Loading...
2000-02-15CITY OF BEVERLY MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: LOCATION: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: RECORDER: Beverly Harming Board February 15, 2000 Beverly City Hail Chairman Richard Dinkin, Vice- Chairman Bill Delaney, Robert Rink, Peter Thomas, Elizabeth McGlynn, Ellen Flannery, John Thomson, Joanne Dunn Barry Sullivan City Planner Tina Cassidy, City Engineer Frank Killilea Recorder: Tina Cassidy Chairman Dinkin calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Thomson: motion to recess for public hearings, seconded by Delaney. All members in favor, motion carries. Public Hearing (continued): Meeting Place Circle definitive subdivision plan Cassidy reads the public hearing notice, and explains to the Board that the public hearing on this filing was tabled at the December Board meeting to this evening. The reason for that continuance was the Board's vote to have the consulting firm of CDM conduct a study of the area around the development with respect to existing and potential future drainage problems. The study has been completed, and she distributes copies of the CDM Guidance Memorandum to the members. Dinkin asks Thomas Neve, the project engineer, if he would like to make any comments on the CDM memorandum. Neve states that he has read the report and is glad but not surprised that the document does not suggest any changes to the design of the drainage system he proposes for this subdivision. Members discuss the recommendations contained in the report, including the improvements to the brook and pond outlet structure that were originally suggested by Neve. In response to a question from the Board, Killilea states that his office would manage the process of having these improvements completed. The process would include construction Planning Boad minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page two contracts, work inspections, and obtaining necessary easements from private homeowners. Dinkin raises two questions: what is the value of the work that needs to be done, and will Neve be expected to perform the work or will the City hire a contractor? Cassidy answers that Neve has estimated that the work will cost $25,000 to complete. She also states that she has spoken with Killilea on the question of whether the developer or the City should do the work, and the question remains an open one at this point. There are both advantages and disadvantages to hiring an outside contractor. Thomson asks Killilea if he thinks $25,000 is sufficient to perform the work outlined in the CDM memo. Killilea answers that $25,000 would be sufficient to clean the stream bed, replace the outlet structure at the Willow Pond subdivision, and to clean out the plume of accumulated material where the brook reaches the smaller pond on the applicant's property. It would not cover the cost of reworking the culvert under Essex Street, which would be extraordinarily expensive. Delaney asks Cassidy to outline the waivers that have been requested. Cassidy informs members that two waivers are being sought: a waiver from the Board's requirement that dead end roads be no longer than 500', and a waiver from the requirement that all trees six (6) inches in caliper or greater be shown on the plans. Dinkin asks if the developer has agreed to comply with the Fire Department's recommendation that all houses in the subdivision be equipped with residential sprinkler systems. Neve answers that the developer is prepared to sprinkler all houses. Delaney states that he is pleased to learn that CDM feels the drainage situation can be improved. He is concerned about the timetable for implementing the improvements. He would not want to see construction of the subdivision begin before the drainage improvements were in place. Delaney adds that while CDM indicates the design of the Meeting Place Circle subdivision is acceptable, he is concerned with the fact that the subdivision will be adding volume to Willow Pond. Neve confirms that the project will add water to Willow Pond, but also states that his project represents only 8 acres of the 100 acres in this watershed. Additionally, this project is located at the lower end of the watershed, and that water from this subdivision will therefore be the first water "through the pipe" in all rainfall events. Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page three Thomson asks if the first drainage improvement will be replacing the outlet to Willow Pond. Neve says that it could be, and notes that as a general rule drainage work should start at the downstream end of a project and progress upstream. Thomson asks if the work that must be done to the streambed will be confined to the developer's property. Neve states that only about half the work will be on the developer's property, and recommends that none of the work begin until all the approvals needed for the work are obtained. Neve states that he would fix the outlet structure at Willow Pond first, before the spring runoff, and work on the center reach during the summer when conditions are driest. The pond and stream should be excavated during the summer season. Thomson asks if the cost of each of the three components of the drainage improvement project can be estimated as line items for bonding purposes. Neve answers that they can be. Delaney asks Killilea if doing this work without addressing the issue of the Essex Street culvert will create problems downstream. Killilea answers that instead of removing the existing pipe in the culvert, the City can clean the culvert more frequently. Neve suggests that the culvert could be cleaned with a water jet and a bar grate added on the pond side of the culvert to keep debris from further clogging the pipe. Cassidy informs members that the Board has received a letter from the City's Department of Public Services regarding the planting locations for street trees. The department would like to see either an 8' wide tree belt or street trees planted outside of the street right-of-way. Cassidy states that she has discussed the matter with Mr. Neve, who is amenable to planting the trees on the house lots themselves. She adds that such an arrangement would require that an easement be created along the front of each lot giving the City the sole right to maintain the trees. Neve states that he is willing to create the easement, and simply needs to know whether the City prefers a 10' wide swath of easement along each side of the road, or whether individual easements around each tree location are preferable. Cassidy says that she would expect to finalize the easement document during the 20-day appeal period. Rink asks if the estimated $25,000 cost would include dredging the small pond on this site. Neve answers no, but that it would be possible to create a sump area in front of the culvert in the pond for that amount. Full dredging of the pond would cost more than that. Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page four A resident of 3 Old Essex Road asks if work on the outlet would create a problem for the homeowners on Old Essex Road. Dinkin asks if there are any members of the public who have questions or would like to make additional comments on the proposal. Hearing none, he closes the public hearing and returns the Board to regular session. Thomson states that he shares Delaney's concern that granting the waiver requests should be predicated on the drainage contributions offered by the developer. Dinkin suggests that if the cost of the improvements is included in the bond for this project, then the developer can either do the work, surrender the bond money to the City so it can complete the work, or he can seek a modification of the Board's approval at a later date. Including the money in the bond should address any concern about what happens if all the apprgvais needed for this maintenance project are not obtained. Thomas states that the Board should identify a contingency plan in the event the work cannot proceed due to penidtting issues. Dinkin notes that the Board must start the second public hearing slated for this evening. Delaney: motion to recess the meeting for public hearings, seconded by Thomson. All members in favor, motion carries. 2: Public hearing: Site Plan Review application for construction of new office building on Sam Fonzo Drive / Liberty Publishing Cassidy reads the legal notice. Christopher Sparages, engineer with Hayes Engineering, introduces himself and Mr. Al Woods of Spaulding and Slye to the Board. He explains the plan and the location of the project on Sam Fonzo Drive. He states that the company has already received an Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission. Spaages explains that there will be 114 parking spaces on the site, and that the zoning requires at least 112 spaces. Cassidy reads comment letters from the various City boards and departments on this filing (see file). Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page five Dinkin asks for an explanation of the use of the building. Sparages answers that the building will be used for both office use and light publishing activities. Thomson asks for an explanation of the proposed drainage patterns from the site after construction. Sparages explains the proposal, and shows the wetlands areas on the site and the locations of proposed detention areas. Thomson asks ff any runoff will be directed toward the residences on Cabot and Trask Streets. Sparages answers no. Flannery asks what the hours of operation will be. Sparages answers that while he cannot state specific hours, he knows the plan is to be open normal business hours. Flannery requests that the lighting scheme for the site by explained to the public, and Sparages points out the locations of light poles and states the light poles will be 22' high and equipped with "shoe-box" style fixtures. Dinkin asks if the operations of the company will generate liquid toxic waste. Sparages says that there will be no outside storage of these types of materials, but that a very limited amount of potentially toxic waste may be generated by the activity of cleaning the printing presses. These materials are stored in specially-designed containers and handled as required by law. Dinkin asks if any members of the public have questions or comments. Renee Mary, 274 Hale Street, asks the applicant to point out the location of all wetlands, which Sparages does. Dinkin asks if there are any other questions or comments from the public. Hearing none, Dinkin declares the public hearing closed. Public Hearing: Modification to approved site plan for the former Haiku Haiku restaurant on Enon Street / John Athanasopolous Cassidy reads the public hearing notice. Attorney Thomas Alexander, representing the property owner, explains the nature of the changes being proposed to the approved site plan. First, the owner wants to eliminate the drive-through lane and connect the new retail building to the former restaurant. The old restaurant would be used for office space instead of as a restaurant, and the owner would like to retain the existing building at the back of the lot and reuse it for an upscale restaurant. He states that the total floor area of buildings on the site has decreased from the original site plan. He introduces Mr. Elvin Phillips from Siemasko and Verbage and Mr. Jack Kelleher of Kelleher Construction. Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page six Dinkin asks if there is any pending litigation between the property owner and the existing tenants on the site. Alexander states that there is no pending litigation, that the tenant withdrew his complaint. Thomson asks for the lighting scheme to be explained. Phillips states that all lights will be replaced with new fixtures that will direct light downward. Alexander states that the owner would be amenable to a condition that required the replacement of all light fixtures. Delaney asks how deliveries will be made to the establishments, and what types of vehicles will make the deliveries. Phillips answers that delivery vehicles will use the designated travel lanes. He says there will be double doors at the back of the retail structure, and that trucks will pull into the parking spaces to make deliveries. Delaney asks how many retail establishments will be located in the new retail building. Phillips says there will be three. Delaney asks if each one will have a set of loading doors. Phillips says that two establishments will have single doors in the rear of the building, and that the Hit or Miss establishment will have the set of double doors. Delaney asks if they have included an area for deliveries that will not conflict with the parking calculations. Phillips states that he believes so. Dunn asks how many employees are expected to need all-day parking. Alexander answers that there will be 13 people for the office use. Dinkin asks what the hours of operation are for the liquor store. Alexander answers 9:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. Alexander adds that the restaurant hours are expected to be 10:00 a.m. to midnight, and that the owner will be seeking a beer and wine license. Thomas asks if the restaurant will have live music. Athanasopolous answers no, there will not be any musical entertainment. Dinkin asks if the restaurant will have a lounge area. Alexander states that there may be a small bar for patrons to sit at while waiting for a table. Delaney asks if the restaurant will be a sit-down style restaurant. Alexander states that it will be a sit-down style restaurant. Ms. Paula Colahan from Bayberry Lane asks where the parking for the restaurant will be located and where deliveries will be made. Phillips states that parking for the restaurant will be located near the restaurant and that deliveries will be made on the side of the restaurant nearest the Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page seven train tracks. Colahan asks what the capacity of the restaurant will be. Phillips answers that the patron area will be 800-900 square feet in size. Thomson asks if the stockade fence is an existing feature or one that is being proposed to help screen the uses on this lot from the abutters. Alexander answers that the stockade fencing is proposed. Flannery asks if both dumpsters will be screened. Alexander answers yes. Mr. Shawn Potter, operator of the Depot Wine Shoppe, addresses the Board and states that the revised plan he reviewed - which was the basis for dropping his earlier complaint against Mr. Athanasopolous - did not include a restaurant at the rear of the lot. Parking is an issue for him, as is the fact that the building he is currently in has a loading area and three dumpsters at the back of the building that are not shown on the site plan. Dinkin asks Potter if he thinks this revised site plan can meet either the spirit or the letter of the agreement he had with Athanasopolous. Potter says that it cannot. · Alexander notes that submitting this plan to the Board was not the result of the agreement mentioned earlier. Dinkin asks if the existing loading areas are posted, and whether the parking spaces proposed at the back of the existing building are located in the way of the existing loading ramp. Potter says that they are. Dinkin asks Alexander where the dumpsters will be relocated. Alexander answers that there are only two dumpsters being proposed on this site, and their locations are shown on the plan. Thomas states that he would like to see the dumpster located nearest the restaurant be relocated on the other side of the structure, away from the residences on Bayberry Lane. Dinkin asks if any members of the public have any questions on the site plan. There are none. Dinkin asks if there are any comments from members of the public. Shawn Potter from Hamilton objects to the proposed parking scheme which will block his loading dock, and the elimination of the dumpsters that both he and the other existing tenant are using. Jeff Bennett, 12 Bayberry Lane, is concerned about the future use of the buildings on this site. Paula Colahan, 14 Bayberry Lane, has the same concerns as Mr. Bennett, including noise from the establishments, deliveries, and dumpster locations. Dinkin asks if there is any other public comment. Hearing none, he closes the public hearing. Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page eight Chairman Dinkin declares a five-minute recess, and reconvenes the Board thereafter. 4. Discussion |continued]: Meeting Place Circle definitive subdivision plan Thomson offers his opinion that the developer has met every concern raised by the Board. Delaney agrees, and states that while the timing of off-site and on-site drainage improvements as they relate to construction of the subdivision may not be perfect, the work will not aggravate drainage problems in the neighborhood. Dinkin asks if there is any additional discussion on this subject. Thomson: motion to approve the Meeting Place Circle definitive subdivision plan, subject to the following conditions: that the recommendations contained in all depaxhnental and board letters regarding this project be incorporated into the Board's approval and the definitive plan where appropriate; That as part of the bond posted to guarantee completion of this subdivision, the developer shall be required to contribute $25,000 in funds (or in the alternate contribute $25,000 worth of work) to address drainage problems created by the design of the drainage system in the Willow Pond subdivision. Such work shall include modification of the outlet structure to Willow Pond and the cleaning of the 18" outlet pipe, the cleaning of the brook behind the houses on Old Essex Road, and the cleaning of the pond on lot #8 in this subdivision. The City shall endeavor to address the remaining recommendation of the CDM Guidance Memorandum regarding off-site improvements to the culvert under Essex Street; That a 10' wide easement be created along both sides of the proposed new roadway for the purpose of allowing for the proper maintenance of street trees by the City of Beverly. The easement can be reduced to Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page nine individual easements around each proposed street tree if deemed appropriate by the City; and All homes in this subdivision shall be equipped with residential sprinkler systems. Motion seconded by Flannery, all members in favor. Motion carries. 5. Discussion: Site Plan Review application for Liberty Publishing Dinkin asks if there is any additional discussion on this subject. There is none. Delaney: motion to approve the proposed, site plan for Liberty Publishing on Sam Fonzo Drive, subject to the recommendations contained in letters from the various City boards and departments. Motion seconded by Thomas, all members in favor. Motion carries. Discussion: Modification to approved site plan for former Haiku Haiku site on Enon Street Delaney states that while a number of concerns can be addressed through the imposition of conditions, he is troubled by the parking issues raised this evening. Alexander states that the owner will create a loading space behind the liquor store and one behind Hit or Miss. Flannery asks how often dumpsters will be emptied. Alexander and Athanasopolous state that the dumpsters will be serviced twice a week. Flannery questions whether twice-weekly service will be sufficient. Alexander states that the dumpsters can emptied as often as necessary. Dinkin asks if there is any additional discussion on this matter. There is none. Delaney: motion to approve the modified site plan for this site subject to the following conditions: That all curb cuts on Enon Street conform to the requirements of the Massachusetts Highway Department; Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page ten That no trash collection activities or deliveries be allowed on the site between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.; That all lighting on the site be directed downward onto the property and all existing lighting fixtures be either removed or replaced with "directable" heads; That a stockade fence at least six (6) feet in height be erected along the southeast property line; That the use of the existing structure at the rear of the site shall be for a "sit-down" style restaurant, and that the hours of operation of the restaurant shall be between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and midnight; this condition shall mean that all patrons of the establishment shall be outside of the building by 12:00 midnight; That the proposed dumpster located adjacent to the restaurant shall be relocatdd from the location originally proposed to the west side of the restaurant; That at least one loading area shall be designated behind the new retail building and two loading areas shall be designated behind the existing retail building on the site; the loading areas shall be designated as such by utilizing signage and/or painting. The parking spaces eliminated as a result of the creation of these loading areas shall be relocated to areas adjacent to the restaurant as indicated during the public hearing; That all comments contained in letters received on this application from the various boards and departments be incorporated into the plans and hereby made a condition of site plan approval; That approval of this site plan is predicated on the uses as shown on the site plan, and any changes to the site plan or the proposed uses shown thereon must be resubmitted to the Planning Board for review and approval; That the owners include a provision in all subsequent leases that employees of the establishments on this site must park in the parking areas behind the retail building or on the side of the retail buildings; That, to the extent they can be added, additional plantings shall be installed along the rear property line Planning Board minutes February 15, 2000 meeting Page eleven to provide additional screening between the commercial uses and the abutting properties; and A revised site plan be submitted to the Board reflecting the conditions of approval. Motion seconded by Thomson, all members in favor. carries. Motion 7. Approval of minutes Dinkin asks members if there are any suggested changes to the minutes of the Board's December 14, 1999 and January 18, 2000 meetings. There are none. Delaney: motion to approve the minutes of the Board's December 14, 1999 and January 18, 2000 meetings, seconded by Dunn. All members in favor, motion carries. 8. New or Other Business Dinkin asks if there is any other business for the Board to conduct this evening. Dunn: motion to adjourn, seconded by Flannery. All members in favor, motion carries.