Planning Board

City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 1 CITY OF BEVERLY 2 PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES 3 4 BOARD OR COMMISSION: City of Beverly Planning Board 5 DATE: January 15, 2025 6 LOCATION: Beverly City Hall, 191 Cabot Street, 3rd Floor Council 7 Chambers 8 MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair Ellen Hutchinson [9:00PM]; Vice-Chair Derek 9 Beckwith; Ellen Flannery; George Gomes; Wayne Miller; 10 Marcus Glynn; Sarah Bartley 11 MEMBERS ABSENT: Nathaniel Lewis 12 STAFF PRESENT: Assistant Planning Director Kenneth Clawson 13 RECORDER: Kristan Patenaude 14 15 Call to Order 16 Vice Chair Beckwith called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 17 18 1. Subdivision Approval Not Required Plans 19 20 None at this time. 21 22 2. Request for release from Covenant and establish Performance Guarantee – Definitive 23 Subdivision for 63 Sturtevant Street – Symes Development & Permitting LLC 24 25 Jeff Rhuda explained that construction is complete with the exception of the finished pavement, 26 curbs, and the as built plans. The City’s Engineering Department has reviewed the work. The 27 applicant is bonding the remaining work. The request is for the Board to vote on the triparty 28 agreement and the lot releases. 29 30 Clawson stated that were several conditions of approval that have been met by the applicant. 31 32 Beckwith asked when the remaining work will be completed. Rhuda stated that this will likely be 33 done in April or May. 34 35 Gomes: Motion to accept the Form H Release Form for 63 Sturtevant Street for applicant 36 Symes Development & Permitting LLC. Flannery seconds. Motion carries 37 unanimously (6-0). 38 39 Gomes: Motion to approve the triparty agreement for 63 Sturtevant Street in the amount of 40 $75,000, pursuant to work to be completed by October 24, 2025. Flannery 41 seconds. Motion carries unanimously (6-0). 42 43 3. Request for release of Performance Guarantee – OSRD #10-17 – Hickory Hill Way (f/k/a 44 20, 30, 40 Webster Avenue) – Hickory Hill, LLC 45 Page 1 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 46 The Board tabled discussion on this item to later in the meeting, as the applicant was not 47 present. 48 49 4. Set Public Hearings: 50 a. Request to set Public Comment Period and Public Hearing: Open Space 51 Residential Design #13-25 Initial Review Application, Yield Plan and Initial Review 52 – 38 Standley Street – Waring School, Inc (Timothy Bakland, Head of School) 53 i. Initial Review Site Plans contain a Site Context Map, Existing Conditions / 54 Analysis Plan, Yield Plan that shows 4 proposed lots, 3 OSRD Concept Plans 55 56 Flannery: Motion to set a public hearing for Open Space Residential Design #13-25, 57 for March 12, 2025. Gomes seconds. Motion carries unanimously (6-0). 58 59 5. Continued Modification Request: Modification of Site Plan Review #165-24 – 50 Balch 60 Street (181 Elliott Street, Cummings Center) – Beverly Commerce Park, LLP 61 a. Increasing the number of units from 52 to 59 and increasing the building height 62 from 50 to 53 feet. Zoning Board of Appeals approved a minor modification to the 63 Special Permit for the increase in the number of units and a minor modification to 64 the variance for the increased building height in October 2024. 65 66 Michael Aveni, Cummings Properties, explained that the applicant was before the Planning 67 Board on December 17, 2024, and the Board asked that the applicant go back to the Design 68 Review Board (DRB) and share the modifications. The applicant met with the DRB on January 69 9, 2025, and they approved the changes. The applicant also engaged the Engineering Department 70 to confirm that the added units would not have a negative impact on the municipal systems. The 71 Engineering Department determined that the size of the services did not need to be changed. He 72 noted that the DRB was mostly focused on the proposed color changes. Overall, the DRB was in 73 favor of the proposed color scheme and materials. A retaining wall proposed on the east side of 74 the property was originally shown as stone faced but was then changed to concrete blocks with 75 an intention to skin it. The DRB recommended a condition that this be skinned with a thin-faced 76 stone material. Some of the Juliet balconies have been relocated on the plan to the corners of 77 Balch Street. This was done to help diversify some of the unit stock. 78 79 Flannery: Motion to grant the modification request to Site Plan Review #165-24 – 50 80 Balch Street with the following conditions: 81 1. All previous conditions of approval from the Planning Board decision 82 dated June 20, 2024, are still applicable including conditions contained 83 in the comment letters submitted by various Department Heads, 84 Boards, and Commissions, which are attached to the previous Planning 85 Board Decision and incorporated herein by reference: 86 a. Letter dated April 24, 2024, from Captain Jacob Kreyling, City 87 of Beverly Fire Department Bureau of Fire Prevention 88 b. Letter dated April 26, 2024, from Darlene Wynne, AICP, Vice- 89 Chair of the City of Beverly Parking and Traffic Commission Page 2 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 90 c. Letter dated April 29, 2024, from Laura DelleChiaie, MPH, 91 Director of the City of Beverly Board of Health 92 d. Letter dated May 17, 2024, from Jared Contrada, Associate 93 Planner for the City of Beverly Design Review Board 94 e. Letter dated May 21, 2024, from Lisa Chandler, PE, City 95 Engineer for the City of Beverly Engineering Department 96 f. Comments in the City of Beverly Central Square Permitting 97 system from: 98 i. Jim Butler, Director of Municipal Inspections: 99 1. There needs to be five Handicap parking spaces 100 along with one Van Accessible space. 101 2. 10% of the units need to be designed for people 102 with disabilities. 103 g. Letter dated June 5, 2024, from Michael Aveni in response to 104 the City of Beverly Engineering Department comments 105 h. Letter dated June 5, 2024, from Michael Aveni in response to 106 the City of Beverly Fire Department comments 107 i. Letter dated June 5, 2024, from Michael Aveni in response to the 108 City of Beverly Health Department comments 109 110 2. The conditions contained in the letter of recommendation dated January 111 10, 2025, from Kenneth Clawson, Assistant Planning Director for the City 112 of Beverly Design Review Board, which is attached hereto and 113 incorporated herein by reference: 114 a. A stone skin is added to block wall on the East and North 115 elevations to improve the appearance of the block wall in these 116 locations. 117 Gomes seconds. Motion carries unanimously (6-0). 118 119 10. Continued Public Comment Period on Concept Plans: Open Space Residential Design 120 (OSRD) Initial Review Application #12-24 - 184 & 186 Hart Street – CS Hart, LLC – The 121 Board took up this item at this time. 122 a. Public comment period for the three submitted Concept Plans each showing 7 123 residential lots 124 125 Flannery: Motion to continue the public hearing regarding the Public Comment Period on 126 Concept Plans: Open Space Residential Design (OSRD) Initial Review 127 Application #12-24 - 184 & 186 Hart Street – CS Hart, LLC, to February 12, 128 2025. Gomes seconds. Motion carries unanimously (6-0). 129 130 6. Recess for Public Hearings 131 132 Flannery: Motion to recess for public hearings. Gomes seconds. Motion carries unanimously 133 (6-0). 134 Page 3 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 135 7. Continued Public Hearing: Site Plan Review #168-24 – 0 Trask Lane – Corcoran Trask 136 Lane, LLC, Attn: Peter Mahoney, EVP 137 a. Development consisting of 6 multifamily buildings containing 440 units in the 138 aggregate; associated amenity and recreational areas; 882 surface and garage 139 parking spaces; an extension of Trask Lane; and various site improvements 140 including landscaping elements, common walkways, 4 monument signs, utilities, 141 drainage infrastructure, and stormwater management facilities. 142 143 Miranda Siemasko, Glovsky & Glovsky, explained that the applicant previously was before the 144 Board with a limited presentation including some of the mitigation which will be reflected in the 145 next iteration of plans, including a convenience store, public trail access, and a monetary 146 contribution to the City to help with transportation planning for this area. There was also an 147 intermediate presentation regarding a reduced parking ratio for the project. There has not been an 148 application submitted for that relief, nor has the application been amended in any way to alter the 149 parking shown on the original plans. This project was specifically designed to not require any 150 zoning relief, and the applicant is carefully weighing the implications of asking the Board to 151 make a discretionary decision in that regard. This evening, the applicant would like to update the 152 Board on various peer reviews and other proceedings. The applicant’s meeting with the 153 Conservation Commission has been continued to their February 4th meeting. The peer review 154 comments on traffic were received and the applicant’s consultant is currently preparing a 155 response. The applicant has met with the Parking & Traffic Commission twice and is waiting for 156 the results of the peer review. The applicant submitted a draft Environmental Impact Report to 157 MEPA on December 16th which included an updated traffic analysis. The applicant appreciates 158 that traffic is a predominant concern for this project and the intent on postponing a more formal 159 presentation on traffic is to make sure the best information is available. The applicant has had 160 three meetings with the DRB, and they seemed pleased with the presentation at the last meeting, 161 though a recommendation will not be made until there is a final plan set to review. 162 163 Matthew Littell, Utile, explained that the plan shows six buildings on two sites, site A and site B. 164 He reviewed how the grading of the sites will be modified and how the grades relate to the 165 surrounding neighborhoods. The ground level for the project is called 0 on the plans and is 166 approximately five feet above Apple Village. Many of the proposed retaining walls are behind or 167 up against existing vegetation and will not be visible. The applicant intends to preserve as many 168 existing trees as possible. One proposed retaining wall is approximately 5’ tall and encloses part 169 of the entry. There is an additional wall that retains the surface parking area. This is up against 170 existing trees and likely will not be visible. The ground level of the proposed project is 171 approximately 20’ above the existing ground level of Cherry Hill. Another proposed retaining 172 wall retains some of the outdoor amenity areas and is approximately 5’ tall. It will likely be 173 concealed by some vegetation. There is another 7’-8’ wall proposed at the end of the driveway 174 near Duck Pond Road. The material for the retaining walls is proposed to be gravity block. These 175 blocks will be able to be inserted without disrupting too much of the adjacent greenery. The 176 blocks come in various shades and colors. There are some very steep grades that drop off to the 177 back of the site and a fairly significant retaining wall is proposed around most of these edges to 178 contain the site. On site B, a retaining wall of approximately 8’ is set against mature trees. 10’ 179 above grade at the property line, a section has been cut into where the building essentially needs Page 4 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 180 to be propped up. This is very close to mature trees and will likely not be visible. Regarding the 181 distribution of the amenity spaces and how residents will move between site A and site B, there 182 are core amenities proposed in each individual building. Approximately 2/3 of the parking spaces 183 in the building will be assigned or rented to residents. Regarding the material treatment for the 184 podium level of the buildings, this will be clad in masonry in a range of colors. The blocks may 185 have different textures to create patterns. 186 187 Bill Brown, Brown Sardina, Inc., presented a view of what the landscape may look like around 188 year 7 of the project. This indicates the height of the trees at roughly 28’ tall. Initially these trees 189 will likely be in the 16’-18’ range. There is an existing wetland area that screens two of the 190 buildings from the view looking north. There is a 15’ easement for the golf course and the trees 191 is this area will be quite tall. Regarding the site amenities, there will be a main intersection where 192 all the entrances to the buildings are located. This will be an active space with an on grade 193 amenity space behind Building 1. Dense screening will be provided along the edge of the site 194 and there will be screening between Building 1 and the Cherry Hill condos. Site A has no lawn 195 area and there are landscaped areas between the buildings and between the parking areas. These 196 areas will be seeded with a conservation wildlife mix that does not need to be maintained. The 197 dog park fencing will be a chain link fence, 4’ high. On Site B, there are two buildings with 198 similar landscape schemes. There is an outdoor amenity space proposed, with a fitness center on 199 grade. These residents do have some lawn areas, and the other areas will be seeded with the same 200 conservation wildlife mix. Regarding lighting, there are two different pole lights proposed for the 201 project. The 14’ poles are generally proposed in particular areas and shorter poles will be used 202 between the buildings. 203 204 Glynn noted some concerns with safety and some of the proposed gravity block walls. Joe 205 Peznola, Hancock Associates, stated that any wall higher than 4’ will feature fall protection for 206 safety. Any wall subject to vehicular traffic will also include a guardrail. 207 208 Beckwith asked about the tallest wall anticipated. Peznola stated that this is 20’ tall. The concept 209 is that the weight of the block itself creates the structural integrity of the wall. Only the top and 210 subsoil need to be removed for installation. 211 212 Miller asked if the buildings are designed for energy generation or solar. Littell explained that 213 the intention is to make provisions for PV on the roof of the buildings. The intention is to design 214 the site to passive house standards. Peter Mahoney, Corcoran Trask Lane, LLC, stated that solar 215 is not feasible without subsidies. The buildings will be designed to place this on the roof, if the 216 subsidy programs are available. Miller stated that he does not agree with this proposal. 217 218 Gomes asked the difference in height between the two building sites. Peznola explained that Site 219 A sits at elevation 118 and Site B sits at 108, or 10’ lower. This is a fairly continuous grade 220 between the two sites, although the sites are split by Apple Village. 221 222 Peznola explained that the parking ratio is a 1.7 on Site A and a 2.3 on Site B. The best ratio 223 would likely be 1.6. The applicant may seek to reduce parking in certain ways later in the 224 process. Page 5 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 225 226 Beckwith asked for a projected rendering view showing what the sites may look like in 227 winter/spring months. The walls may look more noticeable during these times when leaves are 228 down. 229 230 Glynn asked if Mass DOT has been contacted regarding a way to access from the site directly to 231 the nearby highway. Siemasko stated that the State is reviewing this project through its MEPA 232 process. Clawson noted that the intersection in question is located in Danvers, though the project 233 site is in Beverly. 234 235 Flannery asked about delivery and/or mail vehicle parking on the site. Siemasko stated that there 236 will be designated spaces. 237 238 Patrick Knight, 4 Duck Pond Road, stated that he does not see the Trask Lane/Duck Pond 239 Road/Manor Road intersection on any of the traffic studies. There needs to be a study reviewing 240 the safety of this intersection. The second entrance is for emergency vehicles but not for regular 241 vehicles. The only emergency exit for other vehicles will be the main entry area. 242 243 Tom McDonald, 4 Radcliffe Road, stated that the proposed building will be very tall and on top 244 of a hill. He expressed concern with light pollution. He noted that vehicles will fan his home 245 with their headlights when accessing the site. He asked about light to mitigate from spillover. 246 247 Bob Guay, 5 Miller Road, stated that he cannot go on Route 128 from 3pm-6pm due to traffic. 248 He expressed disappointment with the continued building of residential units in the City. 249 250 Bill Squibb, 509 Cabot Street, agreed with Glynn that an overpass may be the only way to solve 251 the traffic problem. 252 253 Andrea Belanger, 12 Walcott Road, asked the distance between the southern site to the buffer on 254 Walcott Road. She also asked about a potential additional access point to the site in the future. It 255 was noted that this is approximately 400’, including the buffer zone. Siemasko explained that the 256 proposed emergency access route cannot be used as an alternate traffic access area. 257 258 Gomes: Motion to continue this hearing to February 12, 2025. Flannery seconds. Motion 259 carries unanimously (6-0). 260 261 262 Flannery: Motion to recess for five minutes. Gomes seconds. Motion carries unanimously 263 (6-0). 264 265 Chair Hutchinson joined the meeting at 9:00p.m. 266 267 8. Public Hearing: Special Permit #200-24 – 18 Leather Lane – Paul B. Doetsch and Anne 268 Marie Doetsch Page 6 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 269 a. Creation of a pork chop shaped lot and establish a new buildable lot on the 270 premises for a single family use. 271 272 Conor Walsh, Glovsky & Glovsky, explained that the applicants are requesting approval of a 273 Special Permit as to authorize the creation of a pork chop shaped lot in order to divide the 274 existing property and create a new lot to be used for a single family lot purpose in the future. The 275 subject property consists of an approximately 4.5 acre lot, presently improved with one single 276 family home. The property is located in the R-90 Zoning District and Leather Lane is a small 277 road with approximately ten single family houses on it. The minimum lot area in the R-90 278 District is 90,000 s.f. and the minimum frontage requirement is 225’. The applicant proposes to 279 divide the existing lot to create a pork chop shaped lot that would include the existing single 280 family home and a separate buildable lot in the northwest portion of the property. This proposal 281 will not exceed the minimum requirement of 90,000 s.f. The Zoning Ordinance states that the lot 282 area of the pork chop shaped lot cannot count for the square footage calculation and excluding 283 this area will bring the existing lot to just over 90,000 s.f. remaining, which is compliant with the 284 requirements. Similarly, the minimum width at any point in the pork chop shaped lot can be no 285 less than 75’. The shortest width is roughly 95’ for the lot. The applicants have discussed this 286 project with their immediate neighbors and heard no objections. 287 288 Beckwith addressed questions from Lisa Chandler, City Engineer. It should be confirmed that 289 the existing onsite soil absorption system (SAS) for 18 Leather Lane is not in violation of the 290 Title 5 setback requirements due to the new property line. SAS is not shown on the plan. Walsh 291 explained that this is because the property is serviced by sewer. The property in question actually 292 owns a fee interest in the sewer line that services this property, as well as that property across the 293 street at 15 Leather Lane. There is a record at the Registry of Deeds that depicts the sewer line. 294 295 Beckwith asked if Lot 2A will be tied into the sewer. Walsh explained that the applicant owns 296 the interest in the sewer line and plans to tie into the sewer. There is also a possibility that they 297 may pursue septic, if that is easier for whomever may ultimately construct a home on the 298 resulting lot. The sewer line is available and is owned by the applicants. 299 300 Beckwith noted that the closest hydrant is approximately 500’ away and there appears to be no 301 adequate emergency vehicle turnaround. Walsh stated that the Fire Chief indicated that the 302 Department’s apparatuses are able to access Leather Lane but, due to lack of turn around, 303 whatever house were to be built would need to be sprinklered as a fail-safe. The applicant is 304 comfortable with this condition. 305 306 Beckwith stated that the Fire Department is working to implement a Wildland Urban Interface 307 Program for properties such as this, so that the home built is prepared for wildfire exposure 308 through setbacks, maintenance, and building design. There is a request to please integrate up-to- 309 date guidance on building in the wildland urban interface (WUI) area. Walsh stated that this 310 seems to be a discussion for the building permit process, and this could be addressed in the 311 ultimate construction of that house. Clawson noted that there will need to be a subdivision 312 created for this lot through an ANR plan. 313 Page 7 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 314 Beckwith addressed a comment from the City Engineer that it appears the existing water line is 315 undersized 1.5” to add an additional service. The applicant should provide information on how 316 the lot will receive water. Walsh stated that the applicant’s engineer has not done a full analysis 317 of the adequacy of water lines at this stage. However, the water line in question only services 318 three properties. His client, as part of the construction of their house, was advised that the water 319 pressure was such that they almost needed to put in a reduction system. Adequacy of water 320 should be a discussion at the building permit stage. There are adequate utilities to service the 321 new structure. 322 323 Gomes asked if the Board should be evaluating the site as a potential building site at this time. 324 Clawson stated that ten findings need to be made in order to grant a Special Permit. Walsh 325 explained that the majority of the improved properties on Leather Lane are serviced by wells. 326 327 Beckwith stated that engineering noted that the topography is severe, and the Engineering 328 Department would have concerns over the possibility of an adequate driveway installation. 329 Walsh stated that the applicant reviewed this in a very preliminary manner and the engineer 330 believes that there is a viable location for a driveway at the northwest of the property. The 331 topography change looks to be in the range of 9’ from the bottom of the hill up to where a house 332 could potentially be built. This would need to be formally determined before any house were to 333 be constructed. 334 335 There was no public comment at this time. 336 337 The Board reviewed the Special Permit findings for the creation of a Pork-Chop-Shaped Lot. 338 339 1. The site is an appropriate location for the proposed use and the character of adjoining 340 uses will not be adversely affected. 341 Gomes stated that he does not believe a single family home on almost two acres of land will 342 impact anyone. Beckwith agreed that this is not an overbuilt area, and no objections were heard 343 from abutters. 344 345 2. No factual evidence is found that property values in the district will be adversely affected 346 by such use. 347 Flannery stated that no evidence was presented that neighboring property values would be 348 adversely impacted by this project. 349 350 3. No undue traffic and no nuisance or unreasonable hazard will result. 351 Gomes stated that the proposal is only for a single family house on approximately two acres of 352 land. Flannery asked about the concern regarding a potential nuisance from water issues. Walsh 353 stated that, if there were concerns to this, a well could be drilled. 354 355 4. Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation and 356 maintenance of the proposed uses. 357 There was discussion regarding the water and sewer on the site. Walsh noted that the applicant is 358 willing to do what is needed, should issues arise during the building permit process. Page 8 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 359 360 5. There are no valid objections from abutting property owners based on demonstrable fact. 361 Beckwith noted that the Board did not hear any objections during the meeting. 362 363 6. The minimum lot area of the pork-chop shaped lot shall be at least the minimum lot area 364 required in the zoning district in which the pork-chop-shaped lot is located, except the 365 portion of the lot which is the narrow strip or portion of the lot to the way shall not be 366 included in the lot area calculation. 367 Beckwith stated that the lot meets both the size requirement, and this does not include the stem 368 of the pork chop. 369 370 7. The width of the pork-chop-shaped lot measured at the shortest distance between side lot 371 lines is no less than 75 feet at any point between the street and the existing or proposed 372 building on the lot. Pork-chop lots approved by the Planning Board previous to December 373 1984 with less than the required frontage but at least 20 feet of frontage shall be 374 considered valid building lots for a period of 15 years from the date of adoption of this 375 zoning amendment (9-5-1991). On September 5, 2006, any pork-chop lot approved by 376 the Planning Board prior to December 1984 which is vacant or for which a valid building 377 permit has not yet been issued shall lose its status as a "grandfathered" lot and be 378 considered unbuildable. 379 Hutchinson stated that the applicant has established that the width of the pork chop shaped lot 380 measured at its shortest distance between the side lots at 95.08’, therefore meeting the 381 requirement of the law. 382 383 8. All front, rear, and side yard setbacks shall be the same as the minimum setbacks 384 specified for the zone in which the lot is located. 385 Hutchinson stated that the applicant has shown that all front, rear, and side setback requirements 386 for the R-90 Zone meet the requirements. 387 388 9. The depth of that portion of the lot which fails to satisfy the lot frontage requirements set 389 forth in the definition of "frontage" in § 300-5 between the street and the existing or 390 proposed building on the lot cannot exceed a distance of 250 feet from the street. 391 Walsh stated that this would generously be 150’. 392 393 10. There shall be not more than one other pork-chop-shaped lot with frontage contiguous to 394 it. 395 Walsh explained that this lot was created by ANR along with a number of other surrounding lots 396 and there is nothing stating that any of the other lots were pork chop shaped lots. 397 398 Gomes: Motion to close the public hearing. Flannery seconds. Motion carries unanimously 399 (7-0). 400 401 Gomes: Motion that, regarding Special Permit #200-24 – 18 Leather Lane – Paul B. 402 Doetsch and Anne Marie Doetsch, the following findings are met for the creation 403 of a Pork Chop Shaped Lot: Page 9 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 404 405 1. The site is an appropriate location for the proposed use and the character of 406 adjoining uses will not be adversely affected. 407 2. No factual evidence is found that property values in the district will be adversely 408 affected by such use. 409 3. No undue traffic and no nuisance or unreasonable hazard will result. 410 4. Adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation and 411 maintenance of the proposed uses. 412 5. There are no valid objections from abutting property owners based on 413 demonstrable fact. 414 6. The minimum lot area of the pork-chop shaped lot shall be at least the minimum 415 lot area required in the zoning district in which the pork-chop-shaped lot is 416 located, except the portion of the lot which is the narrow strip or portion of the lot 417 to the way shall not be included in the lot area calculation. 418 7. The width of the pork-chop-shaped lot measured at the shortest distance between 419 side lot lines is no less than 75 feet at any point between the street and the existing 420 or proposed building on the lot. Pork-chop lots approved by the Planning Board 421 previous to December 1984 with less than the required frontage but at least 20 422 feet of frontage shall be considered valid building lots for a period of 15 years 423 from the date of adoption of this zoning amendment (9-5-1991). On September 5, 424 2006, any pork-chop lot approved by the Planning Board prior to December 1984 425 which is vacant or for which a valid building permit has not yet been issued shall 426 lose its status as a "grandfathered" lot and be considered unbuildable. 427 8. All front, rear, and side yard setbacks shall be the same as the minimum setbacks 428 specified for the zone in which the lot is located. 429 9. The depth of that portion of the lot which fails to satisfy the lot frontage 430 requirements set forth in the definition of "frontage" in § 300-5 between the street 431 and the existing or proposed building on the lot cannot exceed a distance of 250 432 feet from the street. 433 10. There shall be not more than one other pork-chop-shaped lot with frontage 434 contiguous to it. 435 436 Flannery seconds. Motion carries unanimously (7-0). 437 438 Gomes: Motion that, regarding Special Permit #200-24 – 18 Leather Lane – Paul B. 439 Doetsch and Anne Marie Doetsch, the following findings are met: 440 441 1. That the specific site is an appropriate location for the proposed use, and that the 442 character of adjoining uses will not be adversely affected. 443 2. That no factual evidence is found that property values in the district will be 444 adversely affected by such use. 445 3. That no undue traffic and no nuisance or unreasonable hazard will result. 446 4. That adequate and appropriate facilities will be provided for the proper operation 447 and maintenance of the proposed use. Page 10 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 448 5. That there are no valid objections from abutting property owners based on 449 demonstrable fact. 450 6. That adequate and appropriate City services are or will be available for the 451 proposed use. 452 453 Flannery seconds. Motion carries unanimously (7-0). 454 455 Gomes: Motion to grant Special Permit #200-24 – 18 Leather Lane – Paul B. Doetsch and 456 Anne Marie Doetsch, with the following conditions: 457 1. That the adequacy of a water supply to the site be established prior to the 458 issuance of the building permit 459 2. Per the November 25, 2024, letter from the Fire Department, that the building 460 shall be required to be sprinkled with the minimum of an FPA13D residential 461 fire sprinkler system. 462 463 Flannery seconds. Motion carries unanimously (7-0). 464 465 9. Reconvene meeting 466 467 Flannery: Motion to reconvene the meeting. Hutchinson seconds. Motion carries 468 unanimously (7-0). 469 470 3. Request for release of Performance Guarantee – OSRD #10-17 – Hickory Hill Way (f/k/a 471 20, 30, 40 Webster Avenue) – Hickory Hill, LLC – The Board retook this item at this time. 472 473 Gary Patch representing the applicant explained that the request is to release the final bond. The 474 final as-built plan has been approved by Engineering and the Conservation Commission signed 475 off last night. The work has been confirmed to have been done according to the plan. 476 477 Gomes: Motion to release the Performance Guarantee for OSRD #10-17 – Hickory Hill 478 Way (f/k/a 20, 30, 40 Webster Avenue) – Hickory Hill, LLC. Flannery seconds. 479 Motion carries unanimously (7-0). 480 481 11. Approval of Minutes (as available): 482 a. June 18, 2024 483 b. December 17, 2024 484 485 Flannery: Motion to accept the meeting minutes of June 18, 2024, as amended. Gomes 486 seconds. Motion carries unanimously (7-0). 487 488 Flannery: Motion to accept the meeting minutes of December 17, 2024; as amended. Gomes 489 seconds. Motion carries unanimously (7-0). 490 491 12. New or Other Business 492 Page 11 of 12  City of Beverly Planning Board January 15, 2025 Meeting Minutes 493 Clawson gave a brief update on 3A. 494 495 13. Adjourn 496 497 Flannery: Motion to adjourn. Gomes seconds. Motion carries unanimously (7-0). 498 499 Meeting adjourns at 9:47 p.m. Page 12 of 12