Loading...
2011-06-21CITY OF BEVERLY MASSACHUSETTS REGULAR MEETING MINUTES BOARD OR COMMISSION: Planning Board SUBCOMMITTEE: - DATE: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 LOCATION: Beverly City Hall, Council Chamber, 3 rd Floor PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard Dinkin, Vice Chairman John Thomson, Charles Harris, Ellen Flannery, David Mack, James Matz MEMBERS ABSENT: Ellen Hutchinson, Michael O'Brien OTHERS PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director, Leah Zambernardi RECORDER: Diana Ribreau Dinkin called the Regular Meeting of Beverly Planning Board to order at 7:30 p.m. Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans (SANR's) a. Corner of L.P. Henderson Road and Sam Fonzo Drive — City of Beverly and Cicoria Tree Service/Mark Cicoria Zambernardi informed the Planning Board that the applicant did not submit a SANR in time for this meeting, therefore it will not be heard tonight. b. 11 Whitehall Circle (a.k.a. Boyles Street) and 44 Boyles Street — Manor Homes Development and Kavanaugh. Bob Griffin from Griffin Engineering reviewed the plan for the Board and presented a map of the previously approved subdivision plan highlighting in yellow the old lot line. He stated that the land south of the yellow line is owned by Manor Homes Development. The subdivision plans filed did not completely describe the perimeter of parcels A, B, C, and D and various distances on the intermediate lot line had been left off the plan. Griffin said that no new lots are being created nor is there new frontage. The plans are the result of two lots (Lot 27 and Lot 32) with the same boundaries as on the approved subdivision plan. The subject is the process of the Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 2 of 17 conveyance of the land from Manor Homes to Mr. Kavanaugh. Griffin added that 11 Whitehall Circle is an unimproved lot that was approved as part of the 2008 Subdivision Plan. Thomson made a motion to endorse the plan as presented. Motion seconded by Harris. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining. C. 93 and 103 Hart Street MacQuarrie and Cabot Zambernardi described the property. She stated that Parcel C and D as shown on the plan are owned by MacQuarrie. The proposal is to cut off parcel C from MacQuarrie's land and convey it to the Cabot's. Zambernardi stated that Parcel D is MacQuarrie's lot, which is not a new building lot in the R15 Zoning and will continue to comply with the R15 zoning law. Parcel C will not be a building lot on its own. Matz asked a clarifying question. Zambernardi responded. Thomson made a motion to endorse the SANR plan. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining. Pending Application for Modification of Wellington Heights Definitive Subdivision (a.k.a. Oak Hill Estates Subdivision) — Request for Waiver of Owner Signature on Form C Application — Glenn Wood on behalf of Roundy Estates, LLC Zambernardi read a letter submitted by Wood on behalf of his client to the Planning Board dated June 20, 2011 requesting a continuance. Harris made a motion to accept the request for an extension to the July 19, 2011 Public Meeting. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining. Dinkin called the meeting to recess until 7:45 p.m. at which time the Planning Board will reconvene for the scheduled Public Hearing. Public Hearing: Special permit Application #127 — Convert existing property to 32 studio apartments for supportive veterans housing with additional studio unit for live -in responder — CC Zone — 60 Pleasant Street (a /k/a 62 Pleasant Street) — Pleasant Street Apartments — Windover Properties, LLC Zambernardi read the public notice for the record. Attorney Miranda Gooding, Glovsky and Glovsky, presented the proposed plans on behalf of the applicant, Windover Development. Gooding informed those present that she is accompanied by several representatives that will be available for questions. Present are: Lee Dellicker, Windover Development, Betsy Collins and Doreen Bushashia from Peabody Properties. Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 3 of 17 Gooding reviewed the special permit request under Section 29 -17.0 of the Zoning Ordinance, which requires authorization of a multi - family dwelling use in the CC District where more than 75% of the floor area of the building will be used for residential use. The property consists of a 7,000 s.f parcel of property of which there is 50 feet of frontage at 60 Pleasant Street and the private way on Court Street. Gooding went into the building's history stating that the building has been used as a nonconforming warehouse for at least 10 years. Since purchased by Windover Development in 2006, the building has been leased for operation as a self - storage facility. The request will create a conforming use by special permit to authorize the conversion of the property to 32 studio apartments for use as permanent, supportive veterans housing, together with one additional studio unit for a live -in responder. In addition to the residential use, the first floor will be used for veterans counseling and vocational training as well as offices for administrative purposes. There are exterior renovations proposed but no exterior expansion of the building footprint. The units will range from 350 -375 s.f and will include an efficiency kitchen and private bathroom. There will be a common area laundry and vocational services and additional space available for recreation. Gooding informed the Board that there is one correction on the application. The Local Veterans Affairs Agent that was originally planned to have an office on -site has potentially agreed to move to another location. Commercial space will be available for lease if in fact the space indicated is not used for the Local Veterans Affair Agent. The floor plans have been revised to show the designation of commercial space to avoid any confusion. Gooding continued to say that the newly restored building will be compliant to all ADA requirements, also noted on the floor plans. There are two units that are handicap accessible and the remainder of the units will be adaptable to handicap accessibility. The common areas will be compliant with ADA as well. The renovation will be done by Windover Development. Windover Development has requested historic tax credits to assist in funding the project. The project will be compliant with National Park Service Standards. The property will be professionally managed by Peabody Properties. Gooding gave a brief overview on the background of the company. Gooding stated that on May 23, 2011, Windover Development conducted a neighborhood meeting to all residential abutters that had questions or concerns about the project so that they could hear those concerns and comments and answer questions to the best of their ability before this meeting. Gooding added that Windover Development has had considerable support from state and local governments and feels that Windover Development has already made a marked difference in the property since it was purchased and the project will greatly enhance the neighborhood. Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 4 of 17 Lee Dellicker, President of Windover Development, gave a brief overview of Windover's vision at Depot Square and the surrounding areas. Dellicker presented different views of the original building and what the building looks like now in addition to plans for the exterior. Dellicker reiterated that Windover has applied for historic tax credits and has already been granted $400,000 so far and in total will be eligible for $1.1 million. There are a series of steps to get that money but the funding will make the building an outstanding one. Dellicker presented drawings of Depot Square and the surrounding areas to help viewers understand what their vision has been. They have worked closely with the MBTA and explained a variety of schemes of how they have not been able to complete everything they had envisioned but they are doing their best with what the market is at the time. He added that the location of the building in question has always been a challenge in their overall development plan. There were plans to have a public /private partnership with the "T" and combine the residential /commercial needs with the commuter parking needs. However, the "T" ended up going in a different direction. The "T" decided to go with an RFP and with that, took several sites that Windover owned by eminent domain. Dellicker pointed out on graphics presented what Windover owns today and projects they are currently working on. Dellicker told the Board that Windover Development is and has been heavily invested in the neighborhood and feels that they are making the best use of the property. Thomson asked Dellicker if he knows where the parking garage is projected to be. Dellicker showed the Board what he believes are the MBTA's latest plans. Dellicker went on to say that he was introduced to an outfit called Caritas Communites that works with North Shore Veterans who have purchased the property previously known as the "Press Box ". He was educated on the need for veteran housing from what Caritas Communities has been doing to help. In the process, he was also introduced to DHCD (Department of Housing and Community Development) and found even more reasons for the need to assist veterans with housing. Windover started looking for a partner who understands the complexities of funding and understands veterans housing and operating and managing this type of service. After their research, they found that Peabody Properties was the best fit for the project. Dellicker feels that Peabody Properties has similar values and culture as Windover. Peabody Properties has been involved with veteran housing and experience with funding for many years. He noted that Peabody Properties also manages the Millery across the street. In closing, Dellicker reviewed phase one and two of their plans between Depot Square and the Weaver Site and added that they have been consistent with high quality projects and would not be proposing a use for the proposed building site if he thought it would jeopardize the value of the 63 unit market building next to it (Depot Square). Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 5 of 17 Doreen Bushashia, Director of Resident Properties - Peabody Properties, introduced herself and gave an overview of Peabody Properties mission statement and their approach to management. Currently, they manage 10,000 units in Massachusetts with affordable housing and supportive services. Peabody Properties is an experienced long -term management company but is also experienced with the population in need. Bushashia submitted for viewing a portfolio showing a number of awards and recognition from the State. Peabody Properties has a full complement of professionals and experts in all different areas including a grant writer. They are also licensed by the State for a foster care program. In addition, they have personal care and homemaking services, which shows they are very committed to the affordable housing model. Peabody Properties has a good track record with many awards that prove that they are a good fit for this particular property in serving special populations. Bushashia described the model of staffing that will be available for the building. She added that the building is not open to the general public. Bushashia closed by saying that Peabody Properties has a long track record for managing affordable permanent housing and they welcome the opportunity to work on this project. Betsy Collins, Director of Development - Peabody Properties, reviewed their plans for the project. Sufficient funding has been secured for the proposed project. Peabody Properties has been successful in getting long -term commitments from HUD for rental subsidies. Plans to hire a Case Manager are in place that will be funded fully by HUD. The project is dependent on state and municipal resources under Chapter 115. The resident portion is 30% of the individual income and the subsidy received by HUD pays the remainder of the housing fee. There are requirements for the residents that receive the subsidy. Because it is a certified Historic Building, tax credits have been available for funding. In addition there is private equity money coming in. They have accumulated resources to begin the project as a permanent resource. In closing, Collins said that they have met with the Mayor and Congressman Tierney whom have been very supportive and have helped in getting the rental subsidies. Dinkin said that in comments he heard there was only one stream of income stated that would be taken care of by HUD. He asked where funding is coming from to support the remainder of the staff Collins responded that other staff members are funded by rental income from the building and that the project is fully funded and within the budget. Dinkin asked about the extent of a long -term commitment. Collins responded that it is a 15 -year commitment that is subject to renewal at that time. At the end of the initial commitment the option to choose a 10 or 20 year renewal is available. Matz asked for an explanation for the plans that show the case manager office and vocational classroom on the first floor, which seems to be replaced by commercial space on the new plan. Gooding responded that those services will still be there however they defined everything that was commercial as opposed to residential for clarification purposes on the plan. Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 6 of 17 Matz asked about available parking spaces. Gooding responded that there is space on -site for 3 cars and the property is within 500 feet of public parking. Matz asked if there is a project that has been done that is similar to the proposed project and if so, where the nearest location is located. Boushashia distributed a package of all the properties that Peabody Properties currently manages. Boushashia noted that not all of the sites they manage house veterans. Matz asked if the facility is for men only. Boushashia responded no, however the property is not suitable for children. Matz asked how Peabody Properties plans to manage other homeless people outside the building and if it is an issue at other facilities they manage. Boushashia responded that they have a very proactive process in place and explained the incident follow -up process. Collins added comments relating to the processes in place. Dinkin asked how many units that house veterans are on the North Shore and how many police incident reports they have on record. Boushashia responded that Peabody Properties has close to 1,000 units but they do not have exact numbers for incident reports available however that there have been very few. Boushashia stated that they work very closely and collaboratively with local police departments and the local neighborhood watch. In addition, they have onsite satellite to police stations and security onsite between staff and the building itself. They continue to work on the front end and be preventative by giving education up front to avoid as many incidents as possible. She also stated they have data which can be made available if the Planning Board wishes to review it. Dinkin requested to see the data pertaining to incident reports from projects that house veterans that are managed by Peabody Properties. Collins agreed to gather information to satisfy Dinkin's request. Gooding added that this was brought up at the neighborhood meeting. There had been frequent complaints of vandalism when the building had been used as a warehouse. By bringing a good active use with onsite management 24 hours a day with this project she believes the situation would be actively improved for the neighborhood and it would hopefully eliminate the number of incidents. Mack asked if they anticipate the commercial rental income is necessary to fund any portion of the project. Collins responded no. Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 7 of 17 Thomson asked if the project is subject to an affordable housing restriction recorded with the registry of deeds. Gooding responded that it is financed in part by tax credits. The Ordinance for Affordable Housing is almost identical to the DHCD for other affordable housing restrictions. Thomson asked if there is an affordability requirement. Collins responded that it is 60% of the area median. Thomson followed by asking if the project is designed for one or two occupants. Gooding responded that it is intended for one occupant per unit. Thomson then asked what happens if a person gets married. Gooding responded that the space is restricted by size of the unit by the State and if a situation arises where there would be a need for more than one occupant together, they would work with that resident to find suitable space for them. Thomson asked if Peabody Properties could provide a general idea of the number of homeless veteran's there are in Beverly. Collins responded that the latest data she has from 2009, there are 1,890 veterans in the State of Massachusetts and that 12% of the actual homeless population is veterans in the State. Thomson asked what happens if there comes a time where the need for veterans housing is no longer needed. Gooding responded that it is not likely to happen but in the event that were to happen she feels there is ample need for affordable housing for the general population. Collins added an example of a building they manage with AIDS patients and the use for that type of housing is still for affordable housing units. Mack asked if the tenants are required to sign a lease. Gooding responded yes, a 12 -month lease is required. Dinkin asked that Zambernardi read the comment letters submitted for the record. June 20, 2011 — Sergeant William Page, Beverly Police Department June 16, 2011 — William T. Burke, Director of Public Health June 14, 2011 — Amy Maxner, Environmental Planner; Conservation Commission June 13, 2011 — William Fiore, Beverly Fire Department June 07, 2011 — Email; Eric Barber, City Engineer June 06, 2011 — Arthur Daignault, ADA Coordinator, City of Beverly May 20, 2011 — Email; Michelle Gordon — Resident of Gateway June 20, 2011 — Lynn Pellino, Executive Director, North Shore Veterans Counseling Services, Inc. Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 8of17 No date - Rocco L. Pensiaro, Veteran — 116 Rantoul Street Gooding presented closing remarks. Gooding corrected for the record that Windover has always represented that the project is for individual veterans and it has never been intended for veteran's families. Gooding added that the project satisfies the requirements for a special permit because more than 75% of the total floor area of the building will be used for residences in the CC Zoning District. Under Section 29 -28.0 the Planning Board is required to evaluate the project against criteria that was read aloud for the record and also included in the staff report. Gooding commented how Windover Development meets each of the criteria. Windover Development finds that this proposed project is appropriate use for the property. Mack asked about the type of security that is planned for the site and what type of insurance is mandated. Collins responded that they have comprehensive insurance for all the properties they manage. In reference to security, the staffing plan is used to have a security presence. Security cameras and flex hours are in the budget for additional security presence during certain times. The building is also a locked building. Harris stated that he is a 7 -year veteran and he applauds what the project's purpose is. He said that it seems to be a concern with what type of individual will be housed in this building and he asked for an explanation on the screening requirements for the veteran's that apply. Collins responded that they must be a veteran and provide documentation of homelessness. Boushashia added that it is mandated in the tenant selection plan by the State to meet all standard qualifications such as references, ability to pay rent, criminal records, etc. Harris asked for confirmation on plans for the MBTA parking lot adjacent to this site. Gooding responded that the plan is for a multi -level garage with approximately 500 parking spaces and it will also have commercial space for lease as well. Thomson asked what the time frame is to construct the MBTA garage. Gooding responded that the estimates known to her is the project is to begin January 2012 and will be finished in 2013. Gooding added that for the proposed plans before them this evening Windover Development foresees the site to be construction ready by the end of this calendar year. Thomson said for clarification to the public, Windover is before the Planning Board tonight because their plans propose using more than 75% of the building for veteran's housing which requires a special permit. If the plans presented were less than 75% they would not require a special permit or be before the Planning Board for a vote. Gooding responded yes. Thomson requested clarification on the meaning of a veteran and asked if it is anyone who served in the military not just those that served inaction. Gooding responded yes. Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 9 of 17 Dinkin opened the meeting up to clarifying questions from the public Victor Capozzi, 138 Bridge Street, Beverly, stated that he is on the Board of Directors for the North Shore Veterans Counseling Services, Inc. and also a Vietnam veteran. Capozzi stated that the parking garage is vague and poses much concern. There is no garage yet therefore there is no guaranteed staff parking available beyond the three spaces mentioned in addition to those that will be coming and going from the site. Gooding responded that the population being served will be homeless and not likely to have a vehicle but agreed that in the future there may be cars owned by residents with the help of the services provided onsite to get the veterans back on their feet. Gooding added that the site is in walking distance to transit bus and train lines and it is likely that residents will live without a vehicle. In the event residents do own a vehicle, there are mechanisms in place. Parking passes will be provided and subsidies will offset the cost of the passes. Gooding said that the location of the facility is a perfect offset not to have a car and for those that do, arrangements will be available to those residents. Gooding added that the site complies with parking by the City Zoning Ordinance prospective. Robert Desjardins 21 Swan Street, stated he is a 33 year veteran of US Army and that he supports homeless veteran's 100 %. He asked how many homeless veterans there are in Beverly and what the projections of homeless veterans are in 1, 3, and 5 years from now in the City. Scott Houseman, Appleton Avenue, Beverly, stated that in the past year the River House has provided at least temporary housing for approximately six or less homeless veterans. Gooding responded that it is not foreseen that the proposed facility will house only veterans from the City of Beverly and the figure on the number of veterans that are homeless in the State of Massachusetts is currently 1,700. Lauren Kelly, resident at Depot Square, 116 Rantoul Street, Beverly, said she is not opposed to veteran's assistance but is opposed to the location. Kelly asked what type of security will be provided to the Depot Square residents. Susan Fielding, resident at Depot Square in Beverly asked about the square footage for residential space and commercial space in the building. Gooding responded. Michelle Gordon, 60 Rantoul Street, Gateway, Beverly, stated that she attended the last meeting on Zoning Ordinance changes to the parking requirements and she said that Planning Director Cassidy spoke about the garage and said it was a private commercial garage. She added that no provision has been made for parking other than the provision from the MBTA. Gordon asked for clarification on what municipal parking really means and if a commercial MBTA lot meets those Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 10 of 17 criteria. Dellicker responded that it is his understanding that they will lease out commercial space in addition to having the parking in the garage. Bob Gilbert, 115 Water Street, Beverly, stated that he is Commander of the Vietnam Veterans Association and a 22 year veteran of the US Army. Gilbert wanted clarification that you cannot specify that the project would only house Beverly veterans. Dinkin responded it would be against the law. Gilbert asked if the criteria defined as a veteran means an honorably discharged veteran. Collins responded yes. Gerry Giulebbe, 26 Pine Street, and Veterans Agent for Beverly described his responsibility for the wellbeing and care for Veterans that move into the City of Beverly. Giulebbe stated that the proposed project will add another 20 -30 hours to his job and he feels it would be an additional burden on him and for the City of Beverly. Giulebbe stated that an additional 10 to 15 veterans alone adds another $60,000 + a year coming out of the City which he feels is over taxed and burdened now. VASH vouchers can't be awarded indefinitely and he stated his concerns over stipends. He added that he is retiring next year and that it will not be his problem but is concerned nonetheless. Collins responded and supports some of the concerns Mr. Giulebbe raised. Collins said that most of the job Giulebbe does will be in -house at the facility. There is a 2 year commitment that the State and City makes with funding a veteran. It allows them to move into the facility even if they are no longer dependent on the stipend under Chapter 115. Dinkin added that eligibility for SSI will likely be available. Collins concurred. Collins stated that there is a special award for VASH vouchers (tenant based subsidy for veterans from HUD and the VA), which is given to the unit rather than the individual, which is held by the Case Manager. If a veteran moves on, this award would go to the next veteran. Collins added that it is a federal VA not the State. Maureen Troubetaris, 28 Davis Road, Beverly, stated that she is not opposed to veterans housing and has family members that served. Troubetaris stated her concern that several pending projects all point to the MBTA garage for parking and are dependent on this garage. She doesn't feel there will be enough space for the commuters to park especially with yet another proposed project that will have tenants, staff, and visitors parking in the MBTA garage. In addition, Troubetaris said that Collins referenced using community resources. She feels that the City is maxed out on local references and resources. Collins responded that the facility is not trying to tie into existing services. There is an active outreach program with vocational efforts as well as North Shore Veteran's Association offers some programs that are a good fit to the residents. Educational schools are active in the community college network on training. Their hope is to try not to burden other existing programs. Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 11 of 17 Boushashia added that there is the GED program in the community and opportunities for referrals there as well. She added that Peabody Properties has a full -time person dedicated for funding. Referrals are made when appropriate. Rosemary Maglio, 32 Pleasant Street, Beverly, asked if the project has a variance yet and how it plans to get through the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Maglio said that under the Zoning Ordinance, this lot is 7,000 s.f in a CC Zone which requires 1,000 s.f per unit and the proposed plans include 32, 1- bedroom apartments. Gooding responded that under Section 29- 17.D.5 the building is a combined residential/commercial use so a variance is not required. Gooding said that the proposed plan complies with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Also, 100% of units are affordable which far exceeds what the City Ordinance requires. In addition to a special permit application they have filed an application for review with the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance to ensure that the project complies with other regulatory requirements. Dinkin stated that the section Maglio refers to does not require the Public Hearing part of the discussion or part of the decision process for this proposal. Because it does not require a Public Hearing it is not in order. Maglio asked if Windover Development plans to restore the sidewalk on Pleasant Street. Dellicker responded that no, a sidewalk is not required on both sides of the street. Maglio doesn't feel that the MBTA garage can be counted on for parking for the facility and asked where staff will park. Collins responded that there are 3 spaces available on -site and staff will be on a rotating basis and that not everyone will be using a vehicle. Lauren Kelly, 116 Rantoul Street, Depot Square, asked again what type of security will there be for Depot Square residents. Dellicker responded that they installed a security system at Depot Square and plan to install a security system at the proposed building. Jim Ladder, 145 Park Street, Beverly, stated the he would never want to discourage veteran's coming to Beverly. He asked that the Planning Board keep in mind that the facility is being used for a special population. There are other properties around the area that also house a challenging population and he feels that needs to be taken into consideration. Victor Capozzi, 138 Bridge Street, Beverly, is a member of North Shore Veterans. Capozzi stated that he resents that Windover Development is assuming that the occupants will not have cars. His facility took in transit veterans and 70% of them have cars. Capozzi wanted to make it clear that residents of the facility will not all be honorably discharged veterans. Capozzi went over the different types of veterans that qualify. He explained his opinion that the veterans that will be housed at the proposed facility will be like the veterans that are at his facility. He agreed that there are some veterans that are truly deserving and are in need but that 90% of the veterans Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 12 of 17 that qualify for the facility will have problems with mental and /or substance abuse. Capozzi gave some examples of the personalities of the veterans that he houses in Beverly adding that they are homeless because they have issues. He does not allow VASH vouchers in his building and explained the VASH voucher process within the system. He added that having a VASH voucher doesn't allow you to check a veteran's military background history. Capozzi feels that the proposed facility will bring environmental and social problems to the Beverly community, as the City will have approximately 100 people within one City block that will be very high risk. Chuck Clark, 65 Juniper Street, Beverly, board member of the North Shore Veterans Service, stated that he is the owner of a towing business on Park Street in Beverly. Parking continues to be an issue in the downtown area and he described projects with multi -unit buildings that have been created over the years and with each one, parking becomes more of an issue. He feels there simply is not enough room to keep adding projects that do not house sufficient parking on -site. Clark described his experience with towing in the downtown area of Beverly. Clark agrees with Victor Capozzi's comments. Robert Desjardins, 21 Swan Street, Beverly, read statistics from Veteran's Inc. that serves veterans across the street. He added that he is in support of North Shore Veterans. Dinkin asked for a motion to recess the Public Hearing until another time certain. Thomson made a motion that the Public Hearing be recessed until July 19, 2011 at 8:00 p.m. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining. City Council Legal Affairs Committee Request for Planning Board Comments - Proposed Amendments to Watershed Protection Overlay District Ordinance and Map — Planning Board Discussion/Recommendation Dinkin asked if the Planning Board has had an opportunity to read Planning Director Cassidy's comments and if the Board would like to add or delete anything at this time. Thomson said he would like input from Cassidy. Thomson stated that he had trouble comparing the new proposal to the existing proposal. He added that the Chief Planner has done a nice job summarizing and raising issues. With extensive comments and conflicts that are not resolved Thomson doesn't feel the Board could make comments on the matter. Thomson recommends that City Council not act favorably on the current proposal but if the City Council is to pursue the matter a study committee of some kind be created to try and resolve those differences and produce an ordinance that will meet those concerns. Pam Kampersal, 241 Dodge Street, Beverly, stated that the City Council Legal Affairs Committee has decided to have a subcommittee meeting in the fall to look at the Watershed Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 13 of 17 Protection Overlay District Ordinance and have a new ordinance written if deemed it is important. Kampersal informed the Board that she has a copy showing side by side the current Ordinance created in 1987 on one side and the proposed Safe Drinking Water Ordinance on the other side which makes it much easier to read and eliminates most all of Cassidy's concerns. Kampersal offered to send this to the Board via email. Dinkin requested that she send it to Leah Zambernardi. Kampersal agreed. She continued by stating that the only thing that is different in the proposed ordinance is updating it to meet the Federal Clean Water Act and the Mass DEP Requirements as well as the US EPA Requirements. Kampersal doesn't feel the concerns are a big issue and offered to answer Cassidy's concerns now to the Planning Board if desired. Kampersal reminded the Board that a draft of the Safe Drinking Water Act proposal was provided to all boards and commissions and if things need to be changed it needs to get done. She added that the existing Ordinance is 24 years old and Beverly needs to step up and get it accomplished. Kampersal asked that the Planning Board write a letter to the City Council of Legal Affairs stating the Board's view that it is a good idea and that Council should sit down with those members appropriate and get it done to make the best revisions possible to protect the City of Beverly's drinking water supply. Thomson stated that he is supportive of the Ordinance however he feels that there are two different bodies looking at the same Ordinance and if there are things that need to be changed it is another process itself. Thomson said it doesn't make sense to discuss the matter any further. Ward 2 Councilor Wes Slate said that a request went out to Legal Affairs and to all relevant boards and commissions to revise the Ordinance. When the proposal came in it was lengthy and complicated. Speaking as a member of Council, Legal Affairs and the rest of Council felt that they didn't have the expertise to judge it and that is why it went out to the Planning Board and other Commissions for review and comments. Those involved have given their best advice on what the current ordinance did or did not do and it did not get a unanimous response from City Council. It seemed necessary that a subcommittee needs to be created that has the relevant experts to evaluate the proposals. It was a general agreement that that the current ordinance needs work and it should be made relevant to look at the boundaries for the subcommittee to comment on. Thomson asked if subcommittee exists. Slate responded not yet but it will be created. It will be a subcommittee of City Council members and added that Ward 5 Councilor Don Martin is a member of Legal Affairs and the representative in the ward where much of the watershed lies and he will surely be part of the subcommittee. Thomson made a recommendation and motion for the Planning Board to write a letter to City Council that a subcommittee be created with Cassidy included in some way. The Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 14 of 17 Planning Board will rely on Cassidy's input. Matz concurred and seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining. Continued Discussion/Decision — OSRD Site Plan Application #02 -10 — 875 and 875 V2 Hale Street — Montrose School Park, LLC. Matz recused himself from the room at this time. Zambernardi stated for the record, David Mack has signed a certification of evidence review — pursuant to General Law Chapter 39 Section 23D that he missed no more than a single session of the Hearing and that he has examined all evidence of that session including an audio of the session and is eligible to vote. Zambernardi updated the Planning Board on the matter stating that the last meeting on May 10, 2011, members took 2 votes. One carried and one did not. The plan is still on the table for the Board to look at and comment. Zambernardi made note that the last plan dated May 5 th was circulated around to the various commenting bodies and the Planning Board has received comments back. Zambernardi said that the Open Space Committee and Conservation Commission have made comments on the open space management plan submitted. In addition, letters from various bodies have been received. The Board has received email correspondence from Kevin Barry, 265 Hale Street; RJ Lyman, 852 Hale Street; and Tom Grant of Hale Street. Jeff Rhuda responded to those emails today. Thomson stated he would like to hear what the municipal agencies had to say. Mack agreed and asked for Zambernardi to paraphrase the letters to the Planning Board: Zambernardi paraphrased certain sections within the following letters: Letter dated June 20, 2011 - Conservation Commission Letter dated June 20, 2011 - Open Space Committee Letter from the Fire Department Letter dated June 7, 2011 - Engineering Department (included in staff report) Letter dated June 7, 2011 — Parking and Traffic Commission (included in staff report) Thomson said he is concerned about the date that the Planning Board is bound by in the Ordinance. Thomson submitted the following motion in writing: "To approve the proposed OSRD site plan as last submitted, including the granting of all waivers necessary in order to accomplish same, upon the following conditions in addition to any non - waived requirements of the OSRD ordinance: Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 15 of 17 1 - The recommendations set forth in the comment letters received to date from the following boards, committees and departments of the city are incorporated by reference in this decision to the extent not already depicted in the site plan: City Engineer - dated June 7, 2011 Parking & Traffic - dated June 7, 2011 Design Review Board - dated June 7, 2011 2 - The Standard Open Space Conditions submitted by the Planning staff at the May 10 meeting (attached) are incorporated by reference. 3 - No portions of the Open Space shown on the site plan may dedicated to exclusive use easements or other rights for specific lots or homeowners - the entire Open Space is to remain available for use by all owners of homes within the site plan tract. There shall be no landscaping to set off or demark yard areas outside the house lots. 4 - No fences or other above - ground structures, whether temporary or permanent, may be erected or places within the Open Space - this would include (but not be limited to) swing sets or similar play structures, tennis courts, paved walkways, but would not include moveable: lawn furniture, picnic tables and chairs /benches etc. suitable for passive recreation. 5 - The way providing access to new the lots shown on the site plan shall remain private and the city shall at no time have any obligations with respect to its maintenance, snow - plowing or utilities therein. 6 - The Open Space shall not be disturbed during construction except for the planting of trees as depicted on the landscape plan, and the installation and maintenance of underground utilities and drainage structures; and all disturbed areas shall be promptly restored upon completion of the applicable portion of such work. No building material, fill, or debris shall be stockpiled within the Open Space, even temporarily. 7 - Construction activity shall be limited to the hours of 8 AM to 6 PM, on weekdays only. 8 - The site plan must clearly depict the "areas not to be disturbed" (to be reviewed by Planning staff for consistency with representations made to the Planning Board by the applicant). 9 - The form of deed of the Open Space must be approved by this Board prior to recording. 10 - The Open Space Management Plan, the Operation and Maintenance Plan for Long -term Pollution Prevention, the Homeowners Association Trust, the Restrictive Covenant, Easement Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 16 of 17 and Agreement - Open Space, shall each be subject to final approval by this Planning Board after first having been reviewed by the city solicitor. Initial changes required include: Open Space Management Plan - no structures except per this decision; only organic weed, pest and disease control (as well as organic fertilizers) Operation and Maintenance Plan - delete references to parking lot Homeowners Trust - reference on page 1 to city acting "by and through its Planning Board" needs review; assignments under 9(k) to other entities to be subject to prior Planning Board approval and only if new entity assumes all obligations; cost shares (1/5 vs 1/6 need to be rectified and coordinated with Restrictive Covenant) Restrictive Covenant - must refer to and incorporate conditions of this decision; amount of bond must be increased to $5,000; right of enforcement to be extended to abutting lot owners on same side of Hale Street." Harris suggested that item #7 read Monday- Friday, excluding Holidays. Mack made a motion to accept Thomson's motion as read with the suggested change by Harris. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with Matz abstaining. Continued Discussion/Decision: 875 Hale Street Definitive Subdivision Plan — create 6 new lots in R10 Zone — Montrose School Park, LLC Attorney Brad Latham respectfully requests a continuance on the discussion on the matter until the end of July. Thomson said it is his understanding that in that period of time the subdivision plan is going to be revised to be consistent with the decision. Latham said that the Board gave instructions tonight that if a revision is required the engineer would make revisions consistent with the OSRD. Thomson made a motion to extend the discussion and decision until the end of July. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with Matz abstaining. Matz joined the meeting at this time. Request for Minor Modification to Site Plan #37 -98: 950 Cummings Center: Beverly Commerce Park, LLP — New solar support structure over 3 -level parking garage at corner of Elliott and McKay Streets: Regular Meeting Beverly Planning Board June 21, 2011 Page 17 of 17 Steve Drohosky, 43 Hickory Lane, Boxford, General Manager of the Cummings Center in Beverly discussed the request for a minor modification to an existing site plan at the Cummings Center. He described a similar request that was approved a couple years ago and that they are hoping to do the same thing on the west garage which is on the corner of Route 62 and McKay Street. The plans are for the installation of a solar support structure on the west garage, which is the only garage that doesn't have plans for a solar structure on it. Zambernardi asked Drohosky if he could explain the ZBA Application for a variance request. Drohosky explained that they were asked to come to the Planning Board for site plan review before going to the ZBA by the Building Department. The ZBA Hearing is scheduled for July 26, 2011. The height requires the variance on part of the garage, which sits in two zones. The IR Zone has a 60 ft. height limitation and the IG Zone has a 35 ft. height limitation. Drohosky stated that the variance would allow the structure to go to 49 ft. over the required 35 ft. and it would be 33 -36 ft. high on McKay Street. Mack requested the actual height of the solar structure panels. Drohosky presented a rendition of the plans. He stated that the structure will not be visible on McKay Street. Thomson stated his opinion that the request is a minor modification request not a major modification. Dinkin added that it goes along with renewable energy and the previous approval for a minor modification to the other solar panel structures at the Cummings Center. Mack made a motion determining that the request is for a minor modification. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining. Mack made a motion to approve the modification request. Motion seconded by Flannery. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining. Approval of Minutes: March 29, April 26 and May 10 meetings. Dinkin said that the approval of the minutes listed on the agenda can be made at the next meeting. Mack made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 10:50 p.m. Motion seconded by Matz. Motion passed 5 -0 -1 with the Chair abstaining.