Loading...
2007-PLANNING BOARD ro a CITY OF SALEM ' PLANNING BOARD i 2008 Planning Board Meeting Schedule — You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meetings for 2008 at 7:00 PM, in Room 313, Third Floor at 120 Washington Street. co Charles Puleo Chairman January July c January 3, 2008 July 17, 2008 January 17, 2008 N' • February September m = February 7, 2008 September 4, 2008 v n February 21, 2008 September 18, 2008 _ March October c o J March 6, 2008 October 16, 2008 March 20, 2008 m U`y 'C� April November a April 3, 2008 November 6, 2008 M April 17, 2008 November 20, 2008z„��0 i� aI� cZ�44 May. December May 1, 2008 December 4, 2008 May 15, 2008 December 18, 2008 June June 5, 2008 June 19, 2008 *No meetings scheduled for the month of August. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM A` PLANNING BOARD AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursday, December 20, 2007- 7:00 P.M. 3"" FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o December 6, 2007 2. Continued: Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 8, Lots 6, 7, 8) —Attorney John Keilty 3. Public Hearing Site Plan Review- Washington at Derby LLC, 155 Washington Street, 26 New Derby Street, & 31 Front Street(Map 34, Lots 423, 425, 426) (Former Salem News Building) - RCG LLC 4. Old/New Business 5. Adjournment This notice postedi on ooa icialo Bu ettn Boards city :Ono A/11 iap. � Sam dt / aii %xvG`Jfl�.aei"tCh3 iu`1 23A y, ZSB of 1u1.G.L. 120 AV\S11iVG'1'0N STREE"F, SALEM, 14ASSACHOSETFS 01970 ' TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 975.740.0404 ' MVWXALEM.CUM City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: ���cvtwit�q Date: J2�z�j/� � Name Mailing Address i Phone # Email QAY `t.✓ UZL S &0-1IN4)-M 00'0A 11 f 4 I Dy 4&11 n �Ir- 9rx s3f�izl b,�- ko Q) c�� �� 5 g78 74ks 17�- v 3CT b ATWew(1ncac{ . • ,go�o�ro CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND agree a: -� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEYDRISOOLL MAYOR 120 WAsHNGTON STREET♦SALEM,MASSAC-RBETCS 01970 TEL:978-619-5685♦FAx:978-740.0404 LYNN GOONl.\DuNcv,N,AICD DiEEcrox MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: December 13, 2007 RE: Agenda—December 20, 2007 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Minutes from December 6, 2007 ➢ Applications and Materials for Agenda Items • Notes on Agenda Items Continued: Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 8, Lots 6, 7, 8)— Attorney John Keilty Jim McDowell of Eastern Land Survey tells me that everything is set for the site visit on Saturday December 15`h at 9:30am. The meeting place will be at the entrance to the proposed subdivision (between 13 and 21 Clark Ave). Chuck, Walter, Pam, and Tim Ready have all confirmed they will be attending. I am unable to attend and encourage others who are unable to attend to take a look at the intersection of Clark St and Clark Ave prior to the meeting on Thursday. At this time Eastern Land Survey has not provided the Planning Department or FS&T with any further analysis of the safety of the waiver they are requesting for the centerline radius of Kimberly Rd. They have also not had any further discussions with the City Engineer about possible improvements to the Clark Street and Clark Ave intersection. Public Hearing Site Plan Review- Washington at Derby LLC, 155 Washington Street, 26 New Derby Street, & 31 Front Street (Map 34, Lots 423, 425, 426) • (Former Salem News Building) -RCG LLC • The proposed project includes the rehabilitation of the second and third floors of two of the interconnected existing buildings on the property for residential use, and the construction of a new four-story mixed use building along Washington and New Derby Streets. Thirty one (3 1) dwelling units are proposed: seven (7) in the upper floors of the existing buildings and twenty four(24) in the new building. In the new building 15,000 square feet of new retail is proposed. In your packet you will find a memo from Lynn Duncan reviewing the status of the project to date. You will also find two memos, from the City Engineer to RCG, which contain his comments and a summary of the Engineering Department's recommended conditions of approval. The proposed project is not located in an area of jurisdiction for the Conservation Commission. Carey Duques, Conservation Agent, recommends reviewing stormwater runoff pre and post construction, as well as proper controls for stormwater runoff during construction. She also encourages the use of low impact development practices. Prior to the meeting I should have comments from Lt. Griffin of the Fire Department and Tom St. Pierre, the Building Inspector. Both have been away. Other Announcements • Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance The Renewable Energy Task Force asked the Planning Department for assistance in developing an ordinance for wind turbines. The new ordinance would allow for both residential and commercial scale wind energy facilities in certain districts by special permit. The Planning Board would potentially be designated as the Special Permit Granting Authority. A first draft of the ordinance has been developed and the Renewable Energy Task Force hopes to come to the Planning Board in the near future to solicit input. Communities around Massachusetts have recently been adopting ordinances for wind energy facilities to encourage renewable energy in appropriate locations, while minimizing any adverse visual, safety, and environmental impacts. The Salem Zoning Ordinance has no provision for wind turbines. There is currently one wind turbine in Salem owned by Groom Construction at 96 Swampscott Rd. The turbine was treated as an accessory structure; a variance from the maximum height of 18' was granted by the Board of appeals to allow for the 41' tall turbine. Upcoming Projects Despite the appeal of the Zoning Board's decision for Riverview Place (Salem Suede), Attorney Scott Grover informs me that they will be going forward with permitting and they hope to file an application for the Planning Board's January 17`h meeting. You can reach me directly at 978-619-5691 if you have any questions, or to let me know if you are able to attend the December 201h meeting. 2 • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting December 20, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, December 20, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Walter Power, Pam Lombardini, John Moustakis, Nadine Hanscom, Christine Sullivan, Gene Collins, Tim Ready, and Tim Kavanaugh. Also present were: Lynn Duncan, Director of the Department of Planning & Community Development, Amy Lash, Staff Planner, and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Approval of Minutes The minutes for the December 6, 2007 Planning Board meeting were reviewed. Walter Power suggested the following changes: On page 3, 3 d paragraph, take first sentence out, then in the last sentence after "...for the City" add in "to balance infrastructure gains". Also on page 3, second to last paragraph, after"...about knowing" add in"the difference between". Same paragraph last sentence change "they are" to "the Planning Board is" and after "presentation" add in "by the developer". • A motion was made by Walter Power to accept the minutes with these changes, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved unanimously. Continued: Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 8, Lots 6,7,8)—Attorney Jack Keilty Note: Christine Sullivan recused herself from this agenda item. Attorney John Keilty, representing Chapel Hill LLC, said that they are moving toward a compromise between the City and his client. At the site visit, Board members were able to see the layout of Clark St and Clark Ave. He also said there was a discussion during the site visit regarding the neighbor to the left of the subdivision entrance (the Tran's) whose property has some arborvitae trees. If the road was constructed as planed, the trees adjacent to their property would have to be moved. Mr. Keilty said if the Fire Department approved changes to the layout of the subdivision entrance the trees could be saved. Jack Keilty had a meeting with Faye, Spofford & Thorndike, the City's Peer Review Engineer. He said there were still a few remaining issues, which are outline in the latest memo from FS&T. One issue is the drainage problems at the intersection of Clark Ave and Clark St, which they are willing to help the City with. Mr. Keilty said they received a memo from Mr. Knowlton, City Engineer, which had outlined three infrastructure improvements that the City need assistance with to support the proposed development a) new sewer pump, b) infiltration • and infill study and removal, and c) drainage improvements at the intersection of Clark St and Clark Ave. 1 Attorney Keilty said another issue that has come up is the potential road widening down on • Clark Street where a rock outcropping lies partially within the public way; his client is not interested in addressing this issued. His client is also not interested in the providing sidewalks during the short stretch from Clark St up Clark Ave heading up the hill. When Eastern Land Survey marked the public way with stakes, it showed there was encroachment by private property owners. Attorney Keilty does not believe it's his client's responsibility to widen the road as the pavement width near the rock is the required 24 ft. Attorney Keilty mentioned that the City's cost to do the work is inflated over their costs. Additional expenses Attorney Keilty mentioned that have been added to the project include the Fire Department's sprinkler requirement and the Board of Health's requirement for radon testing. Chuck Puleo said on the site visit he noticed a double catch basin between #16 and #20 Clark St. Amy said she understood from the City Engineer that the improvements would tie into that system. Chuck asked if the City had a schedule to repave Clark Rd and if so, how would this project fit into that schedule? Walter Power doesn't think the area where you go up the hill and turn near the rock is a safe situation. He suggested rounding off the corner and putting a sidewalk. Nadine Hanscom asked if the rock is on City property. Chuck explained that it was partially on private land and partially in the City right of way. Nadine asked if the rock was removable. It's unknown at this time. Nadine questioned why Attorney Keilty and his client did not want to undertake the rock issue. Mr. Keilty said that whether it's right or wrong to • remove it they did not want undertake such a project on private property. Tim Ready said that it is imperative that the coordination of paving takes place so that a new street isn't disrupted with construction. Lynn Duncan mentioned that Steve Casazza of Faye, Spofford & Thorndike, was present at the meeting and could update the Board on the instructions they had given him last time. Mr. Casazza said that last time there was a question about would happen if a school bus was traveling on the street while there were parked cars along the side. He made a scale model of a vehicle 40 feet long and 8 % feet wide and placed it over the proposed plan. The school bus was able to pass with no problems in the area where the waiver is being requested for the centerline radius. Where there is a slight crossover is at Kimberly & Clark Ave, it's a 90- degree turn and that's not uncommon. Chuck asked Steve Casazza, in regards to where the vortex system is going to be installed, if he is comfortable where that system drains. Steve said yes and also explained that the calculations were reviewed as well as the location. This first location for the system had been in the back end, but FS&T had recommended it be put at the front end and it was revised. Walter Power commented that with this cluster subdivision and all the issues they have been talking about, the narrow street and rock/sidewalk issues are imperative to handling additional traffic. Walter mentioned he remembered a similar issue with another project with a narrow road and rock, and that developer was required to remove the rock. He also said that if the 2 developer wants the units, there has to be substantial benefits to the City and that the • developer should work with the City to make the roads passable. Chuck Puleo pointed out the rock's location to other members of the Board. He noted that there is 24 ft of pavement even with the rock there, and with the rock on private property its removal would be complicated. Attorney Keilty said they will work with the City on the timing of the repaving. He also mentioned that with the Infiltration and Inflow study and removal, they need to examine and seal pipes. Lynn Duncan said that she will ask the City Engineer what would be involved with cutting back part of the rock that is on the right of way. Walter Power said that the rock made it difficult to see at the bend in the road. Lynn Duncan mentioned that Christine Sullivan is not present during this discussion due to a potential conflict of interest. The meeting was opened to the public. Ellen Rogato (13 Clark Ave) asked if the Peer Review Engineer was saying that based on tests, Kimberly Road does not require a waiver? Steve Casazza said that when they did the overlay in the location a waiver is needed, it showed that the bus did not create a safety • hazard. Ellen Rogato asked what would happen if she had blasting or flooding issues? She said she has never had water in her basement before; would a survey be done incase she has problems after the project was completed? Lynn Duncan said she was not aware of a pre construction survey being done for flooding. Amy Lash mentioned that she had brought informational handouts on blasting to the meeting for those that had concerns. She also spoke with Lt. Griffin of the Fire Department who encouraged property owners outside of the 250' pre-blast survey area to take photos. Taking photos would also be away of showing damage from any flooding. Sandra Tran (21 Clark Ave) asked how secure the retaining wall would be and if the sewer system would affect her property. Chuck Puleo mentioned that the developer would have to submit plans to the City for the wall. Amy Lash added that the Building Inspector could require the construction plans for the wall to be peer reviewed. Attorney Keilty said the sewer system would not impact her property. Councilor Jean Pelletier (Ward 3) asked if the property has been surveyed. Jack Keilty said yes. He stated his concern that the number of homes will overflow the sewer pumping station. Will they run a new pipe? In regards to the rock, he said that he understands that the developer wouldn't want to blast it. Councilor Pelletier would like to see the Board to ask the City Engineer to come in and address the Board for more clarification. He said the paving of Clark St was halted because of the drainage problem and Dunkin Donuts was being built. • Jeff Rogato (13 Clark Ave) mentioned the blind spot where the rock is on Clark Ave is dangerous. Maybe they could make the road have a less sharp turn. He also inquired as to 3 whether he could get copies of the Planning Board meeting minutes. Amy Lash said that the • minutes are available on the City's website after final approval. Councilor Pelletier will talk to the City Engineer about the rock, he will also talk to the homeowner. Nadine Hanscom would like to have this information for the next meeting. Lynn Duncan said the next meeting for Chapel Hill would be January 17`h. Walter Power had a question on the engineering. He asked about the sewage and the pumps and how much storage they will provide. Mr. Mello said that there are grinder pumps and built in wet wells. The submersible pumps are easily accessible and privately maintained. Walter asked about the gravity feed and asked if they would put connector pumps in. Mr. Mello said on Clark Ave they all have them. Chuck Puleo asked who did the cost estimates for the drainage and I & I work. Attorney Keilty said the City did and that he believes that they could do the project for 25-30% less. John Moustakis asked if they would have the City Engineer come in to address the Board. Lynn explained that that is why they brought in FS&T; they are paid for by the developer to serve as the engineer for the project. John asked if Councilor Pelletier is happy with that. Councilor Pelletier said he is and could speak with the City Engineer himself. Lynn Duncan said she likes the idea of the Councilor speaking with the City Engineer. Amy Lash said that before the Board voted to continue the matter she wanted to mention that • the Planning Department received a letter from Robert Strasnick, Attorney for David Colpitts stating his concerns. She noted Mr. Colpitts was concerned about industrial access in a residential neighborhood, he feels there are other alternatives for the site, and that the project does not meet the City's design standards. She mentioned that members of the Planning Board all received copies of the letter and that it was available in the file for others who would like to read it in its entirety. There being no further questions or comments, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to continue the public hearing to January 17, 2008, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). An additional motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to extend the deadline for final action to January 24, 2008, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). An extension form was signed by Attorney Keilty. (Five-minute recess) Public Hearing Site Plan Review— Washington at Derby LLC, 155 Washington Street, 26 New Derby Street & 31 Front Street (Map 34, Lots 423,425,426) (Former Salem News Building)-RCG LLC Note: John Moustakis recused himself from this item. • Matthew Picarsic of RCG brought the Board up to date on the project and explained that they had been before the Salem Historic Commission, the Design Review Board, and then the 4 Salem Redevelopment Authority. They received approval for the schematic design from the • Redevelopment Authority with conditions. Chuck Puleo asked if that means preliminary approval. Matt said yes they'd have to go back for final approval. Chuck mentioned that the previous proposal was 6 stories this is 4. Matt explained that the density and height of the proposal before the Board was within the zoning regulations. The existing building (central house) will remain with some renovations. The building will be residential on the top floors, retail on the first floor. Christine said she did not like the windows and asked if they were reviewed. Matt said the windows were reviewed by the Design Review Board as far as size, shape and material. The color has yet to be determined. Chuck Puleo asked about the number of spaces for parking. Matt mentioned there are 36 spaces on site, 31 on the surface, 5 enclosed, and 7 off-site. The 7 off site spaces will be by 76 Lafayette St (near the West Coast building). Walter Power said he was concerned about the parking and disappointed with the parking lot; he feels there should be a garage and that this should be a component of the whole block's redevelopment. Lynn Duncan mentioned that the project could possibly be phased. Matt Picarsic said it's feasible that if the City comes up with improvements to Artists Row, it could be implemented. He said the plan doesn't preclude a garage in the future. , Alex Steinberg said the City needs to come forward with a plan for the parking. RCG can't do • that; they can go forward with what they have. They've done as much as they can on this parcel. The parking lot could be entered from Derby, Lafayette or Washington. Chuck Puleo asked how the seven off-site parking spaces would work. Matt said they would be for the units of the rehabilitated building. Gene Collins asked if the project before them meets the parking requirements Matt said yes, it meets the requirements. Lynn asked Matt if visuals and figures for parking at 76 Lafayette St could be provided. Christine Sullivan said she agrees with everyone's comment. The City should push for parking, the corner is ugly, and the project is a great project for downtown. She asked about the sidewalk in front of the new building. Matt said it is a park. Christine said she would like to challenge whether it was a park or not. She said that she felt it could be used in a better way, like as an outdoor caf6 area. Matt said that would be something they would consider being involved in. (Meeting opened to the public) Robert Wall (13 Crombie St. Unit #1) commended the project and asked what his view would be from his condo. Matt showed him on the plans. Robert Wall said he'd like to see diversity . of form, more peaks than a flat roof because he doesn't think this building fits the Salem look. Matt mentioned that the Design Review Board had opinions as well. They liked that the 5 building pulled around New Derby St. Lynn Duncan mentioned that there would be other DRB meetings. Mr. Wall asked if there would be an awning. Nadine Hanscom asked if there would be trees blocking the view of the parking lot. Matt said yes the existing street trees would remain. Nadine mentioned that the building itself doesn't represent Salem, as the City is quainter than the building depicts. Shirley Walker (resident of the Derby Lofts and member of the Beautification Committee) said they beautified Artists Row with great results. She suggests that if they're looking for quaint, consider beautification. It would add culture and life. Lynn Duncan said this was the most successful year for Artists Row and it's caught on. They've been getting more proposals, thanks to the Beautification Committee and RCG. Councillor Pelletier (Ward 3) thanked Matt and Alex. He said that the area mentioned as a park was actually open space under Rick Rennard's jurisdiction. He mentioned that when they took a tree down near the Indian restaurant, and the restaurant owners will be putting seed down to grow others. Christine Sullivan asked if they could show what the building will look like on the back (from Artists Row). She mentioned that on the Derby St. side, she thought the building was all brick, but it doesn't look like it on the drawing. Alex said that two stories are brick; two stories are handy plank. • Chuck Puleo mentioned that the Board of Health will require a dumpster. The project architect mentioned that there is an internal compactor and that it's serviced from the parking lot area. Robert Wall asked what the material is at ground level. The architect said it was wood and glass. It was explained that they would keep in sync with existing building instead of bring in a new buildings with new materials. The DRB was happy with this approach of continuity. Lynn said that new buildings should be compatible, not mimic, older buildings. Amy summarized a letter she received from Historic Salem hie. that included suggestions for the site design. She said they would like to see access from the residential entrance in the rear of the building to New Derby Street. They would to see treatment of the parking lot paving and landscaping to make a pedestrian friendly path between the residential entrance and Front Street. Amy will copy this letter for the members of the Planning Board as well as other past letters from Historic Salem to the Design Review Board. Amy read a letter from Hugh Kerr, of Passage to India; he is in support of the application and believes the project will be beneficial to his business. Amy read a letter of support from Dennis Moustakis, owner of the Edgewater Caf6. He has been a tenant of that building for 5 years and looks forward to the restoration of the building. • Amy Lash said that the Fire Department is concerned with the width of the gate to the rear parking lot and that they would like to see the width increased to 18' ft. They would like to 6 see the sprinkler hook up location noted on the plans. If there are restaurants in the new spaces the applicant is aware the Fire Department is concerned about the ventilation. Amy received a memo from David Knowlton, which has specific details he would like changed on the plan relative to the sewer lines. He has some additional details that he would like clarification on when they get to the building documents. Walter requested that the Board gets copies of letters the Planning Department gets. Amy will get the copies of these letters to the Board members. Amy will also get the minutes of the Design Review Board meetings for the Planning Board members so they have an idea of the review that has taken place to date. There being no further questions or comments, a motion was made by Gene Collins to continue the Public Hearing on January 3, 2008, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Old/New Business o Many members of the Planning Board expressed interest I having a joint meeting with other Boards like the Design Review Board to discuss how the Boards work together. Adjournment There being no further business, a motion was made by Gene Collins to adjourn the meeting, • seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 7 CITY OF SALEM 4` PLANNING BOARD AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursday, December 6, 2007- 7:00 P.M. 3ND FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chair, 1. Approval of Minutes o November 1, 2007 2. Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 1 Parallel Street(Map 23, Lot 132)—Attorney Stephen Lovely 3. Public Hearing— Wireless Facility Special Permit- 488 Highland/0 Cain Road (Camp Lions) (Map 3, Lot 1) - FiberTower Corporation, Attorney Francis Parisi • 4. Public Hearing- Wireless Facility Special Permit- 40R Highland Ave (Fairweather Apartments) (Map 5, Lot 19) — FiberTower Corporation, Attorney Francis Parisi 5. Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 8, Lots 6, 7, 8) —Attorney Jolui Keilty--Request for Continuance to December 20, 2007 6. Old/New Business o Request of 289 Derby Realty Trust to extend the Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit and Site Plan Review Decision dated December 2, 2004 for an additional one (1) year—Attorney Scott Grover o Vote to adopt 2008 Meeting Schedule 7. Adjournment Thls notice posted on 'Official Bulfetln Board, City Hall Salem, Mass. on NOV 2 g 20 at 149 /,�/�1 in �� n pp 23A A 28B of M.G.L. oe u,h Chap. 38 Sse. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, NIASSACHGSE'ITS 01970 - TEL: 978.619.56S5 FAX 978.740.0404 - Wl6W.SALENLCOM City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: Date: Name Mailing Address Phone # Email o �Tj'rn/ P7 . o CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Form A — Decision 1 Parallel Street Stephen Lovely, Esq. 14 Story Street =w Salem, MA 01970 r• • Q? Dear Mr. Lovely: Co The Salem Planning Board voted on December 6, 2007 to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Stephen Lovely, 14 Story Street, Salem, MA 01970 2. Location: 1 Parallel Street, Assessors Map 23 • Project Description: Lots A, B, C, and D were created by the plan for 1-3 Parallel Street endorsed by the Planning Board on September 20, 2007. This Form A shows Lot 3 (5,405 sq ft), the portion of Lot A that is registered land, and Lot 4 (595 sq ft), the portion of Lot B that is registered land. The purpose of this plan is to illustrate the conveyance of the registered land portions and does not alter the previously endorsed plan. Sincerely, A, Va Charles Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM ` .ems CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Wireless Special Permit Decision For The Petition of FiberTower For The Property Located At 4011 Highland Xve s u; . or A Public Hearing on this petition was held on December 6, 2007. The following Planning Board =' members were present: Charles Puleo, Walter Power, John Moustakis, Tim Kavanaugh, Ti;n r Ready, Gene Collins, and Christine Sullivan. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters arg y notice of the hearing was properly published in the Salem Evening News. n GO The petitioner is requesting a Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit under Section 5- 3, Special Permit Uses, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow for the installation of two antennas (on approx. 1 ft. in diameter, the other approx. 2 ft. in diameter) on the existing rooftop penthouse located at 40R Highland Ave Salem, MA. Cabling will run from the antennas to telecommunications equipment that will be located within a weatherproof cabinet, which will also be located on the rooftop. The Planning Board reviewed the application and plans submitted and found that the petitioner addressed the requirements of this section for the issuance of a Special Permit. • On December 6, 2007, the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven in favor, and none opposed, to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application dated November 7, 2007 and site plan last dated October 30, 2007, titled "FiberTower BOS 1908 40R Highland Ave", Sheets TO1, A01, A02, SOI, and S02 and drawn by Aerial Spectrum Incorporate, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant paints the antennas to match the color of the building and the existing roof structures; the applicant; and his successors, shall maintain the paint on the antennas. I hereby certify that a copy of this decision is on file with the City Clerk and that a copy of the decision and plans is on file with the Planning Board. 1 Charles Puleo, Chairman This endorsement shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing certification of the City Clerk that twenty (20)days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed or that if such appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Essex South Registry of Deeds and is indexed in the grantor index under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for recording or registering shall • be paid by the owner or applicant. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM ig PLANNING BOARD Wireless Special Permit Decision For The Petition of FiberTower For The Property Located At 488 Highland/O Cain Road r-) A Public Hearing on this petition was held on December 6, 2007. The following Plann� Board " members were present: Charles Puleo, Walter Power, John Moustakis, Tim Kavanaugh, Am Ready, Gene Collins, and Christine Sullivan. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutterstatd notice of the hearing was properly published in the Salem Evening News. The petitioner is requesting a Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit under Section 5- 3, Special Permit Uses, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow for the installation of a 2ft. dish antenna on the existing 170 ft. lattice tower located at 0 Cain Road/488 Highland Salem, MA. Cabling will run from the antenna to an equipment cabinet to be located on the existing tower foundation. The Planning Board reviewed the application and plans submitted and found that the petitioner addressed the requirements of this section for the issuance of a Special Permit. On December 6, 2007, the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a • vote of seven in favor, none opposed, to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application dated October 30, 2007 and site plan last dated October 5, 2007, titled"FiberTower BOS1903 O Cain Road", Sheets TO 1, COI, CO2, A01, A02, drawn by Aerial Spectrum Incorporated, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant paints the antennas to match the color of the existing tower; the applicant; and his successors, shall maintain the paint on the antennas. I hereby certify that a copy of this decision is on file with the City Clerk and that a copy of the decision and plans is on file with the Planning Board. k- R-4--lAIL Charles Puleo, Chairman This endorsement shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing certification of the City Clerk that twenty (20)days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed or that if such appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied,is recorded in the Essex South Registry of Deeds and is indexed in the grantor index under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, .SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 0 WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM 4' �' DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEYDRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHNGTONSIREET♦SALENi,MASSAcHusE11s 01970 TEL.978-619-5685 ♦FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN G00N1N DtrrGnN,AICP DIRECTOR DECISION-REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE December 11, 2007 Chapel Hill, LCC c/o John Keilty, Esquire " -- 40 Lowell Street = n<c Peabody,MA 01970 -n' _9 n' .-r Dear Mr. Keilty, 0 1 0 On December 6, 2007 the Planning Board voted to accept your request to continue the Chapel Hill Subdivision to the meeting on December 20, 2007. If a decision is not rendered at this meeting, you will need request to extend the date of final action by signing the Planning Board's standard extension form. • Please contact me at 978-619-5695 if you have any questions. N cerely, Amy . Lash Staff Planner • CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND �s z COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KINMERLEYDRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET♦ S.u-EM MASSAcntbETn 01970 .1_978-619-5685 ♦FAx:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNCAN,AIC' DrmcroR DECISION-SITE PLAN REVIEW EXTENSION December 10, 2007 289 Derby Street Realty Trust N C-,, Henry Bertolon, Trustee o C/o Scott Grover, Esq. Tinti, Quinn, Grover and Frey, P.C. 27 Congress Street, Suite 414 Salem, MA 01970 RE: 289 Derby Street D T, ,9 . n M -+: Dear Mr. Grover: o 0 The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, December 6, 2007 to discuss the request by 289 Derby Street Realty Trust for an extension of the Planning Board's decision for approval of a Site Plan, dated • December 2, 2004, for an additional one year. A one year extension was previously granted in December of 2006. The Board decided by a unanimous vote to approve the extension request for an additional one year, until December 2, 2008. The Board recognizes there has been a change in economic conditions beyond the control of the property owner, and that if the project could be built as permitted, the parking that would be supplied would be beneficial to the City. If you have any questions or require further information, please feel free to contact me in the Department of Planning and Community Development at(978) 619-5685. Sincerely, Amy h Staff Planner Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • ,rte CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decisions At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday,December 6,2007 at 7:00pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,Salem Massachusetts,the Planning Board voted upon the following items: Applicant: FiberTower Corporation Request: Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit under section 5-3 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. Location: 0 Cain Road/488 Highland Ave (Camp Lions) (Map 3, Lot 1) Description: Allows the applicant to install a 2 ft. dish antenna on the existing 170 ft lattice tower located at 0 Cain Road/488 Highland Ave, Salem,MA. Cabling will run from the antenna to an equipment cabinet to be located on the existing tower foundation. Decision: Approved-Filed with City Clerk December 11, 2007 Applicant: FiberTower Corporation Request: Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit under section 5-3 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. Location: 40R Highland Ave (Map 5, Lot 19) Description: Allows the FiberTower to install two antennas (one approx. 1 ft. in diameter,the other approx. 2 ft. in diameter) on the existing rooftop penthouse on the Fairweather Apartments located at 40R Highland Ave. Cabling will run from the antennas to telecommunications equipment that will be located within a weatherproof cabinet,which will also be located on the rooftop. Decision: Approved-Filed with City Clerk December 11,2007 This notice is being sent in compliance with the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 9 and does not require action by the recipient. Appeals, if any, shall be made pursuant to Chapter 40A, Section 17, and shall be filed within 20 days from the date which the decision • was filed with the City Clerk. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 , TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - WWW.SALEM.COM \Lie, i CITY OF SALEM ' PLANNING BOARD J City of Salem Planning Board — Site Visit , Clark Ave- Chapel Hill Subdivision CD . RESCHEDULED The City of Salem Planning Board will hold a site visit for the Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit application of Chapel Hill LLC for the property located at Clark Ave (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8). The site visit to be held on Saturday, December 8, 2007 at 9:30 has been rescheduled to Saturday, December 15, 2007 at 9:30 AM, and will begin at the entrance to the proposed • subdivision (between 13 and 21 Clark Ave), Salem, Massachusetts. Charles Puleo Chairman This notice post ;'n "C",.clol Bu in Boa City H 11 :, �L, a t• `/ at / 7��� i r,�o,n err witb 39 SIIR 23A 23D of f' • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 . WWW.SAI-EM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF CANCELD SITE VISIT City of Salem Planning Board Clark Ave- Chapel Hill Subdivision The Planning Board site visit scheduled for Saturday, December 1, 2007 at 9:30 AM for the Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit application of Chapel Hill LLC for the property located at Clark Ave 1(Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8) has been canceled. • Charles 49W4" �4L eo Chairman Tt o[ics city it XAQ 33A A 233 fat rem, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD City of Salem Planning Board — Site Visit Clark Ave- Chapel Hill Subdivision The City of Salem Planning Board will hold a site visit for the Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit application of Chapel Hill LLC for the property located at Clark Ave (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8). The site visit will be held on Saturday, December 1, 2007 at 9:30 AM, and will begin at the entrance to the proposed subdivision (between 13 and 21 Clark Ave), Salem, Massachusetts. Charles Puleo Chairman • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 0 WWW.SALEM.COM o e CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board Meeting scheduled to be held on Thursday, November 15, 2007 at 7:00pm in City Hall Annex, room 313, 120 Washington Street has been cancelled due to the lack of agenda items. The next regularly scheduled meeting will be on Thursday, December 6, 2007. G)-- 0� IA.L. Charles Puleo Chairman • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM 'ev lid, PLANNING BOARD r` NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF SITE VISIT CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD m CLAR.KE AVE- CHAPEL HILL SUBDIVISION o You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board Site Visit scheduled to be held on Saturday, November 3, 2007 at 9:30 AM for the Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit application of Chapel Hill LLC for the property located at Clark Ave (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8)has been canceled. Charles Puleo Chairman 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 e TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM G§C0 CITY OF SALEM )J, 1q Q PLANNING BOARD City of Salem -0 Planning Board — Site Visit 1 Clark Ave- Chapel Hill Subdivision Q) y The City of Salem Planning Board will hold a site visit for the Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit application of Chapel Hill LLC for the property located at Clark Ave (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8). The site visit will be held on Saturday, November 3, 2007 at 9:30 AM, and will begin at the entrance to the proposed subdivision (between 13 and 21 Clark Ave), Salem, Massachusetts. Charles Puleo Chairman OCT 2 9 2007 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 e TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 4 WWW.SALEPI.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD C"J - AGENDA ;r – PLANNING BOARD =_, Thursday, November 1, 2007- 7:00 P.M. 3P-D FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET r - 6 luleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o October 18, 2007 2. Continued Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval—43 School Street (Map 26, Lot 286) –Lona Belanger ---Request to Withdraw 3. Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit– Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8)– • Attorney Jack Keilty 4. Old/New Business o Request by Osborne Hills Realty Trust to modify July 27, 2007 Definitive Subdivision, Cluster Residential Development Special Permit, and Wetlands District Special Permit Decision o Request by the Salvation Army to release escrow funds for the project at 93-95 North Street 5. Adjournment This notice poste nsn "0`r"iidal Bulletin Board' Ciry Hall 3 ' Ail' OCT 2at AO iin 5 1GQ &jA A 238 W M.G.L. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 WWW.SAI-EM.COM i • City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: «hn�'+Ik Date: No�P02f i Name Mailing Address Phone # Email �G9A2-VA S 6U(ztArVL7tv.j �aoCL� 7 SL 221- ll$'! S -Z7gL�s�itic •cn� uRu+.�(o-rar�y inn GP 4 f #1,. k Nws 2gtA • /�;��jar c� DDq �I�,QY��4✓� P78ZY/��� ST j'>�-75`s= 4'/aS� z o S QA-0�1>aCV7�& D� d u`Q44-ce 4V Salem Planning Board • Minutes of Meeting November 1, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 1, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Charles Puleo, Walter Power, Tim Kavanaugh, John Moustakis, Pam Lombardini, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Ready, Gene Collins and Christine Sullivan (arrived at 7:50, participated in Chapel Hill LLC Public Hearing). Also present were: Lynn Duncan, Director of Planning & Community Development; Amy Lash, Staff Planner; and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Approval of Minutes The minutes for the October 18, 2007 Planning Board meeting were reviewed. There were no changes. A motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (7-0). Continued Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 43 School Street (Map 26, Lot 286) Lona Belanger-Request to Withdraw Amy Lash received a letter from Lona Belanger requesting to withdraw her application, • Chuck Puleo read the letter to the Board members. A motion was made by John Moustakis to allow withdrawal, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Old/New Business o Request by Osborne Hills Realty Trust to modify July 27, 1007 Definitive Subdivision, Cluster Residential Development Special Permit, and Wetlands District Special Permit Decision A letter from Attorney Brian McGrail was available to the Board members. Gene said that after reading the letter and the information, he thinks they should allow the modifications. Chuck Puleo wanted to know how far the traffic signal is being moved and how does that compare to what they approved in relation to the crosswalk and the park entrance? Lynn Duncan explained that they are trying to work with the property owner at #60 Marlborough Road. The property owner is hoping to move the poles (two of them) away from their property closer to McGrath Park. Ken Petraglia said they could move them 5 ft. closer to McGrath Park. The poles would stay in the same relationship to each other. Before they can do that, they need to get a right of entry from the owner. The Planning Dept. is currently waiting for developer to submit a professionally engineered design of the foundation so that they can get information to the property owner and can make a decision. Chuck Puleo asked how this would affect the timetable for the project? Lynn said she made the developer aware that this is a critical path before they move forward. Chuck asked how close they are to having the homes ready. Lynn said that 3 1 homes have been sold, 10 were approved, and they're asking for 10 more. Chuck asked • what the time frame is for completion; Lynn does not have the time frame. Tim Ready suggested getting concessions for a concrete sidewalk from the developer because the sidewalk to the entrance is concrete for about 200 yards, and then it becomes asphalt. Pam Lombardini felt that it is too much to ask for and that it's too expensive. Pam also commented that the developer isn't asking for anything more as far as the light, and Lynn agreed and said that they're abiding and helping out the property owner. Tim Kavanaugh as well didn't want to force the issue. Walter felt the Board didn't have leverage to ask them for this. After hearing comments from Board members, Tim R. withdrew his suggestion for the concession. A motion was made by Gene Collins to accept the request for the partial waiver of condition 4 and 18A to allow for twenty (20) certificates of occupancy to be issued prior to the installation of the traffic light and turn lane, seconded by John Moustakis and approved (7-0). o Request by the Salvation Army to release escrow funds for the project at 93-95 North Street Chuck had a letter from Attorney Joe Correnti that he read to the Board members. It stated that two outstanding issues had been taken care of- as built plans were submitted and the shrubs required to screen the utility cabinet were submitted. Amy said they • removed the graffiti from the cabinet and planted 5 shrubs to provide better screening than what they had originally planted. Amy said they were actually only asked to provide three (3) shrubs, so they have done more than what was asked of them. Therefore, they are requesting that the Planning Board vote to release the escrow funds for the project. Amy passed around the as built plans and photos of the shrubbery for members to view. Walter Power commented that when the electric company sees the bushes near the electrical units outside, they might want to take them down so that they have access. There is supposed to be 10 ft. between shrubbery and the building. Amy will mention this concern to Joe Correnti. A motion was made by Gene Collins to release the escrow funds for the project at 93-95 North Street, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (7-0). o Walter mentioned to Lynn that he has noticed that at Hawthorne Crossing condominiums on Highland Avenue (next to Chevy dealer) the gates have been open consistently, and they're supposed to be closed for safety purposes. Lynn will look into this. o Chuck Puleo said that he had questioned the screening on the roof that was supposed to be installed on Beverly Cooperative Bank. Amy said that a building permit had been signed before receipt of the plan for screening. Amy talked with Tim Smith and he is aware this plan needs to be submitted to the Planning Dept. and he will work on getting the screening • taken care of soon. o Endorsement of plan for Leggs Hill Road. Amy Lash said the appeal period has passed with no appeals. There were two items were are supposed to be added to the plans prior to 2 endorsement- a reference to the decision, and a note about the requirement for their only • to be hammer head driveways. A motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to endorse the plans for Leggs Hill Road, seconded by John Moustakis and approved (7-0). Members will sign at end of meeting. Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit— Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8)—Attorney Jack Keilty Attorney Jack Keilty, of 40 Lowell St, Peabody is the representative for Chapel Hill LLC. Mr. Keilty said he is before the board for consideration for 27 lots. He explained that Clark Ave appears on a landcourt plan. The developer is proposing to build Clark Ave & Kimberly Road with the 27 lots. It was discovered during the summer that Jennifer Circle is industrially zoned. They then requested that the City Council rezone the easterly side of Clark Ave to residential, though the Planning Board recommended the rezoning all of the lots, the City Council did not do so. The changed their plan accordingly and then filed a new application for procedural reasons. Now they are before the Planning Board with a single cluster plan that depicts the number of lots that can be developed in accordance with current zoning. There are significant wetland areas that surround the site. They have gone to the Conservation Commission. They are proposing to develop this land under cluster provisions and are proposing to develop at the peak elevation, not bringing house lots down to a lower grade. They will keep the open space • and not impact the wetlands. They are asking for two things: 1-Approval of definitive subdivision plans of 27 lots and a waiver for Kimberly Road. There are two outstanding issues that need to be resolved: 1-improvements to intersection of Clark Avenue & Clark St. and 2-what is to happen with the sewer system. Chuck Puleo said that Clark Ave does not look like it's built out to its full width where it makes the bend. Chris Mello of Eastern land Survey said that on the existing conditions plan (dated Sept. 21, 2007), it shows the actual paved road and the public layout. There is no intention to take anything from anyone occupying the layout. They don't plan on widening the road. They have proposed to work with the City to correct some water issues at the intersection of Clark Ave and Clark St. If the Board requests widening, they would address it, but they would be dealing with taking the City's land back from people who have been using it. Nadine Hanscom asked about the legal lots- if the house lots weren't over the line, would they have space for widening? It was mentioned that the Fire Dept. has similar issues as to how to get out of the street. Chuck Puleo said he doesn't think they received an answer regarding sprinklers in the homes. The Fire Dept. is concerned about access. Lynn Duncan said that the City has recognized (separate from the subdivision) there is an issue with the roadway and drainage. The City Engineer is looking into improvements. The City said the Developer should be somewhat involved since they're adding lots. Walter Power asked where the sewer water goes from the project. Mr. Keilty said off of Clark Ave. Walter asked if they've • received any complaints about water pressure on the street. Jack Keilty said no and that it's more of a sewer issue. Gene Collins asked what the width of the narrow part of Clark Ave is. Chris Mello said its 24', which is a normal size street. 3 John Moustakis commented that it doesn't solve the problem of encroachment. John asked if the streets are staked out, they are not. Chuck Puleo said that prior to the site visit, can there • be some stakes put in a few places so that there can be a line of sight for them to see. Chris Mello said that yes that can be done. (The following excerpts are verbatim per Christine Sullivan's request) Chuck Puleo said, "One thing they're questioning is the remaining lot #21, which in the original proposal was to put the cul de sac in that to try to get access to that property. We are not seeing that on there now, so what happens to that in the future? Jack Keilty said, "I'm not certain what will happen in the future but I do know that the eventual owner, today it's owned by Barbara Driscoll, it is under agreement with a fellow by the name of George Belleau, but I would suggest to you that there's a fight to be had. They are not going to purchase this land without access to the industrial land. That's a fight for another day." Jack Keilty said, "We are trying to present to you now a plan that is in accordance with the existing zoning and can assure you that we will be back. My clients are paying too much to leave it unattended and we do not have another access to it. We have city lands, wetlands all around us so it's not like we can easily come off of Technology Drive. So that's a fight to be had. Christine Sullivan asked "Is the road adequate for what they're proposing"? Chuck Puleo said "Further to our point of the condition of Clark Ave., if that it were ever to happen, the road should be adequate, that's my reasoning." Jack Keilty replied, "That's the question before you. Is the road we're proposing adequate for the residential land that we're • proposing? The fact that it's a fight for another day, it's more a legal issue." Gene Collins commented , "That's more speculation than what's before us". Christine Sullivan said, "Thinking as a practical minded person, you're telling us that this is going to be a cluster development and you are later going to want to get access to industrial development from that location. We're supposed to make a decision on a road that's going to lead there?" Jack Keilty replied, "No, not anymore". Christine Sullivan answered back, "So we're supposed to pretend that we're blind and approve a road that we know may not be adequate for industrial development just because you didn't put it on the plan?" Jack Keilty said, "That's a choice for you at a later date." Christine Sullivan replied, "We could then say Your road is inadequate, you have to redo your road." Jack Keilty answered, "Yes, when I come to you with an industrial plan." Christine Sullivan asked, "Why don't you make sure it's adequate now for those purposes?" Jack Keilty answered, "I don't think there's an answer to that question. I have a strong sense that if I show you a plan with that access there is no requirement that makes the road any wider, any deeper thickness of pavement in that particular zoning district. We are not in the industrial district that Technology Drive is wherein you say it has to be 50 ft wide and there is no zoning ordinance. We have no such provisions in an ordinary industrial zone. So our width and our pavement are adequate. I understand these are political issues, we are not properly zoned. So I am showing you now a plan that shows access to those lots that are residentially zoned, I am showing you an adequate roadway. I will be back I think, I believe I will be back • to develop the extra acres, about 2.3, in some industrial fashion and that's a fight for another day. There is not a wider or thicker pavement in your zoning ordinance that requires that. You will get site plan review, that's what the Planning Board will have, site plan review." Chuck Puleo said, "I don't know that we'll have site plan review because if you came up with 4 an industrial plan that is an allowed use". Jack Keilty said "it would have to be a pretty small • building, it's the square footage of the building triggers site plan review". Lynn Duncan said, "The plan would have to put in a roadway." Jack Keilty, "No we're going to put it on a lot, and it's a subdivision, you don't have any lot size in front of you. " Lynn Duncan said, "You would still have the same legal issue accessing the industrial way thru a residential road." Jack Keilty said, "That's the fight we'll have" Lynn Duncan said, "You have the opinion from the Assistant Solicitor Gerry Parisella that case law states that you can not access" Jack Keilty interrupted with "He did not find a case in point by the way". Lynn stated that "I'm not here to debate the legal merits. I'm just telling you laypersons terms it's the city's opinion" Jack said, "It's a fight to be had on another date" Lynn said, "It's a legal issue. Site plan review or not but you would not be able to access the industrial plan, yes, It's a legal issue there are two sides to that coin." Gene Collins commented, "That's not the issue before us." Jack Keilty said, "To Ms. Sullivan, if you're asking, why don't we show the access road now? I'm telling you that the City Solicitor's opinion is I cannot access commercial/industrial land over residentially zoned land. So I have taken it off your plate and I want an approval in accordance with zoning and I am telling you that I'll be back another day for that other issue, that fight." Christine Sullivan stated, "I would like to request that all the remarks in the last dialogue be in the minutes verbatim, not truncated, but verbatim because I would like this record real clear of what the conversation has been all about (that he's ready for a fight)". Jack Keilty replied "We have no objection to that". Christine Sullivan said, "Because I think that going forward • it would be useful to have the whole transcript on that. I don't know what's going to happen". Jack Keilty stated, "My only point in being as direct and as on point, is that there is not a willingness whatsoever for the potential developer to accept a condition that there will be no access to the industrial end, that's why I'm being as pointed, perhaps obtrusive." Christine said, "I'm just completely confused because if you needed a better road to go to the industrial end for whatever purpose you will use it and we approve a less than better road, you can't go back and take land from people your selling houses to". Jack Keilty said, "To regress that issue, we don't believe that there is a requirement in your zoning ordinance that requires any road wider than what we're providing for the roads that are already there so we're willing to say this is what we'll build because the only place that you have a different requirement is Technology Drive." Gene Collins said, "I'd like to ask the Chairman to bring us back on point and to get to the item before us." Chuck Puleo, "I think it's a needed discussion, so we might as well get it over with. At least we'll know where we all stand. I think we should all be clear to his intention and know what we're able to do with this decision. We now have to deal with what's before us." Walter Power said, "Mr. Keilty now that you're being perfectly frank with us I'm wondering why you didn't go ahead and try to appeal the decision of the Council? There are single family houses there." Mr. Keilty stated, "I'll be very candid with you, because that's not an opportunistic appeal. The City Council has almost complete discretion with respect to how they designate zones. Had we appealed it then those neighbors they wouldn't get the benefit • of it. I don't think at the end of the day we would necessarily gain an approval the court in my opinion would not say that the City Council ought to have rezoned us. So that was money not well spent. I think at the end of the day when we come in for access to our land, that's money well spent. Because I think if the Planning Board does not give us that roadway that allows us 5 access to our land it'll be a taking. That's my opinion. And I know that's not necessarily • shared by the Planning Dept or the Assistant City Solicitor but it's my opinion and my clients opinion. So that why I say it's a fight for another day."Walter Power, "We had recommended that be allowed."Jack Keilty said, "Yes you did and I thought that was very wise." Chuck Puleo, "Now that we have that issue aired, we all know where we stand. Tim Ready said "I'd like to think of it as less of a fight for another day, I think we need to tone down the rhetoric and the emotion on this a little bit." Chuck said, "Maybe we can get to this drainage issue and maybe Chris Mello could address the plan that we got in our packet." James McDowell of Eastern Land Survey addressed the Board. He said that they broke the site into 4 existing drainage areas and pointed them out on the plan. The plan shows 4 existing drain areas: 1 towards existing construction on Clark Ave., 2 towards the back lot line, 1 towards the wetland area. The first area flows towards the existing system on Clark Ave and goes to a storage facility that has five 48" diameter underground pipes. Chuck Puleo asked where Clark Ave currently drains to right now. Mr. McDowell showed on the plan where it drains. James McDowell remembered a neighbor being concerned about what happens if this drainage system overflows, where does it go? If it filled up and started bubbling up it would tend to run down one side of Clark Avenue (gutter flow). The second drainage area goes to catch basins that release water to the wetlands. Basins are proposed behind lots 25 & 26. The last area is where Jennifer Circle was. Chuck Puleo asked how big the wetland/resource area is?" Chris Mello has the number and will get it to them. Someone questioned where Technology Way in relation to the streets discussed is located and it was shown on the plan. Stephen Casazza of Fay, Spofford & Thorndike (FS &T), working for the City representing the Planning Board, said that State regulations require maintenance and asked who will maintain the basins and structures, which will require annual maintenance, cleaning out and a report to be filed. You want to keep this in mind when making your decision. In terms of runoff, you can't send any more water offsite than comes off the site right now. The biggest concern is who will maintain the storage facility? The plan meets City requirements in terms of not letting more runoff go off the site but he suggests that the Board be careful about who will be taking care of those other than normal maintenance. Chuck Puleo mentioned that the vortex system is the most extensive and asked Steve Casazza if the number of catch basins is okay and Steve said he's happy with what they have. Steve Casazza mentioned that they like to see the capacity analysis of the catch basins/grades, it helps to finalize things. There are double grades provided, they would like to see the analysis as a matter of checks & balances. He discussed the letter that FS & T wrote. The centerline on Kimberly Road is not in accordance with Planning Board regulations and the applicant has requested a waiver. Since the last meeting, they were asked to make a recommendation. So they put a school bus template over the plan and found that a school bus and fire truck would cross out of their lane to make the turn on the road. This happens on many secondary roads and they don't see it as a major safety hazard. Steve recommends that if the other concessions are met that this waiver be granted. • Chuck Puleo said the original comment from the Fire Dept. was that they didn't have two means of access; this is why they were requiring sprinklers. Since plans have changed a couple of times they would need to review this to make sure it's satisfactory. James 6 McDowell said whatever the Fire Dept required before still stands, since they really haven't • realigned the road. Also, they have a 90' cul de sac at the end, which is required for turn- around. Steve Casazza continued to say that the retaining walls are a bit steep, though a distance from the neighboring properties. He firmly believes the specifics of the walls ought to be on the plan. They did show pictures and separation distance and cross-section as to what it would look like. James McDowell said they do not have an issue or disagree with Mr. Casazza but he does want to put it on the Definitive Subdivision Plan. He mentioned that the Building Inspector requires stamped structural engineer plans for the specific walls as the project goes along and they do issue permits on those walls. So, the jurisdiction of the walls does continue under the building department. Walter Power asked Mr. Casazza about the use of swales. Mr. Casazza mentioned that he was here to review what has been presented and not come up with new designs. Mr. McDowell said any swale you construct would be of ledge, you would not get infiltration. A possible option would be vegetative swales. Chuck Puleo asked if they would build those lots first? Chris Mello said that the gravity sewers would be built first. Chuck Pulco asked if there were any other questions by the Board members. There were none, the meeting was opened to the public. Gale Fialho, Clark Street- Ms. Fialho lives opposite the project. Her biggest concern is • blasting. She has lived there for 11 years and has lived through weekly blasts. She now has a crack in her foundation, from the cellar floor. If they blast in her yard, she is terrified as to what would happen to her house. Also, the hill that they'll build on is very steep, are they building a wall? Mr. McDowell gave her photos to look at and explained the range of the walls. Ms. Fialho's other concern is her view. Right now she can see a wooded area, she requests that when the Board goes to do their viewing of the area, if they can go by her property and see her current view and what she will be losing. Again, her biggest concern is the blasting. Ellen Rugato, 13 Clark Ave- One concern she has is about the cluster and if the open land is truly useable. Chuck Puleo said the City has a formula to determine the useable land. Under the by right plan done on February 14, 2006 there would be about twenty (20) lots, the plan was done when all land was thought to be zoned residential so now it is not exactly what could be built by right. The 6 lots at the bottom are conventional lots. So they have only gained 5 lots. Ms. Rugato asked if it had been determined to be useable? The walking trail goes from one end to the other, but there is no parking for it. What will be separating the public walking trail from people's property? Can they put a barrier in? Mr. Keilty and Mr. Mello said that yes, a barrier/fencing could be put up. Sandra Tran, 21 Clark Ave (the back of her house abuts the roadway) -I am concerned about blasting, water and traffic. Mr. McDowell said that the roadway will be 3 to 4 ft higher. Mr. McDowell was asked if they propose to put up a retaining wall on the back of the sidewalk. • Chuck asked about how much blasting they plan on doing. Mr. McDowell said for about an acre of land. Walter Power asked, "With the retaining wall, would it be higher than other property?" James McDowell said"There will be a wall with a fence on it facing the yards." 7 Liliana D'Amato, 9 Clark Ave.- I pay taxes on 15,000 sq ft. of land, if you give them more, are they going to pay more taxes? Christine Sullivan is concerned about the people who are concerned with the blasting. She feels they all should know the process for blasting. Gale Fialho said that it's nice that there's all these protections in place, and that the company is responsible should something happen, but what happens to her home? She.doesn't want to be misplaced. Chuck Puleo explained that prior to blasting there is a survey, and since she is within 300 ft. she would be included in the blasting survey. Also, Ms. Fialho asked where the walking trail would be. She was told at the bottom of the retaining wall. Ms. Fialho said that's within the 100 ft buffer zone. The Conservation Commission will have to approve the walking trail. Gale Fialho said she objects to all of that because she cut a few shrubs in her backyard within the buffer zone and she was fined and had to pay $5,000. Mr. Keilty said they have an order of conditions and they're not going to actually build a path. Gene Collins said they have built other trails at other developments like this. Richard O'Day, 11 Clark Ave- He asked if the Board knows how much blasting is going on. Aggregate blasts on a weekly basis. He has cracked in his doorways, etc. There is blasting near Walmart, we are surrounding by blasting. There is ledge that goes all the way from the quarry, where the developer is going to build its all rocks, ledge, boulders, etc. He said the width of the street is 23 ft. and there will be blasting and all sorts of trucks going up and down the street and people park on both sides. • Jeff Rugato, 13 Clark Ave- The cul-de-sac, has it been approved for a fire engine to turn around? Chuck Puleo said the City of Salem says it has to be 90 ft. in diameter, and it is. Steve Casazza said the centerline radius of the street is 220 ft. So, they made a template with a school bus and saw that it could make the turn but would have to go into the other lane to make the turn. That's not totally out of the question for a secondary road. Mr. Regatto asked, "Why don't you go to Technology Drive and buy part of that property to get access to the industrial area?" Mr. Keilty said that that is not out of the question. Chuck Puleo asked about the road design, could they make it a different radius? Chris Mello said that they designed the road for little excavation. Mr. Puleo asked if they could make the road bigger? Mr. Mello said they could, but it would infringe on the wetlands. Jeff Rugato said they are failing to recognize that cars park on both sides. Gale Fialho asked if the road were standard size, would they have less usable road? Chuck Puleo said no. Ms. Fialho said that the road approaching is steep and asked "Don't you think a bus swerving into the other lane to turn on steep hill, and a car coming from the other direction may not see them over the hill and that they can collide?" Gene Collins asked if they could instill the three-minute rule from now on. Jean Pelletier, Councillor Ward 3- He directed toward Mr. Collins that the City Council did not put the Planning Board in this situation for granting/denying the access road. He said the • Planning Board made a recommendation, but the Council makes the final decision. He asked for the correct number of lots- its 26. Mr. Pelletier said they need drainage improvements on Clark Ave. He understands from the City Engineer that the Sewer Pump Station is nearly at full capacity. Mr. Pelletier said that Mr. Keilty talks about city getting money to fix this, he 8 wants to build, so he should assist. There is a citywide flood control committee that he is on. They have cleaned may drains this past summer. He is working with the City Engineer on redesigning the drainage on Clark Ave. The 100 yr floods- they have had a few in about 13 few years. As for the cluster—the residents don't seem to care about having a trail. If they're going to propose possible building some sort of development on the industrial land later on down the road, the Planning Board should take that into consideration. Mr. Pelletier is going to the Conservation Commission to clean the culverts. Maintenance wise, the city is doing a lot, he doesn't want to put it on the residents, the developer should help out. Councillor Sargeant asked for the total acreage on the plan right now. Chuck has asked this as well and this information will be provided. Clr. Sargeant asked how are they determining how many buildable lots? Do they look at wetlands and include that? Chris Mello said there are different ways, and yes they do look at the wetlands. Lynn Duncan said the zoning ordinance doesn't have to be 15,000 sq ft, doesn't take out wetlands or slopes. For open space, you have to have a certain percentage. Clr. Sargeant doesn't understand the density. Lynn Duncan said though it's not written that way, it is a density bonus encouraging people to build a cluster. Clr. Sargeant asked how big does it have to be to be a cluster? Steve Casazza said it's a 5- acre parcel minimum. Clr Sargeant asked that any agreements be made part of the deed so they can be looked at in the future. Should potential buyers be let know about the industrial zoning? • Councillor Sosnowski said that Cathy Leahy (who did a presentation on clusters years ago) and the City's ideas of buildable footage are different. You divide the buildable square footage not the total square footage. He then asked that when the templates were done with the school bus overlay, did it include parking on either side? Steve Casazza said no and that he will redo it. Tim Ready asked, aren't they bound to follow the law? Christine Sullivan said she would like to know how many houses could be built by right? 20-27. Is it normal for a developer to have a 30% increase than first asked for? Lynn Duncan said there is no norm. This is they way this ordinance is written. It comes to conformance issues and what works. There are a number of issues. Pam Lombardini made a motion to continue the Public Hearing to December 6`h, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (8-0). There will be no site visit this Saturday due to poor weather conditions forecasted; the date and time of the site visit will be determined at a later date. Adi oumment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and . approved (8-0). The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board 9 C CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Decision- Withdrawal November 2, 2007 Lona Belanger 43 School Street N. Salem,MA 01970 RE: Withdrawal of Form A-43 School Street ' t' Dear Ms. Belanger, The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday,November 1, 2007 and voted unanimously to approve • your request for a Withdrawal without Prejudice for the Form A application for 43 School Street (Map 26,Lot 286) dated September 30, 2007. If you have any questions or require further information,please feel free to contact Amy Lash in the Department of Planning &Community Development at (978) 745-5685,extension 5691. Sincerely, Charles Puleo Chairman 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 e TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 0 WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM 44 - `�� � DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT a ' KIM6ERLEYDRISCOLL : ?= MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET 1 SALEM,MASSACHUSEM 01970 ,h `,. nL:978-619-5685♦FAx:978-740-0404 .p?,. LYNN GOONINDu-NcAN,AICP DIRECTOR Decision- Modification to July 27, 2007 Definitive Subdivision, Cluster Residential Development Special Permit, and Wetlands District Special Permit r November 7, 2007 z �, J CD M ' Brian D. McGrail, Esq Tl Lakeside Office Park m '. 599 North Avenue r Suite Seven Second Floor F" Wakefield, MA 01880 r, RE: Definitive Cluster Subdivision- Osborne Hills Request for Partial Waiver of Condition No. 4 and 18a z ,ARAu F. Dear Mr. McGrail, _ .. ��; The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday,November 1, 2007 and voted unanimously to r ,y approve your request for the partial waiver from condition No. 4 and 18a of the Board's decision dated July 27, 2006. This partial waiver allows for the issuance of the first twenty (20) . : Certificates of Occupancy at the Osborne Hills Subdivision prior to the installation of the traffic light at Marlborough Road and Osborne Hill Drive, and prior to the construction of'the left turn lane on Marlborough Road. Please see the July 27, 2006 decision for conditions pertaining to additional Certificates of + Occupancy. Sincerely, 4 r, Amy Lash Staff Planner CITY OF SALEM �5 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GTftih�Da,„, KIMBERLEYDRISOOLL MAYOR 120WASM\GIONSMEE'I SALENT,NWSAUJUSETPS01970 TEu 978-619-5685 ♦FAX:978-740-0404 L],vry GaxVLv DLNC?A,AXT D«Ecron f�J Decision-Request to Release Funds Held in Escrow November 8, 2007 ODQ �J I The Salvation Army ;v C/o Joseph Correnti 93 North Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: The Salvation Army • 93 North Street Dear Mr. Correnti, The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday,November 1, 2007 and voted unanimously to approve your request to release the funds held in escrow, and return such funds back to the Salvation Army. The Escrow Agreement and a check in the amount of$27,124 were originally received by the City of Salem on April 5, 2006. If you have any questions please contact Julia Medina in the Department of Planning & Community Development at (978) 745-5685 who with be handling the return of such funds. Sincerely, Amy Lash Staff Planner Cc: Julia Medina, Budget Coordinator I ",CITY OF SALEM �K s OFFICE PLANNING BOARD 7211 OCT I ! U '4 AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursday, October 18,2007-7:00 P.M. 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET 1. Approval of Minutes o September 20, 2007 2. Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval—43 School Street (Map 26, Lot 286)–Lona Belanger 3. Continuation of Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit–Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8)–Attorney Jack Keilty--Request to Withdraw[Project will be re-advertised for November 1, 2007 Meeting] • 4. Old/New Business o Request by the Board of Trustees of Derby Lofts Condominium Association to modify July 1, 2003 Site Plan Review Decision. 5. Adjournment Charles Puleo, Chair This notice posted on City Hall Salem, -official BuC, !lout ' al /a3A A �lfl p tilclss. an �y j rW With haA So 8 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - WWW.SALEM.COM • City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board:Q,"� Date: Ibl r� Name Mailing Address Phone # Email 3gLss�� ,T� 3fi�o.c� 4< 2 G � ti Lz s 978 >Ys�s-�n�s Ohl � � l Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting • October 18, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, October 18, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, John Moustakis, Pam Lombardini, Nadine Hanscom, Christine Sullivan, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Gene Collins. Also present were Amy Lash, Staff Planner, and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Members Absent: Walter Power Approval of Minutes The minutes for the September 20, 2007 Planning Board meeting were reviewed. On page 3, second sentence from the bottom. Walter Power was not present but some remembered him asking, "With the reduced cost of this new plan, would they still have money for offsite mitigations and improvements. Chuck Puleo said that Attorney Atkins replied that there is money still set aside and that the City should decide whether to put in an OptiCon system or sidewalks. • On page 4, second paragraph, change $100,00 to $100,000. There was a brief discussion regarding an issue on page 1 where Nadine Hanscom questioned who is responsible for making the decision on the access road. Nadine wants to make sure that it's presented to the City Solicitor for a decision. Amy Lash said the initial response from Gerry Parisella is that they can deny the access road. Christine Sullivan also asked who the legal body is to make the decision on the road. Tim Kavanaugh said the Planning Board is legally responsible but Nadine feels that since the City Council made the initial decision they should own it and make the final decision. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to accept the minutes, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (7-0). Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 43 School Street (Map 26, Lot 286) Lona Belanger Amy Lash said that the plan was not ready for endorsement. It doesn't have signature lines, space for registry recording, and it needs to be fully surveyed. Amy had a signed extension form for November 15`. • A motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the application to November I st, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (7-0). 1 Continuation of Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit – Chapel Hill LLC Clark Avenue (Mai) 08 Lots 6 7 8) – Attorney Jack • Keilty—Request to Withdraw fProiect will be re-advertised for November 1 2007 MeetinQl Chuck Puleo read the letter regarding Chapel Hill LLC to withdraw Form C. A motion was made by Pam Lombardini to withdraw Form C without prejudice, seconded by John Moustakis and approved (7-0). Old/New Business o Request by the Board of Trustees of Derby Lofts Condominium Association to modify July 1, 2003 Site Plan Review Decision. Chuck Puleo introduced Marlene Faust of the Derby Lofts Condominium Association. Marlene explained that the agreement with the City of Salem obligated them to pay for 81 parking passes (for the garage) for 1 year. There is a provision in the agreement that they could reduce this obligation if the residents find approvable spaces (about 900 ft from the dwelling and deeded). Chuck Puleo read the agreement. They have six private spaces that meet the requirements and are asking for a reduction. However, they realized they were given and paid for 82 passes this year, so they are asking for a reduction to 75 passes/spaces. John Moustakis asked if there is any documentation for this and Marlene said yes it has • been provided. Christine Sullivan asked if the six spaces are owned by RCG and if they'd be developed on eventually would they lose those spaces. Kevin Greeley, Building Manager, said RCG doesn't own them, the condo owners own them. He also said that they fully understand the need to keep cars of streets. The actual count of cars in the building is 68, so 75 spaces is more than enough when someone new comes in and needs a space or someone needs an additional space. Chuck Puleo said that it was intended that the easements be with the owners. Kevin Greeley said they are willing to have an order added that should any spaces leave the hand of the unit owner and be sold to someone other than another unit owner, the Derby Lofts Condominium Association would go back to the Planning Board for an increase in parking passes. Amy drafted a draft condition. The Board can approve this tonight and the condition is that if a new owner purchases a condominium, the easement is transferred or they purchase the space as well or they again lease spaces from the parking garage. Tim Kavanaugh said the way he understood it, a new owner has 3 options: 1-Easement has to be assigned to new purchases, 2-Obtain their own space elsewhere and provide an easement to the City, 3-Condominium association is to again lease spaces from the garage. They will record these restrictions and buyers will look at these when purchasing a unit. • 2 s Tim Ready asked who would be maintaining the six spaces that the owners have. Kevin Greeley said it's maintained by whoever the owners hire to manage the building where the spaces are; right now it's RCG. Gene Collins mentioned that they have been paid on during the past year, so they already have an agreement in place for maintenance. John Moustakis asked if it's cheaper to have these spaces than the garage. Marlene said no, having these six spaces are not cheaper than being in the garage, they're more convenient because they can't always depend on their spaces in the garage. She said that the spaces in the garage aren't even reserved and their spaces aren't always there. They don't always have a space especially in bad weather or during October. This was new information to the Board; they said they were unaware of this. It was also mentioned that the condition of the garage is not good, it's not maintained and doesn't feel very safe because it's not staffed. Shirley Walker, Condominium Owner at Derby Lofts, addressed the Board. She explained that when she signed her P&S, it said she had one space, she changed it to two, but recently discovered that it's not in her title. One of her concerns is that unit owners think they paid for their space, but it's not in their deed and if they go to sell, it's not going to be what they think. She also mentioned that some Condominium owners didn't pay for their parking passes, so the Condo Association told everyone else that they can only get one space, but she needs two. Is there a policy in the City as to what the Condo Association is doing? Marlene clarified some things that the Condo Association will be doing as far as these spaces are concerned. Chuck Puleo mentioned that as far as the City is concerned, the number of spaces they get is up to the Condo Association, it's a private • building and a private Board. Gene Collins said that they understand her plight but the Planning Board has limitations on the decision. As far as spaces, John Moustakis suggested that the only thing they can do is to get in touch with whoever is in charge of the parking garage and ask about reserving spaces. Tim Kavanaugh mentioned to the present owners of the condos that there is a meeting next week of the Committee of Ordinances and Legal Affairs and that they may want to attend. Chuck Puleo said that the current request is to modify the Site Plan Review Decision. Amy Lash has suggested language to add in... "Existing easements could be transferred, or new easements are to be provided or leased by South Harbor Garage". Chuck Puleo added "the existing easements held by owners in units 510, 603, 604 and 607 must be assigned to the new purchasers of those units or new parking easements must be provided or required or the appropriate number of spaces must again be leased in the South Harbor Garage". A motion was made by Gene Collins to accept the modified Site Plan Review Decision seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Chuck Puleo said they will ask for clarification as to what the process is for reserving and get more information. Tim Ready said they also need to convey their concerns about the • conditions of the parking garage. 3 o Community Preservation Act, Joanne Fitzgerald McCrea Joanne Fitzgerald McCrea began by stating that the Council passed the Community Preservation Act and it will be placed on the ballot. It allows a $1 surcharge on property taxes, would be an average of$32 per house and the State matches these funds at 100% right. It is a separate fund used for various items. 10% has to go to open spaces, 10% historic, 10% affordable housing, 70% recreation. Monies can be held over the year, they don't have to use it that same year. If passed, there would be 9 people on the CPA Committee, some people from the Conservation Commission, the Historic Commission and 4 at large members. A yes vote on#1 would pass this Act. o Chuck Puleo mentioned that the Beverly Co-Op Bank was supposed to put screening on their roof. The last time he was at Derby Loft and looked at the bank, it still wasn't there. Would like this to be looked into. o Chuck Puleo discussed tentative plan that was sent regarding Chapel Hill LLC showing Clark Ave and Clark St. He suggested that maybe the Board should take a walk through with Chris Mello. Christine suggested they wait until after October and asked if they will be getting answers to all of their questions. Amy has a letter with all of the questions to Jack Keilty. Amy will give Jack a heads up that they want to do a site visit. o It was mentioned that Salem Suede project has been approved and they will be coming to • the Planning Board soon. They will be filing with Conservation Commission soon. Adiournment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Tim Ready to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (7-0). The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: : Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board. • 4 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD DECISION October 25,2007 :,n C :'... John K Keilty,Esquire .? 40 Lowell Street r' Cn Peabody,MA 01960 RE: Chapel Hill Subdivision, Salem,Massachusetts Dear Mr.Keilty, The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, October 18, 2007 and voted unanimously to approve • your request for a Withdrawal without Prejudice for the Form C Definitive Subdivision Application of Barbara Driscoll dated July 27,2006. Notice has been given that a public hearing will be held on November 1, 2007 for the new application dated October 9, 2007. If you have any questions or require further information,please feel free to contact Amy Lash in the Department of Planning&Community Development at (978) 745-5685, extension 5691. Sincerely, arles Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD October 18, 2007 Board of Trustees of Derby Lofts Condominium Association 51 Lafayette Street Salem, MA 01970 Attn: Marlene Faust, Secretary Board of Trustees of Derby Lofts Condominium Association: The parking easements presented to the City of Salem by the Derby Lofts Condominium Association on October 2, 2007 state, "It is expressly intended that this easement shall be in gross and shall not be appurtenant to any estate". Because the easements do not run with the property, it is necessary to address at this time what is to happen after a sale or transfer of one of these units. • The Planning Board voted on October 18, 2007 to approve the request of the Board of Trustees of Derby Lofts Condominium Association to reduce the number of parking spaces the Association is required to annually procure in the South Harbor Garage by six (6)parking leases (from 81 leases to 75 leases)with the following condition: 1. Deed restrictions are to be provided to the City Planner, requiring that upon the sale or transfer of units 510, 603, 604, and 607, parking easements held by the owners of these units are to be assigned to the new owners, OR new parking easements are to be provided to the City of Salem, OR the appropriate number of parking spaces must again be leased in the South Harbor Garage by Derby Lofts Condominium Association. This will ensure that Derby Lofts maintains the 81 spaces (1.5 spaces per unit) required in the July 1, 2003 Planning Board decision. The information requested above, must submitted to the Department of Planning & Community Development before this decision can take affect. Sincerely, r Charles Puleo, Chairman • Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday September 20, 2007 at 7:00 PM in Room 313, Third Floor at 120 Washington Street. CIO r r Charles Puleo Chairman -n r rn . 1. Approval of Minutes N o September 6, 2007 C5- 2. Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval—Lot 2 Story Street (Map 23, Lot 2)–Leo Higgins 3. Continuation of Public Hearing–Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision Plan -Leggs Hill Road (Map 30,Lot 83) –Atty. George Atkins, Chris Nowak, PE �\ 4. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval–1-3 Parallel St/282 Rear Canal Street (Map 23, Lots 77, 131, 132, 144) –Atty. Stephen Lovely 5. Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage -1-3 Parallel Street (Map 23, Lots 77, 131, 132 )–Atty. Stephen Lovely 6. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval– 1-3 Parallel Street (Map 23, Lots 77, 131, 132)– Atty. Stephen Lovely 7. Old/New Business o Vote on Request for Extension of Deadline,for Plandinal Planning BoarFAction– . - _ -_ __... - Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC- Clark Ave (Map 6, Lots 6, 7, 8)- Atty. Jack Keilty o Signing of Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit Decision–1000 Loring Ave (Map 20, Lot 7)–Fibertower, Atty. Fran Parisi o Discussion- New Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit Application Form, and Standard Decision This notice posted on "Officw wietin Board" City Hally/�/'1 i nti, it 25 . on ? G� �cVTJ �ll g in �,-* i2�u:'`.i.nw.Y'S lir:Ii • 3 Wtl7. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 * TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM _ ri City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: PL.0�� Date: ° 1-2- Name Mailing Address Phone # Email - 46 rn X-A Vs 2 L"A,1)Z UV n. r�os � O e2r RS' Surra Rd , AALt-jLjgaw Jc4pL /�LGId�=��� -7 /, • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting September 20, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, September 20, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Walter Power, Nadine Hanscom, Christine Sullivan, Tim Kavanaugh, Gene Collins, Tim Ready. Also present were Amy Lash, Staff Planner, and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Members Absent: Pam Lombardini and John Moustakis Approval of Minutes The minutes for the September 6, 2007 Planning Board meeting were reviewed. Walter Power had some changes on page one, second to last paragraph: instead of Beth Rennard, the name should be Jerry Parisella. • Walter Power had a question in regards to page 3, fourth paragraph: Amy will have a draft wireless special permit application for this meeting, is there one? Amy said that in the members' packets, there is a draft application for them to review. On page 4, second paragraph, take out "he's" and add in "the developer" .will be providing... Fifth paragraph, should be `would also like to see the lot yardage on all the lots". Page 5, top paragraph, take out "they" replace with " "the Board" should determine capability of the access road and intersection of Clark Ave. and Clark St. Page 5, last paragraph Walter Power suggested to put Stephen Casazza'a full name in the last paragraph. Regarding the access road, Walter was asking for clarification. Nadine was trying to be clear as to whether the Planning Board should be making the decision on the access road. She wants an answer as to who is responsible legally to make the decision; she feels that the City Council should have to finish what they started instead of leaving the Planning Board in the position to make the decision about the road. There are houses but no road and its zoned industrial. Christine Sullivan commented that night was a bit confusing and there should be some clarification. Chuck Puleo said that the Jack Keilty said that if the Planning Board disapproves the cul-de-sac plans on the grounds that it's residential then he would sue and look for some monetary relief. Chuck Puleo reminded all that the Planning Board did recommend to the City Council that it be zoned residential. They considered it and gave some relief to some lots and rezoned some to residential. The others remained industrial. Tim • Kavanaugh said part of the last sentence should read `remains industrial" cross out "zoned". 1 11 14 Page 6, second paragraph, Walter Power said it should be- since we're adding significant amount of traffic, the Board would like to see it superimposed... on the road from Highland . Ave to the subdivision road. Also, same paragraph at end it should read, "Mr. Keilty would give the Planning Board drawing...add in "plus the overlay". Page 6, fourth paragraph- ...What kind of volume would the system get. Add in "in a 100 year storm". Last paragraph after motion was made after the date of the 20th, put in brackets "subsequently changed to the 18th„ There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to accept the minutes, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (6-0). Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- Lot 2 Story Street (Map 23, Lot 2)- Leo Higgins The applicant, Mr. Leo Higgins discussed the plan and notes which were added to meet the suggestions of the Jerry Parisella, the Assistant City Solicitor [Form A Endorsement had been previously denied]. Higgins said his attorney believes these notes meet what the City � Mr. gg asked for. Amy Lash read the language which Jerry Parisella suggested be added to the plan. Jerry Parisella suggested the plan include a notation "to be conveyed to the owner of and joined with adjoining lot of Gerard and Linda Tardiff' and he recommend the language "Parcel A is not a legal building lot and similar language be added to the lot identified as REMANING LAND". Lot A and the REMAINING LAND are RC; 15 Story St is in Rl. Parcel A, would be added • to 15 Story Street. The small piece next to Parcel A the Tardif 's already own. Tim Kavanaugh spoke with Jerry Parisella who gave opinion for subdivision purposes. He said that in a similar, previous case the subdivision control law said that a lot is an area of land with definite boundaries and can be built on. If a lot cannot be used for building purposes, then it is no longer a lot, and you can divide it into two parcels. The lot currently in discussion cannot be considered for building purposes on its own. A motion was made by Christine Sullivan to accept the ANR plan, seconded by Walter Power. 1 Abstained, Nadine Hanscom and 5 Approved. Attorney Stephen Lovely spoke saying that there are no cases where ANR has been granted where neither lot has frontage on street but that there is a difference of opinion in the legal community. For clarification, Tim Kavanaugh said Parcel A is presently owned by Leo Higgins and is to be sold to the Tardiff s. Tim Kavanaugh also stated that Jerry Parisella said both lots are not buildable by themselves and if interpretation is correct then the Board has to endorse it. Continuation of Public Hearing—Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision Plan- Leges Hill Road (Mal) 30, Lots 77, 131, 132,144)- Atty. Stephen Lovely Attorney George Atkins, 59 Federal Street, representing the YMCA of the North Shore. Also • in attendance, Chris Novak, Project Engineer and Paul Gorman, Executive Director of 2 • YMCA. Elizabeth Rennard, the City Solicitor who had issued an opinion on issues relating to the amendment was also in attendance. Atty. Atkins recapped some history: In July 2006, the Planning Board approved a definitive subdivision plan (he showed a rendering of the plan) which included the roadway behind the building that the Fire Dept. requested and 10 house lots. The approved plan also included offsite improvements that the YMCA agreed to. The total project was estimated at $150- 200,000. They realized that the cul-de-sac and house lots would be a loss for YMCA and they would be losing money. City Solicitor Beth Rennard said that the subdivision control law allows modification and they could come up with an ANR plan. So they made a modification to the original definitive subdivision plan, keeping on and offsite improvements. On the original plans the turning lanes are on Loring Ave, signage needs to be implemented. $250,000 was set aside by YMCA for an analysis: grinding down, widening, repaving. Also, a $100,000 fund was established for an OptiCon system and the addition of curbing and sidewalk from site down to Loring Avenue. Also agreed on was $75,000 look at improvements (on Marblehead side) intersection of Tedesci Way. The total is between $400- 450,000 extra cost for YMCA. The new plan provides 6 house lots on Leggs Hill Road, none on pond side (reduced from 10) and it eliminates roadway and cul-de-sac. The plan includes emergency access around building as required by Fire Department. Also, the road is 18 feet wide, which was previously • in question. Photo simulations were provided to see possible views from Linden Avenue. They will be adding trees and greenspace. They spoke with Conservation Commission about this and drainage issues. Atty. Atkins said the YMCA has no intention of building on this greenspace. As far as tax money to the City issue, which was an issue raised by City Councillors, Mr. Atkins did some estimates and six lots would roughly be worth $66,000 a year for the City. The City Solicitor was asked about the easement area across the back of Leggs Hill Road and the Fire Dept. wanted to make sure they wouldn't get rid of the easement for access purposes. The Solicitor presented to the Fire Dept. that this would be created as a permanent easement. Walter Power said that suppose in the future the lots along the water were to be built, is the road wide enough to do this? Chris Novak said he believes so and there's a 50 ft right of way. Walter Power also asked if the current house lots on the plan are 15,000 sq ft. Chris Novak said they are "at least" that. 5 '/� lots are in Salem and % lot is in Marblehead. Walter Power asked about the easement and why people would pay taxes on land they can't use. Is there a way of not taking part of their land for the road? Attorney Atkins said its common practice to do this and they will still have a good size lot (people don't have to buy it if they don't like it). The easement area does not take away from the 15,000 sq ft lots. Mr. Power also made a suggestion about the road that goes down to the boxed culvert and paving, when the road is made they should add in a swale/drainage so it doesn't pool up and flood. • Chuck Puleo asked if there is a gate on the new plan like the older plan. There is not a gate, but the road is emergency vehicles and there would be signage. He also mentions that there is granite curbing on sidewalk and asked if there will be a swale near the boxed culvert on drainage. Chris Nowak mentioned that there is drainage in front of the site. 3 Christine Sullivan is concerned about not having any lights on the road behind the building. • Chris Novak said that there are lights on the back of the building. Chuck Puleo asked how long the driveway is - it's about 500 ft. Tim Ready asked about the cost of the new roadway- Chris Novak couldn't estimate but said the original option cost at least 2x as much. Walter Power with the reduced cost of this new plan, he hopes they still have money for offsite improvements. Arty Atkins said yes, the money is still set aside. Chuck Puleo asked if anyone from the public would like to speak. Ward 7 Councilor Joseph O'Keefe, 28 Surrey Road, said he was previously opposed, but now he's not sure, he wants some concessions from the YMCA. He would like to see a possible wall or trees on waterside to make the view for Linden St. better. He would also like to see lights on the roadway that goes down to Loring Ave for people (suspecting people would be running on that road to the YMCA). Mr. O'Keefe is also concerned about the bridge. He suggested a study be done, what if fire trucks couldn't go over the bridge? He doesn't expect the YMCA to build a new bridge, but he would like it addressed. As far as the landscaping issue, Attorney Atkins mentioned that the Planning Board and Conservation Commission have to review these plans. As for bridge issues, they will try to address and contribute to the discussion. Walter Power said that with any construction on Leggs Hill Road, we're tied to its either an OptiCon System for the road down to the bridge, some of that is owned by Marblehead or a • $100,000 fund for OptiCon system. Christine Sullivan asked if the Fire Dept decides it can't bring any trucks over the bridge, and then the road won't have an OptiCon System, what would happen with the OptiCon money? Arty. Akins said it's written for the City to determine what type of system can be used and believes there is a year to determine this. Jean Pelletier, Councillor Ward 3, asked if the corner house can be turned so that it's paying more taxes to Salem? How will the taxes be distributed? Attorney Atkins said the assessors from each community would determine the tax distribution. The ratio looks to be about 50/50. Mr. Pelletier also asked about the sidewalk that is partially in Marblehead and the curbing, Arty. Atkins said that the sidewalk and curbing would be continued. Robert Bouchard, 23 Linden Ave, asked if the emergency road could only be for emergencies not other vehicles such as garbage trucks, etc. Mr. Bouchard also asked if the lots would definitely have houses on them and nothing else and asked if all lots are owned by the YMCA? Yes. Chuck Puleo asked if there could be signage on entrance to emergency road. Atty. Atkins said it's a one-way so that people cannot enter. There being no further questions or comments on this matter, Gene Collins made a motion to approve the amended decision, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (6-0). Amy Lash presented copies of a draft amended decision. Items in red are changes to original • decision. 4 i I • The following changes to the decision were discussed: o Reduced number of house lots from 10 to 6. o Updated public hearing dates, closing the public hearing September 20th o Updated Voting information o Updated Conformance with plan o Removed -12. Security(Special Conditions now 12) o Removed -14. Lighting; Walter Power would like to see streetlights down the whole road, some are in Marblehead. Walter Power would like to have study sent to Engineer and City electrician and see what the cost would be. Arty. Atkins can't commit to the YMCA paying for the lights. He would like to leave it flexible and wait and see what the needs of the road would be once it's down. Atty. Atkins would like to approach the cities to see about the cost of lighting and who would cover the cost. Christine Sullivan thinks we should have some information in the conditions- to add paragraph under B consensus of the Board that lighting should be considered. They will look at the requirements and will consider lighting on roadway. Added under "Special Conditions (d.) (i.)" "The developer will consider street lighting options with the City Electrician". (Blasting now 14) o Removed from "25. As-built Plans & Street Acceptance" and language pertaining to Street Acceptance (renumbered as 23) o With no surety, it is necessary to updated requirements for submission of As-built Plans to be submitted. George Atkins suggested "within 60 days of the pavement of • the binder course". o Tim Ready said standard landscaping language should be included. "Special Conditions (d.) (i.)" still has language about cul-de-sac and the secondary access way, which should be eliminated that since it's no longer in the plan. Atty. Atkins suggested they should add in "Access way should be completed to Fire Department specifications." Chuck Puleo asked about the paving of the access road and the bottom of the driveway. Chris Novak said that there is a swell at the bottom of the driveway for drainage. It's a low impact design measure. o Christine Sullivan mentioned the standard landscaping language. Chuck Puleo said to make the standard landscaping language#25. A motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to approve the draft decision of amendment with comments, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (6-0). Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 1-3 Parallel St/282Rear Canal Street (Mal)p23 Lots 77 131,132,144)—Arty. Stehe n Lovely Attorney Stephen Lovely, 14 Story St.- Owns two parcels, 1 & 3. He had planned to put 4 units under zoning. Spoke with the neighbors and direct abutter. They asked if he would tear down commercial building and put up 3 single-family homes (instead of duplexes). He checked the zoning requirements for ANR. There is frontage on Adam St. The large lot that • remains has frontage on Adams Street (on Esther Realty Trust plan) that he would like to use. It is not a buildable lot, but if he adds it to his lot, it will satisfy a size requirement. Chuck Puleo said it would give him a bit of frontage to make his lot a buildable lot. 1 Parallel St, 18,000 sq. ft. will not be built on (on brook) it will be used to add to square footage for 5 another ANR in the near future. Stephen Lovely said he needs Planning Board to approve the ANR so that the land of John Bertini lot can be added to the land at 1-3 Parallel St prior to the • ANR which follows. A motion was made by Gene Collins to approve the ANR plan, seconded by Tim Ready and approved(6-0). Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage- 1-3 Parallel St (Map 23, Lots 77, 131,132) — Atty. SteRhhen Lovelv Attorney Stephen Lovely received approval from Board of Appeals for lot width on all four lots, and would like waiver of frontage, although he said there is no frontage requirement. He is applying for Waiver of Frontage because it is customary to do so. He will be building 3 new houses, one already exists. These have at least 20 ft of frontage, though again he said there are no frontage requirements. Amy Lash said that an important thing about the Waiver of Frontage Application part of the Parallel Street proposal is that the Planning Board could condition the Waiver of Frontage decision to require improvements to the street. She mentioned the condition in the draft decision. Chuck Puleo asked about the Conservation Commission- Stephen Lovely has been to Conservation Commission for the lot with the existing residence, and will have to go back for the new residences. At this time flooding issues will be discusses. • Nadine Hanscom asked if the Planning Department had comments. Amy said that Lynn Duncan, the Planning Director has seen the plans and is okay with the process the different applications the Parallel Street proposal are going through with the Planning Board. Christine Sullivan asked if flooding issues would be addressed. The flooding issues will be addressed with the Conservation Commission. public. Matt Veno Ward 5 Councilor, had a number Chuck Puleo opened the hearing to the , Chu g P of concerns for development including flooding and traffic. He spoke with many of the residents. David Ayers, 7 Parallel St., said it is a much better idea to go with single-family homes. Christine Sullivan asked Stephen Lovely if he is tearing down the current building. Stephen Lovely said yes, they would be taking down the warehouse building at the end of the street. A motion was made by Christine Sullivan to close the public hearing, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (6-0) A motion was made by Gene Collins to approve waiver of frontage draft decision with conditions, seconded by Walter Power and approved (6-0). • 6 • Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 1-3 Parallel Street (Map 23, Lots 77, 131, 132)—Atty. Stephen Lovely Atty. Stephen Lovely said that the application is for the division of lots A, B, C and D. Amy said that the lot areas are slightly different on the Form A plan, than the plan that went to the Board of Appeals. Stephen Lovely said when he went to the Board of Appeal, the issue was lot width, lot width is the same on both sets of plans, and so this should not affect anything. A motion was made by Gene Collins to accept the ANR plan, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (6-0). Walter Power asked about the setback. Stephen Lovely said there will be a five (5) foot setback and all houses on Parallel St have around a five (5) foot setback, which gives more land in back. Also, the houses will not have basements. Stephen Lovely will address some flooding issues with Conservation Commission. There are two drains at the end of Parallel Street. He talked about some of the water and flooding issues in the surrounding areas. He will come up with a plan and will go to neighbors first before going to Conservation Commission. Councillor Jean Pelletier spoke to Planning Board on flooding issues. He informed them that they are currently working in his ward on some streets, cleaning storm drains, etc. • Old/New Business o Vote on Request for Extension of Deadline for Planning Board Final Action- Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC- Clark Ave (Map 6, Lots 6,7,8)Atty. Jack Keilty Amy has a request for extension form dated November 8 signed by Jack Keilty. Amy drafted a letter that listed all the concerns/issues discussed at the last meeting. Amy will email the letter to all Planning Board members so they can review it. Amy will put in a second letter containing any other issues addressed. Solicitor Beth Rennard will investigate the ramifications of the Planning Board approving or not approving the access road. Regarding the access road, Walter Power thinks that if the Planning Board does not approve it, the City would be taken to court. Christine Sullivan stated that a cul-de-sac is a turn around street, and an access road onto it would make it no longer a cul-de- sac. Tim Ready said that the property owner will have the right to access his/her own property. Attorney Robert Strausnick, representing Mr. Colpitts, sent letter to the Board that states Mr. Colpitts' concerns. Amy read the letter aloud to the Board. Christine Sullivan said he has brought up some serious issues, especially regarding re-advertising. Amy said she would look into the question of re-advertising. o Signing of Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit Decision- 1000 Loring Ave • (Map 20, Lot 7)-Fibertower, Atty Fran Parisi and Discussion The Board had no comments; the decision was signed by Chuck Puleo 7 Wireless Special Permit Application Discussion • Christine Sullivan would like supporting photos instead of sketches of the site and building, as it would look with antennas. Chuck Puleo asked it had been determined if the number antennas on buildings are limited. Amy said no. Chuck said that the ordinance does encourage co-locating. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Walter Power and approved (6-0). The meeting was adjourned at 10:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board. • • 8 e e CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Form A — Decision Lot 2 Story Street o m � Leo Higgins NJ 24 Eagan Place J o Peabody, MA 01960 I7 �. Dear Mr. Higgins: 4n rTID w The Salem Planning Board voted on September 20, 2007 to endorse"Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Leo Higgins, 24 Eagan Place, Peabody, MA 01960 • 2. Location: Story Street, Assessors Map 23 3. Project Description: This Form A conveys a portion of Lot 2 (owned by Leo Higgins and referred to as"Parcel A") to Lot 11 (owned by Gerard and Linda Tardiff), which has frontage on Story Street. Parcel A consisting of 1,792 square feet, is combined with Lot 11,which consists of 7,405 square feet, creating a lot of 9,197 square feet. Sincerely, Charles Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk Gerard& Linda Tardiff • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, .SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 a WWW.SALEM.COM "A.LIi. Ilia CITY OF SALEM 1< s OFFICE PLANNING BOARD NO] '[P 2b A 11: 59 Leggs Hill Road Form C--Definitive Subdivision Amended Decision September 26, 2007 North Shore YMCA C/o Atty. George Atkins Ronan, Segal &Harrington 59 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Leggs Hill YMCA Definitive Subdivision Amended Decision (Map 30, Lot 83) The Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a public hearing regarding the request of the North • Shore YMCA to amend their Definitive Subdivision Plan on April 19, 2007. The applicant proposes to reduce the number of housing lots, from what was originally approved (10) to six (6) single family housing lots and one (1) lot for construction of an 88,525 square-foot YMCA facility and associated driveways and utilities. The housing lots shall be divided from the original lot, but will be built upon separately from the YMCA building and at a later time. The public hearing was continued to May 17, 2007, June 21, 2007, July 19, 2007, and September 20, 2007. At a regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting on September 20, 2007, the public hearing was closed and the Board voted by a vote of seven (7) in favor (Puleo, Power, Sullivan, Collins, Kavanaugh, Ready, Hanscom) and none opposed to approve the amendment subject to the following conditions: 1.Conformance with the Plan Work-shall conform-with-the-plans-entitled, "YMCA-at-Leggs-Hill,-Leggs-IEILRoad,_Salem,-- _ Massachusetts", prepared by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc., 101 Walnut Street, Watertown, MA 02471, dated April 18, 2006, revised July 7, 2006, and March 13, 2007. 2.Planning Board Endorsement Following the statutory twenty (20) day appeal period, the Planning Board will sign the amended subdivision plans, which shall be recorded at the South Essex Registry of Deeds subject to condition #5. 3.Amendments Any modification to the approved plans must receive the prior approval of the Planning Board unless deemed insignificant by the City Planner. Any waiver of conditions contained within shall require the approval of the Planning Board. 4.Subdivision Regulations 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 e TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 6 WWW.SALEM.COM The Subdivision shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision • Rules and Regulations and any other applicable regulations, if applicable to the amended plan. S.Reference on the Approved Plans This decision shall be referenced on the amended plans prior to the endorsement by the Planning Board. 6.Transfer of Ownership Within five days of transfer of ownership of the subdivision, the Owner shall notify the Board in writing of the new owner's name and address. This shall not include the sale of lots within the subdivision in the ordinary course of business, but only a sale of the entire subdivision. The terms, conditions, restrictions and/or requirements of this decision shall be binding on the Owner and its successors and/or assigns. 7.Pre-Construction Conference Prior to the start of work on the approved subdivision, a pre-construction conference shall be scheduled with the City Planner,the City Engineer (or his designee),the Building - -- Commissioner, the Health Agent, and any other departments that may be necessary. The Owner shall submit a construction schedule at the time of the pre-construction conference. S.Salem Conservation Commission a. All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Conservation Commission. • b. The applicant shall receive all necessary approvals from the Salem Conservation Commission prior to commencement of any work. 9.Housing Lot Driveways The developer shall only allow construction of hammerhead driveways for the housing lots adjacent to and fronting on Leggs Hill Road and/or the private drive leading to the YMCA. This restriction must be recorded on the approved subdivision plans and shall be filed at the South Essex Registry of Deeds, and shall run with the land in perpetuity. 10. Private Way The-YMCA-shall-be-responsible for maintaining the private way, including the sidewalk and _ curbing. 11. Sidewalks The applicant shall install concrete sidewalks with vertical granite curbing along the site frontage along Leggs Hill Road. Bituminous sidewalks with vertical curbing shall be installed along the northeast side of the private drive to be connected to the parking and pedestrian circulation areas of the YMCA. 12. Special Conditions a. The developer shall receive any and all necessary approvals and construct turn lanes on Loring Avenue at the intersection of Loring Avenue and Leggs Hill Road. Construction shall include road striping of turn lanes and signage. The city may be named on any required permits to the state for the installation of these turn lanes, on behalf of the developer, upon approval of the City Planner, City Engineer and any other required city 2 • representatives. The City will not incur any type of obligation for completion of the improvements or financing of the work. b. The developer shall construct an eight (8) foot widening on Leggs Hill Road on the Leggs Hill side of the box culvert at the intersection of Loring Avenue and Leggs Hill Road. The developer will obtain all necessary approvals for construction of this widening to allow for a widening of the road and increase the safety and accessibility of Leggs all Road. c. The developer shall set aside $100,000 in an escrow account for a period of one (1) year for installation of either a concrete sidewalk with vertical granite curbing along one side of Leggs Hill road extending from the neighboring subdivision on Leggs Hill Road to the box culvert on Leggs Hill Road, or for installation of an Opticom system. The City will determine which of the two projects shall be installed/constructed by the developer at the end of this time period. d. The developer shall make improvements to Leggs Hill Road at a cost not to-exceed- $250,000 which shall include the following: i. The developer shall complete an analysis to determine the condition and • necessary repairs of Leggs Hill Road from the subdivision entrance to the box culvert , under the direction of the City Engineer prior to the start of construction. If the analysis determines that reconstruction is required for some or all of the roadway, the developer will propose a plan to be approved by the City Engineer and the City Planner describing the roadway work that will be done by the developer, prior to the start of roadway construction. The developer will consider street lighting options with the City Electrician. ii. The developer shall grind and repave the length of Leggs all Road from the intersection of the subdivision road to the box culvert. The new top coarse shall be at least two inches (2") thick and will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the YMCA facility. — iii. The developer shall attempt to receive approval for repaving of Leggs Hill Road prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the YMCA facility. If permitting is not possible, or extends beyond the timeframe of the completion of the YMCA facility, the developer shall request a waiver of this provision of the decision, to be approved by both the City Engineer and the City Planner. e. The developer shall construct the secondary access way from the site entrance to the building. This access way shall be maintained by the YMCA and shall be paved with • heavy-duty asphalt. The access way shall be completed to the Salem Fire Department's specifications. 13. Construction Practices All construction shall be carried out in accordance with the following conditions: 3 a. The operation of tools or equipment used in construction or demolition work shall occur • in accordance with Salem Ordinance Section 22-2 (5): Construction and Blasting and between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM on weekdays and Saturdays. No work shall take place on Sundays or holidays. b. Any blasting, rock crushing,jack hammering, hydraulic blasting, or pile driving shall occur in accordance with Salem Ordinance Section 22-2 (5): Construction and Blasting and be limited to Monday-Friday between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM. There shall be no blasting, rock crushing,jack hammering, hydraulic blasting, or pile driving on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays. c. Blasting shall be undertaken in accordance with all local and state regulations. d. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided by the applicant to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of construction of the project. e. All construction vehicles and equipment shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on surrounding roadways as they exit the site. f. The applicant shall abide by any and all applicable rules, regulations and ordinances of the City of Salem. • g. All construction vehicles and equipment left overnight at the site must be located completely on the site. h. All staging of materials and equipment shall be on-site. i. There shall be no cuing of construction vehicles on Leggs Hill Road. j. No Street shall be closed without prior approval of the Department of Planning and Community Development, unless deemed an emergency by the Salem Police Department. 14. Blasting The applicant shall distribute the flyers entitled, "Facts for Massachusetts Property Owners About Blasting" to all abutters within three hundred (300) feet of any blasting area. 1.5. Construction Traffic & Phasing a. All construction will occur on site; no construction will occur or be staged within City right of ways. Any deviation from this shall be approved by the Department of Planning & Community Development prior to construction. b. A construction traffic/phasing management plan and schedule shall be submitted to the • Department of Planning & Community Development for review and approval prior to the start of construction. 4 c. Any roadways, driveways, or sidewalks damaged during construction shall be restored to their original condition by the Owner. d. The Owner shall clean construction vehicles before they exit the construction site, and clean and sweep all streets affected by their construction truck traffic as necessary. 1.6. Clerk of the Works The services of a consultant to serve as a Clerk of the Works shall be provided by the City, at the applicant, his successors or assigns' expense, as is deemed necessary by the City Planner. 17. Office of the City Engineer The applicant, his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the City Engineer 18. Board of Health (BOH) The Owner shall comply with all regular conditions of the Board of Health, and the following specific conditions: a. If a rock crusher is used on the site, the location of the crusher must be approved by the Health Agent. • b. The developer must present the plan for drainage including the water detention area, to the Northeast Mosquito Control & Wetlands Management District for review. c. All pool plans must be presented to the Board of Health, prior to construction, for approval in accordance with the State Sanitary Code. d. All plans for food service/prep areas must be presented to the Board of Health, prior to construction,for approval in accordance with the State Food Code. 19. Health Department All work shall comply with the general requirements of the Salem Health Department. 20. Fire Department All-wor-k-shad-compl-}with-the requirements the-Sateen FireI2epartment 21. Office of the Building Commissioner All work shall comply with the requirements of the office of the Salem Building Commissioner. 22. Utilities Any utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 23. As-built Plans As-built plans, stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer or Registered Land Surveyor, shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development and Department of Public Services within 60 days of the pavement of the binder course. The As-Built plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer in electronic file format suitable for the City's use and approved by the City Engineer. 5 A completed tie card, a blank copy (available at the Engineering Department) and a certification signed and stamped by the design engineer, stating that the work was completed in substantial compliance with the design drawing must be submitted to the City Engineer. 24. Violations Violations of any condition shall result in revocation of this permit by the Planning Board, unless the violation of such condition is waived by a majority vote of the Planning Board. 25. Landscaping a. Any proposed landscaping shall be done in accordance with a final landscaping plan to be approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. b. Trees shall be a minimum of 3 t/2" caliper. c. Maintenance of landscape vegetation shall be the responsibility of the developer, his successors or assigns. I certify that a copy of this decision and plans has been filed with the City Clerk and copies are on file with the Board. The decision shall not take effect until a copy of this decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty(20)days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed or that if such appeal has been filed,and it has been dismissed or denied, is • recorded in the Essex South Registry of Deeds and is indexed under the name of the owner of record or is recorded on the Owners Certificate of Title if Registered Land. The owner or applicant,his successors or assigns, shall pay the fee for recording or registering. Charles Puleo Chairman 6 s s CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD ,i Form A — Decision 1-3 Parallel Street/282 Rear Canal r Stephen Lovely, Esq. 14 Story Street 47 Salem, MA 01970 Cn Dear Mr. Lovely: The Salem Planning Board voted on September 20, 2007 to endorse"Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required"on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Stephen Lovely, 14 Story Street, Salem, MA 01970 2. Location: 1-3 Parallel Street/282 Rear Canal, Assessors Map 23 • 3. Project Description: This Form A conveys a portion of lot 144 (owned by Esther Realty Trust and referred to as Lot 1), located at 282 Rear Canal Street, to lots 77, 131, 132 (owned by Stephen Lovely),which are located at 1-3 Parallel. Lot 1 consisting of 18,000 square feet, is combined with lots 77 (95,832 square feet), 131 (6,969 square feet), and 132 (12,197 square feet) to form one lot consisting of 132,998 square feet with frontage on Parallel Street. Sincerely, , "off c5 AV14-�. Charles Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk John Bertini, Esther Realty Trust • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM iCl r_ t -- - ' ril Fj•t t'Irl CITY OF SALEM f S OFFICE PLANNING BOARD ioul SEP 27 P Waiver of Frontage- Decision For the Petition of Stephen Lovely for a Waiver of Frontage at 1-3 Parallel Street A Public Hearing on this petition was held on, and closed on September 20, 2007 with the following Board members present: Charles Puleo (Chair), Walter Power, Tim Kavanaugh, Nadine Hanscom, Christine Sullivan, Gene Collins, and Tim Ready. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and notice of the hearing was published in the Salem Evening News. Stephen Lovely, owner of the property, is requesting a waiver from frontage requirements from the Subdivision Regulations and under MGL Chapter 41, Section 81R, to allow the property located at 1-3 Parallel Street to be subdivided into four lots. This section states that"A Planning Board may in any particular case, where such action is in the public interest and not inconsistent with the intent and purposed the subdivision control law, waive strict compliance with its rules and regulations, and with frontage or access requirements specified in the law..." The waiver from frontage is being granted for the property located at 1-3 Parallel Street, as shown on the plans titled, "Subdivision Plan of Land located in Salem, MA"prepared by Eastern Land Survey Associates, dated September 10, 2007, upon the findings by the Board that: • 1. Special circumstances exist which especially affect the land and structures involved and which are not generally affecting other land and structures involved; 2. Literal enforcement of the provisions of the Regulations would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioners; and Therefore, the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven(7) in favor (Puleo, Power, Sullivan, Collins,Ready, Kavanaugh, Hanscom), and none opposed to grant the waiver from frontage requirements for 1-3 Parallel Street,with the following condition: 1. The waiver of the frontage requirement is conditioned upon certain roadway improvements to be constructed prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for any new -----------dwellings—. Said improvements-tobu-shown on-a plan-subjecto review and approval-by -- the City Engineer; and may include, but not be limited to, paving, drainage, and curbing in front of any new dwellings. The endorsement shall not take effect until a copy of the decisions bearing certification of the City Clerk that twenty(20)days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed,or that if such appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied,is recorded in the Essex South Registry of Deeds and is indexed in the grantor index under the name of the owner of record and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The owner or applicant shall pay the fee for recording or registering. I hereby certify that a copy of this decision is on file with the City Clerk and that a copy of the Decision and plans is on file with the Planning Board. 114e f • Charles Puleo, Chairmain 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 4 WWW.SALEM.com CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Form A — Decision 1-3 Parallel Street r_- N m ' IV � Stephen Lovely, Esq. J 14 Story Street ons- Salem, MA 01970 :23 rTi�- Dear Mr. Lovely: �0 n The Salem Planning Board voted on September 20, 2007 to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required"on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Stephen Lovely, 14 Story Street, Salem, MA 01970 2. Location: 1-3 Parallel Street, Assessors Map 23 • 3. Project Description: 1-3 Parallel Street consists of 132,998 square feet and was formed by the Form A decision for"l-3 Parallel/282 Rear Canal Street", which combined Lots 77, 131, 132, and a portion of 144. The Planning Board voted to endorse said Form A on September 20, 2007 prior to this Form A. This Form A subdivides 1-3 Parallel Street (as described above) into four lots: `Lot A" consisting of 67,200 square feet, "Lot B"consisting of 25,000 square feet, "Lot C" consisting of 20,400 square, and"Lot D"consisting of 21,100 square feet. All lots have frontage on Parallel Street Sincerely, 64.-le-5 W&,/*-L. Charles Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 0 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decisions At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, September 20, 2007 at 7:00pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,Salem Massachusetts,the Planning Board voted upon the following items: Applicant: Stephen Lovely Request: Waiver of Frontage Requirements from Subdivision Regulations under MGL Chapter 41, Section 81 R Location: 1-3 Parallel Street (Assessors Map 23, Lots 77, 131, 132) Description: Allows the property located at 1-3 Parallel Street to be subdivided into 4 lots. Decision: Approved-Filed with City Clerk September 27,2007 • Applicant: North Shore YMCA Request: Amendment to previously approved Definitive Subdivision Plan Location: Leggs Hill Road (Assessors Map 30, Lot 83) Description: Reduced number of housing lots,from what was originally approved (10) to six (6) single family housing lots and one (1) lot for construction of an 88,525 square-foot YMCA facility. Decision: Approved-Filed with City Clerk September 26,2007 This notice is being sent in compliance with the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 9 and does not require action by the recipient. Appeals, if any, shall be made pursuant to Chapter 40A, Section 17, and shall be filed within 20 days from the date which the decision was filed with the City Clerk. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 4 WWW.SALEM.COM D ria CITY OF SALEM nE.�r S OFFICE PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board gill hold its regular meeting on Thursday September 6, 2007 at 7.00 PM in Room 313, Third Floor at 120 Washington Street. Chuck Puleo Chairman 1. Approval of Minutes o July 19, 2007 2. Public Hearing— Wireless Facility Special Permit— 1000 Loring Ave(Map 20, Lot 0007) - FiberTower Corporation, Attorney Francis Parisi, Esq. • 3. Continuation of Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit— Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8)— Attorney Jack Keilty 4. Old/New Business 11113 notice City Hall a c;; ""I 3'01etin acitirg- atA X2!,37 P/1) �,� T s q„� .jo it.3.1 .� 6JJ:7 ✓' . rte. _.. '.:s l: ,.� r t,,� 3� �+.L i i 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 Fvc: 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM VIII City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: Date: � 1 ( I o`}- Name Mailing Address Phone # Email �Cvt Hwl 5� k-en Ousazz4 FST D iS CDl)tij-4/ 3 ? 1 1-/ S oaf `��$ -7 YS /d'66 GQucQC�hGDI . Coo a F /� • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting September 6, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, September 6, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Walter Power, John Moustakis, Nadine Hanscom, Christine Sullivan, Tim Ready, Tim Kavanaugh. Also present were Amy Lash, Staff Planner, and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Members Absent: Pam Lombardini and Gene Collins Approval of Minutes The minutes for the July 19, 2007 Planning Board meeting were reviewed. Walter Power had some changes on page 1, last paragraph, it should read `if they still envision the roadway going to the YMCA going over the rear lots facing Leggs Hill Rd'. In the third sentence, take out "but" and replace with "and"; also, in the next sentence after • "Leggs Hill" insert "road". Mr. Power commented that he doesn't like the idea of people paying taxes on land they cannot use. Maybe the City Assessor will look at this issue. People should be aware that the Board doesn't agree with people paying taxed on land they cannot use. Mr. Power had changes on page 2, first paragraph: Take out "something" and put in "land". Next, take out "they" and it should read- Mr. Atkins explained that the homeowners will own the property. Second paragraph, line 2- after "there were no issues" add in "to settle". Line 3- should read "on the houses...... how much time is envisioned to complete the project..." On page 3, regarding the Story Street Form A, someone asked if we received an answer from Beth Rennard. Amy said yes we did, but it was from the Assistant City Solicitor, Jerry Parisella, said that 2 details need to be added to the Form A plan and then it could be resubmitted. Mr. Kavanaugh said that the language used to label the parcels on the plans had to be changed. John Moustakis had a change on page 5, it should read "wants to protect the right of way to the water as long as there is no encroachment on the abutters land". Another change on page 5 from Mr. Power— the sentence regarding the d-cell lane should read "the city has started the deceleration lane next to Trader's Way". • There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to accept the minutes, seconded by Mr. Power, and approved (6-0). 1 • Public Hearing—Wireless Facility Special Permit- 1000 Loring Ave (Mai) 20, Lot 0007)- FiberTower Comoration, Attorney Francis Parisi, Esc. Attorney Francis Parisi addressed the Board proposing to put in FiberTower's antennas at 1000 Loring Ave. He explained a bit about the company. FiberTower is a wireless service provider for other wireless service providers. They link up wireless sites. It is more cost effective and provides a more reliable service. They attach antennas on existing buildings that other providers already have antennas on. The antennas are relatively small compared to others (they showed an example). Mr. Parisi mentioned that he would be back before the board in the near future for two more sites. John Moustakis asked if they would be eliminating towers that are already up there. Mr. Parisi said no they will not be, they're providing service to them. The current towers are connected and use wires. Once these wireless antennas are up, the service providers could essentialy disconnect their wires and use FiberTower's wireless service. Chuck Puleo asked if there would be any interference with other providers. Mr. Parisi said there are two types of interference: 1) frequency- The FCC controls the frequencies and FiberTower operates on a different frequency. 2) Physical- These antennas use a `line of • sight' technology. For this reason, they place them on the roofs in such a way so that they have no physical interference. They use microwave technology, similar to radar. Walter Power asked if there is any scatter or what if someone walks in front of it? Mr. Parisi answered that there is no scatter as it's a narrow beam. Also, it is up above the existing roof and they try to place the antenna at the edge of the building because they don't want any physical interference; chances are slim that anyone could get in front of it. Chuck Puleo asked if the City Zoning Ordinance has a limit on the number of antennas on rooftops and creating new space for towers. Mr. Parisi said that the city by-laws strongly encourage the use of existing facilities, so FiberTower is not intending on adding any extra towers, they want to be where other providers already are. Amy said she is not aware of any limit. Christine Sullivan asked if FiberTower takes the place of the provider, or are they backup. Mr. Parisi said that it's one or the other, or both. It is actually the decision of the provider (like AT&T, Verizon, etc.) Ms. Sullivan said that there had been a previous decision in a similar case that stated towers and antennas to be painted to blend with the building. These antennas are white. Can they be painted? Mr. Parisi said that yes they can be painted. Walter Power asked how they're set up and would they interfere with other • telecommunications. Mr. Parisi said that before they set up the antennas, workers would go to the roof on Highland Ave and on Cane Road (where the other antenna would be placed) and 2 • make sure there is direct sight between the two antennas. If they have direct sight line, they would not interfere with the other antennas. Mr. Power asked about their safety in regards to workers on the building. Mr. Parisi explained that OSHA regulations are extensive on telecommunication sites, there are signs posted, and, there is an educational process with other workers (those that may need to be on buildings like window washers). They learn safety procedures as to what you can and can't do. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Mr. Moustakis to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Ms. Sullivan and approved (6-0). A motion was made by John Moustakis to approve the proposal as presented with a condition that FiberTower paints the antenna a matching color and maintains it as well. Seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (6-0). Amy Lash will write up a draft decision and bring it to the next meeting. Christine Sullivan suggested that, for future similar proposals, there be an application form with a checklist of standard conditions that need to be met, to expedite the process. Amy will have a draft application form at the next meeting. Continuation of Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chanel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (map 08, Lots 6,7,8)- Attorney Jack Keilty • Since Jack Keilty was not present at the start of the hearing, Chuck Puleo presented Stephen Casazza from Fay, Spofford & Thorndike to present the peer review. On August 24, he received a letter that contained Chris Mello's comments. He uses these comments along with his for his letter to the City and apologized for not getting his letter to the Board earlier than tonight. The current plan was revised on August 20`h and that was subject to comments that FST made on July 24`h. FST comments related to drainage, the sewer system, the water system and such. He went on to bring the Board up to date on what has been going on. He mentioned the water pressure tests were done on August 24`h; he hasn't seen any results from that test yet. Following up is a concern of the Board. There is still a water supply concern. In terms of the 26-lot cluster, the issue of the plan he wants to discuss is Kimberly Road, the main access off of Clark Avenue, is sharper than, and not in accordance with city radius regulations. The cul-de-sac is fine. Christine Sullivan asked if the street doesn't meet the requirements of the city, what is the consequence? For example, can fire trucks get down the street? Steve Casazza seems to think that a fire truck could get down the street. Chuck Puleo asked if this problem of the road is correctable. Stephen said it is. Mr. Casazza talked about the drainage system- it is extensive with steep retaining walls, they range in height from 15 to 20 feet high. He stated that he asked for more details as to what they would look like and that they would be addressed at a future meeting. Chuck Puleo asked if these walls meet slope and grade requirement. Mr. Casazza said that they do and that • they are similar to the ones on Osborne Hill. Ms. Sullivan asked if there would be houses 3 • facing/looking at the retaining wall. It was mentioned that there is a proposed trail to go in at the open space, possibly behind these wall. Walter Power questioned whether we're getting a value for this cluster with the open space, trees and trail he's talking about the developer providing. Chuck Puleo asked Steve Casazza if he would suggest seeing a profile and cross-section of about 3 or 4 sections. Mr. Casazza said yes that they should request to see it on the plans so that you know what you're getting. Chuck Puleo agreed that it would be beneficial to see a detailed plan. Mr. Casazza mentioned that the issue of zoning residential versus industrial was settled. Five lots were zoned industrial. The only question from the City Council was whether industrial could have access on a residential street. Amy Lash mentioned that City Solicitor Beth Rennard is looking into the access from the industrial land. The Board will have an answer from her at the next meeting. Walter Power said he'd also like to see the square footage of all the lots. Chuck Puleo asked why they are requiring sprinkler systems in the houses and Amy explained that it's because of the one means of access to them, it's extra protection. For example, if the fire department needs a few extra minutes to get that area. Mr. Puleo asked if they have taken • the sprinkler systems into consideration when they did the pressure tests? Mr. Casazza said he does not know a lot about them but believes there is a water system in each house that provides for the sprinkler, which means the pressure tests are separate. It would be a good idea to check with the fire department on this. Mr. Moustakis mentioned that it seems like there are a lot of loose ends to tie up and it is difficult to have a lot of questions without anyone (the lawyer or developer) present to answer them. Mr. Puleo said that we would get all of this information in a letter including details and a cross-section drawing. Tim Kavanaugh stated that Mr. Casazza's.work is excellent. Mr. Keilty arrived at the meeting. Mr. Casazza mentioned that the Conservation hearing is on the 13`h' and said that Mr. Keilty contacted him and asked if he has everything he needs. Mr. Casazza is not sure if he has the updated forms he needs and will get those from Mr. Keilty. He explained to Mr. Keilty some of the questions they have regarding the intersection of Clark Ave and the subdivision. They are questioning the filter on the outlet of the underground drainage system. And there is extensive maintenance requirement for those systems. Town & Country Homes said they would maintain them but there needs to be more information than that and it needs to state that "they will maintain the systems and they will work". He mentions that Mr. David Colpitts, Clark Ave resident, has concerns. Also, do the catch basins have sufficient capacity? • 4 1 Walter Power thinks the board should determine the capability of the access road and the intersection of Clark Ave and Clark St. Christine Sullivan asked how many houses could be built if it wasn't a cluster? She would like to compare the number of houses between a conventional subdivision and a cluster subdivision. Mr. Keilty said he didn't know the exact number but said it is less than the number initially proposed when they came before the board. Chuck Puleo said that Mr. Casazza has a list of issues to be addressed. John Moustakis said that the Board should make a list of those questions and get the answers in writing. Mr. Puleo told Mr. Keilty that there are some issues with the drainage system. Mr. Keilty said that they're not done yet with this issue, but they did have a second site visit to review it. He also mentioned he's meeting with the Conservation Commission on Sept. 1P. Walter Power rephrased Christine's previous question to "How many standard lots could be put in versus what we're getting in the cluster". Mr. Keilty said he didn't know this at the time, but can get the answer in writing to the Board. Chuck Puleo told Jack Keilty that Mr. Casazza has questions beyond the letter that was presented to him. Mr. Casazza said that they had requested that fire flow tests be done. Mr. Keilty said they were done. Mr. Casazza told Mr. Keilty that the Board would like a cross- section or profiles of the retaining wall so they can see what it would look like. Mr. Keilty • asked if they would like this information for the next meeting. Amy suggested that Mr. Keilty submit a request for an extension so that they can present and review this requested information at the next meeting. Mr. Keilty said they can get this information two weeks prior to the October 18`h meeting to Mr. Casazza. Mr. Keilty will send a letter to his engineers and will copy Mr. Casazza on it. This letter will request flow test information, cross section and/or profiles of sections of the wall and catch basin information. Christine Sullivan asked if the Conservation Commission would make their decision by the 18`h? They are unsure of that. Mr. Keilty said he wants Stephen Casazza's firm, Fay, Spofford, &Thomdike, to speak to the issue of Stormwater Management. Mr. Keilty also said he would like the Planning Board to approve his access road. On the drawings, page 4, at Jennifer Circle (there is a bubble shown). He wants the Board to approve the roadway, that it's adequate access to the industrial land in a northerly cluster and southerly ANR. Tim Kavanaugh mentioned that Beth Rennard will be weighing in on the issue of the access road. Nadine Hanscom confirmed that there are houses there, no road, there is nothing there, and it was zoned industrial. Mr. Keilty explained that although the Planning Board recommended to the City Council to zone all residential, the Council didn't take the recommendation and remained zoned industrial. He wants the Board to give relief to that road and approve it. • 5 • Walter Power asked how wide Clark Avenue is at the entrance. Is it about 30 ft. Jack Keilty suggested that it is wider than most. The radius and width are a little bigger than ordinarily proposed. Walter Power said that since we're adding a significant amount of traffic, the Board would like to see the road superimposed from Highland Ave to the subdivision road to start to see how the road would look like when done. Jack Keilty said that they have given the traffic report there are some major improvements that need to be done on the road that is behind Dunkin Donuts on Highland Ave. Walter Power wants to see where the road is constricted and not constricted, that the roadway is the same width all the way. Mr. Keilty said they would give the Board a drawing that shows everything as it is plus the overlay. Chuck Puleo asked if anyone from the audience would like to speak. Mr. David Colpitts, resident, Clark Ave., said he had a chance to talk to Stephen Casazza before the meeting regarding water storage. Mr. Colpitts property is directly down from the new street. He has a retaining wall and he's concerned with the water storage area. Since Highland Ave flooded in the spring, he's concerned that if there's another flood, the water storage pipes (4 of them) will overflow and water will run down to his property. Stephen Casazza said the intent of the drainage design is to create runoff to hold water back in the subdivision area. However, it is not relative to the flooding on Highland Avenue. The • capacity and design are intended to handle the new development. Chuck Puleo said it still wouldn't fix the flooding on Highland Ave. John Moustakis said that this is an engineering issue. Mr. Colpitts said he asked Mr. Casazza if the water storage could be moved and that Mr. Casazza said yes, but to where would be a question for the project engineer, not for him as the peer reviewer. Mr. Keilty said he would ask the engineers about the design integrity of the water storage area and it's impact on the neighbors. Tim Ready asked if the City Engineer has looked at this issue. Amy Lash said no but she can direct his attention to this issue. Tim Ready said that the Board needs to take the City Engineer and Mr. Casazza's expertise guidance on this issue. Walter Power asked what direction the water flows from storage. Jack Keilty said it flows into Clark Avenue. There are 5 storage facilities. Mr. Power asked- What kinds of runoff do we get? What kind of volume will the particular storage system get in a 100 year storm. Mr. Colpitts said of the number of drain catch basins, most of them are directed towards Clark Avenue. Chuck Puleo said the next time Chris Mello is here to take the drawings and have him explained the flow of the catch basins. Stephen Casazza explained that his role is to review this in accordance with the City. He's not here to redesign the project. Jack Keilty asked if Chris Mello, or someone from that office, should be at the next meeting to walk thru these issues. Mr. Puleo said yes, on September 20`h(subsequently changed to the 18`h of October). Ms. Sullivan said it's good to • have a peer review and she would like to hear all parties. 6 I` • There being no further questions or comments on this matter, John Moustakis made a motion to continue the public hearing to September 20th, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (6-0). Two board members were going to be absent on September 201h and the point came up that the board does not want to loose eligible voting members, so the public hearing should be continued to the following meeting on October 18`h. A motion was made by John Moustakis to amend the previous motion and to continue the public hearing on October 18`h' seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (6-0). John Moustakis mentioned that it used to be that the planner would sit with the city engineer and other city departments and go over everything. Walter power was disappointed that the peer reviewer spoke with the abutter prior to the meeting. There was a bit of discussion on the issue of the industrial zoned area and the access road. Chuck Puleo seems to think that it's possible city Solicitor Beth Rennard will come back with information that says we can't approve it, which essentially takes the decision off of their hands. If it's denied, and there is no access to part of their land, then they could sue the City. The question is- can the Board approve it and/or can they deny? Nadine Hanscom thinks the City Council should make the final decision on the road that is zoned industrial. • Old/New Business o Tim Ready mentioned that the new gas station on Highland Ave is doing great and hasn't created any additional traffic problems there. Also, Osboume Hills already has 70% of the homes sold to Salem residents. o City of Salem Open Space &Recreation Plan Update 2007-2012 Amy said that the deadline to send comments to Carey Duques is September 28`h Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Mr. Kavanaugh to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ms. Sullivan, and approved (6-0). The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: • Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board 7 CITY OF SALEM FI? 'S OFFICE PLANNING BOARD ZU01 SEP 21 A it: SLI Wireless Special Permit Decision Petition of FiberTower Corporation For The Property Located At 1000 Loring Ave A Public Hearing on this petition was held on September 6, 2007. The following Planning Board members were present: Charles Puleo (Chair), Walter Power III., John Moustakis, Tim Kavanaugh, Nadine Hanscom, Christine Sullivan, and Tim Ready. Notice of this meeting was --sent-to abutters and notice—of thegearing was properly published in the Salem Evening News- The petitioner is requesting a Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit under Section 5- 3, Special Permit Uses, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, to allow for the installation five antennas on the existing mechanical penthouse located on the roof of the building located at 1000 Loring Ave Salem, MA. Cabling will run from the antennas to telecommunications equipment that will be located within weatherproof cabinets, which will also be located on the roof of the building. The Planning Board reviewed the application and plans submitted and found that the petitioner addressed the requirements of this section for the issuance of a Special Permit. • On September 6, 2007 the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven (7) in favor, none opposed, to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the applications (date stamped by the City Clerk August 3, 2007) and plans last dated June 25, 2007, titled"FiberTower BOSFPI9, 1 Loring Tower, 1000 Loring Ave, Salem, MA 01970" (Sheets TOl, COI, A01-02, and S01-03) and drawn by Aerial Spectrum Inc, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant paints the antennas to match the color of the building and the existing roof structures; the applicant; and his successors, shall maintain the paint on the antennas. This endorsement shall not take effect until a copy of the decision bearing certification of the City Clerk that twenty (20) days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed or that if such appeal has been filed that it has been dismissed or denied,is recorded in the Essex South Registry of Deeds and is indexed in the grantor index under the name of the owner of record or is recorded and noted on the owner's certificate of title. The fee for recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. I hereby certify that a copy of this decision is on file wit ity Cle and tha-t a-y of the decision and plans is on file with the Planning Bo ) Charl o, airman 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decision At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, September 6, 2007 at 7:00pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem Massachusetts, the Planning Board voted upon the following item: Applicant: FiberTower Corporation Requested Permit(sl: Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit Location: 1000 Loring Ave Description: Allows for the installation of five antennas on the existing mechanical penthouse located on the roof of the building located at 1000 Loring Ave Salem, MA. Cabling will run from the antennas to telecommunications equipment that will be located within weatherproof cabinets,which will also be located on the roof of the building. Decision: Approved -Filed with City Clerk September 21, 2007 This notice is being sent in compliance with the Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 9 and does not require action by the recipient. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM w CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF MEETING (REVISED) You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board uall hold its regular meeting on Thursday ju/y 19, 2007, at 7:00 PM in Room 313, Third Floor at 120 Washington Street. Charles Puleo Chairman _ 1. Approval of Minutes o July 12, 2007 --' 2. Request to Continue Public Hearing–Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision' Plan –Leggs Hill Road (Map 30, Lot 83)–Atty. George Atkins, Chris Nowak, PE RequestedContinuanceContinuance to September 20, 2007 3. Discussion- Six (6) Month Follow Up Report- Witch Hill Subdivision –Dell Street/Durkin Street–Ken Steadman 4. Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval— Story Street (Map 23, Lot 2)–Leo Higgins 5. Continuation of Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit–Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 08, Lots 6, 7, 8)– Attorney Jack Keilty --- Requested Continuance to September 6, 2007 6. Old/New Business o Chapter 91 Application Received for 6 Dearborn Lane This roflca Posted On "O f°. 1111 Edi iovn a% amo d U.41. , !�{{ ,7 5/, ��]] �g g i�pi'',y'� [s(\es ,i�i+I:'s�e s� 2�J A atlA �19 4 11 dFNV'A 1. NO, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 o TEL: 978.745.9595 Fa : 978.740.0404 4 WWW.SAI-EM.COM r • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting July 19, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, July 19, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Walter Power, Tim Kavanaugh, John Moustakis, and Pam Lombardini. Also present were Amy Lash, Staff Planner, and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Members Absent: Tim Ready, Christine Sullivan and Nadine Hanscom. Approval of Minutes The minutes for the July 12, 2007 Planning Board meeting were reviewed. On page 2, paragraph 5, regarding the "Drive Thru" sign, Mr. Power questioned whether the sign should say "Bank Drive Thru". Attorney George Atkins said that he believes that since the bank would be the only drive thru there, the word Bank doesn't need to be on the sign, also, the bank logo may be on the sign. If necessary, they can comply. Matters regarding signage will have to go for sign review, and it can be brought up then. • No changes needed to be made to the minutes. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Ms. Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Mr. Power, and approved (5-0). Request to Continue Public Hearing—Amendment to Previously Approved Subdivision Plan- Leggs Hill Road (Map 30, Lot 83)- Atty. George Atkins, Chris Nowak, PE-Requested Continuance to September 20, 2007 Atty. George Atkins requested to continue the public hearing so they can look at the project and address concerns as well as talk to the City Council and neighbors. They would like to come back September 20, 2007. Mr. Power asked if they still envision the roadway to the YMCA going over the rear lots on Leggs Hill Road. Mr. Atkins said that yes, the driveway does go up to the YMCA, and the driveway is on part of the land owned by the people on Leggs Hill Road. Mr. Atkins stated that the plan originally approved doesn't include any parcels on Leggs Hill Road. They reconfigured the lots, eliminating 5 lots on the cul-de-sac and creating an extra lot on Leggs • Hill road. This is the proposed modification, but they could come back with a different plan. 1 • Mr. Power is concerned that the people who own the land are paying taxes on land that is being used to create an easement. Mr. Atkins explained that the homeowners will own the property that the road goes over. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Ms. Lombardim to continue the Public Hearing, seconded by Mr. Moustakis, and approved (5-0). Discussion- Six 6) Month Follow Up Report- Witch Hill Subdivision-Dell Street/Durkin Street- Ken Steadman Atty. George Atkins addressed the Board. They were in six months ago, at that time it had been two years since the Dell St. project was approved, and there were two issues: clearing the titles for the land and the fact that the land will cross under National Grid's power lines. He reported that they have made progress. They have: 1- clarified and resolved all the title problems and 2-made an agreement with National Grid, they just need to get the paperwork done and that is currently in progress. In addition, they submitted the plan (which the Planning Board approved) to Land Court engineers and a preliminary review has been done. Mr. Puleo asked what percentages of the roads are in. Mr. Steadman said that a good 1/3 of the roads are in. Utilities, hydrants and drainage are in. Mr. Power asked if any construction • on the houses has started and how much time is envisioned to complete the project? Mr. Steadman said there isn't any construction yet, but they're hoping that the first phase of 6-8 lots can be marketed in the fall. There are no issues to setting and the land will cross over National Grid lines. Mr. Moustakis asked how quickly they think they can get approval by National Grid- Mr. Steadman said that they already have a deal, the approval is in place and the paperwork has been sent to their legal department. They are getting their finances in place, and will be ready to go once this paperwork is done. Continuation of Public hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (map 08, Lots 6,7,8)- Attorney Jack Keiltv Requested Continuance to September 6, 2007. Mr. Puleo read a letter from Attorney Jack Keilty respectfully requesting continuance of the public hearing until September 6, 2007. There being no further questions or comments on this matter, Ms. Lombardini made a motion to continue the public hearing to September 20th, seconded by Mr. Power and approved (5-0). Councillor Pelletier, present at this meeting, also has a copy of plans for Chapel Hill LLC. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- Story Street • (Map 23, Lot 2)- Leo Higgins 2 • Neither the applicant nor a representative attended the meeting to present the plan. Mr. Tim Kavanaugh has some reservations about this application and feels that they will need a legal opinion from the City Solicitor. According to the subdivision regulations, page-2 paragraph-A there are three criteria to meet. First, he states that on the map provided to the Board, there is a dotted line, which assumingly shows the end of the street. There appears to be a line separating Story Street, which is a public way, from St Ann's Park, which would appear to be a private way. That line of demarcation is just above the parcel A that would be created. So according to this plan, parcel A does not have any frontage on the public way. St. Ann's Park would be a private way. He said that it does not seem to meet the requirements for an ANR. The second criterion says `a way shown on a plan theretofore approved in accordance with the subdivision control law'. Mr. Kavanaugh pointed out that there are no notes, no reference that would indicate that St. Ann's Park is a way shown on a plan since 1964. The third says `a way in existence when the subdivision control law became effective'. The applicant shows the way on the plan. On that, it appears wooded and unconstructed and the applicant has not proven it was in existence in 1964. Mr. Kavanaugh feels the plan does not meet any of the requirements for an ANR and the Board should seek a legal opinion from the City Solicitor. • Ms. Lombardini thinks the petitioner should have been at this meeting to hear the concerns and issues of the Board instead of just having Councilors and abutters present. Mr. Power reminded the Board that they have 21 days before it would be automatically approved. Mr. Kavanaugh said that Mr. Power is right and that the Board must take a vote. Mr. Kavanaugh wants to submit a query to Beth Rennard, the City Solicitor, to review the application and plan and give her opinion as to whether they must approve this plan if it is submitted again. Mr. Collins asked that if this goes to the City Solicitor and if her opinion says that it doesn't meet the requirements for an ANR, does it "stop the clock"? Should they take a vote tonight? It was concluded that they must do so or the application would not be constructively approved. Mr. Collins is concerned and feels that the Board's opinion should be sent to the City Solicitor with their denial attached. They want to know whether they acted correctly or not. Mr. Kavanaugh says this must be considered a subdivision because it does not meet the three exceptions of section-2. Mr. Power said that he assumes that the Board could turn this down due to lack of important information needed. Also, if turned down, is there a time frame that the petitioner would have to wait before re-filing? Board members agreed there is not, though a re-filed plan should include additional information. A motion was made by Mr. Collins to "deny the Form A based upon lack of reliable • information as to whether the road is private or existing" seconded by Mr. Moustakis and approved (5-0). 3 • The board wants to send to Beth Renard the results of the deliberation and would like her to render her opinion based upon the information. Mr. Kavanaugh views this as a subdivision and would like Beth to see if this is entitled to ANR status. The motion was restated- Mr. Collins made a motion to send the results of the discussion of the Form A to Beth Rennard, City Solicitor, for her review in terms of whether or not it's a subdivision, or needs to be filed as a subdivision, or whether or not it should be considered a Form A. Seconded by Mr. Kavanaugh, and approved (5-0). Mr. Power asked if there was any other access to the remaining parcel. Councillor Lovely pointed out that the terminus off (Cleveland) street is not to be considered for frontage purposes. She also pointed out that the extension Story Street was cut into a subdivision in the early part of the century. Mr. Kavanaugh stated that he understands why abutters are interested, it is a large parcel with wetlands. He said that we know it's not a public way, and we know it's not a way that's on an approved plan since 1964. There is an 1895 plan, which shows the way, which is different than being a way in existence. He questions what a way in existence means and wants Beth Rennard to interpret that by looking at the case law. Mr. Power recalls a precedent case off of Chapel Hill where somebody wanted to build a house with frontage on a paper street and they were allowed to do that. He believes the paper street may have been registered in some way. • A question was posed- wouldn't the other thing to look at be the original zoning map for the city? The zoning district is R-C, when the zoning was originally done they must have looked at the street. The footprint where somebody could build is very limited. Mr. Kavanaugh said if Beth Rennard says it is an ANR- the board must form an opinion- is it sufficiently wide enough? We might say because it's being joined with a parcel that has frontage on Story Street, the board could say yes we believe there is sufficient width because we could consider it as part of a larger lot on Story Street. Mr. Kavanaugh noted it does say on the application that the lot will be combined with the lot of Gerald and Linda Tardiff, however they aren't present to acknowledge the property is being conveyed to them. Comments were made that parcel A is not a legal lot by itself. Mr. Power said to add that, if in fact it is a Form A, how do we protect ourselves from the use of upgrading utilities? Mr. Collins said that if her opinion comes down to the side that we were wrong, he has 100 ft of access on the city street. Mr. Collins said that it's 1700 ft in question plus the 100 ft of frontage, which would give him adequate lot size plus minimum frontage on Story Street. Gene Collins noted that it is all speculation at this point. Can Amy ask Beth that if does not meet Form A requirements, what rights does the petitioner have, what could he do legally? If we approve this are we giving him greater rights to develop his parcel? Can he go to the building inspector and get a permit to build something? What are his rights in terms of the remaining parcel? Are we giving him rights to a greater parcel? Does it have proper sewer and utility lines? Gene Collins noted he could just add that land • and just make his land bigger. The Board wants make sure that he will not be using this as an entrance to the rest of the property. 4 • The Board members were in agreement that the petitioner should be there to answer the questions. Mr. Power made amendment to the previous motion to add in that "if in fact we approve as Form A, how can we make sure that the utilities in the Paper St area are installed and street extended if in fact that's opening into a subdivision", seconded by Kavanaugh, and approved (5-0). Old/New Business o Chapter 91 Application Received for 6 Dearborn Lane This is for a floating dock. Ms. Lombardini lives in this area and said that the public way runs down near the top part of the beach. The right of way is a city way, open to the public, you can get there. There are no postings. Mr. Moustakis wants to protect the right of way to the water as long as there is no encroachment on abutters land if that is what the neighbors want, if it is an encroachment on their right of way. Pam asked when this would be going to the DEP, she will email Amy Lash with her questions and she can check on when they will be going to the DEP; there may be a public comment period. • o Mr. Puleo received a letter from the City Council regarding the rezoning of six parcels from the July 12`h public hearing. Against what the Planning Board recommended, it was approved as first passage to rezone six parcels in question. It will go for a second passage at the Sept. 13`b regular Council meeting. o City of Salem Open Space & Recreation Plan Update 2007-2012 Amy explained that the Open Space & Recreation Plan was sent out by email for review by Planning Board Members, and that comments/suggestions could be submitted to Carey Duques, the Conservation Agent who is still working on the draft. The board indicated they are in support of this effort, though they would like more time to read the draft document. Amy will send hard copies to the planning board members and find out the date that comments need to be in by. o Comment that they have started the deceleration cell lane on Highland Ave next to Traders Way. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Mr. Collins to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mr. Kavanaugh, and approved (5-0). • 5 The meeting was adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board 6 CITY OF SALEM ;t_'_`,It FICE PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF MEETING (REVISED #2) You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regular meeting on Thursday July 1 Z, 2007, at 6:00 PM in Room 392, Third Floor at 120 Washington Street. C�L_— )C. R_LA e_1 Chuck Puleo Chairman 1. Approval of Minutes o June 18, 2007 o June 21, 2007 o June 7, 2007 (Clarification needed on Stutz Volvo Site Plan Review Decision) 2. Continuation of Public Hearing–Site Plan Review Special Permit & Drive Through Facilities Special Permit–Danversbank, 3-5 Traders Way (Map 08, Lot 0126)- Attorney George Atkins • 3. Discussion- Six (6) Month Follow Up Report- Witch Hill Subdivision –Dell Street/Durkin Street–Ken Steadman ***MOVED TO JULY 19, 2007*** 4. Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval — Leggs Hill YMCA (Map 30, Lot 83)–Alex Caruso, Innovative Properties 5. Old/New Business o Osborne Hills –57 Marlborough Rd (Map 09, Parcel 1)–Paul DiBiase • Vote to execute Tri-Party Agreement • Vote to release lots for Phase I (Lots 1-4 inclusive, Lots 6 & &, Lots 27, 28 & 29, Lots 30 & 31, Lots 24-26 inclusive and Lots 44-46 inclusive), as well as 23 and 43 (within Phase 2). o Chapter 91 application received for 8 Harbor View Terrace (Map 32, Lot 0378) This notice Postedon "O9fic;al [3ullotin $oIIr+�• acety fal>3SI5 f41�r $e!: yrs, 1A,; ss. oii Tcly /t - cc 73A A 238 ofi't► rte• 39 sea 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 o TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM r • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting July 12, 2007 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, July 12, 2007, at 6:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Tim Kavanaugh, Christine Sullivan, John Moustakis, Pam Lombardini and Nadine Hanscom. Also present were Amy Lash, Staff Planner, Lynn Duncan,Director, and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Members Absent: Walter Power and Tim Ready. Introduction Lynn Duncan introduced Amy Lash, the new Staff Planner for the Planning & Community Development Department. Approval of Minutes • The minutes for the June 18th, 2007 Planning Board meeting were reviewed. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Mr. Moustakis to accept the minutes as presented, seconded by Ms. Lombardini, and approved (7-0). The minutes for the June 21, 2007 Planning Board were reviewed. Under Approval of Minutes on page 1, it was noted that the date of May 17`h be replace with June 7"'. A correction was noted on page 5, to change `close' to `continue' Public Hearing. Also on page 6, change `tow' to `two'. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Ms. Sullivan to accept the minutes, seconded by Ms. Lombardini, and approved (7-0). The minutes for the June 7, 2007 Planning Board needed a correction. They were reviewed, as a clarification was needed on the Stutz Volvo Site Plan Review Decision. Lynn Duncan said the board needs to clarify (from page 4, first paragraph) their decision to accept their findings of fact and to reaffirm what should/shouldn't be removed. The suggested wording is • that the Board voted to incorporate their findings of fact and reaffirms that the barbed wired will be removed and Volvo will install seasonal planting barrels along the building, about 2 1/2 1 • feet high, to be maintained seasonally. In addition, a motion was made to paint the chain link fence black. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Ms. Sullivan to amend these June 7`h minutes with the language as outlined by Lynn Duncan, seconded by Mr. Kavanaugh, and approved (7-0). Continuation of Public Hearing- Site Plan review Special Permit &Drive Through Facilities Special Permit- Danvers Bank, 3-5 Traders Way (Mai) 08, Lot 0126)- Attorney George Atkins Mr. Puleo stated that last time there were two remaining issues- to repair the dumpster enclosure and to decorate/maintain the island, and would it be appropriate to include these as conditions? Also, traffic flow was discussed last time. Mr. Puleo also questioned the signage for the drive-thru. Mr. Rick Salvo, Project Engineer, Central St., Saugus addressed these issues. For signage, the sign that is currently there will remain and will say "Drive Thru" and an additional sign will be added and the whole lot will be restriped, which will help with traffic flow. He also said for clarification, he talked with Dean Larrabe of the Fire Dept. about the island that is in the parking lot that will separate the drive-thru, it's a rumble strip and not a raised island. There will be a drive up ATM, which will be lit up 24 hours as well as the lobby. • For the Fire Protection Plan, Mr. Moustakis asked if the Fire Department had copies of the architectural drawings. Mr. Salvo said that they do. Questioned whether there will be enough time for them to respond as they have 35 days and the drawings and plans were submitted June 11`h. Lynn Duncan said that if they don't hear from them, they assume that they don't have any comments. Mr. Salvo said that for access around the building, the Fire Dept. was looking for at least 18-20 feet from the canopy, and there is 22 ft., which is more than enough. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Mr. Moustakis to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Ms. Sullivan, and approved(7-0). Lynn Duncan suggested that they make the landscaping (on the island in front of the main entrance) be required in accordance with the specifications as stated in the previous decision. Mr. Puleo went over the Site Plan Review/Drive Through Special Permit Conditions. Each condition was read and discussed. Following are some of the discussions that proceeded. • Number 3, Dumpster- the dumpster will be in accordance with specifications of the previous conditions. • Number 4, Landscaping- this will be required in accordance with the specifications as stated in the previous decision (will reflect conditions as stated in the original decision of Jan 20, 1994). • Number 6, Clerk of the Works- question if we needed this condition. Lynn • Duncan said she doesn't deem it necessary, but that they should leave it in. 2 • • Number 9, Board of Health- Amy Lash said that the Board of Health had no comments. Lynn said they should leave the standard conditions in. • Number 12, Signage- there will be some signage facing Highland Ave. and on the front facing Trader's Way. There will be a Do Not Enter sign for one way circulation. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Mr. Collins to accept the Site Plan Review/Drive Through Special Permit, seconded by Ms. Lombardini, and approved (7-0). Discussion- Six (6) month Follow Up Report- Witch Hill Subdivision- Dell Street/Durkin Street- Ken Steadman- Moved to July 19, 2007 This is a six-month following up report that the Board requested. This is moved to July 19, 2007. Christine Sullivan will not be at the July 191h meeting. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval-Leggs Hill YMCA (map 30, Lot 83)- Alex Caruso, Innovative Properties Alex Caruso of Innovative Properties addressed the Board. They are developing 4 new homes • on parcels 3,4,5 and 6 in Marblehead. They approached the YMCA to purchase a parcel of their land in Salem to expand lot 6, since the yard is very small. This parcel of land, which is 2700 sq. ft., is not buildable; rather it would be a usable yard for those residents. They are not creating a right of way. Mr. Puleo asked if this would have any impact on where they are currently working for the YMCA. Mr. Caruso said it's on the slope of land that they are not using. Lynn pulled the site plan for the YMCA and said that it doesn't look like the parcel in question is on the site plan. Mr. Caruso mentioned that the homeowners would be paying taxes in Marblehead, since part of that land is in Marblehead. Plans for the area were shown and the areas in question were shown. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to approve the Form A Application as presented, seconded by Ms. Sullivan, and approved (7-0). Old/New Business o Osborne Hills- 57 Marlborough Rd. (Map 09, Parcel 1)-Paul DiBiase Vote to Execute Tri-Party Agreement Vote to release lots for Phase 1 (Lots 1-4 inclusive, Lots 6& 7, Lots 27, 28, & 29, Lots 30 • & 31, Lots 24-26 inclusive and Lots 44-46 inclusive), as well as 23 and 43 (within Phase 2). 3 Lynn Duncan said that the developer has completed the basic infrastructure, utilities and paving for Phase 1 and they submitted the tri-party agreement to TD Banknorth. Mr. Puleo asked if they have a Clerk of the Works notes and reports. Lynn said they have submitted that the work has been completed. Regarding the Memorandum of Understanding Relating to Temporary Cul-De-Sacs, Lynn Duncan explained that the cul-de-sacs are not completed yet and that the agreement says that no Certificates of Occupancy shall be requested by Developer or granted by the City for any of the lots being released from the existing Covenant by the Phase I Tri-party Agreement unless and until the Developer constructs the temporary cul-de-sacs shown on the Phasing Plan of the Subdivision for Phase I. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Christine Sullivan made a motion to accept this Memorandum of Understanding, seconded by Mr. Moustakis, and approved (7-0). Mr. Kavanaugh made a motion to execute the Tri-Party Agreement of $264,000 (Exhibit A), seconded by Ms. Sullivan and approved (7-0). Lynn Duncan said they the Board need to make the last vote to release the lots for Phase I. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Mr. Kavanaugh made a • motion to release lots for Phase 1 [ (Lots 1-4 inclusive, Lots 6& 7, Lots 27, 28, & 29, Lots 30 & 31, Lots 24-26 inclusive and Lots 44-46 inclusive), as well as 23 and 43 (within Phase 2)], seconded by Ms. Lombardini, and approved (7-0). All members of the Planning Board present at the meeting signed the Tri-Party Agreement. o Chapter 91 Application received for 8 Harbor View Terrace (Map 32, Lot 0378) Christine Sullivan asked Lynn Duncan about the Waterfront Hotel and what is the current situation. Lynn explained that they want to add a conference center and additional hotel room. The developer will be submitting a site plan review to the Planning Board. They had a site visit; they are currently working with MEPA. They rent parking right now and want to purchase the parking area from Verizon (across the street) and then build parking. Lynn wondered if the Planning Board wanted to submit a letter of support for this project. Christine Sullivan isn't happy with that area and the properties. That area is appalling, Rockett Realty has not kept up some of the properties, how do we know they won't let this go as well? Mr. Collins suggested that those are two different issues- some of the condos and slips are owned buy others. Ms. Sullivan and Mr. Kavanaugh both said the area is terrible • looking and asked if we could send them a message to fix things. Lynn explained that there 4 s • would be an opportunity when the Developer comes before the Board. Mr. Puleo commented that the Hotel should have parking issues solidified first. Ms. Sullivan asked if the Board could request a marketing report as to whether there is a need for a large conference center (more than 200 people). Mr. Puleo wondered that when they present the whole package, the Board asks that when the conference center isn't being used, if the public can use the parking area. That may help parking and business at the Wharf. The Board will raise these issues with the Developer when they are approached. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Mr. Collins to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Ms. Sullivan, and approved (7- 0). The meeting was adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 5 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Form A — Decision Innovative Properties Subdivision Jack Meany YMCA of the North Shore, Inc. 245 Cabot Street Beverly, MA 01915 Dear Mr. Meany: ` The Salem Planning Board voted on July 12, 2007 by a vote of seven (7) in favor and none opposed to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan: • 1. Applicant: Jack Meany, CEO,YMCA of the North Shore, Inc., 245 Cabot Street, Beverly, MA 01915 2. Location: The "Innovative Properties Subdivision" is located on Leggs Hill Road, assessors map 30, parcel 0083. 3. Project Description: This Form A application requested to create Lot A from existing Lot 11 (in Salem) and combine Lot A with existing Lot 6 (in Marblehead) to form lot 6A. Existing Lot 6 consisting of 11,905 sf is located on Leggs Hill Road, Marblehead, MA plus Lot A consisting of 2,767 sf on Leggs Hill Road, Salem, MA is combined to create Lot 6A consisting of 14,672 sf. The use is single family residential. Sincerely, Charles Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • Alex Caruso, Innovative Properties 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 0 TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 s WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM � T PLANNING BOARD Decision Site Plan Review/Drive Through Special Permit 3-5 Traders Way July 12, 2007 Danversbank 3-5 Traders Way Salem, MA 01970 ; RE: 3-5 Traders Way Drive Through Special Permit On Thursday, June 21, 2007, the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing under Sections 7-22 and 7-18 of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, Drive Through Facilities and Site Plan Review, at the request of Danversbank, for the property located at 3-5 Traders • Way. The Public Hearing was continued on July 12, 2007. The proposed plan shows that Danversbank will locate a branch bank with a drive through facility in a portion of a building in the Traders Way development previously occupied by a video store. The drive thru facility will contain one (1) service land and a bypass lane. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board held on July 12, 2007, the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven (7) in favor (Charles Puleo, Christine Sullivan, Gene Collins, John Moustakis, Pam Lombardini, Tim Kavanaught, Nadine Hanscom), and none opposed to approve the Drive Through Special Permit & Site Plan, subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform to the plans entitled, "Proposed Drive-Thru Plan" Sheet C-1 prepared by Engineering Alliance, Inc., 194 Central Street, Saugus, MA dated May 31, 2007 and elevations entitled "Danversbank Highland Ave Salem, MA" sheets A.2.0 prepared by RoyalDesign, 208 Market Street, Portsmouth, NH ("the site plans"). Revised Plans reflecting all conditions and incorporating by reference this decision must be submitted to and approved by the City Planner for consistency with this decision prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2. Amendments Any amendments to the site plan shall be brought to the Planning Board for review and • approval. Any waiver of conditions contained within shall require the approval of the Planning Board. 3. Dumpster 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 o TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALEM.COM The dumpster enclosure must be replaced in-kind and deemed satisfactory by the City • Planner prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Specifications for in-kind replacement are provided in the drawing, which accompanied the original January 20, 1994– Site Plan Review Special Permit Decision for 3-5 Traders Way. The property owner is responsible for the maintenance. 4. Landscaping Landscaping must match the original landscaping plan which accompanied the original January 20, 1994- Site Plan Review Special Permit Decision for 3-5 Traders Way, and must be deemed satisfactory by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The property owner is responsible for the maintenance. 5. Construction Practices All construction shall be carried out in accordance,with the following conditions: a. The operation of tools or equipment used in construction or demolition work shall occur in accordance with Salem Ordinance Section 22-2 (5): Construction and Blastingand between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM on weekdays and — y Saturdays. No work shall take place on Sundays or holidays. The Planning Board will agree to changes in the starting time, at the request of the applicant and if approved by a formal vote of the City Council, as per the ordinance. b. Any blasting, rock crushing,jack hammering, hydraulic blasting, or pile driving • shall occur in accordance with Salem Ordinance Section 22-2 (5): Construction and Blasting and be limited to Monday-Friday between the hours of 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM. There shall be no blasting, rock crushing,jack hammering, hydraulic blasting, or pile driving on Saturdays, Sundays, or holidays. c. Blasting shall be undertaken in accordance with all local and state regulations. d. All reasonable action shall be taken to minimize the negative effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided by the applicant to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of construction of the project. e. All construction vehicles and equipment shall be cleaned prior to leaving the site so that they do not leave dirt and/or debris on surrounding roadways as they exit the site. f. All construction shall be performed in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Planning Board, and in accordance with any and all rules, regulations and ordinances of the City of Salem. g. All construction vehicles and equipment left overnight at the site must be located completely on the site. 2 h. All staging of materials and equipment shall be on-site. i. No Street shall be closed without prior approval of the Department of Planning and Community Development, unless deemed an emergency by the Salem Police Department. j. A Construction Management Plan and Construction Schedule shall be submitted by the Applicant prior to the issuance of a building permit. Included in this plan, but not limited to, shall be information regarding how the construction equipment will be stored, a description of the construction staging area and its location in relation to the site, and where the construction employees will park their vehicles. The plan and schedule shall be submitted and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. All storage of materials and equipment will be on site. k. All sidewalks, roadways, utilities, landscaping, etc. damaged during construction shall be replaced or repaired to their pre-construction condition, or better. 6. Clerk of the Works A Clerk of the Works shall be provided by the City, at the expense of the Applicant, its successors or assigns, as is deemed necessary by the City Planner. • 7. Fire Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department prior to the issuance of any building permits. 8. Building Inspector All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Building Inspector. 9. Board of Health The applicant shall comply with all rules and regulations of the Board of Health and shall comply with all conditions of the Board of Health decision. 10. Utilities If applicable, utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. All on site electrical utilities shall be located underground. 11. Department of Public Services The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Department of Public Services 12. Signage Proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and the Sign Review Committee. • 13. HVAC 3 If an HVAC unit is located on the roof or site, it shall be visually screened. The method for screening the unit shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval prior to installation. 14. As-built Plans As-built Plans, stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development and Department of Public Services prior to the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. The As-Built plans shall be submitted to the City Engineer in electronic file format suitable for the City's use and approved by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. A completed tie card, a blank copy (available at the Engineering Department) and a certification signed and stamped by the design engineer, stating that the work was completed in substantial compliance with the design drawing must be submitted to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of Certificate(s) of Occupancy; as well as, any subsequent requirements by the City Engineer. 15. Violations Violations of any condition contained herein shall result in revocation of this permit by the Planning Board, unless the violation of such condition is waived by a majority vote of the • Planning Board. I hereby certify that a copy of this decision and plans has been filed with the City Clerk and copies are on file with the Planning Board. The Special Permit shall not take effect until a copy of this decision bearing the certification of the City Clerk that twenty(20)days have elapsed and no appeal has been filed or that if such appeal has been filed, and it has been dismissed or denied, is recorded in the Essex South Registry of Deeds and is indexed under the name of the owner of record is recorded on the owner's Certificate of Title. The owner or applicant,his successors or assigns, shall pay the fee for recording or registering. Charles Puleo Chairman • 4 n CITY OF SALEM t aI l i cy r PLANNING BOARD Z001 aU'N '21 A 01: 11 L, Notice of Rescheduled Meeting You are hereby notified that the regularly scheduled meeting of the Salem Planning Board, to be held on July 5, 2007 at 7:OOPM, has been rescheduled to Thursday,July 12,2007 at 6:OOPM in City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street. � t• �� W Charles M. Puleo / 7• Chairman This notice posted on 'Mcasl Bulletin Boarw City Rall S1iltorn, Mass. on jUNE �'1 -�o07 at q.'U4 k) ) in eii=rdJE#': ) "OROa Chap. So "Eft. 23A A 239 of M,G.L. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, .SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 * TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM