Loading...
1998-05-19City of Beverly, Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes Board: Planning Board Subcommittee: Date: 05/19/1998 Place: City Hall Board members present: Richard Dinkin,, Joanne Dunn, Ellen K. Flannery, Salvatore Modugno,, Barry Sullivan, Peter M. Thomas, and John Thomson Board members absent:, William Delaney, and Robert Rink Others present: Tina Cassidy, Director of Planning; Frank Killilea, Jr. Director of Engineering; Susan Akerman, Secretary to the Board Recorder: Susan Akerman Minutes Beverly Planning Board May 19, 1998 Meeting Members present: Chairperson Richard Dinkin, Barry Sullivan, Salvatore Modugno, Ellen Flannery, Joanne Dunn, John Thomson and Peter Thomas; also present: Planning Director Tina Cassidy, Director of Engineering Frank Killilea, Jr., and Susan Akerman, Secretary to the Board. Chairperson Dinkin calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Thomson: Motion to recess for public hearings, seconded by Sullivan. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries. Public Hearings Tall Tree. Drive Extension Definitive Settlement Plan / Gladys Dailey & Suzanne Sullivan-Silva Cassidy reads legal notice. Mr. Moran addresses the Board and states that after numerous hearings, the applicant has come to a conclusion / resolution that is in the best interest for the City, the applicant, and the residents. Mr. Moran states that an agreement has been drafted indicating to the Court that the applicant is seeking a possible settlement of this matter. Mr. Moron states that Mr. Marchionda is here with the plan and will explain it. Paul Marchionda of Marchionda addresses the Board and explains that the plan before the Board entire site as being approximately 38 acres in size, that the proposal is to do a small extension to create three large lots, and that the subdivision will have no sidewalks, and that the curbing will be bituminous concrete. Marchionda further states that no additional lots will be created beyond the three proposed here; there will be a notation on the plan preventing further subdivision. Cassidy reads the following letters: Letter from the Engineering Department dated 5/19/98. (On File) Letter from the Fire Department dated 5/19/98. (On File) Letter from the Conservation Commission dated 5/14/98. (On File) Letter from the Police Department dated 5/11/98. (On File) Letter from the Board of Health dated 5/12/98. (On File) Dinkin asks if the Board members have any clarifying questions. Thomson asks if there is a list of waivers. Marchionda states that the requested waivers are for no sidewalks, bituminous curbing, and a waiver on the maximum length of a cul-de-sac. Thomson asks if the street is to remain private. Marchionda explains that Tall Tree Drive is referred to on the plan as a private way, because the City has not yet accepted it as a public street. Frank Killilea states that Tall Tree Drive qualifies as an accepted street, but that he is not positive if it is maintained by the City. Thomas asks what the entire length of the subdivision is, from Boyles Street to the end of the cul- de-sac. Marchionda states 900 feet. Dinkin asks if anyone from the public wishes to speak. Peter Tarr of 3 Brooks Circle asks what precautions have been taken to ensure that there is no further development. Dinkin explains' that there will be a notation on the plan, and then reads a letter from City Solicitor Marshall Handly dated 4/28/98 (On File). Dinkin further states that both the plan and the deeds as they are filed., will. have a notation prohibiting further development of these lots in the future in perpetuity. Mr. Tarr states that he would also like to see on whatever approval a condition that there will be no further development-. in the Board's approval. Renee Mary of 274 Hale Street states that her main concern is flooding, but that she would also like to see the definition of various types of Conservation Commission restrictions, because they are public information, and states that the pedestrian right of way off Tall Tree Drive Extension and by approving this subdivision it is eliminating public rights. Ms. Mary also noted that the Conservation Commission found loop holes with the proposal, and questions Mr. Handly's letter (RE: further build-up of this area). Dinkin states that with respect to further build-up of the subdivision, Mr. Handly leads me to believe that the plan and deeds to the lots will prohibit subdivision of these lots in the future, in perpetuity, and then states that the public can see a copy of Mr. Handly's letter, that it will be on file. Cassidy explains that the Conservation Commission issued an Order of Conditions for Tall Tree Drive, that this Board deals with just the appropriate drainage and building conditions provided. Ms. Mary states that she is also concemed that there will be other possibilities for agreements with the City. Dinkin states that the City and a land owner or developer can enter into any type of contract provided that the terms of the contract are not prohibited by law. Ms. Mary asks how the public will be able to access the conservation land. Dinkin states as it does now. Dinkin asks if there are any comments in support of this subdivision. There were none. Dinkin asks if there are any comments in opposition to this subdivision. Renee Mary of 274 Hale Street states that she is opposed to this subdivision. Donald Winslow of 2 Robin Road asks what has been done about the water flowing through the area. Marchionda explains that there are two existing culverts, that one is partially blocked and is due to be cleared out as ordered by the Conservation Commission in their Order of Conditions. Mr. Winslow states that the culvert has only been blocked for the last five months, and that the area does get flooded. Marchionda states that a flood plain map has been done by FEMA; that a complete drainage study has been done which concludes that there will be no measurable impact to the area. Dinkin states that the way the statute is written, is that the developer can't make matters worse, that the developer must mitigate any increase in flow, but that there is no requirement that a developer has to mitigate pre-existing conditions. Dinkin further states that if the residents think that the City should do something about the matter they should contact the Engineering Department. Frank Killilea states that he has not yet seen any engineering plans regarding how the water flows through these two culverts. Marchionda states that they did submit calculations to the Conservation Commission. Stephen Crane of 3 Robin Road notes that the water drainage calculations were submitted with a previous plan, not this one. Marchionda explains the water flow and states that no water will be added to the area, that there will be no change. Thomson asks if there will be any additional language in the settlement agreements regarding drainage issues. Moran states no, there are no other terms in the settlement agreement that deal with drainage, and notes that the applicant is following Conservation Commission issues. Marchionda states that the settlement agreement is just to restrict any future building. John Murray Ward 6 Councilor addresses the Board and states that there is concern about access onto conservation commission land. Marchionda states that any access that currently exists will still be there after the development. Dinkin states that the plan should be clearly marked where there is public access. Marchionda refers Dinkin to Sheet #3 of the definitive plan and states that the plan is clearly marked indicating where the public may access conservation land. Sullivan asks if there is another street from which to access the conservation commission land. Cassidy states not that she is aware of any other road. John Murray addresses the Board on behalf of Ms. Janet Appleton and states that her concerns were addressed at a prior conservation commission meeting. Tarr states that he still would like to see a clearly defined restriction written and attached to the deeds that three and only three lots can be built and to have this restriction put into the minutes for public access/knowledge. Dinkin reiterates that the Board will likely do this. Renee Mary of 274 Hale Street asks the Board to consider leaving the hearing opened one more month, and states that she agrees with Mr. Tarr's comments. Dinkin states that the Planning Board's restrictions are always on file and available for public review, and states that there will be no right to submit a plan for further development of the if this plan is approved. Dinkin declares the public hearing closed and recesses the Board for 10 minutes. Dinkin returns the Board back to regular session. Discussion/Decision: Tall Tree Drive Extension Definitive Settlement Plan / Gladys Dailey & Suzanne Sullivan-Silva Thomson: Motion to approve the subdivision plan and to grant the three requested waivers: no sidewalks will be required, that the curbing may be bituminous concrete curbing, and the 500' dead-end rule is waived, conditioned upon the following: (1) that the recommendations of various department letters be complied with (Engineering, Conservation Commission, Board of Health, Police and Fire Departments), (2) that the plan bear a restriction that none of the three lots can be subdivided in perpetuity, and (3) that execution of settlement agreements dispositive of all pending litigation between the City and the Proponents, which settlement agreement(s) shall provide, without limitation, that each of the parcels resulting from the subdivision be for single-family residential purposes, only, and that each of the deeds of the resulting parcels must include a restriction by easement or other mutually acceptable means against further subdivision in favor of the City of Beverly. in perpetuity, seconded by Sullivan. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed- Motion carries 7-0. Discussion/Decision: Site Plan Review Application #37-98: Construction of 3-level parking garage and addition to maintenance building at 181 Elliott Street / Cummings Properties Cassidy updates the members and states that at the last Board meeting discussion of this matter was tabled in order for the members to do individual site inspections and to have an opportunity to review the parking & traffic study. Cassidy states that the applicant has made several amendments to the site plan that incorporate much of the Board's concerns/information. Bruce Oveson addresses the Board and states that he would like to review the amended chances made to the plan so that they can be Clarified. Mir. Oveson explains that a larger drawing of the garage has been made up in order for the members to get a better idea of what the garage will. look 'Like, and notes that there will be recessed light panels on the second and third decks; that the architectural detail will be the same as what exists on the around level so that the pieces all tie in together; and states that they are- no', asking for any signage Oveson then reviews handicapped parking spaces on the site and explains that there are nine handicapped parking spaces in the garage because the garage is 150' from the closest building, but that there is a total of 43 handicapped parking spaces near adjacent entrances. Oveson explains that there are approximately 30 current accessible accesses to the building, that there are a minimum of two handicapped parking spaces at all public entrances and that they will increase the number of handicapped stalls when more buildings go up. They would be more than willing to put handicapped parking spaces in the garage if required. Next, Oveson reviews the details of the light poles and explains that they are proposing a 10' pole with a slight angle to it so that the direction of the light goes down and to the west. Oveson states that they have been experimenting with several light fixtures, hoods, etc. Cassidy asks if hoods have the ability to redirect. Oveson states yes, or a barn-door device which is attached in order to block light in any particular direction. Next, Oveson reviews the proposed landscaping features, explaining that they are proposing 2 red pine and two white pine trees on the noah side of the Maintenance Building, and that they will also use junipers along the base, and that they will maintain the lawn. Oveson explains that a current landscaping scheme around the parking structure has been submitted, and explains that they are proposing 30 new pine trees along McKay Street and on the west side of the garage, and notes that they are inviting the neighbors so that they can have a say as to the locations of these trees. Oveson then explains the parking calculations and states that these calculations are based on a mixed use and for a combination of office, R & D, restaurants, clubs, storage facility, etc. Oveson states that 4,582 spaces are needed to meet zoning requirements and explains that there are 2,832 parking spaces on site, that the garage will have 453 which gives a total of 3,285 parking spaces to date C-t e. Oveson reviews the square footage of the proposed building and then states that this is all the new information presented. Thomson asks because McKay Street rises in elevation how much of the top of the garage will be seen from the street? Oveson states that the elevation of McKay Street is even with the top of the handrail on the second floor, that it is even with the second floor, and notes that the height of the building is 33'. Thomson asks if the trees suggested are mature ones. Oveson states that they will be 10' high pine trees at the time of planting and that these trees will be placed under the mature trees to help fill in the void, with an ultimate growth of approximately 30-50 feet in height. Sullivan states that he took a ride in the location of the proposed garage and that he feels that the screening for the garage will work quite effectively, and will look nice. Flannery questions if the west entrance is going to remain unavailable to the public, and if the right turn in/right tum out still remains. Oveson states that the westerly drive will remain unavailable to regular traffic, and available only to emergency vehicles and that the easterly drive will remain right turn in/right turn out. Thomson asks if there will be security lighting on the east side. Oveson states probably not. Thomson questions the lights for the loading bays. Oveson explains that those lights will be on a timer or on a motion detector. Thomson asks what is the survival rate of a pine tree. Oveson states that he doesn't know what is in the ground (i.e. ledge), that the trees there now are mature, but that they assume that there will be an acceptable pementage of kill, and that they are willing to replace any that die. Cassidy explains that the site plan is enforceable if found unsatisfactory upon planting, and explains that the Building Inspector has the right to request that they be replaced. Thomson asks if the 4th level of the parking garage will be day time parking only. Oveson states that they haven't discussed that option, that people would not be inclined to park up there during inclement weather or during the night when they have the opportunity to be closer to grade level. Thomson asks if they have considered putting the lights on the 4th level on a. motion detector or timer. Oveson states that there is a practical concern about -chat request, because they are concerned with vandals. S u I I i v a n : Motion to approve Site Ite P 1 a n Application #37-98, construction of 3-1evel parking garage at 181 El iott Street and an addition to the maintenance building on Cabot Street, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, and Flannery -in favor, Thomson and Thomas abstained. Motion carries 5-0-2. Planning Board May 19, 1998 Meeting Page Eight Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans (SANR's) Virginia Avenue Extension Subdivision Cassidy updates the members and explains that the developer would like to move the property line so that the entire easement is on Lot #3, and explains that both lots will still have the required fromage. Cassidy states that the plan meets all the Board's rules and regulations. Thomson: Motion to endorse the plan of land for Virginia Avenue Extension Subdivision as one not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law, seconded by Sullivan. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. Branch Lane ANR Thomson asks what the required frontage is. Cassidy states 225'. Attomey John Keilty representing Charles Benevemo addresses the Board and asks if the members have any questions. Dinkin asks if there is access at the lot line. Attorney Keilty responds yes. Dinkin asks how much linear frontage Lot A has, exclusive of wetlands. Attorney Keilty explains that it is approximately 40-50' at its narrowest and that it is 70' of pure linear frontage with no wetlands. Thomson questions the boundary of the resource area on the plan. Attorney Keilty explains where the edge of the wetland is and states that there will be a buffer zone. Thomson: Motion to endorse the plan of land for Branch Lane as one not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. Chanticleer Drive Subdivision: Replacement of Letter of Credit with Passbook, reduction of bond posted as surety, extension of construction completion date / Dan Finn Cassidy updates the members and explains that there are several requests by the applicant, the first is a request for a reduction of bond money posted. as surety to $2,000.00 second is a Planning Board May 19, 1998 Meeting Page Nine request that the Letter of Credit be replaced with a passbook; and the third being a request for an extension of the construction completion date for 60 days. Cassidy further states that the preparation of as-built plans, tree and grass plot guarantee remain to be completed. Thomson asks what the current expiration date is. Cassidy states May 21, 1998 and states that she recommends that the Board extend the construction completion date to July 30, 1998. Sullivan: Motion to accept passbook in the amount of $2,000.00 in lieu of Letter of Credit as surety for this project, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. Sullivan: Motion to extend the construction completion date on Chanticleer Drive Subdivision to July 30, 1998, seconded by Thomson. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. Virginia Avenue Extension Subdivision: Set bond amount, accept performance bond, release of lots from language of Form G Covenant for building and sale purposes / Curtis Jones Cassidy updates the members and explains that the applicant is requesting that a bond be established in the amount of $59,225.00, that a Tri-Partite Agreement be accepted in that amount for a performance guarantee, and that the applicant is seeking the release of lots from the language of Form G Covenant so that they can be sold and built on. Frank Killilea states that the amount of $59,225.00 is sufficient to guarantee completion. Thomson: Motion to accept the Tri-Partite Agreement in the amount of $59,225.00 as surety for the performance bond, seconded by Sullivan. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7- 0. Thomson: Motion to release lots from the Form, G Covenant for build ing and sale purposes, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. Planning Board May 19, 1998 Meeting Page Ten Moore Circle Subdivision - Request for minor modification to release Lot #1 and permit relocation of house to that lot, acceptance of revised Covenant posted as surety / Paul & Sheila Moore Cassidy updates the members and explains that the Board included a notation on the plan stating that the existing home on the property would be moved to Lot #2, and that Lot #2 was excluded from the language of the Form G Covenant. Cassidy explains that the applicant is now seeking to put the house on Lot 1, and to have it released from the restrictive Form G Covenant instead. Sullivan asks if the applicant had to go through any Boards in Danvers. Cassidy explains that the applicant did go through the Planning Board in Danvers, which okayed the modification. Thomson: Motion to find this request to be a minor modification, seconded by Sullivan. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. Dinkin asks the applicants if they are creating or destroying any lots; if they are changing any impervious areas; or if any infrastructure is being changed. Applicants responded no to all questions. Thomson: Motion that the minor modification be approved by substituting Lot #2 for Lot # 1, that the Form G Covenant will cover Lots 2-6, and that the modification be printed on the plan, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. City Council Order #167: Planning Board recommendation on acceptance of Boxwood Lane (minor subdivision road) Homeowners' Petition. Cassidy updates the members and explains that a letter from a group of homeowners was submitted to City Council seeking approval for Boxwood Lane, a private way, to become a public way. Cassidy reads the Ietter. (On. File) Cassidy explains that the subdivision was approved several years ago as a minor subdivision and that the road services six homes. Cassidy reads the Board's restriction regarding a private minor street. Planning Board May 19, 1998 Meeting Page Eleven Thomson asks if the Board should hold a public hearing. Dinkin states that the Ordinance does not state that a public hearing has to be held. Thomson states that the Board needs some further information with respect to what the condition of the road is. Sullivan states that the Board needs to: (1) distinguish if the assessments are identical or impacted by status of a private way; (2) to determine what aspects of the design and the construction of road don't meet standards; and (3) ask the City Engineer and the head of DPW to comment on what are the impacts to the City if the City were to take on Boxwood Lane as a public way. Thomas comments that the roadway, as constructed doesn't meet typical construction requirements for a City street and that the biggest concern is if snow plows go up and down the lane. Thomson states that maintenance of the roadway is a major concern/issue with respect to liability. Dinkin states that this is not a unique request. Thomson states that this is the first request of this kind that he can remember since he has been on the Board, and recommends that the Board be consistent on the way it wants to approach this type of request in the future for the best interest of the Board and the City. Thomson asks if there is a way to determine how many more streets in the City are private minor subdivisions, and how many of these streets within the last ten years have become accepted public ways. Cassidy states that she can go through her records that date back through the 1980's and see what actions were taken. Thomas: Motion to table the matter to the Board's next meeting scheduled for June 16, 1998 so that staff can get answers to questions/issues listed above, seconded by Sullivan. Dinkin; Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn., Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. Morgan's Island Subdivision: Convert Tripartite Agreement to Passbook and request for extension of construction completion date Dean nis& Karen L'Italien Cassidy updates the members and explains that there are two requests, the first being to replace the existing Tripartite Agreement with a passbook, and the second being a request for an extension of the construction completion date from June 30, 1998 to November 30, 2998. Planning Board May 19, 1998 Meeting Page Twelve Cassidy states that the bond amount is $39,675.00. Mr. L'Italien addresses the Board and explains that he is seeking a six month extension of time because the developer contracted to install the curbing is backed up due to the recent bad weather conditions. Thomson: Motion to replace the existing Tripartite Agreement with a passbook in the amount of $39,675.00, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0. Thomson: Motion to extend the construction completion date for the Morgan's Island Subdivision from June 30, 1998 to November 30. 1998, seconded by Sullivan. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0 Birch Woods Subdivision - Request for extension of construction corn Mpqey- Cassidy updates the members and reads a letter from Attorney Thomas Alexander requesting an extension of the construction completion date for this project from June 28, 1998 to June 28, 2000. (On File) Attorney Thomas Alexander addresses the Board and explains that the project has been involved with a series of Conservation Commission appeals, that the matter has just recently been settled and that they are now done with the permitting processes. Attorney Alexander updates the members and states that this proposal includes a requirement that a sewer line be extended along Cross Lane for an additional 37 houses to be added to the sewer system at the developers expense. Dinkin asks Attomey Alexander if he believes that all litigation -is done Attorney Alexander responds yes. Thomson asks when the proposed work is to start. Attorney Alexander states that in July they plan to start the installation of the sewer line, the roadway and utilities for 37 house lots. Sullivan: Motion to grant the extension of the construction completion date for the Birch Woods Subdivision to June 30, 2000, seconded by Thomson. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0 Planning Board May 19, 1998 Meeting Page Thirteen Estates at Pride's Crossing: Set date for Public Hearing on Definitive Subdivision Plan (formerly "Mullen/Loeb Estate") / Toll Brothers Inc. Cassidy updates the members and explains that a 58 lot definitive subdivision plan has been received and that the applicant is looking to set a date for a public hearing. Sullivan: Motion to set a public hearing on the Estates at Pride's Crossing for the Board's next meeting scheduled for June 16, 1998, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposedMotion carries 7-0 McDonald's Restaurant: Set date for Public Hearing on site plan review application #38-98 The McDonald's Corporation Cassidy updates the members and explains that The McDonald's Corporation is looking to establish a McDonald's restaurant on Elliott Street (by the Stop & Shop). Thomson: Motion to set a public hearing date on the McDonald's Restaurant for the Board's next meeting scheduled for June 16, 1998, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one-opposed. Motion carries 7-0 New or Other Business Sam Fonzo Drive Cassidy states that the City is finalizing all pre- construction aspects of this project, and explains that there are three exhibits that need to be endorsed by the Chairperson for the City's CDAG grant, and asks the Board to authorize the Chairperson to sign on behalf of all the Planning Board members. Sullivan: Revisions Thomson: Motion to authorize the Chairperson to sign for the entire Board on the three exhibits, seconded by Modugno. Dinkin, Thomson, Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0 to the Planning Board's Rules and Regulations Motion to have the Planning Director assemble a list of possible proposed amendments to the Planning Board's Rules & Regulations for review in September. and for a public hearing in October, seconded by Thomas. Dinkin, Thomson~ Sullivan, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomas in favor, no one opposed. Motion carries 7-0