Loading...
2005-05-02 City of Beverly, Massachusetts Public Meeting Minutes BOARD: Planning Board TOPIC: Joint Public Hearing with the City Council DATE: May 2, 2005 PLACE: Council Chambers, Beverly City Hall BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairperson Richard Dinkin; John Thomson, Joanne Dunn, Eve Geller-Duffy, Jason Silva, Charlie Harris, Ellen Flannery BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Donald Walter OTHERS PRESENT: Leah Zambernardi, Assistant Planning Director; Tina Cassidy, Planning Director: RECORDER: Robin Levesque Council President Paul Guanci calls the meeting to order at 6:30 pm City Council Order #105: Proposed Zoning Amendment - Open Space Residential Design Ordinance (OSRD) Tina Cassidy, Planning Director provides an overview of the proposed zoning amendment. She states this Ordinance was submitted earlier this year but that the time restraints for review of the original ran out before the Council was done commenting. She states that is the reason for the Ordinance being in front of the Board once again. She introduces Scott Houseman, Chairman of the ZBA and co-drafter of the Ordinance. Houseman states there are two major changes being submitted: 1. Changes suggested by the Planning Board 2. Changes by the Legal Affairs and Accounts Committee Guanci asks the members of the Council if they have any questions. Maureen Troubetaris, Ward 1 Councilor, asks the pro's and con's of excluding the R10 zoning district from the Ordinance. John Burke, Ward 3 Councilor, asks a question about the wetlands being counted towards the open space requirement and states his concerns. 1 Ronald Costa, Ward 2 Councilor, asks about whether the abutting tidelands have been considered. He asks how the developer considers the low water mark or the high water mark. Houseman states that question hasn’t come up before and is a good one. He states the Ordinance calls for buffers to be included in open space. Costa states you could have 100ft set back off the water and at those certain set backs you can not build. Costa states the low water mark is essential in channel conservation. Pat Grimes makes comments. Guanci asks the Members of the Planning Board if they have any questions. There being none at this time, Guanci asks the residents if they have any questions Guanci asks the Residents if they have any questions. Joan Murphy, 36 Longmeadow Rd. states there are allot of nonconforming lots in the R6 zones. She asks how the R10 is any different. Murphy states the lots are all kinds of shapes and sizes, that there are lots of 6000 sq. feet and 10,000 sq. ft. She asks how the nonconforming lots are affected. She states there is less room for maneuvering without doing harm. Murphy states that wetlands are a gift to the developer and that if they didn’t include the wetlands there would have less development. Renee Mary, 274 Hale St. shares her comments: ?? Page 1: add a new entry: I.1.g. to read "to protect the regional water supply from contamination to ensure its adequacy to serve the population requirements for the future". ?? Page 2: regarding what is a covered project: it should be written in language that ordinary people can understand. ?? add R-10 & R-15 after R-6 as exclusions and we need to hear from the ZBA members on this. ?? Regarding III.1.a, end of paragraph, she asks why it is a stated goal to help the developer? She also asks why the developer is encouraged, but not required to meet with the neighbors. Page 2: reduce the cost; do not remember seeing this in the planning board or conservation, price reference should be deleted. ?? She asks why a landscape architect is used. She states a wetland expert is needed instead. ?? She states that other issues not settled by the Planning Board were the mandatory versus optional, and why, if using the mandatory approach, would we use density bonuses. Guanci states there is another meeting scheduled and recesses the Council's public hearing until June 6, 2005 @ 7:00 p.m. Dinkin recesses the Planning Board's Public Hearing until the same time. 2 City Council Order #103: Proposed Zoning Amendment - Brimbal Avenue/Sohier Road Rezoning from IR to CG Guanci states that Attorney Thomas Alexander is here to represent the petitioners Attorney Thomas Alexander, 1 School St. Beverly, MA, hands out information to the Planning Board and Councilors. He states this is a request to rezone parcels at Assessors’ Map #55, Lot #29 and Map #55, Lot #30. Alexander states the property is zoned IR and that it has been vacant since 1962, and prior to 1962 it was used as a landfill. Alexander states the property went on the market last year to pay off debt owed by the Catholic Church. Alexander states the Developer is proposing a one-story building, less than 65 feet in height. Alexander states the IR zone allows for light manufacturing and office use, and it doesn’t make sense to develop like the Cummings Center. Alexander states the traffic with the CG will be less intensive than an IR zone. He states the peak traffic with an IR use could be very intense. Alexander states the CG zone traffic course would be the entire day. Alexander states this would allow taxes to come into the City. Alexander at this time introduces Steve Cohen, President of CEA Group. Steve Cohen, President CEA Group states that the 6 ½ acres at Rt. 128 and Brimbal Ave was a former landfill, and hasn’t been touched for over 50 years. CEA Group is under an agreement with the Archdiocese, which is selling the property at $2.5 million to pay off debts. Cohen states a retail development is the best use for this site. Cohen states that the booklet handed out tonight relates to its surroundings and has a site plan. It shows the scale and design. He states that in order to build retail on the site, we have to re-zone. He states that instead of asking for 5 stories, we’re asking for one. Cohen states there will be additional reviews by the City and that the State Highway Department is also involved. Cohen states re-zoning is the first step. Cohen states that the impact on traffic, in the morning and afternoon (rush hour) will increase traffic in the morning by 1% and in the afternoon by 5%. He states that we found that office development would cause more traffic at peak hours and that retail spreads traffic throughout the day. Cohen states that the traffic would be diverted away from the Music Theatre and traffic would be reduced by 30 to 40 percent with the Brimbal Ave. interchange project. Cohen states that the DEP will be closely supervising this operation. He states they will be spending $1.5 million in environmental and geotechnical costs. He states the untreated landfill must be certified by DEP. Cohen states they will put together the top designers to clean up the former landfill. Larry Grossman, architect, states he’s designed many retail projects. Grossman states the building is designed on all sides or with "360 degree architecture". He states the main access would be Brimbal Avenue. There would be a right turn in there and a right turn out on Sohier Road. He states it would be a mix of very small shops, of 800 s.f. or more, and the retail will have different areas. He states this would be a down zoning from IR to CG. Grossman states that rezoning will reduce traffic on this site and, due to the interchange project, traffic in general will decrease to 40 percent. 3 Rich Moore with the development team states that the site has been inactive for 50+ years. He states they will be compacting. There will be a gravel cover with pavement on top. He states that landscaping and parking will be added. He states they are using acceptable approaches to cap a landfill and they will get approval from DEP. He states that a 21E report has been completed and closed out. He states that there are no more hazardous wastes. He states that an evaluation of gas generation on the site is also evaluated and they have had lengthy discussions with the DEP. He states there is a venting system under a concrete slab, which will vent the buildings. He states there is not much gas because the landfill has been inactive for 50 years. They will have monitoring in enclosed spaces. Alexander states the City has another example, but a larger site. He states that the North Beverly Plaza was built on a former landfill and they underwent a similar procedure for treatment. He stated this site even had wetland resources although there are no wetland resources identified on their site. Dinkin asks for the zoning of surrounding parcels. Alexander states the surrounding parcels are zoned IR. He states that Northridge is a residential development allowed by M.G.L. Chapter 40B. Dinkin asks if the sale is contingent on a zoning change. Alexander states that it is not. Guanci and Dinkin recess their respective public hearings to June 20, 2005 @ 7:00 pm Planning Board Special Meeting Immediately Following the Joint Public Hearing Dinkin opens the special meeting and notes there will be no discussion on OSRD or the Brimbal Avenue parcel rezoning because the public hearings have not been closed. Zambernardi states that one ANR plan was received since the last meeting for members to review. SANR a. Cailin Rd. - off Rt. 97, Cabot St. Zambernardi states this ANR plan is a reconfiguration of the lot lines. She states that these lots were created by a Planning Board constructive approval in the late 80’s. She states the Planning Board had then tried to rescind the plan but the developer appealed and won. So the subdivision was constructively approved. Dinkin asks who the owner is. Flannery states Jack Kelleher still has some part in it. Zambernardi states that Stanley Bialek also has ownership. She states there is a plan for a subsidized elderly development in this area floating out there. She states they could do it if they received a special permit from the Zoning Board. 4 Dinkin asks if there are any additional questions or comments Thomson asks if there is a bond. Zambernardi states she doubts there is still a bond in effect since the subdivision occurred so long ago, but that she will have to look into that. Thomson states his concern. Zambernardi states the lots are already created and this is a shifting of lot lines. She states no new lots are being created. Thomson asks if there are any building permits. Zambernardi states she doesn't believe there are. Dinkin states they could get building permit on front parcel. Thomson: motion to endorse the plan as one not requiring approval under the subdivision control law. Seconded by Flannery. All members in favor. Motion carries. 5