Loading...
1997-02-25 Minutes Beverly Planning Board February 25, 1997 Meeting Members present: Chairman James Manzi, Richard Dinkin, Joanne Dunn, Bill Delaney, John Thomson, Barry Sullivan, Ellen Flannery, Stephen Papa and Salvatore Modugno; also present: Planning Director Tina Cassidy, Assistant Planning Director Debbie Hurlburt and Susan Akerman, Secretary to the Board. Chairman Manzi calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Dinkin: motion to recess for public hearings, seconded by Thomson. All in favor, motion carries. · Public Hearing: Lakeshore Crossing Definitive Subdivision Plan / A1 Symes, Developer Chairman Manzi recused himself from discussion of this matter, Vice-Chairman Dinkin chairs the meeting. Cassidy reads legal notice. Dinkin asks if Counsel would like to make presentation. Attorney Thomas Alexander addresses the Board and states that there have been questions raised regarding whether there are owners of property outside the limits of this subdivision who have deeded rights to the old road layouts. Attorney Alexander explains that there is documentation and that the issue is being held in abeyance until the Planning Board and the City Solicitor can review them. Attorney Alexander explains that this proposal is a 47 lot subdivision off Bonad Road and Lakeshore Avenue, and that the lots will be located in the R10 and R22 Zone. Attorney Alexander explains that there were a number of issues raised during the Preliminary Plan process, that there have been many meetings with the City Solicitor and City Planner responding to the comments of the Preliminary Plan, and that there are waivers that need to be granted and unless these waivers are granted they may not be able to proceed. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Two Attorney Alexander asks if he could request that the Board give some sense, by way of vote, if the key waivers requested would be granted. The waivers requested are (1) a waiver from the maximum roadway grade requirement of 6%, the proposal seeks a grade of 9.9%; (2) a waiver from the minimum reverse curve tangent requirement of 150' in length to a reverse curve tangent of zero; (3) a waiver from the use of sloped faced granite curbing vs. straight faced granite curbing; (4) a waiver from the minimum centerline radius requirement of 300' to 225' and (5) a waiver from all trees 6" in caliper or greater be shown on the plan. Cassidy reads the following letters: - Letter dated 2/24/97 from the Beverly Fire Department. (On File). - Letter dated 1/17/97 from the Beverly Police Department. (On File). - Letter dated 1/16/97 from the Beverly Board of Health. (On File). - Letter dated 2/25/97 from the City Solicitor. (On File). - Letter dated 2/21/97 from the DPW. (On File). Joanne Dunn joins the meeting at this time. Delaney states that the Board has heard Attorney Alexander's issues, but that there are a number of major areas of concern with this project. Delaney states that he would like to ask a few questions on those particular waiver issues, let the public be heard on the waivers, and then vote on the four or five major waiver requests as Counsel for the applicants has requested. Thomson questions whether the Board should vote on the waivers prior to the close of the public hearing. Delaney responded no, that he believes the Board can vote on the waivers earlier. Thomson states that he is not comfortable having an official vote without public comments. Delaney states that it is his sense that we are having a public hearing and that we cannot preclude anyone from speaking. Dinkin states that this Board, in the past, has voted on waiver issues in absence of any public hearing based on the amount of information received and that it is his view that the Board may make any vote, in substance, in the course of a public hearing on the waivers. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Three Dinkin states that the Board is voting only on specific waiver issues. Attorney Alexander stated that it was his intention to speed up the process as much as possible by voting whether or not to grant the waivers, seeking to limit the length of the process. Thomson states that the action the Board should take is a straw vote. Delaney asks from a procedural point of view, if the Board took a straw vote, and should the indication be negative, could the Board move forward to the public hearing and resolve this issue. Attorney Alexander stated that if the Board resolves the waiver issues tonight then the Board could proceed as long as necessary, but if the waivers were denied then the applicant would like to continue the public hearing to the next meeting. Dinkin recesses the Board for 10 minutes to resolve the procedural issues of the public hearing. Dinkin asks for a show of hands of who is prepared to vote on the specific matters of waivers after testimony is taken from the public. The vote was 8-1 with Thomson opposed. Cassidy reads the list of waivers: - use of sloped faced granite curbing vs. straight faced granite curbing; - grading outside; - waiver of maximum roadway grade requirement of 6% to 9.9% for design standard; - minimum reverse curve tangent requirement of 150' in length to a reverse curve tangent of zero; -minimum centerline radius requirement of 300~ to 225'; - all trees 6" in caliber or greater be shown on the plan; - certified list of waivers. Ken Anastasi of 114 Colon Street asked for a clarification of the requested waivers. Cassidy explains the 6% grading, straight faced curbing, and tree issues. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Four George Zambouras explains the minimum reverse curve tangent of 150' and the centerline radius requirements issues. Priscilla Johnson of 2 Jewett Road questions the issue of the 6" trees and asks if the trees would be identified on the plan. Cassidy explains that all trees over 6" need to be identified by the regulations, however the applicant is seeking a waiver from this requirement. A resident of Beverly asked what will be the consequences of granting these waivers. Cassidy explains that they are largely a matter of public safety and economics. Renee Mary of 274 Hale Street asks if the abutters have been notified. Cassidy responds abutters have to be notified. Mr. Torgler of 27 Lakeshore Avenue asks what power does the Board have to act on these waivers. Dinkin explains that waivers are a request from the developer not to be held to strict regulations and that it is the Board's authority to approve or disapprove a definitive plan for a subdivision of land. A resident of Parramatta Road states that the waivers seem incidental, that residents are interested in the subdivision as a whole. Dinkin states that some waivers could be incidental, but some address very specific design issues of the roadway. Dick Biegger of 3 Greenleaf Dr. asks if the waiver for the caliper of trees is granted, what would protect someone's yard with respect to drainage issues. George Zambouras explains that the waiver is for the location of trees to be shown, not to tear down trees. Bill Walker of i Bonad Rd. states that the City has rules and regulations which state specific issues; and asks why does the City have waivers or allow waivers. Mr. Walker also states that terms being used tonight like "economically feasible" and "expedient time", are disturbing to him. Dedee Kartstein of 18 Lakeshore Avenue asked to have the tree waiver explained again. Cassidy explains that this waiver pertains to trees that directly relate to drainage. Mr. Woitunski of 114 Rear Colon Street asked if the waivers go hand in hand with other waivers, and states that the whole picture should be looked at, and that the City should build proper drainage systems throughout the City. A resident of Pearl Street Extension states that the 9.9% grading is hazardous, that a major accident could occur because cars can't Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Five stop especially when iced over and that it would be a disaster to put the project in as indicated on the plan. Ellen Hutchinson, Attorney representing Mr. & Mrs. Hutchinson of 2 Jewett Road asks for a clarification regarding the minimum reverse curve tangent of 150' in length waiver. George Zambouras explains this waiver issue, explaining that there is currently no tangent distance in between. Virginia McGlynn, Ward 4 Councillor gives an example of how steep a 9.9% grade would be, stating that the angle of the Beverly bridge is at a 6% grade, so the proposed grading of this street will be steeper. Fred Hutchinson of 2 Jewett Road states that if the waivers are approved then there will be problems with respect to health and safety issues for the entire community. Bruce Philbrick of 87 Lakeshore Avenue states that he is against putting through any of the waivers and that he is against the project. Attorney Ellen Hutchinson asks who are we to second guess the Fire Department or the City Officials. A resident of Pearl Street Extension asks what will be the bottom line/final outcome. Dinkin explains that an individual or corporation in this situation can seek a judicial review. A resident of Stanley Street asks if the Board denies the waivers, can the developer go back and change the plan and come back for another consideration of the same final subdivision plan. Dinkin explains that if the public hearing is not closed and the waivers are denied, then the developer may come back to a subsequent meeting with a new plan. Dinkin further explains that the developer must show on the new plan conformance in the areas where waivers have been denied. A1 Symes, proponent of the plan addresses the Board and states that he came before the Board with a preliminary plan and had an indication of the departments comments, but that he came here tonight to see what changes would need to be made to the plan. Barry Sullivan joins the meeting at this time. Terry Russo of Beverly asks how many times can the developer make changes and come back with a new plan. Dinkin explains that a property owner or person who owns property can continue to present plans for development of property until he hits upon a plan that is acceptable. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Six Mary Walker of I Bonad Road states that the Fire Department has a hard time getting into this area as it is. Richard Hutchinson questions that in regards to flooding, is the Board going to let the people drown. Mr. Lee Yaffa asks if the procedure is to take a vote on these waivers, what follows that vote, will you entertain other public comments. A resident of 31 Lakeshore Avenue states that all four of these issues are all public safety issues. Andy Herman of 4 Foster's Drive asks if these waivers are exceptional, and states that they are public safety issues. Donald Brown of 49 Cross Street states with respect to the grade, drainage in this area is not sufficient, that the grade is to steep to handle the water issue and that it would be detrimental to the houses. Delaney states that it is clear to him that the waivers are inappropriate and feels that the Board has enough information to vote upon them. Thomson states that he is opposed to granting these waivers for public safety reasons. Delaney: motion to deny applicant's request for sloped faced granite curbing on Lakeshore Crossing Definitive Subdivision Plan, seconded by Flannery. Motion carries with a 6-1-1 vote. (Dinkin, Modugno, Papa, Delaney, Flannery, Dunn in favor, Thomson opposed, Sullivan in abstention.) Delaney: motion to deny applicantts request to allow a waiver from the Board's requirement of roadway grade of 6%, seconded by Modugno. Motion carries with a 6-1-1 vote. (Dinkin, Modugno, Papa, Delaney, Flannery, Dunn in favor, Thomson opposed, Sullivan in abstention.) Delaney: motion to deny applicant's request to allow a waiver from the Board's requirement of minimum reverse curve tangent requirement of 150', seconded by Modugno. Motion carries with a 6-1-1 vote. (Dinkin, Modugno, Papa, Delaney, Flannery, Dunn in favor, Thomson opposed, Sullivan in abstention.) Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Seven Delaney: motion to deny applicant's request to allow a waiver on centerline radius requirement of 300', seconded by Flannery. Motion carries with a 6-1-1 vote. (Dinkin, Modugno, Papa, Delaney, Flannery, Dunn in favor, Thomson opposed, Sullivan in abstention.) Dinkin explains to Attorney Alexander that the developer needs to redraw the plan, and asks Attorney Alexander if he wishes to proceed. Attorney Alexander states that he would like to request that the public hearing be recessed for two months untilApril 15, 1997, and he would also like to request an Extension of Time until April 30, 1997. Delaney: motion to recess the Public Hearing to the Board's regular April meeting on April 15, 1997, seconded by Modugno. All in favor motion carries 8-0. Delaney explains that this is contingent upon obtaining the request for an Extension of Time from the applicant. Delaney: motion to grant the Extension of Time until April 30, 1997, seconded by Dunn. All in favor, motion carries 8-0. Delaney: motion to recess for 5 minutes, seconded by Dunn. All in favor, motion carries. Manzi resumes the Chair at this time. m Public Hearing: Access Road Definitive Subdivision Plan / David Camevale Cassidy reads legal notice. Cassidy reads the following letters: - Letter dated 1/27/97 from the Beverly Fire Department. (On File). - Letter dated 1/17/97 from the Beverly Police Department. (On File). - Letter dated 1/23/97 from the Board of Health. (On File). - Letter dated February 21, 1997 from the DPW. (On File). Attorney Alexander addresses the Board on behalf of developer David Carnevale and explains that they are seeking to construct 2 lots within this subdivision that are in the R10 Zone with lot #3 being in excess of 10,000 square feet. Attorney Alexander explains that Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Eight the original layout of the road was 640 liner feet but only paved to 460' and was originally done by the Commonwealth, and that they are seeking to extend the pavement to 640' and add a turn around for emergency access vehicles. Attorney Alexander states that the applicant came before the Board previously on a portion of this subdivision for a special permit for a pork chop lot which was granted. Attorney Alexander states that they are seeking a waiver for no sidewalks or curbs on the street, a waiver for a hammerhead turnaround, a waiver for a dead-end street beyond 500' and a waiver for no street trees. Attorney Alexander explains that the existing way has no sidewalks or curbs and that they are looking to keep that continuity. Attorney Alexander states that the Fire Department and the DPW are in favor of these waivers and of this development. Attorney Alexander further explains that with this subdivision they are looking to install sewerage to go all the way to the end of Access Road and resurface the whole street, improving the whole area. Joan Murphy of 36 Longmeadow Road asks if the 4" water line shouldn't be an 8" water line. George Zambouras explains that a 4" water line is more than adequate to service the neighborhood. Joan Murphy states that the existing septic system will be located 15' from the lot line and another 15' from the foundation of Lot #3 and that the septic system runs out the back towards the development and asks if there would be any health hazards. George Zambouras explains that the subdivision is going to be hooked up to city sewerage, then, the existing system will be dismantled and filled in. Attorney Alexander states that they will comply with all Board of Health requirements. Joan Murphy states that she would not recommend that the Board waiver the tree issue explaining that the fourth lot is in a red maple swamp and if the developer puts in a detention pond then there will be increased flooding for the rest of the neighborhood. Don Brings, drainage consultant for the project, explains that the pond designed is not in the wetlands, it is above the wetlands and that they will not be adding any more flow, and that the water balance will remain the same. Manzi declares the public hearing closed. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Nine Discussion: access Road Definitive Subdivision Plan / David Carnevale Thomson asks for clarification with respect to the layout of the road and the sidewalks. George Zambouras explains that sidewalks could physically fit, but the neighbors don't want them and states that they will create water problems in the residents yards. Sullivan asks why the developer is seeking a waiver for no street trees, couldn't they move the street over. Mr. Vernon LeBlanc states that trees could be planted outside the layout, that they could push the paved part of the road to the right. Delaney asks if there are any trees at the beginning of the street. Mr. LeBlanc responds no. Attorney Alexander states that they would be happy to add more trees if it was the consent of the Board. Sullivan asks if they would go through the drainage design layout. Mr. Brings explains the layout, stating that whatever drains off the hill will follow along the roadway then shed down to a catch basin, like sheet flow. Sullivan asks how big the detention pond would be. Mr. Brings states 1,000 square feet explaining that it is designed to allow the same flow and balance as it exists today. Sullivan asks how long it will hold 2' of standing water. Mr. Brings states 24 hours, then it will drain itself through. Delaney: motion to waive the Board's requirement that all 6" caliber trees be shown on the plan, seconded by Sullivan. A1J~=~s-~a%~pr, motion carries 7-1. Delaney: motion to waive the Board's requirement for installation of sidewalks, seconded by Sullivan. Ell in fzver, motion carries 5-3. Discussion: Thomson states only if the City Engineer determines that it is not feasible to install. Dinkin comments that he generally prefers the installation of sidewalks rather than not, but believes in this case the developer controls the property to Dodge Street and if we require the developer to install sidewalks throughout all the property he owns it would only be 2/3rds of the way on Dodge Street. Dinkin states that he agrees with George Zambouras. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Ten Delaney asks if it is feasible to install sidewalks. George Zambouras states that it is possible to do this. Delaney: motion to allow a hammerhead turnaround rather than a cul-de-sac, seconded by Sullivan. All in favor, motion carries 8-0. Delaney: motion to deny applicant's request from the Board's requirement to allow no street trees, seconded by Dinkin. All in favor, motion carries 8-0. Delaney: motion to grant the requested waiver to allow a dead-end street beyond 500 feet, seconded by Sullivan. All in favor, motion carries 8-0. Dinkin: with the amendment that a sprinkler system be installed, seconded by Flannery. Dinkin: withdraws his amendment. Delaney: motion to waive the requirement that all trees six inches (6") in callper or greater be shown on the plan, seconded by Flannery. Motion carries 7-1 with (Sullivan, Delaney, Papa, Modugno, Dunn, Flannery and Thomson, Dinkin opposed). Delaney: motion to waive the requirement that sidewalks be installed on both sides of the roadway, sconded by Dinkin. Motion carries 5-3 with (Dinkin, Delaney, Sullivan, Papa and Modugno in favor, Flannery, Dunn & Thomson opposed). Delaney: withdraws his motion. Dinkin: motion to waive the Board's requirement to allow Access Road to extend beyond 500' provided that all new homes constructed within the subdivision be installed with a residential sprinkler system and that the developer submit a plan for street trees on the entire length of Access Road, two trees per lot for new and existing lots, seconded by Sullivan. All in favor, motion carries 9-0. Delaney: motion to approve Access Road Definitive Subdivision Plan, conditioned upon the installation of residential sprinklers for the two new dwellings and upon installation of street trees and that it is incorporated into the Subdivision Plan, seconded by Sullivan. All in favor, motion carries 9-0. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Eleven Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans (SANR's) a. Bennett Street Cassidy explains that the developer is shy of frontage for this ANR project and that they request to withdraw. Chairman Manzi asks if it meets all the rules and regulations. Cassidy explains that there are three issues that are unresolved. Attorney Alexander withdraws applicant's request for an ANR. Delaney: motion to accept applicant's withdrawal of application, seconded by Flannery. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Sunday Drive Subdivision: Request to grant waiver of curbing requirement, notification of violation of buffer zone / Gary Palardy and David Carnevale Attorney Alexander address the Board and states that the Applicant would like to request a waiver to a sloped faced granite curbing verses a straight faced granite curbing explaining that the rest of the neighborhood has sloped. Dinkin asks if it is a major or minor modification and states that he objects, in principal, in a modification being submitted outside of the public hearing process. Dinkin: motion that the Board find the Request for Sunday Drive Subdivision to be a minor modification, seconded by Thomson. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Dinkin: motion to deny the applicant's request for granting a waiver for straight faced granite curbing to sloped faced granite curbing, seconded by Thomson. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Cassidy updates the Board regarding the notification of the violation of the buffer zone with respect to tree and brush clearing. Cassidy states that the Conservation Commission is asking the developer to replant the trees and that the number of plantings required is up to the Conservation Commission. Cassidy further explains that the Board is requiring the developer that a notification is required in every deed regarding a 20' no cut zone. Attorney Alexander discusses a bond issue for the remaining lots explaining that he has negotiated a figure with George Zambouras and is requesting that a bond be set. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Twelve George Zambouras states that the current amount to finish the project is $104,075.00. Dinkin: motion to set a bond or surety amount for Sunday Drive Subdivision in the amount of $104.075.00 exactly, seconded by Thomson. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Dinkin: motion to accept as surety for Sunday Drive Subdivision a passbook in the amount of $104,075 exactly, acceptance to become effective on the delivery of the passbook to the Chairman of the Board, seconded by Delaney. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Dinkin: motion to release the lots in Sunday Drive Subdivision for building and sale purposes pending release to become effective upon receipt and verification of appropriate surety to the Chairman of the Board, seconded by Sullivan. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Montserrat Estates Definitive Subdivision Plan: set date for public hearing / Sullivan and Dailey Cassidy updates the Board explaining that the proposed subdivision is at the preliminary stage, that the definitive plan submitted is nearly identical to the last submittal and that the applicant would like a public hearing date be set. Sullivan states that he did not look upon this subdivision favorable before. Thomson: motion that a public hearing be scheduled for the next regular meeting provided that the developer provide a legal opinion and supporting documentation relative to the issue of possible overburdening of the easements with the right to use Brookhead Avenue area for access by March 11, 1997, seconded by Papa. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Virginia Avenue Definitive Subdivision Plan: set date for public hearing / Curtis Jones Cassidy update the Board explaining that this is a 5 lot subdivision plan and that the applicant is asking for a public hearing. Delaney: motion to set a public hearing for Virginia Avenue Definitive Subdivision Plan for the Board's next regular meeting scheduled for March 18, 1997, seconded by Thomson. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Thirteen 46-48-50 Bartlett Street: set date for public hearing on request for waiver of frontage requirements in accordance with M.G.L. Chapter 41, Section 81-R / Martinez & Metta Cassidy updates the Board explaining that the applicant is looking to set a public hearing and is also looking for a frontage waiver. Delaney: motion to set a public hearing for 46-48-50 Bartlett Street for the Board's next regular meeting scheduled for March 18, 1997, seconded by Modugno. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. City Council Order #61: Recommendation to City Council on Joint Public Hearing on Order to fezone several lots from R-10 to "CN" near Shortmeadow Road / Arthur Booras Cassidy updates the Board explaining that the applicant is looking to rezone the undeveloped lots #15, 16 & 17 from an R-10 to a CN. Cassidy states that a petition in favor of this change has been submitted on behalf of many neighbors. Delaney: motion to recommend to the City Council that a joint public hearing be scheduled, seconded by Papa. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Approval of Minutes: December 17, 1996 regular meeting, January 6, 1997 special meeting and January 21, 1997 regular meeting. Delaney: motion to adopt and approve the minutes of the Board's December 17, 1996 regular meeting, the January 6, 1997 special meeting and the January 21, 1997 regular meeting as drafted, seconded by Papa. All in favor motion carries. New or Other Business a. Receipt of Waterways License application Cassidy states that a license application for a Waterways license application is on file with the Planning Board as required, and that it is available for members to review. b. Request from David Gardiner to address Board on open space issues Cassidy states that the Board could decide the best time for Mr. Gardiner to address the Board at the April meeting. Cassidy will contact Mr. Gardiner to coordinate. Planning Board Minutes February 25, 1997 Meeting Page Fourteen c. Other Attorney Thomas Alexander addresses the Board with respect to Woodland Road and explains that he received the redrafted plans today and that he would like to submit them under the existing submittal to avoid paying a new filing fee of $900.00 and to request that this matter be placed on the agenda for the next public hearing. Thomson: motion to waive the fee and to set a public hearing date for the Board's next meeting scheduled of March 18, 1997, seconded by Dunn. All in favor, motion carries unanimously. Sullivan: motion to adjourn meeting, seconded by Dinkin. All in favor motion carries unanimously. Meeting is adjourned at 11:20 p.m.