CLARK AVE DEPARTMENTAL COMMENTS - PLANNING C\cac�4-lv2
7.7
t
l
1 �
I
RECEIVE®
SERAFINI, DARLING & CORRENTI, LLP JAN 05 ;rL
ATTORNEYS AT LAW �A
63 FEDERAL STREET OEPT OFPtANNWGB
SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS 01970 COMMUNITYOEVELOPMENT
JOHN R. 9ERAPINI. 9R.
January 5,2016 TELEPHONE
JOHN E.OARLINO 978-744-0212
JOSEPH C. CORRENTI FACSIMILE
978.741.4683
Amanda Chiancola,Staff Planner
City of Salem
Department of Planning and Community Development
120 Washington Street
Salem,Massachusetts 01970
Re: Clark Avenue Subdivision
Dear Ms.Chiancola:
Below please find the applicant's responses to your letter dated October 28,2015. For ease of
reference,we have kept the same format as your letter with our responses directly below each comment.
As we move forward in addressing each of these issues,we look forward to further discussions
with the Planning Board and staff.
SKhC. rrenti
JCC:dI
cc: client
October 28, 2015
i
Joseph C. Correnti
Serafini, Darling &Correnti, LLP 63
Federal Street
Salem, MA 01970
RE: Clark Avenue Subdivision
Dear Mr. Correnti:
In reviewing the application of NSD Really Trust, I have flagged several issues that are identified
below. I wanted to notify you in advance to enable your client to best prepare for the Board
meeting. As you noted in the application, a Subdivision and Cluster Development (herein
i
referred to as Chapel Hill) was approved for 25 lots in 2008 and the decision has since
expired (Attachment 1). The Chapel Hill decision is enclosed for your reference as it.is cited
herein.
A. Planning Board Comments
September 17, 2015 Planning Board Meeting
1. The Planning Board requested the developer to make the open space into a feature of
this development and place it such that it is clearly accessible for community use rather than
just for use by the private properties.
Response: A revised plan was presented to the Planning Board at its meeting on
December 17, 2015 showing Open Space#1 and#2 with access through a trail
system to both spaces. These revisions continue to be discussed with the Planning
Board.
October 15, 2015 Planning Board Meeting
1. The Planning Board requested a Landscape plan to better understand the buffer between
the existing and proposed development
Response: Landscape Architect Doug Jones presented his plans to the Board at its
December 17, 2015 meeting detailing the entranceway into the subdivision, street
landscaping and discussing the trail into the Open Space.
2. The Planning Board requested for you to consider whether there is an altemative location
for the detention basin proposed on lot 12 since it currently abuts the neighbor.
Response: Alternative locations for the detention basin proposed on Lot 12 have
been considered but the Project Engineer continues to believe that this location
works best and, most importantly, will not adversely impact any abutters.
3. An abutter provided public comment that contends that the existing undeveloped public
way through the project site is land court protected and cannot be altered. Please
provide a response to this comment.
Response: All of the site is registered land, which falls under the jurisdiction of the
Land Court The existing paper street shown on the land court plans is proposed to be
altered, as shown on the recent Planning Board filing. A petition to alter this land court
paper street will be filed with the Land Court requesting the street be altered to reftect
the proposed plans.
4. During public comment, abutters expressed concern with how project will affect the existing
access to Clark Avenue and existing blind spots. Please note that staff is following up
with the Police Department regarding these concerns. It would be helpful if you would
also comment with mitigation suggestions. Also, Section B(5) of this letter details the
conditions of approval in the Chapel Hill Subdivision approval.
2
i
Response. The applicant has met with City department heads concerning the off site
mitigation and then: is ongoing coordination with the City Engineer concerning line of
site improvements at the existing blind spots, including boulder removal once
permission is obtained from the private property owner. The applicant agrees to
penbrm this work once permission is obtained.
I
B. DPCD Comments
i
1. Per Sheet 6 of the plans submitted on August 27, 2015, the maximum height of the
proposed residences is 35 feet. Please note that pursuant to Section 7.2.4(1) of the Salem
Zoning Ordinance, no structure shall exceed two and one-half (2.5) stories. Should the
Planning Board approve the project, this requirement will be incorporated as a condition of
approval.
Response: It is understood and agreed that the 2.5 story maximum shall be a
condition of approval
2. The ownership of the Open Space should be clarified as being under the ownership of
the Homeowners Association and granting conservation easements for the residents
of Salem to have access for passive recreational activities.
Response: A Homeowners Association shall be created for the subdivision and the
required access to the Open Space, in compliance with Zoning Ordinance
requirements, will be built into such documents.
3. Pursuant to Section 7.2.5 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, at least 20 percent of total tract
area shall be set aside as common land and shall consist of usable open space. Such
common land shall not contain more than fifty (50) percent wetlands or slopelands (herein
defined as land with slopes of 15%or greater), nor shall it include streets, ways and parking
areas.
a. Please identify the benefits of the open space parcels and how residents will
access the open space. It appears that the connection to the Salem
Conservation land is an important component of the benefit of this open space.
b. It is unclear how to access Open Space No. 2, thus it appears to be
unusable. Please delineate access to the open space and the location of
trailheads if proposed.
c. The maintenance of the trails and Open Space are not currently defined.
d. The plans note that+/-211,858 sq. ft. of open space is provided. Please provide
a breakdown of the net open space to demonstrate that at least 75,054
square feet? of the open space does not include wetlands, slopelands,
streets,ways or parking areas.
3
I
Pursuant to CI of Salem Zoning Ordinance
Section 7.2.5. 20% of the Total Tract Area
750,538 sq ft = 150,108 sq. ft.
50% of the Required Open Space Area 150,108 sq.ft. = 75,054 sq. ft.
Response (a-0: Open Space calculations, as well as connections to the abutting
conservation land and between Open Space #1 and #2 have been delineated in a
plan dated December 16, 2015 and submitted to the Planning Board at its December
17, 2015 meeting. See attached Memorandum of Williams & Sparages dated
December 30, 2015. Calculations of net open space per the terms of the Ordinance
will be provided by the applicant.
e. The project is going to necessitate the clearing of vegetation within the open
space area to accommodate the proposed erosion control elements of the
plan.Will these areas be revegetated?
Response (e): Areas that are cleared will be revegitated and such work will be
performed in the least disruptive manner possible.
4. The Chapel Hill project included traffic safety3 mitigations measures. Please clarify whether
the following mitigation measures, or aftemative mitigation measures are proposed:
a. A crosswalk which will lead from the end of the sidewalk on the
northeasterly side of Clark Avenue to the sidewalk on the southwesterly side
of Clark Avenue (which continues to the intersection with Clark Street).
Response: Agreed.
b. A stop sign at the intersections of Clark Ave. and Clark Ave. Extension,
Clark Ave and Woodlands Avenue.
Response: Agreed.
3 Pursuant to Section IV(A)(1)(a) of the City of Salem Subdivision Regulations, all streets in the
subdivislon shall be designed so that, in the opinion of the Planning Board, they will provided safe
vehicular travel.
4
' c. A center line on a portion of existing Clark Avenue to guide motorists through
the bend.
i The striping and signage shall be installed as shown on the 'Traffic
Improvement Plan", dated February 13, 2008, prepared by Eastern Land
Survey Associates.
Response: A new plan produced by the current Project Engineer will be submitted to
the Board for review and will include shiping and signage.
d. Vertical granite curbing along the existing bituminous concrete sidewalk at the
northerly end of Clark Avenue from the end of the existing granite curbing on
Clark Avenue northerly to the intersection of Clark Avenue and Clark Street.
Response: A new plan was submitted to the Board at its December 17, 2015 meeting.
e. Repair of the sidewalk as needed.
Response: Agreed.
f. A mirror on the existing utility pole near the bend on the existing section of Clark
Avenue.
Response: It is believed that the mirror is currently installed.
a. Funds to remove the rock at the bend on 1 Clark Avenue and realigning the
fence impeding sight distance on Clark Avenue.
i. Please note that staff suggests the developer remove the rock
rather than providing the City funds.
Response: In lieu of providing funds, the applicant will work with the City
as detailed above to address these site lines.
g. A line of sight easement from 1 Clark Avenue to be granted to the City by the
property owner of 1 Clark Avenue.
5. Pursuant to Section 7.2.4(2) of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, the cluster shall follow the
natural contours of the terrain and respects the natural features of the site as far as
possible.
a. Please elaborate on how the plan conforms to the existing contours; i.e. would
more cutting and filling be required if lots had to contain 15,000 s.f.?
Response: If the lots were designed to meet the 15,000 square foot lot area, then there
would be much more extensive cutting and filling of the land and vegetation. The
5
i
realignment of the roadways and lots, as proposed, provides the least disruptive plan to
the existing grades and vegetation.
6. The length of the street as a dead-end is approximately 1,000 feet from Clark Ave. to the
end of Woodlands Road (cul-de-sac). Pursuant to Section IV(A)(1)(g) of the Subdivision
i Regulations, dead-end streets shall not be longer than 500 feet The Chapel Hill
Decision included a waiver based on the requirement for installation of sprinkler systems
' in the dwellings. Please clarify if a waiver is requested.
Response: Yes, the waiver to the 500 foot maximum for dead end streets is
requested and necessary.
C. City Department Comments
1 . Building Commissioner
a. The City of Salem Building Commissioner has expressed concern
regarding the future development of lot 27 as it is predominantly zoned
industrial. Please note that staff understands that Lot 27 cannot be
developed as an industrial lot because its access is from Clark Avenue
through the residentially zoned portion of the lot. This is based on the opinion
of the Assistant City Solicitor, dated October 15, 2007 (Attachment 2).
Response: This filing does not include Lot 27 in its development plans and any
industrial use would not be allowed as pre-configured. Any future plans to develop
the lot would come before Planning at the appropriate time.
2. Fire Department
a. Per the Fire Prevention Officer's comments, there is a 8" main providing water
to the project area. The Fire Prevention would like to see a hydraulic
report done by a third party source agreed upon by the Fire Department
defining what is needed for firefight capabilities for the subdivision. The
undefined lot should be taken into consideration in this report with the
maximum water supply requirements considered for potential development
of the property.
i. I will follow up with you after discussing this with the City Engineer to let
you know whether it is necessary.
Response: Water tesfing was conducted on the evening of December 17, 2015 and
the results, which are favorable, are attached hereto.
3. Conservation Commission
a. The Conservation Agent has determined that the project will require an order
of conditions form the Conservation Commission and a Stormwater Permit in
accordance with Section 37 of the Salem Ordinances.
6
I
L Staff has received a hardcopy of the stormwater report and has
requested New England Civil Engineer Corp to conduct a peer
review of the report. Please submit an electronic copy of the report.
I
Response: The applicant is currently before the Conservation Commission and public
hearings and a site walk are scheduled.
I
4. City Engineer
a. Please submit a utility plan for the City Engineer to review.
b. The Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development approved at the
subject location* in 2008 included offsite drainage improvements at the
intersection of Clark Street and Clark Avenue. The City Engineer has
recommended that the proposed project be subject to the same offsite
improvements. The infrastructure improvements are itemized herein.
Response (a-b): Williams and Sparages completed an existing conditions survey
of the existing intersection and confirmed that the City of Salem has completed
extensive roadway reconstruction. A new plan dated December 16, 2015 was
prepared by W&S to address the drainage requirements at this intersection taking
into consideration the existing conditions.
i. The applicant shall perform an infiltration and inflow identification and
removal program for the approximate 2,700 linear foot sewer system to
which the proposed subdivision shall discharge sewage. The program
shall be completed and flows removed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy. All
pipes collecting sewage flow and discharging to the Highland Avenue
pump station shall be included in the program.The program shall be
performed in strict compliance with the latest Guidelines for
InfiltrationlInflow Analyses and Sewer System valuation Survey. No
. such work shall commence without first meeting with the City Engineer
to review the scope of work. All reports and summaries of work completed
shall be reviewed by the City Engineer prior to the start of the next phase of
work starting (phases are outlined in the Guidelines). It is expected that the
applicant will remove all extraneous infiltration and inflow that is cost
effective to remove up to an amount not to exceed a cost determined by
the City Engineer, The amount of flow removed shall not be less than the
amount of flow to be added by the proposed subdivision.
Response: The applicant is working closely with the City Engineer in
determining the necessary steps to perform an I&1 study. It is unknown at this
point the quantity of 41 into the system since the City has no available studies.
The applicant requests that the completion date of the program be after the
issuance of the first 10 occupancy permits and not 'prior to the issuance of any
certificates of occupancy" The applicant is committed to removing all obvious
W from the sewer system to which the proposed subdivision shall discharge, as
identified above; however, should the amount of flow to be removed not equal
7
the discharge to be added, then the applicant should not be required to search
and hunt for leaks that may not exist.
ii. The applicant shall complete drainage improvements at the
intersection of Clark Street and Clark Avenue as depicted on the plan
entitled "Clark Street Drainage Improvements", dated "January 9, 2008",
revised February 13, 2008. The drainage improvements shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including temporary
pavement of the trenches, within 30-days of work starting on the
proposed subdivision site. In any event, no building permits will be issued
prior to completion of these drainage improvements. Temporary
paving shall remain and be maintained by the applicant, until the proposed
subdivision is determined to be substantially complete by the City
Engineer, at which time the applicant shall provide a full width pavement
replacement program to the following limits from the center of the Clark
Street/Clark Avenue Intersection: 240 feet easterly towards Barnes
Road, and 30 feet westerly towards Highland Avenue.
Response: A drainage improvement plan dated December 16, 2015 was
submitted to the Board at its meeting of December 17, 2015. This plan
addressed ii., iii. and iv.
iii. The pavement replacement program applied to Clark Street shall consist
of grinding and removing no less than 4 inches of the existing
pavement, from curb to curb, and replacement with 2- inches (or more
if necessary) of binder and 2-inches of top pavement mix approved
by the City Engineer. Final grading of the top mux shall promote stormwater
conveyance to the newly installed and existing drainage facilities on Clark
Street and not cause any issues with existing driveways. The pavement
replacement program must be completed and approved by the City
Engineer prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy.
iv. On Clark Avenue from the Clark Street/Clark Avenue intersection southerly
to the existing vertical granite curbing, the applicant has agreed to patch all
deficiencies and overlay with 2-inches of new pavement. This shall occur
when the subdivision is deemed to be substantially complete by the City
Engineer.
V. If deemed necessary, prior to beginning the drainage improvement work the
applicant shall file a Request for Determination of Applicability with the
Salem Conservation Commission and a Notice of Intent.
Response: Agreed.
s
S. Board of Health
a. The Salem Board of Health reviewed the subdivision application at its
regular meeting on October 13, 2015. The Board has voted to issue a list of
conditions of approval(Attachment 3).
i
j Response: The applicant has received, reviewed and accepts the proposed Board of
Health conditions.
5. Police Department
a. The City of Salem Police Department has informed staff that they will provide
traffic and safety recommendations subsequent to a site visit. Staff will be in
icontact with you to arrange a site visit.
Response: The applicant has yet to be contacted by the Salem Police Department, but
is certainly willing and available to meet and discuss safety recommendations.
If you have any questions about these issues, I would be happy to discuss them with you.
Please feel free to contact me in the Department of Planning & Community Development
at(978)619-5685.
Amanda Chiancola
Staff Planner
Attachments
j 1. Chapel Hill Decision
2. Opinion from the City Solicitor
3. Board of Health List of Conditions
9
A
C(&:WILLIAMS
MemorandumSPARAGES
A'm(O{ PK4U 0111[[0
To: Salem Planning Bdoar ® T
From: Peter M.Blaisdell,Jr.,P.E.,P.L.S. J
Date: December 30,2015
Subject:The Woodlands Subdivision,Salem MA-Open Space 15%Slope Calculation
Project Number: SALM026
Dear Members,
Below is a breakdown of the provided area in Open Spaces 1 &2 with slopes less than 15%
demonstrating compliance with the 10%minimum requirement.
Description Open Space 1 Open Space 2
Total Area 168,388 sq.ft 135,070 sq.ft.
Existing wetland area 44,100 sq.ft. 47,500 sq.ft.
Area outside wetland area 124,288 sq.ft. 87,570 sq.ft.
Area with 15%slope or greater 81,000 sq.ft 46,000 sq.it
Provided area outside of 43,238 sq.ft 41,570 sq.ft.
wetlands with less than 15%
slope
i
Total provided-area outside wetlands with less than 15%slope:
43,2381 sq.ft.+41,5703 sq.ft=84,808±sq.ft,-85,000±%ft.
Calculate 10%of Parcel Area requirement for comparison:
750,538 sq.ft.(See Definitive Plan)x 0.10=75,0543 sq.ft Required
Conclusion: 85,000±sq.ft. (Provided) >75,054±sq.ft.(Required)
Therefore,the project complies with the Requirement
147 Blossom Streol
Lyn4 Ma.01902
Tel.(781)581-0464
Fu(781)581-2860
• i t
New England Water Specialists
December 18,2015
Meninno Construction
7¢Oakville Street
Lynn,MA 01905
1 Hydrant Flow Test Report
Date:December 17.2015
Location: 21 Clark Avenue, Salem,MA
GPM gallons per minute): 850
T ro WPI(worWn prMare): 30
I Statie PSI(static ps ure): 86
I es Kidney
ew England Water Specialist
t
>IL
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
120 WASHINGTON STREET,SUITE 202E,P.O.BOX 3026,SALEM,MA 01970
PH:978.741.7401-FAX:978.741.7402-W W W,ENGINEERINGCORPORATION.COM
c
November 24, 2015
Ms. Amanda Chiancola
Staff Planner
Office of Planning and
Community Development
120 Washington Street
Salem, MA 01970
Re: City of Salem RFQ 0-37—On-Call Civil Engineering Support Services, Task Order No. 29 -
Peer Review Services, Woodlands Subdivision (formerly Chapel Hill Estates), Salem, MA
Dear Amanda:
We are pleased to support the Salem Planning Board with peer review services for the above referenced
project. We understand the project was scheduled to be presented at your upcoming December 3, 2015
meeting but has been continued and the discussion of utilities and stormwater will take place at a
subsequent meeting. We have prepared this project status letter for your use in future meetings.
Project Understanding:
• NSD Realty Trust is proposing a development/redevelopment project on Clark Avenue . The
project will involve construction of twenty seven(27) building lots, two (2) lots of open space,
roadway buildings, parking lots, and related site work and utilities.
• The project has been proposed for development/redevelopment in the past as "Chapel Hill
Estates" and was approved but due to delay the approval expired. The plans and developer have
both changed since previously approved project, requiring resubmission.
• The City of Salem OCD will be reviewing the project for compliance with Salem Zoning
Ordinance and Section 7-2 Cluster Residential Development and the Salem Subdivision
Regulations.
• The City of Salem requests an independent peer review of the proposed development plans and
documentation including stormwater management, drainage, and on-site engineering issues
covered by the Environmental Impact Statement including garbage, snow storage, etc..
• Included in the peer review will be consideration of existing and proposed utilities, sewer
separation and infiltration issues.
• Specific documents to be reviewed include a Cluster Residential Development and Subdivision
Review Narrative(not yet reviewed, provided 11/24/15), Environmental Impact Statement(not
yet reviewed, provided 11/24/15), Stormwater Permit and Stormwater Report(dated August 31,
2015), and a set of Design Drawings (10 sheets).
WATER RESOURCES - BURIED INFRASTRUCTURE-PUBLIC WORKS - CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION - LAND DEVELOPMENT
• We understand a notice of intent has not yet been filed and wetland resource area provisions will
be reviewed by the Conservation Commission and are not part of this review.
• We understand the previous project was approved for this site with conditions that would require
drainage improvements offsite on Clark Avenue and a capacity study of the sanitary sewer
system tributary to the pumping station on Highland Avenue(near Walmart), including removal
of all cost-effective, extraneous flows equal to, or greater than the proposed sewer flows from
the Woodlands Subdivision development. We also understand there is a question about
adequacy of fire flows. It is not clear at this time if this project will be subject to the same
conditions and include the same improvements as the previous project, so a review of offsite
utilities serving the project and adjacent areas are not included in the scope of this peer review.
Review Comments:
• Submittal Package
o The Woodlands Subdivision design plans, 10 sheets (8/25/15)
o Stormwater Report & Mitigative Drainage Analysis(08/31/15)
o Cluster Residential Development and Subdivision Review Narrative (Not yet provided)
o Environmental Impact Statement (Not yet provided)
o Stormwater Management Permit(City of Salem, Planning Dept.)
o Drainage Alteration Permit(City of Salem, Engineering Dept.)
o Previous Design Plans, Chapel Hill Subdivision, 13 sheets (10/26/07)
o City Engineer Memorandum (12/20/07)
o Previous Planning Board Decision(03/03/08)
Status=Ongoing, Stormwater Management Permit application, Drainage Alteration Permit application,
Environmental Impact Statement, and Cluster Residential Development and Subdivision Review
Narrative to be submitted for review.
Site Development Plans
• Lot 27, Utilities
Sheet 1 of 10, Lot 27
It is not clear what future plans are for Lot 27 (148,000 so, as no drainage calculations or utility
connections relating to this site are incorporated into this project.
Status= Unresolved, Request Applicant clarify plans for this proposed Lot 27, as they relate to impacts
on the proposed water, sewer, and drainage utilities in the development.
• Open Space and Access
Sheets 1 and 6 of 10
o Similar to the Chapel Hill subdivision plans, 3+acres of open space is proposed on the north
side of property and public access is provided to Open Space 1 in three locations with a
constructed access trail.
The Woodlands subdivision plans propose an additional 3+ acres of open space on the south side
of the property, but it is not clear how public will access Open Space 2. A single access location
is provided around the back of Lot 27 and no access trail is proposed.
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 2 of 7
o Items 9, 11, 12 from previous decision require access to Open Space and trail construction, but
restricts access trail construction to be completed without earthwork or machines, current
proposed access trial involves removal of existing soils, and replacement with 3" minus stone
(Sheet 5 of 10). Proposed construction is within the 100-foot buffer zone of resource area and
downgradient of proposed erosion and sedimentation control barrier(Sheet 6 of 10).
Status =Unresolved, Request clarification if previous requirements are applicable to this project with
respect to access to open space and construction of access trail, and recommend layout be confirmed
with Conservation.
• Connection to Existing Utilities
Sheets 4-7 of 10
o Connectivity of City of Salem water and sewer utilities on Clark Avenue and Clark Avenue
Extension is not clear near points of proposed connection to the end of the cul-de-sac.
o City typically requests triple gate valves at points of connection to City water mains.
o Items 13 and 14 from previous decision require improvements and/or studies to identify
improvements to existing sewer and drainage utilities serving and in the vicinity of the
project area, but information about proposed improvements is not included in the
Status= Unresolved, Recommend Applicant revised proposed water connection to include triple gate
valves and coordinate with City Engineering Department regarding capacity and improvements to the
existing drain and sewer utilities.
• Proposed Utilities
Sheets 4-7 of 10
o Proposed water and sewer services are not shown on the plans, and should be included to
demonstrate 10-foot separation.
o Proposed water and sewer main layouts may need to be modified, to provide 10-foot
separation in some areas, in particular in areas between large double catch basin structures.
o City typically requires triple gate valve connections at intersections, no gate valves are
proposed at South Ridge Circle intersection.
o Items 16 and 22 from previous decision require sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D
standards, plans should be revised to show separate fire service connections and valving to
meet this standard and City standards.
Status= Unresolved, Recommend Applicant revise plans to address proposed utility comments as
appropriate.
• Proposed Topography and Detention Basins
Sheets 4-7 of 10
Spot grades along tops of forebay and basin embankments (high points between topographic
contours) are referenced in report but not shown on plans, nor are forebay spillway elevations.
Recommend additional elevations be added to plans to facilitate construction.
Status= Ongoing, Recommend Applicant provide additional elevations to plans for constructability.
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 3 of 7
• Lighting
Item 19 from previous decision describes street lighting requirements. A street lighting plan is
not included in the design drawings.
Status= Unresolved, Request clarification if previous requirements are applicable to this project with
respect to street lighting(and other miscellaneous issues in Items 15 and 16), and revise design plans to
include street lighting and additional information as required.
• Irrigation Plan
An irrigation plan is not provided on utility drawings, Applicant to confirm if irrigation is
proposed and provide additional information about irrigation plan piping, connection to City
water main, and backflow prevention and metering.
Status=Ongoing. Applicant to confirm and/or provide additional information.
• Snow Storage
Plan for snow storage is not clear on plans if applicable.
Status=Ongoing. Applicant to confirm if snow storage is need and will be provided.
• Details
Sheets 8, 9, and 10 of 10
o Item 17 from previous decision requires sidewalks with vertical granite curbs, and requires
the sloped granite curb detail be removed from the plans. Plans do not clarify material for
proposed sidewalks, City typically looks for concrete walks. Plans still include sloped
granite curb detail which must be removed.
o Typical fire hydrant detail appears to be missing water main line type on CAD.
o Detail for proposed ADA ramp does not appear to allow for ramp alignment across
intersections and along crosswalks.
o Detail for rip rap embankment includes 4" perforated underdrain, location of underdrain
piping is not shown on plans.
o Foundation underdrain detail shown on Sheet 5, foundation underdrain piping is not shown
on plans.
o Trail detail shown on Sheet 5 requires equipment and excavation, refer to previous comments
about open space trails.
o Numerous street trees (43) proposed along subdivision within grass strip. Grass strip appears
to be approximately 2-feet wide between curb and sidewalk. Tree detail identifies root ball
and size of excavation which do not appear to fit within grass strip. Recommend sidewalk
layout be modified to 3 to 5-foot minimum width per City standards, and/or to include tree
pits to facilitate trees.
o Cul-tec recharger detail provided on Sheet 9. Layout of recharger on Sheet 4 identifies a 4"
outlet pipe at elevation 124.94'. The outlet pipe and piped discharge location is not
identified on the detail or the layout.
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
• Page 4 of 7
o A single, generic outlet control structure provided for reference without pipe sizes and
elevations. Recommend specific details for outlet control structures be provided for each of
the four basins for constructability.
Status= Unresolved, Recommend Applicant revise plans to address construction detail comments as
appropriate.
Permits and Environmental Impact
• Environmental Impact Statement
Status=Unresolved, Applicant to provide permit application and narrative.
• Drainage Alteration Permit (Engineering Dept.)
Project includes a number of fill areas, including proposed cuts of approximately 20-feet and
fills of approximately 16-feet. As a result, the project requires a drainage alteration permit from
Salem Engineering Department.
Status= Unresolved, Applicant to provide permit application and narrative.
• Stormwater Management Permit (Planning Dept.)
Status= Unresolved, Applicant to provide permit application and narrative for review.
Stormwater and Drainage
• Mitigative Drainage Analysis
o Page 3, Catchment Mapping: Pre and Post development drainage catchment area delineation
mapping was not provided for reference as part of the submittal package. Sheets 7 and 8
identify pre and post-contours and a single set of proposed flow arrows, but due to the extent
of contour changes(20 foot cuts an 16 foot fills) it is difficult to visualize the changes to
runoff patterns. It is also not clear if or how this project is influenced by runoff from
adjacent property to the east.
Status=Ongoing, Request Applicant provide pre and post-catchment delineation maps identifying the
limits of all runoff entering or leaving the project area including adjacent land if applicable.
• Mitigative Drainage Analysis
o Page 1 of 20: Required and provided volumes are confusing between table provided on page
1, 2, 9, and 10. Request clarification or explanation of the information provided.
o Page 7, Pond 1: volume table references elevation 131, plans appear to show bottom at 132'.
Request clarification.
o Page 9, Pond I: storage depth listed at 0.75', plans appear to show 132.5'-132'=0.5'.
o Page 9, Pond 2: storage depth listed at 0.50', plans appear to show 128.5'-128.5'=0'.
o Page 10, Pond 4: storage depth listed at 1.0', plans appear to show 117.5'-1 17=0.5'
o Page 10, CultTec system: volume calculated as open void between 124.94' and 122.4', plans
appear to show stone layer below 122.9' which may reduce volume.
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 5 of 7
Status= Unresolved, Request clarification on comments listed above and whether reduced volumes if
applicable will impact the mitigative drainage analysis.
• Emergency Overflow
Page 4, Pond 1: It is not clear where emergency overflow from pond 1 spillway will flow,
appears to be opposite direction of planned discharge.
Status= Unresolved, Applicant to clarify.
• Long Term Pollution Prevention Plan
o Page 1, Paragraph II states assumption that the City of Salem will assume full responsibility
of continuing the operation and maintenance of the stormwater management system. Item 8
of previous decision states that a homeowner's association will have several responsibilities
including maintenance of the stormwater management system which is in conflict.
Status=Unresolved, Applicant to clarify who will be responsible for the operations and maintenance
program for all the stromwater BMPs which is quite extensive.
• Operations and Maintenance Plan
o O&M Plan does not appear to include Sediment and Oil Separator.
o O&M Plan does not appear to include sediment forebays and removal of sediment from
forebays and detention basins if applicable.
o Design of detention basins does not appear to provide vehicular access to the forebays and
detention basins for maintenance, which are obstructed by walls or steep slopes in some
places.
o Maintenance of sub-surface infiltrators on page 2 requires the crushed stone and cul-tec
chambers to be removed and replaced once sediment accumulates 3", which would represent
a significant cost if required.
Status= Ongoing, request clarification on 0&M plan for all BMPs, access to BMPs to facilitate
maintenance, and responsible party for the operations and maintenance program for all the
stromwater BMPs which is quite extensive.
• Stormwater Checklist:
Page 4 states Project is otherwise subject to Stormwater Standards only to the maximum extent
practicable, Page 7 states that Standard 7 is not applicable which appears to be in conflict.
Status=Ongoing, Applicant to clarify.
• Pre and Post Runoff- Standard 2 (Page 5)
Pre and post runoff analysis provided for 2, 10, 100 year storm events and calculations
predict ates that pre and post-development runoff rate requirements are met.
Status= Resolved.
• Groundwater Recharge—Standard 3 (Pagesl, 2, 9, 10)
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 6 of 7
Calculations predict recharge requirements met, however request clarification of required
and provided recharge volume calculations in previous comments.
Status= Unresolved, pending response to previous comments.
• Water Quality—Standard 4
TSS removal tables narrative details that pre-treatment is provided prior to infiltration BMPs
and 80%TSS removal provided by BMP trains, (providing maintenance is performed).
Status=Resolved.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at any
time on my cell phone at 978-767-5415 or at my Salem office at 978-741-7401.
Sincerely,
William M. Ross, P.E.
Project Manager/Principal Engineer
New England Civil Engineering Corp.
Cc: David Knowlton, City Engineer
Lynn Duncan, Amanda Chiancola, Salem Planning OCDP
Clients/Saletn/Woodlands/11242015letter
NEW ENGLAND CML ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 7 of 7
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
120 WASHINGTON STREET,SUrrE 202E,P.O.BOX 3026,SALEM,MA 01970
PH:978.741.7401-FAX:978.741.7402—W W W.ENGINEERINGCORPORATION.COM
r
a
October 19, 2015
Ms. Amanda Chiancola
Staff Planner
Office of Planning and
Community Development
120 Washington Street
Salem, MA 01970
Re: City of Salem RFQ 0-37—On-Call Civil Engineering Support Services,Task Order No. 29 -
Peer Review Services, Woodlands Subdivision (formerly Chapel Hill Estates), Salem, MA
Dear Amanda:
I greatly appreciated the opportunity to meet with you last week to briefly discuss the opportunity to
provide Peer Review Services on behalf of the City of Salem, in support of the proposed"Woodlands
Subdivision"development on Clark Avenue in Salem, MA. At your invitation, we have prepared this
Task Order—Letter Proposal to provide peer review services of the proposed development.
Project Understanding:
• NSD Realty Trust is proposing a development/redevelopment project on Clark Avenue . The
project will involve construction of twenty seven (27)building lots, two (2) lots of open space,
roadway buildings,parking lots, and related site work and utilities.
• The project has been proposed for development/redevelopment in the past as "Chapel Hill
Estates" and was approved but due to delay the approval expired. The plans and developer have
both changed since previously approved project, requiring resubmission.
• The City of Salem OCD will be reviewing the project for compliance with Salem Zoning
Ordinance and Section 7-2 Cluster Residential Development and the Salem Subdivision
Regulations.
• The City of Salem requests an independent peer review of the proposed development plans and
documentation including stormwater management, drainage, and on-site engineering issues
covered by the Environmental Impact Statement including garbage, snow storage, etc..
• Included in the peer review will be consideration of existing and proposed utilities, sewer
separation and infiltration issues, and adequacy of existing utilities to serve the project.
• Specific documents to be reviewed include a Cluster Residential Development and Subdivision
Review Narrative (not yet provided), Environmental Impact Statement(not yet provided),
Stormwater Permit and Stormwater Report(dated August 31, 2015), and a set of Design
Drawings (10 sheets).
WATER RESOURCES - BURIED INFRASTRUCTURE-PUBLIC WORKS - CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION - LAND DEVELOPMENT
• We understand a notice of intent has not yet been filed and wetland resource area provisions will
be reviewed by the Conservation Commission and are not part of this review.
• At this time, we have not reviewed the current development proiect or previous development
project designs for this location, and have prepared the following scope of work and budget
under the assumption that the current submission requires peer review as a stand-alone project.
• We understand the previous project was approved for this site with conditions that would require
drainage improvements offsite on Clark Avenue and a capacity study of the sanitary sewer
system tributary to the pumping station on Highland Avenue (near Walmart), including removal
of all cost-effective, extraneous flows equal to, or greater than the proposed sewer flows from
the Woodlands Subdivision development. It is not clear at this time if this project will be subject
to the same conditions and include the same improvements as the previous project, so a review
of these offsite improvements and/or studies are not included in the scope of this peer review.
SCOPE OF WORK:
Task 1) Review existing City of Salem utility plans and information in the vicinity of the proposed
Woodlands Subdivision on Clark Avenue and adjacent streets.
Task 2) Review previous City of Salem development review letter(s) and Planning Board conditions of
approval for previously approved project.
Task 3) Attend meeting with City Engineer to discuss specific City concerns to be addressed in the peer
review, including concerns and conditions from previous City Engineer review.
Task 4) Review and compare/contrast previous development plans with current revised development
plans, including building size and locations, parking and paved surface areas and configurations, grading
and topography, and drainage infrastructure onsite as well as City of Salem infrastructure impacts.
Task 5) Complete site visit to observe the number and location of existing sewer and drainage
structures, existing topography and impervious areas, and existing structures as shown on"Definitive
Plan & Profile, Sheets 4 and 5, by Williams & Sparages Engineering.
Task 6) Review Project Narrative and Environmental Impact Statement(not yet provided) and
Stormwater Report prepared by Williams & Sparages Engineering.
Task 7) Review site development plans prepared by Williams & Sparages Engineering. Review
proposed on-site stormwater management system, pre and post-development runoff calculations, and
stormwater quantity and quality issues. Review calculations for projected sanitary sewer flows,
hydraulic calculations for proposed sanitary sewer design, and layout of proposed water and sanitary
sewer piping.
Task 8) Attend up to one (1) meeting with engineering representatives of Williams& Sparages
Engineering to review the findings of the site walk and review of the documents summarized in Task 6.
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 2 of 5
Task 9) Prepare Letter Report summarizing findings of the record search, site walk, document review,
and meeting described in Tasks 1-8 above.
Task 10) Attend up to one (1) meeting with Staff Planner and City Engineer to discuss findings of Letter
Report.
Task 11) Plan for and attend up to one (1) Planning Board public hearings to present findings of peer
review.
Expanded SCOPE OF WORK:
Task 12) If requested by the City of Salem, provide additional engineering services as required to
complete additional site visits,review additional project plans and documents beyond those described
above, and attend additional meetings or public hearings.
PROJECT BUDGET:
Compensation for the Scope of work described in Task 1 through Task 11 shall be made based on
periodic accrual invoices (time and materials), not to exceed the amount of Four Thousand Eight
Hundred Dollars ($4,800.00) without written authorization from the City of Salem. Task 12 will be
completed on an accrual (time and materials)basis at an hourly rate of$88.00 to $160.00.
Written direction from the City of Salem will be required to expand scope of services.
PROJECT SCHEDULE:
New England Civil Engineering Corp. will complete the Scope of Services described in Task 1 through
Task 1 above within 20 working days following receipt of written authorization to proceed and copies of
all documents to be reviewed as described above.
PAYMENT TERMS:
Periodic invoices will be submitted to the Client and will be based on percentage completion of
individual tasks as described above. Invoices are payable within fourteen(14) days of receipt and
approval by Client.
EXPENSES:
The method for charging expenses, sub-contracted or supplemental services is 1.15 x the actual cost of
the direct expense.
ACCEPTANCE:
This Task Ordered letter proposal, in conjunction with the reference Contract RFQ 0-37 issuance of
Notice to Proceed dated June 3, 2013, will serve as an"Agreement to Professional Services". Please
sign this proposal in the space provided and return one executed copy to my attention at your earliest
convenience to initiate the project. We have provided five execution lines for City of Salem
authorization to proceed but will be happy to revise or append the format of this letter with additional
signature lines at your request.
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 3 of 5
L_ __
If you have any questions or require additional information,please do not hesitate to contact me at any
time on my cell phone at 978-767-5415 or at my Salem office at 978-741-7401. We thank you for the
opportunity to work with the City of Salem and look forward to building on our successful and
rewarding parte rship moving forward.
n
JV
Sincerely,
William M. Ross, P.E.
Project Manager/Principal Engineer
New England Civil Engineering Corp.
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 4 of 5
Task Order No. 29 Authorization:
Kimberley Driscoll Date:
Ma or ,
V
L n Duncan, AICP Date:
Director of Planning and
Developm t
Stanton Date:
Finance Director
Whitney Haskell Date:
Pur ha g Agent
Elizabeth Rennar Date:
City Solicitor
NEW ENGLAND CIVIL ENGINEERING CORP.
Page 5 of 5
l
1
October 28, 2015
Joseph C. Correnti
Serafini, Darling & Correnti, LLP
63 Federal Street
Salem, MA 01970
RE: Clark Avenue Subdivision
Dear Mr. Correnti:
In reviewing the application of NSD Realty Trust, I have flagged several issues that are
identified below. I wanted to notify you in advance to enable your client to best prepare
for the Board meeting. As you noted in the application, a Subdivision and Cluster
Development (herein referred to as Chapel Hill) was approved for 25 lots in 2008 and
the decision has since expired (Attachment 1). The Chapel Hill decision is enclosed for
your reference as it is cited herein.
A. Planning Board Comments
September 17, 2015 Planning Board Meeting
1. The Planning Board requested the developer to make the open space into a feature
of this development and place it such that it is clearly accessible for community use
rather than just for use by the private properties.
October 15, 2015 Planning Board Meeting
1. The Planning Board requested a Landscape plan to better understand the buffer
between the existing and proposed development.
2. The Planning Board requested for you to consider whether there is an alternative
location for the detention basin proposed on lot 12 since it currently abuts the
neighbor.
Page 1 of 6
3. An abutter provided public comment that contends that the existing undeveloped
public way through the project site is land court protected and cannot be altered.
Please provide a response to this comment.
4. During public comment, abutters expressed concern with how project will affect the
existing access to Clark Avenue and existing blind spots. Please note that staff is
following up with the Police Department regarding these concerns. It would be
helpful if you would also comment with mitigation suggestions. Also, Section B(5) of
this letter details the conditions of approval in the Chapel Hill Subdivision approval.
B. DPCD Comments
1. Per Sheet 6 of the plans submitted on August 27, 2015, the maximum height of the
proposed residences is 35 feet. Please note that pursuant to Section 7.2.4(1) of the
Salem Zoning Ordinance, no structure shall exceed two and one-half (2.5) stories.
Should the Planning Board approve the project, this requirement will be incorporated
as a condition of approval.
2. The ownership of the Open Space should be clarified as being under the ownership
of the Homeowners Association and granting conservation easements for the
residents of Salem to have access for passive recreational activities'.
3. Pursuant to Section 7.2.5 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, at least 20 percent of total
tract area shall be set aside as common land and shall consist of usable open
space. Such common land shall not contain more than fifty (50) percent wetlands or
slopelands (herein defined as land with slopes of 15% or greater), nor shall it include
streets, ways and parking areas.
a. Please identify the benefits of the open space parcels and how residents
will access the open space. It appears that the connection to the Salem
Conservation land is an important component of the benefit of this open
space.
b. It is unclear how to access Open Space No. 2, thus it appears to be
unusable. Please delineate access to the open space and the location of
trailheads if proposed.
c. The maintenance of the trails and Open Space are not currently defined.
d. The plans note that +/- 211,858 sq. ft. of open space is provided. Please
provide a breakdown of the net open space to demonstrate that at least
75,054 square feee of the open space does not include wetlands,
slopelands, streets, ways or parking areas.
Pursuant to City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Section 7.2.5.
2 20% of the Total Tract Area 750,538 sq ft = 150,108 sq. ft.
50% of the Required Open Space Area 150,108 sq.ft. = 75,054 sq. ft.
Page 2 of 6
e. The project is going to necessitate the clearing of vegetation within the
open space area to accommodate the proposed erosion control elements
of the plan. Will these areas be revegetated?
4. The Chapel Hill project included traffic safety mitigations measures. Please clarify
whether the following mitigation measures, or alternative mitigation measures are
proposed:
a. A crosswalk which will lead from the end of the sidewalk on the
northeasterly side of Clark Avenue to the sidewalk on the southwesterly
side of Clark Avenue (which continues to the intersection with Clark
Street).
b. A stop sign at the intersections of Clark Ave. and Clark Ave. Extension,
Clark Ave and Woodlands Avenue.
c. A center line on a portion of existing Clark Avenue to guide motorists
through the bend.
i. The striping and signage shall be installed as shown on the "Traffic
Improvement Plan", dated February 13, 2008, prepared by Eastern
Land Survey Associates.
d. Vertical granite curbing along the existing bituminous concrete sidewalk at
the northerly end of Clark Avenue from the end of the existing granite
curbing on Clark Avenue northerly to the intersection of Clark Avenue and
Clark Street.
e. Repair of the sidewalk as needed.
f. A mirror on the existing utility pole near the bend on the existing section of
Clark Avenue.
a. Funds to remove the rock at the bend on 1 Clark Avenue and realigning
the fence impeding sight distance on Clark Avenue.
i. Please note that staff suggests the developer remove the rock
rather than providing the City funds.
g. A line of sight easement from 1 Clark Avenue to be granted to the City by
the property owner of 1 Clark Avenue.
5. Pursuant to Section 7.2.4(2) of the Salem Zoning Ordinance, the cluster shall follow
the natural contours of the terrain and respects the natural features of the site as far
as possible.
a. Please elaborate on how the plan conforms to the existing contours; i.e.
would more cutting and filling be required if lots had to contain 15,000 s.f.?
6. The length of the street as a dead-end is approximately 1,000 feet from Clark Ave. to
the end of Woodlands Road (cul-de-sac). Pursuant to Section IV(A)(1)(g) of the
Subdivision Regulations, dead-end streets shall not be longer than 500 feet. The
3 Pursuant to Section IV(A)(1)(a) of the City of Salem Subdivision Regulations, all streets in the
subdivision shall be designed so that, in the opinion of the Planning Board, they will provided safe
vehicular travel.
Page 3 of 6
Chapel Hill Decision included a waiver based on the requirement for installation of
sprinkler systems in the dwellings. Please clarify if a waiver is requested.
C. City Department Comments
1. Building Commissioner
a. The City of Salem Building Commissioner has expressed concern
regarding the future development of lot 27 as it is predominantly zoned
industrial. Please note that staff understands that Lot 27 cannot be
developed as.an industrial lot because its access is from Clark Avenue
through the residentially zoned portion of the lot. This is based on the
opinion of the Assistant City Solicitor, dated October 15, 2007 (Attachment
2).
2. Fire Department
a. Per the Fire Prevention Officer's comments, there is a 8" main providing
water to the project area. The Fire Prevention would like to see a
hydraulic report done by a third party source agreed upon by the Fire
Department defining what is needed for firefight capabilities for the
subdivision. The undefined lot should be taken into consideration in this
report with the maximum water supply requirements considered for
potential development of the property.
i. I will follow up with you after discussing this with the City Engineer
to let you know whether it is necessary.
3. Conservation Commission
a. The Conservation Agent has determined that the project will require an
order of conditions form the Conservation Commission and a Stormwater
Permit in accordance with Section 37 of the Salem Ordinances.
i. Staff has received a hardcopy of the stormwater report and has
requested New England Civil Engineer Corp to conduct a peer
review of the report. Please submit an electronic copy of the report.
4. City Engineer
a. Please submit a utility plan for the City Engineer to review.
b. The Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development approved at the
subject location in 2008 included offsite drainage improvements at the
intersection of Clark Street and Clark Avenue. The City Engineer has
recommended that the proposed project be subject to the same offsite
improvements. The infrastructure improvements are itemized herein.
Page 4 of 6
i. The applicant shall perform an infiltration and inflow identification
and removal program for the approximate 2,700 linear foot sewer
system to which the proposed subdivision shall discharge sewage.
The program shall be completed and flows removed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any
certificates of occupancy. All pipes collecting sewage flow and
discharging to the Highland Avenue pump station shall be included
in the program. The program shall be performed in strict
compliance with the latest Guidelines for Infiltration/Inflow Analyses
and Sewer System Evaluation Survey. No such work shall
commence without first meeting with the City Engineer to review
the scope of work. All reports and summaries of work completed
shall be reviewed by the City Engineer prior to the start of the next
phase of work starting (phases are outlined in the Guidelines). It is
expected that the applicant will remove all extraneous infiltration
and inflow that is cost effective to remove up to an amount not to
exceed a cost determined by the City Engineer. The amount of
flow removed shall not be less than the amount of flow to be added
by the proposed subdivision.
ii. The applicant shall complete drainage improvements at the
intersection of Clark Street and Clark Avenue as depicted on the
plan entitled "Clark Street Drainage Improvements", dated "January
9, 2008", revised February 13, 2008. The drainage improvements
shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including
temporary pavement of the trenches, within 30-days of work
starting on the proposed subdivision site. In any event, no building
permits will be issued prior to completion of these drainage
improvements. Temporary paving shall remain and be maintained
by the applicant, until the proposed subdivision is determined to be
substantially complete by the City Engineer, at which time the
applicant shall provide a full width pavement replacement program
to the following limits from the center of the Clark Street/Clark
Avenue Intersection: 240 feet easterly towards Barnes Road, and
30 feet westerly towards Highland Avenue.
iii. The pavement replacement program applied to Clark Street shall
consist of grinding and removing no less than 4 inches of the
existing pavement, from curb to curb, and replacement with 2-
inches (or more if necessary) of binder and 2-inches of top
pavement mix approved by the City Engineer. Final grading of the
top mix shall promote stormwater conveyance to the newly installed
and existing drainage facilities on Clark Street and not cause any
issues with existing driveways. The pavement replacement
program must be completed and approved by the City Engineer
prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy.
Page 5 of 6
iv. On Clark Avenue from the Clark Street/Clark Avenue intersection
southerly to the existing vertical granite curbing, the applicant has
agreed to patch all deficiencies and overlay with 2-inches of new
pavement. This shall occur when the subdivision is deemed to be
substantially complete by the City Engineer.
v. If deemed necessary, prior to beginning the drainage improvement
work the applicant shall file a Request for Determination of
Applicability with the Salem Conservation Commission and a Notice
of Intent.
5. Board of Health
a. The Salem Board of Health reviewed the subdivision application at its
regular meeting on October 13, 2015. The Board has voted to issue a list
of conditions of approval (Attachment 3).
6. Police Department
a. The City of Salem Police Department has informed staff that they will
provide traffic and safety recommendations subsequent to a site visit. Staff
will be in contact with you to arrange a site visit.
If you have any questions about these issues, I would be happy to discuss them with
you. Please feel free to contact me in the Department of Planning & Community
Development at (978) 619-5685.
Sincerely, n
j a,
Amanda Chiancola
Staff Planner
Attachments
1. Chapel Hill Decision
2. Opinion from the City Solicitor
3. Board of Health List of Conditions
Page 6 of 6
i
CITY OF SALEM
` ,
((3
LEGAL DEPARTMENT
93 WASHINGTON STREET•SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TEL.978-745-9595♦ FAX:978-7441279
KIMBERIEY DRISCOL.L ELIZABETH RENNARD,FSQ. JERALO PARISEL LA,FSQ.
MAYOR CITY SOLICITOR ASST.CITY SOLICITOR
To: Elizabeth Rennard, city solicitor
From: Jerald Parisella, assistant city solicitor
RE: Chapel Hill subdivision
October 15, 2007
You have requested an opinion regarding the proposed subdivision located at"Chapel
Hill."The issues you would like reviewed are: (1)Whether access may be denied to a
portion of the land in question because it is zoned industrial and access would have to be
gained through a residential zone, (2)if access is denied is this a taking, and (3)whether
upcoming meetings have to be advertised.
The facts as I understand them are that the Planning Board is reviewing a proposed 26-lot
single family subdivision near Clark Avenue, also known as Chapel Hill. The homes will
be constructed in the R-1 district but are being proposed as a cluster development.
Adjacent to the R-1 District is land zoned Industrial. It has been represented that access to
the Industrial land is only available via the roadways proposed in the subdivision, and
that said roadways will be located in the residential district, as shown on Definitive
Subdivision Plan Chapel Hill, prepared by Eastern Land Survey Assoc. Inc., dated June
28, 2006 as revised on June 11, 2007 and August 20, 2007.
The Planning Board has had several meetings regarding this subdivision and advertised
its first meeting as required by M.G.L. c. 41 section 81 T.
The caselaw makes it clear that access to a use is an extension of such use. Beale v.
Planning Board of Rockland,423 Mass. 690 (1996), holding that access to a retail
shopping center was a retail use and not permitted in a district zoned industrial.
Chelmsford v. Byrne, 6 Mass.App.Ct. 848 (1978), injunction barring use of residential
land in Chelmsford for access to industrial land in Lowell. See also Building Inspector of
Dennis v. Harney, 2 Mass.App.Ct. 584 (1974), use of a portion of defendant's land that
lies in residential zone to access commercial use not permitted by town's bylaw.
It appears that this limitation applies to private ways or ways not accepted as public
streets.
I was not able to find a case squarely on point, but the SIC seemed to state that zoning
restrictions should not apply to publicly accepted ways.
"Although a municipality is subject to its own zoning regulations ... we know of no
authority for the proposition that a public way, laid out by municipal action, pursuant to
statute, may be used only for purposes which are permitted in the zoning district in which
the public way lies. The adoption of such a rule at this time would be both surprising and
disruptive throughout the Commonwealth. If the issue were before us squarely, we would
! rule that the use of a public way is not restricted by local zoning provisions." Harrison v.
Textron, 367 Mass. 540 (1975).
A way does not become a public way unless it has become public by one of three ways:
1. A laying out by public authority in the manner prescribed by statute(see M.G.L.
c. 82);
2. By prescription;
3. prior to 1846 by dedication and acceptance. Fenn v. Town of Middleborough, 7
Mass.App.Ct. 80 (1979).
Approval by the Planning Board of a subdivision does not mean that the ways in the
subdivision become public ways.
The principal purpose of the Subdivision Control Law is to protect the
health and welfare of the community `by regulating the laying out and
construction of ways in subdivisions providing access to the several lots
therein, but which have not become public ways, and ensuring sanitary
conditions in subdivisions and in proper cases parks and open areas'
(emphasis supplied). s 81M. The Subdivision Control Law may thus be
exercised only when new ways required to serve the subdivided lots
themselves are required. The suggestion that the planning board's approval
of the way under the statute vests some rights to use it in the plaintiffs
whose lot was not within the subdivision finds no support in the statute,
! whose principal object is to ensure sufficient access to the lots within the
subdivision and to provide them with municipal services. Such subdivision
plans ... indicate no more than that the ways shown adequately ensure that
the lots within the subdivision are sufficiently accessible so that they can
be provided with municipal and other services. The Subdivision Control
Law provides no authorization or implication that such approval vests any
interest in these ways in the public. Dolan v. Board of Anneals of
Chatham, 359 Mass. 699 (1971).
It should be noted that the public ways should also be adequate to ensure safe and proper
access. As noted in M.G.L. c. 41 sec. 81M, the purposes of the subdivision control law
include protecting the safety, convenience and welfare of the inhabitants of the city and
ensuring that access and ways in the subdivision will be safe and convenient for travel
and lessen congestion in the ways of the subdivision and adjacent public ways. The
Planning Board also can ensure proper coordination with the proposed ways in the
subdivision with other public ways in the city and in neighboring subdivisions. See Beale
v. Planning Board of Rockland.
Because the plan proposed utilizes a way in the residential district to gain access to a lot
in the industrial district, it is my opinion that the Planning Board may deny the plan as
presented. I also believe that the Board can take into account the quality of access in and
around the subdivision in determining if the plan should be approved.
The second issue is whether a taking would occur if access to the Industrial-zoned land
was denied. It has been represented to me that the only access to the industrial land
(shown as lot 27 on Definitive Subdivision Plan Chapel Hill,by Eastern Land Surveyors,
dated June 28, 2006 and revised on June 11, 2007 and August 20, 2007) is via the ways
shown on the plan. The courts in Massachusetts have generally divided takings claims
into "facial challenges" or"as applied"challenges. In a facial challenge the landowner
must assert that the regulation leaves no reasonable use of the property. In an as applied
challenge, the landowner must assert that a zoning provision,though valid generally, is
unconstitutional as applied to a particular parcel when due to the peculiarities of the
parcel, application of the by-law is unnecessary to accomplish the public purpose for
which the ordinance was intended. First the courts will determine if the regulation serves
a valid public purpose. If it does, then the court will look to see if the regulation deprives
the plaintiff's land of all practical value to them or to anyone acquiring it, leaving them
only with the burden of paying taxes on it. See Brobrowski, Handbook of Massachusetts
Land Use and Planning section 2.05(c), citations omitted.
In Beale v. Planning Board of Rockland, the SIC did note that in "the absence of an
invalid purpose, courts have upheld restrictions on use in one zone even when the
restrictions make access to property in another zone a physical impossibility."
Turning to the issue of advertising(or re-advertising) the Planning Board meeting, it does
not appear that this is necessary. Before approving a subdivision plan, the Planning Board
must follow the requirements of M.G.L. c. 41 sec. 81T, which requires a public hearing.
Notice of the public hearing must be given by advertisement in a newspaper of general
circulation in the city and mailing a copy of the advertisement to abutters. I have been
informed that this was done at the initial hearing for this project in October of 2006 and
that the matter has been continued on various occasions as a result of various comments
from city boards and officials and because a zoning change was required. As long as each
meeting was continued with notice of the upcoming meeting(and the meetings are posted
pursuant to the Open Meeting law), then I believe the notice requirements have been met.
• I • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
BOARD OF HEALTH
120 WASHINGTON STREET,4"FLOOR PublicHeath
Proms.Promote.Protect.
TEL. (978) 741-1800 FAx(978) 745-0343
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL Iramdin ,salem:com
MAYOR LARRY RAMDIN,RS/REHS,CHO,CP-FS
HEAL:rH AG ENT
October 15, 2015
Serafini, Darling and Correnti, LLP
c/o Attorney Correnti
thru Amanda Chinacola, Salem Planning Department
RE: Clark Avenue Assessor map 6, lots 7, 8 9 Salem MA
The Salem Board of Health has reviewed your subdivision application and at its regular meeting held on October 13,
2105, also considered your presentation to the Board. The Board has voted to issue a list of conditions that must be
met and the list is attached. A copy of this list will be provided to the City of Salem Planning Board.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions at 978-741-]800
Yours Very Truly 002,16 of He
ai�
C NUIP,� 4
c
A a
3
Larry A. Ramdin, MPH, MA, REHS, CHO, CP-FS, HHS hINEM�P�
Health Agent Salem, MP
BOARDOF HEALTH LIST OF CONDITIONS
1. The individual presenting the plan to the Board of Health must notify the Health Agent of the name,
address, and telephone number of the project(site)manager who will be on site and directly responsible
for the construction of the project.
2. If a DEP tracking number is issued for this site under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan, no structure
shall be constructed until the Licensed Site Professional responsible for the site certifies that soil and
ground water on the entire site meets.the DEP standards for the proposed use.
3. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer.
4. The developer shall employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate the area prior to construction,
demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a copy of the exterminator's invoice to the Health Agent
5. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction.
6. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping which
will occur during construction.
7. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for containment and removal of debris,
vegetative waste, and unacceptable excavation material generated during demolition and/or construction.
8. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for fire fighting.
9. Noise levels from the resultant establishment(s) generated by operations, including but not limited to
refrigeration and heating, shall not increase the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A) above the
ambient levels measured at the property line.
10. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the
project.
11. The resultant establishment(s) shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operations in an
environmentally sound manner as described to the Board of Health.
12. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and
confirmation that above conditions have been met.
13. The developer shall install grease traps, to contain grease in gray water, prior to it entering the city sewer
system in developments with 10 or more units and in compliance with the requirements of the City
Engineer
14. Salem sits in a Radon Zone 1 and the risk of radon entering buildings is extremely. Therefore, the
installation of radon mitigation systems are required.
15. The final construction must comply with all requirements of the Massachusetts State Sanitary code.
ro.
CITY OF SALEM
PLANNING BOARD
REQUEST FOR REVIEW COMMENTS
DATE: 09/28/2015
TO: ( ) BUILDING COMMISSIONER ( ) CONSERVATION COMM
( ) TYENGINEER ( ) FIRE PREVENTION
(WOARD OF HEALTH ( ) SCHOOL DISTRICT
( ) DISABILITIES COMMISSION ( ) POLICE DEPARTMENT
( ) DEPARTMENT PUBLIC SERVICES
Attached please find the application referenced below. The Planning Board requests that you review
this application relative to the Zoning Ordinance and/or to the Subdivision Regulations and MGL
Chapter 41. We would appreciate your completing the form below and returning it to Amanda
Chiancola,she can be reached byphone at 978-619-5691 or email at achiancolaasalemcom
( ) Preliminary Subdivision Plan
( ) Definitive Subdivision Plan
( ) Waiver from Frontage
( ) Drive-Through Special Permit
( ) Cluster Development
( ) Planned Unit Development
( ) Site Plan Review
O Business Park Development District
( ) Wireless Communication Facilities Special Permit
( ) North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit
( ) Flood Hazard District Special Permit
APPLICANT: Serafini,Darling and Correnti, LLP, C/o Attorney Correnti
PROJECT NAME &ADDRESS: Clark Avenue, Assessors Map 6, Lots 7, 8, and 9.
CONTACT PERSON: Amanda Chiancola
COMMENTS DUE: Requested by 10/15/2015 for hearing that night.
( ) CONCUR WITH PROPOSAL (Explain on reverse side)
( ) NEED MORE INFORMATION(Explain on reverse side)
( ) CANNOT CONCUR WITH PROPOSAL (Explain on reverse side)
(,,�60MMENTS INCLUDED
4G44;tl4 (.&iT4 a
Reviewer's Signature Title Date
120 WAstrtwcroti,STREET, SALEM, NtASSACHUSE-17S 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404
W W.SALEiMMM
..4
I • CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS .
BOARD OF HEALTH
120 WASHINGTON STREET 4"'FLOOR PubPCHealth
STREET, Prertor.Promote.Protect
TEL. (978) 741-1800 FAx(978) 745-0343
KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL lramdin@salem:com
MAYOR LARRY ItAMDIN,RS/RI-HS,CHO,CP-PS
HEALTH AGL'NT
October 15, 2015
Serafini, Darling and Correnti, LLP
c/o Attorney Correnti
thru Amanda Chinacola, Salem Planning Department
RE: Clark Avenue Assessor map 6, lots 7,8.9 , Salem MA
The Salem Board of Health has reviewed your subdivision application and at its regular meeting held on October 13,
2105, also considered your presentation to the Board. The Board has voted to issue a list of conditions that must be
met and the list is attached. A copy of this list will be provided to the City of Salem Planning Board.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions at 978-741-1800
Yours Very Truly Ovoa�sd of Heei
GONDIrq�'�
Larry A. Ramdin, MPH, MA, REHS, CHO, CP-FS, HHS 0 NF.A P�
Health Agent Sa/em op,
1
BOARDOF HEALTH LIST OF CONDITIONS
' 1. The individual presenting the plan to the Board of Health must notify the Health Agent of the name,
address, and telephone number of the project (site) manager who will be on site and directly responsible
for the construction of the project.
2. If a DEP tracking number is issued for this site under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan, no structure
shall be constructed until the Licensed Site Professional responsible for the site certifies that soil and
ground water on the entire site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use.
3. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer.
4. The developer shall employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate the area prior to construction,
demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a copy of the exterminator's invoice to the Health Agent
5. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction.
6. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping which
will occur during construction.
7. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for containment and removal of debris,
vegetative waste, and unacceptable excavation material generated during demolition and/or construction.
8. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for fire fighting.
9. Noise levels from the resultant establishment(s) generated by operations, including but not limited to
refrigeration and heating, shall not increase the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A) above the
ambient levels measured at the property line.
10. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the
project.
11. The resultant establishment(s) shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operations in an
environmentally sound manner as described to the Board of Health.
12. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and
confirmation that above conditions have been met.
' 13. The developer shall install grease traps, to contain grease in gray water, prior to it entering the city sewer
system in developments with 10 or more units and in compliance with the requirements of the City
Engineer
14. Salem sits in a Radon Zone 1 and the risk of radon entering buildings is extremely. Therefore, the
installation of radon mitigation systems are required.
15. The final construction must comply with all requirements of the Massachusetts State Sanitary code.
Amanda Chiancola
From: David Knowlton
Sent: Monday, October 26, 201S 11:11 AM
To: Amanda Chiancola
Subject: RE:task order
thanks Amanda, i think we need to the intersections of clark st and barnes road evaluated to ensure they have the
necessary capacity for the proposed traffic volumes.
everything else looks great, thanks
david
From: Amanda Chiancola
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 11:03 AM
To: David Knowlton
Subject: RE: task order
I have emailed the development to make him aware that the offsite drainage improvements are expected.
The developer has not been informed that a traffic engineer peer review is required. Will a full traffic study be required?
I am also preparing a letter for him in which I want to outline exactly what those improvements are.The conditions
below are from the previous approval, are the same improvements going to be required?
1. The applicant shall perform an infiltration and inflow identification and removal program for the approximate
2,700 linear foot sewer system to which the proposed subdivision shall discharge sewage. The program shall be
completed and flows removed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any certificates of
occupancy. All pipes collecting sewage flow and discharging to the Highland Avenue pump station shall be
included in the program. The program shall be performed in strict compliance with the latest Guidelines for
Infiltration/Inflow Analyses and Sewer System Evaluation Survey. No such work shall commence without first
meeting with the City Engineer to review the scope of work. All reports and summaries of work completed shall
be reviewed by the City Engineer prior to the start of the next phase of work starting (phases are outlined in the
Guidelines). It is expected that the applicant will remove all extraneous infiltration and inflow that is cost
effective to remove up to an amount not to exceed a cost determined by the City Engineer. The amount of flow
removed shall not be less than the amount of flow to be added by the proposed subdivision.
2. The applicant shall complete drainage improvements at the intersection of Clark Street and Clark Avenue as
depicted on the plan entitled "Clark Street Drainage Improvements", dated "January 9, 2008", revised February
13, 2008. The drainage improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including
temporary pavement of the trenches, within 30-days of work starting on the proposed subdivision site. In any
event, no building permits will be issued prior to completion of these drainage improvements. Temporary
paving shall remain and be maintained by the applicant, until the proposed subdivision is determined to be
substantially complete by the City Engineer,at which time the applicant shall provide a full width pavement
replacement program to the following limits from the center of the Clark Street/Clark Avenue Intersection: 240
feet easterly towards Barnes Road, and 30 feet westerly towards Highland Avenue.
3. The pavement replacement program applied to Clark Street shall consist of grinding and removing no less than 4
inches of the existing pavement,from curb to curb, and replacement with 2-inches (or more if necessary) of
binder and 2-inches of top pavement mix approved by the City Engineer. Final grading of the top mix shall
promote stormwater conveyance to the newly installed and existing drainage facilities on Clark Street and not
cause any issues with existing driveways. The pavement replacement program must be completed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy.
1
4. On Clark Avenue from the Clark Street/Clark Avenue intersection southerly to the existing vertical granite
curbing, the applicant has agreed to patch all deficiencies and overlay with 2-inches of new pavement. This shall
occur when the subdivision is deemed to be substantially complete by the City Engineer.
5. If deemed necessary, prior to beginning the drainage improvement work the applicant shall file a Request for
Determination of Applicability with the Salem Conservation Commission and a Notice of Intent.
From: David Knowlton
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 10:44 AM
To: Amanda Chiancola; wmr@engineeringcorporation.com
Subject: RE: task order
in the last bullet, after walmart), please add "with the removal of all cost-effective, extraneous sewer Flows equal to, or
greater than, the proposed sewer flows from the woodlands subdivision development'
Amanda, has anyone spoken to the developer to make sure they understand both off-site improvement requirements are
expected to be included in the subdivision approval? also, we need a traffic engineer to review access, etc.
thanks
From: Amanda Chiancola
Sent: Monday, October 26, 2015 10:14 AM
To: wmr(d)enoineeringcorporation.com
Cc: David Knowlton
Subject: RE: task order
Hi Bill,
I added minor comments regarding the staff review. I believe your scope is accurate, but cc'd David Knowlton in case he
has any comments.
Thanks,
Amanda
From: wmr(olenoineerinocorporation.com [mailto:wmrCalengineeringcorooration.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 1:38 PM
To: Amanda Chiancola
Subject: task order
Amanda, please find attached proposal for peer review.
Please advise if we over or under scoped the review based on our current understanding of the
project.
thanks.
Bill
Please note the Massachusetts Secretary of State's office has determined that most emails to and from municipal officials are
public records.F4II.please refer to: http://www.see.state.ma.us/ore/preidx.htm.
Please consider the euvironment before printing this email.
2
i
CITY OF SALEM RECEIVED
PLANNING BOARD SEP 15 2015
DEPT OF PLANNING&
REQUEST FOR REVIEW COMMENTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE:
TO: ( ) BUILDING COMMISSIONER ( )BOARD OF HEALTH
( ) CONSERVATION COMMISSION ( )SCHOOL DISTRICT
( ) CITY ENGINEER ( ) DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
(X ) FIRE PREVENTION ( ) POLICE DEPARTMENT
Attached please find the application referenced below. The Planning Board requests that you review
this application relative to the Zoning Ordinance and/or to the Subdivision Regulations and
Massachusetts General Law Chapter 41. We would appreciate your completing the form below and
returning it to Erin Schaeffer, Staff Planner in the Department of Planning and Community
i
Development. She can be contacted by phone at 978-619-5691 or e-mail at eschaeffcr(@salem.com
Application for the following:
( ) Preliminary Subdivision Plan
( )
Definitive Subdivision Plan
( ) Waiver of Frontage Request
( ) Site Plan Review
( ) Planned Unit Development
( ) Cluster Development
( ) Business Park Development District
( ) Wireless Communication Facilities Special Permit
( ) North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit
( ) Flood Hazard District Special Permit
( ) Drive-Through Special Permit
APPLICANT:
PROJECT NAME&ADDRESS: Clark Ave Map 6 Parcels 7,8,9
COMMENTS DUE: Requested by Sept 17, 2015 for hearing that night.
Please att(cents:
) SEE S ATTACHED
CONPROPOSAL
NEEFO TION
) CANWITH PROPOSAL
Reviewe✓ nalare Title Date
120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSEI-I'S 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 • wwW.SALEM.COM
i
There is at this time an 8" main providing water to this area. We would want to see a hydraulic
report done by a third a ' source (whom we agree upon) defining what is needed for firefighting
$
capabilities for the sub division. The undefined lot should be taken into consideration in this report
with the maximum water supply requirements considered for the potential development of the
property.
No hammerheads adequate turning radius must be provided from Fire department spec. sheets.
I
i
120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404
• WWW.SALEM.COM
. CITY OF SALEM 'RECEIVED
OCT 2015
PLANNING BOARD 1 �
�ptns DEPT OF PLANNING 8
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
REQUEST FOR REVIEW COMMENTS
DATE: 10/5/2015.
TO: ( ) BUILDING COMMISSIONER ( ) CONSERVATION COMM
( ) CITY ENGINEER ( ) FIRE PREVENTION
( ) BOARD OF HEALTH ( ) SCHOOL DISTRICT
( ) DISABILITIES COMMISSION (0) POLICE DEPARTMENT
( ) DEPARTMENT PUBLIC SERVICES
Attached please find the application referenced below. The Planning Board requests that you review
this application relative to the Zoning Ordinance and/or to the Subdivision Regulations and MGL
Chapter 41. We would appreciate your completing the form below and returning it to Amanda
Chiancola, she can be reached by phone at 978-619-5691 or email at achiancolaC@,salem.com.
( ) Preliminary Subdivision Plan
Definitive Subdivision Plan
( ) Waiver from Frontage
Drive-Through Special Permit
r'byCluster Development
Planned Unit Development
( ) Site Plan Review
( ) Business Park Development District
O Wireless Communication Facilities Special Permit
( ) North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit
( ) Flood Hazard District Special Permit
APPLICANT: Serafini,Darling and Correnti,LLP, C/o Attorney Correnti
PROJECT NAME &ADDRESS: Clark Avenue, Assessors Map 6, Lots 7, 8, and 9.
CONTACT PERSON: Amanda Chiancola
COMMENTS DUE: Requested by 10/14/2015, for the 10/15 hearing.
CONCUR WITH PROPOSAL(Explain on reverse side)
( ) NEED MORE INFORMATION(Explain on reverse side)
( ) CANNOT CONCUR WITH PROPOSAL (Explain on reverse side)
( ) COMMENTS INCLUDED
. /�4,8_4,J�Cler's Signature- ode Da(e
120 WASHINGTON STREET; SALEM,ALASSACo-nrserrs 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5635 FAX 978.740.0404
WWW.SALEM.00M
CITY OF SALEM
PLANNING BOARD
N- J
htKB
REQUEST FOR REVIEW COMMENTS
DATE:
TO: ( )BUILDING COMMISSIONER O BOARD OF HEALTH
(}CONSERVATION COMMISSION ( ) SCHOOL DISTRICT
( ) CI'TY ENGINEER O DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES
( ) FIRE PREVENTION ( ) POLICE DEPARTMENT
Attached please find the application referenced below. The Planning Board requests that you review
this application relative to the Zoning Ordinance and/or to the Subdivision Regulations and
Massachusetts General Law Chapter 41. We would appreciate your completing the form below and
returning it to Erin Schaeffer, Staff Planner in the Department of Planning and Community
Development. She can be contacted by phone at 978-619-5691 or e-mail at cschacffer@salem.com
Application for the following:
( ) Preliminary Subdivision Plan
( ) Definitive Subdivision Plan
( ) Waiver of Frontage Request
( ) Site Plan Review
( ) Planned Unit Development
( ) Cluster Development
( ) Business Park Development District
( ) Wireless Communication Facilities Special Permit
( ) North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit
( ) Flood Hazard District Special Permit
( ) Drive-Through Special Permit
APPLICANT:
PROJECT NAME&ADDRESS:
COMMENTS DUE: Requested by for hearing that night.
Please attach comments: r I
(� SEE COMMENTS ATTACHED PrOJ c)r rtfU'0.S o� WJ".-rL Coo ( 'O,%S $1-0 .
( ) CONCUR WITH PROPOSAL 1 �"
( ) NEED MORE INFORMATION OO"� r`� t� & '� V/�L"N''s
( ) CANNOT CONCUR WITH PROPOSAL
Reviemer'r ' It ar Ti[ie Date
120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - WWW.SALEM.COM
Amanda Chiancola
From: Thomas St. Pierre
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2015 4:59 PM
To: Amanda Chiancola
Subject: Re: Request for Comments Almenda &Clark
Amanda, I have no other concerns.Thank you
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 8, 2015, at 4:57 PM, Amanda Chiancola <achiancola(c@Salem.com>wrote:
Hi Tom,
Based on some background information that Erin provided me, it is my understanding that your only
concern with Clark Avenue is the future development of lot 27. Do you have any additional comments
on the Clark Avenue Projects?
I appreciate your time and comments.
Best,
Amanda
From: Amanda Chiancola
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2015 9:05 AM
To: Thomas St. Pierre
Ce: Erin Schaeffer
Subject: Request for Comments Almenda &Clark
Hi Tom,
How are you?There are two Form C subdivision applications on the Planning Board Agenda;Almeda
Street and Clark Avenue. I attached a Review sheet for each of the projects for you to complete as both
project are pending Building Commission Comments. Erin has told me you are familiar with both
projects, but if you need any additional information regarding the two projects please let me know.
Best,
Amanda Chiancola
Staff Planner
Department of Planning&Community Development
120 Washington Street, 3`d Floor
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
<image001.gif>
Please note the Massachusetts Secretary of:State's office has determined that most emails to and from
municipal officials arc public records. FiMI please refer to: http://www.sec.state.nia.us/pre/preidx.htin.
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
1
<REQUEST FOR REVIEW COMMENTS Clark.doc>
z