Loading...
1993-PLANNING BOARD SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, December 16, 1993, at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Hart, John Moustakis, Kosta Prentakis, Debbie Hilbert, and Carter Vinson. Also present were Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. EXTENSION OF TIME FOR DECISION ON PROPOSED DAYCARE CENTER AT COLBY STREET - SALEM HOSPITAL Debbie Hurlburt read a letter to the Board from Atty. John Serafini on behalf of his client Salem Hospital, extending the time for which the Board has to act on their proposal for a day care center on Colby Street to January 31 , 1994. Motion made by David Hart to accept the extension of time for a decision for the proposed day care center on Colby Street by Salem Hospital, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT BOSTON AND HOWLEY STREET - ATTY. JOHN SERAFINI • Debbie Hurlburt read a letter from Atty. John Serafini representing Stop & Shop approving the continuation of the Public Hearing to January 6, 1994. Motion made by John Moustakis to continue the Public Hearing for the Proposed PUD for Boston and Howley Street, to January 6, 1994, seconded by Debbie Hilbert, and approved 5-0 with Carter Vinson abstaining. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and requested that the Board hold the next meeting in a larger . location to accommodate the large crowd expected to attend the meeting. He suggested the City Council chamber, and noted that it is available on January 6, 1994 . FORM A - 3 RAYMOND AVENUE - ATTY. ROBERT MUNROE Atty. Robert Munroe addressed the Board on Behalf of his clients Hugh and Lorraine Gilbert, and requested approval of a Form A, for the conveyance of 290 s.f. from 430 Lafayette Street, and 459 s.f. from the Welch Family Trust to 3 Raymond Avenue. Atty. Munroe noted that the agreements had been made to allow the Gilberts to rightfully have the land that they had assumed 1 they owned for many years . He also noted that the lots conveying the land would be minimally altered by the conveyance, noting • that 430 Lafayette Street would be 15,144 s.f. after the conveyance. Beth Debski read letters from abutters James Peterson and Atty. Jeffrey Schribman on behalf of his clients Carol and Layne Kroger, supporting the proposal. Motion made by Kosta Prentakis to approve the Form A for 3 Raymond Avenue, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING FOR A DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION - CALUMET STREET ATTY. JACK KEILTY Christopher Mello of Eastern Land Survey addressed the Board and explained the proposal of Hewitt Construction Co. for a five lot subdivision to be located on Calumet Street. He explained that they propose to extend a public way and develop 5 house lots in an R1 district. He noted that 3 of the lots would be from 30,000 s.f. to 53,000 s.f. and 2 of the lots would be just over 15,000 s .f. Mr. Mello reviewed the plans for the utilities to be brought in from Dundee Street with an 8 inch line and manholes . He also stated that they feel that this is an efficient use of the property. • Walter Power asked if they were requesting any waivers. Atty. Keilty addressed the Board and listed the requested waivers. He stated that they are requesting waivers from street width from 54 to 40 feet, and a waiver from underground utilities, noting that there is overhead electric and telephone in the area at present. They also requested that the fee for the subdivision of $1 ,000.00 be waived since the proposal was brought up in the early 1980 ' s and never acted on. Atty. Keilty explained that in the early 1980 ' s a proposal was presented and after much discussion was left in abeyance. He noted that the matter had gone to the City Council in the hopes of getting a land swap and he was not certain if a formal denial had been given. Walter Power asked if any of the property encroached on the wetlands at the base of the property. Atty. Keilty stated that they would be filing with the Conservation Commission. Walter Power noted that the policy of the Board is to consider matters after the Conservation Commission has made a determination. Atty. Keilty noted that they are concerned about making changes to the plans, after the Commission approved them which would require re-filing them. He suggested that the Board consider the proposal and take action on the items of significance, and hold off on final approval until the Commission makes a decision. • 2 David Hart asked to have the road described. Chris Mello stated that the proposed width of the road should be adequate to provide parking on both sides of the street. He also noted that there should be adequate off street parking provided. Walter Power opened up the meeting to Public Comment at this time. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and expressed his concern that the plan should be signed by the City Clerk. Walter Power explained that the City Clerk signs the plan following the action of the Planning Board. Councillor O'Leary also expressed his concern that there was no neighborhood meeting about the proposed plan. He noted that the developer held neighborhood meetings during other attempts to develop the land and met with much neighborhood opposition. He explained that the neighbors are concerned about the drainage and the effect it would have on their properties. Mr. Millea addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned about the drainage and noted that water cascades down Dundee Street. He explained the locations of the catch basins there. Gerry Verrette of Sutton Street addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned about the water problems that he already has and the effect this project would have on his property. • Ronald Savageau of 38 Calumet Street addressed the Board and noted that he used Belleview Avenue during the winter because it is well sanded. Dick Jodoin of 52 Belleview Avenue addressed the Board and stated that his main concern was the duration of the project and how much it would inconvenience him. He noted that he heard they plan to develop one house lot per year and that would mean that he would have to endure the project for a long time. He also stated that the water is so intense that his garage gets flooded every time it rains. Mr. McDowell addressed those concerns and explained that the level of the street may change 6 inches one way or another, but that it would not be a drastic change. He also explained that the proposed time frame should take 2 years, and that the construction of the road and the installation of the utilities should take about 3 or 4 months. He also noted that the construction of the homes would vary with the sale of the lots . Dolores Soteris of 6 Dundee Street addressed the Board and stated that she has lived there for 26 years and her yard gets flooded during heavy rain. She also noted that she is concerned about the additional traffic that would be created, noting that there is a ball park in Peabody that abuts the area and in the summer 3 there is increased traffic. • Gail MacGregor of 44 Belleview Avenue addressed the Board and stated that there is a pond behind her house which is home to a family of ducks. She also noted that she has problems with water and recently installed a gauge to hold her water pressure under 90. Ron Savageau addressed the Board again and noted that the soil is absorbent and that last spring the thawing in the spring created a lot of problems. Bill Herwig of Rockdale Avenue addressed the Board and asked if the developer has considered using hydraulics as opposed to blasting. Atty. Keilty stated that they would look into it. Carter Vinson expressed his concern that the plan shows bituminous berm, rather than granite curbing. Mr. Mello stated that they plan to use vertical granite curbing of standard length. David Winter of 14 Rockdale Avenue addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the water problems. He noted that he has a river behind his house. He also noted that he is concerned about the blasting on lot D and the location in relation to his property. • Councillor O'Leary addressed the Board again and stated that he would like a neighborhood meeting, and he was upset that one had not been held prior to this meeting. He also stated that he agreed with Chairman Power that they should go to the Conservation Commission before coming to the Planning Board. Councillor O'Leary also stated that he has a problem with the granting of a waiver for the fees. He stated that they should be required to pay the fee. Beth Debski clarified the fee and stated that the fee is not $1 ,000.00, it is $75.00. Walter Power stated that he would like to have a site visit to the property. The Board scheduled a site visit for Saturday January 15, 1994 . Carter Vinson stated that he agreed that he would like the Conservation Commission to take up the matter before the Planning Board. Walter Power stated that he would like to see if the Conservation Commission could act concurrently. Beth Debski agreed that it is important for the Conservation Commission to see what the Board would require and stated that. keeping the Public Hearing open until the Commission decides the plan would be appropriate. 40 4 Atty. Keilty stated that he would file a Notice of Intent with the Conservation Commission to get that process started. Walter Power asked those present to appoint a neighborhood spokesperson to communicate with the Board and the Planning Department following the close of the Public Hearing. Motion made by David Hart to continue the Public Hearing to February 3, 1994, seconded by Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. WETLANDS AND FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - SALEM OIL AND GREASE 60 GROVE STREET Mark Sherfy of Gulf of Maine Research Inc. addressed the Board on behalf of Salem Oil and Grease. He noted that a site visit was held four or five weeks ago and that they had received a request for additional information from the Board, which they responded to in writing. Gary Hanscom, Vice President of Manufacturing for Salem Oil and Grease addressed the Board and explained that they have invested in a number of techniques to address the carbon filtration problem. He noted that the system that is in place has been an improvement with the emissions and that the neighbors seem satisfied with the result. He also noted that the people that were at the last meeting have never toured the plant and • do not know what they have really done. The Board reviewed the letter of answer to their concerns. The Board reviewed the letter of response from SESD, to a letter from the Board concerning the problems that Salem Oil and Grease has had with SESD. Beth Debski noted that the Board has not received a response from DEP, to the letter from the Board requesting information regarding a recent site visit and any report that may have been made on the site. Motion made by David Hart to continue the Public Hearing until Thursday, January 20, 1994, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. OLD / NEW BUSINESS GTE / Sylvania Update Beth Debski reported that she and Debbie Hurlburt met with Atty. Cynthia Barnet. She noted that they walked the site and spent 3 hours with Hugh Mulligan of Gulf of Maine, gathering information on the site. She noted that the 90 days to make • the decision is up in mid February. Kosta Prentakis suggested 5 that the Board should aim for 76 days to be sure that the time frame is met. Beth also informed the Board that the Public Hearing with DEP is set for January 20, 1994 at 1 :00, and that Atty. Barnet will attend for the Board. Walter Power asked that Mark Blair be notified of the Public Hearing. Walter Power suggested that Atty. Barnet be invited to the January 20th meeting to discuss the matter with the Board. Stop and Shop Update Beth Debski informed the Board that the City has received notice that Stop and Shop will be required to do a complete Environmental Impact Report as part of the MEPA process. She also noted that 10 intersections listed by Salem have been included in the MEPA review at the suggestion of the City of Salem. Bill Luster noted that it is important that the members who vote on the decision were present at all of the meetings concerning the matter. Walter Power suggested that the minutes be checked to see who was present at the meetings. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by John Moustakis to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. iThe meeting was adjourned at 10: 30 P.M. RE PECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EI EEN M. SACC , CLERK PB121693 • 6 SALEM PLANNINTG BOARD • MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, !DECEMBER 2 , 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning hoard was held on Thursday, December 2 , 1993 at 7 :30 p.m. , in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Linda Vaughan, Chuck Puleo, John Moustakis , Debbie Hilbert, Y.osta Prentakis, Albert Hill and David Hart. Carter Vinson joined the meeting at 9 : 30 p.m. Also present were City Planner William Luster, Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. PUBLIC HEARING - PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT BOSTON AND HONLEY STREETS - ATTU!.!11EY JOHN SF.P.AFINI SR. '.2E131,,ESENTING STOP AND SIiOP SUPERMARIfFT COMPANY AND JOHN C. JEFFERS Chairman Walter Power addressed those present and stated that the Planning Board would he continuing the Public Hearing at 9: 30 P.M. , because two members of the Board had to leave clue to family commitments. Ile noted that they would listen to the petitioner and asked that they leave as much time as possible for the audience to ask questions . • Atty. John Serafini Sr, addressed the ?bard and stated that tonight they would be beginning the process of presenting a Planned Unit Development ( PUD) . He stressed that the process does not end tonight and that after all of the information is presented the Planning Board would review the plans and make a decision. . . Atty. Serafini reported that they have held two public meetings regarding this project, and have taken the concerns of the neighbors into account and come up with some solutions they hope will please the neighbors . He noted that as a result of those meetings the two main concerns were traffic and noise, and Stop & Shop hired professionals to perform studies . He stated that the results of the studies were reviewed and that they feel that the concerns could be handled. He asked that the neighbors keep an open mina and listen to the material presented. Ile also noted that Stop & Shop is aware of the concerns and that they are confident that thev can develop the site without unreasonable interference . Attv. Serafini described the site as a 7 acre site with some of the parcel being in Peabody and most of it in Salem. ?le noted that it is zoned industrial heing a B2 and an 1`2 mix. tie also noted that the site was formerly a leather tannery and • explained the present condition of the site and the history of the area. 1 • Atty. Serafini also noted that the project would bring a great deal of tax money and jobs to the area. Atty. Serafini stated that Salem is 8 square miles and that at one time it was the focal trading point in the area. He also noted that the project would be a great improvement to the area, as opposed to what it is today. Atty. Serafini introduced Mr. Parazella, the project manager from Stop & Shop to address the Board. Mr. Parazella explained that Stop & Shop has 122 stores in the Northeast and of that 84 are super stores, which is proposed for the site. He describe Stop & Shop as a state of the art supermarket, and explained the various departments that they have, Video, Produce, Bakery, Deli, and Pizzeria Uno. He noted that the store would be similar to the new store in Swampscott. Mr. Parazella explained that Stop & Shop acquired the land about a year and half ago. He stated that they are very concerned about the impacts of the project, noting that they are developing the project, and they will be staying on to run a business , so they have to live with the result as well . Atty. Serafini stated that they have placed a great deal of emphasis on landscaping for this project, concentrating on the portion of the property that abuts homeowners . He noted that this area has been extensively landscaped to provide a buffer. • He introduced Frank Stewart the Landscape Architect to explain the landscaping plans. Mr. Stewart explained the landscaping plans to the Board. He noted the main areas as the Peabody side, and the area abutting the Burial Ground, and the Howley Street side of the property. He stated that they plan to maintain as many shade trees as possible that exist there now. He also showed the Board a cross section of the views . Mr. Stewart also stated that they are planting a great amount of foliage between the project and the homes that abut it. He also stated that they plan to maintain or replace the fence that exists there now. Mr. Stewart explained that they chose Hemlock Trees which will be 12-13 feet high at planting and grow about a foot per year. He noted that within ten years the view of the building would be screened. He also noted that the trees closest to the homes of the abutters would be 13 feet higher than the ground levels of their back yards. Atty. Serafini introduced Mr. Grealish of Goldberg Zoinno (GZA) to explain the results of 21E testing that was performed on the site. Mr. Grealish explained that they were hired by Stop & Shop to investigate the site as a possible 21E site in accordance with • Mass. General Laws . He statee that they sampled the ground water and did test pits . He also noted that they were not the 2 • first company to investigate this site and that he reviewed the data from previous tests as well as their own. They also put in 6 or 8 wells and did an additional 20 test pits. Fie noted that only one portion of the site was used as a tannery. He reported that after reviewing 25 samples of ground water . and 40 test pits there were no reportable concentrations of contamination in the soil. He also noted that there are underground storage tanks located there which will be removed, and they would proceed with the bringing the site up to code through the Mass Contingency Plan. Atty. Serafini introduced Robert O 'Neil of Tech Environmental Services to explain the study they did on the noise concern. Mr. O'Neil addressed the Board and stated that Stop & Shop commissioned them to do a study of noise on what is there today and the effects that the project would have on it. He stated that they focused on the roads, air traffic, and what is located there now and calculated what the impact would be from the proposed store. He stated that the additional noise would be from roof top equipment which would be equipped with noise barriers, which would force the noise upwards. He estimated that the increase in noise would be about 3 decibels above what is there now. Mr. O'Neil also stated that the noise from delivery truck would • be eased by a retaining wall and A/C power for refrigeration trucks to reduce the noise of the diesels . He also noted that Stop & Shop would work with the Planning Department on acceptable hours for times of deliveries. He concluded by saying that the increase would be barely perceptible with the mitigation measures that are planned,_ which comply with local and state regulations . Walter Power opened the meeting up to comments from those in attendance. Ward Four Councillor Leonard addressed the Board and stated that the model looks good, but noted that the applicant has not explained why they are submitting a PUD for this site, rather than seek a zoning change from the Board of Appeal. Atty. Serafini stated that their submission of a PUD for the site complies with the zoning ordinance. He stated that they gathered the information on the project content and what it means and they are proceeding accordingly. Councillor At Large Stanley Usovich addressed the Board and stated that as a former City Planner in Gloucester he questioned the merits of the PUD application. He stated that he felt that the focus of the Board should be whether the site is actually a PUD. He also questioned the long term impact that the project would have and whether this is the correct approach to • development in the community. He urged the Board to deny the PUD and have them go to the City Council for the appropriate 3 course of action. • City Planner William Luster addressed the Board and stated that he had received a written legal opinion on whether this proposal is a PUD or not. He stated that when the application was submitted the Planning Board raised the same concerns on the application so he requested the opinion, as to whether the application meets the requirements for a PUD. He reported that the opinion of the City Solicitor Robert Ledoux is that the application meets the requirements of a PUD as stated in MGL 40A section 9 , and section 715 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. Bill Luster also stated that now the burden is on the Planning Board to decide approval of the matter or not. He also noted that because it is technically considered a PUD, that does not presuppose that the proposal meets the threshold, and would be approved. Maureen Kiley of 15 Bow Street addressed the Board and asked who determines if a project is sufficiently advantageous for the City. Bill Luster stated that the Planning Board would decide. Councillor O'Leary asked if the plan is required to meet the standards of the Master Plan, noting there is no mention of that in the opinion. • John Vanloon of 155 Boston Street addressed the Board and expressed his concern that the additional cars in the area would create a grid lock in the arca. He stated that he is opposed to the project. Councillor Elect Bill Burns addressed the Board and stated that he they have talked a lot about mitigation in the project, and stated that if it needs to be mitigated it should not be there. He stated that they a shoe horning something that suggests it should not be there in the first place. Mr. Burns expressed his concern that the project would be an environmental nightmare, that would impact the neighborhood with additional traffic, and cause property values to go down. He further noted that the neighbors do not want the project and encouraged Stop & shop to go elsewhere. Mr. Burns also stated that he did not feel that this plan is a bonified mixed us and suggested that it was contrived to deceive. He referred to the project as archaic and medieval and suggested that the property should be made into a park. He urged the Planning Board to defeat the project. Jim Bourgas of Peabody addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the noise from the unloading spaces for deliveries. Mr. Lam of 79 Beaver St. addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned about the height of the elevations since his • property directly abuts the property. He also expressed concern 4 • about the store being open 24 hour, the effects of the lighting on his property and the additional noise from the project. Natalie Ross of 20 Beaver Street addressed the Board and expressed her concern that they have not heard anything about a traffic study. She stated that Peabody is a mess with traffic since the redesign of Peabody Square. She also suggested that a traffic study should be done over a period of years . Atty. William DiMento addressed the Board and stated that he represents Thomas Pyburn. He stated that he is bothered by the fact that this is considered a PUD and noted that he felt it is a breech of the law. He stated that the impact on the jurisdiction would be severe. He also noted that he disagrees that a Super Stop & Shop, a lumber company and one house constitutes a PUD. He urged the Board to legitimize the process and make them go the City Council for a zoning change. Councillor At Large Donald Bates addressed the Bcard and stated that as a resident of the area he would like to see the area cleaned up, but noted that he has concerns about the process as well as the impact the project would have on the area. He noted he has serious concerns about the impact of traffic, noise pollution, air pollution. He urged the Board to have a fair hearing and evaluate it the way it should. He asked that the Board deny the application, so that it can be considered by • the Board of Appeal. Regina Flynn of 20 Pleasant St. Salem, addressed the Board and pleaded that they reject the proposal. She also suggested that Stop & Shop should move to Beverly, where Atty. Serafini lives. Richard .White..of 159 Boston Street addressed the Board and noted that he a party to a law suit concerning this matter. He explained that he is concerned about the process that he was subjected to noting that he had to take time off from work to be deposed in Boston. Councillor At Large Jane Stirgwolt addressed the Board and stated that she does not feel that it has been proven that this project would be sufficiently advantageous to the city. John Fifield of 43 Chestnut Street addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned that the addition of 10,000 cars to the 33,000 cars that are there now, would be more than Canal Street, Lafayette Street, and noted that their calculations do not include the bypass road being constructed in connection with the Salem/Beverly Bridge. Mr. Fifield also noted that the decibel level is also of concern with regard to noise. He also noted that experts have been asked to provide information on the project, but that the information requested may not be what • is best for the City of Salem noting that something better could be done with this site and urged the Board deny it. 5 Peabody City Councillor James Moutsoulas addressed the Board • and stated that he has go to Swampscott, Malden, and Beverly and talked with the neighbors of Stop & Shop' s located in those communities. He noted that they are not happy with the results of the projects. He stated that he is concerned that the quality of life of the residents in area will be affected. He noted that he has lived in that area all of his life and never called that area an eye sore. He also noted that the lives of the residents would be affected, noting that he has a handicapped brother who rides his bike freely in the neighborhood now, but he would be unable to do so it this project proceeds. He urged the Board to consider the people who live in the neighborhood. Theresa Saffer of 19 Aborn Street addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned about the additional traffic problems that would result from the project. She stated that her street is already used as a cut through from Boston Street. She also noted that this store would push small businesses such as Crosby ' s Market out of business . Tara Kiley read a letter and presented a petition with 150 signatures of residents from Salem and Peabody opposing the project. Mr. Ed Pappalegis addressed the Board and read a letter from Marie Kocur of 128 Lowell Street, Peabody who was unable to • attend the meeting and is opposed to the project. Mr. Guy Decippio of 158 Boston Street addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the increase of traffic on Boston Street that the project would create. He noted that he has trouble now getting out of his driveway. Joan Sweeney of 22 Silver Street addressed the Board and read a letter of opposition to the project from Susan Reiss of 37 Silver Street who was unable to attend the meeting. Walter Power read a letter from Councillor At Large George McCabe who was unable to attend the meeting. Gordon Grady of 16 Puritan Road addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the increase in traffic that would result from the project. Pat Murphy of 36 Mt. Vernon Street, Peabody, addressed the Board and stated that she would rather have a leather factory located on that site. She noted that she is concerned about the traffic and the build up of it on the side streets. Charles Silva of Peabody addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned that the Stop & Shop would put small business out of business. He noted that they plan to have a video • counter, a bakery, a flower shop, a deli and if you look in 6 Peabody Square you will find all of these businesses which would • be hurt by this. Kim Henry of 33 Bow Street addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned about the cut through traffic which will be created in Witchcraft Heights. She noted that Ord Street is already used as a bypass and that more streets would be affected. Barbara Henry of Mt. Vernon Street, Peabody, addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned about the small businesses that would be hurt by this project. Jack Anderson of 79 Valley Street addressed the Board and stated that Valley Street is a cut through to Peabody. He stated that in his opinion the Board should table the matter and send it to the City Council in Salem and Peabody for action. Ward Six Councillor Sally Hayes addressed the Board and stated that she attended meetings on the traffic concerns and was promised a copy of the traffic study, which she has never received. She also noted that the construction at Bridge and Flint Street is already creating a problem and she this will add to it. She stated that she would stand behind the people and fight this proposal. Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and stated that • he is concerned that many streets in his ward are used as a cut through as indicated by the neighbors this evening. He stressed that the Board cannot let this happen and asked that the consider the the neighbors rights on this matter. Planning Board member Linda Vaughan left the meeting at this time due to family obligations. Walter Power informed those present that the Board would continue the Public Hearing to its next meeting on December 16 , 1993 , at which time the applicants will present additional information and those present will again be allowed to comment. He also suggested that the neighbors appoint a neighborhood representative to speak for them at meetings held on the matter, following the close of the Public Hearing. Motion made by David Hart to continue the Public Hearing to December 16, 1993, seconded by Debbie Hilbert and approved unanimously. Carter Vinson joined the meeting at this time, noting that he is unable to participate in this matter due to a conflict. DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION PLAN RECOMMENDATION - 18 FREEMAN ROAD ATTORNEY JACK KEILTY • Chuck Puleo recused himself from discussion of this matter. 7 • Attorney Jack Y.eilty addressed the Board and noted that the plans have been amended to show the changes requested by the Planning Board during discussions of this proposal. He also stated that as requested by the Board, abutters could connect to the water main with no pro rata charge from the developer. Albert Hill asked why the utilities are not being put underground as the Board has required of other projects . Walter Power stated that this proposal is not an extension of a public way, as was the case with the other projects that were required to have under ground utilities. City Planner William Luster reviewed the proposed conditions for the project. He also reviewed the requested waivers for the project. Motion made by John Moustakis to approve the requested waivers for 18 Freeman Road, seconded by Debbie Hilbert and approved unanimously. Motion made by Debbie Hilbert to adopt the subdivision plan for 18 Freeman Road, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. SITE PLAN RECOMMENDATION FOR McDONALD'S CORPORATION • Bill Luster addressed the Board and stated that Attorney Ellen Winkler of Serafini, Serafini, and Darling, was present at the meeting along with Attorney John Serafini Sr. to review the proposed conditions for the McDonald's proposed for Highland Avenue and Traders Way. He noted that they had requested an extension at the last meeting, and have some concerns about the -proposed conditons. Bill Luster reviewed the proposed conditons with the Board. Atty. Winkler reviewed the concerns of the Board that were noted that the site visit. She noted that the proposed parking spaces are all according to the zoning ordinance and they are in compliance. Carter Vinson expressed his concern about the location of the handicapped parking spaces and suggested that they install speed bumps for the safety of handicapped patrons crossing the parking lot. Bill Luster stated that the Planning Department would prefer signage rather than speed bumps. Carter Vinson stated that he would agree to that as long as there is some thing there to make drivers aware of the handicapped crossing the lot. Walter Power questioned the location of the dumpster. Atty. Winkler stated that they are restricted by the Entrance Corridor Overlay District, and that McDonald' s feels that it is a safety • issue for their employees , so they left it in the original locations. 8 • Chuck Puleo suggested that they could depress the location of the dumpster to lower it a couple of feet. David Hart noted that he would like the trash dumpster to be different from a typical trash receptacle. Atty. Winkler stated that the have plans . for an attractive fence to be placed around the dumpster. Debbie Hilbert stated that she felt that the location and the treatment of the dumpster should be a concern of McDonald ' s and not the Planning Board. Walter Power stated that he wants to make sure it is aesthetically proper for the area. Carter Vinson stated that he is concerned that the location of the dumpster would have an effect on the visibility of the egress out to the road. He suggested having the City Planner review the treatment of the dumpster. Atty. Winkler addressed the condition regarding landscaping with the Board. She referred to condition 3B of the draft decision which stated that after all project landscaping is completed, and prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the developer will be required to add further landscaping if such is required by the Planning Board or City Planner. She stated that they feel that the condition is too open ended. She also stated that they have planned an extensive • landscaping design for the project and they are not attempting to cut corners. Atty. Winkler suggested that they be allowed to proceed as planned with the understanding that any changes made to the landscaping plan be approved by the City Planner. Bill Luster noted that the condition is part of a boiler plate set of conditions , and that it has been used to give the Board and the Planning Department a catch all, noting that if after completion they find that something has been missed, it gives us the opportunity to correct the situation. He stated that he does not recommend changing this condition. The Board discussed the installation of curbing for the project. Atty. Winkler stated that the curbing on the inside of the lot is concrete, as was used at the Canal Street McDonald's. She also noted that they are agreeable to a no salt restriction in the conditions, and located the snow removal areas on the plan. Atty. Winkler introduced Mr. Parachoki , the owner of the property that McDonald' s is leasing. She stated McDonald' s is a tenant on a small portion of a large piece of property, and that by requiring them to install curbing along the entire access road on both sides, the Board is linking McDonald' s with issues that go beyond the boundaries of the site. She also stated that • this is a financial concern as well. She noted that they are agreeable to installing the curbing from McDonald' s to Taco 9 • Bell , on their side of the street. Walter Power noted that the refusal to cooperate with the Board, would jeopardize the approval of the plan. Carter Vinson noted that the access road would become a city street, and he felt that it is not an unreasonable request to ask that they install the curbing. Atty. Winkler noted that they are willing to install the curbing the extent that it impacts this project. Walter Power also noted that it is the responsibility of the Planning Board to ensure the safety of the internal circulation of the road. Atty. John Serafini Sr. stated that Mr. Parachoki would be willing to come in and discuss what the Board expects of the property and repair and replace the curbing as they wish, when it is needed, and requested that the Board allow McDonald' s to go forward. David Hart suggested that Mr. Parachoki could replace the berm on the other side of the street on the street side only as far up at Taco Bell. Mr. Parachoki addressed the Board and stated that as the curbing deteriorates he would consider replacing it with granite curbing as requested, but he does not want to rip up something that doesn' t need repair. Atty. Serafini held a conference with his clients and upon return stated that the developer would install the curbing along the frontage of McDonald' s and on • the islands on the other side of the street. There being no further questions or comments concerning this matter a motion was made by Albert Hill to approve the Site Plan Review for McDonald' s Corporation, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. Chuck Puleo expressed his concern that there is no street light on the sidewalk side of Traders Way. Bill Luster stated that the Planning Department can see if the City Electrician can have a street light installed on that side of the street. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Amendment to Home Rule Petition regarding Institutional Master Planning Bill Luster addressed the Board and stated that an amendment to the Home Rule Petition allowing the city to require institutional master planning, has been drafted due to some concerns of the Governor weld, regarding the original petition. He noted that the Board needs to vote on endorsing the amendment. Carter Vinson stated that he felt that the amendment was not a bad plan. • Motion made by Carter Vinson to endorse the amendment to the Home Rule Petition on Institutional Master Planning, seconded 10 by David Hart and approved unanimously. • Debbie Hurlburt gave the Board members copies -of Chapter 91 Amnesty License Applications and the Regulations for informational purposes. Release of Funds for Greenlawn Avenue Debbie Hurlburt reported that she has received a letter, requesting the release of the remaining money in the Tri-Party Agreement for Greenlawn Avenue. She noted that all of the outstanding bills for the Clerk of the Works and the permits have been paid. She also noted that the As Built Plans have been received by the Planning Department, and they are in compliance with their agreement. Motion made by David Hart to release the remaining $6,000 .00 for the Greenlawn Avenue Tri-Party Agreement, seconded by Chuck Puleo, and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Debbie Hilbert to adjourn the meeting, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :45 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB120293 • 11 SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 18, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Hart, Carter Vinson, John Moustakis, Kosta Prentakis, Chuck Puleo, Debbie Hilbert, and Albert Hill. Also present were Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. The meeting was called to order at 7: 30 P.M. by Chairman Walter Power. SITE PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATION - McDONALDS CORPORATION Atty. Ellen Winkler addressed the Board on behalf of her client, McDonalds Corporation, and requested a continuation for two weeks to the December 2, 1993 meeting. She noted that they have a number of questions regarding the draft decision that would have an impact on the project. She stated that the additional two weeks would give them enough time to review them. Motioh made by Chuck Puleo to continue the decision on the Site Plan Review for McDonalds Corporation as requested, seconded by Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION PLAN RECOMMENDATION - 18 FREEMAN ROAD ATTORNEY JOHN KEILTY Chuck Puleo recused himself from discussion of this matter. Debbie Hurlburt reported that she had a letter from Atty. Keilty stating that they have no objections to the draft conditions which they reviewed. She also noted that Atty. Keilty is unable to attend the meeting due to a conflict with his schedule, but indicated in his letter that the original plans are being revised and they assent to the draft decision. Debbie Hurlburt noted that the changes being made to the plans are the widening of the road as per the Fire Department, and the house will have a sprinkler system. She also suggested that the Board could approve the plan this evening and could review the revised plans prior to the end of the twenty ( 20) day appeal period. David Hart stated that he was reluctant to approve a plan without seeing the revised plans. ' Walter Power question whether they have located the shut off 1 for the water main. Debbie Hurlburt stated that they need to go out there with a metal detector to locate it. She noted that there are discrepancies between where the neighbors think the location is, and where the Engineering Department says it should be. Walter Power also stated that he would like the conditions to insure that the developer would be responsible if any damage was caused to the abutters pipes from the extension of the pipe. Carter Vinson stated that he would like to see the plan when he approves it and is not comfortable that the Attorney is not here, and the Board is considering adding language that he has not seen to the draft conditions. Walter Power stated that he would also like to see the final plan with the water connection clarified, and that there is language in the conditions that if there is any damage to the abutters water pipes from the extension of the pipe that the developer is responsible. He also suggested that the abutters should be allowed to tie into the pipe if they so choose at the time it is installed. He noted that this would be a good time to clean up the spaghetti lines that exist there now. Motion made by Carter Vinson to continue the issuance of a decision on the Definitive Subdivision Plan for 18 Freeman Road ' until the next meeting of the Board on December 2, 1993, seconded by David Hart and approved 7-0, with Chuck Puleo abstaining. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A WETLANDS FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - GTE SYLVANIA - MR. ED HAWKINS Walter Power addressed Mr. Hawkins and asked if they would be willing to answer questions and provide requested information should the Board request it, after the close of the Public Hearing. Mr. Hawkins replied that they would have no problem with that, and that they wished to keep an open dialogue with the Board, as they did with the Conservation Commission. He also stated that they had hoped that the Planning Board would not take all 90 days allowed by law to make their decision. Walter Power stated that the Board may not take the whole 90 days to make a decision, but he wanted to be sure that if the Board finds that they need additional information, as they deliberate on the matter, GTE would be willing to provide that information. David Hart asked if there were any additional submissions to Phase I and Phase II reports. Mr. Hawkins stated that there was no need to submit a Phase III report, and that the Draft Environmental Impact Report and the Final Environmental Impact Report dated December 1991 , Comprehensive Site Assessment dated ' July 1991 , and the Restoration and Revegetation Plan submitted in May 1993, all provide additional information and test results. 2 There being no further questions or comments at this time, a motion was made by John Moustakis to close the Public Hearing for GTE/Sylvania, seconded by Eosta Prentakis and approved unanimously. Walter Power addressed the Board and stated that he met with Mayor Harrington, regarding the hiring of an Environmental Lawyer to advise the Board on this matter. He stated that he conveyed to the Mayor that the Board was concerned about making a decision on this matter without expert legal support. He noted that the Mayor felt that it was a good approach, but had some reservations about having an open ended agreement with an outside Attorney, but agreed that if the City Solicitor has the money in his budget, the Board could hire outside counsel. Walter Power also noted that David Hart had contacted an Environmental Attorney and that the fee agreed to would be $100 .00 per hour and would cost between $5,000.00 - $10,000.00. Debbie Hurlburt reported that the Planning Board requested a Public Hearing on the Chapter 91 License. Walter Power suggested that the Planning Department research the Chapter 91 License and prepare questions to be asked at the hearing. Debbie will contact Mr. Potter at DEP and check on the scheduling of the Public Hearing. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • Walter Power suggested that the approval of the minutes be postponed until the next meeting, and urged the Board Members to review the portions regarding GTE carefully and revise them if needed. OLD / NEW BUSINESS Debbie Hilbert asked about the status of the lawsuit filed against the Planning Board by Laurie Panneton. Debbie Hurlburt reported that the City Solicitor answered the complaint, and that they are basing their argument on the fact that the Board did not take up the matter until September, when he brought the plans in to the Planning Department in July. Debbie also noted that Mr. Swiniuch knew that there was no meeting in August and further noted that it was his responsibility to get the plans stamped at the City Clerks office. Gauthier Motors Debbie reported that the trees have been planted at Gauthier Motors and that they are waiting for Mackey Construction to install the curbing. 3 Stop & Shop Debbie reported that she attended a MEPA scoping session with Bill Luster regarding the Stop & Shop proposal. She stated that they got an overview of the project and that their questions and concerns were added to a list of concerns. She also noted that the City is requesting additional intersections to be included in .the studies. Albert Hill addressed the Board and stated that he is resigning from the Planning Board, to join the Board of Appeal. He stated that he hoped that there would be more communication between the two Boards , and that he would make every effort to work with both Boards. He also thanked the Board Members, and stated that he has enjoyed being on the Board. Walter Power thank Al for his service to the Board and noted that he felt this is a great opportunity to bring the two Boards together, to the benefit of both Boards. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Debbie Hilbert to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9: 15 P.M. • RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO PB111893 APPROVED AS AMENDED MARCH 3, 1994 ' 4 • SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 4 , 1993 at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Linda Vaughan, Carter Vinson, Kosta Prentakis, David Hart, Albert Hill, John Moustakis, and Chuck Puleo. Also present were Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED DAY CARE CENTER ON COLBY STREET - SALEM HOSPITAL Debbie Hurlburt reported that the city is still waiting for a permit from the State to conduct the testing of the pipe on Highland Avenue. She noted that she has a letter from Atty. Serafini extending the time for the decision until December 2, 1993. Motion made by David Hart to accept the extension of time in which to render a decision on the proposed Day Care Center on • Colby Street, to December 2, 1993, seconded by Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. DISCUSSION OF EXTENSION OF TIME TO SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING FOR STOP AND SHOP APPLICATION FOR A PUD Beth Debski addressed the Board and stated that she has received a letter from Atty. John Serafini Sr. , granting an extension until December 2, 1993, for the time in which the Planning Board must schedule a Public Hearing on the application of Stop & Shop for a Planned Unit Development, on Boston and Howley Streets . Councillor at Large Jane Stirgwolt who was attending the meeting, addressed the Board and stated that a City Council Community Development Committee scheduled for Monday, November 8, is an informational meeting to inform the Council on the process that the Stop & Shop project will go through. Carter Vinson suggested that the Planning Department put together a summary of what a PUD is. Beth Debski will prepare the summary for the meeting on Monday. Councillor Stirgwolt also reported that she has attended meetings in Peabody and they are near a decision on their portion of the project. Motion made by Linda Vaughan to accept the extension of time in which the Planning Board has to schedule the Public Hearing, until December 2, 1993, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. 1 • Atty. William DeMento representing neighbors of the Boston Street area addressed the Board and expressed his concern that the granting of the extension could create an automatic approval of the project. Beth Debski noted that the City Solicitor is reviewing the application and that the Planning Board is following the process. She also noted that the extension is only for the time in which the Planning Board has to schedule the Public Hearing, not for the time in which to make a decision. Carter Vinson suggested that the Board get another extension before the next meeting to beyond December 2, so as not to create a problem. FORM A - 9 MEADE COURT - MR. GLEN BEAUDET Mr. Glen Beaudet addressed the Board and requested approval of a Form A for 9 Meade Court. He explained that this is a conveyance of 460 s.f. from 7 Meade Court to his property at 9 Meade Court, which will be used for off street parking. Carter Vinson questioned why they were not required to file for a waiver from frontage. Walter Power stated that the lot is grandfathered because it existed before the subdivision • control law went into effect. Mr. Beaudet also noted that he has received a variance was granted by the Board of Appeal. There being no further comment or discussion on the matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to approve the Form A for 9 Meade Court, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT - SPINALE AUTOMOTIVE - ATTY. STEPHEN LOVELY Atty. Lovely addressed the Board and noted that the changes requested by the Board have been included on the plan. He explained the plan and the locations of the snow removal area, the location of the trash storage area with screening, the landscaping changes, the relocated entrance, and the notation that the direction for the entrance and exit would be painted on the pavement. He noted that the location of the trash storage would be adjacent to the new building, rather than the shared dumpster as originally proposed. Linda Vaughan expressed concern about the number of the cars that are being sold on the lot. She noted that there are 10 or 11 cars there every day and they are only allowed by permit • to sell 8. Beth Debski suggested that the Board could add a condition that all Licensing Board conditions are adhered 2 • to. Atty. Lovely stated that they have no problem with that, noting that Mr. Papalardo leases space from his client and he is not his client. John Moustakis suggested that the eight spaces for the used cars should be indicated on the plan. David Hart agreed that it was a good idea to define the space in which they can park the 8 cars they are authorized to sell. The Board discussed the language for the condition regarding the used car portion of the property. The agreed on the following: Eight ( 8) cars or less will be designated on one ( 1 ) level as the shaded area on the plan, and the decision of the Licensing Board shall be complied with. Beth Debski noted that the applicant is looking for a decision tonight. Carter Vinson stated that he would like to see the plan again with the changes made to it. David Hart agreed. Atty. Lovely stated that he would have no problem with the Board conditioning the approval on the condition that the revised plan be submitted to the Board. Debbie Hurlburt reviewed the proposed draft decision with the Board. Motion made by John Moustakis to approve the Site Plan • Review Special Permit for Spinale Automotive, with the condition that the revised plans be submitted to the Planning Department, seconded by Linda Vaughan, and approved with six ( 6) members in favor as follows: Ayes - Walter Power, Linda Vaughan, David Hart, Carter Vinson, John Moustakis, and Chuck Puleo. Kosta Prentakis abstained and Albert Hill voted present. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A WETLANDS FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - GTE SYLVANIA - MR. EDWARD HAWKINS - GZA Debbie Hurlburt addressed the Board and noted that due to the postponement of the October 21 , 1993 meeting, members should refer to the package distributed for that meeting, for the information regarding this issue. Ed Hawkins representing Sylvania addressed the Board and noted that at the last meeting the Board had questions about the life expectancy of the material of the cap. He submitted three reports on the specification of the materials. He also noted that twenty year warranties are available from the manufacturer. David Hart noted that there is a lot of description in the information presented that that the material will last "forever", but pointed out that the warranty would be prorated, and if 3 • it fails after 18 or 19 years the owner will not get much to replace it. Walter Power questioned whether the warranty would cover the materials and the reinstallation. Ed Hawkins stated that if it is placed correctly and fails the warranty would cover the materials and the reinstallation. David Hart also noted that the warranty specifies that it only covers to the cost of the sale price of the material, when it was installed. Kosta Prentakis asked who would monitor the cap and for how long. Ed Hawkins stated it would be monitored for 30 years and they need to verify the financial mechanism for the 30 year period as required by the EPA. Walter Power asked if there would be any restriction as to the use of the land after the capping. Mr. Hawkins stated that there are no restrictions for recreational purposes. He also noted that trees should not -be planted near there that would have roots greater than 18 inches. Albert Hill asked if the Board had discussed the re-establishment of the ball field. Ed Hawkins explained the process for the re-establishment of the ball field. He noted that they will install a fence and a back stop. Albert Hill expressed his concern about the grade that the field will be at. Mr. Hawkins • stated that it will be elevated four feet from what it is now. The Board discussed the status of the material as to whether or not the site is a hazardous waste site. Ed Hawkins stated that the State classified it as a non priority disposal site, and the Federal EPA was notified in 1983 and has not taken further action since the matter is highly regulated by the State. Walter Power questioned why the area GZA is classifying it as hazardous when it is not listed as hazardous. Mr. Hawkins replied that it is not a risk to health and human environment. John Moustakis addressed Mr. Hawkins and noted that as strongly as he feels that they should leave the material there, he feels strongly that it should be removed. Carter Vinson referred to table 1 of the testing results and questioned whether the same procedure was used for all of the tests, since some were done in November of 1990 and January of 1991 . Mr. Hawkins stated that the same process was used for all tests and reviewed the test results with the Board. David Hart asked what a Non Priority Disposal Site was. Mr. Hawkins stated that there are 9 criteria that need to be met to establish if a site is a priority or not, noting that none • of the 9 criteria were met for this site. The Board discussed the possibility of recycling the material 4 • from the site. Walter Power questioned whether the issue was a matter of being cost prohibitive or that Sylvania is so far into the process that they don't want to change their plans . David Hart asked Mr. Hawkins for an update on the status of the permitting process . Mr. Hawkins stated that they are expecting the Chapter 91 License any day now and the Wetland Flood Hazard Special Permit is all that they need. David Hart asked if the Chapter 91 License was mailed to the Planning Board for comment. Debbie Hurlburt stated that the legal notice was dated October 8, 1993 and that there was 30 days to respond. David Hart suggested that the Planning Board should respond to the Chapter 91 License application. Motion made by David Hart to continue the Public Hearing to the next meeting of the Board on November 18, 1993, seconded by John Moustakis and approved 6-2 with Linda Vaughan and Kosta Prentakis opposed. David Hart asked about the status of his request that the Board retain an Environmental Attorney to advise them on this project. Beth Debski reported that she discussed the matter with Bill Luster and he felt that the City Solicitor could handle the matter. David Hart disagreed noting that he felt that it would be wiser to get advice before the decision process is finalized. • Carter Vinson stated that he feels strongly that the Board should hire an outside Attorney to prevent problems. He also noted that if it is a money issue, he did not think that it would be a problem to get an appropriation through the City Council. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION PLAN - 18 FREEMAN ROAD - ATTORNEY JACK KEILTY Chuck Puleo recused himself from discussion of this matter. Atty. John Keilty addressed the Board and reviewed the details regarding the runoff, as requested at the last meeting. He also noted that they are having a problem locating the water shut off. He stated that they know where it is supposed to be but testimony of the neighbors indicate that it is not where it should be. Atty. Keilty also noted that the widening of the driveway is indicated on the plan. There being no further questions or comments at this time a motion was made by Linda Vaughan to close the Public Hearing, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. The Planning Department will make a recommendation at the next meeting on November 18, 1993. 5. • WETLANDS AND FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT PUBLIC HEARING - SALEM OIL AND GREASE - MR. MARK SHSRFY - GULF OF MAINE RESEARCH CENTER Mark Sherfy of Gulf of Maine Research Center Inc. , addressed the Board on behalf of his client, Salem Oil and Grease. He explained their proposal, and the plans. Mr. Sherfy noted that the activity involves the removal of some contaminated soils, paving a portion of the site and the construction of appropriate drainage control structures. He also noted that they are proposing additions to two of existing buildings and the construction of a secondary containment structure for exposed pipes and oil storage tanks. Mr. Sherfy stated that the purpose of the project is to bring the site into compliance with Chapter 21E and the Spill Prevention, Control and Counter Measure Regulations. Walter Power asked to have the catch basins and drainage explained. Mr. Sherfy explained the drainage routes and the locations of the catch basins. Walter Power asked for comments from those present at the meeting. Jeff Dowdy of 14 Beaver Street addressed the Board and stated • that they have had problems with odors from the plan and that he wanted to make sure that this plan would not add to the strain that is causing the problem. Joan Sweeney of 22 Silver Street addressed the Board and stated that she would like the Planning Board to request Salem Oil and Grease to release the information that they have requested on the content of the by-products of the odor. She stated that the neighbors are getting headaches and Salem Oil and Grease asked them to keep track of the instances but nothing was ever done about it. Linda Vaughan suggested that the Board should have a site visit and requested that they have a technical engineer there to explain the process. She also noted that if they do not give the requested information to the Board that the Board could hold up the matter, until they do give the information. The Board will hold a site visit on Saturday, November 20, 1993 at 9:30 A.M. Motion made by David Hart to continue the Public Hearing until the December 16, 1993 meeting of the Planning Board, seconded by Carter Vinson, and approved unanimously. 6 • OLD / NEW BUSINESS Debbie Hurlburt reported that the City Solicitor Robert Ledoux has responded to the lawsuit filed against the Planning Board by the Richard Swiniuch's daughter and son-in-law. Debbie Hurlburt reported that she has received the information relative to the concerns that the Board has about the McDonalds project, from Atty. Ellen Winkler. Debbie reported that she received a copy of a letter to Building Inspector Leo Tremblay from Ward 4 Councillor Leonard O'Leary, regarding property on Carrolton St. , Frederick St. , and Crowdis Street, noting his objection that permits be given to them at any time since the former Building Inspector had refused the permits. John Moustakis asked about the status of the granite curbing at the Gauthier Motors property on Canal Street. Debbie Hurlburt reported that they have the trees and the curbing and they are expecting to start the work on Monday. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by David Hart to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. • RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB110493 7 r • SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, OCTOBER 7, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, October 7, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Hart, Carter Vinson, Albert Hill, Debbie Hilbert, Kosta Prentakis, and Chuck Puleo. Also present were Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING - FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW - SPINALE AUTOMOTIVE - ATTORNEY STEPHEN LOVELY Kosta Prentakis recused himself from discussion of this matter. Beth Debski noted that the Board held a site visit and that Juli Riemenschneider, the landscape Architect for the Planning Department has reviewed the plans and made comments. She prepared an overlay with the recommendations for the Board to review, with the applicants plans. Beth noted that some of the changes that Juli recommends are to move the entrance • slightly and eliminate parking spaces 17 and 18. She also relocated one parking space. Atty. Lovely stated that Norman LaPointe of the Salem Fire Department requested the elimination of some parking spaces and the applicant has complied. Norman LaPointe also requested the installation of a ballard. Atty. Lovely also noted that they are proposing to share a dumpster with the property next door. Carter Vinson questioned the number spaces that are allotted to the Used Car Dealership. Atty. Lovely stated that they have three spaces to sell 8 cars. Albert Hill noted that they have a variance for retail use of the property and are proposing a wholesale use. He expressed his concern that there would be a violation of the code if there was not enough parking. He also questioned who has the authority to see that they are in compliance. Atty. Lovely stated it would come under the Building Inspector. He also stated that if the Board wished to condition that they be required to have a review by the Planning Board, they would agree to it in good faith. Beth Debski noted that any major changes to the property would • require SPR under the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. 1 • Albert Hill stated that he would like an opinion from the City Solicitor on how to trigger the process that would lead to the Planning Board review, should the use be changed from Wholesale to Retail. Walter Power asked how they were planning to treat the parking spaces that abut the sidewalk,. David Hart suggested that they could use concrete berms. David Hart suggested that the- should calculate the number of spaces that are needed for the proposed use. Atty. Lovely stated that he did not want to create a plan based on the variance, to accommodate a use that they may never have. Carter Vinson noted that even if the Planning Board could condition the plan, there is a need to see where to put the other 4 parking spaces. Walter Power noted that he was concerned about the height of the trees , and the potential for blocking signage. David Hart noted that Norway Maples are tall and that the foliage is about 8-10 feet above the ground. Walter Power also noted that they could narrow the curb cuts and gain more spaces . Beth Debski will look at that. She will • also prepare a chart that shows the required number of parking spaces for different uses. Carter Vinson asked if the dumpster would be screened. David Hart suggested that the Board could require it to be fenced in. Walter Power asked if there was anyone present at the meeting who wished to speak in favor or opposition to the proposal . Kosta Prentakis addressed th_ board as a representative of N & L Realty Trust. He stated +,tiat they are generally in support of the plan and suggested that on street parking will be created with the addition of sidewalks, and the employees could park on the street. There being no further questions or comments on the matter at this time, a motion was made by David Hart to close the public hearing, seconded by Chuck Puleo, and approved unanimously. The Planning Department will make a recommendation on the matter at the next meeting. FORM A - 24 PICKMAN ROAD - MS. ELINOR RYAN Mr. James Hosman addressed the Board on behalf of his client • Ms . Elinor Ryan. He noted that the purpose of the ANR plan is to clarify the lot lines on 24 Pickman Road. He state that 2 • research showed that the size of the dimensions and size of the lot are not the same as what is on file with the assessors office. He also noted that there would be no change in use, and the lot would not be built upon. Carter Vinson asked to have the changes described that were made to the lot lines. Mr. Hosman stated that he did not do the survey work his partner did, but he did know that the lines changed on all sides. He also noted that his client became aware of the problem when they realized that the square footage was different on her deed that it was on the assessors map. There being no further questions or comments at this time a motion was made by Kosta Prentakis to approve the Form A for 24 Pickman Road, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. FORM A - 4 WINTER ISLAND ROAD - MARGARET RIZZOTTI Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board on behalf of his client Ms. Margaret Rizzotti to request approval of a Form A, on property located at 4 Winter Island Road. Atty. Correnti explained that in 1968, Ms . Rizzotti purchased lots 12-16 from a bank, and in 1989 when she attempted to sell the house it was discovered that lot 16 had a clouded title. At that time they discovered that Ms. Rizzotti owned only 2/3 of what is • considered to be lot 16. Atty. Correnti noted that the reason for the Form A is to separate lot 16 from the rest of the property ( lots 12-15) . He also stated that they have obtained a variance from the Board of Appeal for that purpose. A condition of the approval of the Board of Appeal is that the lot shall remain unbuildable and must me maintained by the owners of lots 12-15.- Atty. Correnti noted that lot 16 would be available for use with the house lot. Albert Hill noted that the tax structure for the property would change. Atty. Correnti stated that the City Assessor Peter Caron is aware of the situation and will address the tax structure. He also noted that a case could be made for an abatement of a portion of the taxes paid for the last 24 years, but they have no plans to do so. There being no further questions or comments at this time a motion was made by Albert Hill to approve the Form A for 4 Winter Island Road lot 16 , seconded by Kosta Prentakis and approved unanimously. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING - FOR A WETLANDS FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - GTE SYLVANIA - MR. ED HAWKINS Beth Debski informed the Board that the information requested • from GTE at the last meeting was received by the Planning Department on Wednesday, October 6 , 1993 . She suggested that 3 • the members should review the information for discussion. The Board reviewed Exhibit A, the Cost Estimates for Closure Scenarios, submitted by GTE. Walter Power asked if they had considered his suggestion to screen the material to remove the bases, so as to decrease the amount of lead in the fill and reduce the hazardousness of the material. Mr. Hawkins referred to page three of his letter which responds to the concerns of the Board. He stated, from the letter that the sifting of the onsite glass fill option would not be feasible or useful for the project. The reason for this is that the sifting option would be subject to additional regulatory requirements, permitting modifications, and review processes. Moreov-r, all existing permits and approvals would have to be revised and or reissued. The cost and time required to satisfy such regulatory requirements, as well as the probable costs for carrying out the actual sifting procedure and subsequent disposal of waste materials preclude this option from being viable. Walter Power stated that he was not convinced that sifting would be that difficult to complete. David Hart questioned why the glass was classified as hazardous • waste. Mr. Hawkins stated that when tested half of the tests passed and half failed, so they have to assume that it is. David Hart questioned why is was not considered a risk to human health, if it exceeded normal limits. Mr. Hawkins stated that tests showed that the surface water and ground water were within normal limits. David Hart also questioned whether GTE wanted to explore other options to the closure proposed, noting that it is a dump and if it is not officially classified as hazardous why do they need a permit. Mr. Hawkins replied that the results are due to the analytical testing procedures used. He also noted that the intent of the proposal is to reduce the hazardous material. David Hart noted that the construction industry deals with hazardous waste disposal every day noting that if you remove a window with lead paint it cRnnot be thrown in a dump, but if you throw it in a dumpster with other material it could be disposed of. Mr. Hawkins stated that the glass has lead in it as well and you cannot separate glass with lead from clean glass . Walter Power asked how they dispose of glass today. Mr. Hawkins stated that they recycle the glass . Walter Power again expressed his opinion that it is reasonable • to pursue the idea that picking out the bases and testing the glass to see if the levels would be less. Mr. Hawkins stated 4 • that even if you test the glass alone the levels would still be high. Walter Power asked how many samples were taken. Mr. Hawkins stated that 17 samples were taken from 20 or 30 locations . He also stated that based on the characteristics of the landfill they fall within the right range. David Hart asked for the manufacturers specifications on the material to be used for the closure. He asked for written guarantees of the material . He also questioned whether it would last for thirty years. He also requested test data to back up the guarantee. Mr. Hawkins stated that he had no problem providing that information. He also requested that the Board close the Public Hearing process at this meeting, conditional upon receiving that information. David Hart dated that he was uncomfortable closing the public hearing without all of the information that the Board requested. Carter Vinson agreed, noting that the Board should have time to review the material submitted to them. Walter Power noted that the Board is trying to come up with a frame work with which to make a decision and he was opposed • to closing the Public Hearing until all information is received and reviewed. Albert Hill noted that it would be to GTE' s benefit to perform more testing on the site, since they have more to gain if the tests come out in their favor. Mr. Hawkins stated that they feel comfortable with the amount and type of testing that they have done. He also noted that they do not expect that separating the glass from the bases would test any differently, and that the cost would not be any cheaper than disposing of hazardous material. Beth Debski presented a letter from Ann Fournier, Ellen Galligan, and Georgette Stafford, noting their opposition to the plan, and calling for the removal of the glass all together. Motion made by Albert Hill to continue the Public Hearing to the next meeting of the Planning Board, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. Walter Power noted that he would like independent input on the permitting process for this project. Beth Debski will as Hugh Mulligan from Gulf of Maine Research Inc. to give some details for the Board. David Hart suggested that he would be more comfortable with • some technical and legal advice on this matter. 5 • CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION PLAN - 18 FREEMAN ROAD - ATTY. JOHN KEILTY Debbie Hurlburt addressed the Board and stated that the Engineering concerns have been addressed and have been indicated on the plan as approved by Richard Lis. She also noted that the issues of concern to the Fire Department will be addressed before the next meeting. She asked that the Board continue the hearing until the next meeting of the Board. Motion made by Carter Vinson to continue the Public Hearing to the next meeting, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. DISCUSSION REGARDING SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT FOR McDONALDS - 1 TRADERS WAY Beth Debski reminded the Board that there is a site visit on October 16, 1993 at 8:00 a.m. Chuck Puleo stated that he has concerns about the lighting in the parking lot and on the street. He also noted that there is no sidewalk on the Ground Round side of Traders Way. Walter Power suggested that the Board make a list of the issues relative to the McDonald' s project for the next meeting. • Debbie Hurlburt reported that Atty. Ellen Winkler is addressing the issue of the access road with the owners of the property. OLD / NEW BUSINESS Site--Plan Review fee Structure Cater Vinson reported that he discussed the possible raising of the fee structure with some of the Councillors and one indicated that he would be in favor of a tiered fee structure, possibly 20C for projects over $25,000.00 . Beth Debski noted that it was getting late and the Board still has minutes to approve, and suggested that this discussion could be held at the next meeting, when there would be more time to discuss it fully. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meetings of April 1 , 15, 22 , May 6, 20, 27, June 3, & 17, July 1 , 15, 29, August 2, (Joint Public Hearing) , and September 2, & 16, were reviewed and amended by the Board. Motion made by Carter Vinson to approve those minutes as amended, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. • 6 • There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Carter Vinson to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :00 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PBl00793 • 7 w a SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, grPTEMBER 16, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, September 16, 1993, at 7:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Albert Hill, David Hart, Carter Vinson, John Moustakis, Kosta Prentakis, Linda Vaughan, and Chuck Puleo. Also present were: City Planner William Luster, Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED COLBY STREET CHILD CARE FACILITY - SALEM HOSPITAL Linda Vaughan recused herself from discussion of this matter. City Planner William Luster addressed the Board and updated the members on the status of the proposal. He stated that the City of Salem applied to the Massachusetts Highway Department District 7, for a permit to clean the pipe that comes across Highland Avenue to the Greenway Road neighborhood. He noted that preliminary reports indicate that the pipe comes across • Highland Avenue and ends there, not connecting to anything. Bill Luster reported that he has requested an extension from the Hospital until November 4, 1993, which they have agreed to. He also stated that Acting City Engineer Charles Quigley will report at a Planning Board meeting before as to the results of the cleaning and tests that are to be performed. Motion made by Kosta Prentakis to accept the extension to November 4, 1993, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. CONTINUATION OF FORM A - APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED - GREENLAWN AVENUE RICHARD SWINIUCH Atty. James Flemming addressed the Board on behalf of his client Richard Swiniuch, and reported that the Board had made a site visit and that a locus has been added to the plan as requested. He also stated that he has seen the opinion written by City Solicitor Robert Ledoux, and stated that endorsement of the plan does not constitute zoning approval. Walter Power read the opinion given by City Solicitor Ledoux. David Hart noted that at the site visit a concern was raised on the ability of the Fire Department to get equipment in and • out of the site. Mr. Swiniuch replied that the Fire Department approved the original subdivision for this property, and the 1 records show that the Fire Department made no comments at the time regarding the turnaround in the initial subdivision. Albert Hill stated the street is 27 feet wide and should probably be wider if the Fire Department needed to get two pieces of equipment in there, noting that the Fire Department may want to re-think the original approval. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O 'Leary addressed the Board and noted that when the original plan was approved, 36 neighbors signed a petition requesting that Greenlawn Avenue not be connected to Cloverdale, Springside, or Glenn Avenues. He asked that the Board consider the neighbors in this decision. Bill Luster noted that one of the reasons that the turnaround was included was due to the concerns of the neighbors. Richard Swiniuch recalled that David Hart measured the hammerhead turnaround at the site visit. David Hart noted that it was about 20 feet in width, where it should be 24 feet, noting that if there was an inadequacy in the construction it should be addressed with the contractor, since it is smaller than proposed on the plan. Atty. Flemming argued that endorsement of the Greenlawn Ave. Subdivision meant that the street was adequate, and if it was good for that subdivision it should be good for this as well, • he also stated that nowhere in the subdivision control law does it say that you need 100 feet of frontage on an approved public paved way. Carter Vinson noted that recently the Board had an issue with a Form C in which the applicant was required to request a waiver from frontage requirements, and that this could be the same situation. He asked the applicant if they considered withdrawing this request and filing a Form C. Mr. Swiniuch stated that he wanted a decision on the matter tonight. Motion made by David Hart to approve the Form A. seconded by Linda' Vaughan and the motion was denied 6-2. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A WETLANDS FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - GTE SYLVANIA - MR. ED HAWKINS Ed Hawkins of GZA Inc. representing GTE/Sylvania addressed the Board and responded to questions and concerns that the members raised. Walter Power suggested that they do some more testing and sift through the material to determine the level of hazardous waste in the glass and the bases, noting that if they remove the bases they would possibly lessen the amount of lead in the fill. • He asked Mr. Hawkins if they analyzed the glass alone. Mr. Hawkins stated that they did not separate anything out. 2 Walter Power stated that it would be useful for the Board to • have the information on the chemical content of the glass . Ed Hawkins stated that the only other metal detected other than lead was cadmium and that was only in one sample, and it was never detected above its approved level. Bill Luster stated that assuming they could separate the bases from the glass it could be a difficult process. Walter Power disagreed noting that if they screen the samples they could analyze the material, noting that if it turns out that the bases are the major contributor to the lead content removing them would lessen the amount of lead, and perhaps the glass fill would be accepted at a land fill. Ed Hawkins stated that the bases have been crushed so that it would be difficult to get to them. He also noted that the proposal before the Board is to cap the land fill and that this request is not in the proposal. Walter Power stated that it is the job of the Planning Board to determine the best method for treatment of this fill, and he is not sure that capping it is best for the city. He also noted that if the land is unusable after this capping, that would not benefit the city. Walter Power asked for a list of land fills that are available that may take the fill and the criteria used for determining • what is acceptable. Bill Luster stated that if it is determined as hazardous waste they are limited by law as to where and how it can be disposed of. Linda Vaughan agreed noting that she has been dealing with the Clean Harbor Act and that there is no place around here that will take the this material, adding that it has to be stabilized and the cost is around $700.00 per ton for disposal. Walter Power stated that if the general public can handle light bulbs there must be some way to get a back hoe in there to dig it out, sift it and see what is there. Chuck Puleo asked if soil samples had been taken when the wells were drilled. Mr. Hawkins stated that they were. Chuck Puleo asked if they had an estimate of how long it would take for the material to leech through the various layers. Mr. Hawkins said that he did not know. Bill Luster asked if they considered putting in an underground drainage system. Ed Hawkins stated that it could be engineered but that they did not know if the state would accept that. • Albert Hill asked how they plan to prevent moisture under the cap. Ed Hawkins explained the surface water and ground water 3 • plan and will bring the ground water contours to the next meeting. Walter Power asked if Sylvania still manufactured light bulbs in the United States. Ed Hawkins stated that they do in Pennsylvania. Walter Power asked how they dispose of the broken bulbs. Ed Hawkins stated that he did not know, but would find out. He also noted that they stopped using the land fill in 1983. Since then they have been separating the scrap and disposing of it. Walter Power read a letter from Joseph O'Keefe indicating his opposition to the plan. Motion made by Carter Vinson to continue the public hearing . until October 7, 1993 , seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT - 1 TRADERS WAY - MCDONALD'S CORPORATION- ATTORNEY ELLEN WINKLER Atty. Ellen Winkler addressed the Board on behalf of McDonalds corporation and presented plans to construct a 2,500 s .f. building at the corner of Highland Ave. and Traders Way. She explained that they meet all use and density requirements, and their parking plans are well with in what is required by the • ordinance. Atty. Winkler also noted that this project will benefit Salem in many different ways, citing the addition of 60 new jobs to the city. She also described the landscaping as bringing a benefit to the area, as it introduces a green space that is not found in the area. She explained that there would be a full complement of shrubs as required by the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. Walter Power recalled that during discussions with the previous owners they had indicated that a substantial building would be on that lot. Atty. Winkler noted that the Bank of Boston now owns the property and they have decided to lease all of the lots. Susan Archer, a Real Estate Representative for McDonald's addressed the Board and explained that the restaurant would be half the size of traditional McDonalds. She explained that it would seat 48 people and that they are only using 8% of the lot for the construction of the building. She also noted that the entrance would be from Traders Way and explained the layout of the project. She explained that the hours of operation would be from 6 a.m. - 11 p.m. Sunday through Thursday and 6 a.m. - midnight on Friday and Saturday. Ms. Archer also noted that the store would be company owned. • Al Batog from SEA Consultants addressed the Board and explained the plans. He also explained the landscaping plan. 4 • Walter Power asked what they plan for signage. Atty. Winkler stated that there is an existing shopping center sign on the lot which will remain, and they will go to the Sign Review Board as outlined in the ECOD. She also noted that they have a range of choices for signage. Kosta Prentakis asked how many vehicles they expect per day. Atty. Winkler stated that they have done surveys and they expect between 1 ,200 - 1 , 300 per day. Kosta Prentakis also expressed concern about the condition of the access road off Traders Way. Atty. Winkler stated that they would investigate that matter with the landlord. Bill Luster agreed that the condition of the road is a concern. He noted that the road has been neglected, and it needs to be addressed especially since they are adding 1 ,200 - 1 ,300 cars per day. David Hart expressed concern that the amount of parking spaces of 29 with 6 spaces for employees seems tight. Ellen Winkler explained that surveys show that 50% of McDonalds business is drive through. Kosta Prentakis questioned the location of the dumpster. Atty. Winkler stated that the location was chosen in consideration • of the Entrance Corridor Overlay district, and they felt that this was the least visible location for it. David Hart expressed concern that the high shrubs on the corner may block vision. Chuck Puleo asked when deliveries would be made. A representative of McDonalds stated that they would have one delivery a week and that they take about 20 minutes to unload. She also noted that on occasion they have closed a store to unload a delivery. Walter Power asked about the curbing. Ellen Winkler stated that they propose concrete curbing. Walter Power suggested that the Planning Department check on the curbing on Canal Street. Walter Power asked if there was anyone present who wished to comment on the plan. There was no response. . There being no comments from those present, Walter Power asked the Planning Department to review the plan and make a recommendation to the Board. OLD / NEW BUSINESS • Site Plan Review Recommendation 5 • The Board discussed the fee schedule for Site Plan Review, an issue that was raised at the Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Board and the Salem City Council. Bill Luster explained that they did a survey of fees from surrounding cities and towns and propose to amend the fee schedule from the present $1 ,500 or . 10 per s .f. which ever is greater, to a minimum charge of $100.00 based on a rate of .10 per s .f. Carter Vinson stated that he felt that the fee structure should be increased, noting that large projects such as Stop and Shop will bring in more fees to the city. He proposed charging .10 per s.f. for projects up to 10,000 s.f. and .20 per s.f. for projects over 10,000 s.f. Bill Luster stated that the arlministration is not willing to raise the fees substantially, noting the message that it would send to the economic community, and it would create another barrier to economic development in the city. John Moustakis agreed noting that Salem is known for being tough to do business with and further noted that Bill Luster has a better feel for what would be acceptable. Bill Luster will review the matter and will make a recommendation to the Board at a future meeting. Extension of Time for Stop & Shop Public Hearing • Debbie Hurlburt reported that she received a letter from Attorney John Serafini Sr. , on behalf of Stop & Shop, agreeing to an extension to November 4, 1993, for the scheduling of the Public Hearing, on their application for a PUD to build a Stop & Shop on Boston and Howley Streets. Motion made by David Hart to accept the extension of time in which to schedule the Public Hearing for Stop & Shop to November 4, 1993, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Chuck Puleo to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :00 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY; EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB091693 • 6 There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Carter Vinson to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :00 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PBl00793 APPROVED AS AMENDED MARCH 3, 1994 i :� 7 ,l Y SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 21 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, September 2, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Hart, Carter Vinson, John Moustakis, Linda Vaughan, Kosta Prentakis, Chuck Puleo, Albert Hill, and Debbie Hilbert. Also present were Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. DISCUSSION OF COLBY STREET CHILDCARE FACILITY - SALEM HOSPITAL Linda Vaughan recused herself from discussion of this matter. Beth Debski addressed the Board and stated that the city has applied for a permit from the State to clean the pipe on Highland Avenue, and that when the permit is received they will begin to do the work. Carter Vinson asked if the state realized that determining the condition of the pipe needs to be determined so that the Planning Board can make a decision. Beth Debski noted that they are aware of that and they expect the permit any time now. • Beth Debski also noted that she had a letter from Atty. Serafini granting an extension to the Board until September 16, 1993. Motion made by David Hart to accept the extension until September 16, 1993, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. FORM A - SALVATION ARMY / 93-95 NORTH STREET Captain Gerald Gray of the Salvation Army addressed the Board an requested approval of a Form A for property located at 93- 95 North Street. He explained that they plan to join two lots together, and eventually demolish the existing building and erect a 'new building on the site. He noted that the lot frontage would remain at 106 feet. Carter Vinson asked if they would come before the Board when they construct the new building. Beth Debski noted that they would have to have Site Plan Review before the Board because it is in an Entrance Corridor. Motion made by Kosta Prentakis to approve the Form A for the Salvation Army, at 93-95 North Street, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. • 1 • APPROVAL NOT REQUIRED - GREENLAWN AVENUE - RICHARD SWINIUCH Richard Swiniuch addressed the Board on behalf of his daughter, Laurie Panneton, to request approval of a Form A for property located on Greenlawn Avenue. He noted that they want to combine three parcels into one, and that they would have 150 feet of frontage on Greenlawn Avenue an improved public way. He also noted that there is water and sewer available up there, and as soon as the city starts to maintain it, they will apply for a permit to tie into it. Beth Debski noted that although they have 150 feet of frontage, only 80 feet of it is paved, and the regulations say that they need 100 feet of frontage on an improved way. She suggested that the Planning Board have a site visit and also get an opinion from City Solicitor Robert Ledoux as to whether the Board can endorse a plan with only 80 feet of the paved frontage. Mr. Swiniuch explained his interpretation of the regulations, noting that it does not specifically state a paved way. He also noted that he had hoped for a decision on the matter tonight since he filed the plan in July, but had to wait because the Board did not meet in August. Walter Power stated that he wanted more information before the Board makes its decision. • Mr. Swiniuch stated that he wanted to extend the road the additional 20 feet to make it 100, but that he had problems with the developer and was not allowed to do that. Walter Power expressed his concern that if the Board approved the Form A without the required frontage it would create chaos. The Planning Board continued the matter until the next meeting on September 16, 1993. CONTINUATION OF A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A WETLANDS FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - GTE SYLVANIA - MR. ED HAWKINS Ed Hawkins addressed the Board and gave out copies of a report on the status of the various permits and approval required for the project. He also noted that the application incorrectly identified the area as being in Flood Zone A of a FEMA flood hazard district, and it should be Flood Zone B. Walter Power noted that the Board had several questions at the previous meeting. Ed Hawkins noted that they had responded to some of those issues to the Board. Walter Power asked about the rip rap. Ed Hawkins stated that the size depends on the velocity of the water, since you have to give the water some • place to go. He also noted that it is a sparsely vegetated slope and that very little erosion has occurred in the last 2 • five years . He further noted that the restoration and revegetation planned would help. He also explained that they intend to make the area aesthetically beautiful. Carter Vinson asked if they had any information on the quality of the ground water. Mr. Hawkins stated that the ground water quality does not exceed the surface water quality. Cater Vinson stated that he has a difficult time understanding why the removal of the glass would create unsettling consequences to the ground water. Mr. Hawkins stated that the data indicated that the experiments conducted show that leeching could occur, and that they might have a siltation problem, but they are proposing stringent erosion and sedimentation control measures. Albert Hill noted that Gulf of Maine Research Inc. has concerns about the possibility of contamination. Ed Hawkins stated that the research show that the land fill has not had an adverse effect on the ground water or surface water. He further noted that there was greater potential for contamination over the last 50 years. John Moustakis asked if they plan to take samples, noting that they plan to move a lot of material. Ed Hawkins stated that they plan to have extensive post closure activity taking place, and samples would be taken 3 or 4 times a year. • Carter Vinson asked if they plan to monitor the cap. Mr. Hawkins stated that the area would be well vegetated and that they would monitor the land fill 3 times a year. Carter Vinson asked if they would be monitoring for settlement. Ed Hawkins explained the composition of the cap and stated that the cap would be isolating the materials from the surface. David Hart recalled that the Board had asked for information regarding the cost of the total removal of the glass from the site. Ed Hawkins stated that it would cost between five and twenty million dollars to remove the glass from the entire site. He explained that either an Amvack Retech Firm would come in and bind up the glass and emolsify it, or it would be disposed of as hazardous waste. Carter Vinson questioned how they arrived at the figure of 5 to 20 million, and also noted that they had asked for specific information regarding this. John Moustakis expressed his concern that he felt it was a financial matter, and that it would be cheaper to cap it than remove it. He also asked if GTE has given financial assurance if something happens to the site in 30 years. Kosta Prentakis agreed, noting that he would like to know where the money would come from if the work needed to be done over. Ed Hawkins stated that if the property were sold the owner would be responsible if it were agreed to at the time of the sale. 3 • Albert Hill expressed his concern that 30 years of monitoring was not adequate, and that removing the glass would eliminate anticipating a problem. He suggested that GTE needs to take responsibility for the liability for ever. He also asked who would pay if they need to remove the fill in 30 years. Randy Craig of GTE stated that they have set aside money for the monitoring. Linda Vaughan suggested that they have a site visit. The Board decided that September 9, 1993 at 9:30 would be the date for the site visit. Chuck Puleo asked if they plan to relocate the testing wells when the project is complete. Mr. Hawkins stated that the test wells in the land fill would be decommissioned and new wells would be installed for testing. Carter Vinson expressed his concern that the Board had asked for a draft of a cost estimate, and he has hoped they would get a more formal response with information on how they arrived at the best and worse case senerio. Ed Hawkins replied that they do not feel they have to provide a formal estimate and that they do not want to do that. Carter Vinson responded that the information is relevant for the Board to have, and that he does not understand why the cost of the removal is such a mystery. • Walter Power noted that the Conservation Commission has been through the process and issued their Order of Conditions, but stated that they should not expect the Planning Board to dispose of the matter quickly, and that they should have the requested information as requested. He also stated that he has concerns about why removal of the glass has not been an option, and that they need to satisfy the Boards concerns, noting that if the Board does not have full knowledge they can't make a decision. Walter Power also noted that if they do not supply the information requested the Board would get it somewhere. Councillor Mark Blair addressed the Board and noted that the most likely owner could be Salem State College, and given the record of the State, he feared that if anything goes wrong the State would not fix it. He thanked the Planning Board for bringing up questions that the Conservation Commission did not feel they could raise. Motion made by Carter Vinson to continue the Public Hearing until September 16, 1993, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION PLAN - PUBLIC HEARING - 18 FREEMAN ROAD DANIEL ARCHIBALD • Chuck Puleo recused himself from discussion of this matter. 4 • Atty. John Keilty addressed the Board on behalf of his client Daniel Archibald to present a definitive subdivision plan for property located at 18 Freeman Road. He noted that they have held discussions with the Board prior to this and they were also issued an Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission in November of 1992 for the project. Atty. Keilty reviewed the proposed plans with Board. He explained that they are proposing to end the improvements short of the property line due to the topography changes. He noted that they worked on this with the Conservation Commission. He also noted that they are planning a long driveway to access the house. Atty. Keilty also stated that the Conservation Commission has developed specifications for the installation of hay bales. David Hart asked if the hammerhead turnaround would allow for the extension of Freeman Road. Atty. Keilty stated that they do not think that Freeman Road would ever be extended. Walter Power read comments from other city Boards and Commissions. The City Engineer needs more information on the proposed culvert and the construction method. He also needs information on the sewer man hole and the sewer pipe trench. The Building Inspector concurs with the project. The Board of Health has scheduled a Pubic Hearing. The Conservation • Commission has issued an Order of Conditions. Walter Power opened the meeting up to comment from those in attendance. Ed Sylvanowicz of 13 Freeman Road addressed the Board and expressed his concern that the depth of the manhole is 5 feet and it should be 7 feet. He also noted that there is no water shut off on the street, and that he feared that the location of the house is on land that may be preventing flooding to surrounding properties. Edmund Polechewicz addressed the Board and explained his recollection of the installation of the water pipes on Freeman Road. He also expressed concerns about the need for blasting since the area is all ledge. Linda Vaughan noted that the Fire Department requires pre blast surveys to be done on properties surrounding blasting areas. Atty. Keilty noted that project is expensive and may even be cost prohibitive. Walter Power suggested that the Planning Department investigate where the shut off is for Freeman Road. • Chuck Puleo of 5 Freeman Road, ( speaking as an abutter) addressed 5 • the Board and asked if the replication area proposed is not big enough, what recourse would the city have if the flood area is found to be too much with heavy rain. Atty. Keilty noted that any citizen would have civil recourse, but also noted that the Conservation Commission could reopen the issue and challenge the matter if they do not get what they thought that they were getting. There being no further questions or comments from those present at this time a motion was made by David Hart to continue the Public Hearing to October 7, 1993, seconded by Kosta Prentakis and approved unanimously. SITE PLAN REVIEW SPECIAL PERMIT - PUBLIC HEARING - 34-382 BRIDGE STREET - ATTORNEY STEPHEN LOVELY - SPINALE AUTOMOTIVE Atty. Stephen Lovely addressed the Board and presented plans for the construction of an addition to an existing structure at 34-382 Bridge Street. He explained that the project includes the construction of a 2,800 s.f. addition to the building which houses an ice cream store. He also explained that there is another building on the site which houses an automotive repair business, and they also have a permit to sell used cars on the lot. Atty. Lovely also noted that they have received a Variance from lot coverage and rear setback requirements to allow the construction of this addition. He noted that the addition would • be used as retail space and storage space in a B-2 district. Atty. Lovely presented an artists rendition of the proposed building. Walter Power suggested that the Planning Department review the proposed landscaping and parking area plans. The Board decided to have a site visit on Saturday, September 18, at 8:30 a.m. Walter Power also expressed concern that there is no proposed curbing or sidewalks and the Planning Board historically requires improvements when projects are proposed. Walter Power read comments from other city Boards and Commissions. The Fire Department cannot concur with the project because fire access to the building is poor. The City Engineer concurs with the project. The Conservation Commission has no jurisdiction on the matter. Motion made by David Hart to Continue the Public Hearing to October 7, 1993, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. is OLD / NEW BUSINESS 6 • Atty. Joseph Correnti of Serafini, Serafini and Darling addressed the Board to discuss alternatives to a Tri-Partied Agreement, that was a condition of approval for the Mooney Road Subdivision. He explained that this is an unusual situation, in that the developer owns the property outright, and will be performing the site improvements themselves, therefore no financing is required. He also noted that there is no mortgage on the property. He noted that they have contacted several local banks and no one was willing to become involved in a tri-partied agreement. He proposed that they have a covenant for the 8 lots and that no lots be release while the lots are being improved. They proposed that they be allowed to sell up to two lots and the proceeds of the two lots would be deposited into a bank account in the name of the City of Salem. He stressed that the City would always be secure since prior to the sale of the lots they would have the lots, and then when the two lots are sold, the money would be held until the completion of the project. Motion made by David Hart to amend the Condition of the approval dealing with the tri-partied agreement, to allow for the new proposal, upon approval by the City Solicitor, seconded by Carter • Vinson and approved unanimously. Greenlawn Avenue Tri-Partied Agreement- Release of Funds Beth Debski addressed the Board and stated that the Greelawn Ave. subdivision is completed, and that there is $36,743.50 being held by the Board. She explained that all of the work is completed but that they still have an outstanding bill for the Clerk of the Works which is $2,700.00 and the as built plans have not been filed. She suggested that the Board release $30,000.00, and the remaining $6,700.00 is more than enough to cover the Clerk. of the Works Bill and the as built plans. Motion made by Linda Vaughan to approve the release of $30,000.00 from the Tri-Partied Agreement for the Greenlawn Ave. subdivision, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. Linda Vaughan addressed the Board and stated that she would like the information for the meetings sooner than they have been arriving. She also noted that she is resentful of last minute add ons to the agenda, such as the Form A for Mr. Swiniuch on the agenda this evening. She noted that the Board had no information on this matter. David Hart and Carter Vinson agreed. She suggested that she would like the information at least by Monday prior to a meeting. There being no further business to come before the Planning 7 • Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Linda Vaughan to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Chuck Puleo, and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :15 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB090293 • 8 J MINUTES OF JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE SALEM CITY COUNCIL AND THE SALEM PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1993 A Joint Public Hearing between the Salem City Council and the Salem Planning Board was held on Tuesday, August 2, 1993 at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers in Salem City Hall , for the purpose of discussing a proposed ordinance amendment as it pertains to Site Plan Review. Those present were: Planning Board Chairman Walter Power, Albert Hill, Carter Vinson, Linda Vaughan, Kosta Prentakis, Debbie Hilbert. Councillors Jane Stirgwolt, Vincent Furfaro, Mark Blair, George Nowak, Kevin Harvey, and Sarah Hayes. Also present were City Planner William Luster, Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, Planning Board Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, City Clerk Debbie Burkinshaw, and Planning Board Clerk Eileen Sacco. Councillor Kevin Harvey called the meeting to order and called on City Planner Bill Luster to address the meeting. Bill Luster introduced the members of the Planning Board to those present. Bill Luster addressed the Council and explained the history of Site Plan Review (SPR) . He stated that the existing ordinance requires SPR for six or more residential units, and non residential development requires 10,000 s.f. or greater. He also explained that the entrance corridor overlay district was approved in December of 1990, and that reduced SPR in an Entrance Corridor to 2,000 s.f, but noted that certain projects have gone forward, that may have been designed to bypass SPR. Bill Luster explained the proposed changes to the ordinance and noted that the residential requirements would remain the same at six residential units, and that the threshold for non residential development would change to 2,000 s.f. or greater, and that any non-residential development less than 2,000 s .f. would require the written approval of the City Planner in accordance with the criteria established in the ordinance. Bill Luster stated that the Planning Board has reviewed the thresholds for SPR in the surrounding communities and Salem has the highest threshold with 10,000 s.f. , Beverly is 1 ,000 s .f. , Marblehead is 700 s.f. , and Danvers is 500 s .f. He also noted that Peabody and Newburyport review all commercial projects. Bill Luster also noted that the change would allow for more neighborhood review. He cited the Pizza Hut on Canal Street as an example of retail development that did not require • SPR under the current ordinance noting that they may have been asked to move the building back from the street had it been reviewed. • Walter Power addressed the Council and noted that another good example is the Dunkin Donuts on Canal Street which is located on a postage stamp lot. He stated that SPR may have also meant that there would have been less competition for the now closed Donut Ring across the street. Councillor Vincent Furfaro stated that he felt that the changes are good but expressed concern that the existing fee schedule is geared to 10,000 s.f. and that should also be amended. Bill Luster responded that the Planning Board sets the fee schedule and that is not included in the ordinance change. Councillor Kevin Harvey also agreed that he felt that the change was a good one and noted that it was an opportunity to control development in the city. Councillor Jane Stirgwolt also agreed with the ordinance change noting that while doing research in Revere she noticed that the threshold was considerably less than what Salem requires. She also agreed that the fee structure needs to be addressed and urged that the Planning Board be sensitive in terms of cost, so as not to place an undue burden on businesses. Councillor Mark Blair stated that he is happy to see the change citing the Speedy Oil Change on Canal Street as another example. Councillor Sally Hayes stated that she felt that the change is good, particularly since the Master Plan has not been updated since 1978. Bill Luster noted that the Planning Department has issued an RFP for a design consultant that should be selected in August or September and the City should have a new plan in 12-18 months. Councillor Harvey asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak in favor of the amendment. Planning Board member Carter Vinson addressed the Council and stated that he agreed that undue burden should not be place on businesses due to this change, but noted that nothing could be done for the neighborhoods without SPR. Councillor Harvey asked if there was anyone present at the meeting who wished to speak in opposition to the amendment. There was no response. There being no further discussion on the amendment to the Ordinance pertaining to SPR, Councillor Furfaro moved to close the Public Hearing and asked the Planning Board for a recommendation regarding the matter. Bill Luster informed the Council that the Planning Board meeting • the first week in September and they will address the fee schedule and a recommendation. 2. There being no further matters to be discussed at this meeting, a motion was made by Councillor Hayes to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Councillor Stirgwolt and approve unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK JTPH0802 • 3 . SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING JULY 29, 1993 A special meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, July 29, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Carter Vinson, Linda Vaughan, John Moustakis, Chuck Puleo, and Albert Hill. Also present were City Planner William Luster, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The Board reviewed minutes from previous meetings. Motion made by John Moustakis to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 7, 1993, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. Motion made by Linda Vaughan to approve the minutes of- the meeting of January 21 , 1993, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. • Motion made by Carter Vinson to approve the minutes of the meeting of February 18, 1993, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. DISCUSSION WITH SALEM HOSPITAL - REGARDING PROPOSED DAY CARE CENTER Linda Vaughan recused herself from discussion of this matter. Bill Luster explained that the state has begun cleaning out the pipe from Cottage Street and that they plan to run a video camera through it to determine the condition of the pipe, as well as perform another dye test. He stated that he could not make a recommendation until all of the testing is completed. He also stated that the hospital has agreed to an extension until September 2, 1993. Carter Vinson thanked Salem Hospital for the extension and expressed his hope that the matter will be decided soon. He also stressed that he wants to see the needs of the neighborhood addressed. He also noted that the Board will be considering several projects this fall. Motion made by Kosta Prentakis to accept the extension until September 2, 1993, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. • WETLANDS AND FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT- DECISION REGARDING CLARK AVENUE - NICHOLAS FIORE Dennis McManus addressed the Board on behalf of his client, Nicholas Fiore. He explained that at the last meeting on July 15, 1993 the board has some concerns. He noted that as requested a locus has been added to the plan. He also noted that the other issue was regarding whether a catch basin should be included in the plan. He explained that there is a grade difference of about 4-5 feet, and that runoff was going to Mr. Fiore ' s property as a result of the difference in grade. He also noted that there is more fill in the back of Mr. Claveau' s and Ms . Armstrongs property, and that the Conservation Commission required them to construct a swale to extend from the southeastern most portion of Claveau' s property which would connect to a catch basin on the property and into a pipe to the bottom of the slope transmitting into rip-rap. He explained that Mr. Fiore 's property does not have the extent of the fill that the others have and the stability of his slope is not as precarious. The Board reviewed the proposed conditons for the project. Motion made by Carter Vinson to approved the Wetlands Flood Hazard Special Permit for Nicholas Fiore on Clark Avenue, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. • FORM C - DECISION REGARDING PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF MOONEY AND DURKIN ROADS Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and recalled that at the last meeting there were some concerns of the Board which they have tried to address . Bill Luster noted that they have had discussions regarding the cul-de-sac and they have agreed to eliminate the request for a waiver. Carter Vinson asked if they plan to have a Tri-Partied Agreement for the project. Bill Luster stated that they have included it in the conditons but that no figure has been decided on. Carter Vinson also recalled that at the last meeting there was discussion of the temporary turnaround and that even though they have agreed to the curbing, he has concerns about possibility of future expansion of the street. He asked if they were putting sidewalks in the cul-de-sac. Mr . DeIulis stated that the sidewalks would end at the cul-de-sac. The Board discussed the utilities. Bill Luster stated that he felt that it was important to talk with the City Electrician • regarding the overhead versus underground utilities. He reported that Paul Tuttle the City Electrician had no concerns about 2 1 , • overhead utilities since they are already in place in the neighborhood. Atty. Correnti stated that they have financial reasons for .seeking to go overhead, and that if they would have to dig separate trenches for underground utilities, and that there is a lot of ledge there and it would an expense to the developer. Linda Vaughan stated that the proposed overhead utilities bother her and that the Board- has required underground utilities in the past, noting that they were required in the Greenway Road subdivision and there are also overhead utilities in the area. Carter Vinson agreed that underground utilities make for a higher quality subdivision and improve maintenance and safety features. He noted that he felt that the Planning Board would be remiss if they allowed overhead utilities on this project. Walter Power also expressed his preference for underground utilities, noting that he feels that the Board should be consistent, and that the underground utilities would be a greater value to the subdivision that would sell well . Atty. Correnti stated that they understand the Board' s position on consistency and stated that they hoped that they would look • at each plan on the basis on it' s merits. He also noted that there are high tension wires abutting the back of the property. Carter Vinson stated that it is not fair to assume that the high tension wires would be there indefinitely, or to assume that the Board would require underground utilities for aesthetics. Walter Power stated that regardless of the financial constraints that underground utilities would have, it is the Planning Board ' s responsibility to administer the Sub Division Control law and should be consistent with the applications for all parties. Carter Vinson asked to have the street lighting explained. Debbie Hurlburt explained the process for approval of street lighting by the State. The Board reviewed and voted on the proposed waivers for the project as follows : Motion made by John Moustakis to approve the waiver from the statement of Confromance with Master Plan, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. Motion made by Linda Vaughan to approve the waiver of a dead end street longer than 500 feet, seconded by Albert Hill and • approved unanimously. 3 J ` , • Motion made by John Moustakis to approve the waiver for a Cul- de-sac in place of a "T" of Hammer Head turnaround as recommended with sloped granite curbing, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. Motion made by Linda Vaughan to approve the requested waiver for R-1 lot requirements in area of R-C zone, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. Motion made by Chuck Puleo to approve the requested waiver from the sign advertising the Public Hearing, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. Motion made by Chuck Puleo to approve the requested waiver for all utilities to be above ground, seconded by John Moustakis, and the vote was 0-6 against the motion was denied. Motion made by Linda Vaughan to approve the requested waiver for a maximum of 34 trees, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. The Board reviewed the proposed list of conditions for the project. Bill Luster noted that the Planning Department would review the Tri-Partied Agreement and report at the next meeting. Walter Power noted that the water and sewer pipes have been • in for fifteen years and recommended that they check the pipes to see that they are in good condition. Carter Vinson noted that he expected to see the underground utilities on the plan when it is approved. Bill Luster stated that they should have the revised plan for the next meeting. Motion made by Linda Vaughan to approve the Subdivision for Mooney and Durkin Roads, as amended, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. NEW BUSINESS Bill Luster informed the Board that Stop and Shop has submitted a PUD application to the Board, and that he felt that the plan did not meet the requirements for a PUD. He also noted that the City Solicitor informed him that the Board has to consider the application for the PUD, and that Stop and Shop has granted an extension to September 30, 1993 Motion made by John Moustakis to accept the offer for an extension to September 30, 1993, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. Linda Vaughan reminded those present that her annual Planning • Board cookout would be on August 19, 1993 at 6:30 . 4 Bill Luster noted that the Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Board and the City Council regarding the Site Plan Review Ordinance change, would be on August 2, 1993 at 6:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Linda Vaughan to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9 :30 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB072993 • • 5 'SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, JULY 15, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, July 15, 1993 at 7: 30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Carter Vinson, David Hart, John Moustakis, Kosta Prentakis, Albert Hill, Debbie Hilbert, and Chuck Puleo ( 8: 15 ) . Also present were, Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Linda Vaughan was absent. FORM A - 3 SAVONA STREET - LUCILLE CIVIELLO Debbie Hurlburt presented a Form A to the Board for Lucille Civiello. She recalled that the Planning Board had approved a waiver from frontage requirements on June 17 , 1993 for lots 702 and 703, and that now tha applicant is requesting an Approval Not Required. She noted that the appeal period for the waiver from frontage requirements was over July 11 , 1993 . Debbie Hurlburt also explained that the ANR is warranted because the waiver from frontage requirements was granted and the lots are on an improved public way. • There being no questions or comments on the matter, a motion was made by Albert Hill to approve the Form A for 3 Savona Street, for lots 702 and 703, seconded by John Moustakis and approved with Carter Vinson opposed. FORM A - 4 CARROLLTON STREET Debbie Hurlburt presented a Form A for Patricia McLean of 4 Carrollton Street. She noted that she received the application that afternoon and felt that since the Planning Board would not have another meeting until September 2, 1993 it could be considered at this meeting. She explained that lot # 2 is being split from lot # 1 and that the Form A meets all requirements and is on an improved public way. Motion made by Debbie Hilbert to approve the Form A for Carroll Ton Street, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. WETLANDS AND FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - GTE/SYLVANIA 71 LORING AVENUE Ed Hawkins of GZA Environmental addressed the Planning Board on behalf of GTE/Sylvania. He distributed a handout summarizing the capping of the glass land fill and the salt marsh restoration project on Loring Avenue. He explained that the first phase of the basic step closure construction for the glass land fill 1 • involves excavating glass from the wetlands and moving it to the other portion of the site, grade it and cap the glass fill. He stated that the site at completion will have the baseball field re-established and will be similar to what exists today. Mr. Hawkins detailed the process of capping the glass fill, he stated that they would regrade the glass, put six inches of fill on top of that, and install a geosynthetic membrane consisting of 60 ml thick sheets of plastic that would be laid over the glass fill, and covered with 12 inches of sand and 6 inches of loom which will be revegetated. Carter Vinson asked if the cap would be permeable or impermeable. Mr. Hawkins replied that it would be low permeable as required by DEP Solid Waste Management. Carter Vinson also noted that he reviewed the draft plan and noticed that there was a letter included from Susan Tierney requesting that the feasibility of removing the glass be investigated. Mr. Hawkins stated that the issue was addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report submitted to EDEA. Mr. Hawkins also noted that there would be limited impact on the surrounding area, and that there would be minimal to no risk to the health of the environment. David Hart asked to have the vegetative support layer explained. • Mr. Hawkins stated that the 18 inches of sand would be an organic compound 1 -28 to allow for support vegetation growth. David Hart also questioned the possible increase in elevation. Mr. Hawkins referred to sheet 84 and explained that they indicate the final and existing contours and noted that the chances of erosion of materials would be much less than it is today. David Hart also asked to have the existing surface drainage explained. Mr. Hawkins stated that the sheet flow run off from the glass land fill after closure would be the same. David Hart pointed out that some water must run into the ground. Mr. Hawkins stated that the increase in surface water run off would be more than compensated for with the 3 acre salt marsh, that would have ten times the storage capacity that exists now. David Hart asked if there would be an increase in surface water run off. Mr. Hawkins stated that he would have to get back to him with that information. Mr. Hawkins explained the Salt Marsh Restoration Plan to the Board. He noted that the intent is to create an aesthetic buffer. Carter Vinson referred to zone B on the plan and asked about the 3=1 slope indicated and the possibility of erosion. Mr. Hawkins stated that they intend to place hay bales and a silt fence during the winter months and plant next spring, and would 2 • be monitoring it as well. Mr. Hawkins reviewed the permits and approvals that they have received and those that are pending. David Hart questioned the time frame for applying for the U S EPA General Permit. Mr. Hawkins stated that it takes about 48 hours to get approval from the US EPA. Debbie Hurlburt asked when they plan to start the project. Mr. Hawkins stated that they would like to excavate the glass and do most of the construction this year, and start in early to mid September. He stated that the Salt Marsh Restoration would be done in the Spring, and would take about 14 weeks to construct. Walter Power noted that Conservation Commission Chairwoman Betsy Horne was in the audience and if the member had any questions of the Commission she could address the Board. David Hart asked to have Ms . Horne summarize what the Commission has done. Ms . Horne stated that the Commission closed the Public Hearing at the insistence of the applicant after a three year process, noting that she felt that they were rushing the completion of the process. She also noted that she is planning to give them a draft set of conditions for review at the next meeting, by this weekend. Walter Power read comments from other city Boards and Commissions. He stated that the City Engineer concurs with the project with no comments. The Conservation Commission recently closed the Public Hearing and no Order of Conditions has been issued yet. The Building Inspector concurs with the project with no comments. The Board of Health concurs with the project and sent a letter. Carter Vinson requested that a copy of the Order of Conditions from the Conservation Commission be sent to the Planning Board. Walter Power opened the Pubic Hearing up to those present at the meeting for comment. Ward Seven Councillor Mark Blair addressed the Board and noted that he has never seen a project such as this, noting that GTE has been allowed to police themselves and perform their own testing. He also noted that the Mayor hired a consultant to review the plan but that no additional testing was performed by the city. He also stated that the residents have made it clear since the beginning that they want the glass removed from the site and not capped. Councillor Blair also stated that he felt that GTE has presented a plan that is best for GTE and that this plan is more cost effective than removing the glass. He also stated that any material removed from the wetland should • be removed from the site. Councillor Blair stressed that the neighbors are not in full agreement with the plan and asked 3 • that the Board consider the neighborhood when rendering its decision. Joseph O'Keefe of 28 Surrey Road addressed the Board and stated that he is a registered Professional Engineer and that he is opposed to a fortune 500 company presenting this plan which is basically moving glass around and is most cost effective for GTE. Mr. O'Keefe also noted that he reviewed the documents at the Salem Public Library. He stated that the report shows that TCE was found on the site. Mr. Hawkins replied that organic tricloral ether was found on a portion of the site away from the land fill and it was investigated. He noted that they evaluated the condition and concluded that it is not unacceptable to human health and the environment. Mr. O'Keefe also referred to the letter in the file from Susan Tierney and asked if they investigated the possibility of removing the glass altogether. Mr. Hawkins stated that they feel that the glass fill does not pose a risk to human health and the environment. Mr. Hawkins also addressed the comment that the proposal is cost effective for GTE. He stated that the original proposal was to spread two feet of sand on the glass fill and seed it, and stated that, that was a cost effective proposal but that they did not proposed it. He also noted that this proposal is far more costly and this proposal makes more sense. Ellen Gallagan of 22 Cleveland Road addressed the Board and stated that the neighbors are opposed to the plan, and their primary concern is that the glass should be removed, not cover the glass. She also requested that the Board not close the public hearing this evening. Ms. Galligan expressed anger at not being notified of the July 8, 1993 meeting of the Conservation Commission as agreed at the start of the Pubic Hearing process. She requested that they be notified of all meetings that the Board intends to discuss the matter. Ms. Galligan also stated that she believes that it is a cost issue for GTE and that they should start being good neighbors and take care of business. John Moustakis asked what City Board would have the authority to require GTE remove the glass land fill from the site. Walter Power stated that he would like to get an opinion for City Solicitor Robert Ledoux on that issue. Ann Fournier of 5A Cleveland Road Ext. addressed the Board and stated that she wants to see the glass removed. She noted that there have been many people in the neighborhood with cancer, and she sees no reason to leave the glass there. She also reported that she has seen hundred on dead fish there, and has pictures of the land when it is flooded. • Councillor Mark Blair addressed the Board again and stated that 4 • this has been a long process. He noted that there have been many people involved in this process, and although the number of them who attend the meetings have dwindled the neighbors still care about what happens at this site. He also submitted a copy of a letter that he wrote to the Conservation Commission for the record. David Hart asked what the cost estimate for the project is. Ed Hawkins stated that they have budgeted $500,000 .00 for the closure of the land fill and about $150,000 .00 for the salt marsh restoration. He also stated that he would get more accurate figures for the Board. John Moustakis questioned whether this process has been done before. Mr. Hawkins stated that this is a unique situation and he did not know if it had been used on a land fill. Tom Capano of 139 Loring Avenue addressed the Board and asked if the Board had been to the site. Walter Power stated that he would like to schedule a site visit. Chuck Puleo asked if they manufactured two types of light bulbs at the plant. Mr. Hawkins stated that they only made incandescent bulbs at the plant. Chuck Puleo asked to have the geotextile fabric explained. Mr. Hawkins reviewed the process for the capping. • Walter Power questioned if they were planning to fill right to the edge of the old railroad tracks. Mr. Hawkins stated that they will fill to the edge of the railroad tracks. Walter Power requested that they provide information as to where the 100 year flood line is in relation to the rip rap outlining the capped area. Mark Blair also noted that during a lunar high tide right field of the baseball field is covered with water. He also noted that the water goes right over the beach wall . Mark Blair also noted that there is a lot of drought now and during a fast flood down pour dirt runs off, and he disagrees that it will hold water. Albert Hill asked if during their investigations, did GTE ask for data on removing the glass . Mr. Hawkins stated that they did not. He also stated that this issue has only come up at the last couple of meetings. He further stated that they feel that what they are doing is the environmentally sensitive thing to do. Carter Vinson stated that he would like to see a more expansive summary of ground water quality data. • Walter Power asked if they plan to monitor the site. Mr. Hawkins 5 • stated that they are planning to monitor the site. Al Hill stated that he has a problem visualizing that the water is going to stay on to of the cap and not get through the material. Mr. Hawkins stated that the water would go into the wetland and that all of the calculations are included in the closure report. Walter Power stated that heh would like to extend the public hearing to September. He also requested that they provide cost information regarding the removal of the glass to the Board. Councillor Mark Blair stated that he feels that the process is flawed because GTE is allowed to get approvals from the state, and that is not in the best interest of the neighborhood. He also stated that he felt that if they excavate the glass it would be easier. Albert Hill asked how they got their information concerning the possible hazardous waste on the site. Mr. Hawkins stated that they did test borings and the results are included in the draft environmental impact report. Al Hill asked if they had letters from GTE noting what was dumped on the site. Mr. Hawkins stated that they did have that information. John Moustakis asked if they found chromium in the land fill . • Mr. Hawkins stated that they did find concentrations of it. Carter Vinson requested that the Conservation Commission send a letter to the Board concerning the issues that were raised by the Commission. Betsy Horne noted that she has asked Debbie Hurlburt to review the minutes of all of the proceedings and compile a list of issues that were raised from the start. There being no further questions or comments on the proposal at this time, a motion was made by Carter Vinson to continue the Public Hearing until September 2, 1993, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. DISCUSSION WITH SALEM HOSPITAL REGARDING COLBY STREET DAY CARE CENTER Debbie Hurlburt reported that since the last meeting the state hired a contractor and went out to Dr. Curtin' s property and started to clean the pipe from Highland Avenue to Cottage Street. She noted that the contractor is in the middle of the work at this time. Atty. John Serafini Sr. addressed the Board and stated that they are extending the deadline to July 29, 1993. Stan Poirier addressed the Board and stated that they state has no easement to be on the Lunt ' s property and they are • concerned about who would be responsible if something happens to the pipe. 6 • Mrs. Lunt addressed the Board and expressed her fears that something could happen to the pipe during the cleaning. Beth Debski stated that the Planning Board has nothing to do with this matter. WETLANDS AND FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - CLARK AVENUE - NICHOLAS FIORE Dennis McManus of Landmark Engineering addressed the Board on behalf of his client Nicholas Fiore. He stated that the they are proposing to regrade the existing slope in the buffer zone to a 2-1 slope, stabilize the existing slope near the wetlands with an erosion control blanket and loam and seed the slope. He also noted that the slope would be graded at the property lines to tie into the abutting property. Mr. McManus stated that during construction a siltation fence and a line of hay bales would be placed at the edge of the vegetated wetland to prevent siltations of the wetlands. Mr. McManus also explained that they plan to extend the existing twelve inch drainage pipe six feet and a flared end section will be added to it, and rip rap will be placed at the pipe out fall to prevent erosion of the slope. Mr. McManus also noted that they have received an Order of Conditions from the Salem Conservation Commission. • Carter Vinson asked how they tie into the abutters Claveau and Armstrong. Debbie Hurlburt stated that she gave them records of Claveau and Armstrong to base the plan on. Julie Armstrong of 12 Clark Avenue addressed the Board and questioned if they were planning to install a catch basin at the back of the slope as she had to. Mr. McManus stated that they were not installing a catch basin, and that her catch basin was to stop the water going to the Fiore property. Walter Power read comments from other city Boards and Commissions. He stated that the Board of Health concurs with the project, the Conservation Commission has issued an Order of Conditions (64-209 ) , and the Building Inspector concurs with the project. Atty. Martin McNulty representing the Mulverhill Family addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned about building up an area that will be a problem later. He also questioned the lack of catch basin, stating that he feels that it would alleviate some of the run off. David Hart requested that the Engineer put a locus on the plan. There being no further questions or comments at this time, Walter • Power declared the Public Hearing closed. Walter Power informed the applicant that the Planning Department would review the 7 • plan, and make a recommendation to the Board at their next meeting on July 29 , 1993 . DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISION PLAN - DeIULIS BROTHERS - MOONEY AND DURKIN ROADS - ATTY. JOSEPH CORRENTI Atty. Joseph Correnti, representing Frank and Patrick DeIulis addressed the Board and recalled that they have met informally with the Board in February to discuss the subdivision. he reviewed the history of the property noting that a Form C was approved for the property in August 1968. He also noted that they have received variances from the Board of Appeal for lot size and frontage requirements to allow for the construction of single family dwellings on Mooney Road and Durkin Road. he noted that the variance were necessary because portions of the property are in an RC district. Atty. Correnti reviewed the plan with the Board. He stated that they are conforming to R1 zoning and that they voluntarily agreed to a restrictive covenant for the property based mostly on the concerns of the neighbors. Walter Power questions the plan for a temporary turnaround, rather than a hammerhead turnaround. Atty. Correnti replied that they wanted to leave the option of extending the road open, should anyone choose to do so in the future. • Atty. Correnti reviewed a list of waivers that they are requesting for the project. He noted that they are requesting overhead utilities because that is what is in the neighborhood. He also noted that they are requesting to plant 11 trees. Debbie Hurlburt noted that the requirement is one tree on center every 30 feet and the number should be about 55 trees. Walter Power reviewed the comments of other city Board and Commissions. He stated that the Conservation Commission concurs, noting that a small portion of the property is within the buffer zone. He also noted that the Board of Health concurs with the project with the standard list of conditions. David Hart asked about the existing topography of the property. Scott Petrovich reviewed the profile of the grades of the road for the existing and the proposed plan. Gail Smith noted that the proposed road grade does not change much. She also stated that the developer may not be building all of the houses and that each lot will have to come before the Board if there are changes of more than two feet. Carter Vinson questioned why the Planning Board was not having a Public Hearing on the request for the waiver from frontage. [•falter Power suggested that the Board get an opinion from City • Solicitor Bob Ledoux. 8 • Chuck Puleo asked if they plan to install granite curbing in the cul-de-sac. Patrick DeIulis stated that they are planning to use sloped granite curbing. Chuck Puleo asked if they were extending the curbing all the way around the cul-de-sac. Mr. DeIulis stated that they were paving up to the lawns around the cul-de-sac and not installing the sloped granite curbing in the cul-de-sac. Carter Vinson questioned why the turnaround was temporary and if there is an intention to further develop. Atty. Correnti stated that the road is a paper street, and it seems impractical to further develop it. He noted that there are high tension towers owned by Mass. Electric out there and the city owns the other side. Albert Hill recalled that during the site visit underground utilities were discussed and he was under the impression that they were planning to have utilities underground. Patrick DeIulis stated that he recalled that he said that the utilities would be over head. He stated that they are trying to retain the character of the neighborhood. He further stated that he does not recall discussing overhead vs. underground utilities at the site visit. Carter Vinson expressed his concern that the landscaping is sparse, and that the turnaround is temporary because of the • paper street. Atty. Correnti stated that they are planning 1 tree in front of each lot, but would be willing to work with the Board. He noted that there is 100 feet of frontage less the driveway, and there is not much room for the required 2 or 3 trees. Beth Debski suggested having the Planning Department Landscape Architect review the plan. David Hart asked if the developer would be building the houses. Patrick DeIulis stated that they would be building the road, but the decision on who will build the houses will be up to the buyers of the lots. Chuck Puleo asked if when the lots are marketed they would be marked. Atty. Correnti stated that they will stake out the lots and delineate the buffer zone. Frank DeIulis addressed the Board and stated that they were requesting the waiver on the underground utilities because on Mooney Road all of the utilities are over head and they are extending the road by 3 lots. He also stated that there could be a substantial cost to go underground. There being no further questions or comments at this time Walter Power declared the Public Hearing closed. He informed the applicant that the Planning Department will review the plan • and make a recommendation to the Board at the next meeting on July 29 , 1993 . 9 RELEASE OF COVENANT FOR BERRYWOOD LANE SUBDIVISION Debbie Hurlburt addressed the Board and stated that Will Beaulieu did his final inspection and estimated that $3,750.00 should be held out to insure that the trees and bushes and seeding that needs to be done in the fall is completed. Chuck Puleo suggested that they hold the money for two years to see that the plantings take through one season. Motion made by John Moustakis to release the covenant for the Berrywood Lane Subdivision with the understanding that' $3,750.00 will be held in escrow until October 11 1994 to insure that the planting to be completed is stabilized, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Debbie Hurlburt informed the Board that the Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and the Planning Board regarding the Zoning amendment for Site Plan Review will be held on August 3, 1993 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. Debbie Hurlburt reminded the Board that the get together at Linda Vaughans would be held on Thursday, August 191 1993 at 6:30 and suggested that members contact Linda. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by David Hart to adjourn the meeting, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11 :00 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY; EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB071593 • 10 • SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, JULY 11 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, July 1 , 1993 at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Carter Vinson, Albert Hill, David Hart, Linda Vaughan, Chuck Puleo, and Debbie Hilbert. Also present were Assistant City Planner Beth Debski, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED CHILDCARE FACILITY LOCATED AT 1 -3 COLBY STREET Linda Vaughan recused herself from discussion of this matter. Atty. John Darling and Atty. John Serafini Sr. were present at the meeting with a representative of Schofield Brothers, the engineering firm for Salem Hospital. Also present was Michael Juliano of Meridian Engineering Collaborative, to explain responses to questions raised by the Planning Board regarding the proposed Day Care Facility on Colby Street. • Walter Power addressed each question and repsonse with Mr. Juliano. Mr. Juliano explained each response. QUESTION 1 - WHAT IS THE VOLUME INCREASE? Mr. Juliano noted that he made sure that the calculations submitted were in compliance with standard practices. He also noted that additional calculations were submitted on June 23, which indicated pre and post conditions and that he was in agreement with them. When questioned about the additional calculations, Mr. Juliano stated that he took the original information, ,and during the original review they did not know what the volume would be. Walter .Power noted that the calculations are based on the use of a functioning pipe, and` it has been determined that the pipe is not functioning. Mr. Juliano stated that if the pipe is cleaned all of the drainage should find its way into the pipe system. He also noted that at present a good percentage of the drainage is not going through the pipe and is seeping through the earthwork to surrounding properties. Mr. Juliano explained that all indications are.that the pond was designed to have the drainage go from the pond through an 8 inch pipe, and out to Highland Avenue. He stated that he thought that the pipe has only been blocked for the last two years. • 1 • Mr. Juliano explained that he felt that the increase flow of water would be about 1000 c.f. of water, an increase of about .078 from the proposed to the existing. Walter Power expressed his concern that right now the pipe is blocked and the water is not flowing properly, and that he feels that they would be picking up more volume when the pipe is cleaned out and the water flows properly. It was noted that the proposal was based on the original drainage being restored, to an unblocked pipe. David Hart asked what the impact would be downstream to Highland Avenue when the pipe is fixed. He also asked where the water is going, because it is not going into 100 Highland Ave. the representative of Schofield Brothers explained that under low flood conditions a small flow of water goes down the swale to the DiVirgilio property and seeps into the ground. He also noted that during a big storm the berm at 100 Highland Avenue causes the water to pond to the DiVirgilio property. Chuck Puleo asked what the operating condition of 100 Highland is. Mr. Juliano explained that a dye test performed, showed that the dye did not get through and the system is not functioning. He also noted that the system is not cleaned out yet. • QUESTION 2 - HAS THE IMPACT ALREADY BEEN DETERMINED BY SB?. Mr. Juliano explained that the system has not been cleaned out yet, so they do not know where the water goes. QUESTION 3 - WHAT IS THE VOLUME OF WATER THAT CAN BE GENERATED BY THE INTERCEPTOR PIPE? Regarding question 3, Mr. Juliano reiterated that the proposed interceptor drain has been eliminated from the plan. Albert Hill questioned whether the volume of water that was calculated to flow through the interceptor pipe would be coming out of the pond. Mr. Juliano replied that the pond would have been two feet lower, but they are not draining the pond. QUESTION 4 - CAN A LINE BE DRAWN ON A MAP WHICH DESCRIBES WHERE THE DRAINAGE FROM THE POND GOES? Mr. Juliano explained that the City of Salem Engineering record drawings show the configuration and route of the drainage system in general fashion. He also explained that the Mass Highway Department has on file drainage plans for the Highland Avenue area, and show that the pipes do go in that direction. He also stated that the topography maps indicate that the water is conveyed through those pipes. David Hart noted that even though • the maps show that, it does not function that way. Mr. Juliano noted that is response is based on what the record plan shows. 2 • QUESTION 5 - DOES STORM WATER FROM THE POND CURRENTLY DRAIN INTO 100 HIGHLAND AVENUE DRAINAGE SYSTEM? Mr. Juliano explained that the Engineering Topo maps show that the 8 inch pipe coming from the pond from a drainage swale leads to a depression area and a culvert that leads it to go under Highland Avenue to another culvert out through the backyards to Cottage Street. He also noted that the unblocking the pipe would allow the water to flow into the drainage system at 100 Highland Avenue and out to Highland Avenue. Debbie Hilbert asked what the impact would be on 100 Highland Avenue when the work was completed. Mr. Juliano replied that 100 Highland Avenue was designed to handle the volume. QUESTION 6 - DOES SB' s PLAN OR REPORT DETERMINE WHETHER THE LOCATION, CONDITION, AND CAPACITY OF THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM UNDER HIGHLAND AVENUE PROVE ADEQUATE FOR THIS PROPOSAL? Mr. Juliano explained that the plan does not indicate the location, condition, capacity of the system within Highland Avenue. He also noted that no calculations are required because the capacity of the culvert for pre and post conditions remain unchanged. Mr. Juliano also reported that a dye test performed does not indicate where the water goes , and noted that the State has started to clean out the pipes on Highland Avenue, but need • to finish that. David Hart stated that there is no answer until the pipe is cleaned out. Atty. Flemming addressed the Board and attempted to rebut each point addressed at the meeting. He stated that the information supplied by Schofield Brothers was not adequate, and that the Engineer hired by the City needed more information to do their review. He also questioned the elevations of the pond and the headwall. Atty. Serafini voiced his opposition to Atty. Flemming' s line of questioning, and Chairman Walter Power agreed noting that he felt he was out of line. Stan Poirier of the Greenway Road Homeowners Association addressed the Board and stated that he was present when the state did their investigations. He explained the process the state took to determine the problem with the drainage system. He explained that they cleaned out the manhole in the middle of Highland Avenue and pumped water into it and did not find where it went. Mr. Poirier stated that he did not see how this project could go forward until they find out where the water is going. He also stated that a down stream study needs to be done, and stressed that there are no easements with the down stream neighbors. Mr. Poirier also offered to show the Board videos that he has of the area. • Atty. John Serafini addressed the Board and stated that they have submitted all of the requested information to the Board. 3 • He stated that based on fact, the project does not impact the area. He noted that the problem is a City and State problem that needs to be addressed. Atty. Serafini also noted that there has not been a project in the city that has received such a minute review, and stated that they should be allowed to go forward. Ward Three Councillor Vincent Furfaro addressed the Board and asked the Board to consider the down stream neighbors. He stated that the neighbors are not here to stop the project, but wished to see that the integrity of the neighborhood is maintained. Debbie Hurlburt addressed the Board and stated that what is occurring under Highland Avenue needs to be addressed and the State needs to flush out that line. She stated that they need to go on to Dr. Curtin' s property to do so. Afty. Flemming stated that if they need to do visual inspections that would be all right. Carter Vinson noted that the work should be done in the next couple of weeks. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and stated that he hoped that traffic conditions would be addressed. There being no further questions or comments at this time, a motion was made by David Hart to accept the letter of authorization for an extension to July 15, 1993, seconded by • Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. Carter Vinson stated that while it is important to get the drainage situation addressed, he suggested that the Board move forward with other possible conditions for the project regarding other concerns. OLD / NEW BUSINESS Beth Debski addressed the Board and explained that the City is submitting a grant application for $30,000 for a Maritime Development District and Public Marine Facilities Utilization Plan. She explained that the grant would be used to explore zoning changes to encourage marine activity on the water front. Linda Vaughan suggest a date of August 19, 1993 for the Planning Board Summer Party. Debbie Hurlburt discussed the condition of the planting done at Berrywood Lane. She stated that they should replant shrubs and the grass strip in October. She noted that the shrubs are not too healthy and that the grass seed that was planted was eaten by birds. Debbie Hurlburt distributed. copies of the draft RFP for the • Master Plan Consultant and asked that the members make comments at a future meeting. 4 There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Debbie Hilbert to adjourn the meeting, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB070193 5 SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, JUNE 17, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, June 17, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. , in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Carter Vinson, Albert Hill, Kosta Prentakis, David Hart, and Debbie Hilbert (8: 30 ) . Also present were: City Planner William Luster, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Absent were, Linda Vaughan, John Moustakis, and Chuck Puleo. DISCUSSION REGARDING PROPOSED CHILDCARE FACILITY LOCATED AT 1 -3 COLBY STREET. City Planner Bill Luster addressed the Board and updated them on the progress of the information requested concerning the project. He noted that at the last meeting he briefly discussed the dye test that was performed. He also noted that Salem Hospital had granted another extension until July 1 , 1993 for the Board to act on the proposal . He reported that the results of the dye test were inconclusive, since the dye failed to show • up where expected, and was not located. He also reported that the State has begun clearing an obstruction in the pipe across Highland Avenue, and that when that is completed another dye test will be performed. Bill Luster reviewed the report from Meridian Engineering with the Board. He noted that the results of the dye test were inconclusive and that they agreed with several contentions of the drainage calculations provided in the Schofield Study. He stressed that the Planning Department needs to continue working with all of the groups surrounding this issue. Walter Power asked if after the pipe is cleaned, and another dye test proves inconclusive, should the City go to the next step to find out what the problem is. Bill Luster noted that the next step would be to send a video camera through the pipe to see the condition of the pipe is. The Board reviewed the letter from Meridian, and drafted questions concerning the project. David Hart asked what the volume increase would be. He also questioned what requires the applicant to respond to the downstream. David Hart also suggested that they trace the existing and proposed routes for the drainage across Highland Avenue. It was also suggested that confirmation of where the • 80 inch pipe starts from the pond and goes across Highland Avenue is as stated. 1 r•1' I • !Bill Luster stated that he would try to get a response in writing for the next meeting, He will also try to get a representative of Meridian to attend the next meeting as well . Ward Three Councillor Vincent Furfaro addressed the Board and stated that he was there on behalf of the residents of the Greenway Road area. He questioned the Board as to what point they would decide that the drainage system would not work. He also urged the Board to be sure that everything that is proposed is going to work, noting that it is incumbent on the petitioner to prove that the project will or will not cause serious problems in the Greenway Road area. He also stated that he felt that two weeks was not long enough for the Board to make an informed decision on the matter. Stanley Poirier, President of the Greenway Road Homeowners Association, asked the Board who would be responsible for the drainage system, should the project go forward. Bill Luster stated that right now the responsibility lies with the city. Councillor Leonard O'Leary stated that he thought that the City would not assume responsibility until all of the lines are tied in. The Board will discuss the matter again at the next meeting of the Planning. Board on July 1 , 1993. • 3 SAVONA STREET - WAIVER FROM FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS Atty. John Serafini Jr. addressed the Board and stated that he did not have many new things to add from previous discussions on this matter. He noted that at the last meeting there was concern about approving the three lots, but there was a consensus of the Board that they would go along with lots 702 and 703 and approve the waiver for those lots only. He asked the Board to approve the waiver for lots 702 and 703 . Carter Vinson expressed his concerns about the approval of lots 702 and 703 . He stated that he felt that apart from the frontage requirement for lot 703, he has concerns about access to the lot for fire apparatus. Atty. Serafini replied that fire apparatus is not 26 feet wide, and that they would be held to setback and side yard requirements of the Board of Appeal. Debbie Hilbert noted that she felt that the consensus of the Board two weeks ago that if they made changes to the plan the Board would approve lots 702 and 703. Albert Hill asked if the property would ever be fenced in. Mrs. Civiello stated that she prefers shrubbery to fences. • There being no further comments or questions concerning the matter a motion was made by Debbie Hilbert to approve the waiver 2 • for lots 702 and 703 at 3 Savona Street, seconded by David Hart and approved 5-1 with Carter Vinson opposed. Atty. Serafini presented the Board with a written waiver as to the time for the Form A that was filed for the lots to July 15, 1993. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Site Plan Review - Zoning Ordinance Amendment Bill Luster reported that the Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding Site Plan Review will be sent to the City Council at their next regular meeting. Master Plan Bill Luster informed the Board that a Request for Proposals (RFP) has been issued for the preparation of a Comprehensive Master Plan. He noted that the $30,000 appropriated for the consultant is not enough money to do everything outlined in the RFP, but they are aiming to have the applicants work these things into their proposals. Councillor At Large Jane Stirgwolt was present at the meeting and discussed the progress of the Home Rule Petition regarding • Institutional gaster Planning currently being discussed in the House of Representatives. Gauthier Motors Debbie Hurlburt reported that she received a letter from Marc Gauthier indicating that they are preparing to do the final landscaping on their property on Canal Street. Loring Hills Avenue - Nursing Home Construction Debbie Hurlburt reported that she had received complaints of a dust problem, and that after Will Beaulieu reviewed the situation it was decided that they would place stone in the pathway to eliminate dust and that the street will be hosed down nightly and swept once a week. Berrywood Lane Debbie Hurlburt reported that the stairs at Berrywood Lane are completed and that the planting strip has been installed. She showed the Board pictures of the stairs . APPROVAL OF MINUTES • The approval of the Minutes of the Planning Board that need to be approved was postponed until July 1 , 1993 . 3 - r ' 1 There being no further business to come before the Board at =. this meeting, a motion was made by Albert Hill to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10 :00 . RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. ShCCO, CLERK PB061793 • 4 SALEM PLANNING BOARD • MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, JUNE 3, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, June 3, 1993, at 7:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Debbie Hilbert, Carter Vinson, John Moustakis, Kosta Prentakis, David Hart, and Chuck Puleo. Also present were, City Planner Bill Luster, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. 3 SAVONA STREET - WAIVER FROM FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS & FORM A Atty. John Serafini Jr. addressed the Board and explained that the Board held a site visit to Mrs. Civiello' s property to view the areas of concern raised at the public hearing. He also noted that Mrs. Civiello received a variance for reduced lot area and lot width. He also noted that the area is partially paved. Atty. Serafini stated that there is no neighborhood opposition to the plan. ,, . Walter Power reviewed the plan and noted that. if this was for a single lot, the Board would not even see the plan. He also • noted that the Board is concerned about undersized lots. John Moustakis asked if the Board approved the plan, would they be saying that the applicant would not have to extend the street to build on lot 357. Atty. Serafini stated that this case could be considered a hardship because of the way the existing dwelling was built on the lot. Carter Vinson stated that he felt that in a neighborhood where 50 feet of frontage exists on most lots, he would have a problem with a lot with 25 feet of frontage, and feels that if the Board approved this it would be setting a standard. He also expressed concern about ready access to the property. City Planner Bill Luster stated that he could not remember a situation such as this with so much support. He also noted that he would not expect this to be a precedent or ask the Board to approve 26 foot lots routinely. Chuck Puleo noted that the Board of Appeal could haved asked that the lot line be moved to give 40 feet of frontage instead of 25. • Walter Power noted that in the past the Board has been concerned about lots that are land locked and suggested that they could 1 • combine lots 357 and 358. Debbie Hilbert noted that she has no problem with the plan for lot 703 and suggested the Board could approve the portion of the plan for lot 702 and 703. Atty. Serafini asked the Board if the applicant paved the road an additional 20 feet if it would make a difference, since the lot would then be on a paved way in its entirety. Walter Power stated no. Atty. Serafini stated that the City zoning Ordinance does not specifically state a requirement for frontage, as it only defines what the lots should be. He also stated that Mrs. Civiello wants to give the land to her children, and the only way to solve the problem is to grant a waiver. He further noted that what they are proposing is similar to what is already there, and has been for many years. Carter Vinson stated that Mrs. Civiello could solve the problem by her own means by combining lots 357 and 358. Walter Power agreed, noting that historically people have solved this type of problem by joining lots to try to meet frontage requirements. John Moustakis stated that he did not have problem with lot 703, as long as the neighbors don't mind. • Carter Vinson noted that he is opposed to lot 703 as well . David Hart stated that he felt that there is enough space in lot 703 to be an effective development, and it does not appear to impact the surrounding area, and has plenty of space for accessibility. Carter Vinson stated that he felt that approval would set a very broad level of standard for waivers, as it would be a generous waiver and he feels that the Board should be consistent. Walter Power suggested that they should resubmit the plan for approval of lot 702 and 703. Carter Vinson agreed noting that he would not feel comfortable approving a plan unless it was resubmitted. John Moustakis questioned if they would have to go back to the Board Appeal if the Planning Board approved 2 lots and not the others. Bill Luster stated that they could approve a waiver for only two lots. He also noted that the Board would need an extension for the ANR application. Atty. Serafini stated that there would be no problem with the extension. Carter Vinson stated that he would like to see the plan come • back and have another public hearing. Atty. Serafini noted that another Public Hearing would be an additional expense for 2 • Mrs. Civiello. Carter Vinson suggested that the Board could write a finding to justify the approval of only 2 of' the lots on the plan. David Hart agreed that some kind of a finding should be included to explain why the Board is doing what they are doing. Walter Power stated that he wanted to see everything in writing and suggested that they come back again in two weeks. Atty. Serafini gave the Planning Board written approval for the extension of the ANR. FORM A - APPLEBY ROAD Atty. Albert Ricci addressed the Board and asked approval of a Form A for the conveyance of 432 square feet of land from 29 Appleby Road to 31 Appleby Road. He showed the Board plans of the properties and noted that the lot frontage has not been changed. There being no questions or comments from the Board, a motion was made by Debbie Hilbert to approve the Form A for Appleby Road, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. OLD/NEW BUSINESS Salem Hospital Proposed Day Care Center • Bill Luster reported that a dye test was performed this afternoon. He stated that dye was put in the catch basin on Dr. Curtin ' s property, but has not shown up anywhere yet. He noted that they expected to find it down on Cottage Street, but they did not. He also stated that they popped the manhole on Highland Avenue and it appeared to be clogged, and there was no evidence of the dye there either. ' He also noted that they expect a written report on Monday or Tuesday, which will include a review of the drainage calculations submitted by Schofield Brothers. Bill Luster also noted that he is not comfortable with the June 17 deadline that the Board is under for approval, since the Hospital granted the extension to that date. He stated that he is not willing to say turn the project down, but would say that he did not see how the Board could deal with this in two weeks given the information from the dye test. He also noted that Meridian will be looking on the calculations and what the Board has been told, but that they are being careful not to broaden the scope of what can be addressed. He also noted that it needs to sensitively handled with regards to the hospital, and he will draft a letter from the Board outlining the findings and why another extension of time is needed. Site Plan Review Ordinance Change • Carter Vinson stated that he hopes that the Administration would 3 act quickly to have the ordinance change passed, noting that he is concerned that proposals prior to the ordinance change do not require Site Plan Review. Master Plan Bill Luster reported that $30,000 was included in the budget for a consultant to be hired for the Master Plan. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meetings of October 15, 1992, November 5, 1992, November 5, 1992 Joint Public Hearing, and November 19, 1992 were reviewed for approval. Motion made by David Hart to approved the Minutes of these meetings as amended, seconded John Moustakis and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by John Moustakis to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Debbie Hilbert and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: • EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB060393 • 4 ;�`� `°� �i#>y of �Sttlezlt, �itt�sttcl�use##s n Planning Pourb Om $alem (Sreen PLANNING BOARD MEETING CANCELLATION NOTICE You are hereby notified that the special meeting of the Salem Planning Board scheduled for Thursday, May 13 , 1993 at 7 : 30 p.m. has been canceled. Walter B. Power, III Chairman This notice posted on "Official Bu} in Boatd" City Hail A e., Salem, Mass. onG%� 13 at �.'3> in accordance with C39 Sec. 23A• & 230 of M.G.L. fl�i#� �tf �ttlent, �tt�sttcl��sE##s Planning *arx) One 10ttlem preen NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold a special meeting .on Thursday, May 13, 1993 at 7 : 30 p.m. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. � 4b-?amjA Walter B. Power , III Chairman • TENTATIVE AGENDA: 1 . Discussion regarding the proposed Childcare Facility on Colby Street. This notice posted on 'Official Bulletin Board" City Hall Salem. Mass. o . ` 9 9, at / 'y5— � MG a000nianoe s � br M ,L..;` gib, 23A �` • '� EX\DH\PB042293 RECEIVE® MINUTES PLANNINGPMAY BOARD27 , 1993 MEETING OCT 131993 Sal6DN�Q+' . 4111il8 vepr. A special meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, May 27 , 1993 at 7 : 00 p.m. for a special hearing on the Vinnin Square Shopping Center proposal. Those present were: Acting Chairperson Linda Vaughn, David Hart, Carter Vinson, Chuck Puleo, Kosta Prentakis, Debra Hilbert, and John Moustakis . Also in attendance were Staff Assistant Debra Hurlburt and Acting Clerk Debra Tucker. Attorney Atkins addressed the board on behalf of Stop and Shop Stores regarding the rehabilitation of the Vinnin Square shopping center . He presented revised plans for curbing, roof air condition- ing units , and snow storage areas. The Board discussed the issue of the placement of and the noise produced by the roof air conditioning system. Attorney Atkins reported that by placing the new unit (with no barrier) the decibel level would be 5 .2 or less, a level that the Carrier Co. called (average office conversation level to 80 feet) , to the neighbors 150 feet away. He added that this would be much • quieter than what currently exists. The barrel roof prohibits moving the unit because of engineering problems and cost, but a screen would be installed to hide the unit. Michael McNeese told Chuck Puleo that the screen would be at least 48" and amply cover the unit. All pertinent information including size, material , bracing, etc . , is to be noted on the corrected drawings of the plan. John Hearnan added that shrubs and trees at the perimeter would decrease the noise level as well. Kosta Prentakis added that the new units along with screens and the distance should not make noise a real issue. Al Skirus of Ed Witters Architects said that there is no heat pump system on the roof. Linda Vaughn added that there had not been many complaints about the old system. Attorney Atkins said that the frequency and times that the unit would run depend upon variables such as weather conditions , type of business to operate there, and store hours . He was unable to give a prediction. Al Skirus of Ed Witters Architects agreed that different tenants would generate different uses . David Hart expressed concern that the night time noise level might affect the area neighbors . Linda Vaughn asked if there were any leases signed with tenants as of now. John Hearnan answered that there were none yet with Page 2 of 3 : 5-27-93 Planning Board Meeting the exception of Salem Five and the bakery that are currently there . The snow storage area had been changed. Carter Vinson stated that the new proposal avoided storing snow around the handicapped spaces in front of the store and was better. Linda Vaughn agreed. The curbing matter was discussed in great length. Comparison of granite, concrete , and asphalt were made , and area shopping plazas (MBTA lot, Crosby' s at Canal St. , Beverly Stop & Shop, Shaw' s of Salem, etc . ) had been surveyed. While granite is durable it was the feeling of the Stop and Shop contingent that the cost would be prohibitive with a cost differential of $15 to $25 per foot or approximately $35 ,000 .00 . Chuck Puleo asked about a maintenance schedule for upkeep of the lot. Mr. Hearnan stated that it is now part of the snow plowing insurance policies. The new proposal for curbing was for granite curbing at the entrance and all public ways and for precast concrete with dowel interlocks around islands and the perimeter. Drawing marked C-3 was presented by Michael McNeese. Carter Vinson said that he was reluctant to allow concrete curbing since he felt that it has shown to be less permanent and nicks • more easily. He was also concerned with what the site may look like in thirty years or if there were new owners . Debra Hilbert stated that she did not feel that it would be fair to force this proposal to provide what no other shopping center development was made to provide. Linda Vaughn agreed that a good maintenance program would keep the area in good condition. David Hart added that shopping centers are typically rehabilitated more often than the forty to sixty year life span of the concrete . John Moustakis added that the developers were reputable and he hoped that this project would not get away from the City due to the curbing issue. Carter Vinson suggested making the concrete maintenance program a part of the order of conditions . Attorney Atkins recommended keeping the matter general and having the Planning Board be the body to monitor. He restated the fact that he was uncomfortable not enforcing granite curbing. John Moustakis pointed out that no precedent was being set, and that each proposal is taken separately. Kosta Prentakis added that the tenants of the site would have the greatest interest in keeping the area in good condition to attract business . Debra Hurlburt instructed Attorney Atkins to have the developers provide corrected drawings with details and specifications noted concerning landscaping, screening, and curbing conditions . • i Page 3 of 3 : 5-27-93 Planning Board Meeting Acting Chairperson Vaughn called for a motion. Debra Hilbert moved to approve the amended plan with the order of special conditions as presented. John Moustakis seconded the motion, and the vote was as follows : Ayes Nayes David Hart Carter Vinson Debra Hilbert John Moustakis Kosta Prentakis Chuck Puleo Linda Vaughn The motion passed six votes in favor to one vote against. Debra Hilbert moved to adjourn the special meeting of May 27 , 1993 at 8 :25 p.m. John Moustakis seconded the motion, and it was approved unanimously. Respectfully submitted By: Debra A. ucker • SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, May 20, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Linda Vaughan, David Hart, Albert Hill, Debbie Hilbert, Chuck Puleo, and Carter Vinson. Also .present were, City Planner Bill Luster, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. In the absence of Chairman Walter Power, Linda Vaughan assumed the chair. WAIVER FROM FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS - 3 SAVONA STREET Atty. John Serafini Jr. addressed the Board on behalf of his client Mary Civiello. He explained the plan and noted that Mrs. Civiello wishes to reconfigure two of her existing three lots by moving the boundary line between lot 702 and 703, and leaving lot 357 unchanged. He also noted that last July the Board of Appeal granted a variance from frontage and lot width for the plan. Atty. Serafini referred to a State Appeals Court • Case (Sequin) . He also noted that the two lots front on a paved public way, and would be in keeping with the spirit of the subdivision control law. Linda Vaughan explained that if the waiver is granted the applicant would have a 20 day appeal period, after which they would have to file for an Approval Not Required. Carter Vinson asked for clarification of the change on the plans. Atty. Serafini explained the old subdivision plan in relation to the new plan. Debbie Hilbert expressed concern that the area is narrow and it would be difficult to get a car around. Linda Vaughan agreed and stated that when they next appear she would suggest that they include a hammerhead turnaround, to provide access for the Fire Department. i Bill Luster explained that what is before the Planning Board tonight is a request for a waiver from frontage. He also noted that the Assistant City Solicitor recommended that the applicant should request the waiver and then if granted request an Approval Not Required (ANR) . Carter Vinson explained his interpretation of the Sequin Case. • He also noted that a driveway would be within 10 feet of the existing house. 1 • Debbie Hilbert suggested that she would like to have a site visit. Carter Vinson agreed. Linda Vaughan opened up the hearing for public comment at this time. Ward Four Councillor. Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and noted that he has known Mrs. Civiello for a long time, and that she is creating the new lot so that her daughter can build a home there. He noted that she is not a developer, and he sees no problem with the plan. Barbara Noble of 1 Savona Street addressed the Board and stated that she is in favor of the plan, and her property directly abuts the property. John Condon of 40 Ravenna Street addressed the Board and stated that he is in favor of the plan. Mary Jane Blais of 2 Madeline Avenue addressed the Board and stated that she is in favor of the plan. There being no further questions or comments on the matter at this time, a motion was made by David Hart to continue the Public Hearing until the site visit, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. • The site visit will be held on Thursday, May 27, 1993 at 6:00 P.M. CONTINUATION - SITE PLAN REVIEW AND WETLANDS FLOOD HAZARD DISTRICT SPECIAL PERMIT - 'VINNIN SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER City Planner Bill Luster addressed the Board and stated that he has met with Atty. Atkins to try and address the issues that were raised by the neighbors at the Public Hearing and the Site Visit. He noted that a draft list of conditions has been prepared for the Board' s review. Atty. Atkins addressed the Board and stated that as a result of meetings held with the neighbors and the Planning Department, they have revised the landscape plan. He noted that they added a landscaping border along the R1 border to shield Maple Avenue. He also noted that additional plantings have been added in the front of the building as requested. He also explained that the truck route has been established in a west to east pattern along the back of the building. The specifications for the HVAC units were reviewed. Atty. Atkins explained that they are gas fired roof units with electric air conditioning, that will run at times during the night to • maintain a reasonable temperature. It was noted that the size of the units would be about the size of Xerox machine and that 2 • the nearest house would be 100-150 feet away. Chuck Puleo asked if the locations for the units had been set. Atty. Atkins explained that some would be replaced as they are presently located, and others would be moved. Chuck Puleo suggested that they place them towards the front of the building if possible. Atty. Atkins stated that the issue of signage could be subject to the City Planner ' s approval and they would submit revised plans for a newly designed sign. He also noted that it was requested that the gates on either end of the building be locked at certain times, but they feel that it would be difficult to maintain and costly. David Hart noted that the standard that the Planning Board most often requires for curbing is granite. Atty. Atkins stated that they are proposing precast concrete curb along the new islands and are they asking for a waiver from granite curbing. He also noted that they would maintain the concrete curbing, and that the Board could the condition the approval on it. Linda Vaughan suggested that the granite curbing would make a nicer appearance. Carter Vinson asked to have the snow storage locations explained. He explained that he has concerns about safety issues and the location of snow storage, citing the Highland Avenue Shaws • Parking area as an example. Atty. Atkins noted that the present storage area at the side if the building could still be used and as a condition of approval they could move the snow storage areas. David Hart stated that he would like to see the specifications of the concrete curbing. Carter Vinson stated that he was hesitant to vote on the plan at this meeting, and suggested that the Board vote at the next meeting, or a special meeting if necessary. David Hart agreed, and stated that he would like to see the specifications of the concrete curbing, noting that he is concerned that the Board would be setting a precedent if they waive the granite curbing. The Board decided to hold a special meeting on Thursday, May 27, 1993 at 7: 00 p.m. for the purpose of voting on this matter. Atty. Atkins will forward the specifications for the concrete curbing to Debbie Hurlburt on Friday morning. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE SALEM HOSPITAL CHILDCARE FACILITY ON COLBY STREET Linda Vaughan recused herself from discussion of this matter. • Chuck Puleo assumed the chair at this time. 3 • Debbie Hurlburt updated the Board on the status of the request for an extension of time for review of the project. She reported that the hospital had granted another 30 day extension until June 17, 1993 for the Board to consider the project. She also reported that the Planning Department is seeking bids for a dye test. She noted that the Planning Department could choose the Engineer to perform the test, but that the Board would have to approve it. Chuck Puleo asked if there would be one Engineer to both the test and the calculations. Debbie stated that there would be one Engineer for both. Stan Poirier addressed the Board and restated his position on the proposal. He noted that the city has no records of easements and that no one knows the size of the pipe. He explained his interpretation of the layout of the pipes under Highland Avenue. Mr. Poirier also made it known that he does not feel that the Planning Board, The City Planner or the City has done enough for that area, to try and solve the drainage problems that they are concerned about. He was also particularly critical of the City Engineer Stan Bigelow, noting that he hasn't done one thing. Carter Vinson agreed that he felt that a third opinion would be good, but noted that the Planning Board has constraints as to what they can consider under a special permit. • Atty. James Flemming addressed the Board and stated that he felt that there is a substantial detrimental flooding problem it the area. Dr. Patrick Curtin addressed the Board and stated that the former City Engineer did three dye tests on his property and they never saw the dye come across Highland Avenue. Chuck Puleo suggested that they should review the drainage calculations and the hydrological drainage system between the pond and Greenway Road and then decide if the plan could work. Mr. LeTarte addressed the Board and stated that since this is a wetlands issue, the whole area should be reviewed. He also stated that he would like to see what the impact of filling that area would be. Stan Poirier also noted that a catch basin on Highland Avenue was supposed to be cleaned out by the State four months ago and has not been done yet. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The approval of the minutes of the meeting of May 6, 1993 was • postponed until June 3, 1993 . 4 There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by David Hart to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB052093 • 5 •• SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, MAY 6, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, May 6, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Albert Hill, David Hart, Carter Vinson, and Chuck Puleo (7:20 ) . Also present were City Planner William Luster, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Chairman Walter Power announced to those present that while the Board waits for a quorum to act on matters before the Board that require a vote, the Board would have an informal discussion with Mr. DeIulis . INFORMAL DISCUSSION RE; MOONEY ROAD - FRANK AND PAT DeIULIS Atty. Joseph Correnti of Serafini, Serafini and Darling, addressed the Board on behalf of his clients Frank and Patrick DeIulis. He informed the Board that they plan to propose an 8 lot residential subdivision. He noted that they had received approval in 1968 for a 14 lot subdivision with a temporary turn • around, and the new plan is similar but has been redrawn into 8 lots. He also noted that they plan to seek three waivers , which are: for the length of Mooney Rd. , to have a temporary turnaround at the end of the street, and to have the electric, cable and telephone lines overhead as it is presently on the street. Atty. Correnti explained that they have noted on the plan that a variance was granted as to the zoning line of the property. He also noted that they have had some neighborhood meeting and while there has been some opposition to the project, there has been a lot of support expressed by some neighbors . He stated that the area has been used as a dumping ground and neighbors are eager to see that change. Walter Power asked why the zoning variance was granted. Atty. Correnti stated that the line was drawn as an R-C district along a wetland as was typical in the 1960 ' s, and the lot line is unique to the property. Bill Luster noted that the Planning Department wrote a letter to the Board of Appeal suggesting that they approve the variance with a minimum of 15,000 s .f. frontage. He noted that the minimum frontage requirement in an R-C district is 80, 000 s.f. and the Board found that the line was drawn somewhat indiscriminately. Albert Hill expressed his desire to see the subdivision have • underground utilities. He also questioned the use of a temporary turnaround. Patrick DeIulis noted that the temporary 1 • turnaround proposed is consistent with the turnaround on Seemore Street. He also noted that the temporary turnaround provides for the road to be continued at some point. He also noted that the turnaround would be paved. Carter Vinson stated that he liked the concept of below ground utilities, noting that ultimately it would be a nicer subdivision and it would be beneficial to the contractor. He suggested that they give serious thought to having the utilities underground. He also noted that while there are streets nearby with above ground utilities, that should not determine whether the Board required underground utilities for the DeIulis Subdivision. Albert Hill asked if they had drawings of the types of homes that may be built there. Atty. Correnti stated that at this point the owners are unsure if they are going to build the homes or prepare the lots for sale. Walter Power asked if they had any plans to sell any lots before the completion of the subdivision. Atty. Correnti stated that they have no such plans . Carter Vinson suggested that a condition of the subdivision could be that no lots be sold until the subdivision is completed. Carter Vinson also stated that he felt that this was an opportunity to produce a nice street, in a quality subdivision. • Atty. Correnti noted that covenants would ensure an attractive subdivision. David Hart asked about the soil conditions on the property. Gail Smith stated that is mostly ledge, and that they may use a slight amount of fill . Albert Hill noted that the drawings indicate that bituminous curbing is proposed. Gail Smith stated that they plan bituminous sidewalks with granite curb are planned. There being no further questions or comments from those present, Atty. Correnti thanked the Board for their time, and noted that when they are ready they will file a Form C. Chairman Walter Power officially called the meeting to order at this time. DISCUSSION OF DRAFT DECISION - COLBY STREET DAY CARE CENTER. Walter Power informed those present that this is a discussion of the Planning Board and not a public hearing, but he would entertain comments later in the discussion. • Atty. James Flemming addressed the Board and stated that even though there has been a change in zoning which would allow day 2 • care as use in an R-1 district, he feels that any such structure may be subject to reasonable regulations. He also noted that the proposed parking, the type of use and the number of employees are of concern. He cited Mass . CMR 7.06. He also noted that by his calculations 26 teachers are required to on staff and the parking area has 24 spaces. Atty. Flemming also noted there are several working wells in the area and they have not been considered. Atty. Flemming also noted that the Hospital has recently agreed to merge with Beverly Hospital and proposed a six month moratorium to analyze the effects of the project. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and noted that several meetings have been held with the neighbors and that they have uncovered some technical problems which he would let Stan Poirier discuss . Stan Poirier addressed the Board and noted that he is not an engineer, but considered himself capable of reading a plan. He stated that the plans that have been presented to the Conservation Commission and the Board of Health have since been revised and that there is no indication of a revision on the plan. The location of the revision was pointed out to Mr. Poirier. Mr. Poirier also read a letter to the Board from Mr. John Lunt expressing his concerns about the project. • Bill Luster addressed the Board and stated that they have had several good meetings with the neighbors to determine the issues. He thanked the neighbors for their time spent on the project. He noted that he feels that they are working towards a solution, noting that some neighbors agree and some do not. He also noted that he did not think that a solution could be reached by May 20, the date that the extension is up. Bill Luster also referred to a letter from Mayor Harrington in which he indicated that an extension should be sought to further review the matter. Bill noted that another extension should not be a hardship to the hospital since they cannot move forward until the adjudicatory hearing is held on the appeal that is in process. Bill Luster outlined the concerns that the Board should address . He noted that while Stan Bigleow stated that he had done a dye test, the Board wants another test done before the decision is made. Albert Hill stated that he would like the Board to get another engineer to review the plans. Bill Luster stated that if the dye test failed that would give the Board cause to seek a second opinion of the plan. David Hart asked when the Hospital could expect a decision from • DEP on the appeal . Atty. Flemming stated that he figures it could take at least 4 years. 3 • Carter Vinson addressed the Board and stated that the Board has already used 90 days and would like to see the Board proceed as if they still have the May 20 deadline, in case the hospital does not grant the extension. Bill Luster stated that he felt that they are in good shape, and that they have begun to lay down conditions regarding this plan, but sees the need for more time to make it workable. Walter Power noted that DEP would be reviewing the engineering calculations, and the project cannot go forward until DEP approves it, and suggested that the city money would be better spent on an engineer to correct the problem downstream. He also agreed that they should request and extension until June 17th. He also suggested that if the Hospital does not agree to an extension then the Board should have a special meeting on Thursday May 13, to discuss conditons. Mr. Letarte addressed the Board and stated that he would like to see the matter of pollutants that may be discharged into the pond addressed. Richard Perlman addressed the Board and made an emotional plea, stressing that this project could cost him his home. He also noted that he had requested that the entrance be moved and nothing has been done. Bill Luster noted that they have not • indicated that they are willing to move the entrance. Bill Luster also noted that he would suggest that they have the employees park on the grounds of the hospital. Atty. Flemming did not agree with that suggestion. Atty. Flemming also noted that they do not have sufficient parking provided in the plan, noting that Dr. Curtin was required to have 54 spaces and provided 59, and the hospital is only proposing 23 spaces . Walter Power reminded Atty. Flemming that this is not Site Plan Review and that there are limits as to what the Board can address . There being no further questions or comments at this time, it was decided that Bill Luster would seek a 30 day extension, request a dye test, and have the city engineer follow through on the review of the pipes from Highland Avenue to Cottage St. OLD / NEW BUSINESS Carter Vinson asked about the status of the proposed Stop & Shop on Howley Street. Bill Luster explained that he has had discussions with the Peabody City Planner. He noted that they do not have SPR in Peabody, but that Salem will get a chance • to review it. He also noted that there has been some discussion about doing a PUD, but he is not comfortable with that. 4 • APPROVAL OF MINUTES The approval of the minutes of the meetings of April 15 , 1993 and April 22 , 1993 were postponed until the next meeting on May 20 , 1993. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Chuck Puleo to adjourn the meeting, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10 : 30 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB050693 • • 5 • SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL 22, 1993 A Special Meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 22 , 1993 at 7: 30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Hart, Chuck Puleo, Albert Hill, John Moustakis and Carter Vinson. Also present were City Planner William Luster, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. William Luster explained the purpose of the Special Meeting, and noted that the Board had some concerns about the proposed Salem Hospital Day Care Center on Colby Street, and wanted to discuss some issues with City Engineer Stan Bigelow. Stan Bigelow was present at the meeting to address the concerns of the Board members. David Hart noted that a big concern of the neighbors is the drainage problems that exist and asked if the proposed plans would affect the neighborhoods. Stan Bigelow stated that he • reviewed the drainage calculations and noted that he has no reason to refute them. Bill Luster noted that the drainage problems in the area need to be determined, and stated that the hospital may be willing to contribute some money towards the funding of a study to determine the problem. He noted that the neighbors think that the hospital is the cause of the problems, and the hospital feels strongly that they are not the cause of the problems. He also stated that he did not think that the project would be exacerbate or mitigate the problem. The Board reviewed the concerns of the project and the possible solutions, and the following was discussed: The Board discussed the concern about the pipe under Highland Avenue. The Board requested as built plans from the hospital and wants to require a dye test be undertaken to ensure that the Highland Ave. pipe is there. Stan Bigelow noted that the hospital performed a dye test and water was found coming down the catch basins on Cottage Street. He explained that the dye was put in a manhole that Dr. Curtin' s property was tied into and ten minutes later they found it on Cottage Street. He also noted that exploratory work is starting next week and they will excavate the manhole. Chuck Puleo asked about the method of checking the pipe that will be used. Stan Bigelow explained that they will send a video camera through the pipe that will show in detail the condition of the pipe. • Albert Hill asked about the catch basins. Stan Bigelow explained 1 • and the hospital, calls for the city to take over the maintenance of the whole system. He stated that he would ask for one final cleaning before the city takes over. John Moustakis expressed his concern that the cleaning of the pipe would cause a surcharge. Stan Bigelow stated that they could lower the pond before they begin the work on the headwall . David Hart expressed his concern that there is a lot of hot top proposed and that will make the runoff sheet across the parking lot down to Dr. Curtin ' s drain. Stan Bigelow explained that the new system would collect the runoff and bring it underground, noting that most of the sheet flow ends up in the pond itself, but a good portion of it will flow across Colby Street. Stan Bigelow also explained the drainage calculations for Colby Street and stated that the inflow shows 2 .8 c.f. per second, and he requires double catch basins for anything over 2 c.f. per second. The Board discussed the headwall and the catch basins. Stan Bigelow explained that the pond is like a catch basin. He recommended removable casting to prevent blockage of the pipe inlets , and to gain access to the pipe for cleaning. He also noted that he would have input about the access and wants a spot welded connection so that nobody could get into the pipe. • Walter Power expressed his concern that there are no road upgrades required for this project, as is for other projects. Bill Luster noted that this is wetland Flood Hazard Special Permit and not Site Plan Review, so the Board cannot require road improvements. Carter Vinson noted that he is uncomfortable asking the hospital to cure a situation that is not their responsibility, and felt that the double catch basins address the effect of this project. Bill Luster expressed his feeling that sidewalks should be included, and noted that Juli Riemenschneider is waiting for the landscaping plan, to design a plan for sidewalks. He also noted that the hospital has not suggested that they would have a problems with them. John Moustakis agreed that sidewalks are needed. David Hart asked how you could prove the existing flow and the flow after the project in response to possible complaints after the construction. Stan Bigelow stated that each storm has its own charge and that they use a model on the basis of a standard storm. He also noted that the city understands the drainage problems need to be addressed. He also noted that this drainage problem is not the only major drainage problem in the city. • Albert Hill asked what was causing the downstream flooding. Stan Bigelow stated that to a great extent it is because it 2 • is a wet area, and the drain lines are flat, which causes a surcharge. Chuck Puleo asked about the inspection of the pipe. Stan Bigelow explained that they would be able to tell if there are leaks and that they can isolate the pipe up to 30" in diameter, and can see if the flow is normal . They can also grout and seal joints if needed. Bill Luster explained that they would require the hospital to monitor water quality on a regular basis. The Board discussed parking. Walter Power noted that 95-100 cars per day are estimated, and that they could ask that they have employees park on hospital property to provide enough spaces for peak hours . Bill Luster noted that they are exempt from parking requirements in an R1 district. Walter asked how many employees there would be. Bill Luster stated that he did not have that information. David Hart asked if there was a state regulation in terms of parking that has to be followed for a Day Care Center. Bill Luster will check on that. Carter Vinson inquired if the Planning Department had talked with the hospital regarding shuttling the employees to the site. • Bill Luster stated that the hospital has not responded one way or another. The issue of the parking lot entrance was discussed and the abutters want the entrance changed. Bill Luster stated that Juli Riemenschneider will review the plan to see if the parking can be altered to change the entrance to the facility. Bill Luster reviewed the curbing and noted that they are calling for granite curbing because of the bituminous concrete and the resource area. The Board discussed the possibility of a 21E and the results of it. Chuck Puleo questioned what would happen if something was found on the site. Bill Luster stated that it would depend on what is found. Bill Luster stated that they would prepare some draft conditions to be reviewed at the May 6th meeting. He also stated that he would try to meet with the neighbors one more time before then. He would like to review the conditions on May 6th but not vote on a decision. There being no further comments or discussion, a motion was made by Albert Hill to adjourn the meeting, seconded by David • Hart and approved unanimously. 3 • The meeting was adjourned at 9 :30 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB042293 • • 4 • SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 15, 1993 at 7:30 p.m. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Linda Vaughan, Debbie Hilbert, John Moustakis, Kosta Prentakis, Chuck Puleo, Albert Hill, and David Hart. Also present were: Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. In the absence of Chairman Walter Power, Linda Vaughan assumed the chair. SITE PLAN REVIEW AND WETLANDS FLOOD HAZARD DISTRICT AT VINNIN SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER Attorney George Atkins addressed the Board and presented plans to renovate the Vinnin Square Shopping Center. He noted that Stop & Shop would be vacating the premises next Thursday and opening the new Super Stop & Shop at the Swampscott Mall. He explained that' they are going to be changing the appearance • and the use from supermarket shopping to retail use, and will be going to the Board of Appeal to change some zoning. Atty. Atkins explained that the proposed plans would blend into and complement the neighborhood. A new clock tower is also to be installed which would create a landmark at the Vinnin Square gateway into Salem. He showed the Board drawings of the elevations and the facade of the buildings, and also noted that the footprint of the building would not change they also plan remove HVAC units and replace them with newer ones which would be screened, and repair and maintain an existing fence at the rear of the property. The plans also call for the dumpsters to be screened and lighting will be improved. . Atty. Atkins also explained that the parking area would be redone as well , noting that they plan to recycle the existing bituminous pavement, and new landscaped parking islands will be constructed at the end of the existing parking bays . Atty. Atkins explained that traffic and deliveries should be significantly reduced with a retail use from that of a supermarket use. He also noted that they are planning to improve the entrance on Vinnin Street with NO RIGHT TURN exiting from the lot, and NO ENTRY into that driveway. Atty. Atkins explained the lighting improvements proposed. • He noted that the existing parking lot lighting will be supplemented with new 35 foot high pressure sodium fixtures, 1 • explaining that they would be constructed with the new landscaped islands . Exterior lights in the rear of the building will be upgraded for security, and will have a shield cut off so as not to offend abutters. Atty. Atkins explained the landscaping proposal. He noted that they plan to add to the existing landscaping which would help runoff, because it would be more absorbent. They plan to plant Honey Locust and Callery Pear trees in the new islands , and groups of Hawthorns and small flowering trees will be planted at the parking lot perimeter. Pines and shrubs are also planned for the rear of the property to improve the screening of the shopping center for the abutters. Atty. Atkins reviewed the snow removal, noting the areas designated for snow storage on the plans . He also stated that no salt would be used on the property. Atty. Atkins also noted that there would be a significant decrease in trash, and that the screening of the dumpsters would improve the appearance of the area for abutters. Kosta Prentakis asked to have the screening of the dumpsters explained. He also asked if there would be MDC traps on the drains . Atty. Atkins explained that they are utilizing the existing drainage system, and that new catch basins are being • added. David Hart asked the hours of operation for the HVAC units. Atty. Atkins stated that they would probably be used only during the hours of 9-9 : 30 when the stores would be open, noting that they would not be going as often as with a supermarket use. David Hart asked if the new units would be quieter during opertation. Atty. Atkins stated that the existing units date back to the 1960 ' s and the new ones would be state of the art. He will get some information on them and report back to the Board. Kosta Prentakis asked how much of the shopping center would be vacant when Stop & Shop moves out. Atty. Atkins stated that the Cake Shop and the Salem Five Cent Savings Bank would be the only tenants remaining. He also noted that the interior design of the stores would be designed according to the tenants. Albert Hill asked what type of stores are planned for the shopping center. Atty. Atkins stated that they have no signed leases at this time, but they have been talking with different types of businesses. Al Hill asked if they would rent the whole space if someone wanted it. Atty. Atkins stated that they would have to look at the use. Al Hill also noted that the shrubbery on the plan looks like it overlaps the street and the sidewalk. Atty. Atkins stated that it may be exaggerated on the plan, • noting that they will grow in various fashions . 2 • Chuck Puleo asked how near the closest abutter was. Atty. Atkins stated that it was probably 100 feet to the back yards of the abutters and then another 75 feet to the houses. Chuck Puleo expressed his concern that there is not fence proposed for the rear, noting that the elimination of the use of trailer trucks, may result in the increased use of smaller trucks and more deliveries citing UPS as an example. . Atty. Atkins stated that they would not have the turnover of a grocery store. He also noted that UPS would probably use the front of the building. Linda Vaughan opened the meeting up to comments from those in attendance. Ward 7 Councillor Mark Blair addressed the Board and stated that they have been discussing and negotiating about this property for about 4 years . He noted that when they wanted to build the Super Stop & Shop on this property he and the neighbors had several concerns. He noted that this plan is a lot better than they had seen before and he has a positive reaction to this plan. He asked if Stop & Shop still owned a house that they had purchased near the center. Atty. Atkins stated that they do still own the property, but that they do not know what they will do with it. Councillor Blair also asked about egress . Atty. Atkins stated that the present flow would be continued, but they would be agreeable to a condition by the Planning Board concerning the traffic pattern. • Arthur Seargent of 8 Maple Ave. addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the trailer trucks entering on Paradise Ave. , noting that he does not see how the trailer trucks will make it in there. Atty. Atkins stated that they do not expect many large trucks to be using that side, other than for initial move ins, and again stressed difference from supermarket deliveries. Atty. Atkins suggested that they would agree to a special condition regarding deliveries . Councillor Blair agreed and stated that he would like to see conditions regarding deliveries and trash pick up. Bill Kurzman of 6 Lillian Rd. expressed his concern regarding the trailer trucks , and noted that a new state law allows trucks to be 48 feet long and that most companies are using them, because they can load more onto them, and make fewer trips . He also expressed concern about the traffic. Atty. Atkins stated that they hope that the RIGHT TURN ONLY at the Vinnin Entrance would improve the traffic. Marvin Meyers of 7 Tedesco Pond Place noted that he was concerned about the runoff into the pond and asked what they plan to do to prevent it. He noted that oil and grease separators should be included. Mr. Meyers also expressed his concerns that there could be a rat problem during construction, and suggested that • the developer be held responsible if they do have a problem. Atty. Atkins stated that they have met with the Board of Health 3 and that regulations require that if there is a problem, they 00 would have to take care of it. He also noted that the present catch basins are too deep to install the traps, but the new catch basins will have them. Anjala Grasso of 2 Maple Ave. expressed her concern about skunks and raccoons and suggested that she would like to see Stop & Shop take the house down and landscape it. Arthur Seargant of 8 Maple Ave. stated that he would like to see a lot of smaller stores in the center as opposed to one large one taking over. He asked that the neighbors be allowed to have input into the selection of tenants for the property. Atty. Atkins noted that they have met with the neighbors on several occasions over the last 4 years and they welcome input from the neighbors, but there is a point where the owner has a right to lease the property as he can, within the law. Mr. Seargant also asked that they provide a security guard for the property, if it remains vacant very long. Anjala Grasso asked how long the construction would take. Atty. Atkins stated that he thought it would take about 4 months . Linda Vaughan suggested that the Board have a site visit, and suggested that the neighbors attend to express their concerns . A site visit was scheduled for Tuesday, April 24 , 1993 at 9 :00 a.m. Motion made by David Hart to continue the Public Hearing until the next meeting of the Planning Board, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED CHILDCARE FACILITY ON COLBY STREET - SALEM HOSPITAL Linda Vaughan recused herself from discussion of this matter, and Chuck Puleo assumed the chair for the rest of the meeting. Debbie Hurlburt informed the Board that Salem Hospital has granted an extension to the Board until May 20, 1993. She is putting together a chart with Bill Luster regarding the concerns of the project, but it is not finalized. She noted that Bill Luster would like to have a working session with the Board prior to the May 20 meeting, to discuss the concerns. Albert Hill suggested that he would like the Board to meet with Stan Bigelow before then to discuss concerns. A special meeting will be held on Thursday, April 22 , 1993 at 7:30 p.m. , and Stan Bigelow will be invited to attend. It 4 • OLD/NEW BUSINESS Berrywood Lane Debbie reported that work is starting on the lots and that the top coat of paving is being done, and the planting strip is being replaced. She also noted that a prospective buyer would like to have the row of trees at the rear of a lot moved back 10 feet. The Board reviewed the plans and agreed that there would be no problem moving the trees. Fafard Condos Debbie reported that she spoke to Rich Lis the Assistant City Engineer and he stated that there are no standards for snow plowing, on the local level. He stated that snow plows are called out when they are needed. Debbie will call the state to see if there are any standards for snow plowing on the state level . Kosta Prentakis suggested that when the city calls out the plows, maybe they could add Fafard to the list and call them when the city plows. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of March 18, 1993 were presented for approval. Motion made by Kosta Prentakis to approve the • minutes of the meeting of March 18, 1993, seconded by John Moustakis, and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Albert Hill to adjourn the meeting, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB041593 • 5 • SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL 1 , 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday April 1 , 1993 at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Linda Vaughan, Albert Hill, John Moustakis, David Hart, Carter Vinson, Kosta Prentakis, and Debbie Hilbert. Chuck Puleo was absent. Also present were, City Planner William Luster, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. FORM A - MARLBOROUGH ROAD - JOSEPH FURNARI Joseph Furnari addressed the Planning Board and requested approval of a Form A for 127 Marlborough Road. He noted that his father wishes to subdivide the lot so that he can establish residency. The lot is located on an approved public way and frontage requirements are in compliance. David Hart referred to the plan and asked what the intention was for the land behind the dwellings . Mr. Furnari stated that they have no plans at this time. David Hart noted that if they continue to subdivide that land would be inaccessible. • There being no further questions or comments from those present a motion was made by Linda Vaughan to approve the Form A for 127 Marborough Road, seconded by Kosta Prentakis and approved unanimously. DETERMINATION OF SPECIFIC AND MATERIAL CHANGE - 372 HIGHLAND AVENUE City Planner William Luster addressed the Board and stated that the DiLisio' s were before the Board of Appeal on March 10, 1993, for a variance to allow the construction of a miniature golf course and place of recreation and entertainment housing six ( 6 ) amusement devices at 372 Highland Avenue. Their petition was denied on March 10 , 1993. Bill Luster explained that state law requires that a petition cannot be heard again after denial for a two year period, unless Specific and Material Changes have been made to the plan, and the Planning Board approves that the new plan should go back before the Board of Appeal. Atty. James Flemming addressed the Board. He distributed copies of the old and new proposed plans. He explained the changes to the proposal as follows: 1 . Elimination of the request for a special permit for amusement • devices. 1 • 2. Construction of a driveway in the Northernly portion of the property to allow patrons to turn right onto Ravenna Street and onto the property. 3. The proposed building was originally 2 stories, and that has been changed to 112 stories, in response to the neighbors concerns about noise. They have also included planting along the rear fence. 4. Security was a concern of the Board of Appeal and they have added a fence around the golf course. Atty. Flemming showed photographs of the proposed design of the miniature golf course. Debbie Hilbert asked if the variance was granted by the Board of Appeal if the plan would come before the Planning Board again since it is on an entrance corridor. Bill Luster explained that the building is only 600 s .f. and would not be required to come before the Board again, however signage issues etc. would be addressed. Walter Power asked about the use the new proposed building as opposed to the old building. Atty. Flemming explained that the use would be the same, but they would have had more office and storage space. • Carter Vinson- asked if the owners have met with the abutters. Atty. Flemming noted that Mr. Puleo had met with the neighbors and that they plan to have a neighborhood meeting before the request goes to the Board of Appeal again. Albert Hill asked what the condition of the paper street was . Atty. Flemming stated that it was sand, gravel and ledge. David Hart questioned the use of washed stone in relation to handicapped regulations. Walter Power read a letter into the record from Councillor At Large Stanley Usovich. (A copy of the letter is attached to these minutes. ) Walter Power explained that while the Board is not required to open the meeting to public comment, he would allow comments from those present. He also explained that if the Board determines that specific and material changes have been made to the plan it does not mean that the Board endorses the plan. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and stated that the neighbors were upset that a neighborhood meeting had not been held until the night of the Board of Appeal meeting. • He also stated that he thought that sidewalks and curbing should be installed. Bill Luster noted that the paper street is owned 2 • by Mr. Puleo and that they can not require him to install sidewalks and curbing since this is not site plan review. Bruce Macrae of 4 Sophia Rd. addressed the Board and asked where the driveway would go. Atty. Flemming explained that the driveway would go up Ravenna behind the storage buildings. He also asked about the height of the proposed trees. Atty. Flemming said that they would be 6 feet. He asked if they had an estimate of how many cars would be coming there. Atty. Flemming estimated that they could have between 50-100 per day with 35 parking spaces. Barbara Noble of 1 Savonna Street addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned about the traffic that this will create in the neighborhood. Anthony Pierro of 2 Barcelona Ave. addressed the Board and stated that both streets are dead ends and that if signs were put up there would be no problem. He stated that he is in favor of the proposal noting that it would beautify the area and family activity is a good use. Gerald Yarosh of 8 Sophia Road addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned about the traffic and the "element" that the golf course would attract from Lynn. • Linda Vaughan stated that she resented Mr. Yarosh' s comments concerning the "element" from Lynn, noting that she is from Lynn. Kevin Michaud of 14 Ravenna Street addressed the Board and stated that he is in favor of the plan and it would beautify the area. Alyse Mento of 1 Pyburn Street addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned about the location of the driveway and whether it would alleviate traffic. She noted that she is not opposed to the golf course but would rather see another solution to the driveway. There being no further questions or comments from those present, a motion was made by Debbie Hilbert to approve the Specific and Material change for 372 Highland Avenue and allow the plan to go back to the Board of Appeal, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. DISCUSSION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE HAMLET CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION Carter Vinson and Kosta Prentakis recused themselves from discussion of this matter. • John Erikson a Trustee for the Hamlet Condominium Association addressed the Board and explained that they have had several 3 • complaints about the timeliness of the snow removal during this winter at the Fafard Condominiums . He cited examples of delays in getting plowed out after snow storms . The Board also reviewed a police report concerning the condition of the roads. Mr. Erikson noted that on one occasion the contractor started to plow and came back 2 days later to finish. David Hart stated that this is a health and safety issue and that it should be investigated. Debbie Hurlburt noted that the decision of the Planning Board for the PUD stated that the Fafard Company would be responsible to plow Whalers Lane. She also noted that Councillor Furfaro submitted a City Council Order requesting that the City Engineer contact the Fafard Company and detail their responsibilities for snow plowing with the Sanctuary, Hamlet, and Cloister Condos. The order also asks that the Fire Department assess the accessibility of the area as well, in the event of a situation that endangers the health and welfare of the residents . Walter Power noted that the city has standards that determine when snow plowing should be done. He suggested that they be contacted and made aware of the standards. Debbie will report at the next meeting. • OLD/NEW BUSINESS Debbie Hurlburt stated that the proposed Site Plan Review Changes have been sent to Mayor Harrington. Debbie Hurlburt discussed the letter from Atty. John Serafini regarding the Salem Hospital Day Care Center. She stated that she would have information from Stan Bigelow at the next meeting. John Moustakis stated that he felt that this is a controversial issue and that an independent engineer should be brought in. He suggested sending a letter to the Mayor suggesting that the Board needs expert advice. Albert Hill noted that the Planning Board would be within the realm of their responsibility to confirm the information presented. Bill Luster stated that he had met with Mr. LeTarte, Mr. Porier, and Mr. Curtin regarding their concerns . He also noted that he will be requesting an extension from Salem Hospital on the 90 day time frame the Board has to act on the matter, since the close of the Public Hearing. He also stated that he had discussed the matter with Mayor Harrington and that if the response from the City Engineer does not satisfy the Planning • Board then he would consider an outside engineer. 4 • Walter Power asked what the cost of a downstream study would be. Bill Luster stated that he did not know but he would investigate it. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of March 18, 1993 were postponed until the next meeting on April 15, 1993. ' There being no further business to come before the Board at this meeting a motion was made by Albert Hill to adjourn the meeting seconded by Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: - EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB040193 • • 5 SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, MARCH 18, 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, March 18, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Linda Vaughan, Chuck Puleo, Kosta Prentakis, and David Hart. Also present were Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. SITE PLAN REVIEW ZONING CHANGES DISCUSSION Debbie Hurlburt addressed the Board and noted that at the last meeting Bill Luster discussed the reduction in the site plan review threshold from 10,000 square feet to all commercial development. She reviewed a memo prepared by Bill Luster to Mayor Harrington outlining the change. She referred to a paragraph in the memo that highlights the changes in the ordinance and noted that the main change is that SPR requires all non residential development greater than 2,000 s.f. to go through SPR and any non-residential d elopment less than 2,000 s.f. to gain approval of the anning�partment prior to going forward. This forward step would allow increased community • and professional review of all commercial development. The memo also noted that the amendment would not add any appreciable delay or additional cost to the development process in Salem. Chuck Puleo expressed his concern that people could add 1 ,000 s.f. at a time and could get around the ordinance. David Hart suggested that language should be added that would cover a change in use of a building. Debbie Hurlburt noted she thought that is more of a Board of Appeal function. Motion made by David Hart to direct the City Planner to forward the proposed Ordinance change to Mayor Harrington, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimously. OLD / NEW BUSINESS Linda Vaughan asked if a letter was sent to the Board of Appeal concerning the DeIulis property. Debbie Hurlburt stated that a letter was sent and she would give the members copies of the decision of the Board of Appeal when she receives it. Walter Power asked if copies of letters sent by the Planning Board could be given to the members. Debbie Hurlburt informed the Board that the April 18 meeting • would be the 85th day of the 90 days in which the Board has to act on the Salem Hospital day care center and that Bill Luster has indicated that he will be seeking an extension from them. 1 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the meeting of March 4 , 1993 were presented for approval. Motion made by Kosta Prentakis to approve the minutes of the meeting of March 4 , 1993, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Linda Vaughan to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Kosta Prentakis and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8: 05 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB031893 • 2 . SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, MARCH 41 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, March 4, 1993 at 7:30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Hart, Albert Hill, John Moustakis, Carter Vinson, and Chuck Puleo. Also present were City Planner Bill Luster, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. FORM A - GREENLAWN AVENUE Attorney Joseph Correnti of Serafini, Serafini, and Darling, addressed the Board on behalf of his clients, to request a Form A for the Greenlawn Ave. subdivision. He noted that the original survey that was done was wrong, and that other surveying showed that field notes changed boundaries and added some slight modifications to the sizes of the lots. Bill Luster noted that the Form• A had been presented at the last meeting by Mr. Finnochio, and the Planning Board raised the question regarding whethrr the Board could endorse the plan • due to the Board of Appeal variance dated June 19, 1991 that allowed the lot and frontage to be of a particular size. He also stated that he received an opinion from Lenny Femino and he concluded that since the plan is a minor modification he recommended that the Board endorse the plan. Carter Vinson questioned if the plan was granted a variance based on the exact amount of land. Bill Luster stated that the variance was granted based on the number of lots. Carter Vinson discussed the thought behind the Board of Appeal original granting of the variance and noted that if it is a valid Form A, and the Board approves it OK, but if anyone has a grievance they could argue that variance granted is not for the present plan. Chuck Puleo asked how each lot changed. Atty. Correnti stated that the angle point in the street moved down, and the angle point along the back of the lot lines changed. There being no further questions concerning this matter, a motion was made by David Hart to approve the Form A for the Greenlawn Ave. subdivision, seconded by John Moustakis, and approved unanimously. • 1 SITE PLAN REVIEW ZONING CHANGES DISCUSSION Bill Luster reviewed the memo that he prepared for the Board. He noted that cost information was not available yet. He stressed that the substance of the issue was not so much that the Planning Board would have control as much as they would have neighborhood review. He cited that Colby Street Day Care Center as an example. He also briefly discussed the Stop & Shop project and the fact that the Peabody Planning Board has only an advisory role in commercial developments and that he would like to recommend a joint SPR with Peabody. Bill Luster reviewed the procedure time table for changing the zoning ordinance. Carter Vinson noted that the 2,000 s.f. threshold on new construction in the Entrance Corridor Overlay District and excludes renovations specifically requested by the Council . Chuck Puleo expressed concern that people could add changes to their property in 1 ,000 s.f. increments without having to have SPR. Bill Luster stated that he would request that all Commercial Developments be reviewed and at the discretion of the Board approve projects under 2,000 s.f. He also stated that there is specific language in the zoning ordinance that determines percentages to be considered for renovations. • David Hart also pointed out that the building code stipulates that the more you add to a building the more you have to bring up to code. Bill Luster stated that he would prepare a recommendation for the next meeting for the Board to discuss. Carter Vinson noted that if the Board is going to seek changes in the zoning ordinance he would like to make the changes consistent throughout the ordinance. OLD / NEW BUSINESS Debbie Hurlburt explained the Hatch Act of 1965 to the Planning Board, as it was referred to several times during discussions regarding the Colby Street Day Care Center. Debbie Hurlburt also reviewed a letter to Salem Hospital from the State Highway Department regarding Highland Avenue. Chuck Puleo asked if they have determined the cause of the problem with the drain on Jackson Street. Bill Luster noted that it could be two things . It could be the hospital or something related to Middle School since it was recently tied to that line. He also noted that if it is the school, the state • will pay to fix the problem. 2 The Board reviewed the upcoming agenda for the Board of Appeal. Walter Power suggested sending the ZBA a letter informing them that the Planning Board has mail several discussions with the DeIulis ' and that the Board would like to see the lots conform to R1 zoning requirements. The Board discussed communication between the Board and the Board of Appeal. David Hart suggested that a seminar type meeting could be held to go over the functions of each Board. Walter Power will arrange a meeting with Richard Bencal the Chairman of the Board of Appeal. He also noted that the Board should choose carefully what they write to the Board of Appeal since in the past letters from the Board have not been appreciated. Walter Power stated that while eventually Swampscott Rd. will be upgraded, he noted that the Board should consider having Marlborough Rd. treated as a major roadway. He noted that if state money were to become available the city should pursue it to fix the road up. He also suggested that a plan of the way the road should be, needs to be drawn up. He stressed that a list of highway projects and set priorities that could be addressed with developers as they come in. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • The minutes of the meeting of October 15, 1992 were presented for approval. Motion made by John Moustakis to approve the minutes of the meeting of October 15, 1992, seconded by Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. The minutes of the Joint Public Hearing between the Planning Board and the Salem City Council held on November 5, 1992, were presented for approval . Motion made by Albert Hill to approve the minute of the Joint Public Hearing seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of November 5, 1992 were presented for approval. Motion made by David Hart to approve the minutes of November 5, 1992, seconded by John Moustakis, and approved unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of November 19, 1992 were presented for approval. Motion made by John Moustakis to approve the minutes of the meeting of November 19, 1992, seconded by Carter Vinson, and approved unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of January 7, 1993 were presented for approval. Motion made by Albert Hill to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 7, 1993 as amended, seconded by David Hart and approved unanimously. • 3 . . C The minutes of the meeting of January 21 , 1993 were presented for approval. Motion made by John Moustakis to approve the minutes of the meeting of January 21 , 1993 as amended, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a moti!r,n was made by John Moustakis to adjourn the meeting. seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EI EN M. SACCO, CLERK PB030493 • • 4 • SAL7,M PLAi11NING 3OA7D 4INUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, F-3-UARY 13, 1993 regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, February 18, 1993 at 7 : 30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman .Ualter Power, Chucl: Puleo, Albert Hill, David Hart, Carter Vinson, Linda Vaughan, and I,osta Prentakis. Also present were City Planner 1 I3ill Luster, Staff Advisor Debbie Hurlburt, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. FORM A - 1 PARALLEL STTaBET - STEPHEN COADY ; r. Stephen Coady was present at the meeting to request approval of a Form A, for his property located on 1 Parallel Street. Ke shoved the oard the clans Tdhich showed that lot 21 is being_ conveyed to Land Court parcels 1 and 2 to become one lot. 'Ie also noted that he will be going to the Conservation Commission at their next meeting for an order of conditions to construct a fence around the entire lot. Bill Luster noted that the lot is located on an approved nublic way and that the frontage requirements are grandfathered. • There being no further questions or comments on the Form A, a motion was made by Linda Vaughan to approve the Form A, seconded by Y.osta Prentakis and approved unanimously. DISCUSSION idITH ATTY. JOHN NEILTY REGAP.DII`IG 18 FREEMAN P.OAD Atty. !Ceilty withdrew his request to hold a discussion -pith the ^oard regarding 18 Freeman 'oad. DISCUSSION =ARDI.IG SITE PLAN RF.VIM?l MINIMUM THRESHOLD "ill Luster addressed the hoard and stated that over the last several years the city has experienced an increase in the number of commercial developments which have been less than 10,000 s.f. , and therefore do not require site plan review. He cited the Pizza Hut on Canal Street and the proposed Salem Hospital Day Care Center on Colby Street as examples . He stated that as a result of the concerns by several members of the Board and the Planning Department, he has had discussions regarding some find of minimum threshold that would trigger site plan review. He noted that he will prepare a memo on the matter and get an idea of what the thresholds are in area cities and tOwns. Posta Prentakis asked if the current threshold is for square • footage or total square footage. Hill Luster .stated that site 1 plan review is for total scuare footage for renovations and • new construction. He also noted that an entrance corridor requirements are 2 , 000 s .f. for new construction ')ut does not allow for renovations . ^ill also stated that Ptarblehead requires site plan review for any commercial development regardless of square footage. Carter Vinson stated that he would li'.ce to see the 10, 000 s .f. reduced, }nit expressed concern that the cost of site plan review would be a burden for small businesses and would discourage new businesses from coming to the city. Councillor At Large Jane Stirgwolt addressed the Board and stated that while doing some research she discovered the Town of .^.evere has administrative site plan review that '::ic::s in at 1 , 000 s .f. and it is less restrictive than site plan review. Tlard. our Councillor Leonard O 'Leary addressed the Board and stated that he would like to see the matter addressed and stated that he would like to see it expanded beyond the entrance corridors . i.e also stated that he would like the Conservation Commission to he involved, since he feels that many people are taring advantage of conservation land. iie said that he would like to see more restrictions such as a larger buffer zone, noting that he has had many problems in ward four, which have recently come to light due to heavy rain storms . • Bill Luster discussed the recent water problems in wards three and four. He noted that the areas where the problems have been occurring is where all the development has been and it is not happening in other wards. ITe referred to Greenlawn Avenue and pointed out that there are no catch basin on the too ledge. tie also noted that a swale flooded 23 Marlborough Road. Ualter Dower asked if the Planning Board approved a subdivision that has caused flooding. lilt Luster replied that the planning I oard addressed the drainage for the area, but the problem is occurring further down and needs to he addressee; with the developer. 'ie suggested that a berm should be out on Marlborough Road. Walter Power suggested that he would like to see renovations included in the entrance corridors . Chuck Puleo asked if residential renovations would be included. Bill Luster stated that 6 or more units require site plan review, and he does not anticipate changing that. Bill Luster stated that he would like to see the Planning 73oard have the option of using a common sense approach to administering the law rather than having the option to he able to get waivers . I ie will prepare a memo for the Board for the next meeting. • 2 ORM A - GREENLA-WN AVENUE • ';r. Finnochio addressed the Poard and noted that he was representing his son on this matter. He stated that the plan replaces a prior plan approved by the Board. On the original plan there was an error, since the survey had two different reference points . and this plan has the correct reference points and configurations . ^ill Luster explained that the Atty. was expected to attend the meeting and that lie could explain some of the changes . He stated that he found if difficult to recommend approving the plan without having the changes explained, even though they are minor changes . Councillor Leonard O'Leary questioned whether the Planning Board could address the matter since the original variance was granted I ased on certain size lots . Linda Vaughan agreed, and requested that the Board get an opinion about whether they should ao back to the Board of Appeal first. :lotion made by John Moustakis to have the petitioner come to the next meeting with more information, seconded by Linda Vaughan, and approved unanimously. DISCUSSION .^.EGA'DING THE CHILD CAR" FACILITY AT COLBY STREET • Bill Luster addressed the Board and stated that since the last meeting he and Debbie Hurlburt have composed a letter to Salem Tjospital regarding the concerns of the Board and the neighborhood. He reviewed the letter with the Board. ?ill Luster noted that since that letter has been sent, there have been several additional concerns raised by the neighbors . T',e also noted that there is a lot of additional work that needs to he done, and noted that there is a credibility problem with the City Engineer and the neighborhood, and that the Mayor is considering hiring an outside engineer for an opinion. Carter Vinson noted that he is concerned about the amount of time that the board has to address the Plan. Trill Luster stated that an outside engineer could be retained quickly, since all the purchasing agent has to do is get three telephone bids, and we could hire one. Bill Luster stated that a second letter will be drafted and sent to Salem Hospital with the additional concerns of the neighbors. OLD / NEW BUSINESS • Kosta Prenta}:is asked if there was any news about the sale of 3 Shaw' s and Purity. :Bill Luster stated that he received a call • from someone who bought the Shaw' s Plaza, and that the Caldor Mall is in foreclosure. He noted that there has been some discussion of the two malls being joined together and that the par%ing areas would need to be addressed. Debbie FTurlburt noted that she had received . a letter from Tom Furey in support of the Day Care Center for ^alem Hospital . There being no further business to come before the Planning ^oar' at this meeting a :notion was made by John Moustakis to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Linda Vaughan and approved unanimouslv. The meeting was adjourned at 9 : 30 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTPD BY: ET B) CT M SACCO, CL=iC PB021393 • of "qttlEm, f ttssar4use##s 4��°mut (One �$ttlem (ffireen Planning Board Meeting Cancellation Notice You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board meeting scheduled for Thursday, February 4, 1993 at 7: 30 P.M. has been cancelled. Walter B. Power, III Chairman This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall Ave., Salem, PAass. at i0- /-,& -, in accordar6w wPh Chap. 39 Sec. 23A & Z3B of In /7 '�� c� SALEM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 21 , 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, January 21 , 1993 at 7: 30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem green. Those present were: Linda Vaughan, John Moustakis, Kosta Prentakis, Debbie Hilbert, Albert Hill, Carter Vinson, Chuck Puleo, and David Hart. Walter Power was absent. In the absence of Chairman Walter Power, ChucR Puleo assumed the chair. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - 1 -3 COLBY STREET - PROPOSED CHILDCARE FACILITY SALEM HOSPITAL Linda Vaughan recused herself from discussion of this matter. Chuck Puleo addressed those present and asked that if they wish to speak, they only present new information that the Planning. Board has not heard before. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Planning . Board and stated that he has been doing some investigating. He reported that in October 1991 , Salem Hospital submitted a plan to the Conservation Commission to have the pond in front of Highland Hall connected to the city storm drain system. He charged that the plan was not conformed to in that the drain was not installed, and the result is flooding problems on Jackson Street. .He also noted that the pond is now like a mud flat. Councillor O'Leary also showed the Planning Board a copy of an advertisement which indicated that the child care facility would be open to the general public. Mr. Gilbert LeTarte of Hillside Avenue, addressed the Board and stated that when the Hospital rented the property from Mr. Sullivan, the touched the edge of the pond causing it to overflow to Highland Avenue. He also noted that they have changed their plan 3 times and that if the neighbors did not complain they would have drained the pond if the plan had been approved. He asked that the Board protect the health and safety of the R1 zone. Stan Porier, President of the Greenway Road Homeowners Association, addressed the Board and. read prepared remarks. (A copy of Mr. Poriers comments are attached to these minutes. ) He also showed a photograph of taken in September of 1991 , which shows flooding on the property of Jean Deschenes. Atty. James Flemming addressed the Board on behalf of his client, 1 Dr. Curtin and the residents of the area. He noted that the residents appreciate the time and effort that the Planning Board has taken to review the project. He stated that the issue of Highland Hall had been raised and expressed his concern that if' the pond is reduced in size that the additional water to the vicinity would affect the homeowners downstream. He stated that this would be tempting a serious health problem. Atty. Flemming also referred to an Editorial in the Salem Evening News, . and stated that he has lost confidence in the City Engineer. He also noted that there has been no approval by the City Engineer or the Salem Board of Health. He also stated that the Salem Board of Health has asked for an independent Engineer to review the plan. He also suggested that the neighbors would like to have three representatives work with the Planning Board on the decision. Atty. Flemming also asked that they should be required to create an adequate drainage system. He also questioned the fact that the hospital has been a good neighbor, referring to the promise that the hospital would restore the parking area to its original condition prior to use as a parking area. Rich Perlman of 90 Colby Street, addressed the Board and stated that he has not seen a new plan which addresses the traffic concerns of the neighbors. He stated that he is opposed to the location of the entrance to the property, since it is directly across from his property. He -also suggested that the hospital should have their security on the site to handle traffic matters. Mrs. Jaworski of Greenway Road noted. that she travels on Highland Avenue at -7:00 a.m. and there is a lot of traffic and there are a lot of accidents. She expressed her concern that the center would add to the traffic. Diane Clark of 36 Hillside Avenue expressed her concern that people would cut through Hillside Avenue. She also noted that there are no sidewalks on Colby Street. Ellen Simard of Hillside Ave. expressed her concern that the hospital could move another department into the building. She also stated that she is concerned about the traffic on Hillside Ave. Chuck Puleo stated .that the only use for the building could be a day care center, unless they get a variance from the Board of Appeal. City Planner Bill Luster addressed those present and explained that the Planning Board has 90 days to act on the plan after the close of the Public Hearing. He noted that while the Board • can address some issues, they are obligated to go through the 2 process without bias and cannot prejudge what might happen. • He agreed that it would be a good idea to have 2 or 3 neighbors designated to represent the neighbors during the process. Mr. Levesque addressed the Board and stated that he felt that sidewalks should be included in the plan. Joan O'Neil -of 42 Hillside Ave. asked if they could change the use of the building in the future. Bill Luster stated that they could only use it for a Day Care Center, unless they get a variance from the Board of Appeal. Jim Flemming stated that he would like to have it conditioned with a covenant that would go with the land, specifiying that it is only to be used for a Day Care Center. Atty. John Serafini , representing Salem Hospital, addressed the Board and noted that if some of the attitudes expressed at this meeting had been expressed sooner, something may be able to be done about the concerns, but only adamant opposition has been expressed to a Day Care Center. He also presented a petition signed by 900 Salem Hospital Employees. Atty. Serafini' addressed Councillor O'Leary' s charge about the pond at. Highland Hall, stating that it was never a pond, it was a retaining area, and that when the tennis courts were • removed to provide additional parking, the retention area was hooked into the city storm drain. Atty. Serafini also noted that the matter was reviewed by the Conservation Commission, and after a lengthy process and Order of Conditions was issued. He noted that the order of conditions was appealed by the neighbors to DEP, and under the process a state engineer reviewed and approved the plan. He also stated that he felt it was important for the Planning Board to look at the plan as it is, within the law, and not base its decision on a menard of objection and unsubstantiated concerns, noting that he was confident that the Board would act according. Atty. James Flemming stated that it would be nice for both parties to have a hired gun to review the matter, but they don't. He also noted that the Board of Health asked for an engineers review of the matter. Councillor O'Leary asked that the neighbors be considered in this decision. Debbie Hilbert asked about the drainage to Greenway Road. Fred King the Engineer for Salem Hospital explained that the drainage would not increase because of this plan. Albert Hill stated that he did not agree that they water flow • would not be a problem'. He suggested that catch basins should 3 be used for the parking area. He also noted that if they clean out the pipe in the pond the water would flow more freely, adding to the drainage. Debbie Hilbert asked what would the impact would be on Greenway Road if they cleaned the pipe. Mr. King stated that it would return to the condition to which it was prior to the pipe being blocked and they don' t have any' calculations on that. There being no further comments from those present at this time, a motion was made by John Moustakis to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Kosta Prentakis and approved unanimously. Dr. Curtin, Stan Porier, and Gilbert LeTarte will represent the neighbors on the matter. Carter Vinson stated that he felt that it would be very difficult to falsify and Engineering Report as was indicated during remarks. Bill Luster stated that the City Engineer would review the plan carefully and that he also feels that it is incumbent upon the petitioner to provide the information requested and the city should not have to pay for it. David Hart suggested inviting Stan Bigelow to the next meeting to discuss the matter. Bill 'Luster said that he felt that Stan Bigelow would be hesitant to appear before the Board, but would • probably respond in writing. John Moustakis questioned what recourse the neighbors would have if the plan fails'. Bill Luster stated that they could condition the plan and try to clearly define responsibility. There being no further business to come before the Planning - Board at this meeting, a motion was made by John Moustakis ' to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Albert Hill and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9: 30 P.M. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY: EILEEN M. SACCO, CLERK PB012193 • 4 SALEM PLANNING BOAI`ID • MINUTES OF ;IEETIN.G THURSDAY, JAMUARY 7 , 1993 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, January 7, 1993 at 7 :30 P.M. in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present Caere: Chairman ;palter Power, Linda Vaughan, Carter Vinson, John Moustakis , Debbie Hilbert, David :Mart, Albert Dill, and Chuck Puleo. :costa Prentakis was absent. The meeting was called to order at 7: 30 P.m. by the Chairman, Walter Dower. WETLAIMS AND FLOOD HAZARD SPECIAL PERMIT - PROPOSED CHILDCARE FACILITY - 70-80 COLT3Y STRv= Linda Vaughan recused herself from faiscussion of this matter. Atty. John Serafini Sr. addressed the Planning Board on behalf of his client, Salem Hosoital to present a proposal for a Child Care Center to be located on 70-80 Colby Street, which requires a flood hazard special permit. He explained that they have already been to the Conservation Commission, and after a lengthy • process, received an Order of Conditions . The Order was appealed by the neighbors , to DEP. He noted that DBP reviewed the decision and decided that impact on the pond should be avoided, and issued a superseding Order of Conditions . The superseding Order of Conditions is also being appealed by the neighbors . He stated that they have since developed an alternate drainage plan which will be explained by the Engineer, Bruce Ey of Schofield Brothers . Bruce Ey addressed the Board and explained the plans for the Day Care Facility. He noted that the plans identify the Flood Hazard District and the 100 ft. buffer zone. He explained that the building would he 125 ft 1 48 ft. , and that Northwest of that would be the parking area. 3e also explained that they plan to repair the outlet to the pond, because when it is plugged, the pond over flows and causes flooding for the DiVirgilios . mr. y also explained that the plans call for the installation of a catch basin on Colby Street, and the construction of a head wall creating a haffle around the pine. He reported that the findings of a drainage analysis concluded that the culvert on Dr. Curtins property can take 32 .05 c.f per second. '.e also reported that the drainage discharge to the drainage system would have oil and grit separators would be installed, noting that less water in peak storms and higher quality water would • solve the drainage problems of the city, the DiVirgilios, and 1 Dr. Curtin. Debbie Hilbert asked what is it about the design that keeps the runoff from increasing. Mr. Ey reported that they are managing it the same, but redirecting it in some cases. Walter Power noted a large open sump and questioned if there was a restriction. Mr. Ey stated that they are eliminating the sump with this plan, which would eliminate the problem in the neighborhood. Walter Power also asked if the oil and grit separators would be maintained and who would be responsible for them. Atty. Serafini replied that they would be maintained twice a year or more if necessary, and that they hospital would be responsible. Debbie Hilbert questioned the effect of the runoff on 100 Highland Avenue. Mr. Ey reported that they are not altering the runoff from 100 Highland Avenue. Albert Hill questioned the difference in grade level of the parking area. Mr. Ey noted that the low point is 80. 5 and that a catch basin is being installed. Walter Power asked how may slots the day care center would have. Mr. Ey reported that there would be 100 spaces for children at the center. He also noted that there would be 23 parking spaces for the staff and for people to drop off their children. • Chuck Puleo expressed his concern that they are not installing a curb. Mr. Ey reported that there is a berm that could be continued, but also noted that there should be no water flow from the parking lot. Al Hill expressed his concern that sand could fill the oil and grit separators and that they should be maintained more than once a year. Walter Power asked how high the elevation of the building would be and the location of the nearest residence. Mr. Ey noted that the elevation is 271 feet to the roof line. David Hart questioned the existing annual level of the pond as being 78. Mr. Ey noted that the highest elevation of the bank and the pond is 801. Walter Power asked if there would be an outdoor play area at the day care center. Mr. Ey replied that there would be a play area and that a fence would be installed along it for privacy. Mr. Ey Also noted that the hours of operation would be from 6 : 30 a.m. to 7 : 00 p.m. Chuck Puleo asked if a 21E had been done on the site. Atty. • Serafini noted that the Order of Conditions calls for one if necessary. 2 • Walter Power opened the meeting up for comments from those in attendance. Ward 3 Councillor Vincent Furfaro addressed the Board and voiced his concern that the Greenway Road area would be affected since the drainage is supposed to go through Highland Avenue. He noted that the water has to go somewhere and asked that the Board consider the Greenway Rd. residents in making their decision. Ward 4 Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and reviewed the history of the property since Salem Hospital has either owned it or leased it. He also stated that it is because former Governor Dukakis had a last minute amendment to the zoning laws passed which allows day care centers in R1 districts, that they are even allowed to propose this matter. Ron Tremblay of 10 Almeida Street addressed the Board and noted his objection to the daycare center due to the location of the play ground area, which abuts his property. He stated that he thinks that it is great that Salem Hospital wants to provide Day Care for their employees, but suggested that they try to swap some land with Fafard, and put the day care up there. He said no one would oppose single family home construction on the Colby Street site. • Atty. James Flemming addressed the Board and stated that he has represented the neighbors regarding this property since 1982. He stated that they are not against Salem Hospital or a Day Care Center, but they feel that it is an intrusion in the neighborhood, and should be somewhere else. He also stated that the plan that was presented tonight has not been seen by the Conservation Commission, since it has been amended since DEP issued the Superseding Order of Conditions . He stated that he would go to court to force them to present the plan to the Conservation Commission and start the process all over again. Atty. Flemming also informed the Board that the 100 Highland Avenue Trustees are seeking to retract the easement agreement that they signed with the City, so that they are unable to use it for this plan. He also stressed that Greenway Road would be affected by the runoff. Atty. Flemming also stated that the Hospital is in violation of the Hatch Act. Dr. Patrick Curtin addressed the Board and explained the agreement for the easement that 100 Highland Avenue signed with the city. He stated that the agreement was reached to address the drainage problems and that the terms of the easement hold hold the city liable. He stated that he intends to recind that agreement and expects the hospital to have their own retainage system. • Richard Perlman of 14 Colby Street addressed the Board and 3 stated that he has lived there since 1969 and that since then the more hot top that they put down the more he pumps his property. He also noted that the entrance to the Day Care Center is right across from his property and that he would like to see the location of that 'changed. Mr. Levesque of 32 Hillside Ave. noted that the berm that was referred to was installed by the city to stop a water problem, and that 40 ft. was installed. He noted that the city did not survey the area. Bill Luster also noted that the berm was a temporary solution to a neighborhood problem. He stated that he would check with the City Engineer on the matter. Stanley Porier of 8 Cottage Street expressed his concerns, noting that he is not against Day Care but he is concerned about the water problems that already exist on Greenway Road. He referred to a letter dated October 1992 from the Mass . District Highway Director which stated that the pipe on Highland Avenue has a problem. He urged the Board to keep the Public Hearing open until they can investigate that letter. Leo Higgins of 17 Greenway Road stated that the drainage pipe goes through his back yard, and questioned what would happen if it all backed up. Ray LeTarte of 15 Colby Street, addressed the Board and stated • that he is not against day care but that he does not think that the neighborhood is the right location, citing no sidewalks and the fact that there are no water lines on Colby Street. He also noted that his wife works for Salem Hospital management and that they would be eligible to use the center. Jean Volk an employee of Salem Hospital noted that 100 children would not be arriving at the same time, since there are different shifts at the hospital . Marianne LeTarte of 15 Colby Street expressed her concern that the center would increase traffic and impact the neighborhood. Jean O 'Neil of 15 Hillside Ave. stated that there are no sidewalks on Colby Street, and suggested that they move it behind the hospital . Janet Reale expressed her concern that if they take the children for walks, the absence of sidewalks could be a problem. Mr. LeTarte of 34 Hillside Ave. expressed his concern that the setback requirements should be larger than they are for the safety of pedestrians and traffic concerns . • Councillor At Large Jane Stirgwolt addressed the Board and asked to have some points clarified. She asked about the ownership 4 of the day care center. Atty. Serafini stated that the hospital would own the building but lease it to an operator. Me also noted that it would be primarily for the emnloyees of Salem Hospital. Councillor Stirg%iolt asked if there was an option to open it up to the public. Atty. Serafini stated that it would probably be filled by hospital employees . Councillor Leonard O 'Leary suggested that the Board have a site visit to the property. He also noted that the temporary berm is an issue since the Board requires other develoners to install Granite curbing. Atty. Serafini addressed the Board and those present. Me noted that Salem Hospital employs 3 ,500 people and that they are willing to work out traffic patterns and change entrances if needed. He asked that the Board not deny the project. IIe noted that they are bound by the by-laws , and that Salem Hospital would work, with the Board to address concerns . He stressed that they have obeyed the law and that they should he able to CIO what they want as long as they are within the law. lie also explained the necessity of available space on the main campus for medical services that the hospital provides . He urged the Board to judge the proposal on the basis of the information submitted. "lotion made by Carter Vinson to continue the Public Hearing • until January 21 , 1993 , seconded by John Aloustakis and approved unanimously. The Planning Board will hold a site visit on Saturday, January 9, 1993 at 9: 30 a.m. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by David Hart to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Albert hill and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10 : 30 p.m. "ESPrCTFULLY SUBMIT= BY: M. SACCO, CLERK PB010793 5 C661 i