Loading...
1981-PLANNING BOARD nj = 1981 J • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD HELD JANUARY 7 , 1980, THIRD FLOOR, CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN , SALEM , MA. MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Abby Burns , Paul D'Amour, James Fox, David Goodof, Donald Hunt MEMBERS ABSENT: William Wheaton Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7 :30 P.M. FORM A -- Edward Bolduc , 17 Albion St. The original property is a 12 ,000 square foot lot. There are two structures on the property that were standing when the subdivision law went into effect. Once divided , each lot will have a building on it. A motion was made by Paul D'Amour and seconded by David Goodof to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. • FORM A -- Max S. Talkowskv, 3 Devereaux Avenue. Mr. Talkowsky stated that the coning line goes through the middle of this property. There is presently a shed-type structure on one lot and his home is on the other. He has the proper frontage. A motion was made by Paul D'Amour and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. CITY COUNCIL CONDOMINIUM ORDINANCE City Councillor John Nestor appeared before the Planning Board to explain the history of the Ordinance and set a date for a joint public hearing with the Planning Board and City Council. This Ordinance (copy attached hereto) will set up a review process through the Board of Appeals . It will apply only to houses that are presently rental style. It does not apply to new construction or anything that goes under the UDAG program. It will be set up on a case by case basis . Ms. Madison asked if these would be regulations coming from the Board of Appeals. Councillor Nestor said the City Council is looking for input regarding this from the Planning Board. The Ordinance presented is a first draft from the Legal Affairs Committee of the City Council. After input from the Planning Board and public hearing, the Ordinance will go back to the full Council for further change. SALEM PLANNING BOARD January 7 , 1981 Page 2 • The public hearing will be held on January 29 , 1981 ,at 7 :30 P.M. , in the Council chambers , City Hall. Walter Power will chair the meeting. The City Council will split the cost of advertising. SPECIAL PERMIT -- Lot #5 Dearborn Lane Nicholas Decoulos. ._,.,1. Mr. Decoulos is the applicant for the last remaining lot in the Dearborn Lane Subdivision. The comments from the Engineering Department state that property lines disagree among plans on record and they recommend that nothing be done until subh problems are solved. The meets and bounds are in question and the whole subdivision has yet to be laid out properly. Mr. Decoulos feels this has been done to the best of his ability and the fault lies with the Engineering Depart- ment. He is waiting for some kind of ties so that he can survey the subdivision. They have complied with the Conservation Commission requirements . The Engineering Department feels that necessary information has been given to the applicant. Ms. Madison expressed concern over the ten foot sideline on the property. If the property lines are not correct., Lot #5 will not have proper frontage. The application?for a Special Permit requires that action be taken by the Planning Board before January 16, 1981 or the application will automatically be • approved. Because of the serious problems the Board felt should be rectified before a Special Permit could be approved, Mr . Decoulos gave up his right to Board action within the time allowed , and granted an extension of time for the Planning Board to act on his application. A copy of this extension is enclosed. GREG SENKO , ROBIN CAMPBELL Robin will be working more closely with the Planning Board in the future to establish a five year master plan budget. Mrs. Campbell gave a breakdown of the Planning Department budget. She explained the 7 .5 million dollars being generated in Community Development. She felt the Planning Board could be of assistance in pointing out areas of need in the community so that the Planning Department could go after specific grants . Walter Power suggested that perhaps someone could come up with a community improvement program whereby local businesses could be induced with tax credits to spend money. The Planning.Board chairman felt top priority projects are subdivision control regulations and zoning. The Planning Board will need someone from the Planning Department to work with them on these projects. The City' Planner felt capital improvements was an area the Planning Board should • look at. Specifically, he talked of the area on Highland Avenue and Loring Avenue. Bill Tinti, City Solicitor, f;eiit the Planning Board should move on capital improvement SALEM PLANNING BOARD January 7 , 1981 Page 3 • immediately in that area because of the lawsuit on controlled growth. . Economic development was considered a priority. Mr. Senko suggested transportation as another area of concern, especially if we lose the Almy's parking lot and develope a hotel in the South River Park area. The Harbor area was another consideration . Regarding Bowditch Park, Greg Senko felt a major effort should be made to unite the down town area, the river front and Pickering Wharf. An overall site plan is being prepared with the hotel as the center point. Right now Heritage Plaza East is zoned B-5 . B-5 zoning allows for further height and greater flexibility. Mr. Senko asked the Planning Board to think about rounding out the Heritage Plaza West area and Nathaniel Bowditch park area for B-5 also. A motion was made to adjourn , and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 10:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, acquelyn A. Rybicki Clerk s � I I City Vf �*al In the year one thousand nine hundred and eighty An (Prhinanre relating to the conversion of rental housing to Condominiums. Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: .*mon 1. The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Salem as most recently amended is hereby amended as follows: Section V-B Special Permit Uses is hereby amended by adding at. the end thereof: Subsection 12 - Condominium and Cooperative Conversion a. The conversion of an existing building or structure previously or presently used for rental housing of any type, kind or character into a cooperative or condominium will be allowed if permission of the Board of Appeals is obtained in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section IX-D hereof, provided however, • that all other provisions of this Zoning Ordinance shall apply . relating to Use Regulations, Density Regulations and Supplemental Regulations and further providing that there shall be ccarpliance with all applicable provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 183A as.it may be from time to time amended. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the conversion of existing buildings or structures not previously or presently used for rental housing into a condominium or cooperative and nothing herein shall be construed to prevent cooperative or condominium conversions that . take place as part of the Urban Develocment Action Grant program administered by the City of Salem. b. In addition to the Notice.requirements set forth in this Zoning Ordinance and in the provisions of Massachusetts General-Laws Chapter 40A as amended, prior to the filing of a Petition for a condominium or cooperative conversion, Notice in writing must be given to the present tenants of the building of the intent to file . the Petition and proof that such Notice has been given must be filed with the Board of Appeals together with the Petition. Notice of the filing shall also be given to; the Housing Authority of the City of Salem. All documentation required by Massachusetts General Law Chapter 183A shall also be filed together with such Petition and tenants shall receive Notice of the public hearing before the Board of Appeals. ' • f .j -2- • c. In determining whether or not to grant the Petition for Special Permit, the Board of Appeals shall consider in addition to the matters set forth in Section ix-A hereof and Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, the following mat- 1. the relationship of tile-condmlinium or cooperative . conversion to the Master Plan of the City of Salem; . 2. the impact of the cooperative or condominium conversion on the neighborhood ani its impact on the existing stock of rental units in the City of Salem for families of low and moderate inane and elderly people on fixed incomes 3. the degree of hardship caused by the conversion on existing tenants in the building and the steps taken by the Petitioner to,alleviate such hardship, in particular, steps taken which allow the tenant to purchase the condominium or cooperative unit and steps taken to provide adequate time within which the tenant may find adequate housing; 4. furthermore, in granting any special permit under this section, the Board of Appeals shall provide for a • minimun of six months to elapse from the time of their . action before the issuance of.the permit and the comnence- ment of any work in furtherance of the condominium or cooperative conversion unless the building is vacant at the time of the filing of such Petition or becomes vacant there- after provided, however, that if the Board of Appeals determines that the vacancy has been purposely caused in order to prepare the project for conversion the Special Permit shall be denied. Section II. This Ordinance shall take effect as provided in City Charter and Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, Section 5. In City Council December 22, 1980 Adopted as petition.to Planning Board to amend Zoning Ordinance, and Joint Public Hearing with Council and Planning.Board to be,scheduled. ATYEST: JOSEPHINE: R: FUSC:O CITY CLERK f - - - 19 1 0�4 ,, ,I �.�{{�tt��..t SaY�.;.}�•'`Gr�.� �may,Y* �i r � q_ `�, _-•--..__...--. __- —`—'.--- ___—_—.--_—_' -' ---_' MINUTES OF THE JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD AND SALEM CITY COUNCIL HELD ON JANUARY 29 , 1981, .CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS , SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Councillors Nestor, Nutting , Grace , Healey, Lively and O'Keefe Walter Power, Paul D'Amour, James Fox, David Goodof, Abby Burns , Donald Hunt and William Wheaton Councillor John Nestor opened the public hearing , read the notice , introduced himself and other Council members , and then turned the meeting over to Walter Power, Chairman of the Planning Board. Mr. Power introduced himself and other Planning Board members . He explained the procedure tobe followed for a public hearing , asking for clarifying comments or questions from the City Council, Planning Board members , and then anyone in the audience wishing to speak . • Councillor Nestor presented t/he history and aim of the Ordinance . Councillor Frances Grace referred to two letters she received (copies attached hereto) from those wishing to be recorded in favor of a very strong Ordinance. Councillor Robert Healey suggested a preamble was in order citing *the climate of the Ordinance. He wanted the Board of Appeals to be sensitive to the extreme rental shortage in the City. He also felt the Ordinance should state that any retribution, retaliation or harrassment by the property owner would be severely frowned upon. Another suggestion was that owner-occupied or previous single family homes should be exempt from this . He addressed the need for a preamble again, stressing the problems of elderly tenants on fixed incomes . Walter Power asked for comments or points of clarification from the Planning Board. Paul D'Amour suggested excluding two family or duplex homes . He felt there should be L L/2 parking spaces provided and the Board of Appeals should not be able to deviate from that requirement. Mr. Steve Hemingway from the Human Rights Commission and Fair Housing Task Force stated he was disturbed about the lack of any reference to the vacancy rate. He stated there seems to be no input from the Fair Housing Strategy Plan 1980-1985 put out by the Salem Planning Department. He saw . no input from the Human Rights Commission. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING BOARD •. January 29 , 1981 Page 2 Ms . Deborah Bogs , attorney involved with Helf for Abused Women and Children spoke in favor of the Ordinance. She would like to see the problems of women with low incomes adressed more fully in the City. She spoke of the hardships abused women have in finding suitable housing. Mr. Jack Wachtel of Salem Housing Alliance stated that a vacancy rate of less than 5% constitutes a crisis . In Salem , the vacancy rate is less than 2%. Mr. Wachtel said that in upper New York, there is a program that grants life tenancy for elderly tenants . In Boston, a one year notice of eviction is required, two years for the elderly. There are Ordinances in existence which have notice requirements depending on how long the tenants have lived in the neighborhood. Mr. Wachtel expressed concern about putting that kind of power into the hands of the Board of Appeals . Ms. Joanne Gates , 132 Lafayette Street, Marblehead. She read a statement from a 71 year old woman who was evicted from her home on Lafayette Street in Salem . The woman was given 30 days to leave and during that 30 day period was subjected to severe harrassment and hardship. Ms . Gates encouraged showing down the process of eviction. • Mr. Peter Berry represented Neighborhood;'Legal Services in Beverly. He is supporting the Ordinance because there is a very serious eviction problem in the City. He feels an Ordinance is needed especially for the elderly. Mr. Russell Eckel, resident of Salem , spoke in favor of the Ordinance . He is concerned about the long term impact on a seriously depleted housing stock. Ms . Janice Santos , resident of Salem , said she is against condominium conversions.,, She stated that they are converting her house now and it is a very difficult situation to be in. Mr. Francis Reddy , candidate for Mayor, stated he agrees with everything the people were saying. Ms. Madeline Ramos told how her landlord forced her to move and how difficult it was to find and afford housing in the City. Mr. Patrick Gahagen said he is in favor of the Ordinance but would like to see it-much stronger. He sees a dangerous trend forming in the City, especially in the 'Jbint , wherein new projects such as Pickering Wharf force lifetime residents of surrounding areas to lose their homes because they can no longer afford to live there. He is concerned about the elderly living in the Point area. • JOINT PUBLIC HEARING CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING BOARD January 29 , 1981 Page 3 • Ms . Carol Wagen represented North Shore Community Action. She prepared suggested amendments to the Salem Condominium Conversion Ordinance which she distributed to the City Council and Planning Board (copy attached) . Ms. Marie Gates , Lafayette Street, Marblehead. Two years ago, she had to move out of Salem because she couldn't afford the high rents. She suggests that consideration should be given to low income people in Salem . Mr. Jack Washtel stated that unregulated condominium conversion will snow ball. He feels there should be tenant counseling available if they do purchase their apartment. There should be information available for the tenant to assist him on where to go for help in finding housing if he does not purchase the property. In Los Angeles , if a building has more than 50% occupancy in elderly, handicapped or people with one minor or more, that unit is not able to be converted. Ms. Katie Abrahams stated that she performs social services in Salem and in her job of helping others with parenting problems , she constantly faces people who are preoccupied with housing problems in Salem. She felt a strong preamble was needed. • Mr. George Kimplansky stated that he is a renter who feels he may be looking for an apartment to rent shortly because his present apartment might be converted, and he is concerned that he may be facing this problem again and again in the future. He commended the City Council for the action taken. William Wheaton said he feels there is a mistaken belief that condominium conversion aggravates the housing crisis . It does create a lot of relocation. The City should address itself to whether it can or should try to prevent change. He stated that the housing problem is regionwide. Mobility between areas should be allowed and encouraged and if this is not allowed , he feels it will hurt the City. Councillor Nestor commented that a case in Maryland ruled against the tenant when he sued to have the landlord pay moving expenses. The public hearing was closed at 9 :00 P.M . Respectfully submitted , • acquelyn A. Rybicki Clerk ' '` raj=:i:•< , 'i_ � x.. cl Q•lP7lL cf GQ.�P/ (JC���� - t �7t�iwO/9�0 JAMES T. AMSLER January 5, 1981 President Mr. John Nestor Chairman, Committee on Ordinances and Legal Affairs - Salem City Council One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Nestor: I am writing in reference to the ordinance now before the Salem City Council which would restrict the conversion of rental units to condiminiums in the City of Salem. Please let this letter serve as an expression of concern for the future of our off-campus students, as well as the lower income residents who are in serious need of good rental opportunities. As you may know, almost 90% of our students are commuters and approxi- mately 33% of our commuters will be immediately affected by the initiation l• of condominium conversions in Salem. , Year after year, a large percentage of our students must or choose to live independently of their families. These students experience an enormous amount of difficulty in securing comfortable and economical off-campus housing in the area immediately surrounding the college. The reduction of available and affordable housing would cause a great hardship for our students and- the college. This reduction would also have a ripple effect and economical impact on the Salem community. It is our hope that the City Council will consider and approve stricter guidelines for the conversion of rental units, and a procedure in which conversion permits -would be required. Thank you for the opportunity to respond to this important issue. nce ely, D James T. . Amsler, resident JTA/g north chore older fervioef inc, northshore shopping center, peabody, mass. 01960 tel. 532-0330 January 12 , 1931 Mrs . France's J. Grace , Chairperson Salem City Council c/o 3 Hillside Avenue Salem, MA 01970 Dear Councilor: We are aware of the condominium conversion restrictions currently under consideration by your Council . We are interested in the type of guidelines you pass , as strong provisions are needed to protect the interests of Salem' s elderly, and of the City at large_. North Shore Elder Services provides Home Care services to over = 400 of Salem' s older residents . Housing is frequently a problem our Social Service staff encounters with the elderly, including substandard conditions of apartments , waiting lists for both elderly housing and other rental subsidy programs , a shortage of • available (vacant) apartments , and a general lack of affordable rental property. Widespread conversions to condominiums could force many older Salemites out of their current apartments , and, effectively, out of Salem. The ordinance before you now that requires a permit be obtained from the Board of Appeals prior to a property' s conversion to condominiums provides the type of protections we believe is neces- sary. In deciding whether to grant a permit , we ask that the Appeals Board be required to take into consideration : a) the current vacancy rate in the City, perhaps not allowing any conversions if the rate is below a certain percent . b) the effect of the conversion on the supply of rental housing. c) the hardship for tenants , including displacement , and difficulties of relocation. To anyone on a limited income , there is an obvious burden in the financial cost of relocating. For elders , this is often secondary to the physical burden of apartment hunting, packing, and moving. And; for many, the greatest burden lies in being forced to leave • an apartment and a neighborhood which is viewed as their home. 1 r 2 We support the City Council voting in favor of this type of approach to regulating condominium conversions . For it to be effective, the guidelines. must be strict, and well enforced. The Council can play an important role in overseeing the im- plementation of such a plan. In the interest of the elderly and other rentersin Salem, we ask that you vote to restrict condominium conversion through the permit system, and keep a watchful eye toward how the Appeals Board administers it . Thank you for your time and cooperation on this issue . Sincerely,, det ve Director 14FC :HEM: sjp • • -F. c SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TO SALEM CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE • ADD Section 1 Preamble WHEREAS, a serious public emergency exists with respect to the housing of a substantial number of citizens of Salem; and WHEREAS, the deterioration and elimination of existing housing and an insufficient supply of new housing have resulted in a substantial and critical shortage of safe, decent, and reasonably priced rental housing accomodations; and WHEREAS, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development has determined that a vacancy rate in the total supply of rental housing of five percent or less is an emergency and the vacancy rate for rental housing in the City of Salem is less than zero percent; and WHEREAS, many people of limited means are suffering in that they have . difficulty in obtaining alternative rental housing within the City of Salem at prices which they can afford when displaced from their homes; and WHEREAS, the conversion of existing rental units into condominiums causes • severe displacement of tenants and reduces the number of rental units in an already critically deficient rental housing market and the effects of condominium conversion cannot be dealt with solely by the operation of the private rental housing market, and unless the re- moval of rental units from the market are additionally regulated and controlled, the housing emergency which presently exists in the City of Salem and the inflationary pressures and displacement of elderly, handicapped and those living on fixed incomes resulting therefrom will produce serious threats to the public health, safety, and gen- eral welfare of the citizens of Salem; now Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Renumber current subsection c. 1 ,2,3,&4. Add c.1 . the benefits to the persons sought to be protected by this section of the Zoning Ordinance and the facts of the housing situation in Salem as set out in the preamble to this sub- section. Add to current c.3 (to be changed to c.4) c(4)(a) In no event shall the Board take any adverse action against a tenant who initially indicated a desire to purchase his/her unit but who subsequently de- cided not to purchase. • 2. c. (4)(b) In the event that the Board finds that a tenant(s) • has agreed to relocate, the Board shall also re- quire evidence of adequate relocation assistance for any tenant(s) whose income is equal to or less than the qualification income for Section 8 Housing Assistance. Change c.4 to c. 5 Add to last sentence after denied, and provided further that no person shall be permitted to bring an action to recover possession of the premises un- til the Board issues a permit. Change c. 4 to c. 5 Add c.5.(a) In determining the amount of time to allow before is- suance of a permit the Board of Appeals shall consider the probable difficulties in locating replacement hous- ing, including, but not limited to such factors'as ..age, handicap., _disQr.imination and income. Add c.5.(b) In determining whether a vacancy has been purposely caused, the Board shall specifically find that none of the following has happened: • 1 . No substantial red;lction in habitability according to the standards as set out in Chapter II of the State Sanitary Code; 2. No interference or interruption of .essential ser- vices; 3. No verbal harrassment or threats by landowner against the tenants; 4. No unjustifiable or unreasonable rent increases for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of a Petition for a condominium or cooperative conversion; 5. No eviction except for good cause to be defined as a) nonpayment of rent; b) damaging property or disturbing other residents; c) committing a crime _ on the premises; d) violating a material provision of a lease. Add d. Any person who violates this subsection of this Ordinance shall , upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than five hundrend dollars per violation. The removal of each unit shall constitute a separate violation. • Salem Condominium Ordinance with Proposed Amendments • City of Salem In the year one thousand nine hundred and eighty. An Ordinance relating to the conversion of rental housing to Condominiums. Section 1 Preamble WHEREAS, a serious public emergency exists with respect to the housing of a substantial number of citizens of Salem; and WHEREAS, the deterioration and elimination of existing housing and an insufficient supply of new housing have resulted in a substantial and critical shortage of safe, decent, and reasonably priced rental , housing accomodations; and WHEREAS, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development has determined that a vacancy rate in the total supply of rental housing of five percent or less is an emergency and the vacancy rate for rental housing in the City of Salem is less than zero percent; and • WHEREAS, many people of limited means are suffering in that they have difficulty in obtaining alternative rental housing within the City of Salem at prices which they can afford when displaced from their homes; and WHEREAS, the conversion of existing rental units into condominiums causes severe displacement .of tenants and reduces the number of rental units in an already critically deficient rental housing market and the effects of condominium conversion cannot be dealt with solely by the operation of the private rental housing market, and unless the re- moval of rental units from the market are additionally regulated and controlled, the housing emergency which presently exists in the City of Salem and the inflationary pressures and displacement of elderly, handicapped and those living on fixed incomes resulting therefrom will produce serious threats to the public health, safety, and gen- eral welfare of the citizens of Salem; now Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Salem, as follows: Section 2 The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Salme as most recently amended is hereby amended as follows: Section 5B is hereby amended by adding at the end thereof: • Subsection '12 - Condominium and Cooperative Conversion • a. The conversion of an existing building or structure previously or presently used for rental housing of any type, kind or character into a cooperative or condominium will be allowed if permission of the Board of Appeals is obtained in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in Section IX-D hereof, provided however, that all other provisions of this Zoning Ordinance shall apply relating to Use Regulations, Density Regulations and Supplemental Regulations and further providing that there shall be compliance with all applicable provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 183A as it may be from time to time amended. Nothing herein shall be constructed to prevent the conversion of existing buildings or structures not previously or presently used for rental housing into a condominium or cooperative and nothing herein shall be construed to prevent cooperative or condominium• conversions that take place as part of the Urban Development Action Grant program administered by the City of Salem. b. In addition to the Notice requirements set forth in this Zoning Ordinance and in the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A as amended, prior to the filing of a Petition for a condominium or cooperative conversion, Notice in writing must be given tojhe present tenants. of the building of the intent to file the Petition and proof that such Notice has been given must be filed with the Board of Appeals together with the Petition. • Notice of the filing shall also be given to the Housing ,Authority of the City of Salem.. All documentation required by Massachusetts General Law Chapter 183A shall also be filed together with such Petition and tenants shall receive Notice of the public hearing before the Board of Appeals. c. In determining whether or not to grant the Petition for Special Permit, the Board of Appeals shall consider in addition to the matters set forth in Section IX-A hereof and Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, the following matters: 1 . the benefits to the persons sought to be protected by this section of the Zoning Ordinance and the facts of the housing situation in Salem as set out in the preamble to this sub- section. 2. the relationship of the condominium or cooperative conversion to the Master Plan of the City of Salem; 3. the impact of the cooperative or condominium conversion on the neighborhood and its impact on the existing stock of rental units in the City of Salem for families of low and moderate income and elderly people on fixed incomes; 4. The degree of hardship caused by the conversion on existing ten- ants in the building and steps taken by the petitioner to alleviate any hardship, in particular, steps taken which allow the tenant to purchase the condominium or cooperative unit and steps taken to. provide adequate time within which the tenant may find adequate housing; • (4)(a) In no event shall the Board take any adverse action against a tenant who initially indicated a desire to purchase his/her unit but who subsequently decided not to purchase. (4)(b) In the event that the Board finds that a tenant(s) has agreed to relocate, the Board shall also re- quire evidence of adequate relocation assistance for any tenant(s) whose income is equal to or less than the qualification income for Section 8 Housing Assistance. 5. furthermore, in granting any special permit under this section, the Board .of Appeals shall provide for a minimum of six months to elapse from the time of their action before the issuance of the permit and the commencement of any work in furtherance of the condominium or cooperative conversion unless the building is vacant at the time .of the filing of such Petition or becomes vacant thereafter provided, however, that if the Board of Appeals determines that the vacancy has been purposely caused in order to prepare the project for con- version the Special Permit shall be denied, and provided further that no person shall be permitted to bring action to recover pos- session of the premises wntil the Board issues a permit. (5)(a) In determining the amount of time to allow before insurance of a permit the Board of Appeals shall • consider the probable difficulties in locating re- . placement housing, including, but not limited to such factors as age, hadicap, discrimination and income. (5)(b) In determining whether a vacancy has been purposely caused, the, Board shall specifically find that none of the following has happened: 1 . No substantial reduction in. habitdbility :according to the standards as set out in Chapter II of the State Sanitary Code; 2. No interference or interuption of essential ser vices; 3. No verbal harrassment or threats by landowner against the tenants; 4. No unjustifiable or unreasonable rent increases for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of a Petition for a condominium or cooperative conversion; 5. No eviction except for good cause to be defined as a) nonpayment of rent; b) damaging property or disturbing other residents; c) committing a crime on the premises; d) violating a material provision of a lease. d. Any person who violates this subsection of this Ordinance shall , • upon conviction therof, be fined not more than five hundred dol- lars per violation. The..removal of each unit. shall constitute a. separate violation. Section II This Ordinance shall take effect as provided in City Charter and Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A, Section 5. • • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF JANUARY 29 , 1981, HELD AT CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN , THIRD FLOOR, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Donald Hunt, Paul D'Amour, David Goodof, Abby Burns , Jim Fox and William Wheaton Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board to order at 9 :15 P.M. following a joint public hearing with the City Council. FORM A -- 25-25R Lynde Street. A motion was made by Paul D'Amour and seconded by William Wheaton to approve the Form A•of Lynde Street Realty Corp. for 25-25R Lynde Street, approval under Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. • FORM A -- 74 Washington Square East The owner is Marjorie U. Copeland. Each lot has adequate frontage on a public way. Each building shown on the plan was constructed prior to the adoption by the City of'the Subdivision Control Law. A motion was made by Paul D'Amour and seconded by David Goodof to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed''unanimously. FORM A -- 300 Lafayette Street and 9 Wisteria Street. The property is owned by David and Theresa Goggin. It is a division of land with buildings which are an integral part of the land on an existing public way with all utilities . The building on Parcel B was constructed in 1958 with all permits. A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- #530 Loring Avenue This is the ABS Insurance Agency, Inc. The property is owned by Industrial National Mortgage Co. The plan shows Lots A & B being combined into one building lot with 100 foot of frontage on Loring Avenue. They will be eliminating the line between Lots A & B. It is a B-1 area. A motion was made by Abby Burns • to approved for Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion was seconded by William Wheaton and passed unanimously. a SALEM PLANNING BOARD January 29 , 1981 Page 2 A motion was made to adjourn , and having passed unanimousty/�the meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted , J cquetyn A. Rybicki Clerk • • i MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF FEBRUARY 5 , 1981, HELD ON THE THIRD FLOOR OF ONE SALEM GREEN , CITY HALL ANNEX, SALEM , .MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Donald Hunt , Paul D'Amour, David Goodot, Abby Burns , James Fox, William Wheaton ALSO PRESENT: Councillors Joseph Centorino, Stephen Lovely, and John Nestor W. Gregory Senko , City Planner Carol Wagen Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board to order at 7:30 P.M. CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION ORDINANCE. • Mr. Power suggested that the Board review all comments and suggestions made at the public hearing on January 29 , 1981. After discussion, a motion was made by James Fox and seconded by Paul D'Amour to reject the idea that a preamble should be included in the Ordinance. Mr. Fox felt that any preamble written today might not be pertinent in coming years. The motion passed unanimously. The Board felt tenants should be well informed of all conversion procedures and any protection they may have, and so suggested that a copy of the Ordinance be sent to the tenants along with the notice of intent to file a petition to convert. A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by Abby Burns to include the words "along with a copy of the Ordinance" in Subsection l2(b) so that it will read in part " . . . prior to the tiling of a petition for a condomini=lor cooperative conversion , notice in writing, along with a copy of the ordinance , must be given to the present tenants of the building . . . . .. The motion passed unanimously. A long discussion followed on the meaning of Section C.4 on Page 2 of the Ordinance . Councillors Centorino and Nestor agreed that the language could be interpreted to mean two different things and said they would work on changing it. A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by David Goodot to add the words "issuance of the" to the last line of Section C.4 before the words "Special Permit" so that the last,line of Section C .4 shall read ". . . prepare the project for conversion the issuance of the Special Permit shall be denied. " 0 The motion passed 4-3. SALEM PLANNING BOARD February 5 , 1981 Page 2 • A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by Abby Burns to write a letter to the City Council saying the Planning Board has reviewed the Ordinance , finds it satisfactory, and suggests the aforementioned changes be made. The motion passed unanimously. CITY PLANNER -- BUDGET Mr. Gregory Senko presented to the Board his ideas for submitting a budget which would reflect the 17% decrease the Mayor has requested from all depart- ments. Seventeen percent of the Planning Board budget represents just shy of $2 ,000.00 to be cut. Mr. Senko suggested cutting the Reproduction account to $1,400 . 00 and the Consultant Account to $2 ,000. 00. The Master Plan printing will cost somewhere from $5 ,000.00 to $9 ,000.00. Fourteen thousand dollars was estimated for this project so there is some flexibility in this account. This year we will be reproducing zoning maps . Donald Hunt suggested cutting the Consultants account further in order to give the Planning Board Aide and the Clerk a 7% or 7 1/2% raise in pay. A motion was made by Paul D'Amour and seconded by David Goodof to reduce the Planning Board budget by 17%, incorporating the suggestions of the City Planner. The motion passed unanimously. A motion • was made by David Goodof and seconded by Abby Burns to increase the salaries of the Planning Board Aide and the Clerk by 7%. The motion passed unanimously. B-5 ZONING. There is no time clock on this project until the public hearings start. Mr. Senko suggested the Planning Board establish a joint public hearing with the City Council. A tentative date was set for March 5 , 1981. BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA Regarding the petition of Clayton Smith for a variance from the frontage require- ments for the construction of a one fam ily house on Lots B, C, D & E Pierce Road, it was decided Ms . Madison will work with Bill Tinti on this trying to get final recommendations that will request this be denied. Regarding the petition of Charlotte S. Post for a Special Permit to use the property at 98 Essex Street as a Tourist Home , the Planning Board decided to write a letter saying a Tourist Home is a further encroachment of a commercial use in a residential area and that parking problems in that neighborhood are severe. They recommended that the va=riance be denied. • SALEM PLANNING BOARD !February 5 , 1981 Page 3 Regarding the petition of Peter C. Conway requesting variances for the property at 2-4 Daniels Street Court to construct a three-story, three unit addition which will abut the present structure , the Planning Board decided to write a letter urging the Board of Appeals to consider that adequate additional parking will be required and noting that this area is extremely dense and a three story, three unit structure would place an additional burden on the neighborhood. They recommend that the variances be denied. UPARR GRANT Ms. Madison stated that Planning Board members will receive this in the mail and she would like their thoughts on this matter. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, • ac d�CCN Jacquelyn A. Rybicki Clerk • • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF FEBRUARY 19 , 1981, HELD AT CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN , THIRD FLOOR, SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Paul D'Amour, James Fox, David Goodof, Abby Burns , William Wheaton MEMBERS ABSENT: Donald Hunt Planning Board Chairman Walter Power opened the meeting of the Salem Planning Board at 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING -- Toseph Ragone Swampscott Road storage facility Walter Power declared the public hearing open , read the notice , and introduced Mr. Philip Christiansen, who is representing Mr. Ragone. Mr. Christiansen explained that the units will ha garage style. The site will have to be changed • to make it useful for the purpose intended. They plan to divert the stream and provide a new outlet in another area. The pond is about 70 feet, the maximum flood level is 73 feet, and the building will be set at 78 feet. ThQrQ will be filling in of the ledge area . Walter Power read the comment sheets . The Board of Health concurred with the p oposal stating that the engineer should keep ftexibitity in mind concerning proposed location of the septic system since no deep holes have been dug or percolation tests performed at this time. The City Engineer concurred with the proposal stating that it concurs with department rules and regulations . The City Engineer proposed a ftire hydrant which the fire department and probably owner insurance will require anyway. The Building Inspector concurs with the proposal stating they will need structural plans and design criteria of building. The Conservation Commission will be dealing with this matter next Thursday. Paul D'Amour expressed concern over the location of the septic system . Mr. Christiansen pointed out the septic tank and the taach fiald , which [s set away from the stream , followed State regulations. There was discussion on the safety of gabions: It was decided the Planning Board,will wait for comments from the Conservation Commission before taking any action. The public hearing was declared closed at 8:10 P.M. • SALEM PLANNING BOARD February 19 , 19"81 Page 2 Silent Ships , 12 Franklin Street. Revised plans have been submitted a few days ago. Mr. Russell has granted the City a one month extension to act on this. The City Engineer stated on his comment sheet that the owner has not yet proven titla to a portion of the land on which the wall is to be built. The Engineering Department cannot review the design of the wall as it is not on the owner's property. William Wheaton suggested writing a letter to the City Engineer, with a copy to the City Solicitor, stating that we wonder it the question of ownership should impact progress in this case and telling him the City Solicitor has suggested that the Planning Board can go ahead and review plans and make decisions without the question on ownership being resolved . It was decided that a meeting would be set up with the City Solicitor and the City Engineer before March 5 to make a definitive statement on ownership disputes and their effect on plans submitted. Mr. Mailhoit said they now know that the land is definitely not Mr. Russell's land. Mr. Wheaton suggested that Mr. Russell and Mr. Mailhoit comeback in two weeks and then it can be decided whether they will withdraw and come back with a revised • plan or whether it will be approved or denied. UPARR Ms . Madison said this is 'he Urban Parks Action Recovery Recreation Program. They are trying to keep the recreation in the City at a high level. Some of their ideas for the grant application would be to have toes for teams , or concerned citizens that would keep the area maintained. They have had many public hearings and are now ready to make up their report. Ms . Madison asked for a sub-committee to study this. Abby Burns , Jim Fox and David Goodof volunteered to meet. MINUTES The minutes of February 5 , 1981 were reviewed and a motion was made by Jim Fox and seconded by David Goodof to approve them.- The motion passed unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of January ^9 , 1981 were reviewed , an addition was made , and a motion to approve them as amended was made by Abby Burns and seconded by Paul D'Amour. The motion passed unanimously. The minutes of the January '19 , 1981 public hearing were reviewed and a motion to approve them was made by David Goodot and seconded by Paul D'Amour. The motion • passed unanimously. SALEM PLANNING (BOARD • February 19 , 1981 Page 3 The minutes of the meeting of January 7 , 1981 were reviewed and a motion was made to approve them by Paul D'Amour and seconded by William Wheaton. The motion passed unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of December 4 , 1980 were reviewed and a motion to approve them was made by Paul D'Amour and seconded by Abby Burns . The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made to approve the minutes of the meeting of November ?0 , 1980 by Abby Burns and seconded by Paul D'Amour. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made to approve the minutes of the meeting of October 16 , 1980 by William Wheaton and seconded by Jim Fox. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 9 :15 P.M . Respectfully submitted, 0 acquelyn Rybick9i Clerk I • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNIN. BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 19 , 1981 , HELD ON THE THIRD FLOOR OF ONE SALEM GREEN , CITY HALL ANNEX , SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, David Goodof, Donald Hunt, James Fox, William Wheaton O MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul D'Amour, Abby Burns Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M. PUBLIC HEARING -- Phase IV Sewer Project, Leach Street, Lafayette Place and Salem Street Walter Power opened the public hearing, read the public notice, and introduced Mr. Michael Moniz from the Planning Department. Mr. Moniz explained that this project will involve the abandonment of an old sewer line. Right now the sewer line runs under homes in the area which makes cleaning difficult. This project • will take two months to complete and is scheduled to begin in April. There will be a construction supervisor on the site at all times so if there is any problems , he will be accessible. The Engineering Department can also be reached for information. The City Engineer concurs with the proposal stating that the proposal meets all city,: -state',-federal and department regulations . The Building Inspector concurred with the proposal saying it should have been done years ago . The Board of Health concurs with the proposal stating that if utilities to any dwelling are to be Interrupted„ please notify Health Department. They also asked to be notified it rodents are disturbed so they can bait the area. Mr. Bertrand Corriveau 15 Chase Street Mr. Corriveau stated that he has had back up problems in the past that have been quite severe and he is concerned that this new line will not improve this problem. Mr. Moniz said the Engineering Department will check on this problem. Mr. Cecile Leclerc 39 Lafayette Place. • Mr. Leclerc suggested that a larger pipe be installed because there has been so much trouble in the neighborhood with old lines . Mr. Moniz said calculations showed the size of the pipe was not the problem; the problem is the slope of the land. Mr. Leclerc said sewerage always backs up at his place. SALEM PLANNING BOARD March 19 , 1981 Page • Mr.`Pantaleon Theriault 101 Leach Street Mr. Albert Sauvageau 105 Leach Street -They both said that the end of Leach Street always backs up. Mr. Sauvageau said he has had to install a pump. The public hearing was closed at 8:00 P.M. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by James Fox to approve the Special Permit. The motion. passed unanimously. FORM A's Mr. Richard E. Savickey came before the Board seeking endorsement for his property in the hopes of grandtathering the Condominium Conversion Ordinance. There are no changes in property lines. • 3 Eaton Place . A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by James Fox to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. . The motion passed unanimously. 3 Becket Avenue. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by James Fox to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed;�;unanimously. 83-85 Derby Street. A motion was made by David Goodof and seconded by .James Fox to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. 7-7 1/2 Becket Street. A motion was made by Jim Fox and seconded by David Goodof to approve the Form A, approval under the Suvidvision Control "law not required. The motion passed unanimously. 25-27 Becket Street. A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by David Goodof to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- SRA, St. Peter's Street. There are two Form A's here because there is some registered land that is part of the unregistered parcel. They must be dealt • with separately even though it is the same property because the registered land must be recorded in Land Court while the unregistered goes to the Registry. A motion was made by David Goodof and seconded by Donald Hunt to approve the registered land, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The SALEM PLANNING BOARD March 19 , 1981 Page-3 • motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by David Goodof to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required.. The motion was seconded by Jim Fox. It passed unanimously. FORM A -- O'Rourke Bros. , 73 North Street. This is being divided so that the back parcel can be sold as commercial property. It has the required frontage. A motion was made by Jim Fox and seconded by David Goodof to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required . The motion passed unanimously. SPECIAL PERMIT -- Joseph G. Ragone , Swampscott Road. This Special Permit application concerns the construction of a self-service mini warehouse facility. Ms . Madison read the Order of Conditions issued by the Conservation Commission. They require that all work be done according to drawings submitted. The proposed outlet hannel cross section invert shall be at elevation 70.5 , mean low water datum . The outlet invert elevation shall be set by construction of a concrete weir upstream of the proposed gabions . The weir shall extend into impervious soil in the bed of the constructed outlet channel. All hay or'straw pump • discharge siltation control dams( shall be sized such that there shall be no flow passing around the upstream bales. Erosion control shall be practised during all phases and on all sections of work to minimize siltation. All slopes shall be covered with loam and seeded with grass during the growing season immediately following completion of the grading of the slope. Once work begins on site , the construction diversion structures , channels and permanent slopes into streams and wetlands shall continue until completed. The work shall not remain uncompleted over a winter toCspring period . All inoperable machinery, pipes and junk shall be removed from the site prior to the commencement of work. At least four weeks prior to the start of work the drawings , modified in accordance with these orders , shall be submitted to the Conservation Commission for review . The applicant shall notify the Conservation Commission two weeks prior to the start of work . If-Mr. Ragone does not fulfill these requirements , he will be faced with a cease and desist order. It the Planning Board incorporated these conditions in the Special Permit, it could then vote to revoke the Special Permit. The City Engineer's comment sheet requirements have all been met. A motion was made by James Fox and seconded by David Goodot to approve the Special Permit , siting the plans and incorporating the Conservation Commission's Order of Conditions . The motion passed unanimously. A request was made by Donald Hunt to send the ' Ranning Board in Marblehead a copy of the Special Permit and a copy of the map and application package. SALEM PLANNING BOARD March L9 , 1981 Page 4 • SILENT SHIPS , INC. , 12' Franklin Street . A letter came from Bill Tinti to Richard Swenson regarding this (copy attached hereto). Now it is up to Mr. Russell to contact Mr. Fletcher regarding the method of acquisition . i COMMUNICATIONS The Mayor has appointed Mr. Edward M. .Stevenson and Mr. Normand J. Houle to the Planning Board . Their appointments have been confirmed by the City Council on March 12 , 1981. Mr. Stevenson will replace John Brown and his term will expire May 1, 1982 . Mr. Houle will replace Dick Lutts and his term will expire May 1 , 1985 . A motion was made to adjourn , and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 9:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted , 00 JACQUELYN A. RYBIC Clerk • WILLIAM J. TINTI CITY OF SALEM RICHARD W. STAFFORD CITY SOLICITOR MASSACHUSETTS 70 CITY SOLICITOR 70 WASHINGTON STREET 70 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM. MA 01970 SALEM. MA 01970 744-2172 744-2172 March 17 , 1981 _ Mr. Richard P. Swenson Assistant Civil Engineer City of Salem Department of Public Works One Salem Green Salem, MA 01970 In re: 8 Franklin Street Dear Rich: If in fact the owner has no title to land on which he is proposing construction, then the Engineering Department should not proceed with the review until the method of acquisition is established. Sincerely, William J. Tinti City Solicitor WJT/dlg cc : Susan Madison Conservation Commission 1 1 • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MARCH 5 , 1981, HELD AT CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN , THIRD FLOOR, SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Donald Hunt, William Wheaton , Abby Burns and James Fox MEMBERS ABSENT: !Paul D''Almour and David Goodof Planning Board Chairman WalterPower opened the meeting of the Salem Planning Board at 7:40 P. M . BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA. The agenda of the March 11, 1981 meeting was reviewed. Regarding the petition of the heirs of John Deery for variances to construct 86 residential condominium units and 4 ,000 square feet of new commercial condominiums , together with 130 • underground parking spaces at Norman Street and Barton Square , the Board felt there was insufficient information available. Ms. Madison is going to confer with Andrew Innis , who has been working closely with the developer on this , and will make a report to the Chairman. Regarding the petition of John and Anthe Fillos for a variance to divide a parcel of land at the corner of Belleview Avenue and Belair Street , containing approximately 12 ,850 square feet into two parcels , one to contain approximately 7 ,500 square feet and the second to contain approximately 5 ,400 square feet, the Board wrote a letter saying this sets a dangerous precedent for this area as there are many under- sized lots in this area for which further requests will be made. The result will be a drastic increase in density which subverts the intent of our minimum lot requirements In an R-1 disctrict. FORM A -- #74 Derby_Stroet,_Richard E_Savickey There is no change on this Form A or the other two Mr. Savickey submitted. The purpose of establishing Planning Board endorsement on these properties is to grandfather the Condominium Conversion Ordinance . A motion was made by James Fox and seconded by Donald Hunt to waive the street width requirement and accept the variable width information given. The reason for this is that this is an established part of town where the streets are already layed out. The motion passed unanimously. • A motion was made by Abby Burns and seconded by James. Fox to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required . The motion passed unanimously. Ms . Madison reported that Bill Tinti suggested that the Planning Board say this r. SALEM PLANNING BOARD March 5 , 1981 Page 2 • endorsement does not affect any other necessary permits or applications . The Planning Board added the language that the approval of this plan does not establish compliance with the existing zoning ordinance of the City of Salem . FORM A -- 22 Pleasant Street, Richard E. Savickey. , A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the Form A, approval under tpe Subdivision'Control Law not required . The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- 3-5 Spring Street, Richard E. Savickey A motion was made by James Fox and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed u nanimously. SILENT SHIPS , INC. , 12 Franklin Street • Ms . Madison met with the .City Engineer and the City Solicitor. It was decided that they wanted to see a deed and at that point Mr. Fletcher said he would review the plan . The City Solicitor said the Planning Board could call for an affidavit from applicants saying that they own , rent, lease , or have a right to do something on the land. Mr. Maflhoit submitted a certified copy of the deed . Mr. Russell granted the Planning Board an extension of one month's time to act on the plan . During this time he will be in touch with the City Engineer and they will iron out any difficulties. BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA A review was made of the agenda of the meeting of March 18 , 1981. Regarding the petition of Lionel R. Pelletier for variances for Lots 179 on Ocean Avenue and Brooks Street and Lot #187 on Brooks Street for which petitioner wishes to combine the lots and then divide the parcel into five lots , the Planning Board wrote a letter saying: 1. This proposed plan would not only exceed the density allowed in a R-2 district, but it would also exceed the density allowed In an R-3 district. 2 . This constitutes a miniature subdivision and flagrantly violates the City's efforts to establish control over the haphazard method of development in the City. 3. This petitioner is attempting to sidestep our well-defined subdiv+`ision control law and the precedent should not be allowed. 4. This property is located in the • buffer zone as the South River Flood Control Area . The petitioner should be fore- warned that this is a Wetlands Area and it may be difficult to construct dwellings. SALEM PLANNING BOARD •� March 5 , 1981 Page 3 UPARR Ms. Madison explained that she met with the subcommittee members'on.two occasions last week and they agree with the proposed plan. She was looking for an assessment of what the plan is now and what can be done to Zimprove it.. Jim Fox proposed some changes to be made. A motion was made by Abby Burns and seconded by James Fox to accept and endorse the recommendations for UPARR with appreciation. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made to adjourn , and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 9 :30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, l acquelyn A. Rybick Clerk • • 0 • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF APRIL ° , 1981 , HELD AT CITY HAIL ANNEX ,, ONE SALEM GREEN , THIRD FLOOR, SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Donald Hunt, Normand Houle , James Fox, David Goodof, William Wheaton , Paul D'Amour MEMBERS ABSENT: Abby Burns , Edward Stevenson Planning Board Chairman Walter Power opened the meeting of the Salem Planning Board at 7 :30 P.M. FORM A -- Napolean and Marie LeBlanc, 95-99 Lawrence Street. There are presently two dwellings on the lot. One is a single and the other is a two family house. The lot is to be divided in order to sell one house to a son and the other to a grandchild. Both dwellings have been on the land since 19'?'?. A motion was made,by James Fox and seconded by David Goodof to approve the • Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. SPECIAL PERMIT -- Lot #5 Dearborn Lanq, Nicholas Decoulos . Mr. Decoulos met with Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Swenson from the Engineering Department. Mr. Fletcher was going to write a letter saying his requirements are being met. Ms . Madison said he has not yet written the letter but what it says is that the circle is now closed. The lot line on Parcel #5 has been changed. They now know where they will set the monuments . Walter Power felt the Board should have Mr. Fletcher's letter in hand before any action was taken. Mr. Decoulos said Mr. Fletcher had no objections to the special permit being granted providing there was a suitable drainage easement granted to the City of Salem , that the new lines set out are the corrent ones , and that the lot has been recorded at the Registry of Deeds. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by David Goodof to grant a special permit to Dearborn Realty Trust , Nicholas J. Decoulos , Trustee, for Lot #5 Dearborn Lane , with the following conditions: 1. That the new meets and bounds of Lot #5 , as shown on a revised plan entitled "Plan of Land in Salem , property of Nicholas J. Decoulos , by John J. Decoulos , Peabody, dated April 1981", be approved by the City Engineer. ?. That the drainage easement shown on the plan be granted to the City. 3. That the plan be recorded at the Registry of Deeds ,'and that the prior easement • be abandoned. The motion passed unanimously. SALEM PLANNING BOARD 'iApril 2 , 1981 Page 2 • Mr. Decoulos said he is certain he can clear up the other things that have to be done to release the bond money. He requested a list of things he is required to do. Ms. Madison will meet with neighbors of Dearborn Lane , visit the site, and prepare a list. r SILENT SHIPS , INC. , 12 Franklin Street. Previously, the City Engineer 'had refused to review the plans for the railroad and riprap embankment because it was on land that was not owned by the applicant. The City Solicitor wrote a letter saying this property should not be reviewed until a method of acquisition has been established. As it is now, there still is not a revised plan before the City. Mr. Mailhoit stated that he would like to put in the portion that is the marine railroad , build one portion of the wall, and for the time being , forget the other part of the proposal.. The embankmen, line is shown on a plan dated August l6 , 1980. That whole area has been dug up since then . Ms . Madison asked if a deed would be submitted to the Engineering Department. Mr. Mailholt said he thought something could be worked out with them. A motion was made by Paul D'Amour and seconded by William Wheaton to accept another one month extension from Mr. Russell and Mr. Mailhoit (copy attached • hereto) . The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by Paul D'Amour that the Planning Board call for an affidavit from the applicants for special permits saying they either own , lease , rent, or have a right to use the property in question. Walter Power suggested putting this ownership question to bed and not bring it up every time. After much discussion, it was decided that in the future , the Planning Board should deal with the construction and not worry about ownership. The motion failed 2 - 5 . GREG SENKO -- American Planning Association. The American Planning Association is having its national conference in Boston this year on April 25-?9 . The City of Salem is going to be visited twice; once on Sunday April ?6 and on Wednesday, April 29 . The Salem Planning Department is going to have a booth in Boston with various exhibit panels showing what has happened on the waterfront , the Point, and a general exhibit about what makes Salem different . Mr. Senko asked if Board members would volunteer to work at the booth in Boston or give an introductory lecture on the bus from Boston to Salem. Robin Campbell is working on this . There are plans for a reception at the Peabody Museum . -- Master Plan. • Mr. Senko presented the Master Plan book which has come back from the printer. Board members have or will receive a copy in the mail. Mr. Senko outlined his proposal for small booklets that would be appropriate for general distribution . There was general agreement with the plan. _.•SALEM PLANNING BOARD April 2 , 1981 Page 3 • -- Zoning . Mr. Senko stated that if the Planning Board wanted to start rezoning, they could use the Master Plan, go out into the wards , and see what the pEople think. William Wheaton suggested that a list of possible changes should be presented to the Board. The Board could then review it, make further changes , and then go to the people in the ward. Mr. Senko said he will be in at the next meeting looking for direction for hiring a consultant. -- Budget At the next meeting , Mr. Senko will outline his suggestions for using this year's money. He suggested that the Planning Board should be prepared to cut an additional 13% from their budget. Mr. Power will meet with Mr. Senko during the week regarding additional cuts that could be made. MINUTES. A motion was made by'William Wheaton and seconded by David Goodof to approve • the minutes of the meeting of February 19 , 1981. The motion passed unanimously . A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by Paul D'Amour to approve the minutes of the meeting of March 5 , 1981. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by David Goodof to approve the minutes of the March 19 , 1981 meeting as amended. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 9 :50 P.M. Respectfully submitted, v 4C Jacquelyn A, Rybicki Clerk • SILENT SKIPS , Inc. • 12 Franklin" St., Salem, Mass, April 1 , 1981 Salem Planning Board One Salem Green Salem, Mass, 01970 To The planning Board; We Hereby grant another one month extension to nnoLw the planning board in reference to our proposed seawall and marine l 0 railway. Such an. extension we hop6 will enable the project to be com- pleted to the satisfaction of all. Truly Yours, -e/ Gifford Russell Fres, _U*,.p W. glro�,L E Richard L, Mailhoit P,E . MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF APRIL 16 , 1981 , HELD ON THE THIRD FLOOR OF ONE SALEM GREEN , CITY HALL ANNEX, SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Normand Houle , Edward Stevenson, Abby Burns , James Fox MEMBERS ABSENT: Donald Hunt , Paul D'Amour, David Goodof, William Wheaton Planning Board chairman Walter Power called the meeting o order at 7:30 P. M. PUBLIC HEARING -- Hamblet & Hayes Co. , Colonial Road Walter Power opened the public hearing at 7:30 P.M. Mr. Andrieszkiewicz from Hamblet & Hayes Co. made the presentation to the Board. The Special Permit application is made to add twenty new underground storage tanks for solvents . Hamblet & Hayes is currently storing solvents at Beverly Chemicals but they are being forced • to leave that facility. Hamblet & Hayes teels it is safer to store the solvents under- ground because of temperature fluxuation , vandalism , etc . This proposal has been approved by the Fire Department. The Building Inspector concurs with the proposal stating he can see no problems connected with the installation. The City Engineer concurs with the proposal noting that it meets all requirements of the Engineering Department and of the Wetlands Flood Hazard District . The Conservation Commission concurs . They noted that the applicant has agreed to supply a description of the drugs and install at least six observation wells to.check for tank leakage. Mr. Andrieszkiewicz stated that there are no State,regulations for storing solvents below ground. Hamblet & Hayes has called the Army Corps and was directed to local agencies . There being no further questions or comments , Mr. Power declared the public hearing closed at 7 :50 P.M. After a brief discussion , a motion was made by James Fox and seconded by Normand Houle to approve the Special Permit with the conditions that all work shall be done in accordance with plans presented and that the applicant install at least six observation wells to check for tank leakage. The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- Frederick Dubiel, 183 North Street. Attorney John Tierney came before the Board to explain the proposal. This is part of the old Pickering School site. The intended conveyance by the City of Salem to the Dubiels would add to their existing lot in such a manner as not to leave any lot affected without the frontage required by Ordinance . The plan has been approved by both the Mayor and the City Council . 'SALEM PLANNING BOARD April 16 , 1981 Page • A motion was made by Imes Fox and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the Dubiel Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- Joseph Vargas IN - IN l/7 Mason Street. The property consists of a sin'gle €0 11y dwelling and a two family dwelling on the Lot. He would like to divide the lot for resale . He is having a hard time selling it as it is and this is intended to make it more marketable. A motion was made by Abby Burns and seconded by James Fox to approve the Vargas Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. SILENT SHIPS , INC. , 12 Franklin Street Mr, Mailhoit, engineer for the project, stated that he has been trying to call the City Solicitor to resolve the problem of excess land and has been unable to reach him. In the meantime , they would like to proceed with the railway and a small • portion of the wall. Ms . Madison reminded Mr. Mailhoit and Mr. Russell that they were required to submit a revised plan to the City Engineer. Mr. Mailhoit said he has already done that and the City Engineer approved of the construction . Ms. Madison will seek confirmation on that. LOT #5 DEARBORN LANE , Nicholas Decoulos. The neighbors on Dearborn Lane are concerned about truck loads of fill that are appearing on Lot #5 and an empty lot owned by Mr. Houle. Mr. David DeVoe , a neighbor, said that because of the slope of the land, it appears the lot is unbuildable. He submitted a letter to the Planning Board outlining the situation (copy attached hereto) . After discussion, it was decided that Mr. Houle will meet with his neighbors on Dearborn Lane and they will prepare a list of work that Mr. Decoulos needs to complete in order to free up the $3 ,500. 00 bond money. BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA The agenda for the meeting of April 22 was reviewed. Regarding the petition of Terrance B. Neylon for a special permit to add a third apartment to the existing two-family dwelling at 10 Gardner Street, the Board is writing a letter stating that they would urge the Appeal Board to question the availability of parking at this site. • SALEM PLANNING BOARD • April 16 , 1981 Page 3 MINUTES A motion was made by Abby Burns and seconded by Normand Houle to approve the minutes of the meeting of May '?, 1981. The motion passed unanimously. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Abby Burns is a member of the Salem Community Development Advisory Committee. This is a committee set up to, help the Planning Department decide out to spend the money coming into the City from the block grant. Mrs. Burns passed out "Neighborhood News " which explains what has happened to date. WINTER ISLAND COMMISSION. Walter Power Is a member of the Commission representing the Planning Board. The Commission has been meeting to entertain proposals for the use of the is for this summer. The problems are security and getting a superintendent for the site. Salem State is going to provide 15 students to teach sailing this summer. They are also going to be the security for the island. Another proposal is from New England • Divers who hope to conduct diver's school May through October. There is also a proposal from a trailer group that have been coming to the island for the past two years . A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 9:55 P.M. Respectfully submitted , Jacquel A. Rybic i Clerk • A I U be-"VAY 4-04-� _107Z7 lgorr�all We have been informed that a corrected subdivision plan has been 'submitted for the subdivision at Ropes Point, the bulk of which is on Dearborn Lane. The street circle of Dearborn tn. now closes mathamatically.�--- ,-•The boundaries of Lot #5 redefined or confirmed, though no other lots in the division have been re- '-- defined-:=.- - Any redefinition of those likely inaccurate bounds must be done at the expense of the pr'tdbnt owners . We are also given to believe that the city may be ready to accept the resurvey such as'. it is , as sufficient to satisfy the requirettients of the subdivision and to proceed on Lot #5 . We do not believe that Lot #5 is buildable. We are told that the plan of land and proposed structure will be accomplished with no filling as required by the Conservation Commission, and I agreed to by the owner. One has but to walk and pace the lot relative to the plan to note that there must be something wrong •with the contours indicated on the plan. The house appears to extend over the precipice. Interestingly, no less than an estimated (11) truckloads of material have mysteriously appeared on this and the abutting lot over a period of a year. One load as recently as a week ago. I trust that efforts will be made to remove that illegal fill . The neighbors have been informed to increase their vigilance to help apprehend violators. Some of the fill consists of tree stumps , old asphalt, con- crete pavement and culvert piping. We identify this fill in order to alert the owner so that he may not mistake it as part of the original contour and inadvertantly violate his building manda�te`.� � • •-• We have also other concerns relative to sidewalks, burms and driveway openings on Dearborn Lane and those homes facing that street. . The sidewalks on that street are uneven and the burms 'mis- _located. We do not ask that the total subdivision control standards be met, all we want is that some practical repairs and alterations be made in accordance with the wishes of the residents. We were under the impression that such an agreement had been reached. The residents would be happy to meet with the owner or designee at any time . Finally, though this is not an issue with the planning board or the building inspector, residents are very concerned about the ( 3) foot right of way on this lot to the water. I hope that all recipients of this letter have a better understanding of our concerns relative to this property. Signed r • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MAY 7 , 1981, HELD ON THE THIRD FLOOR OF ONE SALEM GREEN , CITY HALL ANNEX , SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, David Goodof, Normand Houle , Donald Hunt, Abby Burns , James Fox and Edward Stevenson MEMBERS ABSENT: William Wheaton and Paul D'Amour Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. SPECIAL PERMIT -- Silent Ships Inc . 10 Franklin Street At a,,past, meeting, it was decided that since Mr. Russell did not own some of the land, that he would not do the wall at this time . This plan is for the restoration of the mari:rie railway only. Mr. Mailhoit, engineer for the project, has met with the City Engineer. The City Engineer approves of the method of construction for • the railway. He recommended that the special permit be contingent on approval from the Army Corps of Engineers before any work commences . A motion was made by Normand Houle and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the Special Permit for the marine railway , referencing the plans dated April l3 , 1981 , contingent upon obtaining approval from the Army Corps of Engineers before any work commences . The motion passed 6 - l with Donald Hunt opposed. FORM A -- 39 Belleview Avenue. Six lots are being combined to make one lot containing 13 , 217_ square feet. They meet all requirements for frontage. A motion was made by David Goodof and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- 16? and 16? 1/? North Street. This is the Estate of Dr. Arthur O'Neil. There are two two-family houses on the lot and they are looking to divide the lot in order to sell the houses separatety. A motion was made by Abby Burns and seconded by David 'Goodof to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. • S*LEM PLANNING BOARD .,.' May 7 , 1981 Page A • DEARBORN LANE SUBDIVISION , Nicholas Decoulos. Mr. Decoulos is asking for a list of things he is required to do in order to free the $3,500. 00 bond being held by the City. Mr. Houle is working with the neighbors. He has more work to do on this and will bring in the list at the next meeting . One problem has come up. The only subdivision plan that has been recorded Cis the original which is totally wrong . Amendments have been made but they have not been recorded. In order to free up the bond money, one requirement would 'be that the planning board vote for an amendment to the plan and that Mr. Decoulos notify the owner of Lot #2 that the meets and bounds of her property are wrong and will be changed. ' BUDGET Master Plan. Mr. Senko presented an example of the format he would like to use in putting together the short form of the Master Plan. This would , in effect, be a compilation of the six booklets used when first explaining the Master Plan. It is half the size of the printed Master Plan and Mr. Senko hopes to sell this short version for $1 . 00 ..x; He would like to have 1 ,000 copies printed. The Board approved • of the format but questioned the number that should be printed. Mr. Senko said he would come back to the next meeting with some cost figures . 1982 Planning Board Budget. The Planning Board budget has been cut 75% by the Mayor. The position of Planning Board Aide has been eliminated and the Clerk's salary has been cut. to $900. 00. The Advertising account has been cut to $100. 00. �— --�— There was discussron on how to keep the two positions funded for another year. Mr:Senko i he would like everyone to think about it. He and Walter will request a meeting with the Mayor. PLANNING BOARD AIDE REPORT . Mr. Ken Bouffard and Mr. Deschamps of Avis Airmap', Inc. will come in at the next meeting to discuss a cluster development they have planned for Highland Avenue. The next Geeting is scheduled for Wednesday, May ?0 , 1y981. The Planning Board dinner is set for Wednesday, June 3 , 1981 at 7:00 P.M. and will be held at 300 Derby Street. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned • at 9 :30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, cq lynA. Rybicki MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MAY 20, 1982 , HELD AT ONE SALEM GREEN, THIRD FLOOR, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Donald Hunt, Abby Burns , Edward Stevenson MEMBERS ABSENT: Normand Houle , David Goodof, William Wheaton FORM A -- Salem Housing Authority, Bridge, Ash and St. Peter Sts . This Form A is before the Board in order to be resigned. It does not require a vote. There is no change from the original linen. The original linen was lost in the fire at the Masonic Temple. BUDGET • On Tuesday, May 25 , 1982 , the Planning Board budget is coming before the City Council at 6 : 30 P.M. Board members were requested to be there. ZONING Michael , Susan and Greg have made suggestions for changes in the zoning map for the City. They are ready for the Planning Board to act on it. Greg would like to set a special meeting on Wednesday, May 26 , 1982 at 7 : 30 P.M. for the sole purpose of discussing these very important changes . PLANNING BOARD DINNER Tentative dates for the dinner are June 9 , 23 , or 24 . The Place is the House of Seven Gables. (Wednesday, June 23, 1982 has since been determined the definite date) . The guest list will number 31. Suggestions would be welcome regarding the menu. There will be a full kitchen available. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 8 : 30 P.M. Respectfully submitted, • (YacL LA. Ryb li Clerk 1 • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BQARD MEETING OF MAY ?0, 1981, HELD AT CITY HALL ANNEX , ONE SALEM GREEN , SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Edward Stevenson , Normand Houle , Donald Hunt, William Wheaton , James Fox MEMBERS ABSENT: Abby Burns , David Goodof, Paul D'Amour Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board to order at 7:30 P.M. FORM A -- Peter Copelas , Butler Street. Mr. Copelas is expanding. Lot B & D are to be conveyed to Mr. Copelas to add to his existing property to form one contiguous lot. Lot D is not to be considered a separate building lot. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by • Edward Stevenson to approve Lot D, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by Normand Houle and seconded by Donald Hunt to approve Lot B, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- Timothy & Arlene Noonan. There are buildings that were existing before the Subdivision Control Law came into effect. A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by Donald Hunt to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required . The motion passed unanimously. KEN BOUFFARD '-- Proposed Subdivision. Mr. Bouffard made a presentation of a proposed subdivision off Marlborough Road. There is approximately 19 1/9 acres . A good portion of it sits on a strong water brook . Mr. Bouffard stated that he plans to follow the land in designing the subdivision. Control growth requires l) points. This subdivision can meet eleven points . The wetland area was not indicated on the map presented, and the Chairman asked that this area be colored in for the next meeting , It was agreed that the • Planning Board should view the site. Mr. Bouffard suggested bringing in a SALEM PLANNING BOARD • May 20, 1981 Page 2 preliminary plan but the Board felt further work should be done before a preliminary plan is submitted. Mr. Greg Senko recommended that the developer and the engineer work with the Planning Department to get a lot of preliminary things out of the way. He said the Planning Department would be most happy to help them prepare plans that would work well in the City. WILLA SMALL -- Community Development Report. Willa came before the Board to ask for Planning Board approval on the Small Cities grant. There is money available now from HUD which may be lost next year if funding does not come through the State . She explained the areas which would benefit from the grant and submitted to the Board an outline of how the money will be used (copy attached hereto) . A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by James Fox to endorse the plan as presented and write a letter to that effect (copy attached hereto) . The motion passed unanimously. • NICHOLAS DECOULOS -- Dearborn Lane Subdivision . Ms . Madison read the May 19 letter from Anthony Fletcher. In order to release the bond money, the owners of Lots 2 and 5 should be notified by Mr. Decoulos as to the new lines. The plan that is the approved subdivision plan is the one that does not close . The Planning Board should move to accept the amendments to the Subdivision . Planning Board member, Mr. Normand Houle, met with the neighbors at the subdivision and presented their recommendations . All sidewalks should conform to five feet in width. In front of Lot 7 , the berm should be removed for access to driveway. In front of Lot 6 , install berm for sidewalk. Lot 3 needs sixteen feet of sidewalk berm to the driveway. Lot 2 wants the patch job done last year removed. They covered her water main shut off. Berms should be repaired by Lot ? . Sidewalks have hollow spots and should be brought up to grade. All work must be approved by the Engineering Department. Stone bounds must be installed. Mr. Decoulos pointed out that these bounds are going to be in the middle of the sidewalk. He would like to install a solid piece of steel. Ms. Madison said she will check with the City Engineer on this but felt stone bounds would be required. The decision will be made by the Engineering Department. Ms . Madison asked to be notified before sidewalk work was started and Mr. Decoulos said he would do that. GREG SENKO -- Budget. • Mr. Senko reported that there is $19 ,791.86 left over from the Master Plan printing . Although it has yet to be approved by the Mayor, he is requesting that this money be used to fund Ms. Madison's salary and half of the Clerk's salary. He submitted a proposal for Planning Board approval showing possible expenditures (copy attached hereto) . A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by Normand Houle to • SALEM PLANNING BOARD May 20 , 1981 Page 3 to approve the recommended changes in the budget. The motion passed 7 - 0. MINUTES. A motion was made by Edward Stevenson and seconded by James Fox to approve the minutes of April 16 as presented . The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by.William Wheaton to approve the minutes of May 7 , 1981 as presented. The motion passed unanimously. BOARD OF APPEAL AGENDA The Planni ng Board reviewed the Board of Appeal agenda. Regarding the petition of Lionel R. Pelletier for variances for Lot 179 on Ocean Avenue and Brooks Street, and Lot 187 on Brooks Street to combine the lots and then divide the parcel into five lots , the Board decided to reaffirm their letter of March 18 , 1981 objecting to the proposal. • PLANNING BOARD AIDE REPORT. Philip Webster Special Permit . Ms. Madison presented the plan of Philip Webster for the construction of a single family dwelling on Lafayette Street. The public hearing is scheduled for the next meeting. She submitted a letter she wrote to Mr. Webster asking for additional information on the uplift calculations and a revision of the plan to clearly state which datum is being used, and details of water and waste piping and of retaining wall section and stability calculated at unsupported sections . A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. Respectfully submitted , 7 acqueltnA. 'Ryb ickcqick Clerk • SMALL CITIES YEAR 1 FAIDENTIAL REHABILITATION AND ENERGY CONSERVATION Special Energy Projects $ _4-Z,-000.00 Energy Planner (1/2 time) 4O.,.Og9;00�63, A116.06 Target Block Housing Rehab Projects 35-,.000-00 /u, 39o.d6 NSA -Wide Housing Rehab Projects 7 S1SD..-0O lay, yas"o6 City-wide Hardship Final -125;008 00 ay e&�-Oz Administration -=2Cn4^d0T•0 6800 NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS �owdo c22 A�^-0�e( a^tea� 3yf�3y� Rehabilitate: Splaine Park . 15,000.00 Rainbow Terrace 15,000.00 Street improvements to residential neighborhoods 80,000.00 110,000.00 Business District Developments �/' l Essex Street Improvements (HPW) C/''"ost �Ot" �'/ 90,000.00 Riley Plaza (Preliminary) Studies 0 20,000.00 Boston Street Studies (match) 5,000.00 Bridge Street Studies (match) 5,000.00 co 120,000.00. C931�t ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SALEM HARBOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (o,ty /0&04) 60 ,000 . 00 MUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES North Shore Welfare Rights School 7,500.00 Art Colloquium, planning 8,000.00 Senior Center Winterization 14,000.00 Handicapped Center 10,500.00 CCo +M �pom} 40.,000.00 ADMINISTRATION 120,000.00 / 809,000.00 Do 9�� • (9i#.0 of 3„ ',,�=r}.-y A 1ZIYIYIIYi � II2Ir� @m �alem Orren June 1, 1981 Mr. Marvin Siflinger, Area Director U. S. Department of Housing and Urban . Development 15 New Chardon Street Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Dear Mr. Siflinger: • The Salem Planning Board unanimously endorses the Community Development Small Cities Block Grant. We feel that the aims expressed in this grant directly correlate to the needs recognized in our Master Plan which was endorsed and is now City policy. The work to be done fulfills a real need in the City and will provide part of the implementation of our five year plan for the . City. Sincerely, WALTER B. POWER III Chairman WBP:jar • • r J/ ✓i•:w,:i.�L::�ri' //7'.rtL%%� i-t-��` _ � SO G • - - � --=:.:�-�_ ���.�:: /C/l�i:i%--,-: _ � y Yom" /Ui�L y J 5eZ MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF JUNE 18 , 1981, HELD AT CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN , THIRD FLOOR, SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Paul D'Amour, Donald Hunt, David Goodof, Abby Burns , Edward Stevenson, James Fox, and William Wheaton MEMBERS ABSENT: Normand Houle Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the meeting of the Planning Board to order at 7:30 P.M. SPECIAL PERMIT -- Public Hearing for Philip Webster Lafayette Street. • Walter Power opened the public hearing and read the legal notice. Mr. Philip Webster said he would like to submit a report which substantiates the bearing capacity of the soil. Ms . Madison said there was a difference of opinion at the Conservation Commission hearing about how far they would have to go down to stiff clay that would support the house. Mr. Webster stated that everything would be on spread footings and there will be a retaining wall with reinforced pilings . The elevation will be at least 18 feet as the decree of the Conservation Commission required. Mr. Power asked about problems with erosion and wave action . Mr. Webster said his studies show that dense clay is something that will not be moved. It is not as though it were on sand. There is a 1' foot easement on the property that he owns that he cannot block. There is another 9 foot easement that a group of people can use. The Board of Health concurs with the proposal after reviewing the plan and viewing the site. The Building Inspector concurs with the proposal. The City Engineer requested and received uplift calculations. He noted they are in order. A written agreement is needed to preserve drain and acknowledgement of sewer elevation in street. The Conservation Commission has met and passed the application with conditions . The conditions have not been submitted yet. Mr. French has submitted. notes requesting the four toot footings . • Mrs . Branislawa Moore of 437, Lafayette Street lives next door. She stated that it would be nice it he could build a house providing the storm drain could be taken care of. They feel the City should put it out further underground. Mrs. Moore said they would welcome a neighbor that would clean the area . SALEM PLANNING BOARD • June 18 , 1981 Page 2 Mr. Robert Perron, 419A Lafayette Street, abuts the property. He told Mr. Webster that he was in favor of what Mr. Webster was doing. He has a pumping system in his house that does very well. He suggested that the calculations be looked into closely as it seemed very close to him. Mr. Perron said he sees no problem with erosion. There being no further comments for or against the proposal, the public hearing was declared closed at 7 :55 P.M. Mt. Power suggested that action be held off until the City Engineer has the agreement he requested. KEN BOUFFARD -- Subdivision Off Highland Avenue. Mr. Bouffard requested that the Planning Board view the property and he would then point out where the proposed roads would be . Ms . Madison, the City Planner, and the Assistant City Planner, have already walked the site. Mr,. Bouffard said his client isnot comfortable with cluster development, but they, are open for negotiation in any area. • PROCTOR AND POPE STREET CONDOMINIUM. Mr. George Fallon and Mr. Delfaro outlined their plan for new construction to be sold as condominiums . The plan includes more parking that is required. There is a fifteen foot wide driveway. The proposed building is approximately 80' x 50' . The property passes controlled growth. According to the present Zoning Ordinance , this proposal must go through the Planning Board and Engineering Department first If approved, it is allowed to go to the Board of Appeal. Ms. Madison suggested they follow through under R-3 for garden type housing. Walter Power wondered if the Planning Board should include something in the Zoning Ordinance to exclude the problem of going to the Planning Board and then to the Board of Appeal. Perhaps the Ordinance could be redefined to say "any new construction of apartments or condominiums. : . . " . William Wheaton suggested they follow the requirements outlined for a multi-family structure. Then the Planning Board could write to the Board of Appeal explaining that this is not a conversion. Ms. Madison will walk this plan to the Fire Department and the City Engineer. She asked Mr. Fallon to prepare a more detailed plan showing sewer and water. The plan will go out for comments. Mr. Power suggested writing to Bill Tinti to see if the Planning Board could eliminate the need to go to the Board of Appeal. SALEM PLANNING BOARD • June 18 , 1981 Page 3 HEARTLAND EXPANSION. Heartland is proposing a plan to expand their shopping center. It would include building on the land on the other side of the entrance road. Mr. Senko asked if Walter Power would speak at the meeting tomorrow representing the Planning Board. BOARD OF APPEAL AGENDA. The Appeal Board agenda for June 24 , 1981 was reviewed: No letters were written. FORM A -- John and Jennis Quarteroni, 12 Abbott and 24 Maple Streets. Two houses were in existence before the Subdivision Control Law came into e xistence. A motion was made by Paul D'Amour and seconded by David 'Goodof to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed 7 - 0 with Donald Hunt abstaining. • CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS. David Goodof suggested that some kind of a report system be set up so that the Planning Board would be aware of Board of Appeal decisions regarding condominium conversions . After discussion, it was decided to bring Appeal Board decisions to meetings for review. A motion was made to adjourn , and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 9:40 P.M. Respectfully submitted, acque�A. Rybick Clerk MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD HELD ON JULY 16, 1981, AT CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN , SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Donald Hunt, David Goodof, Abby Burns, James Fox, Normand Houle MEMBERS ABSENT: Edward Stevenson, William Wheaton, Paul D'Amour Planning Board Chairman Walter Power opened the regular meeting of the Board at 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING -- Frederick Atkins, 23 Glendale Avenue . The public hearing was opened at 7:30 P.M. and the legal notice was read. Mr. James McDowell was present from T & M Engineefing Associates representing Frederick Atkins Trust. This is the Dion Yacht Yard. Mr. McDowell said they propose steel sheet pilings , concrete retaining wall, timber piles , timber pier, floats and solid till in Salem Harbor. The proposed steel sheet pilings is to replace a deteriorated shed which was destroyed in the 1978 blizzard. The concrete retaining wall is being used because the City sewer goes under the property. Mr. McDowell has worked closely with the City Engineer on this . The steel sheet pilings will be anchored with timber ten feet apart. In order to get the pilings anchored properly, it is necessary to fill. Mr. McDowell felt this has been kept to a minimum and he has talked with the Army Corps of Engineers many times . Most of the present timber pier is coming out. The Building Inspector concurs with the proposal.. The City Engineer says this proposal meets with the requirements of the department and the Wetlands Protection Act. However, further calculations are needed pertaining to the loverturn and resistance for the retaining wall and sheet pilings. The City Engineer now has this material and he gives his approval. _ The Conservation Commission is having their public hearing tonight. There being no further comments for or against the proposal , the public hearing was declared closed. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by James Fox to approve the Special Permit pending Conservation Commission approval and incorporating their Order of Conditions . The motion passed unanimously. „ 1 SALEM PLANNING BOARD • July 16, !1981 Page 2 FORM A -- Peter Copelas , 44 Butler Street. Lot F is not a legal building lot and is to be conveyed to abutter Peter Copelas and combined with abutting land to form one contiguous lot. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. ZONING AND SUBDIVISION Assistant City Planner Robin Campbell came before the Board to explain her suggestions for rezoning. Her five areas for attention are 1) increase in density, 2) use change , 3) renovations , 4) non-conforming use , and 5) added structures. She is planning to put gathered information on the word processor in order to go back later and do cross tabulations . She is making a master map with mylar overlaps to show what land uses are In what areas , and what the zoning is in the areas. This would allow a check for conflicts. She asked the Board for input on procedure. Walter Power suggested that we target certain areas of interest, such as Lafayette • Street, to see how they should be handled. Ms. Campbell said another area for special attention is the land off Highland Avenue. Ms. Madison suggested that Board members read the Zoning Ordinance and familiarize themselves with the comments for change made by Cheri Cooper. It was decided that in the beginning, the Planning Board would act as a whole when reviewing the Ordinance. Some part of ,each regular meeting would be set aside for zoning. SPECIAL PERMIT -- Philip Webster , Lafayette Street. This matter was discussed at the last meeting. A vote was not taken at that time because the Conservation Commission had not issued an Order of Conditions and also the City Engineer wanted specific information that had not been provided. Since that time, this information has been given to Mr. Fletcher and he approves the plan. A motion was made by James Fox and seconded by Normand Houle to approve the Special Permit, referencing the plan. The motion passed unanimously. FEE SCHEDULES. Ms . Madison reported that the Planning Board is to establish a fee schedule for Form A's and Special Permits . When amounts are determined , they will go to the • City Council for approval. Methods for establishing fees for Form As was discussed and it was decided that Ms. Madison will look into the fee requirements of other cities and how these figures were adopted. Subdivision fees will require a sliding scale. This will be discussed at the next meeting. Advertising costs SALEM PLANNING BOARD • July 16 , 1981 Page 3 will be assumed by the person seeking a special permit since this is not budgeted for next year. A motion was made by Abby Burns and seconded by James Fox to establish the requirement that individuals seeking a special permit shall pay for advertising costs . The motion passed unanimously. The Clerk will call the Salem News to arrange a set fee program. FORM A -- Essex Survey. Mr. Steven Butterworth represented Stern-Tise on this . The Board had questions on this proposal that required further investigation, so this Form A was held over for the next meeting. BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA The Planning Board reviewed the agenda for July 29 , 1981 and agreed to write a letter concerning the petition of Stuart Comer for a special permit to divide the building at 3 Ocean Terrace into three separate apartment units and remo del the third floor by.combining the two present units into one unit. The Planning Board respectfully • urged the Appeals Board to question the parking situation in this case. They also suggested that the Board require that parking spaces be listed on the application, stating the number of parking spaces available before and after the permit is granted. There was discussion on the petition of Harbortown Development Corp. for a variance to modify the decision made by the Appeals Board on March 11, 1981 to state no less than 1 1/,2 parking spaces per residential unit shall be maintained at Norman Street and Barton Square for no more than 72 residential units. The Planning Board is concerned that each new unit built have in-house parking . They feel housing should not take away from the business district be infringing on an already tight parking situation down town. Ms. Madison will talk with Chris Onley about this and report back to the Board. Also, it was suggested that the Planning Board meet with the SRA, the Off-Street Parking Commission, and the Board of Appeal to form general policies regarding downtown parking. Ms . Madison will talk to Greg Senko about setting up this meeting. LOT #5 DEARBORN LANE. Mr. Lennie Papalardo did not get a building permit. Conservation Commission has written a Cease and Desist Order giving him ten days to remove the fill. It was decided the Planning Board should write a letter to the Building Inspector requesting • him as the enforcement officer to deny the building permit to Mr. Papalardo because SALEM PLANNING BOARD July 16, 1981 Page 4 • he is in flagrant violation of a Wetlands/Flood Hazard Special Permit voted by the Planning 'Board on April 2, 1981. The reason for denial is that on Tuesday, July 14 , 1981, there has been illegal filling of a wetlands. MINUTES A motion was made by James Fox and secorri ed by David Goodof to approve the minutes of May 20, 1981 as presented. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made by James Fox and seconded by David Goodof to approve the minutes of June 18, 1981 as presented. The motion passed unanimously. The next meeting of the Planning Board is August 20, 1981. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 10:15 P.M. Respectfully submitted, acquelyn A. Rybicki Clerk • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF AUGUST 27 , 1981 , HELD ON THE THIRD FLOOR OF ONE SALEM GREEN , CITY HALL ANNEX, SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Normand Houle, Donald Hunt, Abby Burns , James Fox, David Goodof MEMBERS ABSENT: William Wheaton, Edward Stevenson and Paul D'Amour Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. FORM A -- 1-3 BARNES AVENUE Wilfred Julien Mr. Julien owns three contiguous lots so the lot lines disappear. This Form A caused concern because the front lot line measures 80.66 feet with a one toot deep extension into the next lot 19 .34 feet long to give tle proper frontage . Mr. • Julien said the lot was designed this way because of a stone wall and greenhouse already on the property very close to the wall. There is no definition of the angle of the frontage in the Zoning Regulations . Walter Power suggested approving this plan and amending the Subdivision Regulations so this does not happen again. A motion was made by Abby Burns and seconded by Normand Houle to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. The Clerk was instructed to make a note that a change in the Subdivision Regulations could be to amend the 100 foot frontage wording so that the depth of the lot comes at an angle normal to the sideline. LOT #5 DEARBORN LANE. Mr. Lennie Pappalardo presented a drawing showing the existing grade and the finished grade. He is planning to bring the land back to the original grade. The Conservation Commission is granting conditional approval. They have agreed that the Building Inspector will issue a permit for the foundation only. When the foundation is in, the Conservation Commission will view the site again and it the fill is all taken out, he will then get a building permit for the house. He is now in violation of the Special Permit issued by the Planning Board. Walter Power suggested that the Board adopt the Conservation Commission conditions and add that the elevation of the house be raised from its present 15 feet to 15 . 36 feet. r SALEM PLANNING BOARD August 27 , 1981 Page 2 • A motion was made by David Goodof and seconded by James Fox to accept the "Plan of Land in Salem, Lot 5 Dearborn Lane" dated August 1981 by John J. Decoulos , and "Cross Section of Proposed Dwelling to be Located at Lot 5 Dearborn Lane, Salem , Mass . by John J. Decoulos , Peabody, Mass. dated August 1981", adopting the Conservation Commission's Order of Conditions with the further condition that the cellar floor be at 15 . 36 mean low water Salem Datum . The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- HIGHLAND AVENUE This is approximately six acres of land on Highland Avenue adjacent to the Hawthorne Square Plaza. Mr. Seratini has made a definite agreement that there would be no new entrance onto Highland Avenue. Mr. Fletcher said his department has made conditions on the front parcel. They have to blow out all the ledge and close the eight foot driveway. A motion was made by James Fox and seconded by Abby Burns to approve the plan, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required, subject to the condition that the existing driveway to Lot l shall be permanently closed and entrance and egress to Lots L and 2 will be gained through the existing mall entrance from • Highland Avenue; parking lot design will come before the Planning Board for further consideration . The motion passed unanimously. ANCHOR GAS STATION Mr." Crowell from A & A Construction, Inc. in Everett came before the Board asking that a special permit be granted under emergency procedure to allow the Anchor Gas Station to replace three gas tanks at their station. The tanks have been leaking into the harbor and under a Notice of Violation of Fire Laws they are ordered to correct the condition within fourteen days. The station now has three tanks , each holding 3,000 gallons of gas , which they would like to remove the replace with three tanks , one holding ? ,000 gallons , one 3 ,000 gallons and one 4 ,000 gallons . This way trucks will not have to come into the City with short loads . Everything proposed is in accordance with State Fire Marshall Code. Mr. Crowell stated that he is prepared to meet any stipula- tions made by the City of Salem. Mr. Power explained the Special Permit procedure to him and stated he knew of no grounds where they could waive the procedure. Ms . Madison explained a suggestion made by Greg Senko. Because of the emergency situation, Mr. Senko suggested giving conditional approval, advising the applicants that there would be a slight risk involved to them. The public hearing would come later and if things are not in order, the applicants • would have to be aware that they would have to do it all over again. SALEM PLANNING BOARD • August 27 , 1981 Page 3 Mr. Fletcher said the present tanks do not conform to the present standards . Prior to the Flood Hazard and Wetlands Protection Act, there were no standards. Anchor Gas Station is basically out of busires s now. Mr. Ed Adams, also from A & A Construction, Inc. , stated that there are three inspections this project must go through in the normal course of construction. Walter Power asked if the Health Inspector was notified and Mr. Fletcher said they would have to be notified to check out the tanks during construction and installation. Walter Power suggested a letter be sent to all the Boards involved telling them of this procedure and asking them to be insolved at this time and aware of the action taken. The next step is that Anchor Gas Station is to go through the, formal procedure. A motion was made by Normand Houle and seconded by Abby Burns to approve under emergency procedure the plan presented by Anchor U.S.A. per order of letter issued by Salem Fire Marshall under Notice/Violation of Fire Law dated 8/13/81. The Salem Planning Board approved the replacement of the three tanks at this time provided that all other laws and ordinances are complied with. The reason for this action is to prevent undue financial hardship to the service station • operating as Anchor U.S.A. It is understood [hat the City Engineer has approved the uplift calculations and that the installation is approved by the Fire Marshall. The petitioner is going to file for a public hearing , at which time formal action will be taken on this procedure. The motion passed unanimously. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 8:45 P.M. Respectfully submitted , Jacquelyn A. Rybicki Clerk • • MINUTES OF THE IVE ETING OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD HELD ON September 17 , 1981, AT CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN , SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Normand Houle, James Fox, David Goodof, Abby Burns , Donald Hunt, Edward Stevenson, and William Wheaton MEMBERS ABSENT: Paul D'Amour Planning Board Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:36 P.M. FORM A -- Hyman Marcus, Linden Avenue. Attorney Stuart Abrams presented the plan. The land is to be divided into six lots . All the lots shown meet requirements of zoning in that they have proper frontage. • City severage does not extend to that sec tion of the City. The soil has been tested for septic systems and it is acceptable. There was some question as to whether septic systems were allowed in the City. Mr. Abrams said he talked with Mr. Fletcher and Mr. Fletcher suggested installing septic systems in such a way that would allow for conversion when funds allow City sewerage. A motion was made by Normand Houle and seconded by Edward Stevenson to approve the Form A, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. FORM A -- Messina L'Amenta., Verdon and Crosby Streets. Mr. Ken Bouffard, the Engineer for the proposal , made the presentation. The proposal is to combine three parcels with proper frontage to make one lot. The reason for this is that Mr. Deschamps would like to build his house now. They plan to come in at a later date to develop the subdivision. The lots to be combined are Lots 48 , 49 and 375 . There is a sewer easement ithat is not shown on the plan. A motion was made by William Wheaton and seconded by David Goodof to approve the Form A., approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. The motion passed unanimously. • IAw� SALEM PLANNING BOARD September 17 , 1981 Page 2 • Mr. Bouffard asked to be included on the next agenda in order to bring in a definitive plan for the subdivision. The Board strongly recommended that he bring in a preliminary plan for review. SPECIAL PERMIT PROCEDURE CHANGE. There was discussion on certification stamps for engineers . It was decided that the Planning Board Aide would check on engineering certification stamps when a Special Permit application is submitted to be sure they are valid. SUBDIVISION CONTROL 1 There followed a discussion on the importance of submitting a preliminary plan for subdivisions. A motion was made by Donald Hunt and seconded by David Goodof to change the Subdivision Control Laws with respect to preliminary plans when these laws were being reviewed. On Page 5 -- Procedure for Submission and Approval, the motion required taking out the word "may" and inserting in that place the word "shall". The motion passed unanimously. This will make submitting a preliminary plan a necessary part of a Special Permit. • Walter Power suggested that Board members read Cheri Cooper's comments for changes. Also, please read the Subdivision Regulations. Members are asked to have these two documents read by November 5 . At that time , Robin Campbell will come back to the meeting. CONDOMINIUM CONVERSIONS. It was suggested that a member of the Board of Appeals is continuously voting "present" on condominium conversion decisions. This vote requires the other members to agree unanimously in order to allow a conversion. The Planning Board Aide and Clerk will review the decisions made to date to see if this is in fact the case. It was also decided that Appeal Board decisions will be brought into the next meeting for review. MEETING DATE. The next meeting date is scheduled for WEDNESDAY, October 21, 1981. If a meeting is required before then , Wednesday, October 7 would be the likely date. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 8:35 P.M. • Respectfully submitted, a-a c ueryn qA R bi ki( 7 Y c Clerk MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 5 , 1981 , THIRD FLOOR OF CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN , SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Edward Stevenson, Abby Burns, Donald Hunt, David Goodof, William Wheaton MEMBERS ABSENT: Normand Houle, James Fox Planning Board Chairman'Walter Power called the meeting to'order at 7 :30 P.M. FORM A -- Edward Morgani, Lots 46-52 Greeniawn Avenue This Form A went first to the Board of Appeal and has been granted. The petitioner was granted a variance for one more lot than would be permitted in our zoning now. In the past , the Planning Board has been in favor of combining lots to make larger size lots even though they are not in conformance • with present zoning . In the present case, however, it is not a case of upgrading undersized lots in a completed subdivision. There is open land on two sides. Ms. Madison called Mr. Morgani on the telephone and he came down to City Hall and withdrew his application. He stated that he would come back at the next meeting with the same plan or a revised plan. The Board wrote a letter to the Appeal Board to set a standard for future cases (see attached) . GREG SENKO -- ZONING The City has received a $10 ,000. 00 planning grant. With this money, the City must come up with some hard recommendations within six months to develop the land near Loring Avenue, Highland Avenue and in between. . This should be reflected in the zoning. Mr. Moniz is the designated planning specialist for this land use grant. The City has done a study in that area in 1974-75 . Things have changed since then. Now it is very, very difficult to stop the development out there. In December, Mr. Moniz will be updating ail data on industry. In January he should have recommendations for land use. In January and February, some real decisions should be made as to how the land should, and will be , used. This will involve .the City Council and the Planning Board. Zoning is critical to this whole effort. • SALEM PLANNING BOARD • November 5 , 1.981 Page 2 . Before the next meeting , the Planning Department will take areas J, 2 and 3 on the map, Susan, Robin and Marie Stevenson will interview members of the Board of Appeal and certain businessmen and come back with problems they see in the 1, 2 , and 3 'areas. Members of the Planning Board should read their, Master Plan Neighborhoods Section 1, 2 & 3. Ms . Madison requested that Board members ride or walk neighborhoods 1 , 2 and 3 to refresh themselves With the boundaries . William Wheaton suggested that Mr. Senko provide for the Board: 1) zoning map, 2) existing land use map, and 3) survey of all variances granted. Susan pointed out that the maps are in the Master Plan . Mr. Senko stated that he would like the zones based on property lines. This has been started several years ago but has not been clearly defined and it has. " been the basis for several problems . The City of Salem needs an official zoning map. The one presently being used just shows boundaries drawn down the middle of the street. • NATHANIEL BOWDITCH PARK. After unsuccessful attempts to get a developer to do a multi-facet development in this area , the City went out again and asked developers for their proposals . So far, the Planning Department has received two completed proposals and one partial proposal. Walter Power suggested that site could be best put to use- with a hotel. Mr. Senko agreed but said hotels are not interested now because of lack of access. When the consultants hired to determine best land use did their study, they came up with a listing of 175 dwellings on that site for the City to receive proper value. Fifty units and a hotel would give the same effect. That is why the density has been allowed on this proposal. The tax rate on this per year would be $600 ,000 .00 - $"700 ,000 .00. BOARD OF APPEAL The Board of Appeal agenda for November 18 , 1981 was discussed. Regarding the petition of Katherine Photos and Ernest Delpero for necessary variances and special permits to allow the construction of a two family dwelling at 20 Oaklan d Street, the Board suggested the variance be denied because the area is zoned R-1 neighborhood and this lot is extremely undersized (see attached memo) . QSALEM PLANNING BOARD November 5 , 1981 Page 3 • There being no futher business, a motion was made to adjourn , and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 PM. Respectfully �submitted, ,p f -" l-� /C' Jacquelyn A. Rybicki �tl` Clerk • • w RO f1�itu cifulelu, tt�sttcl�u�e##s � m (Out Mgoatpra (§rrpn MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Appeal V FROM: Planning Board ! DATE: November 23, 1981 RE: Petition of Edward Morgani Lots 46-52 Greenlawn Avenue The Planning Board, after considering your variance conditional on our approval, has taken the matter under advisement and the applicant has presently withdrawn his application. The reason for our concern is based on the following: • L . In cases of land which is surrounded by a completed subdivision, the owner should be, permitted to combine existing lots into larger Lots which do not necessarily result in a lot which meets the current zoning but approaches It as close as possible. 2 . In dealing with land bordered by undeveloped area, the Board strongly feels that current zoning requirements should be strictly adhered to. . 3. We are presently working under the understanding from the-City Solicitor that any lots bordering on an imaginary street or dirt road cannot be processed by a Form A and would have to be considered a Form B. This particular Form A falls in that catagory. We request that the Board of Appeal consider these reasons in making decisions on any future land frontage and Lot size decisions and in connection with this Issue we feel that we are dealing with a Form B and not a Form A. The Planning Board appreciates having the opportunity to review this situation afforded us by your conditional approval. 3 • WALTER B. POWER III Chairman Ny �s r Ctv of , tt.6sac4usE##s 3a P Planning Poarl 011e —95Filem (Srern MEMORAN DUM i i. TO: Board of Appeal FROM: Planning Board DATE: November 12 , 1981 RE: Petition of Katherine L. Photos , Owner;. and Ernest Delpero, Petitioner, for necessary variances and special permits to allow the construction of a two family house on a lot containing 4 ,511 square feet at 20 Oakland Street • The Planning Board has carefully reviewed the"- equest and would urge the Appeal Board to consider the following points in making its decision: 1. The area is zoned an R-1 neighborhood. 2. This lot is extremely undersized. The maximum use permitted should be a single family dwelling. We suggest that the variance be denied. Gum fid.(.P « WALTER B. POWER, III Chairman • I Cr �r • MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 19 ,. 1981, THIRD FLOOR, CITY HALL ANNEX; ONE SALEM GREEN , SALEM , MASSACHUSETTS MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power, Donald Hunt, David Goodof, James Fox, Abby Burns , Normand Houle , Edward Stevenson, William Wheaton Planning Board Chairman Walter Power opened the meeting of the Planning Board at 7 :30 P.M. FORM A UPDATE -- Edward Morgani, Lots 46-52 Greenlawn Avenue Ms. Madison spoke with Bill Tintt. His opinion on the Board of Appeal granting approval of a variance conditional to Planning Board approval was that usually the Board of Appeal would not be allowed to give that condition passing off their authority. However, the Planning Board is the keeper of zoning and the keeper of the Master Plan, so it is legal in this case. Also, the Board of Appeal not • only gave the Planning Board frontage approval, but they also passed over approval on the area. As far as this Form A goes , there are problems. The Assessor's Map shows Greenlawn Avenue as a street. However, it is not a public way. This means that Mr. Morgani now must come in for a Form �B, which is a subdivision. We cannot approve Form A's for dirt roads that are not public ways. Susan also spoke with John Serafini and they are coming in with a Form B in two weeks . ZONING. At this point, Mt Power turned the meeting over to Assistant City Planner, Robin Campbell. Robin directed the Board to neighborhoods 1, 2 and 3. During the past two weeks , she and Susan have interviewed Tony Fletcher, Dick McIntosh and Dick Gauthier. Walter Power felt that rather than attempt zoning at this stage neighborhood by neighborhood that we should take the Master Plan to form our goals and this should be the basis for discussion. After much discussion, It was decided that Planning Board members would read Article I General Provisions Recommended Draft for the next meeting. It was also decided that zoning would be the first order of business at meetings and would be discussed from 7:30 to 9:00. Other Planning Board business will be conducted after 9:00 P.M. • e $ALEM PLANNING BOARD f' Novlember 19 , 1981 Page 2 1 WINTER ISLAND Mr. Power is a member of the Winter Island Commission and reported to Planning Board members the plans of the Commission. Winter Island will be developed for recreational uses for the people of the City of Salem. Cahill's Boat Yard will lease the hanger to store board for the winter. Jillian's Restaurant may relocate to Winter Island. Harbor Tours will be going from the ramp. The barracks will be used for an educational institute. Betsye Sargeant of the Phoenix Center has plans to run her day school there and also having weekend seminars with students sleeping over. The Harbor Master will move into the building further up. There is another person who wants to use the marina for rental and a boat shop. The old lighthouse will be rehabilitated. ' �a The Winter Island Commission will manage affairs. They want this land to be for the citizens of Salem so they are not asking for any federal funds. The Commission will try to use revenue earned from parking and activities to develop the island. Last year they generated $8,000.00 and the City has appropriated $4 ,800. 00 to get things going. • There being no further business , the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. Respectfully) submitted, acquelyn A. Rybicki Clerk • • Access A. To provide access to public open space for all residents. OTo increase visual and public access to the waterfront through the use of easements and acquisitions. I. To improve public access to coastal recreation facili- ties, and to alleviate traffic and parking problems through improvements in public transportation: 2. To link existing coastal recreation sites to each other or to nearby coastal inland facilities via trails for bicyclists and hikers. 3. To provide technical assistance to developers of private recreational facilities and sites that will increase public access to the shoreline. 4. To remove barriers to movement and vision in the city. In general, this strategy refers to waterways and large unused areas, such as abandoned ware- houses and factories that destroy the possibility of a continuous and usable open space system or cause blight and safety problems. 5. To provide access to open space and recreational areas by foot, bicycle, and public transportation. To design bicycle trails and pedestrian paths with rights- of-way set aside for bicycles and wider sidewalks for easier pedestrian flow. To give special consideration • to making open spaces and places of interest accessible to handicapped people. C. To physically and visually unite most of the city's major open space and recreation areas by acquisition or conser- vation restrictions. Linkage is most obviously valuable along major streams and rivers. One of the major benefits of linked open areas is increased accessibility to the city's open space and recreation areas. 1. To consider areas such as power line rights-of-way, large commercial and public parking lots, watershed lands, and water supply areas for open space use. Z. To study the feasibility of utilizing all public rights- of-way for linear park purposes. 3. To encourage the establishment of linear parks as part of all proposed transportation improvements. In many instances, existing open spaces can be phys- ically linked by designing linear parks into proposed transportation improvements. 4. To institute a program for landscaping of median strips, intersections, and street corners. 5. To preserve public rights-of-way along the city's waterways, water bodies, and highways to intercon- nect these with other public green areas and open space. • • Odem Neck/Salem Willows A. To develop a phased program of capital expenditures for traffic_ and parking improvements in the Salem Neck and Salem Willows areas. 1. To study the desirability of instituting a residential permit parking program in Juniper Cove. Z. To provide public incentives for private reinvestment and upgrading of the existing commercial facilities and amusements at the Salem Willows, and to develop and implement, with the aid of state and federal funding, streetscape, bikeway, and parking improve- ments along Fort Avenue adjacent to the park and concession area. B. To develop neighborhood outreach programs which have the objective of reducing juvenile disturbances in the Salem Neck area. • • Otudy Area IVs Salem Neck to Derby Wharf Land Use Acres 75 of Area 1.1neal 1,eet o Of Coastline Coastline 01 Single-Family 41.75 14.8 3,580 14.0 OZ Two-Family 9.22 3.2 700 Z.7 03 Multi-Family 4.90 1.7 350 1.3 04 Hotel 10 Durable Manufacturing .37 .1 20 Nondurable Manufacturing 30 Transportation/Utilities 83.81 Z9.9 5,030 19.6 40 Retail Z.09 .7 80 .3 50 Wholesale .56 .1 60 Personal & Business Service .19 70 Public/Quasi-Public Buildings - 81.73 Z9.0 7,210 28.2 80 Park & Recreation 5Z.Z9 18.5 8,470 33. 1 90 Vacant Land 3.49 1.2 140 .5 Totals 281.23 25,560 Salem Neck and Willows .rpt t • Salem Neck/Salem Willows A. To develop a phased program of capital expenditures for traffic and parking on Salem Neck and Willows Park improvements. B. To provide public incentives for private reinvestment and upgrading of commercial facilities and amusements and to determine if a family restaurant could be reintro- duced to this area. C. To develop and implement, with the aid of state and federal funding, streetscape improvements on Fort Ave- nue adjacent to the park and concession area. D. To increase access to the Willows through the provision of bikeways and expanded public transportation. E. To determine the future use of the Cat Cove Marine Laboratory, should the state divest itself of that proper- ty. F. To extend the SESD sewer outfall pipe as necessary to achieve a dilution factor, as an alternative to secondary sewerage treatment. G. To determine the most compatible and necessary land use for the fullest utilization of Winter Island. H. To take action to securea clear title to Winter Island. I. To consider the feasibility and desirability of a mixed use: for Winter Island. Facility improvements could • include: 1. Boat launching ramps. Z. Boat storage area. 3. Fort restoration. 4. Seasonal camping area. 5. Playing fields. 6. Tennis courts. 7. Play area. 8. Trail system. 9. Bath houses. 10. Restrooms. 11. Beach and swimming area. J. To consider locating a marine research facility on Winter Island. K. To seek state and federal funding to conduct necessary feasibility studies and to implement plans and necessary public improvements. L. To develop background information, limits, and regula- tions as a developer's package and to seek proposals from private developers to determine the potentials for a private development or private and public development of Winter Island for the above-mentioned uses. M. To investigate and encourage the feasibility of private expansion of the White Street Marina to Mackey proper- ty for commercial lobstermen. • N. To encourage Pickering Oil to undertake a landscaping and planting program along the waterfront to reduce the visibility of the industry from the water and from the White Street Marina area. • Salem Neck/Salem Willows (continued) O. To enforce existing zoning in the Derby Street area. P. To study the suitability of alternative sites for the city's sailing program in the event that the present site be- comes unavailable. • r. • Salem Neck, Salem Willows, Winter Island, White Street A. To develop a phased program of capital expenditures for traffic and parking in the Salem Neck and Willows Park improvements. B. To provide public incentives for private reinvestment and upgrading of commercial facilities and amusements, and to determine if a location exists where family restaurants could be reintroduced. C. To develop and implement, with the aid of state and federal funding, streetscape improvements on Fort Avenue adjacent to the park and concession area. D. To increase access to the Willows through the provision of bikeways and expanded public transportation. E. To determine the future use of the Cat Cove Marine Laboratory should the state divest themselves of that property. F. To extend the SESD sewer outfall pipe as necessary to achieve a dilution factor as an alternative to secondary sewerage treatment. G. To determine the most compatible and necessary land use for the fullest utilization of Winter Island. H. To take action to secure clear title to Winter Island. I. . To consider the feasibility and desirability of a mixed- use for Winter Island. Uses to be considered should • include: 1. Multi-purpose public recreation facility . improve- ments to include: a. Boat launching ramps b. Boat storage area c. Fort restoration to be used as a tourist attraction d. Seasonal camping area for recreational vehicles e. Playing fields f. Tennis courts g. Play area h. Trail system i. Bath houses j. Rest rooms k. Beach and swimming area. 2. Improved access through improved public transporta- tion and the creation of an additional access road. 3. Marine research facility. J. To seek state and federal funding to conduct necessary feasibility studies and to implement plans and necessary public improvements. K. To investigate and encourage the feasibility of private expansion of the White Street Marina for commercial lobstermen, or other marine development, consistent with the residential character of the neighborhood. • • L. To encourage Pickering Oil to undertake a landscaping and planting along the waterfront to reduce the visibility of its operation from the, water and from the White Street Marina area. M. To enforce existing zoning in the Derby Street area. N. To study the suitability of alternative sites for the city's sailing program in the event that the present site be- comes unavailable. • 3. 7 ' w I Salem Common, Collins Cove, and Historic Waterfront Area A. To increase public access and enjoyment of the water- front through the development of a comprehensive im- provement'program for.Collins Cove. B. To develop a neighborhood park and passive recreation area for Collins Cove residents in the inner cove area parallel to Webb Street and extending between Essex Street Extension and McManus Square. ' C. To link Collins Cove and the waterfront to the Salem Common and downtown area through the use of public streetscape improvements. D. To investigate alternative sources of funding -to repair the fence at the Salem Common. E. To encourage the private maintenance and rehabilitation of housing in the Common area through the use of housing improvement rebates and similar programs. F. To redefine zoning for commercial and industrial struc- tures in the Derby Street area to encourage their adapt- ive reuse as housing. 1. To encourage rehabilitation of housing in the Derby Street area, while maintaining existing densities in the neighborhood through enforcement of zoning requirements for parking. ?. Tu utilize the "lease-back' parking lot concept in the • Derby Street area to increase off-street parking space availability. Z. 3. To investigate the desirablity of instituting a residen- tial permit parking program in the Salem Common area. G. To encourage Pickering Oil to undertake a landscaping and planting program along the waterfront to reduce the . visibility of their operation. H. To upgrade commercial facades in the Derby Street area using state and federal funding for leverage in stimulat- ing improvements. I. To locate a suitable site for a parking structure in the Derby Street area within close proximity to Pickering Wharf. J. To expand the historic district areas to include other historic structures. • • Salem Common, Lower Essex Street A. To provide public incentives for private investments in architectural preservation, housing rehabilitation, and neighborhood stabilization. B. To undertake public improvements in the neighborhood, including capital improvements to the Common itself. C. To acquire any rights which the Commonwealth may have to the Salem Common for use as a multi-purpose recreation area serving the neighborhood. ` • • a Bridge Street Neck • A. To develop a comprehensive program for housing and neighborhood improvements along Bridge Street Neck. 1, To further study problems associated with the decline of Bridge Street and its effect on standard housing in the area. 2. To determine the full impact of the Connector Road on the Bridge Street area land use activities. 3. To develop a comprehensive approach to sign treat- ment in the Bridge Street area. 4. To improve traffic safety and to reduce traffic congestion along Bridge Street. 5. To reduce noise in the Bridge Street Neck area. 6. To resolve problems of conflicting land uses along Bridge Street, and to reduce the number of curb cuts into Bridge Street. 7. To upgrade the initial aesthetic impression in the area around the Essex Bridge. 8. To encourage the painting of the liquified natural gas tank to reduce its visibility. 9. To encourage the private redevelopment of the Bridge Street commercial area for use as a family recreation area, having motels, restaurants, shops, and beach areas which complement the downtown retail area for overnight tourist visits. • 10. To investigate the feasibility of developing an addi- tional beach and swimming area on the inward side of Collins Cove on lands owned by New England�Power Company. • Study Area III: Howard Street To Bridge Street Neck To Essex Street Extension Land Use Acres % of Area Lineal Feet % of Of Coastline Coastline 01 Single-Family 10.66 14.2 1,530 14.8 02 Two-Family 3.32 4.4 220 2. 1 03 Multi-Family .27 .3 Z60 2.5 04 Hotel 4. 10 5.4 10 Durable Manufacturing 60 .5 20 Nondurable Manufacturing 30 Transportation/Utilities 37.70 50.2 5,530 53.6 40 Retail 9.34 12.4 960 9.3 50 Wholesale 2.85 3.8 180 1.7 60 Personal & Business Service 70 Public/Quasi-Public Buildings 2.Z6 3.0 80 Park & Recreation 4.2 5.6 1,440 13.9 90 Vacant Land 130 1.2 Total 75.00 10,310 Bridge Street Neck i • Rridge Street Neck and Collins.Cove A. To develop a mixed-use plan for the reuse of the Beverly Bridge following the construction of the Salem-Peabody Connector Roadway and Bridge. I. To encourage the following reuses of the old bridge: public landing, fishing, parking, shopping, and res- taurants. Z. To coordinate efforts to reuse the bridge with offi- cials in Beverly. B. To develop a housing rehabilitation program for resi- dences located in the Bridge Street area similar to that in existence in other Salem neighborhoods. C. To develop and enforce sign controls in the Bridge Street area. D. To encourage the painting of the LNG tank to reduce its visibility. E. To encourage the private redevelopment of the Bridge Street commercial area for use as a private family recreation area, having motels, restaurants, shops, and beach areas which complement the downtown retail area for overnight tourist visits. F. To investigate the feasibility of developing an additional hearh and swimming area on the inward side of Collins • Cove on lands owned by the New England Power Com- pany. G. To increase public access and enjoyment of the water- front through the development of a comprehensive im- provement program for Collins Cove. H. To develop a neighborhood park and passive recreation area in the inner cove area parallel to Webb Street and extending between Essex Street Extension and McManus Square. I. To provide a linkage between public open space areas on the waterfront through the installation of a waterfront walk and bikeway which originates at the Osgood Street beach area and continues to the Collins Cove Park, Webb Street Neighborhood Park, along Essex Street Extension and along Memorial Drive to and including land presently used by the Salem Recreation Department. J. To conduct additional investigations toward the develop- , ment of a full-scale marina facility in Collins Cove. Marina facilities to be considered should include: 1. Boat slips and moorings for 539 to 1500 boats. 2. Parking for 400 vehicles. 3. Use of the old hospital site as a motel, restaurant, marine storage, marine support facilities, housing and retailing, laundromat, public restrooms, and shower facilities. • • Bridge Street Neck and Collins Cove (continued) 4. Boat-handling equipment. 5. Repair and maintenance shops. 6. Marine and hardware supply store. 7. Boat and gear storage. 8. Launching facilites. 9. Fuel station. 10. Lockers and sanitary facilities. 11. Clubhouse. 12. Recreation facilities, picnic area. 13. Spectator area. 14. Pedestrian area. K. To carefully evaluate the effects of dredging and filling. L. To consider the alternative uses of this land and water area. M. To seek state and federal funding to undertake needed studies and improvements. N. To develop background information, limits, and regula- tions as a developer's package and to request proposals from private developers to determine the potentials for private development of this land and water area. O. To undertake necessary public improvements which will stimulate the private development of Collins Cove. • • • Bridge Street Neck and Collins Cove A. To develop and support a mixed use plan for the reuse of the Beverly Bridge following the construction of the Salem-Peabody Connector roadway and bridge. 1. To encourage the following reuses of the old bridge: public landing, fishing, parking, shopping, and restaurants. Z. To coordinate efforts to reuse the bridge with officials in Beverly. B. To develop a housing rehabilitation program for resi- dences located in the Bridge Street area similar to that in existence in other Salem neighborhoods. C. To develop and enforce sign controls in the Bridge Street area. D. To encourage painting the Liquid Natural Gas tank to reduce visibility. E. To encourage the private redevelopment of the Bridge Street commercial area for use as a private family recreation area, having motels, restaurants, shops, and beach areas which complement the downtown retail area for overnight tourist visits. F. To investigate the feasibility of developing an additional beach and swimming area on the inward side of Collins • Cove on lands owned by the New England Power Com- pany. G. To increase public access and enjoyment of the water- front through the development of a comprehensive improvement program for Collins Cove. H. To develop a neighborhood park and passive recreation area in the inner cove area parallel to Webb Street and extending between Essex Street Extension and McManus Square. I. To provide a linkage between public open space areas on the waterfront through the installation of a walk and bikeway originating at the Osgood Street beach area and continuing to the Collins Cove Park, Webb Street Neigh- borhood Park, along Essex Street Extension and along Memorial Drive to and including land presently used by the City Recreation Department. • • J. To conduct additional investigations and analyses and to give additional consideration to development of a full- scale marina facility in Collins Cove. Marina facilities to be considered would include: I. Boat slips and moorings, from 539-1500. 2. Parking for 400 vehicles, based on fill from dredging. 3. Use of the old hospital site as motel, restaurant, marine storage, marine support facilities; housing and retailing, laundromat, public restrooms, and/or shower facilities. 4. Boat handling equipment. 5. Repair and maintenance shops. 6. Marine and hardware supply store. 7. Boat and gear storage. 8. Launching facilities. 9. Fuel station. 10. Lockers, sanitary facilities. 11. Clubhouse. 12. Recreational facilities, picnic area. 13. Spectator area. 14. Pedestrian area. K. To carefully evaluate the effects of dredging and filling. L. To consider the alternative uses of this land and water area. • N1. ' o seek state and federal funding to undertake needed studies and improvements. N. .To develop background information, limits, and regula- tions as a developer's package and to request proposals from developers to determine the potentials for develop- ment of this land and water area. O. To undertake necessary public improvements which will stimulate the private development of Collins Cove. • H f- • Land Use and Urban Characteristics A� T'o review existing land use and land use control ordi- nances, and to revise or amend ordinances as necessary to reduce land use and resource conflicts. 1. To resolve land use conflicts whenever possible through improved management, negotiations, and cooperation, rather than through legal means. 2. To expand the Historic District Areas to include other historic structures. B. To enforce land use ordinances to reduce risks of incom- patible land uses. C To require or install green buffers or barriers between non-compatible land use activities. (b,1To protect fragile lands from development pressures ��JJ through zoning, the acquisition of conservation ease- ments or restrictions, and through public acquisition. 1. To develop a comprehensive, prioritized program for acquisition of conservation easements, restrictions, land acquisition, zoning, and management for en- . vironmentally sensitive lands. 2. To acquire where necessary strategic properties vital to the successful implementation of the waterfront • revitalization plan. 3. To obtain conservation easements and restrictions where necessary on private properties to maintain vistas and promontories, to preserve wildlife refuges, and to provide access to the waterfront. 4. To develop a phased capital expenditure program for acquisition of easements and properties valuable for open space. 5. To obtain conservation restrictions on institutional holdings such as the Girl Scouts of America property, golf courses, and cemeteries. 6. To undertake an accurate survey of all historic sites. 7. To protect historic buildings and locations throughout the city and to integrate them in the Salem Open Space Plan. 8. To restore Fort Lee and Fort Pickering and to encourage their use by Salem residents and tourists. To provide public incentives for private investment in the city. 1. To stimulate a domino effect of private waterfront renewal and reinvestment through the disposition and development of strategic publicly-owned waterfront properties. 2. To develop background information, regulations, and limits as a developer's package for the South River, North River, Derby Street area, Bridge Street area, • Winter Island, and Collins Cove, and to request proposals from private developers to determine the potentials for development of these properties. 3. To rehabilitate existing urban parks and playgrounds as multi-purpose recreation areas having facilities for all age groups. C To.carefully assess all proposed and abutting uses in terms of environmental impacts on existing open space. F� To include property of private organizations as part of the open space plan, and to obtain conservation ease- ments or restrictions on environmentally sensitive lands if the reuse or sale of the property will result in a non- open space and recreational use. 1. To consider large institutional holdings for open space use when a change in existing use would result in a non-institutional character. 2. To require all large development proposals which greatly increase the number of Salem residents to provide adequate recreational facilities for residents. • • ENVIRONMENT POLICIES • A. To develop a comprehensive conservation plan which guides the systematic identification, control, 'preserva- tion, protection, reclamation, or enhancement of: I. Natural coastal shores, islands, tidal mud flats, salt- water marshes and island ponds, streams and wet- lands, and natural drainage areas and waterbodies. Z. Floodplains and wetlands subject to seasonal inundation. B. To encourage carefully controlled development which respects and complements the natural landscape and ecology. 1. To identify, evaluate, and develop management strategies for 'dealing effectively with the city's unique natural environment while providing for reasonable expansion of the man-made environment, including recreational uses in suitable areas. 2. To encourage economic and other development in areas best suited and to establish a balance of environment and economic development. a. To conserve and utilize existing physical re- sources which represent potential economic value to the city. b. To conserve and utilize existing physical re- sources in the outlying areas. c. To make use of natural features as the framework • of a land use plan. c.l To identify areas in which controlled growth can occur in reasonable harmony with the environment. c.2 To identify areas which must be left undis- turbed. c.3 To preserve areas whose natural processes benefit man and/or protect him from hostile intervention: water storage areas for flood protection, watersheds for water supply, woods and other vegetation for climate moderation, food and wildlife production areas for wild fowl, marine fisheries, etc. c.4 To plan and recommend land use control and other measures for areas of critical planning concerns such as: wetlands, flood prone areas, wildlife areas, scenic areas, dunes and . beaches, woodlands, aquifer recharge areas, and land susceptible to soil transport. c.5 To establish a balance among natural pro- cesses through proper design and location of open space facilities, considering the eco- logical roles of wetlands, forests, and wood- lands. c.6 To administer the Massachusetts Wetlands • Protection Act. • C.7 To develop an action program for acquisition, development, and management of significant conservation/recreation areas, particularly areas of critical planning concern. Criteria by Which Projects Should be Measured: Linkage with other open areas. Potential adverse effects of development. Unique natural features. Easily accessible. Population density of the area. Historic value. Importance of quantity of natural environ- ment. Preservation of a unique or attractive vegetation grouping. Presence of significant wildlife habitats or populations. Consistencies with local, regional, and state programs and policies. Recreation and open space. Are benefits to be derived from proposal con- sistent with expenditure? • Can proposal be properly managed? 3 To encourage a wide range of land use activities by nguiding activities to appropriate site locations. 4. o control growth in outer areas having limited water, sewer, and other public service capabilities. / 5.1 To restrict development in areas unsuitable for their use. To define to the most specific degree possible areas l with fragile, natural resources where development should be minimized or prohibited, including important aquatic and terrestrial wildlife habitats. 7`2 To preserve lands having sensitive resource areas, such as steep slopes, bedrock, floodplains, wetlands, and other areas unsuitable for development as open �> space areas. V To discourage location of non-compatible land uses in established neighborhoods. • • C. To coordinate efforts between and among residents, city boards, commissions and agencies, regional, state, and federal governments. L To-ensure public access to all resources. Z. To encourage the protection and enhancement of resources which are privately-owned. 3. To initiate and coordinate efforts to protect and preserve 'resource areas that are divided by city boundaries or are shared by more than one commun- ity. 4. To coordinate, in conjunction with other municipal and state agencies, plans with owners and potential developers of significant parcels of land within and adjacent to the City of Salem to achieve voluntary agreements for conservation and recreation purposes. 5. To coordinate among planning agencies on an inter- community basis plans concerning water, sewer, solid waste, energy, and transportation systems. 6. To seek consideration for state and federal funding for conservation, open space, and recreation projects. D. To protect sensitive water resources through enforce- ment of existing laws, ordinances, and land-use regula- tions, and through the development and implementation of water and sewer improvement programs. E. To achieve a comprehensive open space system which • meets the needs and objectives of the city, the region, the state, and the adjacent communities through the cooperation of public and private agencies, and individ- ual citizens. 1. To protect and preserve open space areas for recrea- tional and environmental purposes. a. To maintain outstanding physical features and meaningful amounts of open space for the benefit of all. b. To minimize visual pollution both in the natural and man-made landscape. c. To preserve and protect promontories and scenic vistas in their natural states. d. To provide for continuity in the open space system. 2. To maximize the contribution of the overall pattern of open space while minimizing public expenditures by encouraging retention and expansion of recreation and open space use. a. To develop plans which complement the diversity of landscape in the city. b. To shape urban character through the provision of greenbelts or buffer zones to define and/or separate developed area's and/or incompatible land uses. • c. To beautify central areas and neighborhoods. • �F./i To utilize recreation and open space land as breaks in urban density and to help establish an orderly and rational pattern for future urban development. 1. To make urban park projects which are capable of enhancing other public or private investments in urban core communities high priority activities for funding and/or development. 2. To ensure that projects which are supportive of other revitalization activities, and which are part of the concerted revitalization program, shall also be high priority activities. G. To design programs to integrate historic and cultural areas into the open space and recreational experience of residents. 1. To preserve open space to maintain historic resources in their original settings. This includes the grounds surrounding buildings, waterways, canals, etc. 2. To protect scenic areas and roadways, vistas and historic areas through conservation easements, restrictions, and zoning. H. To increase the capacity of existing recreation areas by facilitating multiple use of the site and by improving management, maintenance, and public support facilities. • i. To dispose of the city's solid waste in a regional resource recovery facility which protects natural resources, uses solid waste efficiently to generate energy, and- mini- mizes the cost and financial risk to the city. 1. To continue to monitor innovations in solid waste technology to provide the city with educated alterna- tives for future solid waste disposal. 2. To increase the efficiency of existing solid waste disposal systems. J. To develop a comprehensive noise program consistent with economic policies. K. To restore, maintain, and preserve the quality of the air for the protection of public health, welfare, and property and for the protection of natural resources, enhancing their scenic and aesthetic quality. L. To establish a comprehensive energy program which stresses installation of energy- saving devices and energy conservation both for the public and private sectors. • ACTION STRATEGIES • Water A. To monitor sources of water pollution and institute remedial actions aimed toward a regional policy for combatting sources of environmental pollution. 1. To eliminate sewer overflows and to separate sewer and drainage pipes. Z. To extend the SESD sewer outfall pipe as necessary to achieve a dilution factor as an alternative to secondary sewerage treatment. 3. To adopt procedures in-the Public Works Department to ensure that road and culvert maintenance prac- tices control pollution and sedimentation of streams, water bodies, and wetlands in accordance with the Z08 Water Quality Study. B. To eliminate industrial discharge into Salem waterways through a program of sewer and drainage improvements, industrial pretreatment and prehandling programs, and the enforcement of water pollution laws. C. To seek additional state and federal funding to conduct a comprehensive drainage study to implement drainage improvements. D. To develop an annual program for the cleaning and maintenance of sewer pipes. E. To continue to seek state and federal funding to continue • the phased sewer improvements program. F. To strongly resist the requirement of secondary sewer- . age treatment on the grounds that it is not' cost- effective for a coastal community. G. To develop a comprehensive, phased water improvement program. H. To seek federal and state funding for use in implement- ing the comprehensive water improvement program. I. To develop an annual program for cleaning and main- tenance of water pipes. J. To develop and implement a comprehensive water con- servation program throughout the city. K. To assist, where possible, in private efforts to modernize water, plumbing, and in-house sewer improvements, through technical assistance and water rebate programs. L. To revise water and sewer use charges to ensure that the largest users pay a proportionate share. M. To adopt legislative provisions in local ordinances which return water receipts to the Water Department for use in implementing water improvements and maintenance. • HOUSING Comprehensive Goals \ ` • To improve the quality and availability of housing, neighborhoods, and community appearances in the City of Salem. 2. To provide a framework within which decisions affecting the quality of housing, neighborhoods, and community appearances can be evaluated. To minimize the negative impacts of housing devel- opment upon the environment and provision of city services, while utilizing improvements in housing, neigh- borhoods, and community appearances to gain benefits associated with economic development. 4. To expand public awareness'in the area of housing, to stimulate citizen involvement and participation in hous- ing and neighborhood planning, and to improve informs- ' tional services available to residents. 5. To recognize that improvements to community facilities and neighborhoods lead to improvements in housing and the economy and to stimulate the maximum feasible private investment in the community through the judi- cious use of public improvements. 6. To periodically revise objectives and policies for housing, neighborhoods, and community appearances. • • F i OBJECTIVES Housing • A. Preservation of existing housing stock through main- B. tenance, rehabilitation, and code enforcement. Adaptive reuse of structures having housing potential. C. Development of a housing data base for use for planning 4ini rposes. troduction of new housing opportunities not presently existence within various areas of the city. E. Improved coordination among city agencies having hous- ing functions. F. Use of limited state and federal funding to leverage maximum private reinvestment in housing. G. Use of rent and other subsidy programs as primary means of delivering public housing assistance. H. Housing development in harmony with objectives and policies of the environment, economy, community facili- ties, and services. Neighborhoods A. Improved traffic circulation and coordination in resi- dential neighborhoods. OImproved parking availability in densely populated resi- dential areas. OSeparation of residential neighborhoods and conflicting • land uses. D. Provision of neighborhood-oriented recreation areas. E. Reduced crime in residential neighborhoods. F. Reduction or elimination of odor, noise, and water pollution problems. G. Stabilization of all Salem neighborhoods. H! Creation of linkages between neighborhoods and the downtown. Community Appearances A. Development of comprehensive sign and facade treat- ment programs. t B. Development of city-wide tree planting programs. • C. Improved appearance of downtown and residential open space areas. D. Creation of visual access to the waterfront. Preservation of historic and architecturally significant structures and areas. . F. Maintenance of human scale and character in the devel- opment of all public improvement projects. • • POLICIES • Housing OTo review and revise land use ordinances to ensure that housing objectives and ordinances are in harmony. B. To continue existing public assistance programs which stimulate maximum private housing investment while minimizing public expenditures. To emphasize renovation of existing housing stock having rehabilitation potential, minimizing the necessity for new housing construction. To continue to encourage private housing developers to develop housing alternatives not presently available within the city. E. To evaluate the economic success of innovative housing construction projects. F. To seek state and federal funding to implement public housing assistance programs. To increase expertise of development review boards and agencies in the city to streamline the process of housing development. nlTo limit and control growth in areas of the city having �. inadequate support service systems until such time as services can be made available without undue burden to the city's financial health. I. To emphasize public housing assistance in the form of housing rebates, subsidized low interest loans, rent subsi- dies, etc., as opposed to new construction. Neighborhoods A. To develop a comprehensive program for neighborhood improvements which is adaptable for use in all city neighborhoods, which is easily implemented and under- stood, and which is in conformity with objectives for housing, environment, and economy. B. To continue and expand existing neighborhood improve- ment programs. C To develop a comprehensive policy guideline for use by decision-makers evaluating changes or improvements to • r� traffic control or on-street parking. • D To work with officials at Salem State College to allevi- ate neighborhood problems arising from conflicts of student-resident housing. To encourage mixed residential and commercial use in the downtown area. Community Appearances A. To improve the entrances to the city, upgrading their aesthetic characteristics. B. To improve maintenance of public open space areas. C. To restore and improve commercial and other facades within the downtown business district. • ACTION STRATEGIES Housing • A. To update the housing information base using assessors' property data, proposed certificate of compliance in- spections, and building permit 'statistics for use for planning purposes. B. To obtain computer software necessary to conduct hous- ing analyses. C. To conduct code enforcement inspections on a regular basis. .D. To increase trained code enforcement staff to enable staff to conduct both emergency and requested housing inspections. E. To reject rent control in Salem as being in conflict with city economic development objectives. F. To investigate the cost-effectiveness of utilizing the Certificate of Fitness Program to ensure code compli- ance throughout the city. G. To continue and expand the existing rebate and 312 rehabilitation programs for those of fixed or declining low incomes. H. To expand the housing rebate program to include the Boston Street and Mack Park neighborhood areas. I.l To recognize that the climate for housing development in Salem is excellent and to take advantage of the healthy climate for housing to reuse 'surplus* buildings, both owned by the private and public sectors, for hous- ing, commercial, and industrial use, depending upon r which use is appropriate for the structure and its loca- tion. J. To continue to seek state and federal funding for the continued implementation of Section 8, 312 and 707 housing programs. K. To reorganize and restructure the 'Salem boards and agencies which have the responsibility to review devel- opment proposals, creating minimum expertise require- ments for members and streamlining the permit process. • Neighborhoods • A. To reduce traffic congestion and speed within neigh- borhood residential areas. To restrict on-street parking throughout the city by developing incentives for property owners to provide off- street parking. C. To investigate the feasibility of enabling overnight resi- dential parking in city lots and structures, school grounds, and other open land areas in dense neighbor- hoods. • • • D. To investigate the feasibility of city acquisition of vacant lots throughout the city to be leased back to neighborhood property owners for rental as off-street parking. OTo revise land use ordinances to allow for varied parking requirements based upon type and intensity of use. F. To further investigate the feasibility and desirability of developing a comprehensive residential permit parking program for the city, with restricted areas to include the Salem Willows and Juniper Cove, Salem Common, Salem � ��State College area, and the historic districts. C G>o develop. neighborhood recreation areas in neighbor- hoods having insufficient recreational facilities within walking distance. H. To develop neighborhood outreach programs in resi- dential areas having high crime rates to develop neigh- borhood awareness and prevention of crime activities and,potentials. I. To encourage the establishment of neighborhood associ- ations within which outreach programs can be estab- lished. Community Appearances A. To develop a comprehensive program for the improve- ment of commercial and other facades, and to imple- ment this program using state and federal funding. B. To develop and implement a comprehensive sign ordi- nance which clearly designates one agency having enforcement responsibilities. C. To develop and implement a capital expenditure program for the planting of trees, shrubs, and flowers throughout the city. D. To designate one agency as having the responsibility for maintenance of open space areas in the downtown busi- ness district, and to seek private contractors, where cost-effective, to perform maintenance work. To aesthetically upgrade the entrances to the city, improving the initial impression of visitors, and setting • an aesthetic example for property owners at each entrance to the city. To create linkages between the downtown business dis- trict, adjacent neighborhoods, and outlying areas of the city through the use of public improvements. G. To investigate the feasibility of allowing tax reductions for developers wishing to undertake landscaping pro- grams for beautification purposes. • • The Salem Waterfront Land Use Acres o ot Area 1,ineeeto o Of Coastline Coastline O1 Single- Family 103.58 12.9 11,470 13.6 02 Two-Family 36.31 4.5 , 1,430 1.6 . 03 Multi-Family 15.46 1.9 1,310 1.5 04 Hotels 4.10 .5 10 Durable Manufacturing 4.16 .5 1,070 1.3 20 Nondurable Manufacturing 28.85 3.6 970 1.1 30 Transportation/Utilities 172.20 21.4 16,760 19.9 40 Retail 3Z.ZZ 4.0 3,860 4.5 50 Wholesale 17. 12 2.1 4,OZ0 4.7 60 Personal & Business Service 6.69 .8 1,000 1.2 70 Public/Quasi-Public Buildings 89.37 11. 1 9,410 11.2 80 Park & Recreation 257.68 32. 1 14,900 Z9.5 90 Vacant Land 38.00 4.7 7,960 9.5 Total 801.37 84, 160 OBJECTIVES A. The recognition and reclamation of Salem's waterfront heritage. B. The use of the successful waterfront redevelopment as a catalyst to spark interest in the revitalization of other areas in the city. C The careful guidance and control of development to ensure that land use activities located on or adjacent to the waterfront are water-related. The provision of public access to the waterfront. `E The preservation of scenic vistas and promontories over- looking the waterfront. F. The attainment and preservation of established stream and salt-water quality classifications. The preservation of existing open space, wetlands, vege- tation, and sensitive natural ecosystems which prevent erosion, flood damage, and water pollution. H. The full utilization of waterfront parks and facilities for recreational enjoyment and economic benefit. • • ACTION STRATEGIES �To develop a Shoreland Protection Zone which overlays existing zoning and which sets performance zoning for setbacks, water-related uses, and structures which pre- serve vistas and stabilizes vegetation along the shoreline and which enhances the waterfront by encouraging orien- tation of structures and uses to the water. To obtain conservation easements and restrictions, where necessary, on private properties to maintain vistas and promontories, to preserve wildlife refuges, and to provide access to the waterfront. c To encourage the private landscaping of waterfront activities which are aesthetically unpleasing from the water or other waterfront properties. D. To acquire, where necessary, strategic properties vital to the successful implementation of the waterfront re- vitalization plan. E. To seek additional sites for public landings which have space for public parking and support facilities and to encourage their development by private investors. F. To create additional "special anchorage areas" in approp- riate locations. G. To stimulate private waterfront renewal and reinvest- ment through creative disposition and development of strategic publicly-owned waterfront properties. 1. To develop background information, regulations, and • limits as a developer's package for the South River, North River, Derby Street area, Bridge Street. area, and Collins Cove. 2. To request proposals from private developers to de- termine the potentials for private development of these properties. H. To continue and increase efforts to obtain funding for dredging of all types. I. To investigate the feasibility of streamlining the permit process for waterfront developments, while maintaining the proper control over projects. J. To control vandalism along the waterfront, particularly in vacant structures. K. To locate a suitable source of sand to replenish Salem beach areas. L. To develop and equip a joint police, fire and harbor team to be available to the Harbor Master to patrol Salem waterways. MINUTES OF THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD DECEMBER 3 , 1981 , THIRD FLOOR, CITY HALL ANNEX, ONE SALEM GREEN, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS' ' MEMBERS PRESENT: Walter Power , Abby Burns , Edward Stevenson, James Fox, David Goodof , Donald Hunt MEMBERS ABSENT: Normand Houle , William Wheaton Planning Board Chairman Walter Power opened the meeting at 7 : 45 P .M. and turned the meeting over to City Planner Greg Senko . Mr . Senko outlined the process the Board will follow in the rezoning effort. We will go through the neighborhoods , understanding the zoning as it exists today in those 'neighborhoods , and under- standing the political overlays in the neighborhoods and analyze if that makes sense. The Planning Department will be interviewing • people in the City concerning these neighborhoods . This way the Board can get the feel of the City first and then proceed to deal with the nitty gritty of the language. Mr. Power said people will also be working with Community Development and the City Council in January so that they will be aware of what is going on as the Planning Board is going through it . The meeting was turned over to Assistant City Planner Robin Campbell who handed out copies of the Comprehensive Goals sheets from the Master Plan. The Planning Board reviewed each page and circled agreed objectives . NEIGHBORHOOD ONE : City Engineer Anthony Fletcher said there is already eavy use of the water system and the City cannot take much more density in Neighborhood 1 . Sewer is okay except for Winter Island. Mr . Fletcher expressed doubts about the septic systems at Winter Island. Walter Power felt Winter Island should be zoned so that the Winter Island Commission could develope it . A marina zone was proposed for the whole area. Another proposal was that the marina zone might have two classes ; heavy and light . Heavy would be commercial fishing or off=shore support companies for off=shore drilling. It was suggested that support facilities like restaurants be zoned into what is presently the highway business zone at Salem Willows . SALEM PLANNING BOARD DECEMBER 3 , 1981 Page 2 The question arose as to what would happen to the residential area. Abby Burns felt the R-1 should be strengthened at the Willows to protect it from illegal apartments . Parking in that area is very bad . The health hospital site is presently zoned R-1 . There is a lot of R-C land there and places where the City could develope housing. Walter Power suggested that the City could use good quality housing and if this land is developed for housing, the City would still have the zone line. Mr . Senko mentioned that one of the things we are trying to do is develope the South River and have some activity that would bring in higher income people to revitalize the downtown. Mr . Senko said that at the next meeting the Planning Department will make definite suggestions to the Board on the sections discussed. We will consider rezoning Winter Island and consider limits to be placed on SESD. Also , for the next meeting ; please review everything you have on the Bridge Street and Section 3 area. A motion was made to adjourn, and having passed unanimously, the meeting adjourned at 10 : 30 P.M. • Respectfully submitted, Jacquelyn A. Rybicki Clerk