Loading...
08-20-19 BPB MinutesCITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Board: Date: Location: Members Present Members Absent: Others Present: Recorder: Planning Board Meeting August 20, 2019 Beverly City Hall, City Council Chambers Chair Ellen Hutchinson, Vice Chair Ned Barrett, Sarah Bartley, Derek Beckwith, William Boesch, Ellen Flannery, Allison Kilcoyne, Wayne Miller Alexander Craft Assistant Planning Director Darlene Wynne Samantha Johanson, Recording Secretary Chair Ellen Hutchinson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans a. 81X Request — Preston Place, Lot 3 Map 75, originally endorsed by the Planning Board on November 7, 1988 — David O'Brien Darlene Wynne tells the Board that an ANR plan that was endorsed by the Board in 1988 was never recorded at the Registry of Deeds. Now the applicant is asking the Board to confirm that nothing has changed so that the plan can be recorded. She has reviewed the plan and it has not changed. Ellen Flannery: Motion to approve the SANR. Allison Kilcoyne seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). b. 105 Standley Street — Robert Vitale Wynne describes the ANR plan to the Board and points out the old and new lot lines. She tells them that the applicant would like to transfer parcels within the interior of the lots, with minor changes in lot area. The request doesn't change the frontage or the access to the lot. Flannery: Motion to approve the SANR. William Boesch seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Flannery: Motion to recess for Public Hearing. Kilcoyne seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Public Hearing: Site Plan Review Application #141 -19 — Conversion and expansion of an existing building (containing one unit) to a residential dwelling adding three new townhouse style units, for a total of four residential units —108 Bridge Street — Frates Realty Trust Materials added into the record: • Site Plan Review Application Form dated 7/8/19 • Site Plan Review Supplemental Information prepared for 108 Bridge Street, Beverly, MA, prepared by George J. Zambouras, PE, 17 Noble Hill Road, Beverly, MA, dated 7/3/19 • Site Development Storm Water Management Report prepared for 108 Bridge Street, Beverly, MA, prepared by George J. Zambouras, PE, 17 Noble Hill Road, Beverly, MA, dated 7/3/19 • Civil Plan Set: Site Plan for 108 Bridge Street, Beverly, MA, scale 1 " =20', dated July 2, 2019 revised through July 20, 2019 (to be provided to Board), 3 sheets, prepared by George J. Zambouras, PE, 17 Noble Hill Road, Beverly, MA. • Architectural Plan Set: Bridge Street Residence, 108 Bridge Street, Beverly, MA, scale 11 /4 " = 1', dated July 2, 2019, hldex/Notes Page + 10 sheets, prepared by LF Studio, Ipswich MA, 978 - 618 -9986. Wynne reads the Public Notice. Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 The applicant is looking to convert and expand an existing building (containing one unit) to a residential dwelling adding three new townhouse style units, for a total of four residential units. Thomas Alexander, 1 School Street, Beverly, MA, is representing the applicant and requests a continuance of the Public Hearing to the next meeting on September 10, 2019. He tells the Board that they are waiting to meet with the Design Review Board and would prefer to have those recommendations for the Planning Board to make their final decision. An unknown member of the public asks why they are continuing the hearing. Hutchinson explains the request and reasoning described previously. Wayne Miller asks if the applicant has met with the Zoning Board of Appeals yet. Alexander says that they have already met with the ZBA and have been approved. Ned Barrett: Motion to continue the Public Hearing to the September 10, 2019 meeting. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Public Meeting: 59 Ober Street — Court Order remanding to the Board to hold a public meeting on a prior Subdivision Approval Not Required Endorsement — 59 Ober Street LLC Materials added into the record: • Motion to Extend Time to Hold Planning Board Meeting, Commonwealth of Massachusetts Land Court Department of the Trial Court, Civil Action No. 18 MISC 00698 • Massachusetts Trial Court Docket, dated 4/29/2019 This is a Court Order remanding the Board to hold a public meeting for a prior SANR endorsement. Attorney Tom Alexander, 1 School Street, Beverly, MA, representing the applicant, tells the Board that this plan has been remanded back to the Board by the Land Court. Alexander informed the Board that his client wanted to withdraw its request for endorsement and further requested the Board annul its October 20, 2018 approval. William Sheehan, 8 Essex Center Drive, Peabody, MA, attorney for the owner of an abutting parcel, spoke in support of the request made by Attorney Alexander. He requests that the Board use the word "supersede," in their updated decision to annul the previous decision. Hutchinson asks Stephanie Williams, the Beverly City Solicitor, to summarize the court's decision and what they are asking the Board to do. Williams explains the Court's decision and requirement. She believes the applicant intends to withdraw their ANR application. To comply with the Court order, the Board must make a determination approved by the court. Legal representation of all parties was present and concurred with the request being made of the Board. Sarah Bartley asks if members who were not present during the last decision may they vote on this. Hutchinson tells her yes. Hearing no other comments, Hutchinson asks for a motion. Barrett: Motion to accept the applicant's request to withdraw the SANR request for 59 Ober Street. Derek Beckwith seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Barrett: Motion to supersede its prior decision of endorsement dated October 30, 2018 and to annul said prior decision of endorsement. Boesch seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). As stated above, legal representation of all parties was present and concurred with the Board's decision. Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Request for Extension of Special Permit #160 -17 — 245 Cabot Street, Unit 2 — YNS Affordable Housing, Inc. Materials added into the record: • Letter from Alexander & Femino, Thomas Alexander, dated 8/7/19, with attachments including Planning Board decision dated 10/25/17 and associated attachments. The applicant is seeking a request for extension of Special Permit # 160 -17 of two years for the Site Plan Review, Special Permit, and hlclusionary Housing Permit granted by the Planning Board on October 25, 2017. Alexander, 1 School Street, Beverly, MA, representing the applicant, tells the Board that the Special Permit expires this October. The funding for the project is currently pending, but construction starting is unlikely prior to the end of the Special Permit. He then asks the Board to extend the validity of the Special Permit for two years. Flannery asks if there is a specific date in mind for the extension. Alexander tells her the request is for October 25, 2021. Miller: Motion to grant extension of 2 years until October 25, 2021. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Continued Public Hearing: OSRD #11 -18 — Off Thaxton Road and Grover Street — Construct a new 250' long dead -end private roadway off of Thaxton Road with 3 new single- family residential lots and a 3.15 -acre open space parcel — Hickory Street Realty Trust Materials added into the record: • Planning Department Staff Report • Letter from City of Beverly, Department of Public Services and Engineering, Eric Barber, P.E., City Engineer, dated 8/19/19 • Letter from City of Beverly, Conservation Commission, Jenna Pirrotta, dated 8/20/19 • Email from City of Beverly, Amy Maxner, Environmental Planner, dated 5/31/19 • Letter from Griffin Engineering Group, LLC, Bob Griffin, dated 8/12/19 • Letter from Salem and Beverly Water Supply Board, Peter Smyrnios, Superintendent, dated 8/8/19 • Letter from the City of Beverly, Fire Department Bureau of Fire Prevention, Chris Halloran, Captain, dated 6/5/19 • Draft Thaxton Heights Road Homeowners Association Trust (HOA) • Draft Drainage System Operation & Maintenance Plan for Thaxton Heights Road • Draft Thaxton Heights Road Private Roadway & Utilities Maintenance Agreement, draft 8/12/19 • Email from Suzanne Sullivan, dated 8/20/19 • Letter from David and Chyllene McDonald, dated 7/8/19 • OSRD Site Plan & Definitive Subdivision Plan for Thaxton Heights Road Wynne notes the Board held a site visit in April and the applicant had then requested a continuance of the hearing as they responded to comments. The applicant has submitted revised plans and draft HOA and Operations & Maintenance materials in response to engineering and Board comments. Wynne explains for the record that both Barrett and Kilcoyne were absent back at the June meeting when they had the Public Hearing. Kilcoyne has reviewed the meeting minutes and audio and certified under the Mullin Rule that she did so, which makes her eligible to act on a decision. Barrett recuses himself from the continued Public Hearing as he was unable to review the previous materials. Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Hutchinson explains the process and tells them that the first step was making a determination of the maximum number of lots that can be allowed, which is the Yield Plan. The Yield Plan was approved in September 2018 and determined that a maximum three lots could be allowed on the property. The next step was to determine what the preferred plan would be. She explains that the applicant came before the Board with three to four plans to consider with feedback from the Public. The applicant and Board reached an agreement on a Preferred Plan in October 2018. This is the next phase of Site Plan Review, where the applicant presents complete engineered plans. She notes at the site visit in April, the Board requested some revisions to the plans. Griffin shows the Board the changes made to the plans. The changes made were: 1) clarified no- disturb area and open space parcel, noting the plan significantly exceeds no- disturb area; 2) neighbors requested adding an additional buffer and "no cut zone;" 3) attempted to comply with O &M requirements from Engineering. Noting the Fire Department has no issues, he pointed out the hydrant locations. The Engineering Department has also recommended manholes be added. He also provided a draft for the HOA and operations and maintenance requirements. Griffin mentions that the applicant slightly expanded the drainage easement, providing a blanket drainage easement on two lots so that the inspector can easily access the site. He then tells them that Wynne's most recent memo cited compliance with the tract buffer, and the applicant is asking for a waiver. He comments that 75% of the site has tract buffer. Hutchinson asks if the tract buffer was calculated for each of the three lots. Griffin describes the buffers, and tells her that there will be no work within 100 feet of the wetlands and there will be no disturbance within the stream area, and all proposed work falls within 25% of the proposed tract buffer. Griffin then describes how the buffers will impact the Wenham side of the project and explains how the plan will protect the buffers. Hutchinson comments that the project is well protected on the Wenham side, but the other neighbors are not. Griffin points out an example of one of the properties near the project and how it will be protected. Griffin explains that the plan minimizes disturbance and that they are protecting the Grover Street vista. He tells the Board that the Beverly & Salem Water Supply Board doesn't want to encourage the use of the open space that they would be taking on, because they would want to use it as a buffer to their watershed. However, there is no restriction for public access. Miller asks about the waiver that is listed on the staff report that is requesting a waiver from the 25 -foot buffer along the whole tract and how has the plan changed. Griffin explains to him that there is additional vegetative buffer and a no- disturb area. Miller then asks Griffin if there is a quantitative measure. Griffin tells him that it was calculated based on the lot widths and depths. Boesch asks Griffin to clarify what is allowed for the house footprints. Griffin answers that the house footprints are conceptual and not confirmed. Boesch then asks if the footprints aren't part of the need for the waiver. Griffin explains that it is uncertain, but that the proposal is based on precedent from other communities. Boesch asks Griffin to explain why the waiver isn't based on the house footprints. Griffin explains that the Board does not necessarily approve house footprints and describes the potential need and goal of minimizing disturbance. Boesch asks if the waiver means that there is no obligation or if a narrower buffer would be required. Wynne comments that the latter is an option. Flannery asks about the HOA documents with regard to page 8, item C which lists the restrictions on the utility lines which will be placed underground. She also asks about the maintenance agreement that states the utility lines can go above or underground. Griffin explains that they intend to put the utilities underground. Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Miller reads the MA State laws for solar power and comments that the HOA is unreasonable in regards to prohibiting solar on rooftops. Griffin says they will remove any unreasonable restrictions. Hutchinson further questions Boesch's point regarding Lot 1 and that the house footprint indicates that it will fall within a 20 -foot buffer under the proposed waiver. She asks Griffin if that gives the developer the opportunity to further intrude on the buffer. Griffin tells her that the developer must meet the zoning. Flannery asks for clarification behind the reasoning for the waiver. Griffin comments that the lots are small and Lot 1 is unusual in shape and is narrow, and some relief is needed. Bartley asks if the Lot could accommodate the house without the waiver. Griffin explains that it is possible, but the house would have to be smaller or have a very small footprint. However, the goal is to keep the houses consistent with the rest of the neighborhood. Wynne reads the letters to be submitted into the record. She mentions that the last letter was written by Suzanne Sullivan who is present for the meeting and asks her if she would like to read her own letter. Sullivan asks Wynne to read the letter for her. Hutchinson asks Griffin to respond to Sullivan's letter. Griffin notes that many conversations have occurred regarding the utility lines and that National Grid has been urged to remove the utility lines as soon as possible. He then comments that the applicant has done test pits, with regard to possible blasting. He adds that drainage is being pushed away from the property. The applicant will ensure any damage to the road be repaired. Hutchinson asks Griffin to respond to the City Engineer's concerns about the project. Griffin states that they are all minor concerns and they will comply with the suggestions. Hutchinson opens the Public Hearing up to the public to speak and ask questions. Ernest Hart of 3 Thaxton Road asks what the lot sizes are for each of the proposed lots. Griffin tells him that Lot 1 is 21,000, Lot 2 is 24,000, and Lot 3 is 64,000 square feet. Hart then asks about the land that is designated as open space. Griffin explains that the proposed open space will be conveyed to the Beverly & Salem Water Supply Board. Boesch asks if the Beverly & Salem Water Supply Board is the appropriate entity to receive this property. Wynne tells him that the City believes it is, explains what is permitted, and how the Water Supply Board meets the definition of a conservation agency and is nonprofit. Hart then asks if the land will be taken off tax rolls for tax revenue. Griffin comments that the open space will be eliminated from the tax rolls, however 3 new house lots will represent a significant increase. Hart asks him why the peripheral buffer should be waived. Griffin notes that the buffer is kept everywhere it is possible, but the waiver is requested due to the driveways and other site aspects. Hart asks Griffin what will happen if the waiver is not granted. Griffin tells him that the roadway could be installed to make room for those uses. He then adds that about 60% of the land is being given as conservation and describes the OSRD process and benefits. Beckwith asks if they have anything more definitive regarding the Water Supply Board other than the interest letter presented. Wynne explains that she has had a discussion with them and they are moving forward with the applicant to take the land. Miller asks when the land will be conveyed as open space. Wynne provides the process that needs to happen and describes the typical OSRD conditions. Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 David MacDonald of 8 Thaxton Road comments that he is an abutter to the Springhill development in Wenham and potential abutter to Lot 1. He states that he has concerns with the 50 buffer of the Springhill development being less than required, the enforceability of the no -cut zone and setback requirements, and clear cutting near his property boundary. He explains his experience with previous clear cutting with the Wenham development. MacDonald tells the Board that other neighbors are concerned with the term "could" instead of "should" and the construction of these new homes. He asks if the 25 -foot setback can be enforced for this project. Griffin explains that they intend to protect the land and enforce the requirements. Hutchinson adds that in the past, when a developer did not comply with requirements that the Planning Department, Board, and Conservation Commission responded strongly. Tina Buchs of 4 Thaxton Road asks about a guarantee for the no -cut zone. Griffin tells her that the no -cut zone and no- disturb areas are filed with the Registry of Deeds. Buchs asks if someone cuts down a tree in the buffer zone once its private property, would it still be considered illegal. Griffin confirms that is correct. Buchs then asks for clarification about the buffer zone. Griffin reiterates that they don't intend on touching the buffer zone. Buchs asks if it is possible for that land to be protected. Griffin explains that there is additional administrative protection on the property. Wynne adds that it would require additional approval from the Planning Board if anyone requests to alter the buffer zone. David Kalman of 4 Thaxton Road echoes the concerns of Buchs (his wife) and asks about the wording "approximate limit" and vagueness of the language. Griffin explains that no work will be done in the buffer zone without the Planning Board's approval. Kalman asks if that will be stated in the final plans. Griffin reassures him that it will. Kalman then asks if the Planning Board has authority to decide if the buffer zone will be part of the no cut zone. Hutchinson explains that this is part of the law. Wynne adds that the 100 -foot buffer zone is under purview of the Conservation Commission, but the Planning Board can approve work in the tract buffer zone. Boesch asks if they have received the Conservation Commissions approval. Wynne tells him that they have not. Kalman asks about the planned construction times. Hutchinson states that work cannot begin before 7:00am and must end by 6:OOpm. In addition, no work is allowed on Sundays or holidays. Kilcoyne asks what the hardship is regarding the waiver of the 25 -foot buffer. Griffin explains that the hardship is the shape of the lot, including the grading. Kilcoyne asks if the hardship could be eliminated for Lot 1 by changing the size of the house. Griffin tells her that is possible, but that the house would also be up against the street. Hutchinson reminds the Board about the process of determining if this site plan was the most appropriate. Buchs adds that two of the houses closest to her property are larger than what is typical in the neighborhood. Griffin explains that the building footprints are conceptual and determined to be average sized. Buchs tells the Board that National Grid stated that the utility poles are utilized by them and not Verizon. Griffin comments that he may be mistaken about that fact. Buchs asks that the applicant help with removing the poles. Suzanne Sullivan of 6 Thaxton Road asks why the developer can't build smaller houses with a smaller footprint. Hutchinson explains the OSRD process to Sullivan and how the applicant has followed the process so far. Hutchinson then adds that the open space that is being conveyed and the benefit for the Beverly residents by protecting that space. She mentions that back in June that there was a request to enlarge the no -cut zone which was put into place. Hutchinson asks for a motion to close the Public Hearing. Boesch: Motion to close the Public Hearing. Miller seconds. The motion passes (7 -0) Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Miller: Motion to recess at 8:28. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (7 -0). Flannery: Motion to reconvene at 8:43. Miller seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Public Hearing: Site Plan Review #140 -19, Special Permit #172 -19, and Inclusionary Housing Permit #17 -19 — "Depot II" a mixed commercial and residential building containing 115 residential units with associated parking and site improvements — 134 - 142 -146 Rantoul Street and 1 -9 Park Street — Depot Square Phase II, LLC Materials added into the record: • Planning Department Staff Report • Site Plan Review, Special Permit Application, and Inclusionary Housing Application forms, Addendum, and required attachments, submitted 6/10/2019 • Inclusionary Housing Special Permit Decisions #16 -18 (461 Rantoul Street) and #14 -17 (2 Hardy Street), including attachments and extensions • Civil Plan Set "Permit Site Development Plans," prepared by Meridian Associates, dated 6/10/19 • Architectural Plan Set "Depot II Building," prepared by SV Design, dated 6/10/19 and revised through 8/12/19 • Traffic Impact and Access Study for Depot Square II, prepared by GPI dated 6/2019 and revised through 8/12/19 • Stormwater Memorandum, prepared by Christopher Broyles, Meridian Associates, dated 6/10/19 • Cover Letter from Glovsky & Glovsky, dated 8/12/19 • Letter from City of Beverly Board of Health, William T. Burke, dated 7/5/19 • Letter from City of Beverly, Department of Public Services and Engineering, Eric Barber, P.E., dated 7/16/19 • Letter to the Design Review Board from John Hall, dated 7/11/19 • Letter to the Design Review Board from Peter Johnson, dated 7/9/19 • Letter to the Design Review Board from James Younger, dated 7/11/19 • Letter from Joan Johnson, dated 7/8/19 • Letter from Babette Loring, dated 7/3/19 • Letter to the Design Review Board from Wendy Pearl, dated 7/9/19 • Letter from Beverly Main Streets, Gin Wallace, Executive Director, dated 8/15/19 • Email from Ken Kumph, dated 8/16/19 • Email from John Cuffe, dated 8/19/19 • Letter from Cummings Properties, Stephen Drohosky, dated 8/20/19 • Letter from Charles Grimes, dated 8/20/19 • Email from Lynne Duby Martin, dated 8/20/19 • Letter from Michael Sperber, MD, dated 7/15/19 • Email from Jerry Guilebbe, dated 7/15/19 • Letter from Martin Lian, dated 7/23/19 • Letter from Stella -Mae Seamans, dated 8/6/19 • Email from Jim Younger, dated 8/14/19 Wynne notes that the applicant has submitted revised plans, changes to which are detailed in the cover letter from Miranda Gooding dated 8/12/19. The applicant and Board have agreed to focus on only design and inclusionary units at this meeting, since there is a lot to cover and substantial public interest. Hutchinson notes that Matt Pujo will be recording this part of the meeting and informs the Public that they will be videotaped. Hutchinson asks everyone to please be considerate of their time speaking due to Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 the limited amount of time that they have. Boesch asks if parking and other issues will be discussed at another meeting. Hutchinson adds she expects those issues will be addressed at the September 10' meeting. Miranda Gooding, Glovsky & Glovsky, 8 Washington Street, Beverly, MA, representing the applicant introduces the project team of Chris Koeplin, Thaddeus Siemasko, Krista Broyles, and Kristen Poulin. She says that team does not anticipate a decision being made at this meeting or at the September meeting. She adds that the team is aware of the importance of this site and intend to give it the best possible process. Koeplin comments that he wants to acknowledge the issue of the historic tax credits and proposed demo of the historic buildings. He notes that all the tax credit money went into the veterans' housing project and that the project did not earn any money and the property still carries a loss at this point. He is proud that they were able to help the veterans and he adds that they had good intentions but ultimately the actions led to an erosion of public trust. He apologies for the actions and emphasizes the team's desire to improve the area. Koeplin shows images of 60 Pleasant Street, 45 Broadway, McKay School, and 50 Broadway, all of which are preserved (and 45 Broadway was saved from demolition). He shares with everyone their charitable involvement to Cabot Cinema and Powder House (25K donation). Koeplin discusses other historic properties that the team is enthusiastic about. He adds that the team would be happy to assist in moving the Casa de Luca to another site. He explains why the project needs six stories of development and the importance of it being walkable and have housing near the train station. Gooding summarizes the relief required for the project including Tall Building Special Permit, Special Permit to apply Depot Parking Overlay Requirements to entire space, and approval of the inclusionary housing credit units (9 off -site affordable units). She then describes the project as 28,850 square feet, with 0' setbacks allowed on all sides, 75' in height allowed, but 73' proposed, number of units reduced from 115 to 111. The affordable requirement for 9 units is met offsite. For parking requirements, 29 is required for the retail which can be met on- street and they are proposing one parking space per each residential unit. Siemasko walks the Board through changes in the plans based on the recommendations of the Design Review Board, as well as the Planning Board to help reduce the scale of the project, to create a more historic aesthetic look to the building, and add greater connections to Odell Park. He explains that the garage has not changed. He shows the Board the revised floor plans and adds that the mass has been moved to the back corner. Siemasko points out the elevations and describes the details and how the building design has changed. He then demonstrates how they utilized some of the elements from the Post Office design and architectural elements for the proposed building. He shows the Board a revised rendering and points out the activated ground floor. Siemasko then comments on the Tall Building Guidelines and how they have complied with the intent of it; he explained the reasoning why some guidelines were not met. He adds that some of the existing buildings in the downtown area have used similar elements. Siemasko notes they have requested for the Parking and Traffic Committee to consider a mid -block crosswalk. In addition, they will use trees to buffer Odell Park. Gooding describes the inclusionary housing requirements. They have previously received special permits from the Board for 12 off -site credit units. They intend to apply 9 of these credit units to the Depot II to meet the inclusionary requirements. She adds that of every Beverly Crossing development has complied with the inclusionary ordinance with on -site units and created 49 affordable units out of 403 total units. She explains why they are not including affordable units onsite. Hutchinson recommends that the public speak prior to the Planning Board's questioning. Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Stella Mae Seamans of 840 Hale Street thanks the architect for all of the redesigns and for listening to the public and committee and board comments and suggestions. She then thanked Gooding for explaining the affordable housing aspect of the project. Seamans hopes that there will be additional reduction of the size of the project including further pushback of the 5t' and 6t' floors. Martha Wetherill of 26 Butman Street agrees that the redesign is still not enough. She adds that the historic nature of the space is more important than the redesign has shown to be. She is disappointed that Depot II's public space will become more retail space. Wetherill hopes that the developer will continue to adjust that. Paul Kotakis of 131 Rantoul Street adds that usually people come out to oppose projects, not necessarily support the project. He is an abutter and in favor of the project despite losing his own view of the river. Sharon McGrath of 12 Webber Avenue disagrees with the project because it is too big and that section of Rantoul is already saturated and too congested. Dorothy Hayes of 680 Hale Street comments that the style and design is non- descript and not consistent with the area. She also believes the state tax credits issue was very disappointing. Barry Checchi of 116 Rantoul Street asks Siemasko what parking at the corner of Pleasant and Park Streets is currently being used for. Siemasko tells him that Enterprise currently uses it. Checchi comments that there were 10 parking spots allotted for the veterans. Gooding explains that was a temporary arrangement between the time the building was redeveloped and the parking garage was built. Checchi then adds that he recalls a motion made by the Planning Board was contingent on allocation of the 10 parking spaces. Hutchinson tells Checchi they will look into it. John Hall of 143 Colon Street who is a member of the Depot Matters Group tells the Board that he moved his studio to Rantoul Street 10 years ago. He comments that some of the newer developments fit in to Rantoul, but others do not. He hopes that they will preserve the building. If they build the current Depot II it will destroy three National Register buildings and the historic scale. He believes that the affordable units should be included onsite per the inclusionary housing intent. Bill Squibb of 509 Cabot Street states that he believes the City needs a traffic study before more units are given. He then adds he wasn't aware that budgetary and financial needs were considered hardship. Squibb provides a letter to the Board from Windover to MHC to receive tax credits and adds that the letter's implications to rehab historic buildings states that this was the reason they received the tax credits. He thinks the Veteran's housing is great but that the proposed design is not consistent with other buildings in Beverly. Angela Villanti of 176 Dodge Street agrees with McGrath and Squibb earlier comments. She is against the development and thinks this will add to the traffic in the City. Peter Johnson of 677 Hale Street states that he will share a shortened version of his comments but then will submit his full comments to the Planning Board for consideration. He is also a member of Depot Matters. He asks about the process for the public to be able to review the revised plans. Johnson adds that there was insufficient time for the public to review this project. Wynne notes that the Board has a timeline to make a decision but it starts from the end of the Public Hearing. Johnson mentions that the project is too large in scale and mass. He hopes that they will preserve the Casa de Luca building and comments that there is a significant difference in the scale. Johnson then cites that there is demo delay by the HDC and a finding. He comments that in 2008, Siemasko spoke in favor of the MBTA garage at the same site. Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Johnson then adds that the inclusionary housing should be part of the project and asks the Board to deny the request and require the units to be developed in this development. Kirsten Shapiro of 12 Mason Street is excited about the diversity of ideas. She believes that the affordable housing is dismaying and argues that this is modern redlining. Shapiro asks what kind of outreach has been done in the community. She believes that affordable housing is badly needed especially for families and elderly and doesn't believe this project meets those needs. Mark White of 4 Agate Street agrees with others who spoke earlier. White mentions that Porter Mill is a good example of what can be done for a development to retain the character of the building. He comments that if a corporation needs waivers to make money, then they are abusing the process. White is surprised that the developer is asking for special assistance to meet their budget. He thinks building design has improved but believes it is too large in scale. Hutchinson announces that the Public Hearing for Depot II will be paused at 10:30pm and continued to the Planning Board meeting on September 10, 2019. She asks that those who speak from this point on only be those who can't attend the September 10' Planning Board meeting. Jackie Moldau owner of Jackie's Tees at 238 Rantoul Street thanks Beverly Crossing for stepping up and fixing this area of Beverly. She has gone to their office to review the plans several times and to discuss the development. Moldau adds that everyone is stating what they do not want and not what they do want. She comments that the Beverly Crossing developments have benefitted local businesses, provided new customers, and brought more people to Rantoul Street. She likes the appearance of both the building and the courtyard. Andi Freeman of 32 Butman Street comments that the proposed building is too big and the two existing buildings are unique. He states that the historic buildings is what makes Beverly special. Freeman comments that demolishing a building after tax credits have been used is unacceptable. Euplio (Rick) Marciano of 141 McKay Street notes that the zoning changes have significantly increased the density of Beverly. He requests to have the maximum affordable housing possible for this project. Antony Ohman of 26 Broadway comments that the design doesn't show the historical significance and the combination of styles doesn't work for the project. Matthew Nugent of 8 Vine Street states that the development will replace four historic structures. He asks that the Board consider any detrimental changes to residents' quality of life. Jim Younger of 32 Butman Street requests that the next meeting be held in a more conducive location Kenneth Smith of 27 Lincoln Avenue comments that Windover should follow the rules of the affordable housing requirements, parking requirements, and height of the building. Hutchinson encourages respectfulness and states that Beverly Crossing is within their rights to request Special Permits. Jim Dawson of 6 Waldemar Avenue comments that the neighborhood needs something and he hasn't seen any other plans. He is pleased to see the developer talk about tax credits and to see the changes made to the design and scale and adds that he supports this development. Suzie LaMont of 20 Porter Street is a member of Depot Matters. She notes that the signatures of their petition doesn't reflect the number of Beverly residents who don't support this development. 10 Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Barrett: Motion to continue the Public Hearing to the September 10, 2019 meeting. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Barrett: Motion to recess at 10:32. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Barrett: Motion to reconvene at 10:40. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Public Hearing: Ellingwood Court Definitive Subdivision Plan — Extend roadway by sufficient length to create frontage for an existing lot — 40 Ellingwood Court — Anthony P. Baltas Materials added into the record: • Planning Department Staff Report • Letter from the City of Beverly, Department of Public Services and Engineering, Eric Barber, P.E., City Engineer, dated 8/20/19 • Letter from the City of Beverly, Board of Health, William Burke, dated 7/5/19 • Letter from George Zambouras, P.E., dated 7/6/19 • Definitive Subdivision, Proposed Roadway Improvements, prepared by George J. Zambouras, P.E., dated 6/5/19 Wynne reads the Public Notice. The applicant is looking to create frontage for a 6,005 square foot lot at the end of Ellingwood Court by making roadway improvements to establish access and meet the definition of frontage in order to have a buildable lot. George Zambouras, the engineer for the project introduces the applicant Anthony Baltas. Zambouras explains that the lot they want to build on already exists, but it is currently not a buildable lot because it fronts on an unfinished roadway. He explains that the road is paved about 70 feet and then another 40 feet of a driveway to the garage. They do not intend to alter the layout of the property. He points out exposed ledge of the area. The applicant is asking for a variety of waivers for this project including sidewalks. The area currently has overhead utilities. He then discusses stormwater plans for the property. Zambouras then shows them the largest possibility of a footprint that they would ever consider. Hutchinson comments that the street is very narrow and residents are parking at the School Street end. Zambouras comments that there is a lot of ledge. He tells her they will remove the ledge and heavy vegetation. Barrett asks if it is a public way. Zambouras tells him that it is a private way. Hutchinson asks if the owner would be responsible for that part of the roadway. Zambouras is unable to comment on the existing portion of the street. Wynne asks the applicant if they received the Engineering Department's recent letter. They have not, so she gives them a copy. She tells them that the letter states that the roadway would not be accepted or serviced by the City and that they want to see some different stormwater details and maintenance plans for the project. Hutchinson asks if they are requesting the emergency turn around be the property's driveway. Zambouras explains where they would put a hammerhead driveway because there are no other options. Hutchinson tells him that they just voted down another project's hammerhead turn around because the emergency access had to turn around in the driveway. 11 Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Miller asks him to describe the northern edge of the property and if there is vegetation in that area. Zambouras tells him there is one tree that is currently dead as well as the rest of the vegetation in that area. Hutchinson asks if they have a response to the Engineering Department's letter. Zambouras comments that he knows that the roadway doesn't meet all of the City's standards. Hutchinson comments that it is best if they continue the Public Hearing so that the applicant can review and address the matters listed in the Engineering letter and the turn around. Kilcoyne asks if they have gotten any comments from the Fire Department. Wynne states that they have not. Zambouras comments that there isn't much they can do about the proposed turn around. Flannery asks for clarification about the property and if they will let the new owner know about the current agreement or not with the City about snow plowing. Paul Vinard of 21 School Street has concerns about the removal of the ledge and disturbances to it. Hutchinson asks what steps they need to take to remove the ledge. Zambouras tells her they don't plan on blasting, but instead they will hammer it out. They are also going to dig some test pits on the edge and see if they can find a corridor where no ledge exists. Wynne adds that because of an issue with the legal ad that the Board is up against a deadline and would ask that the applicant request an extension of time if they were to continue it. She also suggests that they continue this Public Hearing to the September 17, 2019 meeting. Flannery: Motion to continue the Public Hearing to the September 17, 2019 meeting. Kilcoyne seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Miller: Motion to reconvene from public hearing. Boesch seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). Discussion /Decision: OSRD #11 -18 — Off Thaxton Road and Grover Street — Construct a new 250' long dead -end private roadway off of Thaxton Road with 3 new single- family residential lots and a 3.15 -acre open space parcel — Hickory Street Realty Trust Miller: With the public hearing closed, motion to table the discussion to the September 10, 2019 meeting. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (7 -0, Barrett is ineligible). Set Public Hearing: Site Plan Review Application #142 -19 — Construct a Police Station on a 2.01 - acre parcel which currently serves as an overflow parking lot for the Cummings Center — 175 Elliot Street — City of Beverly Flannery: Motion to set the Public Hearing for the September 10, 2019 meeting. Boesch seconds. The motion passes (7 -0 -1, Barrett abstains). Set Public Hearing: Site Plan Review #143 -19 and Special Permit #173 -19 — Construct a 3 -story restaurant containing ground floor amenities including restrooms, a snack bar, and small commercial space for water - related retail or recreational use on land owned by the City of Beverly — 1 Water Street — Beverly Restaurant Associates, LLC c/o Glovsky & Glovskv, LLC Flannery: Motion to set the Public Hearing for the September 10, 2019 meeting. Boesch seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). 12 Beverly Planning Board Meeting Minutes August 20, 2019 Set Public Hearing: Request for Waiver of Frontage and Definitive Subdivision Plan Approval —16 Harwood Street — Marius Becio Beckwith: Motion to set the Public Hearing for the September 17, 2019 meeting. Kilcoyne seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). New /Other Business a. Communication to the Board: Chapter 91 Waterways License Application — 76 Paine Road — Richard J. Kelly Trust, c/o Atlantic Environmental, LLC b. Beverly Master Plan Update — Due to time won't be discussed, refer to Wynne for any questions. Adjournment Flannery: Motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:30 pm. Kilcoyne seconds. The motion passes (8 -0). 13