Loading...
2000-PLANNING BOARD c0:30 U1. "IA � b `RK'S. OFFIC` Ctu of �$ttlem, fflassadjuOrtts • ,, l�mtin$ BnmD 1999 OAC Ili A 25 One �$ttlrm Greett You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meetings for 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. 2 Q S Walter B.Power, III Chairman January July January. l3, 2000 July 6, 20001, January 20, 2000 July 20, 2000 t\O� � 20k February i Sep ember February 3, 2000 V September 7, 2000 February 17,2000 September 21,2000 March October March 2, 2000 October 5, 2000 March 16, 2000 ✓ October 19, 2000 April November April 61 2000 November 2,2000 April 2000 / November 16,2000 ' May December May 4, 2000 `� December 7, 2000 May 18, 2000 December 21, 2000 June -b �otic� s'e� gar °+. Kits; 3,a:.ioUn Fioard- b : June 1, 2000 '>>.li3`'n, tif�s;S.• ;,.' rc June 15, 2000 �. .Cl� cNeU pia�•� Si t.�:r: i;':': �j , r� 1�t,.3D. 30 s�E 231 & 233 of FA.v.L. A _K'S OFFICE 19i#u of "Salem, Htts�ttrl�usl,##s a1 ' � �Ittmtin$ �attrD 1999 C .0 114 A 4: 2; One �tt1em (Breen You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meetings for 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman January July January 13, 2000 July 6, 2000 January 20, 2000 July 20, 2000 ��February September February 3, 2000 September 7, 2000 February 17, 2000 September 21, 2000 March October March 2, 2000 October 5, 2000 March 16, 2000 October 19, 2000 April November April 6, 2000 November 2, 2000 April 20, 2000 November 16, 2000 May December May 4, 2000 December 7, 2000 May 18, 2000 December 21, 2000 June , ,. r�� 'latln �9c� rd June 1, 2000 This 110fles posted or, 1?`��- �` 9 �1ty <:c ;;.i June.15 2000 6im11 i��� S. �' � `' u 3£ &W,. l 23r1 & 232 of ti4A.G.L. � Cit#11 of $alem, . � '.., Plaruting Poarb J�•�I}p,YE (ane ,�$alem Greett Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, January 13, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. `WOCom; Walter B. Power, III Chairman 1V��JI Tentative Agenda: 1. Public Hearing—Definitive Subdivision Plan-Extension of Scenic Way (7:30 PM— 8:30 PM) 2. Public Hearing— Waiver From Frontage Requirements—3 and 7 Winter Street(8:30 PM— 9:00 PM) 3. Public Hearing—Amendment to Site Plan Review—McDonalds—One Traders Way (9:00 PM—9:30 PM) 4. Old/New Business (9:30 PM—9:45 PM) Request to Waive $1,000 of the Site Plan Review Application Fee for 266 Canal Street This notleo posted on "01ficial Bulletin S"r& Ctty Hell Ave., Salem, Mass.. f)r Jw. n jccc at 9:qb R.m . isac�i^a;t� Chap. 39 Sec. 23A & 2343 of h4.G.L.,f Q�y6n) ofSttlPm, H�rsttrl2usl�##s planning pIIMrtb ,J��UpNZ� (1Dne $alem Green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: January 10, 2000 RE: Agenda—January 13, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Public Hearing—Definitive Subdivision Plan—Extension of Scenic Way The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing for the application made by Town and Country Homes, Inc. for a Definitive Subdivision Plan to allow the construction of a cul-de- sac at the end of Scenic Way and associated utilities to service the construction of four(4) single family dwellings. The proposed development is located at the end of Outlook Avenue (an unimproved way) and at the end of Scenic Way. The proposed development is located within the R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. The applicant presented a preliminary subdivision plan to the Board at its October 7, 1999 meeting. The Board reacted favorably to the plan. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance for this project with respect to lot frontage, lot width, and lot area. The Zoning Board of Appeals decision has been attached for your convenience. The proposed development is located in close proximity to a Wetlands Resource Area and will require a filing with the Salem Conservation Commission. The applicant has determined that the trip generation expected from the four lots is a maximum of forty (40) vehicle trips per day. In the morning peak hour it is projected that two vehicles will leave the site and three vehicles will enter the site. In the afternoon peak hour, three vehicles will be expected to enter the site and two vehicles will leave the site. No measurable impact upon adjacent streets or traffic characteristics is expected as a result of the proposed subdivision. • There are no street trees shown on the plan, thus the Planning Board may wish to request . several trees to be planted on the site adjacent to the roadway. PB Memorandum January 10,2000-2 Two comment sheets have been received for this project. The Health Department has stated that they have requested that the applicant appear before them.at their January 11, 2000 meeting. The Conservation Commission has stated that a filing with the Conservation Commission is required. Attorney George Atkins will present the proposed plans to the Planning Board. 2. Public Hearing—Waiver From Frontage Requirements—3 and 7 Winter Street The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing for a request for a waiver from the frontage requirements for the parcels located at 3 and 7 Winter Street. The applicant owns the lots located at both 3 and 7 Winter Street. The rear of the lots abut one another. Lot 1 originally consisted of both Lot 1 and Lot 2. The applicant is requesting to subdivide Lot one into two lots (Lot 1 and 2) and combine Lot 2 with Lot 3. Because of the changes made to the lots, the applicant is required to receive a Waiver from Frontage prior to subdividing the lots. The applicant received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for lot area, lot area per dwelling, lot width, front yard setback, side yard setback, and height. The decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals has been attached. Attorney George Atkins will present the plans to the Planning Board. 3. Public Hearing—Amendment to Site Plan Review—McDonalds—One Traders Way The Planning Board will hear an amendment to a site plan review for the McDonalds located • at One Traders Way. The McDonalds is requesting to construct an additional 220 square feet to their existing building. The additional square footage will result in approximately 20 additional seats in the restaurant and will not remove any parking spaces currently located on the site. The Salem Zoning Ordinance requires a total of fifteen parking spaces per restaurant use, plus space per employee, thus the additional square footage does not require additional parking spaces to be provided. Two comment sheets were received for this project. The Fire Department concurs with the proposal. The Conservation Commi"ssion also concurs with the proposal and states that Conservation Commission approval is not required. 4. Old/New Business Request to Waive $1,000 of the Site Plan Review Application Fee for 266 Canal Street The Planning Board approved the request for site plan review for the proposed boat storage facility located at 266 Canal Street. The project did not involve any construction, only a change in use. Because of the limited review associated with the project, the applicant is requesting to pay a fee in the amount of$500 as opposed to the regular fee of$1,500. The Planning Board can waive the fee so that the applicant only pays $500. The request letter submitted has been attached for you convenience. �a Salem Planning Board • Minutes of Meeting Thursday, January 13, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, January 12, 2000 in the conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Weiner, Bill Cullen; John Moustakis, Chuck Puleo,Lee Harrington, Gene Collins, Kim Driscoll and Carter Vinson. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan. In the absence of Eileen Sacco, this meeting was taped. Public Hearing-Definitive Subdivision Plan -Extension of Scenic Way Atty. George Atkins addressed the Board and explained that his client is proposing to construct a cul de sac at the end of Scenic Way and associated utilities to service the construction of four (4) single family homes. The proposed development is located at the end of Outlook Avenue and at the end of Scenic Way and is within the R-1 zoning district. Atty. Atkins reported that the Board of Appeals has granted variances for lot frontage, lot width, and lot area. He also noted that the proposed development is located in close proximity to the resource area and they have been to the Conservation Commission and ,.established the resource area. They have completed that work to the satisfaction of the • Conservation Commission and have located that buildings outside of the buffer zone. They still may have some issues with the Commission regarding drainage, but that has yet to be determined. Atty. Atkins reviewed the plans with the Board. He explained the process that they used to review the area and come up with the plan. He noted that they developed a plan that is much better than originally proposed informally with the Board in October. Atty. Atkins reviewed the facts of the Environmental Impact Statement. He explained that the houses will occupy 5,400 s.f. and the proposed cul de sac will be approximately 10,000 s.f., the lawn area will be 40,020 s.f., and the unchanged area will be about 8,500 s.f. He noted that at a previous hearing, neighbors had expressed concern about trees in the area, noting that presently it is an undeveloped wooded area. He stated that they expect some displacement of birds during the construction phase but they should return. He noted that they feel it is a good plan and the open space that has been incorporated in the plan should be sufficient for the wildlife that exists there to maintain. He asked Jim McDowell of Eastern Land Survey Associate to address the Board regarding the design of the cul de sac. Mr. McDowell explained that the 4 lots would be services by municipal water and sewer. They plan to install a new fire hydrant and new 8 inch sewer. • Page 1 He referred to storm drainage and noted that they plan to lower the grade from what it is • now by 3 feet which will create a low point in the roadway, construct 2 new catch basins. He explained the direction that the drainage would take on the plan. He noted that the drainage would not affect nearby properties. All utilities will be underground and curbing will be installed around the cul de sac. Mr. McDowell explained the locations of the houses. He noted that they would be constructed on grade to diminish the amount of rock removal that would be required if they excavated for basements. He noted that if blasting is required it would be done in accordance with state and local regulations. Atty. Atkins explained that Councillor O' Leary had questioned if the existing fire hydrant that is there would be dead ended or looped. Mr. McDowell explained that they would dead end it and explained the reasoning behind that. Carter Vinson asked for clarification on the locations of the catch basins and the drainage. He questioned the Swale at the rear end of the lot and asked if there would be free standing water there. Mr. McDowell explained that there would not be an opportunity for free standing water to occur. Mr. Vinson asked if there was a possibility that the Conservation Commission would want them to change the way they propose to handle the flow. Mr. McDowell stated that given the topography of the land there will not be much change to the area. • Atty. Atkins noted that the ZBA put conditions on blasting activity should it be needed and reviewed those with the Board. Chuck Puleo asked about the location of the houses, and noted that the houses on Calumet Street had to be moved. Mr. McDowell explained that they meet the setback requirements. Mr. Puleo questioned if the topography would necessitate the moving of the houses. Mr. McDowell stated that they feel that they can accommodate what is there now, noting that they are looking to keep the back yards large. Walter Power questioned what direction the natural flowage took on the land. Mr. McDowell stated that if all flows towards the swale. Mr. Power asked if there were any flooding problems on Scenic Way now. Mr. McDowell stated that he is not aware of any existing flooding, and meetings with the neighbors indicated that they were concerned about the potential for any flooding as the result of this project. He explained that they have taken that into consideration in the plans for the drainage. Bill Cullen noted that there was a neighbor that was concerned about water problems on the other side. Mr. McDowell explained that the water flows that way in a natural state and they would not impact that. Page 2 • Mr. McDowell explained that the existing power in the neighborhood is overhead and • explained how they plan to hook into that with underground utilities. Walter Power asked for clarification on the curbing proposed for the cud de sac. Mr. McDowell stated that they are using vertical granite curbing. Mr. Power asked how wide the road is. Mr. McDowell noted that the right of way is 28 -30 feet. Mr. Power asked if they were proposing sidewalks on the Scenic Way end. Mr. McDowell stated that they are not proposing any because there are no sidewalks in the area. Carter Vinson noted that the Board usually look at sidewalks with new subdivisions, noting that if they don't start somewhere, and suggested that they could put sidewalks on one side of the road.' Gene Collins recalled that there was a neighborhood that didn't want sidewalks. Walter Power noted that it was the Patton Road project and they did put sidewalks in up there. Mr. McDowell suggested that they could consult the neighbors and discuss it at a future meeting. Walter Power noted that in the past the Board has asked developers to create an island in the middle so that it does not look like a lot of paving. Julianna Tache addressed the Board and stated that they are looking into that. Carter Vinson asked about the scope of the paving that will be done. Mr. McDowell explained the locations that will be paved. He agreed to put a new coat of paving on the • existing pavement at the conclusion of the project. Walter Power asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak on the project. William Gallagher of 3 Scenic Terrace addressed the Board and noted that he is concerned about drainage. Mr. McDowell explained the drainage with relation to his property on the plan. Walter Power suggested that Mr. Gallagher contact his Councillor and have the city look into that for him, noting that this project will not impact the project at all. There being no further questions or comments regarding this project at this time, a motion was made by Bill Cullen to continue the public hearing to the next Planning Board meeting, seconded by Gene Collins and approved unanimously. Public Hearing- Waiver from Frontage Requirements - 3 and 7 Winter Street Arty. Atkins addressed the Board and explained the plan. He explained the original configuration of the lots and noted that the applicant owns the lots located at 3 and 7. He explained that the rear of the lots abut one another and the applicant is requesting to subdivide the lots and a waiver from frontage is required for him to do that. He noted that the applicant received variances from the ZBA for lot area, lot area per dwelling, lot width, front yard setbacks, side yard setback, and height. • Page 3 .Y Atty. Atkins stated that the only thing that will change is the size of the lots and they are • increasing 7 Winter Street to conform and 3 Winter Street will be further decreased from its non conforming status. Walter Power questioned the 12 foot easement on lot 3. Atty. Atkins stated that it services lot number 5. Walter Power asked if there was any plans to build behind 7 Winter Street. Atty. Atkins stated that it would be difficult to do that, and there is not frontage. The owner explained his ideas for what he may want to do in the.f iture to expand the Inn at 7 winter Street. Atty. Atkins noted that they had no opposition from the neighbors on their plans at the ZBA. Carter Vinson noted that he lived in the area and commended to owner on the good job he has done on that. Motion made by Gene Collins to issue the Waiver from Frontage for 3 and 7 Winter Street, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. Public Hearing- Amendment to Site Plan Review- McDonalds - One Traders Way Larry Kimmelman addressed the Board and explained his plans to construct an additional 220 s.f to their existing building. He explained that the additional square footage will result in approximately 20 additional seats in the restaurant and will not remove any • parking spaces currently located on the site. He noted that no additional parking is required with this addition. He showed the Board the plans and explained the locations to him. Carter Vinson questioned if the changes would accommodate a wheel chair. Denise Sullivan explained the changes and the requirements for the handicapped access. Walter Power asked if there would be any changes to the lighting. Mr. Kimmelman stated that there would be no changes to the lighting. He explained the changes that would take place on the interior. He noted that the purpose of the addition is to accommodate more customers with the addition of K-Mart and Home Depot. There being no further questions or comments regarding this plan, a motion was made by Bill Cullen to approve the amendment to the Site Plan Review for McDonald's, seconded by Gene Collins and approved unanimously. Page 4 • G' OLD/NEW BUSINESS • Request to Waive $1,000 of the Site Plan Review Application Fee for 266 Canal Street Denise Sullivan explained that the Board has received a request from Atty. George Atkins to waive the fee for SPR for 266 Canal Street, noting that the application only involves a change in use of an existing premises with minimal site modifications and construction. Motion made by Carter Vinson to approve the request and charge the applicant $500.00 for SPR given the scope of the project, seconded by Gene Collins. The motion was approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Bill Cullen to adjourn the meeting, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: M Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk • Salem Planning Board PB011300 Page 5 _ice r, r uFriCE Ctu of '�$Sttlem, iMssrzrl�use##s Planning PourD (]Otte �$ttlent (Breen NM Y-10 Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, January 20, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. .SIS Walter B. Power, III Chairman Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Definitive Subdivision Plan—Extension of Scenic Way (7:30 PM—8:00 PM) 2. Public Hearing— Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments—205 Highland Avenue (8:00 PM—9:00 PM) 3. Old/New Business (9:00 PM—9:30 PM) Fafard Development Condominiums—Discuss Construction This notle® 13,03,ed en "Offid2l Builetin Board" (,'fly Hall Ava., Saler ; al , �n„ss. on Ii81aaao a:y3 Gm. ZJA A 232 of MSi', gitu of '�$ttlem, passadjusl tts • �A ' �' s �1�mTing f3uxrD Om Salem Green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: January 18, 2000 RE: Agenda—January 20, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Public Hearing—Definitive Subdivision Plan —Extension of Scenic Way The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing for the application made by Town and Country Homes, Inc. for a Definitive Subdivision Plan to allow the construction of a cul-de-sac at the end of Scenic Way and associated utilities io service the construction of four(4) single family dwellings on January 13, 2000. The proposed development is located at the end of Outlook Avenue (an unimproved way) and at the end of Scenic Way. The proposed development is located within the R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. The applicant presented a preliminary subdivision plan to the Board at its October 7, 1999 meeting. The Board reacted favorably to the plan. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance for this project with respect to lot frontage, lot width, and lot area. The Zoning Board of Appeals decision has been attached for your convenience. The proposed development is located in close proximity to a Wetlands Resource Area and will require a filing of a Notice of Intent with the Salem Conservation Commission. As of this time, the applicant has not filed a Notice of Intent application. The Planning Board discussed drainage issues, utility work, blasting and sidewalk construction pertaining to the project. The Board discussed the requested waiver to not construct a sidewalk for the project. The Board requested that the applicant review the possibility of constructing a sidewalk for the length of Scenic Way. The applicant will report its findings to the Board on Thursday. The Board questioned whether a street light was required in the cul-de-sac and requested that the City Electrician be contacted for his recommendation. I have not yet been able to meet i PB Memorandum January 18,2000-2 with the City Electrician, but will prior to the Board meeting and will report back to the • Board on Thursday. In addition, the applicant will present information pertaining to this issue. The Board discussed the issue of providing a landscape island in the cul-de-sac. The applicant stated that this was in their plans and will present an elevation of the island at the Board's next meeting. In addition, the Board discussed the possible restoration of Scenic Way following construction of the subdivision. The applicant agreed that this will happen and it will be made a condition of their decision. There are no street trees shown on the plan, thus the Planning Board may wish to request several trees to be planted on the site adjacent to the roadway. Attorney George Atkins will present the proposed plans to the Planning Board. I will provide a draft decision at the meeting. 2. Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments—205 Highland Avenue The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing at the request of Autumn Development Company, Inc. for the property located at 205 Highland Avenue. The proposed project includes the demolition of the former Vincent's Potato Chip plant currently located on the • site and the construction of five multi-family residential structures, each with 24 units, for a total of 120 units on site. In addition, the plan shows an outdoor swimming pool, and a clubhouse to be constructed on the site. The property will have the parking for 180 vehicles, with 6 handicap parking spaces on site. There has been no traffic study submitted with the application. In speaking with the applicant, the applicant has determined that the traffic impact on both Highland Avenue and First Street will be minimal. The applicant has received a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the project. The parcel is located in the B-2 (Commercial) Zoning District. The variances include the use of the parcel, the location of more than one building on a parcel, and the height of the buildings. The variance given for the height is 40 feet, plus or minus. In the applicant's Environmental Impact Statement, the applicant has stated a maximum height of 48 feet and 45 feet. I have spoken with the applicant concerning this issue and have determined that the height was not measured as the Zoning Ordinance requires. The Ordinance requires the height to be measured from the midpoint of the roof and the maximum height was determined from the highest point of the roof. The applicant is revising the height calculation. The Enviromental Impact Statement shows the hours of construction to be 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM. I have spoken with the applicant and informed him the hours of construction must begin no earlier than 8:00 AM according to City Ordinance. The applicant will address this issue. • I have requested that the applicant provide details of the internal walkways, the fencing around the pool area, and the fencing around the dumpsters. The applicant has agreed to PB Memorandum January 18, 2000-3 provide these to the Board. • We have received two comment sheets for this project. The Conservation Commission has stated that the applicant is required to file with the Commission. The applicant has filed and the project is under review with the Board. The Fire Department has submitted a comment sheet. I sent a letter to the applicant illustrating the comments received from the Fire Department and that letter has been attached for your convenience. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Planning Board. 3. Old/New Business Fafard Development Condominiums—Discuss Construction The developer of the Fafard Development Condominiums will be before the Board to answer questions pertaining to the construction at the site. • • Ctu of '�5ttlEm, fflttsoadj lsdis ' Planning PourD '- 2820 FES -? A. ;I: 0° One �$ttlem Great Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, February 3, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Public Hearing— Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments—205 Highland Avenue (7:30 PM—7:35 PM) 2. Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review—Jefferson At Salem— 190 Bridge Street(7:35 PM—7:40 PM) 3. Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—K-8`" Grade School—77 Willson Street (7:40 PM—8:30 PM). 4. Continuation of Public Hearing—Definitive Subdivision Plan—Extension of Scenic Way (8:30 PM—9:00 PM) 5. Old/New Business (9:00 PM-9:10 PM) TMI nctlee posted on 'Ofllclal Bulletin Board" Clq Well Ave., Salem, Mass. on FEB 39 2 000 sI 11" 0q Q^ pp��, =orris XG %Vhh (dap• 28A & 239 Of hA-L. Chi#y of "Sttfm, gassadjustfle • , '., Planning Pattrb QDnr Salem (Green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: February 1, 2000 RE: Agenda—February 3, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed onthe attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments—205 Highland Avenue The applicant has requested a continuance to the next regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting. 2. Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review—Jefferson At Salem — 190 Bridge Street The applicant has requested a continuance to the next regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting. 3. Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—K-8 1h Grade School— 77 Willson Street The Planning Board will open a public hearing Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request the Salem School Department for the property located at 77 Willson Street. The proposed project includes the construction of a new kindergarten through eighth grade school. The building will consist of approximately 99,500 square feet of space, with the footprint of the building consisting of approximately 40,000 square feet. There are two parking areas proposed for the site consisting of 75 spaces each. The school is proposed to house approximately 630 students with associated teachers and staff. The applicant has held many meetings with both the public and the school building • committee to discuss the plans. In addition, the Conservation Commission has reviewed the plans and approved the Notice of Intent. PB Memorandum January 18,2000-2 Dan Tuberty of Earl Flansburgh and Associates will be present at the meeting to present the • plans. 4. Continuation of Public Hearing—Definitive Subdivision Plan —Extension of Scenic Way The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing for the application made by Town and Country Homes, Inc. for a Definitive Subdivision Plan to allow the construction of a cul-de-sac at the end of Scenic Way and associated utilities to service the construction of four(4) single family dwellings on January 13, 2000. The proposed development is located at the end of Outlook Avenue (an unimproved way) and at the end of Scenic Way. The proposed development is located within the R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zoning District. The applicant presented a preliminary subdivision plan to the Board at its October 7, 1999 meeting. The Board reacted favorably to the plan. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance for this project with respect to lot frontage, lot width, and lot area. The Zoning Board of Appeals decision has been attached for your convenience. The proposed development is located in close proximity to a Wetlands Resource Area and will require a filing of a Notice of Intent with the Salem Conservation Commission. As of this time, the applicant has not filed a Notice of Intent application. The Planning Board discussed drainage issues, utility work, blasting and sidewalk construction pertaining to the project. • The Board discussed the requested waiver to not construct a sidewalk for the project. The Board requested that the applicant review the possibility of constructing a sidewalk for the length of Scenic Way. The applicant will report its findings to the Board on Thursday. The Board questioned whether a street light was required in the cul-de-sac and requested that the City Electrician be contacted for his recommendation. I have not yet been able to meet with the City Electrician, but will prior to the Board meeting and will report back to the Board on Thursday. In addition, the applicant will present information pertaining to this issue. The Board discussed the issue of providing a landscape island in the cul-de-sac. The applicant stated that this was in their plans and will present an elevation of the island at the Board's next meeting. In addition, the Board discussed the possible restoration of Scenic Way following construction of the subdivision. The applicant agreed that this will happen and it will be made a condition of their decision. There are no street trees shown on the plan, thus the Planning Board may wish to request several trees to be planted on the site adjacent to the roadway. Revised plans have been submitted for the Board's review. In addition, a draft decision has • been included in the packet for the Board's review. of "itt1Em, cvassarl�usrtts Manning Poartb One �$alrm (6reen 'c -0 Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, February 17, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. L- C f-7- Walter B. Power, III Chairman Tentative Agenda: • 1. Approval of Meeting Minutes—December 2, 1999 and January 13, 2000 (7:30 PM —7:45 PM) 2. Continuance of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments— 205 Highland Avenue (7:45 PM—9:OOPM) 3. Continuance of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Bowditch School - K-8 1h Grade School—77 Willson Street(9:00 PM—9:30 PM) 4. Old/New Business (9:30 PM—9:45 PM) This notice posted on "OtVicisl BUIIletin Board" Cltr Hall Av©., Salem, Mass. on at f�,;j lJj�l is �: . : arh Eg B Z �# 2000 23A A 238 of M.G.L. , ape 39 See. ai#>u ofSttlem, ]Htt�sttrl�usk�##s One MemI(�'xeen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: February 14, 2000 RE: Agenda—February 17, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments—205 Highland Avenue The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing at the request of Autumn Development Company, Inc. for the property located at 205 Highland Avenue at its February 3, 2000 meeting. The applicant requested a continuance and the Planning Board voted to continue the project to its February 17, 2000 meeting. The proposed project includes the demolition of the former Vincent's Potato Chip plant currently located on the site and the construction of five multi-family residential structures, each with 24 units, for a total of 120 units on site. In addition, the plan shows an outdoor swimming pool, and a clubhouse to be constructed on the site. The property will have the parking for 180 vehicles, with 6 handicap parking spaces on site. There has been no traffic study submitted with the application. In speaking with the applicant, the applicant has determined that the traffic impact on both Highland Avenue and First Street will be minimal. The applicant has received a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the project. The parcel is located in the B-2 (Commercial) Zoning District. The variances include the use of the parcel, the location of more than one building on a parcel, and the height of the buildings. The variance given for the height is 40 feet, plus or minus. In the applicant's Environmental Impact Statement, the applicant has stated a maximum height of 48 feet and 45 feet. I have • spoken with the applicant concerning this issue and have determined that the height was not measured as the Zoning Ordinance requires. The Ordinance requires the height to be measured from the midpoint of the roof and the maximum height was determined from the PB Memorandum February 14,2000-2 highest point of the roof. The applicant is revising the height calculation. • The Enviromental Impact Statement shows the hours of construction to be 7:00 AM to 5:00 PM. I have-spoken with the applicant and informed him the hours of construction must begin no earlier than 8:00 AM according to City Ordinance. The applicant will address this issue. I have requested that the applicant provide details of the internal walkways, the fencing around the pool area, and the fencing around the dumpsters. The applicant has agreed to provide these to the Board. We have received two comment sheets for this project. The Conservation Commission has stated that the applicant is required to file with the Commission. The applicant has filed and the project is under review with the Board. The Fire Department has submitted a comment sheet. I sent a letter to the applicant illustrating the comments received from the Fire Department and that letter has been attached for your convenience. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Planning Board. The site plan and associated materials for this project was included in your January 20, 2000 packet. That meeting was cancelled. 2. Continuance of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Bowditch School - K-811' Grade School—77 Willson Street The Planning Board opened a public hearing regarding Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the • City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request the Salem School Department for the property located at 77 Willson Street. The proposed project includes the construction of a new kindergarten through eighth grade school. The building will consist of approximately 99,500 square feet of space, with the footprint of the building consisting of approximately 40,000 square feet. There are two parking areas proposed for the site consisting of 75 spaces each. The school is proposed to house approximately 630 students with associated teachers and staff. The applicant has held many meetings with both the public and the school building committee to discuss the plans. In addition, the Conservation Commission has reviewed the plans and approved the Notice of Intent. At the Board's February 3, 2000 meeting, the following issues were discussed: • The relocation of the overhead electric lines. The lines are currently restricting the use of the site due to how low the lines are. The Board suggested that the applicant review the issue of relocating the lines either with the Bowditch School project or with the High School project. This would allow the developer to utilize more of the site. • There are two existing parking lots at the High School site. There are not connected to one another. The Board requested that the applicant review the two parking lots to see if a connection could be made. A connection would allow a visitor who is looking for is parking to be able to go between the two parking lots without having to enter the circulation pattern of the site. PB Memorandum February 14,2000-3 • • The Board requested explanation of the drainage calculations for both pre and post development. The applicant's civil engineer was not present, thus the proponent did not feel comfortable explaining the engineer's calculations. The applicant agreed to present the calculations at the Board's next meeting. In addition, the applicant submitted the revised grading plan and that plan has been included in your packet. • The Board requested that the applicant review the speeds on the access road and the possible need for an additional speed hump. Dan Tuberty of Earl Flansburgh and Associates will be present at the meeting to present the plans. • • ;a • p Plarutina �Buarb One �$ttlent &eert 2Wd FEB 20i 3q Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, March 2, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman Tentative Agenda: • 1. Approval of Meeting Minutes—December 2, 1999 and January 13, 2000 (7:30 PM— 7:40 PM) 2. Continuance of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (This project has not yet been discussed by the Planning Board) (7:40 PM—9:40 PM) 3. Continuance of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments— 205 Highland Avenue (9:40 PM — 10:40 PM) 4. Old/New Business (10:40 PM— 10:45 PM) J%W no&" poses on "Official Bull q�[� Board" Cltp Noll Ave., Salem, Mass. on FtB 2 9 2000 at II I '- I fl M! I� ==t&-AV �vM Chap. ^s9 Ser,:. aaA ` 10 of �II.Q.L. . s Ctu of '*a1Em, Htt sttrl�usx�##s Mne ,�$ttlem (great MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner& Salem Planning Department DATE: February 28, 2000 RE: Agenda—March 2, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing under Section 7-15, Planned Unit Development, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of JPI Apartment Development, L.P. and James V. D'Amico, Jr. for the property located at 190 Bridge Street. The proposed project includes the construction of six residential dwelling buildings of either three or four stories in height, with a pool and clubhouse integrated into the development; 1000 square feet of retail space within one dwelling building; a single retail store containing approximately 12,000 square feet of ground floor area; and an automated bank teller machine for vehicular and pedestrian use. The project will provide a total of 265 one or two bedroom apartments with associated parking facilities. In addition, the retail use and the automated bank teller machine will have associated parking. The proposed project does not require any approvals from the Zoning Board of Appeals, but is required to file for a Notice of Intent with the Conservation Commission. The Conservation Commission will hear the application at its March 9, 2000 meeting. The applicant is applying for approval under the Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the Site Plan Review sections of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. The PUD section of the • Ordinance has several requirements that need to be met in order to be eligible for application. The proposed project meets these requirements. The parcel is located in the Industrial (I) Zoning District, which is included as one of the eligible Zoning Districts. The parcel is 14.7 acres in size, thus meets the minimum lot size of 60,000 square feet. PB Memorandum February 28,2000-2 • The maximum bulk, yards, parking and loading requirements shall be established by the development plan approved by the Planning Board, thus the Board has the authority to approve the minimum requirements. The plan shows minimum front yards for most of the buildings in order to be in keeping with the Downtown. In addition, the applicant shows 1.6 parking spaces per residential unit. The Downtown Zoning District requires a minimum of 1.5 parking spaces per residential unit, thus the parking provided is in keeping with the Downtown. I have received three sets of comments from various departments concerning this project. The Board of Health heard the request at their February 15, 2000 meeting and approved the project. Fire Prevention provided the Planning Board with several issues pertaining to the project. I forwarded these issues to the applicant and the applicant has agreed to address these issues (a copy of what was sent to the applicant has been provided in your packet). The Engineering Department provided the Planning Board with a memorandum pertaining to the project and that has been provided in the Board's packet as well. The site is bordered by the MBTA railroad tracks. The site plan shows a bike path to be constructed adjacent to the tracks and several walking paths, which run from Bridge Street, through the site to sitting areas in close proximity to the tracks. The applicant's have expressed an interest in providing a crossing over the railroad tracks, but as of yet have not been able to come to an agreement with the MBTA. The Board may wish to discuss this • issue with the applicants at the hearing. The site plan provided in your packet shows the layout of the site, both with a roadway constructed by the applicant and the proposed Mass Highway roadway. The applicant has agreed to construct the temporary private roadway until the Mass Highway roadway is constructed. The alignment of the Mass Highway roadway has been determined by Mass Highway and its alignment cannot change. The roadway is at the 75% design stage with the Highway Department. 2. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments—205 Highland Avenue The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing at the request of Autumn Development Company, Inc. for the property located at 205 Highland Avenue at its February 3, 2000 meeting. The applicant requested a continuance and the Planning Board voted to continue the project to its February 17, 2000 meeting. The Planning Board heard the project at its February 17, 2000 meeting and continued the Public Hearing to its March 2, 2000 meeting. The proposed project includes the demolition of the former Vincent's Potato Chip plant currently located on the site and the construction of five multi-family residential structures, each with 24 units, for a total of 120 units on site. In addition, the plan shows an outdoor swimming pool, and a clubhouse to be constructed on the site. The property will have the parking for 180 vehicles, with 6 handicap parking spaces on site. • At the Board's March 2, 2000 meeting, the following issues were discussed: PB Memorandum February 28,2000-3 • • The Board discussed the emergency exit located adjacent to Highland Avenue. The plans did not show a gate or a difference in pavement. The Board requested that the applicant consider a gate in the area to limit traffic exiting the site from that egress. • The Board expressed concern pertaining to the view of the site from First Street. The concern dealt with the possibility of seeing the parking lot and the parked vehicles from First Street. The Board requested that the applicant provide a sightline for a vehicle travelling-on First Street. • The Board discussed the landscaping proposed adjacent to Highland Avenue. The Board had concerns pertaining to pedestrians entering the site through the landscaped area. The applicant suggested constructing a wire fence in the area to prevent access. The Board requested that the applicant provide additional information for their review pertaining to this issue. • The Board expressed a concern pertaining to vehicles driving over the wall located adjacent to First Street. The Board requested that the applicant provide a 10 inch curb adjacent to the wall to prevent vehicles from driving over the wall. • The Board discussed the number of parking spaces and their adequacy for multi-family housing. The applicant agreed to provide the Board with additional information on this issue. • • The Board discussed the possibility of a sidewalk on First Street. The applicant agreed to review this issue further. • The Board requested that the applicant review the possibility of a trail system or some type of passive recreation to the rear of the site. • The Board questioned how the issue of postal delivery would be handled. The applicant agreed to provide the Board with this information at its next meeting. • The Board questioned whether there was a sprinkler system proposed for the landscaped areas. The applicant stated that it wasn't, but that they would look into the issue further. I have requested that the applicant provide details of the internal walkways, the fencing around the pool area, and the fencing around the dumpsters. The applicant has agreed to provide these to the Board. Arty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Planning Board. • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, March 2, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, March 2, 2000 in the conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Weiner, Bill Cullen, John Moustakis, Chuck Puleo, Lee Harrington, Gene Collins, Bill Luster, and Carter Vinson. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Continuation of Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review - Jefferson at Salem - 190 Bridge Street Chairman Walter Power recognized Mayor Stanley Usovicz and invited him to address the Planning Board. Mayor Usovicz addressed the Planning Board and noted that this project is a defining project for the City of Salem. The reported that the city stands behind the project and has worked closely with the developer over the past year to work out the details of the project and the details of the proposed roadway. He noted • that they asked the developer to work around the proposed bypass road in an effort to move the project forward. He requested that Board review the project favorably and noted that this is a good project for the city. Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and introduced members of the development team. He noted that Mr. James D'Amico and representatives of JPI were present this evening to make a presentation. He noted that a traffic study has been prepared and the traffic engineer is not present at this meeting, but will be available for the next meeting. Atty. Correnti explained that this is a 12.76 acre site that runs from Woodbury Court to the Awning Shop on Bridge Street. He reviewed the history of the property and noted that they are proposing to construct luxury apartments, a retail use, a cafe and an ATM location. Atty. Correnti explained that JPI spent a lot of time developing the plans for the site and sought input from the city and the neighbors. He noted that Ward 2 Councillor Regina Flynn set up meetings to introduce the conceptual plans. Atty. Correnti also reported that they met with members of the Salem business community such as the Chamber of Commerce, The Salem Partnership and the Rotary. He stated that the '• developer realizes the importance of this project for the whole city. • Jack Englehart presented a slide presentation on JPI noting other projects that they have done and information about the company. Mr. D'Amico reviewed the plans for the project. He noted the site circulation for emergency vehicles, grading, storm drainage, which complies with the stormwater management regulations from DEP. He noted that there is an underground creek and they are working with the Engineering Department on the drainage system. He noted that they are planning on installing several stormwater management devices in accordance with DEP regulations. The landscaping plan was reviewed. It was noted that an emphasis is being placed on green space and the view of the corridors. Mr. D'Amico reviewed the lighting plan and noted that they are planning to use the city standards for lighting. Atty. Correnti reported that they have filed a Notice of Intent with the Conservation Commission, the ENF has been filed, and they are in the process of a Chapter 91-license review. • Walter Power opened the hearing up to public comment at this time. City Planner Patrick Raffert addressed the Board and stated that this is a very important project for the City. He noted that this site should be contributing to the community and that the project will generate $400,000 in tax money that they city sorely needs. Mr. Raffert stated that this will be a shot in the arm to the downtown and although there are a lot of engineering concerns those will be addressed by the city departments. Jim McIntosh of Woodbury Court addressed the Board and stated that he is opposed to an extension of Woodbury Court. He noted it is a narrow street and he is concerned about opening up a congested street. He requested that they take that out of the plan and intstall a safety gate there. Ward 2 Councillor Regina Flynn addressed the Board and thanked the developer for providing information to the neighbors, noting that four meetings were held and this is an enormous undertaking. She requested that the Board listen to the neighbors concerns regarding traffic, • 2 • historical significance, the character of the neighborhood and the impact that this will have on the neighbors. Former Mayor Tony Salvo addressed the Board and stated that while it is a good plan he feels that the city is putting the cart before the horse, referring to the bypass road. He noted that if the plans for the bypass road changes this plan will change too. Mr. LeClerc of 4 Lawrence Street addressed the Board and expressed his concern about surface parking, the proposed ATM facility, emergency access to Woodbury Court, and the bypass road. He noted that there is no design for the site and they should wait until the design for the bypass road has been finalized. He also expressed concern that the development does not meet the requirements of the PUD. Jack Cempellin of 8 Woodbury Court addressed the Board and expressed his concern about traffic and emergency access. He stated that he would • like to see a turnaround and parking area at the end of the street. Ian McLean of 28B Bridge Street addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the impact that the project will have on the Bridge Street neighborhood. He noted concerns about traffic and historic aesthetics. He also stated that the courthouses and the MBTA station should be taken into consideration as well. Mark Bannister of 16 Conant Street addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the use of parcel B for a retail use. He stated that he felt that it would impact the downtown adversely. Meg Twohey of the Federal Street Neighborhood Association addressed the Board and stated that they support the project but would like to see some changes that would affect the neighborhood. She stated that she did not think that this is a legal PUD and asked the Planning Board to look at that. She also requested that they look at making the development more consistent with the historic neighborhoods in the area. Ms. Twohey also noted that green space is a concern and they are opposed to the stand alone retail use proposed on the site. • 3 • Robert Blenkhorn addressed the Board and stated that he grew up in that neighborhood and he is not opposed to the project, but they should wait until the plans for the bypass road are finalized. Jim Day of 1 Dalton Parkway addressed the Board and asked if any of the apartments would be subsidized. Atty. Correnti stated that they would be luxury apartments and there would be no subsidized housing. Barbara Anderson of 15 Northey Street addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned that the site being developed is in a highly populated area. Barbara Cleary of 104 Federal Street addressed the Board and presented a letter from the neighbors on Bridge Street and Boston Street, a group that formed to look at projects that affect their neighborhoods. She commended the developer for their willingness to meet with the neighbors and noted that they have made changes to the original plans at the request of the neighbors. Mark McQueen of Beverly addressed the Board and asked them to consider the needs of the constituents that lack affordable housing. Staley McDermott of 30 Dearborn Street addressed the Board and expressed his concern that the JPI community should be integrated with the Salem community. He cautioned that the amenities that are planned for the development could impact existing Salem business. He also stated that he felt that an ATM was inappropriate for the site. David Hart of 104 Federal Street addressed the Board and noted that this is a very desirable site and congratulated the developer for taking the necessary planning steps to make this a good site, but it could be better. He stated that he would like the site to look a little more urban. He also stated that they need to look at the Washington Street Circle, the overpass and Route 114. David Hart requested to make a 10 minute presentation at the next meeting from a neighborhood point of view. Walter Power agreed that Mr. Hart could make the presentation. David Pelletier addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the project. He expressed concern about the transportation corridor and the five mile study that is being done. He noted that there are • 4 • transportation issues and the proposed parking garage at the MBTA site which is a defining piece of the downtown. James Savey of Andrews Street addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about pedestrian traffic. He suggested that a pedestrian foot bridge overhead near the former Salem Jail would be a good landing. Richard Pabich of Winter Island Road addressed the Board and expressed his support for the project. He noted that the site has been an eye sore and he appreciates what the developer is trying to do, and noted that a project of this quality will be a benefit to the city. Charlie Reardon of Bridge Street and a member of the Disabilities Commission expressed concern that an overhead foot bridge would not be convenient for handicapped people. Ward 7 Councillor Joe O'Keefe addressed the Board and noted that there is a memo from DEP regarding the parking area. Atty. Correnti stated that ENF plan has been filed to start the process that will address the issues that DEP has. He also noted that they are in the MEPA process as well. Mr. O Keefe requested copies of the comments that were made by • the city and the neighborhoods regarding the project. He also congratulated the developer on the process they have taken to include the neighbors. Mr. O Keefe also stated that he did not think that the ATM was appropriate for the site. Councillor At Large Arthur Sargent addressed the Board and stated that he would like to make sure that the project will blend with the old residential and the new residential areas. He also stated that he did not think that an ATM was a good idea for the site. Walter Power noted that he has letters of support for the project from City Planner Patrick Raffert, Council President Kevin Harvey, and Chamber of Commerce Director Ellen DiGeronimo. There being no further questions or comments on the project at this time, a motion was made by Bill Cullen to continue the public hearing to March 16, 2000, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. Approval of Minutes • 5 • The minutes of the meetings of December 12, 1999 and January 13, 2000 were presented for approval. Motion made by Lee Harrington to approve the minutes of the December 12, 1999, and January 13, 2000 as submitted, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review Special Permit - Ridgeside Apartments - 205 Highland Avenue Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and recalled that at the last meeting the Board had a list of concerns regarding the project and they would address them this evening. Phil Coleran and Carole Johnson the Landscape Architects for the project reviewed the plans for landscaping and sidewalks. They noted that they looked at the sight lines at First Street and the inclusion upgrading the sidewalk to connect First Street for pedestrian access. Carter Vinson stated that he was under the impression that the sidewalks would be enhanced. Bill Luster stated that he thought that the photograph of the area seems to contradict what he thought the sight lines would be. • Walter Power stated that the sidewalks should be delineated from the street and the only way to do that is with granite curbing. Carter Vinson agreed and encouraged the developer to consider enhancing the sidewalks. Atty. Correnti noted that First Street is a public street and he would talk to the City Engineer and the Planning Department and look into what can be done about the sidewalks. Chuck Puleo asked if curbing has been addressed for the interior parking areas. Atty. Correnti stated that they would using concrete curbing on the interior of the site. The lighting plan was reviewed by the developer. It was noted that the lights are designed to cut off glare. Mr. Corcoran explained that the landscaping would have to be irrigated but an irrigation plan has not yet been designed. He also noted that postal delivery would be done with a central mail system in the clubhouse. • Trash will be handled by the tenants with the use of trash dumpsters. 6 • Cater Vinson asked how frequent the trash pickups would be. Mr. Corcoran stated that they would be twice weekly and more if necessary. Carter Vinson stated that he was concerned that if it is not monitored the common dumpster would be a mess. Bill Cullen asked what the treatment of the emergency exit on Highland Avenue would be. Mr. Corcoran stated that it would sloped concrete curbing. Mr. Cullen also asked about the signage for the property. Walter Power stated that he would like to see a carved wood sign. Mr. Corcoran agreed noting that they want the signage to attract people to the development. Carter Vinson suggested that he would like to see something on the Highland Avenue side that would prevent access from Highland Avenue to the site. Mr. Corcoran stated they would probably use some fencing covered with vegetation. They will work on that and report back to the Board. Walter Power suggested that he would like to see some kind of open space in the form of a nature trail for the residents which would be used • by the residents for passive recreation. He asked the developer to look into that. Atty. Correnti reported that they looked into that and it looks as if the area could be dangerous. Bill Cullen noted that if that is the case and the area may be dangerous, the developer should look into barricading the area to prevent people from getting up there. Bill Luster asked if the developer has a similar property that they have built that he could go and take a look at. He also suggested that parking should be looked at. Atty. Correnti stated that they have a total number of spaces of 180 which is 1.5 per unit and they are comfortable with that, and it meets the requirements for parking. Ward Three Councillor Joan Lovely addressed the Board and requested that the developer plan some deciduous trees along the First Street side of the property to soften the view. Ward Seven Councillor Joe O Keefe addressed the Board and questioned the adequacy of the fire access. He suggested that they consider a right and left turn on Highland Avenue. • The Planning Board scheduled a site visit for March 11, 2000 at 9:00 • a.m. There being no further questions or comments regarding this project at this meeting, a motion was made by Bill Cullen to continue the public hearing to March 16, 2000, 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 John Moustakis to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB030200 • • 8 V6 . ftp of 6aiem, ,A.a9;5acbu.qett.51\ . i3lanning 36oar0 One .4balem Oreen Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, March 16, 2000 at 7:00 PM, in the second floor of Old Town Hall located in Derby Square. ,- Tl Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuance of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street(7:00 PM— 8:30 PM) 2. Continuance of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review—Ridgeside Apartments—205 Highland Avenue (8:30 PM—9:30 PM) 3. Old/New Business (9:30 PM— 10:00 PM) Fafard Discussion This notice frostfld on "Otf!0121 90otin Boefd" City Hail Ave., Salem, E-.Hass. on ,LIAR 13 2000 23A A 233 of ki.G.L. /� � One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 Cttp of 4*alem, '41aq!5aCbU!6ett2; • Planning 39uarb (One &alem Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: March 13, 2000 RE: Agenda—March 16, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem — 190 Bridge Street The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 7-15, Planned Unit Development, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of JPI Apartment Development, L.P. and James V. D'Amico, Jr. for the property located at 190 Bridge Street on March 2, 2000. The proposed project includes the construction of six residential dwelling buildings of either three or four stories in height, with a pool and clubhouse integrated into the development; 1000 square feet of retail space within one dwelling building; a single retail store containing approximately 12,000 square feet of ground floor area; and an automated bank teller machine for vehicular and pedestrian use. The project will provide a total of 265 one or two bedroom apartments with associated parking facilities. In addition, the retail use and the automated bank teller machine will have associated parking. At the Planning Board's March 2, 2000 meeting, the Board heard many comments from the residents in the audience. The following is a listing of those comments received: 1. The applicant, at the neighbors request, extended Woodbury Court and provided several parking spaces. A neighbor stated at the Public Hearing that he was not if favor of the extension of Woodbury Court or the additional parking. Another neighbor stated that he was in favor of the extension and parking and that the improvements were vitally needed. • If the Planning Board were to determine that the extension of Woodbury Court is appropriate, I ask that the Board require the developers to address their expectation as to One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum February 28,2000-2 whether the extension in public or private, in other words who will be maintaining the • extension. 2. Several residents expressed their concerns pertaining to the developers pursuing Planning Board approval prior to the completion of the construction of the connector road. This is the developer's option and risk to apply prior to construction of the connector road. The Planning Board has the purview to review the proposed location as stated by the State and ensure that the proposed project is in keeping with that location, but the Board cannot require the developer to hold off his application until the completion of construction. 3. The residents expressed their concerns pertaining to traffic in the area and this project's effect on it. 4. Several residents expressed the desire to have the buildings located on Parcel A to be smaller and owner occupied. In addition, the residents requested less parking to be provided on Parcel A. 5. A resident expressed his concern with the proposed location for the entrance to the retail lot. 6. A resident expressed a concern as to whether the project was a legal Planned Unit • Development. I have reviewed this question and it is my determination that as the requirements are written in the Salem Zoning Ordinance for a Planned Unit Development, this project meets those criteria. 7. A resident requested that the Board review the site in conjunction with the possible development in the area, such as the connector road, the courthouse, and the MBTA parking garage. 8. A resident expressed a concern that there was not enough open space proposed for the project. 9. Several residents expressed that they are opposed to any stand alone commercial use on the site, including both the ATM parcel and the retail parcel proposed adjacent to the MBTA site. 10. A resident expressed concern of the services located on the site, such as the health club and the theater. The resident recommended that these facilities be removed from the site so that the residents of the complex will utilize the downtown facilities. 11. Several residents expressed opposition to the ATM parcel. They stated that they felt the use was not in keeping with pedestrian feel of the downtown area. • 12. A resident recommended that the parking proposed on the site be reduced to allow for more open space. PB Memorandum February 28,2000-3 13. A resident expressed that the snow storage provided on the site is not adequate because it • is proposed to be located in the same location as the connector road. 14. Several residents recommended that the Board request plans, which show an elevation of the site from several surrounding properties and streets, such as St. Peters Street and Bridge Street. 15. A resident questioned whether there was handicap access over the railroad tracks. The following is some additional information for the Planning Board to be aware of: The applicant is applying for approval under the Planned Unit Development (PUD) and the Site Plan Review sections of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. The PUD section of the Ordinance has several requirements that need to be met in order to be eligible for application. The proposed project meets these requirements. The parcel is located in the Industrial (I) Zoning District, which is included as one of the eligible Zoning Districts. The parcel is 14.7 acres in size, thus meets the minimum lot size of 60,000 square feet. The maximum bulk, yards, parking and loading requirements shall be established by the development plan approved by the Planning Board, thus the Board has the authority to approve the minimum requirements. The plan shows minimum front yards for most of the buildings in order to be in keeping with the Downtown. In addition, the applicant shows 1.6 parking spaces per residential unit. The Downtown Zoning District requires a minimum of • 1.5 parking spaces per residential unit, thus the parking provided is in keeping with the Downtown. The site is bordered by the MBTA railroad tracks. The site plan shows a bike path to be constructed adjacent to the tracks and several walking paths, which run from Bridge Street, through the site to sitting areas in close proximity to the tracks. The applicant's have expressed an interest in providing a crossing over the railroad tracks, but as of yet have not been able to come to an agreement with the MBTA. The Board may wish to discuss this issue with the applicants at the hearing. The comment letters which were submitted to the Board at the last meeting has been included in the packet. In addition, as the Board requested, the letters the City received as comment on the MEPA process have been included. 2. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Ridgeside Apartments —205 Highland Avenue The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing at the request of Autumn Development Company, Inc. for the property located at 205 Highland Avenue at its February 3, 2000 meeting. The applicant requested a continuance and the Planning Board voted to continue the project to its February 17, 2000 meeting. The Planning Board heard the project at its February 17, 2000 and its March 2, 2000 meeting and continued the Public Hearing to its March 16, 2000 meeting. • The proposed project includes the demolition of the former Vincent's Potato Chip plant currently located on the site and the construction of five multi-family residential structures, 8 PB Memorandum February 28,2000-4 each with 24 units, for a total of 120 units on site. In addition, the plan shows an outdoor • swimming pool, and a clubhouse to be constructed on the site. The property will have the parking for 180 vehicles, with 6 handicap parking spaces on site. At the Board's March 16, 2000 meeting, the following issues were discussed: • The Board discussed the emergency exit located adjacent to Highland Avenue. The plans did not show a gate or a difference in pavement. The Board requested that the applicant consider a gate in the area to limit traffic exiting the site from that egress. The applicant agreed to provide a slanted curb in the area with porous pavement. In addition, the applicant agreed that if this does not deter residents and visitors from exiting the site in this area, they will construct a gate. This issue has been addressed in the draft decision. • The applicant present a plan which showed the view from First Street. It was determined that a person driving by on First Street would not see the parking. • The Board discussed the landscaping proposed adjacent to Highland Avenue. The Board had concerns pertaining to pedestrians entering the site through the landscaped area. The applicant suggested constructing a wire fence in the area to prevent access. This issue has been addressed in the draft decision. • • The Board discussed the number of parking spaces and their adequacy for multi-family housing. The applicant provided the Board with information which showed that the number of parking spaces provided on the site were a minimum of what the applicant needed to make the site work. • The Board discussed the possibility of a concrete sidewalk and vertical granite curbing on First Street. The applicant agreed to review this issue further. • The Board requested that the applicant review the possibility of a trail system or some type of passive recreation to the rear of the site. • The Board questioned how the issue of postal delivery would be handled. The applicant stated that postal delivery will occur in the club house. This issue has been included in the draft decision. • The Board questioned whether there was a sprinkler system proposed for the landscaped areas. The applicant agreed to construct an irrigation system for the landscaping. This issue has been included in the draft decision. • The Board requested that the applicant provide details of the internal walkways, the fencing around the pool area, and the fencing around the dumpsters. The applicant has • provided these and they have been included in the Board's packet. PB Memorandum February 28,2000-5 3. Old/New Business • Atty. Joseph Correnti will be available to answer questions of the Board concerning this project. The following is a list of possible issues that the Board may want discuss with Atty. Correnti: • The landscaping proposed for the rip-rap slope located on Swamscott Road • The landscaping proposed for the toe of the slope. • Construction clean-up on Swampscott Road, particularly between the two slopes. • Additional landscaping in between the two slopes on Swampscott Road. • The rip-rap slope on First Street. The bottom of the slope has been faced with small rocks when larger boulders are appropriate. Please add any comments you may have to the discussion. • • HE Citp of *alem, Aam6acbmattg =1=�c� •J a f a Manning �3oarb One Salem green Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, April 6, 2000 at 7:00 PM, in the second floor of Old Town Hall located in Derby Square. W,R , 8rA*1 IT Walter a Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuance of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson eview—Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street(7:00 PM—8:30 PM) 2. Form A Subdivision— 104 Lafayette Street(8:30 PM— 8:45 PM) 3. Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage—7-17 Thomas Circle (8:45 PM—9:30 PM) 4. Old/New Business (9:30 PM—9:40 PM) T15b no"" POSW On '0411cl2l Bulletin board" off, Nall AWS., Salam, Mass. on APR 32000 omuW108 W* chap. • One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 • ���` Citp of 6alem, Alazzarbuotto Planning A3oarb (One �&alent Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: April 3, 2000 RE: Agenda—April 6, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 7-15, Planned Unit Development, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of JPI Apartment Development, L.P. and James V. D'Amico, Jr. for the property located at 190 Bridge Street on March 2, 2000. The proposed project includes the construction of six residential dwelling buildings of either three or four stories in height, with a pool and clubhouse integrated into the development; 1000 square feet of retail space within one dwelling building; a single retail store containing approximately 12,000 square feet of ground floor area; and an automated bank teller machine for vehicular and pedestrian use. The project will provide a total of 265 one or two bedroom apartments with associated parking facilities. In addition, the retail use and the automated bank teller machine will have associated parking. The request was continued from the Board's March 2, 2000 and the March 16, 2000 meetings, to its April 3, 2000 meeting. At the Board's March 16, 2000 meeting, the Board had many comments and suggestions. In addition, the Board requested that a list of the issues stated by both the Board and the residents be provided. I have been working with Atty. Joseph Correnti to ensure that the listing is complete and that list will be provided to the Board at the April 3, 2000 meeting. The applicant will be presenting revised plans to the Board for your comment. These plans should address many of the issues discussed by the Board and the residents. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum April 3,2000-2 J* 2. Form A Subdivision— 104 Lafayette Street The Form A subdivision is for the lot located at 104 Lafayette Street. The lot is zoned B-5. The B-5 Zoning District does not have setback or parking requirements for existing buildings. The plan shows the lot at 104 Lafayette Street, which currently runs through the brick garage and down to Lafayette Street. The plan proposes to remove the back property line so that 104 Lafayette Street(Lot#2) is just the building and the rest of the lot will be transferred to the rear lot(Lot#1). This plan cleans up the situation of that the lot line currently runs through the brick garage building. This plan is appropriate for the Board's signature. 3. Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage—7-17 Thomas Circle The Planning Board will open a public hearing for all interested parties at the request of Nondas Lagonakis for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the parcel located at 7-17 Thomas Circle to be subdivided into four(4) lots. The four lots are approximately 11,200 square feet in size with approximately 60 feet of frontage each. The lots are zoned both R-1 (Single Family Residential) and B-2 (Commercial). Most of the lots are zoned Single Family Residential and the houses are proposed to be constructed within the Single Family Zone. The developer requested minimum lot size and frontage variances for the lots from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board of Appeals did not vote on the request and directed the applicant to apply with the Planning Board, thus there are no variances approved for the four lots. The applicant is requesting a Waiver from Frontage, which will be followed by a Form A subdivision. The Form A subdivision process as opposed to the Form C (Definitive Subdivision Plan) process because there is no additional right of way required to be constructed for access to the lots. The Waiver from Frontage request allows the Board to make its decision based on whether the frontage size is adequate for access and services provided to the lots. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Board. • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, April 6, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 6, 2000 at Old Town Hall in Derby Square at 7:00 p.m. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Weiner, Bill Cullen, John Moustakis, Chuck Puleo (7:45 p.m.), Gene Collins, Lee Harrington and Bill Luster. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Members Absent: Carter Vinson Form A Subdivision - 104 Lafayette Street - Ouellete Realty Corn Atty. Scott Grover addressed the Board and explained that this Form A Subdivision is for the lot located at 104 Lafayette Street and is zoned B- 5. He noted that the B-5 zoning district does not have setback or parking requirements for existing buildings. The plan shows the lot at 104 Lafayette Street, which currently runs through the brick garage and • down to Lafayette Street. The plan proposes to remove the back property line so that 104 Lafayette Street (lot #2) is just the building and the rest of the lot will be transferred to the rear lot (lot #1). He noted that this plan cleans up the situation that the lot line currently runs through the brick garage building and it is appropriate for the endorsement of the Board. Bill Luster moved and Bill Cullen seconded a motion to approve the Form A Subdivision for 104 Lafayette Street. The motion was approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review - Jefferson at Salem - 190 Bridge Street Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and noted that this is the third public hearing that has been held and since the last meeting the developer has addressed the concerns of the neighborhood and the Planning Board. He introduced Jack Engler of JPI to review the plans for the Board. Mr. Engler addressed the Board and noted that they have met with the • City Planner and the Assistant Planner, members of Historic Salem Inc., 1 • and the Salem Historic Commission to review the plan. He noted that after the last meeting it was apparent that the ATM machine on the site was not a popular choice for the site and that has been taken out of the plan. He explained that the site of the proposed ATM location is now 2 story town homes with 2 bedrooms. He noted that he is doing some research before proposing the facades for the buildings. Mr. Engler stated that they are proposing an opportunity for the public to join the health club that is proposed for the site in an effort to bring the community into the site. Lee Harrington asked what the total reduction in units for the site would be with the changes in the plan. Mr. Engler stated that they have gone from 286 units to 266 units. Mr. Engler stated that he would like suggestions from the Board regarding the suggestion of a right turn only onto Bridge Street. David Weiner stated that he is concerned about the parking near the entrance to the property. • Walter Power asked if they looked at a suggested cross over to get to the MBTA station. Mr. Engler reported that they talked to the MBTA and provided for that in the plan should it get funded. Bill Luster stated that at some point the Planning Board needs to take a look at detailed scaled drawings of the site. He noted that he would like to spend time looking at the height of the buildings etc., and would like to have a working session on that at the next meeting. He noted that it looks like the developer has been responsive to the concerns that have been raised. John Moustakis suggested that the Board should have a site visit before the working session. Walter Power opened the meeting up to public comment at this time. Arnold Nadler of Walter Street addressed the Board and questioned the economic feasibility of rental properties as opposed to condos. Mr. Engler explained how they calculate the rents and noted that they specialize in apartments. He also noted that the townhouses proposed are close to the idea of a condo setting. • 2 • David Hart addressed the Board and noted that at the Conservation Commission meeting there was a question of the grades, noting that a portion of the property is in the 100 year flood zone. Mr. Engler explained the flooding on the site is due to a drain pipe problem and noted that they are proposing a sizable drainage system for the project. Mr. Hart referred to a letter received from MEPA March 3, 2000 . Atty. Correnti stated that they have met with Mass Highway and they will be addressing the issues raised by MEPA. Bill Luster asked for a timetable of when they see the process coming together. Atty. Correnti stated that the draft EIR is in the final stages and he expects that the process of the approvals of the Chapter 91 License, MEPA, Conservation Commission, and the State will go to the end of the summer. Barbara Cleary addressed the Board and noted that the developer has revised the plans in response to concerns raised by the neighbors. She asked that the neighborhood groups be given an opportunity to review the plans to look at the changes and the impact on the neighborhoods. • Staley McDermott addressed the Board and commended the developer for listening to the concerns of the neighbors. He explained the plan the way he views it to the Board. A resident of 1 Arbella Street addressed the Board and questioned the relationship of this project to the Mass Highway Department project. Atty. Correnti stated that they have met with Mass Highway and they are at the 75% design stage of their project and their plans are consistent with Mass Highways plans within a foot or a foot and a half. Walter Power noted that the MBTA parking area is filled by 7:30 a.m. Denise Sullivan reported that the city is working towards a new parking garage for the courthouse but that is a long way away. Bill Cullen noted that it would be up to the state to make a project for a garage fit with what is currently in the neighborhood when they get around to it, noting that it could take the state ten years and it should not affect the developer of this project. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O Leary addressed the Board and asked when they expect to decide it this project is in fact a PUD. Walter Power explained that the Board is considering the application as presented and • it is an application for a PUD. 3 • There being no further questions or comments regarding this project this evening, a motion was made by Bill Cullen to continue the public hearing seconded by Bill Luster. The Board discussed dates to continue the public hearing due to scheduling conflicts with the members. There was a consensus to continue to April 24, 2000 with a site visit at 6:00 p.m. Mr. Cullen amended his motion to continue the public hearing to April 24, 2000, seconded by Bill Luster and approved unanimously. Public Hearing - Waiver from Frontage - 7-17 Thomas Circle Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board on behalf of his client Nondas Langonakis. He explained that the applicant is requesting a waiver from frontage, which will be followed by a Form A subdivision as opposed to a Form C Definitive subdivision because there is no additional right of way required to be constructed to access the lots. Atty. Correnti explained that the lots are approximately 11,200 square feet in size with approximately 60 feet of frontage. The lots are R-1 and B-2 and most are zoned single family residential. The houses are proposed to be built within the single family zone. • Atty. Correnti explained that the applicant has applied for variances from the ZBA and they have continued the hearing because of concerns of the neighbors. Bill Luster clarified that the only action of the Planning Board is the requested waiver from frontage and then the applicant would have to go back to the ZBA for the variances. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O Leary addressed the Board and stated that he did not think that the project should be before two city boards at the same time. He requested that the Planning Board get an opinion from the City Solicitor. Bill Cullen questioned why the ZBA referred this to the Planning Board before acting on the variances. Atty. Correnti explained that the ZBA asked the applicant to come to the Planning Board to address utilities, and road width concerns that the neighbors raised. He noted that they were at the ZBA in September and it has been continued several times. • a • John Moustakis suggested that the Planning Board approve this waiver from frontage tonight and send them back to the ZBA. He noted that the applicant has to come back to the Planning Board for the Form A. Scott Petrowicz addressed the Board and explained that they intend to increase the pavement width that abuts the lots to 20 feet. He also explained that they are proposing improvements to the water main on Highland Avenue and connect the four lots to the sewer behind the lots. Walter Power read a letter from City Engineer Stan Bornstein and reviewed his comments and suggestions for the plan. Walter Power asked if there would be any merit to making Thomas Circle one way, noting that it is something that the City Council would have to address and would go along with it if the neighbors agree. Mr. Power noted that he has concerns about the width of the road and the Planning Board would be derelict in their responsibilities by not addressing that. Walter Power opened the hearing for public comment at this time. • Jane Guy of 2 Thomas Circle addressed the Board and read a prepared statement which is attached to these minutes. Alexandria Adamo of 19 Thomas Circle addressed the Board and expressed her objections to the project. Susan Howland of 3-5 Thomas Circle addressed the Board and read a letter of opposition to the project from Mr. James Adamo. The letter is attached to these minutes. David Zissa of 310 Highland Avenue addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the overall congestion of that area of Highland Avenue. Richard Deschamps of 15 Crosby Street addressed the Board and stated that he is opposed to the project because it does not meet city requirements. Richard Williams of 3 Thomas Circle addressed the Board and read a prepared statement in opposition to the project. The statement is attached to these minutes. • 5 • Bill Cullen stated that he finds it difficult to vote on this matter one way or another due to the new information introduced. He stated that he felt that the matter should be addressed by the ZBA and suggested continuing the public hearing. Atty. Correnti addressed the Board and noted that they filed a legitimate requested for a variance with the ZBA and they were asked to address the road width, water and sewer and utilities. He noted that they spent several months developing the engineering plans for the project. He also noted that they met with the neighbors regarding the plans several times. He also noted that it would be economically unfeasible for the applicant to do the water and sewer repairs if they only build two lots as has been suggested. John Moustakis noted that it would be unfair to the developer if the project gets denied after having been forced to spend the money to develop the plans. Bill Luster noted that the safety of the road is a concern and he would like more information on the road. • Roberta Williams of 3 Thomas Circle addressed the Board and stated that the road is dangerous. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter this evening, Bill Luster moved and Lee Harrington seconded a motion to continue the public hearing to April 24, 2000 . The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting on April 24, 2000 will be held at One Salem Green. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Bill Luster to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB040600 • 6 Up of §Mlent, �a�gaC U!6't!tLLEz�,0,JpF�( s oFFICE SALEM. MA .. 3ptanning A3oarb ' One batem green 2000 APR 10 A l l: 3l NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF MEETING AND NOTICE OF NEXT MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board meeting scheduled to be held on Thursday, April 20, 2000, at 7:30 PM in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green has been canceled. The next Planning Board meeting will be held on Monday, April 24, 2000. Walter B. Power, III Chairman Thin nodes 0401stod on "Official Bulletin Board" City Nall Ave., Salem, Mass. on at //i 3 /l� to accord nae vAttl Chap. 39 See. 23A �. al M.G.L. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 Citp of *alem, Alag!5arbtt.5etq Manning Woarb ��rn�grA� (One &alem Oreen Gt; Notice of Meeting r� You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Monday, April 24, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor Conference Room at One Salem Green. s� 0 Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Site Visit: Jefferson At Salem—Bridge Street—6:00 PM Tentaiive Agenda: 1. Continuance of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site,Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (7:30 PM— 8:45 PM) 2. Continuation of Public Hearing— Waiver from Frontage—7-17 Thomas Circle (8:45 PM— 9:30 PM) 3. Amendment to Site Plan Review—The Bagel Place—296 Highland Avenue (9:30 PM— 10:00 PM) 4. Amendment to Site Plan Review— Stutz Volvo— 309 Highland Avenue (10:00 PM— 10:30 PM) 5. Old/New Business (10:30 PM— 10:40 PM) Request for time extension of the Cluster Development permit for the Salem Housing Authority subdivision on First Street • *'t►le notleo posted on °C°fletal Bulletin Lo.srd^ Clty Hall Ave., Salam, Mass. on2 � at .J"Id/F/yI � acca�~�o ,Wth Chomp 33A i 239 Of M..�.L. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 Citp of iWem, A1a9;2;arbU!5ett!5 • r o Manning �Ooarb One 9palem Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior PlannerlFt� Salem Planning Department DATE: April 18, 2000 RE: Agenda—April 24, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Site Visit—Jefferson At Salem The Planning Board will hold a site visit at the proposed Jefferson at Salem site at 6:00 PM. The developer will flag the site for the Board. We can meet at the entrance to the site on Bridge Street. 2. Continuation of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 7-15, Planned Unit Development, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of JPI Apartment Development, L.P. and James V. D'Amico, Jr. for the property located at 190 Bridge Street on March 2, 2000. The proposed project included the construction of six residential dwelling buildings of either three or four stories in height, with a pool and clubhouse integrated into the development; 1000 square feet of retail space within one dwelling building; a single retail store containing approximately 12,000 square feet of ground floor area; and an automated bank teller machine for vehicular and pedestrian use. The project provided a total of 265 one or two bedroom apartments with associated parking facilities. In addition, the retail use and the automated bank teller machine will have associated parking. The request was continued from the Board's March 2, 2000 and the March 16, 2000 • meetings, to its April 6, 2000 meeting. At the Board's April 6, 2000 meeting, the applicant presented revised plans, which addressed many of the Board's and citizens comments pertaining to the originally submitted plans. The revised plans show the main parcel with four residential buildings all located on the proposed by-pass and Bridge Street. The parcel One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 } PB Memorandum April 18,2000-2 • adjacent to Woodbury Court which contained two 24 unit multi-family residential buildings, now contains24 two story townhouse units, with a landscaped area located adjacent to Woodbury Court. The parcel, which contained the automated bank teller, now contains six two story townhouse units, which are accessed from Howard Street Extension. The parcel which contained the stand alone retail building, now contains a four story residential building on Bridge Street. Many of the buildings have been relocated on the site to assure that view corridors are kept. The retail space for the project was originally approximately 12,000 square feet. The revised plans contain approximately 8,500 square feet of retail space, which will be located in one of the main residential buildings. At the Board's April 6, 2000 meeting, the Board asked several questions concerning the revised plans, such as: • Can the entrances to the townhouse lots on Bridge Street be eliminated? This would allow access only from Howard Street Extension. • Can the main entrance to the site be made more inviting? Maybe by lessening the parking in front. • How close is the developer to providing access over the railroad tracks? • What stage is the State permitting process at this time? • . Can the developer provide parking calculations from other like projects? The Board determined at this meeting that it would hold a working session at its next meeting. There would be no public comment at the next meeting. The Board will take the time to address specific engineering type issues. The list of issues that was provided to the Board at your last meeting has been included in the packet. The Board can work off of this list for the working session. 3. Continuation of Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage—7-17 Thomas Circle The Planning Board opened a public hearing for all interested parties at the request of Nondas Lagonakis for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the parcel located at 7-17 Thomas Circle to be subdivided into four (4) lots. The four lots are approximately 11,200 square feet in size with approximately 60 feet of frontage each. The lots are zoned both R-1 (Single Family Residential) and B-2 (Commercial). Most of the lots are zoned Single Family Residential and the houses are proposed to be constructed within the Single Family Zone. The Planning Board discussed this project at its April 6, 2000 meeting. The Board received many letters discussing the number of lots, the access to the lots, and the utilities servicing the lots. The Board expressed concerns pertaining to the adequacy of Thomas Circle to • access the additional four lots. The Board discussed the options of the developer widening the entire length of Thomas Circle to 20-22 feet or removing a lot from the proposed subdivision. PB Memorandum April 18,2000- 3 • The City Engineer has verified that the utilities proposed are adequate to service the four lots, thus the Board determined that the remaining issue was access. The Board continued the Public Hearing with the expectation that the Board members would visit Thomas Circle and review the access issues associated with the development. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Board. 4. Amendment to Site Plan Review—The Bagel Place—296 Highland Avenue The Planning Board approved a site plan for The Bagel Place, located at 296 Highland Avenue, in April, 1995. The Board approved a building of approximately 4,500 square feet with 21 parking spaces, two being handicapped. The applicant is requesting to amend the site plan approval to allow the construction of a drive through. There will be no additional square feet constructed to the building nor will there be any loss of parking spaces. The drive through will be a window located on the northern side of the building. The parking lot circulation will be revised to allow drive through access. With the addition of the drive through, the flow in the parking lot is tight, but appears to be safe. A copy of the previously approved decision has been included in your packet. • 5. Amendment to Site Plan Review—Stutz Volvo—309 Highland Avenue A site plan was previously approved for Stutz Volvo located at 309 Highland Avenue. The applicant is requesting to amend the site plan to allow the utilization of an approximately 10,000 square foot building located in the rear of the site on Green Ledge Road. The building has been utilized as a welding service in the past. The applicant is requesting to rehabilitate the interior of the building to allow for the service station operations for the Volvo Dealership. In addition, a parking lot of approximately 82 parking spaces for automobile storage will be constructed. The utilization of the building is an expansion of the use of the site, thus triggers an amendment to the site plan review. The applicant shows access on Green Ledge Road, which is a paper street (City Right of Way). The applicant does not own the roadway, thus must develop it in a manner which is adequate to the City for a street. 6. Old/New Business Request for a Time Extension of the Cluster Development Permit for the Salem Housing Authority Subdivision on First Street The Salem Housing Authority is requesting a time extension on the Cluster Development Permit which was approved by the Planning Board December, 1998. The applicant is requesting a five year extension. • • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Monday, April 24, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Monday, April 24, 2000in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, Carter Vinson, David Weiner, John Moustakis, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Lee Harrington, and Bill Luster. Also present was Senior Planner Denise Sullivan. Members Absent: Bill Cullen Continuation of Public Hearing - Waiver from Frontage - 7-17 Thomas Circle Denise Sullivan noted that Councillor Leonard O'Leary has requested an opinion from the City Solicitor stating that the applicant must obtain a variance prior to the waiver from frontage. Carter Vinson suggested that the Board should continue this to May 4, • 2000 and receive the letter from the City Solicitor. Bill Luster recommended contacting the ZBA to let them know that the Board is waiting for that opinion. Denise Sullivan noted that if we find that the Board cannot vote on the waiver prior to the variance, we can send a letter informing the ZBA of our intentions. Carter Vinson moved and Bill Luster seconded a motion to continue the public hearing to May 4, 2000. The motion was approved unanimously. Request for Extension for Cluster Development permit for the Salem Housing Authority Subdivision on First Street Denise Sullivan explained that she had a request for a five year extension on the Cluster Development Permit for the Salem Housing Authority Subdivision on First Street. Walter Power expressed concern on the five year period for the extension and suggested that the Board grant a three year extension. • I • Motion made by John Moustakis to grant a three year extension for the Cluster Development Permit for the Salem Housing Authority Subdivision on First Street, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review - Jefferson at Salem - 190 Bridge Street Jack Englert addressed the Board and presented revised plans and perspectives showing the buildings. Carter Vinson noted that the improvements to the view corridors are great and asked if they have given any thought to eliminating the parking in front. Mr. Englert stated that he would like to keep the handicapped spaces but could forego the rest of the parking in front. David Wiener cautioned that they would not want cars cueing up on the bypass. John Moustakis asked the developer what the status of the bike path is. Mr. Englert stated that Mass Highway has agreed to give an easement to continue the path. • Walter Power asked about the crossing of the tracks. Mr. Englert stated that they are working with the MBTA, noting that they are willing, but not to pay. He noted that he would continue to work with the MBTA on this. Walter Power suggested that the Board review the issues sheet. 1 Does the traffic study consider the potential double decking of the MBTA parking lot? Mr. Englert stated that they have coordinated that in their plan. Atty. Correnti noted that with what is happening in court with the MBTA that may a long way off. Walter Power noted that he would like to prevent people from parking in their lot if there is a platform on Bridge Street. Mr. Englert stated that they are talking to the MBTA about a platform at the Bridge Street side. 2 Has the traffic engineer used "comparables" for comparisons to a socioeconomic analysis of number of cars etc. ? Mr. Englert stated that they like to be at 1.7, and they are down to • 1.5. He noted that downtown projects have 1.62. Walter Power 2 • asked if they were comfortable with that. Mr. Englert stated that they had a parking specialist look at it and it should work. He noted that the there are no three bedroom units so that will help. 3 Will the newly installed light signals have a full pedestrian cycle on Bridge Street? Mr. Englert noted that both the Bridge Street and St. Peter Street lights have a red cycle. 4 Does the plan provide vehicular and pedestrian access from the Woodbury Courtneighborhood? Mr. Englert stated that the resident who lives in the last house would submit letters that people do not want that. Walter Power noted that maybe they could lease some of the spaces in the lots for the neighbors and suggested that they take a poll of the neighbors. 8-9 Will the development worsen the drainage into the North River? • and Will the rate of discharge into the North River increase the risk of flooding into the estuary? Mr. Englert stated that there is no drainage now as the pipes are not performing. He explained that they are putting in a new 48 inch pipe which should alleviate flooding. JS stated that there may be flooding on Bridge Street for a 100 year event. Walter Power asked what event the site is designed for. Mr. Englert stated that they have not analyzed that yet, but it is adequate. Chuck Puleo asked if the drainage on Howard Street was adequate. JS stated that they have looked at the pipes and they appear to be working. Chuck Puleo asked how can we be sure that the rest of the surrounding drainage system works. JS stated that they can work with Mike Collins on that. 10 Can more green space be created behind the buildings closest to the neighborhoods? Mr. Englert stated that they have added a good amount of green space in that area. • 3 • 11 Has the grade separation between the site and the downtown been considered? Bill Luster asked the developer how the project will integrate and be part of the downtown. Mr. Englert stated that they are at grade next to the Awning Shopwith the walkways and there are many connections to the downtown. Bill Luster noted that the city needs to make it inviting for someone to get downtown and asked how we make the crossing friendly. Mr. Englert stated that maybe with the bypass, the green space left from the abandoned Bridge street, maybe a connection can be made there. Bill Luster asked if they could look at the townhouse parking and make Howard Street more like a street and suggested parallel parking. Mr. Englert stated that they will look at the townhouse parking and will eliminate the entrance on Bridge Street. 12 Does the plan meet the 50% open space goal? • Mr. Engler stated that the did meet the open space goal and they will provide a breakdown on that. 13 Has the Conservation Commission reviewed and approved these plans? Mr. Englert stated that they are before the Commission now. 14 Can Howard Street be extended to meet with Woodbury Court? No 26 Can the developer incorporate a "Monopoly" theme into the site? Bill Luster suggested that maybe Parker Brothers could help with that. Atty. Correnti stated that the old Parker Brothers sign has been preserved. Walter Power noted that we want something grand. Mr. Englert stated that he would work on that. 27 Is an independent retail site threatening to existing downtown retail? • 4 • Walter Power suggested that the retail be located in the building adjacent to the MBTA. Mr. Englert stated that they would look at that. Carter Vinson asked if it would be better to have all of the retail in the same building. John Moustakis asked about the court house. Denise Sullivan stated that the city is working on the concept. 30 Will the project have subsidized rental units? No 31 Will there be any ADA compliant units and appropriate parking? Yes. Mr. Englert noted that they are required to have a certain number of ADA units. 33 Is the proposed scale of the buildings comparable to that of the surrounding buildings to the site? Mr. Englert stated that they could better address that question when the computer model is done. 34 Does the plan have adequate snow storage? • Mr. Englert stated that any snow that will not fit in the snow storage areas would be taken off site. 35 How many school children are projected per 100 rental units? Mr. Englert stated that typically they have 6/ 100 with three bedroom units, and they are expecting 4. 36 What will the project generate in annual real estate taxes to the City of Salem? $400,000 37 Can the bypass road be relocated to its original design along the tracks? This is not an option. Walter Power opened the hearing up for public comment at this time. • 5 • Meg Twohey addressed the Board and asked if the Board would be looking at the elevations for the project. Walter Power assured her that the Board would be looking at that. Jim Treadwell addressed the Board and suggested that they should look at stabilizing the cemetery wall when Bridge Street is vacated. Mr. McLean asked if a left turn on Bridge Street would be allowed. Mr. Englert stated that he would think that people would use the entrance with the light more. Barbara Cleary addressed the Board and stated that they would like to see some grade in the grass area as well. Carter Vinson stated that he would like to discuss the possibility of the Bridge Street access having only a right turn out of the property. There being no further questions or comments regarding the Jefferson at Salem project this evening, a motion was made by Lee Harrington to continue the public hearing to May 4, 2000, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. • Amendment to Site Plan - The Bagel Place - 296 Highland Avenue Gary Nadeau addressed the Board and presented plans to the Board to amend his site plan for the Bagel Place. He explained that he is proposing to construct a drive through. He noted that there will be no additional square feet constructed to the building nor will there be any loss of parking spaces. He explained that the parking lot circulation will be revised to allow the drive through access. Carter Vinson asked to have the location of the easement noted. Mr. Nadeau stated that they agree that they would be too close with the drive through if he develops it. John Moustakis suggested using the rear of the building for the drive through. Mr. Nadeau stated that he agreed not to develop any more of the rear of the property. Carter Vinson recalled that when the Board reviewed this the concern was about a strip mall development. 6 • Chuck Puleo asked if they had the room to go in the back of the building. Mr. Nadeau stated that it would be very expensive. Carter Vinson suggested that the first 4 or 5 spaces could be used for employee parking. Bill Luster stated that he thought that it was a reasonable workable plan. Walter Power opened the hearing up for public comment at this time. Dick Williams of Thomas Circle addressed the Board and stated that he supports the plan and Mr. Nadeau has been a good neighbor. Councillor Arthur Sargent addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned about cars cueing up on Highland Avenue. Carter Vinson questioned how long it takes to fill an order. Mr. Nadeau stated that it takes 2 -3 minutes to fill an order. Walter Power noted that one of the things that the Board looks at is safety and questioned if this was safe. Bill Luster suggested that the Board continue this matter to look at it • and suggested that members take a look at the site. Motion made by Bill Luster to continue the matter to May 4, 2000, seconded by Carter Vinson and approved unanimously. Amendment to Site Plan Review - Stutz Volvo - 309 Highland Avenue Atty. Jack Keilty addressed the Board and explained the plan. He explained that the applicant is requesting to amend the site plan to allow the utilization of an approximately 10,000 s.f. building located in the rear of the site on Green Ledge Road. The building has been used as a welding service in the past and the applicant is proposing to rehabilitate the building to allow for the service station operations for the Volvo dealership. He noted that Green Ledge Road is a private piece of land. Carter Vinson stated that he thought it was a public way. John Moustakis stated that he would like to find out if it is a public way. Carter Vinson asked what they are doing to the road. Atty. Keilty stated that they met with Mike Collins and they are paving it to his standards. • • The Board had a discussion on whether this was a paper or private street. Carter Vinson suggested that curbing would be helpful. Atty. Keilty stated that Stutz would agree to do the curbing on his land. If it is a public way then the applicant would curb the day care center, however if it is private they will not do that. Walter Power reviewed the issues on the project. He suggested that they talk to the abutter and see if they can put in a berm. He also asked that they try to find out whether it is a public or private way, and to show a plan of how the access goes over the way. Motion made by Carter Vinson to continue the public hearing to May 4, 2000, seconded by David Weiner 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 Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB042400 Page 7 8 (�t++ { pr p�yy 1. 11.E SCO eit of6Alem' - . .•'•' r' rICE p �laggac�jit�ettg • � a 3planning jBoarb One Salem green Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, May 4, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor Conference Room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuance of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (7:30 PM—8:15 PM) 2. Amendment to Site Plan Review—The Bagel Place—296 Highland Avenue (8:15 PM— 8:45 PM) 3. Continuation of Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage—7-17 Thomas Circle (8:45 PM —9:15 PM) 4. Amendment to Site Plan Review—Stutz Volvo— 309 Highland Avenue (9:15 PM —9:45 PM) 5. Site Plan Review - 135-137 and 135-139 %z Boston Street and 3 and 7 Rawlins Street (9:45 PM - 10:30 PM) 6. Old/New Business (10:30 PM— 10:40 PM) • We nodes posted on "Official SUNPtin board" City Hall Ave., Salem, Mass. on -7�Iiti �cco at IC: 5u R rA. idi tiL`LY3iYZSYf;d� `ri''ti`: C gip. :� Sw,. 731 & 239 of M.G.L. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740.0404 Citp of Salem, Alazzarbugette; • n Planning 36oarb ar One balem Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Senior Planne�j Salem Planning Department DATE: May 1, 2000 RE: Agenda—May 4, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 7-15, Planned Unit Development, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of JPI Apartment Development, L.P. and James V. D'Amico, Jr. for the property located at 190 Bridge Street on March 2, 2000. The proposed project included the construction of six residential dwelling buildings of either three or four stories in height, with a pool and clubhouse integrated into the development; 1000 square feet of retail space within one dwelling building; a single retail store containing approximately 12,000 square feet of ground floor area; and an automated bank teller machine for vehicular and pedestrian use. The project provided a total of 265 one or two bedroom apartments with associated parking facilities. In addition, the retail use and the automated bank teller machine will have associated parking. The request was continued from the Board's March 2, 2000 and the March 16, 2000 meetings, to its April 6, 2000 meeting. At the Board's April 6, 2000 meeting, the applicant presented revised plans, which addressed many of the Board's and citizens comments pertaining to the originally submitted plans. The revised plans show the main parcel with four residential buildings all located on the proposed by-pass and Bridge Street. The parcel • adjacent to Woodbury Court which contained two 24 unit multi-family residential buildings, now contains24 two story townhouse units, with a landscaped area located adjacent to Woodbury Court. The parcel, which contained the automated bank teller, now contains six One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum May 1, 2000 - 2 • two story townhouse units, which are accessed from Howard Street Extension. The parcel which contained the stand alone retail building, now contains a four story residential building on Bridge Street. Many of the buildings have been relocated on the site to assure that view corridors are kept. The retail space for the project was originally approximately 12,000 square feet. The revised plans contain approximately 8,500 square feet of retail space, which will be located in one of the main residential buildings. At the Board's April 24, 2000 meeting, the Board reviewed the list of issues provided by the applicant. The Board determined that a majority of the issues were addressed by the applicant, but several issues still remain. The remaining issues are as follows: • During the site visit, a resident requested that fencing be provided on the parcel adjacent to the park located in close vicinity to Woodbury Court. • The issue of providing emergency access to Woodbury Court. I spoke with the Fire Department and they have agreed that emergency access in the form of grass pavers would be appropriate. • Several Board members have requested that the parking spaces located in the front of the main parcel be eliminated. The applicant agreed to review the issue and determine the number of spaces that could be eliminated from the area. • • A resident expressed concern with the type of parking located on Howard Street. The spaces are perpendicular to the roadway and therefore do not give the roadway and streetscape feel. The applicant agreed to review the parking and provide an alternate plan. • A resident expressed a concern pertaining to the entrance on Bridge Street and whether it could be right out only. The applicant agreed to review this issue. Due to the numerous projects on the Board's agenda for Thursday's meeting, the Board determined at its last meeting to discuss the elevations for the buildings. The applicant will present those elevations at the meeting. 2. Amendment to Site Plan Review—The Bagel Place—296 Highland Avenue The Planning Board approved a site plan for The Bagel Place, located at 296 Highland Avenue, in April, 1995. The Board approved a building of approximately 4,500 square feet with 21 parking spaces, two being handicapped. The applicant is requesting to amend the site plan approval to allow the construction of a drive through. At the Board's April 24, 2000, the Board expressed concerns pertaining to the proposed location of the drive through and whether it was a safe location for both the interior of the parking lot and Highland Avenue. The Board requested that the applicant review the location of the drive through and provide the Board with other options. The Board expressed • that the optimal location would be to locate the drive through behind the building with the window located to the south west of the building. PB Memorandum May 1, 2000 - 3 • The applicant has reviewed the option of locating the drive through to the rear of the building with the window to the south west of the building. The applicant has verified that this option can occur, without blasting any ledge and utilizing the existing pavement. The applicant proposes to remove a portion of the cooler, which will leave adequate space to locate a drive through around the rear of the building. The applicant will present these plans to the Board at the meeting. In addition, I have included a draft decision in the packet for your review. 3. Continuation of Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage—7-17 Thomas Circle The Planning Board opened a public hearing for all interested parties at the request of Nondas Lagonakis for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the parcel located at 7-17 Thomas Circle to be subdivided into four (4) lots. The four lots are approximately 11,200 square feet in size with approximately 60 feet of frontage each. The lots are zoned both R-1 (Single Family Residential) and B-2 (Commercial). Most of the lots are zoned Single Family Residential and the houses are proposed to be constructed within the Single Family Zone. The Planning Board discussed this project at its April 6, 2000 meeting. The Board received many letters discussing the number of lots, the access to the lots, and the utilities servicing the lots. The Board expressed concerns pertaining to the adequacy of Thomas Circle to • access the additional four lots. The Board discussed the options of the developer widening the entire length of Thomas Circle to 20-22 feet or removing a lot from the proposed subdivision. The City Engineer has verified that the utilities proposed are adequate to service the four lots, thus the Board determined that the remaining issue was access. At the Board's April 24, 2000 meeting, Councilor O'Leary addressed the Board and stated that he had spoke with the City Solicitor and confirmed that a letter was being drafted which addressed the issue of whether the applicant is required to obtain a variance for frontage prior to obtaining a waiver from frontage. I have not received this letter as of yet, but when it is provided to me, I will provide it to the Board. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Board. 4. Amendment to Site Plan Review—Stutz Volvo—309 Highland Avenue A site plan was previously approved for Stutz Volvo located at 309 Highland Avenue. The applicant is requesting to amend the site plan to allow the utilization of an approximately 10,000 square foot building located in the rear of the site on Green Ledge Road. The building has been utilized as a welding service in the past. The applicant is requesting to rehabilitate the interior of the building to allow for the service station operations for the • Volvo Dealership. In addition, a parking lot of approximately 82 parking spaces for automobile storage will be constructed. PB Memorandum May 1, 2000 - 4 The utilization of the building is an expansion of the use of the site, thus triggers an • amendment to the site plan review. The applicant shows access on Green Ledge Road. At the Board's May 4, 2000 meeting, the Board discussed the issue as to whether Green Ledge Road is a public right of way or a private way. The applicant's attorney presented evidence to the Planning Board which showed that the roadway was a private way. The Board requested that the City Solicitor provide the Board with a legal opinion as to whether Green Ledge Road is a public or private way. In addition, the Board expressed to the applicant that it would be appropriate for the applicant to provided asphalt berm curbing along Green Ledge Road to alleviate traffic issues. The applicant has agreed to construct the berm and it will be shown on the plan submitted to the Board at the meeting. In the packet, the Board will find a letter from Attorney Keilty to the owners of the daycare facility located on Green Ledge Road. The letter requests that the owners of the daycare facility contact Atty. Keilty concerning the possibility of the ashalt berm being located along their property line. As of the date of this memorandum, the owners of the daycare facility have not responded to Atty. Keilty. I have enclosed a draft decision in the packet which addresses this issue. 5. Site Plan Review - 135-139 '% Boston Street and 3 and 7 Rawlins Street • The Planning Board will open a public hearing under Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of Peter Copelas for the property located at 135-137 Boston Street, 139-139 '/2 Boston Street, 3 and 7 Rawlins Street. The proposed project includes the demolition of three (3) existing residential buildings containing a total of five (5) units and the construction of a new building containing eight(8) units. The building is proposed to be two stories. In addition, the plan shows the parking for 15 vehicles on the site. The project was submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals requesting several variances, including setbacks, parking, and use. The Zoning Board of Appeals did not make a decision on the application and requested that the applicant file with the Planning Board for site plan review. I have requested a letter from the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals explaining why the application has been forwarded to the Planning Board. I have not received this letter as of yet. I have received two comment sheets for this project. The first comment sheet is from the Conservation Commission. The Conservation Commission stated that a four foot minimum deep sump catch basin is required and included. 80% total suspended solids (TSS) should (but is not required) be achieved. All or most storm water is being shed from the site. Downstream flooding should be considered. • The second comment sheet is from Fire Prevention. There comments are as follows: A pre- demolition permit is required from Fire Prevention. A City master box is required and the applicant should contact the Fire Department for a box number. A full sprinkler system with PB Memorandum May 1, 2000 - 5 four inch Fire Department story connection. A full fire alarm system and a knox box is • required. I have reviewed the plans. The Board may wish to review the following issues. • It appears that the building may be too large for the lot. With the reduction of units, it may be possible for the front parking area to be converted to a landscaped area, with possibly which would be more in keeping with the Entrance Corridor. • The building is shown to have zero lot lines on Rawlins Street and the adjacent building. This type of setback is not in keeping with the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. • The entrance to the site located on Rawlins Street is twelve feet wide. This entrance may not be wide enough to provide for two way traffic. • There is no landscaping shown on the plan. • No building elevations have been submitted to the Board. • The Entrance Corridor Overlay District requires only one curb cut for each residential use. The site plan shows two, one on Boston Street and one on Rawlins Street. • Attorney Bill Quinn will be presenting the plans to the Planning Board. • Citp of 6alem, '4ja55arbUq;ett5 a Planning Noarb One sialent Green Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, May 18, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor Conference Room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III I \. Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage— 7-17 Thomas Circle (7:30 PM s — 8:00 PM) 2. Site Plan Review - 135-137 and 135-139 %: Boston Street and 3 and 7 Rawlins Street (8:00 PM - 8:45 PM) 3. Continuance of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (8:45 PM— 10:15 PM) 4. Old/New Business (10:15 PM— 10:20 PM) This notleo w-sWid an Bullc-.F'sn Board" City Hal`lpAva., 34alo;:t, �}<3 .�. MAY 1 6 2000 /i,10 /7/�/ .1. 2rr.Y 3li:Sly: 'rr c�� .rirLap. X Sian. 2K;A & 239 of M.G.L. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 Citp of 6alem, Aaaacbuatto • Planning �Boar0 e (One *alem Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Asst. City Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: May 16, 2000 RE: Agenda—May 18, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage—7-17 Thomas Circle The Planning Board opened a public hearing for all interested parties at the request of Nondas Lagonakis for a waiver from the frontage requirements of the Subdivision Control Law to allow the parcel located at 7-17 Thomas Circle to be subdivided into four (4) lots. The four lots are approximately 11,200 square feet in size with approximately 60 feet of frontage each. The lots are zoned both R-1 (Single Family Residential) and B-2 (Commercial). Most of the lots are zoned Single Family Residential and the houses are proposed to be constructed within the Single Family Zone. The Planning Board discussed this project at its April 6, 2000 meeting. The Board received many letters discussing the number of lots, the access to the lots, and the utilities servicing the lots. The Board expressed concerns pertaining to the adequacy of Thomas Circle to access the additional four lots. The Board discussed the options of the developer widening the entire length of Thomas Circle to 20-22 feet or removing a lot from the proposed subdivision. The City Engineer has verified that the utilities proposed are adequate to service the four lots, thus the Board determined that the remaining issue was access. • At the Board's April 24, 2000 meeting, Councilor O'Leary addressed the Board and stated that he had spoke with the City Solicitor and confirmed that a letter was being drafted which addressed the issue of whether the applicant is required to obtain a variance for frontage prior. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum May 16,2000-2 • to obtaining a waiver from frontage. A letter was received by the Planning Board from the City Solicitor which stated that the application could be heard and voted on by the Planning Board prior to the applicant obtaining a variance. At the Board's May 4, 2000 meeting, the Board discussed the possibility of the applicant widening the roadway to approximately 20 feet for its entirety. There were issues pertaining to the feasibility of widening a portion of the roadway. There was not sufficient right of way in one location. The Board continued the application and requested that the applicant work with the neighbors to resolve the issues pertaining to widening the roadway. I have included a draft decision in the packet for your review. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Board. 2. Site Plan Review - 135-139 '% Boston Street and 3 and 7 Rawlins Street The Planning Board opened a public hearing under Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of Peter Copelas for the property located at 135-137 Boston Street, 139-139 %2 Boston Street, 3 and 7 Rawlins Street. The proposed project includes the demolition of three (3) existing residential buildings containing a total of five (5) units and the construction of a new building containing eight (8) units. The building is proposed to be two stories. In addition, the plan shows the parking for 15 vehicles on the site. • The project was submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals requesting several variances, including setbacks, parking, and use. The Zoning Board of Appeals did not make a decision on the application and requested that the applicant file with the Planning Board for site plan review. I have requested a letter from the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals explaining why the application has been forwarded to the Planning Board. I have not received this letter as of yet. I have received two comment sheets for this project. The first comment sheet is from the Conservation Commission. The Conservation Commission stated that a four foot minimum deep sump catch basin is required and included. 80% total suspended solids (TSS) should (but is not required) be achieved. All or most storm water is being shed from the site. Downstream flooding should be considered. The second comment sheet is from Fire Prevention. There comments are as follows: A pre- demolition permit is required from Fire Prevention. A City master box is required and the applicant should contact the Fire Department for a box number. A full sprinkler system with four inch Fire Department story connection. A full fire alarm system and a knox box is required. The Board discussed the project at their May 4, 2000 meeting and gave the following comments: • • The Board questioned the massing of the building 0 The Board discussed the location of the electrical equipment PB Memorandum May 16,2000-3 • • The Board questioned the width of the parking lot entrance located on Rawlins Street • The Board discussed the proposed building material. The proposed elevations showed brick and the Board suggested clapboard may be more appropriate. • The Board requested that the applicant provide a landscaping plan for the next meeting I have included a draft decision for the Board's review. Attorney Bill Quinn will be presenting the plans to the Planning Board. 3. Continuation of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem — 190 Bridge Street The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 7-15, Planned Unit Development, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of JPI Apartment Development, L.P. and James V. D'Amico, Jr. for the property located at 190 Bridge Street on March 2, 2000. The request was continued from the Board's March 2, 2000 and the March 16, 2000 meetings, to its April 6, 2000 meeting. At the Board's April 6, 2000 meeting, the applicant presented revised plans, which addressed many of the Board's and citizens comments pertaining to the originally submitted plans. The revised plans show the main parcel with four residential buildings all located on the proposed by-pass and Bridge Street. The parcel adjacent to Woodbury Court which contained two 24 unit multi-family residential buildings, • now contains24 two story townhouse units, with a landscaped area located adjacent to Woodbury Court. The parcel, which contained the automated bank teller, now contains six two story townhouse units, which are accessed from Howard Street Extension. The parcel which contained the stand alone retail building, now contains a four story residential building on Bridge Street. Many of the buildings have been relocated on the site to assure that view corridors are kept. The retail space for the project was originally approximately 12,000 square feet. The revised plans contain approximately 8,500 square feet of retail space, which will be located in one of the main residential buildings. At the Board's April 24, 2000 meeting, the Board reviewed the list of issues provided by the applicant. The Board determined that a majority of the issues were addressed by the applicant, but several issues still remain. The remaining issues are as follows: • During the site visit, a resident requested that fencing be provided on the parcel adjacent to the park located in close vicinity to Woodbury Court. • The issue of providing emergency access to Woodbury Court. I spoke with the Fire Department and they have agreed that emergency access in the form of grass pavers would be appropriate. • Several Board members have requested that the parking spaces located in the front of the main parcel be eliminated. The applicant agreed to review the issue and determine the • number of spaces that could be eliminated from the area. PB Memorandum May 16,2000-4 • • A resident expressed concern with the type of parking located on Howard Street. The spaces are perpendicular to the roadway and therefore do not give the roadway and streetscape feel. The applicant agreed to review the parking and provide an alternate plan. • A resident expressed a concern pertaining to the entrance on Bridge Street and whether it could be right out only. The applicant agreed to review this issue. The applicant requested a continuance from the Board's May 4, 2000 meeting. The proposed elevations for the buildings have been included in the packet for your review. The applicant will present the elevations at the meeting. • • • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, May 18, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, May 18, 2000 in the conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Weiner, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Lee Harrington and Bill Luster. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Members Absent: Carter Vinson Continuation of Public Hearing - Waiver from Frontage - 7-17 Thomas Circle Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and explained that at the last meeting the primary issue was the width of the road neck as it comes up from Highland Avenue. He noted that they have made some significant improvements to the plan. He introduced Scott Petrowicz to explain the • changes that were made to the plan. Mr. Petrowicz explained that they propose to widen the road 20 feet, with the exception of one section that they could only get 14 feet. He also noted that if they move the boulders at the neck of the road and put in a guard rail they would gain additional 1 '/z - 2 feet in that area. He also suggested that they could move some trees and shrubs that might inhibit sight lines. Walter Power suggested that in order to have the road done right and address the elevation they could take two feet of the wall of Mr. Adamo in the city right of way. Jim Adamo of 21 Thomas Circle addressed the Board and stated that he has a pitched driveway that leads to a 2 car garage. He stated that any changes to the roadway in that area would affect his property. Jane Guy addressed the Board and stated that she does not have a problem if the road is not as wide in that area. • Bill Cullen noted that he was not at the last meeting and asked to have the situation with the easement explained. I • Ms. Susan Howland read a prepared statement to the Board outlining her requests of the developer in return for giving the city an easement on paper. A copy of her statement is attached to these minutes. She requested that the developer extend the water and sewer to the next lot which is also her property. Bill Luster addressed the Board and noted that the opposition to this project by the neighbors up until now has been clearly presented to the Board as a public safety issue. He questioned how extending the water and sewer is relative to the safety issues. Dick Williams addressed the Board and stated that they should be able to develop their property as well. Atty. Correnti noted that the Ms. Howland keeps referring to the easement on paper. He also noted that the extension of the water line 60-65 feet is an expensive proposition. He noted that it is all ledge and it is not needed for the proposed decision. He noted that the extension can happen at any time it is question of who is going to pay for it and they do not feel that the additional cost is justified. • John Moustakis stated that it seems that the two parties are not going to come to an agreement and he doesn't think that the Board should dwell on this. Bill Luster agreed noting that the Board had asked the two parties to get together and see if they could come to an agreement and they did that. He stated that he would like to offer a motion. Lee Harrington moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Gene Collins and approved unanimously. Bill Luster moved that the Planning Board approve the waiver from frontage in accordance with the plan, with an 18 foot width at the retaining wall, a detailed plan of the guard rail should be submitted to the Planning Department, the street lighting shall be reviewed by the City Electrician, and striping plan approved by the police department, and in addition the sewer easement shall be brought over lot 4 in a location chosen by the developer. Discussion: Walter Power noted that the road should remain open at all times and • requested that the developer should submit a blasting management plan to the Planning Department prior to construction. He also noted that 2 • exiting vehicles should have a wide paved area across from the Howland property to cue as cars come up the hill from Highland Avenue. Bill Luster amended his motion to include the blasting management plan and that the developer extend the water line to lot 4 and the cost of which should be split by the developer and the owner of the property in exchange for the easement. He further noted that if the owner does not agree to pay half of the cost the developer does not have to extend the water line. Walter Power asked for a vote on the motion. The motion was approved (8-0). Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - 135-137 and 139- 139 '/z Boston Street and 3 and 7 Rawlins Street Atty. Bill Quinn addressed the Board and recalled that at the last meeting the Board had concerns about the mass of the building, the location of the electrical equipment, the width of the parking lot entrance on Rawlins Street, the proposed building material, and requested a landscaping plan. • Atty. Quinn stated that they have addressed those concerns and have amended the plans. He noted that the electrical area that was proposed for outside have been eliminated from the plan. He also noted that they redesigned the facade and showed the Board new drawings of the proposed facade. Atty. Quinn also noted that they have increased the number of trees on Rawlins Street to 5 and have added shrubs as well. Bill Luster stated that he has a concern about the height of the pitch of the roof. Walter Power asked if there was any reason that they want to use brick for the building material. Atty. Quinn stated that the developer prefers it for maintenance and aesthetics. Walter Power stated that he would like to see more overhang on the facias and gables. He asked that they look into that. Walter Power opened the hearing up for public comment at this time. • 3 • Tony Russo of 8 Rawlins Street addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the size and scope of the project and the impact that it would have on the neighborhood. City Councillor Tom Furey addressed the Board and stated that he supports the project and noted that it would enhance the neighborhood and would be a benefit to the city. Chuck Puleo asked how they would be treating the parking lot. Atty. Quinn stated that they would be landscaping to the curb. Walter Power suggested that they put a fence around it to make it more decorative suggesting an aluminum 4' high ballastrade type of fence with gate post at each end. He also asked if there would be lighting in the parking lot. Mr. Copelas stated that they have planned for low lights on the walls that will light the walkways and the entrances. Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and stated that he has met with the neighbors and the owner has been working with them on this for a long time. Lee Harrington moved to close the public hearing seconded by Gene • Collins and approved unanimously. The Board reviewed the draft decision for the project. Bill Luster stated that he would like to move this decision tonight but he would like a condition that they come back to the Board with the final elevations one more time. Chuck Puleo asked what kind of trees they are planting. Mr. Copelas stated that they are going to plant pear trees, noting that the roots will not grow to the surface. Motion made by Bill Luster to approve the Site Plan Review for 135-137 and 139-139 '/z Boston Street and 3 and 7 Rawlins Street, seconded by David Weiner and approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review - Jefferson at Salem - 190 Bridge Street Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and noted that this is the 5th or 6u meeting that we have held on this matter. He noted that they feel that things are progressing nicely and they have been addressing the • 4 • concerns of the neighbors. He noted that tonight they would like to look at the elevations and the design of the architecture. Mr. Englert of JPI addressed the Board and noted that to date they have chipped away at 40 concerns that have been presented during the public hearing process. He explained the process that they used when looking at the architecture in the neighborhood and made a slide presentation on the various neighborhoods in the area. Bill Luster stated that the Board has come a long way in a short time and the developer has been responsive to the concerns of the Board and the neighbors. He stated that one of the more critical parts of this is that the buildings are scaled to the neighborhood. He suggested that the Board get some assistance on the architectural aspect of the project noting that there is no architect on the Board. He explained that he would like to go into this phase thinking how to get the design to meet the neighborhood. David Weiner stated that he would like the buildings to emulate the buildings in the neighborhood. Bill Cullen stated that he felt that if the process were opened up for input, we could get five different opinions. Bill Luster explained that this is one project in the downtown where context is very important and he would like to see some really specific comments with regards to the design element of the entire project. Denise Sullivan noted that the Planning Department has an Urban Designer on staff and that the Planning Board could make comments and the Urban Designer could take a look at the comments and incorporate them into the plans. David Hart of 104 Federal Street addressed the Board and noted that he is an architect with some historical preservation experience. He suggested that the Board have the DRB review the project as they have a professional architect on the Board. Denise Sullivan noted that the architect on the DRB resigned today. Gene Collins asked if all of the other issues on the site have been resolved. Bill Luster noted that we seem to have an understanding of what will work on the site. He suggested that if a group gets together and takes a look at this it would be a benefit. • 5 • Walter Power stated that he would like to see diversity that represents Salem in the design. Mr. McLean addressed the Board and stated that he feels that they should have done a plan for the architecture in advance. He also stated that he has concerns about a second entrance to the site and the traffic flow. Jim Treadwell addressed the Board and noted that there was a Mass Highway visit on Tuesday and they will have a say in the treatment of the second entrance. He also noted that the comment period on the EIR is 30 days and it is over in June. David Hart addressed the Board and stated that he would like to see a package that would show the elevations of the site before and after construction. Mimi Gallant of 9 Northey Street addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned about the view from Northey Street. She also stated that she has erosion problems and is afraid that it will erode to the JPI site. • A letter was presented to the Board from some residents of Woodbury Court outlining their support of the project. Ward Two Councillor Regina Flynn addressed the Board and gave her suggestions of the issues that need to be addressed. Motion made by Bill Luster to continue the public hearing to June 1, 2000, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting a motion was made by Bill Cullen to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk • Salem Planning Board PBO51800 6 Citp of *alem, 01aggarbuge4tg n � • Planning Aoarb One 9ia(etn green 7 ti �V 1•1 Notice of Meeting r. You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, June 1, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor Conference Room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Form A Subdivision- 4 Fort Avenue (7:30 PM - 7:40 PM) 2. Continuance of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (7:40 PM—9:00 PM) 3. Old/New Business (9:00 PM—9:15 PM) This notice po3tad on "(ifjICisl Buliatin flerd" City Hall Ave., Sniem, Mass. on MAY 3 0 2000 at .2;;/Fm tg accordanza M1 h Chep. 39 See. 33A & 230 of M.G.L. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 Citp of *alem, Almoarbusmt.5 • Manning Jiloarb One 6alem green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Asst. City Planner( Salem Planning.Department DATE: May 30, 2000 RE: Agenda—June 1, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Form A Subdivision -4 Fort Avenue The Planning Board will review a Form'A subdivision plan for the property located at 4 Fort Avenue. The parcel is owned by the City of Salem. The Salem City Council voted to dispose of the parcel. The first step in that process is to subdivide the parcel voted on by the City Council from the entire parcel owned by the City. The parcel to be subdivided off is not intended to be a buildable lot and it is labeled as such on the plan. The Form A plan is appropriate for the Board's signature. 2. Continuation of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 7-15, Planned Unit Development, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of JPI Apartment Development, L.P. and James V. D'Amico, Jr. for the property located at 190 Bridge Street on March 2, 2000. The request was continued from the Board's March 2, 2000 and the March 16, 2000 meetings, to its April 6, 2000 meeting. At the Board's April 6, 2000 meeting, the applicant presented revised plans, which addressed many of the Board's and citizens comments pertaining to the originally submitted plans. The revised plans show the main parcel with • four residential buildings all located on the proposed by-pass and Bridge Street. The parcel adjacent to Woodbury Court which contained two 24 unit multi-family residential buildings, now contains24 two story townhouse units, with a landscaped area located adjacent to One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum May 16,2000-2 Woodbury Court. The parcel, which contained the automated bank teller, now contains six two story townhouse units, which are accessed from Howard Street Extension. The parcel which contained the stand alone retail building, now contains a four story residential building on Bridge Street. Many of the buildings have been relocated on the site to assure that view corridors are kept. The retail space for the project was originally approximately 12,000 square feet. The revised plans contain approximately 8,500 square feet of retail space, which will be located in one of the main residential buildings. At the Board's April 24, 2000 meeting, the Board reviewed the list of issues provided by the applicant. The Board determined that a majority of the issues were addressed by the applicant, but several issues still remain. The remaining issues are as follows: • During the site visit, a resident requested that fencing be provided on the parcel adjacent to the park located in close vicinity to Woodbury Court. • The issue of providing emergency access to Woodbury Court. I spoke with the Fire Department and they have agreed that emergency access in the form of grass pavers would be appropriate. • Several Board members have requested that the parking spaces located in the front of the main parcel be eliminated. The applicant agreed to review the issue and determine the number of spaces that could be eliminated from the area. • • A resident expressed concern with the type of parking located on Howard Street. The spaces are perpendicular to the roadway and therefore do not give the roadway and streetscape feel. The applicant agreed to review the parking and provide an alternate plan. • A resident expressed a concern pertaining to the entrance on Bridge Street and whether it could be right out only. The applicant agreed to review this issue. The applicant presented solutions to these issues at the Board's May 18, 2000 meeting, thus the issues have been resolved. In addition, the applicant presented elevations to the Planning Board. The Board requested that a meeting be held with several of the residents and the applicant to discuss the elevations prior to the next Board meeting. This meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, May 30, 2000. The results of that meeting will be presented to the Board at the June 1, 2000 meeting. • • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, June 1, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, June 1, 2000 in the conference room at One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Weiner, John Moustakis, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Form A - Subdivision 4 Fort Avenue - City of Salem Denise Sullivan presented a Form A in behalf of the City of Salem for property located at 4 Fort Avenue. She explained that the Salem City Council vote to dispose of the parcel and the first step in the process is to subdivide the 3,000 s.f. parcel from the entire parcel owned by the city. She noted that it is not a buildable lot and is labeled as such on the plan. The lot is intended to be purchased by Buchanan who has been licensed to use the lot. • Motion made by Gene Collins to approve the Form A for 4 Fort Avenue, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing - Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review - Jefferson At Salem - 190 Bridge Street Walter Power noted that there are not enough Board members present to reopen the public hearing at this meeting. The public hearing will be continued at the June 15, 2000 Planning Board meeting. Old / New Business Denise Sullivan noted that the Peabody Essex Museum has filed their plans and suggested that the Board have a Special Meeting on June 28, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. at the Bentley School. It was suggested that the DRB and the SRA be invited to the meeting. John Moustakis expressed concern that the work at Fafard on Swampscott Road has not started and it was supposed to start by June 1, 2000. He stated that if there is no progress by the next meeting they should be shut down. • t • 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 Gene Collins and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB060100 • 2 Citp of 6alemv Aassotbutett.5 r Planning Ailoarb 8 (One talent direen Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, June 15, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor Conference Room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Board and the City Council-Marlborough Road Rezoning (6:00 PM- 7:30 PM) Tentative Agenda: 1. Approval of Meeting Minutes - April 6, 2000, April 24, 2000, May 4, 2000, May 18, 2000 (7:30 PM - 7:40 PM) 2. Form A Subdivision- 9 North Street (7:40 PM - 7:50 PM) 3. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review -North Shore Medical Center- 55-81 Highland Avenue (7:50 PM - 8:50 PM) 4. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit - 12 First Street - Pequot Highland Apartments (8:50 PM - 9:20 PM) 5. Continuance of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (9:20 PM— 10:00 PM) • 6. Old/New Business (10:00 PM — 10:10 PM) . One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 UP of A*alem, A1a!5!5arbu5etto • Planning Noarb (One 6alem Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Asst. City Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: June 12, 2000 RE: Agenda—June 15, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Joint Public Hearing of the Planning Board and the City Council - Marlborough Road Rezoning The Planning Board will open a joint Public Hearing with the City Council pertaining to a request to rezone approximately 160 acres of land on Marlborough Road. The land is currently zoned Single Family (R-1 Zoning District). The request is to rezone the parcel to the Multi-Family (R-3 Zoning District). The R-1 Zoning District requires a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet, thus a parcel this size would accommodate a maximum of approximately 460 single family homes. With the need for the installation of roadways and the presence of wetlands on the site, the parcel would accommodate less units. If the parcel were rezoned to the R-3 Zoning District, approximately four times the number of units would be permitted. The R-3 Zoning District requires a minimum lot size of 3,500 square feet per dwelling unit. A lot this size would permit a maximum of approximately 1,990 multi-family units. With the need to install roadways, parking, and the presence of wetlands on the site, the parcel would accommodate less units. I have included the documentation that was submitted with the request. There have been no plans or studies submitted with this application. Following thejoint public hearing, the • Planning Board will be required to discuss the application at a future meeting(s) and make a recommendation to the City Council. Because the request involves a significant increase in density, it is appropriate for the One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740.0404 PB Memorandum June 12, 2000-2 Planning Board to discuss issues such as the effects of the density increase on • traffic/roadways, utilities, schools, police/fire/emergency services, any other aspect of the City's infrastructure. The applicant has not provided this information for the Board's review. Nor has the applicant provided any information pertaining to the proposed use for the site. Following this public hearing, the Board may wish to request the applicant to provide further information prior to making its recommendation. 2. Form A Subdivision - 9 North Street The Planning Board will review a Form A subdivision plan for the property located at 9 North Street. The parcel is owned by the City of Salem and contains both the Bowditch House and the Witch House. The Salem Subdivision Rules and Regulations states, "The division of a parcel on which are located structures which preexisted the adoption of the Subdivision Control Law does not constitute a subdivision requiring approval." Both the Bowditch House and the Witch House were standing on the same lot prior to 1963, which is the year of adoption of the Salem Subdivision Rules and Regulations. The submitted plan meets the requirements of a subdivision not requiring approval, thus the plan is appropriate for the Board's signature. 3. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review - North Shore Medical Center- 55-81 Highland Avenue The Planning Board will open a public hearing under site plan review pertaining to a request • from the North Shore Medical Center to construct an addition of approximately 25,000 square feet. The addition will house the emergency services department, which will be a consolidation of Salem Hospital and the North Shore Children's Hospital. The plan shows the loss of approximately 27 parking spaces. The hospital is proposing to off-set the loss of parking by requiring employees of the hospital to park off-site on Jefferson Avenue. This project required several.variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board of Appeals approved the requested variances and the decision has been attached for your convenience. The Board received one comment from the Fire Department. The Fire Department's comments included the placement of a new hydrant is required and the Fire Department's connection needs to be a four inch stog. Based on the located on the proposed addition, it does not appear that the additional construction will be visible from Highland Avenue, thus its visual effects on the City is minimal. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Board. 4. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit- 12 First Street- • Pequot Highland Apartments The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing pertaining to the installation of antennas on Pequot Highland Apartments at 12 First Street. The applicant is requesting to install four PB Memorandum June 12, 2000-3 • ISM antenna arrays on the structure. Each array consists of four wireless data antenna panels. Each panel is approximately 35 inches by 10 inches by 3.75 inches and each weighs approximately ten pounds. There are several such antenna arrays currently located on the structure. The applicant is proposing to paint the panels the same color as the brick facade so as to blend the panels into the structure. The Board has reviewed several requests for antennas to be located on this structure. During the discussion for the last antenna proposed to be installed on this structure, the Board expressed concerns that too many antennas were being located on the structure. In light of this discussion, I requested that applicant provide documentation as to the load the structure could handle and if the maximum load had been met. A letter to this effect has been provided in your packet. Based on the letter, it appears that the building can handle additional antennas. A representative from Metricom will be presented the application to the Board. 5. Continuation of Public Hearing—Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review— Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street The Planning Board opened a Public Hearing under Section 7-15, Planned Unit Development, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and Section 7-18, Site Plan Review of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance at the request of JPI Apartment Development, L.P. and James V. D'Amico, Jr. for the property located at 190 Bridge Street on March 2, 2000. • The request was continued from the Board's March 2, 2000 and the March 16, 2000 meetings, to its April 6, 2000 meeting. At the Board's April 6, 2000 meeting, the applicant presented revised plans, which addressed many of the Board's and citizens comments pertaining to the originally submitted plans. The revised plans show the main parcel with four residential buildings all located on the proposed by-pass and Bridge Street. The parcel adjacent to Woodbury Court which contained two 24 unit multi-family residential buildings, now contains24 two story townhouse units, with a landscaped area located adjacent to Woodbury Court. The parcel, which contained the automated bank teller, now contains six two story townhouse units, which are accessed from Howard Street Extension. The parcel which contained the stand alone retail building, now contains a four story residential building on Bridge Street. Many of the buildings have been relocated on the site to assure that view condors are kept. The retail space for the project was originally approximately 12,000 square feet. The revised plans contain approximately 8,500 square feet of retail space, which will be located in one of the main residential buildings. At the Board's April 24, 2000 meeting, the Board reviewed the list of issues provided by the applicant. The Board detennined that a majority of the issues were addressed by the applicant, but several issues still remain. The remaining issues are as follows: • During the site visit, a resident requested that fencing be provided on the parcel adjacent to . the park located in close vicinity to Woodbury Court. PB Memorandum June 12, 2000-4 • The issue of providing emergency access to Woodbury Court. I spoke with the Fire • Department and they have agreed that emergency access in the form of grass pavers would be appropriate. • Several Board members have requested that the parking spaces located in the front of the main parcel be eliminated. The applicant agreed to review the issue and determine the number of spaces that could be eliminated from the area. • A resident expressed concern with the type of parking located on Howard Street. The spaces are perpendicular to the roadway and therefore do not give the roadway and streetscape feel. The applicant agreed to review the parking and provide an alternate plan. • A resident expressed a concern pertaining to the entrance on Bridge Street and whether it could be right out only. The applicant agreed to review this issue. The applicant presented solutions to these issues at the Board's May 18, 2000 meeting, thus the issues have been resolved. In addition, the applicant presented elevations to the Planning Board. The Board requested that a meeting be held with several of the residents and the applicant to discuss the elevations prior to the next Board meeting. The applicant met with the Ward Councilor and two Salem architects. At that meeting, the applicant presented the proposed elevations to the group. The group expressed that the elevations met the concerns that the neighbors had with the previously submitted elevations. •v The applicant will present the elevations to the Board at this meeting. I have included the elevation sketches which were shown to the Ward Councilor and the two architects in the packet for your review. In addition, I have included a draft decision in your packet for the Board's review. • .J Citp of *alem, Alazoacbtugettg; • p Planning Jgoarb (One &alent green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Asst. City Plarmer Salem Planning Department DATE: June 30, 2000 RE: Agenda—July 6, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please • contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Form A Subdivision - Parcel A, Parallel Street The Planning Board will review a Form A subdivision plan for the property located on Parallel Street. The plan proposes to subdivide a portion of a 9.76 acre lot to be combined with an adjacent lot. The adjacent lot is quite small and a portion of the structure located on the lot has been built across the rear property line. The plan shows approximately 4,496 square feet of land to be combined with the lot located on Parallel Street. This will bring the lot which is located on Parallel Street more into conformance than it currently is. This plan is appropriate for the Board's signature and approval. 2. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review- Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street The Planning Board will open a public hearing for the expansion of the Peabody Essex Museum. The project includes the construction of an approximately 100,000 square foot addition to the main museum building, a new public park, a pedestrian esplanade, and the locating of a 19'" century Chinese house on the site. The plan calls for the demolition of the Empire building and portions of the houses currently located at 10 Liberty Street and 42 Charter Street. Both houses are proposed to be relocated to portions of the site and will be incorporated into the project. • In 1997, the Mayor and the City Council negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Peabody Essex Museum. The MOU requires certain tasks to be undertaken by the Museum and certain tasks to be undertaken by the City. The MOU has been provided One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum June 30, 2000- 2 • for your convenience. The project required to acquisition of the Empire Building and the abandonment of New Liberty Street. The City advertised for proposals for a private developer to acquire the Empire Building and New Liberty Street. The project was awarded to the Museum by a vote of the City Council. The plans for the expansion show the construction of an interior concourse linking Charter Street and Essex Street. The project does not require any approvals from either the Zoning Board of Appeals or the Conservation Commission. The project does require approval from the Salem Redevelopment Authority (SRA). The Museum has filed plans with the SRA and their process will begin in July. In addition, both the SRA and its Design Review Board have been invited to attend the Planning Board's July 6, 2000 meeting to hear the presentation of the Museum. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the project to the Board 3. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit- 18 Washington Square- Hawthorne Hotel The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing pertaining to the installation of antennas on the Hawthorne Hotel at 18 Washington Square. The applicant is requesting to install six • panel antennas and a base station. The panel antennas will be finished with a brick pattern matching the structure and the base station will be contained in all-weather cabinets in the alcove next to the penthouse on the roof of the existing Hawthorne Hotel. The applicant met with the Salem Common Neighborhood Association, which unanimously approved the concept of the antennas on Hawthorne Hotel. In addition, the applicant received approval from the Historical Commission for the application. The Salem Redevelopment Authority referred the application to the Planning Board pending your approval. This has been their practice in the past. A representative from Omnipoint will present the application to the Board. 4. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit- 117 Lafayette Street - Lincoln Hotel The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing pertaining to the installation of antennas on the Lincoln Hotel at 117 Lafayette Street. The applicant is requesting to install twelve panel antennas on the structure and place an equipment room, cables and a cable tray on the site. The panel antennas will not be greater than fifteen feet above the height of the building and will be painted to match the colors of the building. The traffic generated by the facility will be limited to approximately one to two trips per month. This is an insignificant amount. • A representative from Nextel Communications will present the application to the Board. 5. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - 394 Highland Avenue The Planning Board will open a public hearing under site plan review for the property located PB Memorandum June 30,2000-3 • a 394 Highland Avenue. The proposed project includes the construction of a self storage facility. The plan shows a two-story approximately 53,000 square foot building. The building will house approximately 200 tenant spaces. There will be limited parking provided on the site for the office space and ample room for vehicles to access the bays. A self storage facility is typically a low traffic impact on a community, but aesthetics can be an issue. I would suggest that the Board particularly reviews the material chosen for the building and the bays to ensure that they are aesthetically pleasing. In addition, the Board should request landscaping to be provided along the side lot lines to create a buffer to both the adjacent lots and those driving along Highland Avenue. 6. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review- North Shore Medical Center- 55- 81 Highland Avenue The Planning Board opened a public hearing under site plan review pertaining to a request from the North Shore Medical Center to construct an addition of approximately 25,000 square feet. The addition will house the emergency services department, which will be a consolidation of Salem Hospital and the North Shore Children's Hospital. The plan shows the loss of approximately 27 parking spaces. The hospital is proposing to off-set the loss of parking by requiring employees of the hospital to park off-site on Jefferson Avenue. This project required several variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning • Board of Appeals approved the requested variances and the decision has been attached for your convenience. At the Board's June 15, 2000 meeting, the Board requested additional information pertaining to catch basins, traffic, and parking. The applicant will provide additional information to the Board at the July 6, 2000 meeting. Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the plans to the Board. • Citp of *alem, A1agfsarbuoett!6 r -4 Planning �Bnarb (One 9palem &Teen Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, July 6, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the cafetorium at the Bentley School located at 6 Memorial Drive. Walter B. Power, III Chainnan • Tentative Agenda: 1. Approval of Meeting Minutes - April 6, 2000, April 24, 2000, May 4, 2000, May 18, 2000 (7:30 PM - 7:35 PM) 2. Form A Subdivision- Parcel A, Parallel Street (7:35 PM - 7:40 PM) 3. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street (7:40 PM - 9:15 PM) 4. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit - 18 Washington Square - Hawthorne Hotel (9:15 PM - 9:30 PM) 5. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit - 117 Lafayette Street - Lincoln Hotel (9:30 PM - 9:45 PM) 6. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Highland Realty Co., LLC - 394 Highland Avenue (9:45 PM - 10:15 PM) 7. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - North Shore Medical Center- 55-81 Highland Avenue (10:15 PM - 10:45 PM) • S. Old/New Business (10:45 PM— 10:50 PM) One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, July 6, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, July 6, 2000 in the cafeteria at the Bentley School, Memorial Drive, Salem, MA. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Lee Harrington and Bill Luster. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Walter Power stated that the Board would be taking the agenda out of order this evening. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty StreedpF— Carter and Essex Street Harrison, Vice President and a Trustee for the Peabody Essex Museum addressed the Board and explained that he is here to introduce those presenting this evening. He also noted that he is the Chairman of the Building Committee and gave a history of the development plans of the • Museum. Dan Monroe, Executive Director of the Peabody Essex Museum addressed the Board and gave a background on the Museum and the mission of the Museum relating to the expansion plan. Mosha Safdie, the Architect for the project, gave a presentation on the selection process for an Architect. He reviewed slides that showed how the design evolved and the consideration that was given to the surrounding architecture in the neighborhood. He noted that rather than build a single, imposing structure he has tried to design galleries that resemble small houses and echo the rhythm of individual dwellings found around the downtown. Michael Van Valkenburgh addressed the Board and reviewed the landscaping plans for the project. He stated that they tried to create a uniting place that would feel within the boundaries of Salem. He also reviewed plans for Armory Park which will be built on the site of the Salem Armory and will be dedicated to the Second Corp. of Cadets. He noted that Salem Veterans Administrator Jean Guy Martineau has had input into the proposed park. • 1 • Atty. John Serafini Sr. addressed the Board and noted that over the next few weeks they will present traffic studies and information at length to the Board. He stressed that the Museum is cognizant of the plans and feels that this plan will benefit Salem. He also noted that the Administration supports this project and it has been made possible because of the initiative of the City of Salem. City Planner Patrick Raffert addressed the Board and reiterated the Mayor's support for the project. He noted that the Mayor is hopeful that this project will bring to Salem what we need to make it a world class city. City Councillor Tom Furey addressed the Board and expressed his support for the project. Ward Two Councillor Regina Flynn addressed the Board and expressed her support for the project. Ward three Councillor Joan Lovely addressed the Board and read a letter of support from City Council President Kevin Harvey. She also expressed her support for the project as well. • Ward One Councillor Scott LaCava addressed the Board and expressed his support for the project. Tim Jenkins of Historic Salem Inc. addressed the Board and read a statement outlining the concerns that they have. A copy of that statement is attached to these minutes. Mr. Lyman of 129 Essex Street addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the lack of communication from the Museum during the demolition of the Armory wall. Biff Michaud of the Witch Museum addressed the Board and stated that he felt that it is a world class building and will help to foster Salem. He also recommended that they look at moving the wall and the archway in Armory Park to allow for more open space. Mr. Van Valkenburgh stated that they could take a look at that. Lance Kasparian Chairman of the Salem Historic Commission addressed the Board and noted that the Historic Commission has some suggestions and recommendations for the Planning Board. He asked that the Historic Commission be allowed to review the plans and comment on them. • 2 • Ellen DiGeronimo, Executive Director of the Salem Chamber of Commerce addressed the Board and expressed the support of the Chamber of Commerce for the project. She noted that it would be an anchor for the future of the downtown. Staley McDermot of 175 Essex Street addressed the Board and expressed his disappointment that the Museum has not sought more community input on the design of the buildings. He also noted that it is a good project and it should go forward. There being no further questions or comments regarding this plan this evening a motion was made by Bill Cullen to continue the public hearing to July 20, 2000, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. Planning Board member Bill Luster left the meeting at this time (9:30 p.m.) Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Highland Realty Cornpanv LLC - 394 Highland Avenue Mr. Griffin addressed the Board on behalf of his client Mr. Amanti and explained the plans to build a storage facility at 394 Highland Avenue. He • reviewed the site plan and the landscaping plans. He noted that the grading would be toward the rear of the property towards a detention pond and the drainage will be no different than it is today. He also noted that a proposed dry well will recharge the ground water. Mr. Griffin stated that the project complies with zoning regulations for that area and they are not requesting any waivers. Chairman Walter Power opened the public hearing for public comment at this time. Michelle Rubino of 11 Pyburn Avenue addressed the Board and expressed her concern about the location of the proposed detention pond and the possible flooding of her property. Mr. Griffin stated that the purpose of the detention pond was to improve the drainage in the area not to make it worse. Mrs. Rubino asked what the hours of operation would be. Mr. Griffin stated that they are proposing 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. Bob Levin of 42 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about security and lighting on the site. Mr. Griffin stated that they would be using wall pack lighting with hoods and there should be no effect on the neighborhood. • 3 • Atty. Steve Singer representing the Highland Condominium Board of Trustees addressed the Board and asked what other permits are needed for the project. Mr. Griffin stated that they would be filing with the Conservation Commission for an Order of Conditions, noting that some work will be done in the buffer zone. Steve Weisberg, Chairman of the Highland Condominium Board of Trustees addressed the Board and noted that they are concerned about lighting, zoning issues, stormwater management and snow storage. He also noted that they are concerned about parking and there is a concern as to whether the owner intends to rent space to RV's. He also suggested that the color of the facade should match the condos. Patricia LiBerti of 3 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed he concerns about lighting and plans to install a chain link fence with barb wire on the top of it. Kate Wilson of 9 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed her concerns about snow storage. Bill Mancinelli of 9 Longfellow Lane addressed the Board and stated that • this is not what he expected when he purchased his unit at the Highland Condominiums. Anthony LiBerti of 3 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the noise that would be generated from the air conditioning unit. Mr. Griffin explained that they would have a small roof mounted, cooling unit which could be moved if there is a problem with noise. Marybeth Nolet of 40 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed her concerns about the project. She suggested that the applicant go back to the drawing board and come back with a more suitable business that would benefit the community. Mark Gilmore asked how many units they are planning. Mr. Griffin stated that there would be 400 units. The audience seemed surprised at that. Bill Cullen noted that the narrative for the application indicated that there would be 210 units. Mr. Griffin stated that it was an error and should have read 200 units on each floor for a total of 400 units. • 4 • David Rymer of 17 Lions Lane addressed the Board and asked if there were any regulations regarding what could be stored in the facility. Walter Power asked the applicant to provide a list of materials that can be stored there. Atty. Singer noted that the public notice for the meeting said that 200 units were proposed and now they are saying that it is really 400. He suggested that the applicant should refile with the correct information. City Councillor Tom Furey addressed the Board and noted that the area is a nice place to live and that this is a poor use of the land. He urged the Board to vote against the plan. Anita Thomas of the Highland Condominium Board of Trustees addressed the Board and thanked Councillor Furey for supporting the neighbors and noted that their own ward Councillor did not attend the meeting. Joyce Nelson addressed the Board and expressed her concerns about the traffic that would be added to the neighborhood because of this facility. Walter Power noted that it was getting late and the Board has other business to attend to this evening. He noted that the Board would be continuing the • Public Hearing to its next meeting on July 20. He suggested that the developer meet with the neighbors and try to come to some consensus with them about this use. He also asked that Denise Sullivan find out if the applicant should file a new application since there was an error in the number of units. Motion made by Lee Harrington to continue the public hearing to July 20, 2000 seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit - 18 Washington Soaure - Hawthorne Hotel Tom Murphy addressed the Board and explained the application for Omni Point Communications to install wireless communication antennas on the roof of the Hawthorne Hotel at 19 Washington Square. He noted that the application is in total compliance with the by law. Mr. Murphy explained that they looked at several locations in the area, including the Salem Housing Authority on Charter Street, Immaculate Conception Church and the Hotel. He explained that the location of the building and the site lines for various downtown locations are needed to improve service to their customers. • 5 • John Moustakis asked how long the lease is for. Mr. Murphy noted that the lease is for five years. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. Gene Collins moved and Lee Harrington seconded a motion to approve the Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit for 18 Washington Square. The motion was approved unanimously. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Permit - 117 Lafayette Street - Lincoln Hotel Christopher McCarrior addressed the Board and explained the application of Nextel for the placement of 12 wireless communication antennas on the roof of the Lincoln Hotel at 117 Lafayette Street. He noted that they meet all the criteria of the special permit. Frank Brancato a radio frequency engineer for Nextel addressed the Board and explained that they operate on a different frequency and band with a • transmission distance of 1-3 miles. He noted that the antennas have been decreased in size as requested by Mass Historic and can barely be seen over the parapet of the roof. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Lee Harrington to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Gene Collins and approved unanimously. Bill Cullen moved and Lee Harrington seconded a motion to approve the Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit for 117 Lafayette Street. The motion was approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - North Shore Medical Center - 55-81 Highland Avenue Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and noted that at the last meeting the Board had some concerns about the entry ways, a curb cut on Highland Avenue, and the suggestion that the hospital use Powder House Lane as a means of the exiting the campus. He noted that they have looked at those things and have revised the plans. Bruce Campbell of Campbell Associates addressed the Board and explained • the traffic plans. Scott Petrowicz explained the changes to the plans. 6 • Don Garrity of Salem Hospital explained that the only ambulances that use the front entrance are the emergencies and the others use the entrance at the back of the property for Davenport 1. Chuck Puleo asked if the plans call for new signage. Mr. Garrity stated that the hospital has an exterior and interior signage plan for the whole campus. Ward Three Councillor Joan Lovely addressed the Board and noted that the use of Powder House lane may have implications on the Collins Middle School which uses the road as an entrance and exit. She requested that they consult with the School Safety Officer Charlie Reed for his input on the plan. Walter Power addressed the applicant and noted that he would like to see them work on a parking plan for the campus. He also noted that Highland Avenue his a heavy traffic area and asked of there was anyway that they could address that. Atty. Correnti noted that this plan is for interior improvements to the campus and no work is proposed on Highland Avenue. Ted Angelakis addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the traffic on Powder House Lane particularly in the morning and the afternoon when students are being dropped off and picked up. He also noted that there • is a lot of traffic during sporting events at Bertram Field. Walter Power suggested that perhaps they could have no parking on Powder House Lane. Mr. Garrity explained that there is usually parking on that street for big events such as football games etc. He also noted that the hospital allows the use of the parking area behind Bertram Field for events free of charge. There being no further questions or comments at this meeting a motion was made by Lee Harrington to continue the Public Hearing to July 20, 2000, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. Form A Subdivision - Parcel A Parallel Street Denise Sullivan addressed the Board and presented a Form A for Parcel A on Parallel Street that needed the signatures of the Board Members. • 7 • There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Bill Cullen to adjourn the meeting, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB070600 • 8 Citp of �balem, AlattacljuatV5 Planning 13narb r+Nn� (One iWem Oreen Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, July 20, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the cafetorium at the Bentley School located at 6 Memorial Drive. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: I. Approval of Meeting Minutes- April 6, 2000, April 24, 2000, May 4, 2000, May 18, 2000 (7:30 PM - 7:40 PM) 2. Form A Subdivision- 223-231 Derby Street(7:40 PM - 7:50 PM) 3. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review-Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street(7:50 PM- 9:30 PM) 4. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review-North Shore Medical Center- 55-81 Highland Avenue (9:30 PM - 10:00 PM) 5. Old/New Business (10:00 PM— 10:05 PM) • One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 Citp of &aCem, ;01a!5!5aCbUatt!5 Manning 30oarb One Salem Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Denise Sullivan, Assistant City Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: July 18, 2000 RE: Agenda—July 20, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Form A Subdivision—223-231 Derby Street The Planning Board will review a Form A subdivision plan for the property located at 223- 231 Derby Street, the proposed location for the Pickering Wharf Hotel. The proposed hotel site plan, which was approved by the Planning Board, showed the demolition of the bank building currently located on the lot and its reconstruction on the lot. The Salem Zoning Ordinance requires that only one principal building may be located on a lot. This Form A plan will subdivide the lot so that the bank building is located on one lot and the hotel is located on another lot. The plan meets the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and is appropriate for the Board's signature. 2. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street The Planning Board opened a public hearing for the expansion of the Peabody Essex Museum. The project includes the construction of an approximately 100,000 square foot addition to the main museum building, a new public park, a pedestrian esplanade, and the locating of a 19" century Chinese house on the site. The plan calls for the demolition of the Empire building and portions of the houses currently located at 10 Liberty Street and 42 Charter Street. Both houses are proposed to be relocated to portions of the site and will be incorporated into the project. • In 1997, the Mayor and the City Council negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Peabody Essex Museum. The MOU requires certain tasks to be undertaken One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum July 18,2000-2 • by the Museum and certain tasks to be undertaken by the City. The MOU has been provided for your convenience. The project required to acquisition of the Empire Building and the abandonment of New Liberty Street. The City advertised for proposals for a private developer to acquire the Empire Building and New Liberty Street. The project was awarded to the Museum by a vote of the City Council. The plans for the expansion show the construction of an interior concourse linking Charter Street and Essex Street. The project does not require any approvals from either the Zoning Board of Appeals or the Conservation Commission. The project does require approval from the Salem Redevelopment Authority (SRA). The Museum has filed plans with the SRA and their process is underway. On July 6, 2000, the Board heard the Museum's presentation for the proposed expansion. In addition, the Board heard several comments from the audience. The Board's questions were held. At this meeting, the Museum will be completing their presentation with traffic and the Board will then have the opportunity to make comments and ask questions. At the last meeting, several residents presented letters to the Board for your review. Those letters have been included in your packets. • Atty. Joseph Correnti will be presenting the project to the Board 3. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review- North Shore Medical Center- 55- 81 Highland Avenue The Planning Board opened a public hearing under site plan review pertaining to a request from the North Shore Medical Center to construct an addition of approximately 25,000 square feet. The addition will house the emergency services department, which will be a consolidation of Salem Hospital and the North Shore Children's Hospital. The plan shows the loss of approximately 27 parking spaces. The hospital is proposing to off-set the loss of parking by requiring employees of the hospital to park off-site on Jefferson Avenue. At the Board's July 6, 2000 meeting, the Board discussed traffic and its effects on the abutting school. Last week, the applicant, a representative from the school, the Police Department, Councilor Lovely, and myself met pertaining to the traffic generated from the site and the abutting school. The school stated that additional signage which would not allow vehicles to exit the Powder House Lane entrance during the drop off times for the school would alleviate any of their concerns. The applicant agreed to this and it has been included as a condition in the draft decision. A draft decision for this project has been included your packet. • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, July 20, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, July 20, 2000 in the cafeteria at the Bentley School, Memorial Drive, Salem, MA. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Lee Harrington, David Weiner, and Bill Luster. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Annroval of Minutes The minutes of the meeting of April 6, 2000 were presented for approval. Bill Cullen moved and John Moustakis seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the Planning Board meeting held on April 6, 2000. The motion was approved unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of April 24, 2000 were presented for-approval. Bill Cullen moved and Lee Harrington seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the Planning Board meeting held on April 24, 2000. The motion • was approved unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of May 4, 2000 were presented for approval. David Weiner moved and Lee Harrington seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the Planning Board meeting held on May 4, 2000. The motion was approved unanimously. The minutes of the meeting of May 18, 2000 were presented for approval. Bill Cullen moved and John Moustakis seconded a motion to approve the minutes of the Planning Board meeting held on May 18, 2000. The motion was approved unanimously. Form A Subdivision — 223-231 Derby Street— Pickering Wharf Hotel Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board on behalf of his client, Rocket Realty Trust and presented a Form A for 223-231 Derby Street. Atty. Correnti stated that the proposed hotel site plan, which was approved by the Planning Board, showed the demolition of the bank building currently located on the lot and its reconstruction on the lot. He noted that the Salem zoning ordinance requires that only one principal building may be located on a lot and explained that this Form A will subdivide the lot so that the bank • building is located on one lot and the hotel is located on another lot. • Bill Cullen stated that he felt that the plan was pretty straightforward. There being no further questions or comments regarding this plan a motion was made by Bill Cullen and seconded by Lee Harrington to approve the Form A for 223-231Derby Street. The motion was approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review — Peabody Essex Museum —Liberty and Essex Street Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Planning Board and recalled that two weeks ago the public hearing was opened and a presentation on the overview of the project was made. He explained that this evening they intend to present the traffic study, which will address vehicular and pedestrian traffic and an analysis on the impact of closing Liberty Street. He introduced Joan Peyreburne of VHB Engineering to make the presentation. Ms. Peyreburne addressed the Board and explained the process that they used for the traffic study. She stated that they expect annual visitation to increase from 130,000 to 260,000. She explained visitation patterns, hours of operation and evening programs offered after 7:00 p.m. • Ms. Peyreburne stated that they estimated that the travel mode is 75% automobile, 22% bus tours, and 3% use public transportation. She explained that the breakdown on the increase anticipated, is an additional 270 vehicles in October which is their peak month, 40 more on weekdays, and 110 vehicles on the weekend during peak season. With regards to parking Ms. Peyreburne estimated an additional 50 spaces on weekday and 130 spaces on the weekend during peak season in October. She stated that they would encourage the use of the South Harbor Parking Garage. Ms. Peyreburne addressed the impact on the closure of Liberty Street. She stated that they looked at who is affected by the closure of Liberty Street. Walter Power asked if they have given any thought to making Essex Street a two way street, noting that cars will be directed to the Common area which has heavy pedestrian traffic. David Weiner agreed noting that October is the peak season in the city and nothing moves in that area. Atty. Correnti stated that the city has a downtown traffic plan for Halloween. • 2 • John Moustakis stated that he agreed that Essex Street should be two ways to Hawthorne Boulevard, noting that it is a safety issue. Atty. Correnti stated that the Museum does not have the ability to make Essex Street a two way street that would have to be done by the City Council. He also noted that it is something that they could look at and report back to the Board on. Walter Power suggested that the Police Department and the City Planner should be involved in those discussions. Atty. Correnti stated that they would have VHB take a look at it, and they will do their share in conjunction with the Planning Department. Bill Luster suggested that they look at Brown Street and Essex Streets noting that 150 cars at peak hours is a significant amount for that area. John Moustakis stated that Salem is hoping that the Museum expansion will generate more business to Salem not just necessarily to the Museum and the Board should look at the growth and background. Walter Power agreed noting that we need to keep in mind circulation of traffic in the downtown. He also noted that he assumes that the traffic circulation in the downtown will remain the same with the exception of the closing of Liberty Street. • Atty. Correnti noted that they did not propose any changes in transportation circulation but they would be happy to look at that and other options and work with the Board on this. Tom Houston form CID Associate addressed the Board and explained the roadway changes and circulation changes for New Liberty Street. He explained the area of Liberty Street that will be closed. He noted that the pedestrian area which will have a clearly identifiable path for vehicular traffic. He also noted that they have eliminated some parking spaces and have plans to widen Essex Street on the west side, which is already land owned by the Museum. Mr. Houston explained that the Marine Arts Gallery at 135 Essex Street will have driveway access for Liberty Street and they are providing them with expanded driveway access and turnaround. John Moustakis stated that he was concerned about encroachment on Essex Street if they widen the sidewalk. Mr. Houston stated that they would be using land that is already owned by the Museum. Atty. Correnti stated that they are proposing to do extensive work on public property such as paving etc. 3 • Walter Power questioned which side of the street would they be widening the sidewalk. Atty. Correnti replied that they would be widening the side with the proposed Armory Park. Bill Luster noted that there are a number of parking spaces on the north side of Essex Street and questioned if losing them was wise. Atty. Correnti stated that they would be losing 2 or 3 spaces and the others will be moved to the other side of Essex Street. Walter Power noted that they could be moved to the other side of the street, assuming Essex Street remains a one way. Mr. Houston stated that they would be able to accommodate the parking with two-way traffic as well. Mr. Houston explained the sidewalk improvements and the work that would be done within the public way. He noted that the work along Charter Street would have a slight shifting and realignment of the sidewalk behind the Museum. Mr. Houston reviewed the utility improvements. He explained that the drainage and utilities for most services would uses the existing system. Water and sewer service for the new addition would be fed from the existing building. He also reviewed the storm drainage system. The electric and • telephone services on Liberty Street will be relocated. Walter Power questioned whether the city has determined that the drainage is adequate to handle the additional drainage on the site. Michael Kim addressed the question and stated that the addition would create very little, if any additional drainage to the site. Laura Celano explained the paving and the landscaping space for Armory Square. She reviewed the materials that they intend to use, such as the brick that will be used for the walkways. She also noted that there would be Blue Stone walks in Armory Square. Lee Harrington requested that the Board be shown samples of the materials that they plan to use. Atty. Correnti stated that they would be able to arrange that. Bill Luster stated that the interior walkway is a concern, noting that there needs to be passage from Essex Street to Charter Street. He suggested that the Museum needs to provide the city some assurance either by easement or legal agreement to guarantee that public access will always be there. Atty. Correnti stated that there has been discussion on that and they will • work some language out that will maintain access for pedestrians. 4 • Walter Power noted that the city gave up a major street in the downtown and he would like to be assured that the city would have pedestrian access beyond 2007. Denise Sullivan stated that she would look into that before the next meeting. Bill Wright from Turner Construction reviewed the construction traffic plan with the Board. He explained that the first phase would be the demolition of the Empire building and they would access that from the Charter Street parking area. The next phase then would be the pouring of foundations and the relocation of the houses on Charter Street. He also noted that there are 10 parking spaces for the Salem Housing Authority that will be relocated as well. Peter Kiernan of the Marine Arts Gallery addressed the Board and expressed his concern about getting customers into his shop. He stated that he has concerns about the size of the driveway. There being no further questions or comments at this time a motion was made by Bill Luster to continue the public hearing to August 10, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. at One Salem Green. Motion was seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. • Continuation of Public Hearing— Site Plan Review — North Shore Medical Center— 55-81 Highland Avenue Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and noted that at the last meeting the Board discussed traffic and its effects on the abutting Collins Middle School. He reported that they have met with the Police Department, Councillor Lovely, and Denise Sullivan on the matter. He reported that the Miss Manning at Collins Middle School suggested additional signage which would not allow vehicles to exit on Powder House Lane entrance during drop of and pick up times at the school. Scott Petrovicz explained that they would be posting signage that will say NO RIGHT TURN between the hours of 7:30— 8:30 a.m. and 2:30— 3:30 p.m. Councillor Lovely addressed the Board and stated that she is satisfied with the solution of signage and thanked the hospital for addressing that matter. There being no further questions or comments regarding this project John Moustakis moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. • The Board reviewed the draft decision for the project. 5 • Bill Cullen moved and Bill Luster seconded a motion to approve the Site Plan Review for North Shore Medical Center. The motion was approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting a motion was made by John Moustakis and seconded by Bill Cullen to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB072000 • 6 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS PLANNING DEPARTMENT •PATRICK REFFETT ONE SALEM GREEN City Planner 01970 {978)745-9595 EM. 311 Fax (978)740-0404 Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, September 7, 2000 at 7:00 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. ti G U Walter B. Power, III i Chairman Tentative Agenda: co c= _ m- • 1. Discussion Pertaining to Final Elevations —Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Str& (7:00 r PM—7:30 PM) 2. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review -Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street (7:30 PM - 8:30 PM) 3. Public Hearing— Site Plan Review—Highland Realty Co., LLC—392 Highland Avenue (8:30 PM—9:30 PM) 4. Public Hearing— Site Plan Review—Crosby Realty Trust— 111 and 119-125 Canal Street —Crosby Market (9:30 PM— 10:00 PM) 5. Public Hearing-Waiver from Frontage—21 Verona Street (10:00 PM — 10:15 PM) 6. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit—NEXTEL- 1000 Loring Avenue (10:15 PM— 10:30 PM) 7. Old/New Business (10:30 PM— 10:35 PM) T'ni4 nock• posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Hall Ave., Salem, Mass. on 5 2000 ai 12 Pn, 12 acw?danos w t7 i*lap. 30 Sac • 23A 239 of M.G.I. /� Citp of &afem, Aao.5acbmattz • r Planning �Ooarb (One $�alem Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Don Cefalo, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: September 5, 2000 RE: Agenda— September 7, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Discussion Pertaining to Final Elevations—Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street Woodman Associates and JPI will be presenting the final elevations to the Planning Board at its next meeting. Woodman Associates has made several recommendations to the elevations, which were completed by JPI's architect, EDI. JPI has accepted those elevations and has had their architect incorporate the recommendations into their plans. It is expected that EDI will have the recommendations incorporated in their plans and will present the final plans to the Planning Board. The decision for this project has been filed thus, JPI is presenting the final elevations in conformance with the condition that the Board will approve its final elevations. 2. Continuation of Public Hearing- Site Plan Review -Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street The Planning Board opened a public hearing for the expansion of the Peabody Essex Museum. The project includes the construction of an approximately 100,000 square foot addition to the main museum building, a new public park, a pedestrian esplanade, and the locating of a 19'" century Chinese house on the site. The plan calls for the demolition of the Empire building and portions of the houses currently located at 10 Liberty Street and 42 • Charter Street. Both houses are proposed to be relocated to portions of the site and will be incorporated into the project. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum September 5, 2000-2 In 1997, the Mayor and the City Council negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding • (MOU) with the Peabody Essex Museum. The MOU requires certain tasks to be undertaken by the Museum and certain tasks to be undertaken by the City. At the last Planning Board meeting, the Board questioned whether the external walkway would remain open in perpetuity. I reviewed the MOU and it states that the Museum is required to provide for an alternate, all hours, exterior pedestrian walkway between Essex Street and Charter Street. There is no time frame associated with this statement, thus it is determined that a walkway must be provided in perpetuity. The Board may wish to include a condition such as this in their site plan review decision. The Board discussed the issue of traffic flow in the area at length at the last meeting. Particularly, the Board discussed the issue of Liberty Street being a two way street, which leads to Essex Street, a one way street. The applicant agreed to work with the Planning Department to review possible solutions to this issue. The applicant has not discussed this issue with the Planning Department as of yet. In addition,the Board requested that the applicant review the traffic flow in the area and make recommendations as to one way versus two way traffic on surrounding streets. The applicant presented plans for different traffic flows to the Board at its last meeting. The Board can discuss the applicant's recommendations at its next meeting The Board also discussed pedestrian access in the area, which abuts the Essex Street pedestrian mall. The Board stated that the area was not defined well enough for the • pedestrian to determine where the pedestrian mall ends and the vehicular Essex Street begins. The applicant stated that it would review the issue and provide a rendering of the Essex Street pedestrian mall with recommendations to the Board at its next meeting. In addition, the Board discussed the amount of work proposed to be conducted in the right of ways. The Board may wish to discuss the issue of the materials proposed by the Museum and whether those materials are in keeping with what the City currently utilizes. Furthermore, the Board may wish to request that if the materials are not in keeping with City standards, the Museum provide materials for maintenance of the right of ways. It is expected that the applicant will present the plans for Armory Park and the elevations of the buildings. The Board may wish to focus its discussions on these two aspects of the site plan. 3. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review- 392 Highland Avenue The Planning Board will open a public hearing under site plan review for the property located a 392 Highland Avenue. The proposed project includes the construction of a self- storage facility. The plan shows a two-story approximately 53,000 square foot building. The building will house approximately 200 tenant spaces. There will be limited parking provided on the site for the office space and ample room for vehicles to access the bays. A self-storage facility is typically a low traffic impact on a community, but aesthetics can be • an issue. I would suggest that the Board particularly review the material chosen for the building and the bays to ensure that they are aesthetically pleasing. A possible alternative may be an internal facility. In addition, the Board should request landscaping to be provided along the side lot lines to create a buffer to both the adjacent lots and those driving along PB Memorandum September 5, 2000- 3 • Highland Avenue. The project does not require approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This project does require Conservation Commission approval and is scheduled to appear at its September 14 public hearing. 4. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review— 111, 119— 125 Canal Street—Crosby's Market The Planning Board will open a public hearing under site plan review for the property located 111, 119— 125 Canal Street. The proposed project includes the construction and expansion to the existing Crosby's Market building which is approximately 18,334 square feet. The plan shows a proposed retail expansion of approximately 9,088 square foot building with an additional 2860 square feet for a second floor office space. The proposed expansion will house a new bank, the relocation of an existing liquor store and provide office space for Croby's Market. The new bank will have a drive-thru window that will only be accessible from an entrance off Canal Street. The board may want to discuss this particular entrance to ensure it is used for bank drive—thru only and not as a means of accessing the parking lot area. Parking on the proposed site will consist of 152, most of which are existing spaces including handicap parking and a designated area for employee parking. The applicant received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for two buildings on one lot and an existing rear yard setback violation for the building at 119-125 Canal Street and a variance from relief for parking for the property at 111 and 119-125 Canal Street. The decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals has been attached. The decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals has been attached. This project not does require approval from the Conservation Commission. 5. Public Hearing—Waiver From Frontage Requirements—21 Verona Street The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing for a request for a waiver from the frontage requirements for the parcel located at 21 Verona Street. The applicant owns the lots located at 21 Verona Street(Lot 2) and 9 Cloverdale Avenue (Lot 1). The northeast side of Lot 1 and the southeast side of Lot 2 abut one another. The applicant is requesting to subdivide the existing lot into Lots 1 & 2. These two lots do not meet the city frontage requirements and do to the changes made to the lots, the applicant is required to receive a Waiver from Frontage. Verona Street is an unpaved paper street. The applicant plan shows the proposed level of improvements. The Board may wish to discuss these improvements with the applicant. The applicant received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for lot area, lot area per dwelling, lot width, front yard setback, side yard setback, and height. The decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals has been attached. 6. Public Hearing-Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit— 1000Loring Avenue • The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing pertaining to the installation of antennas at 1000 Loring Avenue. The applicant is requesting to install twelve panel antennas on the structure and place an equipment room, cables and a cable tray in the building. The panel antennas will not be greater than fifteen feet above the height of the building and will be PB Memorandum September 5,2000-4 painted to match the colors of the building. The traffic generated by the facility will be limited to approximately one to two trips per month, which is an insignificant amount. A representative from Nextel Communications will present the application to the Board. • • • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, September 7, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, September 7, 2000 in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, John Moustakis, David Weiner, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, and Lee Harrington. Also present were Senior Planner Don Cefalo, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Members Absent: Bill Luster and Carter Vinson Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Discussion Pertaining to Final Elevations for Jefferson At Salem— 190 Brid a Street Denise Sullivan informed the Board that the applicant has requested that this item be postponed until the next meeting of the Planning Board as they are not ready to present tonight. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review—Peabody Essex Museum—Liberty Street and Essex Street • Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and reviewed the concerns of the Board from the previous meeting. He stated that tonight they wanted to review the traffic patterns and take a look at the building this evening as well. Atty. Correnti explained that they looked at two way traffic coming out of the Museum Place Parking Garage which would call for Essex Street being made a two way street with the abandonment of Liberty Street between Essex and Charter Streets. He suggested that this new alignment would provide traffic flow to Charter Street from Hawthorne Boulevard when Liberty Street is closed. John Moustakis asked if there would be any parking on Essex Street. Atty. Correnti noted that there are currently 11 spaces on Essex Street and 10 spaces would remain. Walter Power addressed Atty. Correnti and noted that at the last meeting it was suggested that a road be constructed through the proposed public garden along Liberty.Street. Atty. Correnti noted they looked at that and that would create more turns with unsignalized intersections. David Wiener suggested that as a one way street it would relieve traffic from Essex Street. • John Moustakis noted that the Charter Street intersection is tough to get through now. • Denise Sullivan noted that once Essex Street is made a two way street that would alleviate the pressure. Walter Power questioned if the traffic study that was done included Essex Street being made a two way. Gene Collins suggested that they developer draft something that would depict the street proposed so that it could looked at and at least considered the one way street. Gene Collins asked if the external walkways would remain in perpetuity for pedestrian use. Arty. Correnti noted that the pedestrian walkways are addressed in the Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Salem. Walter Power noted that the Board could make that a condition of approval to reinforce the Memorandum of Understanding. Michael Kim of Mosha Safde Associates addressed the Board and explained the facade of the building. He showed pictures and explained how they came to the design that they chose. He noted that in choosing the materials for the buildings, other buildings in the neighborhood were taken into consideration. Atty. Correnti noted that the facade is being reviewed thoroughly by the DRB and the SRA. Walter Power noted that when the Board approved the plans for the Rogers building they • talked extensively about keeping the display windows in tact. He noted that the Museum has not followed through on that at all and he would like to know why they have not followed through with that. Chuck Puleo referred to the plan and noted that he would like to see windows along the side with the brick walls. Walter Power opened the hearing up for Public Comment at this time. Ward Two Councillor Regina Flynn addressed the Board and stated that she applauds the designers and she'believes that this project will be a presence in Salem. She noted that she is concerned about the pedestrian walkway, noting that Liberty Street is 21 feet and she believes that the suggested roadway would not take away from the building at all. She noted that the road would benefit the Marine Arts Gallery and the neighbors on Brown Street as well. Ward Three Councillor Joan Lovely addressed the Board and stated that she agreed with Councillor Flynn that the construction of the roadway through the public garden. She strongly urged the Board to consider this and noted that it would relieve traffic. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the closing of Liberty Street and the timing of the demolition of the Empire • Building being done in October. Arty. Correnti explained that the demolition is • scheduled to begin in mid September and there should be no problem for Halloween. Councillor O'Leary also noted that changing traffic patterns should go to the City Council and he suggested that he would like to see the developer go to the City Council for amendments. Atty. Correnti stated that the Museum continues to provide information to anyone who requests it. Walter Power addressed Councillor O'Leary and noted that in the past the Planning Board has made traffic suggestions to the City Council on other projects and they will look at this project as they have others in the past. Councillor At Large Tom Furey addressed the Board and stated that he is against creating another road in the downtown area. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter this evening, a motion was made by Gene Collins to continue the Public Hearing to September 21., 2000, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. Public Hearing— Site Plan Review—Highland Realty Co. LLC—392 Highland Avenue— Proposed Storage Facility Atty. Kevin Dolan of Woburn addressed the Board and presented the plans for a • proposed storage facility at 392 Highland Avenue. He explained that they are seeking Planning Board approval because they are in the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. Atty. Dolan recalled that at the July 6, 2000 Planning Board meeting the plans for this project were presented and the Board asked that they address the concerns of the neighbors. He noted that a meeting was held and they have done some traffic studies of other facilities that are similar to the one proposed. Atty. Dolan reviewed samples of lighting that they are proposing to use. He also noted that the noise from the air conditioning units was a concern. He stated that they are proposing to use 4 residential style air conditioners for the building and should generate less noise. Atty. Dolan noted that they are proposing put in a berm and tree plantings and fencing similar to what is in the neighborhood. Walter Power asked how the access would be gained to the second floor of the building. Atty. Dolan explained the plans and noted the area that would have stairways to the second floor. He noted the,locations on the plan. Jdhn Moustakis noted that the size and the number of the units was a concern to the neighbors. Atty. Dolan noted that the fust application had a typo in it that indicated that the number of units would be 200. John Moustakis noted that the neighbors had asked if • they would consider changing the number of units for the project, noting that 400 is a large amount. Walter Power asked how much distance there was between the two buildings on the lot. • Atty. Dolan stated that there is 50-75 feet. Lee Harrington suggested that the Planning Board should have a site visit. Walter Power opened the hearing up for Public Comment at this time. Councillor At Large Tom Furey addressed the Board and stated that he feels that this project would adversely effect the neighborhood and he is opposed to this use for the site. He suggested that a better choice would be a medical office building. Atty. Steve Singer representing the Highland Condominium owners addressed the Board and noted that they met with the developer and the discussion tonight does not show the changes that they suggested that they would make to the building. Scott Weissberg of the Highland Condominiums addressed the Board and reviewed the package of information that was prepared. He also noted that there are four storage facilities in the area. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and noted that he contacted Mr. Amanti and asked that he notify him when he had plans for the lot so that he could set up a neighborhood meeting and Mr. Amanti never called him to do that. • Ward Three Councillor Joan Lovely addressed the Board and noted that while the project is not in her ward, constituents of hers in ward three are across the street on Highland . Avenue. She stated that she felt that this is a dead use of this land and asked Mr. Amanti to consider a use that would be more alive and something that would add to the neighborhood. Patricia Liberti of 3 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed her objections to a storage facility being at this location. Bob Levin of 42 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed his concern that if the project is approved he would like to see them be required to install active fire sprinkler alarms. Sandra Warner of 3 Countryside Lane addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned about the alarms in the building. Michelle Rubano of 11 Pybum Avenue addressed the Board and stated that she is an abutter and is concerned about the effect that the drainage from the project would have on her property. Walter Power noted that the project would have to go to the Conservation Commission and they would address drainage issues. • • Councillor At Large Laura DeToma addressed the Board and stated that she has serious concerns about this project and the effect that it will have on the quality of life in the neighborhood. She noted that she echoed the concerns of her fellow Councillors and feels that the developer has not been responsive to the concerns of the neighbors. She stated that she feels that the Planning Board should not approve any project where the developer does not cooperate with the neighbors. Janet Mazer of 9 Countryside Lane addressed the Board and expressed her concerns about the trucks that are on the site from the existing business in the other building. Bill Mancinelli of 9 Longfellow Drive addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the date that the traffic study was done. David Bourque of 20 Indian Hill Lane addressed the Board and noted that the choices for landscaping should be considered by the neighbors. Joyce Nelson addressed the Board and stated that she is not opposed to anyone opening a business but that type of business does not belong in that area. There being no further comments or questions regarding this matter this evening, a motion was made by Lee Harrington to continue the public hearing to September 21, 2000, seconded by Gene Collins and approved unanimously. • The Planning Board scheduled a site visit-of Thursday, September 14, 2000 at 6:00 p.m. Public Hearing— Site Plan Review—Crosby Realty Trust— 111 and 119-125 Canal Street- Crosby's Market Atty. George Atkins addressed the Planning Board and explained the plans for the proposed renovations for Crosby's Market on Canal Street. Atty. Atkins explained that the proposed project includes the construction and expansion to the existing Crosby's Market building which is approximately 18, 334 s.f. The plan shows a proposed retail expansion of a 9,088 s.f building with an additional 2,860 feet for second floor office space. The proposed expansion will house a new bank, the relocation of an existing liquor store and provide office space for Crosby's Market. The new bank will have a drive through window that will only be accessible from an entrance off Canal Street. Atty. Atkins noted that they have agreed to put up a fence in the back of the building to limit access as requested by the neighbors. Atty. Atkins noted that they have asked for a variance on the parking noting that they have 152 spaces and there should be 177 spaces. He explained that their plan calls for employees to park behind the building to relieve parking for customers in the parking area. • • Atty. Atkins noted that the proposed project will improve the appearance of the entire structure and site improvements are planned as well. Gene Collins asked if the bank would clash with the other buildings. Atty. Atkins stated that the bank would fit in with the site. John Moustakis expressed concern about the loading area for the liquor store. He questioned how the trucks would load and unload in the area established. He also noted that he had concerns about trucks backing out of the loading area. Atty. Atkins stated that they would take a look at that and present something at the next meeting. Walter Power opened the hearing up for public comment at this time. Ward Five Councillor Kim Driscoll addressed the Board and stated that she is in favor of the plan. She noted that this will be a big amenity to the area, further noting that Canal Street is booming with business. Councillor At Large Laura DeToma addressed the Board and commended the applicant for his cooperation with the neighbors and for working with the city. She noted that the Crosby's are committed to the city. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and noted that Mr. Crosby does a lot of the city and runs a fine establishment. • There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter this evening a motion as made by' ee Harrington to continue the public hearing to September 21, 2000, seconded by`John Moustakis and approved unanimously. Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage Requirements—21 Verona Street Sabrina Harmon from DiMento and DiMento addressed the Board and presented the plan. She explained that the applicant owns 21 on Verona Street (lot 2)and 9 Cloverdale Ave. (lot 1). She explained that the Northeast side of lot 1 and the southeast side of lot 2 abut one another and the applicant is requesting to subdivide the existing lots into lots 1 &2. She noted that these lots do not meet the frontage requirements and due to the changes made to the lots, the applicant is required to receive a Waiver from Frontage. Atty. Harmon stated that the applicant applied for and received variances from the ZBA for lot area, lot area per dwelling, lot width, front and rear setbacks, and height. Walter Power read comments from other city Boards and Commissions. Comments from the City Engineer were noted and Atty. Harmon noted that the plans presented this evening reflect the concerns of the City Engineer. • Walter Power opened the hearing up to public comment at this time. There was no one. present who wished to speak on the application. It was suggested that the applicant notify the abutters that the work is occurring on the property. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to approve the Waiver from Frontage for 21 Verona Street, seconded by Gene Collins and approved unanimously. Public Hearing— Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit—NEXTEL— 1000 Loring Avenue Chris Nassaria of NEXTEL presented the plans for the installation antennas at 1000 Loring Avenue. He explained that they are requesting to install 12 panel antennas on the structure and place an equipment room, cable and cable tray inside the building. He noted that the panel antennas would not be greater than fifteen feet about the height of the building and will be painted to match the colors of the building. Mr. Nassaria noted that the traffic generated by the facility will be limited to-two trip per month which will have no effect on the neighborhood. Walter Power opened the hearing up to public comment at this time. There was no one present who wished to speak on the application. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Lee Harrington to approve the Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit for NEXTEL, at 1000 Loring Avenue, 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 John Moustakis, to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB090700 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETT. ';• -''' 1Si PLANNING DEPARTMENT •PATRICK REFFETT I ONE SALEM GREEN City Planner � DU-32—+ I �� t— G.� 01970 (978)745-9595 Ext. 311 Fax (978)740-0404 Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, September 21, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuation Public Hearing— Site Plan Review—Crosby Realty Trust— 111 and 119- 125 Canal Street—Crosby's Market (7:30 PM— 7:50 PM) 2. Form A— 111 and 119-125 Canal Street (7:50 PM— 8:00 PM) 3. Discussion Pertaining to Final Elevations —Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (8:00 PM—8:30 PM) 4. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street (8:30 PM - 9:30 PM) 5. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review—Highland Realty Co., LLC —392 Highland Avenue(9:30 PM — 10:30 PM) 6. Old/New Business (10:30 PM — 10:35 PM) Ttub noltes posted cn "O7'tlriai Sul-latin board" City Hall Ave., Mass. on Spl. lx -4,cc 2aA a 239 of M-G.L. • ��� `� o Citp of �balem, Alamncbuattg Planning A3oarb ®ne .4alem Oreen Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, September 21, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuation Public Hearing—Site Plan Review— Crosby Realty Trust— 111 and 119- 125 Canal Street— Crosby's Market (7:30 PM— 7:50 PM) 2. Form A— 111 and 119-125 Canal Street (7:50 PM—8:00 PM) 3. Discussion Pertaining to Final Elevations —Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (8:00 PM— 8:30 PM) 4. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street (8:30 PM - 9:30 PM) 5. Continuation of Public Hearing— Site Plan Review—Highland Realty Co., LLC—392 Highland Avenue (9:30 PM— 10:30 PM) 6. Old/New Business (10:30 PM— 10:35 PM) One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 �V� cIIL Citp of *alem, ;0Ia!5.oarbu!5ett!6 • Manning Aoarb e (One balem green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Don Cefalo, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: September 16, 2000 RE: Agenda—September 21, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review— 111, 119— 125 Canal Street—Crosby's Market The Planning Board will open a public hearing under site plan review for the property located 111, 119— 125 Canal Street. The proposed project includes the construction and expansion to the existing Crosby's Market building which is approximately 18,334 square feet. The plan shows a proposed retail expansion of approximately 9,088 square foot building with an additional 2860 square feet for a second floor office space. The proposed expansion will house a new bank, the relocation of an existing liquor store and provide office space for Croby's Market. The new bank will have a drive-thru window that will only be accessible from an entrance off Canal Street. At the Board's September 7th hearing, the location of the loading zone for the proposed liquor store was discussed. The Board questioned how a truck would load and unload in the area and expressed concerns with a truck backing up out of the loading zone. The applicant agreed to address this issue at the next meeting. A draft decision for this project has been enclosed in the packet for the Board's review. 2. Discussion Pertaining to Final Elevations—Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street Woodman Associates and JPI will be presenting their comments pertaining to the elevations for Jefferson at Salem. JPI's architect, EDI, has agreed to incorporate all of • the comments received from Woodman Associates into their elevations. EDI will present the elevations which address Woodman's comments to the Planning Board. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum September 16,2000-2 • The decision for this project has been filed thus; JPI is presenting the final elevations in conformance with the condition that the Board will approve its final elevations. 2. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review- Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street The Planning Board opened a public hearing for the expansion of the Peabody Essex Museum. The project includes the construction of an approximately 100,000 square foot addition to the main museum building, a new public park, a pedestrian esplanade, and the locating of a 19" century Chinese house on the site. The plan calls for the demolition of the Empire building and portions of the houses currently located at 10 Liberty Street and 42 Charter Street. Both houses are proposed to be relocated to portions of the site and will be incorporated into the project. In 1997, the Mayor and the City Council negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Peabody Essex Museum. The MOU requires certain tasks to be undertaken by the Museum and certain tasks to be undertaken by the City. At the last Planning Board meeting, the Board questioned whether the external walkway would remain open in perpetuity. I reviewed the MOU and it states that the Museum is required to provide for an alternate, all hours, exterior pedestrian walkway between Essex Street and Charter Street. There is no time frame associated with this statement, thus it is determined that a walkway must be provided in perpetuity. In addition, the Board discussed the use of the interior main • spine of the Museum as additional pedestrian walkways. It is important that this public access be continuously open to the public for future use and that it will not be impeded upon by the security of the Museum. The Board may wish to include a condition such as this in their site plan review decision. At the last meeting, the Board was presented with a new traffic alternative. This new alternative incorporated Essex Street as a two way and the abandonment of Liberty Street between Essex and Charter. This new alignment will bring the flow of traffic from Essex Street to a signalized intersection at Hawthorne. The new alignment will provide traffic flow to Charter Street via Hawthorne once Liberty Street is no longer accessible. In addition, comments were made by the public suggesting a road be constructed where the pedestrian walkway is shown on the plan. The Board discussed the proposal and comments were made pertaining to the traffic issues associated with the new roadway as well as pedestrian and open space issues. The applicant will make a presentation pertaining to the roadway at the Board's next meeting. At the last meeting, the architect began to present the elevation of the Museum expansion. The Board may wish to review the size of the expansion in relationship to the downtown area. In addition, the Board may want to keep in mind that the buildings are also being reviewed by the SRA's Design Review Board, which is made up of several architects. • It is expected that the applicant will present the plans for Armory Park at the next meeting. PB Memorandum September 16,2000-3 s. • 4. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review -392 Highland Avenue The Planning Board opened a public hearing under site plan review for the property located a 392 Highland Avenue on September 7, 2000. The proposed project includes the construction of a self-storage facility. The plan shows a two-story approximately 53,000 square foot building. The building will house approximately 200 tenant spaces. There will be limited parking provided on the site for the office space and ample room for vehicles to access the bays. A self-storage facility is typically a low traffic impact on a community, but aesthetics can be an issue. I would suggest that the Board particularly review the material chosen for the building and the bays to ensure that they are aesthetically pleasing. A possible alternative may be an internal facility. In addition, the Board should request landscaping to be provided along the side lot lines to create a buffer to both the adjacent lots and those driving along Highland Avenue. These two issued were brought up at the last meeting, by a large contingency of abutters. The abutters agreed that the property owner has a right to develop the parcel of land, but develop it in a way that will work with the community. Down size the building and incorporate elevations that will provide a less aggressive appearance will help the situation. The other issue regarding the vegetated buffer around the proposed development. The abutters want to be assured that if a storage structure is built, it will be concealed year round. A good solution would be to plant conifer trees and shrubbery will provide a green barrier though out the year. • The project does not require approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This project does require Conservation Commission approval. Wetland issues that were brought up at the last meeting will be addressed when the applicant files with the Conservation Commission. At the Board's September 7, 2000 meeting, many residents made comments pertaining to the proposed development. The comments made at the meeting included the following: • A storage facility is not in keeping with the area. As well as there are too many storage facilities currently in the area. • The garage doors are unattractive and should be removed from the structure. • The footprint of the structure is too large for the lot • The buffer zone located adjacent to the Old Village Drive is only five feet, which is not sufficient. • The proposal does not include sufficient landscaping on the site to buffer the building or the adjacent properties • Questions were raised pertaining to the width of the aisle surrounding the building. It appears that if a vehicle were to back up to the door, it would not be feasible for another vehicle to pass the parked vehicle. • Questions were raised pertaining to drainage on the site. • Residents expressed concerns pertaining to the types of items stored on the site and the traffic associated with customers. The residents suggested that businesses be prohibited • from storing on the site. 0 The hours of operation were brought up as a concern PB Memorandum September 16,2000-4 • The residents stated that the number of units were high and questioned whether they could be reduced. A site visit was held on Thursday, September 14, 2000. Many of the same concerns were expressed at the site. It is expected that the applicant will address these concerns at the Board's next meeting. • • Salem Planning Board •, Minutes of Meeting Thursday, September 21, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, September 21, 2000 in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, David Weiner, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Bill Luster and Lee Harrington. Also present were, Assistant City Planner Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Don Cefalo, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Continuation of Public Hearing Crosby's Supermarket—Canal Street Renovations Atty. George Atkins addressed the Board and reviewed the revisions that have been made to the plan since the last meeting. Atty. Atkins noted that they have revised the area behind the liquor store, which is an improvement and they have moved the dumpster. Walter Power asked if there were any changes to the electrical system. Ed Berman addressed the Board and stated that they would be upgrading from 1200 amps to 1600. • Mr. Berman also reviewed the material for the facade of the building. He noted that the plans show concrete but they have decided to use dry wall and clap boards which will be more attractive. Walter Power asked about the roof top air conditioning units that are proposed. Atty. Atkins explained that they will be replacing the unit for the liquor store and the air conditioning for the new part of Crosby's will be buffered to the rear of the building. Walter Power noted that he would like a condition in the approval that the Planning Board take another look at the air conditioning when construction is complete if any concerns should arise. Motion made by John Moustakis to close the public hearing, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. Denise Sullivan reviewed the draft decision with the Board. Motion made by Gene Collins to approve the Site Plan Review Special Permit for Crosby's Supermarket for renovations on Canal Street, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. Page 1 • Form A— 111- 119— 125 Canal Street—Crosby's Supermarket Atty. Atkins explained the Form A for the property at 111-119-125 Canal Street. There being no comments or questions from the Board a motion was made by Gene Collins to approve the Form A for 11-119-125 Canal Street, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. Discussion on Final Elevations for the Jefferson At Salem Jonathan Woodward the Architect hired on behalf of the City to do a peer review of the plans for the Jefferson at Salem addressed the Board and noted that had completed his review. He reviewed the drawings and explained the process that they used to research the architectural styles of the surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Woodward noted that they are planning to use hardy plank for the facade of the buildings. David Weiner asked if there were any locations that hardy plank has been used that the Board could visit. He noted that this parcel is in the entrance to the downtown and he would like to be sure that it looks right. Denise Sullivan explained that the details of the buildings were what Mr. Woodward was to look at and he has done that. She also noted that he has made suggestions to JPI and they have agreed to them. • Bill Luster suggested that he would like to see a sample of the hardy plank John Moustakis agreed noting that he wants to make sure that this is attractive for the city. Mr. Woodward stated that samples of the hardy plank will available at the next meeting for the review of the Board. Continuation of Public Hearing—Peabody Essex Museum— Site Plan Review Special Permit—Liberty and Essex Streets Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and stated that there are three things that they would like to review with the Board this evening. He introduced Laura Celano to review the plans for Armory Square. Ms. Celano addressed the Board and presented the plans for Armory Square. She noted that the comments of the DRB have been taken into consideration and some changes have been made to the plans. Walter Power noted that the bell is an important artifact and the location of it should be in an area where it can be seen. He suggested that it be in the center of Armory Park. Ms. Celano stated that they looked at that but felt that it would disrupt the flow of pedestrian traffic. • Page 2 • Lee Harrington asked if the Veterans Council has been made aware of the changes. Ms. Celano stated that John Grimes of the Peabody Essex Museum has held several meetings with the Veterans Commission. Joan Peyrebrube of VHB explained the plans that they have suggested to alleviate the traffic at Hawthorn Boulevard and Essex Streets. Walter Power asked if they have considered the possibility of putting a road in to replace Liberty Street. Bill Cullen noted that the Council eliminated Liberty Street and he felt that by creating a road in that location would be increasing the danger. He also noted that the elderly tenants at Charter Street might be inclined to use the park, but noted that the road in that location may deter them from using it. Bill Luster stated that he felt that that designing a road for that location could be a nightmare. Walter Power opened the hearing up for public comment at this time. City Planner Patrick Reffert addressed the Board and explained that the Planning Department has been looking at how to make this work for a number of weeks. • He explained the options that they have looked at. He noted that they are concerned about diminishing the connection from the downtown to Essex Street and the waterfront. Ward Two Councillor Regina Flynn addressed the Board and expressed her concern at to why there should be a road created in that location. She asked the Board not to make a decision on that issue this evening so that we can sit down with the City Planner and the Police Department to see if a solution can be found. Maureen Brodeur, Assistant Executive Director of the Salem Housing Authority addressed the Board and noted that the Salem Housing Authority Board of Directors is against the roadway as it stands now, noting that the present proposed location is too close to the Housing Authority parking lot entrances. Ann Laffof Winter Street addressed the Board and stated that she agrees with Councillor Flynn. Councillor At Large Tom Furey addressed the Board and expressed his opposition to the proposed roadway. Jim Carney of Cambridge Street addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the landscaping, noting that he would like to see the project have a • combination of deciduous and evergreen trees. Page 3 • Staley McDermott addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the changes to Armory Park and the use of the facade of the drill shed. Councillor At Large Arthur Sargent addressed the Board and suggested that the Board consider closing the part of Liberty Street and make Essex Street two way and see how that works. Councillor Regina Flynn addressed the Board and noted that her concern is the impact of the project on the neighbors. There being no further questions or comments this evening a motion was made by John Moustakis to continue the public hearing to October 5, 2000, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review Special Permit—Highland Realty Trust—Proposed Storage Facility Atty. Kevin Dolan addressed the Board and explained the history of the project. He noted that at the last meeting. He explained the changes that they have made to the plans. He noted that the dumpster, which is for the existing business on the site has been removed from this plan. • Walter Power asked if there would be any more trees cut on the property. Bob Griffin explained that the cutting was within the footprint and noted the locations. Bill Luster stated that he would like a representative from the City Engineers Office talk about drainage on that site at the next meeting. Mr. Griffin noted that the City Engineer has had the drainage calculations for a couple of months now. Gary Sinden the Architect for the project addressed the Board and showed a photograph of the area and a computer generated model of the proposed building. Walter Power opened the hearing up for public comment at this time. Anthony Liberti of 3 Lions Lane addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned about the location of the air conditioning units. Mr. Griffin stated that the air conditioning units would be towards the back of the building near ground level. Scott Weissburg addressed the Board and asked the Board to consider what the purposed of the Planning Board is and urged them to deny this project. David Bourque of 20 Indian Hill Road addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the zoning requirements and asked that the Board consider the • concerns of the Trustees of the Condo Association. Page 4 • Patricia Liberti of 3 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed her concern about the facade of the building. Kate Wilson of 9 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed her concern about surface drainage and snow storage on the site. Anita Thomas of 23 Carriage Hill Lane addressed the Board and expressed her concerns about the additional curb cuts for access to the site. Bill Luster addressed the Board and stated that he is concerned that there is only 19 parking spaces on the plan and there is an existing business on the site. He suggested that the Board ask the City Solicitor if they need to provide additional parking. He also noted that he would like the Planning Department to investigate the matter of 60 feet being in the RI district and the large portion of storm water that needs to be addressed. Mary Beth Nolet of 40 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed her opinion of the project and the lack of the concern for the neighborhood that Mr. Amanti has shown in this process. Ward Three Councillor Joan Lovely addressed the Board and expressed her concern that she is offended by the way the developer has addressed this project • with the neighbors. She noted that this project is in an entrance corridor and the developer should be reaching out to the neighbors and the community. She asked that the Planning Board deny the project. Frank Felmo of Indian Hill Road addressed the Board and expressed his concern about the additional traffic that would be generated in the neighborhood. Councillor At Large Laura DeToma addressed the Board and expressed he concern as well about how the developer has treated the neighborhood. She noted that this is a big project for a small space and urged the Planning Board to deny the project. There being no further comments or questions regarding this matter a motion was made by John Moustakis to continue the public hearing to October 19, 2000, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved unanimously. Page 5 • There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting a motion was made by Bill Cullen to adjourn the meeting, seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB092100 • Page 6 i Citp of 6alem, Alaggarb gettg • a Planning �Boarb ®ne .6alern green Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, October 5, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman Tentative Agenda: • 1. Discussion Pertaining to Final Elevations —Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street (7:30 PM—8:00 PM) 2. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street (8:00 PM—9:45 PM) 3. Old/New Business (9:45 PM—9:55 PM) TbW notice poated on "Official ®uRatin Board" City Hall Ave., Salem, Mass. on Oe, a, acco at 8': 33 Ail Ipp � Hitt ctw. 30 SC. WA & 138 of MIL. � , One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS PLANNING DEPARTMENT •PATRICK REFFETT ONE SALEM GREEN City Planner4D 01970 (978)745-9595 Ext.311 Fax(978)740-0404 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Don Cefalo, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: October 2, 2000 RE: Agenda— October 5, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. L 1. Continuation of Discussion Pertaining to Final Elevations—Jefferson at Salem— 190 Bridge Street Woodman Associates and JPI will be presenting their comments pertaining to the elevations for Jefferson at Salem. JPI's architect, EDI, has agreed to incorporate all of the comments received from Woodman Associates into their elevations. EDI will present the elevations which address Woodman's comments to the Planning Board. The decision for this project has been filed thus; JPI is presenting the final elevations in conformance with the condition that the Board will approve its final elevations. At the last meeting (September 21), Jonathan Woodman (Architect for the Planning Board) discussed the use of a material called "Hardy Plank" (clapboard made of concrete) for the front and rear sides of the buildings. Red brick will be uses at the ends of buildings that face Bridge Street. One of the Planning Boards concerns was the durability of the Hardy Plank. Since this is a new material, the Board asked Woodsman and JPI to provide locations of buildings in the area that has used this material, so they could see how it looks. Other issues were the maintenance and color of the Hardy Plank. Woodsman suggested that earth tone colors (browns) with a gray base be use to help incorporate the buildings with the surrounding area. The Planning Board was also concerned that the buildings would look shabby and need repainting after a few years. Woodman replied by saying that it would depend on the quality of the paint that was used, but like every building that is painted, it would eventually need to be repainted. The Planning Board asked if it was possible for the PB Memorandum October 2, 2000-2 • manufacturer to make Hardy Plank with the desired colors already in it, which would, eliminate future repainting. 2. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street The Planning Board opened a public hearing for the expansion of the Peabody Essex Museum. The project includes the construction of an approximately 100,000 square foot addition to the main museum building, a new public park, a pedestrian esplanade, and the locating of a 19' century Chinese house on the site. The plan calls for the demolition of the Empire building and portions of the houses currently located at 10 Liberty Street and 42 Charter Street. Both houses are proposed to be relocated to portions of the site and will be incorporated into the project. In 1997, the Mayor and the City Council negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Peabody Essex Museum. The MOU requires certain tasks to be undertaken by the Museum and certain tasks to be undertaken by the City. At the last Planning Board meeting, the Board questioned whether the external walkway would remain open in perpetuity. I reviewed the MOU and it states that the Museum is required to provide for an alternate, all hours, exterior pedestrian walkway between Essex Street and Charter Street. There is no time frame associated with this statement, thus it is determined that a walkway must be provided in perpetuity. In addition, the Board discussed the use of the interior main • spine of the Museum as additional pedestrian walkways. It is important that this public access be continuously open to the public for future use and that it will not be impeded upon by the security of the Museum. The Board may wish to include a condition such as this in their site plan review decision. The Board was presented with a new traffic alternative. This new alternative incorporated Essex Street as a two way and the abandonment of Liberty Street between Essex and Charter. This new alignment will bring the flow of traffic from Essex Street to a signalized intersection at Hawthorne. The new alignment will provide traffic flow to Charter Street via Hawthorne once Liberty Street is no longer accessible. In addition, comments were made by the public suggesting a road be constructed where the pedestrian walkway is shown on the plan. The Board discussed the proposal and comments were made pertaining to the traffic issues associated with the new roadway as well as pedestrian and open space issues. The applicant will make a presentation pertaining to the roadway at the Board's next meeting. The architect presented the elevations of the Museum expansion. The Board may wish to review the size of the expansion in relationship to the downtown area. In addition, the Board may want to keep in mind that the buildings are also being reviewed by the SRA's Design Review Board, which is made up of several architects. At the last meeting, the applicant presented the new design for Annory Park. The new design showed the relocation of the Revere Bell and the brief discussion regarding the Cadet Memorial that will incorporated the remaining rear wall of the old drill building. The SRA's Design Review Board will also review the new park design. PB Memorandum October 2, 2000-3 • It is expected that the applicant will review the traffic management plan and the lighting plan at the next meeting. • • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, October 5, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, October 5, 2000 in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, David Weiner, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Bill Luster, Lee Harrington and Carter Vinson. Also present were, Assistant City Planner Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Don Cefalo, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Discussion of Final Elevations for Jefferson at Salem—JPI Atty. Joseph Correnti addressed the Board and noted that at the last meeting the Board requested samples of the hardy plank that is proposed for the facade of the building. Walter Power addressed the meeting and stated that at the last meeting he was bothered by the Architect that was hired as a consultant for the city making the presentation. He noted that he found that the architect was in the middle defending the use of materials etc. and requested that JPI make the presentation • this evening. Jack Englert of JPI addressed the Board and explained that cemplank resists rotting and will not mildew or mold. He noted that it is durable and has a warranty for 50 years. He also explained that the material comes preprimed, but they will prime it and paint it on site. Bill Luster questioned whether they were choosing the cemplank because it is less expensive. Mr. Englert stated that the use of cedar plank is a maintenance issue, noting that over time it will fade with the weather, and the cemplank is maintenance free. He also noted that it is not a cheaper product, however in terms of maintenance there is a cost saving benefit. Mr. Englert also noted that he would rather have all granite but that would be cost prohibitive and he wants to provide the best product for the city. Bill Luster noted that the cemplank looks like cedar and asked if there was an opportunity to take a look at a test wall of buildings to see the material. John Moustakis noted that the final approval on elevations has always been that of the City Planner, with the exception of this cases. He suggested that the Board should have the City Planner address the concerns and report back to the Board, noting that JPI is into the construction drawings at this stage. • Page 1 • Carter Vinson stated that these are very big buildings that we will have for a long time and the Board needs to be comfortable with the final design. He suggested that we need a process that will allow that. Bill Cullen agreed with Mr. Moustakis and stated that at some point the Planning Board needs to give this to the City Planner. Mr. Englert addressed the Board and stated that they are making a forty million dollar investment on this project. He noted that they want the buildings to be attractive so that people will want to move into them. Walter Power noted that the location is such that people will see it when they enter the city and he wants to be sure that it is aesthetically pleasing. Gene Collins noted that JPI has been up front and agreed that the city planner can come back to the board. He also noted that it is not unusual to do a prototype for large projects. Denise Sullivan clarified that the City Planner should report to the Board and not have the applicant come back for final approval. David Weiner stated that he would like to see the material himself. • Bill Cullen suggested that the Board give them approval tonight so they can move on with the project. Carter Vinson stated that he has a concern over the whether the choice of material would do anything to the appearance of the mass of the building. Mr. Woodward stated that the issue of size was an issue from the beginning so the color choice is important. Walter Power asked how much trouble it would be for the developer to build a panel. Mr. Englert said that it would be no trouble since they would do that anyway. John Moustakis again expressed his concern that the Board should not hold this up any longer and leave it up to the City Planner. Bill Cullen recalled that a few weeks ago the Planning Board asked the developer to pay for a consultant. The Board has heard the report from the Architect and the expert has given his opinion, and now it seems that the Board is disputing his opinion. He suggested that the Board should rely on the City Planner to use his professional expertise on this matter. Carter Vinson noted that this is the largest development that he has seen since he • has been on the Board. Page 2 • David Weiner stated that the facade of the building will be greatly affected and he would like to see what it will look like. Carter Vinson suggested that the developer make a mock up for the Board to see and the Board can address issues by way of comment. Mr. Woodman suggested that they could do a computer-generated model of the building to show the Board. Walter Power read a letter from Ward 2 City Councillor Regina Flynn, and a letter from neighbors of the project. There being no further questions or comments a motion was made by Bill Cullen to approve the final elevations for the Jefferson at Salem, seconded by Lee Harrington and approved 5-4 with Gene Collins, Bill Luster, Carter Vinson and David Weiner opposed. Continuation of Public Hearin—Peabody Essex Museum Carter Vinson recused himself from discussion of this matter. Walter Power read letters of support for the Museum plans from Councillor at . Large Tom Furey, The Salem Partnership, and Council President Kevin Harvey. Atty. Joe Correnti addressed the Board and noted that they have very little left of their presentation and they would continue where they left off at the last meeting. John Moustakis noted that the Empire building is under demolition and stated that it is the height of the tourist season in Salem. Atty. Correnti reported that less than a third of the rear of the building has been demolished and the museum has agreed to stop demolition for the last two weeks of October and complete it after November 1, 2000. He also reported that the work on the house lots on Charter Street will begin next week. He noted that the work will include foundation preparations and the installation of a construction fence. Bill Wright,the project manager for Turner Construction addressed the Board and are explained the plans for the routes that the construction vehicles will take for deliveries of materials etc. He noted that materials would not be stored for longer than a week on the site, and showed a plan that indicated where vehicles would be stored on the site. Mr. Wright also noted that they are working with the city to plan to construct the roadway in phases. He also stated that they plan to get started with the construction after the first of the year and expect to be completed by 2003. • Page 3 • Mr. Wright explained the process of converting New Liberty Street and the impact that it will have on the Marine Arts Gallery. He explained that the Marine Arts Gallery will be provided with new gas and sewer connections and explained the access they will have. He noted that they are trying to keep the impact on the Marine Arts Gallery to a minimum. Walter Power asked if they had a plan for the washing of vehicles. Mr. Wright explained that they will have a certain location for the maintenance of vehicles. Walter Power explained that the contractor will be required to sweep the streets once a day or once a week depending on the need. He also noted that catch basins should be check occasionally to ensure that they are not full of debris. Lee Harrington noted that there is a sidewalk down there that was painted by some Salem Public School children and asked if they plan to preserve that. Mr. Wright stated that they are trying to salvage that and if they can they will give it to the city. Mr. Wright stated that he has met with Captain Callahan of the Salem Police Department to review the traffic patterns during construction. He also noted that they have received approval from the Board of Health and they are required to submit a Dust Control Plan to them prior to the start of construction. • Laura Celano addressed the Board and updated them on the process with the DRB. She explained that the west end of Essex Street mall brick will meet the existing brick. She also explained the plans for handicapped ramps and the granite curbing. Ms. Celano reviewed the plans for Armory Square. She reviewed the plan that was submitted to the DRB, which showed the diagonal paths and the layout of the park. She also noted that the Revere Bell has been moved to the front and center of the park Ms. Celano discussed the use of brick that is compatible as opposed to matching the existing brick. Bill Luster expressed concern about the difference in the brick and suggested that they have a brick delineation to show the area to cross Armory Square to the Essex Street Mall. Chuck Puleo noted that granite cobblestones are hard to drive on and actually slow travel down. Ms. Celano noted that the DRB has issues with the granite cobbles and handicap accessibility and has suggested a granite band. • Page 4 Walter Power suggested that the Board invite members of the DRB to attend the next Planning Board meeting to discuss these kinds of issues. A lengthy discussion followed on the collaboration of both boards. Denise Sullivan noted that the Planning Department staffs both boards and the views of the Planning Board can be relayed to the DRB. Atty. Correnti stated that the DRB process has been good, noting that Denise Sullivan and Patrick Reffert have moved the process along. He noted that there are issues that have to be solved, but this is an ongoing process. Lee Harrington suggested that the museum might be setting itself apart from the rest of the city when they should be trying to blend in. John Moustakis noted that the construction for JPI and the Museum could all be going on at the same time and he is concerned about traffic. Atty. Correnti noted that they would confer with the Police Department on the traffic and hire the necessary police details to handle traffic. Walter Power opened the meeting up for public comment at this time. Ward Two Councillor Regina Flynn addressed the Board and requested that the Museum take the plans to the Salem Common Neighborhood Association and • make a presentation to them. She also questioned whether the Armory Park would connect to the rest of the gardens behind the Essex Institute. Mrs. Flynn also suggested that money be set aside for signage mitigation on the pedestrian mall. Staley McDermott of 175 Essex Street addressed the Board and questioned if there was any screening for the transformers and the utilities. He stressed that this should be provided for the neighbors on this project as well as the upcoming redevelopment of the old Salem Police Station. He also suggested that all of the lights on the Essex Street pedestrian mall should be uniform. He also expressed concern about the drill-shed wall. Ms. Celano stated that the lighting in the public area would be the same as the City of Salem motif, however the public garden and Armory Square will have museum lights. Walter Power questioned why the standard lights that the city uses are not planned for the public garden. Atty. Correnti stated that the city standard is a street light and the public garden is not a street or a.walkway, and they wanted to use something soft and decorative. He noted that the city light is attractive but they were looking for something different. David Weiner noted that when he worked on City Hall Plaza in Boston they used City Hall brick. He suggested that a distinct area is nice and it is not wrong to do • that. He stated that he would support city hall brick for the project. Page 5 • Michael Kim addressed the Board and reviewed the plans for the drill-shed wall. He noted that they never intended for it to be an exterior wall and looked at ways to preserve it. He explained that they plan to reinforce the wall and add a new brick face. He noted that antique brick would be used. Lee Harrington asked if they had a consultant look at the traffic noting that he was concerned that drivers should know the configuration. Atty. Correnti noted that they would have an evolving traffic plan that they will work out with Captain Callahan. Atty. Correnti addressed the Board and noted that they are done with their formal presentation and they would address questions and issues raised this evening at the next meeting. He noted that they are meeting with the SRA on October 18th and the next Planning Board meeting is on October 19' . He also stated that they hope to get the decision of the DRB for the SRA meeting on the 18th. Bill Luster addressed the developer and suggested that he would like to see an easement in place that would insure that a building would never be built on the open access. Arty. Correnti stated that pedestrian access would remain open at all times. He also noted that if they were to make a change to that they would have to go back • to the City Council for approval. There being no further questions or comments this evening a motion was made by Bill Cullen to continue the public hearing to October 19, 2000, 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 Bill Cullen 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 Salem Planning Board PBl00500 • Page 6 CICLER(SA �lt DftireYTl, LEM, MA ,��55dCfjUgCttS OFFICE T A ;� a �,3lanning �oarD ®ne '�)aletn &reen 1180.0CT 11 P 3: 4 S Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will Hold its regular meeting on Thursday, October 19, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman Tentative Agenda: I. Continuation of Public Hearing— Site Plan Review— Highland Realty Co., LLC — 392 Highland Avenue 2. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street 3. Peabody Essex Museum —Discussion Pertaining to Museum Office Center 4. Patton Road Extension — Discussion Pertaining to the Form C Decision 5. Old/New Business 1"Uid notice poslkad ry^ 1,0KI( ial �j!lolln Acerd" CMy Hall Ave., 5alrtm, mics,. C11-1 U?r 1*7. 9crC &t - :y5 Foli a r t '`'Offh (itis. 30 SM. 20A A 136 of ilkll-. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 31'1 Fax (978) 740-0404 Citp of 4MIem, �Kaooacbuottz m ®. • Planning Aharb ,grA One balem green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Don Cefalo, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: October 17, 2000 RE: Agenda—October 19, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. I. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - 392 Highland Avenue The Planning Board opened a public hearing under site plan review for the property located a 392 Highland Avenue on September 7, 2000. The proposed project includes the construction of a self-storage facility. The plan shows a two-story approximately 53,000 square foot building. The building will house approximately 200 tenant spaces. There will be limited parking provided on the site for the office space and ample room for vehicles to access the bays. A self-storage facility is typically a low traffic impact on a community, but aesthetics can be an issue. I would suggest that the Board particularly review the material chosen for the building and the bays to ensure that they are aesthetically pleasing. A possible alternative may be an internal facility. In addition, the Board should request landscaping to be provided along the side lot lines to create a buffer to both the adjacent lots and those driving along Highland Avenue. These two issued were brought up at the last meeting, by a large contingency of abutters. The abutters agreed that the property owner has a right to develop the parcel of land, but develop it in a way that will work with the community. Down size the building and incorporate elevations that will provide a less aggressive appearance will help the situation. The other issue regarding the vegetated buffer around the proposed • development. The abutters want to be assured that if a storage structure is built, it will be concealed year round. A good solution would be to plant conifer trees and shrubbery will provide a green barrier though out the year. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 PB Memorandum October 16,2000-2 • The project does not require approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This project does require Conservation Commission approval. Wetland issues that were brought up at the last meeting will be addressed when the applicant files with the Conservation Commission. At the Board's September 21, 2000 meeting, many residents made comments pertaining to the proposed development. The comments made at the meeting included the following: • A storage facility is not in keeping with the area. As well as there are too many storage facilities currently in the area. • The garage doors are unattractive and should be removed from the structure. • The footprint of the structure is too large for the lot • The buffer zone located adjacent to the Old Village Drive is only five feet, which is not sufficient. • The proposal does not include sufficient landscaping on the site to buffer the building or the adjacent properties • Questions were raised pertaining to the width of the aisle surrounding the building. It appears that if a vehicle were to back up to the door, it would not be feasible for another vehicle to pass the parked vehicle. • Questions were raised pertaining to drainage on the site. • Residents expressed concerns pertaining to the types of items stored on the site and the traffic associated with customers. The residents suggested that businesses be prohibited from storing on the site. • The hours of operation were brought up as a concern • The residents stated that the number of units were high and questioned whether they could be reduced. At the last meeting the Board asked if the City Engineer would comment on the drainage for the proposed project. The Engineer will be unable to attend the hearing but his comments will be submitted to the Board on Thursday. In addition, the City Solicitor is reviewing the zoning issues in regards to the 60-foot encroachment into the residential zoned. The zoning bylaws states that 30 feet is allowed. The storage building extends 30 feet with an additional 30 feet for roadway and parking. The Solicitor's opinion will be submitted to the Board on Thursday as well. . 2. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Peabody Essex Museum - Liberty Street and Essex Street The Planning Board opened a public hearing for the expansion of the Peabody Essex Museum. The project includes the construction of an approximately 100,000 square foot addition to the main museum building, a new public park, a pedestrian esplanade, and the locating of a 19'h century Chinese house on the site. The plan calls for the demolition of the Empire building and portions of the houses currently located at 10 Liberty Street and 42 • Charter Street. Both houses are proposed to be relocated to portions of the site and will be incorporated into the project. In 1997, the Mayor and the City Council negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding PB Memorandum October 16,2000-3 • (MOU) with the Peabody Essex Museum. The MOU requires certain tasks to be undertaken by the Museum and certain tasks to be undertaken by the City. At the last Planning Board meeting, the Board questioned whether the external walkway would remain open in perpetuity. I reviewed the MOU and it states that the Museum is required to provide for an alternate, all hours, exterior pedestrian walkway between Essex Street and Charter Street. There is no time frame associated with this statement, thus it is determined that a walkway must be provided in perpetuity. In addition, the Board discussed the use of the interior main spine of the Museum as additional pedestrian walkways. It is important that this public access be continuously open to the public for future use and that it will not be impeded upon by the security of the Museum. The Board may wish to include a condition such as this in their site plan review decision. The Board was presented with a new traffic alternative. This new alternative incorporated Essex Street as a two way and the abandonment of Liberty Street between Essex and Charter. This new alignment will bring the flow of traffic from Essex Street to a signalized intersection at Hawthorne. The new alignment will provide traffic flow to Charter Street via Hawthorne once Liberty Street is no longer accessible. In addition, comments were made by the public suggesting a road be constructed where the pedestrian walkway is shown on the plan. The Board discussed the proposal and comments were made pertaining to the traffic issues associated with the new roadway as well as pedestrian and open space issues. The applicant will make a presentation pertaining to the roadway at the Board's next meeting. • The architect presented the elevations of the Museum expansion. The Board may wish to review the size of the expansion in relationship to the downtown area. In addition, the Board may want to keep in mind that the buildings are also being reviewed by the SRA's Design Review Board, which is made up of several architects. At the last meeting, the applicant presented the new design for Armory Park. The new design showed the relocation of the Revere Bell and the brief discussion regarding the Cadet Memorial that will incorporate the remaining rear wall of the old drill building. The Museum wants to use a different style brick and light fixtures instead of the standard used by the City. The Board may want to carefully review this matter and determine weather this change will impact the look and intensions the City is trying to present. The issues remaining before the Board include the open pedestrian access between Essex Street and Charter Street, the standardization of the bricks, and the standardization of the lighting. A draft decision for this project has been included in the packet. 3. Peabody Essex Museum—Discussion Pertaining to the Museum Office Center In past meetings, the Board has discussed the issue of the storefronts at the Museum Office Center or the Rogers Building. The Board has expressed that these storefronts do not meet the intent of the Board as required in their site plan review decision of December, 1996. The Museum will be present at the meeting to discuss the issues and address the Board's • concerns. PB Memorandum ' October 16, 2000-4 • 4. Patton Street Extension —Discussion Pertaining to its Form C Decision The Board approved the a nine lot subdivision on Patton Road in April, 1999. A condition of that approval was that the developer would provide an off site sidewalk from the proposed project to the intersection of Patton Road and Surrey Road. The developer has discussed the proposed construction of the sidewalk with the abutters, who have expressed their concerns and wishes that the sidewalk not be constructed. A letter to this effect has been included in the Board's packet, as well as a copy of the 1999 decision for the subdivision. • • • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, October 19, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, October 19, 2000 in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Bill Luster, Lee Harrington. Also present was Assistant City Planner Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Don Cefalo. In the absence of Planning Board Clerk Eileen Sacco this meeting was taped and transcribed by Eileen Sacco. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review-Highland Realty 392 Highland Avenue Chairman Walter Power read a letter into the record from the applicant requesting that the public hearing be continued to November 16, 2000 so that they may evaluate some possible changes to the footprint and layout of the facility. Motion made by Bill Luster to continue the public hearing to November 16, 2000, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. • Walter Power requested that the Board takes the agenda out of order and goes to item#3 on the agenda, the Peabody Essex Museum discussion relative to the L. H. Rogers Building Discussion with Peabody Essex Museum Officials regarding the L. H. Rogers Buildin John Grimes from the Peabody Essex Museum addressed the Board and noted that at the previous meeting there was some concern expressed by the Board about the use of the showcase windows at the L. H. Rogers building and the conditions of the prior approval. He stated that they have looked the approval and see that there was some concern about the building going from a retail use to office space and there was a desire on the part of the Board to maintain some liveliness at the street level and to create some visual interest in those windows. He noted that they had talked at that time about using some case work and video screens and media in those windows to achieve that effect. He noted that they have taken some steps towards that by placing museum pieces on pedestals in the windows and there is certainly more that they can do to fulfill that condition. He explained a drawing that shows some changes to the original discussion including more objects in the windows. • Page 1 of 18 Mr. Grimes noted that they would be placing 2 high-resolution flat TV screens that would be used to show presentations with Power Point etc. He noted that this technology is consistent with what they use in the Museum. Mr. Grimes explained the layout of the building regarding office space etc. He stated that they would like to implement this and work with the Board to see if this is effective. Lee Harrington asked if they would be running on a regular basis or sporadically. Mr. Grimes stated that they would run them continually. Gene Collins asked about the other windows in the building. Mr. Grimes stated that they could increase the amount of windows that are used if that is something the Board would want. Gene Collins noted that he thought that the use of the windows would be to premier some of the Museum exhibits. Mr. Grimes stated that they could do that, however they cannot display artifacts in the windows because of sunlight since they would fade. Walter Power noted that this was a project that the Board approved in 1996 and there was continual discussion from the Board members and the public that there • would be a feeling or a store front down there. He stated that he walked there tonight prior to the meeting and every window shade was pulled down and the area was dark and is really not an extension of Essex Street. He recalled that L.H. Rogers had those windows lit after dark and there merchandise displays. He noted that at the time the Board made it clear to the Museum that they have appropriate displays. He noted that it is a great place for the Museum to get publicity and for people walking on Essex Street it completes that commercial fapade and not make that end of the street dead, and it is completely dead. He stated that he feels that the Museum has not lived up to the letter of that and it is a blind office front, noting that there are two pedestals in the windows with one artifact on it in the entrance area. He stated that he did not feel that was keeping with the agreement and now it may cost some money to change that. He also stated that he feels that the city has lost a great opportunity there to have that end of Essex Street continued to invite people there after dark to walk. He asked that the Planning Board to readdress this. Gene Collins asked if they had plans for this when the approval was granted in 1996. Walter Power stated that they didn't have any formal plans but we had talked about it and they were agreeable at the time. Mr. Grimes stated that they agree that they did not go far enough down the road in relation to those discussions and they have started to address it with the pedestals and they can and will do more. He also stated that they would need to work with it and consult • with the Board to see what works. Page 2 of 18 Gene Collins asked if there was a possibility that they could have a quick turnaround on this. Denise Sullivan suggested that Board should give the museum some idea of what they need. She noted that Mr. Power is concerned that the windows are not lit at night. Mr. Power agreed noting he felt that is important. Mr. Grimes stated that they would work with their design staff to work this out and see how to maximize the depth of the space in consideration of the office space. He also noted that they would be working to get some programming on there that would interest people. Mr. Power stated that the Board is looking for a plan that we can agree upon and some assurance that the museum will go forward with it. John Moustakis noted that there was a discussion on outside lighting for the whole building. Mr. Grimes stated that they would like to go ahead and implement this and work with the architect on the issues. Bill Cullen noted that when this issue came up at the last meeting he spoke in favor of the museum because he had seen things in the windows. The next time he went by the shades were closed. He noted that he doesn't see what the problem is they can put exhibits up tomorrow. W. Grimes stated that there is a problem with the office staff shutting the shades because of sunlight. He noted that they would go back to the staff and tell them that this is an important issue to the Planning Board. Denise Sullivan suggested that they move the blinds back so that the shades could be closed and the window displays and lighting would be visible on the street. Mr. Grimes stated that they could certainly look into that. Lee Harrington stated that they should tell the people who are working there that this is important to the Board. Bill Cullen suggested that they could put dividers up and that could take care of this. He noted that this issue is coming up every couple of weeks. Mr. Grimes noted that the plans that were developed were the plans that were approved by the Board and no changes were made to those plans. He agreed that discussions were held on the use of the windows in ways that would accomplish what the Board wanted. W. Power stated that while the Board did not spell out the intent in the decision, he felt that the verbal discussions were acknowledgeable. Bill Luster asked to see the original decision since he was not on the Board at that time. Mr. Grimes stated that they would implement this in the fastest way that they can and will look at a plan. • Page 3 of 18 \i Arty. Correnti addressed the Board and stated that the message is clear and the Museum will work on it. He also noted that it would be a revolving matter and the Board can look at what they do and make comment. He suggested that they come back in November and update the Board. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review- Peabody Essex Museum Atty. Correnti addressed the Board and noted that at the last meeting they reviewed the DRB recommendations and some of the changes that they suggested. He updated the Board on the permitting, noting that last evening the Salem Redevelopment Authority accepted the recommendations of the Design Review Board and voted to approve the Museums plans as submitted and amended. Arty. Correnti note the Planning Board has seen all of the revisions to the plans that were approved by the SRA. He explained that the primary change that they talked about was the alignment of the archway in the public garden and explained the pattern of the handicapped ramps and walkways. He explained that at the last meeting they reviewed all of the amendments and at this time they would answer questions or review parts of the plan if the Board would like. He stated that they are hopeful of a decision this evening. Walter Power asked to have the access to the Kiernan property reviewed. Atty. Correnti noted that this was part of the original plan and has not changed. He noted that it has been reviewed by the Fire Department. Laura Celano explained the plan for the Kiernan property. She noted that there is a curb cut for access and an existing wall will remain. She noted that,the access is about 20 feet wide and the existing driveway will remain the same. She also noted that the architect did turning templates to ensure that the turnaround is accessible. She explained that they did studies on turning access and that included backing out. Walter Power noted that he looked at it and it looks tight. Ms. Celano explained that they looked at the space and make of his car etc. and they looked at this carefully. Atty. Correnti stated that they are comfortable that this plan meets or exceeds any driveway specification in any ordinance. He also noted that they showed drawings with a Semi tractor trailer truck so that deliveries could be made. Walter Power noted that he was concerned about backing out of the site. Walter Power asked if the land was going to be sold to Mr. Kiernan. Atty. Correnti stated that there are no plans to sell that land now or in the future, but an easement would be granted. Walter Power asked if there would be access in perpetuity. Arty. Correnti stated that as long as there is a building there and a driveway that access would be granted. Page 4 of 18 • Chuck Puleo asked how that would affect a potential new owner if Mr. Kiernan wanted to sell the building. Atty. Correnti explained that a new owner would have access as long as the building is there and the museum maintains it. Walter Power expressed concern that the Board is approving a plan that has a business next to it that has adequate access. Denise Sullivan noted that the access was taken away by the City Council. Walter Power noted that he is concerned about that and that the individual should have a Right of Way. Atty. Correnti stated that is would be and they would accept a condition on that. Walter Power noted that if the next owner cannot use the Right of Way that would be taking value away from the property. Atty. Correnti agreed and stated that the access will be there, and noted that how it is written into the decision is important, noting that he does not think that they are in disagreement. Walter Power asked that they discuss the intersection and the color of the brick. He noted the things that have been discussed. Bill Luster noted that they have talked about specific design issues in the last couple of meetings. He noted that there was discussion about the color of the bricks and the fighting compared to what the city has on the Essex Street mall. Atty. Correnti explained that the SRA and DRB approved a slightly different shade of brick that is complimentary to the city brick and that was recommended after the DRB reviewed samples. He also explained that they would use all of the city standard fights on Essex Street and Liberty Street and noted the locations on the plan. He explained that there would be a different set of lights in Armory Square and the Public Garden. He explained that the city standard lights are street lights and the DRB felt comfortable that the proposed lights for the Public Garden and Armory Square are complimentary. Bill Luster asked about the idea that was raised about setting off a smaller area between the handicapped ramps with a different brick pattern to indicate the location of the crosswalk. Atty. Correnti stated that the DRB agreed with the Planning Board that it should be somehow set off. He noted that they will be working on that and going back with that information to the DRB. Chuck Puleo asked if they would be continuing the same brick pattern all the way down Essex Street and up Charter Street. Atty. Correnti stated that they would be using the same brick all the way up and around the complex. He explained the area and the intent of the pattern so that people will follow the walk to other areas such as the Derby Street business and the Witch memorial. • Page 5 of 18 • Walter Power asked if the sidewalk that is being widened down to just past the park, and the plans are going to recommend two way traffic on Essex Street with a recommended right hand tum on Hawthorne Boulevard at the lights, going to Derby Street. He stated that he was concerned that there was adequate width. Atty. Correnti noted that there are no plans in the new plan for bus parking on Essex Street and explained the plan for Essex Street. He noted that Essex Street maintains two eleven foot wide travel lanes all the way from Hawthorne all the way around. He noted that there is parking on Essex Street. He noted that the City Council would have to approve the proposal. He noted that a couple of spaces would be eliminated. Walter Power suggested that there might be three spaces needed for traffic density cueing. Atty. Correnti stated that VHB would prepare a package that will have all of the information that will be needed to show how that will work. Bill Luster stated that traditionally the Planning Board makes recommendations to the City Council on matters of traffic and they either accept them and approve it or they don't. He noted that in this situation it is critical that Essex Street become a two way and that there be a right hand turn lane, and there is nothing to ensure that the critical part of this plan will pass the council. Atty. Correnti noted that the Museum came in with their original plan and proposed no changes. During discussions a lot of good ideas were brought up and they were asked to have their engineers look at the three options. He noted that the Planning Board agrees that the two way plan works and they agree with that and like the plan. He stated that they can do this plan whether it is a one way or a two way and they will support the two way plan because they think this is best plan. He also stated that they will provide the engineering data for this plan and they will go to the City Council when it is before them and ask that it be made a two way. He noted that they realize that they are not the ultimate decision maker on this and neither is the Planning Board, but he felt that if the Board has an extremely strong recommendation and the Museum supports it we can work on that. Lee Harrington stated that he has heard from a couple of merchants in that area that have not heard anything about this plan, noting that one owner was concerned about deliveries to his business and the traffic. Atty. Correnti stated that when that process takes place the neighbors will be notified. Bill Luster, noted that when they are notified that will lead to a spirited discussion on whether or not Essex Street should be a two way noting that it would lead to the issue of whether it works if it is not two way. He noted that it would not work as effectively if it were a one way. Atty. Coffenti noted that it is not really expensive to make the street two ways. He also explained that the curb on Essex Street has to be reset by two feet to • increase the lanes to 11 feet. He noted that it is all in front of Museum property. Page 6 of 18 Councillor Regina Flynn asked if the City would be responsible for the cost of the changes to Essex Street. Atty. Correnti explained that the Museum would pay for the resetting of the curbing and build all of the sidewalks and rebuilding of sidewalks as needed. Councillor Flynn asked if the road would be repaved and if the traffic light would be paid for. Atty. Correnti stated that they are not sure if the road would have to be re-paved. As far as the traffic light improvements, they have had their engineers look at that and there are several options and they would like to be able to work with the city on that, he noted that they would take a conditions that the Museum would install the light to Mass Highway standards, facing down Essex Street. Atty. Correnti explained that there are a few options that are acceptable for that area and it depended on the condition of the existing hardware and how things were wired presently, and they feel that they will not have to go out and buy new equipment. He noted that in any event they would be responsible for that. Gene Collins asked how much of an encroachment would the new sidewalk be on the roadway. Laura Celano explained that the present sidewalk is 8 feet and they are adding 6 feet to that,creating a 22 foot driving area. They explained the areas where the street will be widened. Mr. Collins expressed concern over the right of way. • Walter Power questioned if the street would narrow to the end near Hawthorne Boulevard. Atty. Correnti stated that it would be if it were left unchanged. In order to get eight-foot parking the city requires 30 feet. Atty. Correnti noted that the City Planner and the Mayor are in favor of this plan and noted that they will be working on this together. Denise Sullivan noted that the recommendation will be made to the City Council by the Planning Department, and the City Planner feels strongly that this has to happen and there will be a lot of push from the administration to get this passed. Walter Power noted that the location of the bell is in a much better location than previously planned. He noted that this would tend to make this a meeting area and asked if there was much seating planned around the bell. Atty. Correnti noted that the DRB had the same comment. Laura Celano explained the seating that they have planned, which are simple granite non backed benches, so that there would be no barriers. Lee Harrington asked if the Museum owned all of the land around Armory Park. Atty. Correnti noted that the city owns that area. Mr. Harrington suggested that we should ban sausage vendors from that area. Bill Luster stated that he thinks that there is a court order that gives that sausage vendor that space. • Page 7 of 18 • Denise Sullivan stated that she did not think that the Planning Board,through its decision could make the sausage vendor move. Chuck Puleo referred to the Memorandum of Understanding and the section that refers to the dedicate the proceeds from the sale of the empire parking lot to complete the design and construction of the parking structure on Church Street. He asked when that would be taking place. Denise Sullivan noted that the parking lot has not been transferred yet and the administration has been working with the Museum to set up a date for that to happen. The City has held off on the transfer so that they could have use of that parking lot for the month of October and the Museum agreed to that. Mr. Puleo asked where the money would go when it is received. Denise Sullivan stated that the city would set up a new account for that money and it would be used for the parking structure on Church Street. Bill Luster stated that the difficulty with that is that the cost purchasing the Empire lot and the contribution towards the parking deck both happen over a 10— 20 year period that don't really start until the city decides to build a parking lot or deck, so it could happen or it could never happen, but that is the city's obligation. Walter Power noted that Councillor Flynn need to leave at this time but she would like to address the Board. • Councillor Regina Flynn addressed the Board and asked that the Board considers the impact on the residents and businesses are kept foremost in their decision. She noted that traffic congestion and parking are of concern. She also requested at the last meeting that the museum have an informational meeting for the immediate neighborhood on the construction schedule with regards to trucks in the neighborhood etc. and the museum has agreed to that. She also noted that money needs to be set aside for signage that would direct people at St. Peter's street and parking as well as improvements that need to be made on Essex Street and the intersection of Essex and Hawthorne Boulevard. She asked that they be cautious about the intersection and the width of the tum at New Liberty and Essex, as that seem to be quite abrupt to her. John Moustakis asked what the reason is for moving the parking spaces from one side of Essex Street to the other. Atty. Correnti stated that part of the reason is that because they anticipate such a heavy pedestrian flow into the public garden through the arch and into the garden and at the corner where the bell is, the sidewalk needed to be widened to accommodate that. He explained the locations on the plan and the reasons for the moving of the spaces. The Board held a discussion on various situations that could arise with traffic and parking in that area. • Page 8 of 18 • Bill Luster referred to the MOU and noted that he sees this as giving the Museum a unilateral ability to close the interior walkway on September 23, 2007. Atty. Correnti stated that it has been extended a year. Atty. Correnti noted that is would be up for discussion. Bill Luster stated that he thought that was fair since it is the museum's property and the Public Garden is of critical importance to him He noted that condition#3 provide for an alternate all hours exterior pedestrian walkway between Essex and Charter Street. He noted that in 2007 the only obligation to get pedestrians from Essex Street to Charter Street is an alternate all hours exterior pedestrian walkway between Essex and Charter Street and that arguably could be the walkway that runs through the public garden. He stated that he does not believe that is enough for the businesses from Charter Street down and would hinder the city's vision to connect the downtown to the water front. He suggested that he would like to see the city given an easement on the entire public garden that insures if that entire Public Garden is not open to the public as it is today, then at least the City Council would have an opportunity to COPY discuss why that is not so. He stated that the MOU does not give him any reason to think that we shouldn't want that. SETS Atty. Correnti stated that he understands the concern about always wanting to maintain the access. He stated that the museum is committed to always maintaining access through that area. He noted that this happens to be the • configuration right now and that his concern about an easement was that if this ever changes the commitment never changes for access at all times. He also noted that there is other language that is going to be proposed as a condition that would address that. He stated that he agrees that they want more than what the MOU indicates and they understand that. _ Bill Luster stated that he is committed to the fact that he believes that the Museum has no other plans for the area.of the Public Garden since they are investing a lot of money in it. He noted though that it could change and the City does not have the ability then to get the interior walkway back or Liberty Street because of the agreement. He stated that he felt that we do have the ability to condition this against that public garden is important to create the replacement for Liberty Street, and even if that replacement is simply for pedestrian passage he wants to offer an amendment that provides that entire width with the design like that that shows with the understanding that if that is to be changed and it can change, that is goes to the City Council for review and discussion. Atty. Correnti stated that he agreed with everything Mr. Luster said up to the point that it should go to the City Council. He explained that a 60 foot wide easement is not acceptable to the Museum, noting that perpetual access and a condition that says that that there always must be pedestrian access is acceptable. • Page 9 of 18 • Atty. Correnti explained that they went through extensive discussions and negotiations with two city administrations and two mayors, and held a public hearing on Liberty Street. He noted that there was never discussion or negotiation regarding transferring the Liberty Street property and the Museum giving an easement. He stated that they understand the Board and the city's concern about pedestrian access. He also noted that they do not want to get into 30B type issues about granting of rights, property rights and acquiring land and having to place values on those lands. He suggested that they review the language that has been prepared by the Planning Department, noting that they are in agreement 99%. Mr. Luster noted that the I% is of critical importance. He stated that the fact that the Museum doesn't want to provide a dedicated deeded right of way or easement raises suspicions as to why they won't go for that 1%. Atty. Correnti stated that he felt that this is changing the whole deal that was negotiated for the discontinuance of Liberty Street. He explained that several public hearings were held with the City Council and they did not require an easement in the MOU. Mr. Luster disagreed noting that because they have discussed this with two administrations and the Council does not mean that he has to accept that they did not miss something, and he believes that what they missed is that this decision says that the Museum only has to provide for alternate all hours exterior pedestrian walkways between Essex and Charter Streets. He also stated that he feels that the way this plan works is to provide a real solid easement or right of way. Atty. Correnti suggested that the Board review the language of the decision. Denise Sullivan explained that when the concern was raised at the last meeting she took a shot at wording a condition that would address this. John Moustakis explained that he feels that over the years the Board has approved plans and then things change and Board has no recourse. Bill Luster reviewed the language in the condition that Denise Sullivan provided. He noted that the condition says the same thing as provide for an alternate all hours exterior pedestrian walkway between Essex and Charter Street. Denise Sullivan explained that the intention was to stress in the decision that the Public Garden is important and does sell on the plan, and that under site plan review that if something were to change it would come back to the Planning Board, with the understanding that this decision would stress the importance of this Public Garden for the Planning Board to vote on the plan. She explained that any changes to the Public Garden would trigger site plan review. A discussion was held on the process of changing a plan and the review of the City Planner who would determine if there were substantial enough change to go back to the Planning Board. She also noted that the Planning Department has talked with the Mayor about an easement and he is not in favor of an easement because there are a lot of issues involved. • Page 10 of 18 • Bill Luster stated that he wants to protect the magnificence of the plan with the Public Garden. Walter Power stated that he felt that the city would be getting some value for giving up the street. He explained the location and the detours that have to be done due to giving up the street. He noted that he felt that the city should be able to count on that access for as long as they want it. Atty. Correnti agreed with Mr. Powers and suggested that they approve this plan and any significant changes to the plan have to come back to the Board. John Moustakis asked that the Board get a ruling from the City Solicitor for some language on this. Bill Luster noted that the City Solicitor has approved the language that is being used. Bill Cullen stated that he has listened to all of the debate on this issue and noted that in 20 years there will be a different Board looking at this and maybe there might be a good reason that they want to do something different with this and the mechanism for that is there. He doesn't think that we can predict anything forever, and if changes are needed in 20 years let them handle it as they see fit. He suggested that maybe the Planning Department and Atty. Correnti could work out some language. • Denise Sullivan stated that she did not think that the Board should tie a Planning Board in 20 years to something that might not be viable at that time. Bill Cullen also noted that we can't foresee the future and there could be some kind of catastrophe in this area which may require a change to this, and the Board in 20 years is going to look at this decision and see that they can't change it. Joe Walsh, Aide to Mayor Usovicz addressed the Planning Board and noted that the Mayors office and the Planning Department confer on the project regularly. He noted that they agree that the Public Garden is what makes the project. He also noted that either way it is done whether it is how the museum words it or the condition that the Planning Department crafted the idea is the same and we want to keep that access open. He also noted that with regards to an easement, we would be getting dangerously close to renegotiating the MOU, and that there are things in that document that we all may have liked to see different, but the good thing about it is that it gave the idea the we want this pedestrian access in perpetuity, and if it is going to change it comes back to the Planning Board for approval. He noted that the Mayor is comfortable with the language proposed by the Planning Department. Gene Collins stated that his concern is that the businesses and the pedestrians and the activities on the water front are not cut off from the rest of the city. • Page 11 of 18 • Bill Luster stated that he does not think that this would come remotely close to re- negotiating the MOU. He noted that he has read it and he does not think it would be a legal nightmare for the city to accept an easement. He acknowledged that there is some protection here but he does not feel that it is enough. He also noted that it is not the intent for his suggestion to put a$65 million dollar project in peril and suggested that we should find some other language. He stated that he felt that museums are making a poor decision in not giving that park to us in a more protective way than they are doing and it raises questions in his mind as to the motivation of that decision. Lee Harrington asked if, after all is said and done, would the Museum entertain deed the park to the city for$1.00. Atty. Correnti stated that he could not comment on that at this time. Atty. Correnti stated that he felt that it was illegal for the Planning Board condition approval that if changes are to be made that any further site plan reviews go to City Council. He also stated that he felt that the analysis of 30B and there is a process that needs to be done if the value exceeds a certain dollar value. Yes it can be done and has been done in the past. He noted that they agree on the importance of this and tried to get language to address that. • Walter Power read the proposed condition drafted by the Planning Department into the record as follows: The museum shall provide continuous and open pedestrian access between Essex Street and Charter Street through the Public Carden as shown on plans submitted herewith as a condition of this decision. The pedestrian access shall be open to the public 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 356 days a year. The museum shall maintain the walkways and keep them free from debris and the access shall be adequately lighted at all times by the museum. The museum shall not substantially change, alter, restrict, or amend the pedestrian access as shown on the plan unless and until such changes alterations, restrictions or amendments are first approved by 2/3's majority of the Planning Board members after public notice and meeting. Any such proposed changes must demonstrate that unrestricted pedestrian access shall be maintained Bill Luster stated that he felt that the condition would have more of an effect it there is an easement in there. Bill Cullen stated that he felt that we are changing the law if we sent the decision making process to the City Council. He questioned what an easement does that the language does not. He asked if the language covers the Board in the future. Bill Luster agreed that the language would cover the Board and they would have • to come back with a substantial change. Page 12 of 18 • A business man from downtown addressed the Board and stated that he felt that the Museum has done a good job with the plans and he felt that the language makes him feel comfortable with that. He also noted that is a little concerned and would like to make sure that businesses are not put out of business because of this expansion. Bill Luster asked if this was the only issue of concern to the Board, suggesting that if it is the only one, we should move on and try and get this done tonight. Lee Harrington stated that he would like to see something written that would allow residents to have free admission to the museum in perpetuity. He stated that he is concerned about that. Bill Luster suggested that they use the same language in the MOU regarding that. Lee Harrington noted that the MOU is until 2007 or 2008. Atty. Correnti stated that there are a lot of things that are going on at the Museum. Lee Harrington stated that he wants to see the Museum to have free general admission for Salem residents. Atty. Correnti stated that he felt that would be a decision of the Board of Directors and they are asking them to make a decision that is not theirs to make. Denise Sullivan stated that she is not sure that we can ask the Museum through SPR to provide free admission to Salem residents or if it is legal. Atty. Correnti noted that all school children in Essex County are let in free and that has been expanded since the MOU. Bill Luster stated that he senses a move and he would agree to that to move the decision, noting that there are a couple of conditions that the Board has discussed and he would offer an amendment to ask for an easement and have a vote on that and if that fails then he would be perfectly willing to support the plan because it is a wonderful plan. He suggested that if they have a draft decision and we know what the conditions are that we would place on the draft decision then we should move it tonight. Bill Luster suggested a motion to approve the decision with whatever amendments people tend to agree on and he would offer an amendment that would ask for an easement which could then be voted on as an amendment. Bill Cullen asked what kind of a majority of the Board would be needed on that. Denise Sullivan suggested that the Board should close the Public Hearing if there are no other issues to be dealt with. She also suggested that they should vote on some amendments first. Walter Power stated there was one other issue that he would like to address and that is the issue of signage relative to traffic around Museum Place. Denise Sullivan reported that the city is looking at a signage program that will direct • people around town. Page 13 of 18 Atty. Correnti noted that the signage plan for this project is not included in this package and they are required to have the SRA and the DRB approve them and they will be going back to them. He also noted that they would be working and assisting on a comprehensive downtown signage program Walter Power asked what kind of monetary support they would be willing to provide. Atty. Correnti noted that he did not specify a number because they have already started working on that and they would take a condition that they would participate and assist on the signage program. Chuck Puleo noted that there is the concern that Essex Street becomes a two way and questioned if the Board should put a condition on that. Bill Luster stated that it would be tough to place a condition that would make the street a two way or the project can't move forward. He explained that it would put them in a position of having a decision that requires the street to be two way and if the council denies that then they cannot get a building permit. Bill Luster suggested that a condition could be included that says that the Museum will provide engineering assistance and be a proponent of the change to the two way. Chuck Puleo stated that he didn't want to see the city left having to change a situation that never should have happened. He also pointed to the Walgreens project where the council did not approve the suggestion of the Board. Walter Power warned that there are several places in the city that need attention • regarding traffic and he would like to see the council make Essex Street a two way and they really have to push for that. Denise Sullivan stated that the Board has done their job in reviewing the plan and making recommendations is all that they can do. If the City Council feels that they cannot agree to that,then it will be up to them to decide how to address the issue. Atty. Correnti stated that they remain firm in their commitment to stand side by side with the Planning Board and lend any support that is needed to get this matter through the City Council. Walter Power asked if there was anyone present that would like to make a final statement. Staley McDermott addressed the Board and asked if there was a copy of the proposed condition and suggested that the word "meeting" be changed to "hearing", noting that the public cannot speak at a public meeting, but they can speak at a hearing. He also asked about the two sides of the marine arts gallery that will be opened by demolition and what is going to be done with those facades. Atty. Correnti stated that the Saccons building will have the brick cleaned and they are working with the owner, and the other side will be cinder block. He noted that there are going to be meetings with the owner of the other building to see how he would like his property handled. • Page 14 of 18 • He noted that they took a condition in DRB that the building would either be improved or screened by the Museum. He also explained that there would be tree plantings etc. and they want it to look nice. Atty. Correnti stated that he would take a condition that they talk to the building owner. Bill Luster noted that DRB decision is included in the Planning Board decision. Mr. McDermott asked about the brick on the mall and the light fixtures. He explained that his understanding of the DRB decision was that the new brick would be more compatible with the addition. He referred to the plan and pointed out the locations of the new brick and suggested that a portion of the brick remain the city hall brick that is presently used. He also noted that he felt that it is a mistake to have incompatible lighting and noted that these 5 or 6 lights should be consistent with the rest of the downtown, as well as the 6 in the Public Garden. Walter Power declared the Public Hearing closed at this time. Walter Power read a letter from Councillor at Large Tom Furey in support of the project into the record. The Board reviewed the draft decision for the project. Lee Harrington referred to amendment #2 and asked that any changes to the plan • be approved by 2/3 of the Planning Board. Denise Sullivan reviewed the draft decision. She stated that they would add a condition that the Museum will develop a comprehensive downtown sign program for the city under the direction of the City Planner. Walter Power suggested that the construction management plan submitted by the Museum be included in the decision. Gene Collins asked if they were going to have a dust control plan. Atty. Correnti noted that in the Board of Health decision there is a plan for dust control, vehicle washing and street sweeping. Walter Power stated that he would like to put a condition in that the Marine Arts Building be given an easement. Denise Sullivan stated that they would word that as "free and clear access". She explained that there is an easement that runs with the property for access in that area. Atty. Correnti suggested that there is unrestricted access for 135 Essex Street. Walter Power stated that he would like that to go with the property so as not to affect the value of the property. Bill Luster noted that the Board is trying to protect his legal rights and the Board has done that with the condition because the Museum will have to come back to the Board for approval to change that. Atty. Correnti agreed to that condition. • Page 15 of 18 • Chuck Puleo asked if the city has enough staff to cover the clerk of the works. Denise Sullivan stated that she is comfortable that the Clerk of the Works can handle the project. Walter Power referred to the MOU and Atty. Correnti noted that there are some things in the MOU that have changed, noting that they would not want to be held to some dates, for example the approval of the Planning Board was supposed to be in 1999. He outlined some changes that have been agreed upon by the Mayor. He explained that the payment for the parking garage would be 60 days from the deeding of Liberty Street. Bill Luster asked how the Board could insure that the money is used for a deck or garage at Church Street. He reviewed the MOU language regarding the money. Atty. Correnti stated that they have no control over what the city does with the money when they receive it. Walter Power stated that he would like to see something written into the decision regarding that. Denise Sullivan reviewed language regarding Essex Street becoming a two way and supporting and assisting the Board in that endeavor. Bill Luster moved that the Museum offer an easement to the city that will protect the Public Garden in its current form, seconded by Lee Harrington. The board was denied 3-4. • Bill Cullen moved to approve the draft decision for the Peabody Essex Museum as amended, seconded by Gene Collins and approved unanimously. Mr. Grimes addressed the Board and stated that this is going to be a great project and thanked the Board for the time and effort that they put into the review of the project. Discussion Pertaining to a Form C Decision for Patton Road Extension Mr. Paul DiBiase addressed the Planning Board and noted that he wanted to discuss an issue that has come up in the Patton Road Subdivision. He explained that item 7C of the decision calls for the construction of a sidewalk on the north side of Patton Road from Surrey Road until the beginning of the Patton Road Extension. He stated that there are a couple of neighbors that are opposed to the construction of the sidewalk and feel it would be intrusive to their property. He noted that they would have to cut down substantial trees. He suggested in lieu of construction of the sidewalk to overlay a portion of Patton Road to offset the cost for the construction of the sidewalk. He noted that Mr. John Barrett is present tonight and he is opposed to the sidewalk. Bill Luster asked if the sidewalk would be going up towards Mr. Barrett's house. Mr. DiBiase stated that it would be that way. Mr. Luster noted that there is a • grade different there. Page 16 of 18 • Mr. DiBiase noted that Mr. Barrett has the worst of the grade and Mr. McCarthy has a large tree in front of his house. Bill Luster noted that it is not a cut through street and there would not be a huge amount of people using this. Walter Power noted that he was up there today and that road widens out in front of those three houses and noted that he doesn't see why a sidewalk can't be put there. He stated that he felt that the Board would be derelict if the Board didn't require sidewalks when they can. He stated that there is no reason to take down any trees to do this and they could easily put a sidewalk in, as there is plenty of room. Mr. DiBiase explained that he is trying to give the neighbors some consideration since they have been great neighbors for the last year. He explained the logistics of the locations of the sidewalks in relation to the houses where the neighbors do not want the sidewalks. Walter Power explained his opinion on the installation of the sidewalks and how this could be done. Bill Cullen suggested that Mr. Barrett speak on the matter since they are here to oppose this. Mr. Barrett stated that he and his wife and his son were here at the public hearing and at no time did the Planning Board tell him that he was going to have anything done to his section of Patton Road. He noted that all he cared about was that the pavement is replaced because of the utilities and he understood that would be done. He explained that they have had no trouble in the past with the neighborhood,noting that the kids in the neighborhood play basketball out there. He stated that he feels that they should have been notified and that consideration should be given to the people who have lived on that street and if they don't want to have the sidewalks they should not be forced to have one. He noted that in the past the city has determined that damage would be done to his property. Walter Power stated that the sidewalk would not be on Mr. Barrett's property. Bill Luster suggested that the Board should take a look at it. Denise Sullivan agreed that she would like to check this out as well. Mr. DiBiase suggested that if they can find a way to negotiate the trees that would be fine. Mr. Barrett also noted that one neighbor is handicapped and goes out every day to visit the Council on Aging. • Page 17 of 18 • Bill Luster suggested that Denise go out there and take a look at the site. Walter Power suggested that Saturday morning would be good. Bill Luster suggested that they leave it up to Denise and Walter to see what could be done it would save the developer some time since the batch plants will be closing soon. Mr. DiBiase agreed that would be fine with him. Old/New Business Lee Harrington announced that he is resigning from the Planning Board effective this evening. He explained that his appointment was up in May and he has been traveling a lot for his business. Walter Power and the Board Members thanked Mr. Harrington for his years of service, and noted that he will be missed. Mr. Harrington noted that he enjoyed his 8 years of service. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting a motion was made by John Moustakis and seconded by Bill Cullen to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PBl01900 Page 18 of 18 • CITY OF SALEM MA CLERK'S OFFICE -11A �itp of �aCern, �a�gaCfjug¢tt� a Manning ikarb OCT 30 P (One �a[em green 2' 34 Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, November 2, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman Tentative Agenda: 1. Public Hearing—Waiver From Frontage—Herbert and Florence Mackey—230 Canal Street. (7:30 PM—7:50 PM) a 2. Public Hearing—Waiver From Frontage—Geraldine M. Ayers—31-33 Osgood Street. (7:50 PM— 8:10 PM) 3. Public Hearing—Site Plan Review- D & L Realty, LLC—The Gables Club, First Street (209 Highland Avenue). (8:10 PM—9:10 PM) a 4. Amendment to Pickering Wharf Hotel Elevations. (9:10 PM—9:25 PM) 5. Form B —Lots87, 110, 112, 116-123, 126-129, and 149 on Cloverdale Avenue and Rockmere Street. (9:25 PM —9:40 PM) 6. Old/New Business (9:40 PM—9:50 PM) Release of Funds Subdivision—Scenic Way. This notice po:;tod cn "Olslcisl §BuElrspfln board" City Nall Aga., a;e;n, Mass. or, OCT 3 00 2 s1 -2,3y og Ipp pcoordar q W*1 Ghv. 36A a US of ��I.G.L. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740.0404 0 City of &alem, j4la!5!gacbugett!9 t 3planning A3uarb One balem &reen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Don Cefalo, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: October 30, 2000 RE: Agenda—November 2, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please • contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Public Hearing—Waiver From Frontage Requirements—230 Canal Street The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing for a request for a waiver from the frontage requirements for the parcel located at 230 Canal Street (Lot 76). The owners purchased the lots as two separate lots. Because of their contiguous ownership the twp lots merged into one. The owners wish to divide the lots back to two separate lots and construct a home (approximately 28' x 40' in size) on the vacant one (Lot 78). The applicant received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for lot area, lot area per dwelling, lot width, front yard setback, side yard setback, and height. The decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals has been attached. 2. Public Hearing—Waiver From Frontage Requirements—31 & 33 Osgood Street The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing for a request for a waiver from the frontage requirements for the parcel located at 31(Lot 1) & 33 (Lot 2) Osgood Street. The owner wishes to subdivide the present property into two lots. Proposed Lot 1 presently contains a one family house and proposed Lot 2 has a two family. None of which will be change after the property is subdivided. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 a PB Memorandum October 30,2000-2 •' The applicant received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for lot area, lot area per dwelling, lot width, front yard setback, side yard setback, and height. The decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals has been attached. 3. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review—First Street (209 Highland Avenue)—The Gables Club The Planning Board will open a public hearing under site plan review for the property located on First Street (209 Highland Avenue). The proposed project includes the construction of a principal structure with a footprint of 22,707 square feet consisting of 2 %: stories with a gross floor area of 52,250 square feet. The building will be used for health and fitness activities and other forms of recreation. The proposed project will include 6 tennis courts, 2 pools and a child play area including 2 temporary air-supported covers will enclose the tennis courts and pools on a temporary seasonal basis. The entrance and exit will be from First Street and lead directly to a 200 car parking area. To minimize traffic on First Street the project proposes to limit club membership, staggered hours for employees, as well as arrival and departures of members disbursed throughout the day. Comments received by Joe Nerden(Assistant City Engineer) are as follows: A. Reduce drain from 18"to 12"between drainage manhole# 9 & #7. • B. Provide/use rubber boots when connecting sewer(s) to sewer manholes. The applicant has not received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals and there is a continuance of the Public Hearing, which is scheduled for November 15, 2000. This project not does require approval from the Conservation Commission. 4. Amendment to Pickering Wharf Hotel Elevations The proposed hotel to be located at Pickering Wharf is requesting approval of a revised set of elevations. The developer received site plan review approval, which discussed several revisions to be made to the proposed elevations. In working through the revisions, the developer revised the elevations significantly, thus requiring approval from the Board. In addition, several minor changes to the approved site plan were necessary due to comments received by DEP for their Chapter 91 review. The site plan changes include a wider sidewalk along the front of the building, the loss of approximately two parking spaces, the relocation of a handicap space, and the addition of some walkways and seating areas. These changes are minor and do not effect to the overall site plan,but do require the Board's approval. 5. Form B—Lots 87, 110, 112, 116-123, 126-129, and 149 on Cloverdale Avenue and • Rockmere Street The Board will review the proposed preliminary subdivision plan for a three-lot subdivision on Cloverdale Avenue. The applicant is requesting preliminary review so as to get the Board's thoughts on the proposal to construct a cul-de-sac, which does not meet PB Memorandum October 30,2000- 3 the minimum width requirements. The cul-de-sac appears to be wide enough for vehicles to turn around and therefore is appropriate for the number of houses proposed to access the roadway. 6. Release of Funds Subdivision—Scenic Way Project Under the recommendation by the Clerk of the Works, Wilfred "Willy"Beaulieu, the amount of$41,800.00 may be released from the Tripartite Agreement held between the Board and the Developer. Attached is a breakdown of work completed to date. • • • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, November 2, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 2, 2000 in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green at 7:30 p.m. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, David Weiner, Gene Collins, Bill Luster. Also present were, Assistant City Planner Denise Sullivan, Senior Planner Don Cefalo, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Waiver from Frontage—230 Canal Street Atty. Neil Cohen addressed the Board and explained his clients' request for a waiver from frontage for their property at 230 Canal Street. He explained that the lots were bought at different times and that they are requesting that the lots be put back to their original configuration. Gene Collins moved and Bill Luster seconded a motion to approve the waiver from frontage for 230 Canal Street. The motion was approved unanimously. • Waiver from Frontage—31-33 Osgood Street Atty. Henry Lucas addressed the Board and explained his clients' request for a Waiver from Frontage for 21-33 Osgood Street. Bill Cullen moved and Bill Luster seconded a motion to approve the Waiver from Frontage for 31-33 Osgood Street. The motion was approved unanimously. Public Hearing—Site Plan Review—Gable Health Club—First Street John Moustakis addressed the Board and stated that he is against opening the public hearing for this project until the applicant is finished with the Board of Appeals. He noted that in the past the Board has spent much time deliberating on projects only to have the Board of Appeals tum down the project and he would be more comfortable if they had their approvals prior to the Planning Board reviewing the project. Atty. George Atkins, representing the developer explained that the ZBA continued the hearing for one month and the developer would be meeting with the Condo Association about some concerns. He also noted that they have been working with the neighbors. Page 1 • • Bill Luster suggested that the Planning Board open the public hearing and let the developer make a brief presentation and continue it to the next meeting and hopefully by then they will have their approvals from the ZBA. John Moustakis moved and David Weiner seconded a motion to postpone the public hearing to the next Planning Board meeting on November 16, 2000. The motion was approved (4-2)with Walter Power and Bill Luster opposed. Atty. Atkins noted for the record that they are strongly opposed to this action by the Planning Board. Form B—Lot 87, 110, 112, 116-123. 126-129 and 149 Cloverdale Avenue and Rockmore Street Chuck Faia addressed the Planning Board and explained the locations of the lots on the plan. He explained that they will be bringing the road up into the cul-de- sac with a 50 foot turnaround. He also noted that at the suggestion of the Fire Department they would bring the water line all the way to cul-de-sac. Bill Luster moved and Bill Cullen seconded a motion to approve the Foran B for Lot 87, 110, 112, 116-123, 126-129 and 149 Cloverdale Avenue and Rockmore Street. The motion was approved unanimously. • Amendment to the Elevations for the Pickering Wharf Hotel Architect Bob Zarelli addressed the Board and explained that they have been working on the design of the building. He noted that they have tried to capture the architecture of Salem. He explained that they pulled the facade back 6 feet and have included the brick tower at the four corners of the building. He also described the materials that would be used for the facade as being clapboard infill to reduce the scope of the 2 % story building. Bill Luster stated that he likes the design and the materials chosen, noting the copper at the top of the cupla. Bill Luster moved and John Moustakis seconded a motion to approve the change in the building elevations and site plan for the Pickering Wharf Hotel, based on the Chapter 91 suggestions. The motion was approved unanimously. Page 2 • • Release of Funds—Scenic Wav Denise Sullivan addressed the Board and explained that Will Beaulieu has signed off on the project and that it is appropriate for the Board to release the funds for the Scenic Way project. Bill Luster moved and John Moustakis seconded a motion to approve releasing the funds for the Scenic Way project. The motion was approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at this meeting, a motion was made by Gene Collins to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB 110200 • Page 3 • CITY OF SALEM. MA ONDITA,.� CLERK'S OFFICE Citp of &arem, :fflaggacbugettg 1 iRo 3piamting A3oarb • �9�� One dba[etn &reen 1000 NOV 13 A 11: 50 Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, November 16, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuation of Public Hearing— Site Plan Review- D & L Realty, LLC —The Gables Club, First Street (209 Highland Avenue). (7:30 PM— 8:30 PM) 2. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review—Highland Realty Co., LLC — 392 Highland Avenue (8:30 PM —9:30 PM) 3. Old/New Business (9:30 PM —9:45 PM) Release of Additional Funds Subdivision—Scenic Way. TUW natlee pootlad on "01141r, of Qu4stin DrAr_d" City Hall A*a., Salem, Mass. on tit 29A 239 of NA L. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 Citp of llbalem, Ala oubutettg • � � Canning Ouarb (One 9palem Oreen MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Don Cefalo, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: November 13, 2000 RE: Agenda—November 16, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Continuation Public Hearing - Site Plan Review—First Street(209 Highland Avenue)—The Gables Club The Planning Board will open a public hearing under site plan review for the property located on First Street (209 Highland Avenue). The proposed project includes the construction of a principal structure with a footprint of 22,707 square feet consisting of 2 %2 stories with a gross floor area of 52,250 square feet. The building will be used for health and fitness activities and other forms of recreation. The proposed project will include 6 tennis courts, 2 pools and a child play area including 2 temporary air-supported covers will enclose the tennis courts and pools on a temporary seasonal basis. The entrance and exit will be from First Street and lead directly to a 200 car parking area. To minimize traffic on First Street the project proposes to limit club membership, staggered hours for employees, as well as arrival and departures of members disbursed throughout the day. Comments received by Joe Nerden (Assistant City Engineer) are as follows: A. Reduce drain from 18" to 12"between drainage manhole# 9 & #7. B. Provide/use rubber boots when connecting sewer(s) to sewer manholes. The applicant has not received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals and there is a • continuance of the Public Hearing, which is scheduled for November 15, 2000. This project not does require approval from the Conservation Commission, except for possible roadwork on First Street. The Applicant will file a Request for Determination of One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 V 1 PB Memorandum November 13,2000-2 Applicability with the Con Com if necessary. The Applicant also has a meeting with the • Board of Health on November 14w. 2. Continuation Public Hearing- Site Plan Review- 392 Highland Avenue The Planning Board will continue a public hearing under site plan review for the property located a 392 Highland Avenue. The applicant has revised the proposed project for the construction of a self-storage facility. The revised plan shows a two-story with a building footprint, which has been reduced to 100 feet by 200 feet(20,000 square feet), down some 24% from the original plan. The applicant has eliminated 67 storage units; bring the number of storage units to 333, a 17%reduction. The reduction in the size of the building has also helps provide vehicle access around the facility while allowing vehicles to access the bays at the same time. Additionally, do to the reduction in the size of the building, there will be no payed area for access behind the building more than 30 feet into the R-1 zone. The revised plan indicated an increase in parking spaces to 23, which exceeds the requirements for this zoned area by 11 spaces. The Board may want to address traffic signage around the proposed storage facility to better ensure traffic flow. The buffer zone between the proposed building and the existing building on site has increased to allow for addition green space. There is also an increase to the buffer zone between the proposed building and the abutting neighbors. The revised plan indicates a double row of white pine trees within the buffer zone along the abutter's side and a 10- foot wide buffer with a single row of white pines along Olde Village Drive. • To provide additional visual suitability, the applicant has reduced the number of garage doors, which are located along the sides of the building(sides that face Olde Village Road and the existing facility located on site). The garage doors will also be paint to blend in with the rest of the building. The Board may want to address the appearance of the building to make it more visually pleasing. The project does not require approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. This project does require Conservation Commission approval. Denise Sullivan has meet with the applicant to discuss the proposed changes. 3. Release of Funds Subdivision—Scenic Way Project Under the recommendation by the Clerk of the Works, Wilfred "Willy"Beaulieu, an additional amount is requested to be released from the Tripartite Agreement held between the Board and the Developer. Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, November 16, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 16, 2000 in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Weiner, John Moustakis, Chuck Puleo, and Bill Luster. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - D&L Realty Trust The Gables Atty. George Atkins addressed the Planning Board on behalf of his clients the Gables. He explained they received variances for the percentage of the lot that is covered by the structure. He noted that the club house, together with the tennis court and the pool area exceeds the percentage of the area that can be covered. He also noted that the structure is two stories and 38 feet high exceeding the height requirement. He also noted that they are ten feet short of the side setback requirement. • Atty. Atkins introduced David Brown who explained the plans. Mr. Brown explained that the covering for the pool and the tennis courts in the summer is an air supported bubble. Atty. Atkins noted that they have met with the neighbors and Councillor Joan Lovely and have kept them informed. He described the project as a country club without the golf course. Walter Power asked what the delivery entrance would be for the project. Atty. Atkins stated that they are trying to keep the traffic off First Street and they are negotiating with the owners of the Hawthorne Mall for emergency access and for small deliveries. Walter Power noted that the Board spent an exhaustive amount of time on the Hawthorne Mall project and found the entrance as it is exists to be the best possible plan. Walter Power suggested that they add additional landscaping around the pool and tennis areas to buffer noise. Atty. Atkins stated that they would submit a conceptual drawing for the landscaping to the Planning Department. Walter Power asked if there would be a fence around the pool. Atty. • Atkins stated that the plans call for a four foot fence. Walter Power asked how long the air supported bubbles would be up. Atty. Atkins stated that they would be up for nine months out of the year. Chuck Puleo asked if the fence would be secured for safety and also what color is the bubble. Atty. Atkins noted that the fence would be secure. He also explained that the color of the bubbles would be white. Walter Power asked if there would be night time use of the pool and the tennis courts. Atty. Atkins stated that the light is contained in the bubble and there is no need for an off property shield. John Moustakis asked what the hours of operation of the facility would be. Atty. Atkins stated that the hours of operation would be 5:30 a.m. - 11:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on Sundays. Dennis Risky the Architect for the project addressed the Board and explained that the driveway comes off 35 feet off First Street. He noted that the front side of the building is two stories and the rear side is three stories. Mr. Risky explained the amenities that the club plans to offer. He noted that there would be a gym with lockers, and a squash court in • the clubhouse. There would also be an eating facility as well. Mr. Risky also explained the construction materials to be used for the building. He stated that they plan to construct a concrete building that will be sided with hardy plank, the color of which is usually earth tones with white trim. He also noted that they plan heavy landscaping on the First Street side. Walter Power questioned where the water is coming from on the old Vincent Chip Company side of the site and what percentage is draining off. Brad McKennzie stated that 85% drains to First Street and a small amount drains to Ridgeside apartments. He also noted that the stormdrain system is designed for the 100 year storm. Walter Power asked if there was going to be a catch basin at the end of the driveway at First Street. Mr. McKennzie stated that the catch basin is at First Street. Walter Power asked Denise Sullivan to get a written statement from the Salem DPW to confirm that the drainage from the site can be handled by the existing catch basin. Bill Luster asked what the final elevation of the site would be. Mr. McKennzie stated that the final elevation of the site would be 236 at the • top and 165 at First Street. • Walter Power expressed his concern about the steep slope and access for emergency vehicles. Mr. Brown stated that there is a level area at the bottom of the slope on First Street. Mr. Brown addressed the Board as the principal owner and stated that the clubs are community oriented and he wants to offer the community programs for Salem High School and Salem State College. Walter Power noted that is was mentioned that there would limited numbers of memberships available for the club and asked why they would limit it. Mr. Brown stated that they typically limit the number of memberships to provide quality service to the members. There being no further comments or questions regarding this application this evening a motion was made by John Moustakis to continue the public hearing to December 7, 2000, 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 John Moustakis to adjourn the meeting, seconded by David Weiner and approved unanimously. • The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB 111600 • Citp of 6aiem, iftoaEbugettg Planning 30oarb One �baletn Oreen Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, December 7, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review- D & L Realty, LLC—The Gables Club, First Street (209 Highland Avenue). (7:30 PM— 8:30 PM) 2. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review—Highland Realty Co., LLC— 392 Highland Avenue (8:30 PM— 9:30 PM) 3. Old/New Business (9:30 PM— 9:45 PM) • One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 Citp of 6alem, f laoarbuatt!6 o Canning �Boarb �wY1 V8 (One 9paCem green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Don Cefalo, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: December 4, 2000 RE: Agenda—December 7, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any • questions pertaining to the agenda items. 1. Continuation Public Hearing - Site Plan Review— First Street (209 Highland Avenue) —The Gables Club The Planning Board will continue a public hearing under site plan review for the property located on First Street (209 Highland Avenue). The proposed project includes the construction of a principal structure with a footprint of 22,707 square feet consisting of 2 stories with a gross floor area of 52,250 square feet. The building will be used for health and fitness activities and other forms of recreation. The proposed project will include 6 tennis courts, 2 pools and a child play area including 2 temporary air-supported covers will enclose the tennis courts and pools on a temporary seasonal basis. The entrance and exit will be from First Street and lead directly to a 200 car parking area. To minimize traffic on First Street the project proposes to limit club membership, staggered hours for employees, as well as arrival and departures of members disbursed throughout the day. Joe Nerden (Assistant City Engineer) is looking at a revised set of plans sent by the applicant in order to make a determination regarding the pipe replacement proposed for the Ridgeside Apartments project is adequate to handle the additional flow of the proposed Gables project and that the grade to the access roadway slope'is safe. Joe is going to draft up a letter of his detenninations which will be submitted at the at the • December 7' meeting. On Saturday, December 2, 2000, at 8:30 AM, a site visits was conducted. At the visit, board members and the applicant discussed the First Street entrance and the grade of the One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext.311 Fax (978) 740-0404 ' PB Memorandum December 4, 2000- 2 • slope. A cross section plan was submitted at that time which is enclosed in your package. Other issues such as emergency assess and buffer areas for neighbors were discussed. In addition to your package, please find a Traffic Impact Assessment. This project not does require approval from the Conservation Commission, except for possible roadwork on First Street. The applicant will file a Request for Determination of Applicability with the Con Com if necessary. 2. Continuation Public Hearing- Site Plan Review - 392 Highland Avenue The Planning Board will continue a public hearing under site plan review for the property located a 392 Highland Avenue. The applicant has revised the proposed project for the construction of a self-storage facility. The revised plan shows a two-story with a building footprint, which has been reduced to 100 feet by 200 feet (20,000 square feet), down some 24% from the original plan. The applicant has eliminated 67 storage units; bring the number of storage units to 333, a 17% reduction. The reduction in the size of the building has also helps provide vehicle access around the facility while allowing vehicles to access the bays at the same time. Additionally, do to the reduction in the size of the building, there will be no paved area for access behind the building more than 30 feet into the R-1 zone. The revised plan indicated an increase in parking spaces to 23, which exceeds the requirements for this zoned area by 11 spaces. The Board may want to address traffic signage around the proposed storage facility to better ensure traffic flow. • The buffer zone between the proposed building and the existing building on site has increased to allow for addition green space. There is also an increase to the buffer zone between the proposed building and the abutting neighbors. The revised plan indicates a double row of white pine trees within the buffer zone along the abutter's side and a 10- foot wide buffer with a single row of white pines along Olde Village Drive. To provide additional visual suitability, the applicant has reduced the number of garage doors, which are located along the sides of the building (sides that face Olde Village Road and the existing facility located on site). The garage doors will also be paint to blend in with the rest of the building. The Board may want to address the appearance of the building to make it more visually pleasing. John Keenan (City Solicitor) is research the following: • The parcel is split zoned B2 and Rl. The B2 Zone requires a maximum lot coverage of 25% and the RI Zone requires a maximum lot coverage of 30%. Can the B2 lot coverage requirement be calculated for the entire lot or only the portion of the lot in the B2 Zone? In other words, should the portion of the lot in the B2 Zone.only be covered 25% and the portion of the lot in the RI Zone only be covered by 30%? • • Is the snow storage area an accessory use to the commercial use? Can it be located more than 30 feet into the RI Zone? John is going to draft up a letter of his findings which will be submitted at the at the PB Memorandum December 4, 2000-3 • December 7ih meeting. This project does require Conservation Commission approval. • • • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting Thursday, December 7, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, December 7, 2000 in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Weiner, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, Pamela Lombardini , Gene Collins and Bill Luster. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan Don Cefalo, Staff Assistant, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Chuck Puleo was absent. Walter Power welcomed new Planning Board member Pamela Lombardini. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - D&L Realty LLC The Gables Club - First Street - 209 Highland Avenue, Salem MA. Atty. George Atkins addressed the Board and explained that they have a • traffic report to present to the Board. He introduced Michael Abend of Abend Associated to give a presentation on traffic. Mr. Abend reviewed the locations of the morning and evening peak traffic times during the week. Bill Luster noted that part of the design that concerns him a little is that the access road comes down the middle of the property. He suggested that they mirror the access to Ridgeway and create a four way intersection. Atty. Atkins stated that they looked at six or so schemes for the entry to the site and this is the one that they fell works best. David Weiner requested a site distance diagram. He noted that he would like to see a sketch of the area and address the issue of access to the parking lot. Denis Risque the Landscape Architect for the project addressed the Board and explained that there is extensive overgrowth on the site which could be thinned by planting vegetation. Brad McKennzie addressed the Board and stated that they met with the • Engineering Department regarding the utilities and the drainage on the site. He noted that a 12 inch concrete pipe was a concern for the • existing drainage off First Street. He also provided drainage calculations for peak storms up to a 100 year storm. He noted that they looked at two peak decision points along First Street and located the high point and showed the flow of drainage on First Street on the plan. He also presented a memo from Joe Nerdon on the Engineering department approving the changes they have made. He also noted that the State DPW has plans to do some work on Highland Avenue that has not been done yet. Walter Power opened the public hearing to public comment at this time. Ward Three City Councillor Joan Lovely addressed the Board and noted that at a neighborhood meeting the blasting for the site was explained. She requested that the neighbors be given prior notice of the blasting before the day of the event. There being no further comments or questions regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to continue the public hearing to December 21, 2000, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - Highland Realty Co LLC- 392 Highland Avenue, Salem, MA. • Atty. Kevin Dolan representing his client Mr. Amanti, addressed the Board and noted that they are in receipt of letters from Atty. Keenan and Denise Sullivan regarding the facade of the building. He reviewed some changes they made to the plan which included the widening of the entrance on Highland Avenue and revised the plans to meet with Mass Highways criteria. He reviewed the lot and showed the snow storage area on the plan. Atty. Dolan noted that they have provided ample parking, providing 16 spaces when 11 are required. He also noted that revisited the elevations and changed the color scheme as request by the Board in Ms. Sullivan's letter. Walter Power opened the hearing up for Public Comment at this time. Jane Henning of Old Village Drive addressed the Board and expressed her concern about the need for another storage facility. She also noted that she has concerns about traffic and safety. Walter Power noted that the applicant owns the property and he has a right to build on it. He explained that the Planning Board has certain • constraints and one of them is that they cannot tell them what to build there. They can only consider the plan presented and deliberate on that. • He also noted that he know that a lot of the neighbors will be disappointed. He asked that the neighbors offer constructive suggestions when commenting on the project. Sandra Warner of 3 Country Side Lane addressed the Board and expressed her concerns about the signage for the facility. Bob Hunt of 42 Lions Lane addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about water runoff and suggested a retaining wall to force the water where they want it to go. Bill Cullen asked if they would be doing any blasting. Atty. Dolan stated that they have set the building so that they don't anticipate a lot of blasting. He noted that any blasting would be done in compliance with Fire Department regulations. Walter Power noted that the Salem Fire Department has strict blasting requirement and they monitor blasting closely. Walter Power noted that the property would be gated. Atty. Dolan stated that the gate would be card operated and the building tenants would have the only access. Walter Power asked if they had given any consideration to small • decorative trees on each side of the fence. Atty. Dolan stated that there is not much room there but they would look at that. David Bourque, Chairman of the Highland Condo Association addressed the Board and stated that they are concerned about snow removal and the placement of the lights, as well as roadway drainage. Jerry Meola of 3 Indian Hill Lane addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the appearance of the trees on the computer generated model. Scott Weisburg, Vice Chair of the Highland Condo Association addressed the Board and expressed their concerns that this is the first time that they have seen the changes to the plan, and the addition of the cards for the gate. He asked of the tenants would have 24 hour access to the storage facility. Atty. Dolan stated that computer access is denied after hours. Ward Four Councillor Leonard O'Leary addressed the Board and stated that he is totally opposed to the storage facility on Highland Avenue. He suggested that a better location would be on Swampscott Road. • Councillor O'Leary also asked if they would be storing RV's or boats on • the site. Atty. Dolan stated that there would no outside storage on the site. Councillor O'Leary also questioned the drainage calculations for the site, noting that many residents behind the site have water problems. Walter Power suggested that the Planning Department have the Engineering Department check the drainage calculations. Joyce Nelson addressed the Planning Board and stated that she is opposed to the plan. Atty. Steve Singer addressed the Board and expressed his concerns about the use of Old Village Drive as a turnaround for the tenants of the storage facility. Atty. Dolan stated that they would inform their tenants that Old Village Drive is a private way and is not to be used as a turnaround. Councillor Joan Lovely addressed the Board and stated that she is concerned about emergency vehicle access and questioned the design of the turning radius for Fire Department vehicles. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a • motion was made by Gene Collins to continue the public hearing to January 4, 2001, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Bill Cullen to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Gene Collins and approved unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB120700 • Citp of 6alem, Alaggarbugettg a m. • r a Planning 39oarb (One :Fpalem Oreen Notice of Meeting You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday, December 21, 2000 at 7:30 PM, in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Walter B. Power, III Chairman • Tentative Agenda: 1. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit—AT&T 18 Washington Square West. (7:30 PM — 8:00 PM) 2. Public Hearing—Waiver from Frontage— 101 Broadway (8:00 PM— 8:15 PM) 3. Continuation of Public Hearing—Site Plan Review- D & L Realty, LLC—The Gables Club, First Street (209 Highland Avenue). (8:15 PM— 9:15 PM) 4. Old/New Business (9:15 PM— 9:30 PM) • One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 L' QCitp of balm ;ffiaoarb gettg 3pCanning 38oarb One &aCem green MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Don Cefalo, Senior Planner Salem Planning Department DATE: December 19, 2000 RE: Agenda—December 21, 2000 The following is a brief description of the items, which are listed on the attached agenda. Please contact me at the Salem Planning Department at 745-9595, extension 311, if you have any questions pertaining to the agenda items. • 1. Public Hearing—Waiver From Frontage Requirements— 21 Verona Street The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing for a request for a waiver from the frontage requirements for the parcel located at 101 Broadway. The applicant owns the lots located at 101 Broadway (Lot A and Lot B). The northwest side of Lot A and the northeast side of Lot B abut one another. The applicant is requesting that Lot A be returned to its historic 50 feet of frontage and 5,00 square feet of area and Lot B will have 100 feet of frontage on Pacific Street. These two lots do not meet the city frontage requirements and do to the changes made to the lots; the applicant is required to receive a Waiver from Frontage. The applicant received variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the frontage requirement for Lot A, as well as the total lot area for each lot. The decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals has been attached. 2. Public Hearing - Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit - 18 Washington Square - Hawthorne Hotel The Planning Board will open a Public Hearing pertaining to the installation of antennas on the Hawthorne Hotel at 18 Washington Square West. The applicant (AT&T) is requesting to install three crosspolar wireless communication antennas. One antenna and cables will be • located on the southeast comer of the existing penthouse and will be painted to match the structure. The other two antennas will be installed in an RF transparent chimney (basically it is a fake chimney to conceal the antennas), which will replace an existing masonry chimney. An equipment room will be located in the basement of the hotel. One Salem Green, Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (978) 745-9595 ext. 311 Fax (978) 740-0404 • PB Memorandum December 19, 2000- 2 The applicant met with the Salem Common Neighborhood Association, which unanimously approved the concept of the antennas on Hawthorne Hotel. In addition, the applicant has a meeting with Historical Commission on Wednesday, December 20th. The Design Board Review on Thursday, December 28' and Salem Redevelopment Authority on January 4, 2001. 3. Continuation Public Hearing - Site Plan Review—First Street (209 Highland Avenue)— The Gables Club The Planning Board will continue a public hearing under site plan review for the property located on First Street (209 Highland Avenue). The proposed project includes the construction of a principal structure with a footprint of 22,707 square feet consisting of 2 %2 stories with a gross floor area of 52,250 square feet. The building will be used for health and fitness activities and other forms of recreation. The proposed project will include 6 tennis courts, 2 pools and a child play area including 2 temporary air-supported covers will enclose the tennis courts and pools on a temporary seasonal basis. The entrance and exit will be from First Street and lead directly to a 200 car parking area. To minimize traffic on First Street the project proposes to limit club membership, staggered hours for employees, as well as arrival and departures of members disbursed throughout the day. Joe Nerden (Assistant City Engineer) has approved the drainage calculations and • improvements to the existing drain line on First Street. The improvement will be to the existing city drainage, which crosses the Vincent Chip site. A condition the Board may want to issue, is to have the Clerk of the Works inspect the construction of the drainage improvements to insure that the work is to city standards. At the December 7' hearing, the Applicant was ask to prepare a visual schematic showing a drivers view at the top of the entrance road looking into the parking area. The Board felt that the slope of the entrance road might have a traffic impact with cars trying to exit the parking lot. A reconfiguration of the parking area or proper signage may resolve this issue. This project not does require approval from the Conservation Commission, except for possible roadwork on First Street. The applicant will file a Request for Determination of Applicability with the Con Com if necessary. Salem Planning Board • Minutes of Meeting Thursday, December 21, 2000 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, December 21, 2000 in the second floor conference room at One Salem Green. Those present were: Chairman Walter Power, David Weiner, John Moustakis, Bill Cullen, Pamela Lombardini , and Chuck Puleo. Also present were Senior Planner Denise Sullivan Don Cefalo, Staff Assistant, and Eileen Sacco, Clerk. Gene Collins, Bill Luster and Carter Vinson were absent. Chairman Walter Power called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Public Hearing - Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit - AT&T - 18 Washington Square West Don Cefalo informed the Board that the applicant has requested that the matter be continued to January 4, 2001. Bill Cullen moved approval, • seconded by John Moustakis and approved unanimously. Public Hearing - Waiver from Frontage - 101 Broadway Atty. Bob Ford of Serafini, Serafini, Darling and Correnti addressed the Board addressed the Board on behalf of his client Tamis Cameron and presented a request for a waiver from frontage for property located at 101 Broadway. He explained that the area is secluded from the neighborhood and the neighbors are in support of the plan. Atty. Ford explained that they are requesting that Lot A be returned to its historic 50 feet of frontage and 5,000 s.f. of area and Lot B will 100 feet of frontage on Pacific Street. He also noted that these two lots do not meet the city frontage requirements and due to the changes made to the lots, the applicant is required to receive a Waiver from Frontage. Atty. Ford also noted that they received variances from the ZBA for the frontage requirement for Lot A, as well as the total lot area for each lot. David Weiner asked what the purpose of the action was. Atty. Ford stated that they would like to get an accurate appraisal of the property, for the purposes of refinancing. 91. Denise Sullivan stated that the city is happy with the plan and noted that it is a better situation. Walter Power opened 'the hearing up for public comment at this time. There was no one present who wished to speak on the matter. There being no further comment or questions from the members of the Planning Board, John Moustakis moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. Pam Lombardini moved to approve the Waiver from Frontage for 101 Broadway, seconded by Chuck Puleo and approved unanimously. Continuation of Public Hearing - Site Plan Review - The Gables Club - D&L Realty, LLC Atty. George Atkins addressed the Board and explained that they have been working on the changes requested by the Planning Board. He stated that he talked with Building Inspector Peter Strout and he has no objection to closing of an aisle. He explained that it would be chained and include signage. He noted that they decided to chain it because it could be removed if necessary. Atty. Atkins noted that another issue is that of the tie in to the drainage and that is being worked out with Ridgeside Apartments. He noted that the work would be in the street and could be coordinated with the Planning Department and the Clerk of the Works. Walter Power asked how the connection would be made. Atty. Atkins explained that in order for Ridgeside to connect they are putting in a drainage system and they are working with them to tie into that. Walter Power stated that he wants to make sure that both projects are coordinated. Denise Sullivan stated that it would not be a problem for the Planning Department as they will be using the same Clerk of the Works for both projects. Atty. Atkins stated that the construction vehicles would be stored in a specified location and cleaned daily as required by the Board of Health decision. David Weiner noted that at the last meeting there was some confusion about the stairway. Atty. Atkins explained that there was a sketch submitted for the purposes of depicting signage and the plan as submitted and revised shows the stairs as they will be built. • John Moustakis asked where they would be storing excavated material. •- Atty. Atkins stated that they would be removing the soil from the site. Walter Power expressed concern about the trucks going through Salem, noting that there are a lot of projects going on at the same time. Atty. Atkins noted that they have made a commitment not to have truck traffic on First Street, and they are attempting to solve that by negotiating to go through the parking area at the Highland Plaza shopping area. He suggested that the Board add a provision requiring them to consult with the Salem Police Department on the route for the removal of soil from the site. Chuck Puleo referred to the approval for the Ridgeside Apartments and asked if we required any additional street lights on First Street. Denise Sullivan reviewed the locations of the street lights on the plan and the topography of the land. Walter Power opened the hearing up for public comment at this time. Councillor Joan Lovely asked if there were any plans for cross walks. Walter Power suggested that they could put one near the entrance. There being no further comments or questions regarding this project, • John Moustakis moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved unanimously. The Planning Board reviewed a draft decision for the project. Item 10 was deleted because the applicant does not need Conservation Commission approval. Items 13 and 14 were deleted from the decision because they do not apply to this project. John Moustakis moved to approved the draft decision as amended for The Gables Club, seconded by David Weiner and approved unanimously. Old / New Business Chuck Puleo asked about the status of the update on pending projects that the Board requested. Denise Sullivan stated that she is working on it and will get it ready for the next meeting. She noted that the Assisted Living Facility is going through the HUD application process and they are still planning on doing the project. There being no further business to come before the Planning Board at • this meeting, John Moustakis moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Bill Cullen and approved. • The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Eileen M. Sacco, Clerk Salem Planning Board PB122100