Loading...
1996-05-21 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 Sufiivan John Thomson MINUTES Beverly Planning Board May 21, 1996 Meeting Members present: Chairman James Manzi, Vice-Chairman Richard Dinkin, Sal Modugno, John Thomson, Ellen Flannery, Steve Papa, Barry Sullivan, Joanne Dunn. Also present: Commissioner of Public Works George Zambouras, Planning Director Tina Cassidy. Chairman Manzi calls meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Dinkin: motion to recess for public hearings and reconvene, seconded by Thomson. All members in favor, motion carries. Special Permit Request # 90-96: permission to operate the Mayflower Motel at 325 Cabot Street as a rooming house / Robert Brilliant Cassidy reads legal notice. Manzi asks if counsel for the applicant is present to explain the request. Attorney Thomas Alexander explains that Mr. Brilliant has recently purchased the property in question, and lists the similarities between this establishment and the Hannah's Port Motel that Mr. Brilliant also owns. Alexander explains that the Mayflower will operated as a rooming house instead of a motel, and that is why the applicant is seeking a special permit for a rooming house. There are 23 units in the building and 23 parking spaces on site, which meets the minimum zoning requirements, and there are no plans for any expansion at this time. He lists the criteria for granting special permits that are outlined in the zoning ordinance, and states that he believes that this application meets those criteria. Manzi asks Cassidy to read any letters received on this filing; Cassidy reads letter from the Police, Fire, Health, and Building Inspection departments (see file). Naomi Cohen, Colgate Road, asks if there will be any children living in these units. Alexander states that there will not be any children living here because the units are only City Hall 191 Cabot Street Beverly, Massachusetts 01915 (508) 921-6000 Fax (508) 922-0285 Minutes of the Planning Board May 21, 1996 meeting page two one-room units. Manzi asks if there are any other members of the audience or Planning Board who have questions on the proposal. Hearing none, Manzi closes the public hearing and returns the Board to regular session. Sam Fonzo Drive definitive subdivision plan and special permit for commercial/industrial development in the Watershed Protection Overlay District / Aero Manufacturincl, the FlatleV Company, the City of Beverly Manzi asks Cassidy to update the Board. Cassidy states that the Planning Board had voted on April 30, 1996 to continue the concurrent public hearings on the above- referenced filings to this evening; however, revised drainage calculations required by the Commissioner of Public Works were not submitted to the Commissioner until this afternoon and have not yet been reviewed by him. Additionally, one of the members of the Planning Board is unable to attend this evening's meeting due to a conflicting commitment. Cassidy recommends that instead of opening the hearings tonight, the Board consider continuing the public hearings to the Board's June 18, 1996 meeting; in that way, the member who is absent this evening will still be able to participate in the discussion and decision on this project, and the Commissioner of Public Works will have adequate time to review and comment on the revised calculations for the Board's consideration. She also recommends that the Board consider accepting a written request from Attorney Thomas Alexander for an extension of time for Board action on these filings. Dinkin: motion to accept the extension of time for final action by the Planning Board on the definitive plan and special permit filings from May 22, 1996 to June 20, 1996. Motion seconded by Thomson, all members in favor. Motion carries. Dinkin: motion to continue the concurrent public hearings on the Sam For~zo Drive definitive subdivision plan and special permit application to June 18, 1996, seconded by Thomson. All members in favor, motion carries. Dinkin: motion to recess the meeting for two minutes, seconded by Flannery. All members in favor, motion carries. Manzi reconvenes the meeting to order at 8:12 p.m. Discussion/decision: Special Permit application #90-96 to operate the Mayflower Motel at 325 Cabot Street as a rooming house / Robert Brilliant Dinkin states that he is pleased that the property owner has filed for this special permit since it illustrates the true use of the property and will enable the City to more closely and Minutes of the Planning Board May 21, 1996 meeting page three accurately regulate the building as a rooming house. Manzi asks if any other members of the Board have unanswered questions or comments. There are none. Dinkin: motion to approve the special permit request for permission to operate the Mayflower Motel at 325 Cabot Street as a rooming house, seconded by Papa. All members in favor, motion carries. Discussion: Woodland Road Preliminary Subdivision Plan / Joseph Shelzi and Glenn Larson Manzi asks if representatives of the developers are present to explain the proposal. Attorney Tom Alexander explains that a concept plan of proposed development of this site was discussed with the Planning Board last year. He states that Bill Bergeron, from Hayes Engineering, is present to explain the plan. Bergeron states that Woodland Road is already laid out, but has not been constructed. The layout runs from Colon Street to Montserrat Road. There are several homes constructed in the vicinity of Colon Street and that the developers are proposing to follow the existing r6ad grades in that stretch and construct better grades in the vicinity of the parcel to be subdivided. The length of the road from Colon Street to the location of the temporary cul-de-sac at the end of Montserrat Road is approximately 1,010 feet. The plan calls for ten house lots to be created, and forty foot (40') rights-of-way are being proposed to be consistent with the existing layout of Woodland Road. The proposed pavement width is 24', and the developers hope to improve the existing street drainage which will tie directly into Colon Street. Cassidy reads a letter from the Police Department (see file); no other letters have yet been received from City departments. She asks if the developers are proposing to connect Woodland to Montserrat to create a through street, since the plan before the Board does not clearly show a connection. Bergeron states that roadway will be a through street. Cassidy asks Bergeron if the proposed roadway will need a waiver from the maximum grade requirement of 6%. Bergeron states that from station 0 to 300, the grade will be 12% - the existing grades exceed that. Beyond station 300, the road grade will vary from 4.3% to 8% at its connection with Montserrat Road. Thomson asks Bergeron why the developers are not proposing to reduce the grades of 12% in the vicinity of the existing homes on Woodland. Bergeron answers that there are existing driveways and carports very close to the roadway layout, and reducing the road grades in that area to meet the Board's 6% requirement would result in huge grade cuts right in front of the existing properties. Sullivan states that he would like to see a comprehensive waiver list from the applicant as well as comments from the Fire, Health, and Public Works Departments before voting on this filing. He sees the proposed grades as a major problem, but will reserve Minutes of the Planning Board May 21, 1996 page four comments until letters are received from all appropriate departments. Sullivan asks if there is any possibility of relocating the Woodland Ave. right-of-way to create a 50' layout and create a location away from the existing houses that would make it easier to meet the Board's grade requirements. Alexander answers that all abutters have rights to use the way and any attempt to relocate the right-of-way would require the approval of every abuttar. Thomson asks Cassidy for a list of waivers that would be required by this plan; Cassidy states that a number of waivers will be necessary, but that the applicants have not yet submitted a formal list. Dinkin asks if the Board can table discussion until the next meeting and still meet the statutory time frames for final action; Cassidy states that it can. Dinkin says that he would like to table discussion on the matter until a formal list of waivers is submitted and all department comments received. Dinkin: motion to table discussion on the Woodland Road preliminary subdivision plan to June 18, 1996, seconded by Sullivan: All members in favor, motion carries. Worthington Green Subdivision: Request to release lots #6 and #7 for buildinq purposes only / John Sanidas Manzi asks Cassidy to update the Board. Cassidy reads letter from Mr. John Sanidas requesting that lots #6 and #7 in this subdivision be released for building purposes only. This subdivision is currently covered by a covenant which prohibits the sale of and building on lots until either a bond is posted or construction completed. Cassidy recommends that the lots be released only for building purposes, and that the Board consider notifying the developer that there will be no further lots releases unless an acceptable form and amount of surety is posted with the Board. ~ Dinkin: motion to release lots #6 and #7 in the Worthington Green subdivision for building purposes only, but not for sale purposes. Motion seconded by Flannery. Thomson suggests amending the motion to add a condition that there will be no additional releases of lots unless an adequate form of surety is posted first. Modugno seconds the amendment. Vote on the amendment is unanimous; vote on the motion is unanimous, motion carries. Chanticleer Drive subdivision: request to establish bond amount / Dan Finn, CarriaQe Hill Realty Trust Manzi asks Cassidy to update the Board. Cassidy reads a letter of request from Mr. Finn asking that a bond amount be established for the above-referenced subdivision. She Minutes of the Planning Board May 21, 1996 page five explains that Commissioner Zambouras has not been able to establish the bond amount prior to this evening. Manzi asks Zambouras for an update; Zambouras recommends a bond amount of $11,149~00 be set to guarantee completion of this subdivision. Dinkin: motion to set the amount of surety necessary to guarantee completion of the Chanticleer Drive subdivision at $11,149.00. Seconded by Sullivan, all members in favor; motion cardes. Juniper Valley Court: request to modify approved subdivision plan and recommendation to City Council on City acceptance of roadway / Douglas Haring Cassidy reads letter of request from the developer that has been submitted to the City Council asking that body to accept Juniper Valley Court as a public way. Cassidy explains that in 1983, the Planning Board had approved this subdivision plan, and the plan included a notation that the road would be a pdvate way. This notation was included on the plan at the developer's election, not as a Planning~ Board requirement. The developer is now asking the City to accept the mad as a public way. Zambouras states his opinion that maintenance of the road by the City would not be a problem; the road is in good condition, and that serious ledge cuts dictated the existing road grades at the time the road was constructed. The road has a 50' layout, there are no sidewalks, and the grades would make installation of sidewalks at this point almost impossible. Dinkin states that he would like to see acceptance plans submitted to the City before the road is accepted. Haring states that his engineer is in the process of drafting acceptance plans, and the physical surveying work has been completed. Dinkin: motion to find that the elimination of the "preface" statement to the list of requested waivers on page four of the approved Juniper Valley Court subdivision plan would be a minor modification, seconded by Flannery. All members in favor, motion carries. Dinkin: motion to approve the minor modification referenced above, seconded by Modugno. All members in favor, motion carries. Dinkin: motion to recommend to the City Council that the Juniper Valley Court roadway be accepted as a City street, subject to approval of roadway acceptance plans by Commissioner of Public Works George Zambouras. Motion seconded by Thomson, all in favor. Motion carries. Minutes of the Planning Board May 21, 1996 meeting page six Conifer Way subdivision: Request to establish bond amount and release lots for buildin~l I~urDoses only / Jeff Bunk Cassidy explains that the developer of this four-lot subdivision has requested that a bond amount be established for this subdivision, and that the Board consider releasing the four lots from the language of the Form G Restrictive Covenant that prohibits construction on any of the lots. She states that if the Board considers granting such a release, it be only for building purposes and not for sale purposes. Zambouras outlines the work remaining to be done in this subdivision, and recommends that the Board set surety at $14,312.00. Dinkin: motion to release lots #1, 2, 3, and 4 in the Conifer Way subdivision for building purposes only, not for sale purposes. Motion seconded by Sullivan, all members in favor; motion carries. Dinkin: motion to establish an adequate amount ~f surety for the Conifer Way subdivision at $14,312.00, seconded by Papa. All members in favor, motion carries. Nicole Avenue subdivision: set date for public hearing / Tom Carnevale and John Ricci Cassidy explains that a definitive subdivision plan has been submitted to the Planning Board and a date for the public hearing must be set. She adds that when the Board approved the preliminary plan for this parcel in March, the Board attached a condition to the approval urging the developers to meet with both the City Solicitor and City Council on the subject of future acceptance of this roadway by the City, since the road is partially located in another community and is accessible only from Wenham. To date, the developers' attorney has written a letter to the City Solicitor, but has made no contact with the City Council. Dinkin asks how long the Board has to act on this filing. Cassidy states that the Board has ninety (90) days from receipt of the application to act on the matter; a public hearing could be scheduled for as late as the Board's July 16, 1996 meeting. Dinkin: motion to schedule the public hearing on the Nicole Avenue definitive subdivision plan for July 16, 1996, and instruct the Planning Director to express to applicants' counsel a sense of urgency in resolving the issues surrounding the ownership and access questions on the roadway. Motion seconded by Sullivan, who states he would prefer to see definitive answers to those questions prior to the public hearing. All members in favor, motion carries. Minutes ofthe Planning Board May 21,1996 page seven Approval of Minutes: April 17, 1996 regular meeting, April 30, 1996 special meetin¢l, May 6, 1996 sPecial meetina Manzi asks the members if there are any amendments that should be made to the minutes for the above-referenced meetings. Members offer no changes. ThOITISOR: motion to accept the minutes of the Board's April 17, 1996, April 30, 1996, and May 6, 1996 meetings, seconded by Dinkin. All members in favor, motion carries. 10. New or Other Business a.~. Set public hearinQ: 564 Cabot Street / Brendan Teelinq Cassidy explains that Mr. Teeling recently received a variance from the Board of Appeals to subdivide his lot at 564 Cabot Street. The variance pertnits reduced lot frontages. Mr. Teeling has now filed a request with the Planning Board for a waiver from the City's frontage requirements in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 81-R. Dinkin: motion to schedule a public hearing on the above-referenced filing for the Board's June 18, 1996 meeting. Motion seconded by Flannery, all members in favor. Motion carries. b. ReceiPt of amnesty license application: 30 Cliff Street / June Nelson Cassidy explains that the Board has received a copy of a waterways amnesty license application for property at 30 Cliff Street. The owner is June Nelson, and she is seeking permission to maintain an existing pier at that address. Cassidy explains that r~o action by the Board is necessary, but members who may be interested in viewing the application may review it in the Planning Office. Discussion relative to jurisdiction of Fire Chief with respect to al~proved subdivisions Cassidy informs the members of a situation involving the Fire Chief in conjunction with tile Morgan's Island Subdivision (see memorandum from Planning Director in file). The Fire Chief has required that the emergency access road approved by the Planning Board be constructed in a different manner than the construction methods specified on the approved subdivision plan. Dinkin states that he believes the Fire Chief's actions have subverted the open and Minutes of the Planning Board May 21, 1996 meeting page eight democratic process outlined in M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 81 -W, and that he is prepared to request the Planning Director to seek a legal opinion from the City Solicitor on whether the Planning Board can enjoin the Fire Chief from taking such action. Thomson states that the developer does not have the right to subvert and ignore the approved subdivision plan. There were several remedies, though possibly expensive, that were available to him. Papa states that this matter was handled disgracefully, and that no one should be forced to go to the courts for relief from a decision by a municipal department head. Dinkin agrees with Thomson's statement that remedies were available to the developer, but believes that government should take special pains not to trample the rights of individuals. He believes this is a case of administrative abuse of an individual, and that the state statute empowers the Planning Board with the authority to a~mend subdivision plans, not the Fire Chief. Sullivan states that although that may be true, the develolSer should not have knowingly ignored the approved subdivision plan and built something different. It is the general consensus of the Board that the Planning Director should draft a letter from the Board to the City Solicitor seeking clarification of the lines of authority of both the Planning Board and Fire Department with respect to the approval, construction, and modification of subdivision plans. Dinkin: motion to adjourn, seconded by Flannery. All members in favor, motion carries.