Loading...
2014-09-16Beverly Planning Board September 16, 2014 CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Board: Planning Board Meeting Date: September 16, 2014 Location: Beverly Public Library Members Present Chair John Thomson, Vice Chair Ellen Hutchinson, Ellen Flannery (arrived at 7:30), John Mullady, Catherine Barrett, and Wayne Miller, James Matz, David Mack and Ned Barrett Members Absent: None Others Present: Assistant City Planner Leah Zambernardi Recorder: This meeting was recorded and transcribed from tape by Eileen Sacco Thomson calls the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m Request to Set Public Hearing Date — Site Plan Review Application #112 -14 and Special Permit Application #138 -14 — 50(52) Dunham Road — Anderson Clarke, LLP N. Barrett: motion to set the public hearing date for the Board's regular meeting of October 21, 2014. Mack seconded the motion and it carries (8 -0). Request to Set Public Hearing Date — Site Plan Review Application #113 -14 and Special Permit Application #139 -14 — North Shore Crossing — Brimbal Avenue — CEA Beverly LLC Matz: motion to set the public hearing date for the Board's regular meeting of October 21, 2014. Mack seconded the motion and it carries (8 -0). Mack: motion to require peer reviews of the applicant's traffic and storm water reports. Mullady seconds the motion and it carries (8 -0). Bass River Estates Definitive Subdivision (a.k.a. Folger Avenue Extension) — Request for One -Year Extension of Constuction Completion Date (December 31, 2014) — Joseph J. Phelan III, Bass River Beverly LLC Zambernardi reads a letter of request into the record from Mr. Phelan. Hutchinson: motion to extend the construction completion deadline to June 30, 2015. Mack seconds the motion and it carries (7 -1) with N. Barrett in opposition. Request for Minor Modifications to Special Permit #128 -11 and Site Plan Review #103 -11 — 30 LP Henderson Road — Cicoria Tree and Crane Service, Inc. Pagel of 8 Beverly Planning Board September 16, 2014 John Morin and Mark Cicoria are present and describe the proposed changes to the plan. Thomson informs the Board that the task of the Board this evening is to determine if the proposed modification is minor in nature and if so they can approve or deny it. He also noted that if the modification is found to be major then a public hearing date must be set. Hutchinson: motion that the Planning Board find that the proposed modifications are minor in nature and that the Board approves the Minor Modification subject to the conditions and specifications of the City Engineer. Mack seconds the motion. The motion carries (8 -0). Flannery arrives at 7:30 p.m. Subdivision Approval Not Require Plans 40 Neptune Street — Thomas and Linda Wilburn Zambernardi reported that Thomas and Linda Wilburn have submitted an SANR plan to divide their parcel at 40 Neptune Street into two buildable lots. She noted that members may be aware that the historic residence on the property was removed and relocated to 46 Pickman Road in 2013. Zambernardi explains that the parcel is currently vacant with the exception of a small shed on the right side. She further explains that 40 Neptune Street is currently 29, 305 s.f and if the plan is endorsed, Lot 1 will have 25,974 s.f of area where 10,000 s.f is required and 101.20 feet of frontage where 100 feet is required. She explains that Lot 2 will have 17,809 s.f of area where 10,000 s.f is required and 175.96 feet of frontage where 100 is required. She noted that the plan meets the Board's requirements for SANR's and the staff recommends approval. Zambernardi also notes that a frontage analysis was done on both lots and they conform to the R10 Zoning district. Thomson asks if there are any questions or comments from the Board. Thomson asks if there are any other homes on the site. Zambernardi explains that there are a number of easements on the property for views and access to the water via stairs down to it. She noted that certain easements cannot be included in area requirements. She reviewed the areas on the plans. Thomson notes that the there are no access issues with this plan and everything looks to be in order. Zambernardi agreed noting that she visited the site. There being no questions or comments regarding this matter: Page 2 of 8 Beverly Planning Board September 16, 2014 Hutchinson: motion to endorse the SANR as submitted. Motion seconded by Flannery. The chair votes in favor. The motion carries (9 -0) Update on Inclusionary Housing "Submission Requirements, Procedures and Supplemental Regulations" — Fee in Lieu of Affordable Housing Units Fiscal Year 2015 Zambernardi explains that Beverly adopted the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance in July of 2007 and the ordinance requires that 12% of housing in a new development of 10 homes or more be reserved for persons of low or moderate income. She noted that one of the options for developers in providing the affordable units is to request a Special Permit to pay a fee to the City of Beverly in lieu of providing the affordable units. Zambernardi explained that the formula for the fee is provided in the Planning Board's Submission Requirements, Procedures and Supplemental Regulations for Inclusionary Housing. She noted that the fee is 35% of the average of the lowest 50% of residential sale prices in the Beverly neighborhood in which the applicant is developing the units, for the three fiscal years immediately prior to the current fiscal year. Zambernardi explained that the Planning Board is responsible for updating the fee schedule annually without a public hearing, shortly after the start of the fiscal year. Zambernardi reviewed the formula and noted that fee schedule for fiscal year 2015 is included in appendix C of the Planning Board packet. She noted that she was assisted in compiling this schedule by Margaret O'Brien of the Community Development Office. Zambernardi reviews the fee schedule noting that the Board is not changing the formula, they are updating the fee structure. Members review the changes in fees during the recent recession. Hutchinson: motion to approve the fee schedule for the Fee in Lieu of Affordable Housing Units for fiscal year 2015 as submitted. Mack seconds the motion. The motion carries (9 -0). Recess for Public Hearing Hutchinson: motion to recess for public hearings. Flannery seconds the motion. The motion carries (9 -0). Continued Concurrent Public Hearing - Open Space Residential Design Site Plan, Definitive Subdivision Plan, Inclusionary Housing Application and Special Permit — 232 Essex Street — DUC Residential LLC Attorney Brian McGrail addresses the Planning Board and explains that since the last meeting they have been before the Design Review Board on August 7, 2014. He noted that the DRB voted unanimously to support the project. He also noted that they met with the Parking and Traffic Commission who also recommended support of the project and the Open Space and Recreation Committee has issued a letter of recommendation. Page 3 of 8 Beverly Planning Board September 16, 2014 Thomson reviews the action that the Board has taken on the project noting that the preferred plan and the Yield Plan have both been reviewed by the Board and have been approved. He asked Atty. McGrail if they are seeking any more waivers from the Board and has anything changed with the plans. Atty. McGrail reported that there have been no changes to the plan. Thomson asks Zambernardi to review the comment letter the Planning Board received from other city Boards and Commissions. Zambernardi reports that the City Engineer has issued draft comments and the applicant has responded to them last week and the applicant and the City Engineer are still in the process of working on that. Zambernardi reviews a letter from the Open Space and Recreation Committee with recommendations. Matz notes that the lower portion of the open space would go to the Homeowners Association and the upper portion would go to the City of Beverly. Ogren reviews the plan and notes the locations on the plan. Thomson asks if the proposed trail connection would be new. Ogren states that it does not currently exist. Ogren notes the areas on the plan that would be restored. Hutchinson asks what would be the restoration area around the pond and who would be responsible for it financially going forward. Atty. McGrail explains that initially Mr. DiBiase will do some clearing of the area and then the city would be responsible. Zambernardi explains that the OSRD Ordinance allows for the Planning Board to seek an endowment for the property. She also notes that the Planning Board could require a cash bond from the Homeowners Association for the upkeep of their portion of the open space. Zambernardi explains that an internal recommendation is that the City would accept the open space to the care and custody of the Parks and Recreation Department. Thomson states that it makes sense for the Park and Recreation Department to be charged with the care and custody of the land noting that they have property adjacent to it. Matz agrees noting that the Conservation Commission does not have the finances to maintain the open space and it would be best for the city to take it on. Hutchinson asks if the Open Space Committee considered the cost to the city in accepting the open space. Matz states that there was a discussion and it was noted that it would be a benefit for the city. Hutchinson asks what the cost of maintaining it would be for the city. Zambernardi reviews the comment letter from the Fire Department. She notes that the Fire Department gave a waiver to the applicant to use a break away chain explaining that they are Page 4 of 8 Beverly Planning Board September 16, 2014 made of a plastic material and will keep others out but they are easy for the fire department to get through. Thomson noted that if the emergency access road is going to be private the city will need an easement. McGrail explained that the Homeowners Association will be responsible to keep the emergency access clear, noting snow removal etc. Miller asks if any thought has been given to the amount of the endowment for the open space. McGrail explains that the Conservation Commission has requested that they do some work to maintain the pond and that would have to be taken into consideration. He states that they would be having another meeting with them to determine the work to be done noting that it would involve some clearing etc. He states that there will be further discussions about the endowment. Matz states that Parcel B trail maintenance should be low tech and low cost and noted that there are a lot of volunteer groups such as the Boy Scouts Eagle Scout candidates who regularly participate in projects such as maintenance of trails throughout the city. Thomson notes that maintenance of the pond will include dredging and clearing of vegetation on the trail. He notes that the trail has been there for a long time. Ogren reports that Parcel A is currently in disarray and will require removal of brush etc., and restoration and loaming and seeding to restore it. Thomson states that he wants to reassure the public that the pond and the trails will remain park land for the benefit of the community. He notes that the transfer to the Parks and Recreation Department will see to that and they are interested in doing so. Zambernardi continues reviewing the Fire Department comments and notes that they have concerns that lots 12 and 13 have excessively long driveways that are not constructed to handle heavy fire apparatus, and therefore will delay fire department fire and life rescue situations. She notes that the developer has worked with the fire department to improve the driveway access. Hutchinson asks if the emergency access would be a means for secondary access and is there a distinction between them. Zambernardi explains that the secondary access is for emergency response only. Zambernardi reviews the Parking and Traffic Commission letter and notes that they have no comments. Zambernardi reviews the letter from the Board of Health and notes that they have issued their standard conditions. Zambernardi reviews the letter from the Design Review Board and notes that they have no comments. Page 5 of 8 Beverly Planning Board September 16, 2014 Thomson notes that the applicant has requested a special permit to pay a fee in lieu of affordable housing. Atty. McGrail explains that the ordinance contemplates this option because of the cost involved in constructing single family homes. He explains that special circumstances are in order because they presented a yield plan for 19 lots and the developer through negotiations with the neighbors has agreed to build on 16 lots, noting that they have made a concession. He also notes that the inclusionary housing contemplates two family dwellings to comply with the ordinance. He further notes that they are giving up three units with this plan. Atty. McGrail refers to the ordinance language regarding a density bonus and reviews the section. He notes that Mr. DiBiase cannot and will not do that because of the 16 unit limitation. Thomson asks for comments from the Board at this time. Zambernardi explains that the city has not received a fee in lieu of affordable units to date and notes that fees of this nature could be collected and distributed to various non - profit groups to assist them in funding their affordable housing projects. She also notes that the city has access to studies showing a need for affordable housing for the elderly and empty nesters and first time home buyers who are looking for more affordable housing. She also noted that an Affordable Housing Trust could be established. She notes that the money would be used to fund affordable housing units. Thomson states that the idea for affordable housing is to get as many affordable units in Beverly and spreading it throughout the city. He notes that there are 100 units of affordable housing across the street owned by the Beverly Housing Authority. The absence of affordable housing in this neighborhood is therefore not an issue. C. Barrett asks if this has ever been done. Thomson notes that Windover Construction was allowed to provide affordable housing on another site that they owned. Zambernardi also notes that the Ventron project, which has not been built yet, has a provision for a payment of $80,000, noting that it was approved before the Inclusionary Housing ordinance was adopted. Zambernardi estimates that the cost of an affordable single family home based on the 2013 calculations would be $222,500. She explained that the maximum income for a family of 5 is $70,000 and a mortgage would be $1,600 plus the cost of power and maintenance and questioned if that would be affordable in reality, noting that it is very different from the rents at the Beverly Housing Authority. Hutchinson states that she would like to see the affordable housing spread out throughout the city and she would not want to set a precedent for upscale housing projects. She also notes that the ordinance requires affordable housing to be equivalent to what is built. Page 6 of 8 Beverly Planning Board September 16, 2014 Thomson states that his justification for approving this request would be the location of the affordable housing across the street. Atty. McGrail states that this is a unique situation because the yield plan is for 19 units and the developer has agreed to commit to building only 16 of the units he could build. He states that he would suggest that it would not be precedent setting because of the yield plan. Matz states that he would be a lot more concerned if there were zero or very few affordable units in the area. He notes that having volunteered for Beverly Bootstraps he knows that there are a significant number of affordable units in the area and he agrees that it would not be setting a precedent. He also notes that the Board takes each project on a case by case basis and considers the circumstances of each one. Mullady states that this is a chance to get quality housing and that is something that needs to be considered rather than the number of affordable units in the area. N. Barrett states that the Beverly Housing Authority has hundreds of units that are spread across the city that are in need of maintenance. He suggests that these funds may be used to help upgrade those properties for the Beverly Housing Authority and other agencies. Mullady states that he wants to be sure that the money is used for affordable housing. Zambernardi explains that the city would most likely eventually set up an affordable housing trust. She also notes that they are in the process of researching the process for the distribution of the funds. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter: N. Barrett: Motion to approve the request for a special permit to allow a payment in of a fee in lieu of two affordable housing units, subject to the Fiscal Year 2014 fee schedule. Flannery seconds the motion. The motion carries (7 -2) with Hutchinson and Mullady opposed. Thomson notes that a requirement of the OSRD is that the Planning Board hold a site visit at the property and suggests that the Board schedule it before the next meeting in October. The Planning Board will hold a site visit on Saturday, October 18, 2014 at 9:00 a.m. Hutchinson: motion to continue the public hearing to Tuesday, October 21, 2014. Flannery seconds the motion. The motion carries (9 -0). Adjournment 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 (9 -0) Page 7 of 8 Beverly Planning Board September 16, 2014 The meeting adjourns at 9:00 p.m. Page 8 of 8