Loading...
08.16.22 BPB Minutes Final DRAFT CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES COMMISSION: Planning Board DATE: August 16, 2022 LOCATION: City Hall; Council Chambers; BevCam (live stream on YouTube): https://bevcam.org/video/live-stream/ MEMBERS PRESENT: Ellen Hutchinson (Chair), Derek Beckwith (Vice-Chair) Ellen Flannery, Wayne Miller, Sarah Bartley, Andrea Toulouse MEMBERS ABSENT: Rodney Sinclair STAFF PRESENT: Darlene Wynne, Director of Planning OTHERS PRESENT: RECORDER: Sharlyne Woodbury Call to Order Chair Hutchinson calls the meeting to order at 7:03 pm. 1. Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans a. 114&116 Livingstone Avenue—7 Porter Terrace LLC Bob Griffin on behalf of the applicant and presents to the board. Griffin describes the lot line is an adjustment, Lot 3 is deemed as a not buildable lot. The owner proposes to reduce the size of lot 2, create parcel A, and convey the land to lot 3. Makes no change to the frontage of lot 2 or 3. Lot 3 was deficient in frontage. The bond was approved at the June 2022 meeting. Beckwith, there is an existing subdivision already approved. The applicant is ANR. Griffin reads for the board the Ch 41 of the ANR handbook. A developer/landowner may submit in the form of an ANR changes to shape and size of a previously approved subdivision plan. Beckwith questions if this is a modification. Griffin further cites from the handbook reiterating the landowner is well within rights. Flannery inquires why the changes. Griffin, at some point the owner intends to file an application to make lot 3 buildable. With these changes lot 3 will not require a waiver as the land will be over 10,000 sq ft. Beckwith returns to discussing lot 3 not being a buildable lot in lieu of the turnaround loop/easement conditions as part of the subdivision approval. Beckwith recalls lot 3 was offered up as not buildable to the Planning Board as a contingent to approve the subdivision plan. This was not intended to be a buildable lot. Griffin rebukes, there was never any promise to not develop lot 3 in the future. Wynne asks Griffin to clarify the square footage of lot 2. If 1400 sq ft is removed, and lot 2 is already at 10,000 sq ft, how can this be approved. Griffin cites the Beverly zoning ordinance. "The previous calculation excluded the area of the turning easement.The subtraction for the easement or right away is not appropriate since it is open to government agencies and open to public use".The owner's attorney, former city solicitor Marshall Handley has reviewed the language in the ordinance and conditions from the plan, believes it is in appropriate for the calculations to subtract the easement area from the lot area. Hutchinson asks for clarification on the calculations submitted and how they are changing. Lot 2 was 11,429 sq ft. including the turnaround, there was a subtraction of 1355 (turnaround/easement area)for a total of 10,074 sq ft adjusted area. Griffin proposes lot 2 is 10,001 sq ft including the easement area. Planning Board August 16, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 8 Hutchinson asks why it was appropriate to exclude the easement area for the first approval, and now this time it is appropriate to include it. Griffin, if Mr. Marks (owner) had the council of Mr. Handley years ago the calculations would not have been counted as they were originally. Mr. Handley reviewed the zoning regulation, applied it to the dimensions of the lot and determined it is inappropriate to exclude the easement area as done two years ago. Wynne confirms the definition of lot is included in the staff report and that it is a private way. Members express concerns about lot 3 remaining unbuildable. Members would also like to seek council from the city solicitor on the matter. Members are expressing concerns with the interpretation of the statutory language of the ANR handbook. Hutchinson asks members if they would like to continue to the September meeting in lieu of their concerns and clarification for the statutory language. There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Motion: Flannery moves to continue subdivision approval not required plans for 114& 116 Livingstone Avenue—7 Porter Terrace LLC to the September 13, 2022 meeting. Beckwith seconds. Motion carries 6-0. Motion: Beckwith moves to recess for public hearing. Flannery seconds. Motion carries 6-0. Recess for Public Hearing 2. Continued Public Hearing:Site Plan Review#154-22 and Inclusionary Housing#20-22—218- 224 Cabot Street and 18 Federal Street—Miranda Siemasko, Glovsky Councilor at law for Leggat McCall Properties LLC Miranda Siemasko on behalf of the applicant and presents to the board. The Historic District Commission (HDC)found the property not preferably preserved; the Design Review Board (DRB) with a unanimous vote approved of the project; and the Parking and Traffic Commission (PTC) requested a peer review of the parking study. M. Siemasko asks questions for parking please be stayed until the peer review is complete. The units decreased from 113 to 112 with the loss of that one residential unit going to the allotment for 4 artist studios. This is a 5-story building, about 5000 sq ft of renovated commercial space complete with new storefronts; 153 residential parking spaces, 124 in the parking garage and 29 on the adjacent lot; high level of sustainability incorporated in the design; preserving the existing store building; the project design complies with the existing zoning ordinance. M. Siemasko address some questions posed from the prior meeting. The team was asked to be better as describing what currently exists in the building and what they are proposing, specifically the artist studio spaces. Presently there are 15 studio spaces with 11 currently rented. The rent ranges from $325.00- $425.00.The spaces range from 240-625 sq ft. What is proposed is comparable to what already exists. The rest of the second floor would be the residential apartments. M. Siemasko, the team was asked to provide more information on the current commercial space as to what is proposed. The 17,000 sq ft will reduce to 5000 sq ft. The retail sq ft will be 2200 and the restaurant sq ft will be about 2900 plus 1100 sq ft of patio space in the back for a restaurant. This is comparable to what is present at Bone Fish Harry's. M. Siemasko explains how the reduction of retail sq ft impacts the parking requirements and reduces what is presently needed. Planning Board August 16, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 8 Community concern and board members concerns were expressed at losing the Family Dollar. M. Siemasko notes the applicant is not making a commitment to lease to the Family Dollar, even at reduced space. M. Siemasko notes there is flexibility to address the situation if the demand is great enough. Siemasko points out the other food available options in the area between Cabot and Rantoul Streets which are less than a mile from the site. With the exception of Stop & Shop, none of the market venues mentioned offer fresh food, but they do offer comparable food options similar to the Family Dollar. Another area of concern expressed at the prior meeting was the building mass. M. Siemasko reviews the other tall buildings: Beverly Housing Authority McLean Building, St. Mary's School (not of same height but similarly massed building), Cabot YMCA, the Odd Fellows Building, residential property behind the Atomic Cafe and the Cabot Lodge. Hutchinson interrupts discussing the mass of the building. Her concern was less about the presence of Cabot Street and more about creeping into the neighborhood, establishing precedent that goes back into the 2 and 3 family homes. Her concern was preserving the history and character of the neighborhood. M. Siemasko points out the developer is designing according to regulations and zoning ordinances in place. These ordinances existed for decades. M. Siemasko introduces Addy Grady to address the concerns for housing and rent affordability. The slide presentation includes income limits by household size (see table below). There was concern that the income and rent levels demonstrated by the 60% and 80%AMI for inclusionary path that followed may not be an appropriate discount to market rents. The team reviewed the income restriction to the neighboring income and census track. Grady points out AMIs did substantially increase 2021. The team crossed out the 80%AMI because the 60% is more of an appropriate discount to what a market rate renter could afford. Grady concedes as pointed out in the prior meeting these rents do not seem affordable for renters currently living in the area.The team cropped out the 80%AMI levels by reviewing the zoning ordinance. Addy asks the board to keep in mind this project is not subsidized by any affordable housing income tax credits, grants, etc. AS a result, in order for the units to be affordable, the burden is placed on the market rate units increases. If this becomes too great, it is not economically feasible for the project to move forward. They propose a loss of 3 units from 12 to 9 and all the units are at the 60%AMI instead of the 60%/80%AMI split.Therefore, there is 25% less affordable units, but the remaining affordable units rents are also decreased by 25%. This is not the census track, this is a HUD defined income level area, Beckwith clarifies with Grady. Household Size 60%AMI (Gross income limit) 80%AMI (Gross income limit) 1 $58, 920 $78,300 2 $67,320 $89,500 3 $75,720 $100,700 4 $84,120 $111,850 *Gross income per 2022 HUD limits for Boston-Cambridge-Quincy MA Maximum rents by apartment size and household size (estimated) Unit size Household size 60%AMI max rent 80%AMI max rent 1BR 1 $1473 $1957 1 BR 2 $1683 $2237 2 BR 2 $1683 $2237 Planning Board August 16, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 8 2 BR 3 $1893 $2517 2 BR 4 $2103 1 $2796 Members discuss the issue of affordable housing. Collectively the group feels that affordability is a major concern. Hutchinson acknowledges the skyrocketing rents are increasingly a policy issue.The group consensus is that building more housing is not going to help make rent more affordable beyond the 30% total earned income for an individual. Grady and M. Siemasko review the rent data. Beckwith expresses grave concerns regarding the rent and the impact to the current residents. Wynne discusses the multifaceted issues with the supply and demand for affordable housing. M. Siemasko offers final thoughts on the matter.The increase in demand relates to people pushed out of Boston and the Burroughs moving further out. Beckwith returns discussion back to the mass and scale of the building affecting the character of the area. M. Siemasko speaks to the mixed-use buildings, small businesses and the project team meeting with Beverly Main Streets. Wynne clarifies that the housing between Rantoul and Cabot Streets is a different zoning. The city is kicking off a grant to do a historic survey in that area. New design standards are also under review and scheduled to be further discussed in the fall. Bartley asks for more clarification regarding the public comments about private amenities in the building and public spaces. Comments at the July meeting focused on being part of the community, not having a massive building where the residents seem fortified and not approachable. Grady reiterates the enclosed backyard is not at ground level,therefore remains private. Surveys from the pandemic pointed to a greater desire for residents to have their own quiet outdoors spaces and sanctuaries. Members point discussion to the increased units/spaces of affordable rents for artist studios. Chair Hutchinson opens the floor for public comment. Mike Mendez, 4 Chapman Street The location of the egress of the building, specifically the large garage doors. Can those doors relocate to Bow and Federal Streets? Chapman Street is residential. The traffic and noise are concerns for residents on Chapman Street. T. Siemasko informs Mr. Mendez there is not enough frontage on Bow or Federal Street. The best access is on Chapman. Restoring the historic front facade on Cabot Street is not conducive to the restorative plans. T. Siemasko offers to bring the traffic flow and garage doors before the PTC review. Mendez asks about the noise pollution of the HVAC units. T. Siemasko assures Mendez the HVAC units are located on the roof and there should not be noise pollution. Mendez final comments are concerns for vermin control. M. Siemasko informs the board there is a report from the Board of Health addressing pest control and mitigation measures. Peter Johnson, 677 Hale Street Speaks to the value of the Family Dollar and how Montserrat art students use that as a source of affordable food. The college does not have a cafeteria to provide meals for their students.Johnson addresses the vanishing viewpoint down Cabot Street, especially from the street corner of the Baptist Church. Johnson discusses the seriousness of the design standards and changing the zoning for the area. Melissa Casey, 16 Chapman Street Major concern is the construction,the impact to the old homes, cracks in walls, and the noise pollution affecting the businesses and St. Mary's School (to be used temporarily as a charter school). M. Siemasko Planning Board August 16, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 8 confirms the project does not have the full construction plan, however;there are city ordinances mandating when construction and noise can occur. There will be no blasting at the site. Margaret Graves, 24 Federal Street Asks if there is any way to lessen noise on one side to have the least amount of interruptions to St. Mary's School. Grady discusses how to minimize onsite construction. Grady assures the neighbors all city ordinances will be followed to reduced impact on the neighborhood. Sylvia Berger, 23 Vestry Street Working artist in the city. Recently acquired space above 222 Cabot Street for an artist studio. There is still not enough studio space in the art district. The Porter Mills wait list is 3 years. Discusses how difficult it is to get something back once it goes away. Berger would like to see a compromise between adding more affordable housing and studio spaces. Appreciates what has been done so far, but too many people, 7 artists is a lot to displace. Grady notes it is difficult to mitigate the displacement and find alternatives. Ashlee Beade, 29 West Dane Street Discusses the loss of artist spaces, increased rent prices for the development, retail and restaurant space. Has seen many colleagues forced out of Beverly. Has grave concerns of being priced out within the next two years; residents are continuously priced out of Beverly. The atmosphere and community are going to change with such a large development. During construction when the road is closed down, small businesses lose out on valuable foot traffic. There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Motion: Beckwith moves to continue to the October 4,2022 meeting. Flannery seconds. Motion carries 6-0 3. Public Hearing:Waiver of Frontage and Subdivision Plan—17 Jordan Street—Thomas Alexander,Alexander& Femino for James Clarizia The subdivided property is for 17 Jordan. Mr. Clarizia lives at 13 Jordan Street, he's a long-time resident. The subdivision was approved by the Planning Board in 1948. The plans show the lot area to be 7,000 and 8,775 sq ft respectively for each lot. The original area lot dimensions from 1948 were 6,500 sq ft. The approval from the Planning Board allowed the lots to return to the original lot sizes. They are seeking a waiver of frontage to allow 70 feet in frontage for lot 17B. The other lot would have a frontage of 90.66 linear feet. There are not concerns from the Engineering department or from the Conservation Commission. There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Motion: Beckwith moves to close the public hearing. Flannery seconds. Motion carries 6-0. Motion: Flannery moves to grant the waiver of frontage for 17 and 17B Jordan Street. Bartley seconds. Motion carries 6-0. Motion: Flannery moves to approve the definitive subdivision plan at 17 Jordan Street. Bartley seconds. Motion carries 6-0. Planning Board August 16, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 8 Discussion on the motion: Miller appreciates this type of housing development is in keeping with the master plan. Bartley concurs. 4. Public Hearing:Special Permit#182-22 and Site Plan Review#155-22 40 Dunham Ridge— Miranda Siemasko, Glovsky Councilor at Law for 40 Dunham OC, LLC M. Siemasko represents the applicant and introduces the team, Lauren Jezienicki; Ian Ramey; Nancy Ludwig; Caitlin Glass. Siemasko asks that any parking questions are tabled to the next meeting since the PTC requested a peer review. The residential project is for 55 and older households; subsidized 160 units. Nancy Ludwick reviews the architect and design plans. Site has a lot of topography with a rising ridge grade to the north and a relatively flat south side. The Garage will have a green roof and the parking area is limited. 123 spaces in the garage, 90 spaces located around the site for a total of 213 spaces. This is a green building. All the units will have some outdoor space. They are planning robust sustainable initiatives, with an all-electric building. The plan to have solar photovoltaics. The units are a mixed stack of 1 and two bedrooms. Exterior materials include white fiber cement lap siding; gray fiber cement lap siding; white fiber cement panel; wood look siding; stone masonry veneer; photovoltaic canopy. The desired effect is to match the exterior to the natural surroundings in the area. Would like the canopies to provide photovoltaics and an arched entry. There is a recessed courtyard on the east elevation. Ian Ramey provides the landscaping plans. Embrace One Circle's core mission health and wellness. Locally sourced materials, create an environment that promotes interaction with neighbors and nature. Increase biodiversity on site. Rain gardens; shade trees; play lawn; pollinating habitat; meandering path; firepits; community garden; multi use labyrinth; pool & arbor. Use permeable pavers; retaining wall palette used native stacked stone; reviews landscape lightening for ambiance. Planting strategy presented; native species to be functional and beautiful falling back on the long bloom periods to encourage pollination. Caitlin Glass reviews the storm drain coverage. Discusses the grade changes in the area, the existing culverts and catch basins. Reviews the curb cuts along Dunham Ridge Road for the site and proposed sidewalks along Dunham Ridge Road, around the site,the garage and loading zone. The proposed storm water system includes several rain gardens, porous pavers, subsurface infiltration basins. Reviewed the peak rates of runoff per the 2, 10, 25 and 100 year flood plans. M. Siemasko summarizes the project benefits.These include generous well landscaped open space; new bounding sidewalks connecting the large campus to open spaces; building is outside the 100 ft wetland buffer; building sits into the hillside to reduce the height. Includes several robust sustainability goals: Fitwell Healthy building certified; pursuit of passive house certification; all electric systems; EV charging stations; enhanced recycling and composting. Finally, 15%or 24 units are affordable at 30%AM[ (area median income). Construction would begin summer 2023 ending in summer 2025 with full leasing 2026. M. Siemasko reminds the board they are also seeking a special permit to reduce the 2 required parking spaces per unit. The reduction is 1.33 spaces per unit. Miller asks how many parking spaces per unit. M. Siemasko informs the board the PTC expressed concerns with the special permit request for parking reduction. Planning Board August 16,2022 Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 8 Members and Jezienicki discuss the social aspects and resident composition, singles, married, etc. Beckwith and members discuss the rent.There are no fees, and while the rent is more than the average, the rent per square foot is comparable and affordable.Jezienicki emphasis this building is a lifestyle choice and discusses the turnaround rate for residents.The residence focal point is an active lifestyle. They estimate about 245 residents in total, based on per unit and per family. Miller discusses the loading and trash entry, with focus on the composting and recycling. Miller,why are there only 3 3-bedroom units. Due to spacing and allocation within the building, these 3 units were a determination as a result of the space and volume of the building. Miller asks if there will be any gas lines, Ludwig replies with the exception of the social spaces, fire pits, etc. Miller asks if they considered geothermal heating options. Ludwig, those options are not considered for this project. They require more information and project site does not lend to a cost-effective site. More often than not backup systems are designed because investors are concerned with the equipment. Miller asks about transit- oriented options, including ride share, shuttles, etc. M. Siemasko explains they are looking into a shuttle service modeled off the Salem service.There is not a specific shuttle project.They are working on coming up with a greater connectivity to the community for residents to have more access to bike, walking and ride share options. Miller confirms utilities are separate. Ludwig confirms efficiency and usage are better moderated when individuals are responsible for their usage. Members circulate back to traffic trips with the age, were physical therapy, home therapies, and other amenities/home care needs taken into consideration. Chair Hutchinson opens the floor for public comment. Diane D'Angelis, 207 Brimbal Ave D'Angelis cautions the team on expecting the age group to be closer to 72 as opposed to 55. Does not believe comparing Beverly to Natick is appropriate. Beverly is by the water.The water is a great draw for many people. Keep in mind the age limit closer to the lower end of the spectrum will also have more trips generated by a younger crowd driving, travelling and many still have children (young/young adult) living with them or visiting as well. D'Angelis asks if the affordability can be re-examined like the Leggat McCall project reconsidered their rental structure focusing on 60%AMI. Commends Chair Hutchinson for stating to look at this project as "least invasive" rather consider the impacts of the project as standalone. For acknowledging the true effects of the neighborhood on its own merit. Where most responses are to "it could be worse; this is better than what could go in there". D'Angelis implores the board to not ignore the letter written by an abutter, Lisa Middleton. The letter addresses the impact on neighborhood home values with this building construction. Homeowners feel they are losing value in their neighborhoods next to Dunham Ridge.That letter was presented at a different board meeting. D'Angelis feels the letter was not properly acknowledged at that meeting. Barbara Salerno, 16 Dunham Road Traffic is the major concern for the neighbors, will hold comments and attend the PTC meeting on September 13, 2022. Discusses the flooding issues since all the development in the industrial park. Upset and dismayed at the dwarfing of the neighborhood. Price range for rent were high, starting at $2500.00. Safety issues because of increased traffic. Road is very busy,too narrow for sidewalks proposed.The development is too big for the area. Neighbors feel they are not being heard or taken seriously. Recently city hall depreciated a neighbor's home value because of the area development. Planning Board August 16, 2022 Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 8 There being no further comments or questions regarding the matter: Motion: Beckwith moves to continue to the September 13, 2022 meeting. Miller seconds. Motion carries 6-0. Wynne informs the meeting the Parking&Traffic Commission next meeting is September 13, 2022; 8:30 AM, at City Hall Council Chambers. Motion: Flannery moves to reconvene regular meeting. Beckwith seconds. Motion carries 6-0. Reconvene Meeting S. Public Hearing a. Site Plan Review#156-22 and Inclusionary Housing#21-22—26, 28, 28R Cabot Street; 4-6, 8 Rantoul Street and portion of 10 Rantoul Street (Map 1, Lots 79 and 80; Map 4, Lots 160, 161, 162, 163)—Miranda Siemasko, Glovsky Councilor at Law for Southwest Rantoul Gateway LLC Motion: Toulouse moves to set the public hearing for September 13, 2022. Bartley seconds. Motion carries 6-0. b. Site Plan Review#154-22 and Inclusionary Housing#20-22—218-224 Cabot Street and 18 Federal Street—Miranda Siemasko, Glovsky Councilor at Law for Leggat McCall Properties LLC Motion: Beckwith moves to set the public hearing for October 4, 2022. Miller seconds. Motion carries 6-0. 6. Approval of minutes a. July 19, 2022 The minutes will be reviewed at the September 13, 2022 meeting. 7. New/Other Business Net zero energy training and survey for the board members. Wynne will 8. Adjournment Motion: Miller moves to adjourn. Bartley seconds. Motion carries 6-0. Meeting adjourned at 10:25 pm.