2003-12-16
City of Beverly, Massachusetts
Public Meeting Minutes
BOARD: Planning Board
SUBCOMMITTEE:
DATE: December 16, 2003
PLACE: Beverly City Hall
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Richard Dinkin; John Thomson,
William Betts, Joanne Dunn, Ellen Flannery, Daniel
Hamm, Robert Rink, Donald Walter
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Elizabeth McGlynn
OTHERS PRESENT: Leah Zambernardi, Asst. Planning Director
RECORDER: Jeannine Dion (by tape)
Chairperson Dinkin calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Thomson moves to recess and reconvene for scheduled public hearings, seconded by
Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries.
Public Hearing: (cont.) Chapman Corner Estates – 2 Boyles Street – Definitive
Subdivision Plan – Manor Homes at Whitehall, LLC/David Carnevale
Zambernardi reads the legal notice.
Attorney Thomas Alexander requests a continuance until the January meeting for the
purpose of re-engineering the plan to engineer out the extension onto Boyles Street.
Dinkin asks if the applicant intends to use the proposed recess to bring the plan fully in
conformance with the existing legal opinion in record. Alexander responds that the
applicant is trying to bring into design within the constraints imposed by that opinion.
Dinkin states that the City Solicitor’s opinion is not new news. Alexander responds that
the City Solicitor’s opinion initially that the restriction regarding new buildable lots applied
strictly to the property for which the restriction was put on. It was a surprise to the
applicant that it would be construed that a restriction on a lot could apply to land outside
the lot.
Alexander states the Conservation Commission hired a drainage expert, which had a
voluminous review of the engineering and the applicant’s engineer is in the process of
answering the items brought up by the Conservation Commission’s drainage study.
Planning Board Minutes
December 16, 2003
Page 2
Dinkin states that he is of the opinion that the restriction does apply to the lot and that
portion of the lot cannot be further subdivided. He may take a sense of the board vote on
that very issue later in the evening. Alexander responds that he is not looking for that at
this time and the applicant will try to design within the constraints noted.
Thomson:
Motion to grant the continuance to the Board’s January meeting at 7:45
p.m., and to extend the time for Board action to March 31, 2004, seconded
by Rink. All members are in favor. Motion carries.
Public Hearing: Subdivision Rules & Regulations – Proposed Amendment/Update
Fees
Zambernardi reads the legal notice.
In the spring of this year, the Mayor directed the Planning Department to research the fees
structures of other Massachusetts cities and towns and to develop a revised fee structure
for Beverly. The fee schedule had not been updated since the late 80’s/early 90’s.
Planning staff looked at the fees of Peabody, Danvers, Acton, Andover, Chelmsford,
Burlington and Salem. The Planning Department with the assistances of the Solicitor’s
office, submitted a proposal to the City Council to update the City’s fee structure, which
was approved in May 2003. Zambernardi provides a chart illustrating both the old and
new structures for comparison.
Members of the Planning Board believe the fees could be more aggressive.
Dinkin asks if there are comments in support or opposition from members of the public.
There are none.
The public hearing is closed.
The regular meeting of the Beverly Planning Board is called to order.
Discussion/Decision: Subdivision Rules & Regulations – Proposed
Amendment/Update Fees
Thomson: Motion to accept the amended fee schedule, seconded by Flannery.
Motion carries 7-1 (Hamm in opposition).
Dinkin states although he and Thomson believe the fees could be higher, the board could
not, on the basis of the public notice provided, approve higher fees.
Dinkin recommends that the Planning Board revisit the fee schedule including other
following factors (hourly fees, cost of benefits, etc.).
Planning Board Minutes
December 16, 2003
Page 3
Site Plan Review Application #77-03 – 950 Cummings Center Drive – Gerard
McSweeney on behalf of Beverly Commerce Park, Inc.
Gerry McSweeney states that a new building and access drive were approved at the last
meeting. The Board’s approval included the following conditions:
1. That the building’s gross floor area shall be limited to no more than 50,000 square
feet;
2. That the access drive from the parking garage onto McKay Street shall be subject
to the following restrictions:
a. Only cars traveling northbound onto McKay Street and turning right into the
garage shall be allowed to enter the access drive. NO cars traveling
southbound on McKay Shall be allowed to enter the access drive with a left
turn; and
b. Only cars turning right out of the access drive onto McKay Street shall be
allowed to exit. No cars may exit the access drive by turning left onto McKay
Street;
1. That cars exiting the access drive be regulated by a pulsing gate with a light and
bell.
4. That the trash compactor and delivery area be moved to the sides of the building
that are internal to the office park, away from the Elliott Street and McKay Street
sides of the building;
5. That the above-mentioned conditions be incorporated in a revised plan subject to
review and approval by the Planning Board.
McSweeney states the revised plans accomplish what the board asked for and voted on
last month.
Thomson asks about the left turn restrictions. McSweeney responds that there have not
been notations about the left turn restrictions because he was planning to ask the board to
reconsider the condition. The rest of the elements are in place.
Dinkin states the appropriate way that an applicant asks the Planning Board to reconsider
would be to request a Modification to the Plan, which requires a public hearing. Dinkin
states it is his view that when you open up a public hearing on site plan, that the entire site
is up for grabs.
McSweeney states he appreciates the board’s willingness to craft a compromise, however,
it did not seem to serve the applicant or the residential neighbors as well as it might.
Planning Board Minutes
December 16, 2003
Page 4
Dinkin states he would not compel a member of the board to voice an opinion prior the
hearing with additional testimony, however, he will give his opinion and he feels very
strongly about it.
McSweeney states the turns should be under the discretion of the Police Department.
Thomson states that he expected to see a design of something to be physically constructed
with aisles that would prevent people from making left turns. He is not satisfied with just
signage.
Thomson: Motion to approve the site plan with the condition that the applicant return
to the Board prior to construction with a specific design for the access
drive which meets the above mentioned suggestions. Seconded by
Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries.
Site Plan Review Application#78-04 – Set Public Hearing Construction of a 13,000
sq. ft. CVS Retail/Pharmacy with drive-thru, reconfigured parking field, landscaped
islands, demolition of existing Papa Gino’s & Fleet Bank ATM kiosk. S.R. Weiner
Associates/Appledore Engineering
Appledore Engineering is coming forth with a request to construct a 13,000 s.f. building
for a CVS retail pharmacy with a drive thru, to reconfigure the parking field, and to create
new landscaped islands.
Thomson: Motion to set the public hearing for the January meeting at 9 p.m.,
seconded by Dunn. All members are in favor. Motion carries.
Approval of Minutes – Regular Meeting – October 21, 2003 and Special Meeting –
November 15, 2003
Thomson: Motion to approve the Planning Board minutes dated September 16, 2003
and November 15, 2003, seconded by Rink. All members are in favor.
Motion carries.
New/Other Business:
Subdivision Rules & Regulations - Title Page Signature
Planning Board Chairman’s Signature on the title page of the Amended Subdivision Rules
and Regulations.
Planning Board Minutes
December 16, 2003
Page 5
Other:
Thomson states he would like to have an educational session for Planning Board members
on zoning and subdivision law. Zambernardi states she will try to schedule one.
Adjournment:
Hamm: Motion to adjourn, seconded by Dunn. All members are in favor. Motion
carries.
The meeting is adjourned.