1984-PLANNING BOARD 9,8� / - �,�bl
4 r
` ycaxwr
of "SFSLCIYC, ffltSSSFICC4LtslEttS
s �
'• � � �,�1ttxaTittg �IIttr�
v��INpB ` Om �$ttlera OrEPtt
AGENDA--January 5, 1984
1. Form A--20 Varney Street
2. Aide Report
3. Tedesco Pond
4. Fafard PUD
5. Pickman Park Review
6. Stasinos, Highland Avenue
7. Board of Appeal agenda
8. Approval of Minutes--Nov. 17; Dec. 1; Dec. 19
G �
E (1li#g of 'Salem, C��assac4use##s
• a w �` o Pl221111i1tg PDaTI
Ont SaIrm (8rrrn
MINUTES OF MEETING
January 5. 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor
conference room on Thursday, January 5, 1984. Present were
Walter Power, Normand Houle , Kenneth May, Abby Burns , and
Donald Hunt. Edward Stevenson, David Goodof , and William Cass
were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
FORM A--20 VARNEY STREET
In order to upgrade their neighborhood, residents of Varney Street
wish to add additional parcels of land to their property. The
parcel in question is currently owned by the City and is to be
conveyed to Mr. and Mrs . Roger Hatt, who were present to discuss
the petition. The Council, City Solicitor, and Mayor have ap-
proved the conveyance and the ultimate result of the sale will
give equal shares of the parcel to the Hatts and their neighbors .
It was understood that the Hatts and their neighbors will have
•. to come in again for an additional approval not required decision
in the future .
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle , the
Form A was endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law
not required. . It was so voted, five in favor, none opposed.
TEDESCO POND
Mr. Carl Gardner of Maine Post and Beam was present to give the Board
an overview of their Form B proposal for the Tedesco Pond area.
Mr . Gardner noted he and his company are willing to accomodate
all City cepartments and have already taken into consideration the
requests of the Fire Department and the City Engineer. Their plan
now shows twenty detached units which conform to the zoning of the
area. They meet sideyard requirements , etc. and require no variance
from the Board of Appeal. They would like the Planning Board' s
input into the development.
Walter Power noted the Planning Board would like to see additional
site amenities , i. e . tennis courts, etc. The jogging path and
bridge over the pond which were originally proposed are also de-
sirable . Mr. Gardner replied they plan to do a simpler version of
the bridge and still intend to install the nesting island in the
pond which will serve as additional filtration to the pond. They
will be meeting with the Conservation Commission next week as well
Minutes of Meeting--January 5, 1984 Page 2
• in order to ascertain their requirements. Walter Power asked if
they plan to adhere to the original EIR prepared by Sea Plantations
and Mr. Gardner replied in the affirmative .
Walter Power asked about the turnaround requirements and Mr. Gardner
replied they will follow the requirements of the Fire Department.
Mr. Power noted that the garages included in the original plan have
been eliminated and Mr. Gardner replied in the affirmative .
Donald Hunt asked that the developer re-think the units located un-
der the embankment on the property. Following some discussion, it
was generally agreed that the previous plan was much more desirable .
Mr. Gardner was in total agreement, but noted that plan was not
allowed under Board of Appeal ruling. They feel this plan will
be "more palatable" to the neighborhood and will not impede their
views of the pond--single-family detached housing seems to be the
desire of the neighborhood.
Walter Power asked what the total square footage of the lots would
be and Mr. Gardner replied each lot would be in the range of 4500
to 7000 square feet plus common land. Walter Power asked if they
plan to include the same buffer zone between the present residential
area and the new deveboment and Mr. Gardner replied in the affirma-
tive . They will erect the fence included in the original plan as
well. Walter Power stated that for lasting value , the development
should reserve some land for tennis court use . Mr. Gardner replied
• that this was considered, but in discussing the issue , it was de-
cided this was not the best use of the land. Mr. Gardner added
they intend to meet with the neighbors prior to the public hearing
on the definitive- lan.
Councillor Nutting expressed disappointment in the plan as presented.
While understanding the very fine reputation of the developer, he
feels this is not the best possible use of this land. He expressed
concern over snow removal, rubbish removal, lighting, etc. Mr.
Gardner replied that the company has built many types of homes on
varying size lots. They are frustrated in their attempt to come
up with a quality plan that also adheres to the desires of the neigh-
bors and the Board of Appeal. They are trying to make reasonable
use of the land and will do what they can within the guidelines of
the Zoning Ordinance .
Walter Power felt the Board would have something more to say about
the number of units and the loss of open space with this plan.
FAFARD--PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
Attorney John Serafini updated the Board on the current status of
the Planned Unit Development. A letter from the Fire Department is
anticipated outlining their thoughts as to the Elan and all con-
cerns of the Fire Department havL5 been met. ThBy also
Minutes of Meeting--January 5, 1984 Page 3
• will submit additional traffic information within the next ten
days to two weeks, together with other pertinent information.
They have also submitted a Subdivision Plan for the construction
of Traders Way. In order to facilitate the grant money associated
with the construction of this road, they would like to hold a pub-
lic hearing on the road as soon as possible . Following some dis-
cussion, a date of February 2 , 1984 was selected. Further, an
application for a Wetlands Special Permit will be forthcoming and
a February 16 , 1984 public hearing date was set up.
Donald Hunt questioned the possiblity of a marketing study being
a condition of the Special Permit (PUD) . Mr. Serafini replied
they will explore the area of commercial vs . industrial further.
Donald Hunt asked if Fafard had met with Consolidated as yet re-
garding the access road behind Bed and Bath. Mr . Serafini replied
he has tried to do this and solicited the Board's assistance in
this regard. The Board will send a letter to the local affiliate
of Consolidated suggesting some discussion take place (attached
hereto) .
Ken May suggested that a meeting with members of the downtown
business community might be helpful and the Board concurred. He
also suggested some sort of "trade-off" of industrial vs , commercial
space might be possible . The fact that the Board will have site
review over each individual space will be helpful. He also raised
• the issue of traffic on Marlborough Road and Mr. Serafini stated
information regarding this will be included in the traffic informa-
tion which is forthcoming.
Walter Power emphasized Mr. May's concern for the overall impact
of the commercial development on the downtown. Mr. Serafini
replied that the type of commercial development they anticipate
would not go into the downtown area. Normand Houle felt strongly
that the Board cannot mandate the type of development an owner
can do to his own land. We can only make sure what is proposed is
well-planned. He felt there was a fine line here . Walter Power
felt a meeting with the downtown merchants could be helpful, how-
ever. Charles Frederiksen, Planning Board Aide , stated he had met
with Chamber of Commerce dircetor Joan Gormalley and she had no
specific opposition to the proposal. It was felt Ms . Gormalley
should be invited to a Board meeting to discuss this matter further.
Further conditions for the Special Permit were discussedt A con-
dition regarding the size of stores was discussed and Mr. McNeil
of Fafard concurred, adding they plan a restaurant and a few satel-
lite stores of approximately 2 ,000 square feet each. The remaining
four stores will be in the 25,000 to 40 ,000 square foot range .
Site plan approval for each site (tenant) will be another condition.
Mr. McNeil concurred, stating perhaps it should be for each building.
Square foot use , parking lay-outs, pedestrian circulation patterns ,
• location of buildings in relation to remaining PUD buildings will
all be considered.
Overall conceptual landscaping approval will be required.
Minutes of Meeting--January 5, 1984 Page 4
• A phased development of space as tenants are anticipated will be
required to aboid the disturbance of land and the stockpiling
of materials. The Conservation Commission is addressing this is-
sue as well.
A rear access from First Street to Hawthorne Square is to be con-
structed at the developer' s expense . The possiblity of requiring
the developer to indemnify the City to finish the road was dis-
cussed as well, but it is hoped some negotiated settlement of this
issue can be accomplished. Mr. Serafini added that there would
be no incentive to negotiate if the 'developer was required to in-
demnify. Mr. Power stated the Board will do their best.
Regarding the requirement of a ratio of industrial vs. commercial
space , Ken May suggested that a Certificate of Occupancy be issued
on a staged basis for buildings being built as a trade off of
square footage . Mr. McNeil felt this would be difficult and could
jeopardize negotiations with potential tenants. Mr. Serafini felt
some sort of compromise could be reached in this area. It was
suggested that the site plan approval could be conditioned upon
a marketing study. This will be considered further.
Councillr Nutting of Ward 7 asked that the Board request that water-
saving devices be installed in all buildings and residences. Mr.
McNeil replied they do this as a matter of course .
PICKMAN PARK REVIEW
Attorney Peter Beatrice , Mr. Paul DiBiase , Mr. John Emerson of
Hayes Engineering and Mr. Carl Ballsley of Hayes Engineering were
present to discuss this proposal.
Mr. Emerson outlined the proposal which was previously approved
by the Planning Board in 1978. Three-hundred four units are
planned which will be built to go with the contours of the land.
Planning of the devlopment went on over a two-year period. Traffic
studies were done and school impact was studied. Upon approval,
the matter was taken to court and subsequently the decision was
found in favor of the developer. Construction was not begun due
to adverse financial conditions. The Planning Board and Conserva-
tion Commission have put more than a sufficient amount of restric-
tions to protect the City; i. e . a 75' buffer zone was required,
building restrictions were placed upon the developer, no common
gardents will be allowed, and color and design restrictions were
placed on the residential units . It was noted the tax base for
the City will be broadened and the plan under review tonight is
exactly the same as what was approved previously and the Environ-
mental Impact Statement has been updated to reflect the latest
conditions.
Minutes of Meeting--January 5, 1984 Page 5
• Mr. Emerson further stated that every effort was made to protect
the Conservation Area. Two linkages have been made from the de-
At velopment to the City roads. The third phase of the project, which
is closest to the Conservation Area was designed to have minimal
impact on the area and to provide a smooth transition. It has
lower density. The total density is 11,700 square feet per unit
which is well within the Zoning Ordinance . The buildings were
designed to be "non-agressive"=-earth tone colors , height restric-
tions, etc. The architecture is contemporary, but was designed
W harmonize with Salem' s architecture .
Mr. Emerson outlined the 34 acres of land which were donated to
the City for conservation land. It was noted this land was used
to leverage further land acquisition for the Conservation Area.
The cost of the homes will be in the $70,000 range and the con-
struction will be done in three phases of two years per phase .
Councillor Nutting asked that construction guarantees the City would
have and Mr. Beatrice replied he felt it was unfair to link this
project with the problems encountered at Witchcraft Heights. It
was further noted that the Zoning Ordinance now provides for a Clerk
of the Works.
Councillr Nutting raised the possiblity of an exit/egress out to
Jefferson Avenue and Mr. Beatrice replied the plans were done to
_ the specifications of the Police , Fire Department, Engineering
Department, etc, but he will look into this if the Board wishes .
Ken May asked if this project complies with current Subdivision
Regulations and Mr. Beatrice replied in the affirmative . Mr.May
felt that any regulations which were waived should be specifically
waived again.
Mrs. Olbrych of Loring Avenue stated that the limits addressed re-
garding traffic were based on the traffice studies done several
years ago. She questioned the impact of this development on traf-
fice in light of recent development in the Loring Hills area.
She further raised the impact of the development on the school sys-
tem in light of the closing of Horace Mann South and she also
questioned the ability of Mr. DiBiase to financially complete
the project. They do not want something that is half-done.
Mr. DeGrandpre of Auburn Road reiterated these concerns. Walter
Power assured the residents that all these areas will be studied
prior to issuance of the approved Subdivision plan.
STASINOS--HIGHLAND AVENUE
Attorney George Vallis and Mr. Chris Stasinos were present to
discuss a proposal to build a commercial/residential development
on Highland Avenue next to Rich' s. Their proposal would require
• a variance from Board of Appeal as it crosses three zoning lines--
B-2, R-3 , and R-C. They plan to construct executive condominiums
and already have interested tenants. Mr. Vallis had submitted a
Minutes of Meeting--January 5, 1984 Page 6
• Form B application in October and has not received any word from
the Planning Board since . Walter Power replied that the Board
had not been consulted since that time . Mr. Vallis replied that
his client could not afford to prepare final plans only to have them
rejected. They plan 216 condominium units under cluster zoning
and then do commercial development as well. He would like to enter
into some dialogue with the Board in order to come up with an ac-
ceptable plan which can be submitted to the Board of Appeal in
February.
Mr, Vallis further presented a Form A application for the Board's
consideration to begin the commercial phase of the development.
Walter Power reiterated his concern for slowing down and working
with the Planning Board. He would strongly suggest they withdraw
the Form A and set up a meeting with the Board and the Planning
Department to discuss this proposal in more depth. Mr. Vallis
agreed to withdraw the Form A.
The Board was in general agreement that the overriding issue was
whether we wanted the area zoned residential. It was noted that
the zoning package planned for presentation to the City Council
aones that area industrial. Mr. Vallis noted that they already
have potential tenants for the offic condos. Mr. Vallis further
stated that there is a potential revenue loss of $450,000.
Councillor O 'Leary, Ward Four councillor, raised the issue of the
•_ clearing and filling of the land and Mr. Vallis noted that the
former owner of the property was responsible for the violations
and they plan no further work on the property until all areas have
been addressed. . They plan to meet with the Conservation Commission
next week and have hired a consultant to address drainage issues.
Mr. Stasinos stated his dompany has excellent references and are
fast-moving builders.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns , the
petitioner was allowed to withdraw the Form A and Form C without
prejudice . It was so voted.
A meeting will be set up with the Planning Department to consider
this proposal further and the Board will consider the matter further
at our next meeting.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn.
Having passed unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at
10,50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
• Dale E . Yale
Clerk
X
(I�it t�f Sr1leiii, r1
�ttssuch�z�E#ts
• 3 �� J� Iattnittg Puarb
(Ot1P 12vatrin (breett
January 18 , 1984
Johnstown Properties , Inc .
89 State Street, Fifth Floor
Boston, MA . 02109
Rii : Proposed Planed Unit Development abutting Hawthorne Square/
Consolidated Capital property.
Gentlemen:
As you are aware , the Salem Planning Board is currently in the
process of considering a Planned Unit Development project in the
area which abuts the Hawthorne Square Shopping Center. The Planning
Board and Planning Department of the City have been involved in
the development of this proposal for several years .
In the development of this proposal, one of the areas the Plan-
ning Board felt was crucial to improved traffic flow and access/
egress to both Hawthorne Square and the new proposed development
is an additional access road from behind the present Bed and Bath
store to the proposed extension of First Street. This would provide
improved circulation within the two shopping areas , as well as
taking traffic off of Highland Avenue and on to First Street.
The Fafard Companies, developers of this new proposed Planned
Unit Development, have indicated their willingness to construct
this access at their expense to the Planning Board's specifications .
However, this would involve crossing land which is owned by Consol-
idated Capital Properties . The Board would, therefore , be interested
in entering into some meaningful discussion with a representative
of Consolidated to reach an equitable solution to this situation.
The Board feels that this access would be beneficial to Hawthorne
Square and, in light of the fact the road would be constructed at
no cost to Consolidated, would be a desirable agreement in which
to enter.
The Planning Board would like to arrange a meeting with repre-
sentatives of Consolidated, the Fafard Companies , and ourselves
to try to negotiate a mutually beneficial agreement. I would be
pleased to hear from you at your earliest convenience to arrange
a meeting. Please feel free to contact me at 683-1299 or contact
Mr. Charles Frederiksen, Planning Board Aide , at 744-4580.
• I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely yours ,
Walter B . Power, III
Chairman
1
(fitu of 'S71P111, ' assac4usetts
• a
P(atutittg PDarl
(Dur 19alrm (6frett
MINUTES OF MEETING
January 19, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor con-
ference room, on Thursday, January 19, 1984 . Present were Walter
Power, Kenneth May, Normand Houle , Donald Hunt, Abby Burns , Edward
Stevenson, and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen. David Goodof
and William Cass were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 735 p.m.
FORM A--MACKEY, Riverbank Road
This represents a remaining parcel of land left after land taking
by the City for conservation purposes. The purpose of the Form A
is to clarify the parcel for mortgage or sale purposes . There is
not 100' of frontage shown on a public way; however, because this
is not technically a subdivision, becausk the plan does'. not .divide an A
exist ng .tr=t::of land. ..:The. lot -eitists. .by:,no'.action-of the owner.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Houle , the Form
A was endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not re-
quired. It was so voted, six in favor, none opposed.
FORM A--BURNHAM, CABOT FARM
This Form A involves the splitting off of a parcel which is part
of the Lutts property. In the past the Planning Board has al-
lowed parcels to be split off on the basis of frontage on a way
in existence before the Subdivision Control Law was in effect. This
is not to say, however, that the Board is comfortable with this
decision; particularly in establishing a precedence for the future .
Following several minutes of discussion, it was agreed the Planning
Board would inspect the property prior to making a decision. Mr.
Burnham formally requested an extension which. will be forwarded to
the City Clerk.
Due to the large number of people interested in the public hearing
regarding Pickman Park , the Board adjourned to Old Town Hall to ac-
comodate the large group. Signs were posted to this effect and
both the custodian and the security guard were directed to inform
any interested parties of this change .
PUBLIC HEARING--PICKMAN PARK
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing and
explained the Planning Board' s procedure in dealing with this type
of hearing. He then introduced Mr. Peter Beatrice , 44 School Street,
Boston, attorney for the developer, to make his presentation.
Minutes of Meeting--January 19, 1984 Page 2
Mr. Beatrice stated this is a re-submittal of a subdivision plan
• that was originally filed in 1975 and approved in 1978. It is ex-
actly the same plan that was approved by the Planning Board in 1978.
Originally, Mr. DiBiase filed a plan for 350-400 single family homes .
The neighbors strenuously objected at that time . Mr. DiBiase then
attempted to construct garden-type of apartments which were also
opposed by the neighbors. As a result, in 1976, then came up with
a new type of plan using the cluster concept with quadriplexes and
duplexes in clusters using the natural contours of the land. This
plan preserves the open space and took 1-12 years to negotiate.
During these negotiations neighborhood concerns were considered
and many changes were requested by the Planning Board and by the
time the plan was approved in 1978, there were 55-60 restrictions
placed on the development to protect the neighborhood. Meetings
with the Conservation Commission produced forty additional restric-
tions , making a total of 100 restrictions on the devebpment. Fol-
lowing approval, an appeal was made of the decision and :the court
decided in favor of the developer.
The development will be built in three phases of 100 units each.
The first phase will be completed before the second phase is be-
gun. A total of 34.9. acres of land was deeded to the Conservation
Commission to provide more open space. This land was used to lever-
age acquisition of additional conservation land. A parking lot will
b 'built at the developer's expense for users of the Conservation
• Area. Restrictions were placed by the court to impede erosion
minimize dust, protect the slopes , etc. It was found that there
would be minimal adverse effect by increased traffic on air quality
and noise intrusion would be within acceptable limits. The heights
of the buildings will be at a maximum of 35' (22 stories) and
will occupy 11,723 square feet per dwelling unit. (3500 sq. ft are
required per zoning of the area). There will be minimal impact on
the adjacent area--a 75' buffer zone with no-build restrictions
has been mandated by the Planning Board. Further building materials
will be used which will not contrast dramatically with the adjacent
homes. A number of measures have been taken to protect the views
of the neighbors. Roads were designed to minimum width and reduced
pavement to discourage speeding. Roads and parking areas occupy
20% of the locus , 64% would be unaffected, 1% would be re-graded
and restored. The development was found to be in harmony with the
Master Plan.
The units will consist of one or two-bedroom units. Surface water
in the area will not affect the public water supply and the water
system was found to be adequate for the area. An association will
handle plowing, trash pickup and landscaping and this will run with
the deed and a Clerk of the Works hired by the Planning Board will
oversee the project.
Mr. John Emerson, an architect, has been involved with the project
for ten years. Mr. Emerson gave a slide presentation showing the
conservation area and emphasized the housing was designed to pre-
serve as much open space as possible. Mr. John Minton gave a slide
presentation of the architectural aspects of the development and
noted the housing becomes gradually less dense as it goes towards
the conservation area. He showed a typical floor plan and high-
lighted many features of the buildings.
Minutes of Meeting--January 19, 1984 Page 3
• Mr. Peter Ogren of Hayes Engineering stated the plan is exactly
the same as previously approved with updated figures for the En-
vironmental Impact Statement. No school impact was found and
the increase in traffic, on Loring Avenue was still within acceptable
limits.
The City Engineer concurs with the plan; the Conservation Commission
has extended the Order of Conditions; the Board of Health wishes
additional information; and the Building Inspector concurs. ,
Mr. George Ahmed, a real estate appraiser, gave a definition of a
"neighborhood" and felt the addition of this development would
have minimal impact on the real estate values of the area and
noted it would broaden the tax base for the City.
Chairman Walter Power asked if Mr. Beatrice would consider re-
questing an extension and, upon discussion with Mr. DiBiase , it
was agreed to extend until March 15, 1984.
A letter from City Council President Jean-Marie Rochna was read
for the record. She wishes to be recorded as opposed to the
project.
Mr. Perry of Patton Road expressed concern over the increase in
traffic and Walter Power explained the project was designed to
• minimize the impact of traffic , particularly in Phase 3 , which
is closest to the conservation area. Mr. Power further asked the
residents to keep in mind that the Board must work with the fact
that the area is zoned R-3, which would allow many more units and
traffic.
Councillor John Nutting, Ward 7 City Councillor, spoke in opposi-
tion to the plan. He noted the water problems and potential school
problems associated with approving this project. He added the
sewer in the area is not the best. He cited the Master Plan regard-
ing the antiquated water pipes and noted that eventually the resi-
dents of the new development will want City services for their tax
money. Regarding controlled growth, the Councillor felt that there
were not enough points in the area of schools and fire protection
for the project to qualify. Mr. Power stated the Board will look
into this.
Former City Councillor James Fleming, attorney of record for the
residents who appealed the original decision in 1977 , stated that
policemen questioned at the time felt the traffic situation would be "'te ibii "'
Carl Petersen of the School Committee stated that Horace Mann � �i
out
and Horace Mann North could handle the increase in school children;
however, Horace Mann South has been taken over by Salem State College
since that time. A Real Estate appraiser at the time stated the
effects of construction of this type of project would be "astronomical"
on the values of the present homes. The response time from the
Loring Avenue Fire Station is 4 - 5 minutes , with the possibility
of that Fire Station being closed. Mr. Fleming further raised the
Minutes of Meeting--January 19, 1984 Page 4
• possiblity of the completed units not being sold and being rented
to college students.
Dorothy Pelli of 84 Moffatt Road asked what the selling price of
the units will be and Mr. Beatrice stated they would sell for the
mid to high $70' s.
Phyllis Olbrych of Patton Road. appreciated the work of the Planning
Board and Mr. Beatrice . However, the neighborhood would like more
input into the proposal. They would like single-family homes and
want the neighborhood to remain single-family. She further disputed
Mr. Ahmed' s figures. She asked if the plan complies with the updated
Master Plan and Walter Power replied the Board will look into this.
She feels 900 additional cars will have a great deal of impact.
She further raised the issue of the "trip light" at Pickman Road
and what effect the increased traffic will have on this. They
want the open space preserved and would like the developer to
consider cluster single family, with a maximum of 150 dwellings.
She is concerned with lack of adequate schools and also raised the
issue of the water system. Walter Power noted the City Engineer
has stated the plan can be handled by present services in the area.
Mr. Vega of Jefferson Avenue presented a petition with eighty sig-
natures expressing concern over water and sewer problems .
Mr. Joseph O 'Keefe , 28. Surrey Road, questioned the legality of the
• hearing being moved without being advertised. He also expressed
concern over the amount of blasting that will take place when con-
struction begins. Walter Power stated that blasting will be kept
to a minimum and Mr. Ogren added that they will comply with all
regulations and will do everything possible to minimize the problem.
Mrs. Cronin of Sumner Road expressed concern over the traffic. Mr.
Power explained the development was designed this way to minimize
.impact of traffic on the neighborhood.
Mr. Ron Leary of 10 Marion Road felt impact on the school system
will be "unbelievable. "
Councillor-at-Large Joseph Centorino asked that the Planning Board
take alot of time to consider all the issues raised this evening.
Lois Worth of Marion Road expressed concern over the school issue .
Mr. Carl Peterson, vice-chairman of the School Committee , stated
the Planing Board should further analyze the situation in that
area of the City, as the City has no school building of its own
in that area. Horace Mann North is just about filled and there
is a problem now with no new development in the area.
Mayor Anthony Salvo wished to be recorded as opposed to the proposal
unless serious modifications can be made .
AMr. Eric DeGrandpre of Auburn Road spoke in opposition to the pro-
posal. Hec N els the developer has underestimated the number of
cars for the project; therefore underestimating the impact of
traffic. He questioned if the phasing of buildings applied to
sales or construction only and Mr. Beatrice replied it applied to
Minutes of Meeting--January 19, 1984 Page 5
• construction only. Mr. DeGranpre likes the idea of single-family
cluster homes. Mr. Beatrice stated that single-family homes would
mean a new. school, more blasting, more traffic, no conservation
land, etc. , and it was unfair and unjust to ask the developer to
modify this plan at thig point. The blasting will be kept to a
minimum as they will build to the contours of the land.
Mr. Peter DeGrandpre of Auburn Road stated they wish a better
dialogue between the Planning Board, the developer, and the neigh-
bors. Perhaps some compromise will be reached. Schools must be
looked at with all developments in Ward Seven being considered.
Walter Power stated he will be happy to host any type of meeting
between the developer, the Board and the neighbors. , ,;If the neigh-
bors could choose a few representatives, perhaps this would be
more workable. He added, however, the Planning Board must keep
in mind that under the law the developer can do a great deal more
than what is being proposed here with his own land.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Abby Burns, the re-
quest of the developer to extend was approved. It was so voted,
six in favor, none opposed.
Chairman Walter Power declared the public hearing closed and upon
motion made and seconded, the meeting was adjourned at 11:08 p.m. .
• Re ectfully submitted,
Dale E . Yale
Clerk
•
n
n �0 (1Zi#g pf �leiu, Cttssttcl�ixse##s
• aj a
Wnr Onlem (Breen
MINUTES OF MEETING
January 25, 1984
A special meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Wed-
nesday, January 25, 1984, in the Engineering Department , One Salem
Green, second floor. Present were David Goodof , Normand Houle ,
Edward Stevenson, Kenneth May, William Cass , Walter Power, and
Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen. Donald Hunt and Abby
Burns were absent.
Clhairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7040 p.m.
STASINOS--HIGHLAND AVENUE
Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen pointed out the parcel in
question on a map prepared for the meeting. The parcel crosses
three zoning lines and would, therefore , need a variance for the
proposed development which would include commercial and residen-
tial uses . Mr. Frederiksen also presented the Board with pictures
of the area and photographs of another project the developer has
• built. He noted from the photos of the site that the area has been
filled and re-graded in the past.
Walter Power noted that the question is what our response will be
to the Board of Appeal hearing on this proposal scheduled for
February 8. We had previously wished this area to be reserved
for industrial development.
Attorney George Vallis showed an a'rtist' s rendering of the proposal.
He noted his client has had much' success with similar projects
in Stoneham and in Lynn. Two-hundred sixteen units of residential
housing are proposed and he noted this is less than what is allowed
under R-3. He further noted he plans to meet with the abuttors to
discuss any areas of concern they may have . He has met with the
Conservation Commission to present preliminary plans and a consul-
tant has been engaged to study the drainage issues of the site .
The commercial area will consist of professional office condomin-
iums and will be completely separate from the residential portion
of the development. This type of professional office use will not
compete with Rich' s oe the Fafard proposal. He plans to offer the
residential units at a price range of the mid 50' s to low 90' s.
He raised the issue of spot zoning if the parcel was re-zoned in-
dustrial.
Walter Power raised , the issue of insufficient .city services on
• Ehg site and Mr. Vallis felt this would be true if there was an
Minutes of Meeting--January 25, 1984 Page 2
industrial complex on the site as well. He is willing to present
• studies as to the best use of the site if the Planning Board will
give conditional support to the proposal to the Board of Appeal.
This study will include the school issue as well.
Ken May stated that the basic question is whether the Board is willing
to change the original intended use of this area. Mr. Vallis felt
the City had adequate industrial land available elsewhere in the City.
David Goodof stated that re-zoning Highland Avenue has been under
discussion by the Board for a long time .
Walter Power added that the main function of the Planning Board is
to make long-range plans. Further, this parcel likely does not
receive adequate points under controlled growth.
Mr. Vallis replied he will bring in outside experts to study the
feasibility of this proposal. He is not asking for a favorable
decision tonight, but will withdraw from the Board of Appeal until
further studies can be done . He added the owners of the land should
be considered. Further, an increase of $400 ,000 per year in taxes
could be expected upon completion of this development.
Following further discussion,. Mr. Vallis agreed to withdraw from
the Board of Appeal pending further information to the Planning
Board. It was the consensus of the Board that this was a good
plan.
• PICKMAN PARK
Based on the input of the public hearing, Chairman Walter Power
felt the discussion this evening should be a list of areas
where further information is needed in order to make a decision.
The first area he raised was the flooding problems on Jefferson
Avenue . The Pickman Park project is unrelated to this area, but
further research is needed with the City Engineer. The Board will
need information as to the impact of Pickman Park on this , if any,
and how the situation will be corrected. The developer will bring
in a 12" line from the end of the new sewer; the City can go for
18" and pay the difference . This whole situation should be inves-
tigated in light of other developments as well.
The traffic issue regarding Loring Avenue and Jefferson Avenue
plus the opening of additional roads in the development should be
studied further.
The school issue must be addressed. Ken May felt that a letter
describing the overall development of the City, .including the
updated figures prepared by Charles Frederiksen (attached hereto)
should be drafted. A statement is needed as to the overall pic-
ture of the City and impact of development on schools from the
School Committee .
• The issue of Pickman Road being too narrow was discussed. It
was noted there seemed to be an abuse of parking on the road and
this should be addressed. The opening up of other roads in the subdiv-
ision was also discussed and it was felt this would have an adverse impact.
The issue of blasting will be reviewed again as well.
r.
Minutes of Meeting--January 25, 1984 Page 3
• Phyllis Ohlbrych and Marie Whitmore raised the issue of schools ,
as well. Mrs. Ohlbrych felt birth rate statistices should be
considered and Mrs. Whitmore noted the City does not own any
school buildings in Ward Seven.
An updated controlled growth map will be prepared to aid the Board
in making their decisions.
Attorney Peter Beatrice asked the Bca rd and neighbors present to
keep in mind that the plan was developed over two years of serious.
negotiations. All factorssknown at the time were taken into consideration.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Normand Houle , the
Minutes of November 17, 1983 , were approved. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of David Goodof, the
Minutes of December 1, 1983; were approved as amended. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Normand Houle , the
Minutes of January 5, 1984, were approved. It was so voted.
There being no further business, the meeting was declared adjourned
at 9735 P.M.
• . IRspectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yal
Clerk
C
PLANNING DEPARTMENT'
- • .q.C.p�a�L,
ONE SALEM ALEµGREEN(/ 01970
CITY PLAN �+ v
(617)144-4580
7Sy.
p�LLb�T.�
January 20, 1984
IMPACT ON SCHOOL POPULATION FROM PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: 1981-1969
School Year Project Proposed No. Units Bedroom Mix No. Children
IBR 2BR 3BR
1981-1982 TOTAL 71 14 51 6 29.38
Stern II 12 - 6 6
Central Place 34 12 22 -
Pickering School 25 2 23 -
1982-1983 TOTAL 7l 14 51 6 21.58
Heritage Plaza West 43 15 28
Gideon Tucker 14 2 12
1983-1984 TOTAL
57 17 40 - 11.47
Vista Avenue 15 - 5 10
Verdon Street 17 . - 5 17
32 - 32 -
ZiefCollins Cove ieff I 28 8 20 -
5-68
Phillips School 17 17 = -
- 9
*Rockdale Avenue 9 22.08
*Pickman Park I 144 96 48
Bowditch School 28 4 24
*Fafard Residential I 140 6 134 - 32_82
-
*Maine Post & Beam 20 20 - 4:80_ 2S -32_50
Country Club Estates I 25
1984-1985 TOTAL . 475 131 288 56 156.33
56 28 28 - ]79-55
*Dickman Park II
*Fafard Residential IZ 140 6 134 -
22 6 16 -
Zieff II 25 _ _ 25
Country Club Estates IZ
1985-1986 TOTAL 243 . 40- 178 25*Pickman Park IIZ 104 52 52 -14
0 6 134 -*Fafard Residential III 25 - _ 25Country Club Estates III�6-1987 TOTAL269 58 186 25
1987-1989 *Fafard Residential Completion
280 10 270 - 65-90
NOTE: *Projects Pending Approval by the Planning Board.
The number of school children per household is basedon Tufts University
averages for one, two, and three bedroom units as
1 Bedroom Unit = .11 Children
2 Bedroom Unit = .24 Children
3 Bedroom Unit - 1.3 Children
itV o ttterrt, Httss�zcl��tsetts
• 6 i
'!h'IEC1TkIiti$ �IIMCL�
a
9
Otte Sate tt Green
AGENDA--FEBRUARY 2, 1984
1. Form A--Burnham--Cabot Farm
2. Form A--John Hayes--Fairmount Road/Nursery Street
3. Form A--Pyburn--Rockdale Avenue (Marlborough Road area)
4. Public Hearing--Pickman Park Wetlands Special Permit
5. Public Hearing--Subdivision of Traders' Way
6. Board of Appeal agenda
x
7. Approval of Minutes--January 19, 25
• B. Old/New Business
�'CON
0h` 11 tv of !$Utem, fflazoar4uset#s
�J
9
MINUTES OF MEETING
February 2, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, February 2, 1984. Present were Walter Power, Normand Houle,
Kenneth May, Edward Stevenson, Abby Burns, Donald Hunt, and David Goodof.
William Cass was absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
FORM A--CABOT FARM--BURNHAM
The Planning Board had inspected this property on Sunday, January 29, 1984. Attor-
ney William Donaldson was present representing the petitioners and stated they
desire to keep the single-family type of ownership for the property. The
petitioners wish to split off a parcel of land for a single-family residence.
In the past the Planning Board has allowed a similar type of use for other
relatives of the Lutts family. The Salem Fire Department has approved the
use of this particular parcel, but wishes it to be understood that any future
• development or subdivision for private use of the remaining land would require
an updating of the services for the area (see attached letter) .
Mr. Donaldson further stated that no commercial development of any kind is
envisioned for the area. There has been some discussion as to enlarging the
road acid they would entertain working on this subject.
Abby Burns expressed some concern for the distance between the houses for emer-
gency turnaround. Walter Power added that any future development would require
the road to be upgraded to subdivision control standards. The Planning Board
would like to see open space preserved in the area, however, so upgrading the
road could lead to further development. We would, therefore, like some kind
of written committment stating that the lot will not support more building in
the Planning Board's eyes. The Planning Board, additionally, would like an easement
to provide for a 26' right-of-way on the existing access road._
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Form A will be
endorsed upon receipt of an amended plan to show a 26' easement as requested
and a letter stating the owner's understanding that the road will not sup-
port any more building. It was so voted. Mr. May further recommended that the
Minutes of this evening's meeting be filed with the endorsed Form A.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the petitioners
were allowed to withdraw without prejudice pending amendment of the plan.
It was so voted.
• FORM A--JOHN HAYES, NURSERY STREET%FAIRMOUNT STREET
Mr. John Hayes, owner of property at 16 Nursery Street, was present to discuss
the possibility of splitting an adjoining lot,aRnd combining the section'abutting
his at 21.Fairmount Street to form one contiguous lot. He plans -to convert
the existing home on the adjoining lot into a
Minutes of Meeting--February 2, 1984 Page 2
• two-family home for income purposes and understands that he must go before Board
of Appeal for a variance for this purpose.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Donald Hunt, the Form A was en-
dorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so
voted.
FORM A--PYBURN, ROCKDALE AVENUE
Attorney Papanicholas was present representing the petitioner. He stated that
Rockdale Avenue was an accepted street, being in existence since the early 1900's.
Two parcels of land were originally subdivided and water and utility lines were
brought in. It is the developer's intention to install sewer lines.
Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen had viewed the parcel and felt the road
had been accepted. Ken May felt there was some question as to suitability of
grade, sufficient road width, and adequate services were provided. Walter Power
' felt an opinion from the City Engineer as to the adequacy of services, etc.
should be received. He would like the petitioner to withdraw until these con-
cerns are addressed. Attorney Papancholas, respectfully requested to withdraw.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Edward Stevenson, the petitioner
was allowed to withdraw without prejudice. It was so voted.
PUBLIC HEARING--PICKMAN PARK, WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT
• Attorney Peter Beatrice, 44 School Street, Boston, was present representing
Mr. DiBiase. He noted the area in question was the same that was approved
previously. An Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission has been
issued and extended and contains thirty-seven restrictions on the parcel. He
feels they have met all the rep_uirements of the Order and nothing has changed.
A letter from Hayes Engineering (attached hereto) summarizing the proposed
project as it relates to the Wetlands ordinance was read.
The City Engineer concurs with the plan; the Board of Health has requested
additional information regarding the sewer system of the project; the Board
of Health of the Town of Marblehead has requested updated information on
the project. A letter from City Engineer Fletcher further clarifying his
comments on the adequacy of the water and sewer systems for the parcel was
also read for the record.
Donald Hunt raised the issue of the problems Jefferson Avenue residents were
experiencing with their sewer lines. Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen
replied that this has been reviewed by the Engineering Department and the
problem was at the B & M R.R. tie-in. This will not affect the Pickman Park
area, however, and is in the process of being rectified by the Engineering
Department.
In response to a request from Kenneth May, Mr. Carl Barsley of Hayes Engineering
designated the wetland area on the plan for the Board. He also outlined where
. the proposed water mains were to be located and noted that a portion of seven
lots total were part of the designated wetland area. Mr. May noted the Board
had concerns as to the locations of utilities in individual units relative to
the wetland.
Minutes of Meeting--February 2 , 1984 Page 3
• Ken May suggested the Special Permit be conditioned to require amended plans
be submitted for each phase showing the required utility locations, etc.
Councillor Nutting of ward Seven called the Board's attention to the fact the
developer is currently in violation. A stream which runs between Moffatt and
Station Roads has been filled illegally. Rocks and several feet of dirt have
been bulldozed into the brook. Water problems in cellars in the area have re-
sulted. It was noted the area Mr. Nutting has discussed is not under consideration
this evening. It was suggested any wetland violations be discussed with the
Conservation Commission.
Mr. Peter DeGrandpre of Auburn Road noted that Mr. DiBiase was in violation
of Conservation order #5 with the use of a partially buried truck as fill
material; no sign has been placed in violation of condition #9; and the
contours have been changed. He asked that any decision be postponed until
an inspection of the parcel could be made.
Mr. Paul Segal of Moffatt Road noted his home had been affected by blasting
previously. Walter Power outlined the Clerk of the Works procedure and Mr.
Beatrice reviewed the blasting procedures--both the Fire Department and
insurance procedures were cited--and noted it was his opinion that the blasting
would be minimized.
Mr. Beauregard of Bradley Road asked if an updated traffic study had been done
• and Mr. Power replied in the affirmative, noting, however, that this matter
was. not specifically being addressed at this, eyening's meeting.
A letter from a Mrs. Cronin of Sumner Road in opposition to the project was
read into the record.
There being no further discussion, Chairman Walter Power declared the hearing
closed.
PUBLIC HEARING--TRADERS' WAY SUBDIVISION
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing.
Attorney John Serafini gave a brief background of the previous submissions
to the Planning Board and noted that the street called Trader's Way was
included in all the plans submitted to the Board. A grant for construction
of this road is now in place and due to be implemented by April 15, 1984.
Therefore, plans have been submitted under the subdivision regulations for
construction of this road. To further clarify, Walter Power noted that
this road will be constructed under the Subdivision Control Law in this
manner in order to conform to the requirements of the grant. The other
roads will be built to subdivision standards under the umbrella of the PUD.
Mr. Jim MacDowell of the Conservation Commission was present to discuss the
areas of concern the Commission raised in reviewing this plan. He noted
that the Commission would be comfortable with making these concerns as part
0
of conditions for the approval. Further, the Conservation Commission has phase
Minutes of Meeting--February 2, 1984 Page 4
• approval for each phase of this development as well, so he feels "the bases
are covered." He outlined the areas of concern the Commission raised:
(see letter attached) . All these areas will be addressed by the developer.
The Fire Department concurs with the proposal; the Board of Health concurs;
the City Engineer concurs.
Mr. Paul Delisle of Buena Vista Avenue had some general questions regarding
the plans. He questioned the heights of buildings and type of industry that
will be locating in the industrial/commercial portion of the total development.
Kenneth May explained that the Board will have site approval over each site
as it is developed and if Mr. Delisle wishes, he will be notified as each site
is reviewed.
There being no further discussion, the hearing was declared closed.
Following several minutes of discussion, the following conditions will be
incorporated into the decision:
1. A covenant executed by the owner of the property in a form acceptable to the
Planning Board obligating the owner not to seek the endorsement of so-called
'hpproval not required' plans of the property until the road shown on the
subdivision plan is completed.
2. Delivery to the Planning Board of a certified statment from the applicant's
• attorney as to the ownership of and encumbrances upon the land at the time of
approval and identifying a sufficient legal interest of the applicant in the
land to be subdivided.
3. That the plan include an easement for storm drainage facilities at the eastern
end of the way shown on the plan and that the applicant deliver to the Planning
Board a grant of such an easement in a form satisfactory to the Planning Board
executed by the owner of the property.
4. That the way and appurtenances thereto shown on the plan be constructed
in accordance with the Subdivision Rules and Regulations of the Salem Planning
Board, except that sidewalks on the left side of the way shown on the plan shall
be 4'6" in width with a grass strip of 5' between the edge of the curbing and
the sidewalk and that the requirement of sidewalks on the right side of said
way is waived.
5. That the applicant shall deliver to the Planning Board and record a covenant
executed by the owner of record of the property, running with the land, providing
that all ways and municipal sewers required by the Subdivision Rules and Regulations
and as shown on the plan not secured by bond or deposit shall be provided before
any lot may be built on or subdivided.
6. The requirement of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations that the Plan show
elevations according to City datum is waived and the plan may have elevations
shown according to ngvd.
• Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the subdivision :
was approved subject to the above conditions. It was so voted.
Minutes of Meeting--February 2, 1984 Page 5
• A certificate of action will be sent to the City Clerk and following the twenty
day appeal period, the signed plan will be released if no appeal has been filed.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Donald Hunt, the name "Trader's
Way" will be submitted to the City Council as the recommended name for the
road being considered this evening. It was noted the Fire Department has..
approved this name. It was so voted.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Kenneth May, the Minutes of January
19, 1984, were approved as amended. It was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. It was noted that futrue
meetings will begin at 7:00 p.m. rather than 7:30 in the interest of adjourning
at an earlier hour.
Respectfully submitted,
;&OA .
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
•
day,ca.uc44�a
• T C�itg of ttleut, a uclTllsett�
c ,
Aire Pcp ariturtil �Icndyuarlrre
,�famee - nnnun 48 �Infagcttr. *trect
GIhi.t Jittlrm, CA{U. 01970
January 31, 1984
William Power III Rei Orne St. Extension
Planning Board Craig Burnham proposal
18 Loring Ave.
Salem, Mass. 01970
Sir&
As a result of a request for an opinion from the Salem Fire Dept.
concerning the proposed development of a parcel of land, situated
on Orne St, Extension, and shown on a plan of land dated Dec. 27,
1983 as the property of Carlton G. and Nancy B. Luttsl the following
items are listed to provide our opinion on the matter.
1. Whereas this is the private land of one family, and is only the
third parcel of land to be developed, we will not consider this
project to add a burden to the existing fire services required
• in the area.
2. It shall be understood that any future development or sub-
division for pr:ivateuse of the remaining land would require
an updating of the services for the area.
3. With a fourth dwelling in the future, we would consider it
necessary to either replace the existing four (4) inch water
main, with' a minimum of an,eight (8) inch main or at least provide
an eight inch loop to the existing main by connection to Rand
Road. This proposed use if furthur along the Orne St. Ext. roadway
would also require an additional hydrant on the new eight inch
water main. The proposed dwelling of Mr. Craig Burnham is approx-
imately 560 feet distant from the last existing hydrant on the
four inch main. This can be tolerated as our average hydrant
spacing requirements are Five Hundred (500) feet apart.
We therefore would have no objection to granting approval for the
lot of land to be developed for Mr. Burnham, with existing facilities.
Any construction of dwellings shall meet with all provisions of the
current Building and Fire Codes.
Re pect lly �Vsub tte
i tlj���� ���ti.
• Ca t. David J."Gogg>
cci Planning Board Salem Fire Marshal
Building Inspector
Director of Public Services
Mr. Craig Burnham
file
HAYES. ENGINEERING, INC.
82B LYNN FELLB PARKWAY
MELROSE, MASSACHUSETTS 02176
•CIVIL ENGINEERING AREA CODE 617
SURVEYING 665-9900
LAND PLANNING
SANITARY DESIGN
February 1, 1984
Salem Planning Board
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
RE: Pickman Park - Salem Acres, Inc. - Wetlands District Special
Permit
Dear Ladies & Gentlemen:
In accordance with the requirements of Section VII P 5c of the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Salem, the following summary report is
submitted. This report is provided in order to describe the proposed
project and specifically the interelationship of Pickman Park and the
Wetland District.
a. The proposed land use, construction of a 304 unit housing
• development, together with roads and utilites, will be in
accordance with the requirements of the. Special Permit Decision
affectively the underlying District in 'iahich the land is located.
b. Adequate convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian
movement within the site has been provided for by virtue of the
goemetric design of the internal roadways and sidewalks. The
street drainage system, as shown on the subdivision plans
presently before the Board, was designed, as shown in the
attachments to the 1977 EIS concerning the development, for a 10
year frequency event . No area of the portion of the site being
developed lies in the Flood Hazard District as shown on the Flood
Insurance Rate Maps .
C . Adequate provisions exist in the proposed design of the water
distribution system, and sanitary sewerage system, to protect
them against breaking, leaking or otherwise being damaged due to
flooding.
d. The proposed development will not serve to obstruct or divert
any flood flow or substantially reduce natural floodwater storage
capacity in the local drainage area . Implementation of the
Pickman Park subdivision, with the restrictions relative to the
conservancy goal of the development, ensure that valuable habitat
for wildlife will be preserved. No .proposed storm water drainage
systems are to be connected directly to any other piped drainage
• system. There are two major storm drainage systems designed to
discharge to adjacent wetland areas.
J HAVES ENGINEERING, INC.
MELFOB E. MAB9ACMY96,TB O'J f'lB
• SALEM PLANNING BOARD
PAGE TWO
One system will collect storm water runoff from the major portion of
Phase 1 and Phase 2 and the northwesterly portion of Phase 3. This
system will discharge to the wetland area in the Highland Park Golf
Course.
The second major system is to discharge into the wetland area lying
south of Pickman Road and east of Arnold Drive. Other minor drainage
systems will discharge to wetland areas as well .
In all instances, no significant increase in the ultimate storm water
runoff velocity is anticipated. It is not felt that the proposed
storm water drainage system will result in a substantial increase in
either water levels or danger from flooding.
e. The proposed development and use of the site does not include
the storage of salt, chemicals , petroleum products or other
contaminating substances.
No condition . affecting the site or its potential for impact to
adjacent wetland areas have changed since the preparation of the
• original EIS that would render any of the assumptions made, or
conclusions drawn in valid.
It can be seen that the proposed development is in conformance with
the required performance standards of this Section of the Zoning
Ordinance from an examination of the. plans and review ' of the
restrictions previously imposed on the development.
In . addition, no portion of the site lies within a Coastal High Hazard
Area as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the City..
I trust this information will be satisfactory for you to determine
that the proposed development is in harmony with the intended purpose
of Section VII of the Zoning Ordinance
Very truly yours,
�J ^ Q)
Peter J. Ogren, P.E.
Vice President
PJO/jav
•
1
Conservation Commission
Salem. Massachusetts 01970
9�
-E i�A ISS:��N�
January 30, 1984
Mr. Walter B. Power, III, Chairman
Salem Planning Board
One Salem Green
Salem, MA. 01970
Re: Comments on the subdivision of Traders' Way--Fafard Company
Dear Walter:
In reviewing the calculations for the subdivision of Traders' Way for
which you will be holding w public hearing on February 2, 1984, the Conser-
vation Commission has serious reservations regarding the design of the drainage
system. Specifically, our concerns are as follows:
1. We will require a drainage analysis within the proposed development area
consistent with analyses performed by HMM Associates (Section 4--Comments to
Draft EIR) ; i. e. calculations for 10, 50, and 100-year storms.
• 2. Pipe velocities a-pear to be excessive and no energy dissipation specifics
are indicated on the plan. The developer must address potential erosion prob-
lems at the discharge of the .drainage system. The �aischarge is into a wetland
considered significant by the Commission.
3. The Conservation Commission must have more definition of the control struc-
ture handling the effluent from the wetland area.
The Commission is cognizant of the immediacy of making a decision on this
subdivision,and, therefore, recommends incorporating these conditions into
the final approval.
Speaking in a broader vein, the Commission has signed an Order of Con-
ditions for the entire project (enclosed) with the specific stipulation
that they be amended as each phase is reviewed independently. The Commission
would very much like the Clerk of the Works to have an environmental back-
ground. As you can see, the Order of Conditions requires concurrent cooperation
between both boards and the Clerk of the Works. Perhaps a meeting between
our two boards to discuss this further would be helpful.
In the meantime, if there is any further input you may require, please
feel free to contact me or any member of the Commission.
Sinc(enrely yours,
A
• Glenn A. Yalei
vice-chairman `
GY:dey
cc Gerard McNeil, Fafard
John R. Serafini, Esq.
Richard Swenson, Acting Director of Public Services
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
Early 1984 Agenda
February March April May
2 16 1 15 5 19 3 17
FAFARD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
Commercial/Industrial PUD —P.H. was 12/19/8
Trader's Way Subdivision Approved 2/2/84
Wetlands Special Permit P:H.
Conservation Commission Order of
Conditions Approved 1/26/84
PICKMAN PARK SUBDIVISION
Definitive Plan P.H. was 1/19/84
Wetlands Special Permit P.H.
Cluster Special Permit Extended 6/,25/83
Conservation Commission Order of
Conditions Extended 1/12/84
STASINOS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Developer has withdrawn proposal at this time. Form E Plan in Discussi n.
MAINE POST AND BEAM
Form B Preliminary Plan Under Review ,
Cluster Special Permit Not yet submittec to Board.
Wetlands Special Permit Not yet submittec to Board.
Conservation Order of Conditions Extension expectEd to be approved /9/84
NOTE:
P.H. = Public Hearing
= Decision Deadline
.�o•� ti �i#g of ,Salem, eassar4use#ts
• .5hmnin$ C�u�ri3
Y�jp�CIH1V6{ASC Qu 5t711'm 05rem
MINUTES OF MEETING
February 2, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, February 2, 1984. Present were Walter Power, Normand Houle,
Kenneth May, Edward Stevenson, Abby Burns, Donald Hunt, and David Goodof.
William Cass was absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
FORM A--CABOT FARM--BURNHAM
The Planning Board had inspected this property on Sunday, January 29, 1984- Attor-
ney William Donaldson was present representing the petitioners and stated they
desire to keep the single-family type of ownership for the property. The
petitioners wish to split off a parcel of land for a single-family residence.
In the past the Planning Board has allowed a similar type of use for other
relatives of the Lutts family. The Salem Fire Department has approved the
use of this particular parcel, but wishes it to be understood that any future
development or subdivision for private use of the remaining land would require
• an updating of the services for the area (see attached letter) .
Mr. Donaldson further stated that no commercial development of any kind is
envisioned for the area. There has been some discussion as to enlarging the
road and they would entertain working on this subject.
Abby Burns expressed some concern for the distance between the houses for emer-
gency turnaround. Walter Power added that any future development would require
the road to be upgraded to subdivision control standards. The Planning Board
would like to see open space preserved in the area, however, so upgrading the
road could lead to further development. We would, therefore, like some kind
of written committment stating that the lot will not support more building in
Aie Planning Board's eyes. The Planning Board, additionally, would like an easement
to provide for a 26' right=of-way on the existing access road.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Form A will be
endorsed upon receipt of an amended plan to show a 26' easement as requested
and a letter stating the owner's understanding that the road will not sup-
port any more building. It was so voted. Mr. May further recommended that the
Minutes of this evening's meeting be filed with the endorsed Form A.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the petitioners
were allowed to withdraw without prejudice pending amendment of the plan.
It was so voted.
. FORM A--JOHN HAYES, NURSERY STREET/FAIRMOUNTI STREET
Mr. John Hayes, owner of property at 16 Nursery Street, was present to discuss
the possibility of splitting an adjoining lotaiind combining the section abutting
his at 21 Fairmount Street to form one contiguous lot. He plans to convert
the existing home on the adjoining lot into a
Minutes of Meeting--February 2, 1984 Page 2
• two-family home for income purposes and understands that he must go before Board
of Appeal .for a variance for this purpose.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Donald Hunt, the Form A was en-
dorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so '
voted.
FORM A--PYBURN, ROCKDALE AVENUE
Attorney Papanicholas was present representing the petitioner. He stated that
Rockdale Avenue was an accepted street, being in existence since the early 1900's.
Two parcels of land were originally subdivided and water and utility lines were
brought in. It is the developer's intention to install sewer lines.
Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen had viewed the parcel and felt the road
had been accepted. Ken May felt there was some question as to suitability of
grade, sufficient road width, and adequate services were provided. Walter Power
felt an opinion from the City Engineer as to the adequacy of services, etc.
should be received. He would like the petitioner to withdraw until these con-
cerns are addressed. Attorney:Papancholas, respectfully requested to withdraw.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Edward Stevenson, the petitioner
was allowed to withdraw without prejudice. It was so voted.
PUBLIC HEARING--PICKMAN PARK, WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT
• Attorney Peter Beatrice, 44 School Street, Boston, was present representing
Mr. DiBiase. He noted the area in question was the same that was approved
previously. An Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission has been
issued and extended and contains thirty-seven restrictions on the parcel. He
feels they have .met all the requirements of the Order and nothing has changed.
A letter from Hayes Engineering (attached hereto) summarizing the proposed
project as it relates to the Wetlands ordinance was read.
The City Engineer concurs with the plan; the Board of Health has requested
a ditional information regarding the sewer system of the project; the Board-
of
oardof Health of the Town of Marb a ead has requested updated information on
tie project. A letter from City Engineer Fletcher further clarifying his
comments on the adequacy of the water and sewer systems for the parcel was
also read for the record.
Donald Hunt raised the issue of the problems Jefferson Avenue residents were
experiencing with their sewer lines. Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen
replied that this has been reviewed by the Engineering Department and the
problem was at the B & M R.R. tie-in. This will not affect the Pickman Park
area, however, and is in the process of being rectified by the Engineering
Department.
In response to a request from Kenneth May, Mr. Carl Barsley of Hayes Engineering
designated the wetland area on the plan for the Board. He also outlined where
. the proposed water mains were to be located and noted that a portion of seven
lots total were part of the designated wetland area. Mr. May noted the Board
had concerns as to the locations of utilities in individual units relative to
the wetland.
Minutes of Meeting--February 2 , 1984 Page 3
• - Ken May suggested the Special Permit be conditioned to require amended plans
be submitted for each phase showing the required utility locations, etc.
Councillor Nutting of Ward Seven called the Board's attention to the fact the
developer is currently in violation. A stream which runs between Moffatt and
Station Roads has been filled illegally. Rocks and several feet of dirt have
been bulldozed into the brook. Water problems in cellars in the area have re—
sulted. It was noted the area Mr. Nutting has discussed is not under consideration
this evening. It was suggested any wetland violations be discussed with. the
Conservation Commission.
Mr. Peter DeGrandpre of Auburn Road noted that Mr. DiBiase was in violation
of Conservation order #5 with the use of a partially buried truck as fill
material; no sign has been placed in violation of condition #9; and the
contours have been changed. He asked that any decision be postponed until
an inspection of the parcel could be made.
Mr. Paul Segal of Moffatt Road noted his home had been affected by blasting
previously. Walter Power outlined the Clerk of the Works procedure and Mr.
Beatrice reviewed the blasting procedures--both the Fire Department and
insurance procedures were cited--and noted it was his opinion that the blasting
would be minimized.
Mr. Beauregard of Bradley Road asked if an updated traffic study had been done
and Mr. Power replied in the affirmative, noting, however, that this matter
• was. not specifically beliig addressed at this, evening's meeting.
A letter from a Mrs. Cronin of Sumner Road in opposition to the project was
read into the record.
There being no further discussion, Chairman Walter Power declared the hearing
closed.
PUBLIC HEARING--TRADERS' WAY SUBDIVISION
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing.
Attorney John Serafini gave a brief background of the previous submissions
to the Planning Board and noted that the street called Trader's Way was
included in all the plans submitted to the Board. A grant for construction
of this road is now in place and due to be implemented by April 15, 1984.
Therefore, plans have been submitted under the subdivision regulations for
construction of this road. To further clarify, Walter Power noted that
this road will be constructed under the Subdivision Control Law in this
manner in order to conform to the requirements of the grant. The other
roads will be built to subdivision standards under the umbrella of the PUD.
Mr. Jim MacDowell of the Conservation Commission was present to discuss the
areas of concern the Commission raised in reviewing this plan. He noted
that the Commission would be comfortable with making these concerns as part
• of conditions for the approval. Further, t;,e Conservation Commission has phase
Minutes of Meeting--February 2, 1984 ' Page 4
• approval for each phase of this development as well, so he feels "the bases
are covered. " He outlined the areas of concern the Commission raised:
(see'-letter attached) . All these areas will be addressed by the developer_
The Fire Department concurs with the proposal; the Board of Health concurs;
the City Engineer concurs:
Mr. Paul Delisle of Buena Vista Avenue had some general questions regarding
the plans. He questioned the heights of buildings and type of industry that
will be locating in the industrial/commercial portion of the total development.
Kenneth May explained that the Board will have site approval over each site
as it is developed and if Mr. Delisle wishes, he will be notified as each site
is reviewed.
There being no further discussion, the hearing was .declared closed.
Following several minutes of discussion, the following conditions will be
incorporated into the decision:
1. A covenant executed by the owner of the property in a form acceptable to the
Planning Board obligating the owner not to seek the endorsement of so-called
%pproval not required' plans of the property until the road shown on the
subdivision plan is completed.
2. Delivery to the Planning Board of a certified statment from the applicant's
•. attorney as to the ownership of and encumbrances upon the land at the time of
approval and identifying a sufficient legal interest of the applicant in the
land to be subdivided.
3. That the plan include an easement for storm drainage facilities at the eastern
end of the way shown on the plan and that the applicant deliver to the Planning
Board a grant of such an easement in a form satisfactory to the Planning Board
executed by the owner of the property.
4. That the way and appurtenances thereto shown on the plan be constructed
in accordance with the Subdivision Rules and Regulations of the Salem Planning
Board, except that sidewalks on the left side of the way shown on the plan shall
be 4'6" in width with a grass strip of 5' between the edge of the curbing and
the sidewalk and that the requirement of sidewalks on the right side of said
way is waived.
5. That the applicant shall deliver to the Planning Board and record a covenant
executed by the owner of record of the property, running with the land, providing
that all ways and municipal sewers required by the Subdivision Rules and Regulations
and as shown on the plan not secured by bond or deposit shall be provided before
any lot may be built on or subdivided.
6. The requirement of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations that the Plan show
elevations according to City datum is waived and the plan may have elevations
shown according to ngvd.
• upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, .the subdivision
was approved subject to the above conditions. It was so voted.
Minutes of Meeting--February 2, 1984 Page 5
A certificate of action will be sent to the City Clerk and following the twenty
• day appeal period, the signed plan will be released if no appeal has been filed.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Donald Hunt, the name "Trader's
Way" will be submitted to the City Council as the recommended name for the
road being considered this evening. It was noted the Fire Department has %
approved this name. It was so voted.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Kenneth May, the Minutes of January
19, 1984, were approved as amended. It was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. It was noted that futrue
meetings will begin at 7:00 p.m. rather than 7:30 in the interest of adjourning
at an earlier hour.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
4
9
i
•
T, C1.it-0 ofcIIeIII,
C.��cI55cIl'Illl�ltt�
�Tirr Pcpttrtnu•nt 3'Icvdyuurtrra
7Jutties J_ pr.nnutt 48 -afittl0tr r trcrt
Chief *Item, {u. U19iU
January 31, 1984
William Power III Re: Orne St. Extension
Planning Board Craig Burnham proposal -
18 Loring Ave. -
Salem, Mass. 01970
Sir:
As a result of a request for an opinion from the Salem Fire Dept.
concerning the proposed development of a parcel of lando situated
on Orne St. Extension, and shown on a plan of land dated Dec. 27,
1983 as the property of Carlton G. and Nancy B. Luttss the following
items are listed to provide our opinion on the matter.
1. Whereas this is the private land of one family, and is only the
third parcel of land to be developed, we will not consider this
project to add a burden to the existing fire services required
•. in the area.
2. It shall be understood that any future development .or sub—
division for pr.ivateuse of the remaining land would require
an updating of the services for the area..
3. With a fourth dwelling in the future, we would consider it
necessary to either replace the existing four (4) inch water
main, with• a minimum of aneight (8) inch main or at least provide
an eight inch loop to the existing main by connection to Rand
Road. This proposed use if furthur along the Orne St. Ext. roadway
would also require an additional hydrant on the new eight inch
water main. The proposed dwelling of Mr. Craig Burnham is approx—
imately 560 feet distant from the last existing hydrant on the
four inch main. This can be tolerated as our average hydrant
spacing requirements are Five Hundred (500) feet apart.
We therefore would have no objection to granting approval for the
lot of land to be developed for Mr. Burnham, with existing facilities.
Any construction of dwellings shall meet with all provisions of the
current Building and Fire Codes.
R/ tfu lly ,sub itt�e� , ..
Ca t. David J. ogg
cc : Planning Board Salem Fire Marshal
Building Inspector
Director of Public Services
Ivir. Craig Burnham
file
UUL� HAYES ENGINEERING, INC.
a
828 LYNN FELLS PARKWAY
MELROSE. MASSACHUSETTS 02176
•CIVIL ENDINZERING AREA CGDE 617'
SURVEYING 665-39013
LAND PLANNING
SANITARY DESIGN
February 1, 1984
Salem Planning Board
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
RE: Pickman Park - Salem Acres, Inc. - Wetlands District Special
Permit
Dear Ladies & Gentlemen:
In accordance with the requirements of Section VII P Sc of the Zoning
Ordinance of the City of Salem, the following summary report is
submitted. This report is provided in order to describe the proposed
project and specifically the interelationship of Pickman Park and the
Wetland District .
a. The proposed land use, construction of a 304 unit housing
development, together with roads and utilites, will be in
_ •, accordance with the requirements of the Special Permit Decision
affectively the underlying District in 'which the land is located.
b. Adequate convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian
movement within the site has been provided for by virtue of the
goemetric design of the internal roadways and - sidewalks. The
street drainage system, as shown on the subdivision plans
presently before the Board, was designed, as shown in the
attachments to the 1977 EIS concerning the development, for a 10
year frequency event. No area of the portion of the site being
developed lies in the Flood Hazard District as shown on the Flood
e Insurance Rate Maps.
C . Adequate provisions exist in the proposed design of the water
distribution system, and sanitary sewerage system, to protect
them against breaking, leaking or otherwise being damaged due to
flooding.
d. The proposed development will not serve to obstruct or divert
any flood flow or substantially reduce natural floodwater storage
capacity in the local drainage area . Implementation of the
Pickman Park subdivision, with the restrictions relative to the
conservancy goal of the development, ensure that valuable habitat
for wildlife will be preserved. No proposed storm water drainage
. systems are to be connected directly to any other piped drainage
system. There are two major storm drainage systems designed to
discharge to adjacent wetland areas .
f HAYES ENGINEERING. INC.
-4'4E11091. MA99ACHUSL 8 02,00
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
PAGE TWO
One system will collect storm water runoff from the major portion of
Phase 1 and Phase 2 and the northwesterly portion of Phase 3. This
system will discharge to the wetland area in the Highland Park Golf
Course.
The second major system is to discharge into the wetland area lying
south of Pickman Road and east of Arnold Drive. Other minor drainage
systems will discharge to wetland areas as well .
In all instances, no significant increase in the ultimate storm water
runoff velocity is anticipated. It is not felt that the proposed
storm water drainage system will result in a substantial increase in
either water levels or danger from flooding.
e. The proposed development and use of the site does not include
the storage of salt, chemicals, petroleum products or other
contaminating substances.
No condition . affecting the site or its potential for impact to
adjacent wetland areas have changed since the preparation of the
original EIS that would render any of the assumptions made, or
conclusions drawn in valid.
It can be seen that the proposed development is in conformance with
the required performance standards of this Section of the Zoning
ordinance from an examination of the plans and review ' of the
restrictions previously imposed on the development.
In addition, no portion of the site lies within a Coastal High Hazard
Area as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map for the City.
I trust this information will be satisfactory for you to determine
that the proposed development is in harmony with the intended purpose
oft- Section VII of the Zoning Ordinance
Very truly yours,
ao QC, ,
Peter J. Ogren, P.E.
Vice President
PJO/jav
•
't �.coxnn 1.1 tv Ul "inl.em, 'Casa°ifTr4usetts
6 i
a (O�Itt111'[Ltt$ �IIMXI�
ne j5dera Green
MINUTES OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING RE-
LATIVE TO CARRIAGE HOUSES-
FEBRUARY 23, 1984 -
A joint public hearing was held with the City Council of the City of Salem
in City Council Chambers on February 23, 1984, relative to an amendment to
the Zoning Ordinance to protect historic carriage houses.
Planning Board members present: Chairman Walter Power, Kenneth May, Normand
Houle, Donald Hunt, and William Cass. Also present was Planning Board Aide
Charles Frederiksen.
City Council members present: President.'Jean-Marie Rochna, Stephen Lovely,
Leonard O'Leary, Joseph Centorino, John Nutting, Stanley Usovicz, and George
McCabe.
President Jean-Marie Rochna read the notice of the public hearing and intro-
duced the councilors present.
Planning Board Chairman Walter Power introduced the Planning Board members
present. He noted the purpose of the hearing-was in response to an interest
expressed in the preservation of historic carriage houses. Many such carriage
houses are in a state of disrepair and, in order 'to insure their preservation,
there should be an incentive to do so. Mr. Power introduced Charles Frederiksen,
Planning Board Aide, to give a brief overview of what is proposed.
Mr. Frederiksen stated that Historic Salem, Inc. did a survey of carriage
house in three areas--Federal/Chestnut St. area, Salem Common, and Lafayette
Street. It was found that carriage houses numbering in excess of 70 existed
in those three areas alone. It was noted that the North Salem area was
not surveyed, but it was felt several more existed in that area as well.
Further, carriage houses were defined as out-buildings in existence prior
to 1900 which were used specifically for carriages and horses. Garages
were specifically excluded. In drafting and administering this ordinance,
some sort of list would be drawn up by the Historic Commission and home-
owners would petition the Commission to be included on the list if they
felt their particular outbuilding would qualify.
Mr. Frederiksen presented a map of the carriage houses presently surveyed. At
present if you have a carriage house on your property which does not meet the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, a variance would be needed to put a
dwelling unit or single-family residence in the carriage house. This means
goind before the Board of Appeal and proving a hardship exists for the variance
to be granted. Most carriage houses presently do not meet minimum sideyard
requirements.
7inutes of Joint Public Hearing--February 23, 1984 Page 2
• ' Kenneth May explained the proposed zoning change in more detail. He noted
the intent of the ordinance is to preserve historic carriage houses while
avoiding having a large lot that has a carriage house on it being divided
up therefore increasing the density. of the original parcel.
Mr. May made several suggestions relative to avoiding the increasing of the
density for a particular parcel: 1: A date should be established beyond which
a carriage house would not qualify, 2: A minimum area within the dwelling unit
should be established in order to avoid the creation of too small a dwelling
area; 3: Adequate parking must be provided for the the new residence in the
carriage house on the same lot as a primary residence without reducing the spaces
available; 4: Any Special Permit shall expire upon a fire or any other type
of destruction of the structure; 5: The Planning Board and the Council should
consider that there be no exterior changes to the structures without the ap-
proval of the' Historic Commission or the Board of Appeal; 6: The carriage houses
cannot be added to or enlarged.
Walter .Power stated the Planning Board will discuss this issue further and will
comment to the City Council for their consideration.
Councillor Nutting asked if there was not adequate parking provided with the
rehabilitation of the carriage house as a dwelling unit, could a variance from
parking be obtained and Mr. May replied in the affirmative.
Elizabeth Wheaton, Chairman of the Historic Commission, wished to be recorded
• in favor of the proposed ordinance, but felt very strongly, as Chairman of
the Historic Commission that without design review, thebasis of the ordinance
is without effect. Therefore, a design review component of the Ordinance should
be included.
Mr. Donald Coleman of 328 Essex Street spoke in favor of the proposal. Dr. Richard
Pohl , 335 Essex Street, spoke in favor of the ordinance. He feels the tax base .
will be increased and preservation will be encouraged. Mr. John Carr, 7 River
Street, spoke in favor of the proposal. Mrs. Katherine Marchand, Bott's Court,
felt the ordinance should be structured and refined to a certain date. She feels
she has a structure that would qualify, but it is strictly a "garage." Mr. Lane
Nielsen, 10 Monroe Street, spoke in favor of the ordinance. Martha Hodgman, a mem- .
ber of the Board of Directors of Historic Salem, Inc. , spoke in favor of the ordinance
on behalf of Historic Salem. Mr. Richard Thompson of 374 Essex Street, urged the
Council to approve this ordinance. Meg Towey, Pleasant Street, spoke in favor
of the proposal with the amendments outlined by the Planning Board. Mr. Steve
Thomas questioned the amendment pertaining to destruction and asked if the
structure was replaced exactly would this apply and Mr. Power replied it will be
discussed by the Planning Board. Mr. William R. Burns, Jr. , Beckford Street, spoke
in favor of the proposal.
Mrs. Joan Kelley and Mr. John Kelley, 3 Cambridge Street, wished to be recorded
as opposed to the proposal.
There being no further discussion, Councillor Lovely moved the hearing be closed.
• Having passed unanimously, President Jean-Marie Rochna declared the hearing closed
at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale, rk
�.Co C v of "inkm, ACassar4uset#s
s .
�a�,� �ittrnlizcg �uttr�
(One �$ttiem (green
AGENDA--MARCH 1, 1984
1. Joint discussion with Board of Health re Pickman Park
2. Form A--20 Varney Street
3. Form A--600 Loring Avenue
4. Fafard
5. Approval of Minutes Jan. 25; Feb. 16; Feb. 23
6. Old/New Business
•
II# CEm, iEl�zss�tcl#ixse##s
�j roruaa�Ptr Pne ,$MIem Or=
MINUTES OF MEETING
March 1, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, March 1, 1984. The first part of the meeting was devoted to
a joint meeting with members of the Board of Health. Board of Health members
present: Robert Bonin, Patrick Scanlan, Philip Saindon, Dr. Eric Reines,
and Health Agent Robert Blenkorn. Planning Board members present: Donald
Hunt, David Goodof, Edward Stevenson, Abby Burns, Normand Houle, Kenneth May,
Walter Power, and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
PICKMAN PARK--JOINT MEETING WITH BOARD OF HEALTH
A letter from the Board of Health dated February 27, 1984, was read for
the record (attached hereto) . In order to address the concerns the Board
of Health has expressed, the Board has asked Acting City Engineer Richard
Swenson to attend this evening's meeting.
• Board of Health Chairman Patrick Scanlan stated that the Board of Health
had approved this proposal when it first was addressed several years ago.
Recently, although two communications from former City Engineer Fletcher
were received affirming that no problem existed with City water and sewer
services in this area and the building of the Pickman Park development would
not exacerbate any problems, the Board of Health became concerned that the
new development proposed for the City would indeed have an adverse impact
on the City's water and sewer services. This concern was increased by a recent
article in North Shore Sunday (January 29, 1984)outlining the City's water and
sewer problems. Therefore, on a vote of 3 to 1, the Board of Health voted not
to concur with the proposal.
Specifically, their questions are: Is the City taking any steps to up grade
the facilities of the pumping station? Current estimates state that there
may be 1500 additional housing units in the City in the next few years, can
our present facilities handle this? Has the Planning Board or the Engineering
Department addressed these concerns?
Walter Power stated this was a City policy question. The Planning Board
is dealing with a subdivision plan. The City would have to address this
matter with some form of moratorium which would apply to everyone in the
City. To single out one subdivison would be unfair. The Board has to make
a decision based upon the facts and the input of the various City depart-
ments and trying to define the problems with respect to the services of the
specific subdivision under consideration. The former City Engineer has sta-
ted there is no problem with the proposal as far as the water and sewer ser-
vices are concerned. Acting City Engineer Richard Swenson has reviewed the
Minutes of Meeting--March 1, 1984 Page 2
• proposal and also has stated the subdivision meets the necessary criteria. Any
action by the Planning Board contrary to professional opinion could cause
problems.
Kenneth May stated that if the Board of Health recommends that the Planning
Board disapproves the proposal, the Board is required to comply under the
Subdivision Control Law. However, the reasons as stated in the letter from
the Board of Health would invite a law suit. It is not a question of whether
the Planning Board feels it is appropriate, but whether the reasons for denying
the proposal are in a defensible form. The Planning Board has a fair amount of
evidence saying that this project meets the water and sewer requirements of
the area.
Mr. Scanlan felt that in view of the fact he is not an engineer, he would like
additional input from other parties. They have not received information that
has satisfied them that they should change their decision. Mr. May replied
that the Planning Board understands Mr. Scanlan's concerns, but we are re-
quired to act by March 15.
Health Agent Robert Blenkorn noted a meeting had been held that Richard Swenson
and Charles Frederiksen attended where this proposal was reviewed. A letter
from Mr. Swenson outlining what was discussed at that meeting was received
today by the Board of Health (attached hereto) . Mr. Blenkorn questioned what
was meant by development "upstream." Acting City Engineer Swenson stated
• that the .overall length of the sewer pipe is at the minimum slope for the
size of pipe, but is capable of carrying 1-� million gallons per day, which
should be adequate for Pickman Park. In the future, the proposed sewer line
should have adequate slope. He has inspected the sewer lines at the manholes
and all is in order.
Chairman Walter Power noted that a 12" sewer .line will be put in by the de-
veloper and, if the City chooses, an 18" line could be substituted with
the City paying the difference in cost. Originally, it was intended that
the sewer line run out the railroad tracks to Swampscott Road, but with the
upgrading of the Loring Avenue trunk line, this was no longer necessary.
Mr. Blenkorn asked what adverse conditions could exist at the pumping station
as a result of this project. Could the Board of Health be assured that the
upgrading of the pumping station was a priority? Mr. Swenson replied there
is a new pumping station which has been designed for which a grant has been
obtained. It is expected to go out to bid shortly, as there is a deadline
under the grant--construction must be started this year. It will be located
adjacent to the existing pumping station.
Donald Hunt asked for some clarification of "upstream" and Mr. Swenson replied
he was referring to Highland Avenue. Walter Power noted that everything in that
area is new.
Mr. Scanlan wished to address the question of the overall development in the
• City. He is concerned that the services are inadequate.
• Minutes of Meeting--March 1, 1984 Page 3
Walter Power replied that we had answers regarding the pumping station and
the potential for its upgrading. Mr. Scanlan noted that problems with
water could result from other developments, however. Mr. Power noted that
the only mechanism the City has to address these concerns is a general mora-
torium on all construction. Plans to add another pump to the pumping station
are in process. Mr. Swenson added that the water system in the area presently
is not the best and the looping that is planned with the construction of the
proposed development would improve the system and will give additional backup
to the area should a water main break develop on Jefferson Avenue. With the
proposed improvements, re-reuting can take place, so the area will be better
served.
Walter Power asked Mr. Swenson if the overall water supply will be affected
by the addition of the Pickman Park subdivision. Mr. Swenson felt this was
difficult to ascertain. The capacity would be no problem, and the pressure
would be no problem: The main concern, which is the concern of the Board of
Health, is the pumping station and there is no way to ascertain whether the
addition of this project would cause a problem or not; however, plans are
underway to upgrade the pumping station. Mr. Scanlan felt he would like an
assurance from the Mayor that this was a priority. Walter Power stated he
would speak with the Mayor regarding this, but the sufficiency of the pump
was not an adequate reason to deny the proposal.
• Robert Bonin felt the Board was under some pressure to make a decision. He
felt further input was needed. He had some particular questions on the
Environmental Impact Statement. Walter Power noted that the Planning De-
partment and the Conservation Commission were available to review this project and
approved the EIS. _Mr. Bonin questioned the impact of this project on Thompson's
Meadow and Donald Hunt' stated that water from this project does not flow into
Thompson's Meadow. Mr. Bonin expressed concern for the sewerage system. He
lives on Charles Street and experiences water and sewerage problems. Are
these going to be exacerbated by Pickman Park? Mr. Swenson noted that the
area where Mr. Bonin lives is all filled land and the water table is level
with basements. Mr. Scanlan stated he felt more comfortab3e knowing the pumping
station matter is being addressed.
Donald Hunt raised the issue of thos residents of Jefferson Avenue who were
experiencing water.problems. Richard Swenson will look into the matter.
David Goodof noted that the Planning Board should probably deny the proposal
on the basis of the Board of Health disapproval; however, we would need
some specific findings. Mr. Scanlan asked for a little more time and the
Board of Health will make a recommendation within the next ten days.
FORM A--20 VARNEY STREET
Mrs. Iphegenia Hatt had previously been before the Board regarding the con-
veyance of one-half of a lot previously owned by the City at 20 Varney Street
to her property and one-half to her neighbors. Now the line has been moved
• so the portions of the parcel to be divided have been changed.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the Form A was en-
dorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so
voted.
Minutes of Meeting--March 1, 1984 Page 4
• FORM A--600 LORING AVENUE
James MacDowell of T & M Engineering was present to discuss this Form A.
Lots D-1 and D-2 on the plan are to be divided and Mr. David Hark, also
present, is purchasing lot D-1, which is 42,000 square feet. Frontage is
shown on both Loring Hills Avenue and Loring Avenue. The lot crosses two
zones (B-2 and R-3) , but frontage requirements are met for both zones.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was
so voted.
FORM A--BECKET STREET REALTY TRUST, STEPHEN AND JOHN INGEMI, TRUSTEES
Attorney John Serafini was present representing the petitioners. By virtue
of a Special Permit granted by the Board of Appeal, the petitioners wish
to subdivide their land at 255-259 Washington Street. Parcel A and Lot 6 on
the plan are to be combined and sold.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the Form A was en-
dorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was
so voted.
FAFARD
• Chairman Walter Power noted that a decision on the PUD application will be
made on March 15. Therefore, the remainder of this evening's- meeting shall
be devoted to arriving upon a consensus as to the conditions to be included
in the decision.
Discussion first centered around the draft decision included with the Subdivi
sion approval of Traders' Way. Regarding the easement for storm drainage
facilities at the eastern end of the way shown on the plan, it was agreed
to release the plan to the applicants to include the easement with the un-
derstanding that the plan shall not be recorded until the easement is in-
cluded to the satisfaction of the Planning Board.
Regarding #5 on the decision requiring a covenant be provided on all ways
and municipal sewers not covered by bond or deposit before any lot is built
upon or subdivided, Gerard McNeil noted that the City will be putting out
a contract for construction and this will be supported by a bond. Therefore,
language addressing this issue will be included.
Following, a draft of the Planned Unit Development was distributed for dis-
cussion and working purposes (attached hereto) .
Regarding Section II-A, which addresses the matter of the road from the exist-
ing terminus of First Street to the existing paved area at the rear of
Hawthorne Plaza, Gerard McNeil stated they will bring up the road to their
property line. Several minutes of discussion followed as to the best mech-
anism to get this road constructed and Mr. McNeil suggested that they will
Minutes of Meeting--March 1, 1984 Page 5
• post a bond and if the road is not constructed, the City can take the land
and construct the road. This was agreeable to the Board.
Regarding Section II-B, the language will read, "No building in the Planned
Unit Development shall exceed two stories or 30' in height."
Regarding the specific uses and definitiions of the space in the development,
John Serafini will come up with a specific list of these uses and will send
them to the Board members for their consideration. In Section II-D, "First
Street" shall be substituted for "Traders' Way," and the sp_uare footage shall
read 395,000 square feet and"no more than 185,000 square feet thereof occupied
by the following uses: ."
Regarding II-F, some input from Michael Moniz of the Planning Department
shall be solicited regarding the definition of a small store.
As far as Section II-G is concerned, more specific language is needed in order
to set up specific rules to govern the site. This would prevent future
Planning Boards from taking arbitrary action on the development. Mr. Serafini
felt that some type of language which would state that approval would not
be unreasonably withheld could be drafted for the Board's approval.
Walter Power presented a list of concerns which he would like addressed in
the drafting of the final decision: He would like to see an overall landscaping,
parking and open space plan. Kenneth May felt that before any permits are
issued, a general overall plan of landscaping should be submitted. Site
• plan approval would be contingent upon conformity to this overall plan.
Stockpiling of material and disturbance of land is a second area which should
be addressed. Language addressing this issue will be drafted by Mr. Serafini.
The Board will act on this application on March 15, 1984.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Kenneth May, the Minutes of
February 16, 1984, were approved as amended. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the Minutes of
February 23, 1984, were approved as amended. ' It was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made. to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:50 p.m.
Please note that the meeting on March 15 will begin at 7:00 a.m.
Renct^fully submitted,
/1 � k
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
V
• r.CON
I
S �a
�°°oiemacOe'0 � �2/�L
CITY OF SALEM HEALTH DEPARTMENT
BOARD OF HEALTH `.:^s CP
Salem, Massachusetts 01970 \•.Y;� P
ROBERT E. BLENKHORN 9\;KORTN REET
HEALTH AGENT
(617) 741-1800 February 27, 1984 .y
Planning Board
City of Salem
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
"i:-' DI. BIASE PROPOSAL
PICKMAN PARK SUBDIVISION
ATTN: Mr. Charles FYedricksen
Dear Mr. Fredricksen:
I am writing to inform you that at the Salem Board of Health meeting
on Tuesday February 21, 1984 the following motion was presented and passed.
• The Motion was presented by Robert Bonin and seconded by Patrick Scanlon,
it was voted that the Board of Health not concur with the proposal presented
by Mr. DlBiase because of existing water and sewerage problems in the immediate
area, the inadequacy_* of the sewerage drainage problems to handle additional
flow, and because of the current condition of the pumping station 'aluded to
by Mr. Anthony Fletcher in an article in the North Shore Sunday dated
January 29, 1984.
The Motion was passed on a vote of 3-to I. Robert Bonin, Patrick Scanlon
and Peter Saiadon were all in Favor. in'. EfW-J. Reines was opposed.
Thank you for your time and consideratipn.
VERY TRULY YOURS,
F'OR THE BOARD OF HEAL7ii
UBERT E.
altBLETIKHORN
eh Agent
REB/kfm
•
V
w
yt tt,� j
w.ca Ctv of "Sp aknt, �infiar4usetts
3 Izarnrng Pear?
�JgCofkp89'tY^
One ,$afem (Sreen
AGENDA--March 15, 1984
1. Fafard--Planned Unit Development
2. Form A--Summit Avenue
3. Pickman Park
• Minutes of Meeting
March 15, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, March 15, 1984. Present were David Goodof, William Cass, Donald
Hunt, Edward Stevenson, Kenneth May, Abby Burns, Walter Power, and Planning
Board Aide Charles Frederiksen. Normand Houle was absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
FAFARD--PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
Prior to opening discussion on the Planned Unit Development, the final draft of a
covenant accompanying the subdivision of Trader's Way was submitted for the
Board's perusal. After review, upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Abby.
Burns, the covenant was approved and signed. It was so voted. A letter from the
City Clerk attesting to the fact that no appeal had been filed on the trader's Way
subdivision was read for the record.
Walter Power noted that although the approval may appear perfunctory at this
point, work and refinement of drafts have been done over a number of months to
reach this evening's vote.
Disccussion of the draft decision began with the addition of an addendum referred
to on page 2 which listed all the documents which havew been received and
• reviewed in arriving at the decision. The Board requested that the letter from
Johnstown Properties regarding the easement for a second access road to First
Street be included in the list. It was also requested the addendum be listed in
chronological order.
It was noted that the name "Fafard" includes three companies. (Ledgemere
Corporation, Fafard Construction Company and Fafard Development) Regarding
the completion of the second access from Hawthorne Square to First Street, some
language needs to be drafted to preclude responsiblity for completion of the road
to rest with the City.
There followed several minutes of discussion regarding the enforcement of uses of
the land outside the Planned Unit Development. Language will be drafted to
address this question without affecting the integrity of the PUD.
Kenneth May felt that some language should be included to specify that no interior
mall will be constructed. Also some type of language shall be included which
states the developer agrees to an easement for the purposes of a trail to be
constructed at a future date. Further, except as specifically modified by the
Special Permit, all zoning requirements shall apply.
Further modifications of language are addressed in the attached decision.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Donald Hunt, the Special Permit
for the Planned Unit Development was approved as amended. It was so voted-by
unanimous vote.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--March 15, 1984 Page 2
FORM A--SUMMIT AVENUE
Donald Hunt wished the record to state there was no locus noted on the plan.
This involves a lot of land located at 45 Summit Avenue and 10 Cliff Street. The
owner of the land, Mr. McKenna, wishes to split the property into two lots so that
Lot B, located on Cliff Street would have a smaller lot and the property at 45
Summit Avenue would have a larger one. A Board of Appeal decision permitting
this request was submitted for the record.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so
voted.
PICKMAN PARK
Chairman Walter Power read sections of the Subdivision Regulations which
pertained to the Board of Health role and responsibilities.
A letter from the Board of Health (attached hereto) was read for the record, dated
March 15, 1984.
Kenneth May noted that decision on the Subdivision had to be made this evening,
• but it was agreed that time would be allowed for the typing and recording of the
decision. Petger Beatrice, attorney for the developer, confirmed this.
Walter Power stated that the only area the Board can address regarding the
concerns of the Board of Health is the issue of the sewer problems at Jefferson
Avenue. The Acting City Engineer has stated that the existing lines are adequate
for the addition of the new proposed units (see letter of February 28, 1984).
However, it would seem that the problem had not beden sufficiently addressed.
Donald Hunt suggested that a condition of the approval be that the concerns of the
Board of Health be satisfied. Following further discussion, David Goodof noted
that the Planning Board could act in one of two ways: disapprove the project on
the basdis of the Board of Health concerns or conditionally approve the plan
subject to the Board of Health's satisfaction. He added that the developer has
indicated he will replace any sewer line which he feels could be a potential problem
upon constructgion of his subdivision. As far as the other concerns of the Board of
Health go, the Planning Board could disapprove the proposal and the developer
would go to court. On the basis of the non-specific reasons the Board of Health
raises, the court would most likely find in favor of the developer. Ken May added
that the Planning Board has to find a specific reason for their disapproval. The
fear here is that the reasons the Board of Health raises are not as yet recognized
as adequate reason for disapproval. If the sewer problems on Jefferson Avenue
would be exacerbated by the development, that is an adequate reason to
disapprove.
It was noted that regardless of the outcome of this subdivision, the sewer problems
should be addressed.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--March 15, 1984 Page 3
David Goodof added that the Board of Health did not respond in 45 days to.the
proposal as requested. Further, they failed to notify the applicant of their
discussions so that the developer could respond.
Ken May noted that if our disapproval is overturned in court, there is the potential
for losing the other conditions negotiated in the proposal.
Walter Power suggested that the Board move on to other conditions that should be
included: (see decision attached hereto)
Mr. Paul Segal of Moffatt Road wished some clarification on the Board of Health
issue; it is his understanding that if the Board of Health recommends a proposal be
denied, the Planning Board must deny. Mr. Power replied the Board is trying to
deal with this issue in the best way they can.
Mr. Peter DeGrandpre of Auburn Road wished the Board tgo consider that owner
occupancy be a condition of approval. He further wished to state he felt one
quadriplex should be committed to be sold prior to the commencement of work on
another.
It was the general consensus of the Board that they would be unable to impose
these conditions upon the developer from a legal standpoint.
• Walter Power explained the Clerk of the Works component of the Subdivision
Regulations and added this person is paid by the developer with monies deposited to
the City. The Clerk of the Works is hired by and paid by the City Engineer. He is
in no way answerable to the developer, rather he is answerable to the City.
Councillor Joseph Centorino felt it was implicit.that the Board of Health's
problems be satisfied. Mr. Power replied the.Board was still wrestling with the
best way to do this.
The issue of school impact was raised again and it was noted that this alone was
not a sufficient reason under the Subdivision Regulations to deny the project.
Walter Power again stated that this is the identical plan which was approved in
1977 after many months of work. The project was designed to have the least
impact possible while still ensuring the developer of his right to develop his land.
Peter Beatrice added that there were over 100 restrictions on the decision made in
1977 bewteen what the Planning Board and Conservation Commission ordered. He
felt the law was clear regarding the position of the Board of Health--the Board was
not set up to prevent development, only to regulate the development to the best
interest of the City. He cited the Loring Hills case among others to back up his
statement. The developer must also be allowed the time to address the Board of
Health in order to satisfy their concerns. This was not done. Mr. Beatrice felt
very.sure of his position in this matter. It is not a question of building or no
building, but rather which plan has the least impact on the environment and City
services.
. As far as the conditions cited previously, Mr. Beatrice had no problems with them.
• There followed considerable discussion as to the resolution of the sewer issue and
the other concerns of the Board of Health. Mr. Beatrice suggested a covenant
which would guarantee the completion of the sewer regardless of the financial
future of the developer. Walter Power felt the concern was for the purported
problem on Jefferson Avenue between Preston Road and Parallel Street. Charlie
Frederiksen noted that there is a 1/4 mile of sewer pipe which was built in 1912. It
is a 1511pipe which Mr. DiBiase's proposed 12" pipe would tie into. He noted the
developer agreed that if the addition of their units would exacerbate the sewer
problems experienced on Jefferson Avenue, they would do everything they could to
rectify the situation. Mr. Beatrice agreed this was true; however, the City
Engineer has determined the sewer is adequate.
Following some further discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that the
resolution of the sewer problems should be a condition of the approval.
Walter Power suggested that an 18" line be installed from Salem Acres property
out to the intersection of Jefferson Avenue and Parallel Streets and the existing
15" line from that intersection out to the major interceptor be replaced with an 18"
line.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Kenneth May, an 18" line shall be
installed on Salem Acres, Inc. property parallel to the railroad line and out to the
intersection of Jefferson Avenue and Parallel Streets. From that intersection
along Parallel Street to the major 36" interceptor the existing 15"line shall be
• replaced with an 18" sewer line.
Upon a roll call vote, the vote-was unanimous.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Donald Hunt, the conditions as
enumerated on page 3 shall be conditions of the appioval of the subdivision.
Upona roll call vote, the vote was unanimous.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Donald Hunt, the approval of the
subdivision plan shall be conditioned upon the resolution of the problems set forth
in a letter to the Planning Board from the Board of Health dated March 15, 1984 to
the satisfaction of the Board of Health and no lot shall be built upon until the
Board of Health is so satisfied.
Upon a roll call, the vote was unanimous.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Abby Burns, the Subdivision Plan
submitted by Salem Acres, Inc. known as Pickman Park is approved subject to the
conditions previously voted.
Upon a roll call, it was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
• Respectfully submitted,
Rile E. Yale
S _
z z Manning Puarb '84 APR -5 P2 :38
rs/
O)ne Salem Green
-
- E!CE
SsaLi_r•_
CERTIFICATE OF ACTION
DATE: March 15, 1984
TO: Josephine R. Fusco, City Clerk
FROM: City of Salem Planning Board
RE: . Pickman Park/Salem Acres, Inc. Subdivision
I hereby certify that, pursuant to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter
41, Section 81 U,..that the Salem Planning Board has taken the following
action with respect to the above-referenced subdivision application:
By a' unanimous' vote, the Planning Board approved the proposed subdivision
as presented with the attending conditions.
Notice of the Planning Board's action' and the reasons supporting it are
• more fully described in the attached copy of a letter, the original
of which was sent today to the a-plicant by registered mail, postage
".prepaid,: at his address stated on the-application.
Walter B. Power, III cLY-
Chairman .
1 -
' of
nom. • .��
• � � lllln�r� 1 984 AP: -f, P2 ;33
Mim Salem Green . CITY C; '1--!CE
SAL_t
March 15, 1984
Mr. Ugo DiBiase
Salem Acres, Inc.
71 Hancock Street .
. Everett, MA.,
Dear Mr. DiBiase:. -
The Planning Board voted,on. March 15, 1984, to approve the subdivision
plan of Salem Acres, Inc. subject to the following conditions:
1. No building or structure shall be built in the Subdivision
until the matters set forth in a. letter from the Board of Health to the
• Planning Board dated 3/15/84, a copy of which is attached hereto, are
resolved to the satisfaction of the Board of Health and the Board of Health
- " shall have issued its written confirmation thereof.
2. Prior to endorsement of the plan, the Plan shall be revised to .
conform to the requirements of paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of a letter from David
J. Goggin to the Planning Department received 2/13/84, a copy of which is
attached hereto.
3. No building or structure shall be constructed in the subdivision
until a post hydrant is .tested and in service within five hundred feet
of said construction.
4. Prior to endorsement of the Plan, the Plan shall be revised to show
a 12 inch sewer line from the rear of Lot 77 on MacArthur Drive adjacent
to the railroad to the Eastern boundary of the Subdivision and an 18 inch
sewer line from that point to the point where it will tie into the City
sewer line at the intersection of Jefferson Avenue and Parallel Street'-
-2-
• 5. No building or structure shall be occupied and no occupancy
permit shall be issued therefor until the,existing 15" sewer line running
from the intersection of .Jefferson Avenue and Parallel Street to the 36"
main interceptor adjacent to the Eastern Terminus of Ocean Avenue is re-
placed at the Applicant's sole cost and expense with a new 18" sewer line
meeting all current codes and standards.
6. - No building or structure shall .be occupied until condominium
documents are recorded which shall (i) prohibit the occupancy of any condo-
minium unit in the subdivision by more than two people unrelated by blood
or marriage and (ii) expept to the extent prohibited by applicable rules
and regulations of .the Federal .National Mortgage Association or the Federal
Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, require that all leases and tenancies of
• condominium units in. tbe subdivision be approved by the managing board of
the organization of unit'owners.
7. No more than one-hundred and two residential units shall be con-
structed in any twelve-month period with construction to take place over
a three-year period. The units closest to Jefferson Avenue shall be
constructed prior to units closer to the Forest River.
B. All construction within the Subdivision shall be conducted in ac-
cordance with the following conditions:
a. The applicant and his development associates shall be required
to advise all of their construction contractors that no exterior work
shall be performed in area which might reasonably cause disturbance to
abuttors prior to 7:00 a.m. on any week day, 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays or
at any time on Sundays, provided that nothing herein shall be deemed to
• restrict interior work or exterior work which does not cause disturbance
to abuttors at any time.
b. The applicant and his development associates shall take all
-3- .
• actions reasonably required to minimize inconveniences to residents in
the general area of the planned development, whether of noise, vibration,
dust, blocking of City roads, or. otherwise; and to advise abuttors in
advance of work to be done near their premises.
' c. All construction vehicles entering and leaving the subdivision
shall do so over an access route approved in writing by the Planning Board.
and shall be covered.
d: All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior' to leaving the
subdivision.
e. Water saving plumbing fixtures shall be installed in all
.. dwelling units .in the'subdivision. ' '
f. Exterior-reading water meteis shall be installed on each dwelling
• unit.
g. All current codes regarding blasting and the installation of
smoke detectors shall be strictly adhered to.
h. All construction shall be carried out in accordance with
the rules and regulations of the Planning Board and the _Plans.
9c:: The' applicant.'.'shall 'clean.-up and..re�grade to-original contours
the ends of Station Road and Moffatt Road which were previously disturbed
and any other areas previously disturbed outside the Subdivision.
10. The applicant shall provide in the buffer zone adjacent to
. existing homes tree plantings subject to Conservation Commission approval
as appropriate and desirable if suitable trees do not exist to- screen
existing homes from the new development at the commencement of con-
struction or the planting season before. The developer is responsible
• to see that these trees become established and replace those that fail
to become established.
_4_
•. 11. Prior to the endorsement of the Plan, the applicant (i)
shall submit and record a duly executed Restrictive Covenant setting forth
the conditions set forth herein in a form satisfactory to the Planning
Board and (ii) shall revise the Plan to include a reference to such
covenant.
3 -
This endorsement shall not take effect until a copy of the decision
bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty days have elapsed and ,
no appeal has been filed or that 'if such appeal has been filed, that it has
been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Essex County Registry of
Deeds and is indexed in the grantor index under the name of the
owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of
title. The fee for recording or registering shall be paid by the owner
or applicant.
I hereby certify that a copy of this decision and plans is on file with
the City'Clerk and a copy is on file with the Planning Board.
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman,' Planning Board `/J�
CiTf OF SAL=_,til HEALTH D=9AR-iNIENT
BOARD Or HEALTH
Salem, Massachusetts 01970 '
P.0P.6RT E. ELENICHORN - 9 \ORTii s?RccT
HEALTH AGENT -
(617) 741-1800 March 15, 1984.
Planning Board
lip
One Salem GreenSalem, Mabsachusetts 01970 .RE: DI Biase ProposalfPJf3 ��p;;
Pickman Park Subdivision
ATTN: ' Mr. Walter Powers, III, Chairman
Dear Mr. Powers.:
I am writing to inform you that on March 13, 1984, at the
Board of Health' s Public Hearing, that a notion was presented
by Robert Bonin and seconded by Peter Saindon on the above_
entitled issue. The 44otion. reads as follows :
To Reaffirm the+February 21--1984 -vote not to concur with
g the D7: Biase Proposal (Pickman- Park Subdivision)
The reasons being as follows :
1. The water and sewerage problems on Jefferson Avenue
verified by .-membzrs' personal visits to the residents
of the area.
2 . The current condition of the water pump and the potential
inability to dandle the increase capacity of this
development.
3. L--ck of written assurance from the City Engineer, or
aopropriate municipal authority of the impending rcpal_r
of. the Cities water nump.
The members voted on the above stated motion_ The results
ware as follows : 3-0, All Members in favor.
Also a miotion was presented by Patrick Scanlon and seccnl:al:�^
bl Robert Bonin. The ;Motion reads as follows :
. Before any new developments are started that the Plannir-c
Board conduct: studies relevant to seweraae and water nro52e-= =--
;.'.1c ir:Lmed atr..! area and throughout the city.
"he me:-.b s voted on the above stated i:otion- The result--
C• were as folio-: ,: : 3-0 , All Members . in favor.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Very truly yours,' ' ,
FOR THE BOARD OF HEALTH _
Robert E. 'Blenkhorn,
t:ealth .Agent
REB/kjm
CC: Mr. Patrick Scanlon
Mr. Robert` Bonin
Mr. Peter Saindon .
s -
r4�i���to:. •
T. Cnt of Ufem,
�4c p E ire pepartment Veubquarters
. Iamee J. Przrmax 48 2 P �tLCCt \•� �\
(Chief alem, C4UM B19713
l
. 1
Planning Department Re: Pickman Park Sub-0 001on
City of Salem, Mass. Salem Acres, Ino. -Uw"are
One Salem Green
Salem, Ma. 01970
Plans consisting of 26 sheets, with a revision date of Aug. jtl�
1979 were provided this office for review.
Reports on this project were previously submitted March 1, 19970
Sept. 16, 1977, and June 9, 1980. Comments in this report retlao•t
that certain items noted in prior reports have not been corroO'00*
1. Per item 1 (a) of of my report dated June 9, 1980, the poet
hydrant requested in my report dated Sept. 16, 1977 has b'$a►)
shown on sheet #17 at Pickman Road and Vandero�ift Drive 9410
at Pickman Road and McArthur. Drivel but they still have not been
located on the Detail sheet #19, as requested. It is DAPOr 'ln t
to have all sheets agree to eleminate any confusion.
2. Per item 1 (b) of my report dated June 9, 1980, the nam* of �johnson
Drive was used to replace Patton Drive as requested in prrr1/1411a
reports, however this has still not been replaced as of th10t
date as requested, because Johnson is also a duplication Of sttr@eree
names. We have on the existing street map (Sections P10 Utw
lerate
a Johnson Road located off Harrison Road. We can no lorWA'O 1an,y
any duplication of street names. and shall not approve Anf. P #17P
with a duplication. This name appears on sheets #2, #5r /jli
#20, #21, and #25. Please arrange for a new street nam'$ V1
correct this duplication.
3. It has been shown that a Street location for a fire allrxK1'$
has been indicated as Pickman Road opposite Arnold Driv'$,
location shall be acceptable for the Pickman Road area. V*fe
Sheet #16)
4. It has been shown that a Street location for a fire alar%
has been indicated as Marion Road at Griswold Drive. TALO
location shall be acceptable for the Marion Road area. o
Sheet # 11).
5 No construction shall be permitted on any structure, un't'il' a
post hydrant is tested and in service, within 500 feet 0%- '�4
construction.
;te
6. All current codes concerning blasting and installatiort 4/�
detectors shall be adheared to. sp t lly _supm
cc, Salem Building Inspector apt. David J. S/o a' i
Salem Electrical Dept. Salem Fire Marshal
Walter Power III
fill _
s
CON Ctu of _��atjent,
Minutes of Meeting
April 5, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, April 5, 1984. Present were Abbby Burns, Donald Hunt, Kenneth May,
Normand Houle, David Goodof, and Walter Power. Edward Stevenson and William
Cass were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
PICKMAN PARK
For clarification purposes, the Planning Board reviewed the draft decisions
previously distributed to the Board. Working from the draft that Ken May prepared
(attached hereto), it was noted that the City has done additional review of the
matter of the sewer issue. It has been determined by the Acting City Engineer
that the City has adequate sewers to take care of all potential construction in that
area. Therefore, a 12" line will be adequate. Originally, the 18" sewer
requirement Was proposed to handle any future development, but it has now been
determined this.will not be necessary. Any development off Swampscott Road
would tie into a Highland Avenue line. Therefore, a 12" sewer will be required
within the Subdivision, and the 1/4 mile out to the 36" interceptor will still require
an 18" line.
Upon the motion of Abby Barns 'arid second of Donald Hunt, the decision will be
amended to require a.12'!'sewer line within 'the Pickman Park subdivision itself and
an 18" line shall be constructed from the rear of Lot 77 on MacArthur Drive
adjacent to the railroad.to;the Eastern boundary of'the,Subdivision and an 18"
sewer line fconl' that"point to the point where it will tie :into the City sewer line at
the intersecti'6n of'7efferson Avenue and Parallel.Street: ;It w-as so_voted;six in
fad F' none opposed. `hium6er five on the''draft decision, which deals with the
sewer easement can now•be deleted.: ilpon the nrotion:of:David Goodof and second
of Abby Burns; 'this section was so deleted. It was so voted, six in favor, none
- opposed. Regarding item 6, David Goodof.had previously. discussed with-the ..,
developer a way:to provide some up-front funding so,constructon of the. . :'
replacment sewer would not'adversely affect the developer.finan'cilly. A proposal
to have the City provide the up front funds for the sewer replacement with
reimbursement taking place upon the sale of the first units Was discussed.
Attorney Peter Beatrice, representing-the deveioger;.noted..tha!-Ahe concept was
there and the method'could;be;worked.out•!later..,;Perhaps,'the;City..•would like to
put the job out to'bid'and accept the lowest bidder. Then the City would have
_. control. In any case, the mechanism can be worked out later upon the
recommendation of the Planning Board. Input,will,be needed from;the City
Solicitor,.Auditor,'.and Engineer. .Walter Power added that perhaps a special task
force could be set•up to study this issue further. David Goodof felt that the
language could remain in the decision and the method could be dealt with later. He
wished the Minutes to reflect, however, that the Planning Board is trying to find a
way to deal with this without overburdening the developer and will try to find a
• Minutes of Meeting--April 5, 1984 Page 2
way to minimize the impact of the up front costs of the sewer replacement.
Number 8 on the draft shall be amended to read "No more than one-hundred and
two residential units shall be constructed in any 12-month period with construction
to take place over a three-year period. . ."Upon the motion of Kenneth May and
second of Normand Houle, this amendment was adopted. It was so voted, six in
favor, none opposed.
Regarding number 9 a, the language shall more specifically reflect the language
drafted by the Chairman at our previous meeting. It shall now read (and will be
numbered 8 a): "The applicant and his development associates shall be required to
advise all of their construction contractors that no exterior work shall be
performed in areas which might reasonably cause disturbance to abuttors prior to
7:00 a.m. on any week day, 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays, or at any time on Sundays,
provided that nothing herein shall be deemed to restrict interior work or exterior
work which does not cause disturbance to abuttors at any time." Number 9 b shall
read, "The applicant and his development associates shall take all actions
reasonably required to minimize inconveniences to residents in the general area of
the planned development, whether of noise, vibration, dust, blocking of City roads,
or otherwise; and to advise abuttors in advance or work to be done near their
premises." Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and Abby Burns, this language was
adopted. It was so voted, six in favor, none opposed.
Number 10 (which shall become X19 in the final draft), shall read, "The applicant
shall clean up and re-grade to original contours the ends of Station Road and
Moffatt Road which were previously disturbed and any other areas previously
disturbed outside the Subdivision. Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of
Donald Hunt, this language was adopted. It was so voted, six in favor, none
opposed.
Number 11 (which shall become #10 in the final decision), shall read, "The
applicant shall provide in the buffer zone adjacent to existing homes tree plantings
subject to Conservation Commission approval as appropriate and desirable if
suitable trees do not exist to screen existing homes from the new development at
the commencement of construction or the planting season before. The developer is
responsible to see that these trees become established and replace those that fail
to become established. Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David
Goodof, this language was adopted. It was so voted, six in favor, none opposed.
It was noted that the condition of approval which deals with the developer
satisfying the concerns of the Board of Health is prior to the issuance of a building
permit, not prior to endorsement of the plan.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the draft decision as
amended shall be adopted as record of the decision made on March 15, 1984. It was
so voted, six in favor, none opposed.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the waivers
requested by the developer were accepted. It was so voted, six in favor, none
• opposed.
Chairman Walter Power wished the record to show that Mr. Donald Anglehard,
attorney for the Concerned Citizens of Ward 7 refused to return unapproved
material to the Board, even upon specific request from the Chairman.
• Minutes of Meeting--April 5, 1984 Page 3
FORM A--CLOUTIER,PUTNAM STREET
This involves the combination of one parcel (Parcel A on the Plan) with the parcel
of Mr. Robert Cameron to form one contiguous lot. Upon the motion of Kenneth .
May and second of David Goodof, the Form A was endorsed, approval under the
Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so voted, six in favor, none opposed.
FORM A--HEWITT--BARNES ROAD
James MacDowell of T & M Engineering was present to discuss this Form A. He
noted that this same parcel was considered by the Planning Board in 1979 when it
was divided into four lots. In addition, a variance was granted for the subdivision,
but it has lapsed. Now the owners wish to develop again. They now wish to split
off one lot under a Form A and will deal with the remaining parcel later. Mr.
MacDowell added he was aware of the wetlands on the parcel.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of David Goodof, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so
voted, six in favor, none opposed.
STASINOS—HIGHLAND AVENUE
Attorney George Vallis was present to discuss a proposal for his client, Mr.
w,% Stasinos, regarding a parcel on Highland Avenue. Mr. Vallis noted he had sent a
land use study to the Board several weeks ago which was conducted by Mr. Frank
Piatrowski. He found the highest and best use of the land was for a multi-family.
The need for a pumping station and other utility considerations are under
consideration at present. Mr. Vallis would like some type of feedback from the
Planning Board as to the use of this land. They are presently considering a PUD
plan which would consist of residential and commercial use. Walter Power
reiterated the desire of the Planning Board for industrial use on that site. Further,
he stated the Board saw no immediacy in developing this property. The Board is
interested in more long-range planning. Contrary to what is stated in the land use
study prepared by Mr. Piatrowski, there is a definite need for industrial
development in the City. Charles Frederiksen added that the Planning Department
receives several inquiries as to the availability of industrial space in the City.
Kenneth May noted that whatever use is finally made of the parcel, the traffic
problem will be acute. There is no egress except on to Highland Avenue and'it is
likely an additional traffic light will be needed. Mr. Vallis noted the traffic issue
was addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. Kenneth May replied that
he is not so much concerned about volume as access and traffic flow.
David Goodof stated that traffic will be a problem whatever use is made of the
land. The question is whether the Board is willing to accept a use other than
industrial for the parcel.
Donald Hunt felt that in light of the success of the Peabody Industrial Park the
• need for industrial space in Salem was acute. Mr. Vallis replied the land use study
would refute this premise.
r
• Minutes of Meeting--April 5, 1984 Page 4
Councillor Leonard O'Leary of Ward Four stated that in meetings with the
residents of the area, they would very much like to see residential use of that land.
Walter Power replied that what the Planning Board had in mind was a specific type
of industrial use of that land with plans to meet with the neighborhood to discuss
the types of.industrial uses and seek their input. The land would be tailored to
specific uses. He added that industrial use was sometimes intimidating to abuttors,
but the Board would be very specific as to what was allowed.
Kenneth May noted that the Environmental Impact Statement reported that for .
residential use the.trip generation for 750 units would be 3800 trips per day;
commercial use would generate 3500 per day and industrial would generate 1600
trips per day. It would seem that industrial use would have the least impact traffic
wise. Attorney Vallis stated that the Board is basically asking the owner of the
land to continue paying taxes over a long period of time with no income being
generated from the property. The land will likely not be developed industrial
unless the City is prepared to take the land by eminent domain. David Goodof
stated that he would hope the developer would be willing to work with the Planning
Board to come up with a compromise type of plan. The Board does not want to see
any more "strip" type of shopping centers along Highland Avenue.
Charles Frederiksen noted that the present owner of the land had been contacted
by a person who wishes to build a quality type of motel on the property which can
be done as of right in the B-2 zone.
Walter Power felt that the input of the new City Planner would be desirable. Some
planning input is needed. -. The Board does not wish to rush into developing this
land until after the Planning review.
Mr. Vallis stated that he would like to effect some type of rapport with the Board.
If the Board would entertain a PUD type of plan, he would be encouraged; however,
they would like some flexibility. 'Walter Power replied that the Board would like
some type of percentage of use to be negotiated as was done with the Fafard
project. Kenneth May added, however, that this was not a large parcel and it did
not have the same physical characteristics as Fafard. Mr. Vallis would like some
indication from the Board as to what they would like on site. Ken May replied that
it was difficult to say what the Board would like on the parcel. Mr. Vallis stated
that his client was going to buy the parcel regardless and will develop it. He would
like to compromise with the Board and reach an equitable solution to the problem.
Walter Power noted that the Board had just completed two important and difficult
subdivisions which were dictated by zoning. The Board would very much like to
take some time in considering the plan in order to find the best use for the site.
Ken May added that some solution to the traffic situation would also be helpful in
considering the use for the parcel.
Donald Hunt asked about the wetland area and Mr. Stasinos stated they plan to
work with the Conservation Commission regarding the wetland area.
• Kenneth May stated that the Board will consider a plan which is presented. Mr.
Vallis asked if there was any encouragement from the Board for a PUD and Ken
May replied that something was needed to help make the plan more attractive; i.e.
a solution to the traffic problems. Mr. Stasinos stated he had a letter from the
State saying they would be willing to construct a traffic signal at the entrance to
Minutes of Meeting--April 5, 1984 Page 5
the site. Plans are in the design stage regarding this issue. He added that the
agreement included protecting Ravenna Avenue from being closed off by a new
traffic light.
Donald Hunt asked Mr. Piatrowski if it was common practice to develop a site with
only access and Mr. Piatrowski replied in the affirmative.. He added that there is a
clear market for residential units in Salem. Any industrial development would
require adequate housing.Minutes of Meeting--April 5, 1984 Page 5
Kenneth May felt that with what we have already approved, there is not a problem
with adequate housing stock in the City. He felt inclined to see the developer plan
the lot under the present zoning and the Board will consider it. Walter Power felt
the Board should inspect the property and consider all the ideas for development.
He would further like the input of the City Planner. Mr...Vallis will return to the
Board when a new plan has been prepared.
CARRIAGE HOUSE ORDINANCE
Doctor Richard Pohl was present and thanked the Board for arranging the public
hearing recently held to discuss this zoning amendment. He noted that the hearing
showed the support the citizens have for this type of ordinance. He felt very
strongly that design review by the Historical Commission was indeed a crucial
component of the ordinance; however, it was not his desire to "overdesign" the
ordinance so it became cumbersome to administer. If it is too restrictive, the
intent of the ordinance is lost. Ken May recommended that the text of the
ordinance remain the same as originally drafted--including a definition of an
historic carriage house--and including the design review component. The remaining
concerns should be left to the discretion of the Board of Appeal.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Planning Board
shall recommend the above-referenced language to the City Council with the
addition of language addressing design review by the Historical Commission. It was
so voted, six in favor, none opposed.
DAVID BIGDA--SIGN ORDINANCE VARIANCE
Mr. David Bigda of Pickering Wharf was present to request a variance to allow the
Wharf to post eight 2 x 2 signs off-site in various locations around the City. Just
prior to leaving, Greg Senko stated he felt the variance could be granted on the
basis of conformance with the Master Plan; however, the concern was for the
precedent which could be set. Mr. Bigda recognized the problem and, in response
to a question as to the possibility of one comprehensive sign being posted for all
attractions, he stated that all efforts he has made to organize a comprehensive
program "fell apart."
David Goodof gave the Board an update on the billboard proposal. Ackerley should
be submitting a proposal shortly and an off-shoot of this could be the posting of
some in-town signage. He felt that if we allow this type of sign, we could have a
future problem with a very disjointed group of signs being placed around the City.
He added there are illegal signs everywhere.
Minutes of Meeting--April 5, 1984 Page 6
Ken May raised the possibility of a one-year permit and the consensus was this was
a good idea. Meanwhile, it was felt the Board should work with the Building
Inspector to try and coordinate the whole sign issue.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Normand Houle, the permit for one
year was granted. It was so voted, six in favor, none opposed.
MAINE POST AND BEAM
Mr.Reid Blute and Mr. Carl Gardner of Maine Post and Beam were present to
submit their Form C application and application for a Cluster Special.Permit. The
public hearing for these applications, as well as the Wetlands Special Permit will be
held on Thursday, April 19.
Mr. Blute presented the plan for the Board's perusal and noted that each unit will
be a single-family detached dwelling which will conform to set back and sideyard
requirements. The only access will be from Tedesco Street. A private road,
maintained by the condominium association, will be the only road in the project.
There will be 4-1/3 acres of common land with separate lots ranging in sizes of
approximately 4400 square feet each. There will be twenty units total. All
utilities will be underground and the sewer will be connected into the municipal
sewer at Elm Avenue. The water will be looped from Peter Road and Maple
Avenue. Three hydrants will be placed on the site per the recommendations of the
Fire Department. Two types of parking will be available--forty common spaces,
plus a driveway for each unit. There will be no garages. The parking more than
meets the parking requirements of the City ordinances. There will be a common
pathway around the pond with easements along some of the lots.
Kenneth May asked what was still remaining of the original plan presented to the
Board approximately a year ago and Mr. Blute replied the treatment of the pond,
etc. remains the same. The boardwalk over the pond has been re-designed for
efficiency. All the filtration and other amenities recommended by Sea Plantations
in their report which accompanied the original plan will remain. However, the
tennis courts have been eliminated.
Walter Power asked about drainage on the site and Mr. Gardner noted there were
eight underground dry wells for street drainage. Mr. Power asked if the dry wells
were approved by the City Engineer and Mr. Gardner replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Power asked what would happen if one of the dry wells becomes blocked and
Mr. Blute replied they will be maintained by the condominium association. Mr.
Gardner added that the drywells were 18" in diameter with an access hole. The soil
type in the area precludes failure. A cross section is included with the plans.
Walter Power asked if the building conforms to the constraints of the R-1 zoning
district and Mr. Blute replied in the affirmative--it is below the allowable density
for the area.
Kenneth May asked if they still anticipate using breakaway barriers for emergency
purposes at the ends of-Peter and Chandler Roads and Mr. Blute replied in the
• affirmative. Abby Burns asked if the buffer zone is the same as the previously
submitted plan and Mr. Blute replied in the affirmative. Walter Power asked what
the square footage of the houses will be and Mr. Blute replied they will be 1400
square feet. i In response to;a� further question , -•
11J F
. Minutes of Meeting--April 5, 1984 Page 7
from Mr. Power regarding the roadway, Mr. Blute stated that there would be 24' of
pavement with a Cape Cod berm (sloping wedge curbing) and no sidewalks. Walter
Power asked if there was only one way to get to the common area and Mr. Blute
replied in the affirmative. Mr. Gardner stated there was a possibility of:
providing an easement for pedestrians for better access to the common areas.
Kenneth May felt that would be important and Mr. Blute agreed, noting, however,
that they have done everything they can to preserve privacy.
Walter Power asked if they will be able to preserve the old trees now present on
the site and Mr. Blute replied in the affirmative.
Councillor Nutting of Ward Seven asked if the distance between Elm and Maple
Avenue was the same as on the previous plan and Mr. Blute replied in the negative
due to the extension of the road. The distance is approximately 25 - 30' at the
bottom of the steep slope.
Walter Power raised the question of erosion and Mr. Blute replied they plan to take
specific steps to control erosion. The Conservation Commission has issued a
modified Order of Conditions which addresses erosion control as well.
Abby Burns asked what the price of the finished dwelling unit will be and Mr. Blute
replied he estimates the price to be in the $130,000 range.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby Burns, the minutes of March
1, 1984, were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the minutes of March
15, 1984 were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
NEW.BUSINESS
An informal meeting will be set up between-the Planning Board and the Board of
Appeal for a Monday evening in the near future.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
Respec Ily submitted, q�
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
of 'Sttiem, �ss�zcuse#f
pourb of tApped
�ElllilAi w T'�
V
PPR 11 �gg4
NNING DEPT
SALEM PLA
AGENDA
April 25, 1984 - 7:00- P.M.
2nd Floor = One Salem Green -
1 . Continued - Petition of Frank & Cheryl Romano for Variances from
lot size, density, setbacks & frontage in order to construct a
single family dwelling at 2 Crowdis St. (R-1)
2. Continued - Petition of Josephine Ellis & Rosemarie Spinazola for a
Special Permit to convert two family dwelling into three family dwelling
at 58 Endicott St. (R-2)
3. Petition of David L'Heureux for a Special Permit to continue the use of
19 Green St. (R-2) as a three family dwelling_
4. Petition of Stephen D. Whittier for a Variance from all density requirements
`and setbacks in order to construct a single family dwelling at 8-10 River St.
R-2
5. Petition of Richard DeForrest for a Variance to rebuild four unit apartment
building that was consumed by fire and, to convert to four unit condominium
at 15-17 Read St. (R-2)
6. Petition of Mark Leibowitz for a Special Permit to convert 11-13 Bryant St-
R-2, to a three family dwelling.
7. Petition of Robert P. McCauley for Variances from all density and setbacks
as they relate to lots A & B at 6 Prince St. (R-3)
8. Petition -of John B. Conroy for Variances from all density and setbacks in
order to construct a 24' x 24' garage at 12 Scotia St_ (R-1 )
9. Petition of Robert C. Bramble for Variances to allow 38 dwelling units
at 24 Norman St. (B-3)
10. Petition of James B. Maguire, Tr.for a Special Permit to convert to three
condominium units at 2 Chestnut St. (R-2)
of "ialm,
°goumc�"t Om '*ttlem Green
AGENDA--APRIL 19, 1984
1. Form A--Harry Hewitt, Barnes Road
2. Form A--DeFrancesco, Loring Avenue
3. Donald Masella--Wetlands Special Permit--Public Hearing
4. Public Hearing--Maine Post and Beam--Wetlands, Cluster Special Permits
Subdivision
5. Approval of Minutes
•
• Minutes of Meeting
April 19, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday, April 19,on 1984: Present were Abby Burns, David Goodof (left at
8:00 p.m.), Walter Power, Kenneth May, Normand Houle, and William Cass (8:00
p.m.). Donald Hunt and Edward Stevenson were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
DONALD MASELLA--WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT--PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing. This involves a lot
at 40 Marlborough Road which is in a wetland area. Mr. Masella presented his plan
to the Board and noted it is a single-family dwelling and will be a raised-ranch
style home. James MacDowell of T do M Engineering noted that his firm had
prepared the original plan for the lot for Mr. Alfred Gemma. At that time the line
of the wetland was surveyed and found to be different from the delineation on the
wetlands map. Physically, the wetlands follows the toe of the slope. Charles
Frederiksen and Mr. MacDowell verified this line on a recent inspection of the
property for the Conservation Commission. Therefore, the proposed dwelling,
i� although technically encroaching into the wetland, does not physically encroach.
Walter Power asked if the contours on the plan correctly reflected the actual lot
and Mr. MacDowell replied in the affirmative. He added that the house is to be
built on a slab located at elevation 112 which is 8' above the level of the wetland.
The elevation of the wetland is the measure of the seasonal high water table;
therefore, the living space will be 81 above that level.
Walter Power asked if the land had been "perk" tested and Mr. MacDowell replied
they will be tying in to the City sewer.
The Building Inspector concurs with the plan; the City Engineer concurs; the Board
of Health concurs; and the Conservation Commission concurs and has issued an
Order of Conditions for the project referencing the plan and stipulating that any
modification of the plan which included the construction of a full cellar would
require a new filing.
There being no further discussion, the Chairman declared the public hearing closed.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, the special permit
was approved. It was so voted, five in favor, none opposed.
FORM A--HARRY HEWITT, CLARK STREET
James MacDowell presented the Form A plan which supersedes the plan endorsed
at our last meeting. Based upon a conversation with Mr. Hewitt at the suggestion
of Donald Hunt, Mr. Hewitt will donate the parcel which abuts the wetland area to
•
• Minutes of Meeting--April 19, 1984 Page 2
the Conservation Commission. The reserved area will have a 26.51' strip for access
and a note has been placed on the plan that this lot (Lot 346) does not constitute a
building lot. Lots 344 and 345 will be subject to Wetlands Special-Permits.
Walter Power asked what obligation the City has to accept donated land and it was
felt that the City Council must vote on the donation.
Upon the motion of David Goodof and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so voted,
five in favor, none opposed.
FORM A--DEFRANCESCO, LORING AVENUE
Attorney George Vallis was present on behalf of the proponents. A variance from
the Board of Appeal was granted for this lot in January and Chairman Walter read
the decision to the Board. The petitioner wishes to deed a portion of her property
to her daughter.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of David Goodof, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so
voted, five in favor, none opposed.
TRADERS WAY SUBDIVISION
• The plans for the Traders Way subdivision which were approved several weeks ago
were signed by the Chairman on behalf of the Planning Board.
MAINE_POST AND BEAM, TEDESCO POND--WETLANDS, CLUSTER
SUBDIVISION PUBLIC HEARING
The notice of the public hearings for wetlands, cluster and subdivision were read by
the Chairman. Mr. Carl Gardner, a representative of Maine Post and Beam wished
to request the Board's indulgence in waiting for his associate Mr. Reid-Blute who
had additional material to present to the Board. He suggested that the Chairman
read the comments from the various City agencies first.
The Building Inspector concurs with the plan as long as the requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance are not violated; the City Engineer concurs, subject to approval
of design calculations for the proposed pump station which will pump sewage up to
Elm Avenue; the Board of Health concurs, with stipulations addressing the
adequacy of the water system in the area, the initiation of a rodent control
program upon construction, and the construction of the pump house in such a
manner as to minimize noise and vibration. The Conservation Commission has
issued a modified Order of Conditions which addresses erosion control; the Fire
Department does not concur, specifically citing the access driveways as a concern.
Mr. Gardner has stated they have met with the Fire Department and will address
their concerns. -A letter from Superintendent of Schools Henry O'Donnel citing the
affect the project may have on Horace Mann North. He noted that the project
•
• Minutes of Meeting--April 19, 1984 - Page 3
will add a minimal number of children to the system; however, that area of the
City is already overcrowding the only school in the district, so a potential problem
exists.
Mr. Gardner of Maine Post and Beam gave a brief history of the company and a
history of the prior filing on the site. -They had originally proposed 24 attached
units; however, it was felt this would be unacceptable to the Board of Appeal (a
maximum of twenty -one units would be allowed in the R-1 area) and the
neighborhood. Therefore, they now propose twenty single-family dwellings which
will be detached units with twenty feet between them. The Wetland Special
Permit aspect of the hearing will be addressed first.
Mr. Gardner noted that also present to answer questions this evening were Mr. Gus .
Sherry of Hancock Survey, Mr. Hancock of Hancock Survey, and Mr. Stuart
Abrams, one of the owners of the property.
Mr. Gardner presented an artist's rendition of the area and noted that a reduced
copy of this rendition was sent to the abuttors. Twenty lots are proposed to be
located on 7.6 acres of land. Each lot size will be 4500 square feet. Drainage
will be routed to dry wells and will re-charge through the soil before entering the
pond. The soil in the area is exceptionally favorable for this purpose. A-boardwalk
is proposed over the portion of the pond at the Stop & Shop end which will include a
• baffle system to contain sediment which is currently acting as a pollutant to the
pond which emanates from the Stop and Shop parking lot. The pond is 4.3 acres.
The boardwalk froms a portion of a jogging path which wraps around the pond and
will be communally owned by the residents.
The water delivery will be looped from Peter Road to Maple Avenue and three
hydrants will be located around the pond. The pumping station will be located in
one corner of the property and an ejector system will pump sewage up to Elm
Avenue. This location is aesthetically better for the abuttors as well as the
residents of the development. He reiterated the company's intention to satisfy all
the requirements raised by Captain Goggin of the Fire Department. The concerns
of the School Department the developers cannot address.
Reid Blute of Maine Post and Beam noted the elevation of the pond is always
constant due to the inlet and outlet pipes located at either end of the pond. An
extensive study of the site was made by Sea Plantations of Salem which details the
ecosystem of the pond and its potential to be reclaimed. The impact of the outside
area on the pond is minimal except for the area which receives the run-off from
Stop and Shop. The removal (or control) of the introduction of nutrients from this
area will decrease the potential for algablooms and stagnation of the pond.- They
intend to control the introduction of this nutrients by use of the baffle system
described earlier which would divert the flow of water and circulate it into a small
area which would allow sedimentation to take place. A.small concrete tank will be
located under water to contain the heavy sediment and will be periodically pumped out.
•
• Minutes-of Meeting--April 19, 1984 Page 4
In addition, they intend to clean the debris which has accumulated in the area of
the pond-to help stop the silts which can cause algablooms. Some aquatic plants
specified by Sea Plantations will also be introduced to help the ecosystem of the
pond. The only other change to the pond area is a proposed waterfowl island which
they intend to construct to provide a safe nesting area for waterfowl they intend to
introduce.
In response to a question from Walter Power, James MacDowell of the
Conservation Commission noted the Commission had reviewed the report prepared
by Sea Plantations and concur and endorse the plan. The plan adequately addresses
the interests of the Wetlands Protection Act.
Mr. Blute pointed out the location of the storm drains and described the dry well
system previously mentioned by Mr. Gardner. Any run-off will be collected in pre-
cast concrete dry wells 4' in diameter and 3' deep. They will be set in a bed of
crushed stone and laid in a series. They are designed for a maximum of a five-year
storm as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
Kenneth May noted that the plans do not show the locations of the buildings as
required under the Wetlands Special Permit procedure. The-Board needs to know
the elevations of the basement floors. Mr. Blute replied that a supplementary plan
will be submitted.
• Jim MacDowell asked if any overflow mechanism was included in the leaching pits
and Mr. Blute replied in the negative. Mr. MacDowell raised the issue of super
saturation of the ground which would preclude the efficiency of the leaching pits
and felt it should be looked into further. He also raised the issue of frozen ground
reducing the efficiency of the pits. Mr. Gardner replied the pits will be at a .
sufficienty depth so the ground will not freeze. Input will be solicited from the
City Engineer regarding this issue.
The Board now turned to the Cluster portion of the public hearing. Mr. Blute noted
that generally a subdivision is planned with bi-secting streets laid out in a
relatively orderly fashion, with house locations symmetrically placed. Cluster type
of subdivisions are different in that dwelling units are clustered closer together to
preserve open space. The concept also allows for more efficient use of resources.
What they propose here is to group the houses around the pond as close in proximity
to each other as possible to consolidate services needed for each home. All
utilities will be underground and the remainder of the land will be open space.
Twenty-one units would be allowable under the R-1 zoning, and they have planned a
maximum of twenty. In addition, 4.3 acres will be preserved as open space. The
open space will be under common ownership of the condominium association, which
will own and maintain the land.
Walter Power questioned the calculation of open space. He felt some further study
would have to be made of this issue in light of the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance (Section V F, V; p. 68). Kenneth May added that the area of the pond
•
• Minutes-of. Meeting--April 19, 1984 Page 5
could not be included in the calculations for useable open space. Walter Power felt
that the plan should show the land set-aside for as open land. Gus Sherry of
Hancock Survey agreed, noting, however, that the definition of "useable" was
somewhat tenuous. They also feel the pond is "useable;' so should be included as
useable open space. Walter Power replied that the pond can not be used.
Calculations will need to be made and submitted to the Board and also noted on the
plan.
Walter Power also questioned what provision would be made for conservation use of
the open space. Mr. Blute replied that they plan to have the common land owned
and maintained by the condominium association by-use of some sort of legal entity.
They do not intend to provide any easements or access to persons other than
residents. The reason for this is from a liability viewpoint. Rather than trying to
regulate access in some way, they have chosen to have no public access at all.
Kenneth May felt this would not comply with the requirements of the Cluster
-Special Permit. Walter Power asked if they would consider the pond as
conservation land; however, there would still be a question of public access to the
pond. Jim MacDowell noted that an insurance company should be consulted as to
how this would affect their premiums and insurance coverage. Mr:Blute will look
into some way to solve this problem, but he is concerned over the idea of public
access however limited. Walter Power stated that perhaps a condition of the
special permit could address limited public access. This will be considered further.
• Abby Burns asked how many parking spaces are planned and Mr. Blute replied they
intend to provide for forty spaces, plus some additional spaces in front of some of
the homes. The zoning requires thirty spaces, so that have ample.
Ken May noted that the location of the walkway and the connection between the
paved area and the walkway should be shown on the plan. He added that perhaps a
condition of the approval should be that the walkways be constructed.
The Board then moved to the consideration of the Subdivision component of the
hearing process.
Abby Burns asked how much buffer zone was planned between the new development
and the existing neighborhood. Mr. Sherry replied that it will vary between 8' and
151: It will be landscaped and two breakaway barriers for emergency access are
planned for the ends of Chandler and Peter Roads. Kenneth May felt that Captain
Goggin of the Fire Department should be consulted as to the surface at the location
of the breakaway barriers. Mesh to reinforce underneath the grass to reinforce for
emergencies would perhaps be desirable. The City Engineer will be consulted
regarding this matter.
At the request of Kenneth May, a list of requested waivers was submitted to the
Board. Mr. May added that a condition of the permit will be a specification of the
plantings in the buffer zone. Mr. Blute stated that they plan a natural type of
buffer zone with arbor vitae or other type of hardy planting. They will also
•
i�
• Minutes•of Meeting--April 19, 1984 Page 6
terrace certain areas with railroad ties. They would also consider constructing a
fence if the Board and neighbors so desire. Input from the Board as to the
plantings would be welcome. -
Walter Power read the letter of April S, 1984, which was sent to the neighbors.
Attorney George Atkins, representing a number of the abuttors wished to speak in
opposition to the proposal. He feels the Planning Board is now becoming a Board of
Appeal in the granting of a special permit and several problems have arisen
regarding this proposal. His question is whether the proposal is actually a cluster.
Can the developer take a parcel and put as many residences as possible there and
call it a cluster?- Procedurally he sees problems as well--the plan does not show
buildings as was earlier noted. A statement showing how the plan relates to the
Master Plan is needed; an Environmental Impact Statement which addresses things
such as traffic circulation, etc. is needed; and the only access/egress to the
property is over the town line in Marblehead. Mr. Atkins also feels that the
modification procedure used by the Conservation Commission was improper. A new
Notice of Intent and a new public hearing should be held. Mr. Atkins feels strongly
that this is not a cluster development--it is a substitute plan to avoid the Board of
Appeal. The Cluster Zoning ordinance was created to reduce congestion. This does
exactly the opposite. Mr. Atkins feels the lack of useable open space is most
definitely an appealable issue.
Raymond Gauthier of 24 Chandler Road raised the issue of the proposed storm
• drains. He asked if six or eight were proposed and Mr. Gardner replied that the plan
shows eight. Mr. Gauthier noted that all the surface drainage from Chandler Road
and Linden Avenue runs down into the area of the proposed project. There is a
continuous rushing of water during even a moderate rain storm. He wondered where
this run-off would go if some of the area is blocked off? Further, Mr Gauthier
stated that the water pressure in the neighborhood is very poor now. Tapping into
the Peter Road water line will only exacerbate this problem. He feels that if there
was ever a fire, the pressure would not be adequate. Input will be obtained from
the Fire Department regarding this issue.
Mark LeBeau of Elmwood Avenue noted that he has lived in the area for several
years and there were algablooms on the pond prior to the construction of the Stop
and Shop and the drainage project. He therefore questioned whether the filtration
proposed would actually solve the problem of the stagnation of the pond. He added
that much of that area was filled--the pond used to be larger.
Mr. Dana Snow, Superintendent of Water and Sewers for the Town of Marblehead,
expressed concern for the pond which serves as an emergency water supply which is
second in the series of three ponds in the drainage project. They are particularly
concerned about road salts and grease from automobiles. Adqeuate protection must
be built in to the project to prevent contamination of that water supply. Mr. Snow
would like a copy of the Environmental Impact Statement. Kenneth May suggested
that the developer meet with Maine Post and Beam to resolve some of these
•
Ar
• Minutes of Meeting--April 19, 1984 Page 7
concerns. Mr. Robert Peach of the Water and Sewer-Board in Marblehead added
that the whole state drainage project was poorly designed and places added burdens
on Marblehead to protect their water supply. 'Another member of the Water and
Sewer Board reiterated the town's concerns and added that the town will take any
means necessary to protect their water supply: If the ecosystem in the pond is
marginal now, a new subdivision could upset the balance irreparably.
Mr. James Hacker, Chairman of the Board of Appeal, stated he was speaking not in
favor or against the proposal, but wished to apprise the-Plannirig-Board of the
actual history of the project. He felt the developer has an excellent reputation and
they have built very fine homes. He wished to remind the-Planning-Board,
however, that the Board of Appeal did not deny any application which came before
it on this site. The-Board of Appeal did not look favorably upon the project and
was particularly concerned with the width of the driveways for emergency vehicles;
the fact that the only access/egress to the property is through Marblehead; and the
question of water pressure and delivery. Lot frontage and lot area were also a
concern. Some lots on this plan still need Board of Appeal approval. Mr. Hacker
stated that in light of these concerns, the petition submitted in 1983 was withdrawn
without prejudice.
Mr. Raymond Sweeney of 18 Chandler Road wished to be recorded as opposed to
the project. He is particularly concerned with the calculation of storm drainage
using a five-year storm only. He feels this is not nearly adequate enough. He also
• feels the developer is not adequately prepared enough to be presenting their plan to
the Planning-Board.
Mr. John Vados of Lillian Road noted the very steep slope to the pond. This area is
definitely not "useable" open space. He also raised the issue of the access being
located out of the City. He also raised the issue of snow being stored at the ends
of-Peter and Chandler Roads where the breakaway barriers are to be located. If
the snow piles freeze, the emergency accesses will be blocked. He also reiterated
the poor water pressure problem in the area. He feels Maine Post and Beam has an
excellent reputation, but what happens when they are no longer involved in the
project?
Mrs. Berube of the neighborhood stated the main reason they moved to the area
was the privacy and quiet of the area. They do not have City sewer and the City
will not allow them to tie in, so why should twenty new houses be allowed to tie in?
The loss of privacy is a major concern of hers. She also raised the issue of a
common fence dividing the present neighborhhod from the new development--who
would maintain the "no man's land" between the fence and the existing lot lines?
Walter Power asked if she would prefer plantings only and she replied in the
affirmative.
Mrs. Eleanor Raynes of Peter Road stated she owned the house just opposite the
proposed parking area which would park fourteen cars. She stated this area would
•
• Minutes-of.Meeting--April 19, 1984 Page 8
be located just below her bedroom window. She also questioned the what type of
material-.would be used for the construction of the breakaway barriers and Mr.
Sherry replied they intend to most likely use fiberglass. He added there would be no
access at these points--only for emergency vehicles. Mrs. Raynes reiterated her
extreme concern for the location of the parking spaces just opposite her home at
the end of Peter Road.
Mrs. Thais Gauthier of 24 Chandler Road stated the neighborhood is not opposed to
a reasonable amount of single-family homes in the area. They are opposed to the
present plan. The drainage issue has not been resolved; the water pressure is bad;
she is also concerned with what will happen to the neighbors cement patios and
swimming pools during construction.
Councillor John Nutting of Ward Seven stated that the residents were sincere in
their expression of concern for this proposal. This development was "planning in
reverse" and made a mockery of the R-1 zoning district. The clean up of the pond
is wonderful idea, but who will maintain the area "down the road?" He raised the
issue of the ejector pump causing undue noise and also what contingency plans were
made in the event of a power failure. The storage capacity of the sewer storage
tanks vs. the repair time should be investigated.- He also raised the issue of erosion
problems on the site during construction.
Councillor Joseph Centorino, Councillor-at-large, spoke in opposition to the
proposal. He feels the proposal is a misuse and a distortion of the Cluster Zoning
Ordinance. There are too many units--it must be cut down drastically.
Mr. John Raynes of 3 Peter Road noted that in the area where the abutting
neighbors have five lots, the developer plans to put nine--almost double the amount
of units in the same amount of space: He reiterated concerns for drainage and
water pressure.
Attorney Atkins summed up the neighbor's concerns with the request that the
Planning Board consider that no input from the neighbors was obtained prior to the
preparation of the plan and to consider the misuse of the cluster concept in this
case.
Walter Power stated that the Planning Board must consider all aspects of the
proposal. They must consider the developer's rights vs. the concerns of the
abuttors. More input will be obtained from the developer and the neighbors before
any final decision is made. He suggested a representative of the neighbors be
designated and it ws agreed Councillor Nutting would serve in that capacity. He
added the Board does not take their responsibility lightly.
There being no further discussion on this issue, the public hearing was declared
closed.
•
Minutes-of Meeting--April 19, 1984 Page 9
MINUTES-
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, the Minutes of April
5, 1984, were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
BOARD OF.APPEAL AGENDA
The Planning Board reviewed the upcoming Board of Appeal agenda and found no
petition they felt needed particular input on their part. Chairman Walter Power
noted, however, that plans are still underway for the,Board to meet informally with
the Board of Appeal in the near future.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. -Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
J
i
Y
• Minutes of Meeting
May 3, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, May 3, 1984. Present were Abby Burns, Kenneth May, Donald Hunt,
Walter Power, City.Planner Gerard Kavanaugh, and Planning Board Aide Charles
Frederiksen. Normand Houle, David Goodof, William Cass, and Edward Stevenson
were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
MCNEIL AND ASSOCIATES, COLLINS COVE--PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION
Mr. Thomas Southworth of McNeil Associates was present to give the Board an
overview of the proposed development of the former Health Hospital site on
Collins Cove (Essex Street Extension and Memorial Drive). Mr. Southworth gave a
brief update of the status of the project.
He noted that in 1980 the City asked for proposals for development of the Health
Hospital site and McNeil's proposal was accepted by the City. Several neighborhood
meetings were held for input from the abuttors and the Planning Department found
that the use the neighbors seemed to want the most was for condominiums.
Ultimately, thirty-six condominiums were planned based on the wishes of the
neighbors. They felt this number would have minimal impact on the neighborhood,
I` City services, schools, etc. Further, they would have the further benefit of being
situated such that the visual impact of the power plant could be minimized. They ._
plan to save the mature trees on the site, have a good deal of open space, and, as
part of their agreement with the City have provided access to Collins Cove. A
boat-launching facility will be available for the residents of the development. They
will be working with the existing grades.
Since being designated as the developer, they have been trying to work out the
details of the agreement with the City Council. The purchase and sales agreement
was signed by Mayor Levesque and voted by a majority of the City Council. The
City Solicitor at that time ruled the vote was in order. Their own law firm has also
determined that the vote was in order and they are currently working with Mayor
Salvo and City Solicitor O'Brien to resolve the matter.
Having been selected as the developer, they are now in the process of developing
site plans and topographical plans. Site plans with building footprints and road
locations, water, sewer, utility plans, etc. are now being developed. They will be
developing the site consistent with the zoning by-laws, and are tentatively
scheduled before the Board of Appeal for May 23, 1984. They would like some input
from the Planning Board prior to that time as to concept approval. They feel their
arguments for developing are good and the neighbors are supportive, so they are
hoping for success with the Board of Appeal. They intend to build two-bedroom
units with a clubhouse and will sell them for between $130,000 and $150,000. He
emphasized they will be a spacious size and the location is excellent, so they feel
the units will be quite marketable.
•
• _4� ,
• Minutes of Meeting—May 3, 1984 Page 2
Mr. Southworth noted that the access will be located according to neighborhood
wishes to have the least impact on the neighborhood as possible. A second
emergency access will be constructed according to the wishes of the Fire and Police
Departments. They wish to maximize the open space and feel their concept is good
and a good use of the site. The neighbors are supportive and the project will
generate tax dollars for the City.
Mr. Southworth showed plans and photographs of what type of unit they will be
constructing. They propose to use a traditional theme with cedar shingle exteriors
and possibly some brick. They feel this will incorporate the historic theme of the
City. The units will have the visual impact of a center entrance colonial style of
home. The Cove side of the buildings will have sliding glass doors in order to
maximize the views.
Walter Power asked if they will be using the space under the roof line and Mr.
Southworth replied in the negative. Abby Burns asked if they intend to build on
slabs or full basements and Mr. Southworth felt that slabs were most likely due to
the large amount of ledge on the site. Basements may be possible in some of the
units. Some enclosed parking is being considered and Mr. Southworth showed the
Board a preliminary drawing of parking garages with the same carriage
house/colonial type of theme. Walter Power asked how many parking spaces would
be included and Mr. Southworth replied there would be two per unit with some
additional for guests.
• Regarding road width, etc. Mr. Southworth noted he will be looking to the Board
and the Planning Department for guidance regarding this issue. He further noted
that McNeil and Associates does all its own construction and management.
Walter Power noted that the proposed walkway along the Cove's edge is not shown
on the plan. Mr. Southworth noted it was shown on the site plan. The walkway will
be part of the deed and will ultimately be owned by the City. As to who will
ultimately maintain the walkway is somewhat ambiguous at the moment. They will
likely suggest that a small maintenance fee be charged, but this matter will be
worked out. A permanent easement around the perimeter of the property will be
part'of the agreement. Also, the location of the launching ramp will be done
according to the wishes of the neighborhood. Mr. Southworth feels that, although
the launching ramp will be limited to residents of the condominium association, in
actual fact the surrounding residents will likely use it as well.
Walter Power asked what the status of the Crow II Club was at this point and Mr.
Southworth noted that McNeil and Associates is willing to work with the club in
any way that they can.
Kenneth May asked what permits they will be looking for from the Planning Board
and Mr. Southworth replied they will be applying for a Cluster Special Permit.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 3, 1984 Page 3
Walter Power asked if they intend to use the clam flats as part of the density
calculations and Mr. Southworth replied in the affirmative, noting that a case in
Marblehead recently confirmed that this was acceptable. The land goes out to
mean low water and consists of approximately.7-1/2 acres. Mr. Southworth noted
that they intend to come before the Board following the Board of Appeal hearing.
Donald Hunt raised the issue of impact on schools and Mr. Southworth noted they
feel their market is aimed more towards "empty nesters." Ken May added that
there are ways the project can be designed to minimize the possibility of using the
den as a third bedroom; i. e. constructing no closet in that room. All these areas
will be discussed in greater detail when plans are more finalized.
FORM A--362 ESSEX STREET
Attorney Robinson, representing the petitioner, noted this is somewhat of an
unusual plan. In preparing the plan, the engineer did not certify that the plan
needed no approval not required endorsement, so it must be signed by the Planning
Board in order to be recorded and in order for a closing.
The lot lines have not changed and the Board of Appeal approved the conversion of
the units on the property into condominiums.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Donald Hunt, the Form A was
• endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so
voted.
FORM A--SALEM HOSPITAL
Attorney John Serafini Jr. was present to discuss this Form A. In converting
building space owned by the hospital into medical office condiminiums (which was
approved by the Board of Appeal), the "air space" must be subdivided in order to
release those properties from the mortgage agreement. They intend to lease-hold
approximately 15 office condominium units at present.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so voted.
MAINE POST AND BEAM, TEDESCO POND
Ken May felt that the issues raised by Attorney George Atkins at the public
hearing on this proposal were valid. The proposal does not meet the objectives of
the cluster ordinance. The basis for cluster development is to preserve open space
which this development basically does not do. There should be some valid reason
why the Board should grant this special permit. He personally preferred the other
plan. We are not protecting open space by granting this project.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 3, 1984 Page 4
Walter Power noted that the Board of Appeal did not actually turn the project
down as was represented by the developer. They were allowed to withdraw without
prejudice and it was assumed they would return to the Board of Appeal after making
some revisions to the plan. The question is whether, if the requirements of the
cluster ordinance are satisfied, the Planning Board can deny the application. He
feels this is less desirable subdivision that we had hoped for. He is not happy with
the open space. The Board should decide what they would like to see and then if
the developer can accomodate our ideas, fine.
Donald Hunt reiterated the feelings of the Board in being reluctant to grant this
plan.
Carl Gardner of Maine Post and Beam noted that the conceptual plan does not
conform to set back and side yard requirements, but their actual plan shows
buildings that do conform.
Abby Burns asked if the buffer zone constituted "useable" open space and Mr.
Gardner replied that the buffer zone will be "accessible and negotiable by the
average pedestrian" which is the definition they are using for "useable:' Walter
Power not that they are frustrated with trying to come up with a cluster plan for
this project which will satisfy all concerned parties. Mr. Gardner noted that a
conventional subdivision would not give as much open space as this plan. He added
that the pond improvements and some sort of public access agreement could satisfy
• the requirements the Board is looking for. Walter Power stated he is not in favor
of general public access to the pond. The largest loss of open space was
accomplished when the buildings were detached.
Gus Sharry, engineer for the project, noted that this is a special case--it is not a
"typical" cluster development. What one gets out of the project should be
considered; i. e. a cleaner pond. The configuration of the land makes this a special
type of development. Walter Power replied that the desire is to enhance the open
space, not overwhelm it.
Abby Burns asked if it was economically impossible to take out three or four units
and Mr. Gardner felt he was not able to say. Abby Burns asked if more open space
wouldn't add to the marketability of the project and Mr. Gardner stated he felt
that even half the number of units as are currently present would not satisfy the
neighbors. Ken May stated the Board recognized that the neighborhood will be
opposed no matter what happens; however, if the developer can present a project
which satisfies all governing criteria and will be an asset to the area and the
community, the Planning Board can act accordingly.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted that the plan, in his opinion, does not satisfy
the cluster requirements. He particularly mentioned the lack of useable open
space. This plan does not meet this requirement as set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 3, 1984 Page 5
Mr. Gardner noted they have removed the parking area which abuts the neighboring
homes. Walter Power noted that he is still bothered by the "open space" issue. Mr.
Gardner added they are focusing on the pond and buffering the homes from the
existing area. He feels this is the highest and best use of the site. The
development makes use of the natural conditions of the site.
Walter Power reiterated the Board's concerns as to the site being overwhelmed by
buildings. It is no longer a secluded setting. The Board has serious problems with
the overall project and the density. He emphasized the Board likes the developers
and the type of construction, but now the pond is overwhelmed. Mr. Gardner
replied they will be looking to the Board for guidance. Mr. Power replied we would
like to see less units, less pavement, up-grading of the development, more
amenities. He suggested the developer consider working with Attorney Atkins as a
spokesman for the neighborhood. Some compromise with and input from the
neighbors would be desirable.
Gerard Kavanaugh felt working with the neighbors was a good idea. He questioned
if the developer would consider cutting down the number of buildings. He further
suggested the developer work out a plan that would be acceptable to the Board. He
added he would be willing to work with the developers on the project.
ZONING AND SIGNAGE
• It was noted that input from Michael Moniz was needed in these these two areas.
Gerry Kavanaugh will be meeting with Michael and will make a preliminary
presentation to the Board regarding these issues in the near future. Walter Power
felt the B-5 area should be addressed first in light of recent issues.
BOARD OF APPEAL JOINT DISCUSSION
An informal discussion with the Board of Appeal will be held on Monday, May 7, at
7:30 p.m.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
Respec ully submitted,
l
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
r
• Minutes of Meeting
May 3, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, May 3, 1984. Present were Abby Burns, Kenneth May, Donald Hunt,
Walter Power, City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh, and Planning Board Aide Charles
Frederiksen. Normand Houle, David Goodof, William Cass, and Edward Stevenson
were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
MCNEIL AND ASSOCIATES, COLLINS COVE--PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION
Mr. Thomas Southworth of McNeil Associates was present to give the Board an
overview of the proposed development of the former Health Hospital site on
Collins Cove (Essex Street Extension and Memorial Drive). Mr. Southworth gave a
brief update of the status of the project.
He noted that in 1980 the City asked for proposals for development of the Health
Hospital site and McNeil's proposal was accepted by the City. Several neighborhood
meetings were held for input from the abuttors and the Planning Department found
that the use the neighbors seemed to want the most was for condominiums.
Ultimately, thirty-six condominiums were planned based on the wishes of the
neighbors. They felt this number would have minimal impact on the neighborhood,
City services, schools, etc. Further, they would have the further benefit of being
• situated such that the visual impact of the power plant could be minimized. They
plan to save the mature trees on the site, have a good deal of open space, and, as
part of their agreement with the City have provided access to Collins Cove. A
boat-launching facility will be available for the residents of the development. They
will be working with the existing grades.
Since being designated as the developer, they have been trying to work out the
details of the agreement with the City Council. The purchase and sales agreement
was signed by Mayor Levesque and voted by a majority of the City Council. The
City Solicitor at that time ruled the vote was in order. Their own law firm has also
determined that the vote was in order and they are currently working with Mayor
Salvo and City Solicitor O'Brien to resolve the.matter.
Having been selected as the developer, they are now in the process of developing
site plans and topographical plans. Site plans with building footprints and road
locations, water, sewer, utility plans, etc. are now being developed. They will be
developing the site consistent with the zoning by-laws, and are tentatively
scheduled before the Board of Appeal for May 23, 1984. They would like some input
from the Planning Board prior to that time as to concept approval. They feel their
arguments for developing are good and the neighbors are supportive, so they are
hoping for success with the Board of Appeal. They intend to build two-bedroom
units with a clubhouse and will sell them for between $130,000 and $150,000. He
emphasized they will be a spacious size and the location is excellent, so they feel
the units will be quite marketable.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 3, 1984 Page 2
Mr. Southworth noted that the access will be located according to neighborhood
wishes to have the least impact on the neighborhood as possible. A second
emergency access will be constructed according to the wishes of the Fire and Police
Departments. They wish to maximize the open space and feel their concept is good
and a good use of the site. The neighbors are supportive and the project will
generate tax dollars for the City.
Mr. Southworth showed plans and photographs of what type of unit they will be
constructing. They propose to use a traditional theme with cedar shingle exteriors
and possibly some brick. They feel this will incorporate the historic theme of the
City. The units will have the visual impact of a center entrance colonial style of
home. The Cove side of the buildings will have sliding glass doors in order to
maximize the views.
Walter Power asked if they will be using the space under the roof line and Mr.
Southworth replied in the negative. Abby Burns asked if they intend to build on
slabs or full basements and Mr. Southworth felt that slabs were most likely due to
the large amount of ledge on the site. Basements may be possible in some of the
units. Some enclosed parking is being considered and Mr. Southworth showed the
Board a preliminary drawing of parking garages with the same carriage
house/colonial type of theme. Walter Power asked how many parking spaces would
be included and Mr. Southworth replied there would be two per unit with some
additional for guests.
• Regarding road width, etc. Mr. Southworth noted he will be looking to the Board
and the Planning Department for guidance regarding this issue. He further noted
that McNeil and Associates does all its own construction and management.
Walter Power noted that the proposed walkway along the Cove's edge is not shown
on the plan. Mr. Southworth noted it was shown on the site plan. The walkway will
be part of the deed and will ultimately be owned by the City. As to who will
ultimately maintain the walkway is somewhat ambiguous at the moment. They will
likely suggest that a small maintenance fee be charged, but this matter will be
worked out. A permanent easement around the perimeter of the property will be
part of the agreement. Also, the location of the launching ramp will be done
according to the wishes of the neighborhood. Mr. Southworth feels that, although
the launching ramp will be limited to residents of the condominium association, in
actual fact the surrounding residents will likely use it as well.
Walter Power asked what the status of the Crow II Club was at this point and Mr.
Southworth noted that McNeil and Associates is willing to work with the club in
any way that they can.
Kenneth May asked what permits they will be looking for from the Planning Board
and Mr. Southworth replied they will be applying for a Cluster Special Permit.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 3, 1984 Page 3
Walter Power asked if they intend to use the clam flats as part of the density
calculations and Mr. Southworth replied in the affirmative, noting that a case in
Marblehead recently confirmed that this was acceptable. The land goes out to
mean low water and consists of approximately 7-1/2 acres. Mr. Southworth noted
that they intend to come before the Board following the Board of Appeal hearing.
Donald Hunt raised the issue of impact on schools and Mr. Southworth noted they
feel their market is aimed more towards "empty nesters." Ken May added that
there are ways the project can be designed to minimize the possibility of using the
den as a,third bedroom; i. e. constructing no closet in that room. All these areas
will be discussed in greater detail when plans are more finalized.
FORM A--362 ESSEX STREET
Attorney Robinson, representing the petitioner, noted this is somewhat of an
unusual plan. In preparing the plan, the engineer did not certify that the plan
needed no approval not required endorsement, so it must be signed by the Planning
Board in order to be recorded and in order for a closing.
The lot lines have not changed and the Board of Appeal approved the conversion of
the units on the property into condominiums.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Donald Hunt, the Form A was
• endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so
voted.
FORM A--SALEM HOSPITAL
Attorney John Serafini Jr. was present to discuss this Form A. In converting
building space owned by the hospital into medical office condiminiums (which was
approved by the Board of Appeal), the "air space" must be subdivided in order to
release those properties from the mortgage agreement. They intend to lease-hold
approximately 15 office condominium units at present.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so voted.
MAINE POST AND BEAM, TEDESCO POND
Ken May felt that the issues raised by Attorney George Atkins at the public
hearing on this proposal were valid. The proposal does not meet the objectives of
the cluster ordinance. The basis for cluster development is to preserve open space
which this development basically does not do. There should be some valid reason
why the Board should grant this special permit. He personally preferred the other
plan. We are not protecting open space by granting this project.
•
1
• Minutes of Meeting--May 3, 1984 Page 4
Walter Power noted that the Board of Appeal did not actually turn the project
down as was represented by the developer. They were allowed to withdraw without
prejudice and it was assumed they would return to the Board of Appeal after making
some revisions to the plan. The question is whether, if the requirements of the
cluster ordinance are satisfied, the Planning Board can deny the application. He
feels this is less desirable subdivision that we had hoped for. He is not happy with
the open space. The Board should decide what they would like to see and then if
the developer can accomodate our ideas, fine.
Donald Hunt reiterated the feelings of the Board in being reluctant to grant this
plan.
Carl Gardner of Maine Post and Beam noted that the conceptual plan does not
conform to set back and side yard requirements, but their actual plan shows
buildings that do conform.
Abby Burns asked if the buffer zone constituted "useable" open space and Mr.
Gardner replied that the buffer zone will be "accessible and negotiable by the
average pedestrian" which is the definition they are using for "useable:' Walter
Power noted that they are frustrated with trying to come up with a cluster plan for
this project which will satisfy all concerned parties. Mr. Gardner noted that a
conventional subdivision would not give as much open space as this plan. He added
that the pond improvements and some sort of public access agreement could satisfy
• the requirements the Board is looking for. Walter Power stated he is not in favor
of general public access to the pond. The largest loss of open space was
accomplished when the buildings were detached.
Gus Sharry, engineer for the project, noted that this is a special case--it is not a
"typical" cluster development. What one gets out of the project should be
considered; i. e. a cleaner pond. The configuration of the land makes this a special
type of development. Walter Power replied that the desire is to enhance the open
space, not overwhelm it.
Abby Burns asked if it was economically impossible to take out three or four units
and Mr. Gardner felt he was not able to say. Abby Burns asked if more open space
wouldn't add to the marketability of the project and Mr. Gardner stated he felt
that even half the number of units as are currently present would not satisfy the
neighbors. Ken May stated the Board recognized that the neighborhood will be
opposed no matter what happens; however, if the developer can present a project
which satisfies all governing criteria and will be an asset to the area and the
community, the Planning Board can act accordingly.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted that the plan, in his opinion, does not satisfy
the cluster requirements. He particularly mentioned the lack of useable open
space. This plan does not meet this requirement as set forth in the Zoning
Ordinance.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 3, 1984 Page 5
Mr. Gardner noted they have removed the parking area which abuts the neighboring
homes. Walter Power noted that he is still bothered by the "open space" issue. Mr.
Gardner added they are focusing on the pond and buffering the homes from the
existing area. He feels this is the highest and best use of the site. The
development makes use of the natural conditions of the site.
Walter Power reiterated the Board's concerns as to the site being overwhelmed by
buildings. It is no longer a secluded setting. The Board has serious problems with
the overall project and the density. He emphasized the Board likes the developers
and the type of construction, but now the pond is overwhelmed. Mr. Gardner
replied they will be looking to the Board for guidance. Mr. Power replied we would
like to see less units, less pavement, up-grading of the development, more
amenities. He suggested the developer consider working with Attorney Atkins as a
spokesman for the neighborhood. Some compromise with and input from the
neighbors would be desirable.
Gerard Kavanaugh felt working with the neighbors was a good idea. He questioned
if the developer would consider cutting down the number of buildings. He further
suggested the developer work out a plan that would be acceptable totheBoard. He
added he would be willing to work with the developers on the project.
ZONING AND SIGNAGE
It was noted that input from Michael Moniz was needed in these these two areas.
Gerry Kavanaugh will be meeting with Michael and will make a preliminary
presentation to the Board regarding these issues in the near future. Walter Power
felt the B-5 area should be addressed first in light of recent issues.
BOARD OF APPEAL JOINT DISCUSSION
An informal discussion with the Board of Appeal will be held on Monday, May 7, at
7:30 p.m.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
Respec ully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
• Minutes of Meeting
May 17, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, May 17, 1984. Present were Kenneth May, Edward Stevenson, Donald
Hunt, Normand Houle, Abby Burns, and William Cass. Also present were City
Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen. David
Goodof, Walter Power, and new member John Ahern were not present (Mr. Ahern
had yet to be sworn in).
Acting Chairman Kenneth May called the meeting to order at 7:42 p.m.
COLLINS COVE CONDOMINIUMS--MCNEIL & ASSOCIATES
Mr. Thomas Southworth of McNeil and Associates was present to give the Board a
brief summary of the presentation he had made at our last meeting. He is
scheduled to appear before the Board of Appeal on May 23, and would like some
comment from the Planning Board to go to the Board of Appeal prior to that time.
Kenneth May noted that if a variance for sideyard and attached cluster in an R-1
district is granted, and the proposal is for condominium units the Planning Board
would not have commenting jurisdiction over the project. Mr. Southworth replied
that he realized the project was not a subdivision as such; however, they have no
intention of by-passing the Planning Board. He feels it is appropriate to come
before the Planning Board for review.
Mr. Southworth then gave a brief overview of the proposal. They intend to
• construct 36 condominium units on the site of the former Health Hospital on
Memorial Drive and Essex Street Extension. The site contains seven acres of
uplands and approximately ten acres of mudflat. They intend to preserve the
mature trees on the site and use the topography of the site as best as possible.
They wish to construct the homes in such a manner as to provide a buffer from the
power plant (on the downside of the site). They plan to construct a small clubhouse
and as part of the deed for the property will provide a public access walkway
around the perimeter of the property. A small private beach will be part of the
project and two boat ramps, one of which will be public will be included. They will
construct the access into the project according to the wishes of the neighbors to
minimize impact of traffic on neighborhood children. A second emergency access
will be constructed according to the mandate of the Fire Department. They
propose at least one covered and one uncovered parking space per unit. Water and
sewer services will be tied into the municipal lines. A small graveyard which exists
on the site will also be preserved. The housing units will be two-bedroom units
built in a colonial type of style consistent with the area. The project has good
neighborhood support.
Donald Hunt asked if any amenities; i.e. a tennis court were planned and Mr.
Southworth replied that the site was not really suitable for tennis courts. He added
that the neighbors have seen the plan and were instrumental in the selection of
McNeil as the developer for the project.
•
I
• Minutes of Meeting==May 17, 1984 Page 2
Ken May stated that the Board will discuss their communication with the Board of
Appeal later in'the agenda and thanked Mr. Southworth for his presentation.
FORM A--JAMES POPPE, BRADFORD STREET
This involves a parcel of land to be conveyed from Mr. Poppe's neighbor, Mrs.
Kenney to Mr. Poppe for the purpose of enlarging his yard. Mr. Poppe intends to go
before the Board of Appeal on May 23 for permission to extend a non-conforming
lot.
Following a brief discussion, upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby
Burns, the Form A was endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not
required. It was so voted. The plan will be signed upon the granting of the variance
for the property from the Board of Appeal.
FORM A--ESSEX AND NEW LIBERTY STREETS
This involves the parcel of land where the Marine Arts Gallery is located. The
parcel was purchased from the Salem Redevelopment Authority some time ago, but
the deed needs to go through Land Court to clarify the lot lines. The plan to be
endorsed this evening shows the lines of Mr. Kiernan of the Marine Art Gallery,
plus a small parcel which will be deeded to the City.
Upon the motion of Edward Stevenson and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
• endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so voted.
MAINE POST AND BEAM (APRIL 19, 1984, Public Hearing)
Mr. Reid Blute, President of Maine Post and Beam, submitted a letter (attached
hereto and made a part hereof) from the developers revising the previously-
submitted plan to show eighteen rather than twenty units. This would provide
additional "useable" open space which seemed to be of some concern to the Board.
Mr. Blute estimates that an additional 11-plus thousand square feet of "useable"
open space (flat) is gained by the deletion of two dwelling units. He further noted
that the plan presented this evening also shows the tying in of walkways for access
to the pond area and the elimination of the parking which was located so close to
the Raynes residence on Peter Road. He further wished guidance from the Board
as to the elimination of one breakaway barrier gate at the end of Peter Road which
would provide additional space for buffer landscaping. It was felt by the Planning
Board that this would be acceptable as long as the Fire Deparment concurred.
Regarding the issue of accessible open space, the developers would like to propose
that an agreement be put in the deeds that limited access on a controlled basis
would be agreeable. They would like some City agency such as the Conservation
Commission or the Park and Recreation Department to have control over this and
serve as the administrator of a limited type of use; i. e. a school skating party or a
pollywog hunt in the Spring. The key would be limited use and access. It would
have
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 17, 1984 Page 3
to be strictly controlled and the language specifically drafted to handle this
properly. It was noted by several members of the Board that this could be a source
of friction in the future unless specifically spelled out.
Kenneth May asked what our time frame was and Planning Board Aide Charlie
Frederiksen noted that we have ninety days to act on the Special Permits, but the
time to act on the subdivision runs out shortly. An extension until June 1, 1984 was
included in the letter submitted this evening. Mr. May raised the issue as to
whether the Board would be in a position to vote on the project by May 31. Carl
Gardner stated that he envisions receiving some direction from the Board this
evening which will provide some input so that Maine Post and Beam can re-draft
their plan and the Board can act on May 31st. He is hopeful of a conditioned
approval at that time. Mr. May pointed out the Board was missing a critical
component in not having Walter Power's input on the proposal. However, the Board
will be polled as to their thoughts: Donald Hunt stated he is opposed to the project
as it is now presented. He would be in favor of.attached duplex units. There are
presently too many units on the site and he would not be in favor of any plan which
showed detached units such as are presented in this plan. Normand Houle agreed
that the original type of plan was preferable; however he would like to see fewer
units on this plan. He also raised the issue of the entrance being over the
Marblehead line and felt the water pressure issue should be addressed. Mr. Gardner
noted that he had met with Dana Snow of the Marblehead Water Department and
he was in favor of their proposal for re-charging run-off and clean-up of the pond.
Mr. Snow is disturbed with the entire Vinnin Square drainage project, however. As
• far as the water pressure issue is concerned, Richard Swenson and Thomas Burke
have stated they have no in-house capability to test the water pressure. Normand
Houle felt in general the developer had gone to great lengths to satisfy the
concerns of all persons involved in the project. He asked Mr. Blute if it was
possible to build fewer larger homes on the site and Mr. Blute felt it was
economically unfeasible. Edward Stevenson felt he was generally comfortable with
the proposed plan. He would prefer fewer units as well. He emphasized the
importance of a workable agreement with the homeowners association regarding
the use of the open space. Bill Cass asked what the square footage of the lots were
to be and Mr. Blute replied between 4400 and 4500 square feet. In response to a
question from Abby Burns Mr. Blute noted that the difference between attached
and unattached units, Mr. Blute noted there is a 25% differential in construction
costs, the attached being the more cost effective to construct. He added that they
are still open to pursuing an attached unit plan, but feel they must have some sort
of approval from the Planning Board before proceeding in this direction. They wish
to have a foundation to go on. He also noted, that despite some feelings to the
contrary the fact the original plan presented attached units was the crux of the
Board of Appeal potential for disapproval. Abby Burns stated she would be happy
with sixteen attached units and alot of open space. Mr. Blute noted he would like
opinions directed to this particular plan. Abby Burns felt that eighteen units was
still too many--there was still not enough open space. William Cass felt that
reducing the number of units and spreading them out would enhance the
surrounding property values and would perhaps be more palatable to the neighbors.
If the number of units were reduced
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 17, 1984 Page 4
to compare favorably with other areas of the City where property values were
good, it might become a more palatable project. He personally could support a
reduction of perhaps two units. By dropping the number of units and increasing the
lot size, the dollar value of the lots could increase.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh felt the Board must deal with the density issue and
with where they would like to see the additional open space. Should they remove
units from one end of the project or within the existing lots? The developer needs
the input on the number of units and the layout of the project.
Kenneth May stated the "project does nothing for him." He would like to see
something unique on the site, regardless of the numbers. Nothing beyond the fact
the units will be Maine Post and Beam homes is unique about the proposal. He
would not be in favor of any more than sixteen units maximum. He would like to
see more open space in the middle of the project. He, however, is not convinced
the project is beneficial. Reid Blute felt the reclamation of the pond was a major
benefit to the City.
Donald Hunt felt the agreement by which the accessible open space issue is handled
should be part of the approval process. The question of liability or lawsuits should
be looked at very carefully. Mr. Blute stated he agreed 100%. Edward Stevenson
felt that sixteen units would be more palatable. Normand Houle felt they should
take out two units at differing locations to provide more visual open space area.
Carl Gardner noted that in doing this the roadway could be a problem. It would be
• better to take off units from the end of the project. Ken May felt that creating
more visual open space in the middle of the project would be more acceptable to
the neighbors. Gerry Kavanaugh noted the Board has three options: To reduce the
number of units by taking them off the end; to increase the lot sizes and decrease
the number of units; or take out one or more units at some location in the
subdivision. Stuart Abrams, part owner of the land, felt the first or third option
was preferable to the second.
Councillor John Nutting, Ward 7 councillor, asked what the "bottom line" of the
feasibility of the project would be. Could they live with thirteen units, twelve? He
asked if the developers had talked with the abuttors regarding the project. He
feels that eighteen units was still too dense to the neighbors. He requested the
Planning Board inspect the site again. He also strongly urged the the developers to
meet again with the neighbors. Mr. Blute replied he does not know what the
"bottom line" of this project would be. He needs something approved before he can
determine this. It may be that what is approved is not feasible economically.
Following further discussion, the consensus of the Board was they would like more
open space and they would could live with removing the units from the end of the
project.
Regarding the custody of the open land, the consensus of the Board was that it
should be under the custody of the Conservation Commission.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 17, 1984 Page 5 -
BOARD OF APPEAL AGENDA
Regarding Collins Cove, the Board expressed some concern as to the possibility of
control of the project ending with the granting of the requested variances from
Board of Appeal. A letter will be sent to the Board of Appeal stating the Planning
Board is in favor of the project, but wish to monitor the progress. The possibility
of the Board of Appeal approval being conditioned upon Planning Board site plan
approval will be suggested. Gerry Kavanaugh will also attend the meeting to
clarify this matter with the Board of Appeal if necessary. Upon the motion of
Abby Burns and second of Edward Stevenson, a letter stating our concerns will be
sent. It was so voted.
A letter will also be sent to the Board of Appeal clarifying the matter of Mr.
Poppe's Form A, which will be signed upon the granting of the requested variances.
A third letter expressing general support for the proposal of Robert Bramble Trust
to construct thirty-nine condominium units in the former Telephone Company
building on Norman Street will be sent. This type of use for underutilized and/or
vacant buildings is consistent with the Master Plan and helpful to commercial
concerns in the downtown. However, concern will also be expressed in the letter as
to the question of adequate parking in the area and the Board of Appeal will be
requested to consider this matter carefully (see attached letters).
• WINTER ISLAND SIGN VARIANCE
The Winter Island Commission has requested a variance to construct a sign at
Columbus Square above the Juniper Cove Community Club Bulletin Board. Upon
the motion of Edward Stevenson and second of Abby Burns, it was so voted, with
Donald Hunt wishing to be recorded as opposed.
FAFARD WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Edward Stevenson, the Special
Permit was approved. It was so voted.
PICKMAN PARK WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT
The matter of the Pickman Park Wetlands Special Permit will be addressed at our
next meeting after pertinent Minutes can be reviewed.
PICKMAN PARK--PRESTON ROAD ACCESS
As part of the approval of the Pickman Park Subdivision, a construction access was
to be approved by the Planning Board. A petition signed by several residents was
submitted which suggested that Preston Road would be the best access for
construction vehicles. Upon review of the road system of the area, it was agreed
f
Minutes of Meeting--May 17, 1984 Page 6
that Preston Road would be the logical access road unless otherwise recommended
at a future time. Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Edward
Stevenson, it was so voted.•
MINUTES
Upon the motion of William Cass and second of Abby Burns, the Minutes of April 19
and May 3 were approved. It was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
'CO
e �i of lMna, fflamr4metts
• 3 �° ��2LIlIT1It� �IIMT�1
a 9
DICE $ale tt Green
AGENDA--May 31, 1984
1. Maine Post and Beam
2. Re-zoning discussion
3. Pickman Park Wetlands Special Permit
4. Approval of Minutes--May 17, 1984
• Minutes of Meeting
May 31, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, May 31, 1984. Present were Abby Burns, John Ahern, Edward
Stevenson, Walter Power, Kenneth May, and Donald Hunt. Also present were City
Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen. David
Goodof, Normand Houle, and William Cass were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
MAINE POST AND BEAM
Mr. Reid Blute of Maine Post and Beam gave a brief update of the proposal. Since
the public hearing on April 19, the developers have met with the Board many times
in an effort to formulate a plan with which the Planning Board, the developers and
the surrounding neighborhood could be comfortable. In discussing the plan at the
last Board meeting on May 17, Mr. Blute felt two issues seemed to be uppermost in
the minds of the Board--the reduction in the density and the provision for more
open space. With those concerns in mind, the developers showed two alternative
plans. Both plans reduced the number of units to sixteen, which seemed to be a
number the Board could accept, but one plan removes the two units from the end of
the project, and the second eliminates two units from the "middle." Mr. Blute
noted that by removing the two units from the end, they realize twice the open
space as previously. By removing the units in the middle, a viewing "corridor" is
• somewhat apparent;however, he feels the first alternative achieves what the Board
desires more concretely. Additionally, the overall impact on the pond would be
minimized with the first alternative due to the reduction in the amount of roadway
required. Carl Gardner of Maine Post and Beam further noted that the Board had
requested he meet with the Town of Marblehead regarding the issue of the pond.
Mr. Gardner reported he had done so and a letter from Mr. Snow of the Marblehead
Water and Sewer Department was submitted.
Councillor John Nutting of Ward Seven noted that the Planning Board did indeed
discuss the matter of density and open space at their last meeting. However, he did
not get the impression that a set number of units was decided at that time. He felt
the Board stated that they could not approve more than sixteen.
Attorney George Atkins, representing the neighbors of the area, stated his
comments regarding the proposal are not much different than those he addressed at
the public hearing in April. He feels this is still not a cluster development in a legal
sense. He questioned if the lots met the conformity requirements set forth in the
Zoning Ordinance and City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh replied those requirements
had been satisfied. Mr. Atkins further raised the issue of whether those Board
members present this evening who were not present at the public hearing could
vote on the proposal.
Chairman Walter Power stated that the Board is trying to recognize the rights of
the developer to develop a site vs. the citizens rights to object. He was hopeful
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 31, 1984 Page 2
of reaching a compromise of some sort which would satisfy the developer, the
neighbors and the Board. The Planning Board does not wish to make a unilateral
decision on the proposal and are trying to give everyone a chance to have their say.
It is his desire to set up a dialogue. Mr. Atkins cautioned the Board not to
disregard the specific legal issues which need to be addressed.
Mrs. Thais Gauthier of 24 Chandler Road stated she is not opposed to buildings on
the site; however, they would like to see single-family dwellings similar to the
homes being built on Linden Avenue. The concept of self-maintained, self-
contained units is of concern to the neighborhood. Taking out two units does not
solve the drainage and flooding problems in the area. Walter Power replied that the
Planning Board's aim is to insure that there are no environmewntal problems
inflicted on the area by the building of this development. Mrs. Gauthier raised the
issue of the drainage from Chandler Road. There are no catch basins on Chandler
Road and if the development is constructed as proposed there is a possibility of the
water being dammed up and causing flooding problems. Mr. Power stated they will
look in to the matter of drainage in the area. Edward Stevenson noted that the
situation would be no different with the construction of a conventional single-
family subdivision.
Mr. John Vaters of Lillian Road noted if the development was constructed by
extending Peter Road and making a T type of road ending, the natural flow of
water would not be disturbed. Walter Power declared that regardless of the type of
• building, drainage can be addressed. The Board has no intention of exacerbating
water problems in the neighborhood. Mr. Vaters raised the issue of the water main
at Peter Road. The addition of sixteen more homes on that main could cause'
additional water pressure problems. Mr. Power stated the water will be looped and
the City has said this will improve the pressure rather than exacerbating the
problem. Mr..Vaters felt the small water lines in the area cannot handle the
addition of any more homes. Mr. Power stated the Board will look into this
further. Mr. Kavanaugh noted this has been a recurring concern throughout the
City; however, the Planning Board has received explicit information from the
former City Engineer that the pressures in the neighborhood are adequate and the
addition of these homes will not affect that. Mr. Kavanaugh referred to a letter
from former City Engineer Fletcher which confirmed these comments (attached
hereto). Mr. Gerard Pelletier of Lillian Road stated that he has lived in the area for
twenty years and did not experience any problems until eight years ago. The
pressure is so poor he cannot use his garden hose and his toilet at the same time.
Donald Hunt again referred to the letter from Mr. Fletcher and questioned if the
problem may be in the pipes coming into the individual homes. Mr. John Raynes of
Peter Road confirmed that previously the water pressure was fine, but not it was
very poor. Mr. Raynes further noted that the type of housing proposed does not
conform to the neighborhood. The population of the area will likely triple. He
further raised the issue of who will maintain the properties and the containment
dam in the pond. He feels the abuttors need some assurance that maintenance
"down the road" will be provided. He asked who really benefits from this
development? Why would the Planning,Board make exceptions to the ordinance for
•
• Minutes of. Meeting--May 31, 1984 Page 3
betterment of a few against the wants of many.
Mr. Raymond Sweeney of 18 Chandler Road asked whether if this were to be a
"normal" subdivision, would the roads be built to subdivision control specifications.
Mr. Power replied in the affirmative. Mr. Sweeney noted that if the homes were
built to subdivision specifications, then the City could have control. As it stands
with this proposal, the City does not have to concern itself with the project.
Drainage, etc. does not have to addressed. He added that the project now looks like
an "Army barracks" and the reduction of units does not help the situation. Mr.
Power replied that the roadways will be maintained by a homeowner's association
and the.common open space.will also be included in that maintenance agreement.
The City insists upon all services be built to subdivision specifications. Road widths
can be modified somewhat, but still have to be approved by all appropriate
agencies. Mr. Sweeney noted that corporations have been known to go bankrupt
and the posssibility of the taxpayers of the City having to take this on should be
considered.
Attorney Atkins noted he appreciates what the Planning Board is trying to do
regarding trying to reach a compromise between the neighbors and the developer.
Regarding the rights of the developer, Mr. Atkins felt the rights of the developer
are to develop a piece of property according to the Zoning Ordinance. Is the
P_lanning.Board here to change the terms of the Zoning Ordinance? The rights of
the neighbors are to have the Zoning Ordinance adhered to. He feels the
requirements are not met in this proposal. Walter Power replied that the Board
attempted to get a good design with lasting value for the City for a difficult piece
of property. They were hopeful of a dialogue with the neighbors to provide further
input into their decision-making.
Ken May suggested that some more discussion among the Board members would be
needed. He feels we are far from making a decision and raised the possibility of
the developer requesting an extension. He further suggested that the Board
consider if this project is indeed permissible under the Zoning Ordinance. It is
clear that the Ordinance does permit us to approve this project if certain conditions
are met. The other question is that the whole point of cluster is to have a "trade-
off" of sorts in which something is gained in return for something given up. He is
still not'satisfied that his lay-out achieves this. He feels the project is still a dense
development for an R-1 area. He sees the clean-up of the pond as the biggest value
of this project.
Abby Burns asked what the percentage of open land was with the present proposal
and Mr. Gardner replied the amount of useable open space has been expanded to
67,000 square feet. This more than conforms to the Zoning Ordinance. He added
that this useable space consists of areas which are "accessible and negotiable" for
pedestrian use. He also noted that regarding the common area, documents will be
required as to maintenance, etc. The pond agreement will allow access to the area
on a limited basis and a detailed agreement will be drafted. The responsiblity for
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 31, 1984 Page 4
permitting the usage will be with the Conservation Commission. He added there
are 3.1 acres of pond and 4.5 acres of remaining land. They anticipate that 1-14
acres of that remaining land will be useable open space. Regarding the issue of
whether the plan conforms to the setback requirements, etc., they have provided a
plan to the building inspector that conforms. Regarding the drainage, they feel the
dry wells they intend to construct will more than handle any problems. The dry
wells would have overflows and they are willing to work with the City in any way
they can to make sure that no damming takes place. Mr. Gardner added that the
issue of snow removal at the breakaway barriers would be the responsibility of the
homeowners association. Mr. Raymond Sweeney asked if the developer was willing
to post a bond in perpetuity and Mr. Gardner replied that their aim is to provide
maintenance of the area and it will be clear to those who purchase units there
before they buy. It is in the City's interest to leave maintenance responsibility in
the hands of the homeowners. He emphasized additionally the the looping of the
water will do nothing but benefit the pressure in the area.
Mrs. Berube presented a photograph of her yard at 20 Chandler Road. She is
concerned over the water pressure, landscaping and loss of privacy. Walter Power
asked if she would prefer plantings to a fence dividing the properties. Mrs. Berube
replied she would like "very tall trees."
Mr. Pelletier noted that when he bought his property several years ago he was
assured the area would remain single family. He chose to locate in that
• neighborhood for that purpose. Mr. Vaders added that the neighbors are not anti-
development, they would like to see the area cleaned up there; however, they are
opposed to what is being proposed. It does not conform to the existing
neighborhood. Kenneth May noted that these are not condominiums, they are single
family homes with a homeowners' association. Mr. Vaders raised the issue of the
maintenance of the barriers and the fact that children will be cutting through to go
to school, etc.
Mr. Dana Snow of the Marblehead Water and Sewer Commission was present and
submitted a letter for the Board's perusal (attached hereto). He further noted that
the City of Salem has been remiss in their responsibility to maintain the water
quality of both this pond and Legg's Hill Pond. These ponds feed their well fields
which they may need to use in the near future. He referred to an Order of
Conditions (ff64-24) which was issued for the DPW Vinnin Square Drainage project
which put responsibility for maintenance of the pond water quality in the hands of
the City. Marblehead is now interested in making sure the water quality does not
deteriorate further. Kenneth May felt this would be an argument in favor of the
developer. In addition to cleaning up Tedesco Pond, the developer has agreed not
to use road salt on any of their interior roads and walkways. They would, however,
like to discuss the possibility of using calcium chloride on their walkways. Mr.
Snow said this was open to discussion. Kenneth May asked if Mr. Snow would
express an opinion as to whether what is proposed for the pond would improve the
water quality situation and Mr. Snow replied that, based on the little he has studied
on the project to date, he would agree that what is proposed could only improve the
pond water quality. Carl Gardner added he would like to see Marblehead, Salem and
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 31, 1984 Page 5
the developer work together on this issue and any other which may be of.interest.
Mr. Snow stated in response to a question from Walter Power that he felt what was
being proposed for the pond was excellent. Walter Power further questioned Mr.
Snow as to his opinion of the dry well system and Mr. Snow felt they would appear
to be beneficial to the drainage of the area.
There followed several minutes of discussion regarding the issue of an extension of
time to consider this project. Mr. Blute stated he did not wish to put undue
pressure on the Board, but would like to provide any information the Board wishes.
Walter Power felt that water pressure and drainage needed to be addressed in
further detail with City officials. Kenneth May added that the change in the
roadway due to the reduction in units should be discussed with Captain Goggin of
the Fire Department to ascertain that enough room for turnaround of emergency
vehicles was provided.
Councillor John Nutting urged the Board to consider the sincere concerns of the
neighbors. There were strong feelings expressed this evening and he urged the
Board to take all these issues into account. He felt the Board should not settle for
sixteen units.
Edward Stevenson asked if the Board could have input into the homeowners'
agreements regarding maintenance, liability, open space access, etc. Walter Power
replied the Board should have input and the language should strictly address these
issues.
• There followed some discussion as to whether the Conservation Commission could
be liable for any accidents incurred on the open space and the consensus was they
would not.
Following some further discussion, Reid Blute formally requested an extension until
June 7, 1984. Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Donald Hunt, the
extension was accepted. It was so voted. City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh stated
that once the issues were clearly delineated, he would make every effort to get the
answers for the Board. It was felt that the issues of drainage, water pressure, and
the input of the Fire Marshall were foremost. Mr. Vaders urged the Board to
consider the density issue as well.
FORM A--MICHAEL PENNELL, SOPHIA ROAD
This involves the division of a lot into two parcels. Mr. Pennell wishes to build a
home on one of the lots. It was noted that if the parcel was split, the second lot
would not have 100' of frontage. Mr. Pennell could still build on the site where he
proposes, but any person wishing to subdivide off that lot would have to come in for
a full Form C filing.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
denied. It was so voted.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--May 31, 1984 Page 6
RE-ZONING--GERRY KAVANAUGH
Due to time constraints, the Board will take up this issue in detail at our next
meeting. However, City Planner Gerry Kavanaugh passed out a packet for the
Board's consideration which outlines the high priorities regarding re-zoning and
offers some strategies for addressing those priorities (see attached sheet). He
urged the Board to look over the proposals and they will be discussed in detail on
June 7.
PICKMAN PARK WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Kenneth May, the Wetlands Special
Permit for Pickman Park was approved with the additional conditions that state as
follows: "-Because the plans presented by the developer at the public hearing did not
provide information as to utility service, the Planning Board requires that utilities
including gas, electricity, fuel, water, and sewage disposal, shall be located and
constructed so as to protect against breaking, leaking, shortcircuiting, grounding,
or igniting or any other damage due to flooding." The second condition states,
"Any modification of the plans presented shall require review by the Planning
Board." It was so voted.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby Burns, the minutes of May 17,
1984 were approved. It was so voted.
NEW MEMBER
Walter Power welcomed our new member, John Ahern, to the Board and noted they
were all looking forward to a long and productive tenure.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
Respe tiffnullnynsuubmitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
TOWN OF MARBLEHEAD
Water and Sewer Commission
P. 0. BOX 1108
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
Office: Tower Way
Dana E. Snow 631-2694 — 631-0102
Superintendent SEWER WATER
May 31, 1984
Mr. Walter Powers
City of Salem Planning Board
Salem, MA 01970
Dear Sir:
With reference to the proposed development called Tedesco Pond Place,
the Marblehead Water and Sewer Commission feels that there are still areas
of concern which must be addressed within.the proposed development. Our
primary concerns lie with the possible future contamination of the pond located
directly downstream of Tedesco Pond Place which flows into a public water
supply owned by the Town of Marblehead. The areas which we feel need special
attention are:
1. Strict adherence to a policy for prohibiting the use of road salt or
the chemicals for the purpose of de-icing road surfaces.
2. Guarantees that the proposed sewer system will be of adequate size
to handle the proposed development and perhaps with enough capacity to handle
other homes in the area that do not have access to the city sewer system.
3. That the Town of Marblehead be given the right to review the language
of the homeowners' association agreements pertaining to the maintenance of
sewerage, drainage and pond sedimentation areas.
These are the three areas of direct concern with the proposed development.
However, the City of Salem must bear responsibility for the maintenance of the
drainage system which enters the pond. The Order of Conditions may be found
under D.E.Q.E. File # 64-24.
Sincerely,
DES:V �Danow
Superintendent
5
s
Coity of '�$a(ern, 'Hassac uset#s
wa s
One _$ttlem Green
AGENDA--June 7, 1984
1. Maine Post and Beam
2. John Hamilton, approval of condominium plan.
3. James MacDowell and Frank Romano--preliminary discussion of proposed development
4. Re-zoning package
5. Board of Appeal agenda
6. Approval of Minutes
•
MINUTES OF MEETING
• June 7,1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday, June 7, 1984. Present were Donald Hunt, Kenneth May, Normand
Houle, Edward Stevenson, Abby Burns, and Walter Power. Also present were City
Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen. David
Goodof, William Cass, and John Ahern were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
MAINE POST AND BEAM
Pursuant to the public hearing of April 19, 1984, the Planning Board was granted an
extension to this evening's meeting to finalize a decision on this proposed
subdivision.
Walter Power noted that during our last meeting the effect of the proposed
subdivision on the surrounding neighborhood was discussed.and specific requests
were made to the developers in order to alleviate some of the neighborhood
concern.
Based upon that meeting, it was the consensus of the Planning Board that no more
than sixteen units would be a reasonable number for the parcel in question. Based
• on that opinion, a ruling from the Fire Department was requested addressing the
reduction in roadway which would be included in the amended plan. A letter from
Captain Goggin of the Fire Department was read for the record (attached hereto)
stating he is satisfied with the proposed changes.
A second letter was read for the record from James MacDowell, acting in a
consulting capacity for the City regarding this project (attached hereto). In order
to provide adequate drainage for the Eleanor Road area, the developers are
proposing a catch basin to be constructed over the existing 60" drain. Jim stated he
has no problem with this proposal. Walter Power and Donald Hunt expressed
concern for the drainage from Elm Avenue and Mr. MacDowell replied that
presumable the run-off would drain into the new proposed drainage system planned
by the developers.
Some concern was also raised for the steep slope from Maple Avenue and both Mr.
Gardner and Mr. MacDowell noted the Conservation Commission had addressed
erosion control measures in their Order of Conditions. Chairman Walter Power also
read a letter from Hancock Survey (attached hereto) addressing the issues raised at
our previous meeting.
There followed several minutes of discussion regarding the adequacy of water
pressure in the area. Maine Post and Beam had independent testing performed
which stated that the water pressure was more than adequate for the additional units.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 2
James MacDowell concurred with these figures. Carl Gardner of Maine Post and
Beam noted that Proposition 2yz had virtually eliminated the City's hydrant-flushing
program which has an adverse effect on water delivery.
Walter Power asked how many houses were serviced by this particular water
delivery system and Mr. Gardner replied approximately sixty. This would include
the sixteen homes they are proposing. Jim MacDowell noted that fifteen gallons of
water per minute are needed to serve one house, so the 875 gallons per minute
found by the Maine Post and Beam testing would serve over seventy homes.
Following.further discussion, it was recommended that the new City Engineer make
a determination as to whether the construction of the proposed sixteen new homes
would have any detrimental effect on the surrounding neighborhood and if so, that
it is resolved prior to construction.
Normand Houle felt that the water and drainage problems must be resolved to
everyone's satisfaction prior to construction. He suggested that a condition of the
approval of this subdivision be that a review by the City Engineer be made and a
determination made as to the effects of this project on the surrounding
neighborhood. Any detrimental effects shall be resolved prior to commencement of
construction.
Walter Power raised the issue of what the City is getting in return for the cluster
type of subdivision. Kenneth May felt the proposal was technically correct in
• meeting the requirements of the ordinance, but he questioned whether it met the
spirit of the cluster ordinance.
Walter Power felt that the City was gaining 1) open space; 2) a reduction in
infracstructure from an open subdivision plan; 3) pond clean-up; 4) a resolution to
the drainage and flooding problems in the area; and 5) public access.
There followed considerable discussion on the conditions to be included in the
approval. Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Abby Burns, if all
conditions are addressed, sixteen units shall be approved as a suitable number for
the proposed subdivision. It was so voted, five in favor, one abstention.
The discussion then turned to the waivers requested by the developer (see attached
list). The first requested waiver was from sidewalks. Several minutes of discussion
ensued on the merits of bituminous material which is'proposed for the "Cape Cod
berms" which are proposed for the subdivision in lieu of curbs and sidewalks.
Carl Gardner noted that bituminous problems resulted from those areas where
there was an extruded berm. A Cape Cod berm is 1' x 4" and is monolithic with the
top course. Problems such as are experienced with plowing snow are not a problem
here. Normand Houle asked if warm weather and a heavy vehicle could affect the
berm and Mr. Gardner felt there was no problem.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 3
•
Donald Hunt stated he could not support the use of bituminous in this development
or any other development in the City. In response to a question from Normand
Houle, Mr. Gardner stated that Cape Cod berms have been used in Maine,
Topsfield, and on Cape Cod with much success.
Regarding the requested waiver from road width, Walter Power noted that the
Subdivision Control Law requires 57 feet of road width, in this particular
development the reduction in pavement is an asset due to the reduced number of
dwelling units and corresponsing traffic and gain in open space.
Abby Burns asked what the surface of the walkways was going to be and Mr.
Gardner replied they intend to use "Man-pak" which is a crushed gravel type of
material. Abby Burns asked how this would be plowed and Mr. Gardner replied they
do not intend to plow this area. In response to an expression of concern from
Donald Hunt, Mr. Gardner noted this is different from Lynn-pak in that it is not so
fine a material and it is the next best thing to paving. Reid Blute added it is
maintenance free and is aesthetically pleasing. Donald Hunt felt this should be a
condition of the approval.
Regarding the hammerhead turnaround, the revised plan has met with the
satisfaction of the Fire Department. The utility easement described on the plan is
fifteen feet in width. Mr. Gardner delineated the easements on the plan. In
response to a question from Walter Power, Mr. Blute noted the easements and
• walkways were specifically laid out to maximize privacy.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Edward Stevenson, if the
Subdivision plan is approved, the waiver from centerline radii is approved. It was
so voted, five in favor, one abstention.
Upon the motion of Edward Stevenson and second of Normand Houle, the minimum
width of the street shall be thirty feet. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, a 24' road width
with Cape Cod berms, sidewalks being waived, and a walkway on one side was
approved. It was so voted, with two in opposition.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Houle, the sidewalks and
grass strips are waived. It was so voted.
Walter Power felt that a lay-out of the walkways from the parking lot to the
individual homes should be submitted prior to construction and that lay-out should
be approved by the Planning Board. The Planning Board wishes to reserve the right
to require more walkways or sidewalks after seeing a final plan.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 4
•
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the waivers will be
adopted with approval reservation by the Planning Board. It was so voted.
Kenneth May further noted that the Board would like approval of each lot lay-out
regarding driveways.
Walter Power submitted further conditions for the Board's consideration:
1. The honeowner's association rules shall stipulate that the plowing contract for
snow removal specifically address that the emergency access gate be kept free of
snow at all times and the road shall be accessible to emergency vehicles at all
times.
2. A catch basin shall be located back far enough to handle all run-off from
Eleanor Road and the catch basin shall be constructed with an overflow
mechanism.
Councillor John Nutting raise the issue of enforcement of the maintenance of the
emergency breakaway barrier. He also was concerned that the access could become
a regular means of ingress and egress to the development. It was generally felt by
the Board that it would be in the best interests of the residents of the Subdivision
to properly maintain the breakaway barrier. The possibility of locating a piece of
granite curb across the barrier to discourage general traffic use was discussed and
• it was felt it would need the approval of the Fire Department.
The catch basin alluded to earlier should be located away from any curbing so that
run-off would not be impeded during plowing.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Houle, the location of the
catch basin at the end of Eleanor Road shall be subject to the approval of the City
Engineer. The matter of a granite curb being installed to impede general traffic
through the emergency access shall be installed subject to the approval of the Fire
Department. It was so voted.
3. No fence shall be placed behind abutters' fences. Plantings of a homogeneous
nature shall be planted subject to the approval of the City Planner and Landscape
Designer. The developer shall work with the abutters in developing this landscape
plan. Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Abby Burns, it was so
voted.
4. Walkways shall be surfaced with cinder or small stone for easy maintenance.
The maintenance of all walkways and the foot bridge and sedimentation basin shall
be strictly adhered to.
James MacDowell noted that if the developers have made the pond water quality
improvements, it would be in the best interests of the homeowners to see that this
quality is maintained.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 5
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Hould, all improvements
to the common areas (i. e. walkways, pond improvements, etc.) shall be constructed
prior to any home being sold. It was so voted.
5. A covenant governing the maintenance of the common areas shall be submitted
to the Planning Board for approval. This agreement shall run with the land. Upon
the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, it was so voted.
6. All landscaping shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Director and the
Planning Board. Upon the motion of Edward Stevenson and second of Abby Burns,
it was so voted.
Councillor John Nutting raised the issue of the pumping station. He wishes to
ascertain that the station will be properly insulated against sound, etc. Carl
Gardner stated this was a condition raised by the Board of Health. The City
Engineer must also approve the design.
Councillor Nutting asked about street ighting. Reid Blute noted that only
lampposts would be used--no large street lights are proposed.
Walter Power read a letter from the Board of Health (attached hereto) for the
record.
• Regarding the sewage system, Walter Power raised the issue of electrical
interruption. He asekd what the storage capacity of the tank was and what
contingency plans were considered in the event of a long electrical interruption.
Mr. Blute replied the storage capacity of the tank is 24 hours and a gas portable
generator could be employed in the event of a longer electrical interruption. Jim
MacDowell felt this was common practice and complied with general accepted
standards.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Hould, the installation,
design, operation, and maintenance schedule of the sewage pumping station shall be
subject to the approval of the City Engineer. It was so voted.
The matter of useable open space was discussed in detail. It was agreed by all that
the abutters to the subdivision shall have access to the pond. Several options were
discussed as to how best to handle the matter of limited access. The possibility of
granting permits twice per year was considered, the setting up of specific events
under the aegis of the Conservation Commission was considered, as well as the
possibility of a conservation easement to the pond. Normand Houle asked if a
portion of the pond could be deeded to the City for access by residents and a "Pass
At Your Own Risk" sign be posted. The matter of liability is of some concern to the
Board.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 6
• Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, if the Cluster Special
Permit is approved, a condition of the approval shall be that the developers shall
provide the Planning Board, for their approval, an access plan for recreational use
of the open space prior to the sale of any homes. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby Burns, construction access
shall be from Tedesco Street only. It was so voted.
Reid Blute wished to propose an amendment to the condition that all common areas
be completed prior to any home being sold. He would prefer to state "prior to the
issuance of an occupancy permit." Kenneth May noted that individual waivers on
particular areas would be considered and agreed with Mr. Blute that there could be
construction impact on completed walkways, etc.
Several minutes of discussion ensued regarding the potential of the developer
selling off individual lots and the completed subdivision not being constructed by
Maine Post and Beam. The Board felt they needed a mechanism to protect against
this.
With this in mind, the developer requested an extension on this proposal until June
27, 1984. Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Kenneth May, the
extension was accepted. It was so voted.
JOHN HAMILTON--CONSENT TO BOARD OF APPEAL
• In October of 1983, Mr. John Hamilton petitioned the Board of Appeal for
permission to convert a building on the corner of Derby and Bentley Streets into six
condominium units and three stores. The petition was denied. However, the
petitioners made what they felt was a substantial change in the plan and have
appeared before the Board of Appeal again for a variance for six condominiums
with adequate parking. The petition was granted; however, consent from the
Planning Board that a substantial change in the plan was made must be granted
according to Chapter 40A, Section 16 of Massachusetts General Laws. Without this
consent, Mr. Hamilton must wait two years from the time of the denial of the first
plan.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Kenneth May, the consent was
granted because the new plan shows a residential use only and adequate parking is
provided. It was so voted. It was further noted that the Planning Department
agrees the plan shows a substantial change. All Planning Board members present
signed the consent.
NEW BUSINESS
A date of June 29, 1984, was set for the Planning Board dinner which will be held at
the House of Seven Gables.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
• Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
-a MINUTES OF MEETING
• July 5, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday, July 5, 1984. Present were Walter Power, Donald Hunt, Kenneth May,
Edward Stevenson, John Ahern, and Abby Burns. Also present were City Planner
Gerard Kavanaugh and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen. David Goodof,
William Cass, and Normand Houle were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
The Chairman opened the meeting by thanking Ed Stevenson for the use of the
House of Seven Gables for the Planning Board dinner. The Board extends their
thanks to the Stevensons for their hospitality and to Abby Burns for organizing the
party.
MAINE POST AND BEAM--TEDESCO POND PLACE--WETLANDS SPECIAL
PERMIT (PUBLIC HEARING--APRIL 199 1984)
Mr. Carl Gardner of Maine Post and Beam reviewed the plan which was submitted
this evening to address the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Gardner
noted that Mr. Bruce Poole of Sea Plantations was also present to answer any
questions regarding the pond and the sedimentation area.
• Mr. Gardner then proceeded to review for the Board their compliance with the
sections of the Zoning Ordinance which address wetlands issues. He noted that a
modified Order of Conditions was issued by the Conservation Commission which
addressed walkways, sedimentation areas, drainage, and erosien control during —
construction.
Regarding building locations, the plan submitted this evening shows proposed
locations and also shows a table of the elevations of all sixteen lots and buildings.
The plan also shows the locations of the dry wells with overflow mechanisms.
Eight dry wells are planned, Minimum floor elevations will be more than four feet
above the seasonal high water table. Mr. Gardner noted that test borings were not
done to determine this level; rather, it was estimated to be the same as the pond--
thirty-two feet. The basement levels will be located 1-y: feet above the seasonal
high water table. He added, however, that the basements will not be habitable
living space.
Regarding utilities, underground electricity, water and sewer lines are anticipated.
One section of sewer pipe will be installed below the 32' elevation. This area was
conditioned previously to be in accordance with accepted City and State standards.
John Ahern asked if they plan underground telephone and cable TV and Mr. Gardner
felt this seemed to be logical. Mr. Gardner noted that any utilities will not
impinge upon the ground water elevation except in that one instance noted
previously. Mr. Gardner further noted that no de-icing agents except calcium
chloride will be used and that will be used very sparingly.
, . Some discussion took place regarding the storage of petroleum on the site and Mr.
Gardner stated he was not clear as to whether this was strictly prohibited or not.
• Minutes of Meeting--July 5, 1984 Page 2
Kenneth May felt this would apply only to storage below the water table. Mr.
Gardner noted that the State standards regarding this matter are extremely
stringent. Walter Power asked what type of heating was anticipated and Mr.
Gardner replied that had not as yet been determined. Kenneth May noted that
storage tanks were not shown on the plan, so any decision regarding this would have
to be approved by the Board at a future time.
Walter Power asked if those parts of the Environmental Impact Statement which
needed to be addressed had been addressed and submitted and Mr. Gardner replied
they had not yet done this.
Walter Power asked Bruce Poole of Sea Plantations if they were still comfortable
with the pond reclamation in light of the changes made to the sedimentation area
plans and the change in the layout of the development. Mr. Poole replied that the
changes in the proposed plan enhances their efforts for pond reclamation. The fact
that the baffle system plan has been altered slightly has no impact and the
separation of the buildings rather than attached multiplex units is overall a better
plan with respect to the pond. Potential contamination is now reduced. Also they
plan to place certain bushes and shrubs around the walkway which help with the
containment of undesirable nutrients. He added that they anticipate using no weed
killers or other chemicals which could have potential harmful impact on the pond.
• Walter Power asked about the maintenance of the containment system and Mr.
Poole noted it was a fairly simple operation with low maintenance. The area could
be periodically skimmed similar to the skimming done on a swimming pool surface _
and the system itself would not need to be cleaned more than once or twice per
year. In response to a further question from Walter Power, Mr. Poole noted the
area can be cleaned by using a mobile pump or by pumping the area directly into
the sewer system. Walter Power asked if maintenance of the siltation area should
be conditioned and Mr. Poole replied he felt that it was in the best interests of the
homeowners association to maintain the pond. With regard to the plantings around
the walkway, it was noted that the Planning Board has landscaping approval over
the entire project which would include that area. Bruce Poole further stated that
they would recommend the addition of some species of fish which will help improve
the ecosystem of the pond.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Kenneth May, the Special Permit was
approved with the addition of two conditions: 1) that a written summary of the
planned compliance to the requirements of Section VII, part P of the Zoning
Ordinance be submitted to the Board and 2) that the conditions mandated by the
Conservation Commission be strictly adhered to. It was so voted.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Donald Hunt, the Minutes of June
21, 1984, were approved. It was so voted.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--July 5, 1984 Page 3
NEW BUSINESS .
Chairman Walter Power stated that he had received a letter of resignation from
Bill Cass. His resignation was accepted with regret by the Board. Mr. Power asked
the members to be thinking about some names they feel may be appropriate to
submit to the Mayor as a replacement for Bill Cass.
ZONING
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh gave a brief overview of some proposed changes to
the Zoning Ordinance which he would like the Board to consider:
The first issue deals with the downtown area. Currently, the downtown area is
zoned B-3 and B-5. The most significant difference between the two is that in a B-
3 area residential uses are prohibited and it is the responsibility of the City to
provide parking. In a B-5 district, residential uses are allowed as long as parking
requirements are met. For non-residential uses in a B-5 zone, the City must
provide parking.
Mr. Kavanaugh proposes combining the two zones into one B-5 area with a slight
expansion. This would encourage housing develop in the downtown area which would
have a positive impact on the commercial businesses in the area and would have a
less negative impact on parking than office space development. This would also
• encourage the development of the underutilized or vacant properties in the
downtown area and eliminate some eyesores that still exist. Some attention would
have to be given to the parking situation, however.
Kenneth May suggested restricting the residential uses to above the first floor. He
added that a distinction should be made between old and new buildings. He also
felt that a restriction should be made on the conversion of office into housing
units.
There followed some discussion as to the parking currently available in the City. It
was noted that the garage was severely underutilized and provided 1000 spaces.
Four hundred spaces are available in Riley Plaza and it is rarely full. Abby Burns
felt that Salem is now "clogged" all the time. It was noted, however, that more
housing would not adversely affect the traffic problem. Ken May suggested that
some sort of unit-area ratio be set that parking shall be provided over a certain
level. Walter Power raised the issue of a large development being built in a
saturated area. He felt the Planning Board should have some control. Edward
Stevenson suggested the developer should be required to make an arrangement with
the Parking Commission. Walter Power emphasized the importance of adding
residential uses to the business district.
The consensus of the Board was that conceptually, the proposal was a good one. It
was further agreed that all zoning lines should follow street lines. It was noted
that the current proposed B-5 zone included the Hawthorne Hotel and the parking
lot. Ken May felt that the line should not include the parking lot to deter the
possibility of future construction on that lot as of right. It was felt this was also a
• sound suggestion.
• Minutes of Meeting--July 5, 1984 Page 4
Walter Power felt that any new building should have on-site parking provided. The
consensus was this was a good plan. Regarding rehabilitated buildings, it was felt
that any project which would eventually house above a certain number of units
should require a special permit. Gerard Kavanaugh concurred, adding that Planning
Board approval should be given to any project over a certain number of units.
There followed some discussion as to the number of units above which permits
would be required and it was agreed that the Planning Department will study the
issue and make some recommendations to the Board in the near future.
Following further discussion as to the parking issue and how best to address the
mechanism for enforcement--i.e. stickers being required, etc., Ken May pointed
out that project approval could deal with this issue. Gerard Kavanaugh questioned
what the wish of the Board would be regarding housing with no parking provided
and Ken May felt that any building containing less than the number of units set by
the Board for on-site parking would likely be acceptable as providing no parking.
Walter Power suggested working with the Parking Commission regarding future
needs. Gerard Kavanaugh added that non-residential use of any rehabilitated
buildings would cause greater parking problems than residential uses. Also, the
Salem Redevelopment Authority will be undertaking a market study of the
downtown area which will include a parking analysis.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh wished to address a second area for re-zoning--the
• review and approval of all multi-family developments, City-wide, including
condominiums, by the Planning JBoard. In certain cases, development projects
need not receive approval of the Planning Board, excepting perhaps a Form A —
approval.
Mr. Kavanaugh suggested that multi-family dwellings in an R-3 district being
allowed "as of right" be eliminated and a provision be made that all multi-family
development proposals over a certain number of units (he would suggest between
eight and twelve) be subject to Planning Board review. The consensus of the Board
was this was a good idea and they felt that eight units was a workable number.
A third issue is the preservation of Lafayette Street. The Historical Commission is
willing to work with the Planning Board to preserve this area. Survey work must be
undertaken to define the historical significance of the properties on the street and
the two Boards must work together to determine the best route to take to preserve
the area. It can perhaps be made a local historic district or a National Register
Historic District. The Planning Department will provide financial assistance to
help in getting the survey work done. A meeting must be set up with the Board and
Commission to discuss the steps to be taken to preserve the street.
A fourth re-zoning issue is the encouragement of light industrial development
through the expansion of the Industrial zone and the designation of "light industry"
type of zone. It was felt by the Board that areas should be designated
•
v '
Minutes of Meeting--July 5, 1984 Page 5
• and specific uses should be listed. It was felt the name "industrial' could often be
intimidating to abutters of property where industrial uses were proposed, so a
different name and specific list of uses could alleviate some fears.
John Ahern noted that Atlanta, Georgia has developments which have mixed light
industrial type of use which they call "Office Parks." Gerard Kavanaugh will do
some further research and the Board will discuss the issue further in the future.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
MINUTES OF MEETING
• July 5, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday, July 5, 1984. Present were Walter Power, Donald Hunt, Kenneth May,
Edward Stevenson, John Ahern, and Abby Burns. Also present were City Planner
Gerard Kavanaugh and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen. David Goodof,
William Cass, and Normand Houle were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
The Chairman opened the meeting by thanking Ed Stevenson for the use of the
House of Seven Gables for the Planning Board dinner. The Board extends their
thanks to the Stevensons for their hospitality and to Abby Burns for organizing the
party.
MAINE POST AND BEAM--TEDESCO POND PLACE--WETLANDS SPECIAL
PERMIT (PUBLIC HEARING--APRIL 19, 1984)
Mr. Carl Gardner of Maine Post and Beam reviewed the plan which was submitted
this evening to address the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Gardner
noted that Mr. Bruce Poole of Sea Plantations was also present to answer any
questions regarding the pond and the sedimentation area.
Mr. Gardner then proceeded to review for the Board their compliance with the
• sections of the Zoning Ordinance which address wetlands issues. He noted that a
modified Order of Conditions was issued by the Conservation Commission which
addressed walkways, sedimentation areas, drainage, and erosion control during= —
construction.
Regarding building locations, the plan submitted this evening shows proposed
locations and also shows a table of the elevations of all sixteen lots and buildings.
The plan also shows the locations of the dry wells with overflow mechanisms.
Eight dry wells are planned. Minimum floor elevations will be more than four feet
above the seasonal high water table. Mr. Gardner noted that test borings were not
done to determine this level; rather, it was estimated to be the same as the pond--
thirty-two feet. The basement levels will be located 1-y: feet above the seasonal
high water table. He added, however, that the basements will not be habitable
living space.
Regarding utilities, underground electricity, water and sewer lines are anticipated.
One section of sewer pipe will be installed below the 32' elevation. This area was
conditioned previously to be in accordance with accepted City and State standards.
John Ahern asked if they plan underground telephone and cable TV and Mr. Gardner
felt this seemed to be logical. Mr. Gardner noted that any utilities will not
impinge upon the ground water elevation except in that one instance noted
previously. Mr. Gardner further noted that no de-icing agents except calcium
chloride will be used and that will be used very sparingly.
Some discussion took place regarding the storage of petroleum on the site and Mr.
• Gardner stated he was not clear as to whether this was strictly prohibited or not.
• Minutes of Meeting--July 5, 1984 Page 2
Kenneth May felt this would apply only to storage below the water table. Mr.
Gardner noted that the State standards regarding this matter are extremely
stringent. Walter Power asked what type of heating was anticipated and Mr.
Gardner replied that had not as yet been determined. Kenneth May noted that
storage tanks were not shown on the plan, so any decision regarding this would have
to be approved by the Board at a future time.
Walter Power asked if those parts of the Environmental Impact Statement which
needed to be addressed had been addressed and submitted and Mr. Gardner replied
they had not yet done this.
Walter Power asked Bruce Poole of Sea Plantations if they were still comfortable
with the pond reclamation in light of the changes made to the sedimentation area
plans and the change in the layout of the development. Mr. Poole replied that the
changes in the proposed plan enhances their efforts for pond reclamation. The fact
that the baffle system plan has been altered slightly has no impact and the
separation of the buildings rather than attached multiplex units is overall a better
plan with respect to the pond. Potential contamination is now reduced. Also they
plan to place certain bushes and shrubs around the walkway which help with the
containment of undesirable nutrients. He added that they anticipate using no weed
killers or other chemicals which could have potential harmful impact on the pond.
• Walter Power asked about the maintenance of the containment system and Mr.
Poole noted it was a fairly simple operation with low maintenance. The area could
be periodically skimmed similar to the skimming done on a swimming pool surface _
and the system itself would not need to be cleaned more than once or twice per
year. In response to a further question from Walter Power, Mr. Poole noted the
area can be cleaned by using a mobile pump or by pumping the area directly into
the sewer system. Walter Power asked if maintenance of the siltation area should
be conditioned and Mr. Poole replied he felt that it was in the best interests of the
homeowners association to maintain the pond. With regard to the plantings around
the walkway, it was noted that the Planning Board has landscaping approval over
the entire project which would include that area. Bruce Poole further stated that
they would recommend the addition of some species of fish which will help improve
the ecosystem of the pond.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Kenneth May, the Special Permit was
approved with the addition of two conditions: 1) that a written summary of the
planned compliance to the requirements of Section VII, part P of the Zoning
Ordinance be submitted to the Board and 2) that the conditions mandated by the
Conservation Commission be strictly adhered to. It was so voted.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Donald Hunt, the Minutes of June
21, 1984, were approved. It was so voted.
Minutes of Meeting--July 5, 1984 Page 3
NEW BUSINESS
Chairman Walter Power stated that he had received a letter of resignation from
Bill Cass. His resignation was accepted with regret by the Board. Mr. Power asked
the members to be thinking about some names they feel may be appropriate to
submit to the Mayor as a replacement for Bill Cass.
ZONING
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh gave a brief overview of some proposed changes to
the Zoning Ordinance which he would like the Board to consider:
The first issue deals with the downtown area. Currently, the downtown area is
zoned B-3 and B-5. The most significant difference between the two is that in a B-
3 area residential uses are prohibited and it is the responsibility of the City to
provide parking. In a B-5 district, residential uses are allowed as long as parking
requirements are met. For non-residential uses in a B-5 zone, the City must
provide parking.
Mr. Kavanaugh proposes combining the two zones into one B-5 area with a slight
expansion. This would encourage housing develop in the downtown area which would
have a positive impact on the commercial businesses in the area and would have a
less negative impact on parking than office space development. This would also
• encourage the development of the underutilized or vacant properties in the
downtown.area and eliminate some eyesores that still exist. Some attention would"
have to be given to the parking situation, however.
Kenneth May suggested restricting the residential uses to above the first floor. He
added that a distinction should be made between old and new buildings. He also
felt that a restriction should be made on the conversion of office into housing
units.
There followed some discussion as to the parking currently available in the City. It
was noted that the garage was severely underutilized and provided 1000 spaces.
Four hundred spaces are available in Riley Plaza and it is rarely full. Abby Burns
felt that Salem is now "clogged" all the time. It was noted, however, that more
housing would not adversely affect the traffic problem. Ken May suggested that
some sort of unit-area ratio be set that parking shall be provided over a certain
level. Walter Power raised the issue of a large development being built in a
saturated area. He felt the Planning Board should have some control. Edward
Stevenson suggested the developer should be required to make an arrangement with
the Parking Commission. Walter Power emphasized the importance of adding
residential uses to the business district.
The consensus of the Board was that conceptually, the proposal was a good one. It
was further agreed that all zoning lines should follow street lines. It was noted
that the current proposed B-5 zone included the Hawthorne Hotel and the parking
lot. Ken May felt that the line should not include the parking lot to deter the
• possibility of future construction on that lot as of right. It was felt this was also a
sound suggestion.
Minutes of Meeting--July 5, 1984 Page 4
• Walter Power felt that any new building should have on-site parking provided. The
consensus was this was a good plan. Regarding rehabilitated buildings, it was felt .
that any project which would eventually house above a certain number of units
should require a special permit. Gerard Kavanaugh concurred, adding that Planning
Board approval should be given to any project over a certain number of units.
There followed some discussion as to the number of units above which permits
would be required and it was agreed that the Planning Department will study the
issue and make some recommendations to the Board in the near future.
Following further discussion as to the parking issue and how best to address the
mechanism for enforcement--i.e. stickers being required, etc., Ken May pointed
out that project approval could deal with this issue. Gerard Kavanaugh questioned
what the wish of the Board would be regarding housing with no parking provided
and Ken May felt that any building containing less than the number of units set by
the Board for on-site parking would likely be acceptable as providing no parking.
Walter Power suggested working with the Parking Commission regarding future
needs. Gerard Kavanaugh added that non-residential use of any rehabilitated
buildings would cause greater parking problems than residential uses. Also, the
Salem Redevelopment Authority will be undertaking a market study of the
downtown area which will include a parking analysis.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh wished to address a second area for re-zoning--the
review and approval of all multi-family developments, City-wide, including
condominiums, by the Planning JBoard. In certain cases, development projects
need not receive approval of the Planning Board, excepting perhaps a Form A —
approval.
Mr. Kavanaugh suggested that multi-family dwellings in an R-3 district being
allowed "as of right" be eliminated and a provision be made that all multi-family
development proposals over a certain number of units (he would suggest between
eight and twelve) be subject to Planning Board review. The consensus of the Board
was this was a good idea anti they felt that eight units was a workable number.
A third issue is the preservation of Lafayette Street. The Historical Commission is
willing to work with the Planning Board to preserve this area. Survey work must be
undertaken to define the historical significance of the properties on the street and
the two Boards must work together to determine the best route to take to preserve
the area. It can perhaps be made a local historic district or a National Register
Historic District. The Planning Department will provide financial assistance to
help in getting the survey work done. A meeting must be set up with the Board and
Commission to discuss the steps to be taken to preserve the street.
A fourth re-zoning issue is the encouragement of light industrial development
through the expansion of the Industrial zone and the designation of "light industry"
type of zone. It was felt by the Board that areas should be designated
Minutes of Meeting--July 5, 1984 Page 5
• and specific uses should be listed. It was felt the name "industrial' could often be
intimidating to abutters of property where industrial uses were proposed, so a
different name and specific list of uses could alleviate some fears.
John Ahern noted that Atlanta, Georgia has developments which have mixed light
industrial type of use which they call "Office Parks." Gerard Kavanaugh will do
some further research and the Board will discuss the issue further in the future.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
MINUTES OF MEETING
July 23, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Monday,July 23, 1984. Present were John Ahern, Kenneth May, Normand Houle,
Abby Burns, and Walter Power. Also present were City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh
and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
FORM A--11 SOUTH STREET
This involves two lots located at 9 and 11 South Street, owned by a common owner
who wishes to adjust the common boundary line so that there may be access for
motor vehicles from the street to an area behind the house at Il South Street for
parking. A variance was granted from the Board of Appeal pursuant to this petition
on June 30, 1984.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so voted.
PICKMAN PARK--PROPOSED ELEVATION CHANGES AND WAIVER TO
CONSTRUCT FIFTEEN UNITS ON MARION ROAD
. Mr. Paul DiBiase, Mr. Carl Ballsley of Hayes Engineering, and Mr. Charles Skyer, a
surveyor for the Pickman Park project, were present to discuss a proposal to
modify their original plan. They wish to change the profile on Marion Road so that
it is more in conformance with the topography of the land. Mr. Ballsley showed the
proposed grade on the plan. They now propose the grade to be less than 8% which
is more in conformance with the existing topography. Blasting will also be
minimized with this proposal.
Walter Power asked if this changed the sewer and drainage of the area and Mr.
Ballsley replied it did; however, Mr. Ogren of his office had spoken with the City
Engineer.who agreed with the proposed change. Mr. DiBiase added that ultimately
the direction of the sewer and run-off has not changed.
Walter Power asked what the main reason was for changing their plan and Mr.
Ballsley replied it was mainly so they would not have to cut into the land as much.
They have encountered a great deal of ledge and would like to avoid blasting as
much as possible. He added that it would improve the lots relative to Marion Road
as well. Walter Power asked if the grades were any greater than normally used for
road construction and Mr. Ballsley replied in the negative, adding that in some
cases 10-12% grades have been used. They anticipate a grade of 7.6%. John Ahern
noted that this was a reasonable grade.
Walter Power stated that as long as the City Engineer agreed to the utility lay-out
and drainage and road construction, the Board would have no objection.
Minutes of Meeting--July 23, 1984 Page 2
• John Ahern raised the issue of the other utilities being brought in to the
subdivision--would they also be underground? Mr. DiBiase replied in the
affirmative, adding that they will be putting in street lights of a colonial type
design at their own expense.
Ken May felt that in order to modify a plan, the Board should go through the public
hearing process. He, however, does not have a particular problem with going ahead
and allowing this modification given the understanding that it may or may not be
challenged. Peter Beatrice, attorney for the developer, agreed to some extent with
this premise, but stated he does not feel this is a substantial change and it is safe
to proceed. He reiterated their reasons for requesting the modification: 1) Reduce
the need for blasting, 2) Follow the contours of the site as much as possible, 3)
There is no change in any of the building lots, and 4) There is no change in flow
patterns.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of John Ahern, the Planning Board
has determined that the requested modification is not a substantial change and
approves the request to modify the plan to reflect the changes noted on plan
entitled, "Profile Revisions--Marion Road and Nimitz Way, Pickman Park, Salem,
MA.," prepared by Hayes Engineering, dated 7/3/84. This determination is subject
to the approval of the City Engineer. It was so voted.
Regarding the desire of the developer to construct and convey fifteen units on
Nimitz Way, a letter was read from Attorney Peter Beatrice dated July 13, 1984,
for the record. In response to this request, a letter was sent to the Planning Board
• from City Engineer Paul Niman dated July 17, 1984, stating he had no objection to
this proposal because the proposed units would not impact the "problem area" at
Jefferson Avenue and Parallel Street.
Mr. Ballsley stated that the survey work for the new 18" sewer line which has been
required is underway and they expect the design to be completed within three
weeks. They feel they have shown good faith in beginning the design work and
would like the financial return on the sale of some dwelling units to offset the cost
of the sewer construction.
Walter Power noted that the problem area on Jefferson Avenue and Parallel
Streets must be addressed and Peter Beatrice replied that in a meeting he attended
with the Mayor, this was set as a priority. They also intend to go before the Board
of Health on Tuesday evening, July 24, to discuss this as well as other problems.
Charles Frederiksen stated that the City Engineer has tentatively approved a
concept which might alleviate the impact of the units on Nimitz Way. As it now
stands, the sewerage travels into the "problem area." City Engineer Niman has
suggested preliminarily that the proposed twenty-four units sewerage should drain
down Marion Road and ultimately into the new major interceptor.
Walter Power stated that the problem had to be resolved.
Minutes of Meeting--July 23, 1984 Page 3
• Kenneth May asked the plans have been endorsed as yet and Mr. Frederiksen
replied in the negative. Mr. May noted that several conditions of the approval have
not as yea been met--i.e. hydrant testing, the satisfaction of the concerns of the
Board of Health, etc. Therefore, the Planning Board cannot proceed.
Peter Beatrice stated that it was his opinion that the concerns of the Board of
Health were moot because they did not respond within the statutory time limit;
however, it was the desire of his client to satisfy the concerns of the Board of
Health. The new concept for the sewer connection poses no problem for his client.
As far as satisfying the Board of Health, they are prepared to do so. One concern
the Board of Health raised was the issue of water supply and he understands that
the new pumping station is currently going out to bid, so that concern should be
satisfied. Walter Power stated that the Planning Board will need a letter from the
Board of Health stating their satisfaction with the way all their concerns have been
addressed.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted that he had no understanding that Mr.
DiBiase was asking for an approval this evening. He felt this was to be under
discussion only. He added that the Planning Board has received no building plans as
yet. Mr. Beatrice formally submitted these plans. Walter Power added that the
Planning Board does not wish to make a hasty decision. They would prefer that the
proposed plans be reviewed in advance by the Planning Department for their input.
Mr. DiBiase agreed to defer his request for action until the Board's next meeting in
September.
• FAFARD
Attorney John Serafini, Mr. William McDonough, an engineer with Fafard, and
Architect Greg Warren of Fafard were present to discuss the matter of a
modification of their original plan for Traders Way. They wish to modify the
elevation of the road to be in harmony with the balance of the site. After doing
some site work they found they would like to remove the grade which was included
in the original plan. They feel this will provide the City with a safer and more
aesthetically pleasing roadway. The City Engineer has been consulted and agrees
with this proposed change.
Mr. McDonough presented the plan to the Board. The area in question is that area
from Highland Avenue back approximately 500 feet. They previously had proposed
to create a 6% grade which would bring Traders Way up to elevation 150. This was
done for economic reasons. However, in doing the site work, they find it would be
better to bring the level of the road to meet the level of the Hawthorne Square
Shopping Center. They are eliminating the 6% grade and now propose a 2% grade.
The City Engineer had agreed with the proposal in concept, but has not as yet seen
the completed plan modification.
Walter Power asked about the topography abutting the road and Mr. McDonough
replied they will bring the entire site down to the proposed elevation.. John Ahern
felt the improved grade was a good idea, but expressed concern over the protection
of utilities in the area.
•
Minutes of Meeting--July 23, 1984 Page 4
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh stated this proposal has not been reviewed by
either himself or the City Engineer in any detail. The preliminary PUD and site
plan waiver submission have been reviewed by the Planning Department, but he
would prefer going over this proposed revision before it is presented to the Board.
Kenneth May suggested deferring action on this request until our next meeting.
Attorney Serafini asked if approval could be given subject to the review and
approval of the Planning Department and the City Engineer.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of John Ahern, the proposed profile
change noted on plan entitled, "Highland Acres, Traders Way, Proposed Changes to
Approved Plans," dated July 19, 1984, were approved subject to the approval of the
City Planner and the City Engineer. It was so voted.
Mr. McDonough noted there were a few further items to be addressed. The City
Engineer had requested that the elevations of the sewer lines have a 5' cover. On
Traders Way, this can be accomplished easily as the sewer lines have not been
constructed as yet. However, on First Street the locations of the sewers have to
meet the existing sewer lines already present on First Street, so this cannot be
done. Therefore, in order to avoid potential contamination of water due to crossed
water and sewer lines, they would like to straighten the water lines and bring them
down the westerly side of the street. This would eliminate the crossings which are
now present on First Street with which they were uncomfortable. They will go over
this proposal with the City Planner before our next meeting. Mr. McDonough
further noted he would like a waiver to construct one section of pipe out of cast
• iron rather than reinforced concrete because there is inadequate cover in that area
and the potential of fracture exists.
Mr. Ahern asked how they were bringing in their other utilities and Mr. McDonough
replied they are bringing their electricity in overhead. Walter Power felt all
utilities had to be underground and Mr. McDonough replied that with industrial use
they felt overhead was more desirable;however, they are certainly willing to go
underground if the Board so desires. The Board so indicated.
Regarding the proposed location of the Purity/Heartland Drug building, Mr.
McDonough noted that they now have a tenant for the building closest to Highland
Avenue which had previously been designated for the Demoulas Supermarket. They
would like a waiver from site plan approval to build a foundation only on the site.
They would like to do the concrete work before the cold weather so that interior
work could be done during the winter months. They plan to bring in their
comprehensive site and landscaping plan in the immediate future, but would like
approval to construct the foundation only prior to that time.
Mr. Serafini noted the Planning Board is still protected as a building permit cannot
be issued until the site plan is submitted and approved.
Walter Power expressed some concern over whether the Board would be
jeopardizing their approval process by allowing this waiver and Gerard Kavanaugh
•
i
Minutes of Meeting--July 23, 1984 Page 5
• added that he would like to see a full landscaping plan and site plan for the project.
However, he felt the Board could, if it wishes, proceed with the waiver of the site
plan requirement in this instance.
Kenneth May stated he had always been concerned with the piecemeal approach to
the approval of this project. The Board has never been presented with a complete
plan for this development and, therefore, the approval process has sometimes been
less than orderly. What is being requested tonight is a further erosion of this.
Mr. McDonough felt he understood the Board's frustrations. He noted, however,
that the developer has been involved in lengthly discussions with DEQE regarding
an appeal of the Order of Conditions issued for the project, so they have been
forced to stop all action on the project. They have reached an understanding with
DEQE and are now prepared to proceed.
Walter Power asked what the linkage would be between proceeding with foundation
construction and potential grade changes in the future and Mr. McDonough replied
they are willing to take that risk. They have to meet existing elevations, sidelines,
etc. and the area is fairly flat in any case.
John Ahern asked if they were considering a slab construction and Mr. McDonough
replied they were planning to construct a stepped foundation to accommodate
loading docks.
• Kenneth May suggested the Board waive site plan approval for the foundation
approval only. Gerard Kavanaugh concurred, adding that if there was a problem
with the foundation after it was constructed, the developer would have to deal with
it. He is comfortable with the fact there will be no need for elevation changes.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Houle, the site plan
approval condition of the decision issued on April 4 , 1984, shall be waived for the
construction of a foundation on a 47,150 square foot lot shown on the plan
presented to the Planning Board on July 23, 1984. The elevations shown on that
plan shall not change. Further, this is not a permit for anything other than the
construction of a foundation. It was so voted.
Kenneth May felt-the Planning Board should consider whether they will deal with
this type of issue in the future and Walter Power felt this was a one time only
issue, in light of the fact that this building location had been presented to the
Planning Board in the past. There will be no more approvals until a site plan is
presented. Mr. McDonough stated they plan to submit a master plan for the entire
development in the near future.
Following this, an informational slide show was presented to the Board by Mr.
Warren of Fafard. He also showed a preliminary plan of the proposed residential
PUD II plan. The plan shows a total of 700 units. He noted that under the R-3
zoning of the area, 929 would be allowed. The units would be constructed in phases
•
• Minutes of Meeting--July 23, 1984 Page 6
with two-hundred units being built in the first phase, two-hundred in the second
phase, two-hundred in the third phase, and one-hundred in the fourth. The units
would all be accessible by use of a road to be known as Whaler's Lane. Access
driveways off of Whaler's Lane will be constructed. Whaler's Lane is intended to be
constructed approximately 28' wide and will be paved. This width was chosen to
reduce the potential for high speed traffic. They intend to construct sidewalks on
one side with grass strips and Cape Cod berms. Frontyard, rearyard, and sideline
requirements have been met, as well as the minimum width between buildings. Mr.
Warren noted that part of Whaler's Lane traverses land owned by the Conservation
Commission. In order to construct a proper intersection between Whaler's Lane
and Traders Way, they will try to negotiate a land swap with the Commission to
properly accommodate the intersection construction.
The units will be four-plex, eight-plex and some twelve-plex. They will be
constructed in various styles for variety and aesthetics.
Kenneth May asked if they anticipate constructing the entire roadway prior to
construction and Mr. Warren replied they will likely construct through the first
phase, dead-end the road with the proper turnarounds. A dirt access road through
the project will likely be constructed, however. Mr. McDonough added they would
not connect the road all the way through until at least one-half of the project was
completed. Kenneth May asked if they have given any consideration to
constructing a second access from Swampscott Road and Mr. McDonough replied
that the topography does not lend itself to another roadway, so they did not feel
• this was feasible. They also have to protect the wetlands in the area and by doing
so they will be requesting a waiver from minimum radii in order to do this.
Walter Power stated he had some strong reservations regarding the density, the
requested road width and the need for a second access from Swampscott Road. Mr.
McDonough noted that traffic studies have indicated that maximum anticipated
trips per day are still well under the capacity for the proposed road width. They
anticipate a total of 1000 total trips per day and 1700 is the capacity for that road
width. Walter Power also stated he has some reservations regarding the access to
the units by driveways. This is a new concept for the Board to consider. He was
also under the impression that only quadriplex units were to be built. Mr.
McDonough suggested a visit to their Ashland 'site to see how well this type of plan
works.
Mr. Warren showed the Board a brief slide presentation of their project in Ashland.
Mr. McDonough noted that everything possible is done to preserve mature trees and
work with the existing contours of the land. Heavy screening is done of the units
with the use of trees and earth berms. Abby Burns asked what recreational
amenities were planned and Mr. Warren replied they anticipate none other than a
jogging path. Normand Houle asked what the selling price is anticipated to be and
Mr. Warren replied in the neighborhood of $100,000. Abby Burns asked what the
yearly maintenance fee was and Mr. McDonough replied it was under $100 per month.
•
i
• Minutes of Meeting---July 23, 1984 Page 7
Walter Power expressed concern for the lack of amenities. He felt there should be
better cohesiveness provided to make the site a permanent living site for the
consumers. Mr. Warren delineated the pond areas which he felt were a plus to the
project. Walter Power felt some type of amenity should be built in to guarantee
longevity of ownership. Nothing he has seen so far will provide that. He feels
investors will buy the units for rental. Mr. McDonough felt the cost of the units
would discourage this. John Ahern was concerned about the access to and egress
from the units. He felt there could be real traffic problems. Mr. McDonough
noted the Environmental Impact Statement addressed the traffic circulation.
Walter Power urged the Board to think about this project. A trip will be arranged
out to Ashland in September and the matter will be discussed again at our next
meeting.
BOARD OF APPEAL AGENDA
Gerard Kavanaugh gave the Board an overview of petitions to be considered by the
Board of Appeal on July 25, 1984. Following some discussion it was decided to
write a letter to the Board of Appeal expressing the following opinions:
The Planning Board wishes to be recorded as opposed to the petition of Emma G.
Toomey for a Special Permit to convert an existing two-family dwelling into a
three-family dwelling at 96 Washington Square E. (R-2). The Board feels this
proposed conversion would exacerbate the density and on-site parking problems
• already present in the neighborhood.
The Planning Board wishes to be recorded as opposed to the petition of Paul T.
Bonarda for a Special Permit to convert a store into two efficiency apartments and
a Variance from minimum parking requirements at 107 Federal Street (R-2). The
severe parking problems in the neighborhood were cited, as well as the density of
the neighborhood. It was felt the addition of two apartments to this building would
further impact these problems.
A petition of Crowninshield Corporation for a Variance to convert a building at 35
Flint Street (R-2) is strongly opposed by the Plannng Board. It was felt that no
more than twenty-eight units, as originally proposed for this site, should be allowed
due to the density of the neighborhood. The Planning Board further requested that
if any more than twenty-eight units were allowed, the Board, together with the
Historical Commission, should have site plan review over the project.
MAINE POST AND BEAM APPEAL
Gerard Kavanaugh noted he had spoken with Assistant City Solicitor Mary
Harrington regarding the appeal of the Maine Post and Beam decision by several
neighbors to the project. The Planning Board and Planning Department will work in
a cooperative fashion with the Legal Department to address the concerns raised in
the appeal and to protect the interests of the Board. It was noted that the
•
• Minutes of Meeting—July 23, 1984 Page 8
ultimate responsibility for answering the concerns of the appeal was with the
developer. Some input was provided from the Board as to the answer which is
required to.the appeal.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, the Minutes of June
7, 1984, were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of John Ahern, the Minutes of July 5,
1984, were approved. It was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
•
liTtU Qf �7IPTlt llc�SSc�L�11TaktS
�` c• �
?, � l�untng in�trtl
w.«.. (Din `,aIrm Grrrtt
AGENDA--September 6, 1984
1 . Form A--Dufour, 7 Belleau Road. Z
2. Pickman Park--Submission of exterior building designs to conform with
Conditions 3-7 of the Cluster Special Permit.
3. Pickman Park--Request for waiver of Definitive Plan Condition number 5,
pertaining to the construction of the Parallel Street Sewer for the approval.
of 28 dwelling units on Nimitz Way and Marion Road.
4. Fafard Companies--Commercial/Industrial Master Plan discussion. _
5. Fafard Companies--Site Plan submission for a 47,150 square foot B-2
use within the covmercial area. ,
6. Fafard Companies--Residential Master Plan discussion.
7. Fafard Companies--First Street residential out-parcel discussion.
8. Board of Appeals--9/12 and 9/19/84 meetings review.
9. Rezoning Discussion:
a. Downtown work dession with SRA.
b. Lafayette work session with Historical Commission.
c: Light Industry discussion.
10. Approval of Minutes--July 23, 1984. /
11 . Old/New Business.
• MINUTES OF MEETING
September 6, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday,September 6, 1984. Present were Walter Power, John Ahern, Abby
Burns, Donald Hunt, Edward Stevenson, and Normand Houle. Also present was City
Planner Gerard Kavanaugh. Kenneth May and David Goodof were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
FORM A--ROBERT DUFOUR, 7 BELLEAU ROAD
This involves the trading of two parcels of land basically equal in size which will
change the lot lines slightly to accomodate a driveway on Mr. Dufour's property.
The exchange is agreeable to both parties involved.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so
voted.
PICKMAN PARK--SUBMISSION OF EXTERIOR BUILDING DESIGNS
In order to conform to the requirements of the Cluster Special Permit issued for
Pickman Park, exterior building designs must be submitted to the Planning Board.
Most particularly, items 3 - 7 of the Special Permit must be satisfied.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh stated that he had reviewed the plans for the
project and these items had been satisfied. He then introduced John Emerson,
architect for Pickman Park, to give the Board an overview of the dwelling unit
designs.
Mr. Emerson displayed the plans for the Board and stated they will be building
quadriplex units initially. He noted that the buildings will conform to the contours
of the land. In order to do this, some buildings will have no garages; however, all
parking requirements will be met.
Walter Power asked if any changes have been made in the plans and Mr. Emerson
replied in the negative, noting, however, that no chimneys were shown on the
artists rendering, but they plan to construct stucco clad chimneys for each unit.
Walter Power asked if the parking plan had changed and Mr. Emerson replied in the
negative. He noted again that some buildings have no garages--only driveways.
Normand Houle asked if the exterior was going to be clapboard and Mr. Emerson
replied in the affirmative. They have no as yet selected the colors, but "earth"
tones were required,so the final color will be in that tone. The Planning Board will
be informed as to the final color choices. The shades will be stained, rather than
painted.
• Minutes of Meeting—September 6, 1984 Page 2
Mr. Emerson noted for the Board that in the split level style, two fireplaces, rather
than one fireplace and one woodstove, will be constructed.
Abby Burns asked if sidewalks were to be constructed on both sides and Mr.
Emerson replied in the negative. There will sidewalks on one side of the main
streets and walkways will be constructed between buildings.
Walter Power asked about the bedroom treatment and Mr. Emerson noted that a
maximum of two bedrooms are planned and there will be no den or study which
could be used as a third bedroom. All the units will be two bedrooms only.
Walter Power asked about drainage from buildings. No gutters are shown on the
drawings, so what accomodation has been made to avoid puddling of rain water
which could cause ice hazards? Mr. Emerson replied that there was a slight grade
away from the buildings to prevent puddling.
There followed several minutes of discussion regarding this issue and the City
Planner suggested that this issue be addressed by the developer and some solutions
submitted to the Board.
Normand Houle asked what kind of lighting was anticipated and Mr. Emerson
replied there will be street lighting and ornamental lighting of some sort on each
building. Mr. DiBiase added that there will be lighting at each door—the front door
• and the sliding glass door opening on to the deck.
Walter Power asked Mr. Emerson to describe the deck area and Mr. Emerson stated
that decks will be located to the rear of each unit and will be constructed of
pressure treated lumber. They range in size from 6' x 14' to 9' x 9Yz' in size,
depending upon the style of the building. The decks also provide the second means
of egress from the dwelling units.
Walter Power asked what has been done to make the units energy efficient and Mr.
Emerson replied they are insulated to code and the common walls are extremely
beneficial in conserving energy. Walter Power asked of what material the exterior
was constructed and Mr. Emerson replied the front doors were metal with weather
stripping and the sliding glass doors on to the decks were wooden frame with
thermopane glass. Abby Burns asked the width of the common wall and Mr.
Emerson replied it was 6" in width and insulated for heat and sound. Mr. Emerson
stated the construction of this wall was particularly important to insure proper
sound insulation; i. e. staggered studding and two layers of drywall. It was
suggested that this;was a particular area that should be monitored carefully by the
Clerk of the Works in order to ascertain this construction was done properly.
Mr. Emerson gave the Board a "walk-through" of both the split level style and so-
called flat style of the proposed units. They vary somewhat according to whether
the unit has a garage or not, but the basic unit consists of two bedrooms, a living
room, a dining/kitchen area, IY2 baths with laundry facilities and storage space in
the basement.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--September 6, 1984 Page 3
Walter Power asked how much storage space was provided for each unit and Mr.
Emerson replied it varied, but was in the neighborhood of 180 square feet, which
was more than adequate according to FHA standards. The units are well supplied
with closet space.
In response to a question from Abby Burns, the units range in size from 800--1165
square feet of living area and will cost approximately $80,000 each.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Abby Burns, the exterior building
design was approved as presented. It was so voted.
PICKMAN PARK--REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF DEFINITIVE PLAN CONDITION TO
CONSTRUCT TWENTY-EIGHT UNITS ON NIMITZ WAY AND MARION ROAD.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh stated that the developer wishes to waive the
condition in the approval of the Pickman Park subdivision which would require the
construction of a new 18" sewer line to help alleviate drainage problems in the
Jefferson Avenue/Parallel Street area prior to the construction of any dwelling
units. The waiver would allow the developer to construct and occupy twenty-eight
units on Nimitz Way prior to the construction of the new sewer line.
City Engineer Paul Niman has stated by letter that he feels the addition of twenty-F%
units to that portion of the sewer line would have minimal effect. Paul DiBiase
stated they would like to begin construction now and have completed design of the
>� new sewer line and have showed good faith in doing their part. They wish to have
the financial cushion of the initial units prior to completion of the sewer.
John Ahern asked when they anticipate the new sewer line will be constructed and
Mr. Peter Beatrice, attorney for the project, stated they felt it would be in the next
thirty to sixty days. The City will be putting the project out to bid and will hire
the contractor, etc. and will have complete control. Mr. DiBiase will be providing
the funds for the project. Mr. Paul DiBiase added, however, that easements still
must be obtained for the construction of the sewer as planned. The City Engineer
and the Board of Health have both agreed the impact of these twenty-eight units on
the sewer line will be minimal, if any.
There followed several minutes of discussion regarding this matter. Walter Power
stated there would be a priority placed on solving the sewerage problems in the
neighborhood, but several members of the Board expressed some concern over the
potential of the new 18" line not being constructed. The possibility of placing
occupancy of the,Uau'contingent upon granting of the needed easements was
discussed at length:
A motion was made by Normand Houle and seconded by Abby Burns to grant the
waiver to construct the twenty-eight units proposed prior to the construction of the
new 18" sewer line contingent upon the receipt of the needed easements and upon
the evidence by the developer that expeditious activity towards the construction
was taking place as determined by the City Planner. The motion was denied, two in
favor, four opposed.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--September 6, 1984 Page 4
FAFARD--MASTER PLAN OF COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL AREA
Mr. Greg Warren of Fafard was present to give the Board an overview of the
master plan for the commercial/industrial area of their development. Their plan
calls for 153,000 square feet of commercial space and 190,000 square feet of light
industrial; however, he noted there was a potential for 210,000 square feet of light
industrial use. The parking provided exceeds the requirements of the special
permit.
Mr. Warren further pointed out the trail easement north of First Street given to
the City and the 30' access easement to the rear of Caldor. They are in the
process of bonding and establishing the access easement for this second egress.
Mr. Warren further presented a landscaping theme for the project and noted that it
will be the same throughout the project. They anticipate the use of island type of
parking barriers which will be well-planted with several hardy species. A detailed
plan will be submitted to the Planning Department for review. Mr. William
McDonough, an engineer with the project, noted that they were here in a working
atmosphere and were interested in gaining as much input as possible from the
Board. He added that the master plan will change with the addition of new
tenants. Mr. Kavanaugh added that he and the Planning Department will be
reviewing a landscaping plan in detail.
Mr. McDonough noted that the proposed parking module will be 15' wide and,
following several expressions of concern from the Board, a snow removal plan shall
• be submitted for the Board's perusal.
Attorney John Serafini noted, however, that they did need site plan approval for
the. Heartland Drug site. Greg Warren noted that drainage areas were outlined on
the site plan and easements to the City for drainage included parking lots. Mr.
McDonough then outlined the drainage easements on the plan and noted that all
drainage is directed towards First Street. A series of catch basins are located on
Traders Way.
Edward Stevenson asked if the island module system proposed for the parking areas
interferes with drainage and Mr. McDonough replied that he foresaw no problem
with the islands as a low point is proposed which will run along the line of the island
to channel the flow towards the catch basins.
John Ahern asked if any ornamental lighting was proposed and Mr. McDonough
replied they likely would install basic parking lot type of lighting--most likely
sodium. There will�e lights on the buildings and along the walkways as well.
Gerard Kavanaugh stated he and the Planning Department will monitor the
proposals for lighting.
John Ahern asked if utilities will be installed underground and Mr. McDonough
replied they were open to suggestion in this matter. Following further discussion,
•
• Minutes of Meeting--September 6, 1984 Page 5'
the consensus of the Board was that underground utilities should be a condition of
the approval. John Ahern noted that utility trenches can be shared for ease in
installation.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, the site plan
presented for the proposed 47,150 square foot Heartland Drug building was
approved subject to the seventeen conditions attached. It was so voted.
FAFARD--RESIDENTIAL SITE PLAN
Attorney Serafini noted that in response to previous comments from the Board the
developers are working on providing some recreational amenities for the residential
area. They also are considering the possibility of a second access to Swampscott
Road, but wish to preserve the exclusivity of the area. Mr. McDonough added that
they wish to create a quiet "island" with no through traffic. He noted the
topography is particularly difficult and there is a rapid drop-off to Swampscott
Road. He noted two areas which are currently being considered for access roads--
one would follow a drainage swale and the second is along an existing drive. Walter
Power stated the second alternative would discourage through traffic due to the
slope and direction of the roadway. Mr. McDonough cited some traffic studies
done when the EIR was prepared and felt that perhaps a one-way street would be a
reasonable compromise in preventing traffic from short-cutting through the
project. He also stated that coordination will take place between the two traffic
• lights on Highland Avenue (one at the present Hawthorne Square shopping area and
the second proposed light at Marlborough Road) in order to expedite traffic flow.
Donald Hunt asked if they plan a clubhouse for the condominium association and
Mr. McDonough replied in the negative. Mr. Hunt felt strongly that some type of
recreational facility was needed. Mr. McDonough stated they are considering
setting some space aside for recreation and letting the condominium association
decide what they wish after the units are occupied. They will refine the plan to
provide for the setting aside of some land for this purpose.
In addressing the residential site plan, Mr. McDonough emphasized the preservation
of mature trees which is a priority in their development. They use the contours of
the land and the mature trees which minimize the impact of the density. It is their
hope that the Board will visit their site in Ashland which shows a project similar to
that proposed here.
RE-ZONING
Sub-committees were set up to address three separate re-zoning issues: Working
with the Salem Redevelopment Authority in formulating the B-5 downtown area; a
work session with the Historical Commission on Lafayette Street; and a light
industry discussion. These will be discussed in greater detail at our next meeting
following the sub-committee meetings.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--September 6, 1984 Page 6
BOARD OF APPEAL AGENDA
Two petitions to be heard at the Board of Appeal meeting of September 12, 1984
were addressed by the Planning Board:
The petition of Stephen M. Scalette for a Special Permit to build a third dwelling
unit in an existing two family home at 19 Williams Street was opposed on the basis
that the area is quite dense and there is inadequate parking in the neighborhood. It
was felt that the addition of a'third unit would exacerbate this problem.
The petition of August P. DaCunha for a Special Permit to convert an existing two
family dwelling into a three family dwelling at 71 Bridge Street was also opposed by
the Planning Board on the premise that this area as well has limited parking and
the addition of a new unit would worsen this problem.
A letter will be sent to the Board of Appeal regarding this two petitions.
At the September 19, 1984, meeting of the Board of Appeal, a petition by Angelo
Marotta for a Variance to allow a residential use in a non-residential zoned district
at 394 Highland Avenue to construct 216 single family condominiums will be
discussed. This parcel has been discussed by the Planning Board in the past. The
parcel contains three zones--B-2, R-1, and R-C, and it had been the long-range plan
of the Board that this area be set aside for light industrial use. Therefore, a
• detailed letter addressing this petition will be sent to the Board of Appeal.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, the minutes of July
19, 1984, were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
4 J
• HIGHLAND ACRES/FAFARD
HEARTLAND SITE PLAN APPROVAL
Proposed Conditions for Planning Board Approval:
1. Acquisition of easement for drainage through site
2. Provision of map showing nearby streets, their locations, names and widths.
3. Provision of locus plan
4. Provision of indication of purpose of drainage easements (if applicable)
5. Provision of design calculations for.drainage, water, sewer, and review and
approval by City Engineer
6. Provision of landscaping theme for entire PUD, and landscaping plan for
Heartland site plan, and review and approval of such by Planning Department.
7. Acquisition of storm drainage facilities easement at eastern end of Traders
Way on Conservation Commission land.
8. Provision of performance bond for construction of vehicular way from First
• Street to rear of Hawthorne Plaza, as specified.
9. Alteration of parking lot entrance way from 25' to 30'
10. Provision of updated construction schedule
11. Provision of construction trailer for Clerk of the Works
12. Demarcation of the following on the submitted site plan:
a. width of parking stalls
b. length of parking stalls
c. width of parking aisles
d. width of parking entrance ways
e. amount of gross parking area provided (square footage)
f. total number of parking spaces provided
g. number of loading bays
h. amount of gross loading area provided (square footage)
i. height of•building
14. Evidence that the following has been recorded at the Essex County Registry
of Deeds:
a. Traders Way covenant--not to seek approval not required
b. First Street covenant--not to seek approval not required
c. Covenant as required by Condition 5 of the Traders Way Certificate of
• Action dated 2/8/84.
-2-
15. A lighting plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Board
16. All utilities shall be located underground.
17. A snow removal plan shall be submitted and approved by the Planning Board.
Titu of �Iem, �, tt�sFzrl#use##s
(One �Mrm Grent
AGENDA--September 20, 1984
1. Public Hearing--Wetlands Special Permit--Hamblet and Hayes--Proposal to
construct a pump station and sewage force main on Colonial Road and Jefferson
Avenue.
2. Public Hearing--Wetlands Special Permit--Hamblet and Hayes--Proposal
to construct a valve chamber and sump on an existing drain on Colonial
Road.
3. Romano/Emmerton Cluster Residential Development Special Permit--discussion
of proposal for Greenway Road.
4. Fafard--Discussion of residential site plan for out parcels
5. Trip to Fafard--September 26, 1984--5:30 p.m.
• 6. Re-zoning discussion:
a. Lafayette Street
b. Downtown
c. Light Industrial
d. Site Plan Review
7. Approval of Minutes--September 6, 1984
B. Old/New Business
• MINUTES OF MEETING
September 20, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday, September 20, 1984. Present were Donald Hunt, John Ahern, Abby
Burns, Edward Stevenson, Kenneth May, Normand Houle, and Walter Power. Also
present was City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh. David Goodof was absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
HAMBLET AND HAYES—PUBLIC HEARING--WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT--
PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A PUMP STATION AND FORCE MAIN
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing and introduced Mr.
Harley Orr of Hamblet and Hayes who presented his company's plan. Their
objective is to tie Hamblet and Hayes domestic and treated industrial waste into
the City's sewer system on Jefferson Avenue. They propose to construct a pump
station and force main to accomplish this. Their system would consist of four
sanitary waste lines and a line for industrial waste which would be pre-treated.
Abby Burns asked if Hamblet and Hayes would bear the entire cost of the project
and Mr. Orr replied in the affirmative.
Donald Hunt asked where they are presently placing their waste and Mr. Orr
• replied that at the present moment they truck their industrial wastes to several
landfills which accept this type of waste. Prior to July, 1984, they would truck
their waste to SESD, but due to recent EPA rulings, they are no longer able to do
this. Their domestic waste is discharged into a series of septic tanks at present.
John Ahern asked if their industrial waste was considered hazardous and Mr. Orr
replied that following pre-treatment it is not considered hazardous.
Kenneth May asked if Hamblet and Hayes had received a permit from the Water
Pollution Control Commission and Mr. Orr replied that they have applied for and
received a permit from SESD.
The City Engineer concurs with the plan as revised per his request; the
Conservation Commission has issued an Order of Conditions for the proposal; the
Board of Health concurs with the addition of the following recommendations:
a. No industrial waste shall be allowed to flow into the system until the means for
pre-treatment have been approved and installed for operation.
b. The pumping station shall be constructed and designed so that vehicular traffic,
when passing over the station, shall not damage it.
c. Existing sub-surface septic system distribution boxes, septic tanks, and pits
shall be pumped out, then completely filled and sealed.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--September 20, 1984 Page 2
Mr. Paul Zenovia, a neighbor, questioned whether the wastes generated by the
company were hazardous and Mr. Orr replied that following pre-treatment it is not
considered a hazardous waste. Mr. Zenovia felt that particular care should be
exercised in determining what is allowed to be handled by SESD in light of recent
problems there. Mr. Orr replied that it one of the reasons for the new standards at
SESD, to avoid the type of problems experienced there in the past. They have
hired consultants and have taken great care that their proposed system will remove
the heavy metals out of their waste. He added that the sludge left behind
following pre-treatment will still be trucked off-site to a landfill which accepts
this type of material. There is no landfill in Massachusetts that will accept this
material.
Donald Hunt asked what type of products are used at Hamblet and Hayes and Mr.
Orr replied they use several different types of chemical products; i. e. alum and
aluminum sulfate. He noted that alum and aluminum sulfate are used in water
treatments, so would have little adverse affect on the environment. However, they
must operate within certain pH guidelines which necessitate the pre-treatment
process. Mr. Zenovia asked if any storage took place below ground and Mr. Orr
replied in the affirmative.
John Dick of Hancock Survey addressed the issue of the pumping station being
protected from vehicular traffic--the construction materials will be stressed for
loading with reinforced concrete. The City Engineer has reviewed this design and
• has approved it.
There being no further comments, the Chairman declared the public hearing closed.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the Special Permit was
approved subject to the conditions of the Board of Health and the Conservation
Commission. It was so voted.
HAMBLET AND HAYES--PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT VALVE CHAMBER AND
SUMP OVER EXISTING DRAIN
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Orr stated that
presently all rainwater empties from catch basins directly into the South River. In
order to prevent any contamination of the river from accidential spills in the
future, they are proposing to construct a valve chamber which can shut off all
dishcarges when a spill occurs. Presently, the method they employ is a sandbag
type of operation which cannot always adequately do the job. They wish to protect
themselves and the environment from future problems.
John Ahern asked how they intend to operate this valve and Mr. Orr replied they
will operate the shut-off manually. Donald Hunt asked why they would not have
the valves operated electrically and Mr. Orr replied they have considered this and
may look into the possibility further in the future.
The City Engineer concurs with the proposal as modified per his requests; the
• Conservation Commission has continued their public hearing to study the proposal
further; the Board of Health and the Building Inspector have not responded.
• Minutes of Meeting--September 20, 1984 Page 3
Mr. Stan Poirier of 8 Cottage Street expressed concern over vehicular traffic in
the yard of Hamblet and Hayes. He suggested several "panic" type of buttons which
could operate the valve.
There being no further comments, the Chairman declared the public hearing closed.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby Burns, any action on this
proposal will be delayed until the comments of the Conservation Commission, the
Board of Health and the Building Inspector have been received and reviewed. It was
so voted.
ROMANO/EMMERTON SUBDIVISION--GREENWAY ROAD
James MacDowell of T & M Engineering was present on behalf of the developers.
He stated he was present to update the Board on the status of their proposal. They
are preparing a Definitive Plan and the Environmental Impact Review has been
completed. They will be meeting with the City Planner within the next week to go
over the plan in detail and are respectfully requesting a public hearing date of
October 18.
The final plan is the same configuration presented to the Plannng Board earlier.
They have dropped one lot from the subdivision, for a total of eleven units. The
road has been shortened slightly and the lot that was dropped will now be included
• in the open space. They propose to extend Greenway Road to a 60' radius with a
cul-de-sac at the end. They propose to construct eleven single-family homes under
the cluster portion of the Zoning Ordinance. The lot sizes vary from 12,000 to
23,000 square feet with frontages varying from 75' to 1001. The building lots are
wider at the portion where the house will be constructed.
Kenneth May asked how they propose to satisfy the open space requirements of the
Cluster Special Permit and Mr. MacDowell stated they will defer answering this
question until the public hearing. They are still researching whether to offer the
land to the City for conservation purposes or create a neighborhood park. Mr. May
questioned the willingness of the City to accept the parcel and Mr. MacDowell
replied that if not, an association of the new homes will administer the park
providing for limited access. This will be clearly addressed at the time of the
actual filing. Donald Hunt asked what percentage of open space will be provided
and Mr. MacDowell replied it will be in the area of 25%--26%.
Abby Burns asked if they intend to construct sidewalks and Mr. MacDowell replied
they intend to request waivers for the width of the dedication of the road to
conform to the width of Greenway Road, centerline radius, which they will request
1251, and they will proposed that sidewalks be constructed on one side only--with
granite curbs. All utilities will be underground.
• Minutes of Meeting--September 20, 1984 Page 4
Donald Hunt asked if they had cleared the cul-de-sac proposal with the Fire
Department and Mr. MacDowell replied he intends to do so.
Kenneth May asked what the average lot sizes were and Mr. MacDowell replied
they averaged 15,000 square feet. He added, in response to a request from City
Planner Gerard Kavanaugh, that under conventional subdivision regulations, 15,000
square feet is required, with 100' frontage for each lot. Under cluster, they are
proposing to diminish some lot sizes to 12,000 square feet and some frontages to
501. The lot widths will be 90' to 1001. He added that under conventional zoning
eleven lots could be developed with minor adjustments. They just don't feel it
would be as aesthetically pleasing as what is proposed. Kenneth May asked what
the benefit would be of using the cluster and Mr. MacDowell replied the provision of
the open space is most definitely an asset.
Chairman Walter Power noted that this was not a public hearing. However, the
neighbors have designated a spokesperson who will express the concerns of the
surrounding community.
Ms. Linda Vaughan, President of the Greenway Road Association, stated that the
road now consists of single-family homes. They wish this to continue. Further, the
original plan for this.subdivision would be to complete Castle Road. In this plan,
they intend to eliminate Castle Road altogether and the neighbors are opposed to
this. Mrs. Vaughan urged the Board to inspect the site--it is all ledge and not
• conducive to development. They feel the cul-de-sac proposed could exacerbate
traffic problems, as well. Edward Stevenson asked if the neighbors had any
specific wishes for the site and Mrs. Vaughan stated that they really would prefer
the site be left alone; however, they wish the Board to inspect the site and consider
carefullly how difficult (and expensive) it would be to construct single-family homes
there.
Councillor Steve Lovely emphasized Mrs. Vaughan's concerns and added the area
has terrible drainage problems as well. Many homes presently have to resort to
pumps. He asked the Board to consider this aspect as well.
FAFARD
Mr. Howard Fafard was present to give the Board an update on their project. He
stated they have moved on to the site and have begun construction of the first
phase. The EIR has been updated and they now wish to work with the entire PUD at
the same time so they can treat all the roads with proper respect and be delicate
with the setbacks, greenery, etc. They wish to provide an entrance into the
residential portion of the project that is appealing. They are ready to begin drawing
up the definitive plans for the residential area. He added that there is a great deal
of interest in light industrial use in the City--far exceeding their original
expectations. He is here this evening to outline what they propose to do and to
answer any questions the Board may have.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--September 20, 1984 Page 5
Mr. Fafard gave a brief description of their projects in Ashland and Milford and
noted that what they are proposing here is a carbon copy of their industrial park in
Milford. He stressed their commitment to working with the natural contours of the
land and to saving all the mature trees possible.
He stated that while the zoning for the residential site would allow 900 units, he
realized the Board was concerned with density. Therefore, he feels a realistic
figure for the number of units is in the 550 to 575 range. He asked that the Board
consider waiving the requirement for the submission of grading and design plans to
be submitted up front. They would like several varied designs to be constructed
and these designs will be chosen considering the contours of the land and
predictability of the market.
They intend to phase construction in three phases to determine the market. They
would like the flexibility to see what the market demands.
Donald Hunt asked if all the units will be quadriplex and Mr. Fafard replied that
80-90% of the units will be quadriplex with the styles altered by building.
Kenneth May expressed some concern over the condominium association's ability to
govern. He asked if they had considered separate associations for different areas
or phases and Mr. Fafard replied they would consider this. He added that their
condominium fee is presently $50 per month and they are committed to holding this
• down.
There followed several minutes of discussion as to the possibility of the
condominiums being bought as an investment and then rented out. It is the goal of
the Planning Board to provide family type of atmosphere in this development. Mr.
Fafard stated they have very stringent rules that govern this. They allow no more
than 30% of the toal number of units to be sold to investors. They continue to
tighten up this clause in the condominium agreements and will consider having this
rule run with the land. Mr. Fafard will make the condominium documents available
to the City Planner for his perusal.
Councillor Lovely asked if the original proposal to construct an additional nine
holes of golf in return for City-owned land was still being considered and Mr.
Fafard replied in the negative.
Donald Hunt asked if they were proposing a maximum of two bedrooms per unit and
Mr. Fafard replied they are not adverse to that requirement.
Some concern was expressed regarding the eight-plex styles and this will be
considered further. Mr. Fafard noted they do this to work well with the existing
contours of the land. Walter Power expressed some concern as to the way the
buildings are reached--by long driveways. Mr. Fafard replied this is done
•
• Minutes of Meeting--September 20, 1984 Page 6
to keep the residential areas as private as possible.
Walter Power asked what amenities were planned and Mr. Fafard replied they
usually plan simple, inexpensive types of recreational facilities--tennis courts,
jogging paths, etc. They wish low maintenance types of facilities. Choices can be
made in part by the homeowners themselves.
Walter Power asked what types of plans were being made regarding lighting and
security and Mr. Fafard replied there will be lighting fixtures on each building and
some type of low mushroom lighting in the dark areas.
Mr. William McDonough of Fafard gave the Board a brief review of the traffic they
feel will be generated as a result of this project. They are still considering a
second access to Swampscott Road, but wish to avoid "short-cutters." They are
considering making this second access one-way.
Kenneth May asked if the Fire Department in Ashland expressed any concerns
regarding access by the long driveways and Mr. McDonough replied they worked
with the Fire Department there to answer their concerns and will do so here as
well.
Regarding the second access, Mr. Fafard stated they may leave a place for it and
let the Planning Board decide if it is actually necessary at a later time.
• Mr. Gregg Warren of Fafard gave the Board an overview of the so-called "out"
parcels. These are two parcels on First Street which they wish to develop first to
create models of what will be constructed later. They anticipate twenty-eight
units--all quadriplexes--in one parcel and twenty units--four-plexes and eight-
plexes for the second parcel. They intend to fit the units to the contours of the
land, and will be submitting Wetland Special Permit applications shortly.
Mr. Warren showed the Board plans of proposed designs and noted they were
designed to provide a private deck or courtyard for each unit. It was noted the
City Planner will be reviewing these plans in detail.
A trip to visit Fafard's development in Ashland was arranged for September 26,
1984, at 5:30 p.m. It was noted that a specific area of concern by the Planning
Board is the length of the access driveways and the accessiblity for ambulances,
snow removal trucks, etc.
RE-ZONING
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted that two sub-committee meetings addressing
re-zoning were held recently. Walter Power, Abby Burns, City Planner Gerard
Kavanaugh, and Elizabeth Wheaton of the Historical Commission met to discuss
Lafayette Street and Donald Hunt, Gary Moore of the Salem Redevelopment
Authority and Gerard Kavanaugh met to discuss the downtown area. Additionally,
Mr. Kavanaugh has drafted a proposal for light industrial use and for a site plan
• review mechanism for Planning Board approval.
Minutes of Meeting--September 20, 1984 Page 7
•
Chairman Walter Power gave a brief description of the meeting regarding
Lafayette Street. An inventory is presently being made of the entire street plus
some of the side streets coming into Lafayette Street. There are a number of
options open regarding the protection of this area: 1) Request that the street be
placed in the historic register which would give more control over the street plus
offer certain incentives to the residents or 2) recommending the street be made
part of a local historic district. Either option would be beneficial. Gerard
Kavanaugh noted that the Historic Commission and the Planning Department will
be conducting a survey of the street to define its historic and architectural
significance and determine if the best way to protect the street is through historic
districts or zoning. The consensus of the Board was that this survey would be
beneficial.
Regarding the downtown area, Donald Hunt gave a brief overview of his meeting
with the City Planner and Gary Moore of the Salem Redevelopment Authority.
They discussed Heritage Plaza East and West and the possibility of creating a B-5
overlay district. They went over the rehabilitated buildings in the downtown area
and those with potential for rehabilitation. The most pressing problem is parking
and Mr. Hunt felt that some type of coordinated plan of parking should be
formulated. Mr. Kavanaugh added that an in-depth analysis of the parking
capacity in the City will be undertaken. Further, he noted that in general the
downtown merchants are supportive of the idea of utilizing the downtown buildings
for housing.
• Regarding the proposal of a new light industrial zone, City Planner Gerard
Kavanaugh presented the Board with a draft of proposed uses for a light industrial
area (attached hereto). He also outlined the areas proposed for this new zone.
Donald Hunt expressed some concern for the proximity of the Forest River to the
areas proposed and wondered if there could be a restriction on any further
culverting of the river. John Ahern raised the possibility of a motel or restaurant
being one of the proposed uses of this zone.
The consensus of the Board was that they will review the material prepared by the
City Planner and discuss it further at our next meeting.
Regarding the institution of a site plan review mechanism for the Planning Board,
the-Board will review the material prepared by the City Planner and discuss the
matter further at our next meeting.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Edward Stevenson and second of Donald Hunt, the minutes of
September 6, 1984 were approved. It was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
•
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
• LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONE
PROPOSED ALLOWABLE USES
1. Steam laundry or dry cleaning plant, carpet or rug cleaning plant.
2. Food and beverage manufacturing, bottling or processing or commissary.
3. Assembly or packaging of articles not exceeding two hundred (200) pounds in
weight, provided that no manufacturing or processing is carried.
4. Printing, binding, publishing and related arts and trades.
5. General office buildings including business and professional offices.
6. General storage, warehousing and wholesale distribution uses.
7. Publishing and printing establishments.
8. Manufacturing, packaging, assembly, reconditioning, processing, research and
testing of the following types of industries: food and kindred products, apparel,
electronics and electrical products, furniture and fixtures, primary and
fabricated metal products, box manufacturing, textile.manufacturing, boot and
shoe manufacturing, frozen food storage, ice manufacturing, including the
• storage of new materials and containers used in or incidental to any of the
foregoing. Provided that such operations:
a. are not specifically prohibited from the City of Salem, according to the
schedule of prohibited uses in Section V-C.
b. are not dangerous by reason of hazard from fire or explosion.
c. are not offensive, detrimental, injurious, noxious, or hazardous by reason of
causing dust, smoke, odor, fumes, radiation, ground water discharge, noise,
vibration, traffic congestion, or other nuisance.
d. are compatible with adjacent nonindustrial uses.
9. Laboratories or research facilities, provided any manufacturing is clearly
incidental to the operation of the facility, does not exceed fifty (50) percent of
the gross floor area of the building and is not offensive, injurious, noxious,
detrimental, or hazardous by reason of dust, smoke, odor, fumes, noise,
radiation, ground water discharge, traffic congestion or other nuisances.
•
• PROPOSED AREA, BULK AND DENSITY REQUIREMENTS
Existing I Zone Proposed
Mimimum Lot Area 40,000 Same
Minimum Lot Width 150 . Same
Maximum Lot Coverage 45% Same
Minimum Depth of Front Yard 30 50
Minimum Width of Side Yard 30 Same
Minimum Depth of Rear Yard 30 50
Maximum Height of Buildings 45 50
Maximum Height of Fences 15 10
Buffer Area Required None 75' from any
residential or
• conservation use
Open Space required None 10%
Parking Required Must meet zoning Subject to Planning
requirements Board approval
Loading Required Based on size Subject to Planning
Board approval
SITE PLAN REVIEW
All proposals for development on parcels of land within this proposed zone shall be
required to submit a definitive site plan which meets the requirements of Section
III of the Salem Subdivision Regulations to the Salem Planning Board for their
review and approval. Said site plan shall also include 1) a parking and loading plan,
2) an internal traffic circulation plan, 3) a lighting plan, 4) a landscaping plan, 5) a
plan addressing the adequacy of the construction and proposed maintenance of
disposal facilities for sewage, refuse, snow, and other waste, and a plan addressing
the methods of drainage of surface water. This site plan is subject to the review
and approval of the Planning Board.
•
PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE
New Section VII-Q--Site Plan Review
Any proposed development which includes six or more residential dwelling units or
any non-residential proposal which includes 10,000 square feet or more in building
area shall submit a Definitive Site Plan to the Planning Board for their review and
approval. Said site plan shall meet and be subject to the requirements set forth in
the Salem Subdivision Regulations, Section III, entitled "Procedure for the
Submission and Approval of Plans." In addition, the applicant shall provide the
following information:
1. A parking plan and loading bay plan (if applicable) which meets the
requirements set forth in Section VII, Parts C and D of this Ordinance.
2. An internal traffic circulation plan showing all proposed private streets and
ways within the development. Said plan shall meet the design standards set
forth in the Salem Subdivision Regulations, Section IV and Section V.
3. A landscaping plan showing all proposed landscape features within the
development.
4. An external lighting plan.
• 5. A plan addressing the adequacy of the construction and proposed maintenance
of disposal facilities for sewage, refuse, snow, and other waste.
6. A plan addressing the method of drainage or surface water runoff.
7. Utilities plan.
8. An Environmental Impact Statement which includes the information shown in
the Salem Subdivision Regulations, Appendix A. (If requested by the Planning
Board.)
Items 1 - 7 above may be submitted on the same sheets as the Definitive Site Plan
or on separate sheets.
1�O-Cl ve cA�C�iUe C� .
•
• MINUTES OF MEETING
October 18, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday, October 18, 1984. Present were Walter Power, Kenneth May, Abby
Burns, Edward.Stevenson, and Donald Hunt. Also present was City Planner Gerard
Kavanaugh. Normand Houle and John Ahern were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
FORM A--THOMAS GAGNON, BURNSIDE STREET
This plan involves the clarification of a lot line. The front stairway of a home on
Burnside Street was built out on to the sidewalk owned by the City. Therefore, the
City will convey this portion of its property to the homeowner.
It was noted that the homeowner is the petitioner on this particular application and
it was the consensus of the Board that the City should actually be the petitioner, as
they are doing the subdividing. Upon explanation of this process to Mr. Gagnon, he
requested to withdraw without prejudice.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, Mr. Gagnon was
• allowed to withdraw without prejudice. It was so voted.
FORM A--DOWNEY, CHERRY HILL AVENUE
This petition involves property on 8-10 Cherry Hill Avenue. Originally, three non-
conforming lots existed. The Downey's now wish to create one conforming lot and
enlarge the second non-conforming lot. Frontage requirements are satisfied for
both lots.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so voted.
PUBLIC HEARING--WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT--FAFARD, TWO PARCELS ON
FIRST STREET
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing.
The Conservation Commission concurs with the plan with the addition of the
following conditions:
1. A rip-rap energy dissipator shall be installed at the outlet end of the 21" drain
where it re-enters the brook.
2. The hydraulic adequacy of the drain shall be reviewed and approved by the City
Engineer.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--October 18, 1984 Page 2
The Conservation Commission further recommends that the Planning Board require
all copies of plans and narratives required by the Department of Environmental
Quality Engineering be forwarded to the Board for their records.
An Order of Conditions for the entire Fafard project has been issued by DEQE.
The Building Inspector concurs with the plan; the Board of Health concurs; and the
City Engineer has requested additional information.
Kenneth May outlined the areas of jurisdiction the Board has regarding this
particular permit acccording to the Zoning Ordinance.
Attorney John Serafini, representing the Fafard Companies, stated that prior to
the next meeting they intend to meet with the various Department heads and then
discuss the proposal with the City Planner. All concerns of the various
Departments will be met.
Mr. Serafini added that they plan to develop these two parcels first in order to
provide model units to determine the market for their particular styles of
condominiums.
Gregg Warren noted that there is a discrepancy between the wetlands maps and the
• actual location of wetlands. The wetlands were delineated by a study done by
HMM Associates which was confirmed by the Department of Environmental Quality
Engineering.
Two representatives of the Salem Housing Authority, Mr. William Farrell and Mr.
Joseph Saraceno were present to express some concern as to the impact of the
proposed development on Housing Authority property. They wish to protect their
interests.
Walter Power noted that there would be no filling of wetlands without
compensating storage. Bill McDonough of Fafard added that there will be no
interruption of water flow. He further*added that the study done by HMM confirms
that the water flows from the present Hawthorne Plaza and from the new proposed
area will not have a significant impact on the surrounding areas.
Attorney Serafini stated that all concerns will be addressed and by the next
meeting positive information will be available to the Board for their consideration.
Mr. Barry Ketchke of New England Power and Mr. Boyer of Vincent's Potato Chips
requested additional information which Fafard will provide.
Kenneth May raised the issue of the contours of the land being such that garages
will be flooded. Mr. McDonough replied that drainage will be away from all
garages. Mr. May requested that the plans make clear that there will be.no water
draining into the garages.
• Minutes of Meeting--October 18, 1984 Page 3
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh stated that when he meets with the developers, he
will provide the input from the Planning Board regarding building sizes, designs,
etc. which will be important in the consideration of the PUD. Further, he will
present a list of concerns the Planning Board has raised in the past which will be
addressed.
There being no further discussion, the public hearing was declared closed.
RE-ZONING
City Planner Kavanaugh gave the Board an overview of what has been done thus far
regarding the various zoning issues which have been discussed for the last several
meetings.
Lafayette Street: It is most likely the area will be incorporated into a local
historic district. Survey work will be completed by mid-November. The entire
street and some surrounding neighborhoods will be surveyed and then the Board and
Historical Commission can determine priorities.
Downtown/B-5 Area: The City Planner gave an overview of the under-utilized
areas and the parking problem. Two maps were presented to the Board for review-
-one with the proposed new B-5 area and the second depicting the accessibility of
• the two major parking areas in Salem to the under-utilized buildings proposed for
residential use.
Mr. Kavanaugh noted that the major issue is the fact that these buildings which
could be used for residential dwellings do not have adequate on-site parking. The
Salem Redevelopment Authority is now doing an assessment of two items:
1. A study of the market for downtown residential housing
2. An assessment of the accessibility of parking to key buildings targeted for
residential use.
Mr. Kavanaugh will be prepared to make some recommendations at our next
meeting regarding these issues.
Several minutes of discussion on this subject followed Mr. Kavanaugh's
presentation. It was noted that the Hawthorne Hotel parking lot was not included
in the proposed new B-5 area, and Mr. Kavanaugh felt it should be. The hotel is
entertaining the idea of expanding and certainly the need for hotel rooms in the
City is acute. Mr. Kavanaugh added that in discussions regarding the Armory use,
the adequacy and location of lodging facilities were addressed.
Walter Power felt the new B-5 area should include the site of the present train
station in order to facilitate its re-development once the new intermodal facility is
completed. The consensus was this was a good idea.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--October 18, 1984 Page 4
Walter Power asked what an acceptable distance would be from a parking site to a
residence and Mr. Kavanaugh stated he felt anything over 1000 - 1500 feet was a bit
of a walk. In speaking with developers in the City, it was the general consensus
that there was a good market for residential development in under-utilized
buildings.
Walter Power asked if added parking decks to the Almy's lot is still being
considered and Mr. Kavanaugh replied it is still under consideration. Walter Power
asked if any other parking areas could be considered and Mr. Kavanaugh felt it was
important at this point to concentrate on the parking garage and Riley Plaza. He
added that the redevelopment of the Armory could mean more parking would be
needed.
Walter Power suggested setting up a long-range plan for parking by establishing a
fee system for parking now which could generate monies to expand parking
facilities in the future.
Abby Burns asked how full the parking garage was presently and Mr. Kavanaugh
replied it is 65% full on the floors used at present.
Walter Power raised the issue of Holyoke Insurance and the underground parking
facilities they have constructed. Mr. Kavanaugh stated that Holyoke is opposed to
the Norman Street building rehabilitation and that currently they do not have
adequate parking for their employees. Walter Power asked if Holyoke was planning
any expansion of their facilities in the future. If so, perhaps they could be induced
to provide extra parking for public monthly rental.
Walter Power felt strongly that the approach the Board should take is encouraging
use of existing buildings and require adequate parking for any new construction.
Mr. Kavanaugh concurred.
In summary, the City Planner will include the site of the old train station in the
proposed B-5 boundary and will pursue the parking and residential market issues.
Business Park: Mr. Kavanaugh presented the Board with a comprehensive proposal
for a Business Park Zone. He suggested the Board review the material and discuss
the matter in detail at our next meeting. He noted the areas most likely for
development of Business Park zones are the Highland Avenue/Swampscott Road
areas.
Site Plan Review: As with the Business Park material, the City Planner suggested
the Board look over the material he prepared and further discussion will take place
at our next meeting.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--October 189, 1984 Page 5
Walter Power raised the issue of proposed construction having an adverse impact
on transportation arteries. He asked if arteries could be defined and traffic
patterns defined so policies could be developed to effectively handle the City's
through traffic.
Kenneth May asked if a public hearing would be held as part of the Site Plan
Review and Mr. Kavanaugh replied there would be a public hearing only on the
Business Park Development Special Permit. Ken May suggested there could be a
question of jurisdiction and Mr. Kavanaugh will research the matter further.
The City Planner will meet with business and community leaders for their input on
these proposals as well.
BOARD OF APPEAL AGENDA
The Planning Board reviewed the upcoming agenda for the Board of Appeal and will
write the Board of Appeal regarding the following petitions:
The Planning Board wishes to be recorded as opposed to the petition of Joseph
Mosca for a Variance for square footage for the existing building and a Special
Permit to allow a fourth dwelling unit on the third floor of a building at 22 Irving
Street on the basis that the addition of the fourth unit would exacerbate the
density of the neighborhood.
iThe Board will also inform the Board of Appeal of their opposition to the petition
of Frank and Diane Ouellette for a Variance to convert a four-family dwelling unit
into a five-family dwelling unit at 10-10'2 Hancock Street. The Planning Board had
opposed this petition in the past on the basis of density and parking problems and
will reiterate their concerns to the Board of Appeal.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Kenneth May, the minutes of
October 4, 1984, were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
OLD BUSINESS
Regarding the issue of tax credits as incentives for unusual facade improvements
to buildings, Mr. Kavanaugh stated the Assistant City Solicitor is presently
researching this issue.
NEW BUSINESS
It was suggested another joint meeting with the Board of Appeal be planned for the
near future.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--October 18, 1984 Page 6
Regarding the present moratorium on Cluster Residential development, the City
Planner suggested a working session on the Cluster Special Permit ordinance be
held in the near future. '
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
•
• MINUTES OF MEETING
November 1, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday, November 1, 1984. Present were Walter Power, John Ahern, Abby
Burns, Normand Houle, and Kenneth May. Also present was City Planner Gerard
Kavanaugh. Edward Stevenson was absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
SIGN ORDINANCE VARIANCE--SALEM STATE COLLEGE
Vice-president Richard Marrs and Mr. Joseph Mulligan were present representing
Salem State. They wish a variance to construct a marquee over the existing canopy
on their auditorium on Lafayette Street. The area is a residential (R-2) zone,
therefore, the variance is needed. Mr. Marrs noted that presently somewhat
makeshift signs are used to advertise various productions put on by the Theatre Arts
Department. They wish a more professional type of sign.
Mr. Mulligan showed the plan of what they propose to the Board. The proposed sign
will extend 8' beyond the canopy and will stand 6' high. It will be lighted internally.
• Abby Burns expressed concern for the size of the sign. She and several members of
the Board feel that the size of the sign would overpower the building. Mr. Marrs
noted that the Theatre Department wished to call attention to their productions;
however, Walter Power stated the location of the auditorium was in a residential
neighborhood and in the past the Board has been very stringent in their regulation
of signs in residential neighborhoods. A large neon sign could change the whole
aspect of the street. It was suggested a professional banner or something of that
nature would be more appropriate. Vice-president Marrs noted the design of the
sign was professionally done. However, it was the consensus of the Board that this
size was not necessary.
Following further discussion, it was agreed that representatives of Salem State will
meet with the City Planner to formulate an equitable compromise to present to the
Planning Board at its next meeting. It was agreed to allow Salem State to
withdraw their application pending these discussions.
SIGN ORDINANCE VARIANCE--HONDA, HIGHLAND AVENUE
Mr. John Ligo of Salem Sign was present to discuss a proposal by Honda of Highland
Avenue to erect a sign replacing a present sign on the site. They wish to erect a
Honda sign with six foot block letters on the existing structure which is 32' high.
The height and square footage requirements as set forth in the Sign Ordinance will
be exceeded. Mr. Ligo noted that there is ledge.and two billboards which partially
obscure the sign, so they wish the larger size. Further, he noted that the Honda
dealership will be renovating a building which was previously an "eyesore."
. Minutes of Meeting--November 1, 1984 Page 2
City Planner Kavanaugh noted the Ordinance allowed a total of 65 square feet and
25' above grade. The City has been making an effort to address signage throughout
the City with particular emphasis on billboards. He suggested the site be inspected
prior to the Board's next meeting and a decision will be made at that time.
FORM C--ERNEST TEDFORD, RAVENNA AVENUE--PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing.
Mr. Tedford stated they intend to construct a 52' x 28' split entry type of house on
Ravenna Avenue. They intend to pave the road and bring in the necessary water
and sewer to service the dwelling. Mr. Tedford pointed out the proposed water and
sewer on the plan.
He has asked for a waiver from sidewalks, road width, curbings, and turnaround.
The Conservation Commission concurs with the plan; the Building Inspector
concurs; the Board of Health concurs with the stipulation that the sewer and water
be constructed to the bend in the road and the driveway surface be hot-topped for
stormwater run-off. The Department of Public Works has suggested that a
turnaround be required for emergency vehicles; however the Fire Department did
not express concern for a turnaround.
• City Planner Kavanaugh stated he would recommend the proposed waivers be
accepted. It was suggested that the road be extended only to provide 100' frontage
for the lot. This would preclude building on the other side of Ravenna Ave. without
Planning Board input. It was further agreed that the City Engineer should have
final approval over the water and sewer installation.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the subdivision was
approved with the requested waivers, with water and sewer to be constructed to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer and the road to be constructed so as to provide
100' of frontage for the lot. It was so voted.
A Certificate of Action will be filed with the City Clerk for this subdivision and
the plan will be endorsed following the appeal period.
PUBLIC HEARING--WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT--KERN WOOD COUNTRY
CLUB
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing.
Mr. Erland Townsend of T & M Engineering presented his plans for reconstruction
of deteriorated areas in two places on Kernwood Country Club property. The first
area is on the sixth fairway where they propose to repair on the inside of an
existing retaining wall with reinforced concrete. There is a small pond on the site
and a second area on the pond side where they wish to repair by burying the existing
wall which is deteriorating badly in a blanket of gabions.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--November 1, 1984 Page 3
On the seventh tee there is also an area which is deteriorating badly and is in a
very dangerous state at this point. They wish to go in on the outside of this wall
and put in a concrete retaining wall and six feet of gabions on the top. Mr.
Townsend reiterated that in all the areas, they propose to repair and reconstruct
only. There will be no expansion of any structure.
The Conservation Commission has issued an Order of Conditions for the proposal
referencing the submitted plans; the City Engineer concurs with the plan; the
Building Inspector concurs; and the Board of Health concurs.
There being no further discussion, the public hearing was declared closed.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of John Ahern, the Special Permit was
approved with the addition of the conditions raised by the Conservation
Commission. It was so voted.
FAFARD--WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT--TWO PARCELS ON FIRST STREET
Attorney John Serafini noted that since the last meeting of the Planning Board, the
developers have been trying to address the concerns raised at the public hearing.
There are two lots in question, both located on First Street. A total of forty-eight
units are planned for the two sites.
• Mr. Gregg Warren of Fafard presented a narrative (attached hereto) regarding their
proposal. He pointed out how they intend to address the various issues raised in the
Zoning Ordinance regarding a Wetlands Special Permit.
Mr. Warren noted the proposed garage floor elevations are above the flood
elevation and are sloped slightly to direct drainage towards the drainage swales
proposed for the center of the road.
Mr. Warren further noted that based on 100-year storm calculations, the flow
increase is minimal--approximately 2 cu.ft/sec. following development.
Mr. Warren continued by showing the Board graphic interpretations of Pedestrian
and Vehicular movement and locations of proposed utilities. It was noted that in
de-noting proposed contours, the developers have made every effort to work with
the land. Minimal re-grading will be done to accomodate driveways and garages.
Walter Power asked if all drainage will be down the road bi-secting the parcel and
Mr. Warren replied in the negative, adding that there was a 21" drain which runs
under the driveways to an energy dissipator. However, Mr. William McDonough of
Fafard noted that water will be running down roads--they employ what is known as
"country drainage" where water does run across pavements into wetland areas.
There is no water flow directly down driveways--the contour lines go across
driveways and there is one catch basin at the end of the 21" drain line. In one area,
they intend to construct a slight depression in the road to direct water flow. This
is due to the proximity of buildings in this particular area.
•
• Minutes of Meeting--November 1, 1984 Page 4
Regarding Parcel #2, Mr. Warren noted five four-plexes are intended for the site.
He presented evidence of the garage floor levels being above mean high water and
noted the erosion and siltation control plans being instututed for the site per order
of DEQE. He again noted that some re-grading will be necessary to accomodate
driveways. Mr. McDonough described the drainage system intended for this site--
"country' type of drainage with a downgrade to direct the flow to a catch basin and
existing drain lines on First Street. Flows are directed away from the garages.
Attorney Serafini added that the drainage is the same as is employed in Ashland.
Mr. Warren then gave the Board a brief overview of the proposed landscaping.
They intend to provide a large amount of screening from Pequot Highlands and
Vincent's Chips. They employ both earth berms and pine trees. They also plan to
retain as many mature trees on site as possible.
Attorney Jane Lundregan, representing Vincent's Potato Chips, raised the issue of
this proposal not satisfying the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. She is
bothered by the fact that the Wetlands Special Permit is the only mechanism for
control of this proposal. The spirit of the Ordinance would preclude the building of
more than one principal building on a lot. This property should be subdivided into
five lots.
Kenneth May respectfully disagreed, stating that there was no subdivision of land;
• therefore this was not a Subdivision. The decision as to whether more than one
principal building was allowed on this lot was up to the Building Inspector.
Mr. Charles Bachini of Vincent's Potato Chips asked if the rip-rap proposed for
Parcel #1 would have a damming effect and Mr. McDonough replied that there was a
natural drainage swale to take the water away and drains it eventually into the 21"
drain and ultimately the brook.
Mr. Bachini raised the issue of the adequacy of the sewers and feels there was a
potential adverse effect on Vincent's land. He further expressed concern for any
blasting which may take place. Vincent's has a very deep well on site which he
feels could suffer from the effects of blasting. Mr. Ed Pasca of Fafard felt this
was not a problem.
Mr. Bachini was asked if his concerns were met satisfactorily, would he have any
objection to the project and he replied in the negative.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted that in the memo he prepared for the Board,
his scope was a bit more broad (memo attached hereto). The same issues raised for
these parcels will be addressed in the development of the larger parcels, so he has
recommended several conditions for the Board's perusal.
Mr. Kavanaugh gave a brief overview of the concerns he feels need to be
addressed. He expressed concern over a proposed 10% grade of a roadway into
Parcel 1. A way is needed to direct water away from the garage and properly
direct to roadsides. He also wishes some definition of proposed grades throughout
• the site.
1
Minutes of Meeting--November 1, 1984 Page 5
Mr. McDonough stated he recognized the concerns raised, but felt that where the
grade changes were so minimal, the drainage was not substantially affected. He
cannot accept the idea of crowning the roads throughout the project. Mr.
McDonough felt, however, that another catch basin could be added.
Attorney John Serafini suggested these issues would be worked out to the
satisfaction of the City Planner and the City Engineer.
Walter Power felt uncomfortable with the driveways and minimal provision for
road drainage. He felt it could be a problem during stormy weather. Mr.
Kavanaugh felt some middle ground could be achieved.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of John Ahern, the proposed
conditions of approval prepared by the City Planner were endorsed and the
developers will work with the City Planner and the City Engineer to work out
satisfactory details. It was so voted.
Normand Houle asked if there was any language in the condominium documents
which addressed no third bedroom being added to a unit and Mr. McDonough replied
it is written into the deed.
Walter Power raised the issue of sand and salt on icy roads which could leach into
the wetlands. He also expressed concern for the adequacy of the 21" drain pipe.
• Mr. Bill McDonough expressed his thanks to the Board for their cooperation. He is
leaving Fafard to open his own consulting business. The Board wished Mr.
McDonough well.
RE-ZONING
Mr. Kavanaugh stated that within two weeks he will have definite
.recommendations regarding the downtown and the Business Park Zone. He will also
set up a meeting with the Chamber of Commerce to gain their input.
Mr. Kavanaugh added that the Business Park Zone may be expanded to include the
Mason Street area and information will be provided to the Board regarding this
area.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
�y MINUTES OF MEETING
November 15, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on November 15, 1984. Present were Walter Power, John Ahern, Donald Hunt,
Edward Stevenson, and Abby Burns. Also present was City Planner Gerard
Kavanaugh. Kenneth May and Normand Houle were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING—PICKMAN PARK SEWER
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing.
Mr. Chuck Faia of Parsons and Faia Engineering was present to discuss the proposal
to replace a portion of a 15" sewer line on Parallel Street and along the B & M
Railroad lines with a new 18" sewer. Mr. Faia reminded the Board that this
construction was a condition of the original approval of the Pickman Park project.
He added that pending the receipt of the necessary easements, they are ready to
begin construction. The City Engineer has reviewed the plan and has given his
approval.
• City Planner Kavanaugh noted that he is in the process of working with Attorney
Beatrice to obtain the necessary easements and release the easement which is
currently in place.
Walter Power asked what underlayment is proposed for the sewer line and Mr. Faia
replied they intend to lay the line on a bed of crushed stone. This was common
building practice. Walter Power felt this should be noted on the plan.
John Ahern asked if any borings were done and Mr. Faia replied that some were
done and they encountered 2 to 214 feet of peat, but the pipe will be well below
that level.
The Conservation Commission has issued an Order of Conditions for the project;
the Department of Public Works concurs; the Board of Health concurs with the plan
and the Building Inspector concurs with the plan.
There being no further discussion, the Chairman declared the public hearing closed.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby Burns, the Special Permit was
approved with the following conditions:
1. The bedding under the pipe shall be specified on the plan and shall be subject to
the approval of the Director of Public Services.
2. The conditions specified by the Conservation Commission (DEQE File #64-108)
• shall be strictly adhered to.
It was so voted.
• Minutes of Meeting—November 15, 1984 Page 2
SIGN ORDINANCE REVIEW--HONDA, HIGHLAND AVENUE
Mr. Jim Kirk of Salem Imports (Honda) was present to discuss his proposal to erect
a sign for his business as 329 Highland Avenue. His original proposal was denied by
the Planning Department as being in violation of the Sign Ordinance.
City Planner Kavanaugh noted that he had inspected the site and in view of the
fact that the two billboards which partially obscure the site of the proposed sign
will be removed shortly and particularly in view of the fact that the City has spent
a great deal of time in negotiating the removal of many billboards in the City, he
would recommend a compromise proposal for this site:
1. The height of the bottom of the proposed sign shall be at the top of the ledge
present on the site.
2. The size of the sign shall be no more than 4' in height and 20' in length.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of John Ahern, this recommendation
was approved. It was so voted.
• FAFARD--SITE PLAN APPROVAL--HEARTLAND DRUG SITE
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted the developer has three plans to present this
evening for the Board's review which are conditions of the approval of the Site Plan
for Heartland Drug. Mr. Ed Pasca of Fafard was present to give the Board an
overview of a Lighting Plan, a Snow Removal Plan, and a Landscaping Plan for the
site.
Regarding the Lighting Plan, Mr. Pasca presented an overview for the Board's
perusal. Walter Power asked if they intended to install standard height lighting and
Mr. Pasca replied in the affirmative. They will not be installing high mast lighting-
-only standard height or less. Abby Burns asked if how visible the lighting will be
from neighboring houses and Mr. Pasca assured the Board the area will be
adequately buffered by trees. John Ahern asked if the poles will be ornamental or
standard spun aluminum and Mr. Pasca replied he anticipates they will be
aluminum.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh stated he had reviewed the plan and felt it was
adequate and not excessively glaring as the Hawthorne Square Shopping Center is.
John Ahern asked how the lighting will be controlled and Mr. Pasca replied it will
be photo activated and they will be on all night long. Mr. Ahern further questioned
the location of the the lights and Mr. Pasca replied they will be located off the
traveled pedestrian way in the grassed island areas.
•
' Minutes of Meeting--November 15, 1984 Page 3
Walter Power asked if a lighting lay-out was done showing actual lumen patterns
and Mr. Pasca replied in the negative. It was done by a standardized method, but no
plan will be provided to the Board..
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Edward Stevenson, the plan was
approved. It was so voted.
Regarding the Snow Storage Plan, Mr. Pasca stated the snow will be stored along
the edge of the parking area. Walter Power expressed some concern for the
vegetation on the islands and Mr. Pasca replied the snow will be stored in actual
parking spaces, not on the islands themselves. Gerard Kavanaugh added the parking
spaces provided are in excess of what is required.
Walter Power felt that an alternate site should be designated in the event of a
large snowfall. A planned, non-vegetated area should be designated for this type of
emergency. Gerard Kavanaugh stated he would recommend the approval of the
Snow Storage Plan be contingent upon the notation on the plan of an adequately
sized and located emergency storage site.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Edward Stevenson, the Snow Storage
Plan was approved subject to the condition noted by the City Planner. It was so
voted. The designated area shall be subject to the approval of the City Planner.
• Regarding the Landscaping Plan, City Planner Kavanaugh noted there had been
several draft plans submitted to the Planning Department prior to the compromise
reached on the plan presented this evening. The largest issue was the caliper of the
trees and it was finally agreed that 3-3Y: caliper trees would be planted on the site.
The majority of the trees would be hardy Norway Maples and Ash trees.
Upon perusal of the plan, Abby Burns felt the island were a bit too crowded. More
success would be gained with planting fewer, larger shrubs. Gerard Kavanaugh
noted the intention was to create a solid bank of greenery. Abby Burns felt that the
caliper of trees was the most important; however, she suggested the amount of
shrubs on the islands be reconsidered.
Following further discussion, it was suggested that further input from the
developer was needed regarding this plan. The matter will be discussed again at
our December 6, 1984, meeting.
RE-ZONING
The Special Permit for Site Plan Review and Business Park zone are in the process
of being reviewed as to legal language. City Planner Kavanaugh presented the
Board with a listing of proposed properties in the Mason Street area which he felt
would be appropriate to include in a Business Park Zone. These properties would be
appropriate in light of the proposed construction of the new Bridge Street by-pass.
Mr. Kavanaugh added he.has had positive feedback from the City Council and the
• Chamber of Commerce regarding both proposals.
Minutes of Meeting--November 15, 1984 Page 4
Mr. Kavanaugh stated he is hopeful the language for these two proposals will be
ready for Council submission in early December.
Walter Power suggested that the intent and boundaries in establishing the N. River
zone be included in the submission. This would aid in the possible future expansion
of the zone out to Mason Street, should abutting properties become available. It
was noted, however, that this would have to be worded carefully to preclude the
impression that "spot" zoning was being proposed.
BOARD OF APPEAL AGENDA
The Planning Board reviewed the upcoming Board of Appeal agenda and will write
the Board of Appeal regarding the following petitions:
1. The Planning Board wishes to be recorded as opposed to the petition of Nicholas
DelTorto for a Special Permit to convert a two-family dwelling into a three-family
dwelling at 5-7 Green Street on the basis that there is inadequate parking in the
neighborhood and the area is primarily two-family.
2. The Planning Board wishes to recorded as opposed to the petition of Andrew
Karahalis for a Special Permit to convert existing two family into a three family
dwelling and a Variance from parking at 20-20f4 Phelps Street on the premise that
• the parking problems in the neighborhood are already severe. Further, the
neighborhood is primarily single—and two--family dwellings.
3. The Planning Board wishes to be recorded as opposed to the petition of Joan M.
McCarthy for a Variance to convert a single family dwelling into a two family at
23 E. Collins Street. The side of the street where the house is located is all single-
family homes. Further, there is no on-site parking for a second dwelling available.
4. The Planning Board will write a letter in support of the petition of Donald
Turner, Jr. for a Special Permit to convert a single-family dwelling into a 10 room
bed and breakfast tourist inn at 19 Washington Square N. The Planning Board is
cognizant of the need for more hotel space in the downtown and this type of use
for a large single-family home is consistent with the promotion of the downtown.
The Board will recommend, however, that reserved parking spaces in the parking
garage be a condition of the approval of the Special Permit and Variance.
5. The Planning Board will write a letter to the Board of Appeal expressing some
concern for the proposal of Robert G. Guess for a Special Permit to install and
operate a precious metal recovery process at 12 Goodhue Street. The Board is a bit
apprehensive as to the final by-product of this process and its disposal. Further,
this type of use is not compatible with the new Business Park zone currently being
drafted.
•
Minutes of Meeting--November 15, 1984 Page 5
OLD BUSINESS
It was decided to defer meeting with the Board of Appeal informally until after the
holidays. A tentative date of January 7, 1985, was agreed upon and the Board of
Appeal will be asked if this is convenient. Abby Burns has volunteered her home for
the meeting. Issues to be discussed will include: density, new zones, Site Plan
Review, and condominium conversion.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Edward Stevenson, the minutes of
October 18, 1984, were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Donald Hunt, the minutes of
November 1, 1984, were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 9:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
• Dale E. Yale
Clerk
lJitu 0E MIEriI� �� tt58tiChllSPf S
One �$Aem (Breen
AGENDA--PLANNING BOARD--DECEMBER 6, 1984
I. Form A--Gerald Raymond, Valley Street
2. Form A--James-Abrams, Buena;Vista and Sable Roads
3 . Public Hearing--Form C--Sidney Gerber, Sophia Road
4. Public Hearing--Wetlands Special Permit, Sidney Gerber, Sophia Road
S. Fafard--Wetlands Special Permit , two parcels on First Street
6 Fafard--Approval of Snow Storage and Landscaping Plans for Heartland
7. Re-zoning update
8. Approval of Minutes
9. Old/New Business
J
MINUTES OF MEETING
December 6, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference
room, on Thursday, December 6, 1984. Present were Walter Power, Normand
Houle, Donald Hunt , Robert Guethlen, Abby Burns, and Kenneth May. Also
present were Staff Advisor Dale Yale and City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh.
Edward Stevenson and John Ahern were absent
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
FORM A--GERALD RAYMOND; VALLEY STREET
This involves the combining of two lots on Valley Street to form one
conforming lot. Mr. Raymond is essentially requesting that a lot line
be removed so that he may construct a single—family dwelling on a
conforming lot.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was
endorsed, approval under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It
was so voted.
. FORM A--JAMES ABRAM; SABLE AND BUENA VISTA ROADS
Mr. Abram was present to request that nine non—conforming lots be
combined to make four conforming lots. Two lots show frontage on Buena
Vista and two show frontage on Sable Road.
Upon some discussion, it was noted that the pavement is not consistent
throughout these two roads. Therefore, upon the motion of Kenneth May
and second of Abby Burns, the Form A was endorsed, approval under the
Subdivision Control Law not required with the stipulation that the
Planning Department confirm that adequate frontage on a paved way exists
for Lot 4 on the plan. It was so voted.
PUBLIC HEARING--SIDNEY GERBER; FORM C, SOPHIA ROAD
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing.
This involves the proposed construction of single—family dwelling on
Sophia Road. A Form C is required because 100' of frontage on an
approved way does not exist and there is a question of the adequacy of
the turnaround presently existing at the terminus of the road.
Chairman Walter Power read the list of requested waivers: Mr. Gerber
wishes a waiver from sidewalks and curbings, street widths, and he is
requesting that the turnaround which presently exists be approved.
ON
The School Department concurs with the plan; the Board of Health
concurs; the Conservation Commission has requested more information
regarding the wish of the Planning Board as to the acceptability andlor
location of the turnaround; the Fire Department has not approved the
Minutes of Meeting--December 6, 1984 Page 2
turnaround and feels is is inadequate; the Department of Public Services
feels the turnaround is inadequate. .
Donald Hunt felt that in light of the concerns raised by the Fire
Department and the Department of Public Works, the Planning Board could
not act.
Mr. Gerber stated that the guard rail and turnaround he constructed have
improved the property The turnaround is better than what was there
previously. .He added he plans to build one single—family dwelling only.
Mrs. June DeRoin of 6 Sophia Road stated she felt the lot was not
buildable lot. There is inadequate frontage and a very steep slope.
Mr. Joseph Deveau of 21 Ravenna Avenue stated he has the lot directly
behind and below the property. The lot is extremely steep and he feels
it is unbuildable.
Mrs. Louise LeBlanc of 27 Ravenna Avenue expressed concern over the
brook behind the property. It is already clogged and she feels the
building of another home would exacerbate the drainage problems.
Mr. Jordan of 19 Ravenna also expressed concern over the flow. Mr.
DeRoin of 6 Sophia Road added there is no land to build a house upon. A
retaining wall would need to be built and the cost would be prohibitive.
• Councillor Leonard O'Leary of Ward four wished to be recorded as
opposed. He questioned if a turnaround could be properly constructed
without buying additional land to accomodate the radius of the
turnaround. Mr. Gerber felt this had not been decided as yet, but it
was not out of the question.
Mr. Yarosh of Sophia Road addressed the controversy of the turnaround.
No one has approached him about taking a portion of his land to
construct a turnaround. Councillor O'Leary emphasized that -the Fire
Department and the Engineering Department were opposed.
Mr. Saulnier of 4 Madeline Avenue stated that there was no problem with
the road until the new houses were built. (Mr. Yarosh' s and the home
under construction being built by Mr. Pennell) . There was adequate area
for any vehicle to turn around and there was no problems. He also
raised the issue of blasting. Mr. Gerber felt that blasting would be no
problem. Mr. Saulnier noted that in the past when blasting was done,
Mr. Gerber did not follow proper procedure.
Normand Houle felt the lot should be inspected again Mr. Gerber
stated there was "plenty of land to build a house" there. There is
27 ,000 square feet of land. He plans to build a small house and will do
no filling. Mr. Yarosh added that prior to his house being built (by
Mr. Gerber) the area was a "neighborhood dump" and the activity has
improved the property.
• City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted that in light of the fact that there
Minutes of Meeting--December 6, 1984 Page 3
\ J was no way the applicant could accomodate the demand of the Fire
t Department and the Department of Public Works, he would recommend
denying the application. He added that the petitioner should be allowed
to come back with a different plan. The Subdivision Regulations require
a 116' turnaround. It appears Mr. Gerber would not have the ability to
provide this type of turnaround.
Kenneth May felt that more information was needed on the entire parcel.
It was his recollection that this lot was not to be built upon. Upon
the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Houle, the hearing will
be continued until further information can be provided. It was so
voted.
PUBLIC HEARING--WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT, GERBER, SOPHIA ROAD
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing.
A letter was read from the Conservation Commission (attached hereto)
which raises the issue of the turnaround. The location of a turnaround
could affect the decision made by the Commission.
The Department of Public Works does not concur with the plan; the Board
of Health concurs.
Mr. Gerber stated he will spend the necessary money to construct a
•� turnaround.
Mr. Deveau of 21 Ravenna Avenue expressed concern over the brook to the
rear of Mr. Gerber's property. It is clogged up a great deal of the
time as it is. He questions the impact of new building on the drainage.
Mr. LeBlanc of 27 Ravenna Avenue also expressed concerns for the
drainage of the area.
Mr. Gerber felt the brook would not be affected by his proposal.
There being no further discussion, the Chairman declared the hearing
closed.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Donald Hunt, the decision
will be deferred until further information is obtained. It was so
voted.
FAFARD--WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT--TWO PARCELS ON FIRST STREET
City Planner Kavanaugh noted that several meetings ago plans for two
parcels on First Street were submitted for review by the Board.
Following review by the Planning Department, several revisions of the
plan were made and he drafted a memo of proposed conditions and if they
had been met by the developer.
� The conditions recommended by Mr. Kavanaugh were reviewed by the Board.
The Planning Board will be reviewing the Landscaping Plan and the
Minutes of Meeting--December 6, 1984 Page 4
Lighting Plan. Mr. Kavanaugh recommended approval of the Special Permit
Jtsubject to the conditions noted on the memorandum.
V�. .
Mr. Ed Paska of Fafard presented a site plan which also included a snow
storage area which the Board had previously requested. It was noted
that the location of the snow storage areas was determined by the
location of vegetation. Any adverse impact on vegetated areas was to
be avoided. Walter Power asked how the storage capacity of the area was
calculated and Mr. Paska replied that it was difficult to
address--average snow falls were taken into account. Bob Guethlen felt
the areas delineated were adequate. Mr. Paska added that in Parcel Two,
one building (four units) was eliminated.
Regarding the Lighting Plan, the lighting will be similar to what is
employed in Ashland. The lights will be 16 ' in height and will be
operated by photosensors which will activate them automatically when it
becomes dark. Mr. Paska outlined the illumination layout which is
delineated on the plan. The average is 1-112 foot candles per light.
City Planner Kavanaugh noted in Ashland the lights averaged 112 a foot
candle. He would, therefore, recommend that the Lighting Plan is
adequate. Mr. Paska noted that a comparison is presently being done
between to and high sodium lamps in order to minimize the "yellowish"
cast given off by some lamps. They will choose whatever lamp is more
aesthetically pleasing.
The issue of the lights being operated separately from other lighting in
the complex was addressed and the consensus of the Board was that a
\ condition of the approval should be that these lights be placed on a
separate circuit to avoid the possibility of tenants turning off
individual lights.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Normand Houle, the Special
Permit was approved with the following added conditions:
1 . The safety of utilities from flood damage will be approved by the
Director of Public Services.
2 . All roadways1driveways shall be constructed with sloped granite
curbing and a crown for ease in drainage. The location of the curbing
shall be subject to the approval of the Planning Department.
3 . Plans showing 2 ' contours for proposed grades shall be submitted to
the Planning Board and review and approval of the entire drainage system
shall be made by the Director. of Public Services and the City Planner.
4. Construction measures shall be undertaken to make certain that
basement floor levels are adequately protected from leakage and seepage
of water.
S. All lighting in common areas of the proposed development shall be on
a separate circuit.
6. Work shall conform to submitted plans as revised.
Minutes of Meeting--December 6, 1984 Page 5
JOIt was so voted.
FAFARD--HEARTLAND SITE PLAN
Mr. Paska showed the Board the proposed Snow Storage Area for the
Heartland Drug site. It consists of a 60' x 70' area for storage of
heavy snow fall and is located in an area where there will be no impact
on- vegetation.
Mr. Gregg Warren of Fafard presented a revised Landscaping Plan for the
site which reflects the recommendations of the Planning Department Mr.
Warren stated that the major trees are at 30' spacings along the larger
traffic islands. In addition to the major plantings , smaller shrubhs
such as yews and rhododendrons will be planted. Mr. Warren further
noted that this theme will be carried through the entire Fafard
development. He added the shrubs were of the hardy City variety with
little failure rate. They were also planned so they would not interfere
with traffice visibility.
Abby Burns asked if they were planning a sprinkler system and Mr. Warren
replied in the negative. Walter Power stated the Board was concerned
with maintenance of the vegetation and Mr. Warren replied it was in the
best interests of the company to properly maintain the vegetation. Abby
Burns asked the caliper of the trees and Mr. Warren replied they would
be 3-1/2 caliper, spaced 30' apart.
• Walter Power asked what the difference in elevation between this site
and Hawthorne Plaza was and Mr. Warren replied it is minimal. Walter
Power expressed the hope that this type of landscaping will encourage
the Hawthorne Plaza people to' landscape as well.
Walter Power suggested the next island over should be landscaped as well
to demarcate the parking area andgive it a finished look in front of the
whole building.
1 Robert Guethlen asked what they intend to do 'with the remainder of the
parking lot until further development takes place and Mr. Warren replied
they will rough coat the lot with a binder coat of asphalt. Mr.
Guethlen suggested that .the entrance island from Traders Way be
vegetated as well to provide an attractive entrance and it was noted
that the parking lot in that area will reflect the future tenant, so it
would be difficult to complete the island at present.
City Planner Kavanaugh stated he would recommend approving the plan with
the added condition that the one additional island be vegetated.
Upon the motion of- Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, the Snow
Storage and Landscaping Plans were approved with the added condition
that the additional traffic island be vegetated. It was so voted.
' Attorney John Serafini, representing Fafard, noted the company has just
submitted a PUD application for these two parcels and would like the
Board to consider a public hearing in early January.
Minutes of Meeting--December 6, 1984 Page 6
RE—ZONING UPDATE
Lafayette Street: Mr. Kavanaugh stated that the survey work for
Lafayette Street is well under way by the Department ' s new staff person,
Debbie Hilbert.
Business Park and Site Plan Review: Language for both these proposals
is currently being reviewed by the Assistant City Solicitor and is
expected to be submitted to the City Council for their December 17
meeting.
B-5: Language for this new zone is in final form and will be reviewed
by both the Redevelopment Authority and the Planning Board in early
January.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Kenneth May, the minutes of
November 18, 1984, were approved as corrected. It was so voted.
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Kavanaugh stated that he would recommend some major revisions to the
Zoning Ordinance. To that end, a consultant should be hired to do the
"legwork" regarding the review of the Ordinance as to consistency,
district boundary changes, etc.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Houle, a request
will be sent to the Mayor and City Council to transfer $14,000 from the
Receipts Reserved for Appropriation Account to the Board for this
purpose. It was so voted.
Walter Power officially welcomed Bob Guethlen to the Planning Board and
noted the Board looks Toward to a long and fruitful relationship.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having
passed unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 10:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale, Staff Advisor to the
Planning Board
,.i�N -_ ..� �,�,� �:..✓.��f �•! r'C�^z ly �.'.i�C�.�3�J�Ii IS��m:'.tif�i
• �`r`"`' �%'� fi:%tlr ��:t!21n Cr:.�:
AGENDA--June 2.1 , 1904
1.. Public Ilear:i.ng-Ilewitt Wetlands Special Permit-Claris St.
2. Maine Post: and Beam-Tedesco Pond Piicn.
J. James MacDowell-Preliminary Discuss io .-Cluster Subdivision.
4 . Janos 'L aff--Designat'ion of °Palient Of for City Counci.t. Approval..
5 . Approval of Miam ns-June 7, 1904.
6. Olci Business.
7. New Business.
•
• Minutes of Meeting
June 21, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room
on Thursday, June 21, 1984. Present were Normand Houle, Edward Stevenson, Abby
Burns, Donald Hunt, Walter Power, William Cass, and Walter Power. Also present
were City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Planning Board Aide Charles Frederiksen.
John Ahern and David Goodof were absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at•7:45 p.m.
HEWITT--PUBLIC HEARING, WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT (CLARK STREET)
Chairman Walter Power read the notice of the public hearing. Mr. Erland
Townsend, engineer for the project has been delayed, so Planning Board Aide
Charles Frederiksen gave the Board an overview of the proposal.
The proposal involves a small subdivision (three homes) on Clark Street, off
Highland Avenue. The Planning Board had previously subdivided the parcel into
four lots. Three of these lots will be built upon and two fall within the buffer zone
of the wetlands. A 271wide access strip has been included in the fourth lot to
provide access to wetlands at the rear of the properties and it is understood the
intention of the owner is to deed this piece to the Conservation Commission.
Mr. Frederiksen noted that the corner of one dwelling unit is in the buffer zone and
the entire dwelling unit of another is in the buffer zone. When Mr. Hewitt's
• proposal was heard before the Conservation Commission, the concern was for the
removal of debris on the site and for erosion control during construction and until
the slope is re-vegetated.
In pointing out the buffer zone and line of the wetland on the plan, Mr..Frederiksen
noted that the edge of the wetland as delineated on the wetlands map differs from.
what was found during actual survey; however, the buffer is delineated from the
line of vegetation. He added that the basement elevations are more than 4' above
mean high water.
Walter Power asked if they would be connecting to City sewers and Mr.
Frederiksen replied imthe affirmative. Mr. Power asked if the wetland area was
subject to back-up of flood waters and Mr. Frederiksen replied in the negative.
Donald Hunt wished some clarification regarding the rear parcel and Mr.
Frederiksen replied that Mr. Hewitt had not approached the Conservation
Commission regarding the donation of the parcel, but it was clear it was not
buildable, so he felt there was no reason why Mr. Hewitt would not follow through
with his intention to deed it to the City.
In response to a further question from Walter Power regarding the elevations of the
proposed dwellings vs. the elevation of the wetlands, the lowest home is at least 12'
higher than the vegetated wetland.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 2
•
The' uilding Inspector concurs with the plan; the City Engineer concurs; the Board
of Health concurs; and the Conservation Commission has issued an Order of
Conditions for the proposal referencing the plan and adding conditions for the
removal of debris on the site and for the implementation of erosion control
measures on the slope.
A letter from Mr. and Mrs. Newman, abuttors to the proposed project, was read for
the record (attached hereto) which expressed concern for run-off in the area and
wondering if the construction of these additional units would exacerbate the
drainage problem which already exists. Charles Frederiksen noted that the services
in the area are not built to subdivision standards and there are no catch basins on
the road. However, the City Engineer had reviewed the proposal and has concurred.
Mr. Vincent Capano, who owns Lot 161 (#38 C1ark�Street), asked how far the units
will be from the fire hydrants and Mr. James MacDowell of T & M Engineering
noted that there was a hydrant at the intersection which put the proposed homes
between 75' and 125' from the hydrant.
There being no additional persons wishing to speak in favor or in opposition to the
proposal, the Chairman suggested continuing the hearing until Mr. Townsend,
engineer for the proponent, arrived.
MAINE POST AND BEAM (Public Hearing--April 19, 1984)
• A letter from the developer addressing the issue of an open space access plan was
distributed to the Board (attached hereto). Additionally, the Planning Department
prepared a draft plan similar to the developer's for the Board's consideration
(attached hereto). Walter Power suggested the Board consider this portion of the
conditions first.
The plan proposed by the Planning Department calls for limited access to the pond
and common areas for the purpose of ice skating and nature walks. This access
would be granted on a limited basis to organized, supervised groups. The granting
authority would be the Conservation Commission and authority would be granted to
the Commission by the Homeowners Association of the development.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted that he felt some concern regarding the
resources of the Conservation Commission to administer this situation; however,
according to the ordinance, this authority has to be placed with a City entity and
the Conservation Commission is the logical choice. -He added the Planning
Department will provide all the necessary support assistance. He feels this plan
meets the demands of the ordinance and gave a brief overview of the proposal:
1. Common areas shall be owned by the Homeowners Association.
2. All access would be through common areas, rather than easements through
•
Minutes'of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 3
• private land.
3. The amount of usage would be limited to thirty-six days. The Commission, with
the assistance of the Planning Department shall determine the criteria for user
approval: a) the benefit of the group; i.e. education and the question of negative
environmental impact; b) the benefit to surrounding neighborhood, including other
abuttors.
Mr. Kavanaugh added that it is suggested that the Conservation Commission
advertise for applications twice a year and hold public hearings to review and make
recommendations as to use to the Homeowners Association. He further
recommended that the residents around the pond request approval as a group and
priority would be given to them.
Regarding maintenance of the pond, common areas and sedimentation basins, etc.,
the responsibility would rest with the Homeowners Association.
Mr. Kavanaugh noted he is not entirely comfortable with this proposal, but feels it
meets the provisions of the ordinance.
Abby Burns asked why fishing was excluded as an accepted use and Mr. Kavanaugh
replied that this was not usually a group activity organized and supervised under
the auspices of a particular organization. Ice skating and nature walks could be
organized.
• Donald Hunt asked why the particular months of September and February were
chosen and Mr. Kavanaugh replied these months would be the times the hearings
would be held for the granting of permits in order to take into consideration the
uses for ice skating in the winter months and nature walks in the spring and fall.
Kenneth May asked if the Conservation Commission had approved of this proposal
as yet and Mr. Kavanaugh replied in the negative. He will be presenting the
proposal to the Commission next Thursday evening. Walter Power felt that there
was not really another logical avenue.
Jim MacDowell stated he was not speaking for the Commission, but wondered
about liability. Ken May felt the City would not be liable; perhaps, however, the
Homeowners Association could be held responsible. Walter Power felt this plan
could be approved conditional upon Conservation Commission approval. Normand
Houle felt the Board should work with the City Solicitor regarding this issue and Mr.
Kavanaugh replied he will discuss this with the Legal Department prior to the
Conservation Commission meeting next week. Donald Hunt felt the Homewoners
Association should contact some insurance companies regarding some sort of
protection; however it was the consensus of the Board that this was the
responsibility of the developer and the homeowners.
Walter Power made some suggestions for some slight revisions to the open space
plan: He felt that the advertising for the use by particular groups should be charged
to the Homeowners Association. Mr. Kavanaugh felt this was a good suggestion.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 4
• Regarding the question of priority to be given to the abutters, Mr. Power
questioned if we could actually do that and, following some discussion, the
consensus of the Board was that this will be included unless appealed.
Edward Stevenson felt that the groups that are granted permission to use the area
should be limited to non-profit organizations formed for educational and
recreational purposes; i. e. Boy Scouts, etc. Mr. Kavanaugh felt this was a good
suggestion.
Walter Power wished to add that the Homeowners can entertain any other requests
on their own volition.
Regarding the liability issue, a waiver of liability will be included in the application
signed by those wishing to use the area.
Walter Power felt that a notation should be included in the plan which would
prohibit motorized vehicles from the property. Also the suggestion that the
Conservation Commission provide two weeks' notice to the Homeowners
Association should be included in the open space access plan.
Some discussion took place regarding the size of the groups to use the area and it
was felt that if the developer was comfortable with forty, the Board concurred.
Walter Power felt there should be a way to limit access to those areas which are
• the common areas of the subdivision. It was felt after some discussion that this
was in essence already accomplished by denoting the areas as "common areas,
including the pond." Some signage may be necessary to delineate those areas which
are not common areas.
The Board then turned to deliberations on the draft conditions received previously
(attached hereto):
Regarding the first condition, upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Abby
Burns, the condition was approved. It was so voted.
The second condition dealt with the material to be used on the walkways.
Following some discussion, it was decided that small 1/4" roofing gravel stone
should be used in place of Man-pac, cinder, or other small stone. Upon the motion
of Abby Burns, and Normand,Houle, it was so voted.
Regarding the list of requested waivers, it was the general consensus of the Board
that some sort of granite curbing would be more desirable than Cape Cod berms.
Edward Stevenson noted that sloping granite curbing is used successfully in New
Hampshire and had the same effects as a Cape Cod berm, but granite, which is
more aesthetically pleasing and more durable than bituminous, was used. The
design will be left up to the developer subject to the approval of the Planning
Board. Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Normand Houle, it was so
voted.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 7, 1984 Page 5
Condition 41 4 deals with the concerns raised by the City Engineer. Regarding part
e of this condition, Walter Power wished to amend the wording to state "Specific
building locations and the base elevations of the lowest level shall be shown on the
plans. . ."
Regarding part d of this condition, Walter Power asked if there is a standard for
construction practices described in the condition. James MacDowell replied the
standard is called ASTM, American Society for Testing Materials. Therefore, it
was decided that at the end of part d of condition 4, the words, "and in accordance
with ASTM" shall be added.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Donald Hunt, condition four was
approved as amended. It was so voted.
Regarding Condition #5, Kenneth May wished to make it clear that approval of the
Subdivision and the Cluster-Permit does not necessarily mean a tacit approval of
the Wetlands Special Permit. Further information will need to provided on the plan
for approval of the Wetlands Special Permit. Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and
second of Normand Houle, this condition was so voted.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Abby Burns, Condition 416 was so
voted.
Regarding Condition 417, the addition of language addressing the maintenance of
• the breakaway will be added. The condition shall now read ".. .A breakaway barrier
shall be installed and maintained at the terminus of Eleanor Road. . ." Upon the
motion of Kenneth May and second of William Cass, it was so voted.
Regarding Condition 418, part c, the final line shall now read, ". . .shall have no
detrimental effect upon the water drainage of the neighborhood." Upon the motion
of Normand Houle and second of William Cass, Condition # 8 was approved as
amended. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, Condition 41 9 was so
voted.
Upon the moltion of Donald Hunt and second of Normand Houle, Condition 41 10 was
so voted.
Regarding Condition 41 11, part a, the language should read as follows: "In the
buffer zone adjacent to the existing residential neighborhood and in all common
areas, the developer shall provide a landscaping plan which must be approved by
the Planning Department prior to the sale of any lot in the subdivision. The
developer shall request and take into account the thoughts and requests of property
abutters as the landscaping plan is developed. The developer is responsible for
fully implementing the landscaping plan. The developer shall make certain that
landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition. Should these
•
Minutes-of Meeting--June 21, 1984 Page 6
plantings not remain in a healthy and thriving condition, the developer shall replace
said plantings and shall be responsible for the healthy and thriving condition of
those plantings for a period of one year following the replanting. Following those
one year periods, the homeowners association shall be responsible for maintaining
buffer zone plantings in a healthy and thriving condition."
Regarding part c, the condition shall now read, "All improvements to common
areas shall be completed or appropriately bonded prior to the sale of any lot."
Part d shall now read, "A covenant governing the maintenance of the common area
shall be submiotted to the Planning Board and shall be approved prior to the sale of
any lot. This agreement shall run in perpetuity."
Part a shall be deleted from the draft.
Part f (which shall now become part e) shall read, "The developer shall develop a
plan for the type of limited access to the pond and common area as defined in
Section VII of the Salem Zoning Ordinance and said plan shall be approved by the
Planning Board prior to the sale of any lot."
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Houle, Condition 4411 was
approved. It was so voted.
An addition shall be made to Condition 44 12, which shall now read, "Refuse
• removal, road maintenance, and snow plowing shall be the exclusive responsibility
of the homeowners association of Tedesco Pond Place." Upon the motion of Donald
Hunt and second of Kenneth May, it was so voted.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Normand Houle, Condition #13 was
approved. It was so voted.
Regarding 4f 14 a., the text shall now read, "The developer shall make certain that
no construction shall take place in areas which might cause disturbance to abutters
prior to.7:00 a.m, on any work day, 8:00 on Satursdays, or at any time on Sundays,
provided that nothing herein shall be deemed to restrict interior work or provided
that it is exterior work which does not cause a disturbance. Work shall cease no
later than 6:00 p.m."
Part b shall read in part, ". . . Said invonveniences may relate to noise, vibration,
dust, blocking of City roads or those concerns deemed appropriate by the
appropriate Department heads of the City of Salem at the time of occurence. . :'
An addition section (part g) shall be added to this condition which shall read as
follows: "The developer shall be responsible for dwelling unit construction. This
construction, once started shall continue until completion, complete with the
continued services of the Clerk of the Works, subject to the conditions of the
Subdivision Regulations." Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of Donald
Hunt, Condition #14, as amended was so voted.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 21, 1984 Page 7
• Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Normand Houle, Condition #15 was
approved with the deletion of the second sentence. It was so voted.
Upon the motion of.Abby Burns and second of Kenneth May, Condition # 16 was so
voted.
Upon the motion of Normand Houle and second of William Cass, Condition # 17 was
approved with the addition of the words "prior to issuance of a building permit" at
the end. It was so voted.
Condition # 18 shall now read as follows: "Prior to the approval of the plan, the
developer: a)Shall submit and record a duly executed Restrictive Covenant setting
forth the conditions set forth herein in a form satisfactory to the Planning Board
and b)Shall revise the plan to include a reference to said covenant. Both such
actions shall take place prior to the initiation of any construction. This restrictive
covenant shall include any provisions the Planning Board deems appropriate to allow
the City of Salem to enforce the maintenance obligations of the homeowners
association as set forth herein." Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of
Normand Houle, it was so voted.
Upon the motion of Abby Burns and second of Normand Houle, Condition # 19 was
approved with the addition of the words, ". . .except as waived herein" at the end.
It was so voted.
• City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh noted that this development wholeheartedly meets
the legal intent of the cluster concept as well as meeting the spirit of the
ordinance.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Normand Houle, the Planning Board
approves the subdivision plan submitted and grants the cluster special permit
subject to the conditions as adopted by the Board on June 21, 1984. It was so voted,
seven in favor, none opposed.
HEWITT--CONTINUATION OF HEARING
Mr. Erland Townsend of T & M Engineering was now present to address the matter
of exacerbation of the drainage problem on Clark Street. Mr. Townsend noted that
the water flow is in the direction of this particular abutter. They intend to allow
small drainage swales between each lot to help direct the water towards the
wetland. However, he feels the construction of the proposed homes will not change
the water situation dramatically and could possibly improve it somewhat.
There being no further discussion, the public hearing was declared closed. Upon
the motion of Edward Stevenson and second of Abby Burns, the special permit was
approved.. It was so voted, six in favor, none opposed (William Cass had left).
•
• Minutes of Meeting--June 21, 1984 Page 8
JAMES MACDOWELL/FRANK ROMANO--PROPOSED SUBDIVISION, WILLSON
STREET
Jim MacDowell presented a preliminary plan for a proposed twelve dwelling unit
cluster subdivision located on Willson Street opposite the high school. There is an
additional access from Greenway Road and the parcel is currently under a purchase
and sale agreement to Mr. Romano and Mr. MacDowell. The parcel consists of 6.06
acres in an R-1 district. They intend to cluster the homes partly to reduce the
amount of road and partly in deference to the neighborhood. They have set aside
54,000 square feet for some sort of neighborhood park. Mr. MacDowell has met
with Councillor Lovely regarding the park issue and the Councillor felt that the
City could not bear the burden maintaining another park, so the possibility of the
park being the responsibility of a neighborhood association is being considered.
There are no wetlands on the property. Mr. MacDowell stated that Greenway Road
now ends approximately at the property line and is a 40' wide road with 26' of
pavement. They propose to continue this same type of road configuration if
possible, therefore a waiver from road width would be required. The road would
consist of 26' of pavement with a sidewalk on one side with granite curbing. This is
fairly consistent with the neighborhood. The sewer will be gravity feed to the City
sewer line and the water will be tied in to City water. He has not as yet studied the
water system in detail, but will consider looping if the dead-ending poses a
problem. They would also like a waiver from center line requirements of 230 ft.
They would like 125 ft. centerline. This is consistent with other towns for minor
• streets which do not carry heavy traffic. Mr. MacDowell intends to construct four
lots of approximately 15,000 square feet, four at 14,500 square feet, one at 16,000,
and three at 11,000 square feet. The remainder of the parcel will be open space.
Frontages are as small as 55' and the lots are pie-shaped, so are wider at the rear.
They plan a total of 12 single-family homes. There are no storm drainage facilities
on Greenway or Castle Roads, so they hope to direct most of the drainage towards
Willson Road, which does have adequate facilities.
Mr. MacDowell felt they are ready to submit a Form C and would plan to do so by
early July.
Walter Power asked if this proposal met the requirements of the cluster and
Kenneth May felt there was no question that it did.
Kenneth May asked if Mr. MacDowell had considered an island in the cul-de-sac
and Mr. MacDowell replied that aesthetically they are lovely, but maintenance
wise they are "awful."
Donald Hunt was bothered by the frontage issue. Jim MacDowell replied that with
the lot widths such as are planned, the structure sizes are limited which would
make the houses consistent with the remainder of the neighborhood.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 21, 1984 Page 9
• Edward Stevenson asked if all the lots had 100' frontage, how many lots could Mr.
MacDowell anticipate and Mr. MacDowell felt that most likely he could plan on ten
lots.
Kenneth May asked if Mr. MacDowell could put a "conventional" subdivision on the
site and Mr. MacDowell replied in the affirmative, noting it would require heavy
blasting.
Walter Power asked if they will install underground electricity and Mr. MacDowell
replied in the affirmative.
Regarding landscaping, Mr. MacDowell noted that the open space is not conducive
to much planting, due to the large amount of ledge.
Regarding the radius of the turnaround, Walter Power asked if it had the approval
of the City Engineer and the Fire Department and Mr. MacDowell replied they plan
to meet with all appropriate departments in advance.
Normand Houle asked if they would consider extending the sidewalk around the
perimeter of the cul-de-sac and Jim MacDowell replied they will consider this.
It was the consensus of the Board that this was a good use of the cluster provisions
of the ordinance.
• VALIANT WAY DESIGNATION
Mr. James Zieff was present to ask the Board for their recommendation of the
name "Valiant Way" as a name for a proposed street in their subdivision. It has
been approved by the Fire Department and will need Council approval after the
Planning Board's recommendation.
Upon the motion of Donald Hunt and second of Normand Houle, this name will be
recommended to the City Council. It was so voted.
LORING HILLS
Councillor Nutting was present to discuss the possibility of the Planning Board
making Loring Hills Avenue an accepted street, so that the City would provide
street lighting, plowing, etc. He noted the residents of Loring Hills condominiums
pay a proportionate share of taxes and in the future, with the development of the
area, more taxes will be generated.
Following several minutes of discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that
they cannot recommend the acceptance of a street--only the City Council can do
this and it is now common practice for streets to be built to subdivision standards
without being accepted and therefore maintained by the City. The only way Loring
Hills Avenue could become an accepted street is by Council designation.
•
Minutes of Meeting--June 21, 1984 Page 10
• Councillor Nutting asked if the new condominiums being built would contribute to
the maintenance and upkeep of the road and it was noted that Mr. Zieff plans a
second access road. Charles Frederiksen noted that if Mr. Zieff intends to pave his
access road which is now lin-pack for construction vehicle use, he must apply for a
wetlands special permit. Gerry Kavanaugh will look into this matter further.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. 'Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
Respec !ly submitted,
C' e
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
•
•
SCOW° C1�tt of 'S5'A m, 'fflttssar4use##s
4 Planning Pnarb
gaoirro:,+'�"` W'ttE altut Grern
AGENDA--PLANNING BOARD--October 4, 1984
1. Form A--Frank Romano--Willson Street, Willson-Road
2. Wetlands Special Permit--Hamblet and Hayes--Proposal to install valve chamber
and sump over existing drain
3. Re-zoning discussion
a. Light industrial
b. Site Plan Review
4. Board of Appeal agenda
5. Approval of minutes--September 20, 1984'
6. Old/New Business
C0
MINUTES OF MEETING
• October 4, 1984
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, second floor conference room,
on Thursday, October 4, 1984. Present were Abby Burns, Edward Stevenson, John
Ahern, Kenneth May, Donald Hunt, and Walter Power. Also present was City
Planner Gerard Kavanaugh. Normand Houle was absent.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
FORM A --FRANK ROMANO--WILLSON STREET, WILLSON ROAD
This involves the splitting off of one parcel (parcel A on the plan) from another
(parcel B). Lot A shows sufficient frontage on an approved public way (Old Road)
as well as the required 15,000 square feet. City sewer and water is available to the
site.
City Planner Kavanaugh noted that this parcel was originally part of the six acre
parcel currently being considered by the Planning Board off Greenway Road. Mr.
Romano added that this parcel is not part of the eleven lots proposed for that
subdivision and the parcel will not be taken from the open space proposed for the
cluster development.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of John Ahern, the Form A was
�� • endorsed, approvel under the Subdivision Control Law not required. It was so voted.
HAMBLET AND HAYES--PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A VALVE CHAMBER AND
SUMP OVER EXISTING DRAIN--WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT
This issue was discussed in a public hearing held at our last meeting, but the Board
voted at that time to wait until the comments from the Conservation Commission
and the Board of Health had been received. Both boards have now submitted their
comments. Chairman Walter Power read the comments from the two boards.
Upon the motion of Kenneth May and second of Abby Burns, the conditions
necessary for the approval of the Special Permit have been satisfied and the permit
shall be granted. It was so voted.
RE-ZONING
Light Industrial: City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh gave the Board an overview of
proposed uses for a light industrial zone and a list of parcels in the Highland
Avenue/Swampscott Road area which may be appropriate for light industrial uses.
John Ahern raised the issue of a hotel or restaurant being made part of the
proposed uses of the zone. Kenneth May felt it could be included but it should be
clear what exactly we are proposing. We do not wish a type of restaurant which
would draw from the downtown area. Mr. Ahern agreed, noting perhaps a cafeteria
type of restaurant would be desirable. Walter Power raised the issue of allowing a
restaurant use where industrial space could be placed and Ken
•
Minute of Meeting--October 4, 1984 Page 2
•
May suggested dividing the allowable industrial uses into two parts: the allowed
uses as listed on the sheet prepared by the City Planner and additional permit uses
as needed at the Board's discretion with restaurants being a discretionary use.
Edward Stevenson asked if the Planning Board could be accused of being arbitrary
in a case like this and Walter Power suggested putting in language addressing the
intent of the special permit in the proposed amendment.
Donald Hunt added that if industrial growth is as great as we hope, some restaurant
facilities should be provided. Walter Power stated he likes the special permit idea.
John Ahern felt that the restaurant and hotel/motel use should not be excluded and
Kenneth May felt the special permit idea was reasonable.
Walter Power suggested it may be a good idea to review the ideas for a new zone
with business leaders to ascertain if any linkages could be established with present
industry and to get any suggestions they may have. The City Planner felt this was
a good idea and noted he will try to set up a meeting in the near future.
Walter Power suggested that genetic engineering and manufacturing be added to
the list of proposed uses. Kenneth May felt that would be included in the listing as
it is worded already. He suggested adding "pharmaceuticals" to #8. The consensus,
following discussion was that the words "medical research" would be added to #9.
Walter Power questioned if marine farming should be included in //9 and Kenneth
May felt this would be covered under the listing in #8.
Walter Power asked if the Board had any suggestions as to a name for this new
proposed zone. It was generally agreed the word "industrial" raised a "red flag."
John Ahern suggested "Business Park Zone." Kenneth May felt this was a good
name. He added that the Board should consider under the special permit adding
language which states, "other uses compatible with the uses in the zone may be
allowed by Special Permit" (i.e. hotels, motels, restaurants). Additional wording
regarding the intent of why they may be considered should be added.
Regarding the proposed area, bulk, and density requirements, City Planner
Kavanaugh noted these figures were obtained from various industrial zones in the
area which he adapted for proposal to the Board. He noted the suggestions he
made were done to allow some open space to be preserved and to consider the
wetlands which exist in the areas which are proposed for industrial use. He added
that if the parcels listed on the sheet he presented to the Board were developed
with 45% lot coverage, building two-story structures, assuming this were the
maximum, the City would gain a great deal of square footage for industrial use.
Mr. Kavanaugh stressed the importance of keeping decent buffer zones between
the industrial parcels and adjacent non-industrial uses.
John Ahern questioned the proposed height requirement and Mr. Kavanaugh noted
that this would allow 4Yz to 5 stories of space. Mr. Ahern questioned if fences
would be required and Mr. Kavanaugh replied that this was not necessarily true;
vegetation could sometimes be a desirable alternative. Language could be
•
Minutes of Meeting--October 4, 1984 Page 3
•
included in the site plan review which would address this. Kenneth May added he
felt there should be screening requirements for parcels bordering on residential
areas. Mr. Kavanaugh felt this was a good idea.
Kenneth May noted he felt the parking requirement language should be defined
subject to input from business leaders.
Site Plan Review Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance: Mr. Kavanaugh stated the
proposed language suggests that the Planning Board review any development which
proposes six or more residential units or more than 10,000 square feet of total
building area. Mr. Kavanaugh gave the Board several examples of buildings over
10,000 square feet in area which only required a building permit.
The consensus of the Board, following discussion, was that the proposal was a good
idea.
Walter Power asked if underground utilities could be required under #7—Utilities
plan, and Mr. Kavanaugh felt that the Board should have the discretion to act as
appropriate to the particular streets where the building is being located. Walter
Power asked if the Board should consider an open space requirement and Kenneth
May felt that this could most likely be left to the zone. Mr. May asked if the
compatibility of architecture with the existing neighborhood architecture should be
a requirement and Walter Power felt if the proposed building was to be built in a
sensitive historic area, input from the Historical Commission would be requested.
• Kenneth May felt some language addressing this should be put into the ordinance.
Gerard Kavanaugh suggested the possibility of the historic preservation staff
person who will soon be on board in the Planning Department review proposals
which could have impact on older neighborhoods. Language on this matter will be
drafted further at our next meeting.
Walter Power asked if the Board should consider offering direct tax deductions for
extraordinary facade amenities and the consensus was the Board had no authority
to do this--the City is severely limited by state statute. The City Planner will look
into this further, however.
Walter Power suggested that no site disturbance be allowed to take place until all
approvals are received and Gerry Kavanaugh noted this is under the jurisdication of
the City Engineer.
Walter Power also suggested that some language be added to the proposed
amendment to address the matter of failure of the Board to act within a specified
period of time resulting in automatic approval. The consensus of the Board was
that this was a good idea.
More discussion on the re-zoning matter will take place at our next meeting.
•
Minutes of Meeting--October 4, 1984 Page 4
BOARD OF APPEAL AGENDA
The Planning Board reviewed the upcoming petitions to be heard by the Board of
Appeal and will write a letter opposing the petition of John Suldenski for a Special
Permit and Variance to allow construction of a single-family dwelling on an
undersized lot at 72 Bridge Street. It was the Board's contention that the density
of this neighborhood is already very high and the granting of the requested variance
and special permit would exacerbate this density. Donald Hunt further requested
that the preservation of open space for the recreational use of the residents of the
parcel in question be raised. Such space would be severely reduced with the
addition of another building. This issue will also be brought to the attention of the
Board of Appeal.
TRIP TO FAFARD
Those members who visited the Fafard project in Ashland recently shared their
views on the development.
Kenneth May stated he liked the layout of the eight-plexes he saw the most.
Regarding the "cross"'style, he would prefer to see a softening of the slope.
John Ahern did not care for the four on four's. He felt the entrances and parking
areas were quite crowded. He added the "barracks style" homes were "awful."
Both Donald Hunt and John Ahern agreed they would be opposed to any eight-
• plexes unless they were few and far between. John Ahern further alluded to the
congestion he felt was a severe problem. Walter Power agreed, noting he was
uncomfortable with the long driveways proposed for the Salem residential
development. Kenneth May felt there was a lack of lighting in the entire complex.
John Ahern felt Section II was done much better than Section I. Everyone agreed
with this opinion. Kenneth May added there was much higher vegetation in Ashland
than exists here in Salem which could make a significant difference. John Ahern
added he liked the idea of some single family homes with some common open land.
The consensus of the Board was that this was a good idea. Donald Hunt felt the
proposal for Salem was still quite dense. He felt the Planning Board should be very
choosey about density and lay-out. Kenneth May reiterated his desire to have the
developer consider softening the roof line.
Following some further discussion, it was agreed by the Board members that the
developers should address the matter of lighting, density, and open spaces for
recreation and nature trails.
MINUTES
Upon the motion of Edward Stevenson and second of Donald Hunt, the minutes of
September 20, 1984, were approved. It was so voted.
I `
Minutes of Meeting--October 4, 1984 Page 5
NEW MEMBERS
Chairman Walter Power read a letter from David Goodof submitting his
resignation. It was accepted with regret. The matter of replacing both this
vacancy and one left by the resignation of Bill Cass was discussed in detail with
several names being proposed. Walter Power will contact those persons and report
to the Board at our next meeting.
There being no further business, a motion was made to adjourn. Having passed
unanimously, the meeting was declared adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Dale E. Yale
Clerk
1