Loading...
2004-04-14 City of Beverly, Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes BOARD: Planning Board SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: April 14, 2004 PLACE: Beverly City Hall BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Richard Dinkin; John Thomson; William Betts; Joanne Dunn; Ellen Flannery; Daniel Hamm; Donald Walter OTHERS PRESENT: Leah Zambernardi, Assistant Planning Director RECORDER: Jeannine Dion (by tape) The regular meeting of the Beverly Planning Board is called to order. Thomson moves to recess and reconvene for a scheduled public hearing, seconded by Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries. (Dunn recuses herself from this portion of the meeting.) Public Hearing (continued): Chapman Corner Estates - Definitive Subdivision Plan/2 Boyles Street – Manor Homes at Whitehall, LLC/David Carnevale Zambernardi reads the legal notice into record. Attorney Thomas Alexander requests a continuance to the next regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting. Dinkin asks if there is anyone present who came specifically to speak on this matter who cannot come to a subsequent meeting. There is no response from the public. Thomson asks what the reason is for the request for the continuance. Alexander responds that there are some negotiations taking place. Thomson moves to continue the hearing to the May 18, 2004 Planning Board meeting at 8:30 p.m. on the condition that the timeframe for action be extended voluntarily by the applicant to June 30, 2004, seconded by Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries. The hearing is in recess until May 18, 2004 at 8:30 p.m. (Dunn returns to the meeting.) Planning Board Minutes April 14, 2004 Page 2 The regular meeting of the Beverly Planning Board is called to order. Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans (SANR) – 4 Brookwood Road, Manchester-By-The-Sea – Attorney Glovsky on behalf of W. Merritt Miller and Linda D. Miller Attorney Mark Glovsky represents the applicant, W. Merritt Miller. The petition involves a 29-care parcel lying in both Manchester-By-The-Sea and Beverly. Mr. Miller is in the process of trying to register title for this property. In the course of doing that, Judge Lombardi of Land Court reviewed the plan and file and determined that the frontage to this piece is on Brookwood Road. Judge Lombardi has requested that the applicant submit the plan to the Planning Board as an ANR plan. There is no proposal for a division of the property. The applicant is confirming the perimeter of the property and there is no intention to divide the property and the action of the board does not change the status of the property or the status of Brookwood Road with respect to future development. Thomson: Motion to endorse the plan for 4 Brookwood Road as one not requiring approval under the Subdivision Control Law, with a statement on the plan that endorsement does not constitute any indication of confirmation of the status or dimensions, seconded by Hamm. All members in favor. Motion carries. Set Public Hearing - Pleasant Court Apartments (Pisani’s Market) 116-128 Rantoul Street Special Permit Application #109-04 – Multi-family dwelling or apartment home in which residential use comprises from 76% to 100% of the total floor area of the building and Site Plan Review #80-04 – Raze existing non-conforming wood- frame mixed-use building and construct one 5-story building – one story of commercial & residential space and four stories of residential space with two levels of parking under building – Roof Investors The applicant is requesting a site plan approval to raze the existing nonconforming wood- frame mixed-use building and construct a one, five-story masonry building having one story of commercial and residential space and four stories of residential space with two levels of parking under the building. The project triggers a special permit as the applicant is requesting to construct a building in which the residential use comprises from 76 to 100% of the total floor area of the building. Attorney Mark Glovsky states an application has also been filed which will be heard at the next Zoning Board meeting on April 27, 2004. Planning Board Minutes April 14, 2004 Page 3 Dinkin states if the Planning Board holds a public hearing and disposes of the matter expeditiously and there is deal made with ZBA that changes the site plan in some way, the Planning Board will have to unwillingly force the applicant into another filing fee. Glovsky responds that he understands that. He states he also understands that if the Zoning Board is not far enough along, the applicant might well be encouraged to continue the public hearing. Zambernardi states for the Special Permit filing, the Planning Board has to hold the public hearing by May 19, 2004. Hamm moves to set a public hearing for Site Plan Review #80-04 and Special Permit #109-04 – Pleasant Court Apartments (Pisani’s market) for May 18, 2004 at 7:40 p.m., seconded by Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries. North Shore Community Baptist Church – Proposed Addition – 9 Hart Street – Off Street Parking Requirements – Request from Councilor Patricia Grimes for Reconsideration of Recommendation to Building Inspector – Re: Section 29-24 of Beverly Zoning Ordinance At the last meeting, Ward 6 Councilor Pat Grimes submitted a letter into record requesting that the Planning Board reconsider their vote not to make a parking recommendation to the Building Inspector. The Board took a vote not to make a recommendation. The City Solicitor has since been asked for a legal opinion on this matter. Solicitor Gelineau has written an opinion, which states the Planning Board is compelled to make a recommendation. Zambernardi reads a legal opinion from City Solicitor Gelineau into record. Thomson makes references to federal laws regarding religious uses and how it applies to this project. Dinkin states that, according to the City Solicitor, the Board is compelled to make a decision on this matter. Thomson moves that there be no additional parking required at North Shore Community Baptist Church, seconded by Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries. Folger Avenue Extension Preliminary Subdivision (9 Lots) – Tanzella Property/Essex Realty Trust – John Thomson Attorney Thomas Alexander appears on behalf of the applicant. He states this is a build out to an existing subdivision on Folger Avenue that was created in 1932. There was a Planning Board Minutes April 14, 2004 Page 4 meeting with the neighbors and City Councilwoman Maureen Troubetaris. David Gardner, Chairman of the Open Space and Recreation Committee also met with the parties and asked the applicant to pursue the possibility of a cluster development. Alexander states there has been no decision with regard to Gardner’s recommendation. Alexander introduces Dick Doherty from Hancock Associates. Doherty provides an overview of the Preliminary Plan. He notes they will request waivers from the length of a dead end and for the side slopes of the street. Dinkin asks that the letters from citizens be held until the public hearing on the definitive plan. Zambernardi reads the following letters into record: · A letter from the Engineering Department dated April 14, 2004. · A letter from the Beverly Conservation Commission dated April 14, 2004. · A letter from the Fire Department dated April 14, 2004. · A letter from the Board of Health dated April 9, 2004. · A letter from Maureen Troubetaris, Ward 1 Councilor dated April 6, 2004. · A letter from the Open Space and Recreation Committee dated April 12, 2004. Dinkin states he was trying to remember the last time the board waived street length, cul- de-sac length, by as much as 55%. He states he feels pretty strongly about the 500-foot limit on a dead end street and he is interested in seeing every tree of 6 inches in caliper that is going to come down to accommodate the subdivision. Alexander responds that he believes the board granted a waiver for cul de sac length near the Willow Pond subdivision. Thomson states he would be in favor of a Conservation Subdivision. There is a by-law that is not yet on the books, which allows more creative uses of property to preserve open space and natural resources. Dinkin states he is interested in seeing an analysis of cubic area to be blasted for a conventional subdivision plan versus a cluster plan. There is discussion regarding Leach Street. Thomson asks about the status of Leach Street. Attorney Alexander states that it is a paper street but is not public. Hamm states that he is concerned over the feasibility of a cluster subdivision that comes off Leach Street. Planning Board Minutes April 14, 2004 Page 5 Thomson suggests that the Board take a no vote action on the plan. He suggests that the applicant explore the potential for a cluster development on the site, utilizing the concepts behind conservation subdivision design, including dedicating open space. In addition, the applicant should work with the City Engineer to work out an acceptable design for the grades and slopes of the roadway before filing a definitive plan. Board members concur. Cabot Crossing/495 Cabot Street – Modification to Site Plan Application #67-01 (approved 3/02) – Cabot Crossing Realty Trust (Dunn recuses herself from this portion of the meeting.) Zambernardi reads the legal notice. Site plan approval was granted for this property on March 21, 2002 to demolish the existing structures and to construct a 4,950 s.f. commercial/retail building, a 19,800 s.f. commercial/retail/residential building, a swimming pool and associated grading, parking and utilities. Although the applicant received Planning Board approval, the Conservation Commission denied the request for an Order of Conditions on February 12, 2002. The applicants appealed this decision to the DEP, which in turn, issued a superceding Order of Conditions. The abutters then proceeded to appeal. A settlement plan has been agreed upon, which is reflected in the modified site plan. In the Board’s 2002 approval, a condition was included that the applicant be required to “…come back to the Planning Board for further review of the site plan once a use is determined for the proposed one-story Commercial/Retail building, and that the use may be a CN type use…” Attorney Thomas Alexander appears on behalf of the applicant. He provides the following update: · There have been negotiations with neighbors and the building has been moved completely out of the wetlands. · The swimming pool has been eliminated. · An easement and fence will be provided for a neighbor. · Six (6) residential units are being proposed. · 7,200 s.f. commercial space has been decreased to 2,000 s.f. (1,000 s.f. on each floor). · The Design Review Board has approved the proposal with some modifications. · The Parking and Traffic has reviewed and approved the plan. · The Fire and Police Departments has approved the plan. Dinkin asks if there are clarifying questions from members of the Board. Planning Board Minutes April 14, 2004 Page 6 Thomson asks if everyone in the neighborhood is in agreement of the plan. Alexander responds that the neighbors who were involved in the litigation have signed off on the proposal. He cannot speak for all of the neighbors. Dinkin asks if it is his view that acceptance of the plan will bring litigation to an end. Alexander responds “yes.” Thomson asks if it is necessary to go back to the Conservation Commission. Alexander responds that the Conservation Commission has signed off on the Settlement. Thomson asks if the parking has changed. Bob Griffin responds that there are minor changes. Flannery asks what the total number of parking spaces is. Griffin responds that there are 56 parking spaces. Flannery asks how many tenants will be in the building. Griffin responds that there could be approximately 3 to 4 tenants. Dinkin asks if there are clarifying questions from members of the public. Claudette Turner, of 5 Roosevelt Avenue, asks if the proposed project will affect drainage. Griffin provides an overview of the drainage. Dinkin asks if there are comments in support of the project. Laura Lorelei Azarian, of 509 Cabot Street, states it was nice to work with the builder and she is in support of the project. Dinkin asks if there are comments in opposition of the project. There are none. Zambernardi reads the following letters into record: · A letter from the Engineering Department dated. · A letter from the Conservation Commission. · A letter from the Fire Department. · A letter from the Parking & Traffic Commission. · A letter from the Police Department. · A letter from the Board of Health. · A letter from the Design Review Board. Planning Board Minutes April 14, 2004 Page 7 Zambernardi reads the Planning Board Condition from the Site Plan Approval Letter (2002) was read into record. The hearing is closed. Discussion/Decision - Cabot Crossing/495 Cabot Street – Modification to Site Plan Application #67-01 (approved 3/02) – Cabot Crossing Realty Trust Thomson moves to grant Site Plan Approval for Cabot Crossing/495 Cabot Street #67-01 for the configuration shown with the stipulation that the Planning Board retains jurisdiction of the property, and that the applicant be required to come back to the Planning Board for further review of the uses of Building 1 (commercial building). Specifically, the Board requires that the applicant come back to the Board for any use of the ground floor and for any use other than professional offices for the second and third floors. The plan is also contingent upon the recommendations submitted by the City Boards and Commissions and department heads, seconded by Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries. (Dunn returns to the meeting.) Proposed Zoning Amendment #138 – 950 Cummings Center Change Zoning from General Industrial (IG) Zoning District to Restricted Industrial/Research Office District (IR) – Recommendation to City Council – Set Joint Public Hearing - Gerard McSweeney, Beverly Commerce, Inc. Thomson moves to recommend setting a Joint Public Hearing to City Council on Zoning Amendment #138-950, which recommends a zoning change from IG to IR, seconded by Dunn. All members are in favor. Motion carries. Approval of Minutes Moves to approve the minutes dated February 17, 2004 joint public hearing and special meeting of the Planning Board and the February 19, 2004 regular meeting of the Planning Board with one correction, seconded by Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries. New Business Bushby Estates Minor Site Plan Modification (58-64 Dodge Street) – Assist staff in determining whether a public hearing is necessary for minor change. The applicants received site plan and special permit approval from the Board in February 2004. Mass Highway has since had opportunity to review the plans as Dodge Street is Planning Board Minutes April 14, 2004 Page 8 part of the State Highway. During this review, Mass Highway recommended a slight reconfiguration of the driveway. Staff has had the Parking & Traffic Commission, the City Engineer and the Building Inspector review this change. Zambernardi asks Board members to review the change. Dinkin states he believes when Mr. Handly was City Solicitor was asked this question and at the time Mr. Handly’s opinion was that a minor site plan modification would require a hearing. The members request Zambernardi to ask the City Solicitor’s opinion on this matter. Appoint Planning Board Designee for collecting Project Review Fees Zambernardi states that Section 4.2 of the recently adopted Planning Board Regulations Governing Fees and Fee Schedules includes a provision allowing the Planning Board to collect peer review fees by a majority vote of the Board or by appointing a designee to collect the fees. Zambernardi requests that the Planning Board consider whether it would like to appoint a designee. Dinkin recommends that there be a three-member board to make the determination, consisting of the Planning Director, the Assistant Planning Director and the City Engineer. Thomson moves to appoint a three-member board consisting of the Planning Director, the Assistant Planning Director and the City Engineer as the Planning Board Designees for collecting Project Review Fees, seconded by Walter. All members are in favor. Discussion of Potential Proposed Zoning Amendments – Definitions of Lot, Frontage, PRD’s and Signs Zambernardi states that Planning staff, members of the Planning Board and ZBA have drafted some revisions to the Zoning Ordinance for members to review and potentially submit to the City Council. Zambernardi states that here have recently been different interpretations regarding the definition of “Lot” in the Zoning Bylaw. John Thomson and Tina Cassidy have reviewed the definition and rewrote it to clarify the intent of the meaning of the language. Zambernardi states she also has revisions for Frontage, PRD’s and Signs. · Frontage: The way in which you measure frontage is clarified and updated with case law. Planning Board Minutes April 14, 2004 Page 9 · Sign: The Maximum size of a projecting right-angle sign is proposed to be changed to 7 square feet. · PRD: There is a minimum lot area requirement for the R15 district. But in another section of PRD, the use regulation section, R15 is not cited as a district in which you can have a PRD. It was left out of the Ordinance by mistake. There is discussion regarding signs. Thomson recommends that the Sign definition be changed to “not internally illuminated” signs. Thomson moves to recommend that City Council schedule a Joint Public Hearing regarding the proposed zoning amendments, seconded by Flannery. All members are in favor. Motion carries. Adjournment Flannery moves to adjourn, seconded by Dunn. All members are in favor. Motion carries.