Loading...
1996-04-17 .irman 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 April 17, 1996 Members present: Chairman James Manzi, Vice-Chairman Richard Dinkin, Barry Sullivan, John Thomson, Bill Delaney and Ellen Fhnnery. Also present: Planning Director Tina Cassidy and Assistant Planning Director Debbie Hurlburt. Manzi called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Dinkin: motion to recess to public heating, seconded by Thomson. All members in favor. Motion carries. Public Hearing: Request for Waivers from Frontage Requirements of the Zoning Ordinance Cassidy reads legal notice for the Waiver request from the frontage requirements of the Zoning Ordinance in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 81-R to create a buildable lot at 8 Thomas Road. Attomey Thomas Alexander introduces himself to the Board. Alexander states that the property owner, Mr. Christopher Velonis was before the Board of Appeal for a Variance from lot area and frontage which was granted in August of 1995. Alexander states that this lot has been in the family since 1967 when it was purchased by the applicant's parents. Alexander states that at the time of purchase the zoning was R-15, and subsequently has changed to R-22. Alexander also states that there is a notation on a plan for this property which states that no further subdivision of this lot can occur without the Planning Board's approval. Alexander adds that there are two purposes to this filing, one is the Waiver Request from frontage from the Planning Board and the other is the Board's endorsement of this plan constitutes the Board's approval and satisfies the notation on the previous plan. Cassidy reads the letters from various City Departments (see file). Thomson asks what is meant by the original subdivision. Alexander states that the original plan was a Form A endorsement showing the lot. Alexander states that the applicant has been in touch with abutter, Warren Sawyer who will release their rights to a tam around due to the unlikelihood that the area will ever be further developed due to the wetlands. City Hall 191 Cabot Street Beverly, Massachusetts 01915 (508) 921-6000 Fax (508) 922-0285 Minutes of the Planning Board April 17, 1996 meeting page two Manzi asks if there is anyone else interesting in speaking on this filing, there being none Manzi declares the Public Hearing closed. Chairman Manzi reconvenes meeting at 7:45 p.m. Discussion/decision: Request for Waivers from Frontage Requirements of the Zoning Ordinance Thomson asks Cassidy to discuss the new procedure for waiver requests. Cassidy responds to the recent Court case regarding the lack of frontage of a parcel and that, although the applicant received a variance from the Board of Appeal, he must also receive a waiver from the Planning Board in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 81-R. Cassidy reads the waivers requested; Section III.C. I .b., Section.III.C.2., Section III.C.8., Section III.C.9, Section III.C., Section IV., Section V., and a waiver from frontage requirement of zoning. Thomson asks if the road exists beyond the old existing circle. Cassidy states that it does not. Alexander states that the circle is paved. Thomson asks if Parcel A is under the same ownership. Alexander states that it is not. Cassidy indicates that a decision has been made by the Board of Appeal and proceeds to read the Decision. Dinkin asks when the original ANR was approved. Cassidy responds in 1967. Cassidy reads the minutes of 1967 regard'rag this decision. Thomson: Motion to grant waivers requested for Section III.C.l.b, Section III.C.2, Section III.C.8, Section III.C.9, Section III.C. and Section IV, Section V of the Boards Rules and Regulations for subdivisions, and a waiver from frontage, seconded by Dinkin. All members in favor. Motion carries. Thomson: Motion to approve plan indicating Parcel "B" as a separate building lot, seconded by Sullivan. All members in favor. Motion carries. Discussion/Decision: Pearson Road Definitive Subdivision Plan and Special Permit Request (Watershed Protection Overlay District) off Old Rubbly Road/Gary Palardy and David Carnevale, developers Minutes of the Planning Board April 17, 1996 meeting page three Cassidy updates the Board as to the status of this filing. Cassidy states that the Board closed the Public Hearing on April 1, 1996; however, the outstanding issue is the drainage system through the property and into Hathaway Avenue Extension. Cassidy states that the Board needed input ~'om DPW Director George Zambouras regarding a cost estimate on installing large diameter pipes for the system and a possible new design, and the adequacy of the submitted drainage calculations. Attorney Thomas Alexander, representing the applicant, states that there was a concern originally about the easement over private property and whether the City could access it to install a larger pipe. Alexander states that the person whom once lived at this address has moved, and Alexander has since talked with the new property owners who now own the easement and they are favorable toward a new pipe. Vernon LeBlanc, Engineer for the project states that them will be four catch basins in the roadway and the water would now run into a detention basin area then into reinforced concrete pipes. Dinkin asks if the new plan changes the drainage calculations. Alexander states that it does. Thomson asks the Engineer to explain how the new drainage would work on the southern portion of the property. LeBlanc states that the drainage would mn into the detention basins end then into new reinforced concrete pipes. Thomson asks if the drainage calculations would improve with this new system. LeBlanc states that with the increase in the pipe size that it would. Delaney questions where does the water eventually go. LeBlanc states that it will transmit eventually to the other side of Hathaway Avenue. Cassidy states that the Board has until June 14, 1996 to make a decision on the Definitive Subdivision and until June 30, 1996 to make a decision on the Special Permit. Dinkin states that he needs to see Zambouras' comments before he can vote on this subject. Dinkin: Motion to table this discussion until April 30, 1996, seconded by Thomson. All members in favor. Motion carries. Dinkin: Motion to recess for five m'mutes, seconded by Delaney. All members in favor. Motion carries. Minutes of the Planning Board April 17, 1996 meeting page four 3. Subdivision Aonroval Not Required (SANR) a. C.P. Clare - Cherry Hill Park Cassidy states that previously the Board endorsed an ANR plan for unregistered land in Cherry Hill Park. Cassidy states that the Board now has the "Land Court" portion of the property that must be endorsed as a separate plan and recorded. Manzi asks if the plan meets all of the Board's requirements for endorsement. Cassidy responds that it does. Dinkin: Motion to endorse the ANR plan for Cherry Hill Drive, seconded by Sullivan. All members in favor. Motion carries. b. 30 Boyles Street/Daniel Tobin Cassidy states that there were three conditions placed on the Pork-Chop lot Special Permit which needed to be ful~lled prior to the endorsement of this ANR. Cassidy stabs that the three conditions are a 10' wide easement for the highway utility improvements, a notation stating that no further subdivision shall occur so as to create additional building lots without Planning Board approval, and that the driveway that exists will be utilized by the new lot for access. Cassidy states that all of these conditions have been met and that the plan meets the City's Rules and Regulations. Dinkin: Motion to endorse the ANR plan for 30 Boyles Street while holding the mylars until the easements have been reviewed and approved by the City Solicitor, seconded by Sullivan. All members in favor. Motion carries. c. Briscoe School/City of Beverly Cassidy states that an ANR plan has been submitted for the re-development of the' Briscoe School. Cassidy states that there are two parcels; Parcel A which holds the main building and accessory buildings and Parcel B which contains a portion of the existing roadway. Cassidy states that in the late 1800's a portion of Bfiscoe Street was discontinued to build the new school, and that a request now is before the City Council to discontinue Parcel B as an existing way. Dinkin: Motion to endorse the ANR plan for Briscoe School, seconded by Delaney. All members in favor. Motion carries. Laurel Ridge Subdivision/Extension of Construction Completion Date referenced in Form G Restrictive Covenant/NEHS Properties, Inc. & The Hillhaven Cornoration Minutes of the Plann'mg Board April 17, 1996 meeting page five Cassidy states that in 1988 a Special Permit was issued for congregate elderly housing which was appealed by the abutlets. Cassidy states that subsequent to this appeal the City Council contemplated putting a cap on the number of congregate elderly housing units under the Zoning Ordinance. Cassidy states that the Applicant filed a definitive subdivision plan, and by virtue of filing and having the definitive approved, the zoning was then frozen prior to the City Council putting a four-unit per acre cap on congregate elderly housing. Cassidy reads letter from Robert Fanning, Beverly Hospital President which seeks a one year extension on this subdivision plan. Brad Silsbee, Vice-President of Beverly HoSpital states that the Hospital would preferred to build congregate elderly housing as opposed to a thirty lot subdivision on this 40 acre parcel. Silsbee states that this type of housing would be a less intrusive type of development. Dinkin asks what the status of this litigation is. Cassidy states that Silsbee has informed her that the case has been dropped. Silsbee states that the Notice of Intent which was submitted to the Conservation Commission was denied; however, it was approved by the Department of Environmental Protection. Silsbee adds that this petition submitted to the Planning Board was appealed by the abuttets and then the case was dropped. Silsbee states that the Special Permit was remanded back to the Planning Board. Silsbee states that in 1991 the issue was to be remanded; however, no plan was resubmitted to the Planning Board. Delaney states that proposals are usually remanded after formal hearing of the Courts. Thomson asks why this was remanded back to the Board. Silsbee states to re-vote. Thomson comments that this Board needs to find out what the status is of this case. Thomson asks what is the relationship between the zoning freeze and the Special Permit. Silsbee states that when the original plan was submitted there was no density requirement for congregate elderly uses, a maximum was eventually adopted by the City. Thomson states that he believes that a zoning freeze is in effect for eight years after a subdivision plan is approved and that the extension or the completion of construction dates do not mean anything. Thomson: Motion to extend construction completion date for sixty days to June 29, 1996, seconded by Dinkin. All members in favor. Motion carries. 5. Worthington Green Subdivision/Release of Lots #4 & #5 for building ~urooses only Minutes of the Planning Board April 17, 1996 meeting page six Cassidy states that the Plann'mg Board has received a request from John Sanidas of Cove Crossing Corporation seeking the release of Lots ~4 and #5 for building putposed only. Cassidy states that the applicant knows that this is a release for building only and not for sale of the homes, and before that is done the applicant must post a bond before actual sale could begin. Thomson asks if the City has received an easement for widening of the roadway. Sanidas states that not as of yet. Thomson states that the applicant should have this easement in place prior to the final release for these lots. Cassidy adds that the applicant needs to have a copy of the final plan showing the easement, and to have the easement submitted to the City Council for their approval and acceptance. Dinkin: Motion to release Lots #4 and #5 of the Form G Restrictive Covenant for building purposes only, seconded by Dinkin. All members on favor. Motion carries. 6. Mayflower Motel/Suecial Permit Request/Robert Brilliant- set hublie hearing Cassidy states that the Planning Board has received a request from Mr. Robert Brilliant for a special permit to change the use of the Mayflower Motel from the motel to a rooming house. Cassidy states that she has received a letter from the Fire Department stating that they are in favor of this use change. Dinkin: Motion to schedule a public hearing for a Special Permit for the Mayflower Motel on May 21, 1996 at 7:30 p.m., seconded by Thomson. All members in favor. Motion carries. 7. Minutes Manzi asks if the Board has read the minutes of April 1, 1996, and if there are any comments. Dinkin: Motion to approve the April 1, 1996 minutes, seconded by Flannery. All members in favor. Motion carries. 8. New/Old Business a. Cassidy states that the Planning Board has received a proposed zoning amendment to the definition of height. Cassidy states that the Board needs to make a recommendation on holding a joim public hearing with the City Council. Thomson: Motion to send a recommendation to the City Council to hold a joint public hearing on the definition of height, seconded by Delaney. All members in favor. Motion carries. Minutes of the Planning Board April 17, 1996 meeting page seven b. Cassidy reminds members that the Board has a special meeting for April 30, 1996 and a Joint Public Heaxing with the City Council on May 6, 1996 regarding use variances. c. Cassidy states that the Board had scheduled a workshop for May and due to the many meetings that the Board will be having, asks if the Board want to cancel or reschedule. Thomson suggests that the Board have the workshop on May 6, 1996, the same night that the Board will have the Joint Public Hearing. d. Cassidy states that there is a workshop for Planning Board members if anyone wanted to attend. Sullivan and Thomson states that they have an interest in attending. Cassidy states that the Planning Depadutent will pay for their attending. 9. Adiournment Delaney: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Dinkin. All members in favor. Motion eoxries.