Loading...
2010-10-19Beverly Planning Board October 19, 2010 Page 1 of 6 CITY OF BEVERLY MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: SUBCOMMITTEE: DATE: LOCATION: MEMBERS PRESENT: MEMBERS ABSENT: OTHERS PRESENT: RECORDER: Planning Board Tuesday, October 19, 2010 Beverly City Hall, Council Chamber, Third Floor Chairperson Richard Dinkin, John Thomson, Joanne Dunn, Charles Harris, Ellen Hutchinson David Mack, James Matz, Ellen Flannery Assistant Planning Director Leah Zambernardi Eileen Sacco Chairperson Dinkin calls the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 1. New or Other Business a. Presentation on Pre - Disaster Mitigation Plan by the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC) MAPC Regional Planner, Sam Cleaves makes a presentation on the regional pre- disaster mitigation plan. He explains the plan and notes that the draft plan will be posted on the City of Beverly website. Cleaves explains that the update of the plan is mandated by the Federal Mitigation Act of 2000 and is a requirement to be eligible for grants in pre- disaster mitigation areas. He explains that the Planning Department staff participated in the drafting of the plan, which is an update of the plan drafted by Beverly in 2005. He states that the plan is useful for DPW's, Conservation Commissions, Planning Departments, Fire and other emergency personnel. He further explains that the plan deals with natural hazards such as flooding issues. He also explains how the members can submit comments before the materials are sent to FEMA and MEMA. Thomson asks if the plan suggests any regulatory changes. Cleaves states that no outstanding regulatory concerns are noted. Dinkins thanks Cleaves for the presentation. b. Set Pubic Hearing Date — 26R Michael Road — Norwood Realty Trust Dinkin suggests that the public hearing be held at the next Planning Board meeting on November 16, 2010. Zambernardi reviews the matters scheduled for that evening with the Board. Dinkin recommends that the Public Hearing be held at 8:00 p.m. Beverly Planning Board October 19, 2010 Page 2 of 6 Hutchinson: Motion to hold the public hearing on the matter of 26R Michael Road — Norwood Realty Trust on November 16, 2010 at 8:00 p.m. Harris seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion carries (5 -0). 2. Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans (SANR's) a. 94 Corning Street and 217 Lothrop Street— Jalbert and White Horse Productions Attorney Glovsky is present for the applicant. Attorney Glovsky addresses the Board and explains that the subject properties are located on the northeast corner of Corning Street and East Lothrop Street. He notes that the building at 94 Lothrop Street sits upon the common lot line and the purpose of the plan is to eliminate the encroachment by redrawing the common lot line around the building. Atty. Glovsky explains they would achieve this by conveying an approximately 3,000 s.f parcel from 217 East Lothrop Street to 94 Corning Street. He notes that the 94 Corning Street parcel currently has non conforming area and frontage and the land conveyance would result in the parcel's land area becoming less non conforming and its frontage would be conforming. He further notes that the 217 East Lothrop Street parcel would remain a conforming lot after the land conveyance. Zambernardi states that Planning Staff has reviewed the plan and recommends endorsement of the plan. Dinkin asks if members of the Board have any questions regarding this plan. There are no questions or comments regarding this plan. Thomson: Motion to approve the SANR for 94 Corning Street/ 217 East Lothrop Street. Hutchinson seconds the motion. The chair votes in favor and the motion passes (5 -0). b. 44 Prince Street — David Carnevale Atty. Tom Alexander and Bob Griffin are present for the applicant. Atty. Alexander addresses the Board and reports that the applicant submitted this plan last month and withdrew because some issues were raised by members at that meeting. Alexander explains that they have provided a little more information on the plan and he explains that they are proposing to split the lot into two lots, with one dwelling unit upon each lot. He explains the revisions made to the plan. Beverly Planning Board October 19, 2010 Page 3 of 6 Alexander explains the septic system and the location of it drives this plan and explains that the location of the driveway will be between the septic system and the lot line. Harris asks that the frontage for the site be explained. Alexander responds. Dinkin asks if members of the Board have any questions. There were no questions or comments regarding this matter from members of the Board. Harris: Motion to approve the SANR for 44 Prince Street. Hutchinson seconds the motion. The chair votes in favor. The motion carries (5 -0). Recess for Public Hearings Thomson: Motion to recess for public hearings. Hutchinson seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion carries (5 -0). Concurrent Public Hearings — 875 Hale Street — Definitive Subdivision Plan — Create 6 new lots in R10 Zone and Open Space Residential Design (OSRD) #2 -10 Initial Review — New 6 Lot Yield Plan — 875 and 875 V2 Hale Street- Montrose School Park, LLC Zambernardi reads legal notice. Regarding 875 Hale Street Definitive Subdivision Plan Jeff Rhuda of Montrose School Park LLC addresses the Board and states that they are requesting a continuance on the conventional plan for 875 Hale Street to the next Planning Board meeting on November 16, 2010. Thomson: Motion to continue the Public Hearing for 875 Hale Street Definitive Subdivision Plan — Montrose Park LLC to the next regular Board meeting and to extend the time for Board action to November 23, 2010. Harris seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion carries (5 -0). Regarding 875 Hale Street OSRD Initial Review Jeff Rhuda represents Montrose School Park LLC. New 6 -Lot Yield Plan Thomson notes that the OSRD states that a hearing must be held on the yield plan not later than 45 days after submission of the OSRD application, which was submitted in the spring. He explains that the applicant would have to grant a waiver of this provision in order to conduct this hearing. Rhuda states that he would grant the waiver. Thomson suggests that Rhuda write that up and sign it for the Board this evening. Rhuda agrees. Peter Ogren of Hayes Engineering addresses the Board and explains the Yield Plan and notes that they are proposing five new building lots and one more lot for the existing building. He Beverly Planning Board October 19, 2010 Page 4 of 6 notes that over the summer they filed with the Conservation Commission and received an Order of Conditions and they have obtained the necessary waivers per the OSRD Ordinance. Ogren also states that they have received approval from the Fire Department on the configuration of the turn around and they hope that the Planning Board would approve it as well under the minor subdivision regulations. Thomson asks if the applicant is simultaneously withdrawing the approved 5 -Lot Yield Plan. Ogren states that they are requesting that the Planning Board approve the 6 -Lot Yield Plan. Dinkin opens the hearing up for public comment at this time. RJ Lyman of Hale Street addresses the Board and questions if the Board interprets the relevant section of the OSRD Ordinance to mean only City bodies or other government bodies as well. Thomson explains that the Board interprets the language to mean City bodies. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Dinkin declares the public hearing closed. Dinkin calls for a five - minute recess. Harris: Motion that the Planning Board take a five - minute recess. Dunn seconds the motion. The Chair votes in favor. The motion carries (5 -0). Dinkin reconvenes the meeting at 8:20 p.m. Discussion/Decision: Open Space Residential Design (OSRD) #2 -10 Initial Review — New 6 Lot Yield Plan and New 6 -Lot Concept Plan — 875 and 875 V2 Hale Street- Montrose School Park, LLC Thomson states that he was not present at the meeting last month, however he listened to the tape of the meeting and he is fully aware of the project. New 6 -Lot Yield Plan Thomson states that he feels constrained by the Ordinance in that the Board can't approve a 5- Lot Yield Plan because it has fewer lots than what the applicant has shown could be built under a conventional plan. He states the applicant has shown a 6 -Lot conventional plan and they have obtained local Conservation Commission approval for the 1 waiver needed. He comments that the Board should and must approve the 6 -lot Yield Plan. Thomson: Motion to extend the 45 -day period for the Board to vote on a Yield Plan until October 19, 2010 and to approve the applicant's request for an amendment of the Yield Plan, to Beverly Planning Board October 19, 2010 Page 5 of 6 substitute the 6 -Lot Yield Plan for the previously approved 5 -Lot Yield Plan. Hutchinson seconds the motion. The chair votes in favor. The motion carries (5 -0). Thomson: Motion to adopt and approve the 6 -lot yield plan for 875 -875 '/z Hale Street. Hutchinson seconds the motion. The chair votes in favor. The motion carries (4 -1 -0) with Harris opposed. Dinkin explains to those present that the Planning Board determined how many units of housing could be built under one of two scenarios. He notes that the applicant is entitled to a totally waiver free plan as a right of development. The other scenario is if there are waivers of any city regulatory authority needed, the applicant must obtain them before a vote on a Yield Plan. He notes that the Conservation Commission issued an Order of Conditions that makes the subdivision conform and they are entitled to this yield plan. He notes that they can build up to 6 units which in this case is 5 new units plus an existing unit on the site. New 6 -Lot Concept Plan: Dwg. SP-6 Mr. Rhuda distributes a letter dated October 19 with plans attached addressing concerns raised prior on the calculation of Buildable Area. Thomson notes that the Planning Board spent a lot of time visiting the site and reviewing the benefits of the site with regards to building size and width of roads etc. He notes that 44% of open space is a good outcome. He states that they have made the narrowest possible roadway and reduced the lot sizes to the greatest extent. He states this plan essentially meets the goals of the OSRD Ordinance to the greatest extent for a 6 -lot subdivision. He also states that he is sorry to see six lots on the site but they have proven their case. He recommends the developer still consider further refining the plan. Rhuda explains the changes that they have made to the plan. Dinkins asks if members of the Planning Board have any questions. Zambernardi asks what the frontage of lot 1 on Hale Street is. Thomson notes that once the Planning Board selects a preferred plan the applicant will have to come back to the Board for OSRD Site Plan Review where those details will be hashed out. Hutchinson asks for further clarifications of the plan. Zambernadi reads the following letters into the record: Elizabeth Dunn of the Open Space and Recreation Commission dated October 18, 2010 William Burke of the Health Department dated October 18, 2010 Larry Butler of 106 West Street dated October 19, 2010 Alfred Brown, III of 903R Hale Street dated October 18, 2010 Beverly Planning Board October 19, 2010 Page 6 of 6 Tom Grant of 868 Hale Street dated October 18, 2010 Petition signed by neighbors in opposition to OSRD Waivers at 875 Hale Street dated October 17, 2010 Thomson states that this is not a perfect situation, explaining that the 50% target for open space cannot be achieved with a 6 lot plan, however what they show they are entitled to by right. Thomson: Motion to adopt Dwg. SP -6 as the preferred plan as submitted this evening. Harris seconds the motion. The chair votes in favor of the motion. The motion carries (5 -0). Dinkin states that the OSRD ordinance is not an attempt to discourage development and is designed to encourage well designed residential projects that yield more than just profit. Continued Discussion/Decision — Proposed Adoption of "Submission Requirements Procedures and Supplemental Regulations" Pursuant to Section 29 -34 "Inclusion of Affordable Housing" and amendments to "Planning Board Regulations Governing Fees and Fee Schedules Zambernardi notes that at the last meeting members instructed planning staff to consider revising the method for determining neighborhoods by using groupings larger that the Assessors Neighborhood Code area. She explains that planning staff has met with Assistant Assessor Terry DeBlasie to discuss options for grouping the Assessor's neighborhoods. Zambernardi explains that the neighborhood codes are very specific and the proposal is to still use the neighborhood codes but take the average of the lowest 25% of the sales price with a minimum fee of $100,000 and a maximum fee of $1 million. She explains that the fee would be the difference between the market rate unit and the affordable purchase price. Dinkin states that he does not want to discourage development. Harris agrees and notes that a fee of $1 million dollars could have a chilling effect. He requests that the Planning Board defer action on this matter tonight. Dinkin agrees. Harris: Motion to table the proposal until a future unspecified date. Thomson seconds the motion. The chair votes in favor of the motion. The motion carries (5 -0). Adjournment Harris: Motion to adjourn. Dunn seconds the motion. The motion carries (5 -0). The meeting is adjourned at 9:30 p.m.