2014-03-18 (2)Beverly Planning Board
March 18, 2014
Board:
Date:
Location:
Members Present
Members Absent:
Others Present:
Recorder:
CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
Planning Board Meeting
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Beverly City Hall
Vice Chair John Thomson, Ellen Flannery, Ellen Hutchinson, John
Mullady, James Matz, Edwin Barrett, David Mack, Catherine
Barrett and Wayne Miller
None
City Planner Aaron Clausen, Assistant City Planner Leah
Zambernardi
Eileen Sacco
Thomson calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
Thomson states that the first order of business this evening is the election of a Chair for the
Planning Board.
Election of Officers for 2014
Election of Chair of the Planning Board
Flannery nominates John Thomson for the office of Chairman of the Beverly Planning Board for
the year 2014. Hutchinson seconds that motion.
Thomson asks if there are any further nominations for the office of Chairman. There are none.
Thomson declares the nominations closed.
Thomson calls for a vote on the nomination of John Thomson as Chair of the Planning Board for
the year 2014. The motion carried (7 -0 -2) with Thomson and C. Barrett abstaining.
Thomson states that the Board should now elect a Vice Chair of the Planning Board for the year
2014.
Election of Vice Chair of the Planning Board
Hutchinson nominates David Mack for the office of Vice Chair of the Planning Board for 2014.
Mack graciously declines.
Flannery nominates Ellen Hutchinson for the office of Vice Chair of the Planning Board for
2014. Mullady seconds the motion. The motion carries (7 -0 -2) with Hutchinson and C. Barrett
abstaining.
Subdivision Approval Not Require Plans
Page 1 of 6
Beverly Planning Board
March 18, 2014
There are no subdivision approval not required plans this evening.
Request for Minor Modification to Site Plan #106 -12, Special Permit #130 -12 and
Inclusionary Housing #03 -12 — Enterprise Apartments — 79 Rantoul Street — Windover
Enterprise, LLC
Attorney Miranda Gooding of Glovsky and Glovsky addresses the Planning Board and reports
that during the site inspection by Planning Department staff in preparation for an occupancy
permit from the Building Department, some elements of the Planning Board approved plans had
not yet been completed and several changes had been made to the building without Planning
Board approval. She noted that they are here this evening with a request for a minor
modification to the approved site plan.
Atty. Gooding reviewed the items that were reported as unfinished as of the site visit and noted
that they have all been completed.
Atty. Gooding introduced Peter Boudreau to review the changes that were made to the plan
during construction.
Boudreau reviewed the discrepancies between the as built conditions and the approved Planning
Board plan as follows:
• Doors to the transformer on the southeast side of the building - Plain vault doors were
installed, whereas decorative doors were approved by the Planning Board. The metal
gates and brick details above the doors on the soldier course shown on the plans were not
built.
• The east elevation balconies are Juliet balconies, and not full balconies as show on the
approved plans
• The metal gates on the ground story openings are lower and different in design than the
metal gates shown on the approved plans
• The curtain wall on the north elevation differs slightly from the approved plans — as built
there is not a mullion at the ACM panel
• Precast sills were installed on the bottom of the windows on the upper stories and the
plan calls for brick sills
• Fence installed on the site is two feet lower than the approved plan.
Thomson asks if the Design Review Board knows that the mullion was not done. Zambernardi
states that if the Planning Board finds this to be a major modification the Design Review Board
will review this.
Thomson notes that the fence installed is two feet lower than approved.
Barrett states that it was his understanding that the fence was to limit the visibility of the parking
garage.
Page 2 of 6
Beverly Planning Board
March 18, 2014
Miller states that the fence installed provides no limitation to access and one could get over that
fence and that could be a safety concern.
Boudreau addresses changes to the windows and explains that the precast sills were installed
because they do a better job. Matz asks by brick sills were proposed in the first place. Boudreau
states that he is not sure why.
Boudreau explained that the vault doors were installed per the requirements of National Grid
because they are fire rated doors for safety.
Flannery states that the vault doors look awful and suggested that perhaps they could paint them.
Boudreau explains that the full balconies did not make sense given the closeness of abutting
properties.
Thomson explains the difference between a minor and a modification to the approved plan and
explains that the task of the Board this evening is to determine whether the proposed
modifications are minor in nature. He further explains that if the Board finds the modifications
are minor, it shall then vote on the substance of the request. If the Board finds that the
modifications are not minor, it shall order that applications for major modifications be filed with
the Planning Department and that a public hearing be scheduled.
Flannery noted that the Desgin Review Board had very few comments on this project when it
was reviewed. Zambernardi agreed noting that it was a very well designed building at the outset.
Boudreau explained that with the exception of the mullions the other changes came about due to
concerns about neighbors' privacy and noise concerns. He explained that the Juliette balconies
made sense because of the close proximity of the abutters in the rear of the building and to
minimize the noise impact for the neighbors.
Zambernardi noted that the master plan and design guidelines for downtown make
recommendations for a walkable, vibrant downtown. She noted that the guidelines for facades
call attention to how the building interacts with the streetscape. She also suggested that the
Board's focus should be those changes that affect the appearance of the building on Rantoul
Street.
Mullady states that he feels that the change in the fencing improves the project noting that there
is less of a prison like appearance.
Mack states that he would like to give the Design Review Board a chance to weigh in on the
changes that have been made.
Thomson notes that one change was mandated by National Grid for safety reasons however he
does not see why the other changes were made without input from the Planning Board.
Page 3 of 6
Beverly Planning Board
March 18, 2014
Zambernardi notes that the zoning ordinance allows for the Design Review Board to review any
project referred to them by the Planning Board.
Miller questions if all of the changes need to be minor. Thomson explains that if one change is
found to be major they would all require a public hearing.
Atty. Gooding stated that she understands the Board's concerns and noted that in a project of this
magnitude these things happen. She stressed that Windover was not trying to pull one over on
the Board.
Thomson asks if they are waiting for the final Certificate of Occupancy for the building.
Gooding stated that they have a Certificate of Occupancy and are leasing the units at risk.
Mack asks if there would be a hardship if the Planning Board sought guidance from the Design
Review Board noting that he would feel more comfortable if they had a chance for input.
Mack: Moves to refer the request for the minor modification back to the Design Review
Board and to postpone further discussion and a decision on this matter until the
next meeting of the Planning Board in April. Hutchinson seconded the motion.
The motion carried (7 -0 -1) with C. Barrett abstaining.
Request for Modification to Inclusionary Housing Permit
Atty. Gooding stated that they also requested a modification to the Inclusionary Housing permit
and explained that they received a request for a handicap affordable unit and it made sense so
they are requesting to swap out a unit to make the change.
Zambernardi noted that there is an increased need for accessible affordable units.
Zambernardi reported that Planning staff has reviewed this request for an amendment to the
Inclusionary Housing Permit and finds that the proposed changes comply with the ordinance and
its rules and regulations.
Flannery: moves to approve the modification to the Inclusionary Housing Permit
Hutchinson seconds the motion. The motion carries (7 -0 -1) with Barrett
abstaining.
Special Permit #115 -07 for Sam Fonzo Drive /Trask Street — Request for Acknowledgement
Automatic Extension under the Permit Extension Act — C. Ronald Vitale
Zambernardi explains that the Board approved a site plan and special permit in March of 2008 to
allow for the construction of a 15,000 s.f light industrial building in the IR and R45 Zoning
District and in the Watershed Protection Overlay District at the corner of Sam Fonzo Drive and
Trask Street. She noted that the Special Permit was originally set to expire on April 4, 2010 and
Mr. Vitale sought and received an extension of the special permit to April 12, 2012. In March of
2012, Mr. Vitale received an automatic extension to April 4, 2014 pursuant to the Permit
Page 4 of 6
Beverly Planning Board
March 18, 2014
Extension Acts of 2010 which allows that approvals in existence or effect during the tolling
period between August 15, 2008 through August 2012 are automatically extended for a period of
2 years in addition to the lawful term of the approval. The Act was amended in 2012 and
afforded applicants with an additional two year automatic extension and Mr. Vitale is requesting
acknowledge the extension to April 4, 2016.
Mack: moves that the Planning Board acknowledges that Special Permit #115 -07 for
Sam Fonzo Drive /Trask Street has received an automatic extension until April 4,
2016. Matz seconded the motion. The motion carries (7 -0 -1) with C. Barrett
abstaining.
Continued Discussion/Recommendation to City Council- Order #38 Zoning Amendment
Relative to Restaurants in the IR and IR Overlay District, Article XXXVIII, Section 38-
19.C.b
City Planner Aaron Clausen addressed the Planning Board and recalled that the joint public
hearing with the Beverly City Council on this matter was held on March 3, 2014 and the
Planning Board held a Special Meeting immediately following the public hearing to discuss the
recommendation. He noted that the Board continue the matter to this meeting in anticipation of
further information and a staff recommendation.
Clausen recalled that at the last meeting there was a lot of uncertainty about the proposed
amendment and the enforcement of it. He stated that he has put together some information to
clarify the enforcement and noted that it is pretty straight forward. He also noted that it is
difficult to determine take out food and fast food and where to draw the line. He explained that
the Council order is looking to prevent restaurants with drive through facilities, but also allow
take out as a component for restaurant businesses.
Clausen reviews the IR and IR Overlay districts. He noted that the zoning has no definition of
what fast food is.
Clausen stated that his language makes it crystal clear that fast food restaurants are not allowed
in the overlay district.
Members of the Board make suggestions for proposed language.
Mack: Motion to recommend to the City Council that Order #38 be adopted subject to
the proposed Section 38 -19Cb being amended as follows: "Restaurant selling
food both for consumption on and off the premises; provided however that Fast -
Food Restaurants as defined in Section 38 -2 of this Zoning Ordinance shall not be
allowed." Flannery seconded the motion and it carried unanimously (7 -0 -1) with
C. Barrett abstaining.
Old/New Business
Discussion on Draft Zoning Amendment Relative to Floodplain Overlay District Ordinance
Page 5 of 6
Beverly Planning Board
March 18, 2014
Section 38 -31A and Adoption of 2014 Flood Insurance Rate Maps
Zambernardi introduces Roland Adams of the Engineering Department to answer questions the
Board may have regarding the FEMA flood map changes.
Zambernardi explains that the City is asking the Planning Board to sponsor a change in the
zoning ordinance to adopt new flood map changes proposed by FEMA. She stated that the map
changes are principally along the coast.
Mr. Adams stated that new maps include 88 structures that will be in the flood plain that are
currently not in the flood plain. He noted that if the city does not adopt the new maps they will
not be in compliance. He stated that cities and towns must adopt the maps by July 16, 2014, so
that residents can take advantage of reduced flood insurance costs.
Zambernardi explains that the request of the Planning Board is to sponsor the zoning
amendment. She noted that the request will be submitted to the City Council and a joint public
hearing will be scheduled.
Mullady: motion to submit a petition to the City Council requesting a Zoning Amendment
Relative to Floodplain Overlay District Ordinance Section 38 -31A and Adoption
of 2014 Flood Insurance Rate Maps. Flannery seconded the motion. The motion
carried (7 -0 -1) with C. Barrett abstaining.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the Planning Board meetings held on December 17, 2013 and January 22, 2014
were presented for approval.
Mullady moves to approve the minutes of the December 17, 2013 and January 22, 2014 Planning
Board meetings as presented. Hutchinson seconds the motion. The motion carries (5 -0 -3) with
C. Barrett, N. Barrett and Miller abstaining.
Adjournment
Matz stated that before the meeting is adjourned he would like to acknowledge the 30 years of
service and contribution to the Beverly Planning Board of Richard Dinkin
There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening a motion was
made by Flannery to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Hutchinson. The motion carried (8 -0)
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Page 6 of 6