2016-02-24City of Beverly
Zoning Board of Appeals
February 24, 2016 at 7pm
These minutes are not a verbatim transcript of the public hearing of the Board of Appeals.
Reviews of the Board's Decision or outcome of the public hearing should include an
examination of the Board's decision for that hearing.
Meeting Minutes
Members Present: Victoria Burke Caldwell, Vice Chairperson, Jim Levasseur,
David Battistelli, Pamela Gougian, Kevin Andrews, alt.
Members Absent: Joel Margolis, Margaret O'Brien, Alt.
Others Present: Leanna Harris, Zoning Board Administrative Assistant
Location: 191 Cabot Street, 3 d Floor, Conference Room B
Ms. Caldwell called the meeting to order at 7:04pm.
L CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS
Townhomes of Beverly
In a petition for a request for a Special Permit under Section 38 -26 ordinance number 61, 7 -12-
11 for Townhomes of Beverly to erect an internally illuminated monument sign. The property is
located at 201 Broughton Drive in the RMD zoning district.
MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to accept the request from Townhomes of Beverly for
a continuance to the March 29, 2016 meeting. Second by Mr. Levasseur.
" Votes: 5 -0 ( Battistelli, Levasseur, Gougian, Caldwell, Andrews)
Motion carries.
II. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Lockwood Investments, LLC
In a petition for a request for a Special Permit and a Finding to allow the construction of a
56,147' physical rehabilitation facility, licensed as a skilled nursing facility on the 4.01 acres site
and to allow nonconforming parking locations on site to continue as on the existing site. The
property is located at 130 Sohier Road in 1R zoning district.
Thomas Alexander, Esq. of Alexander & Femino addressed the Board on behalf of Lockwood
Investments and stated they are based in St. Louis but they build rehab facilities nationwide and
are seeking to build a short term physical rehabilitation facility at 130 Sohier Road. The
maximum stay will be 30 days so the facility would be geared towards people who have
had replacement knees, hips, shoulders, etc. The existing building (Roller Palace) will be torn
Page 1 of 5
down and replaced by the proposed building. This facility will result in about 100 -110 jobs. It is
open 24 hours a day and staffed in three shifts. The applicant is seeking a Special Permit for the
use and also a Finding to continue the same parking which is nonconforming with present zoning
bylaws. There is sufficient onsite parking. Attorney Alexander stated the site will be very good
for the City, the residents and will also have a good tie in with Beverly Hospital. Attorney
Alexander introduced Cliff Healey, the Principal of Lockwood Investments, Giles Eham who is
conducted a traffic analysis, Bob Griffin the civil engineer and Chris Poravas the Architect of the
facility.
Mr. Griffin provided a brief overview of the proposed building and parking plan. The plan is
to decrease parking from 200 to 100 spaces and create more green space. There will be outdoor
oxygen tanks where the oxygen truck will make deliveries. There will be an outdoor patio and
courtyard. Attorney Alexander stated due to the size of this building a Site Plan was reviewed by
both the Planning Board and the Design Review Board. The fire department has also reviewed
the plans.
Mr. Poravas reviewed the Site Plan and outlined the interior of the building pointing out nursing
stations, patient rooms, etc. They will begin with 82 single rooms with some rooms having the
ability to later become double rooms for a total of 90 beds. The idea is to create a building more
residential in appearance since its patients will be transitioning to go back home. The DPH
regulations have been met.
Mr. Eham provided information regarding the detailed traffic study they conducted and stated
this use will drastically decrease traffic in comparison to the Roller Palace. There are two
driveways right now and they will be eliminating one of the curb cuts.
Public Participation
Colleen Thibault, 15 Prospect Street Ms. Thibault stated she is representing a large group who
is opposing the sale and closing of the Roller Palace. She provided a copy of the signed petition
from change. org.
Rick Marciano, 141 McKay Street Mr. Marciano asked Mr. Griffin for clarification of where
the drain lines will be. Mr. Marciano stated he also agrees with Ms. Thibault.
Board Discussion
Mr. Battistelli asked Ms. Thibault if she met with the owners and Ms. Thibault responded she did
not. Mr. Battistelli agrees that the closing of the Roller Palace is a loss to the City.
Ms. Gougian asked how many designated employee parking spaces there will be and how many
employees will be at the site at one time per shift. Mr. Griffin responded approximately 40 -45
spaces will be designated for employees. Ms. Gougian asked if there is designated visitor
parking and Mr. Griffin confirmed. Attorney Alexander stated they are well over what the City
requires for parking.
Page 2 of 5
Ms. Caldwell asked what time the high school lets out and if that will be at the same time as the
shift change.
Ms. Gougian asked about service vehicles driving through the parking lots and Mr. Griffin
responded they don't expect a lot of service traffic other than ambulances and dumpster service
every couple of days.
Ms. Gougian asked if the courtyard is covered and Mr. Griffin responded it is not, it will be
seasonal.
Mr. Battistelli asked what the size of the parking spaces are and Mr. Griffin responded 9'x 18'.
Mr. Battistelli stated he doesn't like how the building looks on that side.
Mr. Andrews stated that the proposed shrubs, trees, plants, aren't native and asked if they had
considered using more native plants /trees so that birds and insects interact. Mr. Griffin stated
there are many native species being used but that it is necessary to bring in some other plants to
bring in color. Mr. Griffin stated they did review landscaping with the Design Review Board.
MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Andrews.
" votes: 5 -0 (Battistelli, Levasseur, Caldwell, Gougian, Andrews)
Motion carries.
MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to approve the Special Permit for the use of the
property as a skilled nursing facility that based on its location and current use it will not
be a detriment to the community, traffic will be decreased and it meets the criteria of the
zoning ordinance, subject to the plans submitted. Second by Mr. Levasseur.
" votes: 5 -0 (Battistelli, Levasseur, Caldwell, Gougian, Andrews)
Motion carries.
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to make a Finding to continue to allow the preexisting
nonconforming parking configuration at 130 Sohier Road for Lockwood Investments.
Second by Mr. Andrews.
" votes: 5 -0 (Battistelli, Levasseur, Caldwell, Gougian, Andrews)
Motion carries.
B. Paul Sandberg
In a petition for a request for a Finding to permit the addition of a fully conforming addition to
the first floor dwelling unit in a two family structure (allowed by Variance) in a single family
residential district in R10. The property is located at 44 Cross Street.
Marshall J. Handley, Esq. of Handley & Cox addressed the Board on behalf of Mr. Sandberg and
stated the applicant is requesting either a Finding or a Modification of an existing Variance.
Attorney Handley stated it is a two family by ordinance and the proposed addition is in complete
conformity with the Zoning Ordinance. The existing house is nonconforming with a use allowed
by Variance, but the addition would be conforming. The applicant is requesting a Modification
of the Variance to allow the addition and a Finding that it is not significantly more detrimental to
Page 3 of 5
the zoning district that what presently exists. The purpose of the addition is to add space to the
first floor dwelling unit currently occupied by Mr. Sandberg. Mr. Sandberg would like to
construct this addition to create an office space for his consulting business with the thought that
in the future he may come back before the Board to request the addition be permitted to be used
as an accessory in -law apartment.
Attorney Handley stated he has included in the application, signatures from two abutters who are
in support of this project.
Ms. Caldwell read the letter received from the abutter at 245 Lothrop Street who is in
opposition.
Ms. Gougian asked how many two families are in the R10 district and Attorney Handley stated
he couldn't provide an answer to that but he knows there are others in the neighborhood.
Attorney Handley stated the property was originally a two family, converted to a single family
and then back to a two family. Under the terms of the zoning ordinance it is not a
nonconforming property.
Ms. Gougian stated the addition looks like a trailer is being attached to a 1910 house and then a
shed roof is being added on top of it. Ms. Gougian stated the proposed addition does not tie in
with the rest of the house and would be detrimental to the neighborhood. Attorney Handley
stated the siding and roofing would match what is currently there. The members discussed the
choice of a shed roof on the addition.
Mr. Battistelli stated he feels like they are being asked to approve an addition that would create a
three family house. Attorney Handley stated it cannot be used as an accessory apartment without
approval. The existing house is 2,400 square feet and the addition would be adding 900sq. ft to
one unit. Attorney Handley stated there are no plans to add another kitchen and there is no
application for another dwelling unit, it is just for the expansion of an existing dwelling unit.
Ms. Caldwell stated she is not comfortable moving forward without talking to Mr. Frederickson
and stated that this addition would change the view of the street and would be detrimental to the
neighborhood. The members are in agreement.
Mr. Battistelli suggested continuing this hearing to the March meeting so Mr. Frederickson can
guide the Board as to how to apply the percentage increase on the home, whether it can be
applied to one unit or both. Mr. Battistelli stated, if the applicant would decrease the addition
about 1/3 he may be more in favor.
Mr. Andrews stated that if the applicant changed the street view it would be more appealing and
that right now it looks like they are doubling the size of the house without using any architectural
appeal.
The Plot Plan submitted doesn't show the proposed addition, lot lines or the setbacks. Ms.
Caldwell would like to see a revised Plot Plan with the addition superimposed onto it.
Page 4 of 5
MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to continue the hearing until the March 29, 2016
meeting. Second by Mr. Andrews.
" votes: 5 -0 (Battistelli, Levasseur, Andrews, Caldwell, Gougian)
Motion carries.
III. OTHER BUSINESS
Minutes
MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to approve the Minutes from the January 26, 2016.
meeting. Second by Mr. Levasseur
" votes: 5 -0 (Battistelli, Levasseur, Andrews, Caldwell, Gougian)
Motion carries.
Adjournment
MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:58pm.
Second by Mr. Andrews. All in favor. Motion carries.
Leanna Harris, Administrative Assistant
Board of Appeal of the Zoning Ordinance
Page 5 of 5