01.28.2020 BPB MinutesCITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Board:
Planning Board Meeting
Date:
January 28, 2020
Location:
Beverly Council on Aging, Colon Street
Members Present
Chair Ellen Hutchinson,Vice Chair Ned Barrett, Sarah Bartley,
Derek Beckwith, William Boesch, Alexander Craft,Ellen
Flannery, Allison Kilcoyne, Wayne Miller
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Assistant Planning Director Darlene Wynne
Recorder:
Jodi Byrne, Recording Secretary
Chair Ellen Hutchinson calls the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. She wishes all a Happy New Year
and confirms that the meeting will be recorded on video. She offers attendees from the public
who would like to speak the use of a sign-up sheet.
1.Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans
There are none.
Flannery:
Motion to recess for public hearings. Second by Boesch. Motion passes (9-0).
2.Continued Public Hearing: Site Plan Review #140-19, Special Permit #172-19, and
Inclusionary Housing Permit #17-19
and residential building containing 106 residential units (as revised) with associated
parking and site improvements 134-142-146 Rantoul Street and 1-9 Park Street
Depot Square Phase II, LLC
Attny. Miranda Gooding, Glovsky & Associates, 8 Washington Street, representing the applicant
introduces the team present. She reviews what information was requested from the last meeting
and says that the presentation tonight shows the final plan. She invites Siemasko to review this
final plan.
Thad Siemasko, SV Design, 126 Dodge St, shows the layout of the project including the
courtyard and residential units. He projects images of the exterior design materials that were
reviewed by the Design Review Board. He notes that the center section of the building has been
changed to a darker material with more texture as was requested by the DRB.
Siemasko shows the outside images of the project which include the preserved Casa de Lucca
building. The top floors of the apartment units are set to a lighter gray, similar to the Holmes
building. Next he shows photographs from various vantage points showing the scale of the
project, noting that it is mostly hidden by other Rantoul Street Buildings.
Hutchinson opens the meeting up for public comment.
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Paul Boudreau, 8 Dartmouth Street, states that while he understands the need to boost the tax
base of the city, that this project may ultimately threaten Beverly by discouraging new
transplants. He states that he left the congestion in Salem to live in Beverly. While he respects
development and progress, he asks the board to consider the impact to the city in this and in
future projects.
Peter Johnson, 677 Hale Street, Johnson reads a letter, dated December 12, 2019, to the audience
(copies distributed to the Board). The letter asks for the preservation of the iconic angle door,
detail and paneling along Rantoul St., the iconic balustrade, the cornice over the first floor doors
and windows, the paint scheme, the size and placement of windows, and the omitting or revision
of shutters to match historic quality. Johnson recognizes that not all details have been determined
and suggests that the DRB write these requests into the design. His summary states that the
developer should consult with the DRB, and he states his concern that the building is too big for
the space. Johnson notes that the preservation of the Casa de Lucca building is appreciated, but
that the developer is not faithfully restoring the historical elements of the building. He states that
the DRB requires developers to consult with the Historic District Commission and he proposes
that the developer consult with the Beverly Historical Commission to incorporate elements in the
Casa de Lucca to the stage of history when railroads were important to the development of the
city of Beverly.
Hutchinson asks Johnson if he presented this language to the DRB. Johnson answers no.
Wendy Pearl, 21 Morningside Drive, reviews the history of this project indicating the design,
affordable housing, and historical preservation. She compliments the Board and the developer in
the revised design, and states that while this design has greatly improved, that the project still
results in the loss of two historic structures. She notes that the integrity of the National Historic
District is compromised and that this could have economic impacts.
Dorothy Hayes, 680 Hale Street, speaks to the historic building loss, especially of the hotel. She
states that the loss is great. She does not feel that there was enough discussion about the historic
impact. She also has issues with the parking situation, feeling that the MBTA garage should not
be filled with residents. She believes that this will be a transient resident project.
Jerry Gulliebe, 26 Vine Street, notes that while the project is approved, there is still a concern for
historic preservation. He notes that Rantoul Street has lost the charm of Cabot Street. He also
takes issue with the parking situation on Rantoul Street. He feels that this project needs to be
scaled down to allow room to park and grow.
Lynn Huber, 19 Lyman St, shares her concerns with the parking study, especially the impact
during rush hour. She questions if the courtyard area on Park Street will still be glass. Siemasko
confirms. She acknowledges that parking on Rantoul Street is often full. Her concern is with the
added commercial area on the first floor. She questions if establishments will be able to thrive
with limited parking.
Matt Pujo, Lothrop Street, offers a copy of the historic registry. He notes that Beverly has a
unique history, and with the loss of these buildings may cause the loss of the historic district. He
Ϯ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
notes the history of the site and questions if saving this one building will keep the historic tax
credit. He acknowledges that progress is good, but that too much development is occurring. Pujo
shares specific concerns: Tall building guidelines vs. Master Plan, historic features, site plans to
enhance historic features and character, historical and cultural assets to respect the past and
enrich the present, and managing growth.
Pujo hopes that the new Master Plan will contain the reuse of historic buildings with a balance of
development. He does not feel that the BPB has considered these values, and his hope to save
buildings that helped transform the city of Beverly. He says that Beverly Crossing takes credit
for saving the Broadway property, when it was a building swap with political influences. Pujo
expresses his thought that the manipulation of tax credits still occurs, and he worries that the
scale of this project and the loss of historic properties are a part of past corruption. He notes past
transparency and honesty. Pujo states that he was told this project was still years away, revealing
a broken commitment that is built upon a lie resulting in the loss of two historic buildings.
Pujo feels that the city did not look into grants for the restoration of these buildings, and that
others were told to stay away from this block as it already had a development plan. Pujo also
denied this. Pujo also expresses his feeling that the housing crisis claim is false.
Pujo states his opinion that the building is modern and does not add to the historic look of the
area. He notes that he has been advocating for this site, but feels that he has been ignored. He
shares that by voting yes to this project, it is a vote for a lie, claiming one thing and then
presenting another. He states that the project should be preserving historical buildings in
accordance with the Master Plan. Pujo notes the applause received for the members of the public
who spoke, and that they represent the voice of Beverly whom he feels is being ignored.
In regards to the suggestion of additional conditions with the meeting with the Historic District
Commission, Attny. Gooding restates from the last meeting, that they have been consistent and
will continue to meet with the Historic District Commission if this project is approved and
granted a special permit. She states that this is a voluntary discussion without an obligation to
take the recommendations because the review is not required.
Attny. Gooding notes that the December 12th list (from Mr. Johnson) has been considered during
two meetings with the DRB, and the developer has incorporated several of these
recommendations into the design. She says that she would be happy to review these. She restates
photos oard to note that when it votes, that they will clarify that
the process for preservation is voluntary and not binding.
Attny. Gooding also states that many of the speakers from the public have repeated items, but
one new item is Mr. Pujo
buildings come down. She says that there is no research to show that this is a true statement and
that it is not a fair characterization.
ϯ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Attny. Gooding says that she takes issue with the notion that this project is based upon a lie. She
states that there has been a period of years of development with open communication with
changes in circumstances, but never in lies. She feels this should not be a criteria for the vote.
Attny. Gooding states that this vote is one for saving the Casa De Lucca building, and that the
special permit facilitates this.
Hutchinson opens the meeting to questions from Planning Board Members:
Ned Barrett asks about the dark sky lighting. Siemasko states that the plan uses a low-level
lighting similar to the Canvas building, instead of dark sky compliant lighting. Siemasko notes
that this lighting is decorative, not for safety. Barrett would like to see this lighting eliminated
with downcast lighting instead. Siemasko notes that because this lighting is for decoration and
not for code, that it could be taken off of the building. Siemasko states that there are
requirements only on residential balconies.
Wayne Miller asks if there are any changes to the Casa De Lucca restoration. Attny. Gooding
repeats that the request is that the meeting with the Historic Districts Commission is not binding.
Hutchinson states that she is most concerned with honoring the historical aspect of the district.
She asks Attny. Gooding for clarification that when Gooding is talking about the commitment to
meet with the Historic District Commission as not binding, what the anticipation is for her team
to meet the historical context. Attny. Gooding answers that the decision to meet with the Historic
District Commission came from a meeting with the DRB and members of the community.
Gooding says that the developer would be open to an area honoring the history of the area and its
relevance to the railroad.
Hutchinson confirms that she is less concerned about the historical features of the building and
more with how the history of a train center is honored. Attny. Gooding notes that this could be
planned with the Historic District Commission or Historic Beverly, and that they have been in
conversations to do this.
Chris Koeplin, Beverly Crossing, says that his team has already been in communication with the
Historic District Commission and Historic Beverly about keeping an area in the courtyard to
honor the history of the area.
Derek Beckwith says that when he hears the voluntary no commitment and non-binding
nything unless we
cooperative way to please the Historic District Commission. Beckwith suggests that the
developer consider what they can do with what is left. Attny. Gooding states that when meeting
with the DRB, and after much work to add the restoration of the Casa De Lucca building, that the
ϰ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Historic District Commission could have jurisdiction if there were triggers. She then notes that
this project did not trigger any Historic District Commission review. As a lawyer she wants to be
clear that this applicant and design team have worked hard to honor this, but are not obligated to.
She feels that the December 12th letter is old and does not even account for many of the changes
that have already been implemented.
Siemasko says that the design is approved by the DRB and done, based upon (as best as possible)
a historic black and white photo of the original building. He states that the only existing original
areas on the building are the cornice and the metal bands. Siemasko says that he has analyzed the
and will not be changing or enlarging any of the windows. He says that the shutters are real and
will be lined up. He explains that they will rebuild the cornice molding and trim belt to as close
as the photo reveals. Siemasko says that their design fits nicely into the new building, and even
makes it a better building.
Beckwith thanks Siemasko for his review of the project. He also notes that roughly 80% of the
requests have been incorporated, and that he does not see that there is a problem with the
community and understanding of the agreement. He asks if more of an agreement can be met.
Koeplin
work collaboratively with everyone. He states that they want the project done right.
Attny. Gooding thanks him for the question and states that there are absolutely not. She notes
that this is the eighth public meeting and that there were several meetings other than these. She
says that this is a public and a transparent project where 1.5 million tax dollars will be added to
this applicant and that there are no shenanigans. Gooding says that saving Casa De Lucca was
the right thing to do, even though it made the project much more costly and difficult. She feels
this is a good story.
Mayor Cahill is invited to speak. He thanks everyone involved for the long process and work. He
believes that the project as it currently proposed is better because of the involvement of many
people. Mayor Cahill comments on the following specifics: The BPB and DRB meetings have
been passionate and mostly respectful. It should always be respectful. Being open and
accountable is important. Anyone who wants to invest in this community is open to the
conversation. He feels they have worked hard with Beverly Crossing to do the best projects.
Mr. Steve Dodge was a man who cared about this city, and who built quality housing in
transient-oriented areas. The Master Plan set a huge value on housing in dense settings closest to
the trains. Units within walking distance to the trains bring in less vehicles. They may do more
by walking and taking the train. This sustainable model for city living works. The data collected
by the Planning Department indicates these projects have one student for every 35-40 housing
units and less than one forts to invest in
Beverly when others would not. Mayor Cahill says that Mr. Dodge donated millions of dollars to
ϱ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
our community, in the Cabot Theater and in other areas, and notes the good that has come out of
Affordable housing - All Beverly Crossing projects have incorporated required affordable
housing. They have requested that affordable housing not be included within this building so that
it better meets the needs of the community. Instead, the land for 2 Hardy Street is donated to
Harborlight Community Partners for 6 units to truly add affordable housing, and there is another
at 461 Rantoul St. with 6 units of housing that are deeply affordable. Mayor Cahill notes that
Beverly Crossing banked these units for future projects as allowed, and that this is the project
now.
Mayor Cahill notes that this is an important block with the close proximity to the train. He states
that it is a transit-oriented building. He also says that the design and the scaling back, keep it in
line with other buildings. He further notes that all have had a hand in this and that regardless of
the vote, not everyone will be happy, but all should know that they have been a part. Mayor
Cahill states that he is in support of this project, and he thanks the board for their support.
Miller states that the historical railroad is profound and recognized, and that this project is the
modern evolution of this transportation-oriented city.
Barrett:
Motion to close the public meeting. Boesch seconds. The motion passes (8-1)
with Derek Beckwith voting no. The public hearing is closed.
Boesch:
Motion for a five minute recess. Beckwith seconds. The board votes (9-0) for a
five minute recess.
Flannery:
Motion to return to the meeting. Boesch seconds. The motion passes (9-0).
Hutchinson asks the will of the board. She reports that Zane Craft missed two meetings and is
ineligible to vote on the project.
Barrett suggests that the Board makes a motion to vote with discussion in the context of the vote.
Hutchison states that there are 3 items included in the vote:
1.The Inclusionary Housing Permit to apply credit units already approved at 2 Hardy and
461 Rantoul.
2.The height in the Height Overlay District.
3.The Special Permit for deviation from parking requirements to allow 1 parking space per
unit in the portion of the building outside of the Parking Overlay District.
Hutchinson thanks the applicant and the public for all of their review and participation. She feels
that the city is best when citizens interact with our board and applicants.
Barrett then made the following findings with respect to Special Permit #172-19 pursuant to
Section 300-98 of the Beverly Zoning Ordinance:
ϲ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
a.That the specific site is an appropriate location for the proposed use and that the character
of adjoining uses will not be adversely affected. The Board finds support in the proximity
to the train and the mixed commercial nature of this neighborhood and noting that the
character of the adjoining uses will be enhanced as a result of the project.
b.That no factual evidence is found that property values in the district will be adversely
affected by such use. The Board has heard no evidence to the contrary.
c.That no undue traffic and no nuisance or unreasonable hazard will result. The Board finds
support from the reports provided by Greenman Pederson, Inc for the applicant and the
review provided by the Beverly Parking & Traffic Commission.
d.That adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation and
maintenance of the proposed use. The Board finds support for this finding from the review
by the Beverly City Engineer and other City boards, committees and staff who have
reviewed this project. Further, the Board has heard no credible or demonstrable evidence
to the contrary. Additional evidence has been submitted including but not limited to the
Stormwater Management Report, the Traffic Impact and Access Study, and Supplemental
Transportation Analysis, among others (referenced above).
e.That there are no valid objections from abutting property owners based on demonstrable
fact. The Board finds that while they have heard valid opinions from members of the
community, these do not rise to the level of objections based on demonstrable fact
sufficient to deny the special permit.
f.That adequate and appropriate City services are or will be available for the proposed use.
The Board finds support for this finding from the review by the Beverly City Engineer and
other City boards, committees, and staff who have reviewed this project. Further, the Board
has heard no credible or demonstrable evidence to the contrary. Additional evidence has
been submitted including but not limited to the Stormwater Management Report, the
Traffic Impact and Access Study, and the Supplemental Transportation Analysis, among
others (referenced above).
Barrett:
Motion to approve Special Permit #172-19, subject to the above findings, to allow
height in the CC Height Overlay District
pursuant to Section 300-40.D(5), in that the Planning Boards finds the proposed
Buildings and the objectives embodied therein and as recom
Design Review Board in a letter dated 1/12/2020, and to approve Special Permit
#172-19 for deviation from the parking requirements pursuant to Section 300-59,
where a portion of the lot is not in the Depot Parking Overlay District and to
apply the parking requirements for the Depot Parking Overlay District to the
entire project site, resulting in a parking requirement of one on-site parking space
for each residential unit in the project that is 2-bedrooms or less, subject to the
following conditions:
ϳ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
1 The conditions set forth by the Parking & Traffic Commission in a letter dated 10/9/2019, are
incorporated herein by reference and attached.
1.1 Prior to construction the project proponent will develop a Construction Phasing and Traffic
parking restrictions during construction. The Plan shall ensure that access and egress is
maintained to abutting property owners and the traveling public. Full vehicular access shall
be maintained during construction along surrounding street segments. A final construction
phasing and traffic management plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Beverly
Parking and Traffic Commission and Beverly Fire Department.
1.2
communications plan detailing outreach efforts to be utilized by the project proponent to
inform commuters, neighboring businesses, and residents of restrictions on traffic
circulation, parking, and pedestrian access to and through the construction site. The
communications plan shall also provide information regarding alternative circulation
patterns, pedestrian access, and alternatives parking facilities available to the public.
1.3 The project proponent shall develop a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan to
encourage use of alternative modes of transportation for both residents and employees of
commercial tenants. The TDM plan will include at a minimum the demand management
strategies identified traffic response memo by GPI, Inc. dated August 5, 2019 and
membership with the North Shore Transportation Management Association (NSTMA),
develop and disseminate informational resources to inform existing alternative modes of
transportation, ride-matching, and include programming, services and incentives to further
promote alternative modes of transportation such as Personal Commute Planning services,
guaranteed ride home services, and complementary one-month commuter rail pass for new
tenants. The applicant to demonstrate that all TDM strategies are in effect prior to the
Certificate of Occupancy is issued by the Beverly Municipal Inspections department.
1.4 The applicant shall include electrical vehicle charging stations as proposed in the TIAS,
including two stations for up to four parking spaces available for vehicle charging. The
project proponent shall consider making all parking spaces located within the parking
facility located on-site to be made electric vehicle ready to allow simple installation of
electric vehicle charging stations in the future.
1.5 The applicant will implement pedestrian and streetscape improvements as shown on the
Sidewalk Improvement Concept Plan by GPI, Inc. and dated August 30, 2019. A revised
concept plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Commission prior to
construction including with the plan the following additional streetscape enhancements:
Construct and/ or repair existing sidewalk located along Park Street to its intersection at
Broadway, and to include ADA accessibility curb ramps on both sides of the intersection
of Broadway.
Construct and/ or repair existing sidewalk along Pleasant Street to its intersection with
River Street to include ADA accessible curb ramps on both sides of Pleasant Street as
well as River Street.
ϴ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
2 The conditions set forth by the Beverly Fire Department in a letter dated 9/10/2019, are
incorporated herein by reference and attached.
2.1 The applicant shall coordinate with the Fire Department prior to requesting a building
permit regarding any impairments, including access, closures, water supply, material
storage, etc. during the construction phase.
3 The conditions set forth by Beverly Engineering Department in a letter dated 7/16/2019, are
incorporated herein by reference and attached.
3.1 All drainage piping shall be SDR 35 PVC pipe.
3.2 The roof drain connection at the intersection of Pleasant and Park Street should be
et with the use of a new Manhole. Existing
drainage conditions of Pleasant Street will require further examination in the field. The
exact configuration of the connection shall be made at the time of construction with the
consultation of the Engineering Department.
3.3 The utilities will be the responsibility of the Applicant from their connection at the City
mains to the building. This includes all portions of sewer and drainage piping within the
City sidewalk. The City will maintain the DMH at the connection on Pleasant Street.
3.4 The water services shown in Pleasant Street should be located such that they are outside of
corridor.
3.5 The sidewalk surrounding the building shall be replaced in kind by the Applicant at the
completion of the Project.
3.6 Existing utility services should be cut and capped at the back of sidewalk on the Rantoul
Street facade. Services that extend into Railroad, Park Street or Pleasant Street should be
cut and capped at the main.
3.7 Erosion Control and Drainage Alteration permits are due to the City prior to issuance of a
building permit.
3.8 Water demand fees will be incurred for the propos
Engineering Department prior to the issuance of the building permit.
3.9 Grind and Overlay Pleasant Street from the limit of the Rt. 1A cutback through the
intersection of Park Street.
3.10 As-Built Drawings - -
also be delivered in .pdf format, stamped by a Licensed Professional Engineer, generated
directly from the electronic AutoCAD files. These drawings shall be delivered prior to the
sale/installation of the required water meters.
ϵ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
4 The conditions set forth by the Design Review Board in a letter dated 1/12/2020, specifically #1
1
and #3 as restated below:
4.1 Dark gray panels shall be utilized on the north courtyard façade rather than blue or light
gray colored panels.
4.2 Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall return to the Design Review
Board to review the locations of vents on the building.
5 The developer will consult with the Beverly Historic District Commission to develop an
ng the period of significance
for the Odell Park National Register District. These elements may be incorporated into the
146-148 Rantoul Street) building rehabilitation to present the building in the
style of that important stage of Beverl
th
development and defined this area as an important 20 century urban center. Such elements may
6 That the applicant will incorporate in the building a dedicated space used to recognize the
historic nature of the space and the buildings.
7 That lighting shall be downcast, dark-sky compliant lighting, minimizing decorative lighting not
necessary for safety or compliance.
8 Work shall conform to the approved project plans, incorporated herein by reference and attached,
as amended where appropriate:
Architectural Plan Set-142-146 Rantoul Street and 1-9 Park Street,
Beverly MA 01915, 20 Sheets, scale varies, prepared for Depot Square Phase II, LLC, 15
Rantoul Street, Beverly MA 01915, prepared by SV Design, 126 Dodge Street, Beverly MA
01915, dated 6/10/19, and as amended through 1/17/2020. AND
Civil Plan Set: -142-146 Rantoul Street and 1-9 Park
Street, Beverly MA 01915, 8 Sheets, scale varies, prepared for Depot Square Phase II, LLC, 15
Rantoul Street, Beverly MA 01915, prepared by Meridian Associates, 500 Cummings Center,
Suite 5950, Beverly, MA 01915, dated 6/10/19. [To be updated to reflect the changes, see
Condition #11]
9 Any changes made in any plans, proposals, and supporting documents approved and endorsed by
the Planning Board without the written approval of the Planning Board, shall require submission
of a modification request to the Planning Board for review and approval and shall include a
description of the proposed modification, reasons the modification is necessary and supporting
documentation. The Planning Department shall determine the course of review.
10 Prior to the commencement of authorized site activity, the Applicant shall provide to the
Planning Board Office the name, address, email, and business phone number of the individual
who shall be responsible for all construction activities on site.
11 The Applicant shall provide two full-
complete set of the final approved plans with the latest revision date(s), within 14 days of this
Decision. Including, the Civil Plan Set entitled -142-146
Rantoul Street and 1-9 Park Street, Beverly MA 01915, 8 Sheets prepared by Meridian
Associates, 500 Cummings Center, Suite 5950, Beverly, MA 01915, dated 6/10/19, shall be
updated to reflect the changes in the Architectural Plan Set and included therein.
1 This excludes DRB Condition #2, which has been modified as Condition #5.
ϭϬ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
12 The terms, conditions, restrictions and/or requirements of this decision shall be binding on the
Owner and its successors and/or assigns. In the event of the transfer of the site as a whole, within
five (5) days of such tran
name and address.
13 Maintenance of all landscaping on the site shall be the responsibility of the Applicant, its
successors or assigns, and any tree or shrub that does not survive shall be replaced.
14 An as-built landscaping plan accompanied with a letter from a Registered Professional Engineer
or landscape architect certifying compliance of the landscaping with the approved plan shall be
submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy.
15 Refuse removal, ground maintenance, and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the
applicant. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off-site.
16 The owner shall comply with the specific conditions set forth in a letter issued by the Beverly
Board of Health, dated 7/5/19.
17 As-built Plans, stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, shall be submitted to the Beverly
Planning Department and City Engineer, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy.
The As-Built plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer in an electronic file format suitable
Occupancy.
18 To the extent that construction work has been completed sufficient for a Certificate of
Occupancy to be issued for a portion of the Project or the Project in its entirety but that the As-
Built plans have not yet been fully completed (for said portion of the Project or the Project in its
entirety), the applicant may provide a performance bond or surety in an amount and form subject
to approval of the Planning Department to ensure that the As-Built Plans are completed within a
reasonable timeframe.
19 The Applicant shall be responsible for maintenance of the stormwater management system. In
the event that the Applicant, its successors, or agent fails to maintain the stormwater management
system in accordance with the operation and maintenance plan (Stormwater System Inspection
and Maintenance Schedule) as shown on the above-referenced plan, the City may conduct such
emergency maintenance or repairs, and the Applicant shall permit entry onto the Property to
implement the measures set forth in such guidelines. In the event the City conducts such
maintenance or repairs, the Applicant shall promptly reimburse the City for all reasonable
expenses associated therewith; if the Applicant fails to so reimburse the City, the City may place
a lien on the property to secure such payment.
20 Violations of any condition shall result in revocation of this permit by the Planning Board, unless
the violation of such condition is waived by a majority vote of the Planning Board.
Boesch seconds the motion. There is a discussion by the board:
Beckwith suggests three categories for discussion:
1.The mass and scale of the project. He notes that the project is 4 times as large as any
other projects on that block. He feels it changes this gateway to the city that will never be
recaptured. He shares that he visited the area today to consider the project and felt the
weight of the decision.
2.The product of this massive project with concern of traffic and congestion.
3.That this is an exclusionary project for anyone making median income. He
notes that most households in Beverly could only afford a studio apartment in this
project.
ϭϭ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Beckwith concludes by expressing his hope that the Board honors the history of the city. He
states that he will vote no on the Special Permits.
Allison Kilcoyne states that as a resident of Ward 2 she is not coming to this decision lightly, and
she appreciates the applicant adding 12 housing credit units, although she is disappointed that
incorporation of the De Lucca building into the design. She references the impact of the
vote.
Barrett states that as a lawyer, he feels they are charged with looking at the Special Permits for
parking and height. He notes the six criteria to evaluate. He states that they should apply this
criteria to this vote and that the inclusionary housing is not a part of this permit. This vote is just
for the height and parking. He feels parking needs have been met. He feels that the height issue
has been met by the design, and while he sees the project as dense, he notes that it is an
appropriate location for this housing structure.
Flannery believes that what she has seen is positive and the applicant is working within the
design guidelines. She notes these are just that, guidelines. As a long-time resident of Beverly,
she respects the changes on Rantoul Street. She believes that the new design on Rantoul Street
has brought a new energy to the area. She feels that the setback of the upper floors has been
remedied, and she approves of the project.
Beckwith states that he forgot to mention the impact on neighbors (references Mr. Robert Moser
who spoke in September) who are concerned that projects like this were making affordability of
living in Beverly difficult.
Boesch states that he is dumbfounded that it is thought that a no vote on the special permit
request will somehow help with historic or affordable housing in downtown Beverly. He states
that the reason for this discussion and the eight before that is that the choice is between this
project and an unknown by-right project. It is not between this project and a fantasy of historic or
affordable housing. The choice is between this project or an alternative project that this or
another owner could build without the public input and collaboration. Boesch says that a no vote
will not promote ideas of historic preservation or affordable housing.
Hutchinson says that she has been on the board for 10+ years and this has been her most difficult
decision. She notes that she has spent many hours considering this, especially after 2000 people
signed a petition, submitted 78 letters, and shared concerns during meetings. She wants to
balance the needs of the community with the needs of the city. She acknowledges the new vibe
appropriate for the corner property. She expresses the need to be bold, to take some chances with
a design reflecting that this is the gateway to our city. As a long-term Beverly resident, she is
aware of the negative history of Rantoul Street in its dilapidated state, and she credits the
ϭϮ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
developer in recognizing the history of the city within their plan. She believes in a bold and good
design, and although it is large, she is in support of this project.
Miller supports this project on its own merits. He notes that a no
vote does not guarantee affordable housing and/or a historic preservation.
The motion passes (7-1) with Beckwith opposed and Craft ineligible.
Barrett:
Motion to approve Inclusionary Housing Permit #17-
previously allocated by Planning Board Special Permit #16-18 (461 Rantoul
Street) and Special Permit #14-17 (2 Hardy Street) to count towards the housing
affordability requirements for this project, as allowed pursuant to Section 315-14
of the Beverly Zoning Ordinance, whereby the applicant has committed to restrict
12 units as affordable, where 9 affordable units would be required using the 60%
area median income (AMI) calculation. Four of the units at 461 Rantoul Street are
restricted to 60% AMI, and the remaining 2 are restricted to 80% AMI; at Hardy
Street, all 6 units are restricted to 60% AMI (or lower). Flannery seconds. The
motion passes (7-1) with Beckwith opposed and Craft ineligible.
Barrett:
The Board then voted to approve Site Plan Review Application #140-19 pursuant
to Section 300-98 to construct a 6--use
building containing 106 residential units and 9,000 sq. ft. of commercial/retail on
the ground floor, with 106 parking spaces in the CC Zoning District, subject to the
same conditions applicable to Special Permit #172-19. Flannery seconds.
Beckwith would like to revisit the Historic District Commission condition and proposes that the
developer shall meet with the Historic District Commission with conditions. He would like to
add a condition on the motion. Barrett notes that he is not comfortable amending his motion.
Beckwith asks if he should make a motion to amend the motion.
Aaron Clausen explains that to amend a motion, Beckwith would need to make a motion to
amend.
Beckwith:
M
The original motion by Barrett on Site Plan Review application #140-19 passes
(7-1) with Beckwith voting no and Craft ineligible.
Hutchinson thanks everyone and hopes all can come together in this difficult process and
decision.
Bartley:
Motion to take a five minute recess. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (9-0).
Boesch and Barrett left the meeting at 9:50.
Craft:
Motion to return to the meeting. Kilcoyne seconds. The motion passes (7-0).
ϭϯ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
3.Continued Public Hearing: Site Plan Review #146-19 Construct a mixed-use building
in the CN Zoning District containing 880 sq.ft. of retail space on the first floor and 2
residential units on the second and third floors (as revised), with associated parking and
site improvements 0 Everett Street 0 Everett Street LLC, c/o Alexander & Femino
Attny. Tom Alexander presents on behalf of the applicant. Attny. Alexander reminds the Board
that this is a Site Plan Review, not a Special Permit review. He states that this project developer
has worked closely with the city and neighbors, and that the DRB has already voted unanimously
for this project with conditions that the developer was willing to meet and did add to the design.
These conditions include the column design, materials for walkways, and the landscaping of
low-growth plants at the corner for visibility. Attny. Alexander also states that the Parking and
Traffic Commission voted unanimously on this project with conditions that the applicant has
agreed to and added to the plan. In addition, Alexander states that they have requested a permit
from MassDOT and that the project conforms to the zoning, use, and dimensions as noted in
letter already submitted to the Board.
Attny. Alexander confirms with Hutchinson that there is no reason that the project will not
receive the MassDOT permit. Attny. Alexander explains that it is just a request to submit for
construction regarding police details and the use of the street due to the location on a state
highway.
Michael DeAngelo, MDLA Landscape Architects, reviews the updated landscaping plan. He
shows images of the walls and plantings. Flannery asks to see the bike rack in the drawing.
Wynne asks to see the area where the evergreens will be added.
Miller asks about the lighting and it is confirmed that there are no planned lights in the back lot.
Miller is told that there are currently no e-charging stations for vehicles. Miller suggests that the
developer consider this for future planning.
expressed at the last meeting.
Attny. Alexander states that while he tried to meet with the neighbor, a meeting did not occur.
Kilcoyne asks about sight lines. Alexander notes that the low-growth shrubs will maintain the
sight lines for cars.
Beckwith asks about the mixed-use zoning. He wonders if the footprint of the building fits the
requirement. Wynne said that the requirement is not based on building footprint. She notes that
the Building Inspector determined a newly permitted commercial building meets the
requirement.
Hutchinson asks Beckwith for clarification. Beckwith explains that the property looks to him like
it is rigged to make it work on the space. He says that because of this, he is asking if there are
any zoning requirements that they are missing. Alexander states that there are not, and that this is
a solid design. Beckwith wonders if the footprint is based upon the pillars. Hutchinson states that
the city has advised the Board that the plan meets the zoning requirements.
ϭϰ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Miller asks for clarification on what the Board is being asked to approve. Hutchinson says that
the Board is being asked to make a recommendation to the Building Inspector whether they
believe the requirement is met in the landscaping plan, or if they want to provide additional
suggestions. Hutchinson says that they will vote a yes or no recommendation to the Building
Inspector, as part of the Site Plan Review
Hutchinson invites members from the public to speak.
Peter Johnson, 677 Hale Street, says he was asked to read a letter on behalf of Rebecca Swanick,
5 Everett Street, who was unable to attend. Johnson reads a letter from the attorney of Rebecca
Swanick. Johnson states that this letter was submitted to the Planning Board, but Wynne says
they never received it. Johnson reads the letter to the Board, noting that he does not necessarily
support the content, but is just reading for his neighbor.
The letter is five pages and expresses opposition to the project in the areas of construction, land
use, and landscape design. The letter claims that the owner of the abutting property does not
contest the two residential units, but does contest the retail space. The request is to review the
requirements and for the developer to amend the plan.
Johnson thanks the developer for the buffer yard changes and gives the letter to the Board.
Dorothy Hayes, 680 Hale Street, Hayes speaks to the planting design along the residential areas.
It is explained to her that there is a mix of evergreens and deciduous trees. Her concern is that for
half of the year there will be no leaves and requests alternating with evergreens to provide full-
year screening. She also requests native plantings. The landscape architect notes that the zoning
law requires 5 ft. evergreens, so that the current plan provides a great solution for screening most
of the year. Hayes again requests a mix of evergreens and deciduous trees with the use of only
native plants.
Rick Lord, 843 Hale Street, states that he sent a letter this morning about similar zoning and
notes that Beckwith questioned. This resident respectfully asks that this project be given another
zoning review.
Peter Johnson, 677 Hale Street, projects a powerpoint presentation of two arguments. (1) Zoning
- the overhang is 37ft. out of 58 ft. 64% is overhang and he suggests that this is not within the
building footprint; (2) Square Footage - if whole building counts, then the building is 880 sq.ft.
interior retail, 1080 total footprint, 2400 on second and third floors. 2400 ft. x 3 = 5880 sq. ft.
and thus fails. Wynne clarifies that the 5000 sq. ft. is just for the retail space.
Joe Skomurski, the and corrects the
dimensions.
There are no other public speakers.
ϭϱ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Miller asks for another review of the landscape design. It is reviewed that the buffer yards to the
north and the west are required and must include evergreens; these are included. DiAngelo
claims that they are going above and beyond the requirements with evergreens planned on three
sides. Alexander confirms
that the buffer is required on 3 sides, and so they have also include evergreen sides on Everett
Street.
Hutchinson confirms that there are no more questions or speakers.
Flannery:
Motion to close the public hearing. Beckwith seconds. The motion passes (7-0).
Hutchinson confirms the language for the motion for a recommendation to the Building
Inspector and vote on the Site Plan Review.
Flannery:
Motion to recommend to the Director of Municipal Inspections that the screening
Architecture and dated 1/16/2020, is adequate to meet the
intent of Section 300-39G Screening of Conflicting Uses, and is consistent with
Section 300-63A regarding screening of parking. Miller seconds. The motion
passes (7-0).
Flannery:
Motion to approve Site Plan Review application #146-19 subject to the conditions
below. Kilcoyne seconds.
1. Work shall conform to the project plans as named herein, attached and incorporated hereto.
Civil Plan Set for Skomurski Development, 0 Everett Street, Beverly, MA 01915, 6 Sheets, scale
varies, prepared by Bobrek Engineering & Construction, 141 Pine Street, Danvers, MA 01923,
dated September 2019, revised 11/15/19; AND
Architectural Plan Set for Hale Street Development, 0 Everett Street, Beverly, MA 01915, 9 sheets,
scale varies, prepared by Seger Architectis, Inc., 10 Derby Square, Salem, MA, dated 9/19/19 and
revised 12/6/19; AND
Landscape Plan for Hale Street Develop
(no address provided), revised through 1/16/2020
2. Any requests for changes or modifications to the approved project or conditions set forth herein shall
be submitted to the Planning Board for review and approval.
3. Subject to compliance with the recommendation and conditions from the Design Review Board,
dated 11/15/19, incorporated herein and attached hereto, as follows:
3.1 The columns on the rear (north) façade receive further design treatment to reduce the appearance
of the concrete;
3.2 The material for the walkways from Hale Street to both the retail and residential entryways be
changed to bluestone; and
3.3 The landscaping on the corner of Everett Street and Hale Street be changed to low-growth plants
so not to impede visual access at the corner.
ϭϲ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
4. Subject to compliance with the recommendation and conditions from the Parking & Traffic
Commission, dated 1/21/2020, incorporated herein and attached hereto, as follows:
4.1 The project proponent shall install a minimum of two bicycle parking racks, same or similar, to
post and ring bicycle racks on-site, and accessible to commercial, residential tenants and visitors
of the property.
4.2 Construction phasing shall be as shown on the proposed plan set dated November 15, 2019, plan
sheet C-200. Any proposed changes due to the review process with MassDOT for the Highway
Access Permit shall be submitted to the Commission for the record.
4.3 Any damage to the sidewalk located along Hale Street, beyond the area to be repaired as shown
on the plan, shall be repaired or replaced to match existing materials for the length of the property.
4.4 The MassDOT Highway Access Permit shall be submitted to the Commission for the record.
5. Subject to compliance with the letter from the City Engineer dated 11/19/19, incorporated herein and
attached hereto.
6. That all lighting of the property be downward facing and/or dark sky compliant so as to minimize
impact on abutting properties.
property owner at 5 Everett Street. Wynne states that the
Zoning Enforcement Officer, determined that this project meets the zoning requirements and that
he completes his zoning review at the time of the building permit and would denying anything
not compliant. Wynne says she did not see anything in the plan that raised a red flag.
The motion passes (7-0).
4.Continued Public Hearing: Waiver of Frontage and Definitive Subdivision Plan
Subdivide 15,000 sq.ft. lot in the R10 Zoning District into one 10,000 sq.ft. lot and one
5,000 sq.ft lot, where a Variance has been granted by the ZBA, and extend Livingstone
Avenue by 110 ft. 21 Porter Terrace/Livingstone Avenue Jeffrey Holloran
Deborah Colbert, Hancock Associates, presents the revised plans addressing the three waivers
that were denied at the previous Board meeting:
1.The addition of a topographic survey indicating no additional drainage to abutting
properties
2.The omission of the rodent disturbance notation on the plan, that they have added to the
plan.
3.The elimination of one swale and the added sidewalk with curb cut to other property to
mitigate any runoff, and the added area to drain into the existing swale, as approved by
the City Engineer.
Colbert states that on January 7th, the Parking and Traffic Commission approved the plan with
two conditions that are included: 1. An additional area of sidewalk and 2. The change of
pavement thickness to include binder and topcoat.
Colbert states that she is asking for two additional waivers:
1.To allow a sidewalk of 4 ft. wide rather than 5 ft. wide, as there is not sufficient space.
2.Curbing to only be on one side to allow for sheet flow and runoff.
ϭϳ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Wynne notes that she received a letter from the City Engineer late today with standard conditions
project.
Hutchinson asks about the sidewalk placement, and Colbert states that the Parking and Traffic
Commission asked for the ability to have a sidewalk continue along Livingstone to improve the
safety of the roadway. Hutchinson notes that the sidewalk will be driveway to driveway.
Hutchinson also asks about the swale removal. Colbert answers that a drywell was added to
mitigate the 25-year storm runoff, and that if there were a 50-year storm, drainage flow would go
to the swale, then next down the street. Colbert states that this plan meets the city requirement.
was a test where ledge was met 2 ft. down, and another test with groundwater was found 4 ft.
down. Colbert says that engineers will be on-site during the building of the swale and will
redesign if necessary. She notes that if the swale does need to be redesigned, it will be submitted
to engineering.
Craft asks that if the swale has to be changed, if it would affect the drywell. Colbert answers yes,
and adds that an existing large tree indicates the success for the drywell. It is noted that the
dry
unknown dimensions of ledge could influence construction. Colbert notes that while this is so, it
is normal to not know what you will find until construction begins. She shows a projection of the
two test areas to the Board.
Miller asks if the overflow pipe connecting the dry swale may be affected by a ledge.
Hutchison asks if the Lot 1 house owner will be responsible for snow, maintenance of swale,
drywell, the iron pipe, and of any other maintenance issues for the owner. It is explained to the
Board that these responsibilities will be written into a covenant at the selling of Lot 1, and that
the covenant will be referenced on the deed.
Flannery asks if this new house will be a part of the street to maintain. Marshall Handly, of
Handly & Cox, attorney representing the applicant notes that all homeowners have rights on that
street. He states that in the covenant of the deed there will be an obligation by the purchaser of
Lot 1 to maintain the pavement.
Bartley asks what could happen if the new owner does not maintain and plow this lot. Handly
notes that this is not a new issue. Bartley asks where this matter goes if the maintenance does not
happen. Wynne states that if the owner fails to maintain, there are federal requirements, and that
the city would have to access the property and assess fines and liens.
. Handly
ϭϴ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Beckwith states that neighbors will need to work together. Miller asks about the Fire Department
turnaround. Handly answers that the homeowner proposed the hammerhead turnaround. He adds
that if further development happens, a cul-de-sac could someday be added.
Flannery notes that she was on-site yesterday and saw the narrow lane of Livingstone. She asks
if the no-parking easement could be enforced by the city.
Hutchinson reviewed a past project for a 3-parcel subdivision with a hammerhead turnaround,
and notes that the Board denied this plan. Bartley recalls other conditions that caused the Board
to deny this previous vote.
Colbert shows that a study of the plan reveals that two fire trucks could sit in this area side-by-
side. Miller notes that the Fire Department did approve this plan.
Hutchinson asks if any members from the public would like to speak.
Melissa Blanchard, 127 Livingstone Ave, requests that if the road is damaged during
construction, that the homeowner will agree to repair it. The homeowner agrees to this condition
after all construction is completed. This resident requests this in writing as a condition of
approval.
Robert Godjikian, 126 Livingstone Ave, asks about the swale location, noting that although the
homeowners will not own the area, that they will have a right of way. He asks if there is a better
solution than a swale. Colbert answers that the City Engineer has deemed the swale as an
appropriate and preferred solution.
There are no more members of the public to speak.
Flannery:
Motion to close the public hearing. Craft seconds. The motion passes (7-0).
Hutchinson confirms the items up for vote. Handly adds that although the frontage request is
worded as a waiver, the lot has 100 ft. of frontage, and therefore, the waiver is for the
improvement of frontage.
Flannery is concerned with the amount of pavement. Beckwith notes that they are paving south.
Craft:
Motion to grant the requested waiver from Sesction 300-34D2 Frontage
Requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for Lot 1, to the extent shown on the plan,
in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 41, Section 81-R,
frontage is required. Flannery seconds. The motion passes (7-0).
Craft:
Motion to grant the requested waiver from Section 375-
sidewalks on both sides of the street and a grass strip between the roadway and
ϭϵ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
on the southerly side only, with no grass planting strip. Flannery seconds. The
motion passes, (6-1) with Hutchinson opposed.
Craft:
Motion to grant the requested waiver from Section 375-28, requiring granite
curbing on both sides of the street. The plan shows bituminous curbing on the
southerly side of the street and no curbing on the northerly side of the street.
Kilcoyne seconds. The motion passes (5-2) with Hutchinson and Flannery
opposed.
Hutchinson notes the Board needs to vote for the approval of a Definitive Subdivision. Wynne
suggests adding the Parking and Traffic Commission conditions, and also the added request for
the repair of the roadway by the homeowner (if needed) after construction.
Craft:
Motion to find that the Definitive Subdivision Plan meets the purpose and intent
of the Subdivision Control Law and the Beverly Subdivision Regulations and to
approve the Definitive Subdivision Plan for 21 Porter Terrace, with all waivers
granted as described above and subject to the conditions below.
1 The conditions of this approval and any waivers of subdivision rules and regulations shall be set
forth on the plan to which the conditions or waivers apply OR shall be set forth in a separate
instrument (such as this decision letter) which shall be referenced on the plan. This shall occur prior
to plan endorsement by the Board.
2 Work shall conform to the project plans as named herein, attached and incorporated hereto.
3 Any requests for changes or modifications to the approved project or conditions set forth herein
shall be submitted to the Planning Board for review and approval.
4 Subject to compliance with the standard conditions set forth in the Board of Health comment letter
dated 11/5/19, incorporated herein and attached hereto.
5 Subject to compliance with the letters from the City Engineer dated 11/15/19, 12/01/19, and
1/23/2020, incorporated herein and attached hereto.
6 Subject to compliance with the conditions set forth in the Parking & Traffic Commission comment
letter dated 01/23/2020, incorporated herein and attached hereto, and specifically noting that the
applicant has agreed to construct the road
pursuant to Section 375-25C of the Subdivision Regulations.
7 That the future roadway is not being built to a standard acceptable as a public way and therefore
shall remain a private way and have no benefit of municipal services such as utility
installation/maintenance, roadway maintenance, and snowplowing, unless and until the roadway is
improved, at the expense of adjacent owners, to the standards of a public way.
8 That a Covenant shall be recorded for the private way pursuant to Section 375-15C. The Covenant
shall be referenced and noted on individual plot plan(s) for each lot served by the new way. Prior to
sale of the property and prior to the request for a certificate of occupancy, draft property deed shall
be shared with the Planning Department to confirm the Covenant is noted on the Plot Plan.
ϮϬ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
9 That an Easement shall be recorded for the hammerhead turn-around prohibiting parking within that
plan(s) and deed of sale for Lot 1. Prior to sale of the property and prior to the request for a
certificate of occupancy, draft property deed shall be shared with the Planning Department to
confirm the Easement is noted on the Plot Plan.
10 That any real estate property listing, as well as any other legal documentation (including the deed),
shall state that the property is located on a privately-owned street.
11 That the applicant shall repair any damage made to the existing roadway during construction, at the
time of putting final pavement on the new roadway, and prior to receiving a certificate of
occupancy.
sign could be posted.
Craft:
Amends the motion to add to Condition 9, No parking signage shall be included,
Craft:
Amends the motion that the following municipal
services are not available to the property/roadway, specifically: utility
installation/maintenance, roadway maintenance, waste removal (trash and
recycling), and snowplowing, unless and until the roadway is improved, at the
expense of adjacent owners, to the standards of a public way
Beckwith seconds the amended motion. The motion passes (5-2) with Hutchinson
and Flannery voting no.
Barrett returns to the meeting at 11:49.
10a. Endorse Definitive Subdivision Plan without Covenant 7 Porter Terrace Porter
Terrace LLC
Wynne asks to take agenda item 10a out of order and explains that the Board previously
approved a subdivision to create two 5,000 square foot lots. She notes that the appeal period has
passed and the applicant is seeking endorsement of the plan as not having been appealed and
there is no covenant required because no new road is being constructed.
Flannery:
Motion to endorse the Definitive Subdivision Plan for 7 Porter Terrace that no
appeal has been made. Craft seconds. The motion passes (8-0)
5.Extension of Time to Complete and Letter of Credit Maturity: Request for a two-year
extension to the construction completion deadline for Sunnycrest Circle, where current
construction completion date is March 22, 2020 PD Building LLC
Hutchinson asks why construction has been so long delayed and the reason for the extension.
Wynne explains the challenges that this project has faced, including addressing the
encroachment issues on the open space that is to be conveyed to the City.
Ϯϭ
Beverly Planning Board
Meeting Minutes
January 28, 2020
Flannery
: Motion to grant the requested extension of the construction completion deadline
for two years until March 22, 2022 and to accept the revised Letter of Credit
extension in the amount of $61,509 dollars by Haverhill Credit Bank to June 2,
2021. Craft seconds. The motion passes (8-0).
6.Extension of Time to Complete: Request for a two-year extension to the construction
completion deadline for Hickory Hill Way, where current construction completion date
is April 2, 2020 G. Patch, Hickory Hill, LLC
Flannery
: Motion to grant the requested extension of the construction completion deadline
for two years until April 2, 2022. Craft seconds. The motion passes (8-0).
7.Approval of Minutes: June 18, 2019, July 16, 2019, August 20, 2019, September 10,
2019, September 17, 2019, October 1, 2019, October 22, 2019, November 13, 2019,
November 19, 2019, December 17, 2019 (as available)
The minutes from June 18, 2019 are reviewed.
Flannery:
Motion to accept the minutes as amended. Craft seconds. The motion passes (8-
0).
The minutes from July 16, 2019 are reviewed.
Flannery:
Motion to accept the minutes as amended. Craft seconds. The motion passes (8-
0).
The approval of other minutes is tabled until the next regular meeting.
8.Election of Officers for 2020 Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson
The election of officers for 2020 is tabled until the next regular meeting.
Barrett announces that he will be resigning from his position on the Board, and he thanks
everyone for their work. Hutchinson thanks Barrett for his service and contribution.
Barrett:
Motion to adjourn the meeting. Flannery seconds. Hutchinson adjourns the
meeting at 12:05.
The next meeting of the Planning Board is scheduled for February 11, 2020 at 7 p.m. in the
Council Chamber, 191 Cabot Street.
ϮϮ