Loading...
2000-04-18CITY OF BEVERLY, MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: LOCATION: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: ALSO PRESENT: RECORDER: Harming Board April 18, 2000 Beverly Senior Center, 90 Colon Street Acting Chairman Ellen Flannery, Joanne Dunn, Peter Thomas, Robert Rink, Elizabeth McGlynn Richard Dinkin, Bill Delaney, John Thomson, Barry Sullivan City Planner Tina Cassidy, Engineering Director Frank Killilea Tins Cassidy Acting Chairman Flannery calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m Thomas: motion to recess for public hearings and reconvene, seconded by Dunn. All members in favor, motion carries. 7:30 p.m. Public Hearing: Cogswell Avenue definitive subdivision plan / Harry Faust Flannery asks Cassidy to read the legal notice, which she does. Mr. Richard Doherty of Hancock Associates introduces himself as the owner's engineer. He explains the location of this proposed one-lot subdivision, and states that several years ago the Board denied endorsement of an ANR plan for this lot because the portion of Cogswell Avenue that would have provided legal frontage for the proposed lot was not constructed. This plan proposes to construct a short extension and cul-de-sac on Cogswell Avenue. Doherty notes that the application is currently being reviewed by the Conservation Commission, which isn't expected to act on the application until May. The site is 2.7 acres in size, and the existing layout of Cogswell Avenue is about 1,400 feet in length. He lists the three waivers being requested for this project and states that the waivers would allow the homeowner to meet the setback requirements of zoning while minimizing the impact on adjacent wetlands. The cul-de-sac will provide a turnaround (there is presently no turnaround available to vehicles) and a detention pond would be built on the lot of sufficient size to handle runoff from a 100-year storm event. Hanning Board minutes April 18, 2000 meeting Page two Flannery asks Cassidy to read correspondence from various departments. She reads letters from the Police, Fire, and Engineering Departments, and the Board of Health and Conservation Commission (see file). Flannery asks the members if they have any questions. Thomas asks if the plan before the board shows the proposed final grading plan. Doherty responds that it does. Killilea asks for an explanation of the proposed grading easement on the adjacent lot. Doherty explains that it would be a temporary easement needed in order to construct the detention pond. The easement would not be a permanent easement. Cassidy asks Doherty to comment on Killilea's written recommendation that floor and roof drains from the structure should NOT be connected to the municipal system. Doherty says that that design change should not affect the drainage calculations he submitted in any substantial way, and should in fact have only a minimal impact on the calculations. He states that if there was an impact of some consequence, he could make minor adjustments to the design of the detention pond to accommodate the change. Thomas asks if Cogswell Avenue is a public way. Killilea responds that it is, to a certain point. The plan has a notation showing where the limits of public responsibility are. Flannery asks if any members of the public have comments or questions. Richard Bronstein, 6 Fern Street, asks if the lot could be further subdivided in the future to create more building lots. Cassidy and Doherty respond that while the size of the parcel would indicate future subdivision was possible, it was extremely unlikely given the fact that the majority of the parcel is wetlands. Bronstein asks if the board can condition their subdivision approval on a condition that the lot not be further subdivided in the future. Cassidy states that while the Board has imposed such a condition on special permits in the past, it is improbable that the board could do so with a definitive subdivision. She indicates that if the owner were to volunteer such a restriction, the board could accept it. Harry Faust, a member of the family, says that he is considering approaching the Trustees for Public Land to see if that entity would be interested in a donation of the land. Flannery asks members if they wish to conduct a site visit to the property before closing the hearing. She says that individual site visits might be useful, and that the hearing should be continued to the May Planning Board minutes April 18, 2000 meeting Page three meeting if members want to view the site. She asks that the house location and edge of proposed roadway be flagged so members will have reference points when they visit the property. Thomas says that he will not feel comfortable voting on this application until he views the site. Thomas: motion to continue the public hearing on this application to the Board's meeting on May 16, 2000 at 8:30 p.m., seconded by Dunn. All members including the Chairman in favor, motion carries. Flannery calls a five-minute recess, and reconvenes the Board afterward. Public Hearing: Site Plan Review application #58-00; Eaton Corporation Flannery asks Cassidy to read the public hearing notice, which she does. Charles Pappalardo, representing the Eaton Corporation introduces himself and Don Godfrey. He explains that this facility at 108 Cherry Hill Drive will be the company's ion implant world headquarters. They are proposing an addition that will house a new cafeteria and additional office and demonstration space. The rest of the existing building will also be renovated. Cassidy reads letters received from various City boards and departments (see file). Flannery explains to the audience how the public comment portion of the hearing will be handled. Dunn asks what the hours of operation are and will be. Pappalardo explains that they operate three shifts and expect to continue to do so. Thomas asks if the parking lots and other improvements meet the requirements of the ADA. Pappalardo states that the plans were developed with those requirements in mind. He also says that the name of the company (and hence the sign) will be changing slightly once the division is split from the parent company. They will pursue approval of a sign once the text is known. Killilea states that the applicant must submit the missing sheet for sector 3 of the plan, and that information on water and utility connections to Sam Fonzo Drive and Cherry Hill Drive must be provided. Pappalardo states that the company constructed a water line for fire fighting capacity from Sam Fonzo Drive before the road was paved. He will provide the old drawings for that work to Killilea for review. Planning Board minutes April 18, 2000 meeting Page four Rink asks if they intend to keep the facility open during construction. Pappalardo says that they intend to keep it open. Flannery asks if any members of the public wish to speak on the application. Mr. David Earle, 32 McArthur Road, reminds the Board that the Eaton facility has doubled in size over the years. He states that the residents in the area have complained about the noise emanating from the scrubbers on the roof. Pappalardo states that there are no scrubbers used in the company's operation. Earle says the air conditioning units and fans are especially annoying in the summer months. Pappalardo says that the company has received several complaints, and Eaton has hired a noise consultant to see if anything can be done to eliminate or mitigate the problem. Flannery asks if there are any other questions or comments on the application. Hearing none, she closes the public hearing and reconvenes the regular meeting. Discussion: Eaton Corporation site plan Flannery asks Cassidy to address the Board. Cassidy recommends approval of the site plan subject to the conditions outlined in the letters received from the various boards and departments in the City. Thomas: motion to approve site plan review application #58-00 subject to the following conditions: a) b) c) d) e) That a copy of sheet EC-0803 be provided to both the Planning Department and Engineering Departments; That provisions for sidewalk handicap ramps on Sam Fonzo Drive at the location of the new driveway must be made on the site plan and details of same added to sheet EC-7600; That a berm area must be added to the site plan at the corner of Cherry Hill Drive and Conant Street to buffer the new parking areas from view; That the applicant shall, prior to site work start-up/demolition and during site construction, employ a licensed pest control firm for site evaluation and service. A copy of the service program must be sent to the Health and Planning Departments; That the applicant must comply with Board of Health Regulation Chapter 15 entitled Soil and Solid Fill Regulations; Planning Board minutes April 18, 2000 meeting Page five g) h} i) That the design proposal must concur with the requirements of the engineering and inspectional services departments and the Conservation Commission for all utility connections and drainage requirements; That the applicant shall employ an acceptable method of dust control and street cleaning during site construction and shall submit the method that will be utilized to the Health and Planning Departments; That all wastes generated by development activities must be appropriately stored and removed in a timely manner; That the applicant shall consult with the City's Health Department if construction activities could impact the existing food service operation and/or if other facilities are to be added. Motion seconded by McGlynn, all members in favor. Motion carries. Thomas suggests that although not part of the official approval motion, the applicant should consider planting additional trees and landscaping within the 150' greenbelt zone paralleling Conant Street, if the applicant has the legal right to perform such work. 3. Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans ISANR's) a. Carleton Street/Doane Cassidy explains that a similar ANR plan was submitted to the Board several years ago, and was endorsed with a notation that the lot was not to be considered a building lot. That notation resulted from the fact that Carleton Avenue, a private way, was not constructed at the time. Since that earlier filing, another owner of land along Carleton Avenue constructed the road. Cassidy suggests that the roadway as constructed provides sufficient and acceptable access for this lot. Thomas: motion to endorse this plan as one not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law, seconded by Dunn. All members in favor, motion carries. b. Linden Avenue and Porter Street / Carnevale Planning Board minutes April 18, 2000 meeting Page six Cassidy explains that another ANR plan has been filed for the property at the corner of Linden Avenue and Porter Street. The Board has seen several ANR's previously. This plan reconfigures the lot line between #21 and #23 Porter Street. Rink asks if the plan meets the Board's requirements for ANR plans. Cassidy states that it does. Thomas expresses concern with the frontage shown for each lot, and asks if all lots meet the frontage requirements of zoning. Cassidy answers that each lot has at least 65' of frontage as required by zoning, and says the zoning ordinance contains a provision allowing an owner of a corner lot to orient the building as he chooses, as long as there is sufficient frontage on at least one street. Thomas says that the areas contained in easements on this property seem to be larger than the calculations on the plan indicate. Members also discuss the notation On the house located at 23 Porter Street, which has two notations indicating it is a 2-story dwelling. Thomas: motion to endorse this plan as one not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law, subject to the following conditions: That one of the two notations stating "2-story dwelling" for the structure at #23 Porter Street be erased from the plan to clearly reflect that there is only one two-story dwelling on the lot; and That the area of all easements be reviewed and verified by the Building Inspector before any additional permits are issued. Motion seconded by Dunn, all members in favor. Motion carries. Virginia Avenue Extension: Request for acceptance of extension of Tri-Partite Agreement and construction completion date / Curtis Jones Cassidy explains that the construction completion date for this subdivision expires at the end of the month, as does the Tri-Partite Agreement posted as surety for this subdivision. The developer has submitted a request to extend the completion date for six months, and has provided the Board with an extension of the surety from the Heritage Bank. Planning Board minutes April 18, 2000 meeting Page seven Cassidy notes that while she suggests the Board accept the surety extension, she has grave concerns with Jones' ability to complete this subdivision. Literally no work has been completed in this subdivision in nearly two years, and the developer's reasons for not completing the work appear non-credible. She reminds members that the Board required Mr. Jones to submit a timetable for completing the project back in December, and informed him at that time that additional extensions of time were unlikely. Unfortunately, none of the work items listed on the timetable have been started, let alone completed. Cassidy adds that Jones is out of town this evening, and his daughter is here to represent him if needed. She has brought a copy of the agreement Jones has with the curbing company that indicates the curbing will be installed by May 20th. Killilea suggests that all curbing, paving, and stone bound work should be completed by May 31st, and all remaining work (including street trees, grass plots, and as-built and acceptance plans) completed by June 15th. Thomas states that he is not willing to grant any extension of time beyond June 15th. Thomas: motion to accept the extension of the Tri-Partite Agreement for the Virginia Avenue subdivision to August 31, 2000, and to extend the construction completion date to June 15, 2000. The matter shall also be placed on the Board's May meeting agenda for the purpose of obtaining a progress report from Jones. Motion seconded by Rink, all members in favor. Motion carries. Morgan's Island Subdivision: expiration of construction completion date / Dennis and Karen L'Italien, Morgan's Island Realty Trust Flannery asks Cassidy to update the Board. Cassidy explains that the construction completion date for this subdivision expires at the end of the month. She has spoken with the developers of this subdivision off Old Town Road, and they indicate that it is unlikely they will be able to complete the remaining work in this subdivision. The form of surety is a passbook from the Heritage Bank. Planning Board minutes April 18, 2000 meeting Page eight Based on her conversation with the developers, Cassidy recommends that the Board vote to begin bond revocation proceedings on this subdivision. The City will hire an engineering firm to prepare the as- built and acceptance plans and install the stone bounds. Street trees will also need to be purchased and planted. This work will be paid for with the money in the passbook. McGlynn: motion to instruct the City Solicitor to begin bond revocation proceedings for the bond posted for the Morgan's Island subdivision. Motion seconded by Rink, all members in favor. Motion carries. Set date for public hearing on site plan application #59-00 / Marciano Bass River Trust Cassidy informs the Board that a revised site plan for the property at 240-250 Elliott Street has been filed, and she recommends that the Board schedule a public hearing on the application for the Board's May meeting. Dunn: motion to schedule a public hearing on site plan review application #59-00 for the Board's May 16, 2000 meeting. Motion seconded by McGlynn, all members in favor. Motion carries. 7. New or Other Business Thomas states that he would like to officially thank Ms. Flannery for chairing this evening's meeting, and notes that she is probably the first female chairman the Beverly Planning Board has had. Cassidy agrees that she is the first to serve in that capacity. Flannery asks if there is any more business for the Board to conduct. There is none. Dunn: motion to adjourn, seconded by McGlynn. All members in favor, motion carries. The meeting is adjourned at 9:45 p.m.