notes that Windover has faith
in the neighborhood and they are trying to build a good product.
Gin Wallace of 22 East Street addresses the Board and notes that she is the Executive Director
of Beverly Main Streets and a resident of Beverly. She notes that the Downtown 20/20 Plan
held a public meeting for input from residents to contribute what they would like to see in the
downtown. She notes that the personalities of the street were discussed and the consensus was
that we need the type of businesses that will attract people to the area during the day.
Wallace also notes that this area has recently seen a lot of new development and notes that a
bakery will be opening in area in a couple of weeks. She states that this proposal is an
attractive design and the present use is not the best use of the space and this project has the
possibility of outdoor dining and will be a huge difference in that corner.
Hutchinson opens the hearing up for comment in opposition to the proposal.
A resident of 46 Pleasant Street addresses the Board and states that he is not opposed to the
project as a whole but suggested that the explore a secondary entrance that would not have to
change the direction of the traffic.
Claire Lunberg of 1 Moulton Court addresses the Board and states that she is opposed to the
size and scope of the project and the impact it will have on the neighborhood. She also states
that she is concerned about noise in the neighborhood noting the proposed restaurant is likely
to have a liquor license. She also states that she is concerned about the size of the building for
that corner.
Rick Marciano of 141 McKay Street addresses the Board and states that this project by right
could build 36 units and they are seeking a permit for 72 units. He also states that he would
Page 8 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
like the city to recognize Beverly Beach Stickers as proof of residency and the residents should
be allowed to park for free at the metered spaces.
Marciano states that three buildings are being demolished and the public should be aware of
when they are going to come down. He urged the Board not to interrupt the traffic flow and
parking on Pleasant Street.
Robin Murphy of 8 Hardy Street addresses the Board and states that this proposal will greatly
affect her property value. She also questions how the presence of this building will affect the
neighbors shading noting that she is afraid that they will lose sunshine.
Atty. Gooding explains that they will have to file for a demolition permit and also notes that
the Parking and Traffic Commission has requested that they provide a construction sequencing
and staging plan in consideration of the Route 1 A improvement project.
Atty. Gooding also reported that based on their experience with other projects in the city under
utilized urban areas property values tend to rise.
Andrea Dickenson of 190 Highland Street addresses the Board and states that she is concerned
that the project will be adding 100 neighbors to the neighborhood and she feels that the
neighborhood has been forgotten and this is too many units for the area.
Rosemary Maglio of 30 Pleasant Street addresses the Board and states that the project is too
dense for the area and there is a conflict of uses. She suggested it should be reduced to 38
units with no commercial space.
Maglio also states that she would like to see them retain the existing traffic flow.
Clausen explains that since the last meeting the Parking and Traffic Commission has
recommended approval of the Site Plan Review and suggested conditions. He also notes that
the Design Review Board issued a letter of recommendation with no conditions and the City
Engineer has reviewed the project without any issues. He also notes that they received a letter
from a resident at 8 Hardy Street in support of the project.
Mack asks why the entrance to the parking is on Pleasant Street and not on Rantoul Street or
Railroad Avenue. Siemasko explains that there is a substantial change in the grade on
Railroad Avenue and it would be impossible to construct because of the grade. He notes the
area on the plan.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Mack: Motion to close the public hearing. Flannery seconds the motion. The motion
carries (6 -0).
Hutchinson calls for a two minutes recess at this time.
Page 9 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Thomson assumes the Chair and notes that the Board will be continuing with the public
hearings on the agenda this evening at this time.
Continued Public Hearing — Open Space Residential Design (OSRD #7 -15 — Initial Review
and Yield Plan and Preliminary Subdivision Plan — 50 and 54 Boyles Street — Symes
Development and Permitting LLC
Matz recused himself from discussion of this matter.
Mack moved to waive the reading of the legal notice. N. Barrett seconded the motion. The
motion carried (7 -0).
Clausen explains that at the last meeting the Board reviewed the preliminary subdivision plan
and if the Board sees fit this evening they can approve the number of lots.
Thomson notes that the Board heard public comment at the last meeting.
Clausen states that he has reviewed the plan with the Conservation Commission agent regarding
the area of the 25 foot No Disturb Zone and the 100 foot buffer zone meet the Wetland Protection
Act regulations and they would allow the yield plan.
Williams reports that they held a neighborhood meeting that several neighbors attended.
Thomson opens the hearing up for public comment at this time.
Rick Marciano of 141 McKay Street addresses the Board and states that he is happy to see that
they are proposing to keep the two existing houses on the site.
Thomson explains that the OSRD process and notes that the Board has to look at a plan that
shows how many houses they could build as of right in accordance with the subdivision
regulations and to review a conceptual plan providing for open space showing that the properties
are situated with the preservation of the most open space in mind. He notes that this plan shows
what the owner could build if the OSRD did not exist.
Scott Santoro of Cross Lane addresses the Board and states that he is concerned about the
number of trees that will be cut down and requested that screening be provided to screen the
property.
Jane Bretton of 55 Boyles Street addresses the Board and questions if all of the lots meet the
required zoning. Clausen explains that Planning Staff has reviewed the plans and determined
that they have met the zoning requirements.
Santoro asks if the houses will have septic systems or will they be tied into the sewer system.
Williams explains that they will be tied into the sewer system. He notes that one house that has a
septic system will be changed to the sewer system.
Page 10 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Hutchinson: motion to approve the Yield Plan for 6 new house lots and two existing homes at
50 and 54 Boyles Street — Symes Development and Permitting LLC. Mack
seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion carries (6 -0).
Thomson explains that the Board must now act on the conceptual plans for the proposal.
Williams reviews concept plans #1 and #2 and notes that both designs provide for a new water
main on Boyle Street and notes that the trees around the perimeter are valuable to the project and
they want to keep them.
Williams explains that concept plan #1 gives them the best solution for maintaining the buffer
area along the entire perimeter and maximum setback for the home sites.
Williams explains that they have tried to keep the paving as narrow as possible and notes that
they are showing 24 feet of paving on the plan but they would like 18 feet.
Clausen states that it would be vital to get input from the Fire Department on that regarding fire
access. He also notes that the City Engineer likes to see 10 foot lanes.
Mack asks if there is any advantage to concept plan #2 over concept plan #1. Williams explains
that concept plan #2 provides more open space but there is not much more of an advantage.
Mack notes that there is a letter in the packet from the Beverly Open Space and Recreation
Committee indicating that they prefer concept plan #2 with the following comments:
• because it appears to preserve the largest uninterrupted block of field and woodland
• It should be clarified as to whether the space between Lot 4 and Lot 5 is intended for
public access as it appears to be. That would be desirable.
• It should be clarified as to whether Lot B should be included in the overall land area that
constitutes the "parent' lot and thus included toward the open space percentage
calculation.
• The Committee recommends that the meadow portion of the open space area be kept
clear of brush and trees and includes a restriction from the use of fertilizers and
pesticides. It is preferred that area be cut on more than two times annually to preserve its
value as a meadow habitat. A management plan similar to that developed for the 875
Hale Street subdivision would be a helpful guide in this respect.
Clausen explains that the Conservation Commission has submitted a letter dated May 14, 2015
indicating that they prefer Concept #1 because the site layout is more evenly distributed. He
reads the letter to the Board.
Clausen notes that the Yield Plan shows the wetlands that have been flagged. He explains that
the plan shows that the lots will be out of the buffer zone and does not affect either of the lots at
the end of the road. He also notes that Lots 1 &2 on concept plan #1 will be in the 100 foot
Page 11 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
buffer zone and there might be some kind of work for the drainage system for Lot 1 in the buffer
zone.
Clausen explains that Concept Plan #2 would have Lot 2 within the buffer zone and they would
need a permit and drainage plan for the road.
N. Barrett asks if either plan have an increased likelihood of keeping more trees. Williams states
that Concept 1 does allow for them to build further from the perimeter.
C. Barrett asks if there will be any blasting for the project. Williams states that they do not think
so and they do not want to but notes that they have not dug everywhere that they need to at this
point.
C. Barrett states that she is concerned the additional traffic for six more homes noting that cars
speed down Boyles Street. Williams states that they will be removing a tree from the corner of
Boyles Street that will improve the sight lines and that would be helpful.
Clausen requested that the Yield Plan showing the wetlands flags be submitted to the Planning
Department.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Mack: Motion to approve Concept Plan #1 for 50 and 54 Boyles Street — Symes
Development and Permitting LLC, because it most evenly distributes the open
space. N. Barrett seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion
carries (6 -0).
Matz returns to the meeting at this time.
Public Hearing - Open Space and Residential Design (OSRD) #6 —15 — OSRD Site Plan —
30 Foster Street — Lindallwood Realty Trust
Bob Griffin of Griffin Engineering addresses the Board and explains that the Board held a public
hearing on the yield plan and the preferred plan in April and the yield plan was approved and the
preferred plan was selected.
Griffin explains that they have submitted an OSRD Plan application for the Board's review.
Griffin explains that the OSRD site plan is consistent with the 2 -lot ANR style, preferred plan
approved by the Board at its April 14, 2015 meeting. He explains that since that meeting the
preferred plan has been altered slightly to accommodate stormwater management features,
specifically the easterly 25 foot No Cut Zone boundary line has been shifted approximately 40
feet to allow for the construction of a stormwater diversion berm and the proposed No
Disturbance Zone on the northerly portion of Lot 2 has been reconfigured to allow for a
Page 12 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
stormwater detention area. He also notes that the area of the No Disturb Zone on Lot 2 (0.82
acres) is the same as approved at the April 2015 meeting.
Griffin explains that they are proposing to convey the 1.72 acre forested open space parcel (Lot
3) to the City of Beverly. He also notes that the No Disturbance and No Cut Zones on Lot 2 will
be protected by permanent deed restrictions.
Griffin explains that they will be installing a water line for Foster Street and sewer access. He
also notes that they have received comments regarding the project from the City Engineer and
they have responded and have submitted revised plans to the Board.
Griffin reported that they will be installing sprinkler systems in both houses, noting that it is a
close call as to whether they are required but the developer agreed to install a residential
sprinkler system.
Clausen reports that other City Boards and Commissions have reviewed the project and have
submitted letters to the Board. He notes that letters from the City Engineer, Beverly Board of
Health, Beverly Police Department and are included in the Board packet for this meeting. He
notes that he Beverly Fire Department has submitted a letter that was received by the Planning
Department today, indicating that they have no issues with what has been proposed.
Thomson opens the hearing up for public comment at this time.
Dan Spencer of 14 Foster Street addresses the Board and requested that they push the house next
to his lot further into the lot. He also requested that they install vegetation and plantings along
his property line. Griffin stated that he could commit to the landscaping along the property line
but he could not commit to the sighting of the house at this time.
Clausen suggests that there should be a condition to mark the No Disturb Zone with permanent
markers on Lot 2.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Mack: Motion to close the public hearing. Flannery seconds the motion. The motion
carries (7 -0).
Hutchinson: Motion to approve the Open Space and Residential Design (OSRD) #6 — 15 —
OSRD Site Plan — 30 Foster Street — Lindallwood Realty Trust with the following
conditions:
1. That permanent markers be installed to designate the No Disturb Zone on Lot
2. That all of the Board of Health Conditions be adhered to
3. Screening shall be installed along the boundary of Lot 1 and 16 Foster Street.
Flannery seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion carries (7 -0).
Page 13 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Public Hearing — Special Permit Application #146 -15 — 70 to 72 Cabot Street — RBG
Properties LLC
Atty. Thomas Alexander with offices at 1 School Street addresses the Board on behalf of
RBG Properties and explains that the applicant is requesting a special permit to convert
approximately 2,000 s.f of office space currently located on the ground floor of the building into
three (3) residential units. He states that two of the three units will be two bedrooms and the
third unit will be a one bedroom unit. He notes that the total residential count for the building
will be 11 units. He also notes that there are currently 15 parking spaces on the premises.
Alexander states that all of the units will be built to code. He reviews the parking requirements
for commercial and residential uses and notes that 9 parking spaces are required for 11 units.
Alexander reports that the direct abutters to the property have signed a petition in support of the
project.
Alexander reviews the criteria for a special permit as follows:
a. That the specific site is an appropriate location for he proposed use, and that the character
of adjoining uses will not be adversely affected.
b. That no factual evidence is found that property values in the district will adversely
affected by such use.
C. That no undue traffic and no nuisance or unreasonable hazard will result
d. That adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation and
maintenance of the proposed use.
f. That there are no valid objections from abutting property owners based on demonstrable
fact.
g. That adequate and appropriate City services are or will be available for the proposed use.
Atty. Alexander states that they comply with all of the criteria for the granting of a special permit
for this property.
Thomson opens the hearing up for public comment at this time.
Rosemary Maglio of 30 Pleasant Street addresses the Board and states that she is glad that this is
going to be residential.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Hutchinson: Motion to close the public hearing. Flannery seconds the motion. The
motion carries (7 -0).
Page 14 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Mack: Motion to approve the Special Permit for 70 -72 Cabot Street, RBG LLC
as the applicant has shown that they meet the criteria for a Special Permit.
N. Barrett seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion
carries (7 -0).
Continued Public Hearing — Special Permit Application #143 -15 and 144 -15 and Site Plan
Review Application #115 -15 — and Inclusionary Housing Application #7 -15 - Construct Five
Story Residential Building within a Mixed Use Development -181 Elliott Street (aka 201
Elliott Street) — Beverly Commerce Park, LLC
Stephen Drohosky, Vice President of Cummings Properties addresses the Board and explains that
he is joined this evening by Dennis Clark, President of Cummings Properties. He recalls that at
the last meeting the Board continued the Public Hearing in order to get more information
regarding two outstanding issues.
Drohosky explains that the first item is relative to the lot coverage requirement of the IR and IR
Overlay District and the second issue was with respect to the maximum sale price limit for
affordable housing units if they were provided within the project in place of the request to make
a payment in lieu fee. He explains that the central question was what the maximum for sale price
would be for affordable units within the proposed project.
Drohosky explains that they have submitted a letter to the Board summarizing the comments he
made at the last meeting regarding this issues and the basis of their request as follows:
1. Extensive inventory already exceed the "target" percentage in Beverly.
Nearly twelve (12) percent of Beverly's existing housing inventory is
"affordable" by Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40B. According to
Planning Department records, 1,940 of Beverly's 16,522 year round homes
are affordable, and unlike most cities and towns in the Commonwealth,
Beverly is in compliance with the law.
2. A critical mass of affordable housing already exists in the immediate
vicinity. As the City's own records make clear, much of Beverly's
affordable housing is clustered in the downtown, within a short distance of
the Cummings Center and along Rantoul and Cabot Streets. Specifically,
62 affordable units exist immediately adjacent to 201 Elliott Street, in the
Fairweather Apartment Building at 245 Elliott Street. He also reports that
DHCD's map of affordable housing in Beverly more than 800 of the City's
1,940 units are within two thirds of a mile of the Cu Center.
3. The proposed contribution has "value" beyond the project itself. Their
proposed payment of $556,605.00 fee in lieu of including nine affordable
units at 201 Elliott Street could be utilized by the City for any number of
Page 15 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
purposes, including to encourage and generate more affordable housing
units in other parts of the city father away from the existing concentration
of units and is consistent with the stated purposes of the Affordable
Housing provision. He also states that it might be used to help the City
maintain, update and or renew its current inventory of affordable units,
thereby advancing the goals of the Inclusionary Housing Regulations. He
further notes that by increasing the overall supply of residential units in the
City, the project will increase the overall inventory and will necessarily
open up more existing units for lease as purchasers have more alternatives
from which to choose.
4. The contribution is critical to the financial viability of the project.
Although they suggested at the May 20, 2015 meeting that some project
would likely still go forward if the Planning Board were to deny the
requested Special Permit, it has become clear that the viability of the
project, as planned is very closely connected to the allowance of the
requested payment in lieu of a fee. He states that the proposed project
will result in a premium product with a very high quality appearance and
distinctive finishes, inside and outside and accordingly they expect a price
point that will be higher than other multi -unit properties currently available
in Beverly, and other such purchase prices will yield increased revenue to
the City from real estate taxes both on a per unit basis and in perpetuity.
He note that while this segment of the condo market is served in nearby
communities such as Danvers, Salem, Wenham and Marblehead, it is not
currently served in Beverly.
Drohosky also explains that for planning purposes they anticipate that the proposed
building will produce at least a $400,000 average sale price per unit. He explains the
overall financial impact on 9 of the 73 units being sold as affordable units at $190,000
and assuming that prevailing mortgage rates do not fluctuate markedly, the negative
financial impact would be approximately $1,890,000 ($400,000 - $190,000) X 9. He
notes that the additional cost over and above the fees and expenses for extensive
surveying, engineering, professional services, and permitting, would make this high
quality project much less appealing to develop them, for instance an attractive but more
utilitarian apartment building in the same location.
Drohosky concluded by asking the Board to consider the above reasons in evaluating
their request for a Special Permit to make a payment of $556,605 in lieu of including 9
affordable units in the project.
Clausen notes that there is a memo in the Board packet from Margaret O'Brien verifying
the minimum sale price for LIP units and provides a calculation estimating that $190,000
Page 16 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
would be an affordable purchase price for a three person household at 80% LMI. He
also notes that the memo includes Code of Massachusetts Regulations general
information.
Clausen addresses the Board and states that he talked with the Steve Frederickson, the
Director of Municipal Inspections regarding the issue of the zoning restrictions on lot
coverage in the IR and IR Overlay District. He reported that in a memo dated June 8,
2015, Frederickson indicated that it is his opinion that lot coverage applies only to
buildings, based on the definition of "coverage" in the zoning ordinance as "the ration of
the total ground floor area of buildings to the total area of the lot, expressed as a
percentage, therefore only buildings can be included in the calculation of "maximum" lot
coverage" and "impervious lot coverage."
Clausen further explains that the memo states that in accordance with Section 38- 19.D.2
the proposed project cannot result in more than 40% coverage of all buildings in the IR
zone and 60% coverage of all buildings in the IR zone, including parking and it is his
opinion that "parking" used in the calculation of coverage only applies to parking
structures and not paved areas because as noted coverage only includes buildings.
Clausen explains that with a Special Permit, the coverage of all buildings can be up to
75% in the IR Overlay and it is not clear in the ordinance if all buildings including
parking structures must be considered. He notes that as the ordinance is currently
written only buildings can be included in any calculation of lot coverage.
Clausen reported that the memo indicates that Frederickson met with Drohosky and
Mike Aveni, Senior Project Architect and reviewed the C Property in terms of
acreage, and the proposed coverage as defined in the Beverly Zoning Ordinance. He
notes that he has not verified the numbers but if they are accurate it is Frederickson's
opinion that the proposed project will comply with the zoning requirements of 38- 19 -D.2
of the City of Beverly Zoning Ordinance.
Matz asks for confirmation that the City of Beverly Zoning ordinance IR Overlay district
allows for up to 75% coverage and the proposed project is less than 75% with sufficient
open space. Drohosky confirms that the lot coverage is less than 75% with sufficient
open space.
There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter:
Hutchinson: Motion to approve the Special Permit Application #143 -15 and Site Plan
Review Application #115 -15 — Construct Five Story Residential Building
within a Mixed Use Development -181 Elliott Street — Beverly Commerce
Park, LLC, as the use requirements for the Special Permit have been met
and that all materials referenced and presented be included in the decision.
Flannery seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion carries
(7 -0).
Page 17 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Mack discloses that his Law Firm is representing a client who has high profile dealings with the
Cummings Center for the record. Drohosky indicates that they have no objection to Mack
participating in these proceedings and see no conflict.
Mack: motion to approve the Special Permit Application #144-15 -181 Elliott Street (aka
201 Elliott Street) — Beverly Commerce Park, LLC. The Chair votes in favor.
The motion carries (6 -1) with Matz opposed.
Discussion/Decision — Special Permit #145 -15, Site Plan Review #116 -15 and Inclusionary
Housing Application # 8 -15 — 131 Rantoul Street — Depot Square Phase III LLC
Thomson recuses himself from this matter and Hutchinson assumes the Chair.
Matz suggests that this matter be continued to the next meeting due to the late hour and as most
of the neighbors who were interested in the project have left the meeting.
Hutchinson states that she feels that people have been very patient this evening and she would
like to deliberate on this decision. She notes that this has been a very thorough public process
and she is prepared to act on this tonight. N. Barrett agreed.
Discussion:
C. Barrett questions if it would be appropriate for the Board to talk about the concerns of the
residents about residential parking.
N. Barrett states that the traffic changes will have to be approved by the Beverly City Council
and the neighbors should have a discussion with Ward Two Councilor Estelle Rand.
Mack states that he feels comfortable with the input from the Parking and Traffic Commission.
He also states that he feels that adequate parking exists in the neighborhood.
Clausen states that Councilor Rand is interested in looking at a residential parking program.
Atty. Gooding stated that if the City Council does not approve the proposal to change the
direction of the traffic she would anticipate that they would be going back to the Parking and
Traffic Commission.
N. Barrett notes that the Parking and Traffic Commission made a recommendation to the
Planning Board and it does not have to be a condition of the entire project.
Matz addresses the Board and states that this is a large project and will be a significant
improvement to that area. He states that he is concerned about the magnitude of a 72 unit project
on that site. He explains that if the Council denies the traffic request the applicant would have to
come back for an amendment to the site plan.
Page 18 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Clausen agrees and states that depending on what is proposed it could be a minor amendment but
either way they would have to come back to the Planning Board.
Mack notes that the Board can only approve the plan that has been submitted.
Mack: Motion to approve Special Permit #145 -15, Site Plan Review #116 -15 — 131
Rantoul Street — Depot Square Phase III LLC based on the plan presented as they have
demonstrated that they have met all of the criteria for the Special Permit, subject to the
conditions of the Parking and Traffic Commission and other conditions set forth from other City
Boards and Commissions and Department Heads. Flannery seconds the motion. The Chair
votes in favor. The motion carries (6 -0).
Mack: Motion to approve the Inclusionary Housing Application # 8 -15 — for 131 Rantoul
Street — Depot Square Phase III LLC. N. Barrett seconds the motion.
Matz states that he applauds Windover's commitment to Affordable Housing
noting that they always include it on site and never try to propose payments in
lieu of providing the housing.
Hutchinson calls for a vote on the motion at this time. The Board voted on the motion to
approve the Inclusionary Housing Application #8 -15. The Chair votes in favor. The motion
carries (6 -0).
Thomson returns to the meeting at this time and assumes the Chair.
Bass River Estates Definitive Subdivision (a.k.a. Folger Avenue Extension) — Request for
Six Month Extension of Construction Completion Date
Clausen explains that Joseph Phelan III of Bass River LLC has submitted a letter requesting the
Planning Board grant a six month extension of the required construction completion date which
is June 30, 2015. He explains that the applicant indicated in the letter that they are working with
Planning Department and the Engineering Department in moving towards the common goal of
completing the project and are working on establishing the City's desired location for the street
lights as well as City Council approval of the types of trees they have selected.
N. Barrett: Motion to grant a six month extension for Bass River Estates Definitive
Subdivision (a.k.a. Folger Avenue Extension) — Request for Six Month Extension
of Construction Completion date which expires on June 30, 2015. C. Barrett
seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion carries (7 -0).
Request to Release Lots from Form G Covenant and Acceptance of Tri -Party Agreement —
Essex Crossing — 232 Essex Street
Clausen explains that DUC Residential LLC has submitted a letter requesting the acceptance of a
Tri -Party Agreement as surety for the remaining infrastructure work required of the approved
Open Space Residential Design Site Plan (OSRD) and Definitive Subdivision Plan located at 232
Page 19 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Essex Street. He notes that the letter further requests that all of the lots be released from the
Form G Covenant.
Clausen notes that the proposed Tri -Party agreement and schedule of remaining work to be
completed and estimated costs associated with the work was included in the Board packet. He
also notes that Planning Staff and the City Solicitor have reviewed the language of the Tri -Party
Agreement and have determined that it sufficiently protects the City in the case the infrastructure
is not completed per the requirements of the OSRD and Subdivision approval.
Clausen explains that the amount of money that is set aside in the Tri -Party Agreement is
$293,998.67.
Hutchinson: Motion to approve the Tri -Party Agreement — Essex Crossing — 232 Essex
Street. N. Barrett seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The
motion carries (7 -0).
Request to Set Public Hearing — Off Nelson Avenue Definitive Subdivision Plan to Create
Two New Lots and Extension of Nelson Avenue — Matthew Power, Trustee of Fairlee
Nominee Realty Trust
Mack: Motion to set public hearing for Off Nelson Avenue Definitive Subdivision for
July 21, 2015. Flannery seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The
motion carries (7 -0)
Request to Set Public Hearing — Special Permit Application #147 -15 — Request to Share
On -Site Parking for Mixed Use Property (Section 38- 25.D.1) — 50 Dodge Street
Clausen explains that Appleseed's Square Condominium Trust has submitted a Special Permit
application for a commercial mixed use facility seeking to reduce parking spaces to
accommodate a new tenant called Doctors Express. He requests that the Board set a public
hearing date for this application.
Mack: Motion to set the public hearing date for July 21, 2015 Planning Board meeting.
Flannery seconds the motion. The motion carries (7 -0).
New or Other Business
Community Preservation Committee Priorities for 2015
Thomson suggested that the Board discuss this matter at the next meeting if time allows.
Page 20 of 21
Beverly Planning Board
June 16, 2015
Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening a motion was
made by Mack to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Flannery. The motion carried (7 -0)
The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m.
Page 21 of 21