Loading...
2000-06-29CITY OF BEVERLY MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Board or commission: Date: Location: Members present: Members absent: Others present: Recorder: Planning Board June 29, 2000 City Council Chambers, City Hall Chairman Richard Dinkin, Vice-chairman Bill Delaney, John Thomson, Joanne Dunn, Robert Rink, Elizabeth McGlynn, Ellen Flannery Peter Thomas, Barry Sullivan Planning Director Tina Cassidy, members of the Beverly City Council Tina Cassidy City Council President Flaherty calls the meeting to order and City Clerk Frances Macdonald reads the legal notice for City Council Order # 163. Flaherty explains the public hearing process to the audience and reads a letter from Councilor Costa detailing the reasons for recusing himseff from the hearing. Flaherty asks the proponents to present their rezoning request to the public. Attorney Thomas Alexander, representing Cuminings Properties, Inc., introduces himself and explains the nature of the rezoning request. The owner is seeking an amendment to the language of the 'IG' zoning district which would allow buildings to be 70' in height if they are set back at least 400' from the nearest public way. He states that the owners have agreed in principle to develop a build-out plan for the site in conjunction with this rezoning request to allay concerns about the potential impact of future development of this parcel. He shows this plan to the public, Alexender adds that the existing buildings on the site are between 65' and 70' tall, and that until 1984 the height limit in this zone was 80'. In 1987, the height limit was lowered from 65' to the current 35', and notes that the Planning Board recommended against the 1987 zoning amendment. Alexander states that Cummings would agree to a deed restriction limiting the amount of additional buildings that could be constructed on the site in the future. He outlines the locations of all potential new buildings. The locations include the corner of McKay and Elliott Streets, the proposed 6-story building contemplated under this zoning change, and a new parking garage next to the railroad tracks in front of the main building on the site. Planning Board minutes June 29, 2000 joint public hearing Page two Alexander estimates that the City will receive an additional $300,000 in new tax revenue annually from the proposed 6 story building. He states that the building would have very little impact on City services. Alexander states that a number of people have asked why Cummings doesn't file a variance request rather than a rezoning request. With a variance request the owner would have to prove there was a hardship if the zoning ordinance were literally enforced, and he feels that they could not successfully meet that mandatory test. Instead, they have elected to follow the rezoning route which is a more comprehensive, public process than would be true for a variance request. Alexander adds that some have also questioned the decision to propose a single 6-story building instead of two 3-story buildings. Constructing one 6-story building will provide more open space on the site, will allow for additional landscape buffering to be added to the site and more importantly will lessen the short- and long-term impacts on the abutting elementary school and the neighborhood. The architecture of the new building would be compatible with other buildings in the vicinity. It may be concrete like the existing buildings on the site or could be brick to match the McKeown School. Cummings would need to obtain site plan review from the Planning Board for the new building, and expects the development of the site will include high quality aesthetic details. He distributes copies of a draft deed restriction, but notes that it has not yet been reviewed by the City Solicitor. Alexander states that some have questioned whether new traffic studies should be completed. Three traffic studies have been done in the last few years for the streets around Cummings Centers and notes that traffic generated by a six-story office buildlng would be the same as the traffic generated by two three-story office buildlngs. He notes that the original proposal by Cummings would have allowed the construction of a 12- story building, but that proposal was withdrawn when the neighbors expressed concern about the impact of such a tall building. Alexander introduces both Gerry McSweeney, the general manager for Cummings and Bruce Oveson, company architect. They are available to answer any questions. Flaherty explains his intention to stop the hearing at 9:00 p.m. to allow the Council time to complete other business. The hearing may well be Planning Board minutes June 29, 2000 joint public hearing Page three continued to another evening if all issues are not resolved tonight. He asks if there are any members of the Council or Planning Board who have questions. Councilor Joyce McMahon asks what the size of the proposed parking deck will be. Oveson states that the deck will accommodate 120 cars, and is 115' wide and 200' long. There is only one deck on the structure that will be at a height of 12'. Councilor Paul Guanci asks if any new building construction would be subject to the TIF agreement previously negotiated between the City and Cummings. Alexander states that yes, all new development would fall under the TIF. Councilor Tim Smith asks Alexander how big the potential building at the corner of Mckay and Elliott Streets would be. Oveson answers that the building would be a 3 story structure with 30,000 square feet of space. Councilor Maureen Troubetaris states that she will have difficulty supporting the rezoning request if the new construction will be subject to the terms of the TIF agreement. Councilor Don Martin reminds the audience that the TIF agreement cannot be voided or amended unilaterally. He asks Alexander if the applicant intends to build two 3-story buildings if the rezoning proposal is denied. Alexander states that the applicant will construct two 3-story buildings as a matter of right if the rezoning is not approved. McMahon states that she would like to see a scale drawing of the proposed building showing perspectives from both Balch Street and Mckay Street, and urges the applicant to provide that information. Alexander answers that Cummings will provide those drawings. McMahon suggests that a five minute recess be called to allow those in attendance to review the plans.Flaherty calls a five minute recess, and the hearing is reconvened at 8:55 p.m. In response to a question, Alexander explains that the new 6-story building would be 340' long, 180' deep, and 100' wide. The footprint of the building would be 49,000 square feet and the square footage of the entire building would be approximately 300,000 square feet. Planning Board minutes June 29, 2000 joint public hearing Page four Bill McDonough, 9 Harris Avenue, is concerned about the proposed restriction that may be offered by Cummings. He asks what the process would be if the company ever wanted to void the agreement. Alexander answers that it would require a public hearing and a vote of the City Council to do so. A resident asks if the rezoning request would constitute "spot zoning". Several issues and suggestions are then noted: · the deed restriction should be signed by the appropriate individuals on behalf of both Beverly Commerce Park, Inc. and New Horizons, Inc. · the restriction should indicate that the footprint and size of existing buildings on the site must remain the same. · what amenities are being proposed to benefit the adjacent neighborhoods? any parking garages that would be needed to service the new 6-story building should be included on the buildout plan. Members of the Council and Planning Board confer on an appropriate date to which the public hearing can be continued. Following a brief discussion, Flaherty announces that the hearing on Order #163 will be continued until Thursday, September 7, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. in the City The hearing is recessed at 9:30 p.m.