Loading...
1996-03-12 ~airman James A, Manzi Vice Chairman Richard Dinkin Planning Director Tina P. Cassidy William Delaney Joanne Dunn Ellen K. Flannery Salvatore Modugno D, Stephen Papa Barry Sullivan John Thomson MINUTES Beverly Planning Board Special Meeting March 12, 1996 Members present: Chairman James Manzi, Vice-Chairman Richard Dinkin, Bill Delaney, Sal Modugno, Steve Papa, Barry Sullivan, Joanne Dunn, John Thomson and Ellen Flannel. Also present: Planning Director Tina Cassidy, Commissioner of Public Works George Zambouras and Assistant Planning Director Debbie Hurlbun. Manzi calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Dinkin: Motion to recess for public hearing, seconded by Sullivan. All members in favor, motion carries. Concurrent Public Hearings: Definitive Subdivision Plan and Watershed Protection Overlay District Special Permit/Fonzo Realty Trust, The Flaticy Co. and the City of Beverly Cassidy reads legal notice for this Definitive Subdivision Plan and Special Permit Request for construction of a roadway and associated work within a Watershed Protection Overlay District. Attorney Thomas Alexander introduces himself to the Board and states that he is representing Aero Manufacturing who is one of the applicants. The other applicants am the Flatley Company and the City of Beverly. Alexander states that Aero Manufacturing is a high quality manufacturer of metal products who have been in business for over 30 years manufacturing military and air products. Alexander states that Aero employs over 60 employees in Danvers and hopes to come to Beverly which will help create jobs and produce a new tax base. Alexander states that this proposal was previously before the Board as a Preliminary Subdivision Plan. In addition, this proposal has been filed with the Department of Environmental Protection under the MEPA process. Alexander states that this proposal also requires that the applicant file with the FAA for an Environmental Assessment which is similar to the MEPA process. The proposal will also be filed with the Conservation Commission soon. City Hall 191 Cabot Street Beverly, Massachusetts 01915 (508) 927-6000 Fax (508) b22-0285 Minutes of the Planning Board March 12, 1996 page two Alexander states that this project encompasses 89 acres of which 60-65 belongs to the Fonzo's with the balance belonging to the City of Beverly and the FlatIcy Company. Alexander adds that this proposed road will go from one industrial road at Cheny Hill Drive to another industrial road, L.P. Henderson. Alexander states that the City has applied for three grants, $25,000 from the Land Bank which will be matched by Aero Manufacturing, $1 million from a PWED grant for the construction of the roadway based on the economic impact of this project, and there is preliminary indications that the City will receive $750,000 from a Community Development Action Grant (CDAG) which has been earmarked for this site. Alexander states that Phase I of this project will be the installation of the roadway and Phase II will be to pay back some of the governmental grant funds initially utilized to install sewerage systems to the airport and homes along Cabot and Trask Street. Alexander adds that the Beverly Airport is under an Order from {he Department of Environmental Protection to clean up a portion of the area because the septiie system has failed, and this project would allow this to come into compliance due to the installation of a sewer system. Alexander continues that this project allows for much needed tax revenue while the service cost is very small based on the fact that this is not a residential development and there will be no children and the businesses provide for their own collection of trash. Alexander states that a comparison of the tax base in various communities shows that in Danvers the tax revenues generated from residences are 61%, in Peabody 61%, in Salem 48%, and in Beverly 78%. Alexander then introduces Bill Bergeron from Hayes Engineering. Bergeron states that this installation of this roadway will provide for a looped roadway system and that the roadway is 4,490 feet in length. Bergeron states that from the Preliminary stage of the subdivision to the Definitive stage he has been able to reduce the roadway by 125' in length due to some changes in the roads placement. Bergeron states that this project will be soon flied with the Conservation Commission and will be filed as a Limited Project filing. Berg~ron states that part of the project will be to connect the industrial roads to each other but also to get additional traffic off Cabot Street. Bergeron goes on to state that there was an initial traffic study filed but there will be a more extensive traffic study done with the new filing. Bergeron adds that this project also requires that the applicants look at air quality and its impact. Bergeron states that the proponent will bring in a 12" water main and bring it up into the site, and that an extension of the sewer will be brought to a pumping station near Trask Road which will be an improvement for the residents in the neighborhood. Minutes of the Planning Board March 12, 1996 page three Bergeron adds that a hydrologic analysis will be conducted for the Conservation Commission but that the applicant is required to get the Planning Board approvals prior to filing with the Conservation Commission meeting. Bergeron states that the applicant is seeking two waivers, one for the grade of the roadway and the other is for sidewalks on one side only. Bergeron adds that there will be a 50' layout but one sidewalk will allow for less wetlands filling, and there will be vertical retaining walls with no side sloping within the three crossings. Bergeron adds that there will be erosion sedimentation barriers installed adjacent to all the wetlands, and that the hydrological analysis in post- development will not be more than in pre-development according the Best Management Practices (BMP). Bergeron states that preliminary traffic estimates indicate that the traffic generated in the a.m. will be 445 vehicles in and 37 exiting the site for a total of 482, and in the p.m. 210 vehicles in with 241 out for a total of 451 vehicles. Cassidy reads letters from Board of Health, Police, Department of Public Works and Fire Departments and from George Batcheider. She states that the Board is waiting for a letter from the Beverly/Salem Water Supply Board. Chairman Manzi asks if there is anyone who would like to speak on this proposal. Dinkin asks Cassidy if she could provide the Board with the letter from the Department of Public Works and from Batcheider. Cassidy responds that she will. Dinkin asks what is the sum total of public financial participation for this roadway. Alexander responds that the balance is privately funded. Dinkin asks what the date of the final disposition of funds. Alexander responds imminent. Dinkin asks what is the sewerage funding methodology and if the total sewerage is being funded. Alexander responds that the roadway and the utilities will cost approximately between 2.4 and 2.7 million dollars and that the City is participating by using only grant monies. Dinkin reiterates his understanding of the funding stating that the City will provide all of the 1.75 million dollar grant as a loan to the developer for the developers share of the sewerage costs and attended improvements, and that the loan is to be repaid on the sale of the buildable lot then used for funds for off-site improvements. Alexander states that was correct. Manzi asks if anyone would like to speak on this proposal. Minutes of the Planning Board March 12, 1996 page four Naomi Cohen of 31 Colgate Road states that both presentation represents that approximately 1,200 jobs are anticipated and questions whether that would include all the 65 acres. Alexander states that the estimate is based on zoning for the entire 65 acres. Cohen discussed the gridlock that would occur on Routes 128 and 97, and that she believes that there are always more cars than what is anticipated. Cohen goes on to state that she believes eventually there will have to be an interchange here, and it will impact Danvers and Wenham. Cohen also states that this project cannot go forward if the sewerage is not in place, and that the City is responsible for sewer, and asks how much will the City be paying for debt sendee. Cohen directs a comment to Council President Brace Nardella asking for a public hearing for what the debt service will be for this project. Cohen also asks if the new developer will be getting new sewer rates or will they have to pay what the residents have to pay. Carolyn Costsin of 21 Wellesley Road asks if there will be further testing of the groundwater. Alexander responds that there will not be. Costsin asks what t?pographic maps are being used. Bergeron states that 1991 air photogrammetry. Glen Terry of 13 Macarthur Road asks where the sewer connection will be made. Bergeron states in Cherry Hill Drive. Terry asks if the sewer can handle this new development. Bergeron states that pan of the study to be conducted wilt review this. Bill Bums a former Salem City Councillor and Salem resident states that Beverly is the custodian of the Salem/Beverly Water supply and that he urges the Board to keep that in mind. He also states that to eliminate the risks to any of the two Cities that the Board should stop this therefore not impacting the water supply. Dave Booeggman of 56 West Street states that the Bass River emanates from this area, and when them is a lot of rain there is overflow to the pipes which effect the downstream residents. Booeggman states that the Board should make sure the areas downstream are not affected. Manzi responds that the applicant will have to show the drainage system plan. Bob Perron of 8 Bass River Road states that in October there was a flood that flooded his back yard and the City had three men working to keep the Bass River open. Perton states that he saw the legal notice in the newspaper in December of 1995 and he wrote a letter to the Secretary of Environmental Affairs indicating his concerns (see file). Perron states that we will see more asphalt but wonders where will all the water is going to go. He states that the water will try to go under 128 but cannot, and downstream will then have real flooding. Meeting of the Planning Board March 12, 1996 page five Tom Vasile Jr. of 38 Trask Street states that he is concerned with the water run-off, and specifically the water that comes off the hill creates more flooding in area. Bergeron states that the project will use BMP to encourage water to be held and actually cleaned. Vasile states that there is a brook in the vicinity and wonders if there are any plans which impact the brook. Bergeron states that there will be a detail crossing here and there are plans to create a control structure to control the water going out. Visale asks on what side of the street will the sidewalks be located. Bergeron states that the sidewalks will be toward Trask Street. Wayne Smith of 678 Cabot Street states that he is concerned with m-off but if the developer does the project properly it would be a good project, and that he is in favor of the project. Renee Mary of 274 Hale Street asks that if blasting is necessary, how much blasting would occur, and what effects would this have on the surrounding area. Mary questions that during and after the blasting will the IVBVSS test well and L.P. Henderson Road and Route 128 be tested on a weekly basis to see if there is any effect and then the records made public. Mary asks if there will be additional costs from the clean up of fly ash. Mary asks how much fill would be brought in and how would this change the contours of the topography.~ Councillor At Large Peter Gilmore of 10 Parsons Road asks what is being subdivided. Cassidy explains that the establishment of new lots and new roadways trigger this subdivision as well as a Special Permit because it is within the Watershed Overlay Protection District. Gilmore asks how may lots are being created. Cassidy responds five. Gilmore asks if there will be further subdivision. Bergeron states that generally one tailors the land to meet the needs of the development but basically this subdivision is to create a roadway. Gilmore asks what would be the result of connecting a 12" pipe to an 8" pipe for the water main. Bergeron states that it will increase the pressure. Gilmore states that he has heard the number of $1 million dollars to $2 million dollars in tax generated revenues and wondered what the actual amount would be. Alexander states that it depends on the ultimate buildout. Gilmore asks how much area is needed for parking for 60,000 s.f. of developed area. Alexander states that the lot coverage cannot be greater than 60% including parking and buildings. Gilmore asks how much of the 89 acres is buildable. Alexander states that approximately 75% is buildable area and approximately 25% is wetland. Gilmore states that perhaps the area left can be denoted as a no-build, no-develop zone, no matter what the zoning allows to give a buffer zone forever. Nathan Zoll of 4 Orchard Street states that the citizens are concerned with the wetlands, wildlife and the fly ash. Ward Five City Councillor Bill Coughlin states that he would like to know who is going to respond to the following issues; the Bass River flow, the hydrological disturbance, the houses on Trask Street where the water comes in the basement and if there is a disturbance who will be responsible, the cost analysis of breakdown of all three entities, when can the residents see the sewerage installed, and the contaminated sites. Meeting of the Planning Board March 12, 1996 page six Ward One City Councillor Maureen Troubetaris states that the City needs to address the drainage problems and that we cannot afford more drainage problems. Troubetaris adds that the developer should spend the money to take care of the problems and if they can't then the project shouldn't be done at all. Vincent Cotreau of 71 Enon Street asks what review these plan will have in terms of noise pollution and air pollution. Cassidy responds that this size development would trigger Site Plan Review, Cotreau states that he believes that this road is substandard. Steve Bates of 26 Parramatta Road states that this development is critical to the City and without this we will all be paying higher taxes. Dinkin: Motion to recess the public hearing to 7:30 p.m. on April 30th, seconded by Thomson. All members in favor, motion catTies. 1. Discussion: Workshort for P!anninl Board Cassidy states that due to the late hour the Board may want to postpone the Board's workshop that was contemplated for this evening. Dinkin states that he would like to see this postponed to another date when the Board doesn't have three meetings in that month. Dinkin: Motion to hold the next workshop on May 7, 1996 at 7:30 p.m., seconded by Flannery. All members in favor, motion carries. 2. Adiournment Dinkin: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Sullivan. All members in favor, motion carries. Meeting is adjourned at 9:40 p.m. --