Loading...
2008-PLANNING BOARD CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD I A 11; 11 NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 6:30 pin at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street Charles M Pideo, Ciw�" Chairman MEETING AGENDA 1. Approval of Minutes + November 20, 2008 Meeting + November 13, 2008 Joint Hearing 2. Public Hearing - Site Plan Review- William Wharff, 17 North Street (Map 26, • Lot 492) (formerly the Elks Lodge)-Attorney Scott Grover 3. 'Withdrawal of Riverview Place, LLC petition- Attorney Scott Grover 4- Old/New Business * North Shore Transportation Management Association (TMA)presentation- Andrea Leary * Discussion of 2009 meeting dates 5. Adjournment This notice posted on 'OffI61 I I 1 .1 3ulletin Bull City Hall a(YL, A )n ct 1 N. I A 11k I I A t)7( [Ij 0 CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING .AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KlnulnRLr�°gltiSCot.t. Nhti oR 120 WvSI❑NG'1'ON S"I'RF1I♦ SALEM,MAssn(]JUSH Fr 0197q I,A'NN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICD TPJ.:975-745-9595 1 I'nS:978-740-0404 D11wc wit MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner DATE: December 8, 2008 RE: Agenda—December 18, 2008 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Draft Minutes of November 20, 2008 ➢ Draft Minutes of November 13, 2008 Joint Hearing ➢ Materials for Agenda Items • Notes on Agenda Items Public Hearing—Site Plan Review—William Wharff, 17 North Street(Map 26, Lot 492) (formerly the Elks Lodge)—Attorney Scott Grover. 17 North Street was previously before the Planning Board, which approved an application for Site Plan Review on September 4, 2008. Attorney Scott Grover has submitted a new application, however, which reflects a new design created because of financial constraints presented by the original plan. The proposed building has been scaled down from its original size— it has six units instead of the originally approved seven, eliminates the elevator, and has units ranging in size from 1,200 to 1,800 square feet, instead of the originally proposed 1,000 to 1,300 square feet. The total square footage of the structure is now 8,750, rather than the originally approved 12,295. Six parking spaces (for six units) are now proposed, rather than the original eight spaces (for seven units). A copy of the September 4, 2008 decision letter is enclosed. Plans were circulated to the Building Inspector, City Engineer, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, and Fire Prevention. I am awaiting comments from the City Engineer, Board of Health, and Fire Prevention; all others concur with the proposal. The Zoning Board of Appeals and Historic Commission will both review revised petitions for this project on Wednesday, December 17, 2008. • J , ` CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND • "" COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Krnutna.r,Y DnlsCoi.i, MAYOR 120WAsn1NGION Sra1-:1=:'r Sn1.r.ni,�4nssna lust:rrs 01970 LYNN CIoomN DUNCAN,AICD 111t 978-745-9595 1 FAX:978-740-0404 DI1173c'I o1z North Shore TMA presentation Andrea Leary of Northeast Transit Planning and Management will be attending the meeting to discuss the North Shore Transportation Management Association's activities. The City of Salem is a founding member of the TMA and Andrea's firm has been hired to implement the program. The North Shore TMA works to reduce traffic congestion and vehicle emissions through carpool arrangements within their member organizations; membership could potentially be a condition imposed by the Planning Board for certain projects, particularly relating to traffic and density and increases. • • ZoN CITY OF SALEM r DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT K IMmI:Rl jiaDIUScOIa. NL\ron 120%V2VS[UNGION SIRE r-,I ♦ SA1i:M,NL\ssAQ II NI;rls 01970 LvN,N'G(x)rn u D I:KGU,A101 "Ru,:978-745-9595 ♦FAs:978-740-0404 DiRFOOK MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner JX-, DATE: December 8, 2008 RE: TMA Information for December 18, 2008 Please find enclosed in this supplement to your December 18 packet the information from Andrea Leary of Northeast Transit Planning& Management. She will be giving a presentation about Salem's Transportation Management Association on Thursday. • • V:4 ���GOM13017gq��� -A� City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board � oa Date Name Mailing Address Phone # E-mail • Page of CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1pII4 Jul -1, Site Plan Review ctfY cLERrt, Decision January 6,2009 Mr. William Wharff One Carol Way Salem,Massachusetts 01970 RE: 17 North Street(Map 26,Lot 492) (The Former Elks Lodge) On Thursday,December 18,2008,the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing regarding the application of William Wharff under Site Plan Review for the property located at 17 North Street. The project will include the construction of a third and fourth story and the • conversion of the current assembly hall to six residential condominiums. The Public Hearing was closed on December 18, 2008 and the Board voted at this meeting by a vote of eight (8) in favor (Puleo,Kavanaugh,Ready,Hanscom,Moustakis, Collins,Lombardini,and Sullivan) and none opposed,to approve the application as complying with the requirements of Site Plan Review subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform with the site plan entitled"Site Development Permit Plan 17 North Street, Salem,Massachusetts," prepared by Eastern Land Survey, dated July 28, 2008 and revised December 1, 2008, as well as the elevations entitled"North Street Condominium, North Street, Salem,Massachusetts", prepared by Pitman &Wardley Architects LLC, dated November 25, 2008. 2. Amendments Any amendments to the site plan, excluding minor changes required by the Salem Historical Commission,shall be reviewed bythe CityPlanner and if deemed substantial by the City Planner,shall be brought to the Planning Board for a vote. Any waiver of conditions contained within shall require the approval of the Planning Board. 3. Landscaping P g a. Any proposed landscaping shall be done in accordance with the approved set of plans. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 s WWW.SALEM.COM • b. After such landscaping is completed,the developer will add further landscaping if such is requested by the City Planner. 4. HVAC 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. The approved method for screening shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. Parking Six (6) parking spaces are to be provided on site as shown on the approved plans. This number is allowed bythe Board of Appeals variance decision dated January 6, 2009. 6. Lighting a. No light shall cast a glare onto adjacent parcels or adjacent rights of way. b. A final lighting plan shall be submitted to the CityPlanner and the CityElectrician for illuminance review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. c. After installation,lighting shall be reviewed by the City Planner and the City Electrician prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The developer shall modify the lighting if such is requested by the City Planner. • 7. Construction Practices All construction shall be carred 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 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. 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 to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of construction of the project. The notice shall state that: "A copy of the plans and construction management plan and schedule are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the office of the Salem Department of Planning and Community Development, located on the Third Floor of 120 Washington Street,978-619-5685." • 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. -2- • 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. 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. 8. Construction Traffic &Phasing a. All construction will occur on site; no construction will occur or be staged within City right of way. Any deviation from this shall be approved by the Department of Planning &Community Development prior to construction. b. Any roadways, driveways, or sidewalks damaged during construction shall be restored to their original condition by the applicant. c. The applicant shall clean construction vehicles before they exit the construction site, and clean and sweep all streets affected by their construction truck traffic as necessary. 9. Clerk of the Works A Clerk of the Works shall be provided by the Cry, at the applicant, his successors or • assigns' expense, as is deemed necessary by the City Planner. 10. Salem Health Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Health Department. 11. Board of Health All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Board of Health. 12. Fire Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department. 13. Office of the Building Commissioner All work shall comply with the requirements of the office of the Salem Building Commissioner. 14. Office of the City Engineer The applicant,his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the Ci ty Engineer. 15. Historic Commission All construction shall be done as per the plans and dimensions submitted to and approved by the Building Commissioner,subject to any minor changes required by the Salem Historical Commission. • 16. Utilities -3- • Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, an engineered plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer that confines the connectivity of utilities leaving the properly to those in the street. The condition and capacity of the utilities in the street shall be confirmed by cleaning and internal video inspection to identify any structural defects that may hinder carrying capacity. The City Engineer shall set the limits of the investigations; defects shall be the responsibility of the applicant to repair. 17. Maintenance a. Refuse removal, ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the applicant, successors, and assigns. b. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off site. c. Maintenance of any landscaping shall be the responsibility of the applicant,his successors or assigns. The applicant,his successors or assigns, shall guarantee all trees and shrubs for a two-year period. d. The owner and/or condominium association shall be responsible for trash pickup. 18. As-Built Plans As-built plans, stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development and City Engineer prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy both in hard copy and in electronic file format suitable for the City's use and approved bythe CityEngineer • 19. 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 majorityvote 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 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 fled, 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. .IYK Charles M Puleo, Chair Cc: Clieryl LaPointe City Clerk • -4- CITY OF SALEM r PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decision At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 6:30p.m. in Room 313 at CityHall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem Massachusetts,the Planning Board voted upon the following item: Applicant: Mr. William Wharff Request: Site Plan Review Location: 17 North Street(Map 26, Lot 492) - Former Elks Lodge Description: The proposed project includes the construction of a third and fourth story and the conversion of the former Elks Lodge Assembly Hall into six (6) residential condominiums. Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk January 6, 2009 This nonce is 16ng sem in apliarxe wth the Massadnuetts Genal L ays, Chapter 40A, Sation 9 and dors not require action by the r 4wit Appeals, if an y shall be mxde pursuam to Chapter 40A, Sation 17, and shall be filal within 20 dais from the date ubidr the docision zeas filed Keith the City Cl k. i o CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1009 CK -2 P 1. 49 CITY C L F R i, ,;LEN,3#,4S;. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board Meeting scheduled to be held on Thursday, December 4, 2008 at 6:30pm in City Hall Annex, room 313, 120 Washington Street has been cancelled because of the lack of agenda items (the application for Riverview Place has been withdrawn; the Planning Board expects it to be refiled for a hearing in January). The next regularly scheduled meeting will be on Thursday, December 18, 2008 (Riverview Place will not be heard on this date). f, Charles Puleo Chairman T hfs nodes paseted an "Ofi1r=a1 1•ul n Board" City Ha3120498 ua' Ia'...I I �� w 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 regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, December 4, 2008 at 6:30 pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street Charles M. Puleo, Chairman MEETING AGENDA 1. Approval of Minutes ♦ November 20, 2008 Meeting ♦ November 13, 2008 Joint Hearing 2. Continued Public Hearing—Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District • Special Permit, &North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit— Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street(Map 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 0097) (former Salem Suede Property)—Attorney Sc6,ft Grover ZZ 3. Old/New BusinessT • Discussion of 2009 meeting dates r:. s .. 4. Adjournment 4 0 'Chis notice Posted on "aOfticiat ui9 til 13®ardo City kn„!3 � z, Gn wi,IZ 7,0,f Pm Xn • 120 t9 \sxiNaroN SrRi:.F�, SALEM, MASS CHUSETIS 01970 ['110NE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD • NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will(told its regularly schechded meeting on Thursday, December 4, 2008 at 6:30 pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street Charles M. Puleo, Chairman MEETING AGENDA 1. Approval of Minutes November 20, 2008 Meeting ♦ November 13, 2008 Joint Hearing 2. Continued Public Hearing— Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, & North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit— • Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street(Map 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 0097) (former Salem Suede Property) — Attorney Sc6,ft Grover m 3. Old/New Business Discussion of 2009 meeting dates = N Cr 4. Adjournment o co This 110ticn post ld 01, "„foff!c"�” Riali�f6n ®ard" 120 IIJi:i, J:AfI �It A{.vtitii IISIIIS0S-10 PIU,VI. !I?A.b l`),`b1 1:; �) t.7$U.OaUI \A"VIA 1:1Lt'0AI CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Zana NOV 12 P 2. 01 FILF 4 NOTICE OF MEETING CITY CUL-RK, SALEH. flIASS You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,November 20, 2008 at 6:30 pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street Ch" #. T Charles M. Puleo, Chairman MEETING AGENDA L Approval of Minutes ♦ November 6, 2008 Meeting 2. Public Hearing—Request for Waiver of Frontage—2 Prospect Avenue(Map 16, Lot • 0121) Angelo Meimeteas represented by Attorney William F. Quinn i 3. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval— 2 Prospect Avenue(Map 16, Lot 0121) Angelo Meimeteas represented by Attorney William F. Quinn 4. Continued Public Hearing—Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, & North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit— Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street(Map 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 0097) (former Salem Suede Property)—Attorney Scott Grover 5. Old/New Business ♦ Recommendation to City Council on proposed Zoning Amendment to allow Wind Energy Facilities 6. Adjournment This notice post�O on ,officiq ry�4,11/ /tin Board"Board"1} city i'IM li f� 120 WASHINGTON STREET, .SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 4 WWW.SALEM.COM City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board �( a,�n na o arch Date Name Mailing Address Phone # Email �1tgw, ,lot; Pr ?s Fieri S-1 97Y 7yy -691,6 `Pv� v �oG�I,�/ �1�1 s7Pvzr St 77-7wy� i Page of 12/03/U8 14:Ua IAA 876741J415 14Gl KCAL C51A1G y�rvva „ o ., T1NTI, QUINN, GROVER & FREY, P.C. 27 CONGRESS STREET,SUITE 414 SALEM.MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • WILLIAM J.TIMI TF1(iPtIONE WILLIAM a ARnTFF(1965-095) dnd@rinnlaw.com Wn.I.IAM F.QUINN (97R)745-8065 - (978)7442948 MARCIA MUT-FORD CINI Will!&n Quinn@wLcom OF COUNSEL SCOTT M.GROVER TEIECOPIER JOHN D.U04AN amR.ove'®linolawsum (978)745-3369 OF COUNSEL www,rinrilaw.com MARC F.FREY mpfrcy@dndlew,rom MAILCY D.HAUKR �? mhaube4dwilaw.cam JAMES G.GUERT Jgllben@dndlflw,eom r m December 3.2008 VIA FACSIMILE `s Mr. Charles Puleo, Chairman LA' Saletn Planning Board 120 Washington Street Salem MA 01970 RE: Riverview Place Dear Mr. Puleo: • 1 am writing to request the perrnission of the Planning Board to withdraw the Applications of Riverview Place LLC for a Special Permit, Site Plan Riverview Special Permit and Flood Plain Special Permit for the property located at Mason and Flint Streets. Given the fact that only six (6)members of the Board remain eligible to vote, l believe the prudent course of action is to withdraw the Application and immediately re- file, so that the full Board is available to consider the matter. It is my intention to file complete Applications within the next few weeks and to appear before the Board at the meeting scheduled for January 15,2008. I look forward to working together to bring the permitting for this exciting project to a positive conclusion. Very t ly yours co . G ver n � �� DEC 0 3 2008 DEPT. OF PLANNING 3 COh4!.4ukuy e[VEL 0Pkr4:c7i 12/UJ/Ud 14:UN kAA VTO741441J 1Wk KLAL CJ1AIL wiuul T1NTI , QUINN , GROVER & FREY , P . C . • FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET O: FROM: Danielle Mclinighr Scon M.Grover COMPANY. DA— rt;-Salem Planning Depal menr 12/3/2008 FAN NUMUR: TOTALNO.OF PA(:P.S INCLUDING COVUR: 978-740-0404 2 PIIONI(NuAa115R1 TM.RPNONE NGMBLIL 978-745-8065 R E: TCLar Lx Numira: Riverview Place 978-741-3415 ❑uRGP.NT ❑FOR RF.VTCW ❑ PLEASF.COMMENT ❑ PLF.ASC REPLY ❑ FT.CASL•'RECYCLE. N[Y7 F,$/C-Udlll I±NTS: ' Danielk Attached is du letter reque:dagpermission to withdraw. Scott • This relecopy is arromey-client privileged and conraine confidential uifulmadon intended only for die penou(s) named above. Any other disuibudon,enpying or disclosure is stricdy prohibited. If you have received dus telccopy is error,Pleasc notify us'aatnedistcly by telephone,and rcnlm the original n'aasmissinn to us by mail without making a copy. RECEDE® DEC 0 3 2008 DEPT.OF PLANNING& COPAL ili11TY OEVELOPIKK 27 CUNCRESS STIUI.1;1' SUITR 414 . SALEM, MA 111970-3705 TELP.Pn ONE: 078-715.11na5 TL•LEFA\: 978741-3415 CITY OF SALEM ' PLANNING BOARD 1000 DEC - FILE E t CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. December 2, 2008 Mr. Angelo Meimeteas 30 Cloverdale Avenue Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Meimeteas: The Salem Planning Board voted on November 20, 2008 to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required"on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Mr. Angelo Meimeteas, 30 Cloverdale Avenue, Salem, MA 01970 2. Location: 2 Prospect Avenue, Assessors Map 16, Lot 0121 3. Project Description:J t esc tption: 2 Prospect Avenue consists of 22,944 square feet. It is subdivided into Lot 1, consisting of 13,662 square feet, and Lot 2, consisting of 9,282 square feet, as shown on the plan entitled, • "Plan of Land, Salem, Massachusetts,Prepared for: Angelo C. Meimeteas,"by Parsons and Faia, Inc., dated October 14, 2008. The Planning Board voted to grant a Waiver of Frontage for 2 Prospect Avenue on November 20, 2008 to allow Lot 2 to have 50 feet of frontage on Butler Street. Lot 1 has frontage on Prospect Avenue. Lot 2 will be assigned a Butler Street address. Sincerely, Charles M. 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 n CITY Ct-F.. December 2, 2008 Mr. Angelo Meimeteas 30 Cloverdale Avenue Salem, MA 01970 Waiver From Frontage—Decision Dear Mr. Meimeteas: A Public Hearing on the petition for a Waiver of Frontage for 2 Prospect Avenue, Salem, MA was held on November 20, 2008. The following Planning Board members were present: Chuck Puleo, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Nadine Hanscom, and John Moustakis. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and notice of the hearing was properly published in the Salem News. Angelo Meimeteas, the petitioner, is requesting a Waiver of Frontage from frontage requirements from the Subdivision Regulations and under MGL Chapter 41,Section 81R,to allow the propertylocated at 2 Prospect Avenue to be subdivided into two lots. This section states that "APlanning Board mayin any • particular case,where such action is in the public interest and not inconsistent with the intent and purpose of the subdivision control law,waive strict compliance with its rules and regulations,and with frontage or access requirements specified in the law... ." The Planning Board voted by a_vote of seven(Puleo,Collins,Lombardini,Kavanaugh,Ready,Hanscom, and Moustakis) in favor,none opposed,to grant the waiver from frontage requirements for the property located at 2 Prospect Avenue, as shown on the plans titled,"Plan of Land,Salem,Massachusetts,Prepared For: Angelo C Meimeteas," by Parsons and Faia,Inc.,dated October 14,2008. 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 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. Sincerely, y. Charles Puleo Chau-man CC: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 1 120 WASHINGTON STREET, .SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 4 WWW.SALEM.COM yft CITY OF SALEM �4 y�f Or PLANNING BOARD -NuNotice of Decisions At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday,November 20, 2008 at 6:30p.m. in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem Massachusetts,the Planning Board voted upon the following item: Applicant: Mr. Angelo Meirneteas Request: Waiver of Frontage Location: 2 Prospect Avenue (Map 16, Lot 0121) Description: A Waiver of Frontage from the Subdivision Regulations and under MGL Chapter 41, Section 81E,to allow the property to be divided into two lots,where one of the lots lacks the requisite lo' width in the Residential Two Family Zone. Decision: Approved— Filed with City Clerk December 2,2008 This notice is being seat in coiT lance with the Massadmetts Gemral Lazes, Chapter 40A, Semm 9 and dar not • n quire action by the navial Appeals, if an.� shall be mrde pursuant to Ckupter 40A, Sazm 17,and shall le filed within 20 dais from the date uhuh the deision zeas filed with the City Clerk. • I� I Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting • November 20, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 20, 2008, at 6:40 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, John Moustakis, Pam Lombardini, Nadine Hanscom, Gene Collins, Tim Kavanaugh, Christine Sullivan (arrived 6:55), Tim Ready. Also present were: Danielle McKnight, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Those absent: Dave Weiner. Approval of Minutes The minutes of the November 6th meeting were reviewed. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to accept the minutes, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage- 2 Prospect Avenue (Map 16, Lot 0121) Angelo Meimeteas represented by Attorney William F. Quinn Attorney William Quinn said the Board of Appeals has approved the division of land frontage on • Butler St (behind the Diary Witch) & Prospect St., which is considered legal frontage. Mr. Meimeteas owns the lot from Boston to Butler St. It's an oddly shaped lot and in May they were at the Board of Appeals where they received a variance to establish a separate building lot to build a single-family house. Because the lot does not meet the Planning Board's frontage requirements, they have come for a waiver. The lot has 50 feet of frontage, and about 9,000 sq ft on the land division plan provided with the Form A application. This would be a single family home set back at least 25 ft. There is access on an approved way, Butler Street, where the driveway will be. A two-family home is next to this property and there are no easements or other connections between the two lots. Attorney Quinn said this is a clear division. Meeting Opened for Public Comments Mario Costa of 26 Butler St. and Ed Young of 30 Butler St. took a closer look at the plans. Chuck Puleo asked if the way shown on the plan will remain a private way and Attorney Quinn confirmed that it will. Chuck Puleo asked Attorney Quinn to clarify if Prospect Ave. was a "private way" or a right-of-way for use by all the abutting lots; Attorney Quinn said it is one of those private ways that is considered frontage by the City of Salem because it's paved and it's adequate access — it's an existing private way. He said the abutters probably have rights to the middle of it. It's used as a walkway, but could be used for driving purposes to get between the properties. The current address on the petition is 2 Prospect Ave, but the City would assign it a Butler St. address. is There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to close the public hearing, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (7-0). 1 There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene • Collins to approve the waiver of frontage, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved(7-0). Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 2 Prospect Avenue (Map 16, Lot 0121) Angelo Meimeteas represented by Attorney William F Quinn Attorney Quinn stated that the plan presented for the Form A application was the same as that shown for the Waiver of Frontage just granted. Chuck Puleo asked Attorney Quinn to explain that the conditions of the variance for the above application are tied to the deed for this property —the variance is recorded and has a specific condition about not blocking the kitchen window of the abutter at 30 Butler St. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to approve the Form A Application believed not to require approval, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0) Old/New Business • Recommendation to City Council on proposed Zoning Amendment to allow Wind Energy Facilities Danielle McKnight went over some of the issues that arose from the joint public hearing with the City Council last week: 1) Some wondered if it was an error that it was zoned R3 —this was not an error; it was done to allow sites like the Fairweather to possibly be considered for something like this. 2) How would we define nuisance? This can include noise, odor and visual nuisances, which can be discretionary to the Planning Board. 3) Use of the word "preferred" in reference to monopoles doesn't mean technologies other than monopoles are not considered, it isn't limiting. 4) The question had been asked whether Marblehead had an wind facility siting ordinance - they do not and would like to see Salem's ordinance when it's complete. Chuck Puleo asked if the Planning Board's next step was now to endorse the ordinance as it was sent to City Council, if no language changes were proposed; Danielle McKnight confirmed that it was. Nadine Hanscom reminded all that Councillor O'Keefe suggested an amendment to the ordinance to include fire safety equipment and wondered if it will be incorporated. Gene Collins said that the Councillor made a suggestion that Board members haven't discussed and noted this language had not yet come back before the Board. Danielle McKnight thinks it would be up to City Council to add and approve that suggested amendment. Chuck Puleo feels they would likely incorporate at least some of the suggested amendment—that this was probably the prudent • thing to do. 2 There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to recommend to the City Council to accept the proposed Zoning Ordinance relative • to special permit uses and regulations for land-based wind energy facilities, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (8-0). Continued Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, &North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 00971 former Salem Suede Property—Attorney Scott Grover John Moustakis and Nadine Hanscom are not eligible to vote on this item; as the recorder didn't work at the last meeting, they are unable to listen to that meeting for information purposes. Chuck Puleo clarified that there are now six members eligible to vote, and all six votes are needed. Attorney Scott Grover, representing Riverview Place LLC, introduced Dave Walsh, Dave Zion, Chris Huntress, Landscape Architect, Steve Livermore and Jim McDowell, Site Engineer from Eastern Land Survey. Attorney Grover noted that since the last meeting, they had been before the Design Review Board. The peer review consultants are expected to be at the first Planning Board meeting in December. The traffic study has begun; the civil engineering peer review has also begun. Danielle will check next week on the status of the studies. Discussion on traffic issues will be covered at the next December meeting. Chuck Puleo said traffic would one of the strongest points the Board would be focusing on, and there were suggestions for particular points • the traffic peer review should cover, such as Goodhue St. Gene Collins mentioned that they already had a traffic study submitted and presented at the first meeting. Scott Grover responded that new issues were being looked at, such as the entrance and exit off of Flint St. The bigger picture on traffic has been presented in terms of the number of trips, but the peer review is looking at new specifics. The Board will also be refreshed on previous information given by Beta. Tonight will be discussion on the site plan, including drainage, landscaping and utilities. Danielle McKnight received the watershed plan and distributes. Councillor Prevey had suggested moving entrances that will be addressed at the next meeting as well. Chris Huntress, Landscape Architect from Huntress & Associates said they presented to the Design Review Board (DRB) last night and the DRB had good comments. From Mason St. down to the river, there is a 12 ft. wide walkway with a few steps. They are introducing some crosswalks and plantings that would strengthen the street for pedestrians. He discussed some of the trees and plantings to be used. There will be two styles of lighting: one using pedestrian scale ornamental fixture, an identical fixture to what's being used on the canal corridor already; and another using downcast shoebox fixtures with ornamental light pole and using taller fixtures with a concealed source. Chuck Puleo, who was at the DRB meeting, said that someone mentioned that if the easement for • the extension of Commercial St. becomes a reality, how would we address the fact that this would take out the majority of the green space along the canal? Chris said they haven't fully examined the issue, but said that in considering the potential for the Commercial St. extension, 3 they would look to tie the main road in one exit up Flint St.; although the road itself would take up open space, it might also present an opportunity to increase buffering and landscaping on • Flint St. if they can reorganize parking and circulation. They would be presenting plans that will not inhibit the future construction of Commercial St. and will include buffering and landscaping. Chuck Puleo asked about the proposed 6 ft walkway. Jim McDowell said they were asked early on to incorporate a walkway and that it should be close to the river. They will have more information to present this at next meeting. There will be a pedestrian connection from the walkway to the sidewalk. Chuck Puleo suggested getting as much built into the plans for the walkway as they can; if the road does come through the area, we want to be sure not to be left with just a swatch of pavement with no amenities left. Attorney Grover said the plan is to come up with alternative schemes. Chris Huntress mentioned that the DRB suggested that the walkway could perhaps become a sidewalk in the future, and also that they should take a harder look at programming the open space and taking advantage of the views. Christine Sullivan said if the road were to go in, there should be a condition that landscaping must be reviewed by the Planning Board. She mentioned that when the Jefferson apartments went in, the landscaping/plants were tiny in comparison to the building, and she would like these to be good size in relation to the building. Chris said the by-laws state they have to be 3 %z to 4" caliper trees. The building is 3-5 stories in height. Also, it's required to have 1 tree for every three spaces. Chris Huntress said they will be providing more than the bylaw requires for planting, and that the buffering trees are significant in size. Chuck Puleo mentioned that there was also a fence proposed along the back on Flint St. on the • previous plan and wanted to know if this was still part of the landscape plan. Chris Huntress said they are working on proposing a retaining wall between the driveway and landscape area, and it is not very high. Tim Ready asked roughly how high the trees would grow. Chris Huntress approximated 30 ft up to 60 ft high and said bigger plants have a higher failure rate, so they need a balance. Jim McDowell of Eastern Land Survey, talked about the utilities. They are proposing two water connections: one at the existing 8 inch on Flint St and tie in to the existing 12 inch at Mason. They will be building a new 8-inch through the property. They are proposing 2 fire hydrants. Each building will have potable water and sprinkler connections, all service connections for sewer and water will be off of new facilities they are building on the site, other than their water main connection. The sanitary sewer will be an 8-inch sewer with 6-inch connection and will be a gravity system with no pumps on site. Concerning storm drainage - the 2008 DEP regulations stated when you have site subject to coastal storm flows tidal waters, you don't have to have storm water detention rate or volume. They do have a series of manholes/catch basins on site which will flow to a common point that he showed on the plan, at which point they will go into the stormceptor. Roof drain will be separate; the conservation commission asked to have it separate in case of a spill from mechanical equipment on the roof. Rain gardens will be installed to handle the roof drainage (uncontaminated water only). McDowell explained how rain gardens function and how they are constructed. There are some 21E site conditions, which they won't know until later. They are looking at the • possibility of putting in rain gardens to handle roof drainage. A discussion of how rain gardens, how they function, and how they are constructed ensued. Chuck Puleo asked about what would happen to the drainage system in an extreme high tide event, and McDowell explained that they 4 are bringing the outlet in at the high tide level, and there will be a tide flex gate on the end of the outfall. The stormceptor has a high-capacity tank. • McDowell explained that the telephone, electric and transformers will all be underground. Chuck Puleo wondered if they have received comments from the City engineers as well as the age of the water mains on Flint and Mason Streets. Jim McDowell said they have not received comments from the city engineer yet since the plans just came in last week. He spoke with the Fire Department regarding the water mains and they are not aware of problems with them, as far as the age of the water mains. Christine Sullivan asked about snow removal and Jim McDowell said it would have to be removed from the site by trucking, since snow storage areas on the site are limited. They will show these areas on the drawings and will be in compliance. Chuck Puleo inquired about whether they were recommending restrictions on what was used for ice melt. McDowell said that sometimes sand is preferable to ice melt in a tidal area and that the retention basins and stormceptor's maintenance plans include sand removal. Christine Sullivan wondered if the water mains, since they are older, could handle the extra water? Jim McDowell offered to send a letter with that question to the City Engineer and cc the DPW, and will bring the answer back to the Board. Meeting Opened for Public Comments • Meg Twohey, 122 Federal Street, thought that the traffic engineer would be looking at the traffic as it is today compared to the traffic report the Board saw earlier, since there has been a substantial change to that area due to changes on North St., Mason and Flint. Scott said BETA is doing the traffic study and it would be appropriate for the Board to ask if the new lights on North St. have had any impact on their report. Chuck Puleo said the point had come up at the last meeting, and so he had assumed BETA would be looking at this, and we should certainly expect the question to be asked when BETA comes before the Board again. Scott Grover said that it probably made sense for the Planning Department to ask BETA to include this in the scope of their report. Gene Collins said the project would have an impact all over the city, but that it was not located on North St. or Goodhue St. Chuck Puleo said that the project would impact both of those streets. Christine Sullivan suggested that the Planning Board urgently asks that BETA presents this information to them. Chuck Puleo said the we could do that, and Danielle McKnight said she would communicate that to BETA. David Gogin, retired Deputy Fire Chief, asked about the two story parking garage and suggested the plans be submitted to the Fire Department. Martin Imm, 174 Federal St., asked where the trash collection is going to be. Jim McDowell explained that there would be two closed dumpsters angled next to building one. Mr. Imm also pointed out that the designated land for the extension of Commercial St. bumps against a parking lot that offers parking spaces for the park, which is owned by the state, and does this present a problem? He wondered if Commercial St. gets pushed through, what would happen to this land? • He notes that the creation of the parking lot for the park was done as mitigation for other activities at the other end of the park. Dave Walsh said that offering the easement is an accommodation to the City, and that the City was under no obligation to take it, but in view of 5 the requirements for the number of spaces needed, we feel the parking is probably in excess of what is needed. Pam Lombardini reiterated that they're providing an easement and that the issue of what will happen to that parking lot lies between the City and Commonwealth and is not under the control of the developer. Mr. Imm said if they're accommodating the Master Plan, they should offer public parking as it is now by the state owned land (there are 7 spaces). Scott Grover mentioned that a condition of the variance is to provide 12 or 13 spaces or so for public parking on the Riverview Place property. Chuck Puleo pointed out that when the state does a project in the city, the Planning Board doesn't get to review it. Christine Sullivan said the Planning Board could put in a recommendation to say that should Commercial Street go through, those seven spaces shouldn't be lost. Pam Lombardini mentioned that they could recommend something for the Riverview Place site but not for the state's land. Tim Ready felt the Board was getting ahead of themselves, but recognized that the developer seems amenable to working with the Board on this problem. He feels the problem has been presented from both sides and that both sides seem to want to work to an answer, but it's not currently an issue that should be before the Board. Jane Arlander, 92 Federal St., noted that Section 110 of the Eastern Land Survey submission asks if there are any historic homes and it's marked "no", however 13 of the abutters to this project are within the McIntire District. Meg Twohey also noted that when Commercial and Bridge Streets are flooded, traffic goes up to Flint & Federal Streets and this puts more stress on the infrastructure; and any construction, such as pile driving, will affect the historic district. Some board members felt that this project wouldn't affect the historic district. Pam Lombardini acknowledged the traffic and flooding problems in the Federal Street neighborhood, but stated • that this project would not have any impact on these conditions. However, she said that she would like to see a list of the abutters in the historic district because it had not occurred to her that there would be impacts to the historic district itself, and suggested Ms. Arlander and Ms. Twohey send a copy of this list of abutters to the Planning Department. Steve Livermore added that if they do pile driving, they would do a pre-blast survey. Jane Arlander wondered if they have contacted the Historic Commission and Scott Grover said they haven't been directly contacted but representatives from the Historic Commission have attended the DRB meetings, so they know what is planned. Gene Collins questioned whether this property in question is part of the historic district. Jane Arlander thought she remembered hearing the dumpsters would be in a garage behind closed doors. Jim McDowell said both plans have always had the dumpsters out and not behind doors. Steve Livermore added that there will be further discussion about trash removal with the DRB and that the dumpster location may be moved. There being no further questions or comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to continue the Public Hearing to December 4, 2008, seconded by Pam Lombardim and approved (6-0). Adjournment • 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 Gene Collins and approved (7-0) The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. 6 Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 7 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD • Legal Notice City of Salem The City of Salem Planning Board will hold a joint public hearing pursuant to G.L. c. 40A, s. 5 with the Salem City Council on Wednesday, November 12, 2008, at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts to see if the City will vote to amend the Salem Zoning Ordinance by adding a provision allowing Wind Energy Facilities by special permit in accordance with specific requirements. The purpose of the public hearing is to provide interested parties with an opportunity to comment on the proposed amendment. The complete text of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance is on file at the office of the Department of Planning & Community Development, City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts, and is available for inspection during regular business hours. • Charles Puleo Chair C7 f7 LYJ L7 �y N N tr This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Boaw' City Hall Salem. Mass. on OCT 2 2 1008 at Ai �Y �, In acc ordamco wiih Chap. 319 , 23A A 238 of M.G.M.. • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 *TEL: 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 •WWW.SALEM.COM CITYOF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ComwmTy DEVELOPMENT Kimm:juj ),DRIS(01.1. JVLAmR 120\VA.si11NG10_NS1NFFI 4 SAII.M,M:V55j\(][L,.,1:1*1,,,0I970 LYNN G(X)Ni�Dt:NQ%\,ANT 978-745-9595 * FAX:978-740-0404 DIRECT OR December 3, 2008 Salem City Council 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 At its meeting on November 20, 2008, the Planning Board reviewed the proposed Zoning Ordinance for Land-based Wind Energy Facilities. Present at the meeting were Chuck Puleo, John Moustakis, Gene Collins, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Kavanaugh, Pam Lombardini, Tim Ready, and Christine Sullivan. The Board voted 8-0 to recommend approval of the proposed Ordinance to the City Council. The Planning Board also discussed Councillor O'Keefe's proposed amendment to the proposed • Ordinance relative to fire safety, and there was consensus that such an amendment would be prudent. Sincerely, 4.4ti )9"x- Charles Puleo Chairman CC: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 0-,' r Minutes of Joint Public Hearing with the City Council and Planning Board • November 13, 2008 A Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and Planning Board was held Wednesday, November 13, 2008 at 6:00 pm in the Council Chambers, 93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts on the Proposed Salem Zoning Ordinance Amendment Section 5-3 for Land- based Wind Energy Facilities. The meeting was posted on November 7 and advertised on October 291h and November 5`h by the City Clerk. City Council Members present: President Mike Sosnowski, Ward 2 Joan B. Lovely, Councillor at Large Steven Pinto, Councillor at Large Joseph O'Keefe, Sr., Ward 7 Arthur Sargent III, Councillor at Large Paul Prevey, Ward 6 Jerry Ryan, Ward 4 Robert McCarthy, Ward 1 Absent: Jean Pelletier, Ward 3 Thomas Furey, Councillor at Large Matthew Veno, Ward 5 Planning Board Members present: Chuck Puleo, Chairman Pam Lombardini John Moustakis Tim Kavanaugh Tim Ready Nadine Hanscom • Gene Collins Christine Sullivan City Council President Mike Sosnowski opened the meeting, read the meeting notice and noted the City Councillors who were absent. He introduced the Planning Board members as well as Tom Watkins, who is from the Mayor's office and the Renewable Energy Task Force. Tom Watkins explained that this amendment to the zoning ordinance stems from the Mayor's green efforts for the City. The Renewable Energy Task Force, whose goal is to promote alternative energy, was formed in February 2006. They have been looking for alternative power sources for the city such as solar, geothermal and wind power, as economic benefits for the City of Salem. They are proposing a wind energy facility siting ordinance to help streamline the process for applicants in a constructive way which fosters proper use of wind turbine technology and provides appropriate guidelines. They have been working with the Planning Department, which he commended; Amy Lash took the lead in getting the ordinance's language together. The ordinance includes height and noise restrictions, lays out areas of zones in which wind energy facilities are allowed by special permit, and contains guidelines for applicants. The applicant would have to go before the Planning Board for a special permit before obtaining a building permit. Councillor Sosnowski recognized Christine Sullivan, Planning Board member who arrived, and then he Opened the Meeting to Questions. • Joseph A. O'Keefe, Sr, Ward 7, explained that he needed to leave at 7 pm for a meeting at SSC. He noted in a section of the ordinance on page 3, it states that height of a commercial-scale tower be no more than 400 ft, or in a residential area no more than 150 ft., which would be the height 1 of a 15-story building. For that height, Councillor O'Keefe recommends an amendment be added • to the ordinance that says the structure should be equipped with a site-specific fire detection and fire suppression system. He presented this in memo format that was distributed. Councillor Paul Prevey asked if information regarding the height and size of the turbines had been taken from existing ordinances. Tom Watkins explained that, as far as the height of the wind turbines, for commercial, 200 ft height for facilities is pretty average given the economic viability and that a lot of recommendations came from neighboring towns and the state. Councillor Mike Sosnowski and Tom Watkins discussed that the area of height measurement for a tower is to the top of the blade/arch. They also mentioned the wind turbine on Highland Ave. Tom Watkins believes the tower is on residential property. It's a "met" (meteorological) tower that measures to see if a wind turbine would be feasible at that location. A met tower is exempt from height restrictions but would follow the regular setback requirements of the ordinance. It collects data which are then used to determine what height for a wind turbine would be feasible. Councillor Steven Pinto, noted on page 2, section 3 it states that under R3 commercial scale is allowed with special permit but that in the other zones, commercial scale is not allowed at all. Could this have been an error? Tom Watkins said there are two other sections where a commercial-scale facility is allowed by special permit. Councillor Pinto pointed out that the other two zones are not residential. Tom Watkins said it may have been an error. Councillor Pinto then asked how we determine the length of blades in comparison to the height of pole. Tom Watkins said the length of blades would be, anywhere from 30-80 ft from hub to top, and that the particular size depends on each facility. • Christine Sullivan, Planning Board, asked about the average height of a wind turbine in a residential area. Tim Watkins: They vary from house to house, city to city and state to state; we are recommending a special permit for 150 ft or greater, but each facility's height is determined after a professional organization collects wind data at the site, assesses the site's feasibility, then come back with height recommendations for what would be the most economically feasible size particular to that site. Christine Sullivan mentioned how she was in France a few years ago in a seacoast area and she saw wind turbines there. She felt they added to the charm. John Moustakis, Planning Board asked if are there any locations they're looking at. Tom Watkins mentioned 40R Highland Ave, Salem Heights, testing at SESD sight, and possibly Winter Island. Nadine Hanscom, Planning Board, wondered that since Christine Sullivan saw some wind turbines directly, what was the noise like and Christine said she didn't notice any noise. Nadine has seen studies and reports on the news statin that wind turbines are noisy — even P g Y though studies were done in advance that determined noise would be minimal, all neighbors hear is "swish, swish." She expressed concern that perhaps we would not really know what noise levels would be like until the turbines are all up and running. Neighbors near new facilities are likely to be very upset if the facilities are louder than promised. Tom Watkins explained that a lot of the new wind turbines are "noise friendly." Also, Section 6J of the ordinance requires that a noise study be done. Gloucester had the same thing. Anything over a 10 decibel limit from the closest property line wouldn't be allowed. Sosnowski inquired about what would happen if two • companies come in with proposals, one using much better, quieter technology than the other — how would the city know which was the better one? 2 Councillor Sosnowski acknowledged Adam Siegel from the Renewable Task Force who arrived. Nadine Hanscom brought up the possible scenario of people who bought their property for the ocean view who won't want to look at wind turbines, and said that we needed to be conscientious of that. Tom Watkins acknowledged she was correct that some people may object, and explained that specifications such as the color of the pole, any lighting, and other features would need to be agreed to. Additionally, abutters would be notified, and placement of wind facilities would be a public process, and residents could attend the public meetings. Even so, Nadine expressed concern that abutters objecting to the facilities would not be able to stop them from being built if all the boards and councils felt applicants had met all requirements and the proposed sites were appropriate. Chuck Puleo, Planning Board Chairman, pointed out that because this use is by special permit, each proposal is considered case by case and the decision is discretionary. A concern of the Chairman's had been the possibility that three or four facilities could be proposed within the same neighborhood, and whether there would be any mechanism for limiting the number in an area if there were too many. However, Chuck Puleo noted that if there were too many in a neighborhood and they became noisy and unsightly, future facilities could be limited because each petitioner would need a special permit; this is the advantage of allowing the Planning Board to make a discretionary call. Christine Sullivan also pointed out that those who may object to facilities near their properties "do not own the ocean,"they just own their property. Councillor McCarthy noted that a feasibility study is being done at SESD. According to the chart on page 2, SESD is zoned industrial and they're required to get a special permit on height. He noted that the only relief they would need would be for height; would this mean that none of the other requirements would need to be met? Tom Watkins said that the by-laws state that • anything on state property is exempt. They discussed setbacks and Tom Watkins said he'd refer this to the Planning Department. Councillor McCarthy also inquired about whether any particular areas of City had been identified as potential sites; he wondered who would be affected and how. Tom Watkins explained that on 6/2006 UMass did a site survey of city owned property including Winter Island, Forest River, and some areas surrounding the High School. There was no real analysis or technical analysis done yet, with setback criteria. No studies were done on residential properties. As far as how many local communities have done this, Tom Watkins mentioned Beverly, Gloucester, South of Boston and Cape Cod. McCarthy encouraged anyone who had the time to go visit the wind facility in Hull. The wind turbine at the transfer station is huge, but the one by the high school isn't as overbearing — do they know what scale size it is? Adam Siegel thinks it's about 30 or 40 ft shorter than the one at the transfer station. Tim Ready has also seen the one in Hull that sits on the waterfront. He noted that the facility is a huge piece of machinery, but that it is set far from homes way out on the waterfront. He believes it has been so efficient that Hull is interested in increasing the size of it. They realize a significant cost savings from the electricity from the facility (including savings on energy used by the schools). Tim noted the importance of wording the ordinance so as to not discourage the development of this innovative technology. While he noted that Salem is a small city with limited space, we do have an interest in inviting wind energy, particularly for the electricity savings which will become more important in coming years. He urged balance in the ordinance between accepting and discouraging the technology. • Councillor McCarthy asked the Renewable Energy Task force to talk about recent legislation on allowing transmission lines to cross property boundaries, making it easier to install wind 3 turbines. Tom Watkins responded there is legislation floating around the State House, and had perhaps already been passed, which would allow for wind turbines to have transmission lines • that brought power to other properties. In reference to page 3, section (6) b. Tim Kavanaugh asked why monopole towers are "preferred" and whether other types of support are available; would other types of structures be appropriate in a residential/commercial setting? Should the ordinance specify that in residential areas, only monopole towers are allowed? Also on page 2, paragraph 3c it states "the finding the Planning Board must make" lists "nuisance" and wondered what defines nuisance? Odor? Visual? What constitutes visual nuisance? Adam Siegel mentioned one visual nuisance known as a strobe factor, which is a bright light combined with movement of the blades. Councillor Sosnowski mentioned that there are other styles of wind turbines such as spiral ones (although he doesn't believe they are as efficient) that rotate and asked if they were considering those as well. Tom Watkins said yes, they are considering those as well. Councillor Sosnowski suggested that if the other styles are not in ordinance they should include them. He also mentioned that he went around to homes located near the met tower and most residents didn't even know about it. Chuck Puleo said there is a residential scaled wind turbine, for demo purposes, on Swampscott Road and there is also one on the roof of the Carlton school. Also, it seems as though the smaller the wind turbine, the poorer the design/construction. No one to speak in opposition. • There being no further business to come before the City Councillors and Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Councillor Pinto to close the public hearing. There being no further business to come before the City Councillors and Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Councillor Sargent to refer this matter to the Planning Board, all in favor. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the City Councillors and Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Councillor Pinto to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board 4 CITY OF SALEM �. PLANNING BOARD 2002 NT 30 P 3: 3u r.II_F i CIT` NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,November 6,2008 at 6:30 PMat City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street ay4r Charles M Puleo, / Chairman MEETING AGENDA L Approval of Minutes October 16, 2008 Meeting 2. Continued Public Hearing—Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, & North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit— • Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street(Map 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 0097) (former Salem Suede Property) — Attorney Scott Grover 3. Old/New Business 4. Adjournment This notice Poststl on City Hall c��� Bulletin se ap :s ZsFl<-S`�, tea s sre �t , 3 3 v a r. .. _ QCT 3 0 7111nn 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM DRAFT Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting • November 6, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, November 6, 2008, at 6:30pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chairman Chuck Puleo, John Moustakis, Pam Lombardini, David Weiner, Gene Collins, Tim Kavanaugh, Christine Sullivan, Tim Ready. Also present were: Frank Taormina, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Nadine Hanscom Approval of Minutes The minutes of the October 16`h meeting were reviewed. Chairman Puleo pointed out that on Page 2, second to last paragraph, it should read "...the HVAC Unit shall be screened prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter a motion was made by John Moustakis to accept the minutes as revised, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Continued Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, &North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Mai) 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 0097) former Salem Suede Property—Attorney Scott Grover Attorney Scott Grover explained that the last time they were before the Planning Board in April, the Planning Board referred this to the Design Review Board. When the DRB first saw the design of this project, they were not very enthusiastic. With recommendations and comments from the Planning Board that they incorporated into the re-design, Attorney Scott Grover feels that they are now closer to a DRB decision. Eastern Land Survey is working on the engineered plans to be submitted and Riverview Place LLC will be providing money for the Traffic Peer Review and the Engineering Peer Review. They hope the Planning Board will be ready to render a decision in December. Attorney Grover asked that Staff Planner Frank Taormina read into the record the status of quorum and each board member's eligibility to vote on the project. Frank mentioned that currently there are seven (7) members eligible to vote and quorum is six (6) members. Those members those are eligible to vote Chairman Puleo, Gene Collins, Tim Kavanaugh, Pam Lombardini, Nadine Hanscom, Christine Sullivan and Tim Ready. Frank mentioned that Dave Weiner will not be able to vote since this project began prior to his appointment to the Planning • Board. He also mentioned that both Gene Collins and Pam Lombardini have already missed a meeting and pursuant the Mullin Rule are still eligible to vote, however they cannot miss any further meeting. -1- DRAFT Steve Livermore, Architect, discussed the revised plans: It still includes 3 buildings but they • were reconfigured and the design of the buildings have changed. The largest of the three buildings includes a 196-car parking garage, this reduces the surface parking by 100 cars. The garage has 2 floors with one floor below grade. The image of the building has been modified to appear as an old renovated mill from Bridge Street, and will appear more residential from another Mason Street and Flint Street. There is a physical and visual connection from Mason St through the development to the canal. The new landscape design includes more trees and plantings along the North River Canal side, with some parking along the Flint Street side for the residents of Flint Street. Steve Livermore walked the board members through all the design changes and the new access street. Gene Collins expressed his concern with calling it a street, as it may encourage people to cut through. He remembers them offering to provide an easement through the property to connect Commercial Street to Flint Street. Attorney Scott Grover said the access road is much narrower than a street, it's an access way or driveway into the complex, with speed bumps. Steve Livermore mentioned that the DRB liked the vista and access way, the access way organizes vehicular access on site and creates an edge that the NRCC Plan calls for. Dave Weiner noticed on the plans that there is a set of stairs and asked if there will be ADA access as well. Steve Livermore said that due to a grade change it is extremely difficult to add an ADA ramp next to the stairs, instead there is a sidewalk that connects to Mason Street which does meet ADA standards. • Michael O'Brien, Manager Riverview Place LLC, mentioned that he is willing to create an easement through his property to connect Commercial Street with Flint Street, he is just not sure how long that will take, and in the mean time he would rather keep that area green as shown on the plans. Steve Livermore added how much greener this plan is compared to the last and that the trees would be planted in a manner that once the road connection is build they would remain. Steve Livermore mentioned that the Mason St. building is more residential in nature. They are still proposing commercial space but it will not be on Mason Street but rather within the complex on the first floor. There is some parking along the access drive and they have proposed about 5,000 sq ft of that first floor for commercial/retail use. Steve Livermore added that the commercial space is intended for more internal use. Gene Collins said that they had an earlier discussion regarding retail on Mason St. to encourage circulation on Mason St., not internally. Pam Lombardini likes the idea of the `internal' commercial space because Mason St. is so busy. Michael O'Brien explained that they changed from Mason St. to interior due to traffic issues on Mason St and Flint St. Michel added that he does not plan of including an attraction or commercial use that people would drive to, but rather a use like a gym, bookstore, or coffee shop, etc for people in that complex and/or residents within walking distance. Chairman Puleo asked for comparison of old design and new design with regards to height and area. Steve Livermore explained that the tallest building is 50 ft, the next one 40 ft and the last • one is slightly lower. The actual footprints increased slightly to 69,000 mainly because of the added parking garage; green space increased 18-20%. -2- DRAFT Christine Sullivan agreed with Pam Lombardini as far as building use. John Moustakis did not really like the old mill building style. Steve Livermore explained that it fits the NRCC and it • looks more residential from the Flint St. and Mason St side. The materials to be used will mimic that of the old mill and the siding will be diamond shaped asphalt shingles. Gene Collins echoed what John Moustakis said regarding not liking the "old mill" style either. Steve Livermore feels that the look from the North Street overpass will look good. Pam Lombardini however likes the idea of the old mill style. Tim Ready suggested tabling these issues until the DRB comes to the Planning Board with recommendations. Christine Sullivan disagreed with that and said that the DRB will only make recommendations and it is up to the Planning Board to agree or disagree with them and ultimately issue a decision. Christine Sullivan also stated that she, like Pam also likes the old mill style as well. Prior to opening the meeting to the public, Chairman Puleo read a letter submitted by Lorene T. Scanlon, President of Mack Park Association. The letter explained how two years ago she wanted to purchase a condominium on Mason St. but was reluctant. After some research, she was satisfied because she was told if someone were to re-develop the former Salem Suede Property it would be of a certain style, type, size, etc according the NRCC plans. She is now disappointed with the eyesore that is still there and what is now being planned for that site. John Moustakis suggested the letter be sent to Board of Appeals. Public Comment David Goggin inquired about the width of the driveway, curb cuts and fire hydrant connections. • Steve Livermore said the with of the driveway is 24 ft but doesn't know yet about the fire connections, however, the fire department has approved what they have done so far. David Goggin suggested the Fire Marshall get a set of plans. He also suggested the parking garage be open air and for them to check the grading of the area for the garage for flooding issues. Paul Prevey, 26 Tremont Street, City Councilor Ward 6, opposes the density of this project because of it's impact on the neighborhood. Flint St. and Mason St. are a failure with traffic. He thinks this re-design looks better than last design. He attended the last Design Review Board (DRB) meeting and said one of the members suggested using quality materials or it won't look like a mill building. He appreciates the comments from the Planning Board and work thus far by the members of the DRB. John Moustakis suggested making Goodhue St. a two-way street. Chairman Puleo said he asked Lynn Duncan to look into that possibility. Jane Arlander, 92 Federal Street, suggested that the study done by the City's Traffic Consulting Engineers, BETA Group, relative to the Court Project should be looked at in concert with this project because this project may have an impact those mitigation measures for the Court project. Attorney Scott Grover said that is why they are paying for the Peer Review consultant. Jane Arlander added that residents have noted that since the traffic changes on North Street were implemented, traffic on Federal Street has increased. Scott Grover suggested that discussion of traffic issues will be best to discuss at the December meeting because traffic experts will be • present at that meeting. Frank Taormina added that the traffic engineers that will be performing the peer review of this project are the same traffic engineers that the City hired for the Court Traffic Study, so there will be continuity. -3- DRAFT Mark Bellingham, 14 Oak Street (across from cement factory), commended everyone on their • work. Regarding traffic, he feels any study won't matter because those streets were built for horse drawn carriages. He also said the sewer systems are old as his water main has blown twice in the last two years. Rich Lapurches, 79 Oak Street, his biggest concern is traffic. He said that it is getting worse every day. He suggested before the Planning Board allows this project, they should deal with the traffic. Tim Ready explained to audience members that the Planning Board would try to mitigate and work with the developers and neighbors. Martin Imm, 174 Federal St., explained that he played a role in the NRCC Master Plan and ordinance and that this project does not follow the guidelines. He presented the Planning Board with a letter he drafted and highlighted some of his concerns. He wants the property to be complying with the Master Plan. One factor it ignores is the connection of Commercial St to Mason St. Chairman Puleo pointed out that the connection is shown through the abutting property connecting Tremont Street, Mason St to Commercial Street. Matin Imm claims that that may never be done, but this property could offer that connection, even though it is not a direct connection with Tremont St. John Moustakis added that Martin Imm is correct in that when they were on the NRCC working group, they didn't envision developments this large. However, the ZBA granted the density relief • and the Board is working within in that and trying its best to the best project under that framework. Chairman Puleo read a memo from Lynn Duncan, City Planner, regarding the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) Decision to grant a density variance for the project and the role of the Planning Boards moving forward. Meg Twohey, 122 Federal Street, questioned Lynn Duncan's letter to the board. She read a couple sentences from the NCRR Ordinance which allows the Planning Board to grant density bonuses and questioned why the applicant had to go before the ZBA for a variance when the Planning Board had the jurisdiction to grant a density bonus above and beyond what is allowed by-right. Betsy Burns, 20 Burnside Road, questioned the density of the project and that it is not in keeping with the NRCC Ordinance. She cautioned the board that this project once approved will transform the area forever. Humphrey Gardner, 170 Federal Street, asked the developer whether the number of one bedroom units, two bedroom units, and three bedroom units. He also asked whether they would all be rental or owner occupied or both. Christine Sullivan asked that all DRB Meeting Minutes relative to this project be sent to the • board members. Staff Planner Frank Taormina agreed to forward the DRB meeting minutes to the board. -4- DRAFT Old/New Business Danvers Bank— 3-5 Traders Way—Request to Release Escrow Account Funds Frank Taormina mentioned that he received a letter from Danvers Bank requesting the release of Escrow, as they have finished all the landscaping requirements and have complied with all the other conditions of their Decision. Frank stated that the City has already received the As-Built Plans and that he drove to the site and confirmed that everything has in fact been completed and recommended that the Board release the funds being held in escrow. Chairman Puleo asked for a motion to release the funds. A motion was made by Gene Collins, seconded by Tim Ready and approved unanimously(7-0). Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by John Moustakis to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved unanimously( 7-0) The meeting adjourned at 8:28pm. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board -5- City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet W, Board P1 avvk I?oa�tr Date H of* / 08 Name Mailing Address Phone # Email / rr��� n/ g17F-gysFV65 Em l aocV s J3V&--k377�,7`( / 6 7o-7, VZZ:aS5 E� UQ✓i eve. - N£ (.. Ae-iawdoz9 ane- 978-7yy-G9/� N Esau S4 #2 �I '}�I2dn t u ala 1'e,Qo* _5�- 9 - z�s d oNP Page of T CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD t699 OCT -9 P 3. 12 F)LE If CITY Ci EM, 51,,LE11. 11ASS, NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday, October 16,2008 at 6.30 PM at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington Street e l%• �GGItifT� Charles M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA I. Approval of Minutes September 18, 2008 Meeting 2. Continued Public Hearing—Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit—Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street(Map 33, Lot 0006)— • Daniel DiLullo,AIA&Matthew Leidner,PE 3. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval (ANR)—13 Fort Avenue(Map 41, Lots 0240& 024 1)—Attorney Peter Arvanites 4 Continued Public Hearing—Site Plan Review,Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, & North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit— Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street(Map 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 0097)(former Salem Suede Property)—Attorney Scott Grover 5. Old/New Business ♦ Request for Release of Escrow Account—370 Highland Avenue, St. Jean's Credit Union, Puleo Realty Trust ♦ Chapter 91 License Application—Salem Wharf, 10 Blaney Street, City of Salem ♦ Chapter 91 License Application—Kernwood Marina Public Boat Ramp, City of Salem ♦ CPTC Planning Workshop ♦ APA Planning Board Membership ♦ Thomas Circle—Brief Report on Outstanding Issues Thle ttoHoe owed on "Official Official 6. Adjournment cityHall Sal@m, Mass. � Bulletin Boards at 3: , z P OCT - 9 2000 23A tit 238 of In .acccrdance With Chap. 39 Sec, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' PHONE 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 - www.sALEM.com City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board i Date Name `t II Mailing Address I I Phone # Em ail �Ay' \"IIA�vYI�JwCC. CPZ �Jw� ,v� ryti`C SF�"(hc,'N. '1�'l �1FL11� �0.�\(o W�0.� nit , Ca� • • Page of { .�,....--+r-.- - � ....a. .r.. .. �.-.. ..�_.-...fes �.... .«�..�.r..�. ���.._........r.-.... l Y r' Salem Planning Board • Minutes of Meeting October 16, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, October 16, 2008, at 6:30pm in City Hall Annex, Room 312, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chairman Puleo, Tim Kavanaugh, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Ready, David Weiner, and Gene Collins. Also present were: Frank Taormina, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Christine Sullivan, Pam Lombardini and John Moustakis Approval of Minutes The minutes of the September 181h Meeting were reviewed. Page 5, paragraph under"Old Business" change `residential'to `B2 Districts". There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Tim Ready to accept the minutes, seconded by Dave Weiner and approved (5-0). • Continued Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit, &North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 0091, 0095 & 0097) (former Salem Suede Property—Attorney Scott Grover Chairman Puleo read a letter submitted by Attorney Scott Grover requesting the continuance of the public hearing and an extension of time for Planning Board to act on this application to November 6, 2008. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Tim Kavanaugh to approve the continuance and extension to November 6`h (Nadine Hanscom mentioned that she is unable to attend the November 6`h meeting, however there will still be a quorum) Seconded by Tim Ready and approved (5-0). Continued Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit- Snakebit_e_Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street (Map 33, Lot 0006 ) - Daniel DiLullo, AIA & Matthew Leidner, PE Paul Marchionda of Marchionda & Associates LP said that mylars were submitted earlier this • week. He mentioned that he received a copy of the draft decision and asked the board if they would rescind the condition regarding striping the parking spaces behind the existing building. Chairman Puleo said the Board is concerned that if they change uses to that building. He reminded everyone that they had a discussion previously about further development, and by -I- right, the ability to make changes without Board approval; he had asked Staff Planner Frank • Taormina to look into this issue. Frank Taormina said the he had a conversation with the Building Inspector and he explained that a change of tennant space use within the existing building will not trigger Site Plan Review, however, demolition of or an addition to the existing building (which is larger than 10,000 sq ft or 2,000 sq ft for portions within an Entrance Corridor) would trigger Site Plan Review. Dave Weiner asked if they could approve the proposed new building project subject to the property owner having to stripe the required parking spaces for the existing building, if they make changes on the existing building. Paul Marchionda said what they've talked about the property owner's vision to demolish the front part of the building, essentially square it off and to make some fagade changes. He said they don't want a fight with the Board, and would stripe the parking if they had to, they just feel it is a waste of money and time. Chairman Puleo suggested some repairs should be made to the lot as they noticed holes, etc at the site visit. Gene Collins agreed and thought it had already been mentioned that clean up of the lot would be done. He then suggested that if the lot is that bad, striping would be a waste of money because it wouldn't last through the winter. Instead, he suggested posts to delineate rows in the parking lot. Chairman Puleo discussed circulation in regards to whether there is access to the back. Paul Marchionda said there is access, but it wouldn't make sense for folks to go back there. Frank Taormina mentioned that he spoke with Anthony Gattineri, the property owner, and that he discussed the purpose for striping the parking spaces in the rear of the existing building to satisfy City Zoning requirements. The owner said he has stamped engineered plans that depict the required spaces and that should satisfy the City requirements. • Tim Ready is not sure the Board should ask them to stripe if it won't last (not worth it due to condition of lot) and possibly have the Board accept plans and deal with striping in the future, it sounds like they plan on making fapade changes, which means they would be back before the Board. Tim Kavanaugh would like to see potholes taken care of and maintained. He doesn't see the striping in back as a critical component. As part of the draft decision, Chairman Puleo saw language that said parking spaces alongside of building are used by the Hertz bldg. Paul Marchionda said that all responses to the Peer Review were incorporated in plans and Frank Taormina said everything was cross-referenced between the City and the Peer Engineers; the Planning Department has reviewed everything. Chairman Puleo suggested adding to #13 on the draft decision for the HVAC unit, to install screening prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. For#15, for the front loading dumpster, suggest some kind of screening fence/gate. Tim Kavanaugh reminded that at the last Planning Board meeting, they discussed fencing along the entire property line, abutting the MBTA's property which the City is negotiating to utilize to extend the Salem Bike Path through. He mentioned that he didn't see those changes made to the plans, instead the fencing would be limited to 150 linear feet and only behind the new building. He assumed when they talked about the fence that it would extend the entire length of the property line and that all the encroachment issues would also be resolved. He would object to a 150 ft fence because it only addresses part of the problem. Paul Marchionda showed on the plans where the fence would start and end. It was remarked that if any part of the fence is open, it allows people to encroach onto the MBTA's property. Gene Collins said that fencing the • entire property line may block access by the MBTA onto their own property and that this should really be coordinated with the MBTA. Frank Taormina stated that he has walked the MBTA's property several times and that there is an access gate at both ends of the property to allow access without the MBTA having to cross through the 142 Canal Street property to access its property. -2- .j Some Board members felt that they were fighting the MBTA's battle. Chairman Puleo explained • that it is in everyone's benefit to fence that area, it's a safety issue and the area back there looks terrible. Some discussion about abutting properties that are fenced off, such as DiLisio Landscaping property (off of Broadway Street) where the fence goes to the property line and then gets shaky near the MBTA area/property. Nadine Hanscom suggested the owner could put a fence with a gate (locked) to allow access. Chairman Puleo remembered the offer of clean-up the area and put up a fence at the back area and then it would be the MBTA's responsibility thereafter. He suggested the area to fence to keep areas segregated and showed it on the map. Frank Taormina mentioned to the Board members that this is an opportunity to resolve this issue, but they are not obligated to do so. He mentioned that if it is not resolved here, that the property owner will likely have to deal with it legally, with the MBTA and/or the City in the near future. He added that the MBTA is now aware of the encroachment and it is on their radar screen. Tim Ready suggested that this is an opportunity to put up a fence as Chairman Puleo suggested. No Public Comments were taken. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Dave Weiner to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Nadine Hanscom, and approved (7-0). Frank Taormina went through the Draft Decision highlighting some items: Section 18- applicant shall record at least sheet 4 of 7 of the Approved Site Plans at the Registry of Deeds. Nadine • Hanscom suggested putting in wording so that in the future, if they do something else with the building or parking, they need to re-stripe in case they don't need to come back before the Planning Board. Frank Taormina will add "At such time that the parking area in back is resurfaced or repaved, applicant is required to stripe 80 spaces". It was also suggested to add a fence as condition 18C, "Fence shown on sheet 4 of 7 of the approved plans behind the proposed retail building shall tie into northwest corner of existing building and southwest corner of California Olive Oil building at 134 Canal St. Applicant is permitted to install access gate." There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to accept the draft decision as amended, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (5-0). Dave Weiner suggested putting in date that plans are amended. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to approve site plan review and drive thru facilities at 142 Canal St., seconded by Tim Ready, and approved (5-0). Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval (ANR) — 13 Fort Avenue (Map 41, Lots 0240 & 0241)—Attorney Peter Arvanites 1. Attorney Phil Durgin (works with Peter Arvanites) said they're trying to clear up a title • problem that expands years back. It was discovered when they were putting together a Purchase & Sales Agreement. He added that the property swap was never recorded properly. Last week, Beth Rennard, City Solicitor, went before the City Council and got a vote to convey property shown on the plan to the applicant to resolve the City's and the -5- applicant's title as such: 15 Fort Avenue (Map 41 Lot 0241) owned by the City of Salem • and shown on the Plans as Parcel B (1,181 sq. ft.) is to be conveyed by the City of Salem to Ralph C. Martin, Jr. and combined with 13 Fort Avenue (Map 41 Lot 0240) shown on the Plans as Parcel C (4,705 sq. ft.) to form a single 5,886 square foot contiguous parcel. A portion of 13 Fort Avenue (Map 41 Lot 0240) shown on the Plans as Parcel A (2,000 sq. ft.) owned by Ralph C. Martin, Jr. is to be conveyed to the Salem Housing Authority and combined with 1 Lee Fort Terrace (Map 41 lot 0249)property. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins accept application for endorsement ANR, seconded by Nadine Hanscom, and approved (5-0). Old/New Business ♦ Chapter 91 License Application, Salem Wharf, 10 Blaney Street, City of Salem DPCD filed a Chapter 91 Application to construct a new commercial wharf at 10 Blaney Street. Frank Taormina briefly described the project and offered to make copies of the application for members of the board. Chairman Puleo and David Weiner asked for copies. ♦ Chapter 91 License Application, Kernwood Marina Public Boat Ramp, City of Salem Park and Recreation Department filed a Chapter 91 Application to reconstruct the • existing boat ramp at McCabe Park/Kernwood Marina. Frank Taormina briefly described the project and offered to make copies of the application for members of the board. Tim Ready asked for a copy. Tim Ready mentioned McCabe Park is an underutilized area, that it's a beautiful waterfront park could be used more if the City were able/willing to put some money into it and include things like public bathrooms. ♦ CPTC Planning Workshop - City of Salem can pay for workshops if any Planning Board member is interested in attending. ♦ APA Planning Board membership- APA membership, unfortunately, the City can't pay for reenrollment fees, it is $60 a year for membership. Frank Taormina briefly explained the benefits of joining. ♦ Request for Release of Escrow, 2-5 Water Street, Maritime Townhomes - Developers has a number of outstanding items, which it has addressed and completed. Fay, Spofford & Thorndike (FST) is on contract with the City for clerking the project and they have inspected the work and agreed that it has all been completed. Frank mentioned that the Developer has one remaining item, which is Final As-Built Plans. Frank recommended that the Board approve the release of escrow ($46,625) once the City obtains the final As- Built Plans. There being no further comments on this matter, Nadine Hanscom made a motion that funds are to be released after City gets the as-built plans, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (5-0). ♦ Thomas Circle, Brief Report on Outstanding Issues- Frank Taormina reviewed the file and spoke with the City Assistant Building Inspector regarding the building violations. Currently, there is $6,247.73 in escrow held by the City for installation of utilities only. • There were a number of building violations, and to date, all the building violations have been addressed. The width of roadway is still a concern and Anthony Tiro was supposed to establish an easement under and MOU but that hasn't been done. Chairman Puleo reminded all that at a previous meeting Anthony Tiro felt that even with adding the -4- additional property donated by the residents that the road still wouldn't be wide enough; • Mr. Tiro agreed to put up the guardrail. Gene Collins thought there were 4 lots in back, but Mr. Tiro only built on 3, the neighborhood wanted him to make the 4`h lot usable because it would be more valuable. Frank Taormina said that there are two remaining issues left: the width of roadway and the outstanding issues under the MOU. The MOU issues are a legal matter and the width of the roadway, if they cannot achieve the width identified in the approved decision, would require an amendment or modification. ♦ Chairman Puleo mentioned that the HVAC screening at the Beverly Co-Op Bank still isn't in. Last week they received a letter from Mr Howard. Frank Taormina said he will look into it. He stated that he wasn't certain if the SRA/DRB issued a decision yet or not. ♦ Renewable Energy Task Force- Frank Taormina mentioned that the Planning Director Lynn Duncan is trying to schedule a joint public hearing with the City Council on November 12`h at 6 pm to discuss the proposed Wind Energy Facilities Ordinance, which they reviewed with the Renewable Energy Task Force at the last meeting. ♦ Request for Release of Escrow, 370 Highland Ave, St. Jean's Credit Union, Puleo Realty Trust (Chairman Puleo recused himself from this portion of meeting). Frank Taormina explained that all the conditions of the Decision have been completed and he recommended that the board release the funds in escrow ($10,000). There being no further questions on this matter, Gene Collins made a motion to approve, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved. Adjournment • 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 Pam Lombardini and approved (6-0). The meeting adjourned at 8:1Opm Respectfully submitted P Y Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board i -5- 3 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD ZR3 OUCT 21 P 3: 18 Cl1 Y 1.1 FORM A - DECISION 13 Fort Avenue October 21, 2008 Attorney Peter J. Arvanites 199 Rosewood Drive, Suite 350 Danvers, Massachusetts 01923 Dear Attorney Arvanites: The Salem Planning Board voted on October 16, 2008 to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan: 1. Applicant: Ralph C. Martin, Jr. 20 Diane Road, Peabody, Massachusetts 01960 • 2. Location: 13 Fort Avenue, Assessors Map 41, Lots 0240, 0241, and 0249 3. Project Description: 15 Fort Avenue (Map 41 Lot 024 1) owned by the City of Salem and shown on the approved Form A Plans as Parcel B (1,181 sq. ft.) is to be conveyed by the City of Salem to Ralph C. Martin, Jr. and combined with 13 Fort Avenue(Map 41 Lot 0240) shown on the approved Form A Plans as Parcel C (4,705 sq. ft.)to form a single 5,886 square foot contiguous parcel. A portion of 13 Fort Avenue (Map 41 Lot 0240) shown on the approved Form A Plans as Parcel A(2,000 sq. ft.)owned by Ralph C. Martin, Jr. is to be conveyed to the Salem Housing Authority and combined with 1 Lee Fort Terrace (Map 41 lot 0249) property. Sincerely, Charles M. Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 Fax: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM T CITY OF SALEM � PLANNING BOARD Z009 OCT 20 P-1: tt, Site Plan Review & Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit Decision October 16, 2008 142 Canal Street Nominee Trust 5 Cranberry Lane Lynnfield, Massachusetts 01940 RE: 142 Canal Street— Site Plan Review& Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit On Thursday, July 17, 2008, the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing under Sections 7-18 and 7-22 of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities, at the request of Snakebite Realty, LLC, for the property located at 142 Canal Street. The • proposed plans show the construction of a new 10,980 sq foot single-story building, in addition to the existing 26,555 sq ft building at 142 Canal Street. The proposed building is proposed as a two occupant building: a retail tenant occupying 9,180 square foot and a 1,800 square foot bank tenant with one (1) drive-thru lane. The Public Hearing was continued to September 4, 2008, September 18, 2008, and October 16, 2008. The public hearing was closed on October 16, 2008. At a regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board held on October 16, 2008, the Planning Board voted by a vote of zero (0) members opposed and six (6) members (Charles Puleo, David Weiner, Tim Kavanaugh, Nadine Hanscom, Gene Collins, and Tim Ready) in favor to approve the Site Plan and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit, subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform to the plans entitled, "Site Plan for Proposed Retail at 142 Canal Street, Salem, Mass 01970" Sheets 1 – 7, prepared by Marchionda & Associates, 62 Montvale Ave, Suite 1, Stoneham, Mass 02180, dated October 1, 2008; elevation plans, landscaping plans, and lighting plans entitled "Proposed Floor Plan/Proposed Elevations", "Landscaping/Planting Plans", and "Lighting Plans for Proposed Retail at 142 Canals Street, Salem, Mass 01970" sheet A.1, sheet LS.1, and sheet A.I prepared by DiLullo Associates, Inc., 16 Crystal Street, Melrose, Mass 02176, dated June 23, 2008, October 3, 2008, and October 9, 2008 respectively. 2. Transfer of Ownership . Within five (5) days of transfer of ownership of the site, the Owner shall notify the Board in writing of the new owner's name and address. The terms, conditions, restrictions and/or requirements of this decision shall be binding on the Owner and its successors and/or assigns. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 0 WWW.SALEM.COM • 3. Amendments Any amendments to the approved site plan, elevation plan, and landscape 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. 4. 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 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. 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 Blastin¢ 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. Blastingshall be undertaken in accordance with all local and state regulations. g • 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. 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 -2- l i 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. 5. 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. 6. Fire Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department prior to the issuance of any building permits. 7. Building Inspector All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Building Inspector. 8. 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. 9. Utilities a. 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. b. Applicant shall confine with the City Engineer that there are existing isolation valves on the Canal Street water main on either side of their proposed fire service connection, which are operational and in close enough proximity to allow isolation of Canal Street. Written confirmation from the City Engineer must be received by the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 10. Department of Public Services The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Department of Public Services Il. Signage ,a. Proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and the Sign Review Committee. b. Parking signs shall be installed in front of each parking space abutting the Hertz Rent-a-Car stating that the parking spaces are only for the retail/office uses in the new building. 12. Lighting a. No light shall cast a glare onto adjacent parcels or adjacent rights of way. b. A final lighting plan shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval prior to the • issuance of a Building Permit. c. After installation, lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner, prior to the 3 issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. • 13. HVAC If an HVAC unit is located on the roof or site, it shall be visually screened prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The method for screening the unit shall be submitted to the City Planner for review and approval prior to installation. 14. Landscaping a. All landscaping shall be done in accordance with the approved set of plans. b. Trees shall be a minimum diameter of 3 %2" dbh (diameter breast height). c. Maintenance of all landscaping shall be the responsibility of the Applicant, his successors or assigns. d. Any street trees removed as a result of construction shall be replaced. The location of any replacement trees shall be approved by the City Planner prior to replanting. e. Final completed landscaping, done in accordance with the approved set of plans, shall be subject to approval by the City Planner prior, for consistency with such plans, to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. f. The applicant, his successors or assigns, agrees to perpetually remove the snow on the sidewalks • along their portion of frontage on Canal Street 15. Maintenance a. Refuse removal, ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the Applicant, his successors or assigns. b. Winter snow in excess of permitted snow storage areas on site shall be removed off site. c. Maintenance of all landscaping shall be the responsibility of the Applicant. The Applicant, his successors or assigns, shall guarantee all trees and shrubs for a two (2) year period, from issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy and completion of planting. d. Maintenance of all stormwater structures and bioretention areas shall be the responsibility of the Applicant, his successors or assigns. 16. 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 -4- compliance with the design drawing must be submitted to the City Engineer prior to the issuance of • Certificates of Occupancy; as well as, any subsequent requirements by the City Engineer. 17. 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. 18. Special Conditions a. The Applicant shall record at least sheet 4 of 7 entitled "Site Layout Plan" at the Southern Essex District Registry of Deeds. b. At such time that the parking area in the rear of the existing building is resurfaced/paved, the applicant, his successors or assigns is required to stripe the eighty(80) required parking spaces, or more or less if warranted by the use of the building, as shown on sheet 4/7 of the Approved Site Plans. c. The fence located behind the proposed building dumpster area shall tie directly into the northwest corner of the existing building and tie directly into the southeastern corner of the former California Olive Oil building at 134 Canal Street, as noted and shown on sheet 4/7 of the Approved Site Plans. The applicant is permitted to install an access gate as part of the fence. • 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 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 Southern Essex District 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 M Puleo Chair • -5- CITY OF SALEM �► ' PLANNING B OARD ZGOR S P 1 1 A 9: 33 ci"i Y CLU. ; S. i.cw;: finSS. NOTICE OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board will hold its regularly scheduled meeting on Thursday,September 18,2008 at 7.00pm at City Hall Annex, Room 313, 120 Washington St. les M. Puleo, Chair MEETING AGENDA L Approval of Minutes + September 3, 2008 Joint Public Meering + September 4,2008 Meeting • 2. Public Hearing—Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit—Metro PCS, 1000 Loring Avenue (Loring Tower) (Map 20 Lot 0007)—Kristen LeDuc 3. Continued Public Hearing—Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit—Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street(Map 33, Lot 0006) —Daniel DiLullo,AIA 4. Old/New Business + Salem Renewable Energy Task Force—Discussion of proposed Wind Energy Turbine Ordinance + Discussion and vote to change regular scheduled meeting time to 6:30pm + Thomas Circle—Outstanding Issues 5. Adjournment This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board" City Flail Salem, Mass. on , iz 1 12006 at q ' 33a, % in cccordanca v l'h ap. 39 Sec;, 23A & 238 of M.G.L. 120 WASHNGTON SST, SALEM, MASSAC[ USMS 01970 • TELE: 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 • www.sALEm.com City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board Date /0 Name Mailing Address Phone # Email na,- -7V y36'6/Z Page of -uf 34 .1 Salem Planning Board • Minutes of Meeting September 18, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, September 18, 2008, 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, Tim Kavanaugh, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Ready, David Weiner, Gene Collins. Also present were: Frank Taormina, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Christine Sullivan Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility pecial Permit- Metro PCS, 1000 Loring Avenue (Loring Tower) (Man 20 Lot 0007)- Kristen LeDuc Kristen LeDuc, Metro PCS, explained that Metro PCS would be installing 6 wireless antennas, which will be concealed. There will also be equipment space concealed by a faux wall, blended to match the building and all related equipment would match as well. The wall is made of fiberglass material and there will be enough space for monthly maintenance of equipment. Nothing will exceed the height of anything else on the building. • Public Comments There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter a motion was made by Gene Collins to close the public hearing, seconded by John Moustakis, all approved (7-0). Frank Taormina said in terns of standard template conditions, he removed two because they didn't make sense in this case. He will add maintenance and upkeep of structures as a condition as Chuck Puleo suggested. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to accept the draft decision with amendments made, seconded by Dave Weiner and approved (7-0). Continued Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit- Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street (Map 33, Lot 0006 )- Daniel DiLullo, AIA Chuck Puleo began by introducing Daniel DiLullo and Bill Ross, the Peer Reviewer. He questioned whether there have been any changes to the plans since they last met. Matt Leidner, Marchionda & Associates LP, stated when they were last here, there were some • concerns and since then, they addressed those concerns and also met with the Board of Health. They received the peer review comments and he met with Bill Ross (Peer Reviewer) and last Friday he submitted an updated set of plans. 1 •,l Matt Leidner discussed items addressed in the peer review: . 1-Drainage system concern- treatment of stormwater before it goes into the system. They are pre-treating and routing it differently and they will provide better access to the system for maintenance. There are two landscape strips on Canal St., they depressed these strips to allow for more drainage. Chuck Puleo asked about landscape grass with mulch islands around tree (recommend crushed stone under loam) with filter fabric. John Moustakis asked about drainage off the property onto Canal St. Matt Leidner explained that it converges into one catch basin. Runoff from rear area will not go out front, it will be handled with infiltration system. Chuck Puleo suggested they consider grading the pavement just in driveway area to divert water. Bill Ross mentioned that the grade is so minimal that you'd need a pronounced crown. He also said they met with the City Engineer and that he does not have a concern with this; there is a South River Area drainage study in process. 2-Utilities- The building will have sprinklers. They now show fire service on plan. They upgraded from 4" to 6" sewer service and added a line on the plan to show were it would show up with relation to the other utilities on Canal St. 3-Unresolved- isolation valves for fire service line, they hope to hear decision on this, they may be required to put another valve in(they have no problem with putting on another one). 4-Layout of site itself meets zoning as far as aisle width, parking spaces, etc. The aisle near Hertz is one way, the rest are two-way including the entrance. They expect bulk of users to come in • front lot, they don't see too many heading to the back. Discussion about two-way traffic on the side of drive-thru, striping will separate lanes. He showed on the map how users would get to the rear as well as the stop signs and lines. Idea came up to make area in rear of building one- way instead of two-way. Chuck Puleo asked about the loading dock and Matt Leidner stated that he talked with the owner who said no one uses it so he has no problem limiting it to vans. For the loading dock, trucks will pull parallel to the building; to empty dumpster, truck will pull straight in. Rear of building dimension is 109 ft. Dave Weiner asked about the snow storage area shown on the plan in the front of the building and Matt Leidner explained that the snow removal area will be in the back, next to the dumpster, on the existing lot, and if major storm, then trucked out. Frank Taormina mentioned that there is a sliver of land behind the building owned by the MBTA and asked if there could be a guardrail or fence to delineate the two properties since there is nothing to delineate them. He also mentioned that the City is negotiating with the MBTA to utilize their property to extend the Salem Bike Path through it. The proposed snow storage area appears to be on that property, so it may not be the most practical space for snow. John Moustakis commented that due to layout of the area, they won't be able to plow the area, they would need to use front loader. It was suggested to fence the back of the site until the bike path happens, then the City and the Salem Bike Path Committee may want its own decorative fence, etc. Gene Collins suggested that if they put up a fence, the MBTA should maintain it. Frank Taormina mentioned that it is likely the tenants of 142 Canal Street are the ones encroaching on the MBTA's property. He mentioned that it appears likely that the City will enter into a long-term lease agreement with the • MBTA to utilize that piece of land to extend the Salem Bike Path through it. Encroachment issues could be dealt with now or later when the City has control of the property. 2 After Chuck Puleo asked about curbing and said that typically there are curb cuts or slopes • around areas, Matt Leidner explained that there is no proposed curbing in the back area. Frank Taormina mentioned that he spoke with Lynn Duncan, Director of the Planning and Community Department, prior to the meeting and she is concerned with circulation and curb cuts at the drive- thru area. Bill Ross, Peer Reviewer, pointed out that the landscape shows trees and shrubs in the back area. Bill Ross addressed some of their concerns: the traffic circulation- he suggested making a two-way a one-way; parking to rear- the loading dock proposes some inconvenience to cars that would want to park. He feels the number of cars stacked in the drive-thru may be an issue, any more than two cars would block a couple of spaces and any more than five would conflict with the loading dock. It was suggested that the ordinance calls for 109 ft. in a drive thru, which would give enough room for six cars, including the one being served. The sidewalk in front will have vertical granite curbing along side and wheel stops pinned to pavement; on the islands there will be vertical granite. There is a new divide shown on the plans. Where there is lower grade, rip rap will be put in which will create a boundary; also, there is an existing building with a small 18 ft wall, they are proposing to fix this small wall to act as boundary. Public Comments Frank Taormina mentioned that the Director was also concerned with curb cuts. Bill Ross said the existing curb cuts don't meet the guidelines because they are too close together and too wide. However, since they already exist, his discussion with the City Engineer was that they don't need • to replace them. Frank Taormina said that the Director's other concern is the parking in the rear of the building, the required parking spaces, and the improvements to the parking lot. Bill Ross said the road is passable and that they are proposing more spaces than needed; they will improve the area and strip each parking space. Chuck Puleo reminded all that at the last meeting, they discussed remodeling of the building and how that they could remodel/reface the building and whether they wouldn't need to go back to the Planning Board for site plan review. Matt Leidner recalled differently, that a few weeks ago Amy read the section which said they would need to come back for site plan review if there is a change in use or if they redevelop of remodel the existing building. Discussion ensued regarding discrepancy in the interpretation. Some thought if you're adding or remodeling it would trigger site plan review, or just refacing or remodeling. Frank Taormina mentioned that this property is located within an entrance corridor and the Entrance Corridor Overlay District Ordinance augments local zoning and requires that any new construction over 2,000 sq ft would trigger site plan review. Verbiage was found and read from the zoning ordinance "no structure or premises exceeding 10,000 sq ft shall be constructed, reconstructed, enlarged, altered or used except in accordance with Site Plan submitted to and approved by the Planning Board". Chuck Puleo said that it that is true, if tenants change and uses changes, the Planning Board should have seen numerous site plans instead of viewing their first for this property. Matt Leidner wondered if the Planning Board could put it in as a condition. Frank Taormina agreed to look into this for the Board and get clarification from the Building Inspector, who is the Zoning Enforcement Officer for the City. • Tim Ready suggested the Board look at the presentation of some areas and move forward. Chuck Puleo said that circulation should be figured out and that, as to whether changing the building later on triggers a site plan review, he wants an opinion this. John Moustakis feels they 3 need to at least upgrade the road so that people can get into the parking area, they have agreed to • fix the road that leads to some parking spaces. Matt Veno, City Councillor, asked if the lighting plan had been submitted. Dan DiLullo said that it had been and the Board Members each have a copy of it. As for traffic circulation, Matt Leidner doesn't see the proposed circulation plan having any negative impact. He explained and showed the circulation- in the front, you can enter & exit; cars can go around back and next to drive-thru. Chuck Puleo wants to see stop lines and signs before exiting to Canal St. Discussion about congestion in the bottom stack of cars near the drive-thru. Gene Collins said there's almost 30 ft visibility. Chuck Puleo suggested that the spaces in back could be designated as employee parking. If they agree to make area from the dumpster out to front of building one-way, that may alleviate the problem. Tim Ready suggested they make sure there is a consensus between Matt Leidner and the Peer Reviewer. Frank Taormina said the plans (which are in response to the peer review report) were submitted on Friday and the peer reviewer's letter was submitted hours prior to the meeting, so a decision has not been drafted yet. Frank mentioned that if the meeting were to close tonight, Lynn Duncan suggested that those outstanding items be contingent upon approval and the plans would also need to be revised to reflect the changes. Matt Leidner suggested that there are small, minor issues that they can address and he can make changes on mylar that they've agreed to. Dan DiLullo commented that winter is coming and they'd like to get utility work done prior to • that. He suggested that if the Board approves tonight based on the conditions, they'd update the plans and at the next meeting they could sign the mylar. Pam Lombardini mentioned that the applicant needs to put together mylars for signature prior to the board closing the pubic hearing, so the Board really couldn't entertain closing the public hearing until that was done. She stated that it would be cleaner if the plans and mylar were revised to reflect all the changes discussed tonight for signature and a draft decision was produced by the City. She recommended that the public hearing be continued till Oct 161n Nadine Hanscom echoed Pam Lombadini's sentiments and agreed that the meeting has to be continued. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the Public Hearing on October 16, 2008, seconded by Tim Ready, and approved (7-0). Approval of Minutes The minutes of the September 3rd Joint Public meeting were reviewed. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam • Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (7-0). The minutes of the September 4`n meeting were reviewed. 4 Page 3, change David's name to Weiner (not Weinberg). On Page 5 change Paula to Paulette • Puleo and Holly(Wilbert) to Polly(Wilbert) and add 7 Cedar Street as Polly's address. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (7-0). Old/New Business • Salem Renewable Energy Task Force- Discussion of proposed Wind Energy Turbine Ordinance- Tom Watkins from the Mayors Office, Rob Desrosier and Adam Seigler were present. Tom Watkins explained that they worked with Amy Lash and Lynn Duncan to prepare this Wind Turbine Ordinance. To develop this, they looked at what other city and towns have done and they also used a model from the state. Amy did a lot of research work, then they all met to develop the ordinance. Frank Taormina mentioned that this is just an informal discussion. They will submit to the Ordinance to City Council and there will likely hold a Joint Public Hearing with the Planning Board. Following that Joint Public Hearing the City Council will ask the Planning Board for their recommendation prior to the City Council voting on the ordinance proposal. Chuck Puleo pointed out that on their chart they have restricted this to commercial and industrial zoning districts. They totally avoided B2 -residential districts as potential sites for wind turbines. Chuck believes that their could be some suitable locations in 132- residential zoning districts for these facilities and residential developments that could benefit from this sustainable technology. He asked if the Planning Board could look at other possible spots that meet the size requirements. He mentioned that perhaps by Special Permit these facilities could located in some residential zoning districts. Chuck asked who the Special Granting Authority (SGA) would be, in these instances? Frank Taormina pointed out that the draft ordinance states that the Planning Board would be the SGA. • Discussion and vote to change regular scheduled meeting time to 6:30 pm- Chuck Puleo reminded all that at the last meeting, Christine said she would agree to the time change provided if it became too difficult for her (she has another meeting prior), they would reconsider changing it back. Pam Lombardini would like the earlier time. There being no further questions or comments, a motion was made by Tim Ready to change the meeting time, seconded by John Moustakis and approved (7-0). This time change will start with the next meeting, October 16, 2008. (Dave Weiner was not present for this part of meeting) • Thomas Circle- Outstanding issues- Chuck Puleo had a prior conversation with Frank Taormina on these issues. Frank Taormina reviewed the file and found violation letters • from the Tom McGrath, City Assistant Building Inspector. Tom McGrath is out this week, so Frank wasn't able to confirm whether violations has been resolved or not and he requested that this item be tabled to the next meeting. Chuck Puleo said the main issue is 5 the width of the road and violations with their MOU with the City. Chuck Puleo commented that he doubts the Planning Board would have approved this if they knew the road couldn't be widened. Board agreed that item be tabled until Frank could touch base with the Building Inspector to confirm status. Adjournment 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 Pam Lombardini and approved (6-0). The meeting adjourned at 9:08 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • • '� 6 p Po CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decision At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, September 18,2008 at 7:00pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem Massachusetts, the Planning Board voted upon the following items: Apl2fic Metro PCS Request: Wireless Communication Facilities Special Permit Location: 1000 Loring Avenue(Map 20,Lot 0007)Loring Towers Description: The installation of six(6)panel antennas to be concealed in three(3) faux flues all painted to match the building. The antennas will be connected via coaxial cables to three(3)equipment cabinets located within a 10'x 16' tease space on the roof of the building concealed by a 10' • screen wall textured to look like brick to match the building. The equipment cabinets measure 71" H x 52"W x 38"D. One(1) 19" GSM antenna as well as one(1) 3'/8" GPS antenna will be located on the rooftop to allow the FCC mandated E911 capabilities. Decision: Approved—Filed with City Clerk September 19,2008 • This naw is bwgsear m xnpliarxe wxb theMassadmeltu Gereral Lava, ChVter 40A, Sociar 9 and does not ragtweagxn by the nri xm Appeals, if anK shall be nu&pursuant to C6pter 40A, Seim 17,and sball le f kd vitbin 20 Als finmthe day vbi&rhe dernm uas fWwth the City Clak. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FA-x: 978.740.0404 0 WWW.SAI.F,M.COM r CITY OF SALEM ' PLANNING BOARD r.y l7 '1 Wireless Special Permit Decision The Petition of Metro PCS for the Property Located at 1000 Loring Avenue (Loring Towers) CD r I A Public Hearing on this petition was held on September 18,2008. The following PlaCTnning Board Members were present: Charles Pulco, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Nadine Hanscom, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini, David Weiner, and John Moustakis. Notice of , this meeting was sent to abutters and 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 six (6) panel antennas to be concealed in three (3) faux flues all painted to match the building. The antennas will be connected via coaxial cables to three (3) equipment cabinets located within a 10'x 16' lease space on the roof of the building concealed by a 10' screen wall textured to look like brick to match the building. The • equipment cabinets measure 71" H x 52"W x 38"D. One (1) 19" GSM antenna as well as one (1) 3711" GPS antenna will be located on the rooftop to allow the FCC mandated E911 capabilities. 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 18, 2008, the Planning Board closed the Public Hearing and the Board voted? by a vote of eight (8) in favor, and none opposed, to grant a Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application dated August 27, 2008 and site plan last dated August 20, 2008, titled "Metro PCS, Loring Towers, 1000 Loring Avenue, Salem, MA 01970 Essex County", Sheets T-1, C-1, Z-1, Z-' and Z-3, drawn by Metro PCS and stamped by Professional Engineer Daniel P. Hamm, E submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following condition: 1. Maintenance and upkeep of the approved antennas, equipment cabinets, and screen walls are the responsibility of MetroPCS, its successors, or assigns. 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, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM 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. /hereby certify that a copy of this decision is on file with the City Clerk and that a copy of the decision and plansison file with the Planning Board. 0" ZCharles Puleo, • • r, CITY OF SALEM -e, PLANNING BOARD 1, 1 AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursday, September 4, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o July 17, 2008 no ., 2. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard Zy S ty District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit—Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 0 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede)—Attorney Scott Grover—Request for continuance to October 16, 2008. _m � C} 3. Request for a six (6) month extension for the North River Canal Corridor m c :; • Special Use Permit granted April 13, 2006 and a request for the Site Plan Review and Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit granted February 20, 2007 to be extended to run concurrently with the Special Use Permit for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street—Attorney Joseph Correnti 4. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require c E Approval –0 Felt Street Way(Map 27, Lots 602, 603, 604) –Attorney George cr :s Atkins ` w 5. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require CL C 0 Approval -111 Highland Avenue/1 Willson Road (Map 14, Lot 199)–Attorney 0 M George Atkins —� 6. Public Hearing- Amendment to Thomas Circle Plans to Allow Boulders to Remain Instead of Guard Rail–Anthony Tiro, 7-17 Thomas Circle (Map 8, Lots 20, 21, 22 & 168) 7. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit- Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street (Map 33, Lot 006)– Daniel DiLullo, AIA 8. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review–William Wharff, 17 North Street (Map 26, • Lot 492) (formerly the Elks Lodge) –Attorney Scott Grover 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALEM.COM / I 1 9. Discussion and Vote- Recommendation to City Council on Zoning Amendment • to allow planned unit development (PUD) in the Business Park Development District. 10. Old/New Business - Discussion and Vote- Change regular meeting time to 6:30 11. Adjournment N - IV CrI ca 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 ' WWW.SALEM.COM City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board �I AJY►rK, Date �/ Name Mailing Address P9hoDne/y # Email � �n2ars e.�r• ���- ���-�a6a 97/-�s�I��o�� �2AQJ..k A�� .Sh��� , ,4 73) PY 21 (-gsngL. ST &,(Xew- 7F/-"7-sVf,- Page of '1 Salem Planning Board • Minutes of Meeting September 4, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, September 4, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Pam Lombardini, Tim Kavanaugh, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Ready, Christine Sullivan, David Weiner. Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Gene Collins, John Moustakis Approval of Minutes The minutes of the July 17th meeting were reviewed. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (6-0). • Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede)-Attorney Scott Grover- Request for Continuance to October 16, 2008 Attorney Scott Grover explained that they are going to the Design Review Board with some revisions, and he's optimistic about the outcome. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the public hearing to October 15`h, 2008, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (6-0). Request for a six (6) month extension for the North River Canal Corridor Special Use Permit granted April 13, 2006 and a request for the Site Plan Review and Wetland and Flood Hazard District Special Permit granted February 20, 2007 to be extended to run concurrently with the Special use permit for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street-Attorney Joseph Correnti Attorney Joseph Correnti said this project was originally permitted on 6/2007, had 44 condo units with first floor commercial development. Can't get financing for condos, site itself is vacant. They'd like to keep permits in place and are asking that wetland/flood hazard district permit run concurrently to April. Chuck Puleo mentioned that permits could be two years as • opposed to asking for six months. Christine Sullivan moved to approve the six-month extension of the permit until April 2009. i '1 Paul Prevey, Ward 6 Councillor, said that the project keeps getting delayed because of financing. • His issue is with the condition of the area. He showed photos of the area taken by a neighbor. Until ground is broken and development starts, he hopes the Board takes this into consideration. He'd like some effort to be made to maintain the property until the project starts. Attorney Correnti said they'd agree to repair the fence and clean up the site. Others agreed that it's also a safety issue with having part of the fence broken. Tim Ready asked if anyone checks the property frequently and the owner said that he goes by there every 2-%2 weeks. The fence has been repaired four times already. David Weiner moved to grant the extension of permit with the condition that the site would be maintained. Tim Kavanaugh suggested extending the special use permit 6 month to April 13, 2009 with a further condition on cleaning up the property i.e. trash removal, lawn in 30 days from today while Tim Ready mentioned that we've had good faith with this developer, he's not comfortable putting in a condition. Amy Lash suggested wording it"the developer agreed to cleaning site, moving... There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to extend the special use permit six months to April 16, 2009, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved(6-0). Added to that is "The developer has agreed to clean up the site in 30 days including removing the trash, mowing the lawn and fixing the fence." Although not a public hearing, Beverly McSwiggin of Japonica Street remarked that she had noticed that area in poor condition at one time, mentioned it to the Ward Councillor, and it was cleaned up. • Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 0 Felt Street Way(Map 27, Lots 602, 603,604)—Attorney George Atkins Attorney George Atkins explained that Felt St. Way is an extension of Locust St. On the parcel being discussed, the house is in the center of the lot and they want to take a piece of land on each side of the house and conveying it to the neighbors. Size of each piece being conveyed was shown on map; Lot F is not a separate build-able lot. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Nadine Hanscom made a motion to approve, seconded by Pam Lombardini and all in favor(6-0). Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval— 111 Highland Avenue/1 Wilson Road (Map 14, Lot 199)- Attorney George Atkins Attorney Atkins described the property as having two existing buildings on it and the subdivision statute says you can divide a lot with two buildings on it. The front of the property on Highland Ave. is a building previously used as a gas station; the house set back on the property has a Wilson Street address; both buildings were built in the 50's. The residential home is currently for sale to its tenants. The commercial building in front would have to go to the Board of Appeals. • There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, Pam Lombardini made a motion to approve, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (6-0). 2 Public Hearing- Amendment to Thomas Circle Plans to Allow Boulders to Remain Instead of • Guard Rail- Anthony Tiro, 17-7 Thomas Circle (Map 8, Lots 20, 21, 22 & 168) Chuck Puleo read the public hearing notice. The original decision for this was made on 5/18/00 and then again on 7/06. Anthony Tiro said the original plan called for a 150 ft. guardrail. He met with two companies and both suggested that this is not an area where guardrails would be conducive. Guardrails should be bolted in place, but because of the boulders that are there, it may not work. So, he's requesting an amendment to keep the boulders instead of putting in a guardrail. He moved some of the boulders to widen the street. He thinks because of ledge, they still won't get 20 ft width of street in some areas. He said 20 ft. is in about 95% of the street, and can't achieve that width in some spots. Chuck Puleo mentioned the condition of paving- the entryway of road has to be re-laid. Mr. Tiro said he's not at that point yet. Amy Lash mentioned that she spoke with the building inspector and every issue has been resolved except for paving. There is $6,000 in escrow for utility purposes and mentioned that this is not a traditional subdivision. David Weiner noticed a footnote on the plans that showed no less than 18 ft at retaining wall and 14 ft width parts of street on map. Nadine Hanscom clarified that when the plans were originally approved, Mr. Tiro was not the owner. Plans were reviewed for 14ft and 18 ft width. Meeting Opened to the Public • Susan Howland, 3 Thomas Circle/6 Thomas Circle, said in 2006 it was agreed to change the water line along with the utility poles. She went on to explain that they don't want to widen the road, they want to protect Thomas Circle. When her father and mother in 66/67 created their home, they were guaranteed 20 ft width at all points. She feels if boulders are removed and guardrails are put in, it would give a bit more width to the road. Nadine Hanscom confirmed that Susan Howland wants the guardrail. Ms. Howland mentioned that there was a `gentleman's agreement' for Anthony Tiro to file to change lot lines without any expense to the Howlands because they were going to donate some land. Mr. Howland, Thomas Circle, explained that the Howlands would donate to the city 4 ft of their land to make it 20 ft. He also showed on the drawing that most of the street would be 20 ft. wide, which he created years ago. He explained the part of road in question measures 13 ft. If you remove the boulders, it would be about 16 ft., and then with the land from the Howlands, it would be 20 ft. Mr. Howland also believes from experience that guardrails could be put in at that location. Pam Lombardini inquired whether the 2000 decision had Fire Department requirements, the Fire Department should have input regarding road width., she'd like to se a letter from them. Christine Sullivan stated that this is a more complicated issue than it first appeared. It's not just guardrails, it's also street width. She felt she didn't have enough information to make a decision. Chuck Puleo said he'll ask Lynn Duncan review this. If it is a safety issue, he wants to hear from the City Engineer and informed Anthony Tiro that Board has concerns. • Nadine Hanscom asked Anthony Tiro if he was willing to take the land and make the road 20 ft. He said yes but that in some areas of the road, it will be difficult to make that width. Christine Sullivan pointed out that Anthony Tiro is working on predated set of plan and he should make -3- sure he has the most up to date plans. Tim Ready understood that Susan Howland hadn't . conveyed the land to the city, she's waiting for it to be conveyed and inquired if there is a file in process. Anthony Tiro said the filing process hasn't been started as Susan Howland has to go to the City Council first, then everything else will follow. However Susan Howland said that was the first she heard that she had to do something. She'll do it long as it's no cost to her, and, she wants the guardrail for safety. Anthony Tiro said he signed on 7/07 to say that he would incur costs. A site visit will be planned. Chuck Puleo wants to get input from the City Engineer after which Anthony Tiro said he'll withdraw his request to keep the boulders instead of the guardrail and stated that he'll put in the guardrail. There being no further questions or comments on this matter, Pam Lombardini made a motion to grant the request to withdraw, with a condition to meet with the City Engineer, seconded by Christine and approved (6-0). Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit- Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street (Map 33, Lot 006)-Daniel DiLullo, AIA Matthew Leidner of Marchionda & Associates LP said since the last hearing, they had a site visit; they wanted to address the outstanding department concerns so he met with Lt. Griffin and she had some questions, which he copied Amy Lash on; he called Joanne Scott of the Health • Dept and she didn't anticipate any major problems; there was a peer review which he received the results of= they haven't reviewed all of the items on the peer review yet. Peer reviewer discussed the utility plan; the sprinkler system; the sewer service line — state says it should be 6 inch, city says 5 inch; they'd like more detail shown on the plan as to how the water will drain from the roof; infiltration system; maintenance, they recommend semi-annual not annual. Christine Sullivan brought up that the building is 11,000 sq ft and that this review should be on its impact on the entire site, the whole project, not just parts at a time and that there is a billboard at the site advertises an available building for rent, which doesn't really show the project appropriately. Pam Lombardini agrees with Christine, that this is just a piece of the project and it's an important place, hopefully it will all be redone. Christine Sullivan added that it's on an entry corridor and they're trying to put a strip mall, it could be better. Dan DiLullo said if they were to find tenants for the second building, he doesn't think they're required to come before the Board for renovation of that existing building. Chuck Puleo said that if you develop part of the site, then later if they renovate the other building and don't need the Planning Board, they might not do a good job. Dan DiLullo added that they're trying to make the side of site more desirable and generate income; economic conditions change, schemes need to be redefined. Dan DiLullo mentioned that it is in the owner's best interest to have a design that incorporates the entrance corridor. Currently they don't have commercial tenant for existing building. • Amy Lash said the Canal St. Improvement Plan doesn't recommend some curb cuts in a certain direction. As for parking requirements, Chuck Puleo suggested they might restrict parking usage and mentioned that the peer review is also doing driving circulation. Lighting would coordinate with Planning Department but in terms of new lighting, Dan DiLullo said they did some layouts. 4 • Matt Leidner mentioned that utilities are not shown because the utility company to be used would want to do it's own plan. He addressed some points of the peer review: The 4 inch sewer can be bumped to 6 inches; infiltration system- issue on site is shallowness of ground, so they designed system for that separation; pretreatment; site circulation- they can review that; snow storage- main area is in back and on side. The island in front is not intended for main storage. He said their goals would be to address all of these comments and will forward this to the Planning Board. Amy Lash mentioned that pavement of rear parking in back of building lot will probably come up at some point. Meeting Opened to the Public Paulette Puleo, 5 Freeman Road, asked if this would fall under PUD. Matt Veno, Ward 5 Councilor, was delighted to see some redevelopment. He agrees with the Board members in that he shares the frustration of not seeing the whole vision, it would be helpful for the Board to know the future plans. The former California Olive Oil Bldg, as an example, will be very hard to develop. He added that the owner Mr. Gattenari has been good communicating. He had some observations: access in back of building near drive thru is tight corner to get around; for vehicular access he noted that the tile building is under used and suggested if it were to go away, it may make it more creative for access; pedestrian access- he encourages to look at sidewalk and cross access; have some synergy with the bike path- the plan • is to have the bike path along the back, but on this it shows a dumpster and drive thru, would like it more bike-path friendly. He wondered if this was approved as a drive thru for a bank, could the owner use it for something else? Amy Lash explained that no, the requirements for fast food drive thm are different and they wouldn't be met. Matt Veno is also concerned with the quality of the building, particularly the fagade of the building. He also finds it disappointing that it would be a Family Dollar Store. Polly Wilbert, 7 Cedar Street, supported Matt Veno's comments. She is also disappointed that it will be a Family Dollar Store. She encourages the Board to give South Salem what they gave Essex Street. Jim Crosby is working hard and so is Salem State College, this project does not support the same direction. The Planning Board is the best and last hope for the neighborhood. She encouraged them to ask for enhancement of land and other buildings. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the Public Hearing to September 18`h, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (6-0). Discussion and Vote- Recommendation to City Council on Zoning Amendment to allow planned unit development (PUD) in the Business Park Development District. Tim Kavanaugh is in favor of special permits. Chuck Puleo recommended sending back the • recommendation along with why they approve. He used Stop and Stop as an example- that land was industrialized that no one wanted to use before S&S. Christine Sullivan pointed out that only 7% of jobs are in manufacturing, that's because it's the old economy. The new economy isn't like that, with PUD the city would have options geared toward the new economy. Chuck -5- Puleo added that the review process is open long enough. Tim Kavanaugh agreed with Christine • Sullivan, and said that the number of conflicts generated by PUD are diminutive. Amy Lash said she could draft a letter in the morning to include the recommendation and reasons. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Tim Ready to make recommendation to City Council on Zoning Amendment to allow planned unit development (PUD) in the Business Park Development District with memo, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (6-0). Public Hearing- Site Plan Review- William Wharff, 17 North Street (Map 26, Lot 492)(formerly the Elks Lodge)-Attorney Scott Grover Scott Grover, Attorney, representing Bill Wharff(Chris Mello was unable to attend). Attorney Grover explained that the plan is to restore the building to its original state, making it a 7-unit condominium. It requires multiple approvals from several Boards. They had a neighborhood meeting; went to Board of Appeals and received variance for parking, they have 8 spaces for 7 units. They also went to the Historic Commission, they conceptually approved the project. Next will be the site plan review project; they are going to the BOA on Tuesday. Nadine Hanscom inquired about the number of bedrooms and suggested that more bedrooms may mean families in the units, which would bring more cars. • David Jaquith, Architect, said for dumpsters they are proposing 3 or 4, stored outside: He explained that units are about 1200 sq ft.; they have to have stairs; there are townhouse units and the top one is a penthouse unit that they will to rebuild as Historic Salem said they could rebuild the third floor. There is a lot of detail still in the building; the History of the building has come in; painting and detail will be important. They will put a wrought iron fence out front, which may deter some folks from sitting on the curb at the bus stop that's out front. They are going to the Historic commission one more time. For parking, it will have concrete bricks with the stripes for parking in the bricks. He spoke with Erin at the Fire Department that morning and she knows it will be a residential sprinkler system. Meeting Opened to the Public David Jaquith said the back of the building will be demolished and the front will be saved. Attorney Scott Grover said they have some site area to use for staging. They are hoping for six months for approximate length of construction time and are hoping to get the outer done and framed before the bad weather sets in. Amy Lash said there were comments she gave to the owner. David Jaquith said lighting isn't on the plan because they think it will be an issue with the Historic Society. Chuck Puleo mentioned that the Board would incorporate the Historic Commission's lighting suggestions/plan. Nadine Hanscom asked about snow removal because it mentions "off site", where will it go? David Jaquith said it would be a private company to remove it so it will depend on the company • hired. Christine Sullivan wondered if there was a draft decision. Amy Lash explained that there wasn't a draft decision because they didn't think there would be a landscape plan and there is no lighting plan. Prior to issuance of building permit, lighting plans must be submitted. -6- i David Jaquith said there is no access on the side of the building. As far as the fence, he had a photo of how it looked years ago and described it as well. He mentioned that the historic commission wants lattice on certain places. They may also have other ideas for fencing. There will be lighting on back and side of on Eaton Place. Chuck Puleo said there is a usual standard condition with lighting, for extra lighting if needed. Chuck Puleo noticed that there is 13" between 17 & 19 North Street and wondered if they can maintain that area. Dave Jaquith said yes they could, they can get in there for maintenance. As for height of building, they'll be higher than 19 North Street. As for exterior paint colors, Dave Jaquith said the building was probably painted Victorian colors years ago; the Historic Society had some suggestions on colors. Tim Kavanaugh suggested the Historic Commission would fill in the finer details. It's a conceptually tremendous project. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to close the public hearing, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (6-0). Nadine Hanscom asked about central Air Conditioning and David Jaquith said the units have heat/central AC and the Historic Commission has few concerns with it. Screening equipment won't be a problem. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to approve the site plan for the building with standard conditions, lighting plans and incorporating comments from the Fire Department, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (6-0). Old/New Business • Discussion and Vote — Change regular meeting time to 6:30- Postponed until next Planning Board meeting. Christine Sullivan will not be able to attend the next meeting but said she would vote in favor of changing the meeting time with the understanding that if it becomes too difficult for her (as she has another meeting immediately prior to this one) they would revisit the 7 pm start time. Adjournment 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 Christine Sullivan and approved (6-0). The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board -7- 1 �- e0mt" ' , CITY OF SALEM h DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND < 4 '? COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBIAUk(Y DRISCOU, MAYOR 120 WAS[HNC10O SIRIF,14 SAiraa,NIASSAC[I LSFI-1'a01970 ']'I-.1,978-619-5685 ♦ 1'.As,978-740-0404 LYNN GOON IN DL;V:AN,AKT - DIhul101i MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: August 28, 2008 RE: Agenda— September 4, 2008 This will be my last meeting with the Planning Board. I am leaving the City of Salem to take a campus planning position with a firm in Boston. My last day will be September 5`h. I have enjoyed my time here and have learned a great deal. I admire the dedication you all have to your community! Frank Taoromina, Staff Planner/Harbor Coordinator, will provide staff assistance to the Planning Board until a new planner is brought on board. • In a packet mailed on August 27`h you should have received: ➢ Materials for the Joint Public Hearing on September 3, 2008 ➢ Notice of a public hearing and plans for roadway improvements at Lafayette/Harbor & Lafayette/Washington In this packet you will find: ➢ Materials for the Planning Board Meeting on September 4, 2008 ➢ Draft Minutes of July 17, 2008 Notes on A,eenda Items Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit—Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, &71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) —Attorney Scott Grover—Request for continuance to October l6, 2008. I spoke with Attorney Scott Grover and understand the development team hopes to bring the project before Design Review Board in September and then back to the Planning Board in October. • Request for six (6) month extension for the North River Canal Corridor Special Use Permit granted April 13, 2006 and a request for the Site Plan Review and Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit granted February 20, 2007 to be extended to run concurrently with the Special Use Permit for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street— Attorney Joseph Correnti The project at 28 Goodhue Street received a North River Canal Corridor Special Use Permit, dated April 13, 2006, and a Site Plan Review/Wetlands and Flood Hazard Special Permit, dated February 20, 2007. On March 20, 2008, the Planning Board approved the extension of the Special Use Permit by six (6) months, making this permit valid through October 13, 2008. Attorney Joseph Correnti is requesting an additional six (6) month extension of the Special Use Permit, as well as an extension of the Site Plan Review and Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit so that both permit will run concurrently through April 13, 2009. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval —0 Felt Street Way (Map 27, Lots 602, 603, 604) —Attorney George Atkins This Form A shows that two portions of the lot at 0 Felt Street will be divided off and given to the owners of two neighboring parcels. This will leave 0 Felt Street with sufficient lot width and lot area. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval -I I I Highland Avenue/1 Willson Road (Map 14, Lot 199)—Attorney George Atkins Lot 199 contains two buildings which lie in the Residential One Family (R-1) Zoning District: • 111 Highland Avenue (a commercial building) and 1 Wilson Road (a residential building). The structures existed before the Subdivision Control Law went into effect. This Form A shows a division creating two lots, on each of which one of such buildings remains standing. Following the division as proposed, the lot with the residential building would not meet the minimum requirements for lot width/frontage or side yard setback. I have asked Beth Rennard for an opinion whether this is an endorsable ANR plan. Public Hearing- Amendment to Thomas Circle Plans to Allow Boulders to Remain Instead of Guard Rail—Anthony Tiro, 7-17 Thomas Circle (Map 8, Lots 20, 21, 22 & 168) Anthony Tiro would like to leave the boulders currently along Thomas Circle in place, rather that install the guard rail shown on the approved plans, and referenced under condition 5 (e) of the Planning Board decision dated May 18, 2000. Certificates of Occupancy have been issued for the first two homes, a building permit limited to the foundation only has been issued for the third home, and no building permits has been issued for the fourth home. Assistant Building Inspector, Thomas McGrath, sent two violation notices in recent month regarding Thomas Circle. These letters are included in your packet. I understand that all of the issues besides the roadway work have been resolved. The original Planning Board Waiver of Frontage Decision dated May 18, 2000 does not set a specific time by which the roadway work will need to be completed. Anthony Tiro plans to finish the roadway work once there will be no more heavy trucks traveling over the roadway. 2 Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit-Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street (Map 33, Lot 006) —Daniel DiLullo, AIA The site visit on August 14`h was attended by five (5) Planning Board members, five (5) residents, and Councillor Pinto. Dan Dilullo, AIA and Matt Leidner, P.E. were on hand to answer questions. My notes from the site visit have been included in your packet. Following the site visit I met with the Peer Review Engineer, Bill Ross to review the concerns which came up. You will find the comments from the Peer Review Engineer in a letter included in your packet. A representative from NE Civil Engineering will be on hand at the meeting on September 4`h to answer further questions. The peer review comments have been supplied to the applicant. Project Engineer, Matt Leidner met with Lt. Griffin and supplied her with additional information she requested. Lt. Griffin has confirmed that there are no outstanding issues with the Fire Department. The project will be before the Board of Health on September 91h The Building Department had previously commented that there was a unit in the existing building on site that did not have a Certificate of Occupancy. The applicant contacted the Building Department regarding this; it turns out there was a miscommunication among the • Building Inspectors and all units within the existing building have Certificates of Occupancy. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review—William Wharff, 17 North Street (Map 26,Lot 492) (formerly the Elks Lodge)—Attorney Scott Grover Comments from the Department of Planning and Community Development regarding this application are within a separate memo included in your packet. The project was before the Board of Appeals on August 27`h. The applicant was granted a special permit for a change in nonconforming use as well as variances from maximum height (feet and stories), minimum lot area per dwelling unit, and required parking to allow for construction of a third and fourth story and the conversion of the current assembly hall to seven residential condominiums. The original application submitted to the Board of Appeals called for six (6) units and three(3) stories. The amended application and design which was approved includes a fourth story and seventh (7`h) unit. The design was been shaped by input obtained at the Board of Appeals meetings as well as meetings the development team held with neighbors, Historic Salem Inc., and the Historical Commission. The project has received conceptual approval from the Historical Commission and will be back before the Historical Commission on September 3`d for approval of final details. Discussion and Vote- Recommendation to City Council on Zoning Amendment to include the Business Park Development District in this list of districts eligible to receive a special permit for a planned unit development in accordance with all requirements of the Ordinance. 3 \ J Included in the packet mailed out on August 27th you will find a memo with information about • the proposed zoning amendment, as well as several maps. Discussion and Vote- Change regular meeting time to 6:30 At the last meeting there was discussion about changing the meeting time to 6:30. The Planning Board should take a vote to make this change. Old/New Business Over the past month I have received several notices for the Planning Board from state agencies, including: • Supplemental information for the Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for Flood Mitigation Facilities for the Peabody Square Area. • Notice the following Chapter 91 Waterways Licenses have been issued by the DEP: o City of Salem- License to construct and maintain a waterfront park and associated pile supported walkway on the south side of the South River. o Harborview Properties, Inc. —License to construct and maintain seasonal gangway and floats in and over the waters of the Porter River in the Town of Danvers. o Haborview Properties, Inc.—License to reconfigure and reduce the number of • slips; and to construct and maintain concrete block seawall by placing fill within the existing boat ramp in and over the waters of the Porter River in the Town of Danvers. No action is required by the Planning Board, though I will have these notices available at the September 4`h meeting if anyone is interested. If you would like your own copy of any of these things please let me know prior to the hearing. 4 s CITY OF SALEM < " 4s DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND xr COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KI MBERLEY DRISMLL MAYOR 120 WAsru.\c ror:S'nse r:r♦SAI EM,NWSAU IUSEna 01970 Tr.r:978-619-5685 • FAx:978-740-0404 LYNN COONIy Di N(AN,1\10 Diw.croR ti =a September 5, 2008 , Riverview Place, LCC C/o Scott Grover, Esquire 27 Congress Street, Suite 414 Salem, MA 01970 U-` J RE: Request for Continuance and Extension of Deadline for Final Action Decision Riverview Place, LLC (72 Flint Street,67-69 Mason Street,& 71 Mason Street) Dear Scott: • On September 4, 2008 the Planning Board voted to continue the public hearing concerning the special permit applications of Riverview Place LLC until October 16, 2008. Additionally, the Planning Board voted to extend the time for action on the applications until October 16, 2008. Si cerely, Amy J. ash Staff Planner Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk TINTI, QUINN, GROVER & FREY, P.C. 27 CONGRESS STREET,SUITE 414 SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 WILLIAM J.TINTI WILLIAM B.ARDIFF(1965- 1995) cinci@rincila.x.m TELEPHONE WILLIAM F.QUINN (978)74saan5 - (976)744-2948 MARCIA MULrORD CINI W iBiamFQuinn®aol.com of Comm SCOTT M.DROVER TELECOPIER JOHN O.KEENAN =grovff tinri)aw<am (978)74 5.3W oP COUNSu. ww.rind)n..com MARC P.FREY mp2rcy@rinrilaw.a , MARCY D.HAVER E I V E D mluubcr@cindla.<..... REC JAMES G.GILBERT 0 SEP 4 2008 jgilbe"&inm.nlaw.a DEPT.OF PLANNING& CORM IITY GE(/EI.TPEMT September 4,2008 Ms. Amy Lash City of Salem Department of Planting and Community Development 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: Riverview Place/Special Permit Applications Dear Amy: I am writing to roquest the continuance of the public hearing concerning the above referenced matter until October 16,2008. In addition, please consider this letter a request to extend the time for the Planning Board to act on the application wltil October 16, 2008. Vcry truly yours, Scott M. Grover SMG/dlg VTA FAX: 978-740-0404 CITY OF SALEM 6 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT -:rYtNE U`' KIN aERLEYDRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WAST IINMON S'ITTLr• S. I-F%I,\L�SSAC1-tcseris 01970 Tru 978-619-5685 FAX;978-740-0404 L)NN G(X)y1N D1_1N(.NN,AIC' Duiecroa r� r=1 September 5, 2008 s Joseph C. Correnti, Esq. Serafini, Serafini, Darling & Correnti, LLP 63 Federal Street J Salem, MA 01970 Re: Request for extension 28 Goodhue Street Dear Mr. Correnti: The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, September 4, 2008 to discuss the request of North River Canal LLC for an extension of the Special Use Permit granted by the Board in a • decision date-stamped April 13, 2006 for an additional six (6) months. This permit was previously extended by the Planning Board to October 13, 2008. Additionally, the Board discussed the request to extend the Wetlands and Flood Hazard District Special Permit granted February 20, 2007, so that it runs concurrently with the Special Use Permit for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street. The Board understands North River Canal LLC intends to go forward with the project, though additional time is needed to put in place the necessary contracts and funding to be able to begin construction. In the meantime, the Board also understands the current condition of the property has raised concern. The applicant has volunteered to remedy this situation and clean up the property within thirty (30) days. The clean up is to include repairing the fence, removing the trash, and mowing the lawn. The Board decided by a unanimous vote to approve the extension requests making both decisions valid through April 13, 2009. Sincerely, Ll Amy J. ash • Staff Planner Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk I 3 m CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD /111• Ilk Form A — Decision 111 Highland Avenue/1 Willson Road Attorney George Atkins 59 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 Dear Attorney Atkins: The Salem Planning Board voted on September 4, 2008 to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: HVW LLC 107 Highland Avenue,enue, Salem, MA 2. Location: 111 Highland Avenue (Commercial Building) and 1 Willson Road • (Residential Building) Assessor's Map 14, Lot 199. 3. Project Description: The land contains two buildings which were standing when the Subdivision Control Law went into effect. This Form A divides the land into two lots, Lot A, consisting of 8,808 square feet, on which the commercial building will remain standing, and Lot B, consisting of 4,400 square feet, on which the residential building will remain standing. Sincerely, Charles Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALFM.COM �v CITY OF SALEM orf PLANNING BOARD Hfl _S A ,i, ttb Form A — Decision 0 Felt Street Way Attorney George Atkins 59 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 Dear Attorney Atkins: The Salem Planning Board voted on September 4, 2008 to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Francis J. Gray Jr. Trustee of The Felt Street Way Trust 14 South Street Marblehead, MA • 2. Location: 0 Felt Street Way, Assessors Map 27, Lots 602, 603, and 604 3. Project Description: This Form A moves the lot line between lot 604 and lot 605, transferring 4,385 square feet, shown on the plan as Lot F, to Kevin J. Cutter& Mary Beth Legassey(owners of lot 605) to make on contiguous lot containing 10,053 square feet. This Form A moves the lot line between lot 602 and lot 601, transferring 1,837 square feet, shown on the plan as Lot D, to Scott M. Uva& Mariflor T. Maulit-Uva (owners of lot 601) to make one contiguous lot containing 7,277 square feet. Sincerely, 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 a CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD DECISION- WITHDRAWAL September 5, 2008 Anthony Tiro 9 Gianna Drive Co Saugus, MA 01960 ;, - Iv RE: Thomas Circle Amendment)Withdrawal. o Dear Mr. Tiro: The Salem Planning Board met Thursday September 4, 2008 to discuss your request to amend the Planning Board's Waiver of Frontage approval dated May 18,2000. The proposed amendment was • to retain the existing rock boulders along the roadway rather than install a guard rail. At the hearing, you requested to withdraw your request. The Board decided by a unanimous vote (7-0) to approve the request for Withdrawal Without Prejudice. Further amendments to the approved plans will require the approval of the Planning Board. 7cere", . ly, " Charles Puleo Chairman • Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, Qty Clerk 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Site Plan Review Decision a REVISED 9/5/08 = w I September 5, 2008 °' ti N William Wharff o One Carol Way —� Salem,Massachusetts 01970 RE: 17 North Street(Map 26, Lot 492) (The Former Elks Lodge) On Thursday, September 4, 2008,the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing • regarding the application of William Wharff under Site Plan Review for the property located at 17 North Street. The project will include the construction of a third and fourth story and the conversion of the current assembly hall to seven residential condominiums. The Public Hearing was closed on September 4, 2008 and the Board voted at this meeting by a vote of five (5) in favor(Puleo,Kavanaugh, Ready, Hanscom and Sullivan) and none opposed,to approve the application as complying with the requirements of Site Plan Review subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform with the site plan entitled; "Site Development Permit Plan 17 North Street,Salem,Massachusetts" prepared by Eastern Land Survey, dated July28, 2008 as well the landscape plan prepared byDavid Jaquith, and the elevations entitled "Proposed Renovation of 17 North Street", prepared by David Jaquith, dated May 27, 2008, and revised July 14, 2008 and July 16,2008. 2. Amendments Any amendments to the site plan shall be reviewed bythe City Planner and if deemed substantial by the City Planner, shall be brought to the Planning Board for a vote. Any waiver of conditions contained within shall require the approval of the Planning Board. 3. Landscaping • a. Any proposed landscaping shall be done in accordance with the approved set of plans. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM b. After such landscaping is completed,the developer will add further landscaping if such is requested by the City Planner. 4. HVAC 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. The approved method for screening shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. Parking Eight (8) parking spaces are to be provided on site as shown on the approved plans. This number is allowed by the Board of Appeals variance decision dated September 4, 2008. 6. Lighting . a. The Planning Board defers comments regarding the final design details of lighting fixtures to the Historic Commission. b. No light shall cast a glare onto adjacent parcels or adjacent rights of way. c. A final lighting plan shall be submitted to the City Planner and the City Electrician for illuminance review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. d. After installation, lighting shall be reviewed by the City Planner and the CityElectrician • prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The developer shall modifythe lighting if such is requested by the City Planner. 7. 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 (5a): 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 (5b): 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 m;nimizr the negative effects of construction on abutters. Advance notice shall be provided to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of construction of the project. The notice shall state that: "A copy of the plans and construction management plan and schedule are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the office of the Salem Department of Planning and Community Development, located on the Third Floor of 120 • Washington Street, 978-619-5685." -2- i 1 Y 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. 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. 8. Construction Traffic & Phasing a. All construction will occur on site; no construction will occur or be staged within City right of way. 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 issuance of a building permit. c. Any roadways, driveways, or sidewalks damaged during construction shall be restored to their original condition bythe applicant. • d. The applicant shall clean construction vehicles before they exit the construction site, and clean and sweep all streets affected by their construction truck traffic as necessary. 9. Clerk of the Works 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. 10. Salem Health Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Health Department. 11. Boatel of Health All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Board of Health. 12. Fire Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department. 13. Office of the Building Commissioner All work shall comply with the requirements of the office of the Salem Building Commissioner. 14. Office of the City Engineer The applicant, his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the City • Engineer. 15. Utilities 3 y� Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit,an engineered plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer that confirms the connectivity of utilities leaving the property to those in the street. The condition and capacity of the utilities in the street shall be confirmed by cleaning and internal video inspection to identify any structural defects that may hinder carrying capacity. The City Engineer shall set the limits of the investigations; defects shall be the responsibility of the applicant to repair. 16. Maintenance a. Refuse removal, ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibility of the applicant,successors, and assigns. b. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off site. c. Maintenance of any landscaping shall be the responsibility of the applicant, his successors or assigns. The applicant, his successors or assigns, shall guarantee all trees and shrubs for a two-year period. d. The owner and/or condominium association shall be responsible for trash pickup. 17. As-Built Plans As-built plans, stamped by a Registered Professional Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development and City Engineer prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy both in hard copy and in electronic file format suitable for the City's use and approved by the City Engineer 18. Violations Violations of any condition shall result in revocation of this pemnit by the Planning Board, unless the violation of such condition is waived by 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 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 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. C/�/ Charles M Puleo, T Chair Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 4 3� CITY OF SALEM ' 1 PLANNING BOARD �S N _ rJ _J Report to City Council - _ I September 5, 2008 - I'J At its meeting on September 4, 2008, the Planning Board voted to recommend as follows oniithe proposed zoning amendment: The Planning Board voted six (6) in favor(Puleo, Lombardini, Ready,Sullivan, Hanscom, and. Kavanaugh) and none (0) opposed to recommend approval of the proposed amendment. In making this recommendation, the Planning Board considered the beneficial impact of past projects permitted in the City as planned unit developments (PUD). The Board was pleased with the outcome of several of these projects which were shaped through the special permit process. These projects are the J.P.I (former Parker Bros. site),Fafard Development, Traders Way/Fust Street, and the Stop &Shop on Howley Street. The Board noted that these developments resulted in an expansion of the residential and commercial tax base, mitigation with abutters,substantial contributions to the city's infrastructure and funds being held by the City for future improvements. • More recently,the Planning Board approved a PUD for the redevelopment of the Old Salem Jail. The Board believes that this text amendment will provide a way in which to attract solid, responsible development and envisions this permitting option attracting the redevelopment of challenging sites within the City. The Board recognizes that the economy has changed since the adoption of the Business Park Development zone, and that the limited uses allowed in this district are less viable in today's economy. Therefore,this text change would seem to be a valuable tool for both the developers and the City of Salem If you have any questions regarding this matter,please feel free to contact Lynn Duncan at the Department of Planning &Community Development at (978) 619-5685. Sincerely, C M Charles M. Puleo Chairman Cc: Mayor Kimberly Driscoll Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TES.: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM ' a PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decision At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, September 4,2008 at 7:00pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem Massachusetts, the Planning Board voted upon the following items: Applicant: Anthony V. Tiro Request: Amendment to previously approved Waiver of Frontage Location: 7-17 Thomas Circle (Map 8, Lots 20,21, 22,168) Description: The proposed amendment was to retain the existing rock boulders rather than install a steel guardrail along Thomas Circle Decision: Withdrawn Without Prejudice — Filed with City Clerk September 8,2008 Applica William Wharff Request: Site Plan Review Special Permit Location: 17 North Street(Map 26, Lot 492) Former Elk Lodge Description: The proposed project includes the construction of a third and fourth story and the conversion of the former Elks Lodge Assembly Hall into seven (7) residential condominiums. Decision: Approved — Filed with City Clerk September 8,2008 This now is Ding sea in mVharxe with the Massadmetts Qwal L aus, Clxapter 40A, Seamon 9 aril" not • n gwre aaxn by the ra*wti Appeals, �an)K shag he mule p muaru to Q*ter 40A, Seaman 17, and shall he fled udnn 20 clays from the date wtA&the damian uas falai urtb the city Ck7k. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ♦ TEL: 978.745.9595 F.,-x: 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALE.M.COM g CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD City of Salem Planning Board Notice of Site Visit The City of Salem Planning Board will hold a site visit for the Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit application of Snakebite Realty LLC for the property located at 142 Canal Street (Map 33, Lot 006). Said site visit will be held on Thursday, August 14, 2008 at 6:00 pm at 142 Canal Street. Charles Puleo Chairman � O �rz � This notice posted on "Official ul ti �' City Hell Balem, Mass. on at Sh /Y� in accoreEarye ith ha 23A 9 238 of M.G.L. t vit, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM Minutes of Joint Public Hearing with the City Council and Planning Board • September 3, 2008 A Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and Planning Board was held Wednesday, September 4, 2008 at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers, 93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts to discuss an amendment to Section 7-15 of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. The proposed amendment is to allow the Planning Board to grant a special permit for a planned unit development for any parcel of land in the Business Park Development Zone (BPD) subject to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. One requirement of See. 7-15 is that a parcel must contain a minimum of the lesser of sixty thousand (60,000) square feet or five (5) times the minimum lot size of the applicable zoning district. The minimum lot size of the zoning district is 40,000 square feet; therefore, the parcel must contain a minimum o f 60,000 square feet. Notice of this meeting was posted on May 30, 2008 and advertised in the Salem news by the City Clerk on August 21 & August 28, 2008. In attendance: Planning Board Members: Chuck Puleo, Chairman Mayor Kimberley Driscoll John Moustakis Tim Ready City Council Members: Tim Kavanaugh President Mike Sosnowski, Ward 2 Christine Sullivan Steven Pinto, Councillor at Large Pam Lombardini • Thomas Furey, Councillor at Large Arthur Sargent III, Councillor at Large City Staff Robert McCarthy, Ward 1 Lynn Duncan, Planning Director Jean Pelletier, Ward 3 Amy Lash, Staff Planner Jerry Ryan, Ward 4 Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Matthew Veno, Ward 5 Paul Prevey, Ward 6 Planning Board Members Absent: Joan B. Lovely, Councillor at Large Gene Collins Joseph O'Keefe, Ward 7 Nadine Hanscom The meeting began with the introduction of the Chairman of the Planning Board Chuck Puleo, who proceeded to introduce members of the Planning Board. Lynn Duncan began by explaining that the purpose of the joint public hearing is a zoning amendment to allow Planned Unit Development within the Business Park Development zone. The BPD areas highlighted on the map were presented. Lynn Duncan said based on research, PUD was established in 1977 and the BPD began in 1985. When reviewed, 45 individual parcels are zoned for business. In accordance with PUD, you have to have minimum of 60,000 sq ft. and only 25 of the 45 contain enough area that could be used. Of that 25, most are already developed and they believe nine have potential. The PUD gives the city more possibilities. The list of potential parcels was reviewed. Ch- Pelletier asked about the wetlands and Commercial St. Commercial St. is owned by the State; Lynn explained that they are not changing any existing • requirements. Mixture of uses would have to be determined; some would require permit. In accordance with the law, if you allow PUD in one area, you have to have in another. Lynn said there was a catalyst- potential redevelopment of Camp Lions parcel. This decision would be important regardless of potential development. 1 Z • Ch. Prevey asked for clarification of PUD. Lynn Duncan explained that with PUD business development would allow mixed use, PUD gives Planning Board more flexibility with potential but still needs to meet height requirements. The Planning Board would need to look at impacts i.e. runoff, traffic, density, drainage. Ch. Ryan asked what the area near Wal-Mart was originally zoned for and Mayor Driscoll explained they were zoned newer, progressive zoning like Technology way in Peabody. She reiterated that its very preliminary, that they have been approached by Lowe's, but that's not why they're here. PUD allows development in every other district, thinks it was oversight; it will keep what's allowed. She commended the Planning Board in terms of reviewing projects and said PUD would allow the Planning Board more flexibility with their decisions, gives them a tool and makes it more manageable. She added that they're not rezoning, it's a text amendment. Ch. O'Keefe asked about some parcels on the list and asked for clarification of some areas on the map. Lynn Duncan said any parcel not believed to be developable is not on the list. She also mentioned that every parcel is zoned whether owned by city or state. Clr Sargeant is concerned about Swampscott Rd and rear Pequot Highlands becoming industrial. He also suggested that if we're doing this for one developer, then years down the road we may have to do it for another. Parker Brothers area was mentioned regarding their change of zoning. Clr. Pelletier asked with PUD if housing will be allowed without special permit and if R3 will be allowed. Lynn explained yes, with special permit. Also, the Planning Board can be flexible with • everything but the height. Clr Pelletier feels that if anyone comes in for PUD, councilors would be all for it because we need more businesses. He'd like to see more. Clr O'Keefe recognized Lynn's work and Amy's work. He asked who owns between storage building and health club. Lynn said that area is not zoned BPD so it wasn't included on the list. Opened to Public Beverly McSwiggin, 30 Japonica St, asked if nothing changes, what would (potentially) Lowe's and Wal-Mart have to do to build there? Lynn Duncan felt she wasn't fully prepared to answer the question except to say that BPD allows commercial retail use and they may have to request a variance. Teacie Goggin, 9 Wisteria St, felt like they were taking one step away from the Planning Board. Clr Pelletier explained that it gives them more flexibility with setback, width, footage, etc. We've lost industrial base and we're trying to establish and get more business in to Salem. Teacie Goggin asked why they're taking zoning from parcels. Mayor Driscoll explained that they're not rezoning. It's a text amendment to allow PUD in BPD. They're taking language and changing it similar to other Business Districts; in exchange it allows some flexibility. Ch. Sosnowski further explained that for example if Lowe's wants to build, if we put in PUD, we can increase residents and there will be more flexibility with the project. Lynn Duncan said if left just as BPD, currently allowed is office building, wholesale, manufacturing, lab and research- which are limited usage for BPD. Clr Furey pointed out a section (17) that mentions all uses • would be permitted and Lynn Duncan confirmed that, if PUD is allowed. 2 Scott Weinberg, 12 Tanglewood, asked Lynn to clarify the zoning shown on map, as some is noted in purple,pink, solid lines, dotted lines. Lynn Duncan explained the legends, for example, purple currently BPD, solid line because it's completely developed, etc. Pat Liberti, 3 Lions Lane, she understood her parcel to be R3. This upsets her because she's paying taxes as residents, and the map doesn't reflect that, it should show how it's used now. Ch. Sosnowski said that area might be non-conforming. Mayor Driscoll said it may be nonconforming and if she wants she can get a petition to change the zoning. Gentleman in back of room, did not state name, said there is documentation for that area, it's residential. Ch. Sargeant is surprised that with PUD in existence, that this never came up in BPD before. Ch. Sosnowski asked if Lowe's could petition for PUD eligibility without the other parcels, Lynn said that would not be able to do that. Ch. O'Keefe wondered why Old Village Drive (daycare center) is on there and Lynn suggested that it might be under 60,000 sq ft. Parcels shown are only those that are equal to or greater then 60,000 sq ft and zoned BPD, owned by one entity. Gentleman in back of room, did not state name, believes that the area in question was originally three parcels of land (prior to daycare). :_ ... Lynn reiterated to Ms�Holyoke PUD is allowed in certain districts now and they just want to include it in BPD. There is no re-zoning being done. Joe Correnti, Federal St, thanked Lynn Duncan for extensive look at parcels. He wondered how are property owners affected and if they were notified. Lynn Duncan explained that since they are not re-zoning,just changing text, they didn't need to be notified. Lowe's or any other retail would not be allowed if PUD weren't in place in BPD. This would allow developers to come in with mixed-use plan. Attorney Joe Sano, for Camp Lions, mentioned that Camp Lions has been there since 1945. They want to be good neighbor of Salem and would like to see this approved. Clr. Veno followed up with that they're not being asked to amend. It's technically true but the amendment that's being sought would allow broader range of uses. Joe Correnti added that it would allow developers to bring in more different uses. Ch. Pelletier used NRCC restriction as an example-had that had PUD years ago, they may have had more development by now. Ch. Sargeant feels property owners should be notified. He feels it should be the owner's decision. Clr. Pelletier wondered if the Planning Board would have the option to hear the owners. Lynn Duncan said it's not up to individual property owners; all parcels have to be the same across the board. If someone doesn't want to use the provisions of BPD, they don't have to. Also, everyone has been notified because this was advertised. Ch. McCarthy said we're changing text. If it does pass and a developer comes in, then abutters will be notified and Planning Board would have to be more diligent. He feels the Planning Board will have more responsibility. The definition of PUD was read. Ch. Furey discussed having confidence in the Planning Board and stated that PUD change may be to our advantage; this could be a catalyst for something creative. We need to meet challenges in a creative way. Clr. Lovely noted that Mayor Driscoll said earlier this PUD gives us a • comprehensive look at roadway infrastructure as well. Lynn Duncan clarified that if this goes to the Planning Board, they would deliberate at an open meeting, not a public hearing. 3 I Clr O'Keefe moved that the Public Hearing be closed, all were in favor. Clr. O'Keefe moved • that this be moved to the Economic Committee that includes 3 ward councilors. Mayor Driscoll said this needs to be referred to the Planning Board under the statute, and then maybe it could go to a committee. The ordinance states it has to go to the Planning Board, they make recommendation and then send it back to City Councillors. Lynn Duncan said the Planning Board has 21 days to make recommendation. Clr O'Keefe amended his motion to refer this issue to the Planning Board, all in favor. There being no further business to come before the City Councillors and Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Councillor O'Keefe to refer this issue to the Planning Board, all were in favor(10-0). Clr. Veno moved that the Planning Board notify all owners and abutters about possible PUD. Clr. Lovely and others weren't sure they could require that. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the City Councillors and Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Councillor Veno to adjourn the meeting seconded and all in favor(10-0). The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 4 � vT CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1608 ,Ui IO P 4: 11 AGENDA PLANNING BOARD CII Y Thursday, July 17, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o June 4, 2008 o June 5, 2008 2. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit—Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede)—Attorney Scott Grover—Request for continuance to September 4, 2008 3. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit— Metro PCS, 12 Pope Street (Map 15, Lot 308) —Kristen LeDuc 4. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit— Metro PCS, 27 Charter Street (Map 35, Lot 272) —Kristen LeDuc 5. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans —Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35, Lot 179) —Attorney Joseph Correnti 6. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit- Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street (Map 33, Lot 006) —Daniel DiLullo, AIA 7. Old/New Business 8. Adjournment This notice posted on "Official Bulletin Board' City Hall cSalern, Mass. on �l1yy�� eoY at �F:tiP�j in accordance wrtlyCN.ap. 39 Sit 23A & 23B of M.G.L. 120\VASuiNGTON STREET, SALEM, NIASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 wwws UESa.Cos� 'r ycotiorrgr� CITY OF SALEM ' DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT �cfyrti��w�P KI�IMBISR1 I Y DRISCOLL MAYOR I20 WAY UNG[ON SI RFIF.r♦ SAIA-M,iNIASaV_l Isms 01970 1),:978-619-5685 ♦ 1',vx:978-7-40-0404 1A NN GOON IN DCN(:AN,:VCP Duti-aunt MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: July 10, 2008 RE: Agenda—July 17, 2008 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Draft Minutes of June 4, 2008 (Joint Public Hearing with City Council). ➢ Draft Minutes of June 5, 2008 • ➢ Materials for Agenda Items Notes on Agenda Items Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit—Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, &71 Mason Street(Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) —Attorney Scott Grover—Request for continuance to September 4, 2008 There have been substantial changes to the plans for Riverview Place since the Design Review Board meeting in April. Once revised plans are submitted, the project will need to go back before the Design Review Board. Attorney Scott Grover will be submitting a letter requesting that the Planning Board continue the public hearing until September 4`h. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit— Metro PCS, 12 Pope Street (Map 15, Lot 308)—Kristen LeDuc The applicant is seeking a special permit to add equipment to an existing rooftop wireless communications facility. The equipment proposed includes five panel antennas fagade mounted on the existing penthouse, one faux chimney on the roof to conceal one panel antenna, and three equipment cabinets on the roof behind a screen wall painted to match the building. Plans were • circulated to the Building Inspector, City Engineer, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, and Fire Prevention. I am waiting for a response from the City Engineer and Fire Prevention. All others concur with the proposal In April, the Planning Board granted special permits to Metro PCS to allow the installation of additional equipment at existing facilities located at 10-12 First Street, 320 Lafayette Street, and 488R Highland Avenue. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit—Metro PCS, 27 Charter Street (Map 35, Lot 272) —Kristen LeDuc The applicant is seeking a special permit to add equipment to an existing rooftop wireless communications facility. The equipment proposed includes six panel antennas fagade mounted no the existing penthouse, and three equipment cabinets on the roof behind a screen wall painted to match the building. Plans were circulated to the Building Inspector, City Engineer, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, and Fire Prevention. I am.waiting for a response from the City Engineer and Fire Prevention. All others concur with the proposal Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans—Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35, Lot 179)— Attorney Joseph Correnti The amendment involves phasing the development. Phase I will include the restoration of the Jail and the Jail Keeper's House, as well as rebuilding the Barn. In total, Phase I will include twenty-three (23) residential units. Phase II will including the construction of the new building, • which includes thirteen (13) residential units. Plans were circulated to the Building Inspector, City Engineer, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, and Fire Prevention. I am waiting for a response from the City Engineer and Fire Prevention, all others concur with the proposal. The Health Agent, Joanne Scott, noted that the Board of Health's conditions dated May 28, 2008 shall remain the same. The Design Review Board has recommended that the Salem Redevelopment Authority approve the phasing amendment with the condition that all grass on the site be either sod or loam and seed to create a consistent appearance. The Salem Redevelopment Authority will act on this matter later this month. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit- Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street (Map 33, Lot 006)—Daniel DiLullo, AIA The proposed project includes the construction of a new single story 10,980 sq. ft. building designed for use by a retail tenant and a bank with a drive-through facility. No changes are proposed to the existing building on the site, or to the neighboring site where the California Olive Oil building is located. Comments from the Department of Planning and Community Development's review of the submittal can be found in my letter to Daniel DiLullo, dated July 9, 2008, which is included in your packet. • 2 .r I J The City is undertaking several improvements to Canal Street; a summary of this work has been • included in your packet. I will have a copy of the preliminary design plans available at the meeting. I will also have a copy of the bike path extension plan available at the meeting. The MBTA has agreed to lease the land they own just behind 142 Canal Street to the City for the extension of the bike path. At this time, the City is reviewing the draft lease agreement and having the property surveyed. The City is researching potential funding through the Transportation Enhancement Program to construct the bike path extension. When the bike path extension is constructed, the City plans to install the same wooden guardrail that currently exists along the bike path along the edge of this property. Plans were circulated to the Building Inspector, Board of Health, Conservation Commission, and Fire Prevention for comments. I am waiting for comments from the.Building Inspector, and Fire Prevention. The Board of Health will review the proposal and send conditions to the Planning Board. The Conservation Agent had the following comments: The site is located in the 500-year. loodplain/Zone B according to the FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map. The site does not appear to be located in an area subject to the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission. It is highly recommended that the Planning Board have a peer review completed to assure that additional storm water run off will not be added to the existing system. The peer reviewer should look at the current proposal to assess the possibility of adding one to two additional catch basins to the front and side of the site as well as re-grading the site to direct all storm water into an infiltration system, as proposed. Ideally the storm water should be contained • to the site to prevent flooding along Canal Street and improve water quality. Low Impact Development(LID) techniques are also encouraged. One LID technique would be to incorporate more planting beds to help capture run off. • 3 v City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board >L Ac Q t L� Date -4 / Name Mailing Address Phone # Email 7-4, 0ro /�s' u� QSd � ?Z�^771—/IIB CrossS . 12CAtic' s� " Noises ') S 5 'v,, -Pkkeri131) 92T 2LlS 52 Page of J Salem Planning Board • Minutes of Meeting July 17, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, July 17, 2008, 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, Tim Kavanaugh, Gene Collins, Tim Ready, Christine Sullivan. Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Nadine Hanscom Approval of Minutes The minutes of the June 4`h meetingwere reviewed. A motion was made b Christine Sullivan Y to accept the minutes, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh, and approved(7-0). The minutes of the June 5`h meeting were reviewed. Chuck Puleo said on page 2 next to last paragraph remove "no matter what goes there". Also on • page 2, reword to say John Carr was recognized to speak on a point of fact. Christine Sullivan said first and last names should be used consistently. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Christine Sullivan, and approved (7-0). Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede)- Attorney Scott Grover- Request for Continuance to September 4, 2008 Amy Lash had letter from Attorney Scott Grover requesting continuance of the public hearing to September 4, 2008. The letters also requested an extension of the deadline for final action until September 18, 2008. Amy said they will be going before the DRB in August. A motion was made by Christine Sullivan to continue the public hearing to September 4`h, 2008 and extend the deadline for final action to September 18, 2008, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Public Hearing- Wireless Communications FacilitySpecial Permit- Metro PCS, 12 Pope Street (Map 35, Lot 308)- Kristen LeDuc • Kristen LeDuc of Wellman Associates, Inc., for Metro PCS and Franz Pierre, RF Engineer was also in attendance. Kristen LeDuc explained that Metro PCS is a new wireless carrier, planning to provide people to talk with no contract, no service charge, etc. 1 They propose to put 5 antennas on the penthouse at 12 Pope Street. One antenna will be concealed within a faux chimney. The related equipment will be contained behind a faux . fiberglass 10 ft. wall so that it would mimic a penthouse. All antennas, faux chimney and faux wall will be painted to match the existing penthouse/roof. Christine Sullivan said that there should be a condition in the approval that states that they will maintain the paint should it chip or peel. Amy Lash will add into the decision "The applicant, his successors or assigns shall maintain paint on all equipment, and structures that the applicant installs on roof." John Moustakis pointed out that in Kristen LeDuc's description it says `5 story building' but it's a 10- story- Chuck Puleo remembered that Kristen LeDuc has been to the Planning Board prior to this for other locations and asked if those sites have been constructed. She explained that they haven't been, as they are waiting to get approval for all sites. There being no public comment or further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to approve the Special Permit, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (7-0). Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit- Metro PCS, 27 Charter Street (Map 35, Lot 308)- Kristen LeDuc Kristen LeDuc of Wellman Associates, Inc., for Metro PCS and Franz Pierre, RF Engineer was also in attendance. Kristen LeDuc explained that Metro PCS proposes to put 6 wireless antennas • on the penthouse. The related equipment would be behind a 10 ft wall and all will be painted to match existing roof/penthouse. The connection will be through coaxial cables and the equipment will be off the ground. Chuck Puleo pointed out on the drawing a door that is near where they would be installing their equipment and asked if Metro PCS would be willing to paint the door while they were painting the equipment. Kristen LeDuc said as long as OSHA doesn't say it has to be a certain color; she doesn't see it to be a problem with painting the door. Christine Sullivan suggested adding the door, as well as the wording about successors and assigns to the condition. Amy Lash will reword similar to the conditions for the previous site. Chuck Puleo said that if they can't paint the door, they should get a letter stating why. Meeting opened to the public There being no public comment, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to close the public hearing, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (7-0). There being no further questions or comments from the Board, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to approve the Special Permit, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (7-0). Christine Sullivan asked Amy Lash if there is a community that has a different process for obtaining Special Permits available so that the Planning Board doesn't have to spend time on such issues. Gene Collins said it was set up this way, so that the Planning Dept. would do • preliminary work and then it would go before the Planning Board. Amy will do some research on this. Tim Kavanaugh said if something requires a Public hearing, then it needs to go before a 2 Board. Amy Lash said one thing they may be able to do is add a text amendment to say "allows • substitutions of equipment without Planning Board approval" right now it states that any changes need to come back to the Planning Board. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans- Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35, Lot 179) — Attorney Joseph Correnti Penn Lindsay of New Boston Ventures addressed the Board, he introduced Architect Dan Ricciarelli. Penn Lindsay said Attorney Joe Correnti will not be here, he is at the City Council Meeting. They are proposing to phase the project into two phases. It originally contained all condominiums, but based on the market, they have changed it to some condos and some apartments. They are proposing to move forward with Phase 1, which includes restoring the existing historic buildings, the Jail and Jail Keeper's house and rebuilding the barn; and then they will do the new proposed Alexander Building in a second phase. This is all based on market conditions, getting financing on the condominium aspect. This will accomplish all of the original goals: restore the historic buildings, have restaurant and jail exhibit and artist space, and rental apartments for five years. As market conditions permit, they would move forward to the second phase. Dan Ricciarelli showed a plan of how it would look after Phase 1, before Phase 2. He explained the 3 buildings will be in the same place, they would build a parking lot, loam and • seed, screen parking for tenants and put hedging around. When Phase 2 begins, they will remove the hedging and place it around the site. Christine Sullivan questioned the requirement for the historic tax credits, do historic properties be rental properties for five years to qualify? Penn Lindsay confirmed yes. Christine Sullivan asked if they were granted this change, when would they break ground? Penn Lindsay said they're in the process of closing, so they estimate the beginning of September. John Moustakis asked if there is a chance it could take 5 years for Phase 2 with the way the market is going. He is concerned that the construction of Phase 11 will disrupt traffic, etc. again. Penn Lindsay said the timeline for Phase 1 is about one year. John Moustakis asked for them to write out how they're going to plan for Phase 2. John Moustakis said there is a lot going on with the Courthouse project and roadway work. Dan Ricciarelli said they can put it in a memo (ex., staking, layout, trucks). Chuck Puleo is concerned about opening streets up for pipes. Dan Ricciarelli said they would be doing all that during Phase 1. Amy Lash mentioned that the during the construction of Phase 2, there will be,a loss of on-site parking which will need to be addressed. Dan Ricciarelli said they would put a construction plan together. Chuck Puleo asked about the access path to the driveway (near the bypass road) and also, what's shown on the plan for this, is that what is being proposed or is it going to happen? Penn Lindsay said what is on the plan is what they're proposing, but it's not what MassHighway is in the process of building. They have been speaking with MassHighway to determine how to work together. He also said told them they're going to install the path the way it was designed, because permits are already in place, and then later the City can rip it out. Penn said they're proposing to figure out how to stay within permits and also install pedestrian walkway. Gene Collins said the area in front is bigger than proposed or thought it was. He also said the access 3 they're referring to starts at the cemetery wall and a park blocks the access to the driveway. Chuck Puleo mentioned that they will need access to a dumpster and driveway. If it's blocked, • how will that affect them getting a permit? There is concern over the size of the front park area and the upkeep of it. Dan Ricciarelli said once it reverts back to the City, then the City has control over what they can do, he does not know when this will be. Amy Lash will check with Lynn Duncan on this. Gene Collins asked that on the backside where the carriage house is, where the graveyard is, will that be maintained so as to protect the cemetery? Christine Sullivan emphasized that this is an important project to the City and they're good developers. Meeting opened to the public David Moison (45 St. Peter Street) asked where the parking would be during construction? On site or in the garage? Penn Lindsay said for Phase 1 it would be on site. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to close the public hearing, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Amy Lash had a draft amended decision. Gene Collins brought up about the permitting process- that it doesn't have to be 2 phases. They can do it all at once and pull what they need as they go. Amy Lash said she spoke with Lynn Duncan about the special permit, it's good for 2 years once it's granted, once the original building is renovated that would count as substantial use of the permit so the permit would not lapse. However, New Boston may chose to request an extension of the permit anyways if they have not started the second phase at this time. John Moustakis said the Planning Board should request them to come back because the Board may have questions on • Phase 2. Tim Ready felt that the Board was asking questions that the developer is not prepared or capable of answering. John Moustakis said he is asking when they're ready for Phase 2, they come in with a staging and parking management plan since it's a whole new construction project. Penn Lindsay said they would accept a condition requiring that they do so. Amy Lash asked how the developer would handle 4d of parking section? Penn Lindsay suggested changing it to "For a period of 2 years during construction of Phase 1". Christine Sullivan asked for correction of how many units, Penn Lindsay explained that there are 23 units, 19 in the jail, 3 in jail keepers house and 1 in the carriage house. Amy Lash said in the draft decision she made a change so that documentation of parking passes for the seven resident spaces don't have to be provided until Phase 2. The Board of Health conditions have been included this time, since Board of Health approval happened after the last amendment. Fire Department requirements will be attached again. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to amend the previously approved plans, seconded by Gene Collins and approved (7- 0). Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Drive-Through Facilities Special Permit- Snakebite Realty LLC, 142 Canal Street (map 33, Lot 006)- Daniel DiLullo, AIA Dan DiLullo of DiLullo Associates, Inc. addressed the Board and introduced Matthew Leidner of Marchionda & Associates. Dan DiLullo explained that 142 Canal Street has two existing buildings. They propose to construct a new building in the middle of the lot. The front part of site is in the Canal Street Overlay District, which puts them under certain requirements. Matt 4 Leidner said they propose part retail use and part bank use. It's a 3 '/2 acre site and the project • encompasses only '/2 acre of the site. The existing buildings are 25000 sq ft/2500 sq ft respectively, and the building they're proposing to build will be about 1100 sq ft. The areas in front and on the side of building are paved, they're proposing to expand the parking area and pave the side and back; they'd overlay the existing pavement and restripe. The building would have 69 spaces, distributed throughout the parking area. In front on Canal Street the paving goes right into the sidewalk. They plan they plan to take this out and put in a 5-foot wide landscape strip, which would emphasize the sidewalk. They have put the dumpster in back, so it's not visible from the street. Gene Collins inquired about the drainage area since Canal Street has flooded in the past. Matt Leidner said he met with Dave Knowlton, City Engineer, who said that he does want additional runoff on the street. So, they made an underground infiltration- the entire rooftop and expanded parking area will go into new infiltration system. He said they tested the area and the soil and area are excellent for this type of drainage. The site is very flat, with a gentle grade up to Canal St- it wasn't difficult to pitch the roof back and take new water. They're not adding to the runoff on the street and they'll be taking some component away (some from the back area). Gene Collins said that this area is not the height of the problem, it's more towards McDonald's that's the problem. Christine Sullivan added that it's the whole street through the O'Keefe Center. Chuck Puleo asked about building height and Matt Leidner said the new building is consistent with the buildings that surround it and added that it's not in the 100 year flood plan. Chuck Puleo said there are currently some spaces at the Hertz that are being used. Matt said yes, some spaces • they're proposing are next to the existing building though are more than enough spaces provided — existing and proposed. Matt said 69 spaces will satisfy the new proposed building, the 80 plus in the rear will satisfy the remaining. Amy Lash had comments from the Building Inspector. One comment is that parking is not allowed as a standalone use, only as a use incidental to the principal use. If there is parking on site that is a standalone use, this may hinder the applicants ability to pull a building permit. Also Amy Lash understands from the Building Department that one of the attendants in the existing building doesn't have an occupancy permit, again this would be an issue that may hinder the building permit process. John Moustakis asked about traffic flow. Matt Leidner showed the drawing and said both curb cuts will be two-way. Cars for the bank drive thru will go to the right and then around back, which will give plenty of room for cuing. John Moustakis is concerned with both curb cuts being two-way that it might get confusing. Amy Lash said the Fire Prevention Officer is concerned with getting around the building; Amy will give Matt Leidner the contact number for her. Chuck Puleo mentioned that there is a new drive-thru ordinance and asked if they're providing enough cuing space. Matt Leidner said it's a single window drive up, and with the space behind and to the side of the behind, it will allow for plenty of cars. Chuck Puleo also said the Fire Department will want a clear 18 ft. to get through. Pam Lombardini requested a site visit and Christine Sullivan agreed. Christine Sullivan • explained that the Canal Street is a very important entrance corridor. She said they're trying to do more along the sidewalk and not have buildings set back from the street such as this project is proposing. She would like to know the Planning Department's position on this particular building, what Canal Street should look like. Amy Lash said she brought the preliminary Canal 5 1. Street Improvement Plan for the Planning Board members review. She said there are some non- conforming issues on the site such as the curbs cuts and a chain link fence along Ocean Ave, . which is not allowed in an entrance corridor. The City would like to see the property come as close as possible to conforming to the Zoning Ordinance through the Site Plan Review. Christine Sullivan questioned the building placement. Amy Lash said there are setbacks the applicant needs to comply with. Amy Lash said another on going City project to be aware of is the bike path extension which will be at the rear of the property on the MBTA land. Christine Sullivan said that there are a lot of things in play, and which is appropriate? Gene Collins wondered if this project comes under Design Review. Amy Lash said no. Gene Collins questioned the number of owners and parcels. Matt Leidner said it's one parcel, one owner and the building is designed for business use. Dan DiLullo added that it's the owner's intention to dress up the existing building. The current tenants are at-will and the intent is to get a higher scale tenant. He also mentioned that they are proposing more for beautification. John Moustakis agreed with Pam Lombardini's suggestion to visit the site. Meeting opened to the public Polly Wilbert (7 Cedar Street, member of South Salem Neighborhood Committee) is concerned about whether this is going to provide a sidewalk. Also, the California Olive Oil Co. building is there, will this project put a strain on that building leaving it with no parking? She said that Canal Street should be upgraded, be walker friendly. She's concerned with constraints for the Fire Department and feels this property has not been an asset, it has deteriorated. They would like it to be high quality development. The owner of this property also owns 127 Canal Street • which is residential and they pulled the Police Records for him and found that there were quite a few problems for this building/owner. They want it to be attractive. As for a sidewalk, Chuck Puleo said that on the plan it does show vertical granite curbing. Matt Leidner said the existing sidewalk is not impacted. In fact, they will emphasize that sidewalk with a 5ft stretch of landscaping. Christine Sullivan said concrete sidewalks are shown on the Canal Street Improvement Plan. Jim Crosby (125 Canal Street) said there's a sign on the property listing development and a website which shows other new buildings. Is what's shown on the website what will be going there? Dan DiLullo said there have been proposals that involve tearing down the existing buildings and putting up new. The plan right now is to develop the new building being presented. A site visit was scheduled for August 91 h at 9 a.m. It will be a public site visit and will be posted. Amy Lash said N.E. Civil Engineering will be performing the engineering peer review. There being no further questions or comments, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the Public Hearing to the next meeting on September 4`h, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (7-0). Old Business • Chuck said the Beverly Co-Op Bank screening still hasn't been installed. Amy Lash spoke . with Bill Howard who said at the time the project was approved, he believed there was an approved screening plan. Amy Lash said the Planning Department does not have record of a 6 screening plan being approved and because the property is in the Urban Renewal District the • screening will need to be reviewed by the DRB. Bill Howard is meeting with Lynn Duncan on this issue. • Regarding the property Essex Street (next to CVS) which John Moustakis brought up. Amy Lash said the Building Inspector is going to send the property owner a violation notice since the curb cut that is being use was never approved. Chuck Puleo believes they also broke the sidewalk. New Business • Pam Lombardini proposed moving the Planning Board meetings to 6:30 pm in the fall and winter so that members get out a little bit earlier. Most members said they would consider it. Christine Sullivan has a meeting with another Board on the third Thursday of every month and on that night, she may be a few minutes late for the Planning Board meeting. Tim Ready suggested they discuss this proposal at the September meeting, all agreed. • David Weiner will be rejoining the Planning Board, he will likely be at the September meeting. • John Moustakis said regarding Phase 2 of the Jail, he brought up the issue of staging because the Derby Lofts staging blocked streets and lots, it was terrible and shouldn't be allowed to happen again. Also, he believes the by-pass road will be open at the end of August and possibly part of it in a week. • Chuck Puleo commented that the City upgraded the website for the Planning Board, it looks good, and it still included Walter Power's name which is nice. • Amy Lash said the comment period for the City of Peabody's Flood Mitigation Project has • been extended. • Amy Lash said there is a proposed text amendment to allow PVDs in the BPD Zone. There will be a joint public hearing, she will contact everyone regarding the date. Adjournment 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 Christine Sullivan and approved (7-0). The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 7 TINTI, QUINN, GROVER & FREY, P.C. 27 CONGRESS STREET, SUITE 414 SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - WILLIAM J. TINT] - WILLIAM B. .ARDIFF(1965 1995) s tintiOtin[ilaw.cum TELEPHONE WILLIAM F.QUINN (978)745-8065 • (978)7442948 MARCIA MULFORD CINI W illiamFQuinnOauLcom OF COUNSEL SCOTT M.GROVER TELECOPIER JOHN D. KEENAN smgroverOtintilaw.com (978)7453369 OF COUNSEL www.tintilaw com MARC P.FREY mpfr"@finfiIaw.com - MARCY D.HAUBER JAMES G.GILBERT RECEIVED jgilbert©tintilaw.com JUL 1 7 2008 DEPT.OF PLANNNG 6 July 16, 2008 COWk"TYDEVELOPMENT Ms. Amy Lash City of Salem o Department of Planning and n r Community Development ' 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 "' -0 • Re: Riverview Place/Special Permit Applications i- O pn Dear Amy: I am writing to request the continuance of the public hearing concerning the above referenced matter until September 4, 2008. In addition, please consider this letter a request to extend the time for the Planning Board to act on the application until September 18, 2008. Very truly yours, 4cotM. Gr ver SMG/dlg BY HAND DELIVERY • \, !N4,4,9 � CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT y<crrp;�et�o�` KIMBERLEY DRISO OLL MAYOR 120 WASFuNCTONSrREE"r• S.-klt�,,tVWSACNtsErrs 01970 Tr,i.:978-619-5685 FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN COO nN DUNCAN,AICD' DimcrOR :.a o -C a m c: July 22, 2008 r Riverview Place, LCC 'u C/o Scott Grover, Esquire 27 Congress Street, Suite 414 Salem, MA 01970 n .0 RE: Request for Continuance and Extension of Deadline for Final Action Decision Riverview Place, LLC(72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street,& 71 Mason Street) Dear Scott: On July 17, 2008 the Planning Board voted to continue the public hearing concerning the special permit • applications of Riverview Place LLC until September 4, 2008. Additionally, the Planning Board voted to extend the time for final action on the applications until September 18, 2008. Sincerely, Amash Staff Planner Ce: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Wireless Special Permit Decision —July 18, 2008' I For The Petition of Metro PCS For The Property Located At A-7,"arter'Street A Public Hearing on this petition was held on July 17, 2008. The following Planning Board members were present: Charles Puleo (Chair), John Moustakis, Timothy Kavanaugh, Christine Sullivan, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini, and Tim Ready. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and 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 six panel antennas facade mounted on the existing penthouse, and three equipment cabinets on the roof behind a screen wall painted to match the building at 27 Charter Street Salem, MA. 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 July 17, 2008, the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven (7) in favor and none opposed, to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special • Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application, dated June 26, 2008, and site plan last dated June 24, 2008, titled `BOS0162A, Salem Housing Authority", Sheets T-1, C- . 1, Z-1, and Z-2 and drawn by Hudson Design Group, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant paints the equipment to match the color of the building and the existing roof structures; the applicant, his successors and assigns, shall maintain the paint on the screen wall and all equipment which is permitted as part of this decision. 2. The applicant shall paint the door on the exterior of the penthouse a red brick color to match the color of the penthouse. If this cannot be done for any reason (FAA regulations or otherwise), the applicant shall report back to the Planning Board. 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 with the City Clerk and that a copy of the decision and plans is on file with the Planning Board. �ltr I1.Sf�i ��� L Charles Puleo, Chairman 120 WsStuvc,Tnn STREET, S.At.EM, NIASSACHUS F ITS 01970 • Tr:i.: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 4 WWW,';AI.F.M.ant 0 • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD X869 Jltl I R A 11� 51 Wireless Special Permit Decision —July 18, 2008 For The Petition of Metro PCs For The Property Located At 12��ppe Stegt;',.L-i i .SS A Public Hearing on this petition was held on July 17, 2008. The following Planning Board members were present: Charles Puleo (Chair), John Moustakis, Timothy Kavanaugh, Christine Sullivan, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini, and Tim Ready. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and 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 five panel antennas fagade mounted on the existing penthouse, one faux chimney on the roof to conceal one panel antenna located at 12 Pope Street Salem, MA. Additionally there would be three equipment cabinets on the roof behind a screen wall painted to match 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 July 17, 2008, the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a vote of • seven (7) in favor and none opposed, to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application, dated June 26, 2008, and site plan last dated June 18, 2008, titled "BOS0024B, Salem Heights", Sheets T-1, Z-1, Z-2, and Z-3 and drawn by Hudson Design Group, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The applicant paints the equipment to match the color of the building and the existing roof structures; the applicant, his successors and assigns, shall maintain the paint on the screen wall and all equipment which is permitted as part of this decision. 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. 1 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. C, Charles Puleo, Chairman 20 WASHING ON STREET, SALEM, MASSACMSE:rrS 01970 • TEG.: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 . WWW.sAi.eM.Cunf L CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Amended Decision (#2) Site Plan Review/Planned Unit Development 50 St. Peter Street r _ r� July 28, 2008 r co Old Salem Jail Ventures, LLC = u, C/o Joseph Correnti, Esq. „ Cr 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Amendment to Previously Approved Plans 50 St. Peter Street/Old Salem Jail Site Site Plan Review/Planned Unit Development On Thursday, July 17, 2008, the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing under Sections 7-15 and 7-18 of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, Planned Unit Development Special Permit and Site Plan Review, at the request of Old Salem Jail Ventures, • property located at 50 St. Peter Street. The proposed LLC, to amend thea plans for the p p y p p amendment involves phasing the development. Phase I will include the restoration of the Jail and the Jail Keeper's House, as well as rebuilding the barn. In total, Phase I will include twenty- three (23) residential units. Phase II will be built as market conditions permit, and will include the construction of the new building, which includes thirteen (13) residential units. Phase I will include thirty-one (3 1) on-site parking spaces. Phase II will include thirty-six (36) on-site parking spaces, and seven (7) off-site parking spaces, which are required as a condition of this decision. The combination of on-site and off-site parking spaces will create a total of forty-three (43) parking spaces for Phase II. New Boston Ventures intends to hold and rent 23 units for a period of 5 years in order to qualify for historic tax credits. After this time, Old Salem Jail Ventures LLC intends to renovate and sell the 23 rental units. The proposed four-building development will still feature a jail exhibit, a live/work artist space, and a restaurant. The Public Hearing was continued to and closed on July 17, 2008. The Planning Board voted on April 17, 2008 by a vote of seven (7) in favor(Puleo, Moustakis, Kavanaugh, Sullivan, Collins, Lombardini, and Ready) and none opposed to approve the Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit as amended with the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan • Work for Phase I shall conform to the revised plans for"50 Saint Peter, Salem, Massachusetts" Sheet C-3, last revised June 10, 2008 and Sheet L-10, dated June 19, 2008 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSAQ U-, [=S 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 • WWW.SAI.EM.COM prepared by Finegold, Alexander & Associates, 77 North Washington Street, Boston, MA 02114. Work for Phase lI shall conform to the revised plans for"50 Saint Peter, Salem, . Massachusetts" Sheets C-2 and C-3, prepared by Finegold, Alexander & Associates, last revised February 29, 2008. A full set of plans including the revised sheets, reflecting all conditions, and incorporating a reference to the original decision as well as amended decisions must be submitted and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2. Original Decision All conditions set forth in the original decision dated December 12, 2006, recorded at the South Essex Registry of Deeds Book 27583, Page 498, shall remain and be adhered to by the applicant. All conditions set forth in the amended decision dated April 22, 2008 shall remain and be adhered to by the applicant. 3. Amendments Any further amendments to the site plan shall be reviewed by the City Planner and if deemed necessary by the City Planner, shall be brought to the Planning Board. Any waiver of conditions contained within shall require the approval of the Planning Board. 4. Parking & Construction Staging a. There shall be thirty-one (3 1) parking spaces on site as shown on the approved plan to support parking needs for Phase I. b. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for Phase II, a parking and staging management • plan shall be submitted to the Planning Board for review and approval. c. Upon completion of Phase II, thirty-six (36) parking spaces are to be provided on site as shown on the approved plans, and the condominium association/Old Salem Jail Ventures LLC, their successors, or assigns, shall purchase seven (7) annual parking passes in the municipal garage for residents use. Documentation of the purchase of these parking passes shall be provided to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy for Phase II. The location of off- site parking spaces may be changed to a different facility within 1,000 feet of the development at the discretion of the Department of Planning and Community Development. d. For a period of two (2) years during construction of Phase 1, five (5) annual parking passes shall be purchased by Old Salem Jail Ventures LLC in the municipal garage for use of the residents of the senior housing. Documentation of the purchase of these parking passes shall be provided to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. e. The applicant has volunteered to incorporate language into the condominium documents which would prohibit residents from parking in the church parking lot. A copy of these • 2 condominium documents shall be provided to the Department of Planning and • Community Development. 5. Fire Department a. All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department. b. The locations of all fire hydrants shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a Building Permit c. Specifications for sprinkler systems, fire alarms, fire service, and tunnel construction have been outlined by the applicant's Consulting Engineer, Norton Remmer, P.E., in the document dated April 16, 2008, which was revised by the Salem Fire Department April 17, 2008, and is attached to this decision. These items were agreed to by the Consulting Engineer, the Salem Fire Department, and the State Fire Marshal during a meeting on April 7, 2008 and any deviation shall require approval by the Salem Fire Department. d. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for Phase II detailed tunnel plans shall be provided to the Salem Fire Department for their approval. e. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy details relating to the ownership and management of the buildings shall be provided to the Salem Fire Department; the Salem Fire Department shall be notified when changes in a building ownership or • management occurs. 6. Board of Health The applicant shall comply with the following conditions from the May 28, 2008 decision of the Board of Health: 1. The individual presenting the plan to the Board of Health must notify the Health Agent of the name, address, and telephone number of the project (site) manager who will be on site and directly responsible for the construction of the project. 2. If a DEP tracking number is issued for this site under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan,no structure shall be constructed until the Licensed Site Professional responsible for the site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use. 3. A trash compactor must be installed in each unit. 4. A radon test is conducted in the basements of the Jail Building and the Jail Keeper's Building while they are a closed condition. 5. The developer will give the Health Agent a copy of the 21 E report if one is generated. 6. A lead and asbestos inspection is conducted prior to any demolition or construction. If lead or asbestos is found it is removed contractors licensed for such removal. • 3 L . 7. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer. • 8. The developer shall employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate the area prior to the construction, demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a copy to the exterminator's invoice of the Health Agent. 9. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction. 10. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping which will occur during construction. 11. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for containment and removal of debris, vegetative waste, and unacceptable excavation material generated during demolition and/or construction. 12. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for fire fighting. 13. Noise levels from the resultant establishments generated by operations, including but not limited to refrigeration and heating, shall not increase the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A) above ambient levels measured at the property line. 14. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project. 15. The resultant establishment shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operation in an environmentally sound manner as described to the Board of Health. 16. The drainage system for this project must be reviewed and approved by the • Northeast Mosquito Control and Wetlands Management District. 17. The plans for a food establishment are approved by the Health Agent prior to construction. 18. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and confirmation that above conditions have been met. 7. 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. 1 herebycertify that a co of this decision and plans has been filed with the Cit Clerk and copies are on file with Y PY P Y P 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 •ATTACHMENT: Fire Dept. Requirements 4/17/08 Chairman 4 NORTON S. REMMER, P.E. CONSULTING ENGINEER SALEM JAIL MEETING WITH SFD AND STATE FIRE MARSHAL 04107/08 • BUILDINGS/SPRINKLER SYSTEM: A. NFPA 13/standpipe(Standpipe will conform to NFPA 14 Class 3 system) B NFPA 13/standpipe (Standpipe will conform to NFPA 14 Class 3 system) C NFPA 13/standpipe (Standpipe will conform to NFPA 14 Class 3 system) D NFPA 13D with Detection in the attic if residential/otherwise NFPA 13 and standpipe E Dry system protecting parking located beneath tunnel/building (Covered Parking) FIRE ALARM 1. City of Salem hard wired Master Box for entire site 2. Monitored central station for each building 3. Central Annunciator 4. Beacon on each building visible from St. Peter's Street FIRE SERVICE 1. FDC on St. Peters Street centrally located subject to approval by SFD(branched to all buildings with hydraulically calculated piping to achieve required fire Flows.) 2. Piped to each building fire service/standpipe with exterior FDC. Designed for appropriate flow. . TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION 1. Minimum 2-hour fire resistance rating separation from all building above and around ' 2. Structurally independent 3. At least 20'wide by 12'-6"high 4. Need to provide pdfs of sketches showing details of plan for tunnel OWNERSHIP/MANAGEMENT Information requested: 1. Form of ownership of each building 2. Management of buildings/project when complete Knox Box on Buildings A, B, and C. 4/17;08 1l1 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decisions At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, July 17, 2008 at 7:00pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem Massachusetts, the Planning Board voted upon the following items: Applicant: Metro PCS Request: Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit under Section 5-3, Special Permit Uses, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Location: 12 Pope Street(Map 15, Lot 308) Description: The proposal includes the installation of five panel antennas facade mounted on the existing penthouse, one faux chimney on the roof to conceal on panel antenna,and three equipment cabinets on the roof behind a screen wall painted to match the building. Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk July 18,2008 Applicant: Metro PCS Request: Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit under Section 5-3,Special Permit Uses, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Location: 27 Charter Street(Map 35, Lot 272) Description: The proposal includes the installation of six panel antennas facade mounted on the existing penthouse and three equipment cabinets on the roof behind a screen wall painted to match the building. Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk July 18,2008 This mice is baT sero in mVhanx with the Massadxzetts Ge,�al Laws, Chapter 40A, Semm 9 and does not require action by the raipaeru Appeals, if an)y shall be nude puimaru to Cb apter 40A, Sa=m 17, and shall befiW within 20 dais fi=the date 4z&the claision was filed with the City t Jerk. • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decisions At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday,July 17, 2008 at 7:00pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem Massachusetts, the Planning Board voted upon the following items: Applicant: Old Salem Jail Ventures,LLC Request: Amendment to previously approved plans under Section 7-18 Site Plan Review and Section 7-15 Planned Unit Development Location: 50 St. Peter Street(Map 35,Lot 179) (Old Salem Jail) Description: The proposed amendment includes phasing the development. Phase I will include the restoration of the Jail and the Jail Keeper's House, as well as the rebuilding of the barn. In total, Phase I will include twenty-three (23) residential units. Phase II will be built as market condition: permit. Phase II will include the construction of the new building, which will contain thirteen (13) residential units. Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk July 28, 2008 This notia,is hiT sero in cwpliarxe with the Massadnaetts Geixral L arra, CSapter 40A, Seam 9 and dots not m7twe aa'wn by dere rmpiem Appeals, if an.S s&#be nude pcn cant to Ugter 40A, Soerim 17, aril s&U l e f W within 20&0s f z rn the date whidr dere derision uas f led uah dere City Clerk. a" 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, June 19, 2008 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,July(( 17, 2008. Cj�e,.tJG�-Cts Av14L Charles Puleo Chairman N V O N J This notice posted on "Official Iletin Boal w� City Hall c vri R9 0' 39 a $ .t 298 of A .L. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TEL: 978.745.9595 Fax: 978.740.0404 WWW.SALEM.COM L CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD < r � Nr CD W AGENDA ra PLANNING BOARD 3 D Thursday,June 5,2008-7:00 P.M. 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREETu; to JIR �) •/A V Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o May 1, 2008 2. Continued: Public Hearing-Site Plan Review,Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit—Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street(Map 26, Lots 91, 95 &97)(formerly Salem Suede)—Attorney Scott Grover Request for Continuance to July 17, 2008 • 3. Discussion and Vote-Recommendation to City Council on Zoning Amendment to rezone the St. Joseph's parcel located at 129-151 Lafayette Street(Map 34, Lot 0307) from Residential Multi-Family(R-3)to B-5 Central Development(B-5). 4. Request by Puleo Realty Trust for insignificant change to July 26,2006 Site Plan Review Decision- St. Jean's Credit Union, 370 Highland Avenue 5. Old/New Business • Notice of MEPA Review-Flood Mitigation Facilities for Peabody Square—City of Peabody • Election of Vice Chair • Discussion-August meeting date 6. Adjournment This notice Posted on "Official BultAtin Board" City II Salem, Mass. on 3o ;Woe 23 ��& 223 Cf El,9.0:.L 120 WASHINGTON S REEr, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 • www.sALEM.com City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board Date C> S / C�:) <i- Name me Mail!i�ng Address P.-hone # Email 'Jpo Y�... Li-r 1 1<i u Pa^ 54. Sa�en 7 �0`�-32Lo q 7 c 1 ,t�w(_-P C-7OGG1 9LJj: �e/m7-5 7 S AIIb • I • Page of f Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting June 5, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, June 5, 2008, 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, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Christine Sullivan. Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Gene Collins Approval of Minutes The minutes of the May 1st meeting were reviewed. A motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Nadine Hanscom, and approved (6-0). Old/New Business • • Notice of MEPA review- Amy Lash said this doesn't require any action but the Planning Board is on the notification list. The City of Peabody is looking to improve flooding issues. Three proposed projects are being considered, one of these projects involves widening the North River in Salem (behind Stop & Shop). The Conservation Agent, and Jason Silva from the Mayor's office recently attended a meeting about this and they'll be finding more out about how it will involve Salem. • Election- Pam Lombardini nominated John Moustakis as Vice-Chair, seconded by Christine Sullivan, and all approved (6-0). • Discussion- Amy said that Salem Suede is requesting continuance to July 17th and she knows about other projects coming around that time as well, so, the Board should possibly hold a meeting in August. August 7`h will be held as a possible date for a Planning Board meeting. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street &71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede)- Attorney Scott Grover- Request for Continuance to July 17, 2008 Amy Lash had letter from Attorney Scott Grover requesting continuance of public hearing to . July 17, 2008 and also requesting that final action to be extended to August 23, 2008. Chuck Puleo added that if they hold a meeting in August, they'd have to extend this again. t S j; There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Tim Kavanaugh to continue the public hearing to July 171' and to extend the date of final action to August 23`d, 2007, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Discussion and Vote- Recommendation to City Council on Zoning Amendment to rezone the St. Joseph's parcel located at 129-151 Lafayette Street (map 34, Lot 0307) from Residential Multi- Family (R-3) to B-5 Central Development (B-5). Nadine Hanscom recused herself from this portion of the meeting and left the room. Chuck Puleo said there was a public hearing that the Planning Board attended the previous night with the City Council. Chuck requested that Amy review what is allowed under R-3 and R-5: Currently R-3 zoning allows a lot area/dwelling unit of 3,500 sq. ft. For new mixed use buildings in B-5 the minimum lot area/dwelling unit is 500 sq. ft. B-5 would allow for a mix of uses. Christine Sullivan said the original site plan approved was a six-story building that had 97 units. Chuck Puleo said that density was an issue for R-3 and in R-3 you can't have commercial component. John Moustakis remembered that when this project was originally approved, they needed a variance for height. Tim Kavanaugh thinks this is a huge increase from the potential development site and he's not opposed to the commercial on the first floor but it's a lot of dwelling units. Amy Lash said that accommodating the parking requirements will affect how many units could really go on site. Tim Ready was troubled by John Carr's presentation that suggested that going to the Planning • Board for rezoning is somewhat of an end run around the City's zoning requirements. He feels the Planning Board has a responsibility to look at the facts and not the current litigation. Chuck Puleo thinks whatever they say, it will come back to the Board. They will look closely at benefits for that neighborhood. John Moustakis said regardless of what happens with litigation, they can't look at that as something that will hold us back. Whatever the Planning Board says or suggests, the Councillors will be the ones to make the ultimate decision. Christine Sullivan is in favor of the zoning change. She feels the site needs something it's deteriorating. She thinks of it as a residential/commercial site. If you look at the shape of the area (triangle), it's a commercial area. Tim Kavanaugh favors a commercial component of this project. It seems to work well on that street. He doesn't see how any project at the site would work without commercial component. At the park across the way, there are drugs and some prostitution. A new building may discourage that activity. John Moustakis said if you look at the map, the front ends of streets surrounding that area are B5. Pam Lombardini is in favor of the zoning change, it's a site that needs to be developed. Commercial could be anything- a drug store, restaurant, etc. Pam Lombardini said it would be good for new residents. Tim Ready wanted to make clear that they're not giving the developer anything. They're strictly recommending zoning to the Councillors. John Carr (7 River St.) requested to speak on a point as a matter of fact and was acknowledged by Mr. Puleo. John Carr asked Board members if they have considered that by making the zoning change they have permitted as a matter of right the original plan of six stories to be • approved without any further public hearing and the commercial use on the first floor. Tim Kavanaugh said anything that is approved would have to come before the Board for site plan 2 f review. • Christine Sullivan reminded all that they were at the meeting to talk only about zoning change. Pam suggested putting a motion to recommend to City Council to rezone to B5 with footnote that if approved the building by right could be 6 stories. Tim Kavanaugh phrased it as "Recommend to City Council the adoption of B5 zoning for the parcels of land in question" and have sub paragraph "Planning Board notes that B5 zoning allows 6 story building as a matter of right". In their opinion, this parcel of land would be better utilized as B5. Tim Ready wondered if the City Attorney's decision to advise to the City Council (regarding the lawsuit) had been made yet and it's affect on the Planning Board's recommendation and Amy said that it hadn't been rendered yet. There being no further questions regarding this matter, a motion was made by Tim Kavanaugh to recommend to the City Council that they rezone the St. Joseph's parcel located at 129-151 Lafayette Street (Map 34, Lot 0307) from the current R-3 residential to B-5 central development zoning, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (6-0). Request by Puleo Realty Trust for insignificant change to July 26, 2006 Site Plan Review Decision- St. Jean's Credit Union, 370 Highland Avenue Chuck Puleo recused from this portion of the meeting and exited the room. David Hark (600 Loring Ave) said the project has been completed and the bank is open for business. The issue is that there is supposed to be a hedge to possibly prevent people from cutting across, right now there's a curb there and that seems to be working fine. If they put the hedge in, it will interfere with the space needed for Fire Engines to get through. There are a couple of extra trees and some landscaping around Puleo's Dairy. The Credit Union likes that there is no hedging because of security and the curbing that is there seems to keep people from cutting across the lot. Christine Sullivan asked why they needed to discuss this at the meeting if it's an insignificant change and Amy said because they are asking to modify a condition which had been articulated by the Planning Board. Tim Kavanaugh moved to modify the condition of hedging on the grounds that the curb acts as sufficient barrier and putting in hedging would take away from the required area for Fire Engines to get through. There being no further questions regarding this matter, a motion was made by Tim Kavanaugh to strike the condition from the original decision, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (6-0). Tim Ready excused for remainder of meeting. • John Moustakis mentioned that the curb cut on Highland Avenue next to CVS isn't supposed to be there. Amy will find the address and look into the issue. • Chuck Puleo mentioned that Lynn Duncan, Director of Planning Dept., is looking into John's recommendation to make Goodhue St. a two-way street. John Moustakis said the owners' of • Flynntan property agreed to give the City some land, which may also help. Amy said the traffic consultants looking at Riverview Place would provide recommendations on the two- 3 way option for Goodhue St. John mentioned that Walter made the storage facility (on the comer) include an easement. Tim Kavanaugh said it would be like a ramp into the Boston St. corridor. • Amy Lash said that they have preliminary plans from RCG for the plaza and mentioned that RCG is interested in moving the bus stop. Christine Sullivan asked if they got final approval and which building are they putting in- Amy said yes, and she believes it's the one that's more modern, with more glass. Chuck Puleo said they added more details as well. • Christine Sullivan suggested that in Lappen Park they remove the grass and put more tables and chairs, as it's a central part of the City. John Moustakis added that it's where the information booth should be. It would encourage more people to use that area and make the City livelier. Tim Kavanaugh agreed as well. Adjournment 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 Nadine Hanscom and approved (6-0). The meeting adjourned at 8:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 4 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Report to City Council ' June 9,2008 At its meeting on June 5,2005,the Planning Board voted to recommend as follows on the proposed amendment to the zoning map: 1. To see if the CityCouncil will amend the CAty of Salem Zoning Ordinance and associated Zoning Map by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include the St.Joseph's Church parcel located at 129-151 Lafayette Street(Map 34,Lot 0307). Said property would be rezoned from Residential Multi-Family(R-3) to Central Development (B-5). The Planning Board voted six(6) in favor and none (0) opposed to recommend approval of the proposed amendment. In making this recommendation,the Board notes that mixed use is allowed in the B-5 District;the density allowed in B-5 is appropriate for the site,and Density Regulations . allow for a maximum height of six (6) stories,which the Board also considered appropriate for the site. A project at this site will need to come back to the Planning Board for comprehensive site plan review. If you have any questions regarding this matter,please feel free to contact Amy Lash at the Department of Planning &CommunityDevelopment at (978) 619-5685. Sincerely, Pr to/Pc Charles Puleo Chairman . Cc: Mayor Kimberly Driscoll 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALEM.COM L_ i CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD FILE if CITY CLERK. 5:1LD 1. MASS. Legal Notice City of Salem Planning Board The City of Salem Planning Board will hold a joint public hearing pursuant to G.L. c. 40A, s. 5 with the Salem City Council on Wednesday, June 4, 2008, at 7:00pm at City Hall, Council Chambers, 93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts on the proposed zoning amendment to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and associated Zoning Map by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include the St. Joseph's Church parcel located at 129-151 Lafayette Street (Map 34, Lot 0307). Said property would be rezoned from Residential Multi- Family(R-3) to B-5 Central Development (B-5). The purpose of the public hearing is to provide interested parties with an opportunity to comment on the proposed change to the Salem Zoning Ordinance. • The complete text and map of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance is on file at the office of the Department of Planning & Community Development, City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts, and are available for inspection during regular business hours. LJ(nWtl.fA� Aa. Charles Puleo, Chairman This notice posted on "Official B tin a"r City Hall Salem, Mass. o / , .tee at lW www In accordance with C . 38 SM 23A 8 238 of M.G.L. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 .TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 0 WWW.SALEM.COM Minutes of Joint Public Hearing with the City Council and Planning Board • June 4, 2008 A Joint Public Hearing of the City Council and Planning Board was held Wednesday, June 4, 2008 at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers, 93 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts on the proposed zoning amendment to amend the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance and associated Zoning Map by extending the B-5 Central Development District to include the St. Joseph's Church parcel located at 129-151 Lafayette Street (Map 34, Lot 0307). Said property would be rezoned from Residential Multi-Family (R-3) to B-5 Central Development (B-5). Notice of this meeting was posted on the official bulletin board and advertised in the Salem news. City Council Members present: Absent: President Mike Sosnowski, Ward 2 Joan B. Lovely, Councillor at Large Steven Pinto, Councillor at Large Joseph O'Keefe, Ward 7 Thomas Furey, Councillor at Large Arthur Sargent II1, Councillor at Large Robert McCarthy, Ward 1 Jean Pelletier, Ward 3 Jerry Ryan, Ward 4 Matthew Veno, Ward 5 Paul Prevey, Ward 6 • Planning Board Members present: Absent: Chuck Puleo, Chairman Gene Collins Pam Lombardini Nadine Hanscom John Moustakis Tim Ready Tim Kavanaugh Christine Sullivan City Council President Mike Sosnowski reviewed the petition and time requirement. He introduced Chuck Puleo who then introduced the Planning Board members. Councillor McCarthy said that a petition was received by the City Council and they had 14 days to refer it to the Planning Board to schedule tonight's joint public hearing. After this Public hearing is closed, the Planning Board has 21 days to act on it and get back to the Councillors. It would be good if they could get their recommendation back to the Council by the 22"d so it can be included on the agenda for the meeting on the 24`h. Councillor McCarthy said he brought forth the order for the zoning change for the St Josephs site. The request is to change to B5 zoning which will allow for mixed use. It's the same developer as previous for this site, they're committed to quality, affordable housing and they need this leeway to allow them to talk with retail developers. He feels it's a natural fit for the area. Councillor Sosnowski suggested a presentation from the developer. Joe Correnti (63 Federal St.) • representing the property owner, said there is no development being proposed this evening. Prior development suggested was residential, but they would like mixed-use development on site. It's an expensive property to develop, as a couple of buildings need to come down, some need to be 1 1" revitalized. They need a financial partner for the first floor, as the City is not a potential partner. The zoning is R3, which didn't matter when it was a church and school, but now it does matter. • The parcel is not much like parcels in R3, it's more like parcels in B5. It allows us to talk to partners who could be in B5 by right: retail, commercial could be on first floor. We don't have a partner signed up yet, once we do we would have to go through site plan review. Councillor Sosnowski opened the Public Hearing. Lucy Corchardo (58 Peabody Street) spoke in favor of the project saying that windows have been broken, there is squalor, lawn littered with trash, and it's time for a change. We need to improve the area and need more eyes to look over the area. Shirley Walker (Derby Lofts, Lafayette St.) was in favor, thinks it's a great developer and would like to see affordable housing at that site. Attorney John Carr (Salem) represents 43 clients who appealed the original ZBA Variance Decision, the Planning Board Decision &the ZBA 40B Comprehensive Permit approval. Clients are immediate abutters, 300 ft abutters, those in Lafayette Street area and include Hispanic, working class and immigrants. Zoning change is not recent. They were approved on first floor for residential, now they want retail, which he said is a high volume drug store with a drive thru, which would be in a congested neighborhood. Attorney Carr said they say it's not spot zoning, but if you look at the neighborhood, you'll see it's predominantly residential. It was previously argued that downtown should be extended up Lafayette Street but his clients don't want that. The intersection is very busy. Attorney Carr said he realized abutters weren't notified, but they don't have to be by law, he • found out only by chance. How is an immigrant who speaks Spanish supposed to understand this? He believes several members of the Council have already made up their minds. He said the developer has no serious negotiations with his clients, doesn't feel they have to talk to us. He doesn't think they should be rezoning in the middle of a lawsuit, feels it's spot zoning. If it's a great project, why does the mayor have to bend the lines? Councillor Pelletier felt that Attorney Carr was saying that they (the Councillors) don't know their jobs. How many clients do you have in the suits? You can't tie conditions to the rezoning- and he urged them to think about that there is more than a single use not set in stone. He asked that Attorney Carr to please forward Council the names of his clients. Attorney Carr said it was already sent but he will resend again. Linda Locke (1 Pickering St.) owns 46 Dow St, plus two more private properties that abut St. Josephs. Spends time in park with kids, not in favor of having the downtown zoning extended to this busy intersection. She feels people will hang around more in the park if they vote in favor of it, also, they don't need another drug store. She can't see how the developer can't afford this. She mentioned that Rita Walsh of VHB has done neighborhood Preservation Study. She doesn't understand how the developer can't afford to build without a retail anchor. Chuck Puleo asked how the she and others felt about the density of the area, with current zoning they'd be allowed to build 33 units and she was comfortable with that, not with the potential if zoning is changed. • 2 . j A motion was made to close the public hearing, all in favor, unanimous vote. Tom Furey cited • the Salem News Building as an example of a renaissance and mentioned that this is an exciting opportunity for this neighborhood. President Sosnowski asked the City Solicitor if they need to have a vote, but she hasn't gotten an answer yet. Chuck Puleo reminded people that when this goes to the Planning Board, it will be a public meeting but not a public hearing, so once the public hearing is closed, that's it. Councillor McCarthy made a motion to refer this to the Planning Board for their recommendation, all approved. Councillor Pelletier said that 27% is commercial in Salem, and mentioned that we need business in Salem. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the City Councillors and Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Councillor Veno to adjourn the meeting. The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 3 3v T 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, May 15, 2008 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,June 5, 2008. J C Charles Puleo Chairman • _ N 77 co "Ottt�i t 19tin Board" This Hnotice posted an r y i;: :,cccr� 23A & 238 tit EHi.tasi.. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALEM.COM II CITY OF SALEM - , PLANNING BOARD AGENDA (REVISED) PLANNING BOARD Thursday, May 1, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET ��w(1,41"iqL Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o April 3, 2008 o, April 17, 2008 2. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval —Tri-City Sales Inc. and Tri-City Realty, Inc. —262-272 Highland Avenue (Map 8, Lots 99, 100, 104, & 105)—Attorney Joseph Correnti 3. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard • District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit—Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede)—Attorney Scott Grover—Request for Continuance to June 5, 2008 4. Old/New Business o Notice of MEPA Review- Salem Port Expansion—City of Salem 5. Adjournment � A �C 1i co This noticehosted on "Official Bulletin Board" -A City Hall Sign, +, Ma, s. A 9 d iss �y at �`/� " {il r,g - c r,,, 3 `, .. v3 r ¢:3 6.-:r� � S i�fc�.a mn i • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 ' WWW.SALEM.COM • City of Salem — Meeting Sign-In Sheet Board Date Name Mailing Address Phone # Email Page of S CITY OF SALEM 17 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ` COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEYDRISCOLL MAYOR 120WASHINGTON STREET♦S LEM MASSAMUSETTS 01970 TLL:978-619-5685 ♦FAx:978-740-0404 LYNN GooNmDuNc,,LN,AICP DiREciOR MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: April 24, 2008 RE: Agenda—May 1, 2008 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Revised Minutes of April 3, 2008 &Minutes of April 17, 2008 ➢ Materials for Agenda Items • Notes on Agenda Items Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval —Tri-City Sales Inc. and Tri-City Realty, Inc. —262-272 Highland Avenue (Map 8, Lots 99, 100, 104, & 105) —Attorney Joseph Correnti In the Site Plan Review/Drive Through Facilities Special Permit Decision dated April 9, 2007, the Planning Board approved the construction of two (2)new one-story buildings: a proposed CVS pharmacy, and a Dunkin Donuts/Tri City Sales building. The Planning Board also approved two (2) drive-through lanes for the CVS building. Since the Planning Board approved the project, all registered land contained within the properties have been voluntarily withdrawn from the registration system of the Land Court. The applicant is now seeking ANR endorsement to create two lots: the CVS lot consisting of 70,909 square feet ("Lot A" and "Lot B"), and the Tri City Sales lot consisting of 71,517 ("Lot C"). Old/New Business Notice of MEPA Review- Salem Port Expansion—City of Salem On behalf of the City of Salem, Vine Associates has submitted an Environmental Notification Form (ENF) for the Salem Port Expansion. Submission of the ENF begins MEPA review in • accordance with the provisions of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act. • The proposed project involves the construction of a multi use water transportation facility on a site owned by Dominion, located in the Salem Harbor Designated Port Area. The facility will require dredging 8.3 acres of Salem Harbor to create navigable areas with sufficient depths to accommodate the vessels programmed for the site. A copy of the ENF has been included in your packet. Instructions for submitting comments to the Secretary of Environmental Affairs can be found on the last page. If you have questions please contact Frank Taormina, Staff Planner and Harbor Coordinator. Notice of National Register Nomination for the Joseph Fenno House: Location Clarification The location of the Joseph Fenno House(show on tl the left) is 12 Hawthorne Boulevard, on the west side of Hawthorne Boulevard between Essex i Street and Charter Street. The Massachusetts Historical Commission is considering the { property for nomination to the National Register 1 _ of Historic Places. The Planning Board is being notified that the nomination of this property will ® be considered at a public meeting on June 11, • 2008, at the Massachusetts State Archives, in Dorchester. A copy of the nomination is available at the Salem Public Library. • 2 r � • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting May 1, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, May 1, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: John Moustakis (Acting Chair), Pam Lombardini, Nadine Hanscom, Gene Collins, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Christine Sullivan. Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Chuck Puleo (Chair) A moment of silence was held in memory of Walter Power. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- Tri City Sales Inc. and Tri-City Realty, Inc.- 262-272 Highland Avenue (Map 8, Lots 99, 100, 104 & 105)- Attorney Joseph Correnti Attorney Joseph Correnti said they will be creating two lots, the CVS lot and the Tri-City Sales lot. There are 14 registered lots that they went to land court to de-register. They are essentially wiping out the interior lot lines and splitting the land into two lots. The lot at the comer of Marlborough Rd and Highland Ave will be CVS, and the one next to it will be Tri-City sales. Each lot is about 1.64 acres. Gene Collins asked if the access from Marlborough Road to the second lot will have delineation. Attorney Correnti said not yet, there will be permanent cross. . easements on both lots, all recorded at the registry, and people will be able to park on either as it will not look like two lots. The Cohen family will still own tri-City Sales building and they'll own a piece of the CVS building with another entity. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins approve, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Approval of Minutes The minutes of the April 3rd meeting were reviewed. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Gene Collins, and approved (7-0). The minutes of the April 17th meeting were reviewed. Christine Sullivan asked if there was a different term that should be used rather than insignificant. Tim Kavanaugh suggested on page 1, changing "insignificant" to "insubstantial". • 1 There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam • Lombardini to accept the minutes with the suggested revision, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (7-0). Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit—Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, &7t Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) —Attorney Scott Grover—Request for Continuance to June 5, 2008 Amy Lash said that everyone should have a copy of the DRB minutes pertaining to Salem Suede, and said she spoke with their staff person Tom Daniel. At the DRB last meeting, the architect Steve Livermore was asked questions about the design; there was talk about getting a certain number of units on the site and the DRB responded that that's not what they're looking for. They want them to look more closely at the Masterplan. Amy said it sounded like a constructive meeting with good recommendations. The DRB wants focus on the neighborhood and canal and they want to see changes to reflect the character of the different streets. They will be revising the plans and returning to the DRB. They will possibly coming back before the Planning Board around June 5`h. Amy received a letter from Scott Grover requesting continuance of the Public Hearing to June 5`h and to extend the time for the Planning Board to act on this application to June 19th. There being no further comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the public hearing on June 5`h, seconded by Christine Sullivan and accepted (7-0). • There being no further comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to extend the time for final approval to June 191h, seconded by Christine Sullivan and accepted (7-0). Old/New Business • Notice of MEPA Review- Salem Port Expansion—City of Salem Amy said this requires no action by the Board but if members would like to comment, they can. The project involves dredging a portion of the South river to increase the depth to allow bigger cruise ships to dock. John Moustakis commented that they should fix up that area, as it is currently not appealing. • The Zoning Ordinance Recodification Committee has been meeting for several months. There will be one more meeting to discuss the new draft ordinance and a strike-through version showing changes. They are cleaning up the ordinance, making it more user-friendly. Chuck and Walter were Planning Board representatives, Amy asked if anyone is interested in being on the committee in place of Walter. There is one committee meeting left and one public meeting, the dates have not been scheduled. Gene Collins and Tim Kavanugh are willing to attend. This will go to the City Council after the meetings. • Amy received a letter from Beverly Co-Op Bank that offered sincerest apologies for not completing the screening unit. They have identified a company in Florida that can provide it. They will keep the Planning Board posted of their timetable. Christine Sullivan thinks `wind . issues' on that roof caused the delay of the screening. John Moustakis said many times 2 . developers don't follow what the Planning Bd. agrees on. For example, the building next to CVS on Highland Ave (has hairdresser, chiropractor, etc) doesn't have the right curb cut. Cars were supposed to go in to the right of the bldg. and come out the same way, not go around the building and come out over the curb. Amy will bring those plans to the next meeting. • Amy announced some upcoming events that some Planning Bd. members may be interested in attending: A tour of an LID development in Ipswich; a Conference at Holy Cross College on "Regionalism in the 21" century"; The Dept of Housing & Community Dev. Spring Workshop Series, Topics include: Downtown Economics, Housing and the Creative Economy, and Business Improvement Districts. Christine Sullivan asked if Salem has a BID. Amy said no, that the Main Street Program is set up differently; the idea of BID is self- assessments and tax money going into improving those areas. • Living Green & Renewable Energy Fair being hosted at Old Town Hall June 14 by the Renewable Energy Task Force. This group has also been creating a draft wind turbine ordinance and will be coming before the Planning Board in the near future. • Pam Lombardini recently came back from Louisville, KY and said what struck her about their downtown is that there were beautiful sculptures. She thought with the college here and local artists, maybe it's something Salem should consider- add sculptures with artists name on it. Also, she spoke with Chuck about the Board doing something special for Walter Power to commemorate what he's done for the City. Amy spoke with Lynn about this as well. Some ideas that came up: naming a road; approaching a developer to name a road; naming a trail system; Peabody St. park isn't named yet; Gene suggested naming the small • piece of land near Salem News Building (it will be a plaza) — could put a plaque and make it a `square'. • Tim Ready thinks the Board has had an influence on the DRB because in their minutes they mention the Board in respect to the Masterplan. He feels the Board should let them do their work and then come to us. John Moustakis repeated what he said at the last meeting that the reason for the DRB for the NRCC is to have "another voice", but the Planning Board has the final say. Pam Lombardini said she felt encouraged by the DRB minutes, she feels they heard what the Board had to say. Amy suggested another angle to look at this- that the Board is seeking the DRB's assistance because they're experts in design. John said there's a booklet they can refer to, it says what they can and can't do. John suggested the ZBA caused the problem as there are restrictions on mass and size, and they made it bigger than it was supposed to be. Tim Kavanaugh said as far as he knows, the Board heard a lot of comments during the public hearing, listened and referred them to the DRB. Then, the DRB will consider everything including mass, size, and then refer back to the Planning Board. Christine Sullivan gave an analogy- the SRA to the DRB, which may help explain the jurisdiction of the Board. Gene said Lynn Duncan was here at a prior meeting; maybe she needs to come back. He doesn't like the idea of someone giving opinions to the DRB from the entire Board, when everyone didn't agree on them. Amy said there was nothing formal written, though she had said at the last meeting she would communicate the concerns she had heard to their staff person. Pam said her impression was that we wanted them to take a closer look at things and Nadine said it's also a way to ask questions. John feels this will work out itself. John M. said this is the only project the DRB (other than the one downtown) is involved in. Tim R. said because this is the first time, maybe the Board is being preemptory; the Board needs to let the DRB do their job. Christine said the issues that Tim R. and Gene 3 bring should be addressed. Tim R. feels it opens the door for future projects. Christine said . the meeting between the DRB and a few Board members went very well. Tim K. said the meeting gave the DRB a sense that the Board appreciates their work. Adjournment 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 Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). The meeting adjourned at 8:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board 4 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD MAY _2 A Form A — Decision ciT Y CLERK gp EM MASS. 272 Highland Avenue Tri-City Sales, Inc. and Tri-City Realty, Inc. C/o Joseph Correnti, Esquire 63 Federal Street Salem,MA 01970 Dear Mr. Correnti: The Salem PlanningBoard voted on May 1 2008 to endorse"Approval Under Subdivision Y PP Control Law Not Required"on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Tri-City Sales, Inc. and Tri-City Realty, Inc. 2. Location: 262-272 Highland Avenue (Map 8, Lots 99, 100, 104, & 105) • 3. Project Description: This Form A subdivides 262-272 Highland Avenue into two lots: `Lot A" and"Lot B"are to be combined to form one lot consisting of 70,909 square feet, and "Lot C'consists of 71,517 square feet. "Lot A/B" is a corner lot with frontage on Marlborough Road and Highland Avenue. "Lot C'has frontage on Highland Avenue. Sincerely, Cgwj-414 PO 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 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND i COMMUNIITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEYDRISCOLL MAYA 10: $ ANYOR 120 W:w n.(;RIN S IM;h I # SAI I:M,UWA(I It SI;ri s 01970 Ti:[:978-619-5687 ♦ Fnx:978-740-0404 f'!LE r L5'\:\C(x)i\c\DI:NG\N,AtCP CITY CL rtK. S;;I_EM, MASS. DiKR ]OK May 2, 2008 Riverview Place, LCC C/o Scott Grover, Esquire 27 Congress Street, Suite 414 Salem, MA 01970 RE: Request for Continuance and Extension of Deadline for Final Action Decision Riverview Place,LLC(72 Flint Street,67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street) Dear Mr. Grover, On May 1, 2008 the Planning Board voted to continue the public hearing concerning the special permit applications of Riverview Place LLC until June 5, 2008. Additionally, the Planning Board voted to extend the time for final action on the applications until June 19, 2008. Sincerely, a, � Amy J. ash Staff Planner Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk • fi CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD City of Salem Planning Board — Site Visit Riverview Place (Salem Suede) The City of Salem Planning Board will hold a site visit for the Site Plan Review, Wetlands & _ Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit application of Riverview Place LLC for the property located at 72 FLINT STREET, 67-69 MASON STREET, & 71 MASON STREET (Map 26, Lots 91, 95, & 97). 2 The site visit will be held on Saturday, April 19, 2008 at 9:00 AM, and wilL,egingthe parking lot located at 70 Flint Street, Salem, Massachusetts. v 20AL Charles Puleo 0 Chairman :X n u (,n N cn G7 This notice posted on "Official F3t11 €n �oard� City Halli« �, 4 b on A 13 6Y �yr�M� al d� /� dg'�� 20A 203 tit t4l.C'11a 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAX: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM l CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD ZUB APR 10 P b: 13 (Y I L' AGENDA CL+ i:.., ':, PLANNING BOARD Thursday, April 17, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 312" FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET I Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o April 3, 2003 2. Request for Amendment to Previously Approved Plans and Waiver of Subdivision Regulations to Relocate Street Trees —Cedarcrest Avenue Extension —Paul Cassell 3. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit _ Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans —Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street(Map 35, Lot 179) —Attorney Joseph COrrenti ? 0 i? 4. Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage—19-21 Barcelona Avenue (Map 3, Lots 3 & 29)—Attorney Stephen Lovely " d 5. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require s Approval —19-21 Barcelona Avenue (Map 3, Lots 3 & 29)—Attorney Stephen t.. Lovely cis 6. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit 433 R Highland Avenue (Map 3, Lot 139) (Camp Lions) —Metro PCS 0 7. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit-10-12 N�-r First Avenue (Map 13, Lot 6) (Pequot Apartments)—Metro PCS s: 8. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit—320 Lafayette Street (Map 32, Lot 216) (Park Towers)—Metro PCS (D m r� ,i r.7 9. Old/New Business C: o Notice of National Register Nomination for the Joseph Fenno House 10. Adjournment 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEiNI, bIASs.4CHUSEFFS 01970 • TEL: 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 • NvVvV.SALEM.COD4 CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND \ � COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT • KIMBERLEYDRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASHWGTON STREET♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TEL:978-619-5685 FAX:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DUNCAN,AICP DIRECTOR MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: April 10, 2008 RE: Agenda— April 17, 2008 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Minutes of April 3, 2008 ➢ Materials for Agenda Items • Notes on Agenda Items Request for Amendment to Previously Approved Plans and Waiver of Subdivision Regulations to Relocate Street Trees—Cedarcrest Avenue Extension—Paul Cassell The Cedarcrest Avenue extension includes the development of three homes; two of the three homes are complete and sold. Paul Cassell and the residents would like to plant ' trees between the homes and the sidewalk as opposed to the grass strip between the sidewalk and the granite curbing. ' st'� i They feel that the trees will be better maintained and survive better on private property. If the Planning Board , , chooses to grant this request,the developer can still be required to guarantee the survival of the trees for one year. s ' The project was approved by the Planning Board in a decision dated April 22, 2005. This decision states"Any x. 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". The approved plans include street trees within the 3' grass strip show in the photographs on the right. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment • to Previously Approved Plans—Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street(Map 35, Lot 179)—Attorney Joseph Correnti Lt. Griffin, Chief Cody, Dana Haagensen of the State Fire Marshal's Office, and Norton Remmer, a fire and safety consultant working for New Boston Ventures, met on April 7a'to discuss the plans for the Salem Jail. Lt. Griffin reported that it was a positive meeting and she believes they are moving forward. At this time, they are waiting for additional information they requested from Norton Remmer. The Board of Health has requested additional information from the applicant regarding: the dumpster size, the area for trash barrel storage, and soundproofing of the garage. The project is scheduled to appear before the Board of Health again on May 13 . Public Hearing-Request for Waiver of Frontage& Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval—19-21 Barcelona Avenue (Map 3,Lots 3 & 29)—Attorney Stephen Lovely There is currently a building foundation at 21 Barcelona Avenue. Patrick Chasse has a purchase and sale agreement with Karen Valliere to purchase the property. The purchase and sale agreement has existed for several years (and was formerly with Karen Valliere's mother, Blanche Francullo). The property has been the subject of a recent Land Court Decision. Two plaintiffs appealed the Zoning Board of Appeal's administrative decision to uphold the • Building Commissioner's determination that 21 Barcelona Avenue is a non-conforming, buildable lot. Subsequently, the Solicitor's office was authorized to settle the matter with the plaintiffs and did come to an agreement with one of the plaintiffs, Patricia Pitreau, to allow for the construction of a dwelling on 21 Barcelona Avenue. However,the second plaintiff, Victor L'Esperance, chose to await the decision of the Land Court. The Court determined that 21 Barcelona is not a non-conforming, buildable lot, but merged with 19 Barcelona Avenue. The Court remanded the matter to the Zoning Board of Appeals with instructions to direct the Building Inspector to revoke the permit to construct a single family dwelling on Lot 328 (21 Barcelona Avenue). Attorney Stephen Lovely filed a motion for stay of this order of the Court. Considering the motion for stay, the Board of Appeals did not revoke the building permit. Attorney Lovely filed a petition with the Salem Board of Appeals for variances which would allow the construction of the home. An agreement was reached with Victor L'Esperance. Both Patricia Pitreau and Victor L'Esperance spoke in favor of the petition at the Board of Appeals hearing. Considering the stay, the.Board did not revoke the building permit. In a decision dated April 3, 2008 the Board of Appeals granted variances from lot size and minimum lot width to allow the construction of a single family home at 21 Barcelona Avenue in the Residential One- Family Zoning District. Patricia Pitreau's Agreement for Judgement was included as an attachment to the Board of Appeals Decision. The Board of Appeals required the submission of a revised plan, which increased the lot area of 21 Barcelona Avenue by incorporating part of the sewer easement on 19 Barcelona Avenue. The revised plan is now before the Planning Board with a request for a Waiver of Frontage and ANR endorsement. • 2 Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit-488 R Highland Avenue • (Map 3, Lot 139) (Camp Lions)-Metro PCS The proposal involves the addition of wireless communications equipment to an existing lattice tower located at Camp Lions. Several months ago Fibertower was granted a Special Permit from the Planning Board to add equipment to this site. Public Hearing-Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit-10-12 First Avenue (Map 13, Lot 6)(Pequot Apartments)-Metro PCS The proposal involves the replacement and addition of wireless communications equipment to an existing rooftop wireless communications facility at the Pequot Apartments. The equipment being replaced was installed by Metricom Inc. in 2000. Public Hearing-Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit-320 Lafayette Street (Map 32, Lot 216)(Park Towers)-Metro PCS The proposal involves the addition of wireless communications equipment to an existing rooftop wireless communications facility. Old/New Business Notice of National Register Nomination for the Joseph Fenno House • The Massachusetts Historical Commission is considering the Jospeh Fenno House on Hawthorne Boulevard for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. The Planning Board is being notified that the nomination of this property will be considered at a public meeting on June 11, 2008, at the Massachusetts State Archives, in Dorchester,Massachusetts. A copy of the nomination is available at the Salem Public Library. 3 City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: V L-;kN ry IN I, Date: Name Mailing Address Phone # Email ,a Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting April 17, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 3, 2008, 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, Gene Collins, Tim Ready, Tim Kavanaugh, Christine Sullivan. Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: Walter Power and Nadine Hanscom Approval of Minutes The minutes of the April 4th meeting were reviewed. Changes to be made: Recommended by Chuck Puleo- Page 5, change Danvers Bank to Beverly Co-op Bank. Recommended by Christine Sullivan- last page, confirm and update the DRB discussion to reflect what was discussed. She said it's imperative that the DRB report to the Planning Board to make suggestions. A motion was made by Pam Lombardini to postpone the approval of the minutes to the next meeting, seconded by John Moustakis, and approved (7-0). Request for Amendment to Previously Approved Plans and Waiver of Subdivision Regulations • to Relocate Street Trees- Cedarcrest Avenue Extension- Paul Cassell Paul Cassell explained that they want to move trees to the other side of the sidewalk. They feel they would be better maintained and will survive better at that location. They will still be responsible for them for a two-year period. Paul Lyman (33 Cedarcrest Avenue) added that he thinks they'd better in the newer suggested location. Amy Lash asked about the type of trees and Paul Cassell explained that they would be flowering pear trees of the same caliber as originally discussed. A motion was made by Christine Sullivan that this is an insubstantial request that does not require a public hearing, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (7-0). A motion was made by Christine Sullivan to waive the Subdivision Regulation requirements to allow relocation of street trees, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (7-0). Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans- Old Salem Ventures LLC 50 St Peter Street (Map 35 Lot 179)- Attorney Joseph Correnti Amy Lash said that Board members have a draft decision, including a sheet with requirements set by the Fire Department. Attorney Joseph Correnti, 63 Federal St., representing Old Salem Ventures, explained that they were before the Planning Board two weeks ago and came to an agreement on all things. They are left with one issue to resolve with the Fire Department. They hired Norton Returner, P.E., a renowned expert, to review the fire issues, policies, etc. Most results are reflected on the sheet included with the draft decision. Chuck Puleo asked about'a gate at the entryway. Penn Lindsay said that a `gate' had come up a few times, but it was never 1 their intention to put one up. He also explained that "structurally, independent" refers to the tunnel/arch that goes under the building. It's a structural tunnel for fire purposes- if the units over the parking area were on fire, the Fire Dept. can get underneath where the arch is. Attorney Correnti said they will be going before the Board of Health in a few weeks. They understand what they're asking for and plan to comply with their conditions. Amy Lash said the decision is drafted to include the requirement that the applicant must comply with the Board of Health requirements, and the 35-day window for comments to the Planning Board has passed. (Meeting opened to the public) There being no public comment, or further questions on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to close the public hearing, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (6-0). Amy Lash reviewed the Draft Decision. In section 4 b, add parking passes will be purchased for "2" years. Chuck Puleo asked if when the restaurant area is developed and in 5 years when the units are sold, will Old Salem Jail Ventures still hold the building? Penn Lindsay said the restaurant may be sold to an independent owner by that time, if it's leased, it will still be held by them. Attorney Correnti commented that in the Draft Decision it should say `Old Salem Jail Ventures'. For the reference to the prior decision, he will provide the actual recording information to Amy on Friday morning so it can be included. A motion was made by Pam Lombardini to approve the Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit Amendement, seconded by Christine Sullivan, and approved (7-0). Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage- 19-21 Barcelona Avenue (Map 3. Lots 3 & • 29)- Attorney Stephen Lovely Attorney Stephen Lovely, 4 Story St., said that Salem doesn't have a frontage requirement. There are two lots; one was approved by the Bldg. Inspector to be buildable, then grandfathered in. Some neighbors appealed this, and the Land Court determined it was not a buildable lot. They are appealing the Court's decision, though they also decided to go to the Board of Appeals to seek variances. The Board of Appeals required that the easement on the property be added to make the lot area for the new lot larger. In about a week time the appeal period for the Board of Appeal decision will lapse. Tim Kavanaugh agreed that there is no frontage requirement and because of that, he would approve the waiver request. Christine Sullivan asked why they are approving plans that don't require approval. Amy Lash said they have always had this procedure with a Waiver of Frontage approval being necessary before ANR endorsement. The Planning Department hopes to clarify the lot frontage requirement through the Zoning Ordinance Recodification. There being no public comments or further questions on this matter, a motion was made by Tim Kavanaugh to grant the waiver of frontage, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (7-0). Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 19-21 Barcelona Avenue (Map 3, Lots 3 & 29)- Attorney Stephen Lovely 2 f A motion was made by Tim Kavanaugh to accept the plan submitted by the applicant and move that it meets the requirements for ANR endorsement. The motion was 'seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (7-0). Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit- 488 R Highland Avenue (Man 3, Lot 139) (Camp Lions)—Metro PCS Kristen LeDuc, Metro PCS, explained that Metro PCS is a new wireless carrier to New England. They are offering a new wireless service: one price packaging and no time commitment. The building at 488R Highland Avenue already has an existing tower that they are proposing to use. They would add six panel antennas and there would be three freestanding, equipment cabinets, locked at the base. It would be in a compound with a fence around it. There being no public comments or further questions regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to approve the special permit, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (6- 0). Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility pecial Permit- 10-12 First Avenue (Map 13 Lot 6) (Pe uq of Apartments) Metro PCS Kristen LeDuc, Metro PCS, explained that at Pequot Apartments they are proposing to swap out existing antennas currently not in use. The equipment, a box, will go on the roof. They will use the same mounting, they're just changing the equipment. Antennas are on fagade of building. • Christine Sullivan commented that this would change the site line and that the Board usually requires the provider to paint the equipment to blend in. Amy Lash read the standard language in the draft decision regarding color. For this decision, she will clarify this to say, "match the brick". There being no public comments or further questions regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to approve the special permit, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit- 320 Lafayette Street(Map 32, Lot 216) (Park Towers) —Metro PCS Kristen LeDuc, Metro PCS, proposed to extend the penthouses on the side. The equipment cabinets will be on the roof with a barrier wall blended to match the building. Chuck Puleo asked if the height of the equipment exceeds the other heights. Kristen LeDuc said no and that the height is 7 ft. Christine Sullivan said she will vote against this, as it looks horrible and is not acceptable. Lafayette Street is a pretty street and equipment on this building doesn't fit in at all. Chuck Puleo inquired about the location and Kristen LeDuc explained that there isn't enough room on the roof to place the equipment elsewhere. There being no public comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Gene Collins, and approved (6-0). There being no further questions or comments, a motion was made by Gene Collins to approve the Special Permit, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (6-1). Roll Call Vote: Chuck Puleo, John Moustakis, Pam Lombardini, Gene Collins, Tim Ready, Tim Kavanaugh- Yes. Christine Sullivan- No. 3 Old/New Business • Chuck reported that the stop sign at Swampscott Road and First Street is up. • Amy said they're still working with the Beverly Co-op Bank for screening. Chuck Puleo explained that they never installed screening they committed to, and suggested Amy call Mr. Howard, bank President. • Amy explained that the Joseph Fenno House on Hawthorne Blvd. has been nominated for a National Register Nomination. The notice is from the State Preservation Office and requires no action, if someone is in support, they can send in a letter. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Tim Ready to acknowledge the letter, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh, and approved (7-0). • Site visit Saturday, 9 a.m. at Flint St. Gene Collins said, hypothetically if DRB says plan is acceptable, what do we do? John Moustakis said the Planning Board has the final say. Christine Sullivan reemphasized the importance of this issue with the Boards and would like a memo to the Planning Board about the process of the NRCC since this is different then anything before. It's up to the Planning Department to explain it to the Board, Chuck Puleo said Lynn Duncan did that last time. Tim Ready suggested not asking for a memo as it may be restrictive on them. Christine was on the SRA and said sometimes the DRB would report to them and the SRA wouldn't like what they'd report. She thinks the NRCC meant to model that relationship. John Moustakis was on NRCC committee and said that some people didn't want it to go before the Planning Bd. so they used the DRB as `another pair of eyes' and a place for people to go, but the Planning Board still has the authority. Christine agreed that a memo isn't necessary. • Christine Sullivan explained that Creative Economy is businesses and non-profits that use • creativity to produce products or services that generate wealth. Research found that there are 17-20,000 people on the North Shore that work in the creative economy, that's 10-12% of the entire economy. 4 top cities: Beverly, Salem, Newburyport & Gloucester, with a large technical component as well as arts/creative. 4 largest segments: Design (all kinds); Professional/Technical; Artists; Engineering/research companies. Now the challenge is to make it better known that we are a great place for companies like that to grow. Christine will provide handouts at next meeting. Tim Kavanaugh said the more interactions you capture between creative people it seems to produce more collaborations, projects, etc. Adjournment 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 adjourned at 8:06 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board 4 QTY OF SALEM _. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND f,a; • ^°� ,��E Comm DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WASL-0NGrON STREET♦ SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TEL:978-619-5685 ♦ FAx:978-740-0404 LYNN GOOMN DuNcAN,AIC' DLREcroR April 25, 2008 Paul Cassell-Cassell Builders 11 Vassar Road Marblehead, MA 01945 RE: Relocation of Street Trees Cedarcrest Avenue Extension On Thursday, April 17, 2008, the Planning Board of the City of Salem considered your request • to amend previously approved plans for the Cedarcrest Avenue Extension to allow for the trees that are to be planted within the grass strip along the street, to be planted on the individual residential lots instead. The Planning Board voted unanimously that this is an insignificant change not requiring a public hearing. The Planning Board also voted unanimously to waive the requirement for the location of street trees in Section V of the Salem Subdivision Regulations, and approve your request to relocate the trees. All trees shall be guaranteed for a period of two (2) years as required in the original decision and in the Salem Subdivision Regulations. Any further 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 shall require approval of the Planning Board. Sincerely,, U A�ash Staff Planner • CITY OF SALEM m -'o PLANNING BOARD • .x-n N ,t 3 Amended Decision N Site Plan Review/Planned Unit Developmenf o 50 St. Peter Street April 22, 2008 Old Salem Jail Ventures, LLC C/o Joseph Correnti, Esq. 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Amendment to Previously Approved Plans 50 St. Peter Street/Old Salem Jail Site Site Plan Review/Planned Unit Development On Thursday, April 3, 2008, the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing under Sections 7-15 and 7-18 of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance, Planned Unit • Development Special Permit and Site Plan Review, at the request of Old Salem Jail Ventures, LLC, to amend their plans for the property located at 50 St. Peter Street. The proposed amendment includes seven(7) additional housing units creating a total of thirty-six (36) housing units. The additional units will be accommodated by an expansion to the new building called The Alexander, as well as a restructuring of the internal layout of the Jail Building called The Bryant. The proposed amendment also includes modifications to the parking area. There will be thirty-six (36) on-site parking spaces, and seven(7) off-site parking spaces, which are required as a condition of this decision. The combination of on-site and off-site parking spaces will create a total of forty-three (43) parking spaces. New Boston Ventures intends to hold and rent 22 units for a period of 5 years in order to qualify for historic tax credits. After this time, Old Salem Jail Ventures LLC intends to renovate and sell the 22 rental units. The proposed four-building development will still feature a jail exhibit, a live/work artist space, and a restaurant. The Public Hearing was continued to and closed on April 17, 2008. The Planning Board voted on April 17, 2008 by a vote of seven (7) in favor(Puleo, Sullivan, Collins, Lombardini, Kavanaugh, Moustakis, and Ready) and none opposed to approve the Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Special Permit as amended with the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform to the revised plans for"50 Saint Peter, Salem, Massachusetts" Sheets • C-2 and C-3, prepared by Finegold, Alexander& Associates, 77 North Washington Street, Boston, MA 02114, last revised February 29, 2008. A full set of plans including the revised 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 •TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 4 WWW.SALEM.COM � .1 sheets, reflecting all conditions, and incorporating a reference to the original decision as well as this decision must be submitted and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2. Original Decision All conditions set forth in the original decision dated December 12, 2006, recorded at the South Essex Registry of Deeds Book 27583, Page 498, shall remain and be adhered to by the applicant. 3. Amendments Any further amendments to the site plan shall be reviewed by the City Planner and if deemed necessary by the City Planner, shall be brought to the Planning Board. Any waiver of conditions contained within shall require the approval of the Planning Board. 4. Parking a. Thirty-six (36) parking spaces are to be provided on site as shown on the approved plans, and the condominium association/Old Salem Jail Ventures LLC, their successors, or assigns, shall purchase seven(7) annual parking passes in the municipal garage for residents use. Documentation of the purchase of these parking passes shall be provided to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy. The location of off-site parking spaces may be changed to a different facility within 1,000 feet of the development at the discretion of the Department of Planning and Community Development. • b. For a period of two (2) years during construction, five (5) annual parking n?sses shall be purchased by Old Salem Jail Ventures LLC in the municipal garage for r.se of the residents of the senior housing. Documentation of the purchase of these parking passes shall be provided to the Department of Planning and Community Development prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. c. The applicant has volunteered to incorporate language into the condominium documents which would prohibit residents from parking in the church parking lot. A copy of these condominium documents shall be provided to the Department of Planning and Community Development. 5. Fire Department a. All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department. b. The locations of all fire hydrants shall be approved by the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a Building Permit c. Specifications for sprinkler systems, fire alarms, fire service, and tunnel construction have been outlined by the applicant's Consulting Engineer, Norton Remmer, P.E., in the document dated April 16, 2008, which was revised by the Salem Fire Department April • 2 17, 2008, and is attached to this decision. These items were agreed to by the Consulting • Engineer, the Salem Fire Department, and the State Fire Marshal during a meeting on April 7, 2008 and any deviation shall require approval by the Salem Fire Department. d. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit detailed tunnel plans shall be provided to the Salem Fire Department for their approval. e. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy details relating to the ownership and management of the buildings shall be provided to the Salem Fire Department; the Salem Fire Department shall be notified when changes in a building ownership or management occurs. 6. Board of Health The applicant shall comply with conditions issued by the Board of Health. 7. 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. &.aez YUP-O/A-L Charles Puleo Chairman ATTACHMENT: Fire Dept. Requirements 4/17/08 • 3 I NORTON S. REMMER, P.E. V CONSULTING ENGINEER SALEM JAIL MEETING WITH SFD AND STATE FIRE MARSHAL 04/07/08 • BUILDINGS/SPRINKLER SYSTEM: A. NFPA 13/standpipe (Standpipe will conform to NFPA 14 Class 3 system) B NFPA 13/standpipe (Standpipe will conform to NFPA 14 Class 3 system) C NFPA 13/standpipe(Standpipe will conform to NFPA 14 Class 3 system) D NFPA 13D with Detection in the attic if residential/otherwise NFPA 13 and standpipe E Dry system protecting parking located beneath tunnel/building (Covered Parking) FIRE ALARM 1. City of Salem hard wired Master Box for entire site 2. Monitored central station for each building 3. Central Annunciator 4. Beacon on each building visible from St. Peter's Street FIRE SERVICE 1. FDC on St. Peter's Street centrally located subject to approval by SFD (branched to all buildings with hydraulically calculated piping to achieve required fire flows.) 2. Piped to each building fire service/standpipe with exterior FDC. Designed for appropriate flow. TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION . 1. Minimum 2-hour fire resistance rating separation from all building above and around 2. Structurally independent 3. At least 20'wide by 12'-6"high 4. Need to provide pdfs of sketches showing details of plan for tunnel OWNERSHIP/MANAGEMENT Information requested: 1. Form of ownership of each building 2. Management of buildings/project when complete Knox Box on Buildings A, B,and C. • 4/17/08 1/1 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD FILE if CITY CLERi{, SALEM, MASS. Form A - Decision 19-21 Barcelona Avenue Karen Valliere C/o Stephen Lovely, Esq. 14 Story Street Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Lovely: The Salem Planning Board voted on April 17, 2008 to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Karen Valliere, 19 Barcelona Avenue, Salem, MA 01970 • 2. Location: 19-21 Barcelona Avenue, Assessors Map 3, Lots 3 & 29 3. Project Description: This Form A subdivides 19 Barcelona Avenue into two lots: 19 Barcelona Avenue, a combination of"Lot 733" and "Lot 734", consisting of .15,051square feet, and 21 Barcelona Avenue, a combination of"Lot 732" and"Lot 735", consisting of 8,433 square feet. Both lots will have frontage on Barcelona Avenue. Sincerely, CPkec/AL Charles Puleo Chairman • Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAA: 978.740.0404 0 WWW.SALEM.COM 5 F CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 7999 APD 18 A III FILE 4 CITY CLEi K. SALEM, MASS. Waiver of Frontage- Decision For the Petition of Karen Valliere for a Waiver of Frontage at 19-21 Barcelona Avenue A Public Hearing on this petition was held on, and closed on April 17, 2008 with the following Board members present: Charles Puleo (Chair), Tim Kavanaugh, John Moustakis, Christine Sullivan, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini and Tim Ready. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and notice of the hearing was published in the Salem Evening News. Karen Valliere, 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 19 Barcelona Avenue to be subdivided into two 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 purpose of 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 19-21 Barcelona Avenue, • specifically for the new lot at 21 Barcelona Avenue(created by combining Lot 732 and Lot 735), as shown on the plan titled, "Plan of Land located in Salem, MA"prepared by Eastern Land Survey Associates, dated March 24, 2008, upon the findings by the Board that: 1. The action is in the public interest and not inconsistent with the intent and purpose of the subdivision control law 2. Special circumstances exist which especially affect the property, not generally affecting other properties; Therefore, the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven(7) in favor(Puleo, Kavanaugh, Moustakis, Sullivan, Collins, Lombardini, Ready), and none opposed to grant the waiver from frontage requirements. I hereby certify that a copy of this decision is on file with the City Clerk and that a copy of the Decision and plan is on file with the Planning Board. Charles Puleo, Chairman • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD onn9 hf�R IS A IN �q Wireless Special Permit Decision FILE n The Petition of Metro PCS for the Property LocatedCJIY CLERK. SALEM, MASS 488 Rear Highland Avenue A Public Hearing on this petition was held on April 17, 2008. The following Planning Board members were present: Charles Puleo, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, John Moustakis, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini and Christine Sullivan. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and 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 six panel antennas on the existing lattice tower located at 488R Highland Avenue, Salem, MA (Map 3 Lot 139). The proposal also includes the addition of three equipment cabinets, one GSM antenna, and one GPS antenna. 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 April 16, 2008, the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven (7) in favor(Puleo, Kavanaugh, Ready, Moustakis, Collins, Lombardini and Sullivan), and none opposed, to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application dated April 1, 2008 and site plan last dated February 20, 2008, titled"BOS0025A: ATC 0 Cain Road, Salem, MA", Sheets T-1, C-1, Z-1, Z- 2, drawn by Hudson Design Group LLC, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The equipment shall be painted a color which reduces its visibility and allows it to blend with the existing equipment; the applicant,his successors or assigns shall maintain the appearance of the equipment. 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. (Z"Ikl— 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, MASSACHLSE17S 01970 , TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 4 WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 1g Wireless Special Permit Decision The Petition of Metro PCS for the Property K Locate L `R EM.MASS. 10-12 First Street CIT Y ��� A Public Hearing on this petition was held on April 17, 2008. The following Planning Board members were present: Charles Puleo, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, John Moustakis, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini and Christine Sullivan. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and 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 six panel antennas, and three equipment cabinets on the roof of the building at the Pequot Apartments, 10-12 First Street, Salem, MA (Map 13, Lot 6). This equipment will replace existing Metricom equipment. The proposal also includes the addition one GSM antenna, and one GPS antenna. 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 April 16, 2008, the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a vote of seven(7) in favor(Puleo, Kavanaugh, Ready, Moustakis, Collins, Lombardini and Sullivan), and none opposed, to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application dated April 1, 2008 and site plan last dated January ry15 2008 titled BOS0097A: ATT Pe uotApartments, Salem MA", Sheets T-1 Z-1 Z-2,Z-3 drawn by Hudson Design Group LLC, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The equipment shall be painted red to reduces its visibility and allows it to blend with the existing brick penthouse; the applicant, his successors or assigns shall maintain the appearance of the rooftop equipment. 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. 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 • h CITY OF SALEM - ' PLANNING BOARD 2808 APA 18 A 10. 3q Wireless Special Permit Decision FILE p CITY CLERK, SALEM. MASS. The Petition of MetroTCS for the Property Located at 320 Lafayette Street A Public Hearing on this petition was held on April 17, 2008. The following Planning Board members were present: Charles Puleo, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, John Moustakis, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini and Christine Sullivan. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and 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 six panel antennas concealed within two fiberglass extensions of the penthouses on the roof of 320 Lafayette Street, Salem, MA (Map 32, Lot 216). The proposal also includes the addition of three equipment cabinets, one GSM antenna, and one GPS antenna. 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 April 16, 2008, the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a vote of six (6) in favor(Puleo, Kavanaugh, Ready, Moustakis, Collins, Lombardini), and one (1) opposed(Sullivan), to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application dated March 31, 2008 and site plan last dated January 22, 2008, titled `BOS0052A: 320 Lafayette Street, Salem, MA", Sheets T-1, Z-1, Z-2, Z-3, Z-4, drawn by Hudson Design Group LLC, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The equipment shall be painted a color which reduces its visibility and allows it to blend with the existing rooftop equipment; the applicant, his successors or assigns shall maintain the appearance of the equipment. 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. 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 RECEIVE® g APR 0 9 2008 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts DEPT.OF PLANNING& William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Massachusetts Historical Commission April 3, 2008 Woman's Friend Society c/o Alicia Hart 32 Abbott Street Salem, MA 01915 Re: National Register nomination Dear Ms. Hart: We are pleased to inform you that the Joseph Fenno House, Salem, Massachusetts, will be considered by the Massachusetts Historical Commission for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. The National Register of Historic Places is the Federal government's official • list of historic properties worthy of preservation. Listing in the National Register provides recognition and assists in preserving our nation's heritage. Listing of this property provides recognition of the community's important historic resources and assures protective review of Federal projects that might adversely affect the character of the property. If the property is listed in the National Register, certain Federal investment-tax credits for rehabilitation and other provisions may apply. Listing in the National Register does not mean that limitations will be placed on the property by the Federal government. Public visitation rights are not required of property owners. The Federal government will not attach restrictive covenants to the property or seek to acquire it. If a property is listed in the National Register, the owner may do anything with it that he/she wishes, " unless state or federal funds, permits, or licensing are used, of unless some other regional and/or local ordinance or policy is in effect. In Massachusetts, properties nominated to the National Register are automatically listed in the State Register of Historic Places. There are no limitations, public visitation requirements, or restrictive covenants for private properties included in the State Register. State Register properties owned by municipalities and nonprofit organizations may compete for state restoration grants. 220 Morrissey Boulevard,Boston,Massachusetts 02125 (617) 727-8470 • Fax_(617) 727-5128 www.state-ma.us/sec/mhc You are invited to attend the meeting of the Massachusetts Historical Commission at which the nomination of this property will be considered. The Commission will meet at 1:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 11, 2008, at the Massachusetts State Archives, Dorchester, n, Massachusetts. The Commission meeting is a public meeting and all interested parties are encouraged to attend. If you have special needs and would like to attend the meeting, please contact the Commission and staff will make any arrangements that are necessary. A draft copy of the National Register nomination will be available at the Salem Public Library. Attached please find notices that explain, in greater detail, the results of listing in the National Register and that describe the rights and procedures by which an owner may comment on or object to listing in the National Register. Should you have any questions about this nomination prior to the Massachusetts Historical Commission meeting, please contact me at this office. Sincerely, Brona Simon • State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission cc: Wendy Frontiero,consultant Kimberly Driscoll, Mayor,City of Salem Jane Guy, Salem CLG Coordinator, Salem Planning Department Hannah_Diozzi,_Sale_m_Historical Commission JSam Spatafore,Salem Planning Board Enclosures: NR Criteria tf CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decisions At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, April 17,2008 at 7:00pm m Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,Salem Massachusetts,the Planning Board voted upon the following items: Applicant: Old Salem Jail Ventures, LLC Request: Amendment to previously approved plans under Section 7-18 Site Plan Review and Section 7-15 Planned Unit Development Location: 50 St. Peter Street(Map 35,Lot 179) (Old Salem Jail) Description: The proposed amendment includes seven (7) additional housing units creating a total of thirty-six (36) housing units and modifications to the parking area. Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk April 23,2008 • Applicant: Metro PCS Request: Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit under Section 5-3,Special Permit Uses, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Location: 488R Highland Avenue (Map 3 Lot 139) (Camp Lions) Description: The proposal includes the installation of six panel antennas on the existing lattice tower. The proposal also includes the addition of three equipment cabinets, one GSM antenna, and one GPS antenna. Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk April 18, 2008 Applicant: Metro PCS Request: Wireless Communication Facility Special Pemrit under Section 5-3, Special Permit Uses,of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Location: 10-12 First Street(Map 13, Lot 6) (Pequot Apartments) Description: The proposal includes the installation of six panel antennas, and three equipment cabinets on the roof of the building. This equipment will replace existing Metricom equipment. The proposal also includes the addition one GSM antenna, and one GPS antenna. Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk April 18,2008 • (Comirared on rereise side) 2 Applicant: Metro PCS Request: Wireless Communication Facility Special Permit under Section 5-3, Special Permit Uses, of the City of Salem Zoning Ordinance Location: 320 Lafayette Street, Salem,MA(Map 32,Lot 216) (Park Towers) Description: The proposal includes the installation of six panel antennas concealed within two fiberglass extensions of the penthouses on the roof. The proposal also includes the addition of three equipment cabinets one GSM antenna and one GPS antenna. > Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk April 18, 2008 This notice is being sero in caVharxe with the Massadmem Ger al L aws, Chapter 40A, Section 9 and"not require action by the impier2 Appeals, if airy shall be rm&pursuant to Chapter 40A, Section 17, and shall be . filed within 20 dais from the date wbxb the deaswn was fikd with the City Clerk. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALEM.COM CP143� 11 • • CITY OF SALEM i PLANNING BOARD 7OQ9 HaR 28 n 10: 14 AGENDA i PLANNING 130ARD 'rhursday, April 3, 2008- 7:00 PAL 31tD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chair I. Approval of Minutes o March 20, 2008 2. Request for Plan Endorsement and Execution of Covenant -Chapel Hill Subdivision, Clark Avenue-Attorney John Kcilty 3. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans -Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35, Lot 179) --Attorney Joseph Correnti 4. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit -Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) -Attorney Scott Grover 5. Old/New Business o Election of Chair and Vice Chair 6. Adjournment This nJtIC� PWS I1 { 03is `J L a te�" City rsa�i F{A D • AI;,:i�A( LCI-.ti OIyIO TCL: ')75.619 6S5 1:AX97S.710.(W(H City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: Pl Date: Name Mailing Address Phone # Email M0541v 1.5 S r. Pelma 131 daw MO 1,060 ��,LC , Sj- _ 7qy-09//,:� CnQFJUF.% 1(bn/OYI 77/vJrl f /ni r Z - �tl �• 110 Je l g'1E 53/ 7940 �i Or7Congneas , Cf t 9���7/s BoG�_ r CI'T'Y OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND V COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBER] I 1 DRISCOLL NL\YOR 120WASHINGaINSITF1.1 S:vLe.ni,A-0n�,v IIemrrs 01970 '1'n:1':978-619-5685 1vvx:978-740-0404 LxNN(IOONIN DCNCvN,A1CP DIRIX-IOR MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: March 27, 2008 RE: Agenda—April 3, 2008 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Minutes of March 20, 2008 ➢ Materials for Agenda Items • Notes on Agenda Items Request for Plan Endorsement and Execution of Covenant—Chapel Hill Subdivision, Clark Avenue—Attorney John Keilty The twenty (20) day appeal period for the Chapel Hill Subdivision decision (filed on March 3, 2008)has passed with no appeal. Attorney Keilty has submitted a letter requesting that the Planning Board endorse the plan. He will be submitting revised plans which include the (3) revisions required prior to endorsement: 1. The decision, which shall be recorded with the plans, shall be referenced on the original plans 42 (c) 2. The three (3) required fences shall be shown on the plans 416 (c) 3. The details of sloped granite shall be removed -#17 Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans—Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35, Lot 179)—Attorney Joseph Correnti Since the Planning Board approved the plans for the Old Salem Jail, the developer has • determined various amendments are necessary to make the project financially feasible. The proposed amendment includes seven (7) additional housing units creating a total of thirty-six (36) housing units and modifications to the parking area. The Fire Department is still reviewing the proposed changes to the entrance way on St. Peter Street. There have been two meetings with the applicants, the Fire Department, and staff from the Department of Planning and Community Development to discuss suitable alternatives for fire fighting access on the site. The modifications have received schematic approval from the Salem Redevelopment Authority. The Design Review Board will be reviewing the final design plans at their meeting on April 23, 2008. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) —Attorney Scott Grover The traffic engineers from EarthTech and Beta Group will be at the meeting to further discuss their recommendations for traffic mitigation. I spoke with Attorney Scott Grover about having these presentations first to ensure that they take place before it gets too late. Following this, Attorney Grover plans to discuss the ways in which the proposal complies with the Master Plan. A narrative discussing this was included in the original submission by Riverview Place LLC to the Planning Board. Currently, the landscape plan does not comply with the Zoning Ordinance requirement for one (1) tree for every three (3) parking spaces. The . applicant has requested that the landscape architect revise the landscape plan so that it is in compliance. The applicants would like to start the engineering peer review after going to the Design Review Board. Lt. Griffin of the Fire Department met with Mike O'Brien to discuss issues with access, the turning radius of drives within the site, hydrant locations, and snow storage. She has requested that the site engineer supply the Fire Department with some additional information. She has not yet received this information. I met with Attorney Grover, Lynn Duncan, and Tom Daniel to discuss the comments so far and the appropriate timing for the project to go to the Design Review Board. Acknowledging that there have been public comments about the proposal's consistency with the Master Plan, it was decided that it would be best for the Design Review Board to review the project at a schematic level at this time. The project will go to the DRB on April 23, 2008 and return to the Planning Board after this. While the Zoning Board of Appeals granted three (3) variances, the site plan may change as it is reviewed by the DRB and Planning Board. While the NRCC Zoning Ordinance does reference that development shall be in compliance with the NRCC Master Plan, it should also be noted that the Master Plan contains a plan for the entire planning area which is called an "Illustrative Plan". The Illustrative Plan shows small buildings along an extended Commercial Street. The Mayor spoke with the adjacent property owner about • 2 J r extending Commercial Street and found that they are not interested at this time. Scott Grover mentioned that they are also anticipating Chapter 91 licensing requirements limiting the proximity of the buildings to the North River Canal. I understand that neither Chapter 91 license requirements, nor economic feasibility studies were considered as part of the Master Plan. Other News Beverly Cooperative erative Bank P I spoke again with Tim Smith, Vice President of Beverly Cooperative Bank, regarding the screening of the HVAC units on the roof of the building. He has received the roof plans and details he needs from the project engineer. He has contacted Willard Shutter Co. to design a screening system and will be supplying the DPCD with a plan showing the proposed screening within the next two weeks. �I 3 Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting April 3, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, April 3, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Christine Sullivan, Walter Power, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Pam Lombardini, Gene Collins, and John Moustakis. Also present were: Lynn Duncan, Director, Planning & Community Development; Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. AAVnroval of Minutes The minutes of the March 20th meeting were reviewed. There were no changes. A motion was made by Gene Collins to accept the minutes, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0). Request for Plan Endorsement and Execution of Covenant- Chapel Hill Subdivision Clark Avenue- Attorney Jack Keilty Attorney Keilty had several sheets of plans and a covenant that require signatures by Board • members. One condition to be met is to change the sloped granite, but since that detail hadn't been changed on the appropriate sheet yet, that won't be endorsed at this time. They'll bring it in for separate endorsement. Attorney Keilty informed the Board that they still have to go before land court. There being no further questions or comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to endorse the plans and execute of covenant, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (7-0). Christine Sullivan recused herself on this matter. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans- Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35. Lot 179)- Attorney Joseph Correnti Attorney Joseph Correnti (63 Federal St.) representing Old Salem Ventures explained that in December 2006, the Planning Board unanimously approved the site plan review for the jail site, now they're back with amendments to that plan. Currently, the SRA holds the title to the project. Penn Lindsay of New Boston Ventures (NBV) said that they applied for federal and state credits, which will provide 40% of construction costs. These tax credits require historical buildings to have apartments, not condominiums. The jail building and jail keeper's house (Macintyre and Bryant buildings) will have apartments for rent for five years, and then they will be converted to condos. The new Alexander building will have condos. There will be 36 units altogether- 22 rental and 14 condos. This proposal is the same as originally presented to the SRA and they are • still proposing a restaurant on site, exhibit space and artist workspace. 1 A 3-D model and drawings were presented to the Board. Daniel Ricciarelli explained that parking is in the same location, as is the access, drop off, the restaurant, etc. What they changed is the shape of the building- it will be an L-shaped building with the bottom of the building • carved out for parking. The building will hug the streetscape like other buildings in Salem; outside exterior remains the same as well as the height. There are 5 additional units in this building, all flats. Gene Collins asked where the building comes to on St. Peter Street and Daniel Ricciarelli explained that it's about a five-foot setback to match the other building. The materials are the same as what has been approved. Chuck Puleo inquired about the status with the Fire Department. Penn Lindsay said they are working out the issue, which is that the Fire Dept. isn't totally comfortable with the entrance into the building. Access onto the site hasn't changed much so they're optimistic they can resolve this over the next few weeks. Penn Lindsay said they have been to the DRB, commenting that they liked this plan better than the first. They have received schematic approval. Walter Power inquired if the new entrance will have a gated door. Penn Lindsay answered no, that they anticipate an archway with granite pillars and a window over the archway. Since they've increased the number of units, John Moustakis asked for parking information and Penn explained that there will be 36 parking spaces 1:1 ratio). Am Lash referred to the SRA P P g P ( ) Y minutes that state that NBV will lease 7 spaces in the garage for resident's use, and for use of the residents of the senior housing, 5 additional spaces in the municipal garage for the period of construction. John Moustakis wondered where restaurant and exhibit patrons will park, Penn Lindsay said they can use the garage, optional valet parking and anticipates a lot of foot traffic. He mentioned that their target market are those who want to be near downtown, near a train, and will have less vehicles. In response to Gene Collins, Lynn Duncan explained that this is a B5 • zone and the renovation of the jail/jailhouse requires no parking. Lynn Duncan commented that with leasing spaces in the garage, they go above and beyond requirements. John Moustakis commented that parking passes don't guarantee a space. Gene Collins said that the Board can't change the parking issues since it's a B5 zone. Christine Sullivan asked if they have a restaurant yet, if not, can they guarantee one. Penn said they don't have one yet, they will guarantee one and when they are actually in construction, they will get a restaurant partner. He hopes they will break ground sometime in June. Chuck Puleo added that they are waiting final approval from the Fire Dept and the SRA. In regards to the 22 rentals for 5 years, Gene Collins wanted to know how many are affordable units. He suggested that a 5-year term is short, how about 4 or 5 affordable units? Penn Lindsay said that due to the complexity and expense of renovations, as of now there will be 1 affordable unit. There being no further questions or comments on this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to continue the Public Hearing to April 17th, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (9-0). Continued: Public Hearing,- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street &71 Mason Street (Map 26. Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) -Attorney Scott Grover • 2 / II Attorney Scott Grover explained that there are two issues to clear to go forward: 1. Special permit for use of property, for the Board to approve this they must find that three requirements are met: A. It abuts a residential area (this has been met) B. Retain first floor use on main • corridor (Mason St. is one) C. For all newly constructed units, each must have separate entrance, for this, they have a variance from the ZBA. 2. Site plan review process is enhanced by the Board making a decision based on NRCC, consistency with the Masterplan, which says it should be used for mixed use (the project is mixed use). John Moustakis asked if they could have a walkway. Attorney Grover spoke with Chris Huntress who said they can put a walkway from Mason down the right side of the site. They'll be meeting on April 23`d with the design review Board. Chuck Puleo said the DRB would be commenting on the plans as well. Attorney Grover added that Chapter 91 states to keep areas approximate to tide lands open to the public. Christine Sullivan would like the Board's concerns communicated to the DRB and Lynn Duncan suggested there could be a couple of Board representatives to attend the DRB meeting. Attorney Grover said realistically they'd be back before the Planning Board sometime around May. Attorney Grover explained the two requirements for landscaping. 1. Rows of cars head to head with a planting strip in between, trees in that planting strip as well. 2. One shade tree for every 3 parking spaces. If they account for all parking spaces, there would be over 100 trees. So he suggests interpreting it as one tree for every three visible parking spaces. Steve Livermore went over the renderings. All buildings are roughly the same height; the 3- story building height is similar to what's on Mason St. Ken Petraglia, BETA group, said there is a cuing issue at the Flint St. lights, they've agreed to evaluate the signal and consider retiming. Into the site drive, there should be a left turn only lane, the consultant feels parking should be eliminated on that side on Flint St. Ken Petraglia said they met with the Fire Dept, and that they haven't seen any change in plans. Amy Lash spoke with Erin Griffin who said the only changes they asked for were for additional hydrants. Ken e Petraglia suggested additional signals on Mason St. & Flint St. the consultant made a g gg g , commitment to that. Tremont St., Mason St. and site drive have site distance problems. Ken said they're recommending that this be signalized. Reasons for this: high accident rate location, poor site distance, the proponent prepared sketch to widen Tremont, but Ken doesn't feel it addresses the situation. Nadine Hanscom asked the consultant why they are against a signal. Steve Livermore explained that they're not really for or against a signal, it's that they're not sure how the City stands on this situation. They need more information from the City, also, how do the residents feel about this. Tim Ready asked whether the Police Dept. has weighed in on this intersection, do they have an opinion? Do they have data on this intersection? Ken Petraglia said that he hasn't consulted that department. Lynn Duncan suggested it's the Planning Department's responsibility to get the data from the Police Department, so they will get that information. There was a suggestion to widen Tremont St., and Pam Lombardini suggested that if they were to widen Tremont St., it would cut into Mack Park, is that feasible? Ken Petraglia said that if you cut into the park, it would be about 5 ft. Christine Sullivan asked how many entrances are required for this project. Attorney Grover said there is not a particular amount required. Christine suggested that since Flint St. is old and narrow, and if the entrance off Mason St. is sufficient, maybe they don't need the entrance off of Flint St at all. Lynn Duncan reminded the Board that for Osborne Hill, when the Planning Board and Consultant agreed on a light, they • made it a condition and added `providing City Council approval'; they could potentially do that in this case. 3 John Moustakis suggested making Goodhue St. a two-way street like it used to be. That would alleviate a lot of traffic. He asked if it would be possible to get someone here at the next meeting . to talk about this. Lynn Duncan will talk to Lt. Prezinsky. Walter Power reminded all that issues might take a while to work out. If Goodhue St. is made two-way, it may be an easier travel. He thinks we should also utilize the parking lot across the street (at the top of Flint), possibly expand the pocket with parking. Attorney Grover said they have designated 12 spaces in the lot to Flint St. residents. The Board and neighbors need to realize parking and traffic are an existing problem- and the project is not adding much to the problem. Ken agreed with Attorney Grover adding that lights on Tremont and Mason Streets aren't just for new problems, they're also for existing problems. Jeff Maxtutis of EarthTech responded to Christine Sullivan's inquiry about the traffic study during afterschool hours and explained that this project will generate less than 1 vehicle per minute in the morning peak hour; a little more than 1 vehicle per minute in the afternoon peak hour, and during the hours of 2-4 is about the same. Meeting opened to the public Councillor Paul Prevey (Ward 6) lives on Tremont St., and says there is little effort of cars to slow down when they approach Flint St. The cars parked on Flint St. act like a barrier. If there weren't any cars parked on Flint St., it would be worse. He supports Goodhue St. becoming a two-way street. As far as traffic lights, the traffic impact and density make him somewhat leery of this solution. Attorney Grover said they will consider a left-turn only out of Flint St. Sonia Hernandez (89 Flint St.) feels that removing parking on Flint St. will make cars go even • faster down that street. She has parking on Mason St. and said it's hard to cross with her two kids, parking across the street in the proposed new lot and crossing Flint St. will be difficult too. She said the neighborhood petitioned and got a one-way sign put up on Friday, and it worked pretty well, but it was taken down the following Monday. Bill Penta (89 Flint St.) told Board members that neighbors stood guard because commuters were trying to rip down the one-way signs. He asked about construction trucks in that area, Attorney Grover said there would be a Constriction Plan. Mr. Penta said if there were to be no parking on Flint St., it would be bad because they block traffic and slow it down. Attorney Grover said they have considered slanting the driveway so that people couldn't turn into the driveway from the other way. Martin Imm (174 Federal St.) worked on the NRCC masterplan and said it included long-term traffic recommendations including the extension of Commercial St.; extending Tremont onto Commercial. He suggested having Commercial St. coming across; they'd have to use some parking spaces to put Commercial St in. He feels that this is an opportunity to work with the traffic problem. Dave Pelletier (12 Crombie St.) said to come out of this process without a solution to Flint St. would be to fail. Darrow Lebovici (122 Federal St) asked about the report's predicted additional trips an hour in peak and for an explanation. Jeff Maxtutis explained the numbers, 3-6% increase in the morning • and afternoon, defining those making the left and right turns. Mr. Lebovici asked about the 4 capture ratio-how many cars would raise the number of trips? He was asked how this project effects him and he stated he is concerned for the neighbors on those streets. Lynn Duncan • reminded all that that's why there is a peer reviewer to evaluate. Tim Ready asked Mr. Lebovici if he accepts the traffic study. Darrow Lebovici said he accepts it but doesn't agree with it. Bill Penta and Sonia Hernandez said they agree with making Flint St. a one way or left turn only. Jeff Maxtutis clarified that there would be a left-turn only lane into the project drive. He reiterated that the impact of the project on the roadway is the issue on the table. Lynn Duncan, Director of Planning & Community Development reviewed some recommendations of the NRCC masterplan and how this project is meeting those. She said the Planning Board could not take action without a recommendation from the DRB. The Masterplan suggests a project to facilitate a gateway to downtown. For the North area, extend Mason St. to Commercial St; extend Commercial St to Flint St. Offer parking spaces; improving and maintaining views; enhance residential character; enhance the canal edge. Gene Collins asked if these were recommendations, not requirements. Lynn Duncan confirmed that they are recommendations, and feels this plan meets many of them. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to continue the public hearing to May 1", seconded by Gene Collins and approved (8-0). Gene Collins clarified that the Planning Board cannot change streets, like Goodhue St., but they . can suggest it to the City Council. A motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to extend the deadline for final Planning Board action to May 301h, seconded by John Moustakis and accepted (8-0). Chuck Puleo suggested a site visit on April 19'h at 9 a.m. Old/New Business • Elections There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by John Moustakis to elect Chuck Puleo as Chair; and Walter Power as Vice Chair, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0). Walter Power suggested said the Planning Board needs stability and suggested a three-year term instead of a 1-year term. • Chuck Puleo said the Danversbank still hasn't provided screening. Amy Lash has spoke with Tim Smith and is expecting to see a screening proposal soon. • Chuck Puleo said the stop sign at Swampscott Rd & First St. is missing. Amy Lash will mention this to the DPW. • A brief discussion followed regarding the DRB, its role and the Planning Board's role. Tim Ready said the DRB should be allowed to exercise their prerogative, that the Planning Board 5 t should be cautious and make recommendations. Adjournment • There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Walter Power to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (8-0). The meeting adjourned at 9`.45 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • • 6 Y47 -% 'n\' CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 44 PlAr H A Hs 83 CITY CI-EDi" AGENDA (REVISED) PLANNING BOARD Thursday, March 20, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 3" FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chairl!No 1. Approval of Minutes o February 21, 2008 0 2. Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage-90 Summer Street (Map 25, Lot 493) -John Donahue o 3. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval -90 Summer Street (Map 25, Lot 493)-John Donahue crt 0— - 4. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit-217 0 Essex Street (Map 35, Lot 25 1) (Eastern Bank) -Sprint Wireless Broadband f 5. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans-Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street (Map 35, Lot 179)-Attorney Joseph Correnti 6. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard CV District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District to Special Permit-Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 1C Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) -Attorney Scott Grover 7. Old/New Business • Request for a six (6) month extension for the North River Canal Corridor Special Use Permit granted April 13, 2006 for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street-Attorney Joseph Correnti • Election of Chair and Vice Chair 8. Adjournment • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 - TEL: 978.619.5685 FAx 978.740.0404 - WWW.SALENICOM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD • nou rl I `i i'1, `;Ii l�,�qItt1`'S. (•if�:i). AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursday, March 20, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET kar�l�estPt'ulpeo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o February 21, 2008 2. Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage—90 Summer Street (Map 25, Lot 493)—John Donahue 3. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval —90 Summer Street (Map 25, Lot 493) —John Donahue 4. Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit—217 Essex Street (Map 35, Lot 25 1) (Eastern Bank)—Sprint Wireless Broadband • 5. Public Hearing- Site Plan Review and Planned Unit Development Amendment to Previously Approved Plans —Old Salem Ventures LLC, 50 St. Peter Street(Map 35, Lot 179)—Attorney Joseph Correnti 6. Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit—Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street, & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede)—Attorney Scott Grover 7. Old/New Business o Request for a six (6) month extension for the North River Canal Corridor Special Use Permit granted April 13, 2006 for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street—Attorney Joseph Correnti 8. Adjournment This notice posters nn 1Cgfi4l1.1 �uifetin a08f>9W city Hall 4,7 iy �vo8 .J. 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: ?L4Vtvl Nli Date: 3/Zo/D`6 Name Mailing Address Phone # Email *17 Arm (yoQ,v��N (6'l ��►?,m, SM�ent FQdend SE 912frZy- 54 97�,7Y`/,670a Q�fevecr,. • 1 • l Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting • March 20, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, March 20, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Christine Sullivan, Walter Power, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Pam Lombardini, Gene Collins. Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: John Moustakis Approval of Minutes The minutes of the February 21" meeting were reviewed. There were no changes, a motion was made by Walter Power to accept the minutes, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (6-0). (Pam and Gene were not present/missed part of the last meeting and did not vote in the approval of the minutes). Public Hearing Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North • River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) — Attorney Scott Grover Attorney Joseph Correnti explained that the plans for this project for the Old Salem Jail are being amended due to finances and some required meetings with the city are presently being held. He commented that the plans are turning out to be better than the ones previously approved. He felt that until they complete the meetings with City Departments, they should wait to make their presentation to the Planning Board. They are requesting an extension so that they can present to the Board when the plans and meetings are complete. There is a formal letter from New Boston Ventures that was sent to the Planning Department requesting this extension. There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to move the public hearing to April 3, 2008, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0). Old Business • Request for a six (6) month extension for the North River Canal Corridor Special Use Permit granted April 13, 2006 for the property located at 28 Goodhue Street- Attorney Joseph Correnti • Attorney Joseph Correnti explained that the project is fully permitted, but not fully 1 financed. There is a lender that they have been working with closely, and may come through in the spring. They are requesting a six-month extension to keep the project permitted; nothing will change about the project. • There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to grant the six (6) month extension, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (8-0). Public Hearing- Request for Waiver of Frontage- 90 Summer Street(Map 25, Lot 493)- John Donahue John Donahue explained that he wants to move the house at 60 Federal Street to a lot on Downing Street. He was granted the necessary variances from the Board of Appeals. He is requesting a waiver of frontage so that it can be divided into two parcels. Moving the house and then restoring it will preserve Salem's history. Meeting opened to the public Betsy Burns (22 Beckford Street) speaking for the Federal St. Neighborhood Association, they strongly agree with John Donahue's project. The house is from yr. 1818 and this will save a piece of Salem's history and she hope the Board supports this proposal. Steve Robinson (1 Downing Street) opposes the plan due to shortage of on street parking. The waiver of frontage would eliminate an on street parking spot on Downing Street. Putting an additional house would add more cars, adding to the already existing parking problems. He is also concerned about the fire hazard this home will create in an already congested neighborhood. • David Pelletier (12 Crombie Street) supports John Donahue's proposal and thinks it will enhance the neighborhood, he hopes the project goes through. Chuck Puleo pointed out the Zoning Board of Appeals decision included a condition that states that the house may not be changed in any way. Councillor Jean Pelletier (Ward 3) believes the Zoning Ordinance enforces the same thing. Walter Power asked how the move is going to be accommodated. John Donahue explained that they determined that the route least limited by obstructions is through downtown. The move would take place most likely on a Sunday. The mover is pretty certain he can get it to Downing Street in one day. There will be police details; there is some wiring that needs to be moved- all pending City approval. The City and mover will meet to plan the move. Robert Femino (32 Endicott St) representing his father Mr. Femino (120-124 Margin St., at the corner of Downing Street and Margin Street). His property abuts the property being discussed. He doesn't want to be boxed in with an old structure, as the house would be about 6-10 ft away from his. The Zoning Board said there used to be a stricture there that burned down 94 years ago, and that you have two years to replace such a stricture. Robert Femino suggested that since the structure wasn't replaced, perhaps it was because they realized it wasn't a good fit. This has already been before the Zoning Board and Mr. Femino said they felt that Mr. Donahue is • burdened with owning a lot of property. He feels the property is not a hardship; he's going to sell 2 i the house and much of the land. These are two substandard, nonconforming lots and it comes at the expense of the neighborhood. His father is 91 years old and has been a taxpayer in Salem • for years. He mentioned he had submitted a petition against the proposal to the City. He asked that the Board reject the request. Amy Lash passed around two petitions submitted at the time of the Board of Appeals public hearing, for and against this proposal. Economic Development Planner, Tom Daniel, mentioned that Lynn Duncan was unable to attend and he was there representing the Department of Planning and Community to say that the City is in support of this project. They looked at alternative sites, but feel this is the best site for the house. He emphasized that the character and details of the house shall be maintained. Chuck Puleo asked if the lot was considered one lot and when it had merged. Tom Daniel said it was two lots, then after the fire, it was merged to one lot. Betsy Burns said she is in sympathy with Mr. Femino, speaking for herself, she concurs with his opposition. She is surprised that the City would allow for so many variances. Although she wants the house to be saved, the neighbor shouldn't suffer. Christine Sullivan said that this request for waiver of frontage seems to have two issues: preserving the house and parking issues. She is on the "preserve the house" side even though parking is an issue. Most of the city has parking issues. Nadine Hanscom wanted clarification for the approval of the waiver, whether it's needed to continue the project. Tim Kavanaugh explained that John Donahue needs the waiver for frontage so that the lot can be separated and • built on. If the waiver isn't granted, the lot cannot be separated. Issues similar to this one have occurred in the past and the Board granted the waiver. This is a congested neighborhood with undersized lots, but he has already received the necessary variances. Amy Lash read a letter from Historic Salem who approves the proposed project and hopes it goes through. They feel the house keeps with the character of the neighborhood. Councillor Jean Pelletier (Ward 3) was at the Zoning Meeting when the issues for this project came up. Mr. Femino and Mr. Robinson are on the corners of the street (multi family homes), they are in need of parking. Councillor Pelletier is on the fence for this project. He thinks it is a good fit for the neighborhood and it is only going to be a single-family home, but he also respects the families on that street. Mr. Robinson said that in between the two four-family homes are more multi-family homes. Mr. Femino added that they are appealing what the Zoning Board ruled last week. There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to close the public hearing, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (7-0). Walter Power said he feels for both sides. The overcrowding is a tough issue and he doesn't completely agree with losing some historic homes to the new courthouse. Nadine Hanscom is concerned with the fact that there have been similar cases like this one and the waivers were • granted. She feels the Board can't pick and choose who should get waivers when the same circumstances are present, it wouldn't be fair. Pam Lombardini agreed with Nadine in that it's 3 about fairness. Chuck Puleo reiterated that it will be a single-family home, it can't be changed, and a parking space will be on the property. Tim Ready commended Mr. Femino and the neighbors on their . comments but that the decision for the Planning Board is the frontage. Tim Kavanaugh said in the previous two cases, they determined the waiver of frontage to be allowed under the subdivision control law. There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to grant the waiver of frontage, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (8-0). Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 90 Summer Street (Map 25, Lot 493) - John Donahue There being no comments on this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to accept the application, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (8-0). Public Hearing- Wireless Communications Facility Special Permit- 217 Essex Street (Map 35, Lot 251) (Eastern Bank) - Sprint Wireless Broadband Attorney Rick Sousa said that Sprint has operated a wireless network installation on top of the bank since 1999. They want to upgrade 3 of the 6 antennas and add one wireless dish, which is about 2 feet in diameter. Sprint is upgrading their network to offer high-speed wireless access and they are utilizing the site of already existing antennas. The dish will allow them to transmit from the antennas to another site. • Pam Lombardini confirmed that they are just adding a dish, the rest are replacements. Christine Sullivan asked if Sprint would be providing free access to downtown as a benefit. They could offer it in return for using the building and then take credit for it. Tim Kavanaugh said if there were a business district, it would make sense to offer that. Rick Sousa said that it will be offered to Sprint customers and that it's a gradual process, they're swapping out first. When the network has significant amount of subscribers, they would add more. Walter Power mentioned that another wireless company came in recently with a backup technology. Amy Lash said the name of the company was FiberTower. Rick Sousa said that is a different type of company and Sprint is expanding so that it doesn't have to rely on those companies. Meeting Opened to the Public David Pelletier (12 Crombie Street) said on top of Eastern Bank, where they have the antennas, there was a wire from the civil defense horn to Old Town Hall. He asked if while Sprint is there —could they hook the wire back up for that horn? Mark Sousa said they'll be using licensed electricians and it wouldn't be a problem to do that. Councillor Jean Pelletier (Ward 3) appreciated what Christine Sullivan said about the City getting something in return for companies using buildings for such purposes, so he plans to put in an ordinance for this to happen. Mark Sousa suggested that the City put out an RFP to wireless carriers making available City properties for wireless facilities. • 4 J Carol Magulies (99 Washington Street) asked if the dish going on the roof emits radio frequencies, and how it affects people in the neighboring area? Phil Leite explained that the FCC • places strict limitations on emissions. Sprints' emissions are 20% of the maximum allowed, which is a lot less than the FCC maximum. Mark Sousa said it doesn't impact health and explained that the signal dissipates once it leaves the tower. Also, it can't go thru stone walls. Sprint will provide the copy of the FCC regulations, the scientific information and affidavit to Amy Lash in the Planning Department, who will pass it on to Carol Magulies, she can distribute in her building. There being no further comments on this matter, Gene Collins made a motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Walter Power, and approved (7-0). Christine Sullivan asked for Dave Pelletier's request for the civil defense horn hook-up to be in writing and asked what is needed to hook it up. She would also like the SRA to be aware of this as well. Dave Pelletier said just a 14-gauge zip cord is needed. Condition #3 to be added: "Applicant to install a 150 ft. zip cord line connected to the former Civil Defense horn on top of the building, and coil it 10 ft. above the ground, subject to Eastern Bank approval." Councillor Pelletier will talk to Eastern Bank. There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to approve the Special Permit, seconded by Pam Lombardini, and approved (8-0). Continued: Public Hearing- Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC 72 • Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26 Lots 91 95 &97) (formerly Salem Suede) - Attorney Scott Grover Attorney Bill Quinn, filling in for Scott Grover, explained that they would like to address questions from the Board as well as traffic concerns. The Planning Board asked for a streetscape but he didn't have that because they haven't come up with renderings that they were happy with, they are trying different options for the renderings and want it to give views desired. They plan to bring them to the next meeting. Chris Huntress, Landscape Architect (Huntress & Associates) explained the landscape plan: around the perimeter of the property there are shade trees (ash, maple & oak) and evergreens to provide buffering and screening. There are also ornamental trees. The walkway to the north of the river canal there are benches and ornamental lights. Significant foundation plants around buildings are provided. There are street trees along Mason Street. There are two different types of lighting used: the shoebox type that directs light downward and ornamental/traditional lighting. There are benches along the walkway and interior of the backside of the building. Chuck Puleo asked if there would be fencing along the Flint Street properties. There will be fencing at the perimeter of the site, starting at Flint Street, going down the sidewalk and across the back. Chuck Puleo pointed out the gap between #73 Mason St & #65 Mason St. and said there should be some type of screening. Attorney Bill Quinn will bring in details of landscaping, elevation and fencing, including the type of fencing and height. Chuck Puleo said they want to • make sure that there will be some type of screening that won't take many years to grow. Chris Huntress said the fence will be on the developer's property and they will maintain it. There 5 would not be a fence along the waterway. Christine Sullivan asked about the color of the lights and since Chris Huntress said they would • be white, she wondered how they would look in that neighborhood; they may not be very attractive. Chris Huntress said there is a proposed walkway with lighting and a bench near the river and that it's where it is because the easement is there, it can however be moved. He also said the.shoebox lights are utilitarian and the poles are painted black so that they fade into the landscape. If they used the ornamental type, they would have to use more because of how the light is dispersed. Chuck Puleo asked if the driveway coming in from Flint St. would be one of the main entranceways. If so, is lighting adequate? Attorney Quinn said it does have adequate lighting. Christine Sullivan asked if this needs to go before the Design Review Board, and Attorney Quinn said they're getting ready to do that. Walter Power asked if they have established illumination levels for foot-candle coverage. Chris Huntress will present analysis on this. Walter Power also inquired about the green strip and property line on the plan and Chris Huntress said the white area on the plan is not their property. Walter Power questioned if there are any problems with that area (from the canal back). This information would be useful if the City planned to extend Commercial Street in the future. Attorney Quinn the property goes down to the North River Canal and there's an easement across that area. Chuck Puleo asked if there will be any lighting on the building, Attorney Quinn said that there would be and they will present this at the next meeting. Tim Ready pointed out that on the drawing, on the right side of the 51-unit building there is a walkway with lines. Chris Huntress explained that the lines denote a retaining wall and there is no projected walkway from one end of the building to the other. • Meeting Opened to the Public Dave Pelletier (12 Crombie Street) suggested they use the city standard historic lamp pole, which replaced the lights downtown. They're brighter than shoebox lights, flexible and would be more uniform with the other lights in the park across the river. Jean Arlander (Federal Street) asked how many trees would be planted, as the NRCC parking requirements are specific: 1 tree of at least 3 '/2 caliper, for every 3 parking spaces. Chris said they can look at the number of trees on the plan and try to meet the requirements. Nick Nowak(356 Essex Street) asked if the flood lines and types of plantings were taken into account and Chris Huntress explained that they did and the plantings are of native species. Betsy Barnes (22 Beckford Street) asked if this project is being held to the original NRCC master plan, in terms of lighting and landscaping. Christine Sullivan suggested that although there are variances, the developer is not exempt from compliance with these requirements. Darrow Lebovici (122 Federal Street) said that the NRCC Master Plan and ordinance reflects how the area should evolve. Clusters of townhouses were proposed but this proposal shows 3 block like buildings. Chuck Puleo said that right now the Board is looking at what the developer is proposing, whether it complies or not is separate. Attorney Quinn said he'd look at the Master • Plan and see how they can comply, or request a waiver. Christine Sullivan asked what has been 6 r approved by the Zoning Board and Attorney Quinn explained that elevations, plans, location of building, lot coverage, footprints and height of building were all presented to the ZBA and they gave 3 variances including the density, construction in the buffer zone, and the requirements for first floor entrances. The plan is now subject to the review of the Planning Board, Design Review Board, and Conservation Commission. Pam Lombardini reminded all that the issues are they are discussing are lighting and planting. Chuck Puleo restated that Attorney Quinn said they would comply with the plan, or apply for waivers. Dave Pelletier was at the ZBA meeting and said that the building hasn't been approved yet (the footprint) so he feels the Board is talking about landscaping for buildings that aren't definite. Tim Ready offered that there is a proposal before the Board and these are the steps they have to go through. David Ziom, one of the developers, added that they originally came in proposing 160 units and have made modifications to the buildings with the help of the neighborhood and Board of Appeals. Councillor Pelletier added that he was involved with the NRCC and was opposed because of the process, but he wants the project to go through for the betterment of the City. When Christine Sullivan was on the SRA, they would look at a plan, take into account the ZBA, and send it to the DRB. She feels this discussion is a bit premature and suggests deferring this to the DRB. Chuck Puleo added that the DRB will be looking at the NRCC Master Plan. Betsy Barnes asked the Board, when looking at the plan, to consider the parking. The Master Plan suggests parking be contained inside, instead of seeing mass parking, as people would see from the streets. Jean Arlander said the NRCC called for mostly commercial with some residential for this area, this project has it the opposite way, so it should need a special permit. • Attorney Quinn said that they have requested one. Jeff Maxter, Traffic Engineer (EarthTech) presented the traffic analysis that looked at present and future conditions. They conducted accident research and found that there are geometric issues with this area. They looked at the 5-year analysis and added a percentage of growth and looked at peak hours. This project will generate 56 trips in the morning peak hour, less than 1 vehicle per minute; 87 trips in the afternoon peak hour, a little more than 1 vehicle per minute. They conducted level of service analysis, 2 areas of concern: Tremont Street southbound and Flint Street northbound, he feels this project won't exacerbate these too much. Site drives are on Mason Street and Flint Street; they agree on the easement; they suggest a flashing beacon for traffic; BETA suggested signalizing the intersection, EarthTech suggested making a divided lane. Chuck Puleo questioned if they are proposing two-way traffic on both entrances? Jeff Maxter said yes. Did the studies show higher numbers on Flint or Mason, and if they're proposing a two-way turn on Tremont, won't they be blocking the Mason Street turn? The additional 12 parking spaces on Flint Street are for those at the top, left of Flint St. Walter Power suggested they consider putting a one-way lane on right hand side of the entrance Mason Street. Christine Sullivan thinks that people will mostly use the Flint Street entrance because most of the parking is concentrated near there. Also, because of school there is a peak time between 2-3, study should be done if it hasn't already, Jeff Maxter said they would provide data for that hour. Richard Laperchia (79 Oak St.) asked the date of the study; Jeff said that it was September 2007, when school was in session. He suggested that the residents wouldn't use the 12 parking spaces, 7 because it will be difficult to park with kids, groceries, etc. Dave Pelletier feels that with this project, Flint Street won't get fixed. They should plan for the future and take care of Flint Street first, then plan the buildings around it, and comp the developer for being involved in the process. Ken Petralia, Peer Review (BETA Group) said the report by EarthTech was very professional. He outlined areas that need to be concentrated on: • Internal capture rate- how many trips from one to another building within the development. EarthTech used 28%, BETA disagrees with that. • Journey to work data- they've asked for more data. • Intersection of Bridge & Flint St. They feel if there's a cue, it could block Oak Street. BETA suggests timing of signals or maybe a stripe for a left turn lane on that part of Flint Street. • Intersection of Tremont & Mason, discussion of widening. They don't think it will help, if you widen it, it wouldn't provide a wide-enough lane to turn. It's a high accident area. There is also poor sight distance- when you have this, it's best to put in signals, in conjunction with site egress. • In terms of measuring site distance, they disagree with the measurement from the road; there are issues with safe stopping distance. • EarthTech is going to talk to the Fire Department about the turns. Signals at Tremont - others thought it would cause more traffic, BETA feels it may be less partly because drivers tend to avoid traffic signals. All this information has been presented in writing. Ken hasn't seen a mitigation plan, it should be part of the final plan. Jeff said in the Master Plan, it did talk about a signal, he thinks there are issues with the City to recommend the signal. Attorney Quinn wants this to work for the neighborhoods sake, they'll look at everything to see what they can comply with and will get the analysis to the Planning Department. Dave Pelletier thinks that if they put a traffic signal in, Dunlop Street will get pretty popular. Rich Laperchia asked if anyone looked at the Oak Street traffic and thought that a left turn lane on Flint Street, would add to the cue. Jeff Maxter said if you stripe in a third tum lane, it will keep it down. There being no further questions or comments on this matter, a motion was made to continue the Public Hearing to April 3, 2008 by Nadine Hanscom, seconded by Gene Collins and approved (8-0). Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Walter Power to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (8-0). The meeting adjourned at 10:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board 8 3y CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD Form A — Decision 90 Sumner Street John Donahue =D 90 Summer Street Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Donahue: -9 > N n � in The Salem Planning Board voted on March 20, 2008 to endorse"Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: John Donahue, 90 Summer Street, Salem, MA 01970 2. Location: 90 Summer Street, Assessors Map 25 • 3. Project Description: This Form A subdivides 90 Summer Street into two lots: "Lot 1" consisting of 4406 square feet, and "Lot B" consisting of 3489 square feet. The remaining lot at 90 Summer Street (Lot 1) has frontage on Summer Street, the new lot (Lot B) will have frontage on Downing Street. Sincerely, 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 0 CITY OF SALEM f^ w PLANNING BOARD N • Waiver of Frontage- Decision D For the Petition of John Donahue for a Waiver of Frontage at 90 Sutj mer SAreet A Public Hearing on this petition was held on, and closed on March 20, 2007 with the following Board members present: Charles Puleo (Chair), Walter Power, Tim Kavanaugh, Nadine Hanscom, Christine Sullivan, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini and Tim Ready. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and notice of the hearing was published in the Salem Evening News. John Donahue, 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 90 Summer Street to be subdivided into two 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 purpose of 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 90 Summer Street, as shown on the plans titled, "Subdivision Plan of Land located in Salem, MA"prepared for John Donahue by Eastern Land Survey Associates, dated March 18, 2008, upon the findings by the Board that: • 1. The action is in the public interest and not inconsistent with the intent and purpose of the subdivision control law 2. Special circumstances exist which especially affect the historic structure which will be moved to the new Downing Street lot, not generally affecting other structures; Therefore, the Planning Board voted by a vote of eight (8) in favor (Puleo, Power, Sullivan, Collins, Ready, Kavanaugh, Lombardini, Hanscom), and none opposed to grant the waiver from frontage requirements for 90 Summer Street, specifically for the new "Lot B"being created on Downing Street, with the following condition, which is also a condition of the Board of Appeals decision dated March 3, 2008: 1. The historic character, details, and materials of the exterior of the house to be located on the new Downing Street lot shall be maintained. No vinyl siding or vinyl-clad windows shall be permitted. The petitioner, his heirs, successors and assigns shall familiarize himself with the Salem Historic Commission guidelines prior to undertaking any exterior work and are encouraged to follow such guidelines. I hereby certify that a copy of this decision is on file with the City Clerk and that a copy of the Decision and plan is on file with the Planning Board. z Charles Puleo, Chairman • 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 • WWW.SALEM.COM CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD • 1Q0 en I C17yL.- 1 ;LE >r Wireless Special Permit Decision s. The Petition of Sprint Wireless Broadband For 'rhe Property Located At 217-219 Essex Street A Public Hearing on this petition was held on March 20, 2008. The following Planning Board members were present: Charles PUIC0, Walter Power,Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Nadine Hanscom, Gene Collins, Pam Lombardini and Christine Sullivan. Notice of this meeting was sent to abutters and 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 three (3) WIMAX antennas, and one (I) backhaul dish antenna to the existing wireless facility on the rooftop of the Eastern Bank at 217 Essex Street (Map 35, Lot 251). A new supporting equipment cabinet is to be located in the existing equipment room within the basement. • 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 March 20, 2008, the Board closed the Public Hearing and the Planning Board voted by a vote of eight (8) in favor, and none opposed, to grant the Wireless Communication Facility Special Pennit for the location stated above, in accordance with the application dated February 29, 2008 and site plan last dated January 25, 2008, titled "Eastern Bank 217-219 Essex Street, Salem, MA BS01YCI89-A-BS23NC362-A", Sheets T-1, A-1, A- 2, A-3, A-4, , E-1, E-2, E-3, drawn by Reliable Applied Wireless, LLC, submitted and now part of the file. The Special Permit was approved with the following conditions: 1. The antennas shall be painted a color which reduces their visibility and allows them to blend with the existing rooftop equipment; the applicant, his successors or assigns shall maintain the appearance of the antennas. 2. The :applicant is to obtain approval from any City Board or Commission having- jurisdiction avingjurisdiction including, but not limited to, the Salem Redevelopment Authority and its Design Review Board. 120 %V.A�;I i.ar [iJ Sia+.t ,. S-Ai.i'_.`.I %J F,1lIl(. f';i'i jill i0 ♦ t'..L: x)18.7-13.1)505 Fv1 1)7N.7-10.0'W-1 It 1' S �:1LE)1.it p.t 3. Subject to the approval of the property owner, the applicant shall install a 150 li. zip cord line connected to the formal Civil Delense horn on top of the building, and coil it 10 ti. above the around. The applicant has volunteered to supply the • cord. I hereby certify that it copy ofthis decision is on file with the City Clcrk and that a copy 01'111C decision and plans is on file with the Planning Board. Charles lPvulco, Chairman This endorsement shall not take eltect until a copy otthe decision bearing certi[ication of the City Clerk[hilt mcnly t2(j)dais hale elapsed and no appeal has been filed or that it such appeal has been filed that n has been dismissed or denied, is nronled in the Essex South Kegisnv of Deeds and is indewd in the Grantor index under[he name of the owner of iecond or is recorded and noted on the owner's certilic:ac of title. The tee for recording or registering shall be paid by the owner or applicant. • ;: . CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT .A[A1 )R I 'CWy, 111N',1,NSna_rr• SALLv%MAIS:vlRsr:r!sGIv7C Tia 97,A-r>lo-fir,%9 t�ac'778-74--C4C4 D1 AI P DI !,iia n K o it a Marl'h 24 2008 C' N Joseph C. Correnti, Esq. Seratini, Seratini, Darling & Correnti, LLP 63 Federal Street Salem, MA 01970 cn cn Re: Request for extension 28 Goodhue Street Dear Mr. Correnti: The Salem Planning Board met on Thursday, March 20, 2008 to discuss the request of North River Canal LLC for an extension of the Special Use Permit granted by the Board in a • decision date-stamped April 13, 2006 for an additional six (6) months. The Board decided by a unanimous vote to approve the extension request for an additional six (6) months, until October 13, 2008. the Board understands North River Canal LLC intends to go forward with the project, though additional time is needed to put in place the necessary contracts and funding to be able to begin construction. If you have any questions or require further information, I can be reached in the Department of Planning & Community Development at (978) 619-5685. Sincerely, Amyl. Lash Staff Planner • Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk u i �v CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD 111JRKR -3 P12: 41 r1L 4 Cn Y cE� ,_',AL EM, MASS. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF MEETING You are hereby notified that the Salem Planning Board Meeting scheduled to be held on Thursday, March 6, 2008 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, 20, 2008. Ci`l t t uTM'r"�hL Charles Puleo Chairman -(his notice p p'� ey L,+SYtilu : dctitik at 3_ aoo8' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM N OTA o ?.eV 05E o EtZ 4�� CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD wecmAA M��1' QV�IZVM AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursdav, February 21, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 31t" FLOOR. ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o February 7, 2008 ? X Continued: Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential 7 Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 6, Lots 7, 8, 9)—Attorney John Keilty w x Public Hearing Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 FLINT STREET, 67-69 MASON STREET, & 71 MASON STREET (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede)—Attorney Scott Grover 4. Old/New Business o Chapter 91 License Application Received: 15 Peabody Street Waterfront Park 5. Adjournment notice o$rAd rt1 *t�ffl�f�! � tI Qot�r�' city Hall' 120 %V; SHIN'(iMN jFREEI. SVLL.M. A-1.-ASSACHI' L-ITS 01970 TEL: 978.6195685 F:AX 978.740.0404 ' %4ANVvSALENICUVI CITY OF SALEM ry �; DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMMERLEYDRISOOLL MAYOR 120 WASI-QNGTON STREET♦ SALEM MASSAa-IL5ETIS 01970 Tm-978-619-5685 ♦F.ix:978-740-0404 LYNN GOONIN DLNOAN,AICD DIREcroR MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: February 15, 2008 RE: Agenda—February 21, 2008 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Minutes of February 7, 2008 ➢ 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 6, Lots 7, 8, 9)—Attorney John Keilty David Knowlton heard from CDM that they had first run the model for the fire flow tests using the recommended 8 inch main. When they ran the model again using the existing 6 inch main, they found that upsizing the water main from 6 inches to 8 inches only marginally improves the fire flows in the area. David said that replacing the main in this location is not critical to the subdivision's approval. Chuck had asked how old the 6 inch main is. David tells me it is between fifty(50) and eighty(80) years old. Attorney Keilty, Chris Mello, and I met with David Knowlton to discuss the drainage improvements and the extent of repaving. David has asked that Chris Mello revised the drainage plan to add a manhole on the existing drain line out towards the basins, and a note will be added to the manhole proposed at the intersection of Clark Avenue and Clark Street stating that it be a minimum of five (5) feet in diameter. David Knowlton will be doing a site visit and providing a response to the applicant's paving proposal (see Attorney Keilty's email from February 12, 2008). After hearing from David, I will be revising the draft decision for the Planning Board meeting. • The applicant has agreed to supply the City with a plan showing a line of sight easement on 1 Clark Avenue. • Since the Trans were not in attendance at the last public hearing, I called them to update them on the condition relating to the trees along their property line. I spoke with Mr. Tran and explained to him that the Fire Department would not be supporting a waiver and that the trees would instead be transplanted. Public Hearing Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit-Riverview Place LLC, 72 FLINT STREET, 67-69 MASON STREET, & 71 MASON STREET (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) —Attorney Scott Grover The project includes the construction of three (3) new structures containing a total of 130 residential dwelling units, 5,540 s.f. of commercial space in the Mason Street building, and 309 off street parking spaces. The Zoning Board granted variances to allow for a minimum lot area of 1,440 square feet per dwelling unit, common building entrances, and to allow construction within the 50 foot buffer area. You will find the Zoning Board decision dated November 2, 2007 included in your packet; special conditions of this decision are highlighted. Earth Tech prepared a Traffic Impact and Assessment Study for Riverview Place, LLC. The City has hired BETA Group to peer review the Traffic Impact and Assessment Study. The • February 7, 2008 memo from BETA Group corresponds with the Site Development Plan submitted to the Zoning Board. The layout of the circulation and parking differs on the Site Development Plans submitted to the Planning Board. BETA group has been supplied with the most recent set of plans and will be updating their comments accordingly. Attorney Scott Grover, who is representing Riverview Place LLC, has suggested that the Traffic Impact and Assessment Study be discussed at a later meeting and the first meeting could focus on the site plan. The City will be using the services of a peer review engineer to review the plans. The engineering peer review should begin shortly. The Fire Department has concerns about access points for fire apparatus. These comments have been included in your packet and provided to the applicant. The project engineer and architect plan to speak to Lt. Griffin about these concerns prior to the Planning Board meeting. The Assistant Building Inspector, Tom McGrath, reviewed the Planning Board submission. In his opinion the elevations depict two (2) five-story buildings, and one (1) four-story building. When the project was before the Zoning Board the question of whether or not the parking level was a story or a story below grade came up. Following a letter from the project architect, Stephen Livermore, dated October 17, 2007, Tom St. Pierre had agreed that the parking level was a story below grade, and the building did not need height variances. Before the Planning Board meeting, Stephen Livermore will be revising the elevations to meet the current grading • plan. He has spoken with Tom McGrath and is confident that the revised elevations will 2 • illustrate two (2) four-story buildings and one (1) three-story building as defined by the State Building Code. Chapter 91 License Application Recieved: 15 Peabody Street Waterfront Park An application was submitted by the City to the Department of Environmental Protection's DEP Waterways Program to receive authorization to construct a waterfront park at 15 Peabody Street along the South River. The recently approved South River Harborwalk passes through the western edge of this property. The City is proposing to remediate the existing site and construct a park encompassing a majority of the parcel. The City worked with Tufts University graduate students from the Urban and Environmental Policy and Planning Department to create a schematic design for the park. The schematic design formed the basis for a successful Urban Self-Help Grant Application, which will fund the design and construction of the park. No action is required by the Board, the application is be circulated to notify the Board that the thirty(30) day public comment period will be starting shortly. I will have a copy of the application available at the meeting; please feel free to contact me if you would like your own copy. Other News Salem News Both the new and renovation components of the Salem News project will be reviewed at the • Design Review Board's Meeting on February 27, 2008 at 6:00 in the third floor conference room at 120 Washington Street. Citizen Planner Training Collaborative Spring Conference A few weeks ago, I emailed Board members announcing the Citizen Planner Training Collaborative Spring Conference on March 15, 2008 in Worcester. The program has been included in your packet. if you would like to attend please fill out the registration form and return it to me by February 22, 2008. The Planning Department will cover the cost of registration and I will need to know who is going prior to the CPTC deadline so I can request a check. I have heard good things about CPTC workshops and conferences and hope some of you are able to attend. • 3 City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: P - Date: .2- /0 /C)& Name Mailing Address Phone # Email �% %7-67eAw -,-)r7 �0,4r�� �• �'yS--065 S`yj9r�/OA7hlftJ, Blom NKA Ij ., L.-mW /7`,1-1l IL�-?,War/G° 9- %7, ' A( -573) viva,; *1 Woe&WA/,hi,n f lam` `�1%z r1tln L' `i? f 7y GZ7 Q S/- </Z,?L' oar CID 00,,z Of/'rf".(� � �L 0 /L� L I�H&r L' N1��1c�1 SIy�eT 97d ")V/`l-10Y 7/ A AM Sf 75a-y 4� y 35"-7 '3-s-6 s _ a q?9 --7y f —(2-fa 1J �flr� Oil Lotij 0&04 231-7906 • Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting • February 21, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, February 21, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Chuck Puleo, Christine Sullivan, Walter Power, Nadine Hanscom, Tim Kavanaugh, Tim Ready, Gene Collins (arrived 7:45). Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: John Moustakis, Pam Lombardini Approval of Minutes The minutes of the February 7`h meeting were reviewed. Changes to be made: Page 2: (recommended by Walter Power) fourth paragraph, after "the street paved" add "on Clark Ave."; same paragraph, at the end of the last sentence add "to the intersection at Clark Rd". Page 3: (recommended by Walter Power) last paragraph, at "up the hill' add "to Chapel Hill". Same paragraph at end add sentence "Paving on Chapel Hill Ave. will start from the previous development at the telephone pole." Page 4: (Recommended by Chuck Puleo) second paragraph at "6 and 8 ft piping" change "ft" to "inch". • There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Walter Power to accept the minutes, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (6-0). Public Hearing Site Plan Review, Wetlands & Flood Hazard District Special Permit, and North River Canal Corridor Mixed Use District Special Permit- Riverview Place LLC, 72 Flint Street, 67-69 Mason Street & 71 Mason Street (Map 26, Lots 91, 95 & 97) (formerly Salem Suede) — Attorney Scott Grover Attorney Scott Grover, representing Riverview Place LLC, informed the Board that for traffic, the City currently has a peer review in progress, and, Earthtech will be at the next meeting to discuss traffic. The proposed project will be located on two industrial sites, the Salem Suede site and the Bonfanti site. The buildings that are currently there will come down and be replaced with 3 buildings. Two main buildings will be on the Salem Suede site and the third building will be on the Bonfanti site. It will have 130 residential apartment units and about 5500 ft. of commercial space. There will be 309 parking spaces- 260 allocated for the residential units, 12 allocated to Flint St. residents and 37 remaining spaces for commercial use. Christine Sullivan asked if they could provide an aerial view of the site at the next meeting. They started the permitting process with the Zoning Board of Appeals. They had neighborhood meetings and took some concerns from the residents and made some changes before going to ZBA. There were three variances that were granted. The first was lot area per dwelling unit. 13 of the 130 • units will be affordable housing. The second allows for construction in the buffer zone. The NRCC creates a transition zone, which means no construction can be within 50 ft of a residential 1 . used parcel. They created buffers in certain areas and asked the Zoning Board for the variance for these buffer zones. They also reduced the height of the building in the transitional zone. The third relates to the action that they are asking the Planning Board to take. The multifamily • use in the NRCC is allowable by special permit. There are three conditions on which the Planning Board can grant the permit. 1) Every unit has to have a first floor entrance if it's located within 100 ft. of a residential used parcel in another zoning district. All the units would have to be first floor, which would limit the style of the building. The Board of Appeals granted a variance from that condition so that the Planning Board would be in a position to grant the special permit that they have asked for. Attorney Grover said they received votes in favor of the project with the Zoning Board, but that was appealed and they're presently in litigation in land court to uphold the decision. The Conservation Commission will also have jurisdiction over this project and the Design Review Board has a role as well, they will make a recommendation to the Planning Board. He is asking the Planning Board to make a referral to the DRB. Christine Sullivan said she wants to see the design of the project before making the referral to the DRB. She also confirmed that this project is not a development cluster. Attorney Grover explained that it's a residential development. He also said that they would be meeting with Erin Griffin of the Fire Department to discuss access. Attorney Grover continued to explain the conditions that need to be met for the multifamily use- 2) Project abuts residential use and 3) When on main corridor (like Mason St.) you have to have commercial space on first floor. Attorney Grover said that some of these conditions are met with this project. Chuck Puleo asked, in regards to condition #3, what type of commercial use? Is there any restriction? Attorney Grover believes the developer will determine the type of commercial usage. Attorney Grover explained that the other applications before the Board are the site plan review • and the site plan review criteria for the NRCC, this is where the referral to the DRB comes in. The Zoning Board found that the proposed project complies with the objectives & goals of the NRCC. Steven Livermore, Architect, said that the three buildings would house 22, 51 and 57 residential units respectively. He then presented drawings that showed the different views of the building. The new buildings will be about 100 ft. and 125 ft from the North River. So the heights of the building will be roughly the same as the existing Salem Suede building. The base of the buildings will be synthetic stone; the body will be prefinished brick & veneer clapboards. The pitched roofs will be metal and the flat roofs will be rubber or PVC type. Landscaping will include shade trees throughout site, screening and plantings around the buildings. Lighting will include old-fashioned street lighting at the interior site and the rest will be more traditional. Chuck Puleo suggested that at the next meeting they have a streetscape of adjacent properties on Flint and Mason Street. They will also provide details of fencing. Walter Power asked if they have given thought to the idea (that the master plan suggested) of the possible extension of Commercial Street through to Flint St., with the easement part of Commercial St. being one-way. Jim McDowell of Eastern Land Survey said that they have given thought to it and are making a provision on their site for it. The road would be about 30 ft. wide. The space between the proposed project and Commercial St. is about 400-500 ft; and between the parcel and the adjacent parcel is about 28 ft. He pointed out the land that is owned by the Commonwealth of Mass. Christine Sullivan suggested that for the walkway with benches, to have it along the river. Jim • McDowell explained the utility systems: the water supply will tie into existing 8-inch line on 2 Flint Street & tie into the 12-inch line on Mason St. The sanitary sewer will take from the site and tie into Mason St. There will be a new sewer system on site that will tie into existing site. • For storm drains, they are proposing catch basins to connect to a water treatment device and discharge to the North River; the site doesn't need stormwater detention. Low impact development will be ongoing. For grading, the site right now is a typical elevation of 8-9 above mean sea level, other parts of the site about 9 1/2 to 11 '/2. He pointed out the areas that will have elevation 9 '/2 to 10 '/2; some areas at 11 and the driveway/parking are at 18. Chuck Puleo asked, due to soil testing, if there are any special conditions for the site. Jim McDowell said they might have to do some soil capping. The test wells haven't exhibited anything. Christine Sullivan inquired if there is expensive clean up. David Zion said they have budgeted half a million dollars for cleanup and they're applying for money for cleanup and for testing. The majority of cleanup is where the buildings won't be. Meeting opened to the public Paul Prevey (Ward 6 Councillor, 26 Tremont St.) has been in attendance at the Board of Appeals meetings. Based on the neighborhood, he feels the project is "too big" for the area. He lives on Tremont St. and sees the traffic and congestion there. Also, there are abutting neighbors, who he doesn't want to see negative impacted. He wants a project to enhance the neighborhood. For the Commercial St. easement, if the City doesn't have money to purchase abutting property within 10 years, it will revert back and he's concerned about that. Barbara Warren (5 Hardy St.) said she encourages the walkway to be built along the river. She is concerned with amount of parking. The plan shows that snow storage is on the landscaping, you • won't have trees for very long if snow & salt are on them. She asked when the FEMA 100 yr. flood zone map was last done. She also asked if the lowest level is in the basement. Jim McDowell answered that the FEMA map was updated around mid 1980's and that the lower plan living units in the back of the building are above ground. Christine Sullivan said this makes it more urgent to see pictures of the back of the building and David Zion said it's a good point because the building is almost set in "like a bowl", it's hard to see what the view will really be like. Martin Imm (174 Federal St.) was on the Master plan committee and feels that density is an issue. The zoning ordinance provided for lower level of density and the Planning Board has to approve this as a special permit. Then he handed out a page from the Master plan and went over some features. If Commercial St. could be built with a connection made up to Mason St., which may relieve some of the congestion. Lorene Scanlon (77 Mason St.) said when she purchased her condo years ago she went to the Planning Department and got the NRCC Master Plan. She was told that there wouldn't be any large buildings or apartment complexes put at that site which is what is being discussed today. She feels the building is too large for the neighborhood and that variances were wrongly given. Bill Penta (89 Flint St.) said that traffic is ridiculous. The City Council all agrees that the situation is bad, and this is before the building goes up. He heard Jim McDowell say they'd build an easement street to Flint that would be 30 ft. wide, which would be adequate. However, Flint • St. is only 25 ft. wide, how would people get thru there? It's very narrow. 3 Jane Arlander (93 Federal St.) stated that the City is lucky to have received a HUD grant to prepare a Master plan for NRCC. We should take the time to look at a development that would help the city, one that brings in more money. To put more residential buildings, that would stress • the infrastructure. Jane Arlander had a memo from Lynn Duncan dated October 2007 that outlined the permitting process, that she thought was well written, and handed it out. Ray Harvey (84 Flint St.) said that when he looks out his window, he sees the roof of the existing building because the building is down low. Also, he's lived there for 36 years and has yet to see anything done with the parcels, so he's for the development since it will improve the area. Jacqueline Washburn (143 Federal St.) has concerns of the effects on traffic. The streets are not wide and the traffic comes from the Salem Hospital, schools, etc. By adding residents, that will increase the number of kids, increasing traffic to those areas. Look at Boards ability to rectify the traffic situation. Amy Lash said when this project came in, she checked on the number of kids in other similar units such as the Jefferson building, in which there are 260 units and less than 5 children. Darryl Labisi (122 Federal St.) said the context of the NRCC Master plan included one overriding concept- to bring mixed use to an urban area, have a way of connecting old industrial areas back to the City. He urged the Board to look at ways to modify the plan to keep more in concept and in line with the Master plan. Mary Whitney (356 Essex St.) said that there has been pollution, asbestos falling into the river and asked where the refuse would be as to eliminate pollution. She asked how many stories the building will have and also asked, for the affordable units, how is portability calculated? Scott Grover said that rent is based on 20% of 80% of income. • There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to continue the Public Hearing, seconded by Tim Ready and approved (7-0). The public hearing to be continued to March 201h. Christine Sullivan recused herself from the remainder of the meeting. Continued: Public Hearing Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 6, Lots 7, 8, 9)- Attorney Jack Keilty Attorney Jack Keilty, representing Chapel Hill LLC, said that they are in agreement with City Engineer David Knowlton with all matters except for the intersection of Clark St./Clark Ave. They, the developers, don't think the paving on Clark St. is as bad as Clark Ave. Amy Lash said that the Planning Department asked FS&T to compare the cost of the paving options: Option 1: Repair and put down two inches of top layer pavement- Cost $60,000 with 8-10 yrs lifetime expectancy Option 2: Full rebuild- Cost $120,000 with 15-20 yrs lifetime expectancy Attorney Keilty said they're paving out the full course to the catch basins and some driveways are below grade. They're going to try to minimize any water that could pool on the roadway. Chuck Puleo reaffirmed that they are proposing 30 ft of paving out to Highland Avenue. Chris Mello agrees with the cost options. The road from Clark Avenue to the rock, it's not too bad, it • has a good base. George Belleau said in areas where patches are done, it would be equivalent 4 t I with the new road. Chuck Puleo asked what the time frame of construction is. Chris Mello said they agreed to do all grinding and base paving first, then construction and finish paving. Walter Power asked about the paving on Clark Avenue up to the new section of subdivision pavement. Attorney Keilty said they would repair any deficiencies and put topcoat over to match the new section. Chris Mello said they have provided a striping plan. Walter Power suggested having vertical granite curbing up Clark Avenue. Gene Collins felt that that is a little overkill on the developer and Walter Power said he's concerned about safety; there should be a verified sidewalk on one side. Amy Lash said to put a sidewalk and curbing in on the same side as the rock, there is the issue of the wall at 1 Clark Avenue in the way. Walter said he was talking about the other side of Clark Avenue. Attorney Keilty said there is an encroachment issue. If they consider this, it will change the drainage issue. Tim Ready asked if they consider Walter Power's proposal, what would be the cost? Chris Mello said it would be about $10,000 but it's not about the money; it's about possibly impeding on the neighbors. Chris Mello said that Dave Knowlton is fine with the number of manholes and that there is another manhole to be named later. Walter Power said he won't make a big deal out of the sidewalk if there's striping where the stop sign will be- at the top of the hill, first house on right, in gutter line. Chris Mello said they could do that. George Belleau said residents aren't here to object to the sidewalk impeding on their driveway. Gene Collins said they've been through this in other neighborhoods and wound up backing off. Councillor Jean Pelletier said that there would be a lot of vehicles going up there including heavier vehicles, the Board should consider that when considering the paving. Tim Ready said that the developer has proposed a reasonable plan; imposing rebuilding a city street on the developer is excessive. • Chuck Puleo said the Board seems to be in agreement with Option 1 for paving. Tim Kavanaugh said the sidewalk, from the safety point of view is a good idea but the cost and anticipatory uproar of the neighbors is something to consider. Walter Power said that the Legal Department might back them up. Tim Ready pointed out that it's an issue not brought by the neighbors but raised by the Board. George Belleau offered to put $10,000 in escrow, then, if the neighbors are okay with the sidewalk improvements, use the money for the sidewalk. If not, then the money would go back to the developer. Ellen Regato (13 Clark Ave) said that neighbors have addressed the corner in question. She felt that a sidewalk for safety might be something to consider. Nadine Hanscom said its City land, the Board has the right to determine its safety. Tim Ready pointed out that there is already a sidewalk but the problem is that the neighborhood is not treating it like a sidewalk. Councillor Pelletier said that it's bituminous curbing; it's not much to take it out & put in granite curbing. Walter Power said that their subdivision will impact the existing subdivision and it should have a sidewalk, George Belleau then said they would repair the sidewalk and replace the curbing with vertical granite. There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Walter Power and approved (6-0). Amy Lash reviewed the Draft Decision with the Board members, adding in the conditions that have been agreed to: . Section 14 (a)- should say 240 feet easterly towards Barnes Avenue. 5 t Section 14- Specify the full pavement replacement program shall be applied to Clark Street and that the applicant has agreed to patch all deficiencies and overlay the road with two inches of new pavement on Clark Avenue from the intersection to the existing vertical granite curbing. . Section 15- add: (C) The applicant has agreed to install vertical granite curbing from the intersection of Clark Avenue and Clark Street southwesterly to the existing granite curbing on Clark Avenue and repair sidewalk as necessary Section 16- Fences: add "onto owners property" at 13 Clark Avenue Section 18- Trees: Guarantee tree survival, change to "One year" Section 17- Sidewalks: insert: "vertical" granite Chris Mello said that the sidewalks will have vertical granite curbing, he will change the plan details to removed the sloped granite Section 14 (d) Attorney Keilty said for the Conservation Commission files, the first sentence says "shall" insert if deemed necessary Attorney Keilty requested that a note be added to the second paragraph on Page 1 that the Planning Board's understanding about Lot 21 is not a condition. Gene Collins commented that he is taken back at the last minute money and burden put on the developer. There being no further comments on this matter, a motion was made by Nadine Hanscom to • approve the Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Special Permit with the decision and conditions reviewed, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (6-0). Old/New Business • Chuck Puleo said that the telephone poles on Highland Ave. have been removed. • Chapter 91 License Application Received: 15 Peabody Street Waterfront Park Amy said action of the Board was not required, this was simply a notification. Many Board Members requested that they receive their own copies. Adjournment There being no further business to come before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Walter Power to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Tim Kavanaugh and approved (6-0). The meeting adjourned at 10:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 6 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD RUIR MAR -3 P 3: 113 Murch 3, 2008 Decision -Clark Avenue/Chapel Hill Form C--Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit Chapel Hill, LLC 532 Lowell Street Peabody, NIA 01960 Re: Chapel Hill- Clark Avenue (Map 6, Lots 7, 8, 9) On November 1, 2007 the Planning Board of the City of Salem (hereinafter referred to as the "Planning Board" or"the Board") opened a public hearing regarding the application of Chapel Hill LLC(hereinafter referred to as the "Applicant" and/or"Owner") to allow construction of the Chapel Hill Subdivision and associated roadways and utilities. The subdivision contains twenty-five (25) residential lots and one (1) lot zoned residential and industrial. • Though it is not a condition, it is the Planning Board's understanding that Lot 21, zoned residential and industrial, cannot be developed as an industrial lot with the access from Clark Avenue through the residentially zoned porion of the lot. This is based on the opinion of the Assistant City Solicitor, dated October 15, 2007. It is important to note that the applications, which are the subject of this decision evolved from the following: 1. A Form B-Preliminary Subdivision Plan Application, which was submitted to the Board on January 4, 2006 and for which a decision was issued by the Board on April 21, 2006. The preliminary subdivision plan was a cluster, and this approval directed the Owner to pursue a Cluster Residential Special Permit. 2. A Form C-Definitive Subdivision Plan and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit Application to allow construction of the Chapel fill Subdivision and associated roadways and utilities to service the constriction of thirryseven (37) single family dwellings was submitted on July 27, 2006 with plans dated June 28, 2006. The item was opened at the Planning Board on September 21, 2006 and the public hearing was continued to October 19, 2006, November 17, 2006, December 7, 2006,January 4, 2007, January 18, 2007,February 15, 2007,March 15, 2007, April 5, 2007, and June 21, 2007. 3. On June 21, 2007 the Planning Board voted to recommend approval for a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to rezone eight parcels on Clark Avenue (Map 6, Parcels 4, 6, 8, • 9, 10, 15, 17, and 19) from Industrial to Residential One Family. The City Council rezoned parcels 4, 6, 10, 15, 17, and 19 but did not rezone parcels 8 and 9, which are a portion of the proposed Chapel Hill Subdivision. 120 WAS lN(l ft>>. SIiwFi SAI_P:.V, M\." .A( 1)11)7U � � il.; 078.7 15.().59FAX 11)1-8 710 o4o.} 1 9 4. A revised single cluster plan (revision dated June 11, 2007) was submitted on June 27, • 2007 depicting 27 lots (accounting for the lots which were not rezoned). The public hearing was continued to July 19, 2007. The single cluster plan was further revised (August 20, 2007) to add additional details and the public hearing was continued to September 6, 2007. The initial application with all its revisions was voluntarily withdrawn without prejudice, by the Applicant on October 9, 2007 to rectify a potential issue of constrictive approval due to the action of the Board in April of 2007 with regard to continuance. A new application was submitted on October 9, 2007, followed by revised plans (dated October 26, 2007) which removed Jennifer Circle. This item was again opened at the Planning Board on November 1, 2007 and the public hearing was continued to December 6, 2007, December 20, 2007,January 17, 2008, February 7, 2008, and February 21, 2008. 5. It is important to note that all written materials, information, studies, peer reviews and any and all other correspondence involved in these applications were accepted as part of the record for the applications for which this decision is issued. At the regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting on February 21, 2008 the public hearing was closed and the Board voted by a vote of six (6) in favor(Puleo, Power, Collins,Ready, Kavanaugh, Hanscom) and none (0) opposed, to approve the Form C Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit. Furthermore the Board finds that all standards for the issuance of a Special Permit have been met by the Owner and that the Plan is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance to protect and promote the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the inhabitants of the city and will not result in a net negative environmental impact. The Board finds that the • subdivision meets the purposes of cluster residential development because it promotes the more efficient use of land in harmony with existing natural features. The Board recognized that the building lots created and the buildings to be constructed thereon may have dimensional controls and density regulations varying from those otherwise permitted by the ordinance or by-law and the approvals are subject to the following conditions and waivers and/or relief: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform with the plans entitled, "Definitive Subdivision Plan Chapel Hill Salem Massachusetts", prepared by Eastern Land Survey Associates, Inc., 104 Lowell Street, Peabody, MA,01960, dated June 28, 2006, and revised June 11, 2007, August 20, 2007 and October 26, 2007. 2. Endorsement of the Plans Following the statutory twenty(20) day appeal period, the Planning Board will endorse the original subdivision plans, subject to conditions of this decision, which shall be recorded at the South Essex Registry of Deeds. Prior to endorsement of the plans, the following items must be submitted for approval by the Planning Board: a. A Covenant to secure the construction of ways and installation of municipal services, including required description of mortgages and assents of mortgagees. b. Acceptable form of grants of easements, if applicable. • 7 v � • c. This decision shall be referenced on the original plans prior to the endorsement by the Planning Board; the decision shall be recorded with the plans at the Southern Essex Registry of Deeds. 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 this decision shall require the approval of the Planning Board. 4. Subdivision Regulations The Subdivision shall be constructed in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations and any other applicable regulations as affected by this decision. 5. Waivers In approving the Plans, the Board is hereby granting the following waivers of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations: a. Section IV.A.Lf Minimum Center Line Radii of Curved Streets is waived to allow construction and operations of the streets and ways as shown on the Plans; this waiver is being granted based on a recommendation from the consulting engineer that this does not negatively impact safety or vehicular circulation. b. Section IV A.4.a. Maximum Length of Dead-end Streets is waived based on the requirement for installation of sprinkler systems in the dwellings. • In the judgment of the Board, the granting of the above waivers is in the public interest and consistent with the intent of the subdivision control law. 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. Security(Section III(B)(5) of the Subdivision Regulations) Prior to the release of any lots for sale or building, the Planning Board shall require that an acceptable form of surety is posted along with a proposed schedule of releases. If partial release of surety is to be requested, the Planning Board may, at its discretion, require deposits to be broken down in amounts of anticipated requests for release. The applicant agrees to complete the required improvements in accordance with Section V of the Subdivision Regulations for the subdivision. Such construction and installation is to be secured by one and/or in pan by the other of the following methods which may from time to time be varied by the applicant with the reasonable approval of the Planning Board: a. Endorsement of approval with covenant • The Owner shall file a covenant, prior to endorsement by the Planning Board, executed and to be duly recorded with the Subdivision Plans by the owner of record, which I nstrument shall with the land, and shall state that such ways and services shown on the 3 J approved plans shall be provided to serve any and all lots before any lot may be built • Upon or conveyed, other than by mortgage deed; and/or b. Endorsement of approval with bonds, surety or tri-party agreement The Owner shall either file a performance bond, a deposit of money or negotiable securities, or a tri-party agreement in an amount determined by the Board to be sufficient to cover the cost of all or any one phase of the sub-division of the improvements. Surety, if filed or deposited, shall be approved as to form and manner of execution by the Gty Solicitor and, as to sureties by the Gty Treasurer, and shall be contingent on the construction of the roadway through binder course. The amount of the surety shall be reasonably determined by the Gty of Salem Engineering Department and shall include an additional 10% to cover the cost of inflation or maintenance for eighteen (18) months after completion of the phase and release of surety. The Owner may file a covenant to secure the construction of ways and services for the entire sub-division and said covenant may be partially released for phases of the sub- division by bond, surety or tri-party agreement being filed for any phase or phases of the subdivision by execution of a recordable instrument so stating by the Planning Board. c. Timeframe The construction of all ways and the installation of all required municipal services shall be completed within 18 months from the date of receipt of bond or surety by the Board or within two years of the date of approval of the Definitive Plan, whichever is earlier. Failure to do so shall automatically rescind approval, unless an extension is granted by the • Planning Board. 8. Homeowner's Association a. Draft Home Owners Association or Home Owner's Trust Documents shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development, for reasonable review as to form and content prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy for the proposed dwellings. These documents shall include the following responsibilities: i. Ownership and/or maintenance of the storm water management system; ii. Ownership and/or maintenance of the trail system and open space iii. Ownership and/or maintenance of any walls located in the subdivision that are not situated on the lots in the sub-division. b. The Gty of Salem reserves the right to enforce the responsibilities and requirements of the Homeowner's Association documents. 9. Open Space Open Space as shown on the Plans and consisting of approximately 3.875 acres shall be perpetually preserved as open space. The Open Space shall be placed in a corporation or trust owned or to be owned by the owners of lots within the subdivision with provisions for limited easements for recreational use by residents of the Gty of Salem; provided that such ownership shall vest in the Board sufficient rights to enforce compliance with restrictions imposed by the • Board as a condition of its Cluster Special Permit. The easement documents shall allow for 4 l • passive, non-motorized recreation and shall empower the City at its discretion, to make improvements to the trail system. The open space shall be opened for public use upon the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the final dwelling or at such an earlier time as mutually agreed to by the applicant and the Board. 10. Salem Conservation Commission a. All work shall comply with the requirements of Order of Conditions N 64-434 issued by the Salem Conservation Comms sion. b. The applicant shall receive all necessary approvals from the Salem Conservation Commission prior to commencement of any work 11. Trails Prior to the release of the final Certificate of Occupancy, the trail for the open space will be laid out, flagged and completed by the Owner. Trail segments will be cleared by manual cutting of brush and tree saplings to facilitate passage. All materials cut or cleared shall be chipped and left in place. No earthmoving, grading or mowing will occur. Small brush will be cut and dispersed into the underbrush for wildlife habitat value. No tracked vehicles or mechanical egtupment (other than chippers, clippers, loppers, and small chain saws for the clearing) will be employed. 12. Trail Signage • Signage identifying the open space area is to be installed at the trailheads. Sign design and proposed location shall be submitted for approval to the City Planner prior to installation. Standard trail marking metal tags, used by the Conservation Cornmission, shall be placed on trees at eye height, and where trees are not present, on wooden posts or stakes at least three (3) feet high along the trail at appropriate intervals. 13.Sewer The applicant shall perform an infiltration and inflow identification and removal program for the approximate 2,700 linear foot sewer system to which the proposed subdivision shall discharge sewage. The program shall be completed and flows removed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer Eng iprior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy. All pipes collecting sewage flow and discharging to the Highland Avenue pump station shall be included in the program. The program shall be performed in strict compliance with the latest Guidelines for Infiltration/Inflow Analyses and Sewer System Evaluation Survey, Revised January, 1993. No such work shall commence without first meeting with the City Engineer to review the scope of work. All reports and summaries of work completed shall be reviewed by the City Engineer prior to the start of the next phase of work starting (phases are outlined in the Guidelines). It is expected that the applicant will remove all extraneous infiltration and inflow that is cost effective to remove up to an amount not to exceed a cost of$100,000. The amount of flow removed shall not be less than the amount of flow to be added by the proposed subdivision. 14.Infrastructure Improvements • a. The applicant shall complete drainage improvements at the intersection of Clark Street and Clark Avenue as depicted on the plan entitled "Clark Street Drainage Improvements", dated "January 9, 2008", revised February 13, 2008. The drainage improvements shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including 5 temporary pavement of the trenches, within 30-days of work starting on the proposed • subdivision site. In any event, no building permits will be issued prior to completion of these drainage improvements. Temporary paving shall remain and be maintained by the applicant, until the proposed subdivision is determined to be substantially complete by the City Engineer, at which time the applicant shall provide a full width pavement replacement program to the following limits from the center of the Clark Street/Clark Avenue Intersection: 240 feet easterly towards Bares Road, and 30 feet westerly towards Ffighland Avenue. b. The pavement replacement program applied to Clark Street shall consist of grinding and removing no less than 4 inches of the existing pavement, from curb to curb, and replacement with 2-inches (or more if necessary) of binder and 2-inches of top pavement mix approved by the City Engineer. Final grading of the top mix shall promote stormwater conveyance to the newly installed and existing drainage facilities on Clark Street and not cause any issues with existing driveways. The pavement replacement program must be completed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of any occupancy. certificates of occu anc . c. On Clark Avenue from the Clark Street/Clark Avenue intersection southerly to the existing vertical granite curbing, the applicant has agreed to patch all deficiencies and overlay with 2-inches of new pavement. This shall occur when the subdivision is deemed to be substantially complete by the City Engineer. d. If deemed necessary,prior to beginning drainage improvement work the applicant • shall file a Request for Determination of Applicability with the Salem Conservation Commission and a Notice of Intent. 15. Safety Improvements The following safety improvements shall be completed prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy. a. Following a reconunendation from the Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by Abend Associates, the applicant has agreed voluntarily to provide signage and striping at the intersections of all streets in the neighborhood. Following a recommendation from the Peer Review Engineer,the applicant has also agreed to paint a center line on a portion of existing Clark Avenue to guide motorists through the bend. The striping and signage shall be installed as shown on the "Traffic Improvement Plan", dated February 13, 2008,prepared by Eastern Land Survey Associates. b. The applicant has agreed to paint a crosswalk which will lead from the end of the sidewalk on the northeasterly side of Clark Avenue to the sidewalk on the southwesterly side of ©ark Avenue (which continues to the intersection with Clark Street). The exact location shall be approved by the City's Police Safety Officer. c. The applicant has agreed to install vertical granite curbing along the existing bituminous concrete sidewalk at the northerlyend of Clark Avenue from the end of the existing granite curbing on Clark Avenue northerly to the intersection of Clark • Avenue and Clark Street; the applicant shall also repair the sidewalk as needed. • d. The applicant will purchase and mount a mirror on the existing utility pole near the bend on the existing section of Clark Avenue. The type of mirror and its location must be approved by the Cit)�s Police SafetyOfficer. e. The applicant shall contribute $5,000 to the City to be used for the removal of a certain rock and realigning the fence impeding sight distance on Clark Avenue. f. If a line of sight easement is granted to the City by the property owner of 1 Clark Avenue, the applicant shall prepare a plan showing the easement area to accompany easement documents prepared by the City Solicitor's Office. 16.Additional Special Conditions a. Sprinklers are to be designed and installed in accordance with NFPA 13D standards for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems in One and Two Family Dwellings and Manufactured homes as required by the Salem Fire Department. b. Retaining walls shall be constructed in compliance with the Massachusetts State Building Code CMR780. c. The following fences shall be shown on the plans prior to endorsement and installed prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy. i. A four(4) foot tall black chain link fence is to be installed on the top of the • slope/retaining wall on Lots 2 through 8 and Lots 18 through 20. ii. A six foot tall wood stockade fence is to be installed on the property of 13 Clark Avenue on two sides: the side nearest to the subdivision entrance, and the rear. The fence would be along courses 556-31-OOW 130 feet, and 533- 29-OOE 134.47 feet. iii. A four foot tall slatted chain link fence shall be installed at the back of the sidewalk section of the retaining wall in the layout of Clark Avenue (adjacent to 21 Clark Avenue). The fence will be installed from Station 0 +93 20 feet right to Station 1 +84 20 feet right. d. When the roadway into the subdivision is constructed, all trees removed from the row of arborvitae along the edge of 21 Clark Avenue are to be transplanted to the back of the existing row, or the same number of new trees of the same species and height shall be planted at the back of the existing row. This work will only be done provided permission is granted by the owner of 21 ©ark Avenue and the execution of a release of liability is granted to the applicant and executed by the owner of 21 ©ark Avenue. Any new trees planted shall be at least the height of the shortest tree in the row and no taller than the tallest tree. The developer shall guarantee the survival of the trees for a period of one year. • e. Prior to the issuance of any certificates of occupancy three (3) boulders will be added to the City Conservation land at the end of Clark Avenue to prevent passage if agreed upon by the Salem Conservation Conunission. 7 17. Sidewalks • The applicant shall install bituminous concrete sidewalks with vertical granite curbing throughout the subdivision, according to the approved plans. Prior to endorsement the plans shall be revised to remove details of sloped granite. 18. Street Trees The species of street trees depicted on Sheets k > and 13 of the plans is to be determined by the Gt}?s Director of Public Services and be a minimum of 3 'L caliper DBH (diameter at breast height). 19. Lighting a. The Owner shall coordinate with the electric company and the City Electrician regarding the installation of street lighting within the Subdivision. b. The street lighting shall be the responsibility of the Owner until such time as the Guy accepts the streets. c. A final lighting plan shall be submitted to the City Planner and the City Electrician for review and approval prior to the issuance of any building permits for the proposed dwelling units. 20. Office of the Building Commissioner All work shall comply with the requirements of the office of the Salem Building Commissioner as affected by this decision. 21.Offrce of the City Engineer • The applicant, his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the City Engineer 22. Fire Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department as affected by this decision. 23. Health Department All work shall comply with the general requirements of the Salem Health Department as affected by this decision. 24. Board of Health (BOH) The Owner shall comply with the following specific conditions issued by the Board of Health: a. The individual presenting the plan to the Board of Health must notify the Health Agent of the name, address, and telephone number of the project (site) manager who will be on site and directly responsible for the construction of the project. b. If a DEP tracking number is issued for this site under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan, no structure shall be constructed until the Licensed Site Professional responsible for the site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use. c. A radon remediation kit is installed and is operational in each dwelling. d. A radon test is conducted following installation and operation of the remediation kit. • The results must be given to the purchaser of the dwelling. 8 d e. The developer will give the Health Agent a copy of the 21E report. f. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the Cry Engineer. g. The Developer shall employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate the area prior to construction, demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a copy of the exterminator's invoice to the Health Agent. It. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction. i. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping which will occur during construction. j. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for containment and removal of debris,vegetative waste, and unacceptable excavation material generated during demolition and/or construction. k The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for fire fighting. 1. Noise levels from the resultant establishment(s) generated by operations, including but not limited to refrigeration and heating, shall not increase the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A) above the ambient levels treasured at the property line. • m The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project. n. The resultant establishment shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operation in an environmentally sound manner as described by the Board of health. o. The drainage system for this project must be reviewed and approved by the Northeast Mosquito Control and Wetlands Management District. p. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and confirmation that above conditions have been met. 25. 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. 26. 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 . 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. The Planning Board 9 will agree to changes in the starting time, at the request of the applicant and if • approved by a fortnal vote of the City Council, as per the ordinance. b. Any blasting, rock crashing, 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. applicant shall abide b an and all applicable rules, regulations and ordinances f. The app Y Y PP g of the City of Salem. g. All construction vehicles and equipment left overnight at the site must be located completely on the site. • h. No Street shall be closed without prior approval of the Department of Planting and Community Development, unless deemed an emergency bythe Salem Police Department. 27. Blasting The applicant or argent shall distribute the flyers entitled, "Facts for Massachusetts Property Owners About Blasting" to all abutters within three hundred (300) feet of the blasting area. 28. Construction Traffic a. With the exception of off-site improvements required as part of this decision, 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 management plan and schedule shall be submitted to the Department of Planning &Community Development for review and approval prior to the start of construction. 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. 10 29. Progress Reports Upon the request of the Planning Board, the owner shall subnrit reports of the prog"NIt�},e_3 P 3: 43 subdivision's completion. LU i1 FILA. if 30. Clerk of the Works CITY CLERK, SALEM, MASS. The services of a consultant to serve as a Clerk of the Works shall be provided by the City, at the expense of the applicant, his successors or assigns as is deemed necessary by the Cry Planner. 31.Utilities Any utility installation for housing lots shall be reviewed and approved by the Cry Engineer prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. All utilities shall be installed underground. 32. As-built Plans & Street Acceptance Plans As-built plans and Street Acceptance 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 the final Certificate of Occupancy for the subdivision and/or the acceptance of any streets. 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 Cry Engineer,prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy for the subdivision and/or the acceptance of any streets. • 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 Cty Engineer prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy for the subdivision and/or the acceptance of any streets; as well as, any subsequent requirements by the City Engineer. 33. Violations Violations of any condition shall result in revocation of this permit by the Planning Board, unless the violation of such condition is cured within fourteen (14) days, or waived by a majority vote of the Planning Board. 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 beanng 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. 4 Charles Puleo Chairmen • Il CITY OF SALEM •s LEGAL DEPARTMENT 93 WASY[INGTON STREET♦$A1151,b ASSACI R SFAs 01970 7YL:978-745-9595 • FAx:978-7441279 KISIBERL.E7'DRIswL.L Euz:SRE ITL RENnARn,ESQ. jimuD r,\usEl1.S,Esc2. Nt.47"OR CITY SOLICITOR ASS"r.Q'lY S011(]10R To: Elizabeth Rennard, city solicitor From: Jerald Parisella, assistant city solicitor RE: Chapel Hill subdivision October 15, 2007 You have requested an opinion regarding the proposed subdivision located at "Chapel Hill." The issues you would like reviewed are: (1)Whether access may be denied to a portion of the land in question because it is zoned industrial and access would have to be • gained through a residential zone, (2)if access is denied is this a taking, and(3)whether upcoming meetings have to be advertised. The facts as I understand them are that the Planning Board is reviewing a proposed 26-lot single family subdivision near Clark Avenue, also known as Chapel Hill. The homes will be constructed in the R-1 district but are being proposed as a cluster development. Adjacent to the R-1 District is land zoned Industrial. It has been represented that access to the Industrial land is only available via the roadways proposed in the subdivision, and that said roadways will be located in the residential district, as shown on Definitive Subdivision Plan Chapel Hill, prepared by Eastern Land Survey Assoc. Inc., dated June 28, 2006 as revised on June 11, 2007 and August 20, 2007. The Planning Board has had several meetings regarding this subdivision and advertised its first meeting as required by M.G.L. c. 41 section 81T. The caselaw makes it clear that access to a use is an extension of such use. Beale v. Planning Board of Rockland, 423 Mass. 690 (1996), holding that access to a retail shopping center was a retail use and not permitted in a district zoned industrial. Chelmsford v. Bvme, 6 Mass.App.Ct. 848 (1978), injunction barring use of residential land in Chelmsford for access to industrial land in Lowell. See also Building Inspector of Dennis v. Harney, 2 Mass.App.Ct. 584 (1974), use of a portion of defendant's land that • lies in residential zone to access commercial use not permitted by town's bylaw. .; . It appears that this limitation applies to private ways or ways not accepted as public . streets. I was not able to find a case squarely on point, but the SJC seemed to state that zoning restrictions should not apply to publicly accepted ways. "Although a municipality is subject to its own zoning regulations ... we know of no authority for the proposition that a public way, laid out by municipal action, pursuant to statute, may be used only for purposes which are permitted in the zoning district in which the public way lies. The adoption of such a rule at this time would be both surprising and disruptive throughout the Commonwealth. If the issue were before us squarely, we would rule that the use of a public way is not restricted by local zoning provisions." Harrison v. Textron, 367 Mass. 540 (1975). A way does not become a public way unless it has become public by one of three ways: 1. A laying out by public authority in the manner prescribed by statute (see M.G.L. c. 82); 2. By prescription; 3. prior to 1846 by dedication and acceptance. Fenn v. Town of Middleborough, 7 Mass.App.Ct. 80 (1979). Approval by the Planning Board of a subdivision does not mean that the ways in the • subdivision become public ways. The principal purpose of the Subdivision Control Law is to protect the health and welfare of the community `by regulating the laying out and construction of ways in subdivisions providing access to the several lots therein, but which have not become public ways, and ensuring sanitary conditions in subdivisions and in proper cases parks and open areas' (emphasis supplied). s 81 M. The Subdivision Control Law may thus be exercised only when new ways required to serve the subdivided lots themselves are required. The suggestion that the planning board's approval of the way under the statute vests some rights to use it in the plaintiffs whose lot was not within the subdivision finds no support in the statute, whose principal object is to ensure sufficient access to the lots within the subdivision and to provide them with municipal services. Such subdivision plans ... indicate no more than that the ways shown adequately ensure that the lots within the subdivision are sufficiently accessible so that they can be provided with municipal and other services. The Subdivision Control Law provides no authorization or implication that such approval vests any interest in these ways in the public. Dolan v. Board of Appeals of Chatham, 359 Mass. 699 (1971). r It should be noted that the public ways should also be adequate to ensure safe and proper access. As noted in M.G.L. c. 41 sec. 81 M, the purposes of the subdivision control law include protecting the safety, convenience and welfare of the inhabitants of the city and ensuring that access and ways in the subdivision will be safe and convenient for travel and lessen congestion in the ways of the subdivision and adjacent public ways. The Planning Board also can ensure proper coordination with the proposed ways in the subdivision with other public ways in the city and in neighboring subdivisions. See Beale v Planning Board of Rockland. Because the plan proposed utilizes a way in the residential district to gain access to a lot in the industrial district, it is my opinion that the Planning Board may deny the plan as presented. I also believe that the Board can take into account the quality of access in and around the subdivision in determining if the plan should be approved. The second issue is whether a taking would occur if access to the Industrial-zoned land was denied. It has been represented to me that the only access to the industrial land (shown as lot 27 on Definitive Subdivision Plan Chapel Hill, by Eastern Land Surveyors, dated June 28, 2006 and revised on June 11, 2007 and August 20, 2007) is via the ways shown on the plan. The courts in Massachusetts have generally divided takings claims into "facial challenges' or"as applied"challenges. In a facial challenge the landowner must assert that the regulation leaves no reasonable use of the property. In an as applied challenge, the landowner must assert that a zoning provision, though valid generally, is • unconstitutional as applied to a particular parcel when due to the peculiarities of the parcel, application of the by-law is unnecessary to accomplish the public purpose for which the ordinance was intended. First the courts will determine if the regulation serves a valid public purpose. If it does, then the court will look to see if the regulation deprives the plaintiff's land of all practical value to them or to anyone acquiring it, leaving them only with the burden of paying taxes on it. See Brobrowski, Handbook of Massachusetts Land Use and Planning section 2.05(c), citations omitted. In Beale v Planning Board of Rockland, the SJC did note that in "the absence of an invalid purpose, courts have upheld restrictions on use in one zone even when the restrictions make access to property in another zone a physical impossibility." Turning to the issue of advertising(or re-advertising) the Planning Board meeting, it does not appear that this is necessary. Before approving a subdivision plan, the Planning Board must follow the requirements of M.G.L. c. 41 sec. 81 T, which requires a public hearing. Notice of the public hearing must be given by advertisement in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and mailing a copy of the advertisement to abutters. I have been informed that this was done at the initial hearing for this project in October of 2006 and that the matter has been continued on various occasions as a result of various comments from city boards and officials and because a zoning change was required. As long as each meeting was continued with notice of the upcoming meeting(and the meetings are posted pursuant to the Open Meeting law), then I believe the notice requirements have been met. • A� ` A CITY OF SALEM F PLANNING BOARD Notice of Decision At a regular meeting of the City of Salem Planning Board held on Thursday, February 21, 2008 at 7:00pm in Room 313 at City Hall Annex, 120 Washington Street,Salem Massachusetts, the Planning Board voted upon the following item Applicant: Chapel Dill,LLC Request: Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special Permit Location: Clark Ave (Map 6, Lots 7, 8, 9) Description: The project involves the construction of the Chapel Hill Subdivision and associated roadways and utilities. The subdivision contains twenty-five (25) residential lots and one (1) lot zoned residential and industrial. Approximately 3.88 acres of the site will be perpetually preserved as open space. • Decision: Approved- Filed with City Clerk March 3,2008 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 ally, shall be made pursuant to Chapter 40A, Section 17, and shall be filed within 20 days from the (late which the decision was filed with the City Clerk. 120 WASHINGTON S"I'REET, SALEM, M ASSaC¢SETTS 01970 • TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 WWW_SALEM.COM Qw • • CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD P AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursday, February 7, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET � (� Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o January 17, 2008 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. Old/New Business • 4. Adjournment Th IS notice POro, 11 City Fuld on .i .! 8uilQtin Board° Ell 3 n I, 221P3 pt , t x 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ' TEL: 978.619.5685 FAX 978.740.0404 ' WWW.SALEM.COM I Fi 4 . City of Salem DPCD Meeting Sign In Sheet Board: ,PII Date: -2/7/0 Name Mailing Address Phone # 7y' Email 's 3 7 0-)A/4 ,S f S'�l�h �7� �Ys-SBd� we a �oti.Loh CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KI OERLEYDRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WAS6IlNGTON STREET♦ SAL.EM,MAssna-iusrTrs 01970 TEL:978-619-5685 ♦ FAx:978-7400404 LYNN GOONr:N"DUNGLV,AIC' Dna crow MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: January 31, 2008 RE: Agenda—February 7, 2008 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Minutes of January 17, 2008 ➢ 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 Since the last meeting with Chapel Hill, Stephen Casazza looked at the rock on Clark Avenue to make a determination about the issue of sight distance and safety. He agrees that the rock should be removed as well as a portion of a wooden fence along the edge of 1 Clark Avenue. He has made a number of additional recommendations for safety improvements that are contained in his January 23, 2008 memo, which is included in this packet. The property owner of 1 Clark Avenue, Mr. Ngo, was present when David Knowlton, Stephen Casazza, Councilor Pelletier, and Mr. Hutchinson were visiting the site. Mr. Ngo is aware of his encroachment on the City right of way, though a survey he had done disagreed slightly with the one done by Chris Mello. Mr. Ngo is providing his survey information to David Knowlton. Dave Knowlton explained to me that the discussion between the parties at the site visit resulted in the conclusion that it would be best to leave the small wall along the edge of the Ngo's front yard. Dave said that the construction of a sidewalk on that portion of Clark Avenue would be very difficult and it is not something that the City will likely ever undertake. He feels a simpler solution would be to paint a crosswalk leading pedestrians from the end of the sidewalk on the • east side of Clark Avenue to the west side of Clark Avenue where the sidewalk continues down • to the intersection with Clark Street. I will be speaking to him prior to the meeting about the details and costs of Steve Casazza's recommendations. These items, as well as the extent to which the applicant would assist with the final paving, have yet to be agreed upon. Jack Keilty and Chris Mello met with Chief Cody and Lt. Erin Griffin of the Fire Department to discuss changing the layout of the subdivision entrance in order to save the Tran's trees. The Fire Department will not support the waiver necessary to change the layout. The other option discussed at the last meeting was to have the trees transplanted to the back of the row; I will draft the condition to require this instead. Jack Keilty supplied me with the exact location of the fences that will be installed at 13 and 21 Clark Avenue in his email from January 22, 2008. He should be bringing exhibits highlighting these locations and illustrating what the fencing will look like. Also included in your packet is a letter from Attorney Sara Hammond, who represents David Colpitts. The letter covers the concerns he raised at the last meeting. Project Updates Salem News • The renovation component of the Salem News project will reviewed again at the Design Review Board's Meeting on February 27, 2008 at 6:00 in the third floor conference room at 120 Washington Street. Review of the new component has not yet been scheduled for a Design Review Board Meeting. Old Salem Jail The Old Salem Jail developer, New Boston Ventures, is seeking approval of design modifications to the approved project plans. The proposed modifications would result in an increase of seven housing units for a total of 36 units in the four-building development. The modifications will be reviewed by the Salem Redevelopment Authority on February 13, 2008 and by the Design Review Board on February 27, 2008. New Boston Ventures will also need to request an amendment to the Planning Board's Site Plan Review approval. For additional details about the project changes see the notice included in this packet. • 2 Salem Planning Board • Minutes of Meeting February 7, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, February 7, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Charles Puleo (Chair), Walter Power, Nadine Hanscom, Pam Lombardini, Gene Collins, Tim Ready, Tim Kavanaugh. Also present were: Amy Lash, Staff Planner and Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent: John Moustakis, Christine Sullivan(Recused) Approval of Minutes The minutes of the January 17`h meeting were reviewed. Changes to be made (recommended by Walter Power) Page 1, fourth paragraph from the bottom, after Walter Power's name add the project name. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to accept the minutes, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (7-0). Continued: Public Hearin Definitive Subdivision and Cluster Residential Development Special • Permit- Chapel Hill LLC, Clark Avenue (Map 8, Lots 6, 7, 8)- Attorney Jack Keilty Attorney Jack Keilty, representing the applicant Chapel Hill LLC, said they had a meeting with the Fire Department, Chief Cody and Lt. Griffin to discuss the intersection of the subdivision road in front of the Tran's property. The Fire Department said that intersection should meet the requirements and to meet those requirements, some trees will need to be removed. Therefore, the applicant will not be asking for that waiver and the trees can instead be transplanted. Attorney Keilty also proposed their alternative drainage and paving plan to Dave Knowlton, City Engineer. The revised plan includes an additional manhole, two catch basins and the extent of paving the applicant is proposing. The applicant and City Engineer are in agreement with the drainage but not with the extent of paving. Attorney Keilty showed on the map where Dave Knowlton would like to have paving. Dave Knowlton feels that the existing pavement is in poor condition, that full grinding and rebuilding the road would be better than repaving. Attorney Keilty pointed out that they have agreed with the Fire Department to install sprinklers in the homes. They are all in complete agreement with the Infiltration and Inflow study and removal. They will have to take out sufficient infiltration. Attorney Keilty said that Mr. Knowlton feels they need to look at every street that goes to the Highland Ave pump station so they can determine where the infiltration is coming from. This could take about 2,700 feet of camera work, and if that is what is needed to determine the gallonage, they'll do it. • The applicant offered $2,500 for blasting, Mr. Knowlton said it should be $5,000, they've agreed to the $5,000. Attorney Keilty said that Steve Casazza of FS&T suggested a mirror and the applicant agreed- they need to work out if it will go on a pole. 1 Amy went over a letter from Dave Knowlton that covered some of the issues. In the letter Dave . Knowlton pointed out that the existing pavement is in such poor condition that overlaying it will not be sufficient. When the trench holes are put in, they will be compromising the existing pavement and the heat patch won't be effective. Chuck Puleo asked if with what they've agreed to install, is it in compliance with what Mr. Knowlton wants? He also asked for a recap of the drainage system: 4 catch basins tied into 1 drain manhole which connects to an existing double catch basin drain. Amy Lash said that Dave Knowlton has concerns with the location of the manholes. Attorney Keilty said they could adjust where they go if needed. Chuck Puleo and Walter Power went to the site on Sunday and noted that there is a lot of water that drains from the homes and quite a few puddles. Chuck Puleo said he would ask the City Engineer if the City ever anticipates straightening the road. The stakes there show property that walls and driveways are on. If the road is straightened, what happens to the location of the catch basins? Also, if they repave, would the water make it down to the basin? Chuck Puleo agrees with paving Clark Avenue because the top of the hill is in poor condition. Tim Ready also went to the site and noted the water/puddles. He believes that fixing the roads would help with the marketing of the property to be sold. He asked if the applicant had taken that into consideration. Attorney Keilty said that yes it would be easier to sell with the roads in good shape, they will be making improvements and paving, but the question how much is necessary. Walter Power applauded the ambition of the fourth catch basin in front of Clark Ave. He asked if for the one across the street (on the inland side of Clark Rd), can they consider putting it down on the other side (pointed it out on the map). Jack Keilty said if Dave Knowlton thinks the catch basins would be better somewhere else, then they'll move them. Walter Power would like to see • the street on Clark Ave paved down to the intersection. Walter Power suggested continuing the sidewalk- where the existing granite curbing is and bringing that all the way down Clark Street. Amy Lash talked with Steve Casazza, of FS&T, about the mirror. He said there is a utility pole that it can go on. Amy said that Steve Casazza recommended a stripe on the road where it bends. She said that Steve Casazza and Dave Knowlton concluded it would be best to leave the small retaining wall instead of adding a sidewalk, they felt that instead a crosswalk could be installed to bring pedestrians to the cross walk on the other side of the road. Jack Keilty suggested that when you look at the encroachment, it's fairly narrow, and a stripe might define how narrow the road is. Chuck Puleo asked if the straight paving is 24 ft. from curbing to curbing. Jack Keilty said that is the correct measurement, and they agreed to put the stripe on the road. Meeting opened to the public Councillor Jean Pelletier, Ward 3 said that regarding the rock, Mr. Ngo had his property surveyed. It showed that his property line almost goes to the rock. He talked to the City Solicitor about removing the rock and part of the wall. In exchange, could the City allow the rest of the fence and rock wall to remain? A few board members felt that by doing that, it may set a precedent. Attorney Keilty said they will put in the money to remove the rock; the City will hire a contractor to remove it. Regarding the intersection and trees, Nadine Hanscom asked if the Tran's have been contacted • about the tree removal. Amy Lash said since they were not present she would contact them. For 2 J the striping on the street, Walter Power suggested that there be have a crosswalk at the top of the hill. Chuck Puleo suggested that Traffic Safety should locate the best place for the crosswalk. Councillor Pelletier said that according to CDM, they didn't give the right information. Instead of an 8-inch pipe, there is a 6-inch pipe leading up to the subdivision entrance. He suggests that this water main be replaced with an 8-inch pipe. Attorney Keilty said there was a flow test done way back that showed adequate pressure/flow. Dennis Colbert (37 Clark St.) agreed that paving should go all the way to Clark St. since it's the worst part of the road. Attorney Keilty agreed to grind and repave the area of the drainage improvements on Clark Street, overlay up to the bend on Clark Avenue, and continue 50 ft westerly to Highland Avenue. So, the first 50 ft is new pavement, they rest is overlay. Chuck Puleo asked that with the paving, are they going to make it so that the water will make it down to the drains? Jeff Rogato (13 Clark Ave.) asked where the entrance to the walking path is. Attorney Keilty said there is a path out to Clark Ave and a path into the new development. Jeff Rogato said it would be best for the neighbors if there were to be only one entrance into the new development for parking purposes. Since the walking path abuts the Rogato's back yard, they will be putting up a fence. The fence will go on the Rogato's property. Jack Keilty mentioned that at the end of the cul-de-sac there is some space where people could park. Dennis Colbert prefers huge rocks to be placed there to prevent people from parking there. Attorney Keilty said they'd put some rocks and boulders on the edge of the cul-de-sac to prevent • people from getting in. Board members are uncertain if the Conservation Commission needs to give permission for these rocks. Tim Kavanaugh suggested the Planning Board make it a condition in the draft decision. Amy will word the condition so it says it must be passed by the Conservation Commission first, and this could be coordinated through the staff. Walter Power said that in regards to the fencing behind the houses, the fence should have posts in the ground to make it sturdy, to last a long time. George Belleau, the applicant, said that the fencing would be done properly; the poles and materials used will depend on what the ground is like. Councillor Pelletier asked if the Board would be voting tonight, as he received an email from David Knowlton that said his concerns haven't been addressed yet. Attorney Keilty said that there have been meetings and pointed out that they have agreed to some of Dave Knowlton's requests. Chuck Puleo said that they could vote tonight and put conditions in since all issues haven't been straightened out yet. Amy Lash mentioned that she thought they were going to see a plan tonight showing striping and signage. Chuck Puleo added that the traffic study had recommendations at every intersection for signage. Walter Power is concerned that there are still issues; they should word the conditions in such a way so that they are covered. He is not sure they should vote tonight. Also, the City Engineer just got the drawing of the new plan yesterday. Regarding paving, Walter Power feels that going up to Chapel Hill, the road is not in good condition. Attorney Keilty reiterated they are grinding . 50 ft; thereafter they will repair deficient areas, then top layer. Walter asked that the new paving on Chapel Hill Ave start where the granite curbing from the previous development leaves off. Walter Power added that the cliff walls at the rear of the houses should be permanent, maybe 3 have crushed stone at the bottom for water. Attorney Keilty said there will be vegetative swales, water will collect at each swale and not over the walls. If the walls are over 6 ft., a structural engineer needs to approve it. Chuck Puleo mentioned that he just read the email from the City Engineer at 6:30 pm and Pam Lombardini was a bit frustrated at the lateness of emails, drawings, etc. to the Planning Board members. It doesn't give them much time to look them over. Nadine Hanscom said that if the Planning Board receives late items from people, then those people should be at the meeting to explain things. Chuck Puleo asked the applicant if he could wait two weeks for an approval because the Board members aren't comfortable with getting information late and therefore requiring a lot of conditions in the draft decision. Gene Collins asked that as of the meeting this evening, could the issues be sent to the City Engineer? Can they make a vote in good faith? Also, Amy should make a list of engineering issues. Pam Lombardini suggested that Dave Knowlton, City Engineer, come to the next meeting. Amy will try to talk to him about attending. George Belleau reiterated that Dave Knowlton has made recommendations and the applicant has agreed to some of it. Chuck Puleo said, regarding the 6 and 8 inch piping, he wants to make sure that 200 ft of 6 inch piping doesn't need to be replaced. For drainage and this pipe size, the development could exacerbate the problem. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene Collins to continue the public hearing to February 21, 2008, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved (7-0). Gene Collins asked if they could limit the conversation to just the issues on the list so that they • don't rehash what has already been discussed. Chuck Puleo said they can't stop people from talking about other issues, but they can control the length of conversation. Tim Ready said that the delay of approving the draft decision has nothing to do with the petitioner; it has to do with correspondence going to the Board members late. Old/New Business • Walter Power asked what the hold up with the deceleration lane on Highland Ave is. Chuck Puleo believes its Verizon, they're working on a pole; he will inquire about it at a meeting he is going to on Friday morning. Adiournment There being no further business before the Planning Board this evening, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (7-0). The meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted by: Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 4 O. �3 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursday, January 17,2008- 7:00 P.M. c: 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o December 20, 2007 o January 3, 2008 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. Old/New Business • 4. Adjournment This notice posted on 00fficial 9ul-letin Board° City Hall Sa:l :rn, %4dss. on I-,x . 11, rev at io �SA� in accsrfjariaw iwilh ChV. 30 Set 23A A 238 of 1A.G.L. - 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:P-A"I�`�� Date: Name Mailing Address Pho�1ne # Email // r� l phis C"Ad 37 O/4,dr S1- 9* SYS--9jv6 i� 2f C,6,-r/C17V,, gi7b- cf — Y-7// 53/- 79'00 , WV , cormrr9� CITY OF SALEM DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND A� COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT KIMBERLEYDRISCOLL MAYOR 120 WAS}IINGTONS RLET♦ SALE:,(,MASSAQ-WSETTS 01970 TEL:978-619-5685 ♦FAx:978-740-0404 LYNN GOOMNDLNc,,,N,AICD DmEcroR MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Board Members FROM: Amy Lash, Staff Planner DATE: January 11, 2008 RE: Agenda—January 17, 2008 Please find the following in your packet: ➢ Agenda ➢ Minutes of December 20, 2007 and January 3, 2008 ➢ 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 Since the last meeting with Chapel Hill, Eastern Land Survey has provided FS&T with the gutter flow and inlet capacity calculations that they had requested in their memo dated December 19, 2007. Stephen Casazza is satisfied with the flow rates and informs me that there is no further outstanding information to be supplied to FS&T. His memo is attached. The applicants and I met with David Knowlton, the City Engineer, to discuss the infrastructure improvements that would be conditions of approval. The applicants have agreed to perform an infiltration and inflow identification and removal program for the 2,700 linear foot sewer system for the proposed subdivision. All pipes collecting sewage and discharging to the Highland Avenue pump station would be included in this program. Dave Knowlton will provide suggested wording for this particular condition to incorporate into the decision. The applicant has agreed to design and construct the drainage system for the Clark Street and Clark Avenue intersection. Eastern Land Survey should be submitting a plan for the drainage system for the City Engineer to review prior the Planning Board meeting. Dave Knowlton has suggested a condition which would require the drainage system to be constructed as depicted in • this plan. The applicant has agreed to complete the drainage improvements within 30 days of work starting on the subdivision site. In any event, no building permits will be issued prior to completion of these drainage improvements. Temporary paving would remain until the subdivision is substantially complete and then final paving would be installed. The extent to which the applicant would assist with the final paving has yet to be agreed upon. Councilor Pelletier volunteered to contact the property owner of 1 Clark Ave where the rock is located. I've supplied him with the contact information and am waiting to hear back from him on how the property owner feels about removing a portion of the rock. I have supplied David Knowlton with images of the rock and am waiting to hear back from him on what it might take to remove a portion of it. As you know,the applicant is not interested in being involved with the removal of this rock as it is an existing condition. For those that have not been able been able to go up to the site see the photos below. .2r' •.. �,X 1. 44- r. LL { p • 2 CITY OF SALEM PLANNING BOARD AGENDA PLANNING BOARD Thursday, January 3, 2008- 7:00 P.M. 3RD FLOOR, ROOM 313 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET Charles Puleo, Chair 1. Approval of Minutes o December 20, 2007 2. Form A Application For Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 63 3/4 Jefferson Ave (Map 24, Lot 229)—R.T.D. Nominee Realty Trust, Robert T. Dunham, Trustee 3. Continued: 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 N J:: .0 �.... r" H � A�ss�d on Salem, el�f pufet1A eogrd° at 7$3A e A ,H. I ". " Dec 2/,.20o ? X918 of M.G.I., W"th Chip, 3� 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: Date: Name Mailing Address Phone # Email fr-,MIL;4 (/DN 7 PHELPS ST- k3 �A�g� tU ql� X841 356 CSek Sf lel Si/4, -W- Z-16 • • . Salem Planning Board Minutes of Meeting January 3, 2008 A regular meeting of the Salem Planning Board was held on Thursday, January 3, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. in Room 312, Third Floor, at 120 Washington Street, Salem, Massachusetts. Those present were: Charles Puleo (Chairman), Walter Power, Pam Lombardini, Nadine Hanscom, Gene Collins, Tim Ready, Christine Sullivan, Tim Kavanaugh. Also present were: Lynn Duncan, Director, Planning & Community Development; Amy Lash, Staff Planner; Stacey Dupuis, Clerk. Absent was: John Moustakis Approval of Minutes The approval of the December 20, 2007 meeting minutes were postponed until the next Planning Board meeting. Form A Application for Endorsement of Plan Believed Not to Require Approval- 63 '/< Jefferson Ave (Map 24, Lot 229)- R.T.D. Nominee Realty Trust, Robert T. Dunham, Trustee • Robert Dunham would like to divide Parcel 2 (an existing non buildable lot) into Parcels 2A and 2Bs. Parcel 2B, which he currently owns, is to be conveyed to the abutting land of Olive Realty Trust (Lot 113) as noted on the plan. Chuck Puleo read a notation on the plan that parcels 2A and 2B are not to be considered legal building lots by themselves. Walter Power asked about the parcel labeled "owner unknown". Mr. Dunham said that the engineers don't know what that is, it's been there for a long time. Mr. Dunham's line will go to the "dotted line" on the map. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Walter Power to approve the Form A application, seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved 8-0 (Puleo, Ready, Kavanaugh, Sullivan, Hanscom, Lombardini, Collins, and Power). Continued: 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 Matthew Picarsic of RCG said that during the last two weeks, they have addressed some issues that were raised at the last meeting. Updates have been outlined in a memo to the Planning Board which accompanied the revised plans. Revisions are as follows: a pedestrian walkway has been added from New Derby St to the residential entrance; the location of the fence at the entrance to the parking area has been notated on the plans; a locus map was provided to show the off-site parking location. RCG was able to meet with the Building Commissioner who raised no concerns at this time, but reserves final comments relative to code compliance until they apply for a building permit. Lt. Griffin of the Fire Department asked that the tree on the right side of the driveway aisle be removed so that the entrance could be widened to 18 1 Matt pointed out which tree would be removed to allow for a wider entrance. Christine Sullivan asked if this was 1 r something the Fire Department wanted or needed. Lynn Duncan believes it's needed for access • because 12 ft. is narrow and 18 ft. is more reasonable. Amy Lash mentioned another reason this is necessary is that the only entrances to the residential units are in the rear. Tim Ready commented that 18 ft. is necessary in Salem for the ladder trucks. Amy Lash said that David Knowlton, City Engineer, sent some requirements to the Planning Department that includes adding the location of sewer lines to the plans. Matt Picarsic said they will be doing further investigation as to the location of additional sewer lines (page C-7) and will send this to Mr. Knowlton as the construction documents are developed. Walter Power noticed that on the map, there is a walk area going to the restaurants and inquired as to the use of this. Matthew said it's primarily a service entrance and that doors from this access go directly into the kitchen areas so it won't be used for patrons. Walter also inquired about the fence at the parking lot entrance and asked if they would make the fence go all the way down to the end to make the parking are more private. Ron Lamarre of Opechee said that the area serves as a snow storage area and it serves as a green buffer. Chuck Puleo asked what would stop pedestrians from cutting across the site from Front Street. Ron pointed out that there's a fence at the Lobster Shanty that runs down between the stalls. Matt said that if the Board prefers, they could continue the fence all the way around but he feels that if they do that, they will have minimal place to put snow. It was decided to provide a rod iron fence, matching the fence on Front Street a minimum of 4 ft high. The fence would go from the north east corner to the Lobster Shanty to make parking more private. • Chuck Puleo asked whether the main entrance into the parking lot from the residential area was pointed out on the map as well as the second entrance and egress. It was asked whether there was a lighting schedule to dim down the lights in the parking lot a night. RCG said that the lights could be programmed anyway the Planning Board would like. Ron Lamarre pointed out that the light fixtures point down to the ground. Walter Power asked if they came up with a fagade for the rear of the building so that people aren't looking at the back of a building. Ron Lamarre mentioned that the original issue was that the lines of the brick don't line up (page C- 11) but that is because they are lining them up with existing buildings. Matt said the Design Review Board liked that fact that the building will blend with other existing buildings, that it's a mixture of old and new. The older (historic) section uses similar materials as the older buildings and that wraps around the back, it also has same window openings, etc. The new section is more contemporary. Walter Power asked if the main entrance for the tenants is the back of the building and if so they should consider a roof over the entrance. Ron Lamarre pointed to where there was an entrance way for people to stand under. Chuck Puleo asked if the entrance in front is for retail not for residents. Matt said yes. Walter asked about snow removal and if it will be moved offsite. Matt said that when it becomes problematic, it would be moved offsite. Walter also inquired about smoke, grease, etc. with restaurants on the first floor. Ron Lamarre explained that there are vent shafts that go up through the roof and the first floor could be adapted for restaurants. The HVAC plan is not final yet, they . do know the DRB will ask for a final design for screening and rooftop HVAC equipment. Walter asked if there is any PVC for the decoration/cladding on the building and Ron Lamarre said yes and described it as looking and feeling like pine. It's a different composite that stands up 2 very well. Tim Kavanaugh asked Chuck if the Board should be concerned with the dumpsters • and schedule of removal of waste. Chuck offered that the Board of Health should make comments on this subject. Matt Picarsic added in that they have segregated the dumpsters and that maybe in the summer they would have removal more often. For the residential trash, Chuck asked if the compactor would be locked. Ron said that residents would be carrying their own trash to the compactor and that it can be locked. Christine Sullivan noticed RCG's memo said they will assist with the green space. Lynn said that this was in response to the discussion at the last meeting. Christine said this was great and congratulated RCG for also contributing to the signage. Lynn Duncan said there is a signage committee working on improving signage City wide. Christine said she would be interested in meeting with the DRB to talk about design issues and thoughts. Lynn said that that would make sense to have an informal meeting meeting. Christine said that the Boards should know each other and have communication. Walter Power asked where the drainage and watershed areas are in the parking lot. Ron explained that on page C4 the black square is the catch basin, which is piped to two others and then into the City system. Also, drainage will run along the curb into the catch basin. (Meeting opened to the public) Emily Udy representing Historic Salem said she appreciates the work RCG has done and how they have responded to the comments Historic Salem has made including the comment about the • access to New Derby Street. Barry Neely(15 Lynde St) asked if there is a construction plan since the previous work on Derby Lofts was a nightmare. He suggests that the plan include when construction with start, how parking will be handled, etc. Chuck Puleo said that a pre-construction plan is usually required. Christine Sullivan said she believes that because of the problems with the Derby Lofts construction, they added more language to the Planning Board decisions. Matthew Picarsic said RCG will not be using the same general contractor that they used for Derby Lofts. He anticipates more streamlined staging during construction. Lynn Duncan said that she had heard about the issues with the Derby Lofts construction when she first started and said that the Planning Department has tightened up on this. She said that Derby Lofts was unusual in that it took up the entire lot. Chuck Puleo added that the pre-construction plan needs to be submitted before a building permit is issued. Walter Power suggested sitting down with all parties involved to solve problems between the contractor and commercial business people. Councillor Jean Pelletier (Ward 3) is concerned with flooding. There are 15-inch drains, going into storm drains. They've had problems with storage in the area of Washington and Front St. He's also concerned with floor drains in garage bays and asked why oil & grease traps are going into the sewer system. Alex Steinberg explained that it's regulation. Clr. Pelletier will sit with the City Engineer for these questions. Clr. Pelletier commented on the width of the entrance, the fire department needs to make the turn. How would the dumpsters be picked up since the alleyway is 5 ft wide? Matt showed how this would work. What is the estimated start and end • dates? The second structure should be down shortly, they would start construction in March and have it weather tight before winter. It would take a total of about eighteen (18) months. Counselor Pelletier asked about the water lines from Derby St. Matt said there are two separate lines, one for domestic and one for fire protection. 3 • Emily Udy, representing Historic Salem said they are interested in seeing something done to break up the parking lot and make it more pedestrian friendly. They suggest stamped concrete, something to look like cobblestone between the bump outs. Lynn Duncan asked they have stamped concrete, where would it lead? Alex Steinberg showed on the site plan where the walkways are and discussed screening and fencing. Councillor Pelletier asked if the Public Hearing would be closed after tonight, as he is comfortable with the project, but has just a few concerns to discuss with the City Engineer. Chuck Puleo said that they would see how the Board feels and also notes the Planning Board's approval is contingent upon the Building Inspector, Fire Department and City Engineer's comments. Lynn said all decisions are subject to the City Engineer's requirements and if the Councillor comes across any concerns those could be added to the requirements. Nadine Hanscom said RCG has previously mentioned they would be going back to the DRB with more detail. Matt said the DRB wants the storefront, first floor, trim work, and the corner of building detailed further. Nadine said she would like to see the building bring more Salem into it. Walter Power asked about the electric service and if it's underground. Matt said it's all underground and anticipates one transformer. There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Gene • Collins to close the Public Hearing seconded by Christine Sullivan and approved (7-0). Chuck Puleo mentioned that members can go to the DRB meeting and Tim Ready asked if they should go as a citizen or as a Board member. Chuck said going as a citizen and Lynn said that oftentimes a liaison from one board attends other Board meetings. So, you can attend as a citizen but it's also a good idea to let the DRB know that you are on the Planning Board and that the Planning Board is interested in what is going on. Amy went over the draft decision and the following changes were suggested: Paragraph 3- Landscaping- Chuck requested that Amy add, "Additional landscaping may be required by the City Planner if deemed necessary". Tim K. said that the fence Walter talked about should be added to paragraph 3 and suggested that is say "A commercial grade wrought iron style fence a minimum of 4 ft shall be installed at the edge of the property line from Front St. to the Lobster Shanty". Nadine asked what happens if they realize the fence won't look right after construction starts? Chuck said they could come in for an amendment. Matt doesn't foresee any problem with the DRB with the fence. Paragraph 10-Lighting plan. Amend B, add in "This lighting plan shall include a sequence or schedule for night lighting in the parking area" and leave A as is. Tim Kavanaugh said that in the event the green space is designed, will have to amend 10 • for lighting in that space. Chuck suggested keeping B to the parking area and Lynn said there would be a whole process for the design of the green space. Christine Sullivan asked if there is lighting on the fagade of building and Matt said that yes there is. 4 Paragraph 12a-Construction site- Christine believes this is the verbiage that came after • the Derby Loft construction. Walter Power suggested a grievance committee. Lynn Duncan said a meeting could be held for complaints but they do not necessarily need a Grievance Committee. Lynn believes that communication has improved, and information should be provided to abutters prior to construction with a number they can call with questions or complaints. Walter Power wants language to require developer to provide abutters with a phone number for complaints. Matt Picarsic said to add to 11D "Notice to include contact information for the Department of Planning & Community Development". Christine Sullivan thinks people should be made aware of construction traffic and phasing practices. Amy will work on adding language to inform abutters of the availability of a construction management plan. Paragraph 20-Maintenance. Add to D trash pickup, if converted to Condo Association, "owner and/or condo association"responsible Add "successors and assigns"to other maintenance conditions There being no further questions or comments regarding this matter, a motion was made by Christine Sullivan to approve the Site Plan Review as amended, seconded by Pam Lombardini and approved 8-0 (Puleo, Ready, Kavanaugh, Sullivan, Hanscom, Lombardini, Collins, and Power). • Adjournment There being no further business to before the Planning Board, a motion was made by Pam Lombardini to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Nadine Hanscom and approved (8-0). The meeting adjourned at 9:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Stacey Dupuis, Clerk Salem Planning Board • 5 CITY OF SALEM � 1 PLANNING BOARD Form A Decision `='t 63 3/4 Jefferson Ave ,7 r- - Robert T. Dunham, Trustee 3 R.T.D. Nominee Realty Trust 63 Yz Jefferson Ave Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr. Dunham: The Salem Planning Board voted on January 3, 2008 to endorse "Approval Under Subdivision Control Law Not Required" on the following described plan. 1. Applicant: Robert T. Dunham, Trustee, R.T.D Nominee Trust 2. Location: 63 '/4 Jefferson Ave, Assessors Map 24, Lot 229 3. Project Description: This Form A divides Parcel 2 (an existing non buildable lot) into Parcels 2A consisting of 3,500 s.f. and 2B consisting of 7,415 s.f. as show on the plans. Parcel 2B, owned by R.T.D. Nominee Realty Trust, is to be conveyed to the abutting land of Olive Realty Trust (Lot 1B) as noted on the plan. Sincerely, Charles Puleo Chairman Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk Deb Jackson, Assistant Director of Assessing 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 . WWW.SALEM.COM s i �v CITY OF SALEM i ' PLANNING BOARD Site Plan Review Decision January 7, 2008 Washington at Derby LLC, c/o RCG LLC 17 Ivaloo Street, Suite 100 ;, - Somerville,MA r RE: 155 Washington St, 26 New Derby St, & 31 Front St (Map 34, Lots 423, 425;426) (The Former Salem News Property) On Thursday, December 20, 2007, the Planning Board of the City of Salem opened a Public Hearing regarding the application of RCG LLC under Site Plan Review for 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 connected mixed-use building along • Washington and New Derby Streets. The project will retain approximately 6,000 sq ft of existing retail use and add an additional 7,500 sq ft of new retail. The project will also include the construction of 31 new residential dwellings; seven of the dwelling units will be in the renovation component and 24 dwelling units will be in the new construction component. The public hearing was continued to January 3, 2008. The Public Hearing was closed on January 3, 2008 and the Board voted at this meeting by a vote of eight (8) in favor (Puleo, Power, Kavanaugh, Hanscom, Sullivan, Collins, Lombardini, and Ready) and none opposed,to approve the application as complying with the requirements of Site Plan Review subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with the Plan Work shall conform with the plans entitled; "Washington at Derby LLC's Mixed-Use Facility Salem, MA" prepared by Opechee Construction Corporation, dated November 29, 2007 and revised December 28, 2007 sheets Cl-C11. 2. Amendments Any amendments to the site plan shall be reviewed by the City Planner and if deemed substantial by the City Planner, shall be brought to the Planning Board for a vote. Any waiver of conditions contained within shall require the approval of the Planning Board. Y. Landscaping a. Any proposed landscaping shall be done in accordance with the approved set of plans. .. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 . TEL: 978.745.9595 FAx: 978.740.0404 ♦ WWW.SALEM.COM s b. After such landscaping is completed, the developer will add further landscaping if such is requested by the City Planner. c. A commercial grade wrought iron style fence, a minimum of four feet in height, shall be installed at the edge of the property line between the northeast corner of the property and the most northwesterly building in Artist's Row (currently the Lobster Shanty). 4. HVAC 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. Approved method for screening shall be constructed and installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 5. Parking a. Thirty-six (36) parking spaces are to be provided on site as shown on the approved plans, and seven (7) parking spaces are to be leased at 76 Lafayette Street. Off-site parking spaces are to be marked or signed as reserved for residents of 155 Washington Street. Documentation of this shall be submitted for review and approval by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. b. The location of off-site parking spaces maybe changed to a different facility within 1,000 feet of the development at the discretion of the Department of Planning and Community Development. 6. Parking Contribution • The applicant has voluntarily agreed to contribute $5,000 to be used toward downtown traffic and parking signage. Funds are to be contributed prior to issuance of a Building Permit. 7. Washington and New Derby Plaza The applicant has agreed to assist the City and the Department of Planning and Community Development in developing a new design for the green space on the comer of Washington Street and New Derby Street. A proposed design will be submitted prior to the issuance of a building perrnit for the new construction component of the redevelopment. 8. Salem Redevelopment Authority All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Redevelopment Authority and the proposal is subject to final approval of the Salem Redevelopment Authority, specifically including approval of final design details. 9. Signage All proposed signage shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of a sign pemut. 10. Lighting a. No light shall cast a glare onto adjacent parcels or adjacent rights of way. • 2 b. A final lighting plan shall be submitted to the City Planner and the CityElectrician for • review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. The plan shall include a schedule for night lighting specifically in the parking lot area. c. After installation, lighting shall be reviewed by the City Planner and the City Electrician prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 11. 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 U: 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. 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 U: 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 to all abutters in writing at least 72 hours prior to commencement of construction of the project. The notice shall state that: "A copy of the plans and construction management plan and schedule are on file and available for review during normal business hours at the office of the Salem Department of Planning and Community Development,located on the Third Floor of 120 Washington Street, 978-619-5685." 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. 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. • 12. Construction Traffic & Phasing 3 a. All construction will occur on site; no construction will occur or be staged within City right of way. 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 issuance of a building pemut. c. Any roadways, driveways, or sidewalks damaged during constriction shall be restored to their original condition by the applicant. d. The applicant shall clean construction vehicles before they exit the construction site, and clean and sweep all streets affected by their construction truck traffic as necessary. 13. Clerk of the Works A Clerk of the Works shall be provided by the City, at the applicant, his successors or assignsexpense, as is deemed necessary by the City Planner. 14. Salem Health Department All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Health Department. 15. Board of Health The owner shall comply with the following specific conditions issued by the Board of Health: a. The individual presenting the plan to the Board of Health must notify the Health Agent • of the name, address, and telephone number of the project (site) manager who will be on site and directly responsible for the construction of the project. b. If a DEP tracking number is issued for this site under the Massachusetts Contingency Plan, no structure shall be constructed until the Licensed Site Professional responsible for the site meets the DEP standards for the proposed use. c. The developer will give the Health Agent copy of the 21E report. d. The developer shall adhere to a drainage plan as approved by the City Engineer. e. The developer shall employ a licensed pesticide applicator to exterminate the area prior to construction, demolition, and/or blasting and shall send a copy of the exterminator's invoice to the Health Agent. f. The developer shall maintain the area free from rodents throughout construction g. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for dust control and street sweeping which will occur during construction. • 4 h. The developer shall submit to the Health Agent a written plan for containment and removal of debris, vegetative waste, and unacceptable excavation material generated during demolition and/or construction. i. The Fire Department must approve the plan regarding access for fire fighting. j. Noise levels from the resultant establishment(s) generated by operations, including but not limited to refrigeration and heating, shall not increase the broadband sound level by more than 10 dB(A) above the ambient levels measured at the property line. k. The developer shall disclose in writing to the Health Agent the origin of any fill material needed for the project. 1. The resultant establishment shall dispose of all waste materials resulting from its operation in an environmentally sound manner as described to the Board of Health. in. The developer shall notify the Health Agent when the project is complete for final inspection and confirmation that above conditions have been met. 16. Office of the City Engineer The applicant, his successors or assigns shall comply with all requirements of the City Engineer. 17. Fire Department • a. All work shall comply with the requirements of the Salem Fire Department. b. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit , revised plans shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development showing an eighteen (18) foot wide entrance on Front Street as required by the Salem Fire Department. c. The applicant shall seek approval from the City of Salem Cemetery & Shade Tree Department to remove the street tree on the right side of the entrance, which would prohibit an 18-foot entrance in this location. The applicant shall be responsible for any costs and meetings associated with this process, as well as the cost of tree replacement if required. 18. Office of the Building Commissioner All work shall comply with the requirements of the office of the Salem Building Corrunissioner. 19. Utilities Any utility installation shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 20. Maintenance a. Refuse removal, ground maintenance and snow removal shall be the responsibilityof the . applicant, successors, and assigns. 5 m. b. Winter snow in excess of snow storage areas on the site shall be removed off site. c. Maintenance of any landscaping shall be the responsibility of the applicant, his successors or assigns. The applicant, his successors or assigns, shall guarantee all trees and shrubs for a two-year period. d. The owner and/or condominium association shall be responsible for trash pickup. 21. As-built Plans As-built plans, stamped by Registered Professional Engineer, shall be submitted to the Department of Planning and Community Development and City Engineer prior to the issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy both in hard copy and in electronic file format suitable for the City's use and approved by the City Engineer 22. 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 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 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 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 M. Puleo Chair Cc: Cheryl LaPointe, City Clerk I J ,f CyJ n U1 • 6