1987-PLANNING BOARD i
� a
+
i
ji
I.
' a
a
> y
yah\^Il,lf r�T
Tilu of calcllll C assar4lisrtf5
\,�;• �, QiPlanning iuttrD
A •
�OINr.F.F°T V1LC p�$fl1PITI (FrPP1t
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, December 3 , 1987 , at 7:30 p.m. , One
Salem Green, second floor conference room.
GtJa� .8. Pou.�elz,,
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1 . Public Hearing - Winter Island Pier - Wetlands Special Permit `
• 2. Public Hearing - Shetland Parking Garage - Site Plan Review Special
Permit
3. Old/New Business
4. Approval of Minutes
J930
This notice posted on11Official Bulletin Board"
City Hall eve . , ;;, lc::, L-has en ��d / lye/7
4t ,`2 3.�i/j il: ..cc a :ce wit Chap. 626,
of the Acts
•
Ctv of ttlettt, ttss�Icl�Iz�P#ts
s1
111ctttllilla PDal'il
One OnlC11t Green
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Winter Island Pier - Public Hearing - Wetlands Special Permit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the construction of a pier at Winter Island. The
pier will be 16 feet wide and 182 feet long, and comprised of a 4 foot
wide ramp and 1080 square feet of floats.
The pier will serve recreational boaters, including the Salem State
College Sailing Club and the Salem State College Handicapped Sailing
Program, and hopefully local fishermen.
A representative of the Planning Department will present plans for your
review.
BC2
•
•
of 5aleni, Aussac4use##s
'� ' �ltttutitta �Oartl
One 2WPttt (ArPPtt
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Shetland Parking Garage - Public Hearing - Site Plan Review Special
Permit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the construction of a two-story, 608 car parking
garage at the Shetland Office and Industrial Complex.
The applicant would like to build the structure in two(2) phases, with
the first phase accomodating 392 cars in the structure and 64 cars as a
parking lot in the phase 2 area.
The Applicant was granted a variance to allow the construction of a
parking garage by the Board of Appeal on November 23, 1987.
The Applicant' s representative will present plans to the Board for
review and discussion.
• BC3
•
l
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
•, DECEMBER 3 , 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on December 3,
1987, in the second floor conference room, One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m.
Present were: Vice-Chairman, Ken May, Linda Vaughan, Abby Burns, John
Butler, and Dick Williams. Gerard Kavanaugh, Beth Debski , and student
intern Roy Landry were also present. Walter Power was absent.
Public Hearin; - Winter Island - Wetland Special Permit
Ms. Debra Hilbert of the Salem Planning Department and John Maynard of
Maguire Group were present to review the plans for the construction of a
public pier and restoration of an existing boat ramp at Winter Island.
The proposed 182 ' x 16' pier will be supported by 24 concrete-filled
steel piles (coated with an industry standard heat cured epoxy) which
will be founded in bedrock. According to Mr. Maynard, the life
expectancy of the piles, if maintained, could be over 25 years. 1 ,080
square feet of floats, anchored to pilings drilled into bedrock, will be
attached to the pier to allow docking. The pier will serve recreational
boaters, including the Salem State College Sailing Club and the Salem
State Handicapped Sailing program. If funds are available, an electric
hoist will be installed to allow for the launching of small boats.
Ms. Hilbert noted that of the $545,000 Coastal Zone Management grant
• awarded, Less than $10,000 will be spent on a hoist. The hoist will be
bid as an alternate in the event that the pier construction bids are
higher than estimated. Also, depending on the bid results, the pier may
have to be shortened 30' to be constructed within budget.
Mr. May read the comments from the Building Inspector who concurs with
the proposal. The Conservation Commission and Board of Health will be
reviewing the proposed project at their next meeting.
Mr. Williams asked if fuel would be provided on the site, and Mr.
Maynard responded that the pier would be a transient one with
electricity provided for lighting and the hoist. Bathing facilities
will be provided on the site with the construction of a new bathhouse.
There being no further comments from the Board, Mr. May opened the
public hearing to the audience.
Mr. Ralph Hobbs asked why concrete piles weren' t used, and Mr. Maynard
responded that the bedrock is at a shallow depth and there is inadequate
soil. Therefore, the piles will be driven open ended and anchored to
the bedrock. Mr. Maynard added that the specifications of the pier were
studied at length for the best possible location, size and material.
Gary Moore, manager of Winter Island, spoke in favor of the pier because
he felt it would reinstate Winter Island as a valuable resource for the
City.
1
Page 2
• Mr. Williams asked if any precautions were being taken to prevent
galvanic action from taking place. Mr. Maynard responded that the type
of epoxy to be used responds well in water. He added that corrosion
will be a problem only in the splash zone, and that this type of epoxy
can be replaced every 15-20 years.
Mr. Williams asked if the hoist 's use would be regulated, and Ms.
Hilbert informed him that Gary Moore or his assignee would be
responsible for operating the hoist. Ms. Hilbert added that a chain
will be placed across the pier to prevent unauthorized vehicles from
driving onto the pier.
There being no further comments, Mr. May closed the public hearing. It
was the consensus of the Board that a decision will be made once the
Conservation Commission has made its recommendations.
Shetland Parking Garage - Public Hearing - Site Plan Review
Mr. May read the notice of public hearing for a proposal to construct a
two-story, 608 car parking garage at the Shetland Office and Industrial
Park.
Representing the petitioner, John Johnson and Victor Vitols, informed
the Board that the proposed structure would be constructed in two
phases, the first phase accommodating 392 cars, and the second phase
• accommodating 64 cars.
Mr. Johnson briefly discussed the rehabilitation of four existing
structures on the site into 50,000 - 100,000 square feet of prime office
and warehouse space. Existing surface parking areas have been
maximized, but additional parking is essential.
The proposed garage would be connected to Building #/4. There will be
Landscaping, utilizing 25 existing linden trees, a berm up to the top
railing on the first level, and ground cover. Painted metal panels will
shield headlights, and lighting will be direted inward.
Mr. May read the comments from the various City boards. The Building
Inspector noted that the plan is not stamped-by a professional engineer,
and that additional information is required. The City Engineer concurs
with the project. The Board of Health will review the proposal at their
next meeting. The Conservation Commission has determined that the site
is not within their jurisdiction, and a variance was granted by the
Board of Appeal on November 23, 1987.
Mr. Williams voiced concern over traffic congestion. Mr. Johnson
responded that there would be an alternate entrance for truck deliveries
on Leavitt Street, and that the main entrance had been designed to allow
queing on site.
•
Page 3
Mr. Williams asked if the petitioner would work cooperatively with the
City if at some point traffic lights need to be installed, but Mr.
Johnson was unable to make a commitment at this time.
Mr. Butler asked if several trees could be added to the landscaping
plans for the entrance of the site. Mr. Johnson explained that to add
trees the same size as those existing would be'very costly, and would
result in the loss of 18-20 parking spaces. Mr. Johnson added that a 4'
fence will be installed to screen the parking area.
Roy Landry asked if the petitioner had considered growth at the site.
Mr. Johnson responded that Shetland is hoping a new municipal parking
garage will be built in the near future near the site.
There being no further comments from the Board, Mr. May opened the
public hearing to the audience. _
Mr. Dick Levesque of 14 Pingree Street asked if a guard would be on the
site 24 hours a day, and Mr. Johnson responded that there is an existing
guard in the park.
Mr. Levesque noted that Shetland' s parking lot on Perkins Street has not
been maintained, and Mr. Johnson informed him that the site is vacant
and is being held for future use.
Mr. Butler asked how snow would be removed from the upper Level of the
• garage. Mr. Johnson stated that the snow would be plowed to the sides
and in the event of a heavy snow fall, the snow would be removed by
truck and stored elsewhere on Shetland property.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
The Planning Department will review the project , and make its
recommendation to the Board.
Old/New Business
The Planning Board will not hold its regular meeting on December 17.
The next meeting is scheduled for January 7, 1988.
The Board would like to express its sincere gratitude to Mr. May for his
dedicated service to the Planning Board.
Mr. Butler made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Vaughan seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimously in favor. The meeting adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
• y � �° Uri#u of '-Sttlriil, gassaulliisr##s
�,,J„�' '��Itttuting �nttrt�
(0- ne c alrm 05rrrn
NOTICE OF MEETING
You cue heAeby no.ti.6.ied .that .the SaCem PCanning Board w.iU hold .i t6
)Legutaa meeting on Thursday, NovembeA 19, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One
SaCem GAeen, eecond 6.000A con6eAence %oom.
Lc
WaP-teA B. PoweA, III
ChaiAman
TENTATIVE AGENDA:
1 . Fwun A - 392 H.igh2and Avenuc
2. Form A - PA.ince StLeet Place
• 3. Foam A - 540 and 542A Loring Avewce
4. PubCi.c Heau:ng - FoAm C - Station Road Exteivs.ion
5. Fa6acd Phcue II - PAopoeed Ex.tetuoA Changes
6. Old/Neta Bub inus
7. Appnova2 o6 M.inu.tu
• �}��. c:a "G fi^.iwl Enlletin Eoart:u
TY 15 r..^cic.r to.. .
city .. .. :..: , v._ G�e�. C•.6_
Ly VPS; ZI'Y P/27. ' ..... .. .. __ _....._
of the Act 1 L
I
1.
• 3 . . 9
a p� �Ittrctting +�uttr�
�Jr�J t f ��q �{�
"`Oanue� JUICE $ 1m Green
T0: Planning Board Members
FR: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A - 392 Highland Avenue
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 149,520 square foot lot
into two lots. Lot 1 , on which sit a single family home and a garage,
will contain 74,760 square feet, with 150 feet of frontage. Lot 2, on
which sits a garage, will contain 74,760 square feet, with 150 feet of
frontage.
All necessary requirements have been met.
Endorsement of the plan is appropriate.
J837
•
y'`o git J of �S�zlem, f?Sssacc4usetts
� a �Ittlmin$ '�nttr�
Otte ialem (Breen
T0: Planning Board Members
FR: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Public Hearing - Form C - Station Road Extension
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 4.18 acre parcel of
land into eleven (11) single family lots (See attached chart and plan) .
The petitioner is proposing to extend the existing 32 foot roadway
and to install a 5 foot sidewalk, a 4 foot planting strip and granite
curbing on both sides of the street.
The applicant 's representative will present plans to the Board for
your review and discussion.
• 0
J835
•
r STATION ROAD EXTENSION
• FORM C
LOT AREA FRONTAGE
Lot 1 17,273 s.f. 121 .90'
Lot 2 15,238 s.f. 100'
Lot 3 15,017 s.f. 100'
Lot 4 15,718 s. f. 100'
Lot 5 17,622 s.f. 100'
Lot 6 15,769 s.f. 169'
Lot 7 17,922 s.f. 100'
Lot 8 22,192 s.f. 100'
Lot 9 15,442 s.f. 130'
Lot 10 15,075 s.f. 130'
Lot 11 15,022 s.f. 120'
• J836
•
TO: Planning Board Members
•
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: 11 Summer Street — Site Plan Review Special Permit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
On July 23, 1987, a public hearing was held for this proposal which
involves the construction of a 3� story, 17,000 square foot addition,
containing nine (9) residential units, to an existing building,
containing six (6) units, at 11 Summer Street. The addition would be
located to the rear of the main building.
At the public hearing, the major concerns raised by neighbors were: 1)
the density of the project; and 2) its architectural incompatibility
with the surrounding buildings, with specific regard to the "stilts"
design.
•
At our meeting of September 17, 1987, the Applicant's architect
responded to the concerns raised by presenting revised plans to the
Board. In the revised plan, the number of new units was reduced from
nine (9) to six (6) , and greenspace was added to the rear of the
project. Also, garage doors were proposed to be installed to screen the
parking beneath the building, thus eliminating the "stilts" design.
BN1002
•
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT
• Frederick Small
71 Howlett Street
Topsfield, MA
Re: 11 Summer Street
1. Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled, "Site Plan, 11 Summer Street,
dated September 1, 1987."
2. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled, "Site Plan,
11 Summer Street, dated September 1, 1987":
a. Maintenance of the landscape vegetation in a healthy and
thriving condition shall be the responsibility of the
developer, his successors or assigns.
b. Shrub diameters shall be a minimum of 21 . Mature trees shall
be a minimum of 4" caliper.
3. Utilities
• All utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the
Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building permits.
4. Construction Practices
All construction shall be conducted in accordance with the
following conditions:
a. No work shall commence before 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and 8:00
a.m. on Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m.
There shall be no work conducted on Sundays or holidays.
Inside work of a quiet nature may be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative
effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be
provided to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to
commencement of construction.
C. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the
site so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on roadways
as they leave the site.
6. Violation of Conditions
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of
this permit by the Planning Board.
• J708
• Page 2 '
6. Violation of Conditions
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of
this permit by the Planning Board.
J70B
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
• PLANNING DEPARTMENT
GERARD KAVANAUGH ` , ONE SALEM GREEN
CITY PLANNER 01970
s (617)745-9595 ext.311
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Fafard Phase II - Proposed Exterior Changes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A representative of The Fafard Companies will present plans for proposed
design changes for two buildings in Phase II.
Fafard proposes the alteration of Building #32 to a European eclectic
style (Style 1) and Building #27 to a Prairie style(Style II) .
The structure for both of these buildings is already in place, so there
would be no changes to the footprints of these buildings. The following
material changes, though, would accompany these style changes:
•
EXISTING PROPOSED
Building #32 Redwood Siding Brick Veneer
Pre-Cast Chimney Brick Veneer
Asphalt Shingle Roof Membrane
Building #27 Redwood Siding Redwood Siding
Brick Chimney Brick Veneer
Asphalt Shingle Roof Asphalt Shingle
Roof
J841
•
1,
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
NOVEMBER 19, 1987
• A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on November 19,
1987, in the second floor conference room, One Salem Green, Salem, MA at
7:30 p.m. In attendance were: Chairman, Walter Power, Dick Williams,
Robert Ledoux, Linda Vaughan, John Butler, and Ken May. Abby Burns was
absent.
Form A - Prince Street Place
This proposal involves the subdivision of four lots fronting on Prince
Street Place into two lots. The subdivision would allow the Salem
Harbor Community Development Corporation, owner of the parcel, tb
condominiumize a proposed rehabilitation project.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the plan. Mr. Ledoux seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Form A - 540-542 Loring Avenue
This proposal involves the subdivision of two 7,000 square foot lots
into one 14,000 square foot lot.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to endorse the plan. Mr. May seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
1 Form A - 392 Highland Avenue
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 149,520 square foot lot into
two lots. Lot 1, on which sits a single family home and a garage, will
contain 74,760 square feet, with 150 feet of frontage. Lot 2, on which
sits a garage, will contain 74,760 square feet,. with 150 feet of
frontage.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the plan. Mr. Ledoux seconded the
motion'. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Form C - Public Hearing - Station Road Extension
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 4.18 acre parcel of land
into eleven (11) single family lots. Each lot will be over 15,000
square feet with over 100 feet of frontage. The petitioner is proposing
to extend the existing 32 foot roadway, to install a 5 foot sidewalk, a
4 foot planting strip, and granite curbing on both sides of the street.
Mr. Peter Beatrice, representing the petitioner Paul DiBiase, requested
that the public hearing be continued for one month so that several
issues including drainage could be addressed with the City Engineer and
the Board of Health.
Mr. Power read letters from the School Department, Board of Health and
City Engineer, all of which did not concur with the project.
•
Page 2
• Ms. Vaughan questioned the location of wetlands, and the engineer for
the project, Mr. Charles Faia, pointed out a parcel on Moffat Road and
informed the Board that the developer would be filing a Determination of
Applicability with the Conservation Commission.
Mr. Williams questioned whether the utilities would be _underground and
if an inspector would be placed on the project. Mr. Faia responded that
the utilities would be underground, and that if required by the City, an
inspector would be placed at the site.
Mr. Power opened the meeting to the public.
Mr. Raymond Beaulieu, 35 Station Road, asked if the Board had a map of
the existing land and information relative to overflow. Mr. Power
responded that the issue of overflow would be addressed by the
Conservation Commission.
Daniel Sullivan of Marion Road inquired about the type of dwelling units
and form of heating proposed for the site. Mr. DiBiase responded that
they will be single-family, Split-Level and Garrison homes heated with
oil .
Francis Murphy of Quadrant Road questioned the height of the finished
grade and the amount of fill needed. Mr. Faia responded that the
existing grade will not change until the end of the roadway where it
• will increase 5.4%. He added that 5 to 6 feet of fill may be needed on
the left side of the proposed roadway.
Martha Hogan of Moffat Road raised a concern that her property may have
increased flooding. Mr. Faia responded that the water will be
interrupted by the proposed roadway, and therefore, the amount of water
running to properties on Moffat Road would decrease.
Charlene Bailey of Pershing Road asked if blasting would be done and if
so, what precautions would be taken. Mr. Faia responded that a
pre-blast inspection would be conducted within a 250 foot radius of the
blasting site. Mr. DiBiase added that any property damage would be
addressed immediately.
Councillor Jack Nutting asked the number of lots which would require
blasting, and whether plans had been made to handle excess drainage.
Mr. Faia responded that 1 to 7 lots on the right- side of the proposed
roadway may need to be blasted, and that the developer would comply with
the Board of Health and City Engineer's requirements relative to
drainage. Mr. Faia added that drainage issues have not been fully
addressed at this time, but that the water will be taken care of on the
site.
Councillor Nutting suggested that the Board visit the site, and
requested that the pre-blasting inspection radius of 250' be increased.
Councillor Nutting added that, in his opinion, Mr. DiBiase had been very
• cooperative to work with. on previous developments in the area.
Page 3
• Mr. Williams suggested that the drainage pipe be inspected for debris
which may be causing the existing flooding.
There being no further comment, Councillor—Elect Blair was selected as
the neighborhood representative, and will be notified before the next
meeting.
The developer requested that the public hearing be extended until issues
relative to drainage could be addressed with the City Engineer and Board
of Health.
Mr. May made a motion to extend the public hearing until January 21,
1987. Mr. Ledoux seconded the motion. The vote wa unanimously in
favor.
Fafard — Phase II Proposed Changes
Mr. Robert Tompson of the Fafard Companies came before the Board
requesting exterior alterations of Buildings #32 to a European Eclectic
style and Building #27 to a Prairie style.
The foundation for each building is already in place, therefore, there
will be no change in the footprint of either building. The proposed
material changes include the following:
EXISTING PROPOSED
• Building #32 Redwood Siding Brick Veneer
Pre—Cast Chimney Brick Veneer
Asphalt Shingle Roof Membrane
Building #27 Redwood Siding Redwood Siding
Brick chimney Brick Veneer
Asphalt Shingle Roof Asphalt Shingle Roof
After reviewing the proposed alterations, it was the consensus of the
Board that the proposed alteration to Building #32 would be completely
incongruous, but that the proposed alterations to building #27 were in
character with the existing units.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the exterior alterations to Building
#27 with the condition that the chimney be real brick. Mr. Williams
seconded the motion.
Mr. Thompson presented an alternative to the proposed alterations to
Building #32 which would consist of vertical redwood clapboards.and a
mansard roof and gables (Witch House Style) .
It was the consensus of the Board that this design would also be too
incongruous. Mr. May made a motion to deny both proposed alterations to
building #32. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The vote was
unanimously in favor.
�-T
Page 4
• Mr. May suggested that any further design and paint color changes be
reviewed with the City Planner.
Mr. Power suggested that alternate designs be incorporated into Phases
III and IV.
Old Business
Mr. Power questioned whether a walkway would be provided from the Mall
to CVS on the Almy's project . Mr. Kavanaugh responded that there would
be a walkway to the Mall.
Mr. Power requested that Mr. Kavanaugh investigate the proposed right-
of-way for the connector road running alongside the Village at Vinnin
Square development and Loring Towers.
New Business
Walter Power suggested that the Salem Conservation Commission contact
the Marblehead Conservation Commission regarding the purchase of land
abutting the Forest River Park.
Approval of Minutes
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to approve the minutes of October 15, 1987 as
amended. Mr. May seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in
favor.
Ms. Vaughan made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Butler seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimously in favor. The meeting adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
s �bCtv 'Massar4u.6jette
One -'$tt1em (Breen
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, November 5, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem
Green, second floor conference room.
( �6, �ak1P�t
Walter B. Power, III Q
Chairman
TENTATIVE AGENDA:
1 . Shetland Garage - Informal Discussion
2. Fafard - Style Changes
3. Old/New Business
• 4. Approval of Minutes
J812
• 's='.ja IatmiugQuart)
'% mss
` Qatte c alem (rreett
AGENDA
10/15/87
1. Form A - 18 Intervale Ro*,Jor
2. Form A - 16 Buchanan Roach 11h
• I o
3. Form A - Zieff Phase It�
4. Moose Lodge - Extension of Special Permit �� +
5. Old/New Business r p k. P
K 1
6. Approval of Minutes (� n
DoT' occ� ed aZi5v
November�'
•
-z�, Cs� -PQ's
el -� no � `n
cU°w�
30 (n
Ctu ofttleziz, tz5s�zcl�za�r##s
�lttxtttin$ ��nttrl
One �`�;ttlrm Orren
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular
meeting on Thursday, October 15, 1987, at 7:30 P.M. , One Salem Green, second
floor conference room.
wQ�8• fi owex,,�1Z.
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
TENTATIVE AGENDA:
1. Form A - 18 Intervale Road
2. Form A - 16 Buchanan Road
3. 11-:Summer Street - Site Plan Review Special Permit O
• 4. Moose Lodge - Extension of Special Permit
5. Old/New Business
6. Approval of Minutes
This notice posted on 'Official Bulletin Board"
City Ha 11 Aire . , Sa1em, .'.'_a " . c,n
at, / 00 /y� In C'1' =. ; c with Chap. 625 .
of the Acts of 1958.
•
TO: Planning Board Members
• FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A - 18 Intervale Road
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 20,299 square foot parcel
into two lots. Lot A, on which presently sits a single family home,
will contain 13,159 square feet and lot B, which is vacant, will contain
7 ,140 square feet. Lot A will contain 143 feet of frontage and lot B
will contain 105 feet of frontage.
The petitioner was granted a variance from lot area requirements by the
Board of Appeal on May 13 , 1987.
The Applicant proposes to construct a single family home on the vacant
lot (B) .
Endorsement of the plan is appropriate.
j562
•
•
TO: Planning Board Members
•
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A — 16 Buchanan Road
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the conveyance of a 610 square foot strip of
land, by the owners of 16 Buchanan Road, to the owners of 14 Buchanan
Road. There are homes on both lots.
In conjunction with this conveyance, the petitioner was granted a
variance from lot area and frontage requirements by the Board of Appeal
on September 29, 1987.
Endorsement of the plan is appropriate.
• BN1003
•
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
OCTOBER 15, 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on October 15,
1987 , in the second floor conference room, One Salem Green, Salem, MA at
7:30 p.m. In attendance were: Chairman, Walter Power, Ken May, Bob
Ledoux, Dick Williams, John Butler, and Abby Burns. Beth Debski of the
Planning Department was also in attendance. Linda Vaughan was absent.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7 :35 p.m.
Form A - 18 Intervale Road
Mr. and Mrs. Girard reviewed their proposal which involved the
subdivision of a 20,299 square foot parcel into two lots. Lot A, on
which presently sits a single family home, will contain 13,159 square
feet and Lot B, which is vacant, will contain 7,140 square feet. Lot A
will contain 143 feet of frontage and Lot B will contain 105 feet of
frontage.
The applicants were granted a variance from lot area requirements by the
Board of Appeal on May 13, 1987.
The applicants propose to construct a single family home on the vacant
lot (B) .
• Mr. May made a motion to approve the plan. Mr. Ledoux seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Form A - 16 Buchanan Road
This proposal involved the conveyance of a 610 square foot strip of
land, by the owner of 16 Buchanan Road, to the owner of 14 Buchanan
Road. There are presently single family homes on each lot.
In conjunction with this conveyance, the petitioner was granted a
variance from lot area and frontage requirements by the Board of Appeal
on September 29, 1987.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the plan. Mr. Ledoux seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Form A - Zieff Phase II
In February, 1987, the Board endorsed a plan for Phase II of the Village
at Vinnin Square. Since that time, a 46 square foot survey error has
been detected. Therefore, the Board was asked to endorse the corrected
plan.
Mr. Power questioned why the agreed upon right-of-way was not shown on
the plan. Ms. Debski responded that Mr. Zieff had agreed upon the right-
of-way in a letter to the Planning Department .
Page 2
• Mr. May added that if the adjacent parcels are conveyed, Mr. Zieff may
not have the land to grant a right-of-way.
Mr. Power suggested approval be deferred until the next meeting, and if
there is a problem with the granting of a right-of-way, a special.
meeting will be called.
Mr. May made a motion to disapprove the plan because it did not show a
right-of-way. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously
in favor.
Form A - Moose Lodge
At the last meeting, the petitioner requested the extension of a Special
Permit granted for the construction of an extension to a culvert on
Highland Avenue. At that time, the Board requested a status report on
the project before extending the permit. Ms. Debski informed the Board
that she had spoken to the project manager from the State D.P.W. and a
representative from Miles Sand and Gravel , the contractor. At the
present time, the project is at a halt until several issues can be
resolved.
Mr. Butler felt that the permit should not be extended until. the final.
status of the main culvert is determined.
• Mr. May made a motion to extend the permit until the first meeting in
January, 1988, with a condition that the City Engineer come before the
Board to review the plan for the culvert. Ms. Burns seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Collins Cove Condominiums
Mr. Power read a letter from the Building Inspector stating that
Occupancy Permits for units 1 , 11 , and 29 of the Collins Cove
Condominiums were being withheld because the project does not comply
with the conditions of the approved plans dated August 31 , 1987.
Mr. Southworth, representing McNeil. and Associates, developers of the
sight, explained that when planning the development, a Purchase and
Sales agreement was made with the City requiring that a clubhouse be
built on the site and leased in part to the Crow II Club. Since that
time, the Crow II Club has disbanded.
Mr. Southworth explained that if the developer were to build the
clubhouse, each unit owner's condominium fee would increase $72.00 to
cover the cost of the club. As a result, the developer has solicited
and received permission from each owner not to build a clubhouse on the
site.
Mr. May stated that the plan approved included a clubhouse, and
• therefore, the Board needed to evaluate the City's options with regard
to the pier and the acre of land on which the club would have been
Page 3
-� built. It was the consensus of the Board that the City Planner analyze
the City' s options and make a recommendation to the Board at its next
meeting.
Old/New Business
11 Summer Street
Mr. Ledoux stated that since the development at 11 Summer Street had
been modified, the concerned abutters were not notified and therefore
unable to voice their concern over the development. It was suggested
that each person who spoke in opposition to the plan should be notified
of any meetings held on the proposed development.
Mr. May added that a spokesman is selected by the neighbors, and it is
his/her responsibility to notify concerned neighbors. It was the
consensus of the Board that in the future, it is important that the
Planning Department notify the spokesperson well in advance.
Essex House Condominiums
Mr. Power requested that Mr. Kavanaugh inform the Board as to when the
developer of Essex House Condominiums, Elaine Finbury, would be coming
before the Board for Site Plan Review.
• Approval of Minutes
Mr. May stated that the 4th paragraph of page one under 13-13' Meadow
Street should read ". . .when two buildings predating the adoption of the
Subdivision Control. Law are on one lot, there is no minimum frontage
requirement." Also, paragraph 5 should state "Since the buildings on
the lot predate the Subdivision Control Law, . . ."
Mr. William stated that on page two, paragraph 5, under Blasting, the
word "blasters" should be replaced with "contractors". Also, paragraph
4 should state "the Fire Marshall ' s Office" rather than the "Fire
Marshall".
Mr. Power stated that the 5th paragraph on page 3 should state, ". . .a
Special Permit may not have been granted unless the silo was moved or
loading facilities were located in the parking lot so trucks would not
be a hazard to traffic on Highland Avenue. Mr. Power added that a
condition stating that any alteration of approved plans be 'reviewed by
the Planning Board be added into the Planning Board regulations and
become a standard condition of approval .
Ms. Burns made a motion to approve the adoption of the proposed
condition and the minutes of September 17, 1987, as amended. Mr.
Williams seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
•
Page 4
• Board of Appeals Agendas
The Board discussed whether or not to review the Board of Appeal
Agendas. No formal decision was made.
Mr. Ledoux made a suggestion that Section 5, C10, page 37 of the Salem
Zoning Ordinance be reviewed by the Planning Department for possible
changes.
Ms. Burns made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
ATi#� of tt1em, pafisarl usrtts
6 +,
Pimming� Putt zg 'ER 19 9 01 IU4 161
(Ate ttlemar
SITE#LEAK, EAI.EH. MASS.
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular
meeting on Thursday, October 1, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem Green,
second floor conferece room.
U Ic f 6. P
Walter B. Power, III id
Chairman
TENTATIVE AGENDA:
1. Form A - 18 Intervale Road
2. Moose Lodge - Extension of Special Permit
3. Old/New Business -
• 4. Approval of Minutes
This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Boa,Fd."
City Heli Ave . , Salem, 24ass. on S1 Y f. �q /9P7
at, t2/tii in G COTE ?]^0 with Cher, 62P
• a, -4 Acts of 1958. ,� 1
ditu of
D h
J �O/NR:bDp.fS (1 M gUICI t GYE M
PLANNING BOARD
AGENDA
September 17, 1987
Q zpa� S��nr"
orm A - 13-13� Meadow Street
Form A - Police Station
}p 3jFForm A - Hillcrest Chevrolet
4. Blasting Law Review - Captain Bob Turner / _
5Vunburst Discussion /Qn�0Q b4s .
611 Summer Street - Site Plan Review Special Permit
�7. Moose Lodge - Extension of Special Permit
8. Fafard Discussion
9. Old/New Business
10. Approval of Minutes
10
•
. . y1
'CON of 'SnIrm,
a �
� i ��lzumin$ ��uttr�
9 O
Y..
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular
meeting on Thursday, September 17, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem Green, second
floor conference room. W1n �7f�n� S
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
TENTATIVE AGENDA:
1. 11 Summer Street - Site Plan Review Special Permit o
'2. Moose Lodge - Extension of Special Permit
3. Sunburst Discussion
• 4. Old/New Business
5. Approval of Minutes
This notice Posted on "Official Bulletin Boare-11
City Hall Ave . . Salem, Masa . on SePT. /S 19�7
at P;oz /147 in accordance witYl Chap,. 626 .
of the Aets of 1958.
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A - 13-13' Meadow Street
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 5,727 square foot parcel
into two (2) lots. Two (2) homes currently exist on the lot and this
subdivision would provide two (2) lots•, with one home on each. Lot A
will contain 3,927 square feet and Lot B will contain 1 ,800 square feet.
Because these lots do not conform to lot area, frontage and other
dimensional requirements, the petitioner will appear before the Board of
Appeal in June for a variance. The Planning Board cannot endorse the
plan prior to the granting of a variance, so the petitioner will be
appearing informally at this meeting, and then will return for a formal
presentation if his variance is granted.
• L133
•
• TO: Planning Board Members
FR: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Moose Lodge Wetlands Special Permit —
Request for Extension
In November, 1983, the Planning Board approved a Wetland Special
Permit for the Moose Lodge at 319 Highland Avenue to construct an
extension to an existing culver't under Highland Avenue. This extension,
on Moose property, would then be filled so that buildable land would be
created. The permit has been extended several times and the latest
extention expires in October, 1987.
Commencement of work on the project has always been contingent upon
the cleaning of the culvert under Highland Avenue by the State DPW.
This cleaning has not taken place yet, so the Moose Lodge has requested
an extension of its permit until November, 1988.
The Conservation Commission, which issued a permit in October,
1983, has recently extended its Order of Conditions until April, 1988; f
to facilitate the eventual completion of the proposed project.
• 1525
•
To: Planning Board Members
• From: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
Re: 11 Summer Street - Site Plan Review
Special Permit
On July 23, 1987 , a public hearing was held for this proposal involving
the construction of a 3� story, 17,000 square foot additon, containing
nine (9) residential units, to an existing building, containing 6 units,
at 11 Summer Street. The addition would be located to the rear of the
main building.
At the public hearing, the major concerns raised by neighbors were the
density of the project and its architectural compatability with the
surrounding buildings.
Since the public hearing, the Applicant' s Architect, Design Partnership,
has reduced the number of units in the addition from nine (9) to six (6)
and added green space to the rear of the project. The total number of
units is therefore reduced from fifteen (15) to twelve (12) .
Representatives of Design Partnership Architects will present revised
plans to the Board for your review and discussion.
• I1040
•
1
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS ry,
• PLANNING DEPARTMENT v`1A
GERARD KAVANAUGH ONE SALEM GREEN
CITY PLANNER e�' 01970
(617)744-4580
�cuvx�'
FAFARD
PHASE II
PROPOSED CHANGES
Building # 22 - Add two grand rooms to units 35 & 37
Building # 24 - Short ell to lorigZell
Buidling # 25x - Short ell to RegentyA
Building # 28 - Short ell w/two grand rooms to_ -Regericy-.*-
Building # 29
Buidling # 30 - Cedar clapboards to Redwcod:CTapboardv
• Building # 31
Building # 23
Building # 122 .Cedar:--clapboards to Sh_a_kertownmcedar sHingTese
Building # 127
�.,d� c e✓�'rnftlw-hs -b f�he4eaL�
` -exce�.l�er-t-
� � o
a �
•
♦-- O`
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
• PLANNING DEPARTMENT
GERARD KAVANAUGH y' ONE SALEM GREEN ,1
CITY PLANNER T 01970 i
< (617) 744-4580
FAFARD
PHASE II
PROPOSED CHANGES
,r APS prd ed- Proposed
ve
t Building # 130 �Long�ETl Regency
F
• Buildings 11 131, 132, 133 aShort-E31? Long E11
Open Space 147' 142'
(Reduced by 5')
Janus Lane Between Whalers Split at open space
Lane area
•
S
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
• PLANNING DEPARTMENT
�c..coniccb
GERARD KAVANAUGH " S ONE SALEM GREEN
CITY PLANNER '' l ', 01970
(617( 744.4580
FAFARD
PHASE II
PROPOSED CHANGES
Building # 22 - Add two grand rooms to units 35 & 37
Building # 24 - Short ell to long ell
Buidling # 25x - Short ell to Regency
Building # 28 - Short ell w/two grand rooms to Regency
Building # 29
Buidling # 30 Cedar clapboards to Redwood Clapboard
• Building # 31
Building # 23
Building # 122 -Cedar clapboards to Shakertown cedar shingles
Building # 127
•
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS `
• PLANNING DEPARTMENT
GERARD KAVANAUGH ` \ ONE SALEM GREEN
`1I '
CITY PLANNER :+ � 01970 i
(617) 744.4560
FAFARD '
PHASE II
PROPOSED CHANGES
Approved Proposed
Building # 130 Long Ell Regency
Buildings 4l 131, 132, 133 Short Ell Long Ell
Open Space 147' 142'
(Reduced by 51)
Janus Lane Between Whalers Split at open space
Lane area Vol
•
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
• co�mcc
GERARD KAVANAUGH \ �'? ONE SALEM GREEN
CITY PLANNER 7` 01970
(617) 744-4580
FAFARD
PHASE II
PROPOSED CHANGES
Building # 22 - Add two grand rooms to units 35 & 37
Building # 24 - Short ell to long ell
Buidling # 25x - Short ell to Regency
Building # 28 - Short ell w/two grand rooms to Regency
Building # 29
Buidling # 30 Cedar clapboards to Redwood Clapboard
• Building # 31
Building # 23
Building # 122 -Cedar- clapboards to Shakertown cedar shingles
Building # 127
•
CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
\\ ' ONE SALEM GREEN
GEflARO KAVANAUGH � +1
CITY PLANNER 7' 01970
(617) 744 4560
FAFARD
PHASE II
PROPOSED CHANGES
Approved Proposed
Building # 130 Long Ell Regency
Buildings 11 131, 132, 133 Short Ell Long Ell ✓
Open Space 147' 142'
(Reduced by 5')
Janus Lane Between Whalers Split at open space
Lane area
•
_y
• SALEM PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
SEPTEMBER 17, 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on September 17,
1987 at 7:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room, One Salem Green.
In attendance were: Chairman, Walter Power, Abby Burns, John Butler,
Bob Ledoux, Ken May, Linda Vaughan, and Dick Williams. Also present was
Beth Debski.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
Form A - 13-13� Meadow Street
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 5,727 square foot parcel.
into two (2) lots. Two homes currently exist on the lot and this
subdivision would provide two lots, with one home on each. Lot A will
contain 3 ,927 square feet and Lot B will contain 1 ,800 square feet.
The petitioner was denied a variance from the Board of Appeal based on
insufficient lot area, side and front yard requirements, and lot
coverage.
The City Solicitor sent a letter to the Board stating that the proposal
should be approved as not requiring approval.. By endorsing the plan,
zoning conerns are not addressed.
Mr. Power pointed out that the right of way for each lot would only be
9' in width, and questioned whether or not the subdivision regulations
required a minimum amount of frontage. Mr. May responded that when two
buildings are on one ` o•[, there is no minimum� fL .rontage requirement.
y predAtr��dor,tLm a8 Sc ,b C O 14c-t-
Since t�h��I� Q5 ppredates the Subdivision Control- Act, Mr. May made a
motion Xtf' 5588t� eie plan. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. All were in
favor except Mr. Butler who was opposed. Ms. Vaughan and Mr. Williams
abstained from voting since they were not present when the proposal was
being discussed.
Form A - Salem Police Station
On May 21 , 1987, the Planning Board endorsed the subdivision plan for
the lot on which the new Police Station will. be built. Since that time,
it has been determined that the lot was incorrectly surveyed. The plan
has been altered to reflect the revision.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the plan as revised. Mr. Ledoux
seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Form A - 13-13' meadow Street
Following the approval. of the Meadow Street subdivision, it was
determined that five signatures were needed on the pl.an. Since only
four members had voted in favor of the subdivision, the plan was
• reconsidered.
Page 2
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the plan. All were in favor, except
Mr. Butler. The motion carried with six in favor and one opposed.
It was the consensus of the Board that Mr. Power' s name be recorded with
the Registry of Deeds giving him rhe power to sign for the Board.
Form A - Hillcrest Chevrolet
The petitioner requested to merge Parcel A with Lot 6 to create one
buildable 239,000 square foot lot. There are no plans for developing
the parcel at this time. An electrical. easement exists on Lot 6 which
will have to be taken into consideration if the lot is developed.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the plan. Mr. Ledoux seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Blasting
Captain Turner of the Salem Fire Department came before the Board to
review the Fire Department 's procedures relative to blasting. Captain
Turner informed the Board that blasting is regulated by the State Fire
Marshall .
He went on to explain the two types of blasting which are commonly done.
First, large charges can be used to blast an area, but not before a
• pre-blast survey is completed. This inspection includes structures
within a 250 foot radius of the blasting site. Each structure is
photographed and inspected for cracks. A copy of each inspection report
is filed with the City Clerk and City Engineer prior to the issuance of
a blasting permit. Blasting permits are issued for 30 days or less
depending on the site. The second type of blasting, limited shots of
2-5 lbs. which are used for trench work and the installation of poles,
does not require a pre-blast survey.
Captain Turner and Inspector LaPointe routinely inspect the blasting
site and log books to insure the safety of the neighborhood. In the
event of an accident, they are responsible for determining negligence on
the part of the blaster so that a claim can be processed. '
Mr. Williams felt that .h meowners do not get adequate treatment from the
City Fire Marshalls VMded that tighter restrictions should be placed
on blasting. Captain Turner responded that the City's Ordinance
requires inspections for a 250 square foot radius, while the state only
requires 100 square feet. He added that each blaster must hold a bond
with the State Treasurer to reimburse the homeowner .in the event of an
accident.
CM-Ndrrs
Mr. Williams questioned whether bja.&�could be required to Hoe Ram as
an alternative to blasting. Captain Turner responded that Hoe Ramming
had been done on Brentwood Avenue, but that he knew very little about
the procedure. If blasting appears dangerous, a permit is not issued.
•
•1 �
Page 3
Sunburst
At the August 31 , 1987 meeting, the Board requested that 'a
representative from Sunburst attend the next meeting to explain the
existing traffic hazard and the second silo.
Mr. John Serafini, Jr. , representing the petitioner, informed the Board
that l� years ago Sunburst experienced a need for additional warehouse
space. As a result, the plant had to either move or create additional
space. Plans for such an addition were approved by the Board under Site
Plan Review.
Mr. Serafini explained that the second silo was installed in order to
increase the storage capacity of the plant. In turn, the trucks which
deliver the plastic pellets and sugar will be able to deliver a full
load, decreasing the number of trucks stopping traffic on Highland
Avenue.
Mr. Wakeland, of the Sunburst Corporation, informed the Board that
deliveries are scheduled between midnight and 5 a.m. When deliveries
are made, traffic must be stopped in order to allow the truck enough
room to back into the site.
Mr. Power felt t.hat if the Board had been aware of a second silo, a
ecial Permit " not have been granted. Mr. Wakeland added that the
silo was an after— oug t an to e it would be excessively expensive.
• Mr. Serafini pointed out that an alternate route to the silos would be
impossible because of the limited space between the lot line and an
existing wetland.
It was the consensus of the Board that in the future, a condition
stating that any alteration of approved plans be reviewed by the Board.
11 Summer Street
On July 23, 1987, a public hearing was held for this proposal involving
the construction of a 3� story, 17,000 square foot additon, containing
nine (9) residential units, to an existing building, containing 6 units,
at 11 Summer Street. The addition would be located to the rear of the
existing building.
At the public hearing, the major concerns raised by neighbors were the
density of the project and its architectural compatability with the
surrounding buildings.
Since th'e public hearing, the Applicant 's Architect, Design Partnership,
has reduced the number of units in the addition from nine (9) to six (6)
and added green space to the rear of the project. The total number of
units is therefore reduced from fifteen (15) to twelve (12) .
V G~
s ;
Page 4
A representative of Design Partnership Architects presented revised
plans to the Board. The revised plan will include garage doors so that
the building would not appear to be on stilts.
Mr. Ledoux was concerned that the building would be too tall, but Mr.
Petrozelli responded that the building was the same height as the Salem
Inn and one story lower than the Essex House Condominiums.
Mr. Power asked how much green space would be provided, and Mr.
Petrozelli responded that there would be 37 feet of green space.
The proposed plan will be presented at the next meeting, and each member
of the Board was requested to visit the site prior to the meeting.
Fafard
Mr. Ron Killian of the Fafard Companies came before the Board requesting
an alteration to the appoved plan for Phase II. In an attempt to make
the buildings distinctive, they requested the following changes:
a. 2 Short L' s for 2 Regency units;
b. ne short L for a Long L;
c. redwood clapboards for cedar clapboards on Buildings 29,30, and
31 ;
• d. Shakertown cedar shingles for cedar clapboards on Buildings 23,
122, and 127; and
e. Texture 11 for brick on one unit.
The footprint of these units we be almost exactly the same as the
approved units. The Planning Department has reviewed the proposed
changes and found the changes to be appropriate.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the proposed alterations to the plan
for Phase II. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The vote was unanimouly
in favor.
Moose Lodge
In November, 1983, the Planning Board approved a Wetland Special Permit
for the Moose Lodge at 319 Highland Avenue to construct an extension to
an existing culvert under Highland Avenue. This extension, on Moose
property, would then be filled so that buildable land would be created.
The permit has been extended several times and the latest extention
expires in October, 1987.
Commencement of work on the project. has always been contingent upon the
cleaning of the culvert under Highland Avenue by the State DPW. This
cleaning has not taken place yet , so the Moose Lodge has requested an
extension of its permit until November, 1988.
• The Conservation Commission, which issued .a permit in October, 1983, has
recently extended its Order of Conditions until. April, 1988, to
facilitate the eventual completion of the proposed project.
Page 5
11r. Butler made a motion that a report be furnished by the City Planner
regarding the status of the drainage pipe prior to the issuance of an
extension. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously
in favor.
Mr. Butler made a motion that the City Planner provide a report on the
soil study conducted at the corner of Nichols and Butler Streets and
that notification be given to the Board of Health.
Old/New Business
It was the consensus of the Board that Mr. Kavanaugh sign-off on the
permit for the Sunburst Company.
Ms. Burns requested that the Planning Department check whether or not a
beauty salon on Lafayette Street had received a sign permit.
It was the consensus of the Board that the Board review the Board of
Appeal agendas.
The Planning Department was asked to 'check if a Building Permit had been
issued for a crafts store on the corner of Broad and Summer.
Mr. Butler requested that the Board be informed about the status of the
traffic study.
. Ms. Burns made a motion to approve the minutes of the August 31 , 1987
meeting. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in
favor.
Ms. Burns made a motion to adjourn at 10: 10 p.m. Mr. May seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in .favor.
Respectfully Submitted,
Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
• MINUTES OF MEETING
AUGUST 31 , 1987
On August 31 , 1987, a regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board' was
held at 7:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room, One Salem Green.
In attendance were: Chairman, Walter Power, Ken May, Linda Vaughan,
Dick Williams, and Bob Ledoux. Abby Burns and John Butler were absent.
Also present were City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Beth Debski.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
Lincoln Hotel - Site Plan Review - Special Permit
On May 7, 1987, a public hearing was held for this proposal involving
the rehabilitation and expansion of the Lincoln Hotel at 117 Lafayette
Street, located in a B-5 zone.
The building is currently comprised of 25,700 square feet of floor
space, is four (4) stories in height, has commercial space on the first
floor, and 61 single room occupancy units on the upper floors.
The proposal calls for the construction of two (2) additional floors,
making the building 35,337 square feet with six (6) stories.
The building will be completely rehabilitated. The ground floor will be
• used for retail purposes, with 71 efficiency and one-bedroom residential
units on the upper floors.
At the public hearing, the major concern raised was the possibility of
the displacement of the present tenants of the Lincoln Hotel. In
response to that concern, the Applicant has been working with the Salem
Housing Authority to obtain 26 rental certificates for subsidized units
through the State' s Executive Office of Communities and Development
(EOCD) and its Section 707 Program.
Mr. Power presented a letter from the Applicant which states that if 26
certificates are obtained, they will be honored.
Mr. Serafini, representing the petitioner, informed the Board that the
proposed rehabilitiation is in the best interest of the City, and that
if it is not passed, the building will continue to deteriorate.
Mr. Williams questioned whether the certificates would be honored for a
certain period of time, and Mr. Kavanaugh responded that there is no
time limit set on the applicant. Mr. Serafini added that the
certificates would be honored as long as the program remained in effect.
Mr. Ledoux asked what would happen in the event the building was sold,
and Mr. Serafini responded that the certificates would go with the sale,
but that the applicant had no intention of sellingthe building.
• Mr. Williams suggested that the Board require a condition stating that
the certificates are to be tied to the building for a specific time
period, but Mr. Serafini felt that any such condition would jeopardize
• Page 2
the financing of the project. Mr. Serafini assured the Board that Mr.
Small would honor his commitment to the tenants.
Ms. Vaughan asked how many residents currently live in the Hotel and
what would happen to them if the project were not approved. Mr.
Serafini responded that 14 residents currently live in the hotel, and
that the building would either remain a rooming house or be sold.
Mr. May stated that any subsequent buyer would not be obligated to
fulfill Mr. Small's commitment.
Mr. Power suggested that Mr. Small add a paragraph to.his letter stating
that if the building is sold, the certificates must be honored. Mr.
Serafini felt that it would be impossible to find a buyer based on such
a condition.
Mr. Potfin of NSCAP' suggested that a fixed 20 year agreement be attached
to the units, but Mr. Serafini added that financing would be impossible
if such a condition existed. Mr. Potfin added that he is aware of
several 100% Section 707 buildings which have been financed by local
banks. Also, he has seen a real estate ad in the Boston Globe for the
salle of a building meeting the Hotel ' s description. Mr. Serafini
responded that he knew nothing about such an ad.
• Ms. Vaughan and Mr. Williams voiced concern that if the certificates are
riot obtained, the tenants would be displaced. Mr. Serafini responded
that Mr. Small has made a commitment to the area, and that he has owned
the building since November and has not displaced the tenants.
Mr. Williams questioned whether the structure was stable enough to
withstand the weight of 2 additional floors. The engineer was unable to
determine that since the 2 floors have not been designed. Mr. Williams
suggested that a condition requiring information on the building's
stability be provided to the Building Inspector prior to the issuance' of
any permits.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the plan with the conditions outlined
by the Planning Department. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. Messrs.
Williams, May and Power voted in favor. Ms. Vaughan and Mr. Ledoux were
opposed. The motion carried.
45-49 Clark Street - Form C
0n July 2, 1987, a public hearing was held for this proposal involving
the subdivision of two lots containing 66,706 square feet into four
lots, each with at least 100 feet of frontage and 15,000 square feet of
lot area.
The petitioner is proposing to extend the existing 24 foot roadway and
install a five foot sidewalk and a three foot planting strip on one side
• of the street. These improvements are in compliance with the City' s
subdivision policies. The petitioner has requested a waiver from the
requirements of granite curbing, underground utilities, shade trees,
Page 3
performance guarantee, Environmental Impact Statement, and a statement
of conformance with the Master Plan.
Mr. Serafini, representing the petitioner, stated that since there is no
curbing at the beginning of the street, the curbing would look odd.
Mr. Power asked if there was any possiblity of extending Clark Street to
.the existing BPD zone. Mr. Kavanaugh responded that that was not a
possibility..
Mr. May made a motion to adopt the plan subject to the conditions set
forth by the Planning Department with a waiver of the Environmental
Impact Statement and a statement of conformance with the Master Plan.
Ms. Vaughan seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Ms. Vaughan made a motion to' amend the above stated motion to include
the denial of waivers from granite curbing, underground utilities, shade
trees, and a performance guarantee on the plan. Mr. Williams seconded
the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
83-83' Summer Street — Form A
This proposal involves the subdivision of a lot on which exists two
• single family homes. The petitioner would like to sell one home to her
nephew. The petitioner has received all necessary variances from the
Board of Appeal.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the plan. Ms. Vaughan seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
R-2 Zoning Amendment
On August 12, 1987, the Salem City Council and the Salem Planning Board
held a joint public hearing for the purpose of discussing a proposed
zoning amendment relative to the proposed requirement of a variance,
rather than a Special Permit, in an R-2 District for residential uses in
excess of two dwelling units.
. The proposed amendment received unanimous support from those attending
the public hearing.
The. Planning Board reviewed the proposal, and Mr. Ledoux made a motion
to approve the amendment. Linda Vaughan seconded the motion. The vote
was unanimously in favor.
Old/New Business
Mr. Williams asked about the status of the Sunburst Company, and Mr.
Kavanaugh answered that he had spoken to their representative who stated
that the trucks do back up onto Highland Avenue.
Page 4
Mr. Kavanaugh requested that the representatives from Sunburst come
before the Board to explain the existing situation.
Mr. May requested that a representative from Rich's Department Store
come in regarding landscaping on the site. Mr. Kavanaugh responded that
he has been in touch with Mr. Rich who plans to complete the landscaping
in the early spring.
Mr. Power suggested that the Board draft a letter to Mr. Rich stating
that the Board would like to see the project .completed, and look forward
to seeing the finished product in the spring.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 23, 1987
meeting. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in
favor.
Mr. May made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimously in favor. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
• Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
co A ) Now
Tity of ,Saltm, Aassac4usetts
• g 191 mtinq PourD � Cv�Ri iib N1iB�
(One Tatem Orern
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, July 23, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem
P•
Green, second floor conference room.
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
TENTATIVE AGENDA: '
1. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review Special Permit - 11 Summer Street
2. Form A - Essex House
3. Form A - 12-14 Porter Street
4. Form A - 12 Cedarcrest Avenue
• 5. Form A - 333 Highland Avenue
6. Form A - 4-6 Friend Street -
7. Determination of Substantial Change - 165 Boston Street
8. Blaney Street Informal Discussion
9. Old/New Business
10. Approval of Minutes
• This notice posted on "Official �,0-,t4Wz
4letin Board"
City Hall Ave. , Salem, Masa . on / /qg7
at .3 % / in accordancetp• 628,
of Ake Acts 6f 1958.
A
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Site Plan Review Special Permit —
Public. Hearing — 11 Summer Street
This proposal involves the construction of a 3' story, 17 ,000 square
foot addition, containing nine (9) residential units, to an existing
building, containing 6 units, at 11 Summer Street. The addition will be
located to the rear of the main building. The parcel of land is
comprised of 13,500 square feet, with 88 feet of frontage, and is
located in the B-5 zone.
The proposal'complies with all requirements for the B-5 zo-iing district.
The Applicants representatives ' will present the plans to the Board for
your review and discussion.
J205
•
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A — Essex House
This proposal involves the conveyance of a 321 square foot strip of land
owned by the City of Salem (municipal parking lot at corner of Essex and
Crombie Streets) to the Essex House Associates, developer of the old
Salem Theater site on Essex Street.
t
The purpose of this conveyance is the provision of space under bay
windows proposed for the residential development which will sit on its
propety line.
The parcel measures approximately 96 feet by 3 feet, and no parking
spaces will be eliminated as a result of this conveyance.
On June 25, 1987 , the Salem City Council approved the sale of .this land.
• r
; j Endorsement of the plan is appropriate.
J209
c
i.
5
I •
If
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A — 12-14 Porter Street
This proposal involves the conveyance of .a 204 square foot strip of
land, by the owners of 14 Porter Street, to the owners of 12 Porter
Street.
Erroneously, the house at 12 Porter Street was partially constructed on
the property of 14 Porter Street.
In conjuction with this conveyance, the petitioner was also granted a
variance from side setback requirements by the Board of Appeal on July
15', 1987.
Endorsement of the plan is appropriate.
J208
•
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A — 12 Cedarcrest Avenue
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 22,873 square foot parcel
into two lots. Lot A, which is vacant, will contain 8,438 square feet ,
and lot B, on which presently sits a single family home, will contain
14,435 square feet. Lot A will contain 94 feet of frontage, and Lot B
: i will contain 188 feet of frontage.
i The petitioner was granted a variance from lot area and frontage
requirements by the Board of Appeal on May 27, 1987.
The Applicant proposes to construct a single family home on the vacant
lot (A) .
Endorsement of the plan is appropriate.
J207
:1
4
i
11
i
111
• To: Planning Board Members
From: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
Re: Determination of Substantial Change - 165 Boston Street
-On June 17, 1987, a petition for a variance to allow the construction of
a two story building at 165 Boston Street was denied by the Board of
Appeal (see attached decision) .
According to State law, once a petition is denied by the Board of
Appeal, it cannot be heard again for two years unless a "substantial
change" has been made to the plan. The Planning Board and the Board of
Appeal must determine, by an affirmative vote, that such a change has
been made.
The petitioner has altered his plan by replacing the concrete block
exterior with wood, and by reducing the width of the second floor. The
Board must now determine if the new plan shows a substantial change. If
so determined, the petitioner can return to the Board of Appeal.
I813
'�• ...
•
I
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Blaney Street Development -. Informal Review
3.
This proposed Planned Unit Development, on a 2.3 acre parcel, located on
Blaney Street, involves the construction of 74 residential condominiums,
with public access to the waterfront, and possibe marine related
commercial uses.
: t
The Newport Group, proposed developers of the parcel, will present plans
for this prospective Planned Unit Development to the Board for an
? � informal review and discussion.
Following informal review by the Board and other parties of interst, the
developer will make a final decision regarding the feasibility of giving
approvals of such a proposal, and will move forward accordingly.
Of proceduaral interestin this proposal is the fact that the developer
would like to proceed through the Board' s Planned Unit Development
process, and believes that ,the Planning Board has the ability, through
this. process',_:,to grant app.rovals .whichadev.iate .from: :local zoning.
i J206
I �
1 �
r.:
c
i;
ti
r
i
I'
�' 'Cowr �,r1TI oT• MlA ffl,yyCc ar�1 }tQ C
a lghulnins Pourb
s
(One �$ttlem (preen
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, July 2, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem
Green, second floor conference room.
(�)o ,UA-)F�.
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1. Form A - 38 Butler Street
O/
2. Public Hearing - Form C - 95-99 Clark Street
wP 6� r
3. Form B - 416 Lafayette Street
• 4. New Police Headquarters - Site Plan Review
5. Form C - 44 Crowdis Street
6. Fafard Discussion
7. Old/New Business ��o A 7/41'0 / --tz>
iedeoco
8. Approval of Minutes
✓Zo��l Sof — 8d30f}./YI. �ImCd
This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board"
City Hall Ave . , Salem, Mass . on
at 411 in accordance with Chap.' 626 .
of the kcts of 1958.
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A - 38 Butler Street
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 9,368 square foot
parcel into two lots. Lot A, on which exists a two family home and a
garage, will contain 6,931 square feet. Lot B will contain 2,437 square
feet, and will then be combined with an adjacent lot which fronts on
Boston Street. (See attached plan. )
The purpose of the conveyance is to combine the two lots so that
parking can be increased for the Boston Street business involved in the
transaction (Peter's Laundry) .
The Applicant proposes to convey lot B to the adjacent property
owner.
Endorsement of the plan is appropriate.
1711
•
COPELA S -5� 59° 44`r4�— E--•
. ,
FND 50. 00 '
ROD
N LOT f 8 8 a; A PPRoxl Ai
2 , 437: ± SF DISTRI4
FNDN / F ALFRED
ROD —N 58' 27 ' 04 " W 3 THIBAULT
50. 00' _
Go
w 0
cc)
0 a
0
0
N M
N
/ F o
z DWELLING
1
- r
NO. 38 N/ F PETER
�n C 0 P E L A.S
ILOT /8A
• 6 61931 ± SF
D
FND SET
• OLT 43. 00 ' NAIL 50.00 ' ROD
r
-- N 580 27 ' 04 '" ' W
BUTLER STREET ILI,
1.33815
% G 109-
QI� ez
60 Ll S �
�'S 30•b Z I �i 5�� �,,� o `d Z ti I
rn
d� a _
•
45-49 CLARK STREET
FORM C
• LOT AREA FRONTAGE
LOT 1 15,203 s. f. 100 feet
LOT 2 17,392 s.f. 100 feet
LOT 3 19,702 s. f. 135 feet
LOT 4 15,039 s. f. 103 feet
•
•
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Public Hearing - Form C - 45-49 Clark Street
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the subdivision of two lots containing 66,706
square feet into four lots for the construction of four single family
homes. Lot 1 will contain 15,203 square feet, lot 2 will contain 17,392
square feet, lot 3 will contain 19,702 square feet, and lot 4 will
contain 15,039 square feet. (See attached plan. )
The petitioner is proposing to extend the existing 24 foot roadway and
• to install a five foot sidewalk and a three foot planting strip on one
side of the street. These improvements are in compliance with our
subdivison policies.
The Applicant' s representative will present plans to the Board for their
review and discussion.
pb21
•
To: Planning Board Members
• From: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
Re: Form B - 416 Lafayette Street
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 49,165 square foot
parcel. into three lots. Lot 1 , on which presently exists a single
family home, will. contain 17,720 square feet. Lot 2 will contain 15,160
square feet, while lot 3 will contain 15,090 square feet.
The petitioner is proposing to construct a new 24 foot roadway ,
off Lafayette Street, with a 5 foot sidewalk and a 3 foot planting strip
on one side. These improvements are in accordance with our subdivision
policies.
The proposal meets all zoning requirements for an R-1 zoning
district.
The Applicant's representative will present the plans to the Board
for preliminary review and discussion.
I710
•
•
• To: Planning Board Members
From Gerard Kavanaugh
Re: New Police Headquarters - Site Plan Review Special Permit
On June 4, 1987, a public hearing was held for this proposal for
the construction of a new police headquarters for the City of Salem on
Margin Street. The land is being purchased by the City from the New
England Power Company.
The proposed building will be comprised of 28,000 square feet,
and four (4) floors, including the full basement.
At the public hearing, the major concern raised was the
possibility of flooding at the location. We have further researched
this issue, and found that the site is located in a Zone B area (500
year district) , and is not within the 100 year flood plain in the Flood
Hazard District. Therefore, we are not concerned with the possibility
of water problems, although we will take precautions to make certain
that water will not damage the building.
• Attached for your review are proposed conditions drafted by the
Planning Department.
L430
Sit PlanXeet
i w Spe3,iaR Permit
Sale Polieadqu rt s
95 rgin
S lem, MA970
1 . Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled "Salem Police Headquarters,
Site Plan", dated May 20, 1987.
2. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled, "Salem —
&o -PI Headquarters Site P an", dated May 20, 1987 C2�GY Q/Y1LP/YLOC20�
/a. Trees shall e a minimum of 3�" caliper.
3. Construction Practices
All construction shall be conducted in accordance with the
following conditions:
• a. No work shall commence before 7:00 A.M. on weekdays and 8:00
A.M. on Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond. 5:00 P.M.
There shall be no work conducted on Sundays or holidays.
Inside work of a quiet nature may be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative
effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be
provided to all abutters in writing at, least 72 hours prior to
commencement of construction.
c. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving
the site so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on
roadways as they leave the site.
4. Violations
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of
this permit by the Planning Board.
L432
•
• Subdivsion Regulations
Crowdis Street Subdivision
Requirement Compliance
Section III B Definitive Plan
1 . Original drawing of Plan and 3 prints yes
2. Subdivision name, boundary, N—Point,
date scale yes
3. Name and address of owner or subdivider
and Engineers yes
4. If Subdivider not owner, identification
of legal interest NA
5. Names of Abutters yes
6. Lines of existing and proposed streets yes
• 7. Location, direction, & length of streets yes
8. Location of monuments yes
9. Location of bounding streets yes
10. Locus ( inset) yes
11 . Indication of purpose of easements NA
12. Space for PB' s signatures yes
13 . Boundaries of wetlands NA
14. Street profiles yes
15. Layout and design for storm drainage,
water and 'sewer (Professional Engineer) no
16 . Statement of conformance with Master Plan no
17. Environmental Impact Statement no
18. Board of Health Compliance yes
19. Wetlands protection (ConCom) NA
• 20. Sign advertising public hearing no
21 . Performance guarantee no
• Section IV Design Standards
A. Streets
1 . Location and Alignment
a. Streets designed for safe
vehicular traffic yes
b. Conformance with Master Plan no
c. Access to adjoining parcels yes
d. Reserve strips prohibiting access
not permitted NA
e. Street jobs with centerline
offsets no less than 125 feet yes
f. Centerline radii — 230' min. yes
g. Right—angle intersections yes
h. No less than 30' curb radius at
intersections yes
• 2. Width
a. Minimum road width of 41 ' = 24' yes
street, granite curbs, grass
strips,
5 ' sidewalk
b. Curb faces not less than 24' face
to face
3. Dead—End Streets
a. Length of dead—end no longer than
500' yes
b. 116' diameter turnaround no
B. Easements
1 . Utility easements — 20' wide NA
2. Drainage easements or right—of—way NA
•
• Section V Required Improvements
A. Shade Trees no
B. Underground Utilities no
C. Fire Alarms and Police Boxes no
L03
•
• To: Planning Board Members
From: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
Re; 44 Crowdis Street — Form C
This proposal involves the construction of a single—family home on
a 17,000 square foot lot. The lot meets all requirements for an R-1
zoning district, but now fronts on an unimproved street.
The petitioner proposes to extend the existing 24 foot roadway and
reserve land on each side of the street for a 5 foot sidewalk and a 3
foot planting strip.
The proposed improvements are in accordance with our subdivision
policies, although not with our regulations. Therefore, waivers are
necessary.
At its last meeting, the Board requested that the petitioners
alter their plan to reflect the fact that sidewalks and planting strips
will not be constructed, but instead land will be reserved for future
construction of such improvements. In addition, the Board requested
• that the plan show a "t—turnaround". , acceptable to the Fire Department.
These alterations have been. made, and the waivers from the
Subdivision Regulations which must be approved are listed on the
following page.
L431
WAIVERS REQUESTED
Layout and design for storm / n '1^ on Ob
drainage, water and sewer aX/ vv�x-�L!
(Professional Engineer)
Statement of conformance with
Master Plan
Environmental Impact Statement
Sign advertising public hearing LZ9 vl`
Performance guarantee
116' diameter turnaround
Shade trees -�P-
Underground utilities �
Fire alarms and police boxes --)P.
•
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
JULY 2, 1987
•
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on July 2, 1987
in the second floor conference room, One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m. In
attendance were: Chairman, Walter Power, Ken May, Dick Williams, Abby
Burns, John Butler, and Linda Vaughan. Mr. Ledoux was absent. Also
present were City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Beth Debski.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
Form A - 38 Butler Street
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 9,368 foot parcel into two
lots. Lot A, on which exists a two family home and a garage, will
contain 6,931 square feet. Lot B will contain 2,437 square feet, and
will then be combined with an adjacent lot which fronts on Boston Street
to allow for four (4) parking spaces for an existing residential
development. The applicant, Mr. Peter Copelas, proposes to extend an
existing retaining wall, and blast the existing ledge in order to create
this proposed parking area.
Mr. Williams questioned whether or not there would be adequate room to
allow vehicles to enter and exit the parking area easily. Mr. Copelas
responded that there would be 4-18' parking spaces, 25' for a
turnaround, and a 12' driveway. Mr. Williams added that the 12'
driveway may cause difficulty in the winter months, and Mr. Copelas
1 answered that there is adequate parking on the first level in the event
of a severe snow storm.
Mr. Williams asked if the applicant had considered whether or not the
retaining wall would withstand blasting. Mr. Copelas responded that if
there is too much ledge, the parcel would be landscaped and remain
vacant.
After reviewing the proposed plans, Mr. May made a motion to endorse the
plan as not requiring approval'. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The
vote was unanaimously in favor.
Public Hearing Form C - 45-49 Clark Street
This proposal involves the subdivision of two lots (66,706 square feet)
into four lots for the construction of four single family homes. Lot 1
will contain 15,203 square feet, lot 2 will contain 17,392 square feet,
lot 3 will contain 19,702 square feet, and lot 4 will contain 15,039
square feet.. All lots will have adequate frontage.
The petitioner proposes to extend the existing 24' roadway, install five
foot sidewalks and three foot planting strips on one side of the street,
construct catch basins , and a cul-de-sac.
C_
• Mr. Williams questioned whether or not the sewer had been installed at
40 Clark Street, and Mr. Serafini responded that they would work in
conjunction with the owner of 40 Clark Street when installing the sewer.
The petitioner is requesting waivers from: a) underground utilities; b)
granite curbing; c) environmental impact statement; and d) conformance
with the master plan.
Mr. Power informed the Board that the City Engineer and the Fire
Department concur with the plans. The Health Department will discuss
the plan at their July 14th meeting.
Mr. Power opened the public hearing.
Mr. Edward Colbert of 37 Clark Street questioned whether or not Clark
Street could be developed beyond Mr. Connick's property. Mr. Power
responded that the abutting parcel was zoned BPD and would require Board
approval prior to developement.
Mr. Dennis Colbert informed the Board that the parcel is now covered
with trash, and asked who he could report it to. Mr. Power responded
that the Board could place a condition of approval on the subdivision,
and that the Health Department should be contacted regarding further
dumping on the site.
Mr. James Connick, owner of the property, informed the Board that it has
been difficult to stop the dumping, and that he will contact the Board
of Health to report the dumping.
There being no further comment, Mr. Power declared the public hearing
closed.
Mr. Dennis Colbert, 37 Clark Street, telephone #745-9806 was selected as
the spokesperson for the neighborhood. Ms. Debski agreed to contact Mr.
Colbert when the next meeting is scheduled.
The Planning Department will review the proposed subdivision and make
their recommendations to the Board.
Form B - 416 Lafayette - Site Plan Review
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 49,165 square foot parcel
into three lots. Lot 1, on which presently exists a single family home,
will contain 17,720 square feet. Lot 2 will contain 15, 160 square
feet, while lot 3 will contain 15,090 square feet.
The petitioner is proposing to construct a new 24 foot roadway with a
five foot sidewalk and a three foot planting strip on one side of the
street. A portion of the existing garage may have to be removed to
allow for the construction of the roadway.
Mr. Serafini, representing the petitioner, Mrs. Jane Lyness, informed
• the Board that a Definitive Plan will be filed with the Board for the
next meeting.
Mr. Power asked if the roadway would be a public way, and Mr. Serafini
responded that it would either be a private way with ownership shared by
two lots in the rear or it will be maintained by Mrs. Lyness and
easements will be granted.
Mr. Moran of 415 Lafayette Street, spokesperson for the neighborhood,
submitted a petition from the neighbors against the proposed
subdivision. Mr. Moran informed the Board that the house in question,
known as the Dixie Morgan Home, is a significant historic site. In
order to accommodate the proposed subdivision, he felt that several
trees and the entire garage would have to be removed and, therefore, the
historic character of the site would be altered. Mr. Moran also
informed the Board that increased traffic in and out of the property
would create a safety hazard.
Mr. Power suggested that the Board visit the site following the public
hearing.
Salem Police Headquarters - Site Plan Review Special Permit
On June 4, 1987 a public hearing was held for this proposal for the
construction of a new police headquarters on Margin Street. The
proposed building will be comprised of 28,000 square feet.
v Ms. Hilbert, of the Planning Department, responded to two concerns
raised by the Board at the public hearing. First, the site is in a Zone
B on the Flood Hazard Map, and is not within the 100 year flood plain in
the Flood Hazard District. Therefore, flooding will probably not be a
problem. Nevertheless, the first floor was raised 21 . Second,
Goldsmith's trucks will still be able to turn around in the dirt parking
lot since the land they have been using is their own.
Mr. Kavanaugh reviewed the proposed conditions.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the site plan and conditions of
approval as submitted. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The vote was
unanimously in favor.
Form C - 44 Crowdis Street
This proposal invloves the construction of a single-family home on a
17,000 square foot parcel which fronts on an unimproved street. The
petitioner proposes to extend the existing 24' roadway, reserve land for
a five foot sidewalk and three foot planting strip on both sides, and
provide a T-turnaround accepted by the Fire Department.
Mr. Litman, representing the petitioners, Mr. and Mrs. Theophilopolous,
informed the Board that the petitioners are requesting waivers from the
following:
a) Layout and design for storm drainage, water and sewer
designed by a Registered Engineer;
• b) Statement of Conformance with the Master Plan;
c) Environmental Impact Statement;
d) Sign advertising public hearing;
e) Performance gurantee;
f) 116' diameter turnaround;
g) Shade trees;
h) Undergound utilities; and
i) Fire alarm and police boxes.
Mr. Power felt that since further development might take place down the
road, any designs for storm drainage, sewer and water should be done by
a registered engineer.
Mr. May made a motion to deny the waiver of layout and design for storm
drainage, water and sewer by a registered engineer. Ms. Vaughan
seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the waiver of Conformance with the
Master Plan. Ms. Vaughan seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously
in favor.
Ms. Burns made a motion to grant the waiver of an Environmental Impact
Statement. Mr. Williams seconded the motion. The, vote was unanimously
in favor.
Mr. May made a motion to waive the requirement of a sign advertising a
public hearing. Ms. Vaughan seconded the motion. The vote was
unanimously in favor.
Mr. May made a motion not to grant a waiver of a performance gurantee.
Mr. William seconded the motion. The motion was unanimously in favor.
Mr. May made a motion to waive the requirement of a 116' diameter
turnaround. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in
favor.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the waiver of shade trees, underground
utilities, and fire alarm and police boxes. Ms. Burns seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimouly in favor.
Mr. May made a motion that the plan state that approval is subject to
the conditions set forth by the Planning Board. Ms. Burns seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Fafard
Mr. Lee Sachs of the First Street Board of Trustees asked the Board if a
roadway had been proposed for the land that abuts Pequot Highlands and
Heartland Drug. The Board of Trustees had been interested in a public
walkway rather than a roadway. A petition was submitted to make this
road a public walkway. Mr. Sachs suggested that the proposed roadway be
moved to the left. Mr. Kavanaugh responded that a roadway had been
proposed based on traffic flow patterns, but that he would set up a
meeting with Mr. Sachs and other interested neighbors to discuss this
issue further.
• Mr. John Serafini, representing the Fafard Companies, informed the Board
that the developer would like to substitute three Long Ell' s for three
Short Ell units. These units would be 1,800 sq. ft. larger than the
Short L's, but the lost open space would be made up with 2,500 sq. ft.
of additional open space by closing off Janus Lane.
The new open space will be heavily landscaped. Fafard would also like
to construct one Regency Unit as a model unit.
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board that he had walked the site and found
minimal changes in building design only.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the amended plan. Ms. Burns seconded
the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Mr. Serafini informed the Board that Phases III & IV are being designed
to be more condusive to the existing phases. He requested that Phases
III & IV be reviewed together so that the development could be seen more
clearly as a whole. The Board agreed that this was a good suggestion.
Old/New Business
The Board requested that Mr. Kavanaugh check the previous sets of
minutes on 44 Crowdis Street regarding the cleaning of the site of
debris. Mr. Kavanaugh agreed to do so.
j Mr. Power informed the Board the the Board of Health would like to be
notified of all proposed developments, and that a policy to store trash
within a building be adopted by the Planning Board.
Mr. Power asked Mr. Kavanaugh to review the approved plans for Sunburst
Fruit Juice on Highland Avenue to check for violations of conditions of
approval imposed by the Board.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the minutes of June 18, 1987. Ms.
Burns seconded the motion.
Ms. Burns made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Williams seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimously in favor. The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Respecfully submitted,
Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
E8/I812
City of "itttem, 'fflassarhuset#s
• � � �jtTlil[TTI� �IIMY�1
'P�,Mma�°`°`Y U�Y[F �21jEtti �HIEFlt
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, June 18, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem
Green, second floor conference room.
(it a&.(-)S, Pause RD
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1. New Police Headquarters - Site Plan Review
2. 44 Crowdis Street - Form C
• 3. Old/New Business
4. Approval of Minutes
City HalliB AV,. .F .*e - ,1 f ,`.ria..t Br. At in Boa.:l
J i
Avg�, .:a?.ai, ".Zc c.ci .,
Rt, `O IV/'-/M9 in accord-r:,,
of the Aots of 195II. -th Chsp. 646.
•
rz
w. R
(tai#g of 'Solent, �Hassac4use##s
• � '� � �luttttittg �narl
(�p JON I 129 PN �8]
VYnf SaIrm (gtrpn FILE#
NOTICE OF MEETING
CITY CLERK.SALEM.MASS.
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold
its regular meeting on Thursday, June 4, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One
Salem Green, second floor conference room.
Walter B. Power, III E T�
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Salem Police Headquarters
2. Form C - 44 Crowdis Street
3. Fafard - Phase II - Endorsement of Plan
• 4. Old/New Business
5. Approval of Minutes
Thie notice Posted onOfficial Bu11
• City Hall Ave . , ";'Icm, Mass on ,'U)letin Board's
at a 9 in accordance ?v/i � /L
sf the Acts o�g8. th Chgp, 626,
• TO: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
FROM: GERARD KAVANAUGH, CITY PLANNER
RE: NEW POLICE HEADQUARTERS - SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT - PUBLIC
HEARING
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the construction of a new police headquarters for
the City of Salem, on a 1 .3 acre parcel of land located on Margin
Street. The land is being purchased by the City from the New England
Power Company.
The proposed building, located in an Industrial Zone, will be comprised
of 28,000 square feet.
The City was granted variances from frontage, front yard and side yard
requirements by the Board of Appeal. on January 21 , 1987.
We will present the plan in detail at the public hearing.
L425
•
•
l
y li
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: 44 Crowdis Street - Form C
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 7, 1987, a public hearing was held for this proposal to construct
a single-family home on a 17,000 square foot lot. The lot meets all
requirements for an R-1 zoning district, but fronts on an unimproved
street.
The Applicant proposes to extend the 24 foot wide roadway and reserve
land on each side of the street for a 5 foot sidewalk and 3 foot
planting strip. These proposed improvements are in accordance with our
new subdivision policies.
Approval of the plan is appropriate.
1426
•
•
TO: Planning Board Members
• FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Fafard Phase II - Endorsement of Plan
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 16, 1987, the Planning Board voted to approve a Site Plan Review
Special Permit for Phase II of the Fafard project located off of First Street.
Thdctwenty::day appeal'-period' has expired, therefore endorsement of the plan
is appropriate.
Fafard representatives will also present a Form A plan to separate Phase II
from the overall development. Endorsement of this plan is also appropriate.
Fafard would like the Board to entertain the possibility of a change in building
design. The footprint of the new design has been modified.
Representatives of Fafard will present the new building design plans to the
Board for your- review.
•
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
JUNE 4, 1987
A regular meeting .of the Salem Planning Board was held June 4, 1987, in
the second floor conference room, One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m. Present
were: Chairman; Walter Power, Abby Burns, Robert Ledoux, Ken May, and
Linda Vaughan. Also present were City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Beth
Debski. Messrs. Butler and Williams were absent .
NEW POLICE HEADQUARTERS - SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT - PUBLIC
HEARING
This proposal involves the construction of a 28,000 square foot police
headquarters located in an Industrial Zone on Margin Street. The City
is purchasing a 1 .3 acre parcel owned by New England Telephone on which
the building will be constructed.
The City was granted variances from frontage and front and side yard
requirements by the Board of Appeal on January 21 ; 1987.
Mr. Power read the notice of the public hearing.
Ms. Debra Hilbert of the Salem Planning Department and Richard Boast of
C.E. Maguire presented the proposed plans to the Board.
Ms. Hilbert explained that the entrance to the facility would be. off
Margin Street and an emergency egress would be provided through New
• England Power' s property to the City's Department of Public Works
garage. Seven (7) visitor parking spaces will be provided in front of
the building, police cruisers will be parked on the side, and employees
Will park in the rear.
Ms. Hilbert explained that the Police Department' s needs were evaluated
by a private consulting firm from California, and, as a result, the
building was designed from the inside out. The proposed facility will
be three stories in height . The basement will contain showers, a
physical fitness room, shooting range, armory, and electrical and
telephone equipment . The first level will house a sallyport, booking
area, communication room, break room, detention area, library, computer
room, cell block ( 7 male, 2 female, 2 juvenile, 1 isolation and 1
temporary) , and a two story lobby. The second floor will house a
training room, traffic operations, the auxilary division, and dining
area. The top level will consist of the criminal investigations
division, interview rooms, and administrative offices.
Mr. Power questioned whether or not the shooting range would have
reinforced walls, and Mr. Boast responded that masonry would be on the
left wall, reinforced concrete on the right, and accoustical treatment
on the walls and ceilings.
2.
Mr. Power asked if the Department 's future requirements were taken into
consideration, and Ms. Hilbert responded that they were able to project
future use up to the year 2007 with a force of between 100-115
' (presently there are 84 full—time officers and 15 reserves) .
Mr. Power questioned the location of utilities, and Mr. Boast responded
that the utilities would be underground and that an emergency generator
would be installed. The exterior lighting will be evenly distributed
throughout the parking area .
Mr. Power asked whether or not the site was in a wetland, and Mr. Boast
responded that he was unsure, but that the site will be raised 2 feet.
The basement will be waterproofed.
Mr. Power informed the Board that the City Engineer and Conservation
Commission concur with the proposed devlopment. 'Comments from the Board
of Health and Building Inspector were not available.
Mr. Power opened the meeting to the public.
Mr. Ernest Barbeau, an abutting property owner, spoke in favor of the
development and informed the Board that the site is within a flood
plain; but there have been no prior flooding problems. Mr. Barbeau
added that an adjacent parcel was in disrepair and did experience some
flooding.
Mr. Bernard Phillips of Goldsmith News Agency requested that access be
. provided to allow trailor trucks enough room to turn around on his
property, and Mr. Kavanaugh agreed to resolve the matter.
• There being no further comments, Mr. Power declared the public hearing
closed.
44 Crowdis Street — Form C
On May 7, 1987, a Public Hearing was held for this proposal to construct
a single—family home on a 17,000 square foot lot. The lot meets all
requirements for an R-1 zoning district, but fronts on an unimproved
street.
The applicant proposes to extend the 24 foot wide roadway and utilities
and reserve land on each side of the street for a 5 foot sidewalk and a
3 foot planting strip.
Attorney Litman, representing the petitioner, reviewed the proposed
plan.
Following his review, the Board requested that a "T" turnaround,
approved by the Fire Department, be included on the plan. The Board
also requested that the statement indicating the installation of
sidewalks and planting strips be clarified.
Mr. May made a motion to defer action until the Fire Department has
reviewed the "T" turnaround. Ms. Vaughan seconded the motion. The vote
was unaminously in favor.
•
3.
• Fafard Phase II - Endorsement of Plan/Building Design
On April 16, 1987, the Planning Board voted to approve a Site Plan
Review Special Permit for Phase II of the Fafard Project located off of
First Street. The 20 day appeal period has expired, and therefore,
endorsement of the plan is appropriate. .
Attorney Serafini , representing the petitioner, requested that the Board
endorse the Form A Plan separating Phase II from the rest of the
development.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the plan as not requiring approval.
Mr. Ledoux seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Mr. Serafini informed the Board that the developer is seeking approval
for a redesign to be used in Phase II in order to break up the
continuity of the development. If granted approval, the devlopers would
like to use this design in Phases III and IV.
Ron Killian and Leslie Dale of the Fafard Companies presented the
proposed design to the Board. The structure will be a 4-plex and the
footprint of the units will be approximately the same size as the Long
L. Fafard would like to construct four Regency buildings in Phase II.
This would result in the loss of some open space. To compensate for the
loss, Fafard is proposing to close off Janus Lane so that an area of
• open space will continue across the development.
Mr. May asked why the 4 units were placed so close together, and Mr.
Killian responded that it was for the ease of construction.
Mr. Power asked if the chimneys would be brick, and Mr. Killian
responded that the proposed chimneys are to be covered with T-111
siding.
Several Board members were concerned with the impact of reduced open
space, and Mr. Kavanaugh agreed to review the matter.
4-6 Friend Street - Form A
Attorney Litman, representing Mr. and Mrs. Chigas, came before the Board
requesting that the Board endorse the plot plan for 4-6 Friend Street so
that the plan could' be recorded.
The plan indicates two lots which came under common ownership 10-12
years ago, and are, therefore, merged. As one lot, there is adequate
frontage, but not for two lots. In such a case, a variance from
frontage would have to be granted by the Board of Appeal . It was the
consensus of the Board that since the plan showed two lots, it appeared
to be a subdivision. The Board recommended that the petitioner resubmit
the plan to the Engineer to be certified, and, at that point, it could
• be recorded without the Board' s approval.
4.
• Mr. Ledoux made a motion to deny the endorsement of the plan based on
the fact that, as drawn, the plan would require prior approval from the
Board of Appeal. Mr. May seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously
in favor.
New Business
Ms. Burns informed the Board that the annual Planning Board Dinner will
be held on Tuesday, June 23rd at 7 :00 p.m. at her home.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 7, 1987
meeting. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in
favor.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to approve the minutes of the May 21 , 1987
meeting. Mr. May seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in
favor.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Burns seconded the motion.
The vote was unanimously in favor. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
• Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
Ctv of ".5- ulem, AUSSUc4use#fs
� �lullll[ltg �Darl
"sem«
@ae 0ttlem (firrrn
BAY 19 9 4e AN '87
NOTICE OF MEETING FILE#
CITY CLERK.SALEM.MASS.
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, May 21, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem
Green, second floor conference room.
(Uct�Gt:-6, I Owen . --1
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1. Freeman Road - Form A
2. 22 Oakview Avenue - Form C
3. Nichols and Hanson Street - Site Plan Review Special Permit
4. Old/New Business
• 5. Approval of Minutes
This notioe posted on "Offioial AU 11t 1h Abird"
• City Hall
Ave . , Baler.. M3Eq , G!1 a /9 /487
at 9.' y5 Q iu aaoorP,tnon with Ch►b� �dR �
of the Aots of 1968. ��
TO: Planning Board Members
• FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: 22 Oakview Avenue—Form C
On May 7 , 1987 , a public hearing was held for this proposal concerning
the subdivision of a 16,709 square foot lot with 160 feet of frontage,
into two lots. Lot A, on which presently sits a single family home,
will contain 7,497 square feet, with 75 feet of frontage, and lot B,
which is vacant, will contain 9,212 square feet, with 85 feet of
frontage.
The petitioner was granted a variance from density requirements by the
Board of Appeal on October 29, 1986.
The Applicant proposes to construct a single family home on the vacant
lot (B) . The Applicant also proposes to extend the existing 26 foot
roadway to provide frontage for the now vacant lot(B) and to extend the
sidewalk and granite curbing, which now exists on one(1) side, to his
property. These proposed improvements are in accordance with our new
subdivision policies. Therefore, approval of the plan is appropriate.
•
1401
TO: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
• FROM: GERARD KAVANAUGH, CITY PLANNER
RE: Nichols and Hanson Street - 'Site Plan Review
On April 16, 1987, a public hearing was held for this proposal to
construct a 27,072 square foot, 4-story building with twenty-two (22)
condominium units on two(2) parcels of land located at the intersection
of Nichols and Hanson Streets. To facilitate the project, the
petitioner proposes to demolish both the Koko Machine and Beverly
Leather, Inc. buildings which presently exist on the site.
The major concern expressed by the Board has been the design of the
building, and more specifically the use of vinyl siding. The developer
has agreed to use woodgrain siding in place of the vinyl siding.
Attached for your review are proposed conditions drafted by the
Planning Department.
•
BN930
•
.a
May 19, 1987
Planning Board
City of Salem
Salem, Ma. 01970
RE: Lot 110 - Oakview Avenue, Salem, Ma.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I , Wayne Tremblay, am requesting the following waivers of the
subdivisions regulations with regard to the development of one lot
on Oakview Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts:
1 . a twenty-six (26) feet 'Z—j d"er_strBe ,
_t•,
2. a T design at the end of the street rather than
a cul de sac;
3. lay out design and calculation of storm drainage;
• 4. a statement requiring conformance to a master plan
since only one lot is being developed;
5. a sign advertising a public hearing;
G.
6. an ihnviormental impact statement.
Sincerely, n
o6l
Wayne Tremblay
•
1 �
TO: Planning Board Members
• FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Freeman Road - Form A
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the subdivision of an 18,698 square foot lot into
two lots. Lot A, on which sits a single family home, will contain
10,686 square feet, with 89 feet of frontage, and lot B, which is
vacant, will contain 8,012 square feet, with 68 feet of frontage.
The petitioner was granted a variance from density requirements by the
Board of Appeal on November 19, 1986, and therefore meets all
requirements.
The Applicant proposes to construct a single family home on lot B.
Endorsement of the plan is appropriate.
,1404
•
.1
• Proposed Conditions
Site Plan Review Special Permit
Nichols and Hanson Street
Salem, MA 01970
1 . Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled "Site and Drainage Plan, Hanson
Street Apartments", dated February 23, 1987, revised May, 1987.
2. Utilities
Util.ity installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Director
of Public Services.
3. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall. conform to plan entitled "Site and
Drainage Plan, Hanson Street Apartments", dated February 23 , 1987,
revised May, 1987 .
a. Trees shall be a minimum of 3 1/2" caliper.
b. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility
of the developer, his successors or assigns.
•
4. Exterior Siding Material
Woodo/siding shall. be utilized as exterior siding.
V 5. ConsCruction Practices
t uSp1} All construction shall be conducted in accordance with the following
v'V conditions:
a. No work shall commence before 7:00 A.M. on weekdays and 8:00
A.M. on Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00 P.M.
There shall. be no work conducted on Sundays or holidays. Inside
work of a quiet nature may be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative
effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall. be
provided to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to
commencement of construction.
c. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the
site so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on roadways as
they leave the site.
•
6. Violation
• Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of this
permit by the Planning Board.
L2164
• J
•
PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
MAY 21 , 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on May 21 , 1987,
in the second floor conference room, One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m.
Present were Ken May; Vice-Chairman, Richard Williams, Linda Vaughan,
John Butler, Robert Ledoux, and Abby Burns. Chairman Walter Power was
absent. Also present were City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Beth
Debski.
Mr. May called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Nichols and Hanson Street - Site Plan Review
On April 10, 1987, a public hearing was held on this proposal to
construct a 27,072 square foot, four story building with twenty-two
condominiums on two parcels of land at the intersection of Hanson and
Nichols Street. The petitioner, Brentwood Structures, Inc. , proposes to
demolish the Koko Machine and Beverly Leather, Inc. buildings which
presently exist.
The major concerns expressed by the Board at the last meeting were the
use of vinyl siding and the design of the building.
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh outlined the proposed set of conditions
• which included woodgrain siding. 'Mr. Kavanaugh requested that the Board
act on the petition this evening, as the agreement between the present
occupants and Brentwood Structures is about to expire. If no action is
taken, the current owners intend to lease the property for a
manufacturing use. In addition, he pointed out that the abutting
residents are in favor of a residential development.
Following Mr. Kavanaugh's review of the proposed conditions, Mr.
Williams stated that "woodgrain" seemed too vague and felt that
condition #4 should state, "Wood clapboard siding, 4" of e:cposure to the
weather, shall be utilized on all exterior siding." Mr. Kavanaugh
agreed to make this change to the conditions.
Mr. Butler questioned whether or not two separate pipes would be
utilized for sewer and drainage, and Mr. Kavanaugh stated that the City '
Engineer had assured him that there were two separate pipes.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to approve the plan as submitted subject to the
conditions set forth by the Planning Department. Ms. Burns seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
22 Oakview Avenue - Form C
On May 7, 1987, a public hearing was held for this proposal concerning
the subdivision of a 16,709 square foot lot with 160 feet of frontage,
. into two lots. Lot A, on which presently sits a single family home,
will contain 7,497 square feet, with 75 feet of frontage, and lot B,
which is vacant, will contain 9,212 square feet, with 85 feet of
frontage.
The petitioner, Mr. Wayne Tremblay, was granted a variance from density
requirements by the Board of Appeal on October 29, 1986.
Mr. Tremblay proposes to construct a single family home on the vacant
lot, extend the existing 26' roadway to provide frontage for the lot,
and to extend the granite curbing and sidewalk up to his property.
Mr. Tremblay is proposing to construct a "T"-turnaround and requests a
waiver of the requirement of a cul-de-sac. He also requests a waiver of
an environmental impact statement, a statement requiring conformance to
the master plan, storm drainage design, and a sign advertising a public
hearing.
After reviewing the proposed plan, Ms. Burns made a motion to waive the
above-mentioned conditions and approve the plan as submitted. Mr.
Butler seconded the motion., The vote was unanimously in favor.
Freeman Road - Form A
This proposal involves the subdivision of an 18,698 square foot lot into
two lots. Lot A, on which sits a single family home, will contain
10,686 square feet, with 89 feet of frontage, and lot B, which is
vacant, will contain 8,012 square feet, with 68 feet of frontage.
• The petitioner was granted a variance from density requirements by the
Board of Appeal on November 19, 1986.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to endorse the plan as submitted. Ms. Burns
seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Salem Police Station - Margin Street and Jefferson Avenue - Form A
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board that the City of Salem is purchasing a
1 .337 acre portion of a five acre parcel at the corner of Margin Street
and Jefferson Avenue from the New England Power Company to accommodate
the construction of a new police facility.
A variance from front and side yard requirement has been granted by the
Board of Appeal.
Mr. Williams questioned whether or not an area in the rear of the
devlopment could be utilized for bus parking, and Mr. Kavanaugh
responded that the area will be utilized by the Police Department for
vehicle storage.
Ms. Burns asked what the City planned for the old police station, and
Mr. Kavanaugh responded that it will be utlized as a City Hall Annex.
• Mr. Ledoux made a motion to approve the plan as submitted. Mr. Williams
seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Irving Street - Form A
In 1979, the Planning Board approved the subdivision of a parcel on
Iring Street. This plan was never recorded, and therefore, the
petitioner is requesting that the Board approve the plan once again so
that it may be recorded.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to approve the plan as submitted. Mr. Butler
seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Buchanan Road - Form A
This petition calls for the conveyance of a 10 foot parcel of land to
the owner of an abutting lot for the purpose of widening a driveway.
Mr. Ledoux pointed out that since this proposal would reduce the size of
an existing non-conforming lot, a Special Permit must be issued by the
Board of Appeal for the extension of the non-conformity.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to disapprove the plan as submitted and to
defer it to the Board of Appeal for their review. Ms. Burns seconded
the motion.
Old/New Business
• Ms. Vaughan made a motion to defer approval of the minutes until the
June 2, 1987 meeting. Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The vote was
unanimously in favor. ,
Ms. Vaughan made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Burns seconded the motion.
The vote was unanaimously in favor. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
E722
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
May 7, 1987 .
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, May
7, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. at the second floor conference room, One Salem
Green. Present were: Walter Power, Chairman; Abby Burns, Robert
Ledoux, Richard Williams, and Ken May. Also present were City Planner
Gerard Kavanaugh and Beth Debski. Those absent were: Linda Vaughan and
John Butler.
Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Lincoln Hotel - Site Plan Review Special Permit - Public Hearing
Mr. Power opened the meeting by reading the notice of public hearing for
the proposed residential development at the Lincoln Hotel.
The proposal. involves the rehabilitation and expansion of the Lincoln
Hotel at 117 Lafayette Street, located in a B-5 zone.
Mr. John Serafini, representing the applicant, presented the plans to
the Board for review and discussion.
The Lincoln Hotel occupies a lot of land between Peabody and Harbor
Streets and is currently 25,700 square feet, four (4) stories in height,
and comprised of 61 units.. The proposal calls for the construction of
two (2) new floors, so that the building will. be 35,337 square feet, six
(6) stories in height, and accommodate an additional 10 units.
The interior will be completely rehabilitated, with the ground floor
being used for retail purposes, and all other floors for 71 efficiency
and one-bedroom residential units with inclusive living facilities. The
developer, Mr. Frederick Small, has agreed to reserve 26 efficiency
units as Section 8, low/mod housing if such an arrangement can be worked
out with the Salem Housing Authority.
Presently, there are 20 low/mod residents of the hotel, and Mr. Serafini
has met with representatives from the Essex County Community
Organization (ECCO) and the Salem Housing Authority in an attempt to
retain the 26 efficiency units for these residents.
Mr. Serafini introduced Mr. Angelo Petrozelli of Design Partnership Inc.
who outlined the renovation plans in detail.
Mr. Petrozelli explained that a first floor storefront wi.11. be
eliminated to create a lobby and elevator while renovating the main
facade to be more historically appropriate.
Grass strips will be provided around the building, and the developer
plans to approach the City about the possibility of installing trees.
ON The developer proposes to utilize Riley Plaza for resident parking which
is within the required 1 ,000' of the development.
• Ms. Burns voiced concern over the number of residential developments
proposing to utilize Riley Plaza for parking. Mr. Kavanaugh pointed out
that renovations within a B-5 zone do not require the provision of
parking. He also pointed out that the China Square development will
have one space per unit on site, the Almy's development will utilize the
municipal garage, which leaves only the Norman Street development to
utilize Riley Plaza. In addition, once the new MBTA train station is
built, spaces in Riley Plaza will be more readily available.
Mr. Power questioned whether or not any spaces would be provided on
site. Mr. Petrozelli stated that he would like to provide a restricted
"off-loading" zone in front of the development for the residents use.
Mr. Williams asked if the 26 units would always be available as
subsidized units, and Mr. Kavanaugh responded that the City is working
with the Housing Authority in an attempt to acquire 26 ten to fifteen
year subsidy certificates to be tied to the units for the length of the
certificates.
Mr. Williams questioned whether or not the ground stabilazation was
adequate enough to handle two additional floors, and Mr. Petrozelli
answered that a structural analysis had not been completed yet, but a
light frame structure would be used. He agreed to submit evidence of
the structural stability once the structural analysis was completed.
Mr. Power asked to what extent the interior would be demolished and what
• provisions had been made for fire safety. Mr. Petrozelli responeded
that the main corridor would be narrowed to provide space for bathroom
facilities in each unit, walls will be added, and one stairwell will be
eliminated to provide for an elevator. He added that the building is
now hard wired for fire alarms and new fire doors will be provided.
Mr. Power informed the Board that the Building Inspector concurs with
the development and stated that the development would end the complaints
of health and fire code violations. The Conservation Commission
concured that the development was not in their juridiction, and the
Board of Health will forward their comments after their May 12th
meeting.
Mr. Power then read a letter from Mayor Salvo who requested that the
Board do all they could to prevent the displacement of the 26 residents
of the Hotel.
A tenant representative, Mr. Campbell, read a prepared statement to the
Board stating their wishes to have any approval conditional on the
receipt of subsidized units.
Mark Potfin of the North Shore Community Action Program (NSCAP) voiced
his concern over the number of historically low income residences which
are now being converted to condominiums. With these conversions, low
income residents are forced to move out of the City and sometimes onto
• the street. Mr. Potfin added that since 1975, the cost of a single
room' s rent has risen 250%. Traditionally, immigrants coming into the
area could reside in the Point Neighborhood, but more and more, that is
.no longer the case. Mr. Potfin pointed out that presently, the Salem
• Housing Authority, issues certificates to individuals not units. Even if
there was a policy change, Mr. Potfin feels that a change in owners
could abolish any agreement made between the Housing Authority and the
developer. Mr. Potfin suggested that since the development may not be
in the best interest of the City, the Board had the power to deny or put
restrictions on approval. He suggests that a fixed 20 year agreement be
made with the Housing Authority to secure the 26 units as affordable
units.
Mr. Roland L'Heuruex, an abutter of the proposed development, voiced his
concern over the inadequate parking facilities and questioned where the
construction vehicles will be placed during the renovation. Mr.
Petrozelli responded that the construction vehicles will be placed in
the rear and material will be hoisted up on the Ward Street side.
Ms. Sally Quick of Summit Avenue voiced her concern that if a long term
commitment is not made, the low income residents will be forced out.
Attorney Paul Schick, a NSCAP representative, added that it is
essential, and within the Board' s jurisdiction, to impose a Forceable
condition, recorded at the Registry of Deeds, on the developer to
maintain the units as affordable unless the developer enters into an
acceptable agreement with the Housing Authority.
Mr. Ledoux questioned whether or not financing would be difficult for
such a development, and Mr. Potfin responded that these projects have
• been funded in the past, and he agreed to acquire a list of such
devel.opments from the Salem Harbor Community Devlopment Corporation.
Abutters, Messrs. Hausman, Costin, McKinnon and Ryan spoke in favor of
the development.
There being no further comments, Mr. Power closed the public hearing.
Ms. Debski agreed to telephone the Lincoln Hotel tenant representative,
Mr. Campbell, at 744-1818 when the Board decides to act upon the
petition.
22 Oakview Avenue - Form C - Public Hearing
Mr. Power read the notice of public hearing.
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 16,709 square foot lot into
two lots. Lot A will contain 7,497 square feet and Lot B will contain
9,212 square feet. The petitioner, Wayne Tremblay, was granted a
variance from density requirements by the Board of Appeals on December
29, 1986.
There currently exists a single family home on Lot A, and the applicant
proposes to construct a singl.e family home on lot B.
• Since Lot B does not have frontage on an improved street, the applicant
is proposing to extend the existing 26' roadway to provide frontage for
the lot. The applicant also proposes to extend sidewalk and granite
curbing to his property to match the existing.
• The parcel abuts conservation land, and therefore, no further
subdivisions are possible.
Mr. Tremblay requested that the requirement of a cul-de-sac be waived.
A 16' x 30' T turnaround is being proposed.
Mr. Power informed the Board that the Conservation Commission, City
Engineer, and Building Inspector concur with the proposed development.
There being no further comments, Mr. Power declared the public hearing
closed. The Planning Department is to review the plans and make their
recommendations to the Board.
44 Crowdis Street - Form C - Public Hearing
On March 5, 1987, the Planning Board held a public hearing on this
proposal for the construction of a single family home on a 17,000 sqare
foot lot. The lot meets all the requirements of an R-1 zone, but fronts
on an unimproved street. Since the applicant owns two other lots on
Crowdis Street, they had proposed to extend the roadway to the third lot
for possible future development. On March 19, 1987 , the Planning Board
approved the plan subject to the applicant extending the sewer to the
end of the proposed pavement.
The applicant, Mrs. Anastasia Theophilopolous, explained to the Board
• that after discussions with the Engineering Department and Mr. Kavanaugh
in February, she was unable to receive a definite answer on what
requirements she needed to fulfill. At the time, she was under the
impression that she was required to extend the roadway and utilities to
all of the lots. Mr. and Mrs. Theophilopolous feel that this would be
too costly, and have submitted a new plan which proposes to extend the
sewer and roadway to the end of the first lot to be developed. The
proposed roadway is to be 24' wide with land reserved for a 5' sidewalk
and 3 ' planting strip on each side of the street.
Mr. Kavanaugh agreed to review the proposed plan and make his
recommendations to the Board.
Mr. Ted Michaud of Crowdis Street informed the Board that the lots
abutting the proposed development owned by the Theophilopolous ' were
filled with debris and stones, and that the pavement had been ruined by
the blasting. Mr. Michaud wanted an assurance that the area would be
cleaned up.
The Planning Department agreed to visit the site and make
recommendations to the Board.
There being no further comment, the public hearing was closed.
Village at Vinnin Square Phase III - Street Name
• The developer of the Village at Vinnin Square has requested the street
name "Weatherly Drive" be adopted for Phase III of his development.
Ms. Burns made a motion to approve the name "Weatherly Drive". The vote
• was unanimously in favor.
Old/New Business
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board of the the following proposed zoning
changes: 1) Two parcels in the rear of Stop & Shop will remain B-2
rather than R-1 to allow Stop & Shop to expand; 2) College Zone parking
requirements increased to a � space per student rather than a � space
per bedroom as a result of a College Task Force finding that 50% of the
students own cars; 3) the height requirements in a College Zone
increased to 50' and 5 stories as in medical zones; 4) Peter's Laundry
will remain in a B-2 zone; and 5) requests to increase the number of
units in a dwelling to three or four must receive a variance rather than
a Special Permit.
Mr. Kavanaugh hopes to submit the new zoning ordinance on May 14, 1987,
along with a schedule of hearings so that the public hearing can be
scheduled sometime around June 16, 1987. He added that one serious
issue to be resolved will. be the lot area requirements.
Ms. Debski requested that the Board make a site visit to Nichols and
Hanson Street on May 12th at 6:30 p.m. That time and date was agreed
upon.
Ms. Burns made a motion to approve the minutes of April 23, 1987 ,as
amended. Mr. May secondeded the motion. The vote was unanimously in
• favor.
Ms. Burns made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Ledoux seconded the
motion. The meeting adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Respecfully submitted,
Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
BN926
•
-W
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES OF MEETING
As Amended
May 7, 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,
April 16, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. at the second floor conference room, One
Salem Green. Present were: Walter Power, Chairman; Abby Burns, Linda
Vaughan, Kenneth May, and John Butler. Also present were City Planner,
Gerard Kavanaugh and Beth Debski. John Ledoux was absent.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Public Hearing - Nichols and Hanson Streets
Mr. Power opened the meeting by reading the notice of public hearing for
the proposed development on Nichols and Hanson Streets.
On December 4, 1986, the Planning Board approved a proposal to develop a
24,460 square foot parcel at the corner of Nichols and Hanson Streets
for the 22 units. The parcel presently houses Beverly Leather, Inc. and
Koko Machine Company. The applicant had proposed to rehabilitate Koko
Machine and demolish Beverly Leather Inc. in order to create twenty-two
(22) condominuim units with 33 parking spaces for the residential units.
The original petitioner, though, has decided not to proceed further.
• A new petitioner, Brentwood Structures, Inc. , now proposes to remove
both structures to allow the construction of a 27,072 square foot,
4-story building with twenty-two (22) condominuim units.
Brentwood Structures representative, Mr. John Serafini, reviewed the
'petition before the Board and added that the proposed plans have
received approval from the Zoning Board of Appeal. Mr. Serafini
informed the Board that the developers have also received approval from
the abutting residents who feel. that the elimination of the existing
non-conforming leather factory would be in the best interest of the
neighborhood. Mr. Serafini then introduced Mr. Charles Varrs of
Brentwood Structures who presented the proposed plans to the Board.
Mr. Varrs explained that minimal changes have been made to the plan
approved December 4, 1986, those being:
- The consolidation of the structure which would reduce the size of
the building 4' ;
- An 8" sewer line entrance rather than 6"; and
- The elimination of overhead electrical wiring running from the
electrical poles to the structure;
• Mr. Varrs presented the Board with photographs of several completed
developments similar to the proposed development. The proposed
I i f.A
-2-
structure's main facade would be constructed of brick while all other
facades would be wood grain vinyl siding.
Mr. Butler questioned whether or not the building height would remain
the same, and Mr. Varrs responded that it would remain 48' in height.
Ms. Burns asked about the size of the units, and Mr. Varrs responded
that the units would range between 992 and 1 ,000 square feet per unit.
Mr. Varrs explained that traffic into the development would be one-way
and parking spaces would be angled providing 1' spaces per unit.
Ms. Vaughan asked if a sprinkler system would be provided inside the
building, and Mr. Varrs responded that according to fire codes, that was
not necessary.
Mr. Butler questioned whether or not the granite curbing extends around
the proposed development, and City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh responded
that there is curbing except on the Butler Street side of the
development.
Mr. Power noted that at a future date, the Board should visit the site.
Mr. Power informed the Board that the Building Inspector, the Zoning
Board of Appeal, and the Director of Public Services all concur with the
• plans as proposed. The Board of Health has concurred with a list of
standard conditions, and the Conservation Commission has concluded that
the development is not within a wetland.
There being no comment from the public, the hearing was closed.
Mr. Power requested that the Planning Department review the plans and
make recommendations to the Board.
Public Hearing - 333 Highland Avenue
On March 5, 1987, the Planning Board denied special permits for a
proposed 15,000 square foot professional. office building at 333 Highland
Avenue. Since that meeting, Mr. McAuliffe, the developer and Bill Quinn
of Tinti, Quinn, and Savoy have been working with the Planning
Department to develop a new plan addressing the Board' s concerns.
Mr. Quinn outlined the changes resulting from several working sessions
with the Planning Department. The following changes have been made to
the plan in response to the Board's concerns:
1 . OPEN SPACE: Mr. McAuliffe has purchased a 13,000 sqaure foot
parcel of land to the north of his property, which has enabled him
to relocate the building to the north and create additional green
space (approximately 42%) to more adequately address the
requirements of the Business Park Development zone.
•
-3-
2. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION: Mr. Harkness has prepared traffic counts for
the site which include the existing Hutchinson Medical use, and
both floors of the proposed building (approximately 181 trips per
day) . In addition, parking spaces have been eliminated adjacent
to the parking lot entrance to improve the traffic flow from
Highland Avenue into the proposed development.
3 LANDSCAPING: Mr. Harkness has added a significant number of
deciduous trees to screen the parking area and the existing
building. Also, a small traffic island with three flowering trees
has been proposed in front of the entryway to the proposed
building, and will be an attractive addition to the project.
4. CURBING: Vertical granite curbing will be installed in all
locations which are visible from Highland Avenue and also in those
areas heavily used by the new development. Curb stops will be
placed in all parking areas which are on a downward slope.
Mr. Power questioned if the developer had provided space for snow
removal, and Mr. Quinn responded that the plantings and curbing had been
set back to allow for snow storage. It was also noted that there is
adequate space in the rear for snow storage.
• Mr. Power asked if the developer had agreed that an easement be written
in the Purchase and Sales Agreement allowing a future developer right of
way as well as a covenant restricting use, a use comparable with
business use. Mr. Quinn responded that they had agreed to do so.
Mr. Power informed the Board that the Buidling Inspector, Director of
Public Services, and Board of Health had all concurred with the plans.
The Conservation Commission had also approved the plans and modified
their existing conditions on March 31 , 1987.
Mr. Power opened up the public hearing. Dr. Stanley Resnick of Salem
Hospital spoke in favor of the proposed development since he felt that
the development would result in much needed office space for Salem area
physicians.
There being no further comments, Mr. Power declared the public hearing
closed.
Ms. Vaughan made a motion to approve the plans as proposed with the
conditions set forth by the Planning Department. These conditions are
to include a) a statement of a covenant restricting use of the first
floor space to a compatible use and b) that an easement be written into
the Purchase and Sales Agreement allowing for a right—of—way to the
adjacent property. Ms. Burns seconded the motion, and the vote was
unanimously in favor.
•
-4-
Fafard - Phase II
On November 6, 1986, the Planning Board held a public hearing on Phase
II of the Fafard residential development project on Whaler's Lane,
consisting of 128 units on a 14 acre parcel of land. Since the public
hearing, the Planning Department has been working with the Fafard
Company to resolve the Board's concerns over the chimney material and
landscaping.
Mr. Killian of the Fafard Company outlined the proposed changes for the
Board:
- A walking path connected to Highland Park and the City' s network
of trails has been designed;
- Cedar siding will be used on all units;
- A,l.l. chimneys which can be viewed from Whaler' s Lane, as defined
by the City Planner, will be constructed of brick; and
— - Increased landscaping along Whalers Lane and around all units.
Mr. Butler noted that several shrubs on Highland Avenue were burned, and
• asked if they were to be replaced. Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board
that the landscaping in front of Heartland Drug would be removed and
replaced with deciduous trees.
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board that the Fafard Company has been
working with the Planning Department relocating buildings in Phase II
since the units in the next two phases of the project would be more
dense. Mr. Serafini added that the Fafard Company would return with
preliminary plans of Phases III and IV for the Board's review.
Mr. Power asked if Whalers Lane had been carried around and finished,
and Mr. Killian responded that since the utilities would have to be
installed at a later date, the road would not be paved until this was
completed.
Mr. Power added that since the units are being sold, construction
vehicles should be restricted to the unpaved road. The types of
construction vehicles to be restricted is to be determined by the
Planning Department and set forth in the conditions of approval.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the plans subject to the conditions set
forth by the Planning Department. These conditions are to include the
restriction of construction vehicles to unpaved roadways. Ms. Vaughan
seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
•
- 5 -
Old/New Business
Form A - Greystone Manor Condominiums
David Zierhoffer of Greystone Manor Condominiums came before the Board
requesting an approval not required for an easement in order to create
six parking spaces. There will be two spaces per unit totaling 33.
Mr. Power asked if the original. granite would be used to replace an
existing wall, and Mr. Zierhoffer noted that it has been difficult to
locate. Granite posts have been purchased and will be tied together
with a concrete backwall. The wall will be faced with granite that will
be uniform in size and shape. If necessary, the new granite can be
treated with a chemical to make it appear to be old. Mr. Power
requested that Mr. Zierhoffer present the plans for the wall to the City
Planner for approval. Mr. Zierhoffer agreed to do so.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the plan as not requiring approval.
Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
Rezoning
. Mr. Kavanaugh outlined the proposed zoning changes to be presented to
the City Council and addressed at a public hearing. These changes are
as follows:
1) Extension of the Entrance Corridor Overlay Zone on Lafayette
Street from the intersection of Lafayette Street and Loring
Avenue to the Marblehead line.
2) The alteration of the Salem Hospital Parking Lot on Colby
Street from R-1 to ROS. This parcel will hopefully be deeded
to the City for public open space.
3) The alteration of 74 acres of land off Highland Avenue in the
vicinity of Spring Pond, from R-C to ROS.
4) Increase of the Buffer Zone in the B-1 ,B-2, and B-4 zones from
fifty (50) feet to seventy-five (75) feet.
5) The retention of a 15 AC parcel on Leggs Hill Road as R1 as
passed by the City Council. by a vote of 11 - 0.
6) The retention of minimum lot size for R1 at 15,000 sq. ft.
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board that the Planning Department is working
with the Assessor' s Office on an analysis of buildable land within the
R3 and R1 zones (with existing lot size requirements) to determine how
•
-6—
many buildings could be built over the next 20 years.
Councillor Jack Nutting presented the Board with several photos of a
large bucket loader which has been parked in a residential area.
Mr. Nutting pointed out that zoning requirements limit the width and
length of commercial vehicles in residential. areas, but not the height.
He suggested that a height requirement of 8' be included in the zoning
requirements, but which excludes recreational vehicles.
Councillor Nutting raised a second point regarding the so-called "Mackey
Beach" on Sunset Road presently zoned R-1 . Mr'. Nutting asked the
Board's opinion on whether or not this area could be rezoned ROS, and it
was determined that it should remain R-1 at the present time.
Mr. Kavanaugh continued to outline the proposed zoning changes for the
Board. These changes are as follows:
- Areas on Highland Avenue with single-family dwellings will be
rezoned R-1 .
- The area between Clarke Street and Barnes Road will be changed
from a business zone to R-1 .
- The existing downtown building height requirements are 70' or six
• floors and is propsed to be changed to six floors or 601 .
- The Salem Common, Federal. Street and Essex Street areas presently
zoned R-2 require 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit. Residents
feel that this requirement should be changed to 1' spaces per
unit.
Following Mr. Kavanaugh' s review, Mr. Butler asked the City Planner to
check a) the zoning of Peter' s Laundry on Boston Street and b) whether
or not Sunburst Fruit Juices's is in violation of an Order of Conditions
for installing a second silo in front of their building on Highland
Avenue. Mr. Kavanaugh agreed to do so, and informed the Board that the
zoning changes would be resubmitted to the Council and a public hearing
date would be set for mid/late May.
Mr. Butler made a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of April
2, 1987 . Ms. Vaughan seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in
favor.
Mr. Butler made a motion to adjourn at 9:45 p.m. Mr. May seconded the
motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
• E7/PBMINS
5/7 7 nes
TO: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
FROM: GERARD KAVANAUGH, CITY PLANNER
RE: Lincoln Hotel - Site Plan Review Special Permit - Public Hearing
This proposal. involves the rehabilitation and expansion of the
Lincoln Hotel at 117 Lafayette Street, located in a B-5 zone.
The building is currently comprised of 25,700 square feet and is
four (4) stories in height. The proposal calls for the construction of
two (2) new floors, so that the building will be 35,337 square feet and
six (6) stories in height.
The interior will be completely rehabilitated, with the ground
floor being used for retail purposes, and all other floors for 71
efficiency and one-bedroom residential units (61 single room occupancy
units now exist) .
• The Applicant ' s representative will present the plans to the Board
for review and discussion.
BN926
•
1,
•
TO: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
FROM: GERARD KAVANAUGH, CITY PLANNER
RE: 22 Oakview Avenue - Form C - Public Hearing
This proposal involves the subdivision of a 16,709 square foot lot
into two lots. Lot A will contain 7,497 square feet and Lot B will
contain 9,212 square feet. The petitioner was granted a variance from
density requirements by the Board of Appeals on October 29, 1986.
There currently exists a single family home on Lot A. The
Applicant proposes to construct a single family home on Lot B.
Lot B does not have frontage on an improved street . The Applicant
• is proposing to extend the existing 26 foot roadway to provide frontage
for the new lot (B) . The Applicant also proposes to extend sidewalk and
granite curbing to his property to match what currently exists on
Oakview Avenue.
This land is bounded by a conservation area, and therefore no
further subdivisions are possible. According to our new subdivision
policies, the petitioner should extend existing improvements which would
include the roadway, curbing, and sidewalks.
The Applicant will present the plan to the Board.
•
BN927
TO: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
FROM: GERARD KAVANAUGH, CITY PLANNER
RE: 44 Crowdis Street - Form C - Public Hearing
On March 5, 1987, the Planning Board held a public hearing on this
proposal for the construction of a single-family home on a 17,000 square
foot lot. The lot meets all requirements for an R-1 zoning district,
but fronts on an unimproved street. As a result, the roadway had to be
extended. Because the Applicant owns two other lots on Crowdis Street,
he had proposed to extend the roadway to the third lot for possible
development in the future.
On March 19, 1987, the Planning Board approved the plan subject to
the Applicant extending the sewer to the end of the proposed pavement.
The Applicant feels that this is too costly and has submitted a new plan
• and application for the Board's consideration.
Through his new plan, the petitioner proposes to extend the roadway
only to the end of the first lot that is to be developed, with the sewer
extended to the end of this first lot. The roadway is proposed to be 24
feet wide with land reserved for a 5 foot sidewalk and 3 foot planting
strip on each side of the street.
The Applicant will present the new plan to the Board.
BN925
TO: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
FROM: GERARD KAVANAUGH, CITY PLANNER
RE: Village at Vinnin Square Phase III - Street Name
As you are aware, the formal submission of street names must be
forwarded to the City Council through the Planning Board.
For Phase III of the Village at Vinnin Square, the developer has
requested the name "Weatherly Drive" be adopted.
I would recommend that this name be submitted to the City Council.
for approval.
BN929
Ctvl of 15, M1eIll, gassac4uSBtts
plamtittg Pnarl
One Output %rrpn
087 APP 13 P11 :38
NOTICE OF MEETING CITY -'` ! ' r'Cr
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, April 16, 1987, at 7 :30 p.m. , One Salem
Green, second floor conference room.
Wa .
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1 . Public Hearing — Site Plan Review, Nichols and Hanson Street
2. Public Hearing — 333 Highland Avenue
Site Plan Review, Special Permit
• Wetlands Special. Permit
Business Park Development
Special Permit
3. Fafard Phase II Approval
4. Old/New Business
5. Approval of minutes
L134
• This notice posted on "Official 1 ni3 /gd87
Salem, Mass . on 628.
city Hall Awe• in accord-Zr-Ce w th Chap.
at.
/1 3 8 �
of the. 1ct of 185.8.
L 1
TO: Planning Board Members
• FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Public Hearing - 333 Highland Avenue
-Site Plan Review Special Permit
-Wetlands Special Permit
-Business Park Development Special Permit
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 5, 1987, the Planning Board denied special permits for a
proposed 15,000 square foot professional office building at 333 Highland
Avenue. Since that meeting, Mr. McAuliffe and his representatives have
been working with the Planning Department to develop a new plan which
will hopefully address the concerns of the Board. These concerns and
their responses are as follow:
1 . OPEN SPACE-
Mr. McAuliffe has purchased a 13 ,000 sqaure foot parcel of land to
the north of his property, which has enabled him to relocate the
building to the north and create additional green space to more
adequately address the requirements of the Business Park
Development zone.
• 2. TRAFFIC CIRCULATION-
Mr. Harkness has prepared traffic counts for the site which
include the existing Hutchinson Medical use, and both floors of
the proposed building. In addition, parking spaces have been
eliminated adjacent to the parking lot entrance to improve the
traffic flow from Highland Avenue into the proposed development.
3 LANDSCAPING-
Mr. Harkness has added a significant number of deciduous trees to
screen the parking area and the existing building. Also, a
small traffic island with three flowering trees has been proposed .
in front of the entryway to the proposed building, and will be an
attractive addition to the project.
4. CURBING-
Vertical granite curbing will be installed in all locations which
are visible from Highland Avenue and also in those areas heavily
used by the new development.
The Planning Department believes that the developer has addressed the
Boards concerns. Attached for your review are proposed conditions of
approval..
• L132
Proposed Conditions
Site Plan Review, Wetlands Special Permit, Business Park Development
• Special Permit
333 Highland Avenue
1 . Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled " Site Plan, 333 Highland
Avenue," dated March 31 , 1987, revised April, 1987.
2. Utilities
Utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Director
of Public Services.
3. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled, "Site Plan,
333 Highland Avenue," dated March 31 , 1987, revised April, 1987.
a. Trees shall be a minimum of 3� " caliper.
b. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibilty
of the developer, his successors or assigns.
4. Curbing
• Location of granite curbing shall be reviewed and approved by the
City Planner.
5. Signage
Signage shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner
6. Construction Practices
All construction shall be conducted in accordance with the following
conditions :
a. No work shall commence before 7:00 A.M. on weekdays
and 8:00 A.M. on Saturdays. No work shall continue
beyond 5:00 P.M. There shall be no work conducted on
Sundays or holidays. Inside work of a quiet nature
may be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the
negative effects of construction on abutters.
Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters in
writing at least 72 hours perior to commencement of
c'onstruciton.
c. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to
leaving the site so that they do not leave dirt
• and/or debris on roadways as they leave the site.
TO: Planning Board Members
• v
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Fafard — Phase II Approval
On November 6, 1986, the Planning Board held a public hearing on Phase
II of the Fafard residential development project on Whaler's Lane,
consisting of 128 units on a 14 acre parcel of land. Since the public
hearing, the Planning Department has been working with the Fafard
Company to resolve numerous issues raised by the Board.
Two major concerns of the Board were those of landscaping and the
chimney material to be used. Both have now been resolved.
As a result,. representatives of the Fafard Company will attend our
meeting to review the Phase II site plan.
The Planning Department has reviewed the plans and feels that the Fafard
Company has addressed all of our concerns and therefore approval is
appropriate.
Attached for your review are suggested conditions proposed by the
Planning Department .
•
E621
• Proposed Conditions
Fafard Phase II
I . Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled "Site Plan, Ledgemere Country II,
PUD, Phase II", dated October 21 , 1986, revised February 24, 1987.
2. Curbing
Sloped granite curbing shall be installed along access roadways, as
shown on Sheets 1 and 2 of plan entitled, "Ledgemere Country II,PUD
Phase II," dated October 21 , 1986, revised February 24, 1987 .
3 . Maintenance
Refuse removal, road and ground maintenance, and snow removal shall
be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns.
4. Utilities
Utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Director
of Public Services prior to the issuance of building permits.
5. Landscaping
• Landscaping shall be in accordance with plan entitled, "Site Plan,
Ledgemere Country II, PUD, Phase II in Salem, MA. , Snow Storage and
Landscaping Plan," dated October 21 , 1986, revised February 24, 1987.
a. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility
of the developer, his successor, or assigns.
6. Chimneys
All chimneys which can be viewed from Whaler' s Lane, as defined by
the City Planner, shall. be constructed of brick. The remainder of
the chimneys shall be constructed of pre—cast concrete, and painted
in a fashion and color satisfactory to the City Planner, including
those chimneys already painted in Phase IA and 1B. Any paint color
changes must be approved by the Planning Department. All chimneys
which have not yet been constructed as of February5, T987;—
inc uding those in Phase IA and IB, shall also comply with this
condition.
7. Exterior Siding Material
Cedar clapboards shall be utilized as exterior siding on all
buildings.
8. Construction Practices
• All. construction shall. be carried out in accordance with the
following conditions:
• a.m. on Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m. .. No
work shall be conducted on Sundays. Inside work of a quiet nature
shall be permitted at other times.
b. Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday through Friday
only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. . There shall. be
no drilling or blasting on Saturdays, Sundays or holidays.
c. All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the
Rules and Regulations of the Planning Board. A Clerk of the
Works shall be provided, as defined by a Memorandum of
Understanding between the Planning Board and the developer, to make
certain all such Rules and Regulations are strictly adhered to.
10. "Overall" PUD Special. Permit
All applicable conditions set forth in the "overall" Planned Unit
Development Special Permit dated February 7, 1986, shall. be strictly
adhered to.
11 . Phase 1 Approval
All conditions set forth in both Phase lA and 1B approval dated March
26, 1986 and April 17, 1986, which are pertinent to Phase 2, shall be .
strictly adhered to.
• 12. Violations
Violations of any conditions shall result in revocation of this
permit by the Planning Board.
C1103
•
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Public Hearing - Site Plan Review -Nichols and Hanson Streets
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ 1
On December 4, 1986, The Planning Board approved a proposal to
develop a 24,460 square foot parcel, at the corner of Nichols and Hanson
Streets of 22 units. The parcel presently houses Beverly Leather, Inc.
and Koko Machine . The applicant had proposed to rehabilitate Koko
Machine and demolish Beverly Leather Inc. in order to create twenty-two
(22) condominuim units and 33 parking spaces for the residential units.
The original petitioner, though, has decided no to go forward.
A new petitioner, Brentwood Structures, Inc. , though, proposes to
remove both structures to allow the construction of a 27,072 square
foot, 4-story building with twenty-two (22) condominuim units.
The 'new Applicant ' s representative will present the plan to the
Board.
•
(1,131)
7 . Violation
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of this
permit by the Planning Board.
L135
•
•
Ctu of "intait, lHtt�sttrl�xase##�
,r� �dlttlming �nttrD
e�
(fine �$ttlem Green
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, April 2, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem
Green, second floor conference room.
Walter B. Power, IIIF'��
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1. Public Hearing- Subdivision Regulations
• 2. Old/New Business
3. Approval of Minutes
This notice
posted on Bulletin Board"
City Hall A. e . , V : �cccpc-p.nce with Chap.
of the�� s�°�195E3 .
. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
April 2, 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on April 2, 1987,
One Salem Green second floor conference room at 7:30 p.m. Present were:
Walter Power, III, Chairman, Abby Burns, Linda Vaughan, Ken May, Robert
Ledoux, and John Butler. Also present were City Planner Gerard
Kavanaugh and Staff Advisor Beth Debski.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
Public Hearing - Subdivision Regulations
Mr. Power introduced William Luster of the Salem Planning Department who
outlined the three changes the Planning Department has made to the
proposed subdivision regulations based on the Board' s concerns at the
February 19, 1987 meeting. The following changes to the City of Salem's
Subivision Regulations are being proposed:
1 . All primary roads must have vertical curbing, but the Planning
Board may require either vertical or sloped curbing on
collector, minor and dead end streets as deemed fit;
2. In the instances where collector or minor streets have the
potential for expansion, the Planning Board may require the
• street width of a primary road; and
3 . "Sloped or vertical" was added to the Right of Way Improvements
Policy under curbing requirements for a subdivision of more
than two lots with the possiblity of expansion.
Following Mr. Luster' s review of the proposed changes, the Board
discussed the street upgrading and curbing requirements outlined on
pages 18 and 19 of the Subdivision Regulations. It was determined that
in future developments of more than one lot, the Board could require
granite curbing and street improvements, therefore, not causing hardship
on single-family developments.
Following the discussion, Mr. Power opened the hearing for public
comment. Mr. John Serafini spoke in favor of the proposed changes and
felt they would guide the Board in its decision making. There being no
further comments, Mr. Power closed the public hearing.
Ms. Abby Burns made a motion to approve the above-referenced changes to
the City of Sal.em's Subdivision Regulations as outlined by the Planning
Department . Ms. Linda Vaughan seconded the motion. The vote was
unanimously in favor.
Fafard - Phase II
. The City Planner, Mr. Kavanaugh, informed the Board of the progress the
Fafard development had made since the meeting of February 5, 1987.
There had been concern over the material used on the buildings, the
caliper of the trees which were planted, and the construction of several
• Page 2
chimneys which were not made of brick as ordered by the Planning
Department . Since that time, Mr. Kavanaugh has worked with the
developer on rectifiying this situation and is now satisfied that all
requirements have been or will be met. All buildings in Phase II will
have cedar shingl.es, the trees will be 4�" caliper, and all visibl.e
chimneys (as determined by the Planning Department) will be constructed
of brick.
The attorney for the Fafard Companies, Mr. John Serafini introdued Mr.
Ronal.d Killian and Ms. Leslie Dale of Fafard to present the changes in
the plans for Phase II to the Board.
Mr. Killian stated that Phase II of the development would consist of 128
units on a 14 acre parcel of land. Of the 29 proposed units, three
would be 8 plexes and the remaining 26 units would remain as 4 plex
structures. Mr. Killian pointed out that by creating three 8 plex
buildings, they were able to maintain the proposed 9 units per acre
while creating more passive/recreational. open space. Mr. Killian
pointed out each building and its corresponding landscaping which woul.d
separate Phase I from Phase II and act as a buffer zone between each
building.
Mr. Killian has received approval for Phase II from the Fire Department ,
• Buil.ding Inspector, Health Department, and the Director of Public
Services.
Ms. Leslie Dale pointed out several improvements in the landscape design
of Phase II which wilL include 4�" caliper trees, evergreens and hemlock
as buffers, as well as the use of natural vegetation. She added that
drainage improvements have been added to control. storm flooding as wel.l
as a revised cross-country sewerage access for maintenance.
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board that their concerns regarding the
diversity of buildings and trees, the staggering of the buildings,
adequate buffer zones, and open space have been resolved. Several.
different types of deciduous trees will be used as buffers, the
buildings have been staggered, and the use of 8 plex buildings in some
locations will al.l.ow for more passive/recreational open space. Ms. Dal.e
added that the foot print of the 8 plex buildings is almost the same
size as the 4 plex (4' larger) , and therefore, would provide more open
space.
Ms. Burns questioned whether or not a bike and jogging path woul.d be
provided, and Ms. Dale responded that a path is being cleared in Phase I
and that there are adequate sidewalks for joggers.
Mr. Power asked if Janus Lane had been widened to al.low for increased
traffic from travelers cutting across the development. Mr. Kil.lian
• pointed out that they have determined that there will not be too many
people cutting across the devel.opment because there are several
alternate shorter routes on which to reach Phase II.
• Page 3
Mr. Power questioned the adequacy of snow removal., and Mr. Killian
responded that the snow can be moved with a front-end loader and dumped
over the side of the wall , and several areas have been cleared on each
street on which snow can be placed.
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board that the Planning Department has
developed proposed conditionsfor the approval of Phase II.
There being no further questions, the Board agreed to review the plans
and take action on them in two weeks. Mr. Kavanaugh agreed to send each
member a copy of the proposed conditions prior to the next meeting.
Old/New Business
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board that the developers of 333 Highl.and
Avenue would return on April. 16, 1987, with a revised plan. The
deveLoper has purchased an adjacent parcel of land to the east creating
more open -space, frontage, and parking.
Mr. May inquired as to the status of the T.R. Kerr and China Square
buildings. Mr. Kavanaugh explained that with the elimination of the
• Investment Tax Credit, the developers of the T.R. Kerr building are now
looking into residential developments with adequate parking. He also
added that the developer of the China Square building is now finalizing
financing.
Mr. Power asked whether or not the Board would visit Tedesco Pond, and
Mr. Kavanaugh stated that the Board would visit the site as soon as some
of the plantings were in place and the area dried.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to appove the minutes of March 19, 1987. Ms.
Burns seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor.
There being no further business, Ms. Vaughan made a motion to adjourn.
Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The vote was unanimously in favor, and
the -meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Newton
Acting Clerk
bn801
•
Ti#V of "ittlent, 4Nassarliuse##s
�; � �ltuuimg �nxra
0
J 'LD�NF
One �$ttlem Green
NOTICE OF MEETING
Yod are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular
meeting on Thursday, March 19, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem Green, second
floor conference room.
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1. 44 Crowdis Street- Form C
2. Cogswell School- Site Plan Review Special Permit
3. Old/New Business
4. Approval of Minutes
This notice roe-teh ail
City
all, A-%?c. , %..t.;.r, la's, . (,i� OLA rh /6 /qd'�
a g �f�Y(� ^'' �r91 t
• To: Planning Board Members
From: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
Re: 44 Crowdis Street — Form C
A public hearing was held on March 5, 1987 for this Form C involving the
construction of an improved street to provide frontage for several lots
which are already subdivided, but do not have the required improved
frontage.
Crowdis Street is currently a 16 foot wide roadway, with no planting
strips, curbs or sidewalks. The petitioner proposes to extend the
roadway in the same fashion. Therefore, waivers are being requested
(See attached) .
The Planning Department has reviewed the plan and recommends that the
developer be requested to develop a 24 foot roadway, and also reserve
land for sidewalks and planting strips on both sides of Crowdis Street
because of the potential for future development on Crowdis Street. Such
a request would be in conformance with our proposed subdivision
policies.
• E702
•
x4
A � .
To: Planning Board Members
• From: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
.Re: Cogswell School - Site Plan Review
A public hearing was held on March 5, 1987 for this proposal to convert
the former Cogswell School to eight (8) residential units.
The following concerns were raised by the Board at the hearing:
1 . Adequacy of proposed snow storage area-
The proposed snow storage area is actually two parking spaces
which abut a landscaped area. Concern was expressed about the potential
for destruction of this landscaped area because of snow being piled on
it.
2. Existing right-of-way-
In 1982, the City Council voted to allow a right-of-way through
the Cogswell School parking lot to 143 North Street. The developer is
proposing that this right-of-way be retained.
3. Adequacy of proposed lighting for the site-
The proposed lighting has been reviewed and it appears that it
illuminates both the parking area and the building, yet does not disturb
abuttors.
Information regarding these issues, in addition to revised plans, where
appropriate, will be presented to the Board.
Attached for' your review are proposed conditions drafted by the Planning
Department which reflect your concerns.
E703
•
,A ' PROPOSED CONDITIONS
SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT
COGSWELLSCHOOL
• 1. Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled "Proposed Site Plan, Cogswell Residences", dated
February 25, 1987, revised March 5, 198'.
2. Utilities
Utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Services.
3. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled, "Proposed Site Plan, Cogswell
Residences", dated February 25, 1987, revised March 5, 1987.
a. Trees shall be a minimum of 3Y:" caliper.
b. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility of the
developer, his successors or assigns.
4. Health
Board of Health conditions as set forth in a letter dated March , 1987, shall be adhered
to.
5. Constructibn Practices
• All construction shall be conducted in accordance with the following conditions:
a. No work shall commence before 7:00 A.M. on weekdays and 8:00 A.M. on Saturdays.
No work shall continue beyond 5:00 P.M. There shall be no work conducted on
Sundays or holidays. Inside work of'a quiet nature may be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction
on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters in writing at least 72
hours prior to commencement of construction.
c. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so that they do not
leave dirt and/or debris on roadways as they leave the site.
6. Violation
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of this permit by the
Planning Board.
M21WP
•
MINUTES OF MEETING
• MARCH 19, 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday,
March 19, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem Green, Second Floor Conference
Room. Present were Chairman Walter Power, Richard Williams, John
Butler, Kenneth May, Abby Burns, and Robert Ledoux. Also present were
City Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Staff Advisor Beth Debski.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m.
1 . Form C- 44 Crowdis Street-
Mr. and Mrs. Theophilopoulos reviewed their plan involving the
construction of an improved street to provide frontage for the
construction of a single -family home. The Planning Department reviewed
the plan and recommends that the developer be requested to develop a 24
foot roadway and also reserve land for sidewalks and planting strips on
both sides of Crowdis Street because of the potential for future
development on Crowdis Street.
The Board then acted on the requested waivers:
'l .Waiver the need for an Environmental Impact Statement- granted
• 2.Waive the need for sidewalks, curbing, and grass strips- granted
3.Waive the requirement of shade trees- granted
4.Waive the requirement that utilities be laid underground- denied
5.Waive the requirement for road width- denied
6.Waive the requirement for the installation of either a police box or a
fire alarm box- granted
7 .Waive the need for a sign advertising the public hearing- granted
8.Waive the need for a cul-de-sac and allow the installation of a Tee-
granted, subject to the granting of an easement for a turn-around
because the tee is not in the a right-of-way.
On a motion by Ken May which was seconded by John Butler, the Board
voted to add a condition to the approval that the sewer be extended to
the end of the paved roadway, unless the Director of Public Services
recommends otherwise.
Mr. May motioned to approve the plan subject to the following amendments
being shown on the plan:
1 .24' roadway be shown
2.Extension of sewer to end of paved roadway
3.Board of Health conditions
Page 2
• Ms. Burns seconded the motion. The Board voted unanimously to approve
the plan.
2. Cogswell School-
Mr. Roger Lange and Ms. Jessica Herbert were present to present revised
plans to the Board of their proposal to convert the former Cogswell.
School to eight (8) residential units.. At the public hearing held on
March 5, 1987, the Board expressed concern over the proposed snow
storage area. Mr. Lange explained to the Board that by eliminating the
dumpster at the rear of the property, the snow storage area could be
relocated to that location. Another concern raised at the public
hearing was the existing right-of-way through the parking area to 143
North Street. Walter Power suggested that a condition be added to the
approval that the developer investigate the possibility of incorporating
speed bumps into the plan in an attempt to slow down the cars using the
right-of-way.
Mr. Power then asked if the chimney were going to be blocked up. Ms.
Herbert explained that she is investigating the possibility of
installing fireplaces in the units, in which case the chimney would
remain functional.
The following conditions were then discussed by the Board:
• 1 .Conformance with Plan
Work shall. conform to plan entitled "Proposed Site Plan, Cogswell
Residences", dated February 25, 1987, revised March 16, 1987 .
2 -Utilities
Utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of
Public Services.
3.Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled "Proposed Site
Plan, Cogswell Residences", dated February 25, 1987, revised March 16,
1987.
a.Trees shall be a minimum of 3�" caliper.
b.Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility of
the developer, his successors or assigns.
4.'Health
Board of Health conditions as set forth in a letter dated March 11 ,
1987, shall be adhered to.
5-Construction Practices
All construction shall be conducted in accordance with the following
conditions:
a.No work shall commence before 7 :00a.m. on weekdays and 8:00a.m. on
• Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00p.m. There shall be no
work conducted on Sundays or holidays. Inside work of a quiet nature
Page 3
• may be permitted at other times.
b.All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative
effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided
to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of
construction.
c.All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site
so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on roadways as they leave
the site.
6.Violation
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of this
permit by the Planning Board.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the plan subject to the conditions
listed above. Mr. Butler seconded the motion. The, vote was unanimously
in favor.
Ms. Burns made a motion to approve the minutes of March 5, 1987, as
amended. Mr. May seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in
favor.
Ms. Burns made a motion to adjourn at 8:45 p.m. Mr. Butler seconded the
• motion and the vote was unanimously in favor.
?^ • MINUTES OF MEETING
MARCH 5, 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, March 5, 1987 at 7:30 !�
p.m., One Salem Green, Second Floor Conference Room. Present were Chairman Walter Power,
Richard Williams, John Butler, Kenneth May, and Linda Vaughn. Also present were City
Planner Gerard Kavanaugh and Staff Advisor Beth Debski.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
1. Public Hearing - Form C - 44 Crowdis Street
jMr. Power read the notice of the public hearing from the Salem Evening News.
,
Mr. & Mrs. Theophilopoulos presented their plan to build a single family dwelling at 44 Crowdis
Street. The applicant explained that she had received the required approvals from all other
City Departments and had also been issued a building permit prior to her knowledge that
approval by the Planning Board was also required for this construction. She stated that she did
not realize that a parcel with buildable lots beyond it was subject to requiring Planning Board
i approval until this point of her construction.
f
Board members asked Ms. Theophilopoulos questions pertaining to the existing conditions of
Crowdis Street. Mr. Theophilopoulos responded Crowdis Street from Highland Avenue to his
property is almost completely developed with single family homes and that the width of the
{ •
road varies throughout the street. Widths range from approximately 15' to 241. A paper
extension of Parlee Street joins the end of Crowdis Street, but Crowdis Street currently ends at
the beginning of the applicants property.
Mr. Theophilopoulos stated that blasting has already been done since a building permit had been
! issued, and that the plan is to install an extension of the 8" water main. Approximately 150, of
I roadway and pipe will be installed when the road is lengthened. The construction of the road is
proposed to meet City requirements and has received approval from the City Engineer.
i Mr. Power then read comments from other City Departments. The City Engineer concurs with
the.plan as does the Conservation Commission and Building Inspector. The Fire Department
stated the next buildable lot would be approximately 400' from a fire hydrant. If the lot is
developed, a hydrant would be necessary. The Fire Department also suggested the requirement
of a T turnaround, which the applicant has already made provisions for. The Board of Health
will discuss the proposal at its next meeting.
Mr. Power then read the requested waivers for the project. They were waivers from: the
Environmental Impact Statement, road width, police box, sidewalk, planting strip, shade trees,
underground utilities, sign advertising public hearing, and T turnaround in lieu of a cul-de-sac.
nMr. Power opened the public hearing to the audience.
Mr. Robert Redican of 40 Crowdis Street stated his concern that only a single family dwelling
be built upon the parcel and stated he was satified with the proposed plan.
9
i Mr. Power closed the public hearing and submitted the plan for review by the Planning
Department.
P
i
• Mr. Power told the applicants that a determining factor to be considered by the Board when
reviewing requested waivers is the existence of future buildable lots beyond the applicants
property.
2. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - 5 School Street - Cogswell School
Mr. Roger Lange and Ms. Jessica Herbert were present to present the proposed redevelopment
plans for the Cogswell School to the Planning Board. Mr. Lange explained that the proposal is
for the school to be converted to 8 residential units and that the Board of Appeal had granted
variances from use and dimensional requirements on January 14, 1987.
Mr. Lange then detailed the project for the Board. He stated that as required by the Board of
Appeal, 18 parking spaces will be maintained on the site. Traffic will enter and exit at the
Buff urn Street access. There will be 3 pole lights in the parking lot along with lighting along
the walkways and the entrances. Utilities will be underground. An enclosed dumpster will be
provided on the site. Catch basins will be installed for both parking lot drainage as well as roof
drainage. Awnings will be installed at the entrances on School Street.
Mr. Lange then presented a landscaping plan and a species list which provides for a 4' wooden
fence to be installed along the parking area and the boundary of the property. A green edge
would be planted on the corner of the property, bordering the public walkway.
Mr. May asked if all the necessary variances had been received. Mr. Power responded in the
affirmative and read the Board of Appeal decision.
Ms. Vaughan asked if homes abutted on the southern and eastern sides of the property. The
applicants responded in the affirmative.
Mr. May questioned Mr. Lange about the right-of-way mentioned in the Board of Appeal
conditions. Mr. Lange stated that a survey was underway to determine the width and exact
location of the right-of-way since it has no pavement boundaries. Mr. Power asked what the
right -of-way was used for. Mr. Lange responded it was for vehicular access for 14314 North
Street residents. Mr. May wanted to know the exact location of the right-of-way and how much
traffic it created accross the property.
Mr. Power questioned the applicant about the proposed buffer between the parking spaces and
abutting properties. Mr. Lange stated that the 4' wood fence would act as a headlight shield
and the pole lights would be of a design to minimize lighting of abutting properties. Ms.
Herbert stated that the fence would be discussed at the next neighborhood meeting.
Mr. Power then asked about the drawing capacity of the existing chimney. Mr. Lange stated
that all units will be individually serviced by gas, so the chimney will not be used. Mr. Power
then asked about insullation of the building and Mr. Lange responded it will meet state code.
The issue of the awnings covering the front entrance way was then discussed with Mr. Power
suggesting a more durable solution be considered. Mr. Lange stated the aesthetics and addition
of color were the reasons awnings were chosen. He further stated that awnings should last at
least 7 years.
The issue of snow removal and storage was then discussed. Mr. Lange stated that parking
spaces fill and #18 were the proposed snow storage area. Concern was raised about the
•
1( �
1
• destruction of plant materials directly behind these parking spaces. The developer told the
t Board he would look into the elevation of the vegetation.
Mr. Power then read comments from other City Departments. He then opened the public
hearing. ti
Mr. Power read a letter from Mr. Jay Krauter, owner of 143-143Y: North Steet,
residing in California. Mr. Krauter stated his concern regarding his tenants
,. access across the school lot to his property. He wanted this access to be continued.
Mr. Mielcarz of 42 Buffum Street questioned the issue of private access across
what was public property and was against continued access.
fAl Tirabassi of 44 Buffum Street was in favor of the proposed plan, including the fence, but
spoke in opposition to continued access across the property by tenants at 143-143Yz North
Street.
Mr. David Falker of 143 North Street stated that other property owners in the area currently
use the school parking lot.
i Mr. Butler asked if 143-143Y2 North Street had alternative access to the property. Mr. Falker
responded in the affirmative, from the School Street to the backyard.
f Mr. Power closed the public hearing.
3
1 Mr. Lange stated he would like to leave an amended plan which included the addition of the
• secondary exterior egress.stairs for two units. ,
Mr. May commented that he would like to examine the Council conditions upon sale of the
property to the applicant. He also stated that the Board of Appeal decision regarding the green
space requirements limits the Planning Board directives foi• this property.
'i
Mr. Power told the applicant the proposal would be under review by the Planning Department
and the Planning Board.
t
• 3. 333 Highland Avenue - BPD, SPR, WSP - McAuliffe
Mr. Quinn reviewed the plans previously submitted to the Planning Board for a 15,000 sq. ft.,
two-story professinal office building. Mr. Quinn stated that Mr. Tito Harkness of Lindentree
Associates has reviewed the landscaping plan with the Planning Department and has addressed
the concerns of the Board.
Mr. Harkness stated that the deposit of fly ash at the site has been determined by boorings and
that the proposed building location is not in a location requiring fly ash support. Parking spaces
low will be located on the area, which contains fly ash.
�j
V
The traffic issue was then discussed. Mr. Quinn stated that 6 doctors will occupy part of the
15,000 sq. ft. and they will be open from 8 A.M. to 5 P.M., Monday thru Friday. They are not
open on weekends and employ 20 employees and see between 70 and 100 patients per day.
4 • Mr. Quinn stated that the height of the building and design criteria for the Business Park
Development District have all been adequately met, and that a variance was obtained for side
.p
lot requirements from the Board of Appeal.
1'.
• Mr. Townsend, the engineer for the applicant, stated that the parking lot has 3 catch basins and
that the an additional catch basin has been added to the front of the property. He further
stated that the natural contour at the front of the building is not conducive to build up at that
location.
Ms. Vaughan questioned Mr. Harkness about snow storage areas. Mr. Harkness responded that
there are various sites throughout the plan which can be used as snow storage areas. Ms.
Vaughan then asked how wide the road was between parking spaces. Mr. Harkness responded
the road between parking space areas was 241.
Mr. Williams asked how the rear slope will be stabilized. Mr. Harkness stated that a stone rip
rap, approved by the Conservation Commission, will be used along with vegetation to stabilize
the rear slope. Mr. Williams then asked what plans there are in the event that fly ash is
exposed. Mr. Harkness stated that if fly ash is exposed it will be covered and the area
stabilized. He further stated that the boorings gave a good indication as to where the fly ash
was located and that work at the site will avoid the locations as best possible.
Mr. Butler told the applicant that the abutting property has a helicopter and there is helicopter
traffic over the site which will have to be provided for.
Mr. Power asked what developments were on either side of the proposed plan. Mr. Quinn
responded that Salem Honda, City Property and a vacant parcel abut the property.
Mr. Power then asked if the applicant has continued correspondence with the State about the
installation of a turnaround on Highland Avenue. Mr. Quinn responded they are not initiating
any further discussion.
•' Mr. Kavanaugh stated that approximately 8,000 cars per day travel Highland Avenue in both
directions and that the addition of the traffic generated by this development would not be
significant. He further stated that 700 cars use Highland Avenue, in each direction during the
peak hours.
The following conditions were then discussed by the Board (see attachment A).
Mr. Kavanaugh and Mr. Harkness discussed the use of granite curbing around the perimeter of
the site and the parking area.
Mr. May stated that individual conditions should not be finalized until the entire approval of
this plan was discussed. In his mind the proposal did not represent his interpretation of a
Business Park District at all. He further stated that the BPD District was created to maximize
open space and control traffic and Mr. May felt that this plan fails at both not to mention the
future development of the abutting vacant property which could further detract from the
objectives of the Business Park District.
Mr. Kavanaugh reminded Board members that when the BPD District was originally created,
these parcels were not included because of their moderate size. He also reminded the Board
that under the previous zoning of this site, B-2, the applicant could have proposed much heavier
usage.
Mr. Williams stated he felt this development should be considered on its own basis since the
• land behind it is owned by the City and the slope on the vacant side is very steep. Also only one
lot
,
would be left to be considered in the future.
Mr. May stated that there are existing plans to fill in the slope.
Mr. Butler asked why so many parking spaces had been created at the site. Mr. Quinn stated 1
that a Board of Appeal condition requires 89 parking spaces.
Mr. May stated, once again, the Board of Appeal was doing site plan review planning by
,. dictating how much land was required for parking purposes.
Mr. Power raised the issue of the use of the rest of the 15,000 sq. ft., or first floor of the
building. Mr. McAuliffe and Mr. Quinn stated that a compatible use is intended with Mr.
McAuliffe using a portion of the space for additional storage for Hutchinson Medical.
Mr. Williams asked if precautions would be taken to prevent construction vehicles from making
a mess on Highland Avenue. Mr. Harkness responded that fill will be brought to the site, not
i taken off the site, so he does not anticipate leaving dirt on Highland Avenue to be a large
problem.
' Mr. Williams made a motion to approved the plan as submitted. Mr. Buttler seconded the
motion. The vote was Mr. Williams, Mr. Butler in favor; Ms. Vaughan, Mr. May ard.Mr. Power
j opposed, thus the motion failed.
A
j 14 Cherry Hill Ave. - Wetland Special Permit
• Mr. Bob Farley, the applicant's architect, updated the Board members on the proposed plan to
construct a 5,300 sq. ft. building for use by 2 doctors who would relocate from 116 Highland
Avenue. Mr. Farley stated the project has received a negative determination from the
tConservation Commission. He told Board members that presently the doctors in the 2 buildings
on the lot generate between 80 to 170 cars per day. An additional 22 cars/day could be
1 anticipated from the doctors who willmove into 116 Highland Avenue.
f
Mr. Wiliams asked what the radius was for the entrance. He suggested that a wider cut off
from Highland Avenue may facilitate improved traffic conditions at the site. It was the
consensus of the. Board that the applicant work with the Planning Department to finalize the
approach to the building.
Mr. Butler stated he felt this site presents a more dangerous traffic condition than 333 Highland
Avenue and that there is more over development of the area than there should be.
Dr. Hannaway, owner of the site, stated that the proposed development is cut off from abutting
single-family homes by a 20'-40' cliff and that it is within a 1,500 yard radius of the hospital and
as such is a suitable use for the land.
Mr. May stated that the Board has the proposal under consideration through the Wetlands
Special Permit and should only be considered with the terms and conditions of the Wetlands
Special Permit.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the Wetland Special Permit with the following conditions
I (see Attachment B).
,i • OLD BUSINESS
li
Mr. Kavanaugh stated that the Fafard Companies are in the process of removing and replacing
's trees they had planted on Whaler's Lane with trees of the correct caliper.
i'
1'.
• Revised Subdivision Regulations were then discussed with Bill Luster of the Planning
Department presenting major changes of the regulations to Board members.
Discussion of sloped versus vertical granite curbing ensued. A date for the public hearing for
the Revised Subdivision Regulations was tentatively scheduled for April 2, 1987.
Mr. Power raised the issue of increasing communication with the Board of Appeal. Mr. May
suggested that Mr. Power outline the Board concerns either in a phone call to Jim Hacker or a
letter to the Board of Appeal. It was also suggested that the Building Inspector be requested
not to state that applicants must go to Board of Appeal prior to Planning Board. Preliminary
review by the Planning Board. Preliminary reviw by the Planning Board may even be requested.
Mr. May offered to write the Decision concerning 333 Highland Avenue so that it could be on
file at the City Clerk's Office.
Mr. Williams made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted, Mr. Butler seconded the
motion and the vote was unanimously in favor.
Ms. Vaughan made a motion to adjourn at 10:35 P.M. Mr. May seconded the motion and the
vote was unanimously in favor.
Respectfully submitted,
• Cynthia Carr
Clerk
M21WP
•
ATTACHMENT A
ITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PER,OIT
l • - - -� a l ronformznce with Plan
Worlc shall ronform to nlan entitled °Cita Plan, 34'2 Hinhlanri A_vann�11, r!�tor1
February 17, 1987, revised February 27, 1987.
2. Utilities
Utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Services.
3. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled, "Site Plan, 333 Highland Avenue",
dated February 17, 1987, revised February 27, 1987.
a. Trees shall be a minimum of 3Y:" caliper.
1
b. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility of the
developer, his successors or assigns.
4. Health
3
� Board of Health conditions as set forth in a letter dated February 12, 1987 shall be
adhered to.
5. Board of Appeal
• Board of Appeal decision dated February 19, 1987 shall be adhered to.
j 6. Construction Practices
i
1 All construction shall be conducted in accordance with the following conditions:
a. No work shall commence before 7:00 A.M. on weekdays and 8:00 A.M. on Saturdays.
No work shall continue beyond 5:00 P.M. There shall be no work conducted on
Sundays or holidays. Inside work of a quiet nature may be permitted at other-times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction
on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters in writing at least 72
hours prior to commencement of construction.
c. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so that they do not
leave dirt and/or debris on roadways as they leave the site.
>' 7. Signage
i
Signage shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner.
8. Violation
P
€ • Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of this permit by the
Planning Board.
M21WP
rj
C
_. . ATTACHMENT B
WETLANDS SPECIAL PERMIT
PROPOSED CONDITIONS
• 14R CHERRY HILL AVENUE
1 . Conformance with Plan
[;cork shall. conform to plan entitled "Site Plan, 14R Cherry Hill Avenue".
2. Maintenance
Refuse, road and ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the
responsibility of the developer, his successors, or assigns.
3. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled "Site Plan, 14R
Cherry Hill Avenue".
a. Trees shall be a minimum of 3�" caliper.
b. Maintenance of the landscaping vegetation in a healthy and thriving
condition shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors
or assigns.
4. . Board of Appeal Decision
Board of Appeal requirements as set forth in decision granted on
December ,17 , '1%86; shall;!4g...a'4}ierg CP•
5. Utilities
All utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the
Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building permits.
6. Board of Health
Board of Health conditions as set forth in a letter dated February 12,
1987, shall be adhered to.
7. Construction Practices
All construction shall be in accordance with the following conditions:
a. No work shall commence before 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. on
Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m. There shall be no
work completed on Sundays or holidays. Inside work of a quiet nature
may be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative
effects of construction on abuttters. Advance notice shall be provided
to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of
construction.
•
i
• 8. Entranceway
The developer shall propose a new design of the entranceway to eliminate
the now necessary 90 degree turning movement in the driveway and attempt
to decrease the degree of such movements to minimize safety hazards of 1
turning form Highland Avenue when such traffic is moving in a westerly
direction. Such design shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Department prior to the issuance of a building permit.
9. Violation of Conditions
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of this
permit by the Planning Board.
E631
F
: t
z -
s
t
t
a
i
i
{
i
i
.i
t
Pi •
i
r '
i
i
gift, of �$ulrm, c4ilijussurllxtsr##5
• �� �[ttlntln$ �nttrl
J�'cymrt.
Mur, Salem (Fdrern '87 FER 27 All :?7
r•
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular
meeting on Thursday, March 5, 1987 at 7 :30 p.m. , One Salem Green second
floor coference room.
6.Fay.y�� , ,
Walter $. Power, III
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
1 . Public Hearing - Form C - 44 Crowdis Street
• 2. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - 5 School Street
3. 333 Highland Avenue
4. ' 14R Cherry Hill Avenue
5. Fafard Phase II
6. Old/New Business
7. Approval . of Minutes - February 19, 1987
01115
This notice posted on "Official• B letin Beard"City Hall ?.ve . , SalcM, Luse. on z.G . .2 7 / q8 i
mt // •. -:',7 anti. i ^cerac::ce With Char. 626 .
if the dcAs of lS53. fir\/1y ,� ' --
TO: Planning Board Members
• FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Public Hearing, Form C - 44 Crowdis Street
------------------------------------------=--------------------------
This proposal involves the construction of a single family home on a
17,000 square foot lot. The lot meets all requirements for a R-1 zoning
district, but it fronts on an unimproved street. As a result, the
roadway must be extended. There is curently a 16 ft. wide roadway, with
no planting strips, curbs, or sidewalks. The petitioner proposes to
extend the roadway in the same fashion. Therefore, appropriate waivers
are being requested.
E627
•
Z
•
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Public Hearing - 5 School Street
Site Plan Review Special Permit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposal involves the proposed conversion of the former Cogswell
School at 5 School Street to eight (8) residential units. This is a
City-owned building being sold to Jessica B. Herbert and Associates.
The building contains 10,000 square feet and is located in an R-2 zoning
district. Variances from use requirements and from dimensional
requirements were granted by the Board of Appeal on January 14, 1987.
The applicant ' s representatives will present the plan in detail at the
public hearing.
E630
•
•
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: 333 Highland Avenue —
Site Plan Review Special Permit
Business Park Development Special Permit
Wetlands Special Permit
--------------------------------------------------------------------
A p6blic hearing was held on February 19, 1987, to discuss this proposal
for a 15,000 square foot professional office building at the rear of
Hutchinson Medical at 333 Highland Avenue.
At the public hearing, Board members .raised the following issues:
1 . Traffic flow to and from the site, and the impact of traffic on
Highland Avenue;
2. Adequacy of lighting;
3 . Adequacy of the proposed drainage system;
4. Adequacy of proposed landscaping, particularly along Highland
Avenue; and
5. Amount of open space provided on the site.
• These concerns have been addressed by the developer, and information
regarding these issues, in addition to revised plans 3where appropriate,
will be presented.
Attached for your review are proposed conditions drafted by the Planning
Department which reflect your concerns.
E629
•
TO: Planning Board Members
• FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh
RE: 14R Cherry Hill Avenue - Wetlands Special Permit
----------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 19, 1987 , a public hearing was held to discuss this proposal
for a 5,300 square foot medical office building at 14R Cherry Hill
Avenue.
At the public hearing, Board members were concerned with the following
issues:
1 . Traffic flow to and from the site, and the impact on Highland
Avenue;
2. Adequacy of the proposed drainage system;
3. Adequacy of proposed landscaping.
The developer has addresed these concerns, and will provide information
and revised plans, where appropriate, to address them.
Attached for your review are proposed conditions drafted by the Planning
Department which reflect your concerns.
• E628
Circ DlWl
�BLILSEPECIAL PERMIT
DRAFT CONDITIONS
• 14R CHERRY HILL AVENUE
I. Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled "Site Plan, 14R Cherry Hill Avenue".
2. Maintenance
Refuse, road and ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the
responsibility of the developer, his successors, or assigns.
3. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled "Site Plan, 14R
Cherry Hill Avenue".
a. Trees shall be a minimum of 3�" caliper.
b. Maintenance of the landsca vegetation in a healthy and thriving
condition shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors
or assigns.
4. Board of Appeal Decision
Board of Appeal requirements as set forth in decision granted on
• December 17, 1986 , shall be adhered to.
5. Utilities � ►
ALL utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the�ire&xLL
t prior to the issuance of building permits.
6. Board of Health
Board of Health conditions as set. forth in a letter dated February 12,
1987, shall be adhered to.
7. Construction Practices
All construction shall be in accordance with the following conditions:
•
Page 2
•
a. No work shall commence before 7 :00 a.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. on
Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m. There shall be no
work completed on Sundays or holidays. Inside work of a quiet nature
may be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative
effects of construction on abuttters. Advance notice shall be provided
to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of
construction.
;, • Violation of Conditions
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of this
permit by the Planning Board.
E631
CA�
• work wWPIOLnYlL�
•
of �tlr�tt, co55 871itF5r#3� :(,
• ••� �� ��ltunlincti ��+nttrl _,,,,
3 � s
l 9i °
(Frere '
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem 19, 1987, ata7:3Oip. hold
olOnets
regular meeting on Thursday, February
Salem Green, second floor conference room. rr —
Walter B. Power, IIIjj
Chairman
Tentative Agenda:
----------------
1. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands Special Permit and Business
Park Development Special Permit- 333 Highland Avenue
2. public Hearing- Wetlands Special Permit- 14R Cherry Hill Avenue
• 3. Determination of Substantial Change- 20 Essex Street
4. Fafard Phase II Approval
5. Greenway Road Covenant- Endorsement
6. Subdivision Regulations
7. Old/New Business
S. Approval of Minutes- February 5, 1387
This n �- c; Tom:: _1 �i� � • i3 /4d�
.,�.: � ",- _..- • �'� o.
• TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Public Hearing — 333 Highland Avenue
Wetlands Special Permit
Business Park Development Special Permit
Site Plan Review Special Permit
This proposal involves the proposed construction of a 15,000 square foot
professional office building at the rear of the lot upon which the
existing Hutchinson Medical Building is located at 333 Highland Avenue.
The proposed building is located in a Business Park Development zoning
district. A variance to allow two principle buildings on the same lot
and a variance from side yard setbacks were granted by the Board of
Appeal on January 14, 1987.
To construct this new building, the following permits are needed:
1). Wetlands Special Permit
2) Business Park Development Special Permit
• . 3) Site Plan Review Special Permit
The applicant ' s representatives will present the plan to the Board for
their review.
E620
•
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
• RE: Public Hearing - Wetland Special Permit- 14 R Cherry Hill Avenue
This proposal involves the construction of a 5,300 square foot two-story
medical office building and parking area at 14 R Cherry Hill Avenue (see
attached plan) .
The site is comprised of 21,648 square feet and is accessible from
Highland Avenue through an existing right of way through two (2) other
lots, each of which now has a medical office building on it. The
proposed building is located in an R-1 zoning district.
The Conservation Commission has determined that this parcel is not
subject to the Wetlands Protection Act because the wetland no longer
exists.
The applicant' s representatives will present the plan in detail at the
public hearing.
E619
•
- ETAlIJ11JCs V,/t LL��
r. �!�J ' . - _1 1135,7$ -• _ __ _ . .
i
I .
ti -
14)
EL 6S'.n�_ _ 1
I ' �i I iw,. 1.�.,� r•J
/
• � �`� 1a I � ._ . . - .. -_ W Irl
li I fj 17
1 /t IS !d f. '
• I 13 / I it ! '� •
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE:. Determination of Substantial Change — 20 Essex Street
On April 30, 1986, a petition fora variance from sideyard setback
requirements to allow the construction of an addition on a building at
20 Essex Street was denied by the Board of Appeal (see attached
decision) .
According to State law, when a petition is denied by the Board of
Appeal, it cannot be heard again for two years unless the Planning Board
determines, by an affirmative vote of eight members, that a "substantial.
• change" has been made to the plan.
The petitioner has changed his plan by adding a second story to the
addition and increasing its width from 13 '0 to 13 '8". The Board must
now determine, with an affirmative vote of eight members, if the new
plan shows a substantial change. If so determined, the petitioner can
return to the Board of Appeal.
E618
•
I
Of c ttleM, � ttsstttljusetts
Pattra of
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL CA°.DELLA FOR A
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 20 ESSEX ST. , SALE.".
A hearing on this petition was held April d2; l`8662witt?Ngollowing Board
Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Charnas, uzinski, Strout and
Associate Member Dore. Notice of the teak *was sent to abutters and others and
notices of the "hearing were proper--y p',bliMeo, n the Salem Evening News in
accordance with Massachusetts General laws Chspter '40Ac••HASS.
Petitioner, owner of the property, req:;ests a Special Permit to extend nonconformint
Side setback and any and all applicable density and setback requirements in order
to construct an addition in this R-2 district.
The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request
for a Special Permit is Section V B 10, which provides as follows:
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance,
the Board of Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions
set forth in Section VIII F and IX D, grant Special Permits for
alterations and reconstruciten of nonconforming structures, and for
• changes, enlargement, extension or expansion of nonconforming lots,
land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such change,
extension; enlargement or expansion- shall not be substantially more
detrimental than the existing nonconforminghuse to the neighborhood.
In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests,
guided by the rule that a -Speciai Permit request may be granted upon a finding
by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the public health,
safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants.
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented and afte
viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
IN A petition signed in favor bv customers of the store was submitted;
2. There was neighbortood orpCS_t1Cn;
3. Abutters view would be blocked by the addition of the structure;
4. Would lose a minimum of cne .parking space;
5 This is a congested area and this would exacerbate a bad condition;
6. Plans submitted were nc^'conp'_ete•
• On the basis of the above findings c` `act, and on the evidence presented, the
Board of Appeal concludes as 1,011cws:
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF MICHAEL CAP.DELLA FOR A
SPECIAL PERMIT FOR 20 ESSEX ST. , SALEM
page two
• t . The proposed addition will not promote the public health:, safety,
convenience and welfare of the city's inhabitants;
2. The relief requested cannot be granted without substantial detriment
to the public good or without nullifying or substantially derogating
from the intent of the district or the purpose of the Ordinance.
Therefore, the Zoning board of Appeal voted three to two, 3-2, ('.•'r. Hacker and
Mr. Dore voting in opposition.) against granting the. Special Per---t requested.
SPECIAL PERMIT DENIED
daa^,es B. Hacker, Chairman
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CITY CLERK
• 5i;i i„i 17 CF THE "ASS.
TO
rS9ri;i
;HIS C:IS!r.N, ANY. sr.F..- EE ..-... P'- _ ,.TkE nLTt OF FILE.:
�.;, . .._
r.
,,... ...c Ur Tnoic i.\c
;.n -;:::'i, :F Sb.''i;:i: APFC6: li;:: �..':: F!Li. r. �::i•Oli.\�� L'.:i:. '_
EEC;K_EO S: TKE S"::4 ESE_:: F:i•_ 5'P.f
OF RECORD OR IS RECORDED AND Ow TF.: E"'° CEFTiFiLA"i OF i1iLE.
BOARD OF APPEAL
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh
RE: Fafard — Phase II Approval
On November 6, 1986, the Planning Board held a public hearing on Phase
II of the Fafard residential development project on Whaler' s Lane,
consisting of 128 units on a 14 acre parcel of land. Since the public
hearing, the Planning Department has been working with the Fafard
Company to resolve numerous issues raised by the Board.
Two major concerns of the Board were those of the exterior siding and
chimney material to be used Both have now been resolved.
As a result, representatives. of the Fafard Company will attend our
meeting to again present and review the Phase II site plan.
• Attached for your review are suggested conditions proposed by the
Planning Department.
E621
•
Eroposed Conditions
Fafard Phase II
• 1 . Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled "Site Plan, Ledgemere Country II,
PUD, Phase II" , dated October 21 , 1986, revised January 15, 1987.
2. Curbing
Sloped granite curbing shall be installed along access roadways, as
shown on Sheets 1 and 2 of plan entitled, "Ledgemere Country II,PUD
Phase II," dated October 21 , 1986, revised January 15, 1987.
3: Maintenance
Refuse removal, road and ground maintenance, and snow removal shall
be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns.
4. Utilities
Utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Director
of Public Services prior to the issuance of building permits.
5. Landscaping ,
Landscaping shall be in accordance with plan entitled, "Site Plan,
Ledgemere Country II, PUD, Phase II in Salem, MA. , Snow Storage and
• Landscaping Plan," dated October 21 , 1986, revised January 15, 1987.
a. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility
of the developer, his successor, or assigns.
6. Chimneys
All chimneys which can`be viewed from Whaler's Lane, as defined by
the City Planner, shall be constructed of brick. The remainder of
the chimneys shall be constructed of pre—cast concrete, and painted
in a fashion and color satisfactory to the City Planner. Any paint
color changes must be approved by the Planning Department. All
chimneys which have not yet been constructed, as of February 5, 1987,
including those in. Phase IA and IB, shall also comply with
conditions.
7. Exterior Siding Material
Cedar clapboards shall be utilized as exterior siding on all
buildings.
8. Construction Practices
All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the
following conditions:
• a. No work shall be commenced before 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and 8:00
a.m. on Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m. . No
• work shall be conducted on Sundays. Inside work of a quiet nature
shall be permitted at other times.
b. Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday through 'Friday
only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. . There shall be
no drilling or blasting on Saturdays, Sundays or holidays.
c. All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the
Rules and Regulations of the Planning Board. A Clerk of the
W6rks shall be provided, as defined by a Memorandum of
Understanding between the Planning Board and the developer, to make
certain all such Rules and Regulations are strictly adhered to.
10. "Overall" PUD Special Permit
All applicable conditions set forth in the "overall" Planned Unit
Development Special Permit dated February 7, 1986, shall be strictly
adhered to.
11 . Phase 1 Approval ,
All conditions set forth in both Phase IA and 1B approval dated March
26, 1986 and April 17 , 1986, which are pertinent to Phase 2, shall be
strictly adhered to.
• 12. Violations
Violations of any conditions' shall result in revocation of this
permit by the Planning Board.
C1103
•
TO: Planning Board Members
• FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Greenway Road Covenant
Mr. Frank Romano has filed a covenant with the Planning Board to ensure
that all roadway improvements, sidewalks, planting strips and utilities
shall be provided to serve each lot in his proposed subdivision before a
lot may be built upon or conveyed, other than by mortgage deed.
The covenant has been reviewed by the City Solicitor and is ready for
the Board' s endorsement.
E622
•
•
of �lem, i�� �rl��ze##
• n
VlMltltiltg PIIMY
One
�y ne �$ttlem Green
TO: PI-anning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Subdivision Regulations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the past several months, in our review of subdivision plans, it has
become evident that the existing Subdivision Regulations are somewhat
obsolete, and need major revisions. As a result, the Planning
Department has recently undertaken a major revision of the Regulations,
attempting to address many of the concerns expressed by the Board as we
have attempted to review and approve recent subdivision proposals.
The revisions will be presented to the Board for review and comments.
• Following the Board's comments, a formal public hearing can be
scheduled, and a formal review and approval process can begin.
E559
•
• MINUTES OF MEETING
FEBRUARY 19, 1987
A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on February 19, 1987 at 7:30 p.m.,
One Salem Green, Second Floor Conference Room. Present were Chairman Walter Power, Abby
Burns, Kenneth May Linda Vaughn, and Richard Williams. Also present were City Planner
Gerard Kavanaugh and Staff Advisor Beth Debski.
Mr. Power called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
1. Greenway Road - Covenant Endorsement
Gerard Kavanaugh informed the Board that the City Solicitor had reviewed the covenant and
found it to be in order and ready for the Board's endorsement. It was the consensus of the
Board to sign the covenant.
2. Vista Avenue
Mr. Kavanaugh informed the Board that Mr. Carol Ganey had requested that the Board approve
a revised plan for the Vista Avenue subdivision due to the fact that the foundation for one house
lot does not have proper side lot set backs. Mr. Ganey stated that both lots would still conform
to other applicable regulations.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the revised plan for Vista Avenue, Ms. Burns seconded the
• motion and the vote was unanimously in favor.
3. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review Special Permit, Wetland Special Permit, Business Park
Development Special Permit - 333 Highland Avenue
Mr. Power read the notice of the public hearing which had appeared in the Salem Evening News.
Mr. Bill Quinn, of Tinti, Quinn and Savoy, presented the plans to the Board. This proposal
involves the construction of a 15,000 square foot professional office building at the rear of the
lot upon which the existing Hutchinson Medical Building is located at 333 Highland Avenue.
Mr. Quinn stated that the plan has been reviewed by the Conservation Commission and has
obtained an Order of Conditions. The Board of Appeal has acted favorably on this proposal and
variances have been granted to allow two principle buildings on the same lot, as well as a
.variance from side yard setbacks. Mr. Quinn stated that 89 parking spaces will be provided at
the site.
The owners of the proposed building, the McAuliffe's have entered into a contractual agreement
with the Puritan Medical Group of Swampscott to lease the first floor of the proposed building.
Colored renderings were presented to the Board, by Mr. Tito Harkness of the Lindentree
Corporation. Mr. Harkness stated that the site plan has been drawn in conjunction with various
City Departments recommendations as well as the clients needs.
Mr. Harkness told the Board that the building would have a brick facade. He further stated that
there will be a narrow strip of landscaping along Highland Avenue and fairly extensive
• landscaping along the existing building.
• Mr. Williams asked if test boorings had been done at the site. Mr. Harkness responded in the
affirmative. A profile of the land has been done by Geotechnical Engineering. Mr. Williams
asked if fly ash had been identified at the site. Mr. Harkness responded on the affirmative.
Mr. Harkness stated that a 21E study has been performed on the site, including the area where
the fly ash is located and the results of this study will be submitted to the Board. Mr. Quinn
presented a profile which depicted the fly ash location and the proposed building location. He
stated that the applicant has attempted to keep the distance between the building site and fly
ash location as great as possible. The retention pond is completely removed from the fly ash
area.
Ms. Vaughan asked what the distance between the existing building and the proposed building
would be. Mr. Harkness responded that the distance is approximately 801. Ms. Vaughan raised
the issue of the site being difficult to get to unless a left turn is taken across Highland Avenue
or patients drive to Rich's to turn around. Mr. McAuliffe stated that he has been in contact
with the State Department of Public Works and a plan for Highland Avenue which provides for a
left lane intersection turn around at Barnes Road is being explored. Mr. Williams asked
Mr. Kavanaugh if he had been informed of this change. He replied in the negative.
Ms. Vaughan asked the applicant how many doctors are involved. Mr. Quinn responded that 6
doctors will be relocating with Puritan. Ms. Vaughan then asked if the applicant knew how
much vehicular traffic will be created by this use. Mr. Quinn assured the Board that they would
look into the traffic situation.
• Mr. Power asked if the applicant had appealed to the State for a light or a turn around at their
site.
Mr. Harkness responded that only a curb-cut has been requested from the state. Mr. Power
then asked how much frontage the previously combined properties have on Highland Avenue.
Mr. Harkness responded there is 160' of frontage. Mr. Powers questioned whether this would be
sufficient frontage if the properties were subdivided and sold individually at a later date.
Mr. May then stated that the varianace for the reduced side yard would be in contradiction to
the Business Park Development Park Special Permit if and when another applicant wants to
build on the adjacent property. Mr. Power asked about the drainage on the existing lot. Mr.
Harkness explained that there were no catch basins provided for drainage on the existing lot.
Mr. Power suggested that the proposed drainage system be enlarged to include the existing lot.
Mr. Power asked about the lighting plan. Mr. Harkness told Board members there will be
several 20' poles with sulfur heads installed at the site.
Mr. Power then read the comments submitted from other City Departments, then opened the
Public Hearing to the audience.
Ms. Helen Shebelic of Marlborough Road asked the applicant what hours the medical building
would be open. Mr. Quinn responded that he did not know what hours the practice planned on
keeping, but he will get this information to the Board along with traffic impact information for
• Highland Avenue.
Mr. Power closed the public hearing.
y .
• Public Hearing - Wetlands Special Permit - 14R Cherry Hill Ave.,
Mr. Farley, the applicant's architect, presented the proposed plan for a 5,300 square foot
two-story medical office building to Board members. He stated that access to the property is
by'a 25' right-of-way from Highland Avenue. The Board of Appeal granted a variance from
frontage requirement on 1/9/87 and the Conservation Commission gave the proposal a negative
determination (property non-applicable to Wetlands Protection Act) on 1/29/87.
Mr. Farley explained that the wetland boundary at the time the City wetland maps were made
ran through the property, but changes have occurred since then which have changed the nature
of the property and it is no longer wetland. He further stated that a 36" drain exists across the
site onto Highland Avenue.
Water and sewer lines are also under the right-of-way. Underground utilities will be provided.
Mr. Farley stated that 26 on-site parking spaces will be provided around the perimeters of the
site. Two allergists currently housed at 116 Highland Avenue will occupy the proposed
building. Mr. Farley stated that the building will be lY2 stories with dormers on the 2nd floor
providing administrative space. Ms. Vaughan asked how the address will be determined since
there is no access onto Cherry Hill Avenue.
'Mr. Farley stated they are working on receiveing a more accurate property number for the site
with the Assessor's Office.
Discussion ensued concerning the following issues: the traffic problems this plan may add to
Highland Avenue, the right-of-way and a sewer pipe and it's location to the proposed footing of
• the building, lighting and on-site drainage.
Mr. Farley stated that he would look into the possibility of constructing a retaining wall to
protect the footing. Mr. Farley also stated that the drainage will consist of catch basins which
drain into rock fill. Lights would be provided on the over hangs and 2 security lights would be
placed at the rear of the property.
Mr. Power read comments submitted from other City Departments, opened the public hearing
to the audience and upon hearing no comments from the audience, closed the public hearing.
Discussion ensued, raised by Mr. May, concerning Planning Board input into important aspects
of proposals prior to the Board of Appeal hearing the proposals and issuing variance or special
permits. Mr. May stated that, recently, important planning issues have been left out of and
postcribed by Board of Appeal decisions concerning the granting of variances.
Recommendations to remedy this situation included the reduction of proposed building size
under Site Plan Review Special Permit jurisdiction from 10,000 sq. ft. to 5,000 sq. ft., increase
of open space in a Business Park Development from 10% to 25%, and that a message be sent to
developers suggesting an appearance before the Planning Board before the Board of Appeal.
Mr. May suggested that time be set aside at the next meeting to address these issues and that
Mr. Hacker, Board of Appeal Chairman, be invited at a future date to discuss these issues with
the Planning Board.
20 Essex Street - Determination of Substantial Changes
• Mr. and Mrs. Michael Cardella of 20 Essex Street appeared before the Board for a
Determination of Substantial Change. On April 30, 1986, a petition for a variance from
S sideyard setback requirements to allow the construction of an addition on their building was
denied by.the Board of Appeal.
According to State law, when a petition is denied by the Board of Appeal, it cannot be heard
again for two years unless the Planning Board determines, by an affirmative vote of eight
members, that a "Substantial Change" has been made to the plan.
The petitioner changed his plan by adding a second story to the addition and increasing its width
from 1310 to 13'8". Board members felt that there was indeed a change to the plan but that it
exacerbated the current situation. Mr. May stated that if the Board of Appeal requests to hear
the case again he would be willing to vote that a substantial change had been made. Other
Board members felt the same way. Mr. Cardella will contact the Board of Appeal and be back
before the Planning Board at its next meeting if the Board of Appeal agrees to hear the case
again.
Subdivision Regulations
Mr. William Luster of the Planning Department presented the Board with proposed revisions to
the Subdivision Regulations. Mr. Luster told the Board that other local communities Subdivision
Regulations have been researched to help in revising Salem's Regulations. Danvers and
Newburyport's Regulations have been the major influences in the proposed changes.
Board members were very responsive to the proposed revisions and would like to discuss them
further at the next meeting.
New Business
• Mr. May made a motion to authorize the Chairman to have the power,to sign all previously
approved and correlated materials for the Board. Ms. Burns seconded the motion and the voted
was unanimously in favor.
Ms. Vaughan made a motion to adjourn at 10:00 P.M. Ms. Burns seconded the motion and the
vote was unanimously in favor.
Respectfully submitted,
Cynthia Carr
Clerk
•
aity of 'S'ttlem, 'ittssac ue'Ats
• a
Flaming Pourb
(Om MMlEIi'[ 19rejen
TO: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
FROM: GERARD KAVANAUGH, CITY PLANNER
RE: FEBRUARY 5,1987 Meeting
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
The next Planning Board meeting will be held on Thursday, February 5, 1987
at 7:30 p.m. The agenda will be the same as for the January 22, 1987 meeting
which was cancelled due to inclement weather.
Attached is an agenda for your review.
•
•
.� � �<., L.itu of �alrttt, C��tt�s�ulTtzsrtt�
f ;ilauuittq i� uarl F = ] Q�
� .
« - C01tr alcm 05reett
CITY : :+:,s s
NOTICE OF MEETING
I
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday , February 5,1987, at 7: 30 p.m. , One Salem
Green, second floor conference room.
Walter B. Power, TII
Chairman
Tentative-Agenda
--------- ------
1. Form A- Hayes, Pickman and Patton Road
2. Greenway Road
3. village at Vinnin Square-Phase III
• 4. Ward and Peabodv Streets
5. Peabody Museum
6. gJayatzS
7. City-wide Walking Trail
8. Old/New Business
9. Approval of Minutes-November 20, January 8
This rotice posted cn "Official B �letir, Ecarfl"
• Cit . 8...._). lyre . , i -i, lawns . nn
C.t •/G ' (�/ CL rv— 2,7C., rc: " 'E
Ctu of 'Sallem, AUS.Sadjusetts
p�'�oavE
(ane �$zdem (green
February 5,1987
AGENDA
I . Form A — Hayes, Pickman and Patton Road
2. Greenway Road
3. Village at Vinnin Square—Phase III
4. Ward and Peabody Streets
5. Peabody Museum
• 6. City—wide Walking Trail
7. Old/New Business
8. Approval of Minutes—November 20, January 8
•
Lttu of c Uljent, 'Cassarbuse#f5
�{II�MTI�
Wur �$afkm (preen
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Form A — Hayes, Patton and Pickman Road
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This Form A involves the subdivision of a 5. 1 Acre parcel into two lots,
one lot of .4.7 acres and a single family lot of 17,424 square feet (see
attached plan) . The land is located in an R-1 zone, and both lots meet
lot area and frontage requirements for an R-1 zoning district.
• Endorsement of this plan is therefore appropriate.
E549
•
mN
LL
�j A,�
LOT 2 4 .7 ACRES
V
.0 P\
w NO
_ � a j
Q
tit
LOT
III�
PICKMAN ROAD
/\.I F I "= 100
�w.ca�rz�b
Qlt#u of c Ulezu, 1tt s�trhu�r�##s
• 3A M F Planning �gnttrb
(One �$nlenz Green
T0: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City.Planner
RE: Greenway Road Subdivision
------------------------------------------------------------------------
At our last meeting, Mr. David Goodoff, attorney for developer Frank
Romano, explained to Board members that an agreement had been reached to
deed a 1,050 square foot piece of land to Linda and Robert Vaughan,
abutters to the property, as agreed at an 'earlier meeting' In order to
do this, the subdivision plan must be revised.
• To facilitate this alteration, Mr. Goodoff requested that the Board
modify the planting strip requirement from 5' to 3 ' abutting the Vaughan
property, as well as the planting strip directly across the newly
proposed roadway. The Board voted to approve these changes, and they
have now been incorporated into the plan.
Mr. Goodoff will present the revised plan for the Board's consideration
and endorsement.
E557
•
Qiitu u£ calenl, gassarliiisetts
• �' � "' `� � �C�ltYnYnn� �IIZIXY�
(IDne �$ttlem Gran
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Twenty—four (24) Units — Ward & Peabody Streets
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 8, 1987, a public hearing was held regarding a proposal to
develop an 8,600 square foot parcel located between Ward & Peabody
Streets, with frontage on both streets (see attached plan) . The
applican. proposes to construct a four—story building containing
twenty=fbur (24) dwelling units.
The Board -of Appeal has granted variances from lot size, lot area per
• dwelling unit, front yard, side yard, rear yard, lot coverage, building
height and parking for the project. The parcel is located in an R-3
zone.
Attached for your review are proposed conditions drafted by the Planning
Department for review of this plan.
E551
•
:
r tt >I
I• I
Ii .
it J >C :.,.',.. I �1 • \ ' rr ,
iI •'r.;
I 1
_ I :
'I: I
I
1 I
�/ r I.;. l.' ( ' r..l 1�t,�. •.\ „ L� o.: 11: I' i '`�? ... ... � 1. il( i ( i i 'r�) it
1 �j 1_._..... .. - _.........
VN
I
I.:
I
i \
(
I
I
I:
I t
i
1
i
f
I
1 .1..
I :•f-
1
1•:
,
1
.I.
!
I 1
I
f
I
I Y
..i
1
\
r n..,, _ ...' . .f --_. .II GTIIQ'Ti^� .rcc -.;='r�•^cC'f:.)}I�,::::f:.':�?!�1� �......
I
I
of Salem, 1� s�cli�i�k�##5
m
"""`. (IDne �$ttlsm (Surn
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner -
RE: Peabody Museum — Landscaping
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 1, 1986, the Board voted to issue a Site Plan Review Special
Permit for the construction of a 21 ,000 square foot addition to the
Peabody Museum. One condition of the Permit was that the landscaping,
particularly the garden .area facing Charter Street, be reviewed and
approved by the Planning Board.
Peter Bocot, of Kallmann, McKinnell and Wood, will present the
• landscaping plans to the Board for your review.
E554
•
y C�'� itt? Df c tTIEItt, cl55ciP��iiSYS
• ''a � p �lalmlY[� '�IIar$
s'�<ume
@ne Salem Green
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Village at Vinnin Square — Phase III
------------------------------------------------------------------------
At our last meeting, the Board requested Mr. Zieff to meet with the
Planning Department regarding the internal traffic circulation of his
development, as well as the proposed connector roadway between Loring
Avenue and Swampscott Road. We have done so, are satisfied that the
internal circulation system is adequate, and have agreed on the location
of the proposed roadway.
Attached for your consideration are suggested conditions of approval by
• the Planning Department.
E553
•
January 22, 1987
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
Salem Planning Board
One Salem Green
Salem, MA 01970
Dear Mr. Power:
This morning, a meeting was held at the Planning Department to
review and discuss the internal traffic circulation of Mr. Jim Zieff's
Village at Vinnin Square—Phase III project.
The concerns brought up by Planning Board members at their January
8, 1987 meeting were addressed by the group. After careful review, we
believe that Mr. Zieff has satisfactorily addressed all but one internal
traffic circulation issue. Our sole recommendation would be that a 24
foot roadway be maintained throughout the development. This has been
done in all locations excepting the turnaround at the westerly terminus
of the project, where 20 and 22 foot roadways exist. A 24 foot roadway
could be constructed with minimal alteration to the plan.
Sinc el ,
Gerar a n —
City nner
Paul Niman
Director of Public
Services
Sgt. Auddrey Sullivan.
a is Officer
..u.�.9-
1 1' /t ''
Captain Robert Turner
Fire Prevention
E607
y p PAY SPOFFORD L THORNDIKE. aC.
ENGINEERS
I
t • Should both of the above criteria for pursuing the
relocation of Swampscott Road be met, from the Salem/Swampscott
boundary at Loring Avenue and Essex Street, ;fh sbest�ali=gnment7
f-or the=re-10ca.ted--roadway-from-a-traffic=and roams d:w--esi
sit-and.00.int would-a.p r to-begin-on_the eeas-t=appr-ox-imate.ly
(a c.ros s_f.r.om�the-B-r-ad l ee=s-Shopping-Cen.t e.r-Ma.13;Ro ad-,=skis'-t=f he
'Ior-i-ng Tower-ha=l=i-side-at=or nea-r the-Ci-ty of,SUem/_Swampscot_t�
tL_ne sli rt=fhesZi.e f-pr-ope-r-t-y-and-£ol-low alo.ng,fhe=edgee th`e
S EFore'st�R3vv -r C� on'ti-oa--area^and-rejoin-Swampscott=Road_on
Che--west-eit-her direct-lp over-or'-us-t-sou-thwes-t o-f-i-ts_pr enes t
a°Iignment'(.on,the=Lynn-Sand=&-S' to—ne ide)-to minimize we£lands
timpac.ts� Data was unavailable to firmly establish .the precise
route the proposed Swampscott Road relocation.
o Improve Swamnscott Road to a typical 48 '
cross-section (four 12 ' lanes) with appropriate
pavement -markings and signing ,
j If the above two criteria for the relocation of the
! eastern part of Swampscott Road cannot be met, the City should
focus high priority on acheiving improvements to Swampscott
Road within existing rights of way. These improvements include :
i
' o A general widening to provide a minimum 48 '
• cross-section and pavement marki-ngs to provide a
four-lane cross-section;
o The provision of a _closed drainage/filtration
system to prevent pollution of the Thompson Meadows
' wetlands area; and
o Improved lighting the entire length of Swampscott
Road within the City of Salem.
The future intersection of First Street with
Swampscott Road should be monitored, as it may warrant
signalization at some
point in the future (within the next ten
years) as development occurs . Minimum curb radii of 50 ' should
be provided at the intersection of First Street with Swampscott
Road due to the high percentage of trucks expected to use the
roadway.
o Modify the intersection of Highland Avenue and
Swampscott Road to close the median and provide
right turns in and out only. Modify the
intersection of Marlborough Road/Traders
Way/Highland Avenue
i Presently, left-turns are hazardous into and out of
• Swampscott Road due to the high travel speeds on Highland
-50-
\
,.ate Y '.. •• �, `•,
� 1
• t• 1\ \ ' � •1 �II 'f� :1 '
no
It
m
\\ it
\\• ,�\\ +\.\ . 1 . • �/ 1 �\ 1`♦+\ \ +171 \._._.._. D
It
dj
VA
NN 01
It
It
\\\\` .\\ \ `�1\Y;\\ \ \,—\k\k \ yl\,1r' ia1�+`\�\\;;\\�\ \\\\' .: `aIt It '
It
IL
NV
\ \ `\ \,\\`\`\1 \\\\\\\\•\ \\\j• ' -.. o it
i
II \ \ 4 i
(�(11 a �• �Y 1
it � '\ - .. '•\ •- �. _ � 1
\\ I o 1
&JU of '�;tt1E12T, cffiM582Ujj1T5ett5
• n
� ' %" �12IY[klilt$ it IIMra
One Sall tt Green
February 5,1987
AGENDA
1 . Form A - Hayes, Pickman and Patton Road
/
2. Greenway Road �/ 'n`waq�
3. Village at Vinnin Square-Phase III
4. Ward and Peabody Streets /
• 5. Peabody Museum
6. City-wide Walking Trail
7. Old/New Business /
8. Approval of Minutes-November 20, January 8 V
- Ply
`�T9 /�/s'�
7L
- - — - -
a.
GUC
,�clL w c�QQ
TI -JIB
n4
&UC-Y 4D- QQ 4D 28 .
L 191
`41'
_ a 4,odo'l-
s m �
_ ave
{
20
7 � _
•
MINUTES OF MEETING
FEBRUARY 5, 1987
The Salem Planning Board met at One Salem Green, Second Floor Conference Room on
Thursday, February 5, 1987. Present were Chairman Walter Power, Richard Williams, Robert
Ledoux, Kenneth May, Abby Burns and John Butler. Also present were City Planner, Gerard
Kavanaugh and Staff Advisor Beth Debski.
Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m.
Form A - Hayes, Pickman and Patton Road
Mr. Chuck Faia described the plan to the Board. This Form A involves the subdivision of a 5.1
acre parcel into two lots, one lot of 4.7 acres and a single family lot of 17,424 square feet. The
land is located in an R-1 zone, and both lots meet lot area and frontage requirements for an R-1
zone.
Mr. Williams stated that an old road directory he has depicts Patton Road as being a through
road which.connects with Hayes Road. Mr. Ledoux asked if this was a paper road. Mr. Williams
answered in the affirmative.
Mr. Power asked if the land described is at a high elevation. Mr. Faia responded in the
negative.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the Form A as submitted as not requiring approval.
Ms. Burns seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor.
• Greenway Road
Mr. Frank Romano presented the revised plan to the Board. Mr. Power asked Mr. Kavanaugh to
relay to the Board the status of the project. Mr. Kavanaugh stated that the plan as submitted is
ready to sign and explained that a 1,050 sq. ft. piece of land has been reserved on the plan for
Mr. and Mrs. Vaughan and that the planting strips abutting the Vaughan's property, as well as
the planting strips directly across the newly proposed roadway have been reduced from 5' to 31.
The Vaughan and their Attorney are in concurrence with the revised plan.
Mr. Power asked if the road has been moved. Mr. Kavanaugh responded that it had been slightly
altered to accommodate the changes in the plan. Mr. Power then asked if the City had received
the deed for the open-space land. Mr. Kavanaugh stated that the deed is prepared, but that the
plan must be approved, signed and recorded prior to execution of the deed. Mr. May asked if a
suitable covenant accompanied the plan. Mr. Kavanaugh responded in the affirmative.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the plan as submitted. Mr. Ledoux seconded the motion and
the vote was unanimously in favor.
Village at Vinnin Square - Phase III
Mr. Kavanaugh reminded the Board that there were two outstanding issues after the January 8,
1987 meeting: 1. internal traffic circulation and 2. the proposed connector road between Loring
Avenue and Swampscott Road.
Mr. Kavanaugh stated that both issues have been resolved to the satisfaction of other City
Departments, as well as the Planning Department. Mr. Zieff has agreed to maintain a 24'
t_* roadway width throughout the development. This width would be satisfactory to the City
Engineer and the Fire Department and can be accomplished by minimal alterations to the plan.
-' -2-
The issue of the future construction of a roadway to connect Loring Avenue and
Swampscott Road was discussed between Mr. Kavanaugh and Mr. Zieff. Mr. Zieff will
provide an easement on his property in a location to be determined by the City.Planner
and Planning Board, as conceptually defined by the Traffic Study. The grant of any land
given by the developer for the road easement shall not result in any dimunition in the
number of units which the developer would be entitled to build had such roadway
easement not been granted.
Mr. Kavanaugh stated that the language of the conditions has been changed to reflect
these issues and that the Site Plan Review Special Permit is in order for the Board to act
on.
Mr. Power asked if legal arrangements had been made with the owners of Loring Towers
to ensure their cooperation if the roadway is built. Mr. Kavanaugh stated that they have
submitted a letter to the Planning Department stating their willingness to include their
land in the roadway construction. He further stated that Loring Towers views the land in
question as being unuseable for any part of their development and even though an aceess
road to their property is not part of the roadway plan, they view upgraded access from
Loring Avenue to Swampscott Road as favorable to their development.
Mr. Williams asked what prompted Mr. Zieff to raise the issue of a decreased number of
units if the roadway was constructed. Mr. Kavanaugh responded that the area of Mr.
Zieff's property would be decreased and thus he would not want his approval from the
Board of Appeal to be voided.
Ms. Burns made a motion to approve the Site Plan Review Special Permit with the
following conditions:
1. Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled "Site Plan Vinnin Associates, Realty Trust",
dated 12/8/86.
2. Curbing
Sloped granite curbing shall be installed along all access roadways/driveways, except
as waived by the City Planner.
3. Maintenance
Refuse, road and ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of
the developer, his successors, or assigns.
4. Utilities
Utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public
Services.
5. Signage and Entranceway
Signage for entranceway and proposed entranceway shall be reviewed and approved
by the City Planner.
6. Wetlands
• Any construction within 100' of a wetland shall be subject to approval of the
Conservation Commission.
-3-
7. L�an�ds_c_a_�ing
anL dscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled, "Village at Vinnin Square,
Typical Planting Plan", dated 12/18/86.
a.Trees shall be a minimum of 3" caliper. Shrubs shall be a minimum
of 24" in diameter.
b. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility of
the developer, his successors, or assigns.
8. Proposed Roadway
As defined by the comprehensive City-wide traffic study, an easement for the
future road access between Swampscott Road and Loring Avenue shall be provided
by the developer. The location of such easement on the developer's property shall
be determined by the City Planner and Planning Board, as conceptually defined by
the Traffic Study. The grant of any land given by the developer for the road
easement shall not result in any dimunition in the number of units which the
developer would be entitled to build had such roadway easement not been granted.
9. Construction Practices
All construction within the development shall be conducted in accordance with the
following conditions:
a. No work shall commence before 7:00 a.m. on weekends and 8:00 a.m. on
Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m. No work shall be
conducted on Sundays. Inside work of a quiet nature, though, shall be
permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of
construction on abutters such as noise, dust, fumes. Advance notice of the
commencement of construction in this Phase shall be provided to all
abutters in writing.
c. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to levaing the site so that
they do not leave dirt and/or debris on roadways as they leave the site.
d. Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday-Friday only between the
hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. There shall be no drilling or blasting on
Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays.
e. All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Planning Board. A Clerk of the Works shall be provided
by the City at the expense of the developer as deemed necessary by the
Director of Public Services or the City Planner.
10. Internal Circulation
The developer shall comply with the requirements defined in a letter to the Planning
Board from City Department heads regarding the need to maintain a 24' roadway
throughout the development. To do so, the developer shall alter his plan accordingly
• for approval by the City Planner.
Mr. Ledoux seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor.
Zieff Phase II - Form A
Mr. Steven Zieff su mitted a Form A plan for Phase II to the Board for their
consideration. The property line has been altered slightly to accommodate two additional
units, changing the square footage from 143,075 to 350,072 sq. ft. This alteration did not
cause any change to the footprint of the buildings.
Mr. May made a motion to endorse the change of plan as submitted. Mr. Williams
seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor.
Ward and Peabody Streets
Mr. Kavanaugh gave the Board an overview of the project which involves the construction
of a four story building containing twenty-four (24) dwelling units. Board members were
concerned with the following issues after the public hearing:
The parking, exterior building materials and the pedestrian warning system.
Mr. Power asked if a false facade could be placed on the street level of the building so as
to avoid a stilt effect. Mr. Kavanaugh stated that 31 parking spaces could not be provided
if a false facade were installed at the site. He further stated that this parking
configuration maximizes the on-site parking provided by the developer.
Mr. Power asked Mr. Kavanaugh if the inclusion of some type of stone grill work at the
parking level had been discussed with the developer. Mr. Power added that this
• was discussed at the last meeting with the developer as a way to address the safety
problem. Mr. Kavanaugh responded that this issue had not been discussed, but it could
become a condition of approval. Ms. Burns questioned if security issues were under the
jurisdiction of the Planning Board. Mr. Power responded in the affirmative.
Mr. May suggested that fewer units be constructed to allow the developer to provide more
parking in a safer environment. Mr. Serafini explained the developers situation to the
Board and added that Mr. Small has done a substantial amount of investment in the Point
Area. He also added that 24 rental units in this area was determined to be a positive
contribution, thus he feels the Planning Board should not make undue demands on the
developer while he is trying to realize this goal.
Mr. Butler asked what pedestrian warning system had been proposed for the development.
Mr. Kavanaugh stated that some sort of an alarm system will be worked out. Mr. May
stated that a buzzer and light system would be accpetable.
Mr. Williams asked if all the parking was at street level. Mr. Kavanaugh responded in the
affirmative.
Mr. Power stated that the grill work, gate entrance, alarm system, and soundproffing are
all aspects of this development which are of interest to the Planning Board and which
have not been satisfactorily presented to the Board to this date. Mr. Power further stated
that this building needs to be reviewed in context of future development as well as on its
own merit. Mr. May stated that there are two problems:
• 1. too many proposed units; and
2. the parking area
Mr. Butler asked if the developer could have below ground level parking. ,Mr. Kavanaugh
responded that the developer would respond that ten additional units would be necessary in
order to make below ground level parking cost effective.
Mr. Serafini interjected that these units will be rental units and that limits the market that the
developer can aim for. Mr. Serafini also stated that the Board of Appeal has approved 24 units
and that the neighborhood reaction has been favorable to this number of additional rental units.
Mr. Kavanaugh further stated that 24 new units of rental housing is an important project for the
City.
Mr. Ledoux made a motion to approve the Site Plan Review Special Permit with the following
conditions:
1. Conformance with Plan
Work shall conform to plan entitled, "Site Plan, 28 Peabody Street," dated June, 1986.
2. Construction Practices
All construction shall be in accordance with the following conditions:
a. No work shall commence before 7:00 a.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. on Saturdays.
No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m. There shall be no work conducted on
Sundays or holidays. Inside work of a quiet nature may be permitted at all other
times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of
�.~ construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters at least
72 hours prior to commencement of construction.
C. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so they do not
leave dirt/debris on the roadways as they leave the site.
3. Landscaping
Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled, "Landscape Site Plan, 28 Peabody
Street, dated June, 1986":
a. Maintenance of the landscape vegetation in a healthy and thriving condition shall be
the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns.
4. Exterior Building Materials
Exterior building materials shall be subject to the approval of the City Planner prior to
issuance of building permits.
5. Lighting
Lighting for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to
issuance of Certificates of Occupancy.
6. Board of Appeal Decision
Board of Appeal requirements as set forth in a decision granted on September 9, 1986
shall be adhered to.
• 7. Signage
Signage for the building shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to
issuance of Certificate Occupancy.
-6
8. Utilities
All utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering
Department prior to issuance of building permits.
9. Security of Parking Area
The Security System for the parking area shall be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Department and the Planning Board prior to issuance of building permits.
10. Signage for Parking Area
Signage for the parking area shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Department and Planning Board prior to issuance of building permits.
11. Alarm System
The alarm system, designed to warn pedestrians of on coming cars, to be installed in
the parking area shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and the
Planning Board prior to issuance of building permits.
12. Doors and Gates for Parking Area
Doors, gates, and walls within the parking area shall be subject to the approval of
the Planning Department and Planning Board prior to issuance of building permits.
13. Soundproofing
All methods of soundproofing between the parking area and living units, shall be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Planning Board prior to
issuance of building permits.
14. Violation of Conditions
Any violation of these conditions shall result in revocation of this permit by the
Planning Board.
Ms. Burns seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor.
Peabody Museum
Mr. Kavanaugh explained that on May 1, 1986 the Planning Board had approved a Site Plan
Review Special Permit for a 21,000 square foot addition to the Peabody Museum. One of
the conditions was that the landscaping plan for the site be reviewed and approved by the
Planning Board. Mr. Fiske Crowell presented the landscaping plan to the Board.
Mr. Crowell presented a rendering of the museum addition which borders on East India
Mall. Mr. Crowell stated that the existing chinese garden will remain intact and that
there will be the addition of some landscaping as well as an additional entrance at the
ground level to the new addition in this area.
A total landscape plan was then presented to the Board with details of plantings to be
used, the dumpster location and screening, and materials to be used for the driveway.
Mr. Power asked if the Museum had any lighting plan for the area. Mr. Crowell responded
that the existing flood light would remain and additional lighting would be installed within
the canopy of the loading dock.
Mr. May made a motion to approve the landscaping plan as submitted. Mr. Ledoux
seconded the motion and the vote was unanimously in favor.
` Fafard Chimney Discussion
-�-
Mr. John Serafini and Mr. Ron Killian were present to represent the Fafard Companies
and to solicit Board response to the colors that Fafard has painted the pre-cast concrete
chimneys.
Board members gave Fafard representatives their opinions of the chimney colors. Most
members thought that the painted chimneys looked fine from a distance. The orange
color was favored over the red. Mr. Williams stated that paint added to the aesthetics of
the chimneys, but it did not mask the imperfections in the construction of the chimneys.
Mr. Power stated that the Board may best handle this situation by segregating the issue
into existing chimneys and future installation of chimneys.
Mr. Serafini stated that the same technique for chimney installations has been used in
other communities and Fafard has not encountered any difficulties. He also asked that
the Board keep in mind the overall benefit the development will have for the City, as well
as the price component of the units and the target market Fafard is trying to attract to
the project. Mr. Butler asked what the price difference was between all brick and pre-
cast concrete chimneys. Mr. Killian stated that there was approximately a $2,500.00
difference in the price. Mr. Killian added that the brick chimneys went up more slowly
and weather conditions played a greater role in the construction of brick chimneys as
compared with concrete chimneys. Mr. Killian further stated that, to date, no complaints
have been made from owners regarding the concrete chimneys.
Mr. Serafini stated that the developer has been working in good faith with the City
throughout this project and he believes that aesthetics are an individual choice and so long
as the painted chimneys are not offensive to Board members, Fafard should be allowed to
use the concrete chimneys.
Mr. Power responded that the problem was not of the Board's making and that Fafard
Company had changed their construction technique after installing brick chimneys on
Parcels 1 and 2 which the Board evaluated and used to make future decisions concerning
the Fafard development. Mr. Power further stated that Fafard was in violation of the
permit issued, since a condition of the permit was that all brick chimneys were to be
installed.
Mr. Butler asked why the conditions of the permit were not followed. Mr. Kavanaugh
responded that Mr. Fafard was very surprised with the Board's negative response to the
concrete chimneys because Mr. Fafard truly believes the concrete is as pleasing and as
well constructed as brick chimneys.
Mr. May recommended that the Board first address the issue of future chimney
construction at the Fafard development and made a motion which established the policy
that all chimneys facing Whalers Lane be constructed of brick and that the Planning
Department can designate other chimneys which are significantly visible and warrant a
brick chimney, the remainder of the chimneys shall be pre-cast concrete and painted.
Mr. Killian asked if the color review process would be for the whole Board to review. It
was responded in the affirmative.
�.coxulrt C111 of �.c�1t1tT� '1 iI55c�t111i5LftS
e �
• 4 �, � �jclltn IIFIr�
IMNS One ia6m Green
NOTICE OF MEETING
You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its
regular meeting on Thursday, January 22, 1987 , at 7:30 p.m. , One Salem
Green, second floor conference room.
I.UQJ�II.t_�i 1�0'u.%EJL .�
Walter B. Power, III
Chairman
Tentative !Agenda:
1. Form A - Hayes, Pickman' and Patton Road
2. Greenway Road
Ld
• 3. Village at Vinnin Square - Phase III COP
4. Ward & Peabody Streets
5. Peabody Museum
6. Subdivision Regulations
7 . Old/New Business
8. Approval of Minutes - November 20, January 8
E561
Th'
iu r.ot i.ce
G..: _. : 1 B'111et1*1 llcardn
oZ3 �/7li '<. . . ,. nn �� .o�� 1707
� i
Titil of
C*
uarl
@ tip -§alpnt (6rrrn
NOTICE OF MEETING
You aie hereby notified the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular
meeting on Thursday, January 8, 1987 at 7 :30 p.m. , One Salem Green,
second floor conference room.
Ida Icer B. Power, III
Chairman
Tenative A2enda:
I . Public Hearing Site Plan Review Special Permit Ward/Peabody
Streets
2 . Village at Vinnin Square - Phase III
3 . Determination of Substantial change:
a. 11 Essex Street
b. 8 Taft Road
4. Adoption of street names :
a . Tedesco Pond
b. D i 5 i a s e.
c . Fafr
ard
5. Oldl ew Business
6 . Approval of Minutes November 20, December 4, 18
c925
of
Planniq Paurb
Mm $alem Green
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Public Hearing - Site Plan Review Special Permit - Ward &
Peabody Streets
This proposal. involves the construction of a four-story building
containing twenty-four (24) dwelling units at 34 Peabody Street.
The parcel of land contains 8600 square feet and is located in an R-3
zoning district (see attached plan) . Variances from lot size, lot area
per dwelling unit, front yard, side yard, rear yard, lot coverage,
• height and parking were granted by the Board of Appeal on August 27,
1986.
The Applicant's representatives will present the plan in detail at the
public hearing.
C930
tti
NIX;
Iv
rk
0... ... ....
YVI CP P)
M141 S 60
C'4P.
C tv of tt1em, Htt��ttrl��zsE##�
. �;r ,° �Ittnnin� �nttrD
(One Safem Green
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Village at Vinnin Square — Phase III
As was discussed at our last meeting, James Zieff, developer of Village
at Vinnin Square, is proceeding with design plans for Phase III of his
development. This phase involves the construction of 212 units on 18
acres of land off Loring Avenue.
The Board's response to Mr. Zieff' s original presentation of Phase III
was very positive, and we have all seen the quality of his first two (2)
phases.
• Attached for your consideration are suggested conditions made by the
Planning Department.
C931
•
DRAFT CONDITIONS
SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT
Village at Vinnin Square - Phase III
• 1 . work shall conform to plan entitled " Site Plan Vinnin Associates,
Realty Trust", dated 12%8/86.
2. Sloped granite curbing shall be installed along a!1 access
roadways,/driveways, except as waived by the City Planner.
3. Refuse, road and ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the
respo:i:,ibility of the developer, his succssors, or assigns.
4. Utility install:t.tion shall be reviewed and approved by the Director
of Public Services.
5. Signage for entranceway and proposed entranceway shall be reviewed
ane approved by the City Planner.
6. An} construction within 100' of a wetland shall be subject to
approval of the Conservation Commission.
7. Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled," Village at
Vinnin Square, Typical Planting Plan", dated 12/18/86.
a. Trees shall be a minimum of 4" caliper. Shrubs shall be a minimum
of 24" in diameter.
• b. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall ba the responsibility of
tLe developer, his successors, or assigns.
8. A conceptual plan showing the proposed roadway connecting Loring
Avenue and Swampscott Road shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval, and any and all land ar.!a owned by the
developer necessary for the layout of the proposed roadway or defined by
the Planning Department and developer shall be deeded to the City when
requested.
9. All construction within the development snal.l. be conducted in
accordance with the following conditions:
a. No work shall commence before 7 :00 a.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m.
on Saturdays. No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m. No work
shall be conducted on Sundays. Inside work of a quiet nature,
though, shall be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall. be taken to minimize the negative
effects of construction on abutters such as noise, dust, fumr:s.
Advance notice of the commencement of construction in this Phase
shall be provided to all abutters in writing.
c. All construction vehicles shall be cleaned in order that they not
leave dirt and/or debris on the road as they leave the site.
• d. Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday-Friday only
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. There shall. be no
drilling or blasting on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays.
e. AL1 construction shall be carried out in accordance with the Rules
and Regulations of the Planning Board. A Clerk of the Works shall
be provided by the City at the expense of the developer as deemed
necessary by the Director of Public Services or the City Planner.
C940
•
Ci#v of 'Salem, ttssttclj �e##�
Planning Peart
One Salem Gwen
TO: Planning Board Members
FROM: Gerard Kavanaugh, City Planner
RE: Determination of Substantial Change — 11 Essex Street
On November 19, 1986 a petition to convert a two—family dwelling into a
three—family dwelling at 11 Essex Street was denied by the Board of
Appeal (see attached decision) .
According to State law, once a petition is denied by the Board of
Appeal, it cannot be heard again for two years unless a "substantial
• change" has been made in the plan. The Planning Board must determine,
by an affirmitive vote of the Board, that such a change has been made.
The petitioner has now changed his plan by reconfiguring his parking
plan and proposing that the structure be owner—occupied. The Board must
now determine if the new plan shows a substantial change. If so
determined, petitioner can return to the Board of Appeal..
C932
•
r_-L
0{ �caj£Itt fca55M£k115£tf5
DECISION ON THE PETITION OF SCOTT R. KEATON FOR A SPECIAL rte '
PERMIT FOR 11 ESSEX STREET CI i Y P
A hearing on this petition was held November 19, 1986 with the following Board j
Members present: James Hacker, Chairman; Messrs. , Bencal, Fleming, Strout and
Associate Member Dore. Notice of the was sent to abutters and others and notices
of the hearing were properly published in the Salem Evening News in accordance
with Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40A.
Petitioner, owner of the property , is requesting a Special Permit to convert a
two family dwelling into a three family dwelling in this P,-2 district.
i
The provision of the Salem Zoning Ordinance which is applicable to this request
for a Special Permit is Section 6' B 10, which provides-zs,follows:
: j
= v = Notwithstanding anything to the contrary appearing in this Ordinance, the Board
Appeal may, in accordance with the procedure and conditions set forth in
- - �ection VIII F and IX D, gre:nt. Special Permits for alterations and reconstruction
- of nonconforming structures, and for changes, enlargement, extension or expansion
�f nonconforming lots, land, structures, and uses, provided, however, that such
E-nange, extension, enlargement or expansion shall not be substantially more
• = �_ W ictrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood.
- In more general terms, this Board is, when reviewing Special Permit requests,
_ = J 25 guided by the rule that a Special Permit request may be granted upon a finding
"' - by the Board that the grant of the Special Permit will promote the public health,
safety, convenience and welfare of the City's inhabitants.
is < -
The Board of Appeal, after careful consideration of the evidence presented at the
- the hearing, and after viewing the plans, makes the following findings of fact:
0
The submitted Parking plan was inadeouate for an area that is densely
populated and without sufficient parking;
W 2 . There was no neighborhood opposition to the Pian.
< r — "� r pre
_ - - - < v c Or: the basis of the above f-indins o, fact, and on the evidence seated at the
hearing, the Board of Appeal Col;_Iudes as folioY:
J - -
_ 1 . The proposed ccnversion will not Dr'OmCte the public health, Safety
- _ - convenience and welfare of the City ' s -inhabitants.
C c
Therefore , the Zoning Board of Appeal voted three to two (3-2) , (N-- s. , Fleming,
Strout and Dore voted in favor of granting the petition; Ilessrs. , Bencal and
Hacker voted in Opposition) , petitioner failed to carry the four voted needed to
grant the Special Permit, the Special Permit is denied.
'• DENIED -
! Peter A. Dore, Associate Member
A COPY OF THIS DECISION HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE PLANNING BOARD AND THE CIT': CLERK
c. -
DRAFT CON-57-TIONS
SITS PLAN RSViEW SPECIAL PS? •1I':
• Village at VI.nnin Square - Phase III
I . work shall conform to plan entitled Site PLan Vinnin Associates,
Realty Trust", dated 12/8/85.
2. Sloped granite curbing shall be installed along a!1 access
roadways/driveways, except as waived by the City Planner.
3 . Refuse, road and ground maincenince and snow removal shall be the
respon!.ibility of the developer, his succssurs, or assigns.
4. Utility inscall;•.tion shall be reviewed and approved by the Director
of Public 'Services .
5. Signage for entranceway and proposed entranceway shall be reviewed
ano approved by the City Planner.
6. Ani construction within 100' of a wetland shall be subject
approval of the Conservation Commission.
7 . Landscaping of the site shall conform to plan entitled," Village,ai .
Vinnin Square, Typical Planting Plan", dated 12/18/86.
a. Trees shall be a minimum of 4" caliper. Shrubs shall be a minimum
of 24" in diameter.
• b. ' N,aiucenance of landscape vegetation shall ba the responsibilXy�of
tLe developer, his successors, or assigns.
8. A conceptual plan showing the proposed roadway connecting Loring
Avenue and Swampscott -Read shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for review and approval, and any and all land area owned by the
developer,neceis'ary for the layout of the proposed roadway or defined by
the Planning Department and develcper shall be deeded to the City when
requested.
9. All. construction .-irnin the development sriall. be conducted in
accordance with the following conditions :
a. No work shall commence before 7 :00 a .m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m.
on Saturdays . No work shall continue beyond 5:00 p.m. No work
shall be conducted en Sundays. Inside work of a quiet nature,
though; shall be permitted at other times.
b. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative
effect of construction on abutters such as noise, dust, fumes.
Advance notice of the cornencement of construction in this Phase
shall be provided to all 'abutters in writing.
c. All construct-on vehicles shall be cleaned in order that they not
leave dirt and/or debris on the road as they leave the site.
• d. Drilling and blasting shall be limited to Monday-Friday only
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. There shall be no
drilling or blasting on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays.
i
e . All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the Rules
and Regulations of the Planning Board. A Clerk of the Works shall
be provided by the City at the expense of the developer as deemed
necessary by the Director of Public Services or the City Planner.
C940
' I
i
r ,
i
I
I
I
•
• PI
rtu of �� -nil C ��is��zrl�z1sr s
a. uf,_ _� Ialutitt yrt�
01u: Salem Guni
COr.S_I<t
Fie members of the ;la ming Bored o'f the City of Salem, hereby
consent cu reconsiueration by the Board of appeal of the City of Salem
of --.I- action of the Bca_'d of Aooecl o;, a c2r_ain pet_tion file ` on
behalf of James E. Burkinshaw, 8 Taft Road. dated November 19, 1986,
relating to proposed construction at 8 Taft Road, Salem. A copy of said
petition; is attached to this consent .
ibis Consent is given in accordance w_th and under the terms of
_•iassaciiusetts General Law Chapter LOA, Section lo.
Signed tris g day of JQ,/U-P-t-LI 198' .
/l
v ✓�
SALEM PLANNING BOARD
•! Cl J' (n rU In (n '1 .i.1 :�. :,1 l r
�' l7 '1]l �.., _. > 111 —• I-' U .l 1-.. .11 :.J l'. •: 'S ...1 .-., 11�'
Cl In
1-'• (b Ill (u 11 Cl. iP In Tl 0'1
C. :Y IV :. O O r. '3 i,
N �n J :C 'n :1: rr IU III (n '1-I I+ (p '•'1 �• (' IP 1 in
'L :Yt '3 1 0 •-I r:j. 1
in N 111C. 'in (', fP :Y 1 'r. 1, ::t
" 1 •'9 In (D ", •1') 1- '7 1.) -1 I1, rr :
!:r it - '• , "� la I:1 fel r, to ^3 '1) Il N iV O .• r:. I G) [I_l ,..I
IU J, .O :.I '1,
In Ir r. lu f: .V U'
1(�
^� ( i 1. ID ' 1 •1 1 I� Al In 1 11' li. 1 1 I f
rn IJI In O or Ilr 7 �.•, f, ':t 1"tr In rr -1 I , .-. •
t ..� ! .l' U 111 :1' tl .'.• ?:0'1 P, ,: :Y I '
�i nl Ill •-1 b:• In In W. L•• fU (J' IU :I: f1 '1'1 Ila
r, 1 .! _ 'r 1 3 •••1 (:L Cr ::1 ••1 1-•• nl ll. 1-• In Ill .1 I 1
(-) In W.
i:l n it, m
:I •-'1 rr •(1 n' :1. : m N U r-_ r-rte
N (l
cl. Iil I
.'3 I-'. L Ill U P. 11. LI -1
, � _ ` I.1 N rr 1.•• I-'. '.3 C7 .7 µ I'1 '(3 G. V '
4 !? ' :, 1> L•. 'O J 1 n. 1'. to I c, 3: :�' I'1
'3 'O '1 (11) OU ', I-•. ] n. In I.•. pl C-] to 1/I
1 ;: •'I rn �n
to m In [] .:1 0'1 ..,.) I--' -3
c, .. r, = L.1 \ .Il lil to •s Un .i
'^ \; r. So nl u, n m rr •i) r c•� In
^ .., i i (O �, [D 1— N
1) :t ,.,1 .l' IU .r U, •3' -.' 't 10
n S ,,, t.
, rp r9 :1 "j (n cr rr :., O In G. `3 .' .0 :?
c,. i ,.�. fb �.., .-•, 1-" �l ,• Ill ;
(;
V. N O O n. m nl in
::' r t• '} '� b.r r.. G. rr Cl h '-)'.:) or cr lu .1 ...,
I1. ff� (Dri
r� ^., 1. = ...f :n:' \\ G 'r7 I. N •• f, c'r c.i In :,1 -1-� U
71 (r 1-• to N = 1:'t C-1in - Et
o —.• ':, 1r, i!. - l'I fl ( rI :T PI N m rr N :: cr •3 N
Clto in
, 'u N �, 1-' In IA 1.1 c' O L•. , IU — '•I 1 111
in
C (n
IT 111 _ nl ri} V� 7• _—,
nr •. •v CSl
Q O In
3
\ O •U ry (D Ln rn , to r'
i-j V O N rD ID 7 N (n N m 0
tIV
4tl ''O (D C* O I�r '< -1 t].011 1-
0
-
1 l: rr tD 1� - �•• cr J O G :_rJ
n 7 :J ID n (D (D In COI_.
fl) (D to '3 N ice• m a cr)
1 �.
illCU '3 cl. I� O
in fp
I-•� N O N '
I-• Oa T D o• � —�
,U p D ^ CO
.. to rT